Search results

I have done my research. I do disagree with your reinterpretation of Scripture. It is the reinterpreting of Scripture to fit cultural mores' that is the big big issue here. You will not find any ancient writings discussing hair lengths and the appropriateness thereof. Only mentions of temple...

That is not what it says. If a womans covering is her hair then a mans covering is his hair! So if a man ought to pray uncovered he must be bald. No where does it say a mans or womans haircut length. Show me in the Bible the definition of those! You are just interjecting your opinion in to...

The Bible doesn't call it evil, you do. I don't remember when god gave you the authority to define evil. You have failed to show one biblical support for calling the shot evil.

That is up to the parents and their pediatrician to decide whether a child should do it or not. Not matter what all the fear mongers here wish to say.

That is incorrect. It is Paul who wrote that and then proceeded to explain why, and why it is not sin for them to marry. And also flesh evil... is also Gnosticism Wrong again! Logic has no place in this argument. So your logically speaking is irrelevant. Paul is teaching about order in the...

You start from a faulty beginning and end with terrible conclusions. Yes morality is objective. People will simply draw the line between what they are willing to call subjective. But it matters not a whit what men say. It is the word of God that is a final arbiter of all matters. For you ...

And that also means they are two individuals. the candlesticks in revelation do not mean that every time a candlestick is spoken of- it means churches, especially in light of the fact they stand in the presence of God meaning physically before Him- not like everything else that stands.

Well Babylon- biblically speaking is derived from "babel" which means confusion, for it is there that the Lord confounded the languages of the people. Babylon was built or started by Nimrod. Mystery Babylon is not the modern RCC church as you not so subtly hint at. It goes back far further...

We live under his physical domination for the time being. but though He may inflict all sorts of evil upon us- we are still more than conquerors through Him who loves us. He may harm the body- but can never steal our joy if we do not let him.

Not quite true. Paul wrote in Corinthians about the divisions in the church in the first century as well. The Jewish vs. Gentile churches, Other were Paulione disciples, Appolos disciples, some followed just Jesus etc.etc. Not different denominations, but divisions just like denominations.

There are not as many tin foil hat conspiracists who are atheist than circulate in supposed Christian circles.

Yes and Paruosia is used both of teh rapture and Jesus physical return to earth or His second coming. Paruosia simply means a presence. It can be a proximate (like you are present (paruosia) in the house though not in the room, or present as in right there. Context and construct tell us...

YOu did not read the passage wellthen. Paul concludes this discourse about head coverings this way: 1 Corinthians 11:16 King James Version 16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. Paul is not merely rehashing culture- He is saying this...

No but in the day most woman had a covering on their head like something that could be considered a hood like extension of their robe. And given the faqct Paul uses aner and gune in the passage for man and woman it is referring to married woman in context. I understand the passage well. I...

Revelation 13:3 King James Version 3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. This passage is the same construct as this one: Revelation 5:6 King James Version 6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the...

Revelation 13:3 King James Version 3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. this is the same construct as this: Revelation 5:6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four...

I did not say a hat. Paul said a covering! Paul declared if a woman prays with her head uncovered (akatakalyptos) not veiled! It is a shame for her. And Paul also declared that a woman was given long hair for a covering, (peribolaion) 2 different words with 2 different meanings in greek...

So here is what you said: "Paul is speaking of long hair like a woman's. He uses vails only as a setting for making difference between the length of hair of men and woman, that God wants to see as Christians. It's a shame for men to have long hair like a woman, and for women to get men's...

No but that is the conclusion one has to draw from what Paul wrote if hair is the covering Paul is referring to a woman must have on her head when in the assembly of believers.

Then i f hair is what Paul is referring to (which he is not) then men must have their heads shaved! Paul said it is a shame for a man to have their head covered.