A Cessationist Passage? Part 2

Is 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 A Cessationist Passage?



Note: This was originally posted in Theology, but for the sake of focusing more exclusively on the text at hand we have elected to repost in Apologetics and approach it afresh.

In 1st Corinthians 13, Paul stated the following: "For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when that which is perfect comes, that which is in part will be set aside... for now we see through a glass darkly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know even as I have been known" (1 Corinthians 13:8-10, 12).

The Greek used here was βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι' ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον, which reads literally as "now we see through a glass in an enigma, but then face to face." Paul was here making use of Numbers 12, where it states, "Then the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud. He stood at the entrance to the tent, and summoned Aaron and Miriam. When the two of them stepped forward, He said, 'Listen to My words. When there is a prophet among you, I the Lord reveal Myself to him in visions. I speak to him in dreams. But this is not true of My servant Moses. He is faithful in all My house. With him I speak face to face clearly, and not in enigmas. He sees the [very] form of the Lord. Why, then, were you not afraid to speak against My servant Moses?” (Numbers 12:5-8, LXX).

Paul used the same two phrases from this passage in Numbers from the LXX (Greek translation of the Old Testament), which shows this is the passage he was alluding to, and he used these exact same two expressions to make the same comparisons. God spoke "face to face" (πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον) with Moses, but to His prophets He spoke "in enigmas" (ἐν αἰνίγματι). An enigma is what a prophetic dream or vision is like. It is a riddle, which is why some translations read, "For now we see through a glass in obscurity (or in riddles)." Throughout ancient Greek, the word αίνιγμα is almost invariably translated into English as "dark sayings, riddles," hence the translations, "seeing through a glass darkly." In ancient times, glass was not nearly as refined as it is now. You could see through it a little, but the image was often very blurry and "dark," thus it took perception to discern what you were actually looking at through it. This parallels with what it is like to interpret prophetic dreams and visions, and also to what it is like prophesying directly over the lives of others one does not know. The one prophesying doesn't have a clue about the person he is prophesying over, so he is simply uttering what the Spirit of God is leading him to say even though at the moment he is still completely in the dark about it.

Chapters 12 through 14 deal with the issue of operating in tongues and prophecy, and point out how prophecy is superior, being the greater gift, because it brings greater edification to the saints. But until we get to Heaven, Biblical prophecy would always be needed because we do not truly see one another face to face yet and know one another's inner most secrets as God does. In conclusion then and in context, the passage has nothing to do with the gifts ceasing or the canon being closed. Quite the opposite, it teaches the need for the gifts until the Lord comes.

Below is a Christian apologist discussing this passage, and the pros and cons of the two most prominent Cessationist arguments. I have not finished it yet, but I have found the parts I have been able to watch quite informative. Comments on either my write up or the video are welcome, but please keep the discussion centered on 1 Corinthians 13 and the surrounding Chapters and verses.

Blessings in Christ,
Hidden In Him

Posted by Arial on another thread:

Numbers 12:8 I speak to him face to face, clearly, and not in riddles (αἰνίγματι) ESV ;NIV;NLV;BSB. Many translations use "dark sayings". The most common is "riddles".

1 Cor 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly (αἰνίγματι)but then face to face. Now I know in part; but then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. ESV;BLB "in obscurity"; KJV "through a glass darkly" and so on.

It was asserted that was dealing with Cessationism and Continuism as to prophets and prophecy being active in the modern church just as they were in the scriptures, that Numbers is verifying that they are by Paul's statement. That the two sets of passages are both saying the same thing. The grounding for that was the use of the Greek word αἰνίγματι in both passages, and the interpretation of that word as being enigma. I will not quibble over that translation as "enigma" is one of the Greek usages. However, is not an enigma the same thing as all the other definitions given if you look up the Greek word in lexicons? So that is irrelevant to the argument.

My position is that the two passages are not dealing with the same thing. Not to mention that it is not the OT that interprets the NT but the other way around, for the simple fact that many things were mysteries in the OT that could not be known until those mysteries actually appeared in our history.

Part 2 Numbers 12 and 1 Cor 13

Numbers 12 is dealing with Miriam and Aaron opposing Moses. 1-9 Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had married a Cushite woman. And they said, "Has the Lord indeed spoken only through Moses? Has he not spoken through us also?" And the Lord heard it. Now the man Moses was very meek, more than all people who were on the face of the earth. And suddenly the Lord said to Moses and to Aaron and Miriam, "Come out, you three, to the tent of meeting." And the three of them came out. And the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud and stood at the entrance of the tent and called Aaron and Miriam, and they both came forward. And he said, "Hear my words: If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream. Not so with my servant Moses. He is faithful in all my house. With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly, and not in riddles, and he beholds the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?" And the anger of the Lord was kindled against them, and he departed.


Hidden In Him

What is going on there? Is God saying how he always communicates with his prophets----through dreams and visions?Obviously not for there are many instances where that is not the case and it wasn't with Moses. Or is he telling the three how he communicates with them at that time? Are dreams and visions the subject of what God is saying? Or is he using it to make a comparison to his normal at that time way of giving his word to prophets and the way in which he communicates with Moses? If the communicating is more direct, rather than dreams and visions which are indirect and therefore a bit of a riddle unless God himself explains it or sends someone to do so, then what is being pointed out is the dangerous brazenness of complaining against Moses, who spoke directly with God. Dreams and visions as enigmas, or riddles, are not as easy to validate, subject as they are to humans saying what they mean.

What I have said can find support in Hebrews 1:1-2 where it tells us that as redemption progresses through history, God communicates with humans in different ways. And the one way in which he does so now. Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the Prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.

Lets compare with 1 Cor 13 and its context. In chapter 12, Paul goes to great pains to impress upon the Corinthians that all who are in Christ are one body, all of equal value. This is a result of what was severely lacking in that church, and their misuse of the gifts. It is available for all to read. In chapter 13, called the love chapter with verses 1-7 pulled from the context of the letter and used as a definition of love itself, rather than instruction on how we are to treat one another as a unified body of family, we have what follows.

When we get to verse 8-12 Paul writes Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child, When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

Is this even remotely what God was speaking about in Numbers and Paul refers to above, simply because the same Greek word αἰνίγματι, is used in both passages as the other OP asserted? Does it connect the two passages and in doing so make what Paul is saying that prophecy in the sense of foretelling of future events is ongoing and that he speaks to his modern day prophets through dreams and visions, and by extension that those who do that are prophets?

And to probe farther, can 1 Cor 13:8 be used as a proof text for either view, cessationism or continuism? I say the answer is no. When Paul says those gifts will cease when the perfect comes, he must mean the consummation of redemption, for he declares that now we see through a glass dimly, our knowledge is imperfect, but then we will know even as we are known and we will see him face to face. Where do we see him face to face in Scripture. Rev 21:3-4 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Behold the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying , nor pain anymore. for the former things have passed away."

Does it then say that prophecy will continue until Christ's return? Not in the way Continuists are interpreting and using prophecy, as God giving new revelations through dreams and visions or any other means. A Prophet in the OT was one appointed to speak for God. God communicated to humanity through them. There are no more Prophets because as is stated in Heb 1:1-2 he no longer communicates to us through Prophets but through Jesus Christ.

So what does that mean, through Jesus Christ? It means that when the last word of the apostles, inspired by God, through and in the Spirit of Christ, all that God intended us to have, was penned, the "story" is complete in all that is needed as to divine revelation and truth. It is in that book, the Bible. It even ends with the admonition---"do not add to it or take away from it." But that does not mean there is not prophesying in the body of Christ---which is speaking those words of God that we have, expounding on them, teaching them, maintaining sound doctrine. The whole body should be doing so as we spread the gospel and contend for the faith.

Hidden In Him said:

Numbers 12:8 I speak to him face to face, clearly, and not in riddles (αἰνίγματι) ESV ;NIV;NLV;BSB. Many translations use "dark sayings". The most common is "riddles".

1 Cor 13:12 For now we see in a mirror dimly (αἰνίγματι)but then face to face. Now I know in part; but then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. ESV;BLB "in obscurity"; KJV "through a glass darkly" and so on.

Click to expand...

Arial. Ok, now remember that we are not simply dealing with the presence of ἐν αἰνίγματι here ("in enigmas"), but also πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον ("face to face") in both passages. The presence of both terms in use together is what makes the case much stronger that Paul was using the text in Numbers from a purely linguistic point of view.

Hidden In Him said:

I will not quibble over that translation as "enigma" is one of the Greek usages.

Click to expand...

Also keep in mind that this is literally the word "enigma" in Greek. It was pronounced slightly differently, but it is in actuality the same word we use today. I agree it can be translated in different ways, but it still bares the same meaning in modern English as it did back then. I think the terms "dark sayings" was simply used to try and make it more readily understandable. "Riddles" would be more accurate if a different word absolutely had to be used, but the translation of "enigma" is to be preferred IMO because it is the most literal.

Hidden In Him said:

Is God saying how he always communicates with his prophets----through dreams and visions?

Click to expand...

I think he also speaks to prophets directly, for Moses himself is sometimes referred to in scholarship as a prophet. However, the distinction being made in Numbers 12 is between those whom God speaks directly to and those whom He speaks to in dreams and visions. The point is that there's a greater level of accuracy because Moses was hearing God word for word, and not to question his authority.

Hidden In Him said:

If the communicating is more direct, rather than dreams and visions which are indirect and therefore a bit of a riddle unless God himself explains it or sends someone to do so, then what is being pointed out is the dangerous brazenness of complaining against Moses, who spoke directly with God. Dreams and visions as enigmas, or riddles, are not as easy to validate, subject as they are to humans saying what they mean.

Click to expand...

That's correct.

Hidden In Him said:

What I have said can find support in Hebrews 1:1-2 where it tells us that as redemption progresses through history, God communicates with humans in different ways. And the one way in which he does so now. Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the Prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.

Click to expand...

Ok, but now this passage cannot be used to say that He no longer speaks to us through prophets at all, because he was writing in present tense, and at that time the prophets were still operating in the churches.

Hidden In Him said:

Let's compare with 1 Cor 13 and its context. In chapter 12, Paul goes to great pains to impress upon the Corinthians that all who are in Christ are one body, all of equal value. This is a result of what was severely lacking in that church, and their misuse of the gifts. It is available for all to read. In chapter 13, called the love chapter with verses 1-7 pulled from the context of the letter and used as a definition of love itself, rather than instruction on how we are to treat one another as a unified body of family, we have what follows.

Click to expand...

I would add that in context, Paul was describing the way they should treat one another when operating in the supernatural gifts. This was also pointed out by Mike Winger in the video I posted in the OP, and it is a key point in accurately understanding the context of everything being stated in 1 Corinthians 13.

Hidden In Him said:

When we get to verse 8-12 Paul writes Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child, When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

Click to expand...

Excellent! This is exactly the part of the Chapter I was hoping to get into in discussing the proper interpretation of 1 Corinthians 13, so let me leave things here for the moment and maybe get back to this later. Should be an excellent discussion, and thank you for taking the time to discuss the passage in greater detail with me. I appreciate that, and it should be fun!

Arial said:

If Paul intended any parallel with this passage it was that Christ is superior to Moses, and being in Christ the believer has obtained what is far superior to what Moses obtained.

Click to expand...

This is a teaching of Paul, but it's not what's being discussed in 1st Corinthians 13. The focus in this passage is on how they were operating in the gifts, which must be in love and with maturity, versus to no productive end and in immaturely (i.e. as a mere "clanging cymbal" etc).

Let me show you what the verses in question are referring to, using your translation of 8-12.

Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child, When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

In Chapter 14, Paul will explain exactly what he means by knowing others "in part."

23 If the whole church comes together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an uninformed person comes in, he is convinced by all, he is convicted by all. 25 And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed; and so, falling down on his face, he will worship God and report that God is truly among you.

This is how they knew the man in question in part, by the Spirit of God supernaturally revealing a part of his life that only the Lord knew to the congregation, such that falling down he worshipped God and declared that He is truly among them. As I was stating somewhere else yesterday, in Heaven prophecies like this will no longer be needed because we will hear the thoughts of one another person to person even if they are not communicated verbally. That's what's being discussed here. He compares that style of communication to becoming an adult and putting away childish things, and that then we get to Heaven we will no longer need prophetic utterance, because we will finally know one another face to face, and fully.

THIS is the context of him making the statement "for now we see in a mirror dimly (in enigmas), but then face to face." Now we only see the thoughts that are in a man's heart dimly, through prophetic utterance that reveals them at least in part, but when we are in Heaven we will understand them fully.

This is the same way the two expressions are used in Numbers. With (Moses) I speak face to face clearly, and not in enigmas. He sees the [very] form of the Lord. Why, then, were you not afraid to speak against My servant Moses?”

Arial said:

In other words, not to be interpreted literally. God did not give something to a profit without also giving him the means of interpreting. To do such a thing with a Prophet would be a violation of his own purpose in giving it.

Click to expand...

This is an interesting point of discussion here, and hear me out, because this explains the very reason WHY the Lord communicates in visions and dreams.

What happens is this: When a dream comes to us, it is like a riddle or "enigma" to use the literal Greek. What does it mean, and what does all the symbolism represent? It seems vague and mysterious, like looking through a glass dimly. You can make out maybe a few things at first, but very little with the natural mind. THIS is in reality WHY He does it this way. If the believer wants to understand his dream, he is going to have to go To God to understand its meaning. It forces him or her to have to seek God out, who alone has the proper interpretation. After years of interpreting my own and others, this is always the case. I sometimes - if not nearly always - look at a dream initially and think, "What on earth does that all mean?" I draw an absolute blank. But then as I start to pray and keep looking at it, suddenly the Spirit of God reveals the meaning of some part of it; a "key" that begins to unlock the entire thing.

But having interpreted now for more than nine years, I can tell you that it doesn't just "happen." You have to seek God. He knows what they mean, and He is therefore the only One who can open them up to you.

Arial said:

Is the passage in our Bible? Does it then apply to the Christian church now or only to those who received the letter?

Click to expand...

It applied to them and it also applied to us. But to apply it to us in a way that would make it unintelligible to them would be to take the scripture too far out of its immediate context IMO. The NT epistles ministered to them long before they ministered to us today.

Arial said:

As to whatever Mike Winger has to say, that falls outside the category of apologetics, which is where I am trying to keep the conversation we are having. I am not having the conversation with Mike Winger. Just saying.

Click to expand...

No, no. I would disagree with you here. Free turned me on to him late last week, and he is a Biblical apologist, with quite a lot of good things to say. I don't even know Mike's final conclusion because I never watched all the way to the end, but he's someone I would love to have critique a teaching like I give in the OP, because I believe it is stronger exegetically that what is typically presented from the Charismatic side.

hawkman said:

Dreams can be literal , I know this . In the Bible also as we see with Solomon .

In Gibeon the LORD appeared to Solomon in a dream by night: and God said, Ask what I shall give thee.

6And Solomon said, Thou hast shewed unto thy servant David my father great mercy, according as he walked before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with thee; and thou hast kept for him this great kindness, that thou hast given him a son to sit on his throne, as it is this day.
7And now, O LORD my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father: and I am but a little child: I know not how to go out or come in.
8And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude.
9Give therefore thy servant an understanding heart to judge thy people, that I may discern between good and bad: for who is able to judge this thy so great a people?
10And the speech pleased the Lord, that Solomon had asked this thing.
11And God said unto him, Because thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgment;
12Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee.
13And I have also given thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches, and honour: so that there shall not be any among the kings like unto thee all thy days.
14And if thou wilt walk in my ways, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as thy father David did walk, then I will lengthen thy days.
15And Solomon awoke; and, behold, it was a dream. And he came to Jerusalem, and stood before the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and offered up burnt offerings, and offered peace offerings, and made a feast to all his servants.

And Joseph's dreams , literal .

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.

Click to expand...

Narrated dreams : ) I have yet to receive one, but I know you have.

P.S. I know this is the Apologetics version, so I need to keep that stuff out of the discussion. Just thought I'd mention the category those dreams fall under.

Arial said:

"And maturity" is editorializing the passage, and it is also subjective if not clearly defined.

Click to expand...

What else would he be referring to if he was using the analogy of things he did when he was a child, but then eventually put childish things away?

Arial said:

In chapter 14 Paul moves on from what he has just said to a discussion of the use and purpose of tongues. And that, as far as this specific conversation goes, would be a whole other apologetically and theologically discussion. Right now we are focused on chapter 13 and what Paul is saying in verses 8-12. Paul ends what is our chapter 13 of a letter with a conclusion to that particular discussion. 13. So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Click to expand...

No, no. This is a common mistake, and I have to disagree with you strongly here. Again, this is not just me saying this here. Mike Winger stated the same thing in the video. Chapters 12-14 are a continuum on the teaching of the gifts. If you break things up like that you disrupt the flow of the teaching in its context.

Arial said:

1 Cor 13 is not about identifying persons. It is not about anything you have said here. You have imposed the beliefs of the Charismatic community onto the scripture.

Click to expand...

Arial, the Charismatic community doesn't even know about this particular interpretation so far as I know. I certainly never picked it up from anyone. The teaching is entirely my own. If anyone else out there teaches it, it is unbeknownst to me.

Arial said:

There is no apologetical or systematical use of Scripture to arrive at the place you have presented. This discussion was originally placed in apologetics. Apologetics should therefore be used to prove ones position and disprove any other position.

Apologetics: a systematic argumentative discourse in defense )as of a doctrine)

Systematic: Characterized by, based on, or constituting a system. (systematic thought). Working or done in a step-by-step mannerly methodical. Of or pertaining to system; consisting in system; methodical; formed with regular connection and adaptation or subordination of parts to each other, and to the design of the whole.

When it involves the interpretation of Scripture, the system is the Bible---the revealed word of God. All the parts must be gathered and they must fit. The reason this is the case is that the Bible is God's word, it came from God through men, and therefore must be first consistent with him and second all the parts consistent with one another.

I have already done this with the Numbers and 1 Cor 13 passages we are dealing with here. In a compressed way due to space limitations. I am not getting rebuttals presented in the same way, or anything showing by systematic apologetics that what I say is incorrect.

Click to expand...

What? You are disqualifying what I am presenting here because it does not fit into anyone else's systematic theology? Since when am I responsible for that? As exegetes of the word we are responsible for simply interpreting a passage of scripture in light of scripture itself, not making sure it conforms to someone else's systematic theology. No offense, Arial, but you are grossly underestimating me here. You should not simply assume that just because someone is presenting an interpretation of scripture that is uncommon that they are unfit for apologetics.

Arial said:

He relates that statement to "when the perfect has come."

Click to expand...

But you're again making an assumption about what that phrase and automatically discounting anything with disagrees with it.

Arial said:

Again you are imposing Charismatic teachings onto the scriptures. What it says is very simple and straight forward with no wiggle room to ponder does it mean something other than what it clearly says----unless someone imposes something on it that is not there. Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away;

As for tongues, they will cease;

A for knowledge, it will pass away.

Why?

For we know in part and we prophesy in part. Our knowledge is of God is limited so what we speak of God is limited by the limited knowledge. Prophecy in the Bible is speaking for God (a Prophet. The mouth of God) or speaking his words (the mouth of God.)

The "only see things dimly" is our present limitations a finite. And though they are wonderful, it is nothing compared to what will come to pass when the perfect comes (God himself) ---our knowledge of God will be as complete as his knowledge of us has always been. We will see him face to face.

Click to expand...

No, Arial. You are presently seeking to impose a common interpretation onto the scriptures and disqualify another simply because it disagrees with it.

I don't want to sound insulting here because that's not my intent, but the arguments presented in this post are not apologetics. They are merely an appeal to the status quo.

Arial said:

But I am not having a conversation with him, and he is not in this conversation. This conversation was not originally a part of this thread, and as far as I am concerned this conversation is this conversation. I am not going to swerve off of it since you said you desired to have it, and as long as you have it with me, unless either of us reaches a point of "Yikes! Enough!"

Click to expand...

I wasn't asking you to "swerve off of it," LoL.

Arial said:

Experience. Imposing already held beliefs as interpretive means. No apologetics. Assumption of truth. Appeal to ones own experience as authority on interpretation. The only way of responding to the content of the post would change the subject, take the conversation off its apologetics track, no doubt become emotion driven etc. All before it has been established that dreams and visions are a normative way in which God communicates to us.

Click to expand...

I'm telling you how the prophetic in regard to interpreting dreams actually works, LoL. You specifically brought up the subject of "the means of interpreting." Why should you be allowed to mention that subject but I not be allowed to comment on it when I happen to know something about that? Why should you be allowed to comment on it but I can't?

Arial said:

You have not proven your position to be valid. You presume it. But if this is where the conversation is going, I'm done.

Click to expand...

Arial, everything is a presumption in debate. Unless you are contending that your interpretations of both scripture and doctrinal matters are inerrant truth and infallible, which I certainly don't think is your intent.

Arial said:

Yikes! Enough! It is as though you cannot understand a single thing I say and twist it to be saying something else. I refuse to deal with it anymore. I refuse to repeat myself over and over. I refuse to try and straighten out the tangle because I will just get more of the same back. Charismatics are some of the most difficult of Christians to try and reason with. Reason has left the building. I do not want to sound insulting because that is not my intent, but it has been my experience.

Click to expand...

Well, all I can do is respond with the thoughts that come to mind. But no harm, no foul. It was an interesting discussion while it lasted. I appreciate your time just the same.

Guess I will close the thread for now.
- H