"THE LORD'S DAY IS THE SABBATH DAY NOT SUNDAY ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURES

[Subduction Zone]

Well that would be something you would need to prove. You are just making false accusations here unsupported by and factual evidence. So we will agree to disagree here. Did you want to move forward now and have a friendly discussion? That is all I am after. It does not really matter if we think each other is right or wrong.

I have "proved" that time and again. You ignore the explanations. And again, false implications are rude. If you do not understand there is nothing wrong with admitting that.

 

[3rdAngel]

No, you have been neither. Abusing smileys is always rude. Saying that others make you smile while being wrong is rude. Not reading or understanding the posts of others indicates a lack of patience.

My apologies to you dear friend if me putting a smiley on my post offended you. I ask that you might forgive me and if it offends you I will not do it again. Did you want to move forward now?

 

[Subduction Zone]

My apologies to you dear friend if me putting a smiley on my post offended you. I ask that you might forgive me and if it offends you I will not do it again. Did you want to move forward now?

Yes. And that is much better.

We need to set some base rules. Agreed?

 

[3rdAngel]

I have "proved" that time and again. You ignore the explanations. And again, false implications are rude. If you do not understand there is nothing wrong with admitting that.

Well if you were able to prove what you say it would be more believable. I have addressed most of your posts with detailed responses providing evidence for what I believe. Your projecting now. If you have been caught out just own it. Lets move on

 

[3rdAngel]

Yes. And that is much better. We need to set some base rules. Agreed?

Well I suggested some earlier. Are you still happy with those?

I suggest three simple rules that might be helpful....

1. "Debated topics and subject matter"
When someone makes a topic for debate (e.g. this OP is on the question is "the Lords day Sunday" or "the Sabbath day") we must stick to the debated topic and subject matter being put up for debate posted for or against the OP subject matter. Address the post content, arguments and subject matter and look not to stray off topic to what is the debated subject matter.

2. "The rebuttal"
If you disagree with what has been posted show what it is you disagree with from the post and address the content of the post you are responding to keeping on topic. Provide evidence as proof to show why you disagree with what has been posted for what it is you disagree with addressing all the post content from the person your debating.

3. "Be respectful and polite"
Even if we may not agree on some topics we can still agree to disagree and to move on and remain friends and friendly to each other. There should be no need for name calling and false accusations. If what someone is saying is true or not true "a rebuttal" should be enough to show who is being truthful and who is not in what they are claiming to believe. Lets be respectful and polite to each other.

What do you say? They are three simple rules we both can follow.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well if you were able to prove what you say it would be more believable. I have addressed most of your posts with detailed responses providing evidence for what I believe. Your projecting now. If you have been caught out just own it. Lets move on

I have. But you don't listen when people refute you. I have seen that several times here.

 

[3rdAngel]

I have. But you don't listen when people refute you. I have seen that several times here.

Well provide evidence to your claims. It would make them more believable. So we will agree to disagree here unless you can prove what your saying. Lets move forward now ok?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well I suggested some earlier. Are you still happy with those?

I suggest three simple rules that might be helpful....

1. "Debated topics and subject matter"
When someone makes a topic for debate (e.g. this OP is on the question is "the Lords day Sunday" or "the Sabbath day") we must stick to the debated topic and subject matter being put up for debate posted for or against the OP subject matter. Address the post content, arguments and subject matter and look not to stray off topic to what is the debated subject matter.

2. "The rebuttal"
If you disagree with what has been posted show what it is you disagree with from the post and address the content of the post you are responding to keeping on topic. Provide evidence as proof to show why you disagree with what has been posted for what it is you disagree with addressing all the post content from the person your debating.

3. "Be respectful and polite"
Even if we may not agree on some topics we can still agree to disagree and to move on and remain friends and friendly to each other. There should be no need for name calling and false accusations. If what someone is saying is true or not true "a rebuttal" should be enough to show who is being truthful and who is not in what they are claiming to believe. Lets be respectful and polite to each other.

What do you say? They are three simple rules we both can follow.

Okay. Also some additional rules. No Gish Gallops unless you are willing to face the consequences of using one. In that case a refutation of one claim is a refutation of all.

Plus no merely listing verses. They must be posted and explained how they support you.

Now I do have a bit of a problem with relying on only verses. And you probably do not understand the pitfalls of a literal translation of the Bible.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well provide evidence to your claims. It would make them more believable. So we will agree to disagree here unless you can prove what your saying. Lets move forward now ok?

I have. But you can't bring up old arguments that you lost. What's done is done. You need to ask at the time of posting if you did not understand or disagree. You can't complain pages after a conversation and expect an answer. Let your past failures go. And if you did not ask at that time it was a failure.

 

[3rdAngel]

Okay. Also some additional rules. No Gish Gallops unless you are willing to face the consequences of using one. In that case a refutation of one claim is a refutation of all.

Plus no merely listing verses. They must be posted and explained how they support you.

Now I do have a bit of a problem with relying on only verses. And you probably do not understand the pitfalls of a literal translation of the Bible.

SZ for me I only use the scripture references I provide if they are supportive to what I am saying. I am happy to explain how they support what I am saying. Also, if you are not sure your welcome to ask and I will provide clarification. If I cannot I will delete them. You have my word.

 

[3rdAngel]

I have. But you can't bring up old arguments that you lost. What's done is done. You need to ask at the time of posting if you did not understand or disagree. You can't complain pages after a conversation and expect an answer. Let your past failures go. And if you did not ask at that time it was a failure.

Well we do not agree here so no point in pushing this. Best to move forward now. What do you say.

 

[Subduction Zone]

SZ for me I only use the scripture references I provide if they are supportive to what I am saying. I am happy to explain how they support what I am saying.

This is a problem. Quite often they are only "evidence" for you when you do that. No one else sees them as evidence. You need to be able to validate your claims. If you had a better understanding of the Bible you would see that excessive literal interpretation refutes the Bible.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well we do not agree here so no point in pushing this. Best to move forward now. What do you say.

I have been advocating that for quite some time.

 

[3rdAngel]

This is a problem. Quite often they are only "evidence" for you when you do that. No one else sees them as evidence. You need to be able to validate your claims. If you had a better understanding of the Bible you would see that excessive literal interpretation refutes the Bible.

Yes I see them as evidence. This is a scripture debate forum set by the OP topic for discussion. Scripture can be used as evidence for or against a faulty premise or faulty interpretation of the scriptures. So it is evidence in this section of the forum. I agree with you though they need to be explained if asked and also if they are not self explaining. So how about we make them the conditions of their use? Do you agree?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes I see them as evidence. This is a scripture debate forum set by the OP topic for discussion. Scripture can be used as evidence for or against a faulty premise or faulty interpretation of the scriptures. So it is evidence in this section of the forum. I agree with you though they need to be explained

Scripture can easily be misinterpreted. For example the parables do not appear to be literal events. They are morality tales quite often.

 

[3rdAngel]

Scripture can easily be misinterpreted. For example the parables do not appear to be literal events. They are morality tales quite often.

Yes I agree with you SZ but keep in mind this is a scripture debate section of the forum. In the case of misinterpretation other scriptures or their context can be provided as evidence to refute a false premise of false interpretation of the scriptures

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes I agree with you SZ but keep in mind this is a scripture debate section of the forum. In the case of misinterpretation other scriptures or their context can be provided as evidence to refute a false premise of false interpretation of the scriptures

Can they? My point has always been that sometimes one must go outside of the scriptures.

 

[3rdAngel]

Can they? My point has always been that sometimes one must go outside of the scriptures.

I agree with you SZ but depends on the terms set in the OP of course. For example this OP is on can Christians who practice Sunday worship prove from scripture that "the Lords day" they claim represents Sunday from Revelation 1:10 is Sunday. They cannot but that is another story. So it depends what the OP topic is as to if you can go outside of the scriptures or not. In general though all evidence is ok as long as it is not against the OP. Are you following me?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I agree with you SZ but depends on the terms set in the OP of course. For example this OP is on can Christians who practice Sunday worship prove from scripture that "the Lords day" they claim represents Sunday from Revelation 1:10 is Sunday. They cannot but that is another story. So it depends what the OP topic is as to if you can go outside of the scriptures or not. In general though all evidence is ok as long as it is not against the OP.

I will grant that if you rely solely on the Bible that you will probably be able to make a good case for your claims. (Let's ignore the Eskimos for now). But the problem is that you would still be wrong. Or at best you would have at most a one out of seven chance of being right.

 

[3rdAngel]

I will grant that if you rely solely on the Bible that you will probably be able to make a good case for your claims. (Let's ignore the Eskimos for now). But the problem is that you would still be wrong. Or at best you would have at most a one out of seven chance of being right.

lol well that is as close as I get as an agreement from you then all good. Hey your not a bad guy. I like talking to you like this. Just out of curiosity do you agree or disagree with the OP?