I fail to see how I moved the goal post. I may have elaborated on an ever so slight rabbit trail, but the debate remains the same. Love and fear are not compatible and claiming that one of my points is a false dichotomy is no more legitimate than saying, "nuh-uh, you're wrong" ... the words false dichotomy just make it seem slightly more intellectually valid.
Apparently, my opponent feels that the word compatible means simply to exist together, thereby claiming that I have regressed on my own statements. It's not true. Compatible means: capable of existing or living together in harmony . Key words being, in harmony. According to his definition, bunny rabbits are compatible with wolves because they live in the same square mile of forest. This notion would be funny if it wasn't so absurd. Furthermore, he makes an effort to show a "compatible" connection by using thrill seekers as an example. Making an effort to point out a love and a fear of an extreme sport. (By the way an adrenaline rush is in not fear, but I will concede the point in the interest of time and the fact that it's a bad analogy anyway.) Yes, those moments of fear sought out by thrill seekers are wanted, but talk about cherry picking ... you can't equate the love of a rush to the love a father, let alone a "heavenly father." That thrill seeker IS NOT fearing what he loves, he actually loves the fear (adrenaline) itself. It's apples and oranges. False dichotomy anyone?
No surprise, my opponent has accused me of blatant cherry picking ... something Christians have a lot of understanding of. In all honesty, I had no intention of cherry picking anything. There are many verses that support my point and I simply (and very quickly) located a few that would support my point. It wouldn't have mattered which ones I picked - I would've been accused of cherry picking because they ALL support my point. In addition, his response to the verse in question is an apologists wet dream ... claiming that the author was talking about fear of punishment even thought the Bible CLEARLY states the instruction to have great fear of GOD.
Have I back-peddled at all as my opponent has made claim? I am not aware. I have said from the beginning that it is possible to feel both fear and love for an individual or a thing, but they are not compatible ... that is to say, there is no harmony in their mutual existence. For example, I love music and I love to perform live shows week after week, but I feel fear (apprehension, nervousness) right before a large group of people. I love AND I fear at that moment, but they are not compatible, they are not in harmony and would NEVER want them to exist for any kind of duration. In fact, it is my hope that someday those brief moments of fear will never be felt again.
Thank you for the debate tacky. As always, you are well-thought and eloquent in your writing.
This is not a final point by any means, just something to make you smile as you finish this thread...
If you don't believe me ... believe Yoda.data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/92868/92868735cdaa5f3c6a32c0fa84134c16065ead08" alt="Tongue Tongue"
Apparently, my opponent feels that the word compatible means simply to exist together, thereby claiming that I have regressed on my own statements. It's not true. Compatible means: capable of existing or living together in harmony . Key words being, in harmony. According to his definition, bunny rabbits are compatible with wolves because they live in the same square mile of forest. This notion would be funny if it wasn't so absurd. Furthermore, he makes an effort to show a "compatible" connection by using thrill seekers as an example. Making an effort to point out a love and a fear of an extreme sport. (By the way an adrenaline rush is in not fear, but I will concede the point in the interest of time and the fact that it's a bad analogy anyway.) Yes, those moments of fear sought out by thrill seekers are wanted, but talk about cherry picking ... you can't equate the love of a rush to the love a father, let alone a "heavenly father." That thrill seeker IS NOT fearing what he loves, he actually loves the fear (adrenaline) itself. It's apples and oranges. False dichotomy anyone?
No surprise, my opponent has accused me of blatant cherry picking ... something Christians have a lot of understanding of. In all honesty, I had no intention of cherry picking anything. There are many verses that support my point and I simply (and very quickly) located a few that would support my point. It wouldn't have mattered which ones I picked - I would've been accused of cherry picking because they ALL support my point. In addition, his response to the verse in question is an apologists wet dream ... claiming that the author was talking about fear of punishment even thought the Bible CLEARLY states the instruction to have great fear of GOD.
Have I back-peddled at all as my opponent has made claim? I am not aware. I have said from the beginning that it is possible to feel both fear and love for an individual or a thing, but they are not compatible ... that is to say, there is no harmony in their mutual existence. For example, I love music and I love to perform live shows week after week, but I feel fear (apprehension, nervousness) right before a large group of people. I love AND I fear at that moment, but they are not compatible, they are not in harmony and would NEVER want them to exist for any kind of duration. In fact, it is my hope that someday those brief moments of fear will never be felt again.
Thank you for the debate tacky. As always, you are well-thought and eloquent in your writing.
This is not a final point by any means, just something to make you smile as you finish this thread...
If you don't believe me ... believe Yoda.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/92868/92868735cdaa5f3c6a32c0fa84134c16065ead08" alt="Tongue Tongue"