Mean TOL members

[!!!!First]

1 Way

You worship the devil, you are in hell, cursed to you and your family to the 11th, no to the 12th generation! - - !!!First:

I forgive you 1Way - and your nonsense is as I said - evident to all who can still think.

Polly - you are not a truth smacker - you are an adrenalin adicted bible in one hand, club in the other monster who uses the accounts of the Just Wrath of God to get your addiction for power and self righteoesw indignation satisfied. :jeffrson: In your past life you were probably a satinist, and in this life - if you would of been brought up in the middle east - your nature would of guided you to become a terrorist. Possibly some of the good things about the Nature of God will rub off on you - and in your next life, possibly you might even be a human being - capable of rational thought.

!!!!First

 

[OMEGA]

1 ¶ Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
2 Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

Matthew 18:15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
==============================================

1Way said to Omega -

1. Why did you not say this earlier when more people were currently being loving by correcting false ideas?

1. It is how You are Corrected and how you Correct that Counts.

"Condemn not and you will not be Condemned "

Why all this calling of NAMES and Curses and Hell and Damnation.

Even the Angel who disputed with the Devil over the body of Moses

said " The Lord Rebuke You "

2. Pr 9:8 Do not correct a scoffer, lest he hate you; Rebuke a wise man, and he will love you.

2. Hosea 14:9 Who is wise, and he shall understand these things? prudent, and he shall know them? for the ways of the LORD are right, and the just shall walk in them: but the transgressors shall fall therein.

Let the Scoffers Scoff and do not throw your pearls of Wisdom before them.

3. Pr 27:5 Open rebuke is better Than love carefully concealed.

3. Open Rebuke for whom and when and where it does not Offend.

Are they not for a close Friend than a Stranger.

PROV 27: 6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend;

4. Re 3:19 "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten.

Therefore be zealous and repent.

4. You are Quoting God. Are you putting yourself in HIS place ?

5. Or did you have this entire thread about caring enough to oppose evil (i.e. not nicer than God)?

To not oppose evil makes what may start out as “agape” = godly love, and turns into ungodly sinful hypocrisy through ungodliness.

5. I say , Work out your OWN Salvation with Fear and Trembling.

God says Let us Reason Together.

And do not offend one of these Little ones .

2 Corinthians 10:1 Now I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who in presence am base among you, but being absent am bold toward you:

Ephesians 5:2 And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.

Ephesians 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;

Colossians 2:2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;

Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

 

[1Way]

!!!!First – So I take it that you have no reasonable rational response to my defense of the closed canon. So it’s may a thousand curses curse you with a thousand bad curses bit.

My folly you say, I’m a Satanist you say. I mocked you for being vile and promoting so much ungodly ill will and so somehow in that, you find fault in me. Here is the source of the vile ill will, you said

Your folly is evident to anyone and everyone who has a brain... it is unfortunate that you do not realize the insanity of what you do... the insanity of your doctrines that arise from the Bible Only - you and everyone like you are an abomination to the Lord, His teachings and His Ministry. You paint the Father as a diabolical monster - and you do so from a closed canon - most of what you believe is never directly addressed in the Christian Scripture directly - they are just out of context verses that are causing a severe psychological neurosis in your psyche - you are in hell already – you confuse your current worship of the devil as God for Spiritually - your intelligence has been removed from you, and you think your lack of reasonableness, sensibleness, in deducing doctrine is commanded by God.

When your church burns – it will be the hand of God that destroys it.

Now, who is it who has a “severe psychological neurosis” and is a living hellhound? Your daddy Osama would be proud.

Poly – Look at it on the bright side, we are seen as likeminded in the faith, and we are! Notice how !!!!First responded to my reasonable honest biblical arguments (my post #867 and #841) against the open canon issue, and then go figure :freak: that he resorted to hate spewing terrorist personal attacks. And says I’m ,,, irrational.

 

[1Way]

Omega - Oh, I see, it's, the rebuked (wise) man will love you only works if he is not offended, if he is offended, then that invalidates the rebuke, and only rebuke friends (wow, very insightful and creative) and only in a friendly non-offensive manner (turns rebuke into a mild fun loving event! Excellent), after all, offending is just too ,,, offensive.

Wonderful, sounds great, now if you will just submit that, to the editorial staff of the bible, these corrections should help everyone! We’ll call it the kinder softer more friendly Bible for sinners who don’t want to be offended. Too long, hmmm, how about the Bible light, friendship and kindness first for offenders. Hmmm, a bit too wordy. How about, “the Bible revised”, “Nicer than God”! That’s it, even sounds catchy.

 

[Poly]

Originally posted by 1Way

Wonderful, sounds great, now if you will just submit that, to the editorial staff of the bible, these corrections should help everyone! We’ll call it the kinder softer more friendly Bible for sinners who don’t want to be offended. Too long, hmmm, how about the Bible light, friendship and kindness first for offenders. Hmmm, a bit too wordy. How about, “the Bible revised”, “Nicer than God”! That’s it, even sounds catchy.

How about:
"God-- The anger management years"
or maybe

"Cliff notes to the bible"
:chuckle:

 

[!!!!First]

1Way

When will you find your own material - I say you paint a portrait of the God the Father as a diabolical monster - and therefor are more like a devil worshiper - your respond I am a devil worshiper for being nicer than God

I say Poly has the same debase energy feed/ literalist interpretations that a terrorist would hold - you say Osama is my father...

I say this.... you say whatever I say back to me. - as long as it is bad.

Again you and Poly do not preach what is in the Bible - you teach how to misinterpret the Bible, and you are both receiving the due commences for your behavior. Blind, Deaf and Dumb.

No doubt, now - your next post will be that I am blind deaf and dumb - as far as your curse to the eleventh or twelfth generation the devil has always tried to do that to everyone - so you are still a servant of the devil I suppose - do you have an example of a Christian who curses the way you do - no - there is no-one of Saintly nature that does what you do ever recorded in Scripture.

I accused of worshiping the devil, and thus you act like one... I guess I am partially to blame, - I was only trying to point out that you paint a portrait of the Father who is more like the devil, than anyone whom would be called Daddy (Abba) by the Lord.

!!!!First

 

[smaller]

I would like to hear 1way's imaginative "theory" on how God Himself bore CHILDREN OF THE DEVIL.

It is sure to be wildly entertaining AND he will excuse himself from this alien childhood of course.

Luke 3:38
-Adam, which was the son of God.

 

[Poly]

Originally posted by !!!!First

Again you and Poly do not preach what is in the Bible - you teach how to misinterpret the Bible, and you are both receiving the due commences for your behavior. Blind, Deaf and Dumb.

Please, !!!!First, by all means, show me how I misinterpreted the bible.

Psalm 5:6-7
The boastful shall not stand in Your sight;
You hate all workers of iniquity.
6You shall destroy those who speak falsehood;
The LORD abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man.

I think this verse says that the Lord hates all workers of iniquity and abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man. (And I sure had to do a lot of word twisting to get to this conclusion huh?)

So how do I misinterpret this?

 

[beanieboy]

Originally posted by 1Way
Omega - Why did you not say this earlier when more people were currently being loving by correcting false ideas?

• Pr 9:8 Do not correct a scoffer, lest he hate you; Rebuke a wise man, and he will love you.

• 
  
  Being corrected and accepting criticism, or at the very least, considering it, is what a wise man would do. A fool would simply get angry and resentful.
  
  What I don't understand is that on the one hand, people like to point out how much the bible says to rebuke others. But when someone suggests that the manner that they are rebuking is doing more damage than good, they get angry and resentful.
  
  Can you explain how one should rebuke, but are angered and resentful when you are rebuked for the manner in which you do it?
  
  Certainly, a loving parent will correct his child.
  But if you saw a neighbor yell at his son, "Get out the street, you stupid moron! What an idiot you are!", wouldn't the neighbor need a rebuke himself?
  
  A foolish father would attack you and hate you and say how dare you judge him if you think judging others is wrong, and say, "What do you want me to do, let my child get hit by a car," as if the only option was to belittle the child. It's not honest.
  
  A wise father would consider that perhaps what you are saying holds some weight, and reflect on the way he punishes his child, and the efects it has on the child.
  
  So, can you explain why you are always refusing rebuke, if you call for it so often? Or do you only like to offer rebuke to others, but not receive it?

 

[1Way]

BB – A teaching in scripture is presumed to given in a way that does not assume any other problems. It’s like saying, if you did this teaching perfectly this is how it is supposed to happen. Not all retorts are godly righteous rebukes, plane and simple. Upon occasion, and ideally, I not only respond well to rebukes, I do so upon reasonable suggestion, rebuke need not always apply. I recently apologized and/or stood corrected in one thread like 2 or 3 times after being shown that I was to some extent mistaken. I admit that at first I did not understand the error I was engaged in, but once the correction became clearly delivered, I gladly and thankfully accepted it. So I find your comment to the opposite to be opposite of the truth. Slandering people is wrong to do.

In any given moral situation, there are several factors at play. Truth and honesty, righteousness and error, understanding and ignorance. Here’s a basic run down on how I evaluate such matters.

• Is the claim true or not? If it’s false, all the other matters of the rebuke may be ok, except it is not accurate to the situation at hand, so the rebuke is invalid.
  
  Is the claim righteous? If it is not based upon righteousness, then even if the rest is ok, the rebuke is unrighteous and is therefore invalid.
  
  Is the offendee ignorant or understanding? If the person is ignorant, then to that extent imparting understanding is called for. To the extent that they understand and are responsible, then the rebuke should stick.

Typically the more clear these elements are, the more clear the response should be. After you work with these issues long enough, it becomes second nature to inquire using appropriate methods in order to clarify whatever remain unclear. Fortunately the basics of good and evil are not that hard to understand.

Do I take it that you understand and accept my point that the rebuke’s validity does not depend upon whether or not it was delivered in a friendly way or not? You did not challenge my point, you just challenged me. If so, I appreciate your understanding, but would like to know instead of assume.

So that is a basic rundown of how to view really any moral situation, and I think applies well to rebuking as well. I hope this helps, although, I do wish you were more responsive to my responses directed to you, maybe they were in another thread, but I think you are overlooking my latest to you.

 

[beanieboy]

Originally posted by 1Way
Do I take it that you understand and accept my point that the rebuke’s validity does not depend upon whether or not it was delivered in a friendly way or not? You did not challenge my point, you just challenged me. If so, I appreciate your understanding, but would like to know instead of assume.

I believe I did.
If a neighbor said to his kid, "Get the %&^* out of the street, you stupid moron! What an idiot you are! Do you want to be killed?" I would question his parenting skills.

He prevents the child from getting hit by a car, but belittles the child and erodes his self esteem.

It's questionable parenting skills, and no, I don't think it's justified just because it prevent the child from getting hit.
It also teaches the kid that to get people to do what you want, you can be as verbally abrasive as you want to be, and justify it.

 

[1Way]

BB – You believe you did ,,, what? You are mixing up several things. First, I asked about my previous post, not this one, but you respond with issues from this post. The main point of my previous post (which was not to you), was that the rebuke need not be non-offensively delivered. I am still asking if you agree with that point or not since you have not addressed it yet.

As to your followup, you said

I believe I did.
If a neighbor said to his kid, "Get the %&^* out of the street, you stupid moron! What an idiot you are! Do you want to be killed?" I would question his parenting skills.

You are not understanding or listening or both. The rebuke teachings in the bible I mentioned are stated granting no problems apply. So just because you apply a problem to it, does not mean your problem applies, it does not. Concerning the rebuke, God is effectively saying, it’s a valid rebuke. Concerning your rebuke, it is very unclear the validity of the so called rebuke, it seems likely that the parent is out of control, so there simply is no correlation.

You are not clarifying several issues, like if the kid is responsible for knowing better or not. Was the child just previously warned not to play there? You are not clarifying the nature of the cursing given to the kid, although I would say that it sounds like the parent is acting out of control and should be far more effective by whipping the bottom rather than giving a scolding.

Again, I quoted scripture for my view that you seem to be arguing against. I just ask you to remember that God is not teaching that the rebuke is wrong, or inappropriate, or not truthful and that the recipient is not ignorant and understands the correction. That being the case, rebuke even if it may be viewed as offensive, but where I come from, when love and righteousness is gladly exchanged between two people, such a thing is not an offense, the only thing in opposition is the wrong that was set right, and all is well.

 

[1Way]

!!!!First – You keep straying further and further away from the original point we started out on, which was your attack against the exclusivity of the closed cannon of Christianity. But you said

I guess I am partially to blame, - I was only trying to point out that you paint a portrait of the Father who is more like the devil, than anyone whom would be called Daddy (Abba) by the Lord.

You are to blame. I gave you a reasonable response and you have avoided my bible based arguments in favor of trash talking. I mock you for it, and you find fault in me for sounding like you.

I promoted the truth and how it is exclusive to all other claims, including your own false claims against the God of the bible. If you would stop spewing so much hatred and slander, you might see things in a bit more reasonable way. My God would love and accept you in an instant if you would sincerely humble yourself and trust in Him for your life. I have not presented one thing to deny God’s awesome love and willingness to forgive and that all should be saved. If you think that I have, I don’t know why.

So is the closed cannon fine with you now? Since I served to correct so many allegations against it?

 

[beanieboy]

Originally posted by 1Way
Do I take it that you understand and accept my point that the rebuke’s validity does not depend upon whether or not it was delivered in a friendly way or not?

When one reaches to take out the speck in another's eye, but has a beam remaining in his own, he usually will poke out the other's eye, doing more damage than if he had done nothing.

Should the speck be removed? Yes.
Should the beam be removed from your own eye first? Yes.
Should one try to take the speck out of another's eye before removing the beam from their own first? No.

Is the rebuke still valid?

I don't know.

Let me give you a scenario.

Kelly knows that Mary is sleeping around.

When she walks by her in the hall, she says, "Slut!"
She gossips about her in the lunch room.
She thinks she is better than Mary.
When Mary says, "I need some aspirin. Do you know of a store that is open all night?" Kelly says, "Like your legs?"

Then Kelly tells Mary that what she is doing is wrong.

Is it valid?
Yes, technically.
But I would say the one with the bigger problem is Kelly.
Once Kelly addressed her problem, she could better help Mary.
But that's the problem - she doesn't want to help Mary, she wants to hurt Mary, and justify it. She wants to feel superior to Mary, and justify it.

Mary is doing nothing to harm Kelly.

 

[!!!!First]

Psalm 5:6-7
Poly

The boastful shall not stand in Your sight;
You hate all workers of iniquity.
6You shall destroy those who speak falsehood;
The LORD abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man.

I think this verse says that the Lord hates all workers of iniquity and abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man. (And I sure had to do a lot of word twisting to get to this conclusion huh?)

So how do I misinterpret this?

Thank you for asking - From what I have read of your posts anyone who is not in some way following the same apologetics - showing absolutely no politeness, in their evangelism to sinners - treating everyone who is not like you, or who does not have the same apologetics - methods of evangelism as you - you come across as someone who is thinking they have the right to execute God's Wrath on anyone who is not exacltly like you.

For example - yes God does say in the time, culture etc of the Old Testiment that homosexuals should be killed - but God also includes a number of other crimes worthy of death - which a number of fundamental TV evangelists have commited - never once did I ever see you condemn someone or show the same attitude towards those people - the people of the same apologetics - as you do to people of a different sexual orientation than you.

You seem to paint all people who do not hold the same apologetics as you with the same brush - you show no respect to anyone, except those of the same energy feed as you.

You know all the verses by heart of the Wrath of God - but how many verses do you know of God sparing His Wrath? - and God allowing us His Mercy to repent? - You call people to a blood lust god - a god of your own image - a god that is molded after Poly - not Christ.

Sorry for the same tone that you show towards others - I am human - I get angry... but it is difficult to be polite to someone who shows so much of themselves in the god which they claim to be real. Your god is you, and I feel sorry for you.

If you could see a person - a sinner, crying at Jesus feet - washing His feet with her tears - then somehow claim that this person in the presence of the Lord - would be so moved by a God of the Hell Fire eternal searing flesh burning all sinners except those who agree with the nature of God acording to Poly -

Think about it please.

!!!!First

 

[!!!!First]

1Way

I gave you a reasonable response and you have avoided my bible based arguments

Try again if you like - I found nothing reasonable on how you based what you call a bible based argument to me - it was so far from any form of coherent thought - I could not respond to it - try again if you like - but I could not see anything logical in what you claim is a bible based argument.

!!!!First

 

[1Way]

BB – You quoted me saying

Do I take it that you understand and accept my point that the rebuke’s validity does not depend upon whether or not it was delivered in a friendly way or not?

To which you did not directly answer. Maybe you do not now the answer, I am willing to accept even that much. But please respond according to this question without altering the issue with other issues. (Which was at the foundation of my last point to you, take each teaching separately for what it teaches without interjecting problems into it.)


!!!!First – I don’t like trying again, I am satisfied with my responses refuting your false charges. You try again if you like.

 

[On Fire]

Originally posted by beanieboy

When one reaches to take out the speck in another's eye, but has a beam remaining in his own, he usually will poke out the other's eye, doing more damage than if he had done nothing.

Should the speck be removed? Yes.
Should the beam be removed from your own eye first? Yes.
Should one try to take the speck out of another's eye before removing the beam from their own first? No.

Is the rebuke still valid?

I don't know.

Let me give you a scenario.

Kelly knows that Mary is sleeping around.

When she walks by her in the hall, she says, "Slut!"
She gossips about her in the lunch room.
She thinks she is better than Mary.
When Mary says, "I need some aspirin. Do you know of a store that is open all night?" Kelly says, "Like your legs?"

Then Kelly tells Mary that what she is doing is wrong.

Is it valid?
Yes, technically.
But I would say the one with the bigger problem is Kelly.
Once Kelly addressed her problem, she could better help Mary.
But that's the problem - she doesn't want to help Mary, she wants to hurt Mary, and justify it. She wants to feel superior to Mary, and justify it.

Mary is doing nothing to harm Kelly.

The World According to Beanieboy:

Live and let live. To each his own. Do whatever you want as long as it doesn't hurt your neighbor. Don't correct your neighbor until your life is perfect. Think about trees.

 

[beanieboy]

Originally posted by 1Way

BB – You quoted me saying To which you did not directly answer. Maybe you do not now the answer, I am willing to accept even that much. But please respond according to this question without altering the issue with other issues. (Which was at the foundation of my last point to you, take each teaching separately for what it teaches without interjecting problems into it.)

This is like the Pharisees trapping Jesus and saying, "the law says that we stone her," and Jesus says, "He who is without sin can cast the first stone," and the Pharisees replying, "You didn't answer the question!"

I said, YES, technically it is valid.
But if you are rebuking to harm someone, YOU should look at yourself first, because you have a bigger problem.

Which is bigger, a speck, or a beam?

If you have a beam in your eye (no love), you will probably poke someone's eye out with your "loving rebuke."

What good is it if you remove the speck, and take out the person's eye?

What about that can't you understand???

I have given you an answer. It isn't the black and white "yes/no" thing you want, nor did Jesus answer in that manner.
I gave you a real life example.
I have quoted your Bible.

What more are you looking for?

 

[On Fire]

Originally posted by beanieboy
What more are you looking for?

For you to acknowledge that we will NEVER be without specks or beams.