Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tooblue
I've argued this issue far too many times ... I lack the energy to discuss it further, all of my arguments ultimately lead to discussions of slippery slopes which according to so called rational persons is pure guess work. To hades with the notion of predicting consequences –it’s absurd to even try ;-)
I will contend with one of your points ... simply because the church was slow to change (or, as you put 'wrong') in regards to many political issues does not mean that it should stand idly by on this very issue for fear of repeating the behavior. Of course that’s assuming you are obviously more intelligent and knowledgeable about this particular subject than the men who indeed administrate the church.
I do not wish to disparage you or your thoughts but reality is the fallible men of church leadership are in fact smarter, more experienced, and quite frankly more capable than you, and have been ordained to discern and determine the church’s response to these particular social issues. I know, I know, they made mistakes (well not they specifically, they as in previous GA’s who have passed beyond the veil) so therefore they are going make another mistake … I’m sorry but such logic is woefully short sighted and erroneous.
|
You haven't made an argument based on the issues here, you have made an argument against a person bringing up the issues (a logical fallacy). I most certainly am not disputing that the church leaders are more intelligent and capable than I am. But if that is the end of the debate, then you have set them up as being infallible, despite your statement that they are fallible. We do not believe that they are infallible men, therefore their intelligence and ability to receive inspiration are not at issue here. Make an argument on the issue and I will get back to you.