How can unregenerate people worship God?

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,178
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
It was still your use of a red herring logical fallacy in your response.

Don't you understand the way you use logical fallacies on this forum? I suggest that you study this list of logical fallacies from The Nizkor Project and identify how you use them in your responses on CF.

Then quit using them. Anyone's use of logical fallacies prevents logical discussion. By some of your actions on this forum, you demonstrate that you use logical fallacies and don't want to change how you communicate with others by the use of these fallacies.

Well, since the point of the post was to show FG's contradiction, then I don't see how it's a red herring.

You do realize that the quote was FG's, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AndOne
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Well, since the point of the post was to show FG's contradiction, then I don't see how it's a red herring.

You do realize that the quote was FG's, right?
That's because you did not address the content of FG's post and thus committed a red herring logical fallacy.

In case you have forgotten what you do, here it is again:

Also Known as: Smoke Screen, Wild Goose Chase.
Description of Red Herring

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

  1. Topic A is under discussion.
  2. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
  3. Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.
You do it over and over to various posters - including myself - on this forum. When will you quit it so that we can continue to have logical discussions on the topic raised.

Your use of a red herring fallacy is illogic in action.

NB: Of course I know that the quote was from FG2 to which you replied and to which I responded. You participate often, based on what others say, when it has not been addressed to you. Therefore, why are you making this an issue? I'm as free as anyone else on CF to show your practice of a red herring logical fallacy - even when you address your comment to FG2

Oz

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,178
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married

That's because you did not address the content of FG's post and thus committed a red herring logical fallacy.

In case you have forgotten what you do, here it is again:

Also Known as: Smoke Screen, Wild Goose Chase.
Description of Red Herring

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

  1. Topic A is under discussion.
  2. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
  3. Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.
You do it over and over to various posters - including myself - on this forum. When will you quit it so that we can continue to have logical discussions on the topic raised.

Your use of a red herring fallacy is illogic in action.

NB: Of course I know that the quote was from FG2 to which you replied and to which I responded. You participate often, based on what others say, when it has not been addressed to you. Therefore, why are you making this an issue? I'm as free as anyone else on CF to show your practice of a red herring logical fallacy - even when you address your comment to FG2

Oz


Bye. :wave:
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
It was still your use of a red herring logical fallacy in your response.

Don't you understand the way you use logical fallacies on this forum? I suggest that you study this list of logical fallacies from The Nizkor Project and identify how you use them in your responses on CF.

Then quit using them. Anyone's use of logical fallacies prevents logical discussion. By some of your actions on this forum, you demonstrate that you use logical fallacies and don't want to change how you communicate with others by the use of these fallacies.
Hi Oz,
Thanks for the excellent resource! Very helpful. I think these approaches are done in order to try to keep the focus off one's weakness of their view.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Hi Oz,
Thanks for the excellent resource! Very helpful. I think these approaches are done in order to try to keep the focus off one's weakness of their view.
Yes, but the person will not acknowledge what he is doing. It is used to divert attention away from the content of your post, mine or anyone else's.

I do wish that more people would become conversant on this forum with how others use logical fallacies that prevent us from having reasonable and responsible discussions.

Oz
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,178
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
By paying attention to what I say, of course. :)

I did. I showed your contradiction. Your only response was "No, I don't mean that at all". No explanation of what you really meant.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I did. I showed your contradiction. Your only response was "No, I don't mean that at all". No explanation of what you really meant.
No contradiction was shown. Only your "take" on my post, so I disagreed with your conclusion of my view.

btw, I always mean what I say.

Instead of trying to put words into my mouth, next time just ask for clarification. Then I will. If you persist in trying to paraphrase and misunderstanding me, I will just deny that is my position.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,178
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
No contradiction was shown. Only your "take" on my post, so I disagreed with your conclusion of my view.

btw, I always mean what I say.

Instead of trying to put words into my mouth, next time just ask for clarification. Then I will. If you persist in trying to paraphrase and misunderstanding me, I will just deny that is my position.

FG "Scripture provides two examples of
unregenerate unbelievers who worshiped God."

FG "In spiritual death, a dead human spirit cannot worship God (we are separated from Him)."

FG "No, I don't mean that at all."

FG "btw, I always mean what I say."
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,178
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
All I saw was a quote. No explanation, no nothing. Please be specific if there is a contradiction that I have made.

The majority of folks will find the above post self-explanatory.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
FG "Scripture provides two examples of
unregenerate unbelievers who worshiped God."

FG "In spiritual death, a dead human spirit cannot worship God (we are separated from Him)."

FG "No, I don't mean that at all."

FG "btw, I always mean what I say."
Apparently, you forgot to include the key to understanding this so-called contradiction.

John 4:24
“God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Though both Cornelius and Lydia were described as worshipers of God, they still didn't have the Truth. That was lacking. Until Peter and Paul showed up, respectively.

Even Saul worshiped God as a Pharisee. But he lacked the Truth until he met Jesus.

btw, since you've previously agreed with me that regeneration and faith occur at the same time, though we disagree on the "logical sequence", how do you handle the fact that Saul, Cornelius and Lydia worshiped God before they came to faith in Jesus Christ? Some Calvinists would say that regeneration can occur way before they come to faith, but you don't believe that.

So, how do you explain them worshiping God before faith in Christ?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,012
25,178
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,718,526.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Apparently, you forgot to include the key to understanding this so-called contradiction.

John 4:24
“God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Though both Cornelius and Lydia were described as worshipers of God, they still didn't have the Truth. That was lacking. Until Peter and Paul showed up, respectively.

Even Saul worshiped God as a Pharisee. But he lacked the Truth until he met Jesus.

I said the same thing, basically, on page one.
 
Upvote 0

shturt678s

Regular Member
Dec 11, 2013
2,733
118
✟10,797.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Apparently, you forgot to include the key to understanding this so-called contradiction.

John 4:24
“God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Though both Cornelius and Lydia were described as worshipers of God, they still didn't have the Truth. That was lacking. Until Peter and Paul showed up, respectively.

Even Saul worshiped God as a Pharisee. But he lacked the Truth until he met Jesus.

Only a head's up. Saul worshipped "another God" before Acts9:17, etc. where Cornelius and Lydia where 'hearing' the gospel and law thus worshipping the true God only awaiting for the Pearl of Great Price.

btw, since you've previously agreed with me that regeneration and faith occur at the same time, though we disagree on the "logical sequence", how do you handle the fact that Saul, Cornelius and Lydia worshiped God before they came to faith in Jesus Christ? Some Calvinists would say that regeneration can occur way before they come to faith, but you don't believe that.

So, how do you explain them worshiping God before faith in Christ?

Old Jack
 
Upvote 0

Shocker

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2014
3,175
34
✟3,534.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Only a head's up. Saul worshipped "another God" before Acts9:17, etc. where Cornelius and Lydia where 'hearing' the gospel and law thus worshipping the true God only awaiting for the Pearl of Great Price.



Old Jack

Saul was a Jew who had head knowledge of God, and honored him with his lips and by works.

It was definitely the same God, but Saul was acquainted with Jesus Christ personally and therefore came to understand the God in which he thought he was serving.

In case people get the wrong idea about Saul worshipping a different God.
 
Upvote 0

shturt678s

Regular Member
Dec 11, 2013
2,733
118
✟10,797.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Saul was a Jew who had head knowledge of God, and honored him with his lips and by works.

It was definitely the same God, but Saul was acquainted with Jesus Christ personally and therefore came to understand the God in which he thought he was serving.

In case people get the wrong idea about Saul worshipping a different God.

Saul: Remove IICor.11:4, "another Jesus," and then I may begin to agree with you ;)

Definitely a 'different God' :amen:

Old 'same' Jack

btw Saul had a head knowledge of a 'different' gospel ;)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums