You don’t have biblical proof of it. Got it. Thank you.
Excuse me...no one has Biblical proof, neither thee or me. We have verses that can be read to support our theological pov, but they do not prove that pov to anyone but ourselves.
The short version is:
The flim flam of exegesis is that for anyone to get the meaning of a verse from the verse without any input from their mindset and unfiltered by existing ideas is on the order of Paul's conversion as a bright light and hearing GOD's voice. Every interpretation of a verse is eisegesis, the fitting of the verse into previously accepted definitions.
The longer version is:
1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass darkly: but then face to face: now I know in part, but then shall I know even also as I am known.
darkly - the lack of clarity in old mirrors also reflecting the fact that what we see is in fact, backward, not reality. Grosheide(#5), remarks in his commentary:
"Our seeing in this dispensation is in a mirror darkly. The mirror in antiquity gave a very poor image (
2 Corinthians 3:18).
Seeing something through a mirror only was not seeing the reality. It was like considering a riddle, which makes one wonder what one really sees. Our vision is hampered by a twofold darkness and hence it is in part. We are unable to determine what in our vision is precisely lacking, for if we could we would have freed ourselves of the imperfection of the mirror. The only thing that can be said is that our Lord reveals in a figure which is formally perspicuous that we, when we see now, have not reached perfection. Our present vision is not untrue, but it is imperfect as to its degree. When perfection has been reached, we shall see face to face, ie, we shall with our eyes of our understanding look straight into the face of things reality ; there will be nothing between us and the things like GOD's face."
Consider one small part of (so called) exegesic standing on only what is there: there were no spaces between words or ends of paragraphs in the original texts so a sentence like:
isawabundanceuponthetable when read by the cult of the dancing buns finds corroboration for their view in "
i saw a bun dance upon the table" when in fact the words were written to mean "
i saw abundance upon the table."
This is the cause of many to be led astray who depend upon direct quotes to support a position, that is, it presupposes that there is only one pov and that pov is the speakers, who may be a dancing bun cult member.
With every post of a misunderstood, wrongly interpreted so called direct quote we see proof of the uselessness of not following the Holy Spirit. The quote is true though the interpretation can be as off the wall backwards as thru a particularly bad reflection in a mirror! Instead:
Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;
