KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 25, 2010 12:18:45 GMT -5
To Wesley & Michael: I think it is important to understand that Stephen is not accusing Michael of not being a Christian and not having the truth as it relates to faith in Jesus Christ and the Gospel.
While I vehemently oppose some of the ideas Stephen has as it relates to government, I don't see that in his statements. It might help me that I've been debating these kinds of things with Stephen for years and understand his style.
Stephen, I said to you early on when I first jumped in that sometimes sarcasm can be an effective tool and sometimes it can distract from the overall point that you are trying to make. I think in some ways that has happened here. I know the disagreement is not all based around sarcasm, but some of it is. I encourage you to be careful and yes it is helpful to remember you're debating a very young guy, who while he's articulate and intelligent, is still a young man.
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 25, 2010 12:20:13 GMT -5
Stephen's argument on seeking truth is related to what he views as ignoring the propaganda that he thinks we are all programmed with from the government. Stephen wouldn't you say that is a fair statement.
I find this whole you define truth no you define truth discussion to have completely derailed the thread.
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 25, 2010 12:23:14 GMT -5
Michael: It's important to remember there are different kinds of "truth". If you are referring the THE TRUTH as in THE GOSPEL, one way to be saved etc..... then yes there is ONE truth. But if you believe someone is lying, and you tell them to TELL THE TRUTH you aren't telling them to preach the Gospel.
Stephen: Michael has taken your challenge to him to seek THE TRUTH as it relates to the government as he doesn't have THE TRUTH as it relates to the Gospel message. Maybe I'm wrong but this is what seems to have derailed the discussion several pages back.
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 25, 2010 12:41:52 GMT -5
Did bin laden ever try to enter negotiations with ANY person in th U.S. before deliberately trying to kill civilians? Yes. Repeatedly. And he has attempted negotiations many times since 9/11 as well. In late March 2004, Bin Laden offered a unilateral cease fire and full truce to the United States (and any other nation as well) "which does not carry out an onslaught against Muslims or interfere in their affairs." The United States refused to respond. Five months later, on August 2, 2004, Bin Laden's chief deputy announced that the truce offer was still on the table and they would welcome a chance to negotiate a lasting peace. The United States refused to respond. Another negotiated truce was attempted in late 2005. Bin Laden contacted American officials to offer "a long-term truce based on just conditions that we will stick to... both parties of the truce will enjoy stability and security to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, which were destroyed by war." On Jan 20 2006, Whitehouse spokesman Scott McClellan quietly announced that the offer had been rejected. On December 22, 2006, another Bin Laden deputy, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, attempted yet again to open negotiations by offering a full cease fire if the US invasion forces would free Iraq within one month. The US again refused a diplomatic resolution. In late July, 2009, yet another effort at negotiation was made by Bin Laden. He offered a total cessation to resistance and a truce if US invasion forces would leave Afghanistan. The offer was again rejected. This information was readily available to anyone who sought truth. Now that your question has been answered, specifically and plainly, in the exact manner that you requested, will you accept truth and at least consider it in the future as you form your views? I find it extremely interesting that all of these examples are POST 9-11. You did not answer Michael's question if you go back and read it.......
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 25, 2010 12:53:34 GMT -5
What is your definition of truth Stephan? Once again, you are falling into the trap of relativity, asking what "my" definition of truth might be. There is no "my" truth or "your" truth. There is only the truth. Truth is reality. "Test everything." - I Thessalonians 5:21 You should be careful about quoting out of context. The context Paul was using that statement in had nothing to do with the context you are using it in. Paul was referring to testing prophecies in light of the Scripture. (Warnings to watch against false prophecies are found throughout the Scriptures). The word Paul used here is the Greek word dokimazo which also means to examine and to put to the test. And in Paul's writings he always balances prophecy with discernment. He does that again here. For us I believe that this is a call to test or to examine all preaching or teaching in light of what Scripture teaches. Just because someone opens up a Bible and preaches from it doesn't mean that the message is truly biblical. There is quite a bit of Scripture twisting and bending of the Bible to fit someone’s own personal agendas or biases. So Paul is warning to watch out for this.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 25, 2010 16:23:27 GMT -5
Stephen's argument on seeking truth is related to what he views as ignoring the propaganda that he thinks we are all programmed with from the government. Stephen wouldn't you say that is a fair statement. Not entirely. Obviously the US government specializes in propaganda. Every government does. That's as old as time. But that is no excuse. The truth is still there for those who want it. True, but I got no dog in that fight. I merely responded.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 25, 2010 16:35:46 GMT -5
I find it extremely interesting that all of these examples are POST 9-11. You did not answer Michael's question if you go back and read it....... The very first word of my very first sentence did, in fact, directly answer his question, with supplemental verification and information provided thereafter.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 25, 2010 16:44:53 GMT -5
You should be careful about quoting out of context. I'm not. Your entire theory on the meaning of Paul's writing is based solely on the six words immediately preceding the text I quoted. Otherwise, the word "prophecy" is not even mentioned in the entire book of I Thessalonians and there are no grounds whatsoever for the restricted meaning you suggest. In fact, Paul was issuing instructions to the Thessalonians for over a chapter by this point on all sorts of daily habits including self control, work and labor habits, responding to wrongs done to you, prayer, living peaceably, and much more. And all of these instructions were very brief in nature, even only one or two words at times. So textual criticism supports my contention that the words "test everything" do, in fact, mean that Christians are to make a constant habit of testing their entire belief system, and that this was written as a stand-alone statement as was much of the entire chapter. So while I respect your point of view, your selection of applicable text is far more narrow than mine, and your theory on what Paul meant could be just as out of context as you claim mine to be.
|
|
Michael
Captain
Red Baron Fight XX and XXI Champion
Posts: 407
|
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2010 19:37:50 GMT -5
"Test everything." - I Thessalonians 5:21 um..... owned. Um... most certainly, NOT. Using Scripture out of context is a sure sign of desperation.
|
|
Michael
Captain
Red Baron Fight XX and XXI Champion
Posts: 407
|
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2010 20:02:26 GMT -5
You should be careful about quoting out of context. I'm not. Your entire theory on the meaning of Paul's writing is based solely on the six words immediately preceding the text I quoted. Otherwise, the word "prophecy" is not even mentioned in the entire book of I Thessalonians and there are no grounds whatsoever for the restricted meaning you suggest. In fact, Paul was issuing instructions to the Thessalonians for over a chapter by this point on all sorts of daily habits including self control, work and labor habits, responding to wrongs done to you, prayer, living peaceably, and much more. And all of these instructions were very brief in nature, even only one or two words at times. So textual criticism supports my contention that the words "test everything" do, in fact, mean that Christians are to make a constant habit of testing their entire belief system, and that this was written as a stand-alone statement as was much of the entire chapter. So while I respect your point of view, your selection of applicable text is far more narrow than mine, and your theory on what Paul meant could be just as out of context as you claim mine to be. Paul was telling the Thessalonians to "test everything" using God's word as the ultimate "looking glass" . And if you stand by what you said then you'll have no problem with the fact that even though the The Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus with an trick question, He still responded with: Matthew 22:21- And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Here's the whole chapter, so you can see it in context: Matthew 2215 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how they might entangle Him in His talk. 16 And they sent to Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God in truth; nor do You care about anyone, for You do not regard the person of men. 17 Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” 18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites? 19 Show Me the tax money.” So they brought Him a denarius. 20 And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?” 21 They said to Him, “Caesar’s.” And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” 22 When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left Him and went their way.Christ even goes as far to call them hypocrites for TESTING Him...hmmm.
|
|
Michael
Captain
Red Baron Fight XX and XXI Champion
Posts: 407
|
Post by Michael on Feb 25, 2010 20:10:30 GMT -5
This is now the second most viewed thread ever it the off topic section. Whoop, Hooray. Give us all a prize.
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 26, 2010 0:50:51 GMT -5
You should be careful about quoting out of context. I'm not. Your entire theory on the meaning of Paul's writing is based solely on the six words immediately preceding the text I quoted. Otherwise, the word "prophecy" is not even mentioned in the entire book of I Thessalonians and there are no grounds whatsoever for the restricted meaning you suggest. In fact, Paul was issuing instructions to the Thessalonians for over a chapter by this point on all sorts of daily habits including self control, work and labor habits, responding to wrongs done to you, prayer, living peaceably, and much more. And all of these instructions were very brief in nature, even only one or two words at times. So textual criticism supports my contention that the words "test everything" do, in fact, mean that Christians are to make a constant habit of testing their entire belief system, and that this was written as a stand-alone statement as was much of the entire chapter. So while I respect your point of view, your selection of applicable text is far more narrow than mine, and your theory on what Paul meant could be just as out of context as you claim mine to be. Stephen, your exegesis of this text is way off my friend. No scripture is given for private interpretation Stephen. It all has meaning and relevance as it relates to the context of Scripture as a whole, the book, the chapter, and the immediate verses preceding and following. You did not obviously read my response thoroughly, instead only choosing a portion of it to respond to. The statements in this wonderful chapter of Scripture are often quoted as stand-alone, but care and caution must always be exercised when doing this. You didn't even quote the entire verse only 2 words form it, which in essence was the Greek word that I provided you some info on. My statement was not just that the verse applies to prophecy, although that was CERTAINLY part of Paul's meaning, and that is proven by the IMMEDIATE context. My statement was that it applies to all teaching and that all teaching and preaching should be examined in light of Scripture. Remember just earlier he was talking about how we should view those who teach and labor for us in the Gospel (pastors, elders, and teachers of the Word). 12 And we urge you, brethren, to recognize those who labor among you, and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, 13 and to esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake. Be at peace among yourselves. This is just a few verses before the one you quoted. Something else needs to be stated as it relates to the word "prophecy". When the Bible talks about prophecy, there are a couple of different meanings: FOREtelling (as in predicting the future), and FORTHtelling (speaking forth the truth). So which is it? The amazing thing about this passage of Scripture is that not only did Paul throw in the ones who FORTHtell, but he also at the beginning of chapter five talks about some actual prophecy and the coming of the Day of the Lord. It's amazing that you deny this wonderful chapter didn't say anything about prophecy and rather is about daily behavior. While I agree there is teaching about daily behavior, look at the early part of chapter 5. What do you find? PROPHECY! (forthtelling) Paul COMFORTS them and tells them to COMFORT one another. Later on in the chapter when he tells them to test everything and hold fast to what is good, he is telling them to be sure that what they hear as it relates to the coming of the Lord (or ANY OTHER TEACHING) lines up with Scripture. Why? Because many false prophets were going out and saying many different things. Some were saying Christ has already come. Some were saying He would never come. Paul gives them very clear instructions on His coming and how they should behave IN LIGHT of His coming. For verse 6 of chapter 5 says: "6 Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober. "
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 26, 2010 10:40:48 GMT -5
Stephen, your exegesis of this text is way off my friend. No scripture is given for private interpretation Stephen. It all has meaning and relevance as it relates to the context of Scripture as a whole, the book, the chapter, and the immediate verses preceding and following. If you had tried that with II Thess 2 ("They perish because they refused to love the truth") you would have had some textual criticism with which to make a case from the surrounding text. But you do not. Your entire case was grounded in only six words, was a predetermined and self serving conclusion, and is dead wrong. Scripture commands us to seek truth and understanding at all costs. You can ignore Thessalonians if you like but by the time you explain away the entire book of Proverbs and tear Psalms out of your bible and throw it in the trash, we're pretty much beyond any debate. You will believe what you must and I understand that. The greater points of this thread remain and I will address them in the next post.
|
|
Michael
Captain
Red Baron Fight XX and XXI Champion
Posts: 407
|
Post by Michael on Feb 26, 2010 10:43:15 GMT -5
What is your definition of truth Stephan? Once again, you are falling into the trap of relativity, asking what "my" definition of truth might be. There is no "my" truth or "your" truth. There is only the truth. Truth is reality. What is "reality"?
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 26, 2010 10:56:08 GMT -5
The greater themes of this entire thread are not only unfinished, but appear to be willingly abandoned:
I am still waiting on a moral and biblical defense for torture.
The US military has repeatedly and deliberately attacked innocent civilians over a span of more than 150 years. When repeated historical incidents were specifically outlined, you retreated to nationalistic generalities unrelated to the evidence presented and then dropped the subject entirely rather than permit historical fact to bring the light of truth to the predetermined views that you refuse to reconsider.
Osama Bin Laden repeatedly attempted, both before and after 9/11, to open diplomatic negotiations with the USA on multiple occasions. Specific instances were offered but rather than address them, once again the subject was quickly changed rather than allow historical facts to alter your predetermined views.
Every time you ask a question and a clear, specific answer is given, you ignore the very evidence you yourself demanded and move a new argument and then repeat the process.
This is not the practice of someone who is genuinely seeking truth. This is the practice of one who is defending his position.
I'll tell you both again - I have no interest in arguing. I do have a great interest in seeking truth as scripture commands us to do. If you have any interest whatsoever in seeking truth, applying it, and allowing it to change our views, I am very interested in joining you and doing the same.
If you don't want truth, that's fine, but I have no interest in endless arguing.
|
|