What is evident, Wayeast, in your speech is a hatred for the truth, calling me "satan" because I do believe is like the pot calling the kettle black.
You said this:
"Who's really afraid here, buddy? Those of us who've actually read and studied the Bible or you?"
I've read and reread the Bible through from cover to cover way more times than you have. And why in the world would you assume that I have not?
My motivation in reading it was not because I had an ax to grind and sought to discredit others with my knowledge as you enjoy doing with knowledge. But rather I choose to give people hope. Something you cannot do the way I can.
You wrote this:
"The Branch Davidians would LOVE you. They died martyrs' deaths, too. As did the Nike fans at Heaven's Gate, the inhabitants of Jonestown, the folks at Ruby Ridge, the 9/11 attackers, the Hamas suide bombers, the PLO, the and those gentle folks in Uganda a couple years ago. You're right: anyone willing to die for their beliefs HAS to be right."
"...anyone willing to die for their beliefs HAS to be right." When did I say this? Oh, I see that I didn't!
The groups of people you named weren't witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus Christ and didn't claim to be.
I don't agree with the Branch Davidians religious views, but they did not need Janet Reno to "kill them to save them". You were probably rooting for Janet Reno's nazi slaugher of these people because of their unorthodox views? Interesting.
The Heaven's Gate followers were not martyrs. They killed themselves.
As far as Ruby Ridge, the 3 million dollar settlement with Randy Weaver sometime in 1996 answers the question of who was vindicated in that case regardless if we agreed with his separatist views.
I don't consider "suicide bombers" or "homicide bombers" fit the true definition of a "martyr" though they are told they will be one. These people who murder are going straight to hell. No concubines, no heaven, just a lake of fire and endless torment.
I believe there was a reference from someone other that Josephus, but I admit I don't know the historians name, so, I suppose you "got me" there until I can prove otherwise.
You said this too:
"Once again we see the "heads I win, tails you're spiritually deceived" approach to faith."
What? This statement has made us ALL dumber. No one could understand what you are saying here.
Unless you are saying that I believe the exclusive claim of Jesus Christ to the exclusion of other religions? Sure I do today, but the coin flipping analogy doesn't work for you, but against you.
If we point out your flawed logic, you're right because we're "rebelling against God." If we agree with you, that's God's grace at work."
I never said you or anybody were in "rebellion", you brought this up. You haven't pointed out flaws in my logic. Rather you have sought to discredit me by linking me to already discredited groups of which I would NEVER have any sort of affiliation with whatsoever. Your approach is to blindly discredit anything I say because I believe. Isn't that whole approach undeniably flawed and bigoted?
You also said:
"Sorry, but this has nothing to do with God. It has to do with Evangelical Christianity. Evangelical Christians HAVE to believe that disagreement with them is disagreement with god, and the rest of us are wrong until we hand you a certificate, written in Jehovah's handwriting, saying He doesn't exist."
To seperate "God" from "Evangelical Christianity" is a lame attempt to muddy the waters. So don't be sorry.
The existence of God may not be "proveable" but it is "evident", and neither can you "prove" God does not exist.
I can't speak for all evangelical Christians. I can speak for myself though. It is possible that by disagreeing with me you may be disagreeing with God. But I am not on some ego trip nor am I desiring to exercise authority over people here just because it may be that I represent God every now and then. I am simply sharing my faith with those who will hear it. I am not ashamed of Jesus Christ. But I recognize that many people here are weary of the feuding that comes over religious discussions and so I generally avoid talking Jesus here the majority of the time. Your response to my post warranted a response from me. Otherwise I would have posted about something else instead.
The fact that you are worked up about my post to the point of calling me "satan" is an evidence that you have no peace in your soul and that you are indeed hellbound, and willing to draw people into your own cowardice through means of deliberate deception. I wouldn't want to be someone who does that.
My light-hearted quip about "please don't kill me. thank you." was humor. But seriously, murdering me with speech is no different than killing a man according to God of the Bible whom you evidently hate.
It's one thing to disagree and have different views on subjects. It's quite another to speak evil of me personally. Though I am a man who is flawed and errant as all men are, I am a man whom God, the Lord Jesus Christ, does speak through at times. And at the times that He does, I am representing Him. To be hateful, even in blindness, is not the right thing to do at these times. I know you don't believe, but that doesn't matter because I've now reluctantly told you that you could be fighting against God when you fight against me.
If some people here do want to consider Jesus, what is that to you? It is pointless to discourage the Jesus freakies here, and you never know when you might need one these days. So, learning to love the Jesus freaky people is the lesson of the day, neighbor. Can you say "freaky"? I knew you could.
