tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post6237208373171636588..comments2024-03-28T20:21:44.352-07:00Comments on Through These Woods: False False Teacher Teachings 2Dan Trabuehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comBlogger81125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-8812145551106991262012-01-05T03:30:23.028-08:002012-01-05T03:30:23.028-08:00... I pray for all of you who are debating these i...... I pray for all of you who are debating these issues ... Jesus/Yeshua is very clear that we must follow his commands and most importantly love one another as He loved us ... Where is that love my brothers? In Him and Him alone! Stand firm on the scriptures and remember ... If He wouldn't do it, then don't! God bless you all!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-70378370633247728822012-01-05T03:29:44.460-08:002012-01-05T03:29:44.460-08:00... I pray for all of you who are debating these i...... I pray for all of you who are debating these issues ... Jesus/Yeshua is very clear that we must follow his commands and most importantly love one another as He loved us ... Where is that love my brothers? In Him and Him alone! Stand firm on the scriptures and remember ... If He wouldn't do it, then don't! God bless you all!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-20057314998450950132011-01-25T09:53:16.707-08:002011-01-25T09:53:16.707-08:00Alan, let it go...Alan, let it go...Dan Trabuehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-25658792824470952592011-01-24T21:02:28.417-08:002011-01-24T21:02:28.417-08:00""It is too easy to posture one's se...<i>""It is too easy to posture one's self as having the upper hand after having given no proof that you actually have it."<br><br>Oh, the irony. :)"</i><br><br>Oh! You see it too then. Good.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-2775472324403326962011-01-24T13:33:52.454-08:002011-01-24T13:33:52.454-08:00"It is too easy to posture one's self as ..."It is too easy to posture one's self as having the upper hand after having given no proof that you actually have it."<br><br>Oh, the irony. :)Alanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16274395216929104919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-68330633260686780292011-01-24T13:15:57.587-08:002011-01-24T13:15:57.587-08:00"As always, you are more than welcome to comm..."As always, you are more than welcome to comment on my blog, "<br><br>Thanks. But to quote that great philosopher of our time, Weird Al Yankovic:<br><br>"I'd rather have my blood sucked out by leeches <br>Shove an icepick under a toenail or two<br>I'd rather clean all the bathrooms in Grand Central Station with my tongue<br>Than spend one more minute with you"<br><br>:)Alanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16274395216929104919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-32812276775420213662011-01-24T11:35:08.624-08:002011-01-24T11:35:08.624-08:00In respect for a specific request by our host, lit...In respect for a specific request by our host, little Alan, I can no longer "play" with you. As always, you are more than welcome to comment on my blog, where you will be treated with far more respect and fairness than you are used to. But yes, poor boy. It is too easy to posture one's self as having the upper hand after having given no proof that you actually have it. Another symptom perhaps of your condition.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-31985059590439792472011-01-24T07:52:00.258-08:002011-01-24T07:52:00.258-08:00This is too easy! Thanks for playing, MA.Try again...This is too easy! Thanks for playing, MA.<br><br>Try again, and let's see if we can make it to 100 comments! LOLAlanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16274395216929104919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-77573813807463198242011-01-21T20:53:13.850-08:002011-01-21T20:53:13.850-08:00"QED. One of a million examples."You'...<i>"QED. One of a million examples."</i><br><br>You've demonstrated only that you see what you want to see. I've stated repeatedly that my use of the term "homo" is merely a contraction of the word "homosexual" and you damned well know it. That you choose to regard it as derogatory is a personal problem likely requiring counseling. I refuse to replace the term with a word that means "happy" just because you want it to mean something else. You'll just have to find a way to deal. As such, my use of the term in no way implies bigotry except in your delusions.<br><br><i>"You've already shown that you can't read examples even when they're your own quotes, so I won't bother with more."</i><br><br>Cheap cop out. You couldn't find examples if your life depended upon it.<br><br><i>"I do not believe, MA, that no matter how clear and irrefutable the evidence, that you are ever going to think you are a bigot."</i><br><br>Two reasons for this:<br><br>1--I'm not a bigot.<br>2--You've yet to provide anything remotely comparable to "clear and irrefutable evidence". That's OK. It can't be done if it doesn't exist, which it doesn't.<br><br><i>"I dare say there isn't a single person who reads or comments here who believes that, regardless of the evidence on anything, you would ever change your mind about anything."</i><br><br>That's likely true. There hasn't been anything to read that would indicate there's been compelling and "irrefutable" evidence that would provoke such a change. But I have changed my mind about you. I used to think you were merely sad and misguided.<br><br><i>"While I enjoy poking you because you're a jester and buffoon, you're still too stupid to notice that I do not attempt to argue with you or provide evidence for anything because that would be a waste of time."</i><br><br>Cheap cop out. You couldn't find examples if your life depended upon it.<br><br><i>"I don't argue with my neighbor's dog either, and it has displayed any number of behaviors that demonstrate it to be more intelligent than you."</i><br><br>I'm betting it demonstrates that it can provide better quality insults that you can, too.<br><br><i>"Your next step in your oh-so-pedantic-and-obvious rhetorical style is to claim "victory" of some weird kind."</i><br><br>You mean like "Checkmate!" or "Game, set and match!"? Any success that my words persuade you away from your false and sinful beliefs is not my victory, but God's. It pains me for His sake that I've not been successful.<br><br><i>"In other words, MA, this fish don't rise to cheap bait."</i><br><br>My first thought was to say that bottom feeders usually don't, but I don't think Dan would like it.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-31380475423959178872011-01-20T07:22:35.963-08:002011-01-20T07:22:35.963-08:00"As to "homo", I use it freely.&quo..."As to "homo", I use it freely."<br><br>QED. One of a million examples. You've already shown that you can't read examples even when they're your own quotes, so I won't bother with more.<br><br>I do not believe, MA, that no matter how clear and irrefutable the evidence, that you are ever going to think you are a bigot. I dare say there isn't a single person who reads or comments here who believes that, regardless of the evidence on anything, you would ever change your mind about anything.<br><br>That is simply something you would never consider in a million years. While I enjoy poking you because you're a jester and buffoon, you're still too stupid to notice that I do not attempt to argue with you or provide evidence for anything because that would be a waste of time. I don't argue with my neighbor's dog either, and it has displayed any number of behaviors that demonstrate it to be more intelligent than you.<br><br>But you write stupidity that makes me laugh, so I enjoy encouraging you.<br><br>Your next step in your oh-so-pedantic-and-obvious rhetorical style is to claim "victory" of some weird kind. (That you are forever doing so does make one wonder about what shallow and pathetic life you lead when "victory" in a comment thread gets actually means something to you. But whatever. Proceed. It's your turn to play your part in this play you never realize you're in.<br><br>In other words, MA, this fish don't rise to cheap bait.<br><br>But please continue. I have a bet going with myself that I can get you to ramble on to at least 100 comments in all three of these threads.<br><br>Jump MA! Come on, jump! Good dog.Alanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16274395216929104919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-34840817683509637832011-01-19T19:08:10.359-08:002011-01-19T19:08:10.359-08:00Whatever. You couldn't do it because there is...Whatever. You couldn't do it because there is no bigotry in anything I've ever published. Give it a try, Chuckles. I dare ya. You've obviously got me confused with someone like yourself.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-63540466898058003592011-01-19T12:30:26.786-08:002011-01-19T12:30:26.786-08:00"In the meantime, you couldn't, if your l..."In the meantime, you couldn't, if your life depended upon it, show how I've ever displayed bigotry against or hate of another person."<br><br>What you mean to say is that I couldn't, if my life depended on it, formulate a complete list of all the bigotry or hate you've displayed since that would involve nearly every comment I've ever read from you.Alanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16274395216929104919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-10313426046382201112011-01-18T10:25:25.940-08:002011-01-18T10:25:25.940-08:00Apparently, you're not much better than Geoffr...Apparently, you're not much better than Geoffrey with getting the point. As the first paragraph of my last comment clearly indicates, the words must be properly applied. If a person hasn't stolen, to call that person a thief is an improper application of the word. <br><br>In the meantime, you couldn't, if your life depended upon it, show how I've ever displayed bigotry against or hate of another person. I don't fuss over trifles, so fusspot doesn't apply to me. I'm not a busybody because I don't butt into anyone's personal life (to decry a behavior is not inserting myself into any specific person's personal life). On whom have I been tattling and to whom? And really, if either of us fits the dictionary definition of a scold, it would be you, you excitable boy.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-51931228126396647342011-01-18T06:38:50.494-08:002011-01-18T06:38:50.494-08:00So, since we're just using words as they'r...So, since we're just using words as they're defined, you'll stop objecting to the terms bigot, hater, fusspot, busybody, tattletale and scold as applied to you.<br><br>I'll keep that in mind. Great. Thanks.Alanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16274395216929104919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-58833416290684622962011-01-17T14:19:04.771-08:002011-01-17T14:19:04.771-08:00Is it an insult to call a thief a sinner? Is it a...Is it an insult to call a thief a sinner? Is it an insult to call him a thief? The word "thief", or any of its synonyms, are words long attached to the behavior. The behavior is considered sinful in the Christian faith. In discussions on the subject, where is the insult in using the proper terminology? <br><br>I do nothing more or less when using the terms I do. I use them as they are defined and in those cases where I use a contraction, it is, as I've said, for convenience. I'm so very sorry you have a problem with the truth.<br><br>Yap, yap, yap indeed.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-44126179012173703912011-01-17T12:57:59.622-08:002011-01-17T12:57:59.622-08:00More yap, yap, yapping from MA.I'm not sure wh...More yap, yap, yapping from MA.<br><br>I'm not sure what's sadder, his need to make half-assed third-grade attempts at insults, or his need to spend so much time rationalizing and defending his lame insults.Alanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16274395216929104919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-86330539620244364632011-01-17T12:30:28.736-08:002011-01-17T12:30:28.736-08:00Oh, Al. You're such a cut-up! "Four eye...Oh, Al. You're such a cut-up! "Four eyes!" Oh, ho ho! You're a stitch!<br><br>The truth is that I don't refer to gay people by anything but happy, since that's what the word means. Why I'd refer to a happy person as "homo" or "fag I couldn't begin to say.<br><br>Actually, I don't generally use the term "fag" in public discussions, except to say that I'm not all that concerned that sinners might be called various derogatory terms. In the grand scheme of things, it should be the least of their concerns. But I'd be more concerned with the application of such terms to those who are not guilty of the behavior associated with them. An example would be to label someone a hateful bigot who has shown nothing to justify it. Another would be "busybody" and "fussbudget". However, what words I use amongst close associates and why is something you can only imagine, and I wouldn't be surprised if you'd imagine the worst.<br><br>As to "homo", I use it freely. Contractions of larger words are more convenient. Pardon me if I do not oblige the corrupted by using improperly words they prefer. On second thought, I don't much care if you pardon me or not. <br><br>To be more precise, what I'd love to refer homosexuals as is "repented". I don't "love" calling them "sinners" or "immoral". I regard it as sad and I wish better for them.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-34116538935329794312011-01-17T06:26:28.380-08:002011-01-17T06:26:28.380-08:00BTW, thanks for the defense, Dan, but I'm not ...BTW, thanks for the defense, Dan, but I'm not so fragile that I cannot take MA's lame potshots. This is the same guy who loves to refer to gay people as homos or fags or whatever. <br><br>What do you expect when you engage with such people?<br><br>And, if the worst he can do is try to insult me by stating something true, well, my only response is "meh." Next, to show off his remarkable intellect, he'll be calling me four-eyes. LOLAlanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16274395216929104919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-51362351135299299232011-01-16T23:31:35.092-08:002011-01-16T23:31:35.092-08:00"Moral purity is not defined by God. Jesus di...<i>"Moral purity is not defined by God. Jesus did not "tighten it up". You are just making that up."</i><br><br>All right and wrong is defined by God. Who else has the authority to determine such things for us? God gave us commandments, remember? Did those not set the parameters for proper behavior, or are they just helpful hints? And did your decades of Biblical study not include Christ equating lust to adultery and hate to murder? I'd call that "tightening up" quite a bit God's moral and behavioral mandates, wouldn't you? (Rhetorical question. Of course you wouldn't. The real question is on what basis would you not?)Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-84086452952706856682011-01-16T22:01:22.763-08:002011-01-16T22:01:22.763-08:00"One perhaps salient point raised by "an..."One perhaps salient point raised by "anonymous" on the previous post was...<br><br>'I'd say the level of impact.'"<br><br>The type of christianity modeled by bloggers such as Neil, Mark, Marshall, etc had quite a level of impact on my life several years ago. I almost turned my back on the Christian faith that I had professed for over 50 years. In recent years, since the 80s, christianity seems to have changed, or at least my former denomination (Southern Baptist) changed. It seems more like nationalism than faith. You had to start dotting your I's and crossing your T's the same way doctrinally and politically to be considered a real christian. If you came/come to different conclusions regarding the interpretation of Scripture, your salvation is questioned....always. I thought...if this is what Christianity is....or what is has become...I want no part of it.Martyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02908921670853665703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-14703593322732692792011-01-16T10:09:17.780-08:002011-01-16T10:09:17.780-08:00Moral purity is not defined by God. Jesus did not...Moral purity is not defined by God. Jesus did not "tighten it up". You are just making that up.<br><br>That's my response. I honestly don't care whether you agree or disagree with it, like it or dislike it. This is just reality.Geoffrey Kruse-Saffordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11242660591954094499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-69551150239701327302011-01-16T07:31:10.895-08:002011-01-16T07:31:10.895-08:00I say you follow what pleases you."Yet, what ...I say you follow what pleases you.<br><br><i>"Yet, what counts is not whether or not we insist on moral purity, because this is something always changing."</i><br><br>Moral purity is defined by God and has NOT changed. If anything, it has been tightened up and clarified by Jesus Himself. So I've made no untrue comments on the quality of your beliefs and those of Dan's. Thus your frustration is a result of constant reminders of the greater reality. I guess I'd be frustrated, too.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-80678986684204478372011-01-16T05:08:15.612-08:002011-01-16T05:08:15.612-08:00Art - we just have differing views on what constit...Art - we just have differing views on what constitutes "morality", differing views on its role in our relationship with God (and God's relationship with us), and place different emphases on what constitutes a moral life. I do not, nor have I ever, advocated immorality, nor have I sought to defend such a view from Scripture. Had I, surely the charge of "false teacher" would be true. That there are enough people on the internet who find the stuff I say on such topics agreeable to keep me writing about them on occasion tells me that I am not the only person who thinks that way.<br><br>As I wrote yesterday in a post, it is not the case that our behavior is irrelevant to God. On the contrary! St. Paul insists we are to be blameless before other persons and God! Yet, what counts is not whether or not we insist on moral purity, because this is something always changing. Rather, what counts is our living in love toward others. Feeding the hungry, being with those imprisoned, clothing the naked - even laying down our lives if the moment comes. Done not because we have to, because God will send us to hell if we don't. Rather, we do it out of love, and as the author of the Epistle of John writes, if we love, we are of God, and we love because God first loved us.<br><br>These are all points I have made over and over again through the years, marvelously traditional, wonderfully orthodox, and yet you insist on calling me immoral, and some others blasphemous and a false teacher. Do you understand my frustration, or do you choose to ignore this reality - the reality of the things I've said (not to mention the life I live) - for what you believe you know about me?<br><br>The problem, it seems, is not mine. It isn't Dan's. It isn't Alan's. No matter how often we write it, you continue to insist you know us better than we know ourselves, and that we are immoral creatures, advocating positions contrary to the Gospel and tradition. The weight of evidence, it should be clear, is with us. What say you?Geoffrey Kruse-Saffordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11242660591954094499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-5667187126371503562011-01-15T23:28:42.285-08:002011-01-15T23:28:42.285-08:00"That, in case you missed the point, was an e...<i>"That, in case you missed the point, was an example of me stooping down to your level of dialog."</i><br><br>No it wasn't. It was a chance for you to give me a cheap shot under the cover of <i>"...an example of me stooping down to your level of dialog."</i> Who do you think you're playin' with here? What's more, it shows your concern for "grace" in discussions is hollow far more a burden on those with whom you disagree. This:<br><br><i>"I wouldn't allow it if someone did it to you and your personal life and won't allow you to do that about someone else, not on my blog."</i><br><br>...is not a reflection of reality.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7923725288901074422.post-67075438969381567922011-01-15T23:19:21.269-08:002011-01-15T23:19:21.269-08:00As I suggested but no one chose to check it out, t...As I suggested but no one chose to check it out, the word "immorality" in the Bible is always used in conjunction with the sexual. In other words, the Bible's definition of "immorality" only suggests the sexual. So, as I said, you only allow definitions that you prefer. What's more, you haven't shown that your verses dictate the only way to define the term "false teacher", but have only given examples of how they might be identified. It's the same old story with you guys. You play fast and loose with Scripture as well as definitions in order to control the outcome of discussions to your advantage. I, on the other hand, and I believe those who argue from the same perspective as I do, aren't looking to control outcomes, but to guide people to the truth as we have let the truth guide us. <br><br>So no, I don't want to define the term to mean any and everything. That's ass backwards from what I'm actually doing. I'm using the term as strictly as possible based on the actual meaning of the words. If you are supporting positions that is in conflict with Scriptural teaching, which you are, then you are teaching that which is false. And THAT makes you a false teacher. To defend against the charge, you need to prove that your position is sound from a Biblical point of view. You haven't.<br><br><i>"God meets us where we are. What you call "immorality" is hardly a barrier to God's call; if it were, no one would be asked to do God's work. Furthermore, if God demanded moral purity from us after the Divine encounter, why would we need the crucifixion/resurrection?"</i><br><br>Thanks Geoffrey. Do you have any other arguments against points I've never made? As to the last bit, the answer is, because we are not capable of perfection. We are corrupt. We cannot provide the wages our sinful natures demand of us. Maybe you missed that part of the whole need for Christ thing in whatever you call an education. Yet, the demand for purity still exists to the extent that we are not given leave to indulge in the impure by anything that God has ever done for us.Marshall Arthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.com