ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!

[Nathon Detroit]

I think what Knight is saying is that the "evil spirit" in this case is not refering to an actual spiritual being (i.e. a fallen angel; a demon), but rather a general mood or emotional state among the people. Like when people refer to the "Christmas spirit," it's not a reference to an actual being.

:up:

 

[Clete]

Okay, I just have to share this with everyone here on this thread. I about laughed myself to death when I read this! :rotfl:

I sent the following email to a guy at fallacyfiles.org....

Greetings,

I was searching through your website trying to find out what sort of logical fallacy a debate opponent of mine is using and I'm not sure if I found it or not. I was hoping you could help me confirm whether or not I've got it or whether this fallacy falls better into a different category.

The fallacious argument basically goes like this...

God caused some catastrophes to occur therefore God causes all catastrophes to occur.

The best fit I could find to this silliness is Dicto Simpliciter, or a fallacy of accident. Is that correct or is there another named fallacy that would fit this better?


Thank you very much for your time and congratulations on having put together a terrifically useful and informative website!

Yours,
Clete Pfeiffer​

And here's his very breif and to the point response...

If that's really what he's arguing, it's such a bad argument that it
doesn't have a name, as far as I know. If you have to have a name, you
could always call it a "non sequitur", since that is the general term
for an obviously uncogent argument.

Hope that helps!​

:rotfl: Oh! I just love this guy! :rotfl:

Sorry Z Man, I really am not trying to poke fun at you at all. I just couldn't believe it when I read that answer and had to show it around. You have to admit, it's pretty hard core! :chuckle:

 

[Nathon Detroit]

And here's his very breif and to the point response...

If that's really what he's arguing, it's such a bad argument that it
doesn't have a name, as far as I know. If you have to have a name, you
could always call it a "non sequitur", since that is the general term
​

:ha: Hilarious!!!

 

[Lighthouse]

I know that; I think that's been established a gazillion times already. Let's focus here and concentrate on David's firstborn son. God killed him after living only for 7 to 8 days. I'm sure we both agree that David's son did nothing to be judged about; he was killed on behalf of David's sins. Therefore - now concentrate, cause this is important - therefore, God caused someone to suffer and experience death/tragedy even though they weren't in judgement. This belief between you and Knight that God only causes tragedy upon the wicked is unbiblical.

Where does the Bible say their son suffered? And what makes you think a seven day old child knows what tragedy is, let alone experiences it. Especially since that child is quite likely in heaven, now.

And, since you still can't get this through your thick skull, to your little pea brain, we never said God does not cause these things in people's lives who are not in judgment, but we have said that not all sickness, suffering and tragedy is caused by God.

Wow.. that explains everything. No wonder your posts are dumb. You're lost. You're so far out in left field it isn't funny. Do you realize that no one is arguing for exhaustive predestination right now?

Are you sure?

 

[Freak]

:nono:

But I do not believe a righteous God employs evil Spirits.

This despite what God says...

God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (WEB)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (ASV)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the townsmen of Shechem; and the townsmen of Shechem were false to Abimelech; (BBE)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abim'elech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abim'elech; (DBY)

Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (KJV)

Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (WBS)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech; (JPS)

and God sendeth an evil spirit between Abimelech and the masters of Shechem, and the masters of Shechem deal treacherously with Abimelech, (YLT)

Spirit here is ruwach (roo'-akh) which means it is a rational being. God sent an evil spirit, a demon! This despite what Knight might say. Imagine that.

 

[Delmar]

:nono: This despite what God says...

God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (WEB)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (ASV)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the townsmen of Shechem; and the townsmen of Shechem were false to Abimelech; (BBE)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abim'elech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abim'elech; (DBY)

Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (KJV)

Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (WBS)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech; (JPS)

and God sendeth an evil spirit between Abimelech and the masters of Shechem, and the masters of Shechem deal treacherously with Abimelech, (YLT)

Spirit here is ruwach (roo'-akh) which means it is a rational being. God sent an evil spirit, a demon! This despite what Knight might say. Imagine that.

So it is your claim thay the NKJV has a bad translation for this verse?

 

[Freak]

So it is your claim thay the NKJV has a bad translation for this verse?

Practically every other translation says evil spirit except the NKJV. Do you know why?
Let's use your NKJV! The word spirit is ruwach (roo'-akh) which means it is a rational being. It wasn't a righteous spirit now was it?

 

[Freak]

From the KJV:

But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.

And Saul's servants said unto him, Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee.

Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee, to seek out a man, who is a cunning player on an harp: and it shall come to pass, when the evil spirit from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand, and thou shalt be well.

And Knight tells us that God doesn't employ evil spirits. Apparently Knight hasn't read the OT enough!

 

[Freak]

Or what about this one from the KJV: And the evil spirit from the LORD was upon Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played with his hand.

 

[Delmar]

Practically every other translation says evil spirit except the NKJV. Do you know why?
Let's use your NKJV! The word spirit is ruwach (roo'-akh) which means it is a rational being. It wasn't a righteous spirit now was it?

I'm not just going to take your word for that. You are the same guy who seemed not to realize that the word murder ( which reminds me you haven't responded to post #2345 )implies guilt. Any one else want to weigh in on the word ruwach (roo'-akh)?

 

[sentientsynth]

I'm not just going to take your word for that. You are the same guy who seemed not to realize that the word murder implies guilt. Any one else want to weigh in on the word ruwach (roo'-akh)?

According to my sources, it very rarely indicates an impersonal force. I think that by judging the effects of this ruwach in this passage then we can cogently argue that understanding it as an impersonal force is valid.

Personally, I would hesitate to make a dogmatic claim, though. The non-normative usage of a word has to meet the greater burden of proof.


SS

 

[Freak]

I'm not just going to take your word for that?

Then look it up for yourself...http://www.biblefacts.org/bible/kjv/heb/STRHEB73.htm

:hammer:

 

[Freak]

deardelmar, what you have essentially done is ignore nearly every translation known to man that speaks of evil spirit that God has sent because of your strange theology that dictates what you must believe. Sad.

 

[Delmar]

Then look it up for yourself...http://www.biblefacts.org/bible/kjv/heb/STRHEB73.htm

:hammer:

Once again " rational being" was not the only possible vaid choice, yet you infered that it was. Freak you are thicker than a brick!

 

[Freak]

To recap, all of the following translations, speak of God sending an evil spirit.

God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (WEB)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (ASV)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the townsmen of Shechem; and the townsmen of Shechem were false to Abimelech; (BBE)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abim'elech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abim'elech; (DBY)

Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (KJV)

Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech: (WBS)

And God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech; (JPS)

and God sendeth an evil spirit between Abimelech and the masters of Shechem, and the masters of Shechem deal treacherously with Abimelech, (YLT)

 

[Freak]

Freak you are thicker than a brick!

You are dense for thinking nearly every translation is wrong!

Every translation speaks of evil spirit! What is an evil spirit?

 

[Delmar]

You are dense for thinking nearly every translation is wrong!

Every translation speaks of evil spirit! What is an evil spirit?

Good point the Bible says the majority is nearly always right!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Has Freak repented of his slander that God is a murderer yet? :nono:

Until then, I have nothing to say to Freak.

 

[sentientsynth]

Has Freak repented of his slander that God is a murderer yet? :nono:

Until then, I have nothing to say to Freak.

Aw c'mon. Not this again.

Freak's made it clear what he meant, Knight. He's guilty of equivocation, but not blasphemy against the Lord, as some (total morons read: Clete) have said.

Let's move on, please.

 

[Lighthouse]

Good point the Bible says the majority is nearly always right!

BEEP!
Sorry. That's my sarcasm detector.