All articles
From Kristos Vocabulary Booster
| All pages | Next page (Lawing) |
Matthew Johnson
> In article <093.37.12.05.563408000@srcbs.org>, Bob Felts says...
> >
> >
> >Matthew Johnson
>
> [snip]
> >Now you've devolved to ad hominem.
>
> And by making this accusation, you have 'devolved' to equivocation. Look
> at http://www.galilean-library.org/int16.html to see how you have misused
> the term 'ad hominem'.
>
You making a snide remark on what _you_ think my internal state is, is
ad hominem.
> >Discussions with you would be ever so much nicer if you would avoid
> >getting personal.
>
> And that 'discussions' be 'nice' is NOT a commandment from the Gospel.
How are you going to have discussions when people stop interacting with
you? Our offense is to be the cross, not boorish behavior.
> It is from the world, which is at enmity with the Gospel. There is the
> commandment to be gentle, but even that is not unconditional, as Paul
> showed in his own non-gentle comments about the circumcisors.
The key word is "about". Not "to".
>
> I have to say that, Bob, because based on your recent interchange with
> 'basicallyblue'[as in 'Blue Meany'?], I fear that you are in the process of
> jumping out of one pit of error only to exchange it for another:
So what? According to you, I'm engaged in _all sorts_ of errors, since
I happen to mostly agree with Reformed theologians.
> in the past, your posts were often acrid, and filled with their own
> fallacies while accusing others of fallacies. But now you are far, far too
> quick to agree with this slanderer of all Trinitarians,
That's not true, Matthew. I _do not_ agree with JW Christology. I _do
not_ agree that the Trinity is of pagan origin. I _do not_ agree that
the Trinity is not found in Scripture or the early Church fathers.
What I have questioned is the statement by us Trinitarians that those
who do not hold to the Trinity cannot be saved. Note that I said
'questioned'. I haven't been fully persuaded yet.
> and even agreed precisely where all faithful followers of Christ the
> consubstantial Son of God must surely disagree the most.
>
> Do NOT think that being soft on him is the way to bring 'basicallyblue'
> back to Christ.
There are some people who the Scripture says are "ever learning, but
never able to come to a knowledge of the truth". But I don't know who
belongs to this class.
I haven't gone soft on BB; but I'm trying to stay focused on the issues,
instead of fanning the flames by diverting the dicussion to charges and
the inevitable counter-charges of 'heresy', 'idiot', 'ignorant slut!'.
> For this will not work on many, on those described in the Proberb "those
> who hate reproofs will die" (Prv 15:10). Alas, I fear that fits
> 'basicallyblue' to a T.
That may be. But I refuse to be guided by fear.
>
> And what else are we to think, when he claims to have refuted us, when the
> record in Google shows he has not? Or when he claims we never refuted him,
> when the same record shows we did, and he either ignored our refutations,
> or dismissed them with arrogant sniping? Again, such behavior fits Prv
> 15:10 to a T.
And I'm sure, to BB, that the feeling is mutual.
Do you think that any of us will be able to show BB the truth of the DoT
by focusing on his behavior?
>
> Recall, the Proverb says:
>
> Wicked doctrine for him who deserts the Way;
> he who hates rebukes shall die (Prv 15:10)
>
> And if observing this fact is 'ad hominem', then I have to say that the
> prohibition of 'ad hominem' is contrary to biblical ethics, too.
This is a general statement, which we both agree with. But when you
take it from the general principle and apply it to a specific
individual, based upon what you think his internal state is, it becomes
ad hominem. It also shows that you think that you are his judge (and
jury and executioner?).
Matthew, you're a sharp fellow, and you're steeped in a tradition that
is somewhat foreign to me -- therefore there are things I can learn from
you. But you are not my judge.
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))
