Posted on 01/03/2016 5:07:32 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans
‘And yes, I do think you are using all this to avoid the dealing with the fact that your position is not scripturally sound. It is perfectly legitimate to identify anyone, no matter what their profession, as agents of Satan, if the facts support the charge. It is not slander if it is true.’
And here we have the biggest lie of all.
Cite the exact quote and the link where I stated what you claim I believe.
I’ll wait.
The rest rest of mylife.
Bc said quote and link Do Not Exist.
I am thankful for your analogy. It is helpful. Let’s play it from my perspective. A patient walks into a teaching hospital. The students all gather around to hear the diagnosis. One student pipes up and says “I think he has aids.” A second student says, “No, he is not gay. Where does the textbook show that straight patients could possibly have aids? You are only saying this to slander him.” A third student chimes in and says, “No, it is you who are wrong. On page 42 of the textbook, it clearly states, with examples, that patients who are not gay might get aids. Your rejection of that possibility is in error.” To which the misguided student responds, “ Now you are slandering this poor patient, because you are accusing him of having aids.” The third student responds, “No, brother, not at all. You asked for proof from the textbook that such a person could have aids, and I have shown that yes, they can, not that it is actually true for this poor patient. Why are you angry with me, brother?”
And from my perspective that is all that has happened here. You are in a public forum, and you challenged someone to provide proof that humans could be agents of Satan. You offered as counter-evidence Paul’s statement that we do not wrestle against flesh and blood. Any reasonable reader is going to infer you oppose the idea that humans, of any profession, can be minions of Satan. If you actually agree that humans can be minions of Satan, even those professing to be Christians, you are welcome to set the record straight. I will accept your clarification.
However, a lie is a different thing than a misunderstanding. I am being honest with you about what I think is happening here, but I can’t say I know that for certain, because I do not know your heart. Likewise, you do not know mine. I have seen obfuscation before, and what you are doing, avoiding the theological question like it was the plague, strikes me as obfuscation. But that’s just my interpretation. I could be wrong. I am looking for evidence that I am wrong. I want to be wrong about this.
But I have not lied. A lie is an intentional effort to deceive. To know if someone is lying, you have to know they are saying something they don’t believe. I testify to you that right or wrong, I truly believe what I have said to you. I will accept anything you can offer that shows me to be in error, but you cannot know my heart. It is something I think you also believe. If so, why are you making an exception in my case alone?
Peace,
SR
‘You are in a public forum, and you challenged someone to provide proof that humans could be agents of Satan.’
Not true. Not even close. The word in question was and is “minions.” Since that word is not used in any Scriptural passage I know of, it could just as easily be applied to the devil’s angels. That Is The Point. I was seeking clarification re this non-Biblical word, “minions.” You insist it means “humans.” That is a moot point, bc (A) you aren’t the one who introduced the word, and (B) the fact remains that it could designate angels OR spirits.
You are not the ultimate authority, much as you self appoint yourself to that role. If you can come up with a Greek word that the best translators transcribe as “minion,” and which they agree refers to humans, you would be right. Until then you are wholly misrepresenting my efforts to clarify the word “minion.” And there is no excuse for it, since I stated right in the forum that this was my goal: to gain insight into the word “minion,” in a Scriptural context.
Your personal opinion is just that. Stop trying to force me to accept opinion as fact.
Btw, your analogy is as misleading as practically everything else you post. AIDS is a known and defined medical term. It is precisely because “minion of Satan,” is NOT a known and defined Scriptural term that I inquired about it. Stop misleading. It helps No One.
I made a mistake in my last post. What you are seeking is not a word but a phrase. The phrase is, “minion of Satan.” You need to provide evidence that top notch translators use this phrase when rendering NT Greek to English, and agree it referrs to humans.
Can you cite a Scripture identifying Satan's minions as flesh and blood? The Apostle Paul put it this way:
Ephesians 6:12
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3379182/posts?page=1006#1006In this post, the way I honestly read it, and still read it, is that you are questioning whether Scripture identifies any flesh and blood beings as "Satan's minions." Notice, BTW, you have now given us TWO exact phrases to keep track of, "minions of Satan,' and "Satan's minions." Which one is the "authoritative" template we are supposed to search for?
Does the Bible ever refer to human beings as minions of Satan?And again, you are not asking here about exact matches of phrasing, and you are liberally rearranging the phrase and its parts to express your theological question. Does "his minions" count? No, it is very, very clear you had a theological question, not a strictly or entirely textual one. Or if you say these statements have no theological implications whatsoever, I will say that the words you set down DO pose a theological question, even if it got there entirely by accident. However, crediting you with intelligence and purpose, and assuming the words did not emerge from your keyboard as the product of pure chaos, I assumed you actually meant to ask the theological question framed by your words. Silly me.
How can a minion of Satan not be under judgment? The eternal fire is prepared for the devil and his angels...but not for his minions?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3379182/posts?page=1008#1008
SMH. I am stunned and amazed by one thing: your inability or pathological unwillingness to ask a question. If anything I said inclined you to presume that I disbelieve any part of the Bible,
WHY DID YOU NOT ASK??????????
It’s not only quick and easy, it’s both courteous and dispositive. You can make conjectures and assumptions all day long, and end up being totally, abjectly wrong in all of them.
But if you show another person the respect and decency to ASK, you end up with a definitive fact. For anyone genuinely in search of truth, this is the gold standard.
Had you asked if I believe Scripture when it speaks of human agents of Satan, it would have taken me ~twenty seconds to dispatch that issue once and for all. Maybe less, depending on how long it actually takes to type yes and hit send.
But of course you didn’t give me a chance to speak for myself. I explained this ppattern of yours earlier. If you allow a person the right to speak for themselves, you aren’t in control. You find that unacceptable.
Sad. Very sad.
Note: spare me another long harangue re how you interpreted what I said. If you were so convinced that you were right, you had nothing to lose by asking. Once it became an acknowledged fact [which wouldn’t have happened in a trillion years] you could have made your accusations based on my actual admission, not your subjective [and entirely mistaken] interpretation.
We could have agreed on that hours, indeed, days ago. All you had to do is ASK, as you SHOULD have done. I.e.: if you are going to convict someone of a crime they didn’t commit, it is at least incumbent on you to let them know the charge. Otherwise it’s just a nasty farce.
Imagine the criminal justice system run this way. People would be convicted without ever being told what they were charged with. As for being given a chance to speak to the charges—come on! You can’t address the charges if the party doing the charging is keeping that info to himself/making a big secret of it. After all, telling a person what they’re charged with is a dangerous practice. It might enable him/her to demonstrate their innocence.
All this re a sin I didn’t commit. As for claiming God was backing you up—no, He wasn’t. God knows I believe in His divinely inspired Word—every word, command and teaching, etc. in it—from Genesis to Revelation. So no, He didn’t concur with your false accusations. God is omniscient and infallible. You are not.
Btw, this never-ending exchange illustrates precisely why I said, truthfully, that I didn’t have the time or inclination to engage in tangents with you. You telegraph from miles away that you’re ready, willing and eager to argue pointlessly and incessantly. If you cared about the truth, you could have terminated this idiotic waste of time in under one minute. But you prefered to flush God’s time, of which we are only stewards, down the toilet wholesale. It is a tragic pathology.
Honestly, I am sorry you feel the way you do, but this whole conversation seems just flat out crazy to me. I was tracking through my posts with you and have to say I have done you no wrong, and in fact offered a number of times ample opportunity to clarify you position, but we repeatedly got sidetracked by nonsense accusations, which is not how I want to operate, because such silliness does not lead to insight, only injury. You raised a theological question in posts 1006, 1008, and I tried to give you an honest and doctrinally sound, Biblical answer, and the rest of it was straight jacket, rubber room nonsense.
BTW, I have no doubt you sincerely believe your version of the story. Just know I also sincerely believe what I have said. Can we just leave it at that? I think that would be the best thing for now. Are you OK with that?
Peace,
SR
You’re amazing. You accuse me of doing to you what you actually did to me [projection], throw in a few gratuitous insults, and then say, ‘now, can’t we just leave it at that?’
It’s pathological.
Btw, you don’t need anyone’s permission to leave it. You can leave it at any time.
Or do you have a compulsive need to have the last word?
No, I just want to end this in peace. We both profess to be Christian. To me that means we should be able to do better than what we’ve done so far. I don’t expect you to change your views, and of course I won’t be changing mine. But I don’t want us to part ways under a cloud of hostility. So yes, I am hanging on for that one reason, to end this in a spirit of reconciliation. Are you for at least a truce?
Peace,
SR
You have lied and lied and lied about me, and done so pyblicly. If you wanted reconciliation, you’d offer an apology. That is the Christian way; not to paper over wrongs, but to make wrongs right.
People with an overwhelming compulsion to control to not apologize, however, and I don’t expect you to be the exception.
I blessed you up thread, and continue to pray for you. I will, to the best of my ability, avoid future interactions with you. This is NOT bc I hold a grudge or desire anything but the best for you. It is for two reasons. One, the time I am allotted belongs to God, and I am obligated not to waste it. Two, if your tagline were honest, it would read, ‘Anything you say can and will be used against you.’ That is toxic.
But don’t confuse avoidance with ill wishes. Sometimes prayers—specifically prayers for blessings—are the best option, and you certainly have mine.
No, I have not lied. Not once. And I have done you no wrong, other than respond to a question of biblical theology you presented, and that is not a wrong to you, but an act of good will. However, it does not look to me like you are interested in reconciliation. I consider that a great tragedy. But it is what it is.
Peace and blessing to you and all of yours,
SR
‘it does not look to me like you are interested in reconciliation.’
That’s not what I said.
I’m not even trying to say what you said. I’m saying what it looks like to me, and that is what I’m seeing. That’s a great example of how we’ve gotten all tangled up. I tell you what I really think, and you react to it in a way that just seems totally bizarre to me. For the moment, let’s call this done. I’ll quit if you’ll quit, OK? On the count of three....
Peace,
SR
I’ll let it go at this. You couldn’t represent what I’ve read accurately if someone offered you a million dollars to do so.
Peace, bro.
strange stuff pingy
Why on earth did Cruz release this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkQz8vZ0jsU
His campaign is out of control.
They are either stupid or they have been infiltrated.
________________________________________
In fairness to Cruz, who I don’t particularly like and at this point will only reluctantly vote for in the general, should it reach that pass, the Cruz campaign did NOT release that product. They released the raw video and audio material that was then mixed by someone else, presumably not a friend. That Cruz would hand over such ammunition is one of the things that makes me question his judgment. I also think he is pushing his fragile wife pretty hard.
This is as much as you’ll get for now....
Are you doing any research into the mothers side?
You’ve done a lot on the papas side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.