text:
I Corinthians 11. I tried to delay it as long as I could, but-- (Laughter)Here we are. It has to do with the subordination and equality of women. I Corinthians 11. In our ongoing study of I Corinthians--and I know some of you are going to think that this is, you're going to be sitting there thinking, "Boy, does McArthur love this. I can just tell. He's just all lit up, and he's really eating up every thought here." I want you to know that I recognize that this is the kind of subject that becomes intensely practical. You're going to be wrestling with your own self all the way through it.
I'm not so concerned that it be a wonderful homily with all kinds of beautiful points and subpoints and that it work out in that manner. I'm only interested that you understand the importance and the meaning of the section from verse 2-16 of I Corinthians 11. We'll not be able to cover all of it this morning. It's a lengthy section. There are many things in it.
There are some very, very difficult aspects to this particular Scripture. The amount of time invested in this will probably not be reflected in what comes out just because I'm going to try to simplify it as much as I can, but it is a very difficult portion. You're dealing with a cultural situation that is hard to reproduce.
To try to understand exactly what the situation was in the city of Corinth secularly, what it was in the church of Corinth in terms of the spiritual life, what was going on in the mind of Paul and push all of that up into the modern day is not easy. We don't have a lot of background.
Then to distinguish between what is cultural and what is fact in terms of God's divine and universal principle becomes the real issue in the passage. We're going to endeavor to do that today and next Lord's day and to kind of tuck away this 11thchapter and the first 16 verses, anyway, into our minds of understanding.
Let me begin with some thoughts to help you understand why we need to deal with this so very, very carefully. The roles of men and women have become a battleground today. I think all of us are aware of this. We are constantly hearing about the battle for women's rights. I'm sure if it goes far enough, we'll have a men's lib to try to gain back some of the ground that's been lost, just because society tends to always want to equalize itself.
I think Satan is feverishly involved in upsetting the divine order any way he possibly can. It's clear, as you study the Bible, that God has a divine order in society related to man and woman. Of course, that is manifest in marriage. It's manifest in the church. It's manifest in every dimension of human life. God's basic pattern is there are two factors in society--authority and submission. God has designed that men be given the position of authority and women the position of submission.
It is generally then true that a man, whether he be married or single, must think of himself as someone who has been given by God a responsibility for authority in one sense or another. A woman, whether she is married or single, must recognize the fact that in general, as a woman, she must have a spirit of submission to all men.
Now we don't want to carry that too far. You'll get yourself in a lot of trouble, but the idea is that the spirit of a woman is the recognition is that she is in the position of subjection to men, whom God has given authority in the world.
Now if some of you are all ready to bail out, stick around, because there is a lot more to say. What I'm going to do is not give you opinion. If I have you my opinion on the subject, I couldn't live with myself. I'd have to duck for the next six months. (Laughter)Rather than give you my opinion, I'm going to just share with you what the Bible says and let you know that this is not anybody's opinion. This is God's authoritative statement on the subject.
What has amazed me, however, is that the women's liberation movement has found its way into the church. In general, for the most part, the church is stupid about the revelation of God. It doesn't know the Scripture, so it tends to want to jump on every bandwagon. If there is any kind of a movement in the world, just wait, and it'll get into the church.
It's no different with the women's liberation movement. We now have Christian feminists--whatever that might be--Christian feminists who are advocating the fact that there is only in Christ equality. They wave the flag of Galatians 3:28, that in Christ there is neither male nor female. On the basis of that and on the basis of I Peter 3:7, that a husband and a wife are heirs together of the grace of life, they postulate the fact that there is no such thing as authority and submission between men and women either in marriage, in the church, in business, in education, or in any other dimension.
In fact, there are many people who definitely and strongly feel that Paul was nothing but a male chauvinist. Believe it or not, there are even some so-called Christian people who write books and say that, in essence, that whenever Paul got on this subject, he in his background had a bad relationship with his mother or been burned by some lady or something, and so he was-- Whenever he comes to this subject, he stops giving revelation and fires out his opinion. So they arbitrarily would exchange the revelation of God for the opinion of Paul every time he talks on this subject, which is rather handy if you want to get rid of it. Maybe someday in history, people are going to see Paul for who he is, the great emancipator and protector of women, as God used him to show that though there is--and mark this--though there is a divine distinction in the roles, there is no distinction in spiritual life. There is no distinction in the essence. There is no distinction the person. There is no distinction in the worth of the person. There is no distinction in the emotion or the intellect or the will or the mind or the capacity or the ability between men and women in terms of what they can accomplish or how they can relate themselves to God. There is only a distinction in the role that they are assigned within the framework of society.
Women are not inferior to men in terms of essence, in terms of personality, in terms of thinking, in terms of anything other than role that they have been assigned. You work at a job, many of you men, and you are not in any way inferior to your boss. In your intellect, you might even be more intelligent. In your education, you might even have more. In your aptitude, you might even be superior. All he has over you is a different title, because he's been there long enough.
In order for your corporation to function, somebody's got to call the shots, and somebody's got to carry them out. In the church you have elders and deacons. Elders are not spiritually superior to deacons. They have a different function. We hope there is a spiritual equality in there.
The same is true with a man and a woman. Just because you are the head of the house doesn't mean that you are in any sense superior and she is inferior in essence or in person or personality, simply that you have be assigned distinct roles. I think God has accommodated the personality and the strength and weaknesses of both to those roles.
It's interesting to me that the people who've always used I Peter 3:7, "Heirs together of the grace of life," want to wave that banner, but they don't want to take the phrase before it in the very same verse, which says, "Honor the woman as the weaker vessel." How you can possibly just take what you want out of it and ignore the rest-- You've also got to conclude that Peter threw in his own opinion now and then, had the same problem. Several books have been written recently on the Christian Biblical feminist movement. I feel that the church is really going to have to face this issue.
There are many churches now that are battling the issue of should we or should we not have female elders? People ask me, "What do you think about women pastors?" I always give the same answer. "I never think about them." This desire to force into leadership in the church women simply because this is what's happening. The church wants to accommodate itself to society.
These books are coming out, written by women and in some cases by men, saying that whenever the Bible says this, it's either cultural, it's either Paul repeating his opinion, it isn't inspired by God, or we're misinterpreting it.
Those who listen to such writers are going to be confused. You're going to have to come up with the same conclusion that they do. In every case, they ultimately have to say, "Not all of what Paul said is the revelation of God. Some of it was his own opinion, and when he gave it, he was wrong."
In other words, eventually they must deny revelation. Once you've done that, you have really let the cat out of the bag. Then they become the judges of which part of Paul is inspired and which is not. Of course, that's a deadly, deadly attack.
Let me show you some Scriptures to reinforce concept that you're going to learn in I Corinthians 11. 1 Peter 3. I've mentioned it, let me read it to you. 1 Peter 3:1: "In the same manner--" That is, in the same manner that we are submissive to Christ. In chapter 2 he's been talking about that. "In the same manner that the church is submissive to the shepherd and bishop of her soul, in the same manner you wives be in subjection to your own husbands."
That's a simple statement. "Be in subjection to your own husbands." Verse 7 that I mentioned to you: "You husbands dwell with them according to knowledge." In other words, try to be understanding with your wife. It's important that you understand her. "Giving honor unto the wife as unto the weaker vessel." There is a key thing. "As being heirs together of the grace of life." That simply means as enjoying God's wonderful desire in marriage.
You see there's submission in verse 1 and a weaker vessel in verse 7. Now look at I Timothy 2 and see another Scripture that relates directly to this particular subject.
I Timothy 2:11, it says this: "Let the women learn in silence with all subjection." Women again are connected with subjection. Verse 12: "I permit not a woman to teach nor to take authority over the man but be in silence." A woman is to be in subjection, a man is to be in authority. There is that same duality. The man is in authority, the woman is subjection. He's talking here particularly and specifically about the church when it comes together in its assembly, its unified meetings such as you're experiencing right now this particular Lord's day.
Women are not to teach, they are to learn. They are not to take authority in the church and rule over men. That's very, very simple. It's very, very clear. Couldn't confuse anybody.
These people say, "Yeah, but that's just cultural. Paul is accommodating Timothy to the particular culture in which he had to minister." "Oh?" Verse 13 would end that, "For Adam was first born, then Eve." That's not cultural. God made Adam first and then He made Eve to be a helper for Adam. That's the way it's always been. Further, Adam wasn't deceived but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. The woman is the submissive one by creation and by virtual of her weakness in the Fall that confirms her submissive role.
You can't say, "Well, it's only because of culture." It's because of creation. It is the way God intended it from the very beginning. I take you further to I Corinthians. We're there this morning. Let's look at the 14thchapter of I Corinthians in another particular context related to the assembling of the church, connected with prophesying and speaking in tongues.
I Corinthians 14:34: "Let your women keep silence in the churches. It is not permitted them to speak but to be under obedience as also says the law." What law? The law of God. It is not just creation, it is God's Old Testament law that women are to be submissive. This is God's New Testament standard as well. The law of God says that women are to be silent in the churches and not take authority. Here in this case not to prophesy or speak in tongues.
Now verse 35: "If they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home, for it's a shame for women to speak in the church." That doesn't mean that a woman can't get up and give a testimony or make an announcement or something like that, but women are not to take the role of ruling the church, take the role of being teachers of the church. If they need to know anything, let them learn by asking their husband. The husband's part of the problem with women is they come and ask you, and you never know the answer. It behooves you, if they're going to be submissive, to make sure that you rule for God in your home by knowing something. Very difficult for a woman to do what she ought to do if you don't do what you ought to do, because she can't find any answers in the Biblical pattern unless you're obedient.
They'll say again about this, "Oh, that's just cultural again." Or else they'll say, "No, you see, here's where Paul wasn't inspired. He was getting a little upset here and just shooting off his opinion." Oh? Look at verse 37: "If any man think himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge the things that I write unto you are the--?" What? "The commandments of the Lord."
Either Paul's a liar or he's not. He has just made a statement about women in submission, and he says, "What I'm saying is a commandment of the Lord, and anybody who's spiritual, you'd better acknowledge it." I conclude that the people who don't acknowledge these truths as commandments of the Lord are not spiritual. If they're saved, they're carnal.
That's basic. The relationship of men and women whether in marriage, in business, in the church is founded on the very same principle, the very same revelation of God. The only way to get around it is to deny inspiration, and when you've done that, you've made Paul into a liar, because he specifically knew that might happen, so he said, "What I'm saying is indeed the commandment of the Lord."
Really. You can take the books that say that and throw them away, because they don't have an argument.
Apparently--going back to chapter 11 of I Corinthians--apparently they weren't clear on this concept in Corinth, and there was the potential of a woman's liberation movement. We don't know how involved it was, and there's been a lot of discussion, studying history, trying to figure out how far it had gone in Corinth, but at least it hadn't gone so far that they were smug and indifferent about it. At least they're asking the question here in chapter 11. They had asked Paul to answer this question undoubtedly, because is the second of I Corinthians where he is answering the questions they asked in the letter to him. At least they're open. We don't know how far--but apparently they at least had some kind of Christian feminist movement.
What it amounted to was this: In the society in Corinth, women who were proper, women who were modest, women who wanted to make a statement publicly and visibly about their submission to their husbands, women who were feminine, women who were genteel and wanted to take the role that was assigned to them in their society wore a veil as a symbol of their submission. That was the symbol--to be veiled.
That particular symbol varied from culture to culture, but in the Corinthian culture veils were the sign of woman's submissiveness. She was covering herself. She was leaving herself unexposed to other men by saying, "I belong to my husband. I want no other than my husband. I seek to attract no one other than my husband. I'm after nothing but what my husband provides for me. It is irrelevant that you even see me. I'm not interested."
That's how they stated that. We state that in different terms. By the way women dress today, they are either saying, "Look at me. I'm very interested in being looked at. Check me out." Even when they're married, they're saying, "Check me out. I either enjoy being checked out, or I may be looking for somebody else." Or you see a woman who's very, very modestly dressed, and it may be that she's making the statement--not always true--but it may be that she's making the statement, "I am already taken, and I could care less about whether you're interested or not."
There are ways in society in which we declare that, you see. It's true. In that society, the way a woman showed her submission to her man, the way a woman showed the simplicity, purity, and subjection--even single women who were submissive at that point to a father or whatever--simply in submission covered themselves. That was the feminine way.
But what apparently happened in Corinthians was sort of an abuse of Christian liberty. Some of the women, feeling that they were free in Christ, began to throw away their veils. It wasn't burn your bra, it was burn your veil. (Laughter)
Whenever you see a woman today who doesn't wear a bra or dressed in that manner, that woman is not a submissive woman. That woman is not radiating a dependence on a man. She is announcing something to everybody who sees her, and that something is, "Look at me. I'm interested in something other than what I've got." At least flirting with it.
There are ways in our society that that statement can be made or not made. In that society, when a veil was on, a woman was taking the place of submission. She was honoring the sanctity of a woman's virtue and of marriage. We would even go further and to say it was the custom in the Corinthian society for a prostitutes to be unveiled, because their business was to make sure they got seen. How could they drum up business if they had a veil on? They would throw their veil aside.
There is another interesting historical note that we find in studying the Corinthian situation. Erdmann points this out. That is that there were women in the Corinthian society and in much of Roman society who were making statements against the sacredness of marriage. There was a feminist movement even on a broader base in the Roman Empire, and women frequently would take their veils off and cut their hair. The cutting of their hair to look like a man and the throwing away of the veil was a protest against the inequality of men and women, and it was a statement of their antagonism toward the sacredness of marriage.
What we're seeing today isn't anything new. It's nothing new at all. You can read it in history. In the Corinthian situation, the church was right in the midst of a society that was struggling with these very issues. The word that Paul gives to the church, simply stated, is this: "Look, whatever standard your society sets up as the way in which you manifest a submissive spirit, you abide by that standard so that society knows you are following a God-ordained pattern. If it's a veil, wear it. Don't throw it away. Last of all, don't throw it away in the name of Christian liberty."
This is a problem like meats offered to idols that we studied in the last few weeks. It isn't a problem today. You threw your veil in some drawer the day after you got married and haven't pulled it out since. That isn't our particular thing. We're not a veiled society.
Some people have made this to mean hats. The word "hat" doesn't even appear here. For many years, people thought it was a sin to go to church without a hat. That isn't what it's saying. You can go to church with a hat. That's wonderful. You can go to church without a hat. That isn't the point. In our society, that isn't saying anything.
In their society, a veil was a very, very important statement. In fact, it's true today in many places in the world. I know when I was in the Arab countries, particularly in Amman, Jordan, I saw many, many women--and also in Cairo--many women who were veiled. Eventually in Amman, I asked the significance of it. The significance was that it's a sign of modesty and subjection, I was told. A woman who does not want to flaunt herself. A woman who takes the role of submissiveness wears a veil as an expression of that submission and modesty.
That's precisely what was going on in the city of Corinth, and Paul simply says in this chapter, "If that's the custom, you do it, because it is important that you be submissive, and it is important that the world know that you're maintaining that stand, because it's a divine one."
You know as well as I do people that-- God has sent down a certain style of life that is going to radiate a believable testimony much more than what we say, right? When the women in the church there were throwing their veils away, all that would do would be open the door to misunderstanding.
Remember, dress is very cultural. We have to keep it in mind. What is proper in once place is not proper in another place, and you've got to make some adjustments. The principle here is that women should conform in matters of dress to that which society says is the mark of a modest, submissive woman.
Every time I see--there used to be a big deal on this--unisex. They used to have stores where you could buy unisex clothes. I just recognize that it's difficult--in fact, as I thought about this over and over again, I had a hard time trying to figure out a modern illustration, because we don't have much difference anymore. You can't tell from the back anymore because of the hair. You can't tell the kind of-- It's hard to tell. One good thing today is beards. (Laughter)I've been thinking about growing a beard just so there wouldn't be any confusion. (Laughter)Next thing you know is, all the men get beards, women will go out and buy artificial beards.
It's very difficult in our society to find an up-to-date thing, because the distinctions just aren't there. I've heard people say, "It's a sin for a woman to wear pants, because it says in Deuteronomy 22 that a woman should never wear 'that which appertaineth to man.'" But beloved, in Deuteronomy 22, men wore dresses. (Laughter)That doesn't make any sense at all. It's just that today it's very difficult to make a distinction.
There are ways. You know something, men? We'd better work on them and make sure there's no doubt, because we want the world to see the pattern that God has designed. Don't seek to look like a woman, men, and women, don't seek to look like a man. Maintain the femininity that God has designed. That's what he's saying there.
I'm just preaching. I don't know where I am in my notes here. (Laughter)Verse 2. That's where I'm going to start. "I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the ordinances as I deliver them to you."
Paul starts out with a word of praise. That's good, because whenever you get with a very difficult subject, you've always ought to be real nice. That helps it a little bit. He does that. He says, "I praise you, brethren." He couldn't praise them for everything, because he's just given them 10 chapters of stuff he can't praise them for. He's about to give them five more. There's not a lot of things that he can praise them for, but he says, "I praise you for this, that in all things you remember me. At least you're open to asking me my opinion. I'm glad that you remembered to consult me. I do praise you on that. Secondly, I praise you that you keep the ordinances as I delivered them to you."
I think what he's saying--and I'm not going to give you all the background except to say if you check the word there, "ordinances," it's the word "tradition." As it's used in II Thessalonians 2:15 it is used to speak of doctrine. Whenever the word "delivered" is used, it is used in connection with teaching content.
What he's saying there is, "I'm glad that you at least me questions, and you have maintained the doctrine that I gave you." As you read the whole of I Corinthians, he doesn't straighten them out on doctrine. He doesn't have to tell them about the deity of Christ or the truth of God or the ministry of the Holy Spirit. He doesn't have to discuss the believer's life pattern as it operates in _____ Holy Spirit. He doesn't go into those doctrinal issues, because apparently, they were really hanging in on those. Apparently, there weren't doctrinal impurities. Chapter 15 may indicate some misunderstanding about resurrection, but for the most part, they didn't have questions about the deity of Christ or His saving work. He doesn't have a grace vs. work section in here. Doctrinally, they had heard and received and maintained, and they were at least consulting him about things. He says, "For that, I just want to praise you. I just want to--" It's a very strong assertion of praise. A very, very strong term is used there.
Now he says, "I want to answer the question you've asked me about women in the assembly and about this whole idea of whether you burn your veil or not." As we look at this, it's not going to be any great homilitical masterpiece, but I'm going to give you several points.
No. 1 is the principle statement. This is the crux of everything. Verse 3 is the statement that would cover everything. The rest of it is an explanation of that one statement in verse 3. Here it is, the principle stated. Later on, we'll see the principle defended and the principle responded to and some other points, but the principle stated, "That I would have you know--" and incidentally, that little formula is also used in Colossians 2:1, and it is apparent that Paul used it when he was telling them something he hadn't told them before.
When he says to them, "I would not have you to be ignorant,"--that's a different phrase he uses--he is probably saying, "I want to go further in telling you some more about what I already told you that you don't seem to understand." When he uses this phrase, it seems as though he's saying something new.
"I want you to know the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God." That's the principle. "The principle is this, people. Get it. Authority and submission pervade the whole universe. In the relationship between man and man, there is authority and submission. In the relationship between men and God, there is authority and submission. In the relationship between God and God, there is authority and submission." The entire universe is pervaded by this concept. What is new here is not that the wife is to be subject to her husband. That isn't new, because the Old Testament taught that.
What is new is the vastness, the scope of this principle. That it absolutely pervades everything. Listen. It's simple. Think of it this way. If Christ does not submit to the Father, then redemption is not accomplished. Man is lost, he is doomed, and God is war with Himself if the Son does not submit.
If man, on the other hand, does not submit to Christ, then man is lost. His destiny is denied. Judgment falls on him. If woman does not submit to man in the family, the family is shattered, and society is wrecked. God is saying, "These are the principles, everybody. There is a submissive principle between man and man, between man and God, between God and God. It pervades everything."
Let's look at the first one that he mentions in verse 3, "The head of every man is Christ." The head of every man, not just the church. Christ is the head of the church, Ephesians 1:22-23. Ephesians 4:15, 5:23. Colossians 1:18. All of those verses say, "Christ the head of the church. Christ the head of the church." He is the head.
Let me give you a footnote on this. The term "head" means "ruler, authority, governor." Christ is over His church. He rules. He is the sovereign of His church, the governor of His church, the One Who orders His church.
You say, "But it says there He is the head of every man." That's right. He is the ruler of every man in the universe, every man in world. Some of them don't acknowledge His rule, but it's nonetheless true, right? Matthew 28:18, "All authority is given unto Me in heaven and--" Where? "In earth." Christ rules. He rules.
Philippians 2:10-11 says that, "Someday every knee will bow." I Corinthians 15:25: "For He must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet." Hebrews 2:8 says that, "He is been given power over all and all things are made subject to Him."
Every creature is under the authority of Christ. Some are willingly submissive, and they constitute the church. Some are rebellious, and they constitute the world, but nonetheless, He rules. He rules. You know that Christ even rules the Godless, the rebels, for His own ends to His own purposes?
So you see, "The head of every man is Christ." Christ rules. He is the governor. He is the authority. Even though men rebel, they are someday going to be brought under that authority in judgment.
Second principle: "The head of the woman is the man." Man has authority over woman. He's not just speaking of marriage, people, He is speaking of every dimension of living in general. The man must recognize that God has given him authority, and he has to accept that and take it and rule for God. The woman must realize in any relationship that she has been given the place of submission.
This isn't wrong. This is the way God made it. This is the way He designed it. You don't play golf with a fishing pole, and you don't go fishing with a golf club. God has made people in the same sense to do a certain thing. That's the way they're made, and that's the way they function, and that's the way they're fulfilled. "Man has authority over woman."
Thirdly, "The head of Christ is God." If you're all going to scream blue murder, "Well, the head of the woman is the man. I don't like that." Then you just really have to stop and think about the fact that it says that the head of Christ is God, and Christ loves it.
You see, Christ was willingly submissive to the Father. Listen, Jesus loved his church and gave Himself for it. In that sense, the church is His subject. God loved the Son. "This is my--" What? "Beloved Son, in Whom I'm well pleased."
"Husbands--" What? "Love your wives." It is the authority of love. It is the rule of love. Christ was subordinated to the Father as an obedient Son. He came into the world, He says in John over and over again. John 3, 5, 14, 17, many places. He says, "I came not to do My will but the will of Him that sent me." "My meat is to do the Father's will." "There is one that speaks to Me, and this is the Father. What he says and what I hear that I do." He says, "I obey. I have submitted Myself and that was because of Love." "And the Father had a loving relationship with the Son."
It is not--and mark it--it is not that Christ is inferior to God. In fact, He said, "I and the Father are--" What? "Are one." There's no inferiority. There is simply a role that is taken. I'll tell you something else. Think about this. "In the truest sense, I as a member of the church am not even inferior to Christ, Who is the head of the church, because God the Father says I am a joint heir with Christ, and that Christ lives in me. It is only that I have taken the place of submission, the role of submission. Someday when I get to heaven, I will be like Him."
You see, it isn't talking about inferiority/superiority. It's simply talking about role. It is simply talking about the position that God has designed. Just so somebody doesn't scream about the fact that the woman is to be submissive to the man, he sticks it right in between those two other things that have to be true. The church has to be submissive to Christ, and Christ the obedient Son has to be submissive to the Father.
If you want to deny the middle one, then you'd better be ready to deny the first and the third, see? You've got to deny all of it or none of it. If you want to deny that Christ submitted to the Father, and you want to deny that the church is to be submitted to Christ, then you can have the privilege that the woman is to be submissive to the man. If you're going to grant the first two, you're going to have to grant the other one.
That's why I say the whole idea is ludicrous. There's not even an argument Biblically. They're making much ado about nothing. "Full of sound and fury," said Shakespeare, "signifying nothing."
So in stating the principle of subordination and authority, Paul safeguards it from tyranny and selfishness and cruelty by showing the Father and the Son relationship that was totally a relationship of love. The one of Christ to his church, again, totally sacrificial in its character as love.
The principle stated. Secondly--and we'll just do this one real quick--the principle applied. This is interesting. The principle applied. Verse 4-5: "Every man praying or prophesying--" Those two things mean talking to God and talking to people about God. Usually, prayer is talking to God about people and prophesying is talking to people about God. "Every many praying or prophesying--" The two dimensions of a possible ministry, vertical and horizontal. "Having his head covered dishonors his head."
He says, "If you men, if you pray or preach with a veil on, you dishonor yourself. That's a dishonor to your head to be covered. Every woman that prays or prophesies," talks to God or talks to people about God, "with her head uncovered dishonors her head."
Stop there for a minute. Two parallels here. He says, "Men, pray and prophesy with your head uncovered. Women, do it with your head covered." Is this the universal rule? Is this the divine fiat that any woman who ever speaks, who ever prays, has got to reach into her little bag and take out her prayer shawl? Some people think that.
Just to give you an interesting comparison to that, the Orthodox Jews believe the very opposite. Who is it in Orthodox Judaism that wears the yarmulke? The men. You know the Romans believed the opposite as well? My Monides says, and I quote, "Let not the wise men nor the scholars of the wise men pray unless they be covered."
The Romans, in their pagan religion, felt that a man had to have his head covered when he prayed. The Jews felt that a man had to have his head covered. You see the Orthodox Jews praying over in Israel, and while they do what is called genuflect, they bob up and down, they'll always have a hat on. They'll always have something covering their head. They'll never pray with their head uncovered, because that's their custom.
You know, nowhere in the New Testament did Paul every correct that and did he ever say, "Now you guys take your yarmulkes off. Get rid of your hats. Give them to your wife. She's the one who's supposed to have it on."
No. Why? Because this isn't a universal principle. This is a custom. Paul never said anything to the Jews or the Romans about hats or not hats or covered or uncovered. It was an issue in Corinth. In fact, Paul as a Jew was uttering language here antagonistic to the Jewish custom of rabbinical teaching. The Jew always wore a talif, a covering. Paul was saying, "Don't wear a covering." We say, "Paul, you know the Jews always wear a covering." "Yeah, but these aren't Jews. If they do, it'll be wrong for their society." It's cultural.
Paul wasn't laying down an absolute rule to be observed by all Christians. I read something this week that said that this proves that the women should never come to church without a hat. It doesn't prove that at all. That used to be the feeling of many people, then the hats got so bad, no one could see and the thing died down a little bit.
That isn't the point. It's fine to wear a hat. That's wonderful, but that isn't what he's saying. He's simply saying, "Accommodate yourselves to the custom of the Corinthians. If for a Corinthian woman to appear submissive and modest, she wears a veil, then women, you wear a veil. Men, the opposite. Don't violate customs that have significance in your society. Man and woman, be sure they acquiesce to those."
I want you to notice something. This has given people a lot of problems here. It says, "Every man praying or prophesying." It says, "Every woman praying or prophesying." People will say, "You see? Women can pray and prophesy."
No one ever denied that. No one ever denied that women can't pray or prophesy. You say, "But you always say that women shouldn't preach in church." That's right. It doesn't say in the Bible that a woman can't speak to God about people and a woman can't speak to people about God. It doesn't say that.
Notice something. Some people have wanted to put a modifier in here and have it read this way. Verse 4: "Every man praying or prophesying in the church. Every woman praying or prophesying in the church." Does it say that? No. Why do you want to put that in there? If God didn't need to say it, then why do we need to say it?
We don't. Let's leave it out. There is no modifier here to indicate location. It doesn't say in the church. It doesn't say at home. It doesn't say at this or that place. It doesn't say anything. So what is it saying then? It's saying this: By omitting any such reference to a place or a meeting, Paul is simply saying this--wherever and whenever it is proper for a man or for a woman to pray or prophesy, make sure that you maintain the distinctness of the roles of men and women. He doesn't say where it's proper or where it's not proper. He just says, "Wherever it is, do it in terms of the proper appearance."
If you want to find out whether it's proper for a woman to do it in the church, all you have to do is go to chapter 14. You'll find out. Verse 34: "Let the women keep silence in the churches. It is not permitted to them to speak." That's all you need to know, right? If it says here a woman praying or prophesying, there's one place where she won't do it. Where's that? In the church. There are other places where she will do it. She will pray in many different places, with other people, with other women, with her family, with close friends.
There are places where she will speak and proclaim the Gospel to unsaved friends and neighbors and to other women and whatever, but the one place where she will not preach, where she will not lead, is in the church. In the assembly of the church, when it comes together in its corporate meetings, she is not permitted, because there God wants to establish the male as the authority, carry out His pattern.
It's simple to me to just see that what Paul is simply saying here is, "The idea I'm dealing with here is the covering, not the place that she's supposed to do this. I'll get to that later. Wherever it would be right, she should maintain her modesty and sign of submission." Don't throw away your veil. Don't make a big statement about your liberation. Don't show the world you're independent. Now that you're one in Christ, you're no longer subject to your husband. No. Maintain that modesty, especially when you're praying, especially when you're speaking to other people that they might see that.
Women may have the gift of prophesy. I'll tell you who did. Philip had four daughters with the gift of prophesy. Did you know that? It's in Acts 21:8-9. He had four daughters with the gift of prophecy. You say, "Where did they prophesy?" I don't know where, but I'll tell you one place they didn't prophesy. Where? The churches.
That's simple. The custom, then, in Corinth was for a man to be uncovered, bareheaded, and women to be veiled. Unveiled women were either prostitutes, or they were making a statement of protest against marriage or their husbands, or they were running around looking for somebody who might be interested in them. Paul says, "Don't do that."
On the other hand, he says, "Don't men wear a veil, either. Don't cover yourselves. People are going to think you're effeminate." He didn't want some custom starting in the church of men covering themselves. You know who that could refer to? A Jew, right? What happens if a Jew comes to the Corinthian assembly? He wants to pray, so he covers himself, and everybody goes, "Oooh, look at him. Must be a little hmmm, you know? He's acting like a woman."
"Just don't worry about it, you people who are Jewish. Throw away your talif, dump your yarmulke in that society. It's irrelevant. It'll only confuse the issue." That's what he's saying. He's simply saying, "Accommodate yourself to the society."
To the woman in verse 5, "Let every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head." In other words, she brings shame on herself. Then he says, "For that is even all one as if she were shaved." That's as bad as shaving her. Just take it all off.
You say, "What do you mean by that?" What he means by that, basically, is this: If a woman is going to take her veil off, she might as well just cut her hair off and join the people protesting marriage. Join the feminist movement. As I told you earlier, it seems apparent in that day that one of the marks of the feminist movement that occurred was the shearing of the hair so that it would be like men's hair. That way, they were making a statement that, "We're equal to men."
If you're going to throw your veil away, you said, "You might as well cut your hair to look like a man." This opens up a very interesting discussion about hair. That's going to be our subject next week. (Laughter)You can do whatever you need to do this week to get ready for that. (Laughter)
He says, "You might as well, you might as well," some of you are going to have a lot of trouble growing it, I'll tell you that, "You might as well, if you're going to throw your veil away, you might as well go the whole route, because in essence, that's the way the world's reading it."
That's pretty straight. He says in verse 6, "If the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered." In other words, he says, "All right, if you're going to put your veil away then shave off your head so you look like a prostitute and a protester." They would say, "Oh! I would never do that!" He says, "Put your veil back on. Don't compromise. You either do it or don't. Why not go all the way?" Paul just wants to force them to the bottom line, see.
You see, what God wants to do is maintain a distinction. That's all he's saying. God wants men to be men in the way they look. He wants men to be men in the way they act. He wants men to be men in the responsibility they take. He wants women to be women in the way they look, the way they act, the responsibility they take. He does not want a mixture. He doesn't want men looking like women and women looking like men.
Whatever that means in our society, people, and it's tough in our society, because the distinctions aren't real clear, but remember, it wasn't real easy in that society with everybody wearing a dress, anyway. It's tough today, too, and Satan has always tried to rub out the line. Maybe it's some little things that you can do.
Every time I see a man, for example, with an earring. I want to go-- (Laughter)That's one sign of a woman in our society. Or makeup or whatever it is. Whatever the things are that a man can do to look like a man and a woman can do to show herself modest and submissive and genteel and feminine as a woman, let them be done. That's what he's saying.
Don't try to rub out the line. Keep the beauty of those distinctions. That's the principle. We've seen the principle stated, the principle applied. Next time, we're going to see principle defended and harmonized. Let's pray.
Father, it's been good to share these things this morning that open up our understanding to a very practical area. Father, we thank You for the many Godly men and Godly women that You've given to us here at Grace. We just pray that we might maintain the kind of testimony to the world and to each other in the way we act, in the way we look, in the responsibility we take to fill that role You've assigned to us in Your grace. Knowing that when we do that, You will pour out blessing upon us. We just commit ourselves to You to that end. For the glory of Christ, in His name we pray, amen.
This sermon series includes the following messages:
Please contact the publisher to obtain copies of this resource.Publisher Information


text:
Johan Cruyff – football superstar, decided in 1979 to develop his own sports brand based on his years of expert knowledge in, and on, the field. His vision created elegant and practical sportswear perfectly designed for the technical sports player. Functionality and style are at the centre of all Cruyff products. Popular Cruyff trainer lines include the Recopa, Vicenzo, and Vanenburg trainers, all of which are stocked here at Footasylum.
32 Items

subset: commoncrawl


text:
In the magical underworld of Victorian London, Tessa Gray has at last found safety with the Shadowhunters. But that safety proves fleeting when rogue forces in the Clave plot to see her protector, Charlotte, replaced as head of the Institute. If Charlotte loses her position, Tessa will be out on the street - and easy prey for the mysterious Magister, who wants to use Tessa's powers for his own dark ends.
The special Collector's First Edition will include a never-before-seen letter from Will to his family!
With the help of the handsome, self-destructive Will and the fiercely devoted Jem, Tessa discovers that the Magister's war on the Shadowhunters is deeply personal. He blames them for a long-ago tragedy that shattered his life. To unravel the secrets of the past, the trio journeys from mist-shrouded Yorkshire to a manor house that holds untold horrors, from the slums of London to an enchanted ballroom where Tessa discovers that the truth of her parentage is more sinister than she had imagined. When they encounter a clockwork demon bearing a warning for Will, they realize that the Magister himself knows their every move - and that one of their own has betrayed them.
Tessa finds her heart drawn more and more to Jem, though her longing for Will, despite his dark moods, continues to unsettle her. But something is changing in Will - the wall he has built around himself is crumbling. Could finding the Magister free Will from his secrets and give Tessa the answers about who she is and what she was born to do?
As their dangerous search for the Magister and the truth leads the friends into peril, Tessa learns that when love and lies are mixed, they can corrupt even the purest heart.
Spend some more time among the Infernal Devices.
©2011 Cassandra Claire LLC. All rights reserved. (P)2011 Simon & Schuster Audio. All rights reserved.
"Beautifully Written."
I couldn't help feeling like I was breathing in the classics while listening to this book. The performance was stellar and I actually cried at the end -- which is weird, since I read enough books that this really shouldn't have happened. The prose is so poetic that it makes the world feel tangible and alive. I loved every second of it.
"Great Story very suspenseful"
This was a wonderful book having read book one, I enjoyed this even more! The story line keeps you wanting to learn more without dragging out. It was enjoyable and easy to listen too. I like how two narrated the book both Ed Westwick and Heater Lind did a wonderful job. I look forward to book 3 coming out!
I suggest this book wonderful to listen and enjoy with a cup of tea!
I am a book junkie...I read and enjoy a variety of stories, so please don't "define me" by one book or review! :)
"Completely Won Me Over!"
For quite a long time I wasn't sure if I was interested in this prequel and historical prelude to the Mortal Instruments series, but I'm glad I gave it a chance. It is much more, and better than I thought. I thoroughly enjoyed this installment of the series, and have become deeply invested in the fate of the characters, if that serves as a recommendation to you! When she's at her best, Cassandra Clare is among the master story-tellers and can deliver the twists and surprises (not to mention the heart-breaking "love" scenes) with the absolute best of them.
This is an example of her best! An excellent, event-filled story, totally winning empathetic and sympathetic characters, and even her villains are great. The events during and at the conclusion of this episode leave you begging to see what happens in the next "chapter".
The narration was great! I feel both the male and the female reader were excellent in thier performances, really bringing the characters vividly to life. Whereas many fans, myself included, feel that the audio production (and narration) fell quite short in some other of Clare's stories, this was not the case here at all. Heather Lind has a proven talent and Ed Westwick's voice seems completely suited to this time period and these characters.
"Waste of momentum"
The pace set by the first book is completely lost here. Plus, the
double narration makes no sense. Ed
Westwick has a lovely voice but his America accent is TERRIBLE. Worse is when he's required to do an American female. There is also no rhyme or reason to when or why he takes over narration.
Even more frustrating is the stupid love triangle, the debate about who should run the institute, blah blah blah ... Am I the only one who remembers the world is about to be overtaken by mechanical automatons? Deal of with your personal s--t later!
Such a mushy, story squandering middle and unless the end is excellent I am asking for my credits back!
I'm an LMT originally from the Caribbean Islands of Trinidad and Tobago. I lived in NYC off and on for 15 years. I decided I had enough of long cold winters so summer of 2012 I relocated and now live in sunny Sarasota FL and loving every moment of it. My favorite thing to do is lay on the beach all day long listening to the waves and a great audible book.
"Love Triangle Extraordinaire"
Yes I absolutely would recommend this book also. Sometimes in a series, one book is better than the other. So far the 2 I have read, have had me totally engulfed and getting even more deeply invested into the lives and outcomes of these so very interesting characters and the dynamics of their daily lives being riddled with danger and wrapped in this heart felt love triangle.
I can definitely see this in a movie...
Most memorable for me is Nate dying in Tess's arms. Even with all he put her through, she still had such feeling for him and remembered how they used to be.
My favorite scene was obviously when Will and Tessa were on the balcony at the party getting lost in their feelings for one another. OBVIOUSLY...
Yes I cried a couple of times, when Will thought Tessa was dead, when Jem was trying to explain his feelings to Tessa and also when Will finally revealed to Tessa what happened to him and confessed his all consuming love for her.
I also laughed quite a few times.
I didn't care for the singing. Maybe the words of the songs could have been read out. It was like fingernails on a chalkboard.
"Ready for the next one!"
This second installment in Cassandra Clare's "Infernal Devices" saga has me ready for the third!
I love audible. I discovered it as a solution to my long drive (30mi each way) back and forth to work. This is my down time after work.
"Another success for Clare"
successful tie in to the rest of the series. it does well as its own series and as a prequel to the 'mortal instruments' series
the mortal instruments series - well because its a tie in
I LOVE Ed Westwick's voice. It takes you away! outstanding performance, accent and character differentiation. Heather did a great job too!
yes!! if i had the time, i would.
Like many of you probably, Audible has become my best friend. I'm a huge fan of paranormal fantasies and mysteries.
"Impossible not to love it!"
I can't believe a year ago I was extremely reluctant to start this series! I didn't think TID could ever reach the excitement of TMI, and I simply didn't want to like the characters. Despite willing myself not to like it then, I am completely in love with it now. TID has proved to be better than TMI if that's even possible. Faced-paced. Exciting. Gripping. Suspenseful. Addictive. Heart-shattering. Beautiful. You are most likely to find yourself helplessly lost in the mysterious world Cassandra has created.
The romance in this book is unlike any other YA romance I've ever read. I simply cannot dismiss it as just another piece of silly and ridiculous YA literature, because it is anything but. Cassie has such beautiful and captivating writings that The Clockwork Prince brought out all the feelings and emotions I never thought existed in me. To be honest, I 'm not a sentimental person, not much can make me cry, but by the end of this book, my cheeks are wet with hot tears.
All the charming and lovable characters. I'm sure they are the main reason why this series is so irresistible. Jem. No one in their right mind could possibly dislike him. Tessa. Everyone has to admit she's much more likable than Clary. She's braver, stronger and not afraid to pursuit what she wants. And finally, the legendary, self-destructive William Herondale. People have very mixed feelings for him. Some thought he was too cold and too horrible. Some thought he was just a blue-eyed, dark-haired version of Jace Wayland, but let me assure you that it is not true. As much as I love Jace, Will is completely unique and distinctive in his own way. I admit I used to have my doubts about Will, but now that I know more about him, I think he is the most wonderful character ever created by Cassandra. Such a passionate, good and selfless hero. We have all misjudged him.
If you've already read The Clockwork Angel, as I'm sure you have, then you'll need no convincing buying The Clockwork Prince. But I have to warn you, the narration was in no way outstanding. Heather Lind sounded much older than how Tessa should sound, but other than that, she was okay. Ed Westwick however, was horrible times a million. Seriously! Hadn't he done enough damage in City of Fallen Angels already? Simon & Schuster, please! Find someone else to do the narration next time! It doesn't have to be someone from the Gossip Girls. It could be someone from the Pizza Hut as long as he doesn't sound like he's drowning, choking down slugs, falling asleep or all three at the same time.
I'm all about challenging myself lately so I'm using books to do that. They inspire & engage me so I can see what works. Reading is my life.
I would totally recommend this book to a friend! It's an awesome book that has twists and turns, romance and action, serious moments and funny ones too.
I loved Ed Westwick's Magnus Bane.
I loved Ed Westwick's voice in this audiobook. When it switches to Heather Lind (and she did to an Awesome job too) it would throw me off. Honestly while I did love Heather's reading part of me wishes Ed would have read the whole book through.
Fantasy, adventure, sci-fi, mysteries, and poetry- just a few of my favorite genres.
"A well-oiled machine but... *spoilers*"
Yes, because it kept me at the edge of my seat and I wondered what was going to happen next. It was well written and Ed Westwick was fantastic narrator.
I think when William found out he wasn't cursed and he professed his love to Tessa with her reaction being the opposite of what he hoped for.
I must say I loved the scene where Jem admits how much he feels for Tessa as well as when Jessamine gets her comeuppance and is taken away to the monk's city.
Yes. A hundred times, a thousand times YES!
As much as I loved the book, I found the narration a bit shaky due the constant switching of Ed Westwick to the female reader. It would have been better if either Ed had read the entire book or if he read the male parts and she the female. Just my thought, though. Other than that, very enjoyable.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.


text:
Hi all,
my name is Daniel and I am a CELTA qualified English teacher currently living and working in Berlin.
My wife (an Italian citizen) and I are currently trying to make a move to Asia (China, Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore etc) but we are coming stuck in the situation regarding my wife's ability to work. I will be the one finding the first job and then when it is signed we will move.
I have been told that a dependent can legally travel to a country and apply to live with me as a dependent. Is this correct? However, I am then being told that her ability to work on a dependent Visa is not always there, especially in places like China or Singapore. If this is the case, would she then have to leave the country in order to have her Visa changed?
Does anyone have any direct experience or advice they can give me at this stage as I am running out of avenues of help.
many thanks,


text:
52 hours ago (about) i started playing the game. with no idea about the game i went to play it. i took N-Hunter as my main character and played it. And now 52h later im proud to be first lvl 40
i hope this post doesnt break the rule num.5 bout self-promotion. maby i am a bit promoting myself couse im rly rly happy... but its also for you the information in how much time a player who doesnt know anything about the game and goes hardcore leveling needs time to lvl 40. atleast one of them and im the first


text:
Does anyone remmember this game or ever played it? It used to be on interactive games on NTL tv, but as soon as Virgin took over it disapeaerd, i spent ages on that game too, it was awesome.3
You used to start of with shitty fish, breed them ect and find new species, could play it for hours. >.<
Anybody know were I can download it? or a NTL interactive Emulator?
Iv'e search google, can't seem to find anything.


text:
Only one percent of all alleged sexual asaults committed in West Australia result in a conviction according to a study by a parliamentary committee. The committee was investigating decisions by the Director of Public Prosecutions not to proceed with charges of asault or sexual offences during the past five years. There was considerable evidence of lack of adequate training for pollice who hndled interviewing rape victims which resulted in much evidence not being admissable in a court of law. There was also considerable lack of communication between various agencies. Many victims lacked trust in the judicial system and refused to pursue the initial claim of being raped.
A one percent conviction rate suggests considerable need for reviewing the entire process and organization in West Australia of rape investigations.


text:
Restaurant questions exclusion from Hampton Holiday Parade parade
By JOHN QUINN
Sunday News Correspondent | November 30. 2013 10:57PM
Bill Niland, owner of the Chop Shop Pub & Grub in Seabrook, poses with his daughter and a few costumed characters who walked alongside his float in the annual Hampton Holiday Parade last year. (Courtesy)
Comments have sprung up on Experience Hampton Inc.'s Facebook page both in defense of the decision and in support of the Chop Shop Pub & Grub, a "bike-friendly and classic car bar" that opened in 2009 and has participated in at least four previous parades.
This is the fourth year he's hosted a drive, and it will be held Dec. 7 at 8 p.m. at the Chop Shop, 920 Lafayette Road (Route 1), Seabrook.
According to a statement issued Saturday from the Experience Hampton Board of Directors:
"It's about safety & liability, pure and simple. . Our decision had nothing to do with the good work that goes on at the Chop Shop. It has nothing to do with veterans, giving away free meals at Thanksgiving, Toys for Tots or any of that. It was the recommendation of the safety committee, after the first year when one or more bikes did a "burnout" downtown, the next year people hanging off the float. The board of directors went with the recommendation of the safety committee, and that recommendation was reconsidered earlier this week and still decided to follow the safety recommendation."
In 2010, Niland recalled that a motorcyclist not affiliated with the Chop Shop revved his bike a little too loud to thrill crowds during the parade. He added police dealt with the issue right away, and there haven't been similar problems since.
"It's kind of an ongoing problem with Hampton and bikers," Niland said. "We represent that demographic."
Additionally, Niland said occupants on the Chop Shop's float and the staff who hand out candy to kids follow the designated safety procedures. He added there are plenty of photos on Experience Hampton Inc.'s Facebook page that show other safety issues, including low railings, people hanging out of school buses and children standing in police cruisers and fire trucks.
* e-Edition subscription required


text:
Just wanted to say Hi to yall folks.
I guess I am an old-school gamer starting where most people started. I like Atari but I truely began with the NES and eventually found myself a PC gamer with Doom.
I played EQ and various other MMO's including WOW which really opened my eyes. It is a great game but the amount of hand-holding really grew on me and I got sick of it pretty quick and I feel like A LOT of MMORPG's these days follow the same path. I then found Trials of Ascension which come from Dev's with the same sentiment and are offering a game that is not only new but different (in a very good way) in almost every way possible. If any of you get a chance, check it out.
Anywho - glad to be here!


text:
I hadn't reallized that ORF is planning on manufacturing their own FAL type 3 receivers;
Geez, where have I been :dunno:
I gotta get out more often.................
Printable View
I hadn't reallized that ORF is planning on manufacturing their own FAL type 3 receivers;
Geez, where have I been :dunno:
I gotta get out more often.................
and i bet that they will be as plug and play as their m76 receivers... id buy a vulcan before i get a milled receiver from orf
they've added T1, T2 and Inch preproduction purchase as well as the T3.
I think buying one before there is any feed back on the quality is a little scary.Quote:
Originally Posted by mtdew69
as you said, the m76 and galil receivers seem to have some issues.
the big problem i see is they dont include an ejector block and you cant use the one from your parts set as it is an NFA specific part and has a cutout for the full auto trip. I assume they will be making the ejector block also and dsa probably stocks them but will def add to the price
I never thought the full auto type FAL ejector block was a NFA item. The no-no is to cut the upper receiver to accept the auto (safety) sear on the pin block w/o proper liscensing. Some early Imbel FAL receivers were imported with the full auto ejector block installed but the receiver was not cut to accept the sear. This is the way I've understood it unless I'm either wrong or implementation of the regs have changes since then.
I bought , and had to return, a couple of Imbel rec in the late 80's from dealer wharehouse that came with FA ejector blocks installed. I was told that they had to be replaced with semi ejector blocks. I do not know for fact that this is an issue but i cant imagine that dealer wharehouse went to the trouble unless prompted to do so by ATF. I do know the rec where not cut for the trip on the hinge pin but the window for the lever was visible in the block and the replacement rec didnt have the cutout visible in the ejector block.
I would think that as cheap as century is they would be using the FA ejector block in their FAL and l1a1 builds if it was legal to do so
here is what ATF says on the matter, notice it says it could meet the definition of a machine gun or "might" not
Dear Mr. Bardwell:
This refers to your letter of February 17, 2000, in which you asked
if ATF would consider an FAL rifle assembled with a U.S. made
receiver and an FAL machinegun ejector block to be a machinegun.
The term "machinegun" is defined in section 5845(b) of the National
Firearms Act. An FAL style rifle with a machinegun style ejector
block could meet the definition of a machinegun, or it might not
meet the definition of machinegun. If the rifle was capable of
firing automatically, it would be a machinegun regardless of the
style of ejector block used.
We trust that the foregoing has been responsive to your inquiry.
If you have further questions concerning this matter, please
contact us.
Sincerely yours,
Edward M. Owen, Jr.
Chief, Firearms Technology Branch
I'm not trying to argue the point either way, but sometimes a distributor will go above and beyond the letter of the law (or regulations) to be above any possible legal challenge or change of implementation of the statutes. One example that comes to mind is the change in demill processes that does/does not leave the stamped receiver bits still attached for AK kits. As far as I know this was not a reaction to a change in BATF regulations but done to ensure no doubt or question as to compliance to those regulations. Failure to do so might potentially put the entire imported shipment under BATF impound or seizure. It could be considered cheap insurance that the kits will not be confiscated as contriband. As to Century installing semi blocks, it is probably cheaper and therefore more cost effective to drill and pin new semi blocks instead of trying to retrofit used FA ejector blocks.
After all that is said and done, bottom line is I don't know for sure.
Edit; Just read the ATF letter you posted. Good information. Makes me believe that the semi ejectors are installed as an insurance measure of compliance.
PS - I've got to learn to type faster. Maybe it's just that I think too slow :)
good point on century not reusing them, hadnt thought of the fitting issue.
Looking the letter from ATF over it does appear that they didnt say it would be in violation, If I read the letter correctly it seems it would indeed be OK to use the fa ejector block as long as the rifle was only cabaple of firing one shot per pull of the trigger. I think for safeties sake if i were reusing an FA ejector block i would weld up the window the trip lever passes thru.


text: In honor of National Family Caregivers Month, area libraries will be hosting readings and book signings for "Inside the Dementia Epidemic: A Daughter's Memoir" by local author Martha Stettinius. The Penn Yan Public Library will hold a reading Tuesday, November 27th at 6:30 p.m. (214 Main Street Penn Yan). The events are free and open to the public. National Family Caregivers Month is a time to thank, support, educate and empower family caregivers. Sixty-five million family caregivers in the U.S. provide essential but unpaid care to family members and friends. "Inside the Dementia Epidemic: A Daughter's Memoir" is the unflinching and hopeful story of Stettinius's journey into caregiving, and offers an unprecedented look into the challenges of Alzheimer's care. Stettinius's book has achieved national recognition, and was praised in the Library Journal as "honest, compassionate, and informed" and "compelling reading." Stettinius shares the lessons she's learned over seven years of caregiving at home, in assisted living, a "memory care" facility, and a nursing home—lessons not just about how she learned to negotiate the world of elder care, but about how caregiving can strengthen relationships. Like many adult children of aging parents, Stettinius found herself suddenly filling the role of caregiver when her 72-year-old mother couldn't balance her checkbook, cook, or clean. The remote lakeside home where her mother had lived alone for 25 years overflowed with garbage and recyclables. Despite their challenging relationship, Stettinius, age 40 at the time, moved her mother to her family's small home. It was not long after that that Stettinius learned her first lesson as a member of the "sandwich generation"—caregiving is a job, and as a caregiver she needed information and support. After reading selections from her book at each of these events, Stettinius will talk briefly about the free services offered to caregivers through the non-profit National Family Caregivers Association, for which she serves as a volunteer representative for New York State. Stettinius will share NFCA materials and other resources for caregivers, and her book will be available for purchase. For more information about "Inside the Dementia Epidemic: A Daughter's Memoir," visit www.insidedementia.com.


text:
a place for zinesters - writers and readers
Views: 16
I do a ton of free writing. Free writing is where, for a certain amount of time (say, 5-10 minutes) just HAVE to keep writing. You can't take your pen off the paper and think, you don't worry about spelling or grammar or even if it makes sense, you just write. I love this because I just let go and follow my train of thought, and sometimes write about experiences I totally forgot about! It usually results in some really rough, raw writing that sometiems makes sense but often doesn't. Either way it's a great starting point!


text:
Professor Made Students Sign 'Vote for Obama' Pledge
A Florida community college has launched an investigation and placed a tenured professor on leave over reports that she made students in a math class sign a pledge to vote for President Obama.
A spokesman for Brevard Community College told Fox News that Sharon Sweet was placed on an unpaid leave of absence effective immediately after they received a call from a concerned parent.
"The allegations center on her soliciting support in her classes for President Obama in the upcoming election," said college spokesman John Glisch in a statement to Fox News.
The website Watchdogwire.com, which first reported the allegations, said the students were told to sign a pledge that read: "I pledge to vote for President Obama and Democrats up and down the ticket."
They were also given bookmarks from gottavote.org – a website paid for by the Obama-Biden campaign — targeting young voters, the website reported.
Glisch said they learned of the incident last Thursday and launched an immediate investigation. He said they plan on interviewing as many as 100 students to determine who may have signed the pledge.
"The college has specific policies that address the political activities of faculty and staff, which state that no college employee shall solicit support for a political candidate during regular college work hours or on college property," Glisch said.
He said Sweet asked for — and was granted an immediate leave of absence without pay — effective immediately.
Sweet is a tenured professor who has been at the college for five years, he said. Depending on the outcome of the investigation, she could be exonerated, suspended or terminated.
Glisch said steps are also being taken to make sure all faculty and staff are aware of policies on political activity.
Todd Starnes is the author of Dispatches From Bitter America – endorsed by Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Sean Hannity and Mark Levin. Click here to get your copy.
Related posts:


text:
Learn about the symptoms of Multiple Sclerosis – and find out if you're at risk.
Dim the lights and break out the…eggs? These 10 foods will kick your sex drive into high gear.
15 signs that it's more than just the blues
Put pep in your step with these nourishing spring fruits and vegetables!
Banish belly rolls for good with these easy moves to sculpt strong, sexy abs
We take a look at 20 common human body quirks.


text:
Home >> Metric M5x16mm 304 Stainless Steel Phillips Head Machine Screws 25pcs
- 304 stainless steel round cross head screw used extensively where insulation is needed.
- Widely used in electronics, communication, equipment, electric power products, cultural goods, environmental protection machinery, etc.
- Fixing component, industrial and construction fasteners.
- The illustrations are only for the reference of the dimension, which is not the shape of the object.
|Head Style
|Round Head
|304 Stainless Steel
|Package Content
|25pcs x Phillips Screws
|Product Name
|Phillips Screw
|Thread Size
|M5 x 16mm
|Head Size
|9 x 4mm/ 0.35" x 0.16"(D*H)
|Round Phillips Head
|Silver Tone
|Phillips Size
|5mm/ 0.2"
|Total Size
|20 x 9mm/ 0.8" x 0.35"(L*D)
Other Choice (in stock)
- L Women Lady Shapewear Firm Control Tummy Slimmer Full...
- $11.21
- Free Shipping
- Size L Women Body Shaper Tummy Trimmer Waist Control Girdle...
- $5.76
- Free Shipping
- 15pcs Pro Makeup Brushes Set Eyeshadow Eyeliner Lip Brush...
- $11.66
- Free Shipping


text:
|Topic Review (Newest First)
great links, good info - unfortunately none of it changed my mind so far.
For me it still comes down to batteries and time.
It's not time for batteries yet.
"The completed battery pack contained 18 six-pack building blocks with 108 individual batteries. The total weight was 930 pounds. Total volume was around eight cubic feet. Because of their greater discharge capacity, Tether's 162 amp-hour configuration is equal in performance to 12 AGM 4D batteries in series, but is 30% lighter.
The 162 amp-hours of Tether's test configuration proved to be more than enough capacity for the Lagoon 47 testbed. It has two 9 kw motors that draw 64 amps each at maximum throttle. The same capacity should work fine on the hybrid Lagoon 500s, Tether says. "It's a heavier boat with 16 kw motors, but the waterline is longer so it's more easily driven."
They don't give a price - they hope is becomes comparable (over time) with the 16 life line 8d's agm's it's replacing (about 9.5k). These are about the best batteries out there you can buy at this point in time.
Future batteries don't push my boat.
That's less than 3 hours motor time on the batteries. Great if the gale force winds blowing me to the lee shore abate in time, not so good if not. The two 20kw gensets (29 hp?) on that boat are each about what I have as a full up motor - and replace the 50HP diesels that the old ugly non-green Lagoon's have. Doesn't seem to make sense to me to have two gensets, electric motors, controllers and a ton of batteries so I can get what? Have smaller diesels? That's the whole deal?
No thanks.
I'll go green by sailing more.
GreebBoatBateauVert database
Having just found your thread I suggest you have a look at the webiste we are building - so much is happening so quickly that it is difficult to decide what is the best way to go. If you are thinking of going diesel-electric there are many configurations, we know a few up and running, have several developments under waygreenboatbateauvert.com. Happy to share any knowledge we have, much more than published.
|You can have one of my cookies Wombat!
Torque Curve
Originally Posted by Goodnewsboy View Post
26 Horsepower magically becomes 40 horsepower? Physics doesn't work that way. Something is still rotten in Denmark.
Looking at the electric car sites, that seams to be the reasoning they are selling as well,
As well as
Originally Posted by Goodnewsboy View Post
You seem to want to make your boat an electric hybrid. Here are a few facts:
1. The area near the shaft log in a boat is not a real friendly atmosphere for continuously running electric motors, especially those that have commutators.
2. A hybrid system is usually less efficient. Think of it as the sum of INefficiencies. You have the inefficiency of the engine, the inefficiency of the generator, the inefficiency of the batteries, the inefficiency of the motor controls (analogous to the throttle), and finally, the inefficiency of the motor. If it were a car, you would make a significant gain in fuel efficiency whenever driving in the city because you would consume no energy when stopped. (That is the big advantage of hybrid autos over those gas burning engines at idle.)
Your conventional marine engine has inefficiencies too, but fewer; engine, transmission. (I am assuming that parasitic loads such as the alternator and pumps are figured into the engine performance.)
3. Electric advantages:
But there are a few factors not considered here:
1: We have motors (alternators, blowers, etc), in our current engine bays already.
2: Because of the flat torque curve, we need less of an engine than our current engines in a hybrid setup (the genset doesn't need to have a lot of power, just maintain enough to create enough charge capacity). Also you can peak your electric more than your charging capacity because of your batteries, without the torque curve you would have to gun your engine to get up to the needed rpms to get power.
Just so you know, I haven't installed one of these systems either, but I am interested.
Both of those factors may not weigh out enough to make an electric system worthwhile, but at least they do represent some positives that are often overlooked.
I am interested in these systems as well.
|Bad Wombat... no cookie for you.
|I've been reading about something called a solar st......nah, that's just too cruel.
|Also, relying on a system that is dependent on electricity to the degree an e-power system is on a small sailboat is somewhat unwise. Large ships can do this, because they have the space and capacity to have redundant systems, but small sailboats do not.
I thought about this option for a long time and finally just had a 3 cylinder Yanmar installed. I just posted a picture of it at the end of the Re-E-Power thread. There was just not enough duration and power on the pure electric units. The genset option just adds to the whole thing of something else to maintain, and at that point I just decided to get a standard diesel installation.
The 20HP Yanmar will provide all I need and is incredibly fuel efficient and remarkably quiet considering I was used to hearing a 30 year old Farymann.
Originally Posted by sailawayjnl
The benefits of dealing with the Father of Electric propulsion is something that can really wake up an industry of change. Dave Tether started all the marine propulsion many years ago and has now formed a users group for formal and informal information.
make sure you visit if your interested.
Any reason you're spamming the forums with the same message. This is the fourth one I've seen from you with basically the exact same content.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.
|Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


text:
Perfect Form
Geo-Print City Pant
Out of Stock
- Sits below the waist; slim ankle.
- Countour waistband has center hook-and-bar closure with zip; inside anchor button. Slanted welt pockets in front. In back: hip darts and welt pockets with logo plaque.
- Unlined. Satin-bound waistband facing.
- Inseams: regular 27.5", short 25", long 29.5".


text:
Arsenal Football Club is delighted to announce that four members of the successful Youth League and Cup 'double' winning squad have signed professional terms with the Club.
Defenders Luke Ayling (17), Craig Eastmond (18) and Cedric Evina (17), together with goalkeeper James Shea (18) have all made the step up to becoming Professionals with Arsenal Football Club.
All four were regulars with Steve Bould's successful Youth squad, which won both the FA Premier Academy League and FA Youth Cup last season.
Everyone at the Club is looking forward to the continued contribution and development of Luke, Craig, Cedric and James with Arsenal in the forthcoming years.
The Club can also confirm that eight players have been released after reaching the end of their contracts. We wish Amaury Bischoff, Anton Blackwood, James Dunne, Rui Fonte, Abu Ogogo, Paul Rodgers, Rene Steer and Vincent van den Berg well for their future careers and thank them all for their contributions they made to Arsenal Football Club.Copyright 2017 The Arsenal Football Club plc. Permission to use quotations from this article is granted subject to appropriate credit being given to www.arsenal.com as the source


text:
New for New Mexico
PLIC Gallery Show
Stop by the New Mexico Public Lands Information Center to see Mike Butterfield's amazing photography!
Free, through May 31 at 301 Dinosaur Trail in Santa Fe.
The Rio Grande del Norte National Monument, with views of the Latir Peaks (courtesy BLM NM State Office)
Gear up to visit New Mexico's Rio Grande del Norte National Monument
Planning a spring vacation, a weekend or a day trip near Taos, NM? Make sure your plans include plenty of time to explore the expansive Rio Grande del Norte National Monument, which includes the Rio Grande Gorge, with its spectacular confluence of rivers; high desert and towering peaks. Shop our great selection of maps and guidebooks for more information on fishing and rafting the Rio Grande, visiting the different areas of the Rio Grande del Norte National Monument, and exploring other natural attractions near Taos.
If you are exploring the Wild Rivers Recreation Area, you can't go wrong with the Taos-Wild Rivers map, which is made from a synthetic, water- and tear-resistant material. If you're planning on spending time along the Rio Grande, The Rio Grande - A River Guide is a must-have, with mile-by-mile maps.
If you're headed towards the mountains on the east side of Rio Grande del Norte National Monument, you'll want the Taos, Wheeler & Latir Peaks Trail Map but if you're going to explore the west side, you'll need the Chama surface management map and the Taos surface management map. These BLM maps show roads, trails, waterways and developed features, as well as who manages which lands.
You can also shop our selection of hats and t-shirts to show your support for preserving this national treasure for future generations. Our heavy cotton t-shirts are comfortable and sturdy, and the hats will protect and shade you even on the sunniest New Mexico days!
About New Mexico
American Frontiers Team in Lake Valley
Elk near Socorro
Welcome to the New Mexico Public Lands Information Center
From scrubby deserts in the south to the tall ponderosa forests of the northern mountains, New Mexico offers a rich variety of scenery and a multitude of recreational activities. Along with these natural riches, the Land of Enchantment is famous as a cultural crossroads where ancient Indian pueblos and centuries-old Hispanic villages exist side by side with space-age technology centers.
More than 45% of New Mexico is in public ownership. You can explore our state's public lands on this website or at the New Mexico Public Lands Information Center, 301 Dinosaur Trail, Santa Fe, NM, 87508. We are open Monday - Friday from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Mountain Time.
Either on the website or at the Public Lands Information Center, you'll discover detailed information about recreational opportunities for more than 300 public land sites throughout New Mexico. You can also purchase books, maps, and other educational items to make your virtual or real visit truly rewarding.
To begin your journey, click on Recreation Search to your left. To speak with us in person please call 505-954-2002 or toll-free at 877-276-9404. You can always e-mail our staff with questions by clicking on COMMENTS at the bottom of this page. We try to respond to questions within 24 hours.
For information on lodging, museums, tribal lands, and commercial attractions or services, contact the New Mexico Department of Tourism. For hunting and fishing proclamations, visit the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish website.
Sabino Canyon Bookstore | New Mexico Public Lands Info Center
Arizona | California | Colorado | Idaho | Montana | New Mexico | Nevada | Oregon | Utah | Washington | Wyoming
Website and contents copyright © 1997 - 2017 Public Lands Interpretive Association. All rights reserved.
design & programming: 1uffakind.com
produced by: Queenellen Enterprises


text: If you are a PA resident then it is fairly easy to get a CCW. Nowever, it is not so easy in Philadlephia County. Since you live in NJ then their gun laws, much more restrictive, apply. It seems that whenever you read gun laws anywhere they immediately become ambiguous.


text:
Posted by Diego Lo Giudice on the Application Development & Delivery Professionals Blog on October 29, 2013
I hear people talking about Agile 2.0 a lot. But when I look at what's happening in the application development and delivery space, I see that many organizations are just now starting to experience Agile's true benefits, and they're not yet leveraging those benefits completely or consistently. So let's stop talking about Agile 2.0 for a moment and instead digest and operationalize what've learned so far. There's plenty to improve upon without getting into inventing new practices and acronyms to add to the Agile transformation backlog!
What I see is that app-dev leaders want to understand how they can optimize existing use of AD&D Agile practices like Scrum, XP, Kanban, improve the practices around the more advanced ones like TDD, continuous testing, CI and CD and leverage all with what they've learned over the years (including waterfall). Scaling the whole thing up in their organization in order to have a bigger and more consistent impact on the business is what their next key goal is. We fielded the 2013 version of our Global Agile Software Application Development Online Survey to find out how. I present and analyze this data in my latest report. The survey addressed common questions that clients ask me frequently get in inquiries and advisory, such as:


text:
The Legal Studies program at Roger Williams University is designed for students who have an interest in the law and legal systems. The academic focus of this program is on the development of critical thought, analytic reasoning and scholarly writing. Our program includes courses on criminal law, constitutional law, judicial process and ethics, and electives in conflict resolution and mediation, sports law, social justice and trial advocacy.
Our Legal Studies program faculty members are also attorneys who regularly provide career and pre-law advising services to their students. Students in the Legal Studies major are encouraged to participate in law-related clubs and organizations such as RWU Mock Trial and Phi Alpha Delta Pre-Law Fraternity, and to engage in service learning opportunities like our legal advocacy clinic which provides assistance to clients in need of legal services in Newport, R.I.


text:
Women's Basketball Battles to top of HL with 79-72 OT Thriller
By Rachel Buck (@GBRachel)
DAYTON, Ohio (GreenBayPhoenix.com) – In a physical battle for the top spot in the Horizon League, the Green Bay women's basketball earned a thrilling 79-72 victory over Wright State at the Nutter Center on Thursday evening.
With the win and a Youngstown State loss to UIC, the Phoenix moved into sole possession of first place with a record of 10-3 and an overall mark of 17-8. Wright State fell to 20-8 overall and 9-4 in the Horizon League.
"It was anyone's game tonight," head coach Kevin Borseth said. "Wright State makes you beat them, they play strong and with a lot of heart, and the fans really saw a good one tonight."
Heading into overtime tied at 68, senior Breannah Ranger (Skokie, Ill.) hit a layup off an assist by classmate Sam Zastrow (Algoma, Wis.) for the first points of the extra session, putting the Phoenix ahead for good. Sophomore Kaili Lukan (Barrie, Ontario) scored the next four points for the Phoenix, sandwiching a layup by Wright State's Ivory James to put Green Bay ahead by four, 74-70, with 2:29 on the clock.
Wright State got to within two points after a pair of Tay'ler Mingo free throws (74-72), but it was all the closer it would get. After neither team was able to score a basket during a nearly two minute span as the clock wound down to 30 seconds, Green Bay scored the final five points of the contest for the final 79-72 margin.
Freshman Mariah Monke (Fergus Falls, Minn.) started the scoring, and junior Megan Lukan (Barrie, Ontario) came up with a big defensive rebound on the next Raiders possession before being fouled to send her to the line where she made the first of two free throws. Kim Demmings missed a runner on the next possession and it was again a big defensive rebound by the Phoenix, this time by freshman Tesha Buck (Red Wing, Minn.)that sealed the game. Pulling the ball down, she was fouled and walked to the other end of the court where she sunk both of her free throws with six seconds remaining.
"I don't know that we ran anything different in overtime to make the difference, but we were able to work through the heavy pressure that Wright State put on us all night," Borseth said. "Shooting is all about rhythm and we were able to find it and make the shots."
It was a game of runs in the second half, featuring nine ties and three lead changes. Wright State led by as many as eight points with 15:47 remaining (43-35) before an 11-3 Phoenix run tied it for the sixth time in the contest, 46-46, with 12:24 remaining. No team led by more than three points the rest of the way, as Green Bay went ahead 68-65 with 1:41 on the clock. A three by Breanna Stucke tied it with 1:28, and neither team was able to score in the final minute, sending it to overtime.
Wright State came out strong to start the game, building to a nine point lead (16-7) just over eight minutes in. The Phoenix weathered the storm and went on a 15-5 run over the next six minutes to assume its first lead of the contest, 22-21, with 6:19 remaining. A stingy defense forced five Raider turnovers during the run, while Green Bay shared the wealth on the offensive end with six different players scoring during the run, capped by a pair of free throws by Zastrow.
Green Bay led by as many as three with just over five minutes remaining (24-21) before Wright State closed the opening stanza on a 15-7 run including a buzzer-beater shot by Breanna Stucke to give the home team a 36-31 lead at halftime.
Zastrow had a career game, finishing with 12 points and six assists in 29 minutes. Freshman Mehryn Kraker (West Allis, Wis.) had a strong second half scoring 15 of her 19 points, while Buck notched her first career double-double with 16 points and 10 rebounds. Ranger also finished with a double-double, chipping in 14 points and 10 boards.
"Sam[Zastrow] was the player of the game for us," Borseth said. "Tonight she came in and had a lot of great plays. She played in a triple threat position, something a lot of our kids couldn't do tonight because Wright State is so strong."
Green Bay finished the game shooting 45.9 percent (28-61) from the field, including a perfect 4-for-4 in overtime. They also led the Raiders in rebounding (44-36), points in the paint (38-18) and bench points (26-10).
Wright State finished the game 33.3 percent (21-63) from the field and received 20 point performances from Demmings and James. Tayler Stanton finished with a game-high 14 rebounds.
"One game doesn't make a season, and we are going to have to play Valpo at home on Saturday so we need to be ready," Borseth said.
Green Bay returns to action on Saturday, traveling to Valparaiso for a 7 p.m. contest.
For the latest and most up-to-date information on Green Bay Athletics, please visit GreenBayPhoenix.com.
Follow us on Twitter: @GBPhoenix and @GBPhoenixWBB.
Like Green Bay Phoenix women's basketball and Green Bay Phoenix Athletics on Facebook.


text:
- Home
- News
- Sports
- Opinion
- Obituaries
- Features
- Special Sections
- Classifieds
- Public Notices
The North Hardin Trojans opened the season by splitting a pair of games over the weekend.
If you currently subscribe or have subscribed in the past to the The News Enterprise, then simply find your account number on your mailing label and enter it below.
Click the question mark below to see where your account ID appears on your mailing label.
|ZIP Code:


text:
|Topic Review (Newest First)
Nice review. I have not heard of this brand. Could you post a pic or two of your board?
Really Snowolf?
Originally Posted by rscott22 View Post
This is Jeremy Jones new company since leaving Burton he satrted this company and is mostly based around powder style boards.
Jeremy Jones the freestyler is still at burton.
Nice review. I have not heard of this brand. Could you post a pic or two of your board?
Originally Posted by yojik View Post
I was thinking "What Magnetraction?" the entire time I was out of powder.
Topsheet was blemished and the base had a couple blemishes as well. Two thumbs down for the shit job Nidecker did on what could have been an awesome topsheet.
Nice review. I have not heard of this brand. Could you post a pic or two of your board?
Jones Snowboards 2011-2012
This is Jeremy Jones' brand and the production is done through Nidecker.
I felt that my Heritage carved very well even on pretty hard packed surfaces for what it`s worth...
|Thanks for the review! This was one of the boards I had been looking into. I cannot decide whether I want the C2/RC or something more like the BSOD with Rocker tips and camber between the bindings. I had a flat K2 and it was rather boring. The Heritage I rode last year was fun but that was mostly powder riding. Most importantly I want something that can carve! I guess the Jones Twin is now off the list. BSOD-TFA-GNU DK-TRice -Heritage or Agent. I guess I will have to buy them all!
REVIEW - 2012 Jones Mountain Twin 164W
Bought this board as an early birthday present for myself and took it out for its first pow duty on Saturday Jan 21 2012 at Stevens Pass.
About a foot of fresh had fallen the night before and we arrived around 8:15am to stand in line on Kehr's chair and make our way up to the backside. Unfortunately, high winds plagued the first few hours of the day and we were confined to only the front for my initial experience.
I'm a lean and muscular big guy at 6'3 ~235lbs and typically go for ultra stiff setups so I knew this board would be a very different experience for me.
Now on to the review.
Board: Mountain Twin 164W
Bindings: 2010 burton c60
Boots: Nike Kaiju
Stance: 15/-15, 25in
I chose this combo because I was really interested in seeing if I could carve with the board's CamRock profile.
Board stiffness: I'd rate this board as a 4/10 where my 2012 Custom X is a 9/10.
Playfullness: Super easy to ollie and butter, very fun switch
Flex: Jones says the board is slightly stiffer in the tail but I never noticed it. Board felt like a true twin on jumps and smaller cliffs.
The board did better than expected in powder and floated without too much effort. I appreciated the blunt nose but couldn't even tell there was any magnetraction on the edges. Spinning was simple, butters were fun, ollies had some pop, and the board was really lively. Turning was super easy and I could make really really tight turns with the sidecut. I felt like I could control it very well with very little effort but my "turns per hill" ratio went up drastically from my usual # that I can achieve with the Custom X.
The board was unstable at any real speeds, didn't hold an edge well on steeper groomed runs, and I was thinking "What Magnetraction?" the entire time I was out of powder. Board constantly wanted to wash out in anything but pow and I never felt like it could handle a true deep carve so I didn't even attempt it. The durability of the deck is suspect. Topsheet was blemished and the base had a couple blemishes as well. Two thumbs down for the shit job Nidecker did on what could have been an awesome topsheet.
This board forced me to change my entire style and I had a ton of fun despite the board letting me down in a few areas that I thought it would perform better in. It took a few runs to figure out the balance points so fun went up gradually the entire day. The CamRock profile was interesting but really felt loose at speed. No major chatter, but I had a couple washouts from hard carves that I thought the board would handle given the sidecut and magnetraction feature. I could overpower it at will, but when I turned down the aggression the board had more character and was less frustrating.
I would definitely recommend this board + size for any bigger guy looking to improve core fundamental snowboarding skills with a board that performs decently in powder. My usual mentality is to ride fast and hard on steeps, but this board required a different mindset. I had tons of fun on more mellow terrain and was constantly looking for features to hit without abandon. It wasn't a race to get down each run, but rather more like a chess match to pick a better line and search out some fun stuff. Pairing it with the stiffer bindings was a cool feeling because it made the board feel more playful and allowed me to pop fairly well. I might try a set of softer bindings with it to see what happens but I liked the feel of the c60s and at least now they aren't collecting dust.
This will be the board I take with me when I'm riding with less experienced friends or teaching someone. I did find myself pining for the Custom X a few times when I had to slow down out of necessity rather than choice.
I think if you got this board for under 400 you'd be getting a really sweet deal. The current price point is definitely a little too high given the durability worries and overall free ride performance. Freestyle, 2 thumbs up.
This is my first Jones board and I will continue to provide any updates worth sharing throughout the season.
|Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off