RE: [TruthTalk] To "flame" or not to "flame"

[Jonathan Hughes]

Congrats on the new grandchild John.  Good to see you back on the list again.  I was wondering where you were.   Jonathan   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 9:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] To "flame" or not to "flame"   In a message dated 4/27/2004 8:26:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Daniel responds: Oh, give me a break.  You're about as obfuscating  as any politician.  Teaching is teaching is teaching.  If I put forth a concept concerning scriptural doctrinal matters -- it's teaching.  Even if my "pupils" want to discard it.  When Judy Jezebel  Taylor took it upon her female self to dissect my Romans 7  article it was her TEACHING the interpretation of scriptural  doctrines.  This is strictly forbidden in I Timothy  2. The only thing feminized is  you and the rest  of the pencil necked wimps who refuse to abide by scripture  and put  these jezebels  in their place. And, earlier in that post he writes the words "Judy Jezebel"  --  proving that he can  actually rhyme and write at the same time.  Daniel  -- do you walk upright while slinging the club and dragging your woman back to the cave?    Too bad there is no attention paid to cultural "requirements"  such as this prohibition against women teachers and the washing of feet and the cultural impact to the Jewish community of "water baptism for the remission of sins."    Seems like Mary, the mother of a very adult Jesus, was deserving of full respect as she issued orders to her son  in John 3.  Or is it that women can give orders but not teach.   And your wife goes for this?   Give me a break. I'll go find a hiding place, now In grace John  Smithson  --  a new grandpa  --  6.4 pounds named Lilly Marie.   Bare foot, pregnant and submissively silent will not be my prayer for her.