Do You Know “David Pack”? My Life and Ministry—Rumors and Lies vs. Facts and Truth [Cult Wars]

RCG.org (Restored Church of God, splinter group from Armstrongism) ^ | David C. Pack

[redleghunter]

last Christmas season

Yeah those anti-trinitarian JW Mason (they never really came clean) posters on that heresy thread were hard to pin down. Like giving a bath to a feral cat.

Everytime they were presented with scriptural evidence for the trinity, they tried vigorously to change the Greek lexicon or change the Hebrew meaning of a word.

[redleghunter]

I did not know the “Sabbatarians” were anti-Trinity. What denominations fall under that label?

[Kevmo]

There isn’t even a “sabbatarian” page on Wikipedia to describe this supposed religious group. It’s just a euphemism for anti-trinitarian.

[redleghunter]

I thought “sabbatarian” meant they were 7th day adventists or other groups that worship on the 7th day. That includes some groups that do believe in the Trinity. So kind of confusing. Will go over there to see what’s going on.

[Kevmo]

UCG, for starters. Then eventually it would include JW’s, mormons, deists, etc... anyone who calls themselves christian but denies the trinity.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3107566/posts?page=301#301

[Kevmo]

It’s basically a heretic searching for protection from counterarguments on Free Republic.

Maybe we should open a parallel thread to counter the heresy?

[Kevmo]

I thought “sabbatarian” meant
***It is an excellent euphemism. And of course, the thread author could keep to such a line for a long time before he starts defending his heresy.

sidenote:
Since Sabbatarian isn’t defined at this time, would it include jews? They worship on Saturday.

[Elsie]

Since I’m not as familiar with the ground rules, it’s good to know where we stand on FR.

You'll learn them. Understand logic, how to detect fallicies, try to always be nice - but forceful, remember there are REAL people behind each comment here, respond to the TEACHINGS and not to the people posting them, don't become so offended by something you see that you forget the earlier things in this list.

[Elsie]

...or other groups that worship on the 7th day.

I have no problems with folks that do this.

As long as they do NOT teach that we HAVE to!

---

Romans 14:5
One person considers some days more holy than others, while someone else regards them as being all alike. What is important is for each to be fully convinced...

[Elsie]

Since Sabbatarian isn’t defined at this time, would it include jews? They worship on Saturday.

I would think not.

Only folks who consider themselves to be part of the CHRISTIAN set would come under this subset of Sabbatarian.

[Elsie]

...how to detect fallacies,...

---

Logical fallacies hide the truth, so pointing them out is very useful.

 

1. Ad Hominem - Attacking the individual instead of the argument.
Example: You are so stupid your argument couldn't possibly be true.
Example: I figured that you couldn't possibly get it right, so I ignored your comment.

 

2. Appeal to Force - Telling the hearer that something bad will happen to him if he does not accept the argument.
Example: If you don't want to get beaten up, you will agree with what I say.
Example: Convert or die.
 
3. Appeal to Pity - Urging the hearer to accept the argument based upon an appeal to emotions, sympathy, etc.
Example: You owe me big time because I really stuck my neck out for you.
Example: Oh come on, I've been sick. That's why I missed the deadline.

 

4. Appeal to the Popular - Urging the hearer to accept a position because a majority of people hold to it.
Example: The majority of people like soda. Therefore, soda is good.
Example: Everyone else is doing it. Why shouldn't you?

 

5. Appeal to Tradition - Trying to get someone to accept something because it has been done or believed for a long time.
Example: This is the way we've always done it. Therefore, it is the right way.
Example: The Catholic church's tradition demonstrates that this doctrine is true.
 
6. Begging the Question - Assuming the thing to be true that you are trying to prove. It is circular.
Example: God exists because the Bible says so. The Bible is inspired. Therefore, we know that God exists.
Example: I am a good worker because Frank says so. How can we trust Frank? Simple: I will vouch for him.

 

7. Cause and Effect - Assuming that the effect is related to a cause because the events occur together.
Example: When the rooster crows, the sun rises. Therefore, the rooster causes the sun to rise.
Example: When the fuel light goes on in my car, I soon run out of gas. Therefore, the fuel light causes my car to run out of gas.
 
8. Circular Argument - See Begging the Question
Fallacy of Division - Assuming that what is true of the whole is true for the parts.
Example: That car is blue. Therefore, its engine is blue.
Example: Your family is weird. That means that you are weird too.

 

9. Fallacy of Equivocation - Using the same term in an argument in different places but the word has different meanings.
Example: A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Therefore, a bird is worth more than President Bush.
Example: Evolution states that one species can change into another. We see that cars have evolved into different styles. Therefore, since evolution is a fact in cars, it is true in species.

 

10. False Dilemma - Giving two choices when in actuality there could be more choices possible.
Example: You either did knock the glass over or you did not. Which is it? (Someone else could have knocked the glass over)
Example: Do you still beat your wife?

 

11. Genetic Fallacy - Attempting to endorse or disqualify a claim because of the origin or irrelevant history of the claim.
Example: The Nazi regime developed the Volkswagen Beetle. Therefore, you should not buy a VW Beetle because of who started it.
Example: Frank just got out of jail last year; since it was his idea to start the hardware store, I can't trust him.

 

12. Guilt by Association - Rejecting an argument or claim because the person proposing it likes someone whom is disliked by another.
Example: Hitler liked dogs. Therefore dogs are bad.
Example: Your friend is a thief. Therefore, I cannot trust you.

 

13. Non Sequitur - Comments or information that do not logically follow from a premise or the conclusion.
Example: We know why it rained today: because I washed my car.
Example: I don't care what you say. We don't need any more bookshelves. As long as the carpet is clean, we are fine.

 

14. Poisoning the Well - Presenting negative information about a person before he/she speaks so as to discredit the person's argument.
Example: Frank is pompous, arrogant, and thinks he knows everything. So, let's hear what Frank has to say about the subject.
Example: Don't listen to him because he is a loser.

 

15. Red Herring - Introducing a topic not related to the subject at hand.
Example: I know your car isn't working right. But, if you had gone to the store one day earlier, you'd not be having problems.
Example: I know I forgot to deposit the check into the bank yesterday. But, nothing I do pleases you.

 

16. Special Pleading (double standard) - Applying a standard to another that is different from a standard applied to oneself.
Example: You can't possibly understand menopause because you are a man.
Example: Those rules don't apply to me since I am older than you.

 

17. Straw Man Argument - Producing an argument about a weaker representation of the truth and attacking it.
Example: The government doesn't take care of the poor because it doesn't have a tax specifically to support the poor.
Example: We know that evolution is false because we did not evolve from monkeys.

 

18. Category Mistake - Attributing a property to something that could not possibly have that property. Attributing facts of one kind are attributed to another kind. Attributing to one category that which can only be properly attributed to another.

Example: Blue sleeps faster than Wednesday.
Example: Saying logic is transcendental is like saying cars would exist if matter didn't.

[Kevmo]

Only folks who consider themselves to be part of the CHRISTIAN set would come under this subset of Sabbatarian.
***This should be interesting. There are likely christians who are trinitarian but Sabbatarian and those who call themselves ‘christian’ (i.e., heretics) and are Sabbatarian.

The way to protest the fact that they’ve been given a caucus tag is to open a thread in the ecumenical or open religion forums and point out the obvious differences of opinion that Christ has with belial.

[Kevmo]

You’ll learn them.
***Did not the fact that heretics were granted a caucus tag on FR surprise you?

[Kevmo]

respond to the TEACHINGS and not to the people posting them,
***The main reason why I’m even on this thread is that a member of the UCG answered a question in a way that surprised me.

Basically I asked him: Do you accept that Jesus is (Jehovah) God?
His answer; Yes.

What his answer REALLY means? No. It’s a lie intended to draw someone into their cultish meandering thought processes.

Now that same group has a caucus tag. Of course, he might simply use the caucus tag as originally proposed, for christians who consider Saturday to be the Sabbath. But how do you respond to the TEACHINGS if those TEACHINGS are so buried but the responder is operating in the open on FR?

[redleghunter]

I agree no issues if brothers and sisters want to celebrate feasts and days most of the apostles and early Christians did. Your quote was one of two addressing the matter.

I know some here that do adhere and are solid Trinitarians.

[redleghunter]

LOL I triple dog dare you to take this material and start a Catholic caucus thread:)

[redleghunter]

There are Trinitarians who will post on the sabbatarian caucus.

Easy CAPT Ahab, you won’t find your great white whale on that thread:)

[Elsie]

NOTHING on FR surprises me!

[Elsie]

Basically I asked him: Do you accept that Jesus is (Jehovah) God?
His answer; Yes.

What his answer REALLY means? No. It’s a lie intended to draw someone into their cultish meandering thought processes.

Now that same group has a caucus tag. Of course, he might simply use the caucus tag as originally proposed, for christians who consider Saturday to be the Sabbath. But how do you respond to the TEACHINGS if those TEACHINGS are so buried but the responder is operating in the open on FR?

 

---

Then it appears you have a job to do.  Dig them out for us all to see.

Claims and assertions about stuff don't go very far on FR without actual DATA to back them up and/or blow them apart.

It isn't FR's job to be 'Policeman of the World'; it's the PEOPLE who frequent it's pages to blow the whistle, so to speak.

---

The owner of the site is a Christian, but he is NOT one to stifle free speech - as long it's within his well thought out guidelines.

Folks DO get banned for exceeding those guidelines after being warned.

 

No need to get impatient about wanting JUSTICE done ;^)         

 

Luke 9:54 (ESV)

And when his disciples James and John saw it, they said, “Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and consume them?”

 

---

But to answer your question -  But how do you respond to the TEACHINGS if those TEACHINGS are so buried but the responder is operating in the open on FR? - start a thread, point out the problems, call the Mods.

[Elsie]

What his answer REALLY means? No. It’s a lie...

1. Without data; you are appearing to mindread...

2. Awfully close to calling the PERSON a liar...