Search results

Again you've used a red herring fallacy because you did not deal with the issue I raised of your flaming each other. See #1282 for an explanation of how you use a red herring fallacy. Here you've done it again.

Please read #1253. mjrhealth said: ↑ What and get you pour more petrol on to the stake. no thanks, youve burned enough people. Besides it would be pointless, you have your heart and head set in stone, even to the point it would seem impossible that even God could change you. There are many...

mjr, I ask you also not to flame BoL. This thread has become a quagmire of unpleasant jibes at one another. Please stop it, for the benefit of us all.

Please, please would you stop sniping at each other? It makes for an unpleasant experience in reading this thread.

I think you confuse analogy with parable. The example of the sheep and the goats is an analogy that Jesus used to teach the differentiation of the fixed destiny of believers (sheep) and the damned (goats).

Please refer me to Scriptures that agree with your statement: 'This makes the whole Bible a parable'.

I've already explained to you what a red herring is in #1228. I won't repeat it. In #1266, I provided links to a website that explained red herring and strawman. Please become informed by reading these links and understand how you do it.

Now please tell me 2 points about doctrine that you promote and have done so on CyB.

I beg your pardon!

Red herring and strawman fallacies are errors in reasoning that you've made. Why don't you learn how you are using them and try to quit using such fallacious reasoning? It's nigh impossible to have a reasonable conversation when people use logical fallacies. Oz

What has Acts 9:4 to do with BoL's religion? I also think you are a bit tough on BoL by accusing him of having no care for the things of God. Could he care for the things of God, but not the way you would like him to care? I can't see you getting an informative response from BoL with this kind...

Thanks BoL, I've just checked and I did have him on ignore. He is now unignored and I see his back quote at #1230. Thanks so much for helping me know what is going on for me. Oz

To what do you refer. From where did you get this quote that you have given? Or, is this your sarcasm towards me when you don't know what a red herring fallacy is or a straw man fallacy?

BoL, I did go back and read it. This is all that I saw to read from my end at #1230: In other words - you have nothing useful to add to the conversation. That's what I thought . . . I'll check to see if there is something I have done at my end that caused mjrhealth's post to be unseen...

BoL, This is what happens when you so not back quote. At #1230, your post followed mine and because you did not back quote, I assumed you were addressing me. It was nowhere stated that you were responding to what mjrhealth had written. Please, please, to avoid this kind of misunderstanding...

Or, you are not reading my posts carefully.

I have never stated or suggested that.

You are goading me.

Stranger, What is a strawman logical fallacy? It is 'substituting a person’s actual position or argument with a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version of the position of the argument' (source). This is how you committed the strawman fallacy: Stranger wrote in #304: 'Please...

So, are you saying that some other people have a 'deeper understanding' and have 'eyes to see' spiritual reality and this deeper, unseen knowledge is not seen my you or me?