Proof texting

[honorthesabbath]

So basically what you are saying is the creator of the universe miraculously made a pot of fermented wine so folks could get drunk at this wedding? I don't think so. Alcohol kills brain cells and adversely effects every single other cell in your body. Jesus did not come to destroy but to heal.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

AMEN JIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU NAILED IT BRO!

 

[StormyOne]

So basically what you are saying is the creator of the universe miraculously made a pot of fermented wine so folks could get drunk at this wedding? I don't think so. Alcohol kills brain cells and adversely effects every single other cell in your body. Jesus did not come to destroy but to heal.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

excessive alcohol kills..... your wanting the text to say what you wish prevents you from seeing what is really there... not surprising... and I am not condoning alcohol consumption.....

Another reason why your comment makes no sense, it could have been that Jesus turning the water into wine could have given them the taste without the effects... afterall, it was a miracle..... but you will see what you wish.....

 

[djconklin]

Originally Posted by Jimlarmore
So basically what you are saying is the creator of the universe miraculously made a pot of fermented wine so folks could get drunk at this wedding? I don't think so. Alcohol kills brain cells and adversely effects every single other cell in your body. Jesus did not come to destroy but to heal.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

excessive alcohol kills

Any amount of alcohol kils brain cells.

 

[djconklin]

I've been looking and I have not found a good example of "proof texting" being done in any of our doctrines with the exception of the IJ.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

That's because there isn't any--the claim is made up.

 

[djconklin]

Originally Posted by djconklin
And the proof for this would be ...?

Well read Genesis Noah did not get drunk on grape juice,

I agree that Noah didn't get drunk on grape juice; but, it doesn't help prove the claim that "The church also used proof texting to say the bible speaks against the consumption of wine. 'Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging' and other texts."

Plus Schloers did not exist in bible days.

Agreed and irrelevant.

 

[StormyOne]

Any amount of alcohol kils brain cells.

brain cells die with or without alcohol... so a person who never drinks loses brain cells.... of course you knew that but chose to omit it to make a point.....

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimlarmore
I've been looking and I have not found a good example of "proof texting" being done in any of our doctrines with the exception of the IJ.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

That's because there isn't any--the claim is made up.

Amazing, Jim admits it is used in the IJ then DJ answers that the claim is made up. Is DJ disagreeing with Jim or that there is such a thing as proof texting. I did not realize that the subject had become restricted to SDA examples of proof texting, something I would not take the time to document because it is rather extensive.

One good sign is that in the recent Sabbath School Lesson guide on the book of Ecclesiastes they did not use the often used proof text. "For the living no that they shall die but the dead know not anything..." Probably because when used in the context of the author of Ecclesiastes there is no after life, no reward just a brief life here on earth. But I do take it as a good sign that the leadership is actually learning something and not presenting things by the proof text method.

 

[ricker]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimlarmore
I've been looking and I have not found a good example of "proof texting" being done in any of our doctrines with the exception of the IJ.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

That's because there isn't any--the claim is made up.

Every belief system uses proof texts to one extent or another. If you actually are so thoroughly indoctrinated that you honestly believe that Adventist's don't use proof texts to boost some of their doctrine, I will leave you to your delusions. From these above statements I can only surmise that if I would point some out, you wouldn't be able to look at them objectively anyway. I kinda admire your total trust that all your doctrinal beliefs are 100 percent correct and not contrived in the least way. Enjoy your comfort zone, I won't waste my time by interfering.
God bless! Ricker

 

[Jimlarmore]

Every belief system uses proof texts to one extent or another. If you actually are so thoroughly indoctrinated that you honestly believe that Adventist's don't use proof texts to boost some of their doctrine, I will leave you to your delusions. From these above statements I can only surmise that if I would point some out, you wouldn't be able to look at them objectively anyway. I kinda admire your total trust that all your doctrinal beliefs are 100 percent correct and not contrived in the least way. Enjoy your comfort zone, I won't waste my time by interfering.
God bless! Ricker

The definition of "prooftexting" specifically points out that a belief system is built on using texts ( especially in the Bible ) out of context to build that belief on. I am fully aware of how this is done though out Christiandom as I have come from several churches in my past
that do this on a regular basis. When I came to the sda church I was very surprized to find that they didn't lift texts out of context as other churches did. The ability to find the real truth in God's word is not that hard to do but it does require using some common sense and a degree of faith as well. You certainly don't have to be a literary geneius to find gems of truth in the Bible.

It's quite frankly, been a shock to find those here who are sda who don't accept the creation event or global flood as a literal event that actually occurred on our earth. It's also been a shock to find those who would say that some sda beliefs are based on proof texting or lifting verse out of context. With the exception of the IJ there are none to my knowledge. The IJ as we accept it is not fully supported by scripture that I can find so far.

I challenge you Ricker to show me where I am wrong about this on any of our fundamental beliefs with the exception of the IJ. We can start another thread or do it here if you want. Who knows we could both learn something.

God Bless bro.
Jim Larmore

 

[LightWorker1967]

It's quite frankly, been a shock to find those here who are sda who don't accept the creation event
Jim Larmore

And there are a great number of Adventists--including our teachers--who are just as surprised that you still do.

It's the surprise both ways that worries me.

Remember the survey in the mid-1990s of North American Division science teachers—just over 40% affirmed the traditional 6-day creation story. And that was more than 10 years ago. (I think this was published in Adventist Today—but not sure.)

Most of my early shifts from traditional to more progressive thinking came from my SDA College experiences. From the "leaders."

Jim, what has happened in our community where these things are so surprising both ways? Did we stop communicating with each other enough to no longer understand each other?

Personally, I'm not surprised either way—both postures are completely understandable to me.

 

[djconklin]

Originally Posted by djconklin
Any amount of alcohol kils brain cells.

brain cells die with or without alcohol... so a person who never drinks loses brain cells.... of course you knew that but chose to omit it to make a point.

No, I did not know that brain cells die on their own--by the same token you knew that any amount of alcohol kills brains cells but failed to mention it and changed it to "excessive" (anything over a drop then qualifies) alcohol. I've heard of neurogenesis and Alzheimers. I also haven't heard of there being a contest to see who can kill the most brain cells in the shortest amount of time--what are the prizes?

On an Oprah Winfrey show they mentioned that even one glass of wine affects the judgment.

 

[djconklin]

It's quite frankly, been a shock to find those here who are sda who don't accept the creation event

1) Just because they claim to be SDA doesn't mean that they actually are, or were.
2) Some may have been poorly educated by their pastors and/or the school system they went too. I had the good fortune to go to good schools all my academic life and have been exposed to both sides of the debate.

 

[djconklin]

Remember the survey in the mid-1990s of North American Division science teachers—just over 40% affirmed the traditional 6-day creation story. And that was more than 10 years ago. (I think this was published in Adventist Today—but not sure.)

When my cousin finished his doctorate in biology and sought a position at SDA colleges and universities he was told by one that he was too "liberal." The same school recently told him that he was too "conservative"!