Guest shiloh357 Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 My last address to you. YOU WROTE: The remainder of your remarks, besides being laced with vitriol and bitterness, would only force me to repeat what I have already addressed. I will not waste my time posting and reposting the same arguments over and over. I have presented a substantive enough of a response that the reader can review all past posts decide for themselves who has made the weightier arguments. Enquirer's response: (NEW) You fill your powts with incendiary rhetoric, and accuse me of bitterness and vitriol? I guess that is easier than addressing the issues. You use terms like "Any honest Christian" as though I am a dishonest Christian, but I let that pass. You hav einsulted me and continually questioned my character; then have the audacity to say I am full of vitriol? YOU are not worth the effort. You still have not addressed the first issue I raised, with any degree of success. Jesus, when with the Father, is ouk monos. The father when with Jesus is ouk monos. Jehovah God monos created the heavens and the earth. Ergo, Jesus was not with the father. You have failed from page one to the very last to address any issue raised by me, except to spew your hate language, and dodge issues. Goodby. Not hardly. I answered that point early on in the debate, and more than once. The fact that I did not convince you does not mean that it was not addressed. I demonstrated that you Secondly, I never called you a "dishonest Christian." What I said is that because you have an agenda-driven interpretation, you are unable to be honest about the passages that clearly refute your assertions. You are forced by your agenda, to redefine key terms within the Scriptures and change their meanings in order to impose your beliefs on the Bible. You are trying to mold the Bible around your "theology," instead of allowing the Bible to mean exactly what it says. I have never used any incendiary or hate language whatsoever, that is false charge being leveled simply to provide you with an convenient albeit, lame excuse to run away from a debate that you are losing, in an attempt to preserve your pride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted February 18, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.28 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted February 18, 2007 Grace to you, It would appear that this debate has run it's course. It is now outside of the parameters of the point counterpoint nature of the Soapbox. Peace, Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.59eed8b93aa1c92d8b306f10811981dc.jpg)
Recommended Posts