Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly, and that's why it doesn't make sense. It's all subjective, no matter which way you chock it up. Lutherans are no more right than Catholics...Methodists...Presbyterians....etc. They're all petty, shallow, and crazy.
It's nothing more than a glorified roundtable discussion about a work of literature.
And you are essentially arguing off topic. Your position is contingent on "The Bible is written by man", etc...
That is not the topic here. You use outside influence to condition your conclusion. You don't argue the context of the word, merely it is invalid and therefore anything discerned from it is invalid as a truth.
Your argument:
The Bible is written by man.
Man has subjective views.
The Bible is subjective.
You are off topic. If you want to discuss the validity or the legitimacy of the Bible, there are plenty of threads in the religious forum for that. We are discussing the validity of a Bibles claim within its own context that is known and believed to be the word of God. If you wish to discuss the context within it, by all means, make your case why the Bible does not think homosexuality is a sin. Please spare us with the fallacious debate tactics to confuse the issue. Discuss within topic and in context or move along.
And you are essentially arguing off topic. Your position is contingent on "The Bible is written by man", etc...
That is not the topic here. You use outside influence to condition your conclusion. You don't argue the context of the word, merely it is invalid and therefore anything discerned from it is invalid as a truth.
Your argument:
The Bible is written by man.
Man has subjective views.
The Bible is subjective.
You are off topic. If you want to discuss the validity or the legitimacy of the Bible, there are plenty of threads in the religious forum for that. We are discussing the validity of a Bibles claim within its own context that is known and believed to be the word of God. If you wish to discuss the context within it, by all means, make your case why the Bible does not think homosexuality is a sin. Please spare us with the fallacious debate tactics to confuse the issue. Discuss within topic and in context or move along.
I'll discuss what I want as I see fit. Don't call me off topic just because you can't sustain your arguments.
I'll discuss what I want as I see fit. Don't call me off topic just because you can't sustain your arguments.
I provided evidence why you were off topic, you merely throw out fallacious claims without any support that are not within the context of the discussion (misdirection). You are off topic, you are disrupting the discussion with your red herrings and misdirections. You are discussing using unethical and proven fallacious debate tactics and no amount of useless one liners will change that fact.
I provided evidence why you were off topic, you merely throw out fallacious claims without any support that are not within the context of the discussion (misdirection). You are off topic, you are disrupting the discussion with your red herrings and misdirections. You are discussing using unethical and proven fallacious debate tactics and no amount of useless one liners will change that fact.
You have yet to address my previous post. Instead, you are attacking me based on comments I made to someone else, where we were discussing something external. You can focus your frustration and venom on me all you want, it doesn't change anything that I've stated.
Christianity's interpretation is relative. There will be no consensus on biblical doctrine even among Christians themselves, as has been continually demonstrated presently and historically. You cannot avoid that reality. Therefore, I fully support the Presbyterian Church's decision based on acknowledgment of principle.
I don't care what you have to say, because I've heard the same arguments consistently. And when you realize that everyone is arguing that they know what's going on, that they all have the unadulterated truth, it automatically renders the situation untenable and dubious. You are no different from Joe Blow down the street, and hold no ground with me.
You have yet to address my previous post. Instead, you are attacking me based on comments I made to someone else, where we were discussing something external. You can focus your frustration and venom on me all you want, it doesn't change anything that I've stated.
Christianity's interpretation is relative. There will be no consensus on biblical doctrine even among Christians themselves, as has been continually demonstrated presently and historically. You cannot avoid that reality. Therefore, I fully support the Presbyterian Church's decision based on acknowledgment of principle.
I don't care what you have to say, because I've heard the same arguments consistently. And when you realize that everyone is arguing that they know what's going on, that they all have the unadulterated truth, it automatically renders the situation untenable and dubious. You are no different from Joe Blow down the street, and hold no ground with me.
Refusing to acknowledge a point does not make it go away. I answered to your claim in more than one post. I even explained in detail as to why there is a problem with your approach and why it is not relevant to the focus of this discussion. We are all sitting inside the house while you have yet to even walk in. Your not dealing with the topic, merely excusing it away. You conditioned your conclusion and I am sorry for you, but that is an unethical debate approach. Stay within context and on topic or don't bother responding.
Refusing to acknowledge a point does not make it go away. I answered to your claim in more than one post. I even explained in detail as to why there is a problem with your approach and why it is not relevant to the focus of this discussion.
I also explained why there is a problem with the way you perceive Christianity as it pertains to gay ministers.
Quote:
We are all sitting inside the house while you have yet to even walk in. Your not dealing with the topic, merely excusing it away. You conditioned your conclusion and I am sorry for you, but that is an unethical debate approach. Stay within context and on topic or don't bother responding.
I have dealt with the topic at hand. I have examined the situation from both the Chrisitan and non-Christian standpoint and articulated why it is not cogent and simply does not make sense that there would be uproar over the decision of the Presbyterian Church. You want to believe that it is wrong, and that's fine. It's just getting back to my whole point from the beginning of this discussion.
I also explained why there is a problem with the way you perceive Christianity as it pertains to gay ministers.
I have dealt with the topic at hand. I have examined the situation from both the Chrisitan and non-Christian standpoint and articulated why it is not cogent and simply does not make sense that there would be uproar over the decision of the Presbyterian Church. You want to believe that it is wrong, and that's fine. It's just getting back to my whole point from the beginning of this discussion.
The shellfish was only one example that I chose. There are many, many more, as "anybody who has knowledge of the Bible" can attest.
Sorry to interrupt--but I would be interested in hearing a few more examples that are applicable to New Testament Christianity--preferably from the Gospels--not the Synoptics.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Old laws do not apply
