AV1611 Bible Forum Archive

AV1611 Bible Forum Archive (https://av1611.com/forums/index.php)
-   Doctrine (https://av1611.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"? (https://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1346)

Renee 06-21-2009 11:50 AM

Joined together or Yoked together
 
Guys,(includes gals)

Time to back off and leave off. We have reached the point of contention. Our Lord is the only one that can can convience and convict in the above matter. What say we let The Lord rule and put this thread to rest?


Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

1 Corinthians 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.


If we need to contend, Let us contend for the faith.


Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

There are many guest on this forrum, some of whom may not be saved. we are not presenting a very good christian testimony.

You can say I am picking out verses if you like, but boy it sure fits!

May Our Lord grant each of us the peace and understanding of His written word.

Renee

biblereader 06-21-2009 02:00 PM

Hello, Custer! :)

custer 06-21-2009 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renee (Post 22465)
Guys,(includes gals)

Time to back off and leave off. We have reached the point of contention. Our Lord is the only one that can can convience and convict in the above matter. What say we let The Lord rule and put this thread to rest?


Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

1 Corinthians 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

Titus 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.


If we need to contend, Let us contend for the faith.


Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

There are many guest on this forrum, some of whom may not be saved. we are not presenting a very good christian testimony.

You can say I am picking out verses if you like, but boy it sure fits!

May Our Lord grant each of us the peace and understanding of His written word.

Renee

Renee,

How can we possibly have "reached the point of contention?" It is very telling that you would like to "put this thread to rest," since NONE of the errors in the original post have even been addressed. It is extremely apparent who has "private opinions" and "preconceived ideas" here AND who is trying to suppress the truth. Your post SOUNDS nice, but if there are forum guests reading this (or any) thread, they should be able to tell that our "very good Christian testimony" is that we are "valiant for the truth," not afraid to discuss scripture or to admit when we are wrong!

Speaking of 'wrong,' your post #6 also contained obvious errors... For example, you said, "When you are yoked and do not agree it is impossible to walk together. When you are yoked it is easy to unyoke, you just take off the harness." I dealt with some of the problems with this when I addressed George's incorrect info (in my post #22; ) but I will explain again/further... When two oxen are yoked, if they do not "agree," one is actually LED by the other. Also, when you are yoked, IT IS NOT "EASY TO UNYOKE" - an ox would DIE right there in the yoke before it could "unyoke" itself. (The master, NOT one ox in the pair, would have to do the unyoking!) The point is, from every angle you and George are WRONG about your 'yoked oxen' pictures. Can't you see that this is a problem because it skews the conclusion of the whole study?

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

custer 06-21-2009 04:27 PM

First, the "study" in the original post of this thread is terribly one-sided - we were asked to read and study the verses and then "Tell me if a Biblical marriage is being 'joined together' or is it being 'yoked together'." The "study" then went on to list all the Bible references to "yoke" and all its biblical forms, but never listed ANY for "join" or ANY of its forms...so how was anyone supposed to study and give an answer to George's "tell me," since we were only HALF INFORMED? Obviously, George had a purpose in mind - to disconnect the separation principles in II Corinthians 6:14-18 from a marriage situation at any cost. I have already shown (in post #22) that one of these costs was to completely forfeit the TRUTH. (I am asserting that this was George's purpose because of his stance on the issue in the "Love and Race" thread.)

Those of us who believe that the II Cor. passage CAN be applied to marriage partners have been accused of trying to misapply scripture and take it "out of context" in order to prove our "preconceived ideas!" We were reprimanded with the fact that II Cor. only has to do with "workers," as in verse one of the chapter. But, after Paul gives us the admonition and explanation in verses 14-16, he tells us what to do (with a promise) in verses 17-18 (and part of 16.) Where did Paul get this "saith the Lord?" It certainly WASN'T from a passage having anything to do with "the ministry!!!" Anybody who does a fair amount of Bible study knows that in addition to their historical or prophetical context, passages can also have a practical application. (Peter does the same thing in Acts 2:16-21; James does it in Acts 15:13-17!)) And, back to II Cor. - if the separation principles in chapter six were not clear enough (which obviously for some, they are not,) chapter seven starts out: "Having therefore these promises [that would be the promises that Paul just used 'out of context'], dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from ALL filthiness of the flesh and spirit,..." Since this clearly applies to ALL areas, how can anyone assert that these separation principles do not apply to the choice of a marriage partner?

I need to tell you also that if I don't type out every passage in its entirety, I am not trying to rob you of proper context; I am not (as George is) adept at copying and pasting...I am working off the assumption that everyone here has access to a King James Bible and probably a concordance, so I beg you to read as much as is necessary on either side of any passage I mention to have each in its own context. Also, I have relied on Cruden's Complete Concordance, so if Cruden has missed something, I probably have too! With this in mind. please notice...

The phrase "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers" cannot be lifted out of II Cor. 6:14 and isolated. It is followed (praise the Lord) by at least two-and-a-half verses of explanation...actually the thought continues into the next chapter as mentioned above. The explanation is in the form of parallels; they are as follows:

command : yoked......ye (believers) - unbelievers
explanation: fellowship......righteousness - unrighteousness
communion......light - darkness
concord......Christ - Belial
part......he that believeth - infidel
agreement......temple of God - idols

Now, if you run (and read) all the references for "yoked," "fellowship," "communion," "concord," "part," "agreement," and all the various forms of these words, you will find that NONE of them can be directly connected with marriage anywhere in the Bible! The closest any of them come is:
"Fellowship" is in Eph. 5:11 but not in direct reference to the husband/wife verses; when I ran this reference in the "Love and Race" thread, post #68, no one acknowledged its relevance. "Communed" is in I Sam. 25:39, but it is David communing with Abigail BEFORE they are married. "Part" in Ruth 3:13 is the "part of a kinsman," which still does not refer to the marriage relationship of Boaz and Ruth; it is only the description of the duty of Boaz. Unless I missed something, those are the nearest that any of the parallel words from II Cor. 6 ever come to the subject of marriage...and they don't ever touch it DIRECTLY. By extension of George's premise then, this means that if "yoked together" can in no way be related to a "genuine Biblical marriage," then neither can "fellowship," "communion," "concord," "part," or "agreement." I am asserting that this is a LUDICROUS position, and when I'm done here, you will see that I have taken my assertion from the Bible! (Keep in mind George's position that "JOIN" is THE term for marriage, and his position that we can't take the separation principles in II Cor. 6 and apply them to marriage.)

Upon reading the aforementioned references, I found several very interesting correlations...For example, in Daniel 11:6a, the parties "JOIN themselves together" by "mak[ing] an AGREEMENT." In I Cor. 1:9-10, since we "were called unto the FELLOWSHIP of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord," Paul beseeches us to be "perfectly JOINED together." In I Cor. 10:16-17, the "COMMUNION of the body of Christ" is because we are "one body," which is "one flesh." (I Cor. 6:16 and Eph. 5:31) Also, in Isaiah 28:15 and 18, an "AGREEMENT" IS a covenant; in Jer. 50:5, you "JOIN...in...a...covenant," and covenants are directly connected to marriage in Deut. 7:1-3 and Mal.2:14. Yet another - in I Cor. 12:12-27, "one body" is made of "parts;" and in Eph. 4:16, "every PART" is "fitly JOINED together!"
These verses provide CONCLUSIVE SCRIPTURAL PROOF that "yoked," "fellowship," "communion," "concord," "part," "agreement," AND, YES, "JOIN," and "one body"/"one flesh" are connected and relevant to each other!

Another angle...George, your idea was that we would be taking I Cor. chapter six "out of context" to try to apply the "yoked together" analogy to a married couple; your contention was that the analogy could only be applied to "workers," and for marriage, we must use the term "joined." Well, it is very interesting that the Lord uses "joined" for spouses AND for workers in "the ministry." (See Numbers 18:1-4.) On a completely unrelated note, Genesis 29:34 casts a totally different light on being "joined" to a spouse!

Please note that there has been NO "twisting, wresting, and CHANGING the Holy words of God!" (George's quote) All that I have done is to run some references to show how THE LORD HIMSELF DEFINES AND CONNECTS HIS OWN WORDS!!! There is simply no scriptural reason to shy away from saying that a married couple is "yoked together." Yes, two oxen can be "paired together for work," and when they are "paired," they are JOINED with a yoke! Not only is this plain common sense, but it is clearly shown as biblically related if one will take the time to run all the references in the passage to get the whole picture! And it's a wonderful picture - I can certainly think of no one or nothing that I would rather be yoked to, paired together with, or joined to than my husband. The bottom line is that TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPLICATION OF GEORGE'S WORD STUDY, if one has a problem with "yoked together" being applied to a marriage relationship, he must also reject that a husband and wife can have "fellowship," "communion," "concord," a "part," or "agreement" with each other. This is simply an effort to have George apply his own Bible study principles to ALL the associated words in II Cor. 6:14-16. Why bother with a word study if it's not going to be complete? In order to see the Bible's commentary on itself, we must scripturally define all the elements of a passage!

So, you see, George and greenbear, there was much left to play out because all the original post did was to scratch the surface...and by staying on the surface, George, you could make the Bible line up with YOUR "private opinion" and "preconceived ideas."

I do still believe that when it comes to simply defending the idea that saved/lost marriage is FORBIDDEN, all this cross-referencing is rather superfluous - I Cor. 7:39 ("only in the Lord") is a crystal clear defense. But, for those who reject that plain verse, I do think it's 'nifty' that the Lord has all the separation principles unmistakably connected! I'm sure you will all concur! (ha ha - that's a joke!)

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

custer 06-21-2009 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by biblereader (Post 22470)
Hello, Custer! :)

Oh, are you back?! You'd better play nice!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

biblereader 06-22-2009 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by custer (Post 22472)
we are "valiant for the truth," not afraid to discuss scripture or to admit when we are wrong!

I agree, we have a zeal for the truth. And, I agree we are not always right.
That would be nigh impossible, IMO.

biblereader 06-22-2009 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by custer (Post 22498)
Oh, are you back?! You'd better play nice!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

Yes, ma'am! I intend to!

biblereader 06-22-2009 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by custer (Post 22482)
First, the "study" in the original post of this thread is terribly one-sided - we were asked to read and study the verses and then "Tell me if a Biblical marriage is being 'joined together' or is it being 'yoked together'." The "study" then went on to list all the Bible references to "yoke" and all its biblical forms, but never listed ANY for "join" or ANY of its forms...so how was anyone supposed to study and give an answer to George's "tell me," since we were only HALF INFORMED? Obviously, George had a purpose in mind - to disconnect the separation principles in II Corinthians 6:14-18 from a marriage situation at any cost. I have already shown (in post #22) that one of these costs was to completely forfeit the TRUTH. (I am asserting that this was George's purpose because of his stance on the issue in the "Love and Race" thread.)

Those of us who believe that the II Cor. passage CAN be applied to marriage partners have been accused of trying to misapply scripture and take it "out of context" in order to prove our "preconceived ideas!" We were reprimanded with the fact that II Cor. only has to do with "workers," as in verse one of the chapter. But, after Paul gives us the admonition and explanation in verses 14-16, he tells us what to do (with a promise) in verses 17-18 (and part of 16.) Where did Paul get this "saith the Lord?" It certainly WASN'T from a passage having anything to do with "the ministry!!!" Anybody who does a fair amount of Bible study knows that in addition to their historical or prophetical context, passages can also have a practical application. (Peter does the same thing in Acts 2:16-21; James does it in Acts 15:13-17!)) And, back to II Cor. - if the separation principles in chapter six were not clear enough (which obviously for some, they are not,) chapter seven starts out: "Having therefore these promises [that would be the promises that Paul just used 'out of context'], dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from ALL filthiness of the flesh and spirit,..." Since this clearly applies to ALL areas, how can anyone assert that these separation principles do not apply to the choice of a marriage partner?

I need to tell you also that if I don't type out every passage in its entirety, I am not trying to rob you of proper context; I am not (as George is) adept at copying and pasting...I am working off the assumption that everyone here has access to a King James Bible and probably a concordance, so I beg you to read as much as is necessary on either side of any passage I mention to have each in its own context. Also, I have relied on Cruden's Complete Concordance, so if Cruden has missed something, I probably have too! With this in mind. please notice...

The phrase "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers" cannot be lifted out of II Cor. 6:14 and isolated. It is followed (praise the Lord) by at least two-and-a-half verses of explanation...actually the thought continues into the next chapter as mentioned above. The explanation is in the form of parallels; they are as follows:

command : yoked......ye (believers) - unbelievers
explanation: fellowship......righteousness - unrighteousness
communion......light - darkness
concord......Christ - Belial
part......he that believeth - infidel
agreement......temple of God - idols

Now, if you run (and read) all the references for "yoked," "fellowship," "communion," "concord," "part," "agreement," and all the various forms of these words, you will find that NONE of them can be directly connected with marriage anywhere in the Bible! The closest any of them come is:
"Fellowship" is in Eph. 5:11 but not in direct reference to the husband/wife verses; when I ran this reference in the "Love and Race" thread, post #68, no one acknowledged its relevance. "Communed" is in I Sam. 25:39, but it is David communing with Abigail BEFORE they are married. "Part" in Ruth 3:13 is the "part of a kinsman," which still does not refer to the marriage relationship of Boaz and Ruth; it is only the description of the duty of Boaz. Unless I missed something, those are the nearest that any of the parallel words from II Cor. 6 ever come to the subject of marriage...and they don't ever touch it DIRECTLY. By extension of George's premise then, this means that if "yoked together" can in no way be related to a "genuine Biblical marriage," then neither can "fellowship," "communion," "concord," "part," or "agreement." I am asserting that this is a LUDICROUS position, and when I'm done here, you will see that I have taken my assertion from the Bible! (Keep in mind George's position that "JOIN" is THE term for marriage, and his position that we can't take the separation principles in II Cor. 6 and apply them to marriage.)

Upon reading the aforementioned references, I found several very interesting correlations...For example, in Daniel 11:6a, the parties "JOIN themselves together" by "mak[ing] an AGREEMENT." In I Cor. 1:9-10, since we "were called unto the FELLOWSHIP of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord," Paul beseeches us to be "perfectly JOINED together." In I Cor. 10:16-17, the "COMMUNION of the body of Christ" is because we are "one body," which is "one flesh." (I Cor. 6:16 and Eph. 5:31) Also, in Isaiah 28:15 and 18, an "AGREEMENT" IS a covenant; in Jer. 50:5, you "JOIN...in...a...covenant," and covenants are directly connected to marriage in Deut. 7:1-3 and Mal.2:14. Yet another - in I Cor. 12:12-27, "one body" is made of "parts;" and in Eph. 4:16, "every PART" is "fitly JOINED together!"
These verses provide CONCLUSIVE SCRIPTURAL PROOF that "yoked," "fellowship," "communion," "concord," "part," "agreement," AND, YES, "JOIN," and "one body"/"one flesh" are connected and relevant to each other!

Another angle...George, your idea was that we would be taking I Cor. chapter six "out of context" to try to apply the "yoked together" analogy to a married couple; your contention was that the analogy could only be applied to "workers," and for marriage, we must use the term "joined." Well, it is very interesting that the Lord uses "joined" for spouses AND for workers in "the ministry." (See Numbers 18:1-4.) On a completely unrelated note, Genesis 29:34 casts a totally different light on being "joined" to a spouse!

Please note that there has been NO "twisting, wresting, and CHANGING the Holy words of God!" (George's quote) All that I have done is to run some references to show how THE LORD HIMSELF DEFINES AND CONNECTS HIS OWN WORDS!!! There is simply no scriptural reason to shy away from saying that a married couple is "yoked together." Yes, two oxen can be "paired together for work," and when they are "paired," they are JOINED with a yoke! Not only is this plain common sense, but it is clearly shown as biblically related if one will take the time to run all the references in the passage to get the whole picture! And it's a wonderful picture - I can certainly think of no one or nothing that I would rather be yoked to, paired together with, or joined to than my husband. The bottom line is that TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPLICATION OF GEORGE'S WORD STUDY, if one has a problem with "yoked together" being applied to a marriage relationship, he must also reject that a husband and wife can have "fellowship," "communion," "concord," a "part," or "agreement" with each other. This is simply an effort to have George apply his own Bible study principles to ALL the associated words in II Cor. 6:14-16. Why bother with a word study if it's not going to be complete? In order to see the Bible's commentary on itself, we must scripturally define all the elements of a passage!

So, you see, George and greenbear, there was much left to play out because all the original post did was to scratch the surface...and by staying on the surface, George, you could make the Bible line up with YOUR "private opinion" and "preconceived ideas."

I do still believe that when it comes to simply defending the idea that saved/lost marriage is FORBIDDEN, all this cross-referencing is rather superfluous - I Cor. 7:39 ("only in the Lord") is a crystal clear defense. But, for those who reject that plain verse, I do think it's 'nifty' that the Lord has all the separation principles unmistakably connected! I'm sure you will all concur! (ha ha - that's a joke!)

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com


I see this is still being discussed, and that's good. IMO.

chette777 07-07-2009 07:54 PM

PAm,

I reread this thread wanting to see if I missed something.

You were the first to make some indications of a problem I couldn't see in post #4 "pam ducking" I could not see any reason for that statement. Were you ducking blows or are you saying George was ducking away from you?

so you see you came into the thread with something on your heart. I have to do that with Parish. Often I have to come into thread posts he made and clear my heart of personal biased of him in order to read his post simply for what it is and not with my personal feelings.

then you came into posts 21 and 22 where you came in with a PRECONCEIVED idea that Greenbear would quickly accuse you of manipulating. Can you see it you came in with your guns blazing. you did the same in post 22 to George.

As I see it you brought over from another thread your emotions and hurts and started applying it to this thread. that is where you went wrong. not that you were wrong in what you said. but your own personal bias was implanted into everything your opponents said. though they were not really trying to be your opponents. so it is your heart where the issue lay. Try coming into the threads without bringing with it past or events that took place in other threads, give an abundance of grace (we all need it) and try to learn from it.

It would seem George came out with his view only after you seemed to be ignoring the Yolked references of which you said you agreed. but your statements seem to indicate that yolked to you is a marriage. that is What George was stating.

it is easy to be offended but harder not to offend.

I do see why you are upset. Slow down and consider more what is being shared and try not to react with strong emotions. when responding be sure not to make remarks that would seem like you missed understood the reason for the thread in the first place. it really looks like a misunderstanding that started on your part though you may have understood the yolked references.

don't be so sensitive as you read. George is really a good man.

custer 07-07-2009 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23438)
PAm,

I reread this thread wanting to see if I missed something.

You were the first to make some indications of a problem I couldn't see in post #4 "pam ducking" I could not see any reason for that statement. Were you ducking blows or are you saying George was ducking away from you?

so you see you came into the thread with something on your heart. I have to do that with Parish. Often I have to come into thread posts he made and clear my heart of personal biased of him in order to read his post simply for what it is and not with my personal feelings.

then you came into posts 21 and 22 where you came in with a PRECONCEIVED idea that Greenbear would quickly accuse you of manipulating. Can you see it you came in with your guns blazing. you did the same in post 22 to George.

As I see it you brought over from another thread your emotions and hurts and started applying it to this thread. that is where you went wrong. not that you were wrong in what you said. but your own personal bias was implanted into everything your opponents said. though they were not really trying to be your opponents. so it is your heart where the issue lay. Try coming into the threads without bringing with it past or events that took place in other threads, give an abundance of grace (we all need it) and try to learn from it.

It would seem George came out with his view only after you seemed to be ignoring the Yolked references of which you said you agreed. but your statements seem to indicate that yolked to you is a marriage. that is What George was stating.

it is easy to be offended but harder not to offend.

I do see why you are upset. Slow down and consider more what is being shared and try not to react with strong emotions. when responding be sure not to make remarks that would seem like you missed understood the reason for the thread in the first place. it really looks like a misunderstanding that started on your part though you may have understood the yolked references.

don't be so sensitive as you read. George is really a good man.

Chette,

I cannot tell you just how much I REALLY APPRECIATE your sincerity...unless I am mistaken, it is very obvious in your posts to me!

I would like you to note that George is the one who brought the "parts of speech" thing over from the other thread (Love and Race) by harping on it in his original post here. I brought it up over there (post #74, I believe) because whether a word is a noun or a verb makes such a difference a lot of times in the meaning of the word (as it does in this case...) so my post #4 (I believe) on here was an effort to have him tell us HOW IN THE WORLD the part of speech could be unimportant to this argument. That's one of those things he never answered because HE IS WRONG!

As far as greenbear, in the Love and Race thread, EVEN WHEN I QUOTED HER VERBATIM, she accused me of manipulating her words...when I asked her 'how?' she, of course, never answered! I tell you that here because I was just wanting to make sure from the 'get-go' that she knew I wasn't trying to do that...I was attempting to have a civil discourse with her and George (even if we still disagreed at the end) but, sadly, that proved to be impossible! I am still willing to try! I WILL still be frustrated if they continue to refuse to talk about scripture with me...call me simple, but on "AV1611.com" I thought that was what we were here for!

Again, just trying to clarify for you what's going on at my end!

Oh, I almost forgot, I came into this thread "ducking" because George was definitely swinging at ME (not my info) in the other thread!

And, while you're here, what do you think of my posts #43 and 44...besides that I could show more grace? (ha ha!)

MY MOST SINCERE THANKS FOR YOUR ADVICE!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

chette777 07-08-2009 04:45 AM

yes Pam it sounds as if you are trying to be a grace filled person in those posts. I am trying to be sincere and open as I too make mistakes and try to learn from them. Sometimes if the same mistakes happen again and again with certain people I make sure I don't answer until I am confident it is not my fault. If I am sure I try to avoid them.

George, Irene and Greenbear are all very lovely people. try again and take everything with that grain of salt. we are the salt of the earth.

I am a person who come from a know it all life style and I have had to learn to drop it. It is hard coming to the lord late in life I carried lots of baggage and garbage into my Christian life and I am learning to unload it and throw it off which ever it takes.

I suggest you go to George's web page and read through his studies on the heart and also his studies on humanism. that will give you a good idea where he is coming from.

After I visited you web page I knew that Custer was not so bad and is quiet down to earth. so are they by the way.

The humble one wears the crown. and I have done it and eaten crow at the same time.

God bless sister.

George 07-08-2009 09:00 AM

Re: "Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"?"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23438)
PAm,

I reread this thread wanting to see if I missed something.

You were the first to make some indications of a problem I couldn't see in post #4 "pam ducking" I could not see any reason for that statement. Were you ducking blows or are you saying George was ducking away from you?

so you see you came into the thread with something on your heart. I have to do that with Parish. Often I have to come into thread posts he made and clear my heart of personal biased of him in order to read his post simply for what it is and not with my personal feelings.

then you came into posts 21 and 22 where you came in with a PRECONCEIVED idea that Greenbear would quickly accuse you of manipulating. Can you see it you came in with your guns blazing. you did the same in post 22 to George.

As I see it you brought over from another thread your emotions and hurts and started applying it to this thread. that is where you went wrong. not that you were wrong in what you said. but your own personal bias was implanted into everything your opponents said. though they were not really trying to be your opponents. so it is your heart where the issue lay. Try coming into the threads without bringing with it past or events that took place in other threads, give an abundance of grace (we all need it) and try to learn from it.

It would seem George came out with his view only after you seemed to be ignoring the Yolked references of which you said you agreed. but your statements seem to indicate that yolked to you is a marriage. that is What George was stating.

it is easy to be offended but harder not to offend.

I do see why you are upset. Slow down and consider more what is being shared and try not to react with strong emotions. when responding be sure not to make remarks that would seem like you missed understood the reason for the thread in the first place. it really looks like a misunderstanding that started on your part though you may have understood the yolked references.

don't be so sensitive as you read. George is really a good man.


Aloha brother Chette,

I don't know what you are trying to accomplish by trying to "reason" with custer, but I do know that it is "FUTILE"!

This woman has been trying to "BAIT ME" for a month now, and I REFUSE to take the "BAIT"!

Do you realize that (at this point in time) she has posted a total of 52 Posts and Threads and of those 52 - 27 OF THEM HAVE BEEN ABOUT ME! That's better than 50% of her Posts! Don't you think that there is something terribly "wrong" with this woman? She is obsessed with me! as I said in 06/16/09 > "Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"?" > Post #24: " The woman is "OBSESSED" with yours truly, simply because I have spoken the truth." :eek:

Now, for the record - here are some of the things she has said and some of the things I have said in response to her distortion of my words:

06/09/09 > LOVE & RACE > Post #71

George said:
Quote:

“I grow tired of people (like yourself) taking my words out of context. I grow weary of people taking my words and twisting them, and making them say something I DID NOT SAY! And I especially get upset when someone (like yourself) IGNORES most of what I have said and tries to put words in my mouth - which I never uttered!”
{I still stand by my statement}

06/10/09 > LOVE & RACE > Post #75

George said:
Quote:

{Custer stated (on 06/04/09 > Thread: "Love & Race > Post #41}: "I DON'T want to argue". For a woman who claims:"I DON'T want to argue" - you sure have been doing a whole lot of it lately! Out of 73 Posts on the Thread "Love and Race" you have posted at least 11 of them! Lets see, that works out to about 15% of all of the Posts regarding this issue - NOT BAD for a woman who claimed: "I DON'T want to argue". {Especially since 9 of those 11 Posts were made AFTER YOU SPOKE THOSE WORDS!}

“You are “beating a dead horse” here. You already have my testimony (several times now) on this issue; and my wife’s testimony in regards to 1Corinthians Chapter 7. If you are wondering WHY I have sternly reproved and rebuked you - You TWISTED my words and my wife’s words; and CHANGED them to suit your purposes; and then SUBSTITUTED your own words in their place. I refuse to stand by and let another “Christian” get away with that - without at least letting them know that they are “out of order”.

You should have stuck with the subject at hand, and given us your “SCRIPTURAL” reasons WHY Christians shouldn’t marry someone of another "race" (whatever that is), culture, or color, rather than venturing into a side issue, which has demonstrated that you are disingenuous about what you say: “I DON'T want to argue”; imperceptive or careless to Scriptural exposition; and dishonest in dealing with other people’s WORDS!”

”Don't expect any more personal "replies" from me in regards to anything more you may have to say on this Forum. I refuse to have a "Cat Fight" with an emancipated Westernized "Christian" woman, who thinks she knows everything, and who refuses to receive instruction. There is NO PROFIT in it!”

{Here it is over a month later and she is - STILL ARGUING! :tsk: I still stand by my statement}

06/11/09 > LOVE & RACE > Post #92

George said:
Quote:

Aloha greenbear (Jennifer),

By now you must realize how futile it is to try to reason with someone like Pam. She is determined to be "right", even if she alienates practically everyone on the Forum

Once someone "bends", "twists", and "changes" my words or someone else's words, I write them off as being dishonest and disingenuous. Trying to deal with these kinds of people is "an exercise in futility" - as evidenced by the number of Posts that custer has posted on this Thread.

”This is a woman who claimed in her Post #41 - "I DON'T want to argue", and yet she has (at this point in time) posted a total of 19 POSTS of the 89 Posts on the Thread! That's over 21% of all of the Posts on the Thread, and nearly all of them have been obstinate and argumentative.”

”And out of those 19 Posts - 9 of them have either been addressed to me, or has referenced me. To put it another way - nearly half of her Posts are in relation to me or something that I said. (Makes a person almost believe in Psychiatry/Psychology - but NOT QUITE!)”

Pam just can't "LET GO" - she is determined to PROVE that she is right, at ALL COSTS! I'm used to this - "Westernized" (or "Americanized") women just don't know how to deal with an old curmudgeon like me. You see, having raised and trained 7 children (some probably as old or older than Pam) has given me some understanding of how to deal with women that are "out of order". I REFUSE to let them "sweet talk" me or "bully" me. If they are going to try to act like a man - I treat them like a man. And that just drives "Westernized" (or "Americanized") women like Pam NUTS!”


“After 19 Posts, do you accept her excuse that "this is NOT an argument"? Do you see WHERE she is coming from - "From my standpoint"? That's the WHOLE POINT! Her "standpoint" is all that she "sees" and all that she "cares about". From Pam's "standpoint" everything that has taken place on this Thread is just: "a discussion, a lively and friendly debate!" You could have fooled me!”

”This woman has twisted, bent, changed, and taken other people's words out of context and then inserted her words in their place - and she just considers that: "a discussion, a lively and friendly debate!" It's like I have said before, trying to reason with these kinds of people is "an exercise in futility". If you don't believe me - check out Pam's "smart-alack" remark in her Post #4 on the Thread: "Biblical Marriage - Joined together or Yoked together?"

{I said: Pam just can't "LET GO" - she is determined to PROVE that she is right, at ALL COSTS! - I still stand by my statement}

custer said: 06/10/09 > LOVE & RACE > Post #74
Quote:

In answer to your sarcastic, condescending (not to mention juvenile) question, yes, George, I CAN read English! For the record, I had a 4.0 in all my college English courses...and I have a greater-than-3rd-grade understanding of English parts of speech which means that I can see that when a word is used as a NOUN instead of a VERB, it sometimes has a VERY different meaning (Bible or dictionary!) as is the case with your pet word "YOKE!" I HAVE read ALL the verses in question, and I would LOVE to see you run the references and give me a BIBLE DEFINITION for the word "YOKED" in II Corinthians six because I have not been able to find that word (or "yoke" or "yokes" etc.) used as a VERB (which anybody who can "read English" knows has a completely different meaning than the word "yoke" as a NOUN) anywhere else in the Bible! In addition, anyone who read all the references to "yoke," etc., in the Bible, would come to the EXACT SAME CONCLUSION about the definition that Webster did...that to "yoke" (as a verb) is to "join!" (In the preface to his 1828 edition, Webster gives God the glory for his work, and the introduction and the dictionary itself are replete with Bible references.) The point is that the fact that a word is used "X number" of times in the Bible can be totally irrelevant to its actual meaning in a specific passage...
Now, custer said: “I would LOVE to see you run the references and give me a BIBLE DEFINITION for the word "YOKED" in II Corinthians six” - Which is exactly what I did in my Thread: Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"? And what did she do? She went to ridiculously extreme lengths to pervert the clear Biblical teaching on the word “yoked” as anyone can see by her ridiculously outrageous application of Samson and his wife and his reference to her as “my heifer” – NOT as his “YOKED HEIFER”! {Custer not only makes it a habit to twist the words of God and take them out of “context” - If necessary, she will ADD to the Holy words of God to prove her “point”} as can be seen in her Post #23 on 06/16/09:

custer said in her Post #23 > Re: "Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"?:
Quote:

Plus, for anyone who is interested, the Lord doesn't seem to have a problem with Samson comparing his WIFE to a YOKED HEIFER...we know it was a "yoked heifer" because it says "plowed with my heifer;" I can't find in the Bible where you can plow with only one ox! So SCRIPTURALLY, there's 'being yoked' connected with a marriage relationship! (Judges 14:12-18)
Read the verse:
Judges 14:18 And the men of the city said unto him on the seventh day before the sun went down, What is sweeter than honey? and what is stronger than a lion? And he said unto them, If ye had not plowed with my heifer, ye had not found out my riddle.

Is the word “YOKED” IN THE VERSE? If it isn’t – WHY is custer ADDING to the words of God, unless it is for the purpose of “proving” her ridiculous unscripturalpoint”?

06/16/09 > "Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"?" > Post #24

George said:

Quote:

Aloha all,

Please take note of "custer's" radical "ATTITUDE". This woman is a perfect "example" of what I was referring to as the "Westernized" (or "Americanized") woman. {It's known as HUMANISTIC "FEMINISM"!}

Please check out her pernicious Posts and review her comments in regards to me (a harmless old curmudgeon). The woman is "OBSESSED" with yours truly, simply because I have spoken the truth.

Notice how she will "IGNORE" the overwhelming number of proof texts as to the meaning of "yoke" and how she desperately runs to ONE text (and takes it out of "context") to prove her preconceived ideas. This woman is not only "out of order', she is also "OUT OF BALANCE"!

This is the woman who, early on, claimed: "I disagree with most of what has been posted on this thread, but I DON'T want to argue - I would like to try to understand where y'all are coming from!"; and who has done NOTHING but ARGUE (and is STILL "ARGUING") since she joined our happy little group! "Christian" women should NOT be so disingenuous! And this is one of many reasons why I REFUSE to have anything more to do with the woman. She is OUT OF "ORDER" and OUT OF "BALANCE"!

She is a typical "EXAMPLE" of the typical MODERN Westernized (or Americanized) "Christian" woman, who REFUSES to receive instruction, and is in REBELLION against God's "ORDER" and against His Holy word!

You can do NOTHING for these kind of "Christians". It is "an EXERCISE IN FUTILITY" in trying to "reason" with them. They are determined to be "RIGHT" at any and all costs - even if it means making a complete fool of herself.

This is the result of HUMANISTIC training and education, which produces SOPHISTS - yes even "CHRISTIAN" SOPHISTS!

This woman has been nothing but argumentative, contentious, and combative since she came here. She has done nothing but agitate, disrupt, and disturb the fellowship that most of us seek here. And the "FRUIT" of her contentiousness has been confusion, discord, and division.

I have dealt with these Westernized (or Americanized) "Christian" women for over 50 years - there is NOTHING that we can SAY or DO that will CHANGE them. If we all IGNORE her - she will go away, or she will "get so out of hand" (i.e. OUT OF "ORDER") that she will be "banned".
{I said: You can do NOTHING for these kind of "Christians". It is "an EXERCISE IN FUTILITY" in trying to "reason" with them. They are determined to be "RIGHT" at any and all costs - even if it means making a complete fool of herself. - I still stand by my statement}

This woman (who is a total stranger to me) has posted 50% of her Posts in regards to me (all of them NEGATIVE!) I REFUSE to have anything to do with her. She is out of BALANCE and out of CONTROL! She has been nothing but a DISRUPTION to this Forum, ever since she has Joined! :eek:

I am going to obey the Scriptural admonition concerning these kinds of "Christians": I am going to "MARK" them and then "AVOID" them:

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

chette777 07-08-2009 07:36 PM

I pray it will not prove to be futile and if it is she will be held accountable at the J.S. of Christ for the things she does in this body.

I have grown not only by your words in posts but this forum has helped me to analyze my attitude reaction and actions, in that case it helps me from really expressing what I would say in the heat of a moment of an offense which may or may not be existing in the posters words. that growth in reactions is something I have needed.

With Parish however his posts are offensive when he is upset with anyone. I cannot change what Parish says. However I can change how I react or not to react which ever is appropriate.

I want to help others here to do the same. However if they are unwilling to look at themselves if is futile for sure. If Pam is carrying humanistic, femmistic and worldly ideas, precepts and garbage as what was pointed out. then maybe she just needs to take a moment and see herself from a different angle. I see she is offended and I was just trying to get her to take a moment and get her eyes off of you and on to her as to why be so extreme in her responses. If she will I am sure if the Lord is working in her life she will change for the better.

I went to her web page. she seems to be a caring loving wife and mother. the family looks quite down to earth and simple. simple lives don't always go together with a strong personality or a mind full of knowledge.

I learned that when I came here to do the Lords will. I found that I had to subpress certain attitudes and feelings in order to cope with the new culture. It is often so easy to try and force my culture on them. but better if I come from along side instead of from above.

by the way. I was grateful for this post as it helped me to realize marriage is not a Yolking together of Biblical terms, but a clear joining of two into one.

Bro. Parrish 07-08-2009 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23480)
I pray it will not prove to be futile and if it is she will be held accountable at the J.S. of Christ for the things she does in this body.

I have grown not only by your words in posts but this forum has helped me to analyze my attitude reaction and actions, in that case it helps me from really expressing what I would say in the heat of a moment of an offense which may or may not be existing in the posters words. that growth in reactions is something I have needed.

With Parish however his posts are offensive when he is upset with anyone. I cannot change what Parish says. However I can change how I react or not to react which ever is appropriate.


WOW. I haven't even posted one reply on this thread and you're over hear taking shots at me anyway. What color of hypocrisy are you wearing today... :(

custer 07-08-2009 08:14 PM

Chette, you have been of immeasurable help to me in the way of checking my attitude and reactions...I hope that will be noticable in this post! I sure do feel it, and I want to THANK YOU!

Now, back on topic...
WOW, I do apologize folks; I thought we were all done with Samson! But I really shouldn't leave off with anyone having the impression that I am "ADDING to the words of God," so I'll try to clarify.

Here is Samson's phrase from Judges 14:18 - "If ye had not plowed with my heifer, ye had not found out my riddle." The whole point is that any time in the Bible when plowing and animals (oxen or asses) are mentioned together, there are always at least TWO animals doing the plowing; I cannot find a reference to plowing (or any form of the word) where there is only one animal doing the plowing. There are five such references in the Bible:

Deut. 22:10
I Sam. 14:14
Amos 6:12
I Kings 19:19
Job 1:14

These, of course, are in addition to Judges 14:18 where "plowed" and "heifer" are in the same passage. By simply running references (which is what the original post of this thread was all about) I was able to learn that in every other place in the Bible (listed above,) oxen that are being plowed with ARE YOKED (when there are two, they must be yoked to work together)...So, if Samson's heifer was NOT yoked, she would have to be THE ONLY WORKING OX IN THE BIBLE that wasn't yoked. So, I reached the conclusion that Samson's heifer was yoked by logical deduction...I have never tried to say that the passage SAYS she was yoked, and I fully admit that MAYBE SHE WASN'T YOKED. I just proved that the Biblical pattern for working oxen is that they ARE ALWAYS YOKED!

Be that as it may, the Judges verse was JUST A SIDE NOTE, an afterthought (not going "to ridiculously extreme lengths to pervert the clear Biblical teaching on the word 'yoked'.") In my post #22, I have SEVENTEEN 'proof texts' (plus practical info) that show that the original post of this thread is SERIOUSLY FLAWED! Now, in that same post, I did say something to the effect that I did not expect a response, but it is downright deceitful for someone to act as if the Judges verse was the only Biblical reply that I could come up with; in other words, if one is going to try to refute ONE of my verses, how about a refutation of the OTHER SEVENTEEN?

Again, POST #22 contains factual practical information about oxen AND seventeen verses of scripture that DIRECTLY CONTRADICT the findings of the original 'word study' of this thread, and I would HONESTLY, SINCERELY like to see how ANYONE can reconcile the facts and scripture with those opening assertions.

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

custer 07-08-2009 09:08 PM

Sorry, I almost forgot...for anyone who wishes to discuss this, I would also appreciate any thoughts on my posts #43 and 44. Thanks!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

greenbear 07-08-2009 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenbear (Post 22348)
I don't base my interpretation of scripture on any commentary. The only reason I'm listing these three is to show I am not some lone sick freak way out in left field here. I fear I'm about to be figuratively burned at the stake as a pervert or have to pin some scarlet letter to my blouse. Sheesh.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
Judges 14:18

If ye had not ploughed with my heifer - If my wife had not been unfaithful to my bed, she would not have been unfaithful to my secret; and, you being her paramours, your interest was more precious to her than that of her husband. She has betrayed me through her attachment to you. Calmet has properly remarked, in quoting the Septuagint, that to plough with one's heifer, or to plough in another man's ground, are delicate turns of expression used both by the Greeks and Latins, as well as the Hebrews, to point out a wife's infidelities...

In this sense Samson's words were understood by the Septuagint, by the Syriac, and by Rabbi Levi. See Bochart, Hierozoic. p. 1, lib. ii., cap. 41, col. 406. The metaphor was a common one, and we need seek for no other interpretation of the words of Samson.

John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Judges 14:18

and he said unto them, if ye had not ploughed with my heifer; meaning his wife, whom he compares to an heifer, young, wanton, and unaccustomed to the yoke3; and by "ploughing" with her, he alludes to such creatures being employed therein, making use of her to get the secret out of him, and then plying her closely to obtain it from her; and this diligent application and search of theirs, by this means to inform themselves, was like ploughing up ground; they got a discovery of that which before lay hid, and without which they could never have had the knowledge of, as he adds:

ye had not found out my riddle; the explanation of it. Ben Gersome and Abarbinel interpret ploughing of committing adultery with her; in which sense the phrase is used by Greek and Latin writers4; but the first sense is best, for it is not said, "ploughed my heifer", but with her.


Matthew Poole's Commentary on the Holy Bible
Judges 14:18
Ver. 18. If you had not employed my wife to find it out, as men plough up the ground with a heifer, thereby discovering its hidden parts: he calls her
heifer, either because he now suspected her wantonness and too much familiarity with that friend which she afterwards married; or because she was joined with him in the same yoke; or rather, because they used such in ploughing.


I really don't understand the reason for these hysterics. My viewpoint on the meaning of this verse is not exactly unheard of.

The idea that Samson is saying all 30 men had sex with his wife is preposterous. One would be enough, don't you think? I believe Samson suspects his friend who he ended up giving her to. And just because Samson suspects adultery doesn't mean she actually committed adultery. It could be that no one had sex with his wife. Even if one of the men had sex with her, how could we be sure it wasn't rape?

When the thirty men had expounded his first riddle, Sampson responded with yet another riddle; If ye had not plowed with my heifer, ye had not found out my riddle.

A true riddle consists of a figurative and a literal description of an object in the form of a basic metaphor or allegory. It has two or more meanings. Riddles can be solved by verbal skill or through adaptive or versatile imagination.

allegory, a story or visual image with a second distinct meaning partially hidden behind its literal or visible meaning. The principal technique of allegory is personification, whereby abstract qualities are given human shape—as in public statues of Liberty or Justice. An allegory may be conceived as a metaphor that is extended into a structured system.http://www.answers.com/topic/allegory

Allegory communicates its message by means of symbolic figures, actions or symbolic representation. Allegory is generally treated as a figure of rhetoric, but an allegory does not have to be expressed in language: it may be addressed to the eye, and is often found in realistic painting, sculpture or some other form of mimetic, or representative art.

The etymological meaning of the word is broader than the common use of the word. Though it is similar to other rhetorical comparisons, an allegory is sustained longer and more fully in its details than a metaphor, and appeals to imagination, while an analogy appeals to reason or logic. The fable or parable is a short allegory with one definite moral. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory

If ye had not plowed with my heifer, ye had not found out my riddle.

Remember, a riddle has at least two meanings. In this riddle I believe there are actually three levels of meaning.

1)Literally plowing the ground with an ox to reveal the hidden parts of the ground.
2)Figuratively employing methods of uncovering Samson's secret from his wife. The idea of revealing secret things or hidden parts does have the feel of sexual immorality.
3)Although given in language rather than an image, this analogy is also addressed to the eye and can be pictured by the imagination. The physical form of a plowman behind the plow and...well, hopefully we all get the idea.

I can't foresee any circumstance that would compel me to respond to this thread again, short of being labeled as a harlot. No... not even then. I believe custer will have to play out the rest of this (whatever "this" is) by herself or maybe she'll find someone to take George's and my spots.

OK. I'm positive nobody cares but me but before Brandon unregisters me as I requested, I will take the opportunity to add something that has bugged me that I overlooked since shortly after I wrote this post. Since I had stated that I would by no means post to this thread again I didn't feel that I could add it. But now I will. I'm sure I'm taking myself too seriously but ... here goes.

Just after the editing deadline passed on this post I realized I had missed the most important part of the analogy:

Quote:

Remember, a riddle has at least two meanings. In this riddle I believe there are actually three levels of meaning. (make that four levels of meaning.)

1)Literally plowing the ground with an ox to reveal the hidden parts of the ground.
2)Figuratively employing methods of uncovering Samson's secret from his wife. The idea of revealing secret things or hidden parts does have the feel of sexual immorality.
3)Although given in language rather than an image, this analogy is also addressed to the eye and can be pictured by the imagination. The physical form of a plowman behind the plow and...well, hopefully we all get the idea.
4) What does a plowman do after plowing the ground? HE SCATTERS SEED.

It's just so obvious that plowing has been a metaphor for sex in every "primitive" agrarian society in history. It even is in ours.

I don't have a filthy mind as Pam suggests. I only want to correctly interpret the scriptures the best I can.
Those are the reasons I interpret Judges 14:18 the way I do.

chette777 07-08-2009 10:02 PM

Oh Parish you are being to sensitive. I am not taking shots of any kind at you. the context is explanation as to how I have been forced by your (sensitiveness obviously) posts to reevaluate my own heart. But not that you are a help in that seeing it is God is works these things and gets all the glory.

chette777 07-08-2009 10:05 PM

Greenbear,

Please there is no reason to get unregistered.

your post have been encouraging and enlightening as we get a female view on some issues that differ from others. especially on this topic.

please reconsider staying around.

Jassy 07-08-2009 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenbear (Post 23488)
OK. I'm positive nobody cares but me but before Brandon unregisters me as I requested, I will take the opportunity to add something that has bugged me that I overlooked since shortly after I wrote this post....

4) What does a plowman do after plowing the ground? HE SCATTERS SEED.

It's just so obvious that plowing has been a metaphor for sex in every "primitive" agrarian society in history. It even is in ours.

I don't have a filthy mind as Pam suggests. I only want to correctly interpret the scriptures the best I can.

Those are the reasons I interpret Judges 14:18 the way I do.

Sis Jen,

Please don't unregister here! I've appreciated your posts and reading all of the conversations going on here. Sometimes I haven't agreed with the way things have been handled, but I still see it as EDIFYING, one way or the other. I'm not saying that I haven't agreed with YOU, personally, since I do understand where you are coming from.

The Scripture clearly indicates that it is a RIDDLE - and you gave a good analogy that supports your point. I can't say it is wrong!

When disagreements go on here, I tend to sit back and read - I'm not brave like you and others, sis. I admire the fact that you stand by your beliefs and that you supply very good support for them. Additionally, I admire your openness to correction and to TRUTH. I know that your goal is NOT to be RIGHT... but to learn the TRUTH from God's Word.

Please remain!

If the conflicts here are too bothersome for you, then just sit back and read, as I have done, and don't get involved. But you are not me - and I don't encourage you to do that, if it doesn't fit your personality and style. The Bible clearly shows many different personalities and "styles"! Not everyone is the same. Look at how the 4 Gospels differ and we can see evidence of that.

Anyway, I want to encourage you to remain a vital member of this forum, sis!

I, for one, appreciate you here!

Your sister,
Jassy

greenbear 07-08-2009 10:44 PM

Thanks for your kind words Chette and Jassy. I didn't say the part about requesting to be unregistered to elicit support for staying. But who knows, the human heart is deceitful above all things...

I posted because I was frustrated I hadn't been able to make my most important argument for my interpretation and I saw my last chance.

I must be an old curmudgeon myself, though I'm not that old and I'm definitely not crusty. I believe I will name my next cat after George's nickname for himself. Not that I'm looking to take in a fifth cat any time soon. Then I would be considered a true "cat lady" by my mother. And my husband would be less than pleased.

How about this: I'll stay if Pam asks me to.

Pam, you have the POWER!!!

I have no expectations one way or the other. Let's see what happens.

Jen

greenbear 07-09-2009 12:20 AM

Quote:

I must be an old curmudgeon myself, though I'm not that old and I'm definitely not crusty.
I'm in no way implying that George is old and crusty, I was just going off Pam's word study of "curmudgeon".

George 07-09-2009 02:55 AM

Re: " Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"? "
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23449)
"yes Pam it sounds as if you are trying to be a grace filled person in those posts. I am trying to be sincere and open as I too make mistakes and try to learn from them. Sometimes if the same mistakes happen again and again with certain people I make sure I don't answer until I am confident it is not my fault. If I am sure I try to avoid them.

George, Irene and Greenbear are all very lovely people. try again and take everything with that grain of salt. we are the salt of the earth.

I am a person who come from a know it all life style and I have had to learn to drop it. It is hard coming to the lord late in life I carried lots of baggage and garbage into my Christian life and I am learning to unload it and throw it off which ever it takes."

I suggest you go to George's web page and read through his studies on the heart and also his studies on humanism. that will give you a good idea where he is coming from.

After I visited you web page I knew that Custer was not so bad and is quiet down to earth. so are they by the way.

The humble one wears the crown. and I have done it and eaten crow at the same time.

God bless sister.


Aloha brother Chette,

I cannot believe what you have said about custer, but your response has led me to make a decsion I have been contemplating for sometime.

The AV1611 Forums is turning into a debating society - we are biting and devoring one another. There is so little edifying going on anymore that I am going to scale back my participation and watch as the chaos and anarchy continue! We are supposed to all be of the "same mind", but instead we are all doing, whatever we please - regardless of what the Scriptures say.

We have driven away a brother in Christ that may have been a real blessing to the brethren here; sister greenbear wants to quit; and you are wanting to embrace some woman who has caused more division than practically any other woman who has joined this Forum since its inception! :eek:

Lately, I see so little profit taking place here. Every where I look is naysaying, backbiting, and personal attacks; and then on top of all that you choose to ignore the Biblical admonition to AVOID those who cause divisions - but instead you want to dialogue with them! If the brethren on this Forum would follow Paul's admonition and avoid those who cause divisions most of them would go away. But instead they keep dialoguing with these troublemakers - which only encourages them to continue their pernicious ways!

If you truly believe that custer (Pam) is: "trying to be a grace filled person in those posts", then all that I have presented in my Posts concerning her must not be "grace filled". She is either out of order, or I am.

For you to choose to IGNORE the fact that this woman has posted 27 Posts (more than half of all her Posts) in criticism of me absolutely astounds me, and makes me realize that if even you cannot see how divisive and destructive this vicious person is, then maybe I am wasting much of my time here!

I'm not quiting the Forum, but I refuse to be insulted by some shrewest woman day after day, and then have my friends come to her defense.

Brother we are told not to judge by "appearance", but judge "righteous judgment". Good luck dialoguing with this woman, I wish you well.

chette777 07-09-2009 03:03 AM

I was wondering why you were up so early or late.

I understand your concern I too am hurt that people are being driven away and not edified.

I am sending you an email directly

chette777 07-09-2009 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by custer (Post 23482)
Chette, you have been of immeasurable help to me in the way of checking my attitude and reactions...I hope that will be noticable in this post! I sure do feel it, and I want to THANK YOU!

Pam,

I hope you understand I took time with you to help as I could because we can control ourselves if we will yield to God and not our flesh and so much of our flesh will come through in post, and I like others, we tend to react quickly to what is said without any filtering and recognizing we don't have all the communication signs of others, and all knowledge.

Now having said that as you have read a very dear friend of mine is hurt by my even attempting to dialog with you. I can't judge his heart but I can feel it and that grieves me. He was just as hurt by you as you feel you were hurt by him and I am sure GreenBear fits into this square some where.

Now he is hurt by me because he may think I am defending you or siding with you on the issues you posted. of which I am not I tried to stay nuetral during all ofour dialoging. and without rebuking you for some of the overly ciritcal statement you made of him I came to you humbly and sincerely to help you to grow from all this. It is our duty to one another to be iron that sharpens iron, encouraging one another to good works.

So having said that. I want to encourage you to go back through and look only at what you said in reactions from the very first post where you began to become critical of others and see how you would of handled it as a woman of God should. and if as a woman seeking to be more like Christ would you say it differently or just not say it at all?

I in no way saying that some of the criticism you laid on George and Greenbrear was just. It maybe in your mind but as a third party from what I read it was not.

So I pray that you learn more and grow more in Christ, that you would have Christ's mind and heart for those who found themselves on the otherend of Custer's ire and do what is right.

We are God's husbandman and building and he is doing work in all of us. I am glad I could be of assistance.

Ripdood 07-09-2009 08:48 AM

Hey all,

I know I am just a new guy here and no one really knows me. But I have been following this thread with some interest and trepidation. Now I feel I want to add my opinion here (which along with a dollar will get you a cup of coffee someplace).

Marriage is not a yoking together of two individuals, it is a joining of two folks into one flesh. How do I know this for certain? I was married to a wonderful woman for 24.5 years. She went to be with the LORD 6 years ago and it felt like someone tore my soul in half. We were one person in our hearts, minds, and everything else in life.

I am from a farm background, grew up around livestock and such. While I am no expert on anything I do know if you have a team of animals for plowing, puttin' up hay, or any other thing ya use a team for you have a producing entity. If one animal is replaced with another, there is a time of adjustment but soon that team will come back to working as one, whether it is horses or oxen.

You take any animal and tear it in half you won't never have a workable animal again.

Losing my wife was like that, I am functional but even if I were to remarry it will never be the same as with her, similar is NOT the same.

I think one of the reasons we have problems with the divorce rate among both saved and unsaved couples in the world is because too many think of it as a yoking together, which implies a burden to be borne.

Marriage is not picking up more baggage, it is gaining a helpmeet and expanding of your capacity to serve and love even more.

The original post which opened this thread was an excellent presentation of the verses and thoughts of our LORD in the matter of understanding the concept of yoked or joined. The subsequent posts had interesting points but soon degenerated into a sorry mess of name calling and thin skinned lashing back. Just my opinion.


Nuff said,

George 07-09-2009 09:40 AM

Re: " Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"? "
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ripdood (Post 23516)
Hey all,

I know I am just a new guy here and no one really knows me. But I have been following this thread with some interest and trepidation. Now I feel I want to add my opinion here (which along with a dollar will get you a cup of coffee someplace).

Marriage is not a yoking together of two individuals, it is a joining of two folks into one flesh. How do I know this for certain? I was married to a wonderful woman for 24.5 years. She went to be with the LORD 6 years ago and it felt like someone tore my soul in half. We were one person in our hearts, minds, and everything else in life.

I am from a farm background, grew up around livestock and such. While I am no expert on anything I do know if you have a team of animals for plowing, puttin' up hay, or any other thing ya use a team for you have a producing entity. If one animal is replaced with another, there is a time of adjustment but soon that team will come back to working as one, whether it is horses or oxen.

You take any animal and tear it in half you won't never have a workable animal again.

Losing my wife was like that, I am functional but even if I were to remarry it will never be the same as with her, similar is NOT the same.

I think one of the reasons we have problems with the divorce rate among both saved and unsaved couples in the world is because too many think of it as a yoking together, which implies a burden to be borne.

Marriage is not picking up more baggage, it is gaining a helpmeet and expanding of your capacity to serve and love even more.

The original post which opened this thread was an excellent presentation of the verses and thoughts of our LORD in the matter of understanding the concept of yoked or joined. The subsequent posts had interesting points but soon degenerated into a sorry mess of name calling and thin skinned lashing back. Just my opinion.


Nuff said,

Aloha brother,

I appreciate your comments, which are so true! :amen:

I am truly sorry for the loss of your wife. The Lord saw fit to take our oldest son (42 years old) home at about the same time you lost your wife, and as much as it was painful, I believe the loss of your wife was even more devastating for you brother.

My wife and I have been married for 48 years and I can not imagine my life here on earth without her. We also are not only one flesh, but we are also of one mind, one heart,and one spirit. She is not only my "helpmeet", she has also been my life's faithful companion; my very best friend (here on earth); and she "completes" me.

I have learned in this life that your children "leave", and your "friends" may desert you, but a faithful wife - outside of the Lord, there's nothing to compare with that!

I, like you, believe the Bible to be absolutely clear on this issue, and having been blessed with a Proverbs 31 wife for the past 48 years, I pity the man who hasn't known such a blessing.

God bless you brother - I believe that you will be a welcome addition to the AV1611 Bible Forums. :)

greenbear 07-09-2009 01:43 PM

Pam,

First of all, I withdraw my post of allowing you to decide whether I stay or leave. Last night I ordered an apron from your website. It really is beautiful. I feel I was led to try to reach you for the Lord's sake.

You have gone to great lengths to get people's attention here. You have made many untrue and unkind, even cruel remarks about George. You have said things that I would personally fear for my own life if I was to say them or even think them. We are in the age of grace and the Father sees Christ's blood when He looks at us, that is true. But that doesn't mean He doesn't chastise His children in this life. That chastisement can be unto death. The Lord will do what it takes to get our attention if we are His. Are you His, Pam? You have shown no fruit in that regard. Can you come back and post in humility and love? We should all humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God and He will lift us up.

Everything George has posted about you is absolutely correct. I will personally give you another chance. If you continue to argue and use sophist reasoning and maintain your mocking and scornful spirit I will stop communicating with you again. I pray that you will join us all in allowing Christ to conform us to His image. That's what this fellowship is all about. I've learned so much and I believe you can too.

Jennifer

greenbear 07-09-2009 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenbear (Post 23542)
Pam,

First of all, I withdraw my post of allowing you to decide whether I stay or leave. Last night I ordered an apron from your website. It really is beautiful. I feel I was led to try to reach you for the Lord's sake.

You have gone to great lengths to get people's attention here. You have made many untrue and unkind, even cruel remarks about George. You have said things that I would personally fear for my own life if I was to say them or even think them. We are in the age of grace and the Father sees Christ's blood when He looks at us, that is true. But that doesn't mean He doesn't chastise His children in this life. That chastisement can be unto death. The Lord will do what it takes to get our attention if we are His. Are you His, Pam? You have shown no fruit in that regard. Can you come back and post in humility and love? We should all humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God and He will lift us up.

Everything George has posted about you is absolutely correct. I will personally give you another chance. If you continue to argue and use sophist reasoning and maintain your mocking and scornful spirit I will stop communicating with you again. I pray that you will join us all in allowing Christ to conform us to His image. That's what this fellowship is all about. I've learned so much and I believe you can too.

Jennifer

I want to add to and modify my post above. I know I don't see everything clearly. I know I am not the Judge, either. If you could see my heart you would know I am not trying to be hurtful or harsh though I can see I come off that way sometimes. The Lord is so patient with all of us and it is not fear that leads any of us to repentance but it is when we get a glimpse of His loving kindness and it breaks our hearts. I am not a mature christian and many times I can be deceived that my reactions are spiritual when really they are carnal. I apologize to you if I have hurt you. When I read your post last night I was shocked. You insinuated that George is a fool and equated him as a fool of the magnitude of Nabal, no less. I am not reaching out to you because I despise you or look down on you in any way. It is out of love. I hope that you can see that. If not, then I only pray that the Lord will work in your life and your heart in the same way He is working in mine. I know that He works in our lives according to His own timetable, not anybody elses. I for one hope you can come back to the board in a spirit of love and reconciliation.

greenbear 07-09-2009 04:01 PM

Brother George,

I want to apologize if I hurt you in any way by trying to reach Pam. I recognize the scriptural principle you are following and that you have decades of experience that I don't have the benefit of. But I have to go with what I feel the Lord wants me to do. Maybe I'm wrong. I also apologize if in my posts #61 and 62 it seemed I took lightly what Pam had written about you. That is absolutely not the case. I was delirious with exhaustion by that point and I saw the absurdity of what she had done and sometimes something can become so ridiculous that it strikes me as almost humorous. Sort of like the saying 'If you don't laugh you will cry." Or a release of tension. I am sorry if I added anything to the pain it must have caused you. I hope you know how much respect I have for you. You and Renee have been such a blessing to me and to my marriage.

I hope you don't quit posting or leave the board because in my opinion and I believe in many other member's opinions that would be a great loss.

In Christ's love,

Jennifer

Ripdood 07-09-2009 06:18 PM

Brother George,

Thank you for your kind words about my wife. They are much appreciated.

May the LORD bless you and yours muchly.

chette777 07-09-2009 06:23 PM

It looks like despite the conflict Pam is truly loved by the brethren.

Jen, she is still growing that is for sure and I am just guessing but she may have went to a public school or somehow someone helped her to learn to reason in what we call sophist. I used to argue that way but I never knew there was a Greek Society behind it. we are taught it either through our teachers or through our families and today TV.

George is right this Sophist thinking is now part of the "Greek" reasoning at most Christian Bible Colleges and Seminaries. I guess being Greek is the in thing with these guys. Paul Says the Greek seeketh wisdom

George 07-09-2009 08:16 PM

Re: "Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"?"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by greenbear (Post 23548)
Brother George,

I want to apologize if I hurt you in any way by trying to reach Pam. I recognize the scriptural principle you are following and that you have decades of experience that I don't have the benefit of. But I have to go with what I feel the Lord wants me to do. Maybe I'm wrong. I also apologize if in my posts #61 and 62 it seemed I took lightly what Pam had written about you. That is absolutely not the case. I was delirious with exhaustion by that point and I saw the absurdity of what she had done and sometimes something can become so ridiculous that it strikes me as almost humorous. Sort of like the saying 'If you don't laugh you will cry." Or a release of tension. I am sorry if I added anything to the pain it must have caused you. I hope you know how much respect I have for you. You and Renee have been such a blessing to me and to my marriage.

I hope you don't quit posting or leave the board because in my opinion and I believe in many other member's opinions that would be a great loss.

In Christ's love,

Jennifer


Aloha sister Jennifer,

I am pleased that you have decided to remain on the AV1611 Bible Forums. Both you and sister Jassy have been a blessing and a profitable addition to our "family".

I have never seen anything that you posted that has been offensive to me. Where I might disagree with you is not worth fighting over. You have always been circumspect and considerate in your posts, and I greatly appreciate your conduct here. (so there is no need to apologize - for you haven't done a thing to offend me.)

I have been calling myself "the old curmudgeon" for some time now, and it has always been "tongue in cheek" :rolleyes: - that is with a touch of humor ;).

I know that I can come across "hard" at times, but there are certain things that I will not abide, and at 69 years of age I can afford to be a bit of an "old curmudgeon". :D But I can assure you that my "bark" is worse than my "bite", and in regards to both you and sister Jassy, if either one of you were to leave this Forum, you would be missed! :(

If I may - I would advise you to never let another Christian's "conduct" determine your own. I have determined, with the time that the Lord gives me, to walk with the Lord and to only trust Him, and if NO ONE else wants to follow Him, I am determined to follow Him - regardless of what any other Christian may do or say!

Give my regards to your husband - he is a most fortunate man, as I am also. :)

Psalms 118:8 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.

Jassy 07-09-2009 09:37 PM

Brothers and Sisters,

I have a few things to say to several of you.

Sister Jen, you are very dear to me. I would grieve if you left this Forum. I greatly admire the way that you stand up for what you believe in. That is a gift that you have! I also admire the way that you humbly seek forgiveness, whenever you feel that you have offended someone. It is actually not the case, as I see it, but some may wrongly perceive it that way.

Please don't leave the Forum, Jen!!

Sister Pam, although I do welcome new members to the forum, and it is always interesting getting to know these new members, what I find to be very difficult to handle, is when a new member says offensive things to the beloved, long-term members here. Especially when those members are older, as I said in my previous post. We ought to look towards them with RESPECT, as an elder in the Lord. Sister, that is a BIBLICAL concept!

I want to tell you that the products that I ordered from your farm are top quality and I am very pleased with them. In no way do I let what happens here affect any other aspect, and I'm happy to continue to do business with you. The handmade soaps that I purchased are wonderful and have truly benefitted my skin! The natural lip balms are so smooth and full of moisture, that I find no other natural balm that can compare! So, I thank you for those products and I would like to highly recommend them to others.

Brother George, you didn't deserve any of the criticism that has been presented in any of these posts. I have been much edified by the contributions that you have made here at the Forum. In my humble opinion, sister Pam was very out-of-line in her attitude and her behavior was not befitting of a good Christian woman. You and your wife, Renee, are such a loving example to me, of what a true Christian marriage consists of.

Brother Chette, you are a wonderful brother in the Lord and I have been honored to view the humbleness by which you conduct yourself. It is very edifying for me and shows true love for the brothers and sisters.

Brother Ripdood, you are new here - but it appears that you are going to be a very valuable addition to our little family here at the Forum and I welcome you. I also want to say that I'm very sorry for your loss of such a loving wife. The pain that you feel with that was very evident. What you posted about her was lovely to see. It gives me great hope that one day I may be blessed to find a husband that cherishes me that much and enjoy a marriage like that.

Brother Brandon, it behooves me to emphasize how much I appreciate the Forum here and I thank you for starting it and managing it. I'm sure that is not an easy task at times. You don't know what a wonderful blessing this Forum has been for me. For that reason, I keep my patience and believe that we can all stand together as brothers and sisters in Christ and put that above any personal interests that we each may have. The BODY OF CHRIST is what is vital.

Brother Tony, I'm very glad that you are back! I always learn so much from your posts!

Brother Luke, your posts are also very edifying for me.

To all the other brothers and sisters that I haven't mentioned - I appreciate all of you, for what you contribute here. Even the negative things have at times been for my edification... because I learn how I am to conduct myself, or how NOT conduct myself. I apologize that I have neglected to mention each and every one of you, but you are all precious in the Lord to me, of that I assure you.

TO EVERYONE: I may not always join in discussions... but you can be sure that I am reading and learning here. This Forum has made me want to study the Bible more and to one day be skilled in debate - so that I can present the TRUTH with confidence!

Christian Love and Peace to all the Believers here!
Jassy

chette777 07-09-2009 10:18 PM

Praise be to our Lord forever and ever. Glory to our God.

greenbear 07-09-2009 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23580)
Praise be to our Lord forever and ever. Glory to our God.

Amen!

custer 07-09-2009 11:16 PM

greenbear,

My daughter says to tell you "thank you" for your apron order! Those are usually custom-made-to-order, so we will be contacting you to discuss the details.

In answer to your questions:
Yes, I got saved in 1980...and
Yes, I am perfectly capable of posting in humility and love.

Jassy,

Thank you for your kind comments; I am thrilled that you have been pleased with your soap and lip balm! I feel very blessed that the Lord has given me the inclination and ability to produce these healthy things!

Chette,

I haven't forgotten about getting those soap recipes to you; I just haven't had time to get them typed up and sent...hopefully soon!

All,

Is the thread topic discussion OVER?

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

Jassy 07-10-2009 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chette777 (Post 23580)
Praise be to our Lord forever and ever. Glory to our God.

Amen! :amen:

Steve Schwenke 07-10-2009 09:07 PM

observations
 
Folks, I haven't been on this forum in awhile, but for some weird reason, this thread caught my eye. I have not read the Love and Race thread (don't intend too...time thing, ya' know!!!), but it is evident that there is some carry over from that thread. Here are my observations:

Despite Custer's "loud" objections, they have merit. George, you never answered her arguments. You just slammed her for "attacking" you, which I don't think she did. She may have been very forceful in her arguments, but she made valid points, and gave you 17 verses that you never answered her on.

The Judges 14:18 passage (which I realize is a sidelight to the main event) was interesting. I was raised in an independent, fundamental Baptist church, Christian school, etc. I have NEVER heard that this refered to "marital relations." I have always heard it as Custer put it. They used her against Samson to get information. The text is clear. If the 30 of them had raped her, chances are she would be dead...like the woman in Judges 19, which really showed the depths of depravity in Israel. The three commentaries somebody provided didn't deal with the context. It certainly shows how sheltered I have been in my life, but it doesn't prove that the passage MUST be interpretted to mean that they raped her, or abused her. The context is clear - they used her to get information to put Samson in a bad position, and he knew it.

In the end, good discussion. Heat is good. It is better when there are two sides discussing the issue, even if it is a little "hot." Too bad nobody bothered to answer the main points of Custer's arguments!

In the end, it was nice to see everyone cool down. We may not all agree, but we are all on the same side, and we are all fighting the same enemies!

In Christ
Pastor Steve Schwenke

George 07-10-2009 11:57 PM

Re: "Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"?"
 
Quote:

"Despite Custer's "loud" objections, they have merit. George, you never answered her arguments. You just slammed her for "attacking" you, which I don't think she did. She may have been very forceful in her arguments, but she made valid points, and gave you 17 verses that you never answered her on."
Aloha Steve,

For your information: After clashing with custer on the "Love & Race" Thread, I notified her (on 06/10/09) that I would NOT respond to any more of her Posts (had you bothered to read the Thread you would have known that). This is the problem with you judging a matter without knowing all of the facts.

I have Posted approximately 875 Posts on the Forum in the last year and a half. I am not "obligated" to deal with "Christians" who twist my wife's words and my words; and take them out of context; and make them say things we did NOT say; and on top of that - call me a LIAR! :eek:

For many years now, I refuse to have anything to do with "Christians" who twist, wrest, and change my words (or God's words) and who cause divisions.

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

WHY would you "comment" about an issue on which you don't have all the facts and won't take the time to read and research them?

Your comment:
Quote:

" I have not read the Love and Race thread (don't intend too...time thing, ya' know!!!), "
And for your information her so-called "points" do NOT have any "merit", and in addition I do not consider what transpired on this Thread or on the "Love & Marriage Thread" a "good discussion"; edifying; or profitable at all!

Anyone who Posts more than 50% of their Posts (27 out of 52 - at last count) in regards to just one individual on the Forum, and all of those Posts are negative, criticizing, baiting, and contentious) is not looking for a "good discussion"! :eek:

In case you want to do some research here are the Posts of interest in both Threads:

Love and Race

George (1st. Post – Reply to sister Jassy > 06/03/09)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...4&postcount=28

Renee (George’s wife – 1st. Post – Reply to sister Jassy)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...4&postcount=40

custer (1st. Post – Reply to Diligent)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...7&postcount=41

George (2nd. Post – Reply to Diligent)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...9&postcount=46

custer (2nd. Post – N/A)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...1&postcount=47

George (3rd. Post – Reply to biblereader)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...8&postcount=51

custer (3rd. Post – Twist’s & Changes Renee’s “words”!)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...5&postcount=62

custer (4th. Post – Twist’s & Changes George’s “words”!)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...8&postcount=63

custer (5th. Post – N/A)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...4&postcount=67

custer (6th. Post – comment on George’s Post)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...7&postcount=68

George (4th. Post – reply to custer’s Post #63, where she Twisted & Changed George’s “words”!) )
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...6&postcount=71

custer (7th. Post – Reply to George)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...1&postcount=72

custer (8th. Post – Reply to George)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...7&postcount=73

custer (9th. Post – Reply to George)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...9&postcount=74

George (5th. Post – reply to various custer’s Posts > where she attacks George.)
George’s FINAL POST (06/10/09) to custer:
{“Don't expect any more personal "replies" from me in regards to anything more you may have to say on this Forum. I refuse to have a "Cat Fight" with an emancipated Westernized "Christian" woman, who thinks she knows everything and who refuses to receive instruction. There is NO PROFIT in it!”}

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...3&postcount=75

custer (10th. & 11th. Posts – Replies to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...0&postcount=77
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...2&postcount=79

custer (12th. Post – Reply to George)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...4&postcount=80

custer (13th. Post – Reply to George)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...7&postcount=82

custer (14th. Post – Reply to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...5&postcount=84

custer (15th. Post – Reply to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...0&postcount=86

custer (16th. Post – Reply to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...9&postcount=88

custer (16th. Post – Reply to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...3&postcount=90

George (6th. Post – to greenbear in regards to custer)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...0&postcount=92

custer (17th. Post – Reply to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...3&postcount=94

custer (18th. Post – Reply to greenbear > Last Post on Thread)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...6&postcount=96


The Totals on this Thread:

Custer = 8 Posts (in reply to George and/or Renee - All Negative )


George = 2 Posts (in reply to custer’s Posts – Admonishing, Reproving, and Rebuking )


Biblical Marriage - "Joined Together" or "Yoked Together"?

George (Original Thread – Addressed to the Forum
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...65&postcount=1

custer (1st. Post – “ Cutsy Remarks” to George - After notified of my “Final Post” to her.)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...96&postcount=4

Renee (George’s wife – 1st. Post – Comments on Thread)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...12&postcount=6

custer (2nd. Post – reply to Tim)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...8&postcount=10

Renee (George’s wife – 2nd. Post – reply to Tim)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...0&postcount=11

George (2nd Post – reply to Tim)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...2&postcount=13

custer (3rd. Post – Criticizing George)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...3&postcount=14

Renee (George’s wife – 3rd. Post – to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...5&postcount=16

custer (4th. Post – to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...0&postcount=21

custer (5th. Post – Criticizing George)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...3&postcount=22

custer (6th. Post – commenting on Samson’s wife)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...6&postcount=23

George (3rd. Post – addressed to the Forum > in regards to custer’s “conduct”)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...9&postcount=24

custer (7th. Post – to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...8&postcount=26

custer (8th. Post – to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...8&postcount=28

custer (9th. Post – Calling George a liar!)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...0&postcount=29

George (4th. Post – reply to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...9&postcount=34

custer (10th. Post – in regards to greenbear & George)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...7&postcount=36

custer (11th. Post – to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...1&postcount=38

custer (12th. Post – to greenbear)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...0&postcount=40

Renee (George’s wife – 4th. Post – to the Forum > asking that everyone “drop the subject”)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...5&postcount=41

custer (13th. Post – still arguing to Renee )
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...2&postcount=43

custer (14th. Post – Criticizing George & George’s Original Thread)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...2&postcount=44

custer (15th. Post – to biblereader . “Cutsy Remarks”)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...8&postcount=45

custer (16th. Post – to Chette)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...4&postcount=50

George (5th. Post – reply to Chette > in regards to custer’s conduct on the Forum)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...5&postcount=52
custer (17th. Post – to Chette)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...2&postcount=55

custer (18th. Post – to the Forum in general)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...6&postcount=56

George (6th. Post – reply to Chette > in regards to custer’s conduct on the Forum)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...5&postcount=63

George (7th. Post – reply to Ripdood > N/A to issue)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...0&postcount=67

George (8th. Post – reply to greenbear > N/A to issue)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...5&postcount=73

custer (19th. Post – to greenbear > N/A to issue)
http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...4&postcount=77


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

Website © AV1611.Com.
Posts represent only the opinions of users of this forum and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the webmaster.

Software for Believing Bible Study