Tom, you should read my comments before your reply to them. Then we could have a conversation.
You didn’t vehemently disagree with one of my beliefs – you asked in your post whether we already had Comprehensive Immigration Reform. I replied no, because we haven’t addressed the issue since 1986, during which time the issues have changed. I don’t see insults there (other than my making fun of my own math-challenged means of doing sums) any more than I see vehement disagreement. Similarly, I don’t see my refusing to state the basis for my opinion. I gave the basis for the opinion.
Although I generally consider you to have an irrationally quick trigger finger on your scriptural use, if I wanted to adopt that fashion myself in response to your latest comment, I would say that I fully conformed to the author of the James admonition to let my “No” be No.
As for your inquiry as to why you cannot stand criticism (you and whomever else you perennial “we” happens to be), my thought is that perhaps it is because you (singular or plural, take your pick) sometimes see it when it isn’t there. Simpson-Mazzoli had its reasons and momentum in its day. But it’s long gone. We are on to new issues on our borders. To say that shouldn’t insult you or make you sensitive to criticism. It’s just an observation. (from here)
First note these pertinent details.
- What is carping? If you don’t know, click on the link. Since the term is not widely used, I probably should not have used it, but it fit the occasion.
- scout and novascout are one and the same. That is, there is one one “scout,” not two. Why uses two pseudonyms I don’t know, but he has in the past said he does not know how fix it so the second pseudonym does not show up.
- When I said was carping (here), I was referring his apparent anger as the result of THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MORALITY AND THE LAW — PART 1. Unfortunately, when responded to my observation — his carping — he made it sound as if I was referring solely to his previous comment (here) in DON’T WE ALREADY HAVE COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM? As a matter of fact (easily observed), had already started carping as when he commented upon THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MORALITY AND THE LAW — PART 1.
Seeds Of Confusion
When he first responded (here) to DON’T WE ALREADY HAVE COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM?, was still carping? I think it blatantly obvious, but I suppose a casual observer of this blog might think otherwise. Hence this post.
Do I have an irrationally quick trigger finger on scriptural use? Since and (scout’s second pseudonym) have commented on this blog numerous times, it has become apparent that and I have very different points-of-view on how scripture should be applied. However, I try not to abuse scripture and bludgeon anyone with it. In the comment (here) that complained about, I applied scripture to myself, not him. I merely suggested that I could and should find the patience to endure his carping. I did not use scripture demonstrate that he was carping. That observation did not require any reference to scripture.
Why did I quote scripture and apply it to myself? It is that “we” thing that apparently irks . Because “we” are all sinners, I speak of sinners in the plural. Because I too require Christ’s sacrifice on the cross for salvation, I am not any better than anyone else. So it is that when I quote scripture I usually quote it to remind myself (as much as anyone else) of what God’s wisdom dictates I should do.
No one can make another obedient to scripture. We each must willingly make that choice. Is that not why James spoke of the Bible as a mirror (James 1:22-25)? We must each seek to apply what we learn from the Bible to ourselves.