1Co11.2-16. Instincts. The Cover of Shame.

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Esaias

So from this we see that Don does not in fact believe that God can command something anywhere in Scripture. Instead, Don believes God can only command something anywhere in Scripture IF it was commanded in the Beginning with Adam and Eve. Therefore, any command in Scripture not found being given to Adam and Eve is no command at all.

And so Don overthrows everything in the Bible after Genesis 3. According to Don's theology, man shall live by every word of God in Genesis 1-3 and not by anything else.

He will of course protest that this is a mischaracterisation of his position and belief, but it is the logical conclusion of his statements. Hear him above, as he says "there can be no command for a veil or uncut hair for a woman in 1 Cor 11 because no such command is seen to be given to Adam and Eve." Ergo, there can be no command in Scripture unless it was first given to Adam and Eve. Since we have no record of commands for Adam and Eve except to not eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, that is all that can be commanded mankind, for all time. So, one may do as they will, there are no commands past Genesis 3 that anyone needs to worry about.

That having been established, I do not find any point in continuing this discussion, because I certainly do not accept the idea that any command in Scripture must be seen to have been given to Adam and Eve in order for it to be a valid command. I actually believe the whole Bible is the Word of God, and constitutes "every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God" by which we are to live. So, it seems Don and I follow two very different religions. As such, there is no point in debating with him what apostolic Christians should or should not be doing, anymore than I would be debating a Hindu about how often the Lord's Supper should be taken.

**************

Instead, Don believes God can only command something anywhere in Scripture IF it was commanded in the Beginning with Adam and Eve. Therefore, any command in Scripture not found being given to Adam and Eve is no command at all.

See my reply to this, in post 250.

He will of course protest that this is a mischaracterisation of his position and belief, but it is the logical conclusion of his statements.

And here I had thought that my Game analogy, post161 would have been sufficient to explain what I had said, when I said "there can be no command for a veil or uncut hair for a woman in 1 Cor 11 because no such command is seen to be given to Adam and Eve." Is there anyone else who would chime in to say they follow and use Esaias' reasoning method on this?

As such, there is no point in debating with him what apostolic Christians should or should not be doing, anymore than I would be debating a Hindu about how often the Lord's Supper should be taken.

Now that I can agree with. Apples must be compared with apples, and not apples with oranges. The Lord has purposely given us 1Co11 unclearly, as a test of who we are. As shown by Ro14;15:1-7, God allows varying views on some topics of the Bible, telling those who have opposing views to receive, not judge but accept those who have opposing views when the facts can logically lead in different directions. This happens with 1Co11. To say someone isn't apostolic because they view 1Co11 other than they do, is not showing the spirit of Ro14,15. It is judging. It is not receiving. It is not accepting. Apostolics are defined, with Ro14,15 in mind, by the Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as the I AM, and by the new birth experience as shown by Jn3.5 and Ac2.38. They are not defined by 1Co11 . If 1Co11 were the defining point of what an apostolic is, then which of the two major apostolic camps (the veil view or the uncut long view) are the true apostolics? Will you answer this question for us plz Esaias? Having pointed this out, I hope you now realize how silly your assertion of what is an apostolic, using 1Co11, really is. 1Co11 has little to do with it.