Posted on 02/20/2006 5:33:50 AM PST by ToryHeartland
So calling a liar a liar is a lie? And the "erroneous assumption" is a logical conclusion.
There was obviously someone on the thread that recognized this abuse, outside the posting rules of FR and logical debate. In post 854 the Mod recognized and made note of the fallacious posts.
As I pointed out before, the AM yelled at D because they don;t like the term "Liar." Nowhere in the AM's post does he say that D is lying. Now that I know the AM doesn't like calling people liars, I ask you what term can be used to describe your complete misrepresentation of the AM's post? It ain't honest, I'll tell you that.
Later in a noble act of contrition D makes a concession (later clarified as not applicable) in 1029 that she may have been a bit accusatory.
*sigh* "a bit accusatory" is not a lie nor a logical fallacy. It also has been clarified in another post in terms of its general reference.
And finally, someone else must have passed along another abuse complaint since another Mod appears to recognize the adhominem had exceeded acceptable limits and issues a global smack down in 1059.
Again, a general admonition and no evidence of any logical fallacy or lie.
I'm sure you are aware that adhominem attacks are a logical fallacy. I know that D is aware of this fact since I've posted this to her on numerous occasions, and as documented in the first Mod slap down.
Well, you need to learn what a logical fallacy is. If I call you a jerk, that is just an insult. If I say your arguments are invalid because you are a jerk, that is ad hominem.
I see the insults (and appreciate them). The contention that the original poster is a liar is just that -- it is backed up in logic and argumentation. The other stuff is probably a certain amount of insult from frustration.
Sadly for you, neither is a logical fallacy and you have yet to meet my challenge. 1,300 posts and all you can come up with is some insults as examples of Evo's lying/LFs?
I can come up with specific CRIDer lies in the first couple of hundred.
If Jesus was not a historical figure, then our faith is in vain.
For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. (2 Peter 1:16 KJV)
Seems to me that you have discounted the eyewitness testimony of the evangelists. You are in essence accusing Peter of being either a liar or another figment of the first century imagination.
So I am curious. That is why I asked those questions. Your claim to faith does not match your lack of trust in the veracity of the Word you claim to preach.
You are an enigma. Are you really a Presbyterian minister? Are you ordained or just a lay minister?
Thanks Dave for taking the time to council me.
I just finished reading:
Why I Believe in God
By: The Rev. Cornelius Van Til, Ph.D.
http://www.reformed.org/apologetics/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/apologetics/why_I_believe_cvt.html
Every word rang true for me. Not so much to my mind as to my heart. Since I've been born again, it seems to me that every moment of my waking life is now being interpreted for me by something greater than my own understanding. It is like God sees it first and then explains it to me. Then He commands me as to what I should do next. I find that I am not relying on my understanding of anything anymore.
Nothing has made that more apparent to me than my experiences of the last 6 months since hurricane Katrina destroyed my city. I was there for the whole event. I pulled two women and two children out of the flood water. They were in deep trouble, if you'll excuse the pun.
It is as if my will is not my own anymore. That I have no more will of my own. I am commanded, and I obey, without hesitation and without an any doubt, and with an absolute certainty that what I am doing is exactly what I should be doing at that moment. I could no more refuse to obey Him than I could refuse to breath.
I am interested in being able to lead men to what I have found. I am familiar with the Biblical ways of doing so. The way that Jesus did with the Samarian woman at the well is a good example. Specifically, I am interested in helping to lead an 85 year-old lady friend to the Lord. I rescued her from a drop zone and we have become good friends. The stories I could tell you about what the Lord has done for me through this disaster would make your heart soar. So many opportunities to glorify Him. Praise the Lord.
The promises of an abundant life are true. All the promises are true. And anyone who wants the free gift of a completely new life can have it - a knew heart with which to love, a new mind with which to understand, and a new meaning and purpose for their lives, today, right this minute. They don' have to wait until they die to know the free gifts of the Lord. They can have the promises fulfilled starting this very minute. And if they act now, they can get the free bonus gift of an eternal life with God. :)
So profound were the changes in my life that I left a 6 figure income as a Senior PM with IBM 5 years ago for a new life in the Lord, and have not regretted a single moment of that decision. It is difficult for me to fathom now the person that I used to be.
Thanks again for your time. What would you suggest for me next so that I can become a better witness in bringing souls to knowledge of the saving grace of Christ? I am glad to receive your reply via PM. I just wanted to share with this discussion my experience of what it means to me to be a Christian. As best as I am able to do.
In His service, Al.
Doesn't the duck give away a hundred dollars also?
If that's what you do then bible-on until rapture, rupture, or bankruptcy --whichever comes first.
I'll have to keep that in mind next time someone berates the Moslems for living with a 7th century point of view.
Whoa. that's some major 'be fruitful, and multiply, and replinish'-ing there ...
"...God needed..."
but talk about illogical, God does not "need". God never "needs". If God "needed", God would not be God.
Nah. That was just good special effects.
The preferred way is drowning (deluge & Exodus), plagues of vermin (Exodus), burning brimstone (Sodom), attacking Israelis (Karkari & Jericho).
And then there's the one-off deals: pillar of salt (Lot's wife) and death by coitus interruptus (Onan).
I forgot about that one.
I'm not an expert on scripture by any means, and there are clearly many others in this forum who are, but I think you've got this the wrong way around. What I read (Mark 9:41) is
"For whoever is not against us is for us",
or (in Luke 9:50)
"for he that is not against us is for us."
There is a enormous world of difference!
Lennon wrote Corinthians?
Just a quick note to thank you for posting reading recommendations--the titles sound of interest, many thanks.
1400
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.