AM just curious but I was wondering if you have the gift of tongues?
There is no biblical prohibition against gambling - period. Some passages of scripture are interpreted to imply such prohibition, but that strictly is a matter of interpretation, and, looking at the passages most commonly cited (1 Tim 6:10, Heb 13:5, Prov 13:11 & 23:5, Ecl 5:10, Luke 6:38, and 2 Cor 9:7 most readilly come to mind), interpretation at a stretch. That mainstream Christian churches commonly, and actively, promote and engage in such things as bingo, raffles, drawings, awarding of prizes, incentives, and/or other excersizes of chance, while maintaining that "gambling is a sin (small print: unless it benefits a church with which I am in sympathy)" is just one of many insurmountable adsurdities faced by biblical literalists in particular and by Christianity in general. Whichever version of whatever canon of the bible in whichever translation as any particular Christian may embrace and endorse is "The Word of God" - as that particular Christian interprets and accepts "The Word of God" to be.
A further absurdity exists in the mere fact there are assorted distinct, differing canons and myriad conflicting traditions, each purporting to be or to derive from "The Word of God", each with its proponents asserting theirs is the "True Version". Logic demands if there were to be such a thing as a "Divinely Revealed Absolute Truth", made available "To All Mankind", there could be no question or conflict pertaining thereunto - an absolute truth by definition is an absolute truth, unconditional, self-evident, unambiguous, incontravertable, not subject to interpretation, condition, qualification or modification, a given, not something to be accepted or denied, but rather, and only, a thing which in and of itself IS, and is beyond question, interpretation, or condition.
That there would be, as unarguably there is, question, ambiguity, and differing interpretation of what might be or derive from "The Absolute Truth as Revealed Through The Word of God" invalidates the very concept of an absolute, unconditional truth as revealed through the word of any god. To say that one must have "Faith" - and as always is the case "Faith" of a certain quality - in order to "Recieve The Truth" merely compounds the absurdity through imposing a condition on the definitionally unconditional.
I think we've pretty much painted AM into a corner. I'm curious to see if she'll admit defeat to the logic we've lain out and possibly change some of her beliefs or if she'll fall back to her position of "I vote this way because I think it's the right way to vote and that all I'm going to say about that".
Grab some popcorn and let's see how this plays out.
Gambling is as much a part of the Louisiana landscape as the bayous. Aint nobody going to vote it out anyway.
For me personally, I'm not trying to paint anyone into a corner. In fact, I'm trying to reach into that corner and pull them out so we can better understand each other's viewpoints.
Butrflynet wrote:For me personally, I'm not trying to paint anyone into a corner. In fact, I'm trying to reach into that corner and pull them out so we can better understand each other's viewpoints.
I think I understand what she thinks her viewpoints are, but I also understand that they don't make any sense. I'm trying to point out the nonsense in her POV.
Rather than wagging your finger at her and pointing out all the "nonsense" why not ask her some thought-provoking questions that might lead her toward her own revised conclusions?
I'm a child of the 60's (as is Arella). I for one, usually dig in my heels and refuse to budge whenever someone like "the establishment" wags their fingers at me. Spend a moment rapping with me and ask some exploratory questions and I'm most eager to participate and learn something new.
It's that old vinegar and sugar thing regarding flies.
Butrflynet wrote:Rather than wagging your finger at her and pointing out all the "nonsense" why not ask her some thought-provoking questions that might lead her toward her own revised conclusions?
I'm a child of the 60's (as is Arella). I for one, usually dig in my heels and refuse to budge whenever someone like "the establishment" wags their fingers at me. Spend a moment rapping with me and ask some exploratory questions and I'm most eager to participate and learn something new.
It's that old vinegar and sugar thing regarding flies.
A very level headed approach.
Intrepid wrote:maporsche wrote:Butrflynet wrote:For me personally, I'm not trying to paint anyone into a corner. In fact, I'm trying to reach into that corner and pull them out so we can better understand each other's viewpoints.
I think I understand what she thinks her viewpoints are, but I also understand that they don't make any sense. I'm trying to point out the nonsense in her POV.
Why?
A few reasons:
S**t's & Giggles
Sharpens my reasoning skills
To improve the quality of life for Americans who don't follow the same beliefs as she does.
To uphold the American way of life dictating the seperation of church and state.
To protect the freedoms that have been given to me by my creator and by our great country.
Little stuff.......
Butrflynet wrote:Rather than wagging your finger at her and pointing out all the "nonsense" why not ask her some thought-provoking questions that might lead her toward her own revised conclusions?
I believe that this is exactly what we've been doing for 20+ pages.
Intrepid wrote:In other words. For your own entertainment.
Yes, among the other things that I have listed. Don't you read and post for your own entertainment also?
Most importantly though it is to try to keep her from infringing on my freedoms by showing her that her thought process is lacking in substance, reasoning, or proof.
Butrflynet wrote:Rather than wagging your finger at her and pointing out all the "nonsense" why not ask her some thought-provoking questions that might lead her toward her own revised conclusions?
I'm a child of the 60's (as is Arella). I for one, usually dig in my heels and refuse to budge whenever someone like "the establishment" wags their fingers at me. Spend a moment rapping with me and ask some exploratory questions and I'm most eager to participate and learn something new.
It's that old vinegar and sugar thing regarding flies.
Someone once said "You catch more flies with sugar than you do with vinegar" but the truth is "if you really want to catch flies, put out a dead squirrel."
maporsche wrote:Intrepid wrote:maporsche wrote:Butrflynet wrote:For me personally, I'm not trying to paint anyone into a corner. In fact, I'm trying to reach into that corner and pull them out so we can better understand each other's viewpoints.
I think I understand what she thinks her viewpoints are, but I also understand that they don't make any sense. I'm trying to point out the nonsense in her POV.
Why?
A few reasons:
S**t's & Giggles
Sharpens my reasoning skills
To improve the quality of life for Americans who don't follow the same beliefs as she does.
To uphold the American way of life dictating the seperation of church and state.
To protect the freedoms that have been given to me by my creator and by our great country.
Little stuff.......
In other words. For your own entertainment.
maporsche wrote:Intrepid wrote:In other words. For your own entertainment.
Yes, among the other things that I have listed. Don't you read and post for your own entertainment also?
Most importantly though it is to try to keep her from infringing on my freedoms by showing her that her thought process is lacking in substance, reasoning, or proof.
Entertainment at the expense of others is cheap entertainment indeed.
I doubt that no matter what AM did, she would infringe on your freedoms. Or, at least make any noticeable impact.
Are you not trying to infringe on her freedom of speech and free thought?
Intrepid wrote:Are you not trying to infringe on her freedom of speech and free thought?
No, I'm trying to get her to USE them.
maporsche wrote:Intrepid wrote:Are you not trying to infringe on her freedom of speech and free thought?
No, I'm trying to get her to USE them.
Seems to me, and probably many more, that she was attempting to do just that. Not to your liking, of course, but attempting nonetheless.
Aw c'mon Intrepid. It's big jollies to pick on someone who has obvious sensitive buttons to push, don't you know that?
Between that and abusing small animals, how else is a big red blooded male supposed to have fun?
