[chette777]

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]

Originally Posted by chette777

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."

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:

“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:

{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! I still stand by my statement}

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

George said:

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

“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"?:

“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 unscriptural “point”?

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

George said:

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!

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]

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.

Originally Posted by chette777

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]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by greenbear

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:

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]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by greenbear

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