Isaiah 3 and jewelry...

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

The point is "labor not with meat that perishes, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you." In other words, it's a great example of not this, but this. According to your rebuttal (an awful attempt to "foil my logic"), the "not" should be interpreted the same in all cases. You went to your logic thesauraus again and sloshed around the term "fallacy of equivocation." Ironically, it's exactly what your argument was! Yup, clear and plain.

What's "clear & plain" is that you don't see that you're comparing natural practices w/ unnatural practices & saying "See rdp, you're wrong!". Yes, you're grossly guilty of equivocating...next....

TS's scripture is a perfect example of the "not this, but this" phrasing.

Actually it's a "perfect example" of equivocating the natural w/ the unnatural & attemting to pawn it off as the same thing when it's nowhere even comparable. Try again Jeffrey!

And no, Paul's primary intent was not to prohibit drunknenness,

Then can we go get drunk tonight so long as we still have the Holy Spirit? Watch that "legalism" now .

it was to point to the Spirit. However, with the dozens of other OT and NT instructions and teachings against drunknenness, it's no question that Paul used the "not this, but this" analogy within his larger argument of "children of the day" and "children of the night" -- which are clearly good and evil contrasts.

Watch out now, you might be called a "Pharisee" for obeying the Word of God!

[B[/COLOR][/B]

See -- context definitely helps.

Yes, context definitely helps......very good Jeffrey.