[Bowas]

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

Bowas wants to get involved but not so much. We do as much as we like to. We need not provide reasons. We are free in AFF.

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Yes, and I've given multiple examples of such. Since you haven't read many posts I will give an example, taken from https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.co...ad.php?t=55053 which is my thread: 1Co11.2-16. Instincts. The Cover of Shame.

Reading 1Co11.2-16 sees Paul making a conclusion. See v3. But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. He makes a statement but doesn't here say where it comes from. Apostolics call this conclusion God's Order Of Authority. It is: God as head, the man Christ under him, man - subordinate to God/Christ, woman - subordinate to both man and God/Christ.

It is understood that Apostolics should follow this order because it is given by God to obey.

Paul then refers, v8-12, to the Beginning as the basis for his conclusion. 8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. 10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. 12 For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God. When we read in Ge we see no direct words from God indicating by words that he expects A&E to follow an Order Of Authority. Nothing at all indicates to all Men anything directly from God's mouth about God's Order of Authority, which later is seen as Paul's doctrine. Where then does Paul get his conclusion from, if God made no such statement/command there? It did not come from a command of God seen in the Beginning asking for it, did it?

I've said in other places that Paul makes it up. If I offend you using this phrase, which implies that it comes entirely out of Paul's imagination, then substitute the phrase with: Paul reads between the lines, by his own volition, to make conclusions. Paul gets meanings from events, specifically: Eve was created for Adam, Ge2.

This was only an event and it was not to command anything like that which is implied by v3 and God's Order Of Authority.

Yet using 'reading between the lines' shows that it indicates Eve should be submissive, but not because she was commanded to do so. If she was made for Adam's purposes, then it is logical to think she should be subordinate to the one she is made for. This understanding comes from logic, not words of a command.

What also is not said by command is that Adam should be subordinate to God. We assume this to be commanded but it is only an assumption. Obviously, Adam should be subordinate to the One who is vastly superior to him in every conceivable way. But this subordination is known to us/Adam not by command but by the use of the reasoning ability God gave to all Men. God did command other specifics, such as that certain fruit.

All this is deductive reasoning at work. It is not reading of a command of God asking for Man to comply with his Order Of Authority. Even so, Paul has presented it in 1Co11 as an irrefutable doctrine all should follow. Even though he made it up by using deductive reasoning. (I've only used 'made it up' to indicate it came out of his thoughts. Paul uses God-given deductive reasoning abilities like it was designed by God to be used. Paul's conclusions are right and should be received as Truth with a capital T. Not everything which we should live by comes by a command of God.)

For what it's worth: Perhaps you noticed that Paul has included Christ, when Ge mentions nothing of him. Thus Paul adds to the Word of God, doing so by necessity because further events demand so.

So, Bowas, this is just one example where the scripture shows doctrine coming out of an event, and not from a command of God. It had come to Paul by way of reading between the lines of words written of the Beginning. Doctrine has come by way of reading God's Word but using deductive reasoning/reading between the lines to do so.

God's Order Of Authority was not given as a command of God, but it was indicated by events. Paul makes it authoritative when it is included in 1Co11. Yet even he does not command it. He says this: I want you to know. It is instructive, not commanding, info.

I can give examples of Jesus using reading between the lines. I have other examples also.

In that you referenced Jesus and Paul in your defense to read between the lines, (which they did not) this verse immediately came to mind, as you seem to be elevating yourself to their status.

Can you read between these lines?

Act 19:15.. And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?..