Head Coverings Predated Christianity

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

It's time to awaken, Apostolics. It's time to accept the arguments of the iv as truth.

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

When the arguments the iv puts forth can't be refuted,

The arguments crushed it! Your word serving position lies bleeding in your hands. You might get a chance to fly out to Chris Reed's church. They love baloney sandwiches, maybe you can get a word serving position there.

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

then it is because it is Truth with a capital T.

No, it is BALONEY with a capital B-A-L-O-N-E-Y

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

Efforts to defeat a view which is truth cannot be successful using truth.

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

Truth only supports truth, never contradicting it.

Well, then you need to get some Truth, because all you have is a teaching that contradicts the Bible. Hey, when are you going to show me where you found Lake of Fire in the Old Testament? How long do I have to wait for that? Oh, yeah, as long as I've been waiting to see you refute what I posted?
How's your snow shovel ministry going?

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

And the reason the proponents of the vv can't defeat the iv is because it is truth,

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

which can't be defeated

Yeah sure

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

using something that isn't truth.

You have yet to accomplish that. What is this? More of your wishful thinking?

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

This is why iv opponents focus on commenting on peripherals instead of the main body.

Which you never refuted anything we posted with book, chapter, and verse. But, you believe you don't have to, because Jesus showed it to you.

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

What is seen in the iv is the presentation of scripture and reasoning based on the scripture.

How many scriptures did you post to prove that God doesn't know how to relay information to His followers? How many scriptures did you post that proves Paul was evolving in his beliefs? How many scriptures did you prove that Paul was just preaching about a local custom in Corinth and that everyone can just figure it out by themselves? When did you prove with scripture that weak Christians are too always remain weak? You are just silly man.

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

The reason the main points of it can't be shown wrong is because they come from the Word of God.

Three verses and you believe you started a new movement? 45,001 different denominations now?

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

Paul reads the Word and makes conclusions based on it. He reads in the Beginning and makes a conclusion based on it, but not on words God speaks or commands. The method Paul uses is based on the powers of deductive reasoning.

In 1 Corinthians 7:40, the Apostle Paul writes that his judgements were based on inspiration of the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:21 emphatically states that "no prophecy ever originated from human initiative. Instead, it was given by the Holy Ghost as men spoke under God's direction."

Don, you are a lost potato.

You need the Holy Ghost, with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues.

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

It leads him to believe that GOoA, God's Order of Authority, is real and truth. But this had not come to him by reading a command. If God does not command that which comes out of his Word, ie: GOoA, then that which only exists because GOoA exists would also not be commanded. This refers to the head symbol. The need for a head symbol would not exist if GOoA did not exist. Thus, the head symbol, which gives recognition to the compliance to GOoA, is also not commanded.

Yet, those who believe in the vv or the ulv in their respective views, say God commands the symbol for all to obey. This is contrary to what Paul says is the source for his thoughts: the Beginning. It is contrary to what is seen in the Beginning to say head-symbols are commanded. There is no such command there.

Paul would not say the head symbol is commanded, if he had not seen God commanding it in the Beginning.

First things first. The Beginning is among the firsts, as far as earth is concerned. Anything coming after what came first must agree with the first, or it is seen contradicting the first-seen truth. The truth derived from 1Co11 must not contradict the truth of the Beginning. 1Co11 must be interpreted in the light of, keeping in mind, the light which the Beginning gave.

If conclusions coming out of 1Co11 contradict conclusions from the Beginning, then they must be adjusted to agree with that which came first. If not, then God is seen to contradict himself. God did not show falsehood in the Beginning. Things said to be of God in 1Co11 must not contradict what he shows at the first. God had not commanded either GOoA or the head symbol in the Beginning. Conclusions of 1Co11 must not contradict the first conclusions, to say that God commands either.

If God had not commanded either GOoA or head symbols in the Beginning, nor anywhere else in the OT, then the source for the compliance to them comes from something else.

God had not commanded A&E to love him. God expected them to do so for reasons other than commands. Not everything God expects from Man is commanded. This is by God's will by design. God had not commanded Abraham to tithe. Abraham tithes in compliance to another motivation, perhaps love. God-given reasoning power is the motivator to love God and tithe, not commands.

This springs out of the image of God given to Man. It motivates from within, but not by law. As in: The Lord did not have to go to the Cross. There was no Law which commanded him to be gracious. He reasoned within himself as to whether or not to do so.

The source for the expectation that a head symbol be shown to respect GOoA comes by way of the same inner motivator. That God did not command head symbols in the first 4000 yrs of Man's history testifies this conclusion is correct. The iv agrees with this expectation, by saying the source of the need to display a head symbol is within the God-given nature he gave Man. This is sometimes called an instinct.

If the facts and conclusions of this post can be shown faulty, then great damage will be done to the foundations of the iv.

Don, you have been shown incorrect from the very first time Esaias pointing out your error. You never wanted anyone to correct you. You came here to ram your nonsense down our throats. That's fine, I'm always willing to oblige. But, since you didn't come to break bread, but break arms, don't get flipped out when you get challenged. I'm serious, Don, if you had manna from heaven, I would sit down, and eat with you. I really mean that! But, nothing you offered is hot bread, just some old maggot infested meal.