Jesus is 100% God and 100% man at the same time

[MoreCoffee]

it's the sort of discussion rome hates because it causes people to see right through romes lies

It is a blessing indeed to see through lies. Like the lies in your post.

 

[Josiah]

this is the sort of discussion you get when every individual decides what the bible means for himself.

I agree.... but I must note this is a primary reason why I left your denomination: it is EXACTLY what it itself does, insisting that there is ONE "intrepreter" - itself. There is ONE who is infallibly lead by the Spirit - itself. It itself insists on designating it itself as the sole one to determine what the Bible means (as well as the Tradition of it itself). CCC 85, etc, etc., etc., etc.

 

[psalms 91]

I agree.... but I must note this is a primary reason why I left your denomination: it is EXACTLY what it itself does, insisting that there is ONE "intrepreter" - itself. There is ONE who is infallibly lead by the Spirit - itself. It itself insists on designating it itself as the sole one to determine what the Bible means (as well as the Tradition of it itself). CCC 85, etc, etc., etc., etc.

There is one interpreter, the Holy Spirit, not any church or denomination.

 

[Josiah]

God promises to lead US...... it's corporate, together, community. God never promised that He'd ONLY or ESPECIALLY lead the singular, individual cult or sect or denomination or church or egotistical person who CLAIMS for self that self is unique in this way. God gave the Holy Spirit to US (all Christians..... together).... God gave the Bible to US (all Christians.... equally.... together).


When some denomination (like the RCC) or some person (like Jim Jones or Joseph Smith or some TV preacher or some poster) claims "The Holy Spirit taught ME...... the Holy Spirit told ME..... " then they are rejecting the church, the body of Christ, the corpus of Christians and elevating SELF uniquely: "God only leads ME (at least infallible, or at least I'm the SOLE infallible follower/student)!"


I don't deny that at times, God HAS done that (inspired Prophets in the OT, Apostles in the NT). But there is no promise of such in the age of the Church. Yes, Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would guide US into truth (a point STRESSED by every cult on the planet) - but in that, He promised nothing to any individual cult, sect, denomination, person or office. AND He never promised that there would be ONE individual person, cult, sect, denomination that would be the singular INFALLIBLE/UNACCOUNTABLE follower or student (although this has no kept egotistical, power-hungry people or cults or denominations from CLAIMING Jesus meant to promise that to self alone, just forgot.... this need this to be inserted so as to escape accountability in the sole, singular case of self uniquely).



THAT said..... the doctrine of the Two Natures of Christ IS biblical and IS the result of ecumenical consensus. It comes from the First, Third and Fifth Ecumenical Councils - NOT from any individual person, sect, cult, denomination or church; it's something CHRISTIANS as a whole have agreed upon - completely, entirely - affirming such universally and for centuries. A few - a very, very, very, very few - INDIVIDUALS questioned it (and thus were thought of as heretics) but they were so few as to have no consequence. It was accepted as one of the very, very critical central doctrines of Christianity (indeed, Christianity falls apart without it): Christ is BOTH fully God and Man - always, inseparably. Now.... it does seem that Zwingli in the 16th Century has some very disturbing "problems" with this - and since Zwingli is largely the "father" of modern Evangelicalism, it's maybe not TOO shocking that some "Evangelicals" in the past 100 years or so have discovered Zwingli's issues here - and have taken his views to a radical extreme that would cause Zwingli to scream "Heresy!" This bothers me. In the 20h Century, we found CHRISTIANS - and a goodly number of them - teaching things that WE together, ecumencially, for CENTURIES and CENTURIES, universally, denounced and decried and condemned. Often these don't even KNOW what they are saying has been universally, ecumenically condemned for many, many centuries REGARDLESS of denomination, they don't know because they don't study history, they don't study the Councils, they don't study the Fathers..... and because they've appointed SELF (individually, uniquely, solely, infallibly, unaccountably) as The Interpreter - turning their backs on Christianity, the church, the corpus of Christians. I "see" some (especially modern "Evangelicals") doing the very thing the Reformers rebuked the RCC for doing (and the EOC rebuked the RCC for doing long before the Reformers came alone). Disturbing. VERY, VERY basic, foundational, ECUMENICAL things are being tossed into the trash by those who insist that SELF is The Interpreter, The Student of God, The Follower of God - not Christians, not the church, not us.



Sorry.



- Josiah

 

[popsthebuilder]

I agree.... but I must note this is a primary reason why I left your denomination: it is EXACTLY what it itself does, insisting that there is ONE "intrepreter" - itself. There is ONE who is infallibly lead by the Spirit - itself. It itself insists on designating it itself as the sole one to determine what the Bible means (as well as the Tradition of it itself). CCC 85, etc, etc., etc., etc.

Not trying to refute you exactly, or really argue with you; but I wanted to clear something up, at least in my opinion.

You state/ have stated repeatedly that any doctrine but faith alone is one based on delusion due to egoism of some sort. Right?

Anyway, my only point(sorta) is that what I hold to be true is based on many things, much of which is the unified Word of GOD written in core scriptures spanning before and after the onset of Judaism or Christianity. My point being that all these teachings of those faithful to GOD align with the teachings of the Christ. Why wouldn't they? Sorry; my final point is that all these teachings regard utter humility, selflessness, and equality highly. None of which can be attained to with any level of ego. So you insisting that any other doctrine is necessarily one of self promotion in some form or another is moot.

How can you love another as you love yourself if you regard yourself better in some way?

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Josiah,

Yes, GOD leads Us all. For any to claim express privilege to this is obviously deceit.

You are being deceitful in conflating one having been given knowledge or discernment by the grace and mercy of GOD with one who must, by default, be against any and all other faithful unto GOD, especially those that comprise the parts of the body of the Christ.

No one should ever assert that GOD only leads them. If you see or hear or read such; you know, without a doubt, that they are of deception.

None should ever claim to be without error(infallible). This is obvious misdirection for many easy to see reasons. Some of which are; it goes directly against the teaching of the Christ to be haughty, harsh, prideful. It goes against scripture as we know based on scripture that even though Jesus was Christ, even he didn't know all things. Even though the perfect lamb without blemish was utterly pure, he regarded himself as low.

You say there is no promise of such as prophets, but we all know what is said of gifts. And we know GOD has always spoken through His prophets and messengers, and too, that GOD's will is without change. So how can you rightly claim that none can discern what is written, by the Will of GOD, written in the Word of GOD? How, if you claim that all are of the Holy Spirit who verbally praise Jesus, can't many agree on even minute details? Would not the Holy Spirit bring at least somewhat unified understanding if it indeed indwelled or visited those who claim such as a whole?
The age of the church? What do you mean by that? To me the church is the congregation of the faithful to GOD. There is also a temple.

Wow! Did you say He promised nothing to the individual!? Not that one should do anything for reward, but, the entire bible is chocked full of us being insisted to be obidient, and as such, be closer to the knowledge of GOD and its innumerable benefits.

I know to you the bible doesn't say anything of the sort because of your particular brand of pride, and negation of potential and responsibility, but the bible indeed instructs every one.

Why can't we look to before any scisms? Before any manipulations? Before any divisions or prideful assertion of self as sole infallible interpreter? Wouldn't that make sense?
Arius wasn't insignificant, nor where others before or after. Nor where the church fathers such as Clement and Barnibas.

There is no problem equating Christ to GOD.

The problem lie in equating man to GOD.

There is nothing wrong with thinking the Christ sacrificed himself for our sake. The problem lie in erroneously and vainly thinking it was done that so they would get a free ride to eternal heaven regardless of their actions based on words alone. How can you know that the Christ is the way and Jesus was and is the savior of all mankind, but then not even follow His teachings? Rhetorical.

Centuries of error doesn't make it right; look at the Pharisees. Look at what is said about the whore of Babylon.

That's enough for now I guess.

I mean no disrespect. I do hope for some clarification though, please? Thank you.

Peace


Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

 

[Cassia]

I started this thread to not derail The Holy Trinity thread.

Jesus is 100% God and 100% man at the same time. That seems like a mathematical impossibility but with God anything is possible. Let's discuss.

You may have to start another one because this one is very far off track lol

Josiah,

Yes, GOD leads Us all. For any to claim express privilege to this is obviously deceit.

You are being deceitful in conflating one having been given knowledge or discernment by the grace and mercy of GOD with one who must, by default, be against any and all other faithful unto GOD, especially those that comprise the parts of the body of the Christ.

No one should ever assert that GOD only leads them. If you see or hear or read such; you know, without a doubt, that they are of deception.

None should ever claim to be without error(infallible). This is obvious misdirection for many easy to see reasons. Some of which are; it goes directly against the teaching of the Christ to be haughty, harsh, prideful. It goes against scripture as we know based on scripture that even though Jesus was Christ, even he didn't know all things. Even though the perfect lamb without blemish was utterly pure, he regarded himself as low.

You say there is no promise of such as prophets, but we all know what is said of gifts. And we know GOD has always spoken through His prophets and messengers, and too, that GOD's will is without change. So how can you rightly claim that none can discern what is written, by the Will of GOD, written in the Word of GOD? How, if you claim that all are of the Holy Spirit who verbally praise Jesus, can't many agree on even minute details? Would not the Holy Spirit bring at least somewhat unified understanding if it indeed indwelled or visited those who claim such as a whole?
The age of the church? What do you mean by that? To me the church is the congregation of the faithful to GOD. There is also a temple.

Wow! Did you say He promised nothing to the individual!? Not that one should do anything for reward, but, the entire bible is chocked full of us being insisted to be obidient, and as such, be closer to the knowledge of GOD and its innumerable benefits.

I know to you the bible doesn't say anything of the sort because of your particular brand of pride, and negation of potential and responsibility, but the bible indeed instructs every one.

Why can't we look to before any scisms? Before any manipulations? Before any divisions or prideful assertion of self as sole infallible interpreter? Wouldn't that make sense?
Arius wasn't insignificant, nor where others before or after. Nor where the church fathers such as Clement and Barnibas.

There is no problem equating Christ to GOD.

The problem lie in equating man to GOD.

There is nothing wrong with thinking the Christ sacrificed himself for our sake. The problem lie in erroneously and vainly thinking it was done that so they would get a free ride to eternal heaven regardless of their actions based on words alone. How can you know that the Christ is the way and Jesus was and is the savior of all mankind, but then not even follow His teachings? Rhetorical.

Centuries of error doesn't make it right; look at the Pharisees. Look at what is said about the whore of Babylon.

That's enough for now I guess.

I mean no disrespect. I do hope for some clarification though, please? Thank you.

Peace


Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Stop, you both may be right! Imho God does work directly with some and indirectly with guardian angels.

 

[visionary]

It gets scary when only the "authorized" are privy to God. We all are invited to "sup with Him".

 

[psalms 91]

Yes and Jesus many times was with the sinners rather than the religious leaders, should tell us something about where our priorities should lay

 

[Josiah]

God promises to lead US...... it's corporate, together, community. God never promised that He'd ONLY or ESPECIALLY lead the singular, individual cult or sect or denomination or church or egotistical person who CLAIMS for self that self is unique in this way. God gave the Holy Spirit to US (all Christians..... together).... God gave the Bible to US (all Christians.... equally.... together).


When some denomination (like the RCC) or some person (like Jim Jones or Joseph Smith or some TV preacher or some poster) claims "The Holy Spirit taught ME...... the Holy Spirit told ME..... " then they are rejecting the church, the body of Christ, the corpus of Christians and elevating SELF uniquely: "God only leads ME (at least infallible, or at least I'm the SOLE infallible follower/student)!"


I don't deny that at times, God HAS done that (inspired Prophets in the OT, Apostles in the NT). But there is no promise of such in the age of the Church. Yes, Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would guide US into truth (a point STRESSED by every cult on the planet) - but in that, He promised nothing to any individual cult, sect, denomination, person or office. AND He never promised that there would be ONE individual person, cult, sect, denomination that would be the singular INFALLIBLE/UNACCOUNTABLE follower or student (although this has no kept egotistical, power-hungry people or cults or denominations from CLAIMING Jesus meant to promise that to self alone, just forgot.... this need this to be inserted so as to escape accountability in the sole, singular case of self uniquely).



THAT said..... the doctrine of the Two Natures of Christ IS biblical and IS the result of ecumenical consensus. It comes from the First, Third and Fifth Ecumenical Councils - NOT from any individual person, sect, cult, denomination or church; it's something CHRISTIANS as a whole have agreed upon - completely, entirely - affirming such universally and for centuries. A few - a very, very, very, very few - INDIVIDUALS questioned it (and thus were thought of as heretics) but they were so few as to have no consequence. It was accepted as one of the very, very critical central doctrines of Christianity (indeed, Christianity falls apart without it): Christ is BOTH fully God and Man - always, inseparably. Now.... it does seem that Zwingli in the 16th Century has some very disturbing "problems" with this - and since Zwingli is largely the "father" of modern Evangelicalism, it's maybe not TOO shocking that some "Evangelicals" in the past 100 years or so have discovered Zwingli's issues here - and have taken his views to a radical extreme that would cause Zwingli to scream "Heresy!" This bothers me. In the 20h Century, we found CHRISTIANS - and a goodly number of them - teaching things that WE together, ecumencially, for CENTURIES and CENTURIES, universally, denounced and decried and condemned. Often these don't even KNOW what they are saying has been universally, ecumenically condemned for many, many centuries REGARDLESS of denomination, they don't know because they don't study history, they don't study the Councils, they don't study the Fathers..... and because they've appointed SELF (individually, uniquely, solely, infallibly, unaccountably) as The Interpreter - turning their backs on Christianity, the church, the corpus of Christians. I "see" some (especially modern "Evangelicals") doing the very thing the Reformers rebuked the RCC for doing (and the EOC rebuked the RCC for doing long before the Reformers came alone). Disturbing. VERY, VERY basic, foundational, ECUMENICAL things are being tossed into the trash by those who insist that SELF is The Interpreter, The Student of God, The Follower of God - not Christians, not the church, not us.



Sorry.



- Josiah



.

Josiah,

Yes, GOD leads Us all. For any to claim express privilege to this is obviously deceit.

You are being deceitful in conflating one having been given knowledge or discernment by the grace and mercy of GOD with one who must, by default, be against any and all other faithful unto GOD, especially those that comprise the parts of the body of the Christ.

????


How am I being deceitful? You made that accusation - but then never addressed why it's true, how you can document the accusation. Instead, you seem to largely repeat what I said.

You say there is no promise of such as prophets, but we all know what is said of gifts. And we know GOD has always spoken through His prophets and messengers, and too, that GOD's will is without change. So how can you rightly claim that none can discern what is written, by the Will of GOD, written in the Word of GOD? How, if you claim that all are of the Holy Spirit who verbally praise Jesus, can't many agree on even minute details? Would not the Holy Spirit bring at least somewhat unified understanding if it indeed indwelled or visited those who claim such as a whole?

I don't think you can have it both ways. You repeatedly agreed with me about God leading, teaching only one (who is unaccountable and an infallible follower and student).... then seem to say there is the promise of such. Which is it?

Yes, we CAN proclaim what SCRIPTURE says - but then we're referencing God's revelation to us all - not some private message to self that self has because God only speaks to self, God protects only self from error, God leads only self and God makes self the sole infallible, unaccountable follower and student of God. Yes - I stated that such HAS existed (I referenced the Prophets and Apostles) but that there is no such promise for the age of the church (Pentecost to His Return).

Wow! Did you say He promised nothing to the individual!?

By no means. Not remotely. Of course not.

because of your particular brand of pride

Well, that's pretty bold and flaming..... Now, document it from the words I posted.

Why can't we look to before any scisms?

I never remotely indicated that we cannot.... in fact, I rather strongly implied that such is very wise, I specifically mentioned the Ecumenical Councils (the last ended around 800 AD). I often mention the Creeds.

There is no problem equating Christ to GOD

Um.... where did I remotely indicate otherwise?

The problem lie in equating man to GOD.

Where did I remotely indicate otherwise?

I mean no disrespect. I do hope for some clarification though, please? Thank you.

Sure. You made some pretty strong attacks on me, but honestly, I'm at a complete loss to know what you are referring to...... to the point of wondering if you have me confused with someone else.




Pax Christi



- Josiah

 

[MoreCoffee]

It gets scary when only the "authorized" are privy to God. We all are invited to "sup with Him".

But the 'authorised" in the Catholic Church are not "privy to God". They offer no new revelations of any kind. They rely wholly on public sources and perhaps on some very rare occasions on a few ancient sources in the Vatican library that are available but not on the web or in a public library.

 

[Josiah]

But the 'authorised" in the Catholic Church are not "privy to God". They offer no new revelations of any kind. They rely wholly on public sources and perhaps on some very rare occasions on a few ancient sources in the Vatican library that are available but not on the web or in a public library.

Respectfully, that's just wrong.

The RC Denomination NEVER CEASES to insist on all kinds of specialness of it itself exclusively.... it goes on and on and on and on and on about how it itself is The Authority, The Teacher, the Voice of God, Infallible, Unaccountable, when IT ITSELF UNIQUELY speaks ergo God is speaking, that it itself alone is the sole interpreter of Scripture, that it itself is the sole interpreter of what it itself uniquely labels "Tradition."

And while the RCC and LDS disagree as to WHEN God revealed dogmas, both teach dogmas that self alone claims that self somehow, uniquely, eventually "learned." The RCC calls this "Apostolic Tradition" and the LDS calls it "Second Testimony" but it's the same concept: Jesus taught all kinds of Dogmas that the Holy Spirit in His Divine wisdom kept out of the Bible but...... eventually...... somehow...... became known to either the individual RC Denomination (according to the RCC) OR to the LDS (according to the LDS) which eventually chose to share it with the public. Both denominations have this as a foundational idea: the teachings of the Bible are incomplete.... there's a lot more dogma..... such may be IMPLIED in Scripture but It Itself - that singular, individual denomination - has it in fullness right from God Himself. And both claim that God especially speaks to IT ITSELF..... protects IT ITSELF from error (in dogma anyway)..... teaches doctrines to IT ITSELF ...... leads IT ITSELF...... and makes IT ITSELF alone The Infallible student and follower.... so that each itself uniquely claims that it itself exclusively is (conditionally) infallible, and that each itself uniquely claims that when it itself individually and alone speaks (conditionally) ERGO God Himself is.



- Josiah

 

[visionary]

But the 'authorised" in the Catholic Church are not "privy to God". They offer no new revelations of any kind. They rely wholly on public sources and perhaps on some very rare occasions on a few ancient sources in the Vatican library that are available but not on the web or in a public library.

I agree

 

[psalms 91]

edited, NM

 

[Cassia]

I thought there was a forum being formed for traditional posting yes/no?

 

[popsthebuilder]

Josiah,

I meant deceitful in that you insist that an individual with a view that isn't aligned with yours, seems to automatically be one of some selfish direction. That is wrong and saying such isn't the truth, making it deceitful. You assert that one who's understanding of scripture that doesn't agree with yours is one that doesn't agree with the Church. That is deceitful. You're basing your opinions on the doctrines of tradition, which I'm not against, but at the same time you consider these doctrines to be full and correct, utterly. This I don't agree with. This in itself isn't deceitful, but the ultimate cause of it is. And I answered your question in the post that you quoted. Saying that one who has a different view than you(for whatever reason) is necessarily one who is against the church or faithful of GOD is deceit.

I venture to say that you deceive yourself, by way of your particular indoctrination or closed isolated belief system that you accuse others of. As far as I can tell you are quite closed minded towards those who don't abide by some sort of faith alone doctrine. You run around calling all else of some self centered worthless doctrine who don't accept the teaching of the church or church fathers. Of course saying so is saying that they don't follow the teachings of the Christ; as there is but one church that is acceptable unto GOD; it is wholly OF the Christ. See how I put "of" there? Be sure not to conflate it with being the Christ, or Jesus because that isn't what I mean.

I never agreed with you that GOD only leads one individual or one sect or one religion. Deceit.

I surely didn't say anything about anyone with knowledge being unacountable. I believe that the more one knows the more one is held responsible. They go together to me.

You really kind of loose me when you speak of some private message, and self self self?

I could start to understand it if it had some examples perhaps.

I don't have to document your pride for you. It is blatant, flagrant, and apparent in every post you have made that I have read. Your signature says something too, and it isn't that of humility.

I mean before the councels and creeds as I insinuated.

You indicate otherwise in praising Jesus of Nazareth as 100% man yet also 100%GOD also as a man. Does it not say GOD is spirit? Does it not say that people will tell you Christ is here or there and not to heed their word because the Christ will be with you?

I wasn't attacking you. I was calling you on hypocricy because you are guilty of the very things you accuse others of. I called you on deceit because you seem very clouded when it comes to your direction in contrast to the direction of others, to the point of defending your positions with nonsensical statements.

I really wasn't trying to be negative or overly abrasive. I know in this post I have been quite accusatory. Consider it a defence to things you don't care to so much say out right, yet still accuse one of, or nearly all really.

I would like to more on topic though, as this most likely won't profit either of us or others at this rate. I will gladly speak privately with you or on another thread about it more, if you like. I sincerely hope I am wrong. And will openly admit it if and when it becomes apparent.

Peace


Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

 

[Josiah]

deleted by poster

 

[popsthebuilder]

I not only never "insisted" on that - I never remotely even implied it. Maybe it would help if you quoted me before commenting on the words?







I not only NEVER, REMOTELY suggested such a thing, but I reject that as false. You're powerfully accusing me of some pretty serious stuff - you at least need to quote me stating such before you defame me in such powerful ways for saying "it". I'm not even sure you're addressing the right person, maybe you have me confused with someone else?







... actually, I'm not sure I mentioned my doctrines.







I don't think I even mentioned "full and correct" anything. Or "utterly" anything.






But of course, I have never in my life - anywhere - stated that. Do you have me confused with a different poster? It might help if you quoted what I post - then you can comment on those words, but I'm not sure you're even replying to anything I've ever posted.... anywhere.








Here is what you posted, "Yes, GOD leads Us all. For any to claim express privilege to this is obviously deceit." as you expressed agreement with what I said, beginning your comment to my post with "YES." No, it is not "deceit" for me to indicate that you agreed with me that God leads US when you replied by saying, "YES - God leads us all." Unless, of course, you didn't mean the "yes" but rather, "No" indicating that you disagreed with what you quoted.








Actually, you do. Since you have defamed me, flamed me, attacked me as "deceitful" "prideful" and said such is "blatant, flagrant" Some 15 times in a single public post. Yes - you DO need to document it or retract it and apologize.








I don't have a signature line.







Make up your mind. Which is it?

And you did so without quoting a WORD I ever stated..... I'm not even sure you're addressing whom you think you are.

Consider all the PERSONAL, defaming, attacking, accusative things you've publicly posted - with NOTHING to support such..... not replying to any points but rather attacking, accusing, flaming, defaming ME personally. I think the "ball" is in your court to either document these - or better yet - delete them and publicly apologize.








Before you publicly accuse one of "deceit" 15 times in just one post..... before you so flaggrantly and publicly defame and attack and accuse and flame one .... it's best to check if it's true and be able to document it. Once it's said.....

Another suggestion: Yes, first be able to DOCUMENT your personal, public attacks on one's character BEFORE you post it..... and yes, QUOTE the words you wish to reply to, so that you are addressing POSTS rather than POSTERS (it's a very basic rule at these sites; often a rule violation to do otherwise). And when you don't follow that (as we see here) he derails the thread, damages (perhaps without possibility of healing) relationships and tends to poison a community. Just something to think about.







Your rant, your parade of defaming, accusing personal flames are suppose to give me..... PEACE? Huh?



.

I won't be apologizing. Unless I am wrong. I may have went about something in poor fashion, but I have no reason to think I'm wrong just because you say I'm defaming you and flaming you. What does that even mean? I'm basing what I've said off of what I've seen of you. Others can make their own conclusions. Why are you so worried about what I've said? You could just chalk it up to me misinterpreting what you've said. Like I said; of you want to discuss it privately and if, through that discussion, it becomes apparent that I was or am wrong, then I will sincerely apologize. Right now it wouldn't be sincere, and would be me just trying to appease you or make you feel better. I can't justify that as a reason in this case.

I'm going to try not to speak of your personal assertions anymore on this thread.

I didn't mean to derail this thread. But have tried to keep this discussion at least somewhat within context as of my last post.

And I wish peace on literally all life, including yours. That doesn't mean I am the bringer of said peace, as I am noone.

Peace

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

 

[Josiah]

deleted by poster

 

[popsthebuilder]

Then you need to SUBSTANTIATE each one of your many, many bold, public, defaming, personal accusations and attacks. QUOTE me..... PROVE your the long litany of attacks on my person. Not with "I'VE......" but with my words.






Then you need to READ what you posted. Unless you will state that publically accusing one of DECEIVING (15 times in one post) is a high personal compliment. As well as the host of other attacks, accusations, flames....






YOU chose to make your defaming, personal attacks highly public. You still do. And you chose to not quote a single word from me. You still don't.






When one chooses to ignore every point contain in the thread.... the entirely of the subject of the thread.... and in stead of that, in place of that, in lieu of that, boldly, repeatedly, personally attack the integrity of one poster - that's what it does. It tends to "poison" the milieu, as well. It's one of the reasons it's often a rule violation.




I'm really surprised by your attacks. And the level, boldness and severity of such. Frankly, it just doesn't seem like you. Maybe you just had a bad day...... Think and pray about this. I hope you will publicly apologize. Then perhaps we'll both delete these off-topics, this hijack of the thread, and be reconciled? You started this..... only you can conclude it.





.

Look; I have attempted to keep the thread on topic. So much so that I even incorporated it into what you consider a personal attack. I won't be deleting anything, and offered private conversation for your sake, not mine.

I accused and still accuse you of deceiving others and spreading nonsensical confusion. And yes, it is pertinent to the thread at hand. It wasn't an attack. I repeatedly offered privacy that you wouldn't see as an attack, but evidently you don't really care about that.

I suppose I made this personal for you, but it wasn't unprovoked, and was never intended to defame you. Do you not hold to the faith only doctrine? Do you not consider Jesus of Nazareth as a man to have been the utter fullness of GOD who was a sacrifice to himself for our sins? Do you not believe that all one must do for eternal salvation is say you that Jesus is GOD regardless of action? Do you not in nearly every post, claim that those whose opinion differs from yours is one who claims self to be infallible or whatever?

Now here I have left you ample opportunity to publicly correct me. How you go from here is up to you. I've left these accusations exceedingly vague. So if they are wrong; which I really hope they are, still, then it should be really easy to refute. If you are that worried about it why not open another thread or pm me?

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.