ECT The Broken Record of MAD

[musterion]

I tend to agree. My understanding of the word translated "long" in the passage from 1 Cor. 11 condemning men having long hair would be more accurately translated as "fixed".

Thus, the actual point of condemnation for men is having elaborate hairdos. Sampson and in general the Nazirites shows that it is not length of a man's hair, but ornateness that is in view. A man's hair is not his glory, while a woman's hair is. A woman can cover her glory as a sign of submission, or she can remove her glory. To remove her glory (her hair) would be dishonorable and shaming, which most women would not want.

For men, it is against nature to focus on what is women's glory, but it is perfectly natural for women to be concerned about it.

Sampson being a notable exception for reasons wholly unrelated to Paul's instruction, I still believe feminine length of a man's hair is strongly discouraged in the Body of Christ. Note that women are told not to put effort into externals such as plaiting or adorning their hair, 1 Tim 2:9 and 1 Peter 3:3. Length wasn't the issue for them, apparently. If women are not to have ornate hairdos, then the length of their hair is not the issue but what they do with it was (is).

But with men, the injunction seems simple, flat and closed to interpretation: men in the Body are to have neither ornate nor femininely long hair.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Sampson being a notable exception for reasons wholly unrelated to Paul's instruction, I still believe feminine length of a man's hair is strongly discouraged in the Body of Christ. Note that women are told not to put effort into externals such as plaiting or adorning their hair, 1 Tim 2:9 and 1 Peter 3:3. Length wasn't the issue for them, apparently. If women are not to have ornate hairdos, then the length of their hair is not the issue but what they do with it was (is).

But with men, the injunction seems simple, flat and closed to interpretation: men in the Body are to have neither ornate nor femininely long hair.

We actually are in violent agreement, brother. I say that looking above for a meteor falling out of the sky to strike me.

AMR

 

[musterion]

We actually are in violent agreement, brother. I say that looking above for a meteor falling out of the sky to strike me.

AMR

God ordains meteorites to strike the elect for agreeing with (purported) Arminians?!? So much for TULIP! :rotfl:

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

God ordains meteorites to strike the elect for agreeing with (purported) Arminians?!? So much for TULIP! :rotfl:

Alas, hard Providence.

Like the old joke of the Presbyterian deacon who slips and falls down the stairs. Gets up, dusting himself off, limping away and thinking, "Well I am glad that is over with."

AMR

 

[Danoh]

Woman length hair on a man is shameful.

Seemed okay on John McCain's cousin; Founding Father: George Washington.

Looked pretty cool on Mel Gibson, in Nick's favorite movie "Braveheart."

:chuckle:

 

[musterion]

:idunno: I just go with what Paul says, to the best of my understanding.

 

[Right Divider]

Not one thing in my post was untrue.
Why are you so against the truth and want to run away and hide from it?

When confronted with the truth, he throws a tantrum (in preparation to tell another lie; which is not really another, but it's the same ones over and over).

He's truly the most childish poster on TOL.

 

[musterion]

Have you met Crucible?

 

[Right Divider]

You all do, but in a different way: you say there is a kingdom offer until some secret point in Acts (TBD). You say there is another gospel until Paul comes along and the kingdom offer expires. Does it make any difference if you do that or just say that Israel the ethne is going to be in its land in the future--as far as maintaining 2 progams? No.

Stooping to blatant lying now?

 

[Right Divider]

In Acts 19:10 NET Paul said, "This went on for two years, so that all who lived in the province of Asia, both Jews and Greeks, heard the word of the Lord."

What was the word of the Lord?

He said, "The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the gospel!" (Mark 1:15 NET)

Nice bait and switch.

Paul was receiving REVELATION. That means something, but you're stuck with what you want to believe.

 

[dodge]

Cuz Dodge is a troll.

Want to see a real troll look in a mirror !

 

[Danoh]

Nice bait and switch.

Paul was receiving REVELATION. That means something, but you're stuck with what you want to believe.

Yep :thumb:

And more like bait and confused :chuckle:

 

[Danoh]

Blind men don't see things poorly. They don't see them at all.

Yep :thumb:

It's Israel the foreknown agency; not "Israel the ethne," IP - duh-uh.

 

[heir]

So what if Jews heard it?


1 Corinthians 15:1-4


Paul never said the kingdom was near.

Paul didn't preach "the gospel of the kingdom" either, but every time jamie sees the phrase "kingdom of God" that is what he/she sees in his/her mind's eye.

 

[jamie]

Paul didn't preach "the gospel of the kingdom" either, but every time jamie sees the phrase "kingdom of God" that is what he/she sees in his/her mind's eye.

Acts 28:30-31 KJV And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house and received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no man forbidding him.
​

 

[heir]

Acts 28:30-31 KJV And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house and received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no man forbidding him.
​

Yep. That's what it says and it means what it says. It still has zero/zip/nada to do with the gospel of the kingdom.

We can know this by the facts:

1. Paul could not have been forgiven under the gospel of the kingdom (Matthew 12:31-32 KJV).

2. The gospel of the kingdom is not the same as the gospel of Christ ( 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV) that Paul preached as the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth to the Jew first and also to the Greek (Romans 1:16 KJV) and then later to all men (Acts 20:24 KJV, 1 Timothy 2:4-6 KJV, Titus 2:11 KJV) as Christ had yet to "die for our sins" while the "gospel of the kingdom" was being preached in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

3. The gospel that Paul preached was a mystery during the time of M, M, L, and John and Paul tells us why (Romans 16:25-27 KJV, 1 Corinthians 2:6-8 KJV).

 

[jamie]

Yep. That's what it says and it means what it says. It still has zero/zip/nada to do with the gospel of the kingdom.

The gospel of the kingdom is that it is at hand.

Do you not believe that?

 

[Danoh]

Yep. That's what it says and it means what it says. It still has zero/zip/nada to do with the gospel of the kingdom.

Lol, you sure are rack'n em up lately.

Technically, preaching the kingdom of God would be preaching the gospel (good news) of the kingdom of God.

The same, but different.

Unless Acts 28 is asserting that Paul was preaching bad news :chuckle:

You're too literal, sis...you're too...literal.

 

[Danoh]

The gospel of the kingdom is that it is at hand.

Do you not believe that?

Nope. That was a...different...good news.

The same, but different.

 

[heir]

The gospel of the kingdom is that it is at hand.

Do you not believe that?

The kingdom of heaven is not at hand. Matthew 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.