Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
First, sir or madame, which ever you may be. He has come in stating himself to be a minister. He has stated things that I called him on knowing full well that I can back it up and to an extent have - attempting to engage him in the doing. He has refused firmly and without words to backup anything he has said with scripture. Has he been rebuked, I think it's fair to say that, yes, he has at this point. When I can take the original text and make mincemeat of a self proclaimed minister who's job it is to Know and prove that which he preaches - who's job it is to preach God's word and will, it is my job and my right to require him to back it up in scripture and that is according to scripture. And I can quote it if you would like.
And frankly your demands seem silly since you won't interact with Fury or Wordsmith who have provided you with Biblical challenges that you steadfastly ignore.
Frankly I don't care what you think is silly as you are both mistating and missing things as they are. Wordsmith posted scripture in response to an ongoing debate about physical and spiritual death. And I have continually engaged him on the subject with and without scripture but always referencing him back to scripture. Get your story straight.
With regard to Fury. Who is Fury? Most everyone here is well aware of my mind with regard to Fury. You being the latecomer and ignorant of the prior goings on are unaware of what has gone before. If you bothered to ask what was going on, I'd be happy to tell you. His questions going without answer does deserve a response and I have no problem giving one. Fury can't behave like a grown up. What's more, his argument tactics are designed to be tiresome, tangential, argumentative and are not for the purpose of learning but of distraction and constant attack.
Fury knows I won't respond to him and that is why he constantly attacks - to impugne me to anyone who doesn't know what's going on. He's been warned. Twice before. This is the last warning. And it isn't as though there aren't plenty of witnesses. He is harrassing me and that is his intent. I've offered that if he could show himself capable of adult debate, I'd be happy to include him in what I have to say. He can't do that and I understand why he can't do that. At any rate, I've said my peace. If Fury continues, I'll hit abuse and be done with it. I'll not have this nonsense.
She just lets you think that. :)
BigMack
Nobody said we do worship a book. Doesn't change what the scriptures say.
Horses, huh? So THAT'S the secret. Maybe I should by mrs. al_c a horse. ;o)
No I'm in no way confused. You refuse to deal with the fact that the commands regarding communicating with the dead are speaking of those who are no longer physically with us - whether spiritually alive or not. As soon as that distinction is made, its right back to your circular argument intended to sow confusion. If scripture says dead referring to the physical, you say 'but they are alive' referring to the spiritual. You're mixing apples and oranges to try and defend the indefensible. The scriptures say dead in the flesh whether alive in spirit or not. Dead - meaning they no longer occupy their bodies.
Good lord, my 4 year old nephew fully understands the difference. But he isn't reading with blinders and pushing an agenda.
Is he gonna be a cop when he grows up? :)
Tell him we all said good no ya mate.
BigMack
Maybe I should buy Mrs. Ignorant one too. (I'd be dead if my wife knew I just referred to her as Mrs. Ignorant. Oh well, she still knows nothing about the Neverending Story)
I think, if you don't factor in college, horses are actually more expensive than kids. Then again, when the horse outlives its usefulness you can always eat him. ;-)
SD
That's good, best of luck with the NFP, Mack and I was in agreement too, after a little coaxing on the second:), and then in agreement about no more after that. And that is what each couple has to work out, I think that is what God meant when he said and the two shall become one.
Becky
I'm sure Becky would agree that horses are the secret to lots of things... :-)
Why, my lady has been so happy since she got her first horse that it's more than compensated for the - ahem - previously discussed liability of having small children in the house... ;-)
And on that note, I'm off to evening services. We're still observing Lent. Christ Bless.
Trust me, don't go there.
BigMack
If you must hit the abuse button, do so. I do not respond to each and every post of yours. I do respond to your posts that I believe are errent and that can be corrected with facts, logic, reasoning and faith. If that makes you unfortable, I apologize.
It's not a personal thing, please know. But I think it odd that you want to espouse your beliefs, yet others who disagree have a variety of personal comments made about them, which is a bit off-topic.
I spent months (2) going back though many, many TNS threads. So although I may have not been on the TNS threads early on, I have tried to do my research.
I can certainly behave like a grown-up, Havoc. I have responded to many, many of your posts with Scripture or other facts when appropriate. No response. You are not obligated to respond, for sure. But please do not confuse attacks with posts that run contrary to yours.
I absolutely defend your ability to have your say on the TNS when it sticks to the issues. I am sorry that you do not want to afford me the same opportunity. But when I see something that a poster writes that I feel can be added to or that I may not agree - or agree with, I will comment. I'll gladly leave it up to the Moderators if they consider that abuse.
Scripture please? In addition to Ecclesiastes 9, which I already posted in full and which, as I said earlier, seems to state fact rather than issue commands. Thanks, and God Bless.
G'night, everyone!
AC
She will when we all show up at your house naked talking about contraceptives and what nots. :)
BigMack
On the wall of the kitchen of my grandparent's house, there was a plaque that read:
"I am the boss of this house, and I have my wife's permission to say so."
;o)
But again I say, I detest the way you use Scripture as a weapon to beat up on people who already believe in Jesus Christ.
If you want to engage anyone in a real discussion you need to treat them with respect, Havoc. Until that happens your words are worse than hollow.
That's not what the scripture says. Scripture says that Confession of Christ from faith is the foundation. Jesus said that in Matthew 16:18. He also said,
John 12:
[44] Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.
[45] And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
[46] I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.
[47] And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
[48] He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
[49] For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
[50] And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.
What shall judge? Said a whole lot in that short space didn't he. Ultimately, again, we're right back where we started you claiming that tradition is equal with scripture and can't prove the tradition against scripture. You can say whatever you want about the nature of tradition, where it came from etc. It's all heresay unless you can prove it in scripture. Which means that in a court of law mentality, it's garbage and inadmissable as evidence unless you can establish clear foundation.
Not to be fecetious; but, can you read and think for yourself? Go sit down and read it in context and break it down. Hmm lets see, How can one be guilty for two accidents although he was only involved in one wreck. In the one instance he cause the accident, in the other he was also a party to it when he caused it. It isn't tough, one just has to apply themselves and seek God when it isn't this apparent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.