[donfriesen1]

[QUOTE=Esaias;1618818]

Quote: Originally Posted by donfriesen1

When Paul is seen as commanding the veil in v5 as a spiritual cover that all should keep, it creates problems because the whole of scripture fails to present this as a view to be held.

Sorry, but you already conceded this point, when you admitted God can command something ONCE, and it can be anywhere in the Bible.

Nay, sir. You misrepresent the question and how it was answered. See post 51, 52; points 2,3. Check your facts. You thus twist my words to say something I didn't. Esaias is back to using the twisting tricks he likes to use when boxed-in. I certainly did not concede that if Paul is really seen commanding the veil in 1Co11 that God need not do so elsewhere. Nor that if the only Bible command for co/unco is seen in a 1Co11 command, that it is also in effect for the Beginning, retroactive all the way back to the Beginning (where truly, there are no such commands given). You have not taken the time to properly understand what I said, or I failed to convey what I mean. That said, would you now say that the conversation does have some points worthy to consider, worthy of continuation?

Yet, you still persist AS IF that point was never addressed and dealt with. That is what renders this conversation pointless.

Esaias looks for an excuse for an easy, seen-honourable exit. He needs none as a voluntary contributor, and hopefully keeps contributing. You will notice that I have acknowledged and responded to the points Esaias makes. You will noice that Esaias hasn't responded to all 11 points I made in post 47. Most apply equally to the veil view as to the uncut long view. He offers no response to some things said in post 52, perhaps because the truth presented is unanswerable, not contradictable. He now says he will run off, the conversation being pointless, doing as he usually does when he has nothing to counter points others make, saying 'you're wrong' and not saying why. He wants to look good on the way out when he has failed to respond to valid points. Perhaps he is beginning to see the holes in the veil view and doesn't want to face them publicly to do an about face. Truth knocks at the door and asks admittance, not wanting the door slammed in its face or given the silent treatment - I'm not home. Man up. Face the facts presented. Either prove them wrong conclusively or embrace them. Running off is not an acceptable response to truth while saying 'this conversation is pointless'. That is a cop-out.

Plz, Esaias, provide a meaningful explanation, without holes, that explains why God makes no commands in the Beginning. This logic must be escaping you, because you offer no meaningful explanation of it. If God commands in 1Co11 on this subject, then he would have also commanded at the time when the subject first came up, the Beginning. He didn't. Why not? Ponder this fact for yourself, before rushing on to the next sentence. That he didn't command in the Beginning, shows he would not do so in 1Co11. It is a misinterpretation of the facts of both places to say he commands in 1Co11. If it doesn't make sense then its not likely to be truth. Adjustments should be made to a view which doesn't make full sense in view of facts. I have. I embrace the facts and the view, called the instincts view, leaving behind the uncut long view I once held.

Plz, Esaias, as the giant you are in AFF, plz explain why Paul/God would turn that which has been a long held custom of some Men in many times and places, now into a command of God at the time of the writing of 1Co11? Others are depending on you to provide a counter point which they can't provide themselves.