The dangers of faith

[ShaMan]

Any belief, religious or otherwise, when taken to extreme, can produce error.

[Angrboda]

Even if I thought it possible you were referring to something other than John -- the context makes clear you weren't -- the passage you quoted only supports that there will be no subtractions from the law, not that there will be no additions to the law. So, this is an even worse failure from an exegetical standpoint. And I must say that I find your attempt at a revisionist, ad-hoc attempt to rewrite your way out of trouble to be all too depressingly typical of your "God-given" morality.

Really, if I make false statements in a book I'm writing, and it contradicts an original writing on the same subject by all means I've tried to subtract and add to the original, anyone with understanding knows this. So your little quip has no standing in this case.

GC

So in other words you've argued in a circle:

The book of Mormon is false because it's an addition --> additions aren't allowed because they subtract from the truth of the whole --> this subtracts from the truth of the whole because the book of Mormon is false --> it's false because ....

Very nice. Got any more gems, douche bag?

[Aractus]

---

I'll just leave this here...

---

Homosexuality is deadly , but whatever.

[Jacob(smooth)]

---

I'll just leave this here...

---

Homosexuality is deadly , but whatever.

In that case so is bacon, driving a car and being a man. One could as easily call sex deadly because anyone who has sex is at substantially higher risk of getting an std.

[MindForgedManacle]

At least in the US, the reason many gays (men, not women mind you) got HIV was because when people really started hearing about its existence in the 70s and 80s, the God-botherers on the religious right had made getting condoms a friggin' miracle. Thus they instigated a self-fulfilling prophecy where gays got HIV because of the protected sex the religious right made them unable to have.

[Esquilax]

Homosexuality is deadly , but whatever.

I've had gay sex, and I'm still alive. Therefore, what you meant was that certain aspects of homosexuality, neither uniform within that set nor exclusive to it, are deadly. Those aspects, by the way, also occur in heterosexuality too.

So really all you've determined is that HIV is deadly. We already knew that.

Breast cancer happens mostly in women, does that make being a woman deadly?

[Bad Writer]

---

I'll just leave this here...

---

Homosexuality is deadly , but whatever.

You sound like that fucktard Bill O'Reilly who recently claimed that smoking pot is "literally playing Russian Roulette". Except that bullets to the head almost always kill, but you can smoke pot as many times as you want without succumbing to massive brain trauma.

---

Any belief, religious or otherwise, when taken to extreme, can produce error.

I believe to the extreme that the sun will set tonight and that it will rise tomorrow. Am I in error? Certain beliefs, whether extreme or moderate, are sometimes very correct. Religious beliefs, whether extreme or small, are a guaranteed failure.

[Godscreated]

Really, if I make false statements in a book I'm writing, and it contradicts an original writing on the same subject by all means I've tried to subtract and add to the original, anyone with understanding knows this. So your little quip has no standing in this case.

GC

So in other words you've argued in a circle:

The book of Mormon is false because it's an addition --> additions aren't allowed because they subtract from the truth of the whole --> this subtracts from the truth of the whole because the book of Mormon is false --> it's false because ....

Very nice. Got any more gems, douche bag?

You started out wrong so you could make what I said circular, the book of Mormon is wrong because it is in conflict with the original... thus the addition would subtract from the original... subtracting from the original changes God's word... it's false because it contradicts the truth of God who doesn't lie.

GC

[Angrboda]

So in other words you've argued in a circle:

The book of Mormon is false because it's an addition --> additions aren't allowed because they subtract from the truth of the whole --> this subtracts from the truth of the whole because the book of Mormon is false --> it's false because ....

Very nice. Got any more gems, douche bag?

You started out wrong so you could make what I said circular, the book of Mormon is wrong because it is in conflict with the original... thus the addition would subtract from the original... subtracting from the original changes God's word... it's false because it contradicts the truth of God who doesn't lie.

GC

That's not what you said before. I even quoted you. Changing your argument to suit the objection is the fallacy of equivocation. But by all means, point out where the book of Mormon contradicts the traditional bible.

[Bad Writer]

*Puts on the Peter Priesthood hat*

GC, I await your reasoning without fallaciously appealing to Revelations.