You might be an IFB If…

...if you believe an English language translation corrects the Greek and Hebrew...


YJMBAIFB
 
ALAYMAN said:
Our pastor shortened service today due to the timing of incoming snow/ice, so we'll be expecting the IFB gestapo to revoke our IFB card any day now.😜
Click to expand...
Ours canceled services altogether.
 
...if you claim absolute fidelity and adherence to the infallibility, inerrancy, and inspiration of Scripture but you are fond of saying "just close your Bibles and look up here"...


YJMBAIFB
 
...if you believe that the first step of disciplining a child always ought to be "spare the rod" while citing the Pearls....


YJMBAIFB(x)
 
...if you know what "The 6 inch rule" is, and bonus points if you can quote 1 Cor 7:1 to support it...


YJMBAIFB
 
If you graduated from a college where the dating parlor with the 6-inch rule was known as "The Furniture Store" - you may be IFB.

(I believe the part about the separate sidewalks for men and women is just an urban legend - but then again, I could be wrong).
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
If you still have separate swim sessions for boys and girls during Camp week...
Click to expand...
.
this one is still hard for me to understand.... or even fathom the scenario behind it.. ... even after it was explained to me by an extreme-fundamentalist i still didn;t get it.. ... .......but then i also never went to camp in the sense most mainland fundamentalists talk about it.... . ...unless one considers growing up in waikiki to be a kind of permanent summer swim camp.. ... and surf camp... snorkle/dive camp.... beach volleyball camp etc... building sandcastles camp... . ... which brings up another question in my mind... .if fundamentalists had summer camp week at the beach.... would they have separate sand castle building sessions for boys and girls?......:confused:
 
if you believe that deuteronomy 22-5 means it;s a sin for a woman to wear pants of any kind.. ... (even pants made specifically for women that no man would be caught dead in...)..... but you have no problem with women wearing cullottes... (which were invented by and for male cowboys in argentina)..... ..then you just might be a fundamentalist.....

and side note.... ..if you are perfectly fine with women wearing generic t-shirts with those cullottes.. (t-shirts made identically the same way for both men and women)... .. not to even mention tube socks and tennis shoes.... . then you are most definitely a fundamentalist.... :cool:
 
All the strict dress codes for women, and bans on women's slacks, sure worked good for Josh Duggar, didn't they?

At the time that the command of Deuteronomy 22:5 was given, I do not believe anyone in or around Palestine wore any kind of slacks or pants. Everyone, men and women, wore robe-like garments. So just what was Moses talking about, when he said a women must not wear a man's garment? (And why does that command not apply to the wearing by women of T-shirts, jackets, baseball caps, tennis shoes and tube socks, all of which are worn by men?) I don't pretend to have the final, definitive answer as to what Moses was talking about. However, it is interesting to note Josephus' commentary on this passage: "Take care, especially in your battles, that no woman use the habit of a man, nor man the garment of a woman." [Antiquities of the Jews, Book 4, Chapter 8:43]. Could this have been intended as a prohibition on women in combat?

Also, the passage appears in a section which begins with this statement in Deuteronomy 12:1 - "These are the statutes and judgments, which ye shall observe to do in the land, which the Lord God of thy fathers giveth to possess it, all the days that ye live upon the earth." These commands apply to the ancient Israelites while they were living in the land of Israel. We don't normally obey these commands today, such as the "Everybody Must Get Stoned" command to kill proponents of false religions by stoning, Deuteronomy 13:8-10, or the prohibition on mutilated men joining a church, Deuteronomy 23:1.

If you think I am a compromiser for saying these things - well, you might be an IFB.
 
illinoisguy said:
All the strict dress codes for women, and bans on women's slacks, sure worked good for Josh Duggar, didn't they?

At the time that the command of Deuteronomy 22:5 was given, I do not believe anyone in or around Palestine wore any kind of slacks or pants. Everyone, men and women, wore robe-like garments. So just what was Moses talking about, when he said a women must not wear a man's garment? (And why does that command not apply to the wearing by women of T-shirts, jackets, baseball caps, tennis shoes and tube socks, all of which are worn by men?) I don't pretend to have the final, definitive answer as to what Moses was talking about. However, it is interesting to note Josephus' commentary on this passage: "Take care, especially in your battles, that no woman use the habit of a man, nor man the garment of a woman." [Antiquities of the Jews, Book 4, Chapter 8:43]. Could this have been intended as a prohibition on women in combat?

Also, the passage appears in a section which begins with this statement in Deuteronomy 12:1 - "These are the statutes and judgments, which ye shall observe to do in the land, which the Lord God of thy fathers giveth to possess it, all the days that ye live upon the earth." These commands apply to the ancient Israelites while they were living in the land of Israel. We don't normally obey these commands today, such as the "Everybody Must Get Stoned" command to kill proponents of false religions by stoning, Deuteronomy 13:8-10, or the prohibition on mutilated men joining a church, Deuteronomy 23:1.

If you think I am a compromiser for saying these things - well, you might be an IFB.
Click to expand...
I've heard similar in the past. That it was a prohibition on woman wearing articles of clothing meant for combat. Which makes it interesting that IFBs don't prohibit women from wearing T-shirts, since those were developed for soldiers. Of course my wife was in violation of that either way since she was in the Navy.
 
tmjbog said:
I've heard similar in the past. That it was a prohibition on woman wearing articles of clothing meant for combat.
Click to expand...

I've heard that explanation. I've also heard it said that it was a prohibition against imitating the customs of the pagans--similar to the way the prohibition against trimming the beard or shaving the hair at the temples (Lev. 19:27) was apparently in reference to a particular custom practiced by the Egyptians or Arabs, who cut their hair in a certain fashion in devotion to one of their gods.

Whenever I see something in the Law that appears unusual or arbitrary, barring further study on the subject, my default assumption as to its rationale has basically become "because you must not imitate the pagans."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top