A re-examination of nothing

[Floatingaxe]

This scripture reminded me of another:

funny you mention those outside the city, look who else is out there:

tulc(has no problem being out there with Jesus and the rest of the riff-raff)

Do you really believe that crap?

Jesus will be in the City. You can't pull another scripture out of context and make it fit. Do yourself a favour and study God's Word. Know what He means before you try to refute someone.

 

[BreadAlone]

12"Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. 13I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
14"Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. 15Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.
16"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."
17The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life. 18I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to argue with the words of Christ.

 

[davedjy]

and davedy is the one that started this nonsense when he used the argument of silence here:

You are completely wrong if you think you can say MY argument was from "silence". All I was saying was that those passages don't speak of same sex unions. YOU guys are the ones that love to speak from silence saying that the Bible condemns same sex unions, and THAT is an argument from silence.

 

[MercyBurst]

I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to argue with the words of Christ.

Yeah, I agree, but then you have people here that say the Bible is mistranslated, so why do they keep pulling verses from it I wonder?

 

[davedjy]

The thing is--God does compare fools to dogs. Is God abominable?

Proverbs 26:11
As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his foolishness.

2 Peter 2:22
They prove the truth of this proverb: “A dog returns to its vomit.” And another says, “A washed pig returns to the mud.”

Philippians 3:2
Watch out for those dogs, those people who do evil, those mutilators who say you must be circumcised to be saved.

Revelation 22:15
Outside the city are the dogs—the sorcerers, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idol worshipers, and all who love to live a lie.

That was not my point, you are now bringing verses that have nothing to do with the relationship comparison. God does not compare human-dog relationships to same sex relationships. Those quotes of passages don't have anything to do with what I was addressing.

 

[MercyBurst]

davedjy said:

You are completely wrong if you think you can say MY argument was from "silence". All I was saying was that those passages don't speak of same sex unions. YOU guys are the ones that love to speak from silence saying that the Bible condemns same sex unions, and THAT is an argument from silence.

Look at the examples of "argument from silence" that were provided in the link I gave you from the Wiki. You claim that gay-marriage is not condemned in the Bible, therefore it must be ok, or did you say something different from that?

It's the ol' classic King Jimmy lies, King Jimmy says my conduct is ok fallacy.

 

[davedjy]

davedjy said:




Look at the examples that were provided in the link I gave you. You claim that gay-marriage is not condemned in the Bible, therefore it must be ok, or did you say something different from that?

It's the ol' classic King Jimmy lies, King Jimmy says my conduct is ok fallicy.

I obviously believe it's OK, but as stated, I was addressing those who say that the specific clobber passages address same sex unions are wrong.

 

[savedandhappy1]

Won't presume to speak for EnemyParty but it thinks the point she bes making bes that literalism bes inconsistent. So to read one passage and take it at absolute concrete face value but then to read another passage and abstract it out seems inconsistent and random. And when it appears to be done in cases where reading literal/concretist/surface meaning only makes a convenient finger-pointer to someone ELSE's issues, but abstracting away seems to allow one to avoid perhaps an equally uncomfortable confrontation with themselves, this seems disparate, self-serving, and disingenuous.

FTR, a lot of ppls have wrestled with that passage in scripture you mention, about the rich man being told to sell everything, and whether it applies to everyone or only to such cases in which money and possessions have become one's idols, masters or gods. The tricksy thing bes this: if one bes in that position how would one know without another pointing it out? Most people what lives comfortably have no clue how their lifestyle bes seen to them whats in need. Having been on both sides of that continuum, it knows this well. Having been in poverty before, it also knows it would pretty much rather die than ever have to live that way again.

I am not totally sure what all you are saying above, sorry. I don't know what FTR means, so again sorry.

I will just say that when I read the scriptures we are referring to, and I literally read it to say what I posted. So, I am I guess considered a literist.

I believe that Jesus came to earth, that He died on the cross, that on the 3rd day God raised Him from the grave, and that He is now sitting at the right hand of God. I believe the Bible when it says that He is coming back and that it will happen just as the Bible says it will.

I also believe what the OT says about the creation, Abraham, Moses, Lot, the Flood, etc. Why anyone would want to try and totally understand the ways of God who created all things with a human rational makes no sense to me. Science it good, but to say that if they can't prove it it didn't happen is laughable to me. We can't even figure out how to make dirt, which God used to make man, and we want to say something didn't or couldn't have happen because we can't prove it....................

So that is what I feel about the Bible you can say I'm a literist or not, it doesn't matter. I don't label myself one way or the other I just prayerfully read His word and ask Him to give me the wisdom and understanding needed. Never really thought about being any of the names I have been labeled with until coming to this site. Well I guess I did think of myself as a Conservative, but that would be the only label I ever considered myself to be.

 

[Floatingaxe]

That was not my point, you are now bringing verses that have nothing to do with the relationship comparison. God does not compare human-dog relationships to same sex relationships. Those quotes of passages don't have anything to do with what I was addressing.

Haha! It isn't all about you and your little argument!

 

[davedjy]

I don't know what FTR means, so again sorry.

It means "For The Record".

 

[savedandhappy1]

That was not my point, you are now bringing verses that have nothing to do with the relationship comparison. God does not compare human-dog relationships to same sex relationships. Those quotes of passages don't have anything to do with what I was addressing.

Aren't you the one who says if 450 animal species can do it it is ok for humans to?

 

[davedjy]

Haha! It isn't all about you and your little argument!

Point being, the verses do not specifically address my post. You are now trying to play indirect Bible verse quote arguments.

 

[MercyBurst]

davedjy said

I obviously believe it's OK, but as stated, I was addressing those who say that the specific clobber passages address same sex unions are wrong.

That's not the way it reads. You justify gay-marriage by saying it is not condemned in the Bible, which you believe was mistranslated to start with.

Hence your whole argument is a fallacy. This is really getting dumb.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Uhh...no....dogs are not humans, invalid comparison beyond . It is "abominable" to compare humans and humans to a human and a dog. It's a waste.

Once again, I ask, is God abominable, seeing as I gave scripture attesting to that very comparison?

 

[davedjy]

davedjy said




That's not the way it reads. You justify gay-marriage by saying it is not condemned in the Bible, which you believe was mistranslated to start with.

Hence your whole argument is a fallacy. This is really getting dumb.

The whole argument that gay marriage is condemned in the Bible is a fallacy, and all I was addressing were THOSE WHO SAY THESE CLOBBER PASSAGES ADDRESS SAME SEX UNIONS.

I use other Bible passages for gay marriage (passages on love), you are not reading my quote correctly.

 

[savedandhappy1]

It means "For The Record".

Thank You!

 

[davedjy]

Once again, I ask, is God abominable, seeing as I gave scripture attesting to that very comparison?

Uhh no...I have seen those passages of Scripture before, they do not address a comparison between same sex relationships and a dog-human relationship as a valid comparison. Did you read my quote carefully?

 

[Floatingaxe]

Uhh no...I have seen those passages of Scripture before, they do not address a comparison between same sex relationships and a dog-human relationship as a valid comparison. Did you read my quote carefully?

You know, dave, sometimes these threads get off on little excursions. This is one of them. Let's nail it shut and move on.

 

[MercyBurst]

Davedjy said:

The whole argument that gay marriage is condemned in the Bible is a fallacy, and all I was addressing was THOSE WHO SAY THESE CLOBBER PASSAGES ADDRESS SAME SEX UNIONS.

I use other Bible passages for gay marriage (passages on love), you are not reading my quote correctly.

And I ask you once again: Why do you even bring it up if you believe the Bible was mistranslated? All the translations could be minimizing gay-sin for all we know.

This is why your argument is a fallacy: It starts by saying the Bible as we read it is a lie, then your argument says the Bible is reliable information to justify gay-sex.

I'm sorry but this is a hypocrisy. You aren't sincere, and you can't have it both ways.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Davedjy said:



And I ask you once again: Why do you even bring it up if you believe the Bible was mistranslated? All the translations could be minimizing gay-sin for all we know.

This is why your argument is a fallacy: It starts by saying the Bible as we read it is a lie, then your argument says the Bible is reliable information to justify gay-sex.

I'm sorry but this is a hypocrisy. You aren't sincere, and you can't have it both ways.

Exactly!