Does Proverbs 26:4 contradict verse 5?

[OBW]

The thread topic is "Does Proverbs 26:4 contradict verse 5?" I wondered where it was going. Reread the opening post. It made some statements about the verses. Then a few posts later, there was much discussion about what constituted folly in Lee and his sons. And unrighteousness on the part of those who defended them, even promoted them.

Yet the thread seems to be defined as about the interaction of these two verses. There was significant discussion attempted by some on the topic, but it was quickly turned elsewhere.

So I asked what was the purpose of the thread. I would like to know what we are trying to talk about. I asked if anyone could provide a summary. This is the response.

Originally Posted by 77150

I consider this my first thread (the other thread was an answer to a question).

I registered for this forum because 21:11 When the scorner is punished, the simple is made wise: and when the wise is instructed, he receiveth knowledge.
21:12 The righteous man wisely considereth the house of the wicked: but God overthroweth the wicked for their wickedness.

My first thought was “what is the worst thing that could happen as a result of posting on this forum?” I ruled out being ostracized and scorned because when I appear before the Lord will I be ashamed because I was ostracized and scorned for contending for righteousness? No, that would be a blessing and honor.

The worst thing would be something that causes me to become bankrupt in my Christian life, to be defeated as a Christian? Under what situation would I be better off just making peace with the LRC (Luke 14:28-33)? Because when I can figure out what that is I will know the enemies game plan. The answer was simple “becoming like unto them”. Romans 2:3 “And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?”

So, the purpose of this thread is to reduce the risk of this happening. I knew that if you all had the same fear of the Lord then we would balance one another, we would have each other’s back and we would protect one another.

If this is the purpose, then I would suggest that a careful and detailed analysis of the "topic" verses might be the place to start, continue, and end. The real question is not whether Lee and the BBs were unrighteous and unlawful in defending the sinful PL. It is whether it is a righteous thing to even take on the analysis and speak against such unrighteousness.

And if that is correct, then the topic of the thread is not "do these two verses contradict" but "should I/we be doing this."

And for those who feel the need to consider that, it is fine. For the rest, either throw in your two cents worth (that's all mine is worth) if you feel to, or refrain. For me, I at least know what it is that I am trying to discuss. This is very helpful. It only took around 40 posts to define the purpose of the thread clearly. This is probably the reason that Unto was getting so irritated. The stated purpose and the early rhetoric did not seem to be consistent with later rhetoric. It was suggesting some kind of bait and switch. You probably did not intend it that way.

Much better to be straightforward and clear about your purposes. I would have titled the thread "Why Are We Here?" or "Should We Be Here?" Then I would lay out the two verses as a great example of how there are at least two ways to be involved in this kind of endeavor. Which one are we doing? Is it profitable for us? Then idiots like OBW wouldn't constantly be getting onto the wrong points and issues.

[77150]

Originally Posted by OBW

If this is the purpose, then I would suggest that a careful and detailed analysis of the "topic" verses might be the place to start, continue, and end. The real question is not whether Lee and the BBs were unrighteous and unlawful in defending the sinful PL. It is whether it is a righteous thing to even take on the analysis and speak against such unrighteousness.

And if that is correct, then the topic of the thread is not "do these two verses contradict" but "should I/we be doing this."

One post questioned the assertion that the term "folly" in the verses in question referred to the topics on this forum. The reason for Post #9 was to demonstrate that the term "folly" could reasonably be understood to refer to many of the topics, threads and posts on this forum. I provided 39 examples, but logically it is not necessary for you to agree with all 39, as long as you agreed that one verse was a valid reference you then agreed with the premise.

However, the response to that Post was that they were not willing to read the post because they disagreed with the validity of the first reference. Therefore I peppered verse references on a one on one basis. The purpose was merely to make the point that the term "folly" as applied to many of these actions and sins is valid.