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

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by jediwill83

Almost as if there is interaction with a crude LLM that is compiling arguments and minutiae of comments and spitting them out but lacking reasoning and comprehension...not only that but severely lacking the ability to connect and interact in a way that would lend itself to his goal of persuasion...if persuasion is indeed the real object of the interaction.

What is a crude LLM? Is it different than a refined LLM?



Every thoughtful reader knows that I post

arguments from reason and scripture, though they

are different from the views of the majority.



For Jediwill83 to say that I do not have the ability

to connect and interact is demonstrated how in

postings in this thread? Can Jediwill83 quote one

post demonstrating this? Plz, we'll wait for the

quote.



(Of course, Jediwill83, will not be quoting because

he doesn't come here to demonstrate facts.

Examinations of his posts shows he has not taken

efforts to interact with with logic or scripture, as

he says I should interact. Oh, well.



He has come to persuade you, reader, by means of

expression of his opinion alone, that the iv should

be ignored. Some will believe his opinion-without-

facts-for-basis, but some will not. Check his posts

and you too will see he doesn't present facts.

Opinions require something solid to stand on before

they should be accepted. Like scripture or logical

argument. Jediwill83 will not provide this, though

he is presumedly capable of it. You are capable,

aren't you Jediwill83? Plz show us some of what

you got, instead of just being negative.)



I've talked in the past about 'not expressing

arguments from scripture and logic' when posting.

You did not take my words to heart. Expressing

opinions alone are almost meaningless. Yet here we

are again, with only your opinions. Plz do provide

something of substance which other readers can

take home and share with their friends. You've got

some scripture and reasonings in you, don't you?

Present some Biblical arguments in your next post.



Careful readers, if Jediwill83 gets wound up, he will

blow the arguments of the iv out of the sky. Stand

back! Avoid being hurt by the fallout. I'm baiting

you with that sentence, but don't take the hook.



Opinions without scriptural meat behind them are

almost worthless. You waste our time, when I

presume you've got it in you to do better.



I presume to understand what Jediwill83 means by

his post. I presume to understand his thinking, that

he thinks the iv is so much different than anything

else ever presented on 'head-coverings', that this iv

must be wack.



But that is not how truth is discerned. It is

examined on its own for its merits. If the view is

scriptural, logical, not contradicting other truth,

then it not wacky. Just different than the long

established.



Peter had great difficulty accepting the fact that the

gospel was also for the Gentiles.



He was a dyed-in-

the-wool Jew who had completely embraced the

negative view of Gentiles which most Jews had

embraced. Anything other than this 'long-held

standard of judging' was a hard pill to swallow.

Most then would have said anything new said

contrary to the majority opinion, was wacky, just

because it was different from the long established.



It was hard for Peter to accept the changes

imposed by the Lord, inspite of the great efforts he

had taken to persuade. We see his continued

resistance exhibited in Galatians, where Paul has to

publicly confront and contradict Elder Peter on this

topic. How long after Ac10 this happened is not

known to me. This resistance! Inspite of what God

had very clearly shown Peter in Ac10.



New scriptual ideas contradicting old ideas die

hard, even in Apostolics who say they are

truth-loving.



Those wanting to follow the Jesus way,

like Peter, must adapt to conform to truth, in spite

of peer pressures and personal desires to hang

on to old ways.



The apostle/Word exhibits both what Apostolics

today do and should do. They resist newly-revealed

truth but should then accept it, after careful

examination.



Just being different does not make something

which is scriptural, wacky.