Featured .needs help

You mean like he beat me in the last thread?

Where he, like you, refused to address anything?

Let's take a look at your participation in the thread, my little cheerleader. Gird your skirt about yourself....


Here's your first entry into the thread:

And here is the response:

Then, incredibly, you do respond with more than a video...

How about we start here, where Hell receives her first inhabitants we are told of:

Revelation 19:20

King James Version (KJV)

20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Or here, where those now abiding in Hades are cast into Hell:


Revelation 20:14

King James Version (KJV)

14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

How about we learn what Hell was created for:


Matthew 25:41

King James Version (KJV)

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:


Or here, where we learn that not even all demons are in Hell at this time:


Matthew 8:29

King James Version (KJV)

29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?


Of course, I would suggest that you study the Greek concerning the Eternal Punishment of the wicked, but it seems you have not bothered even to consult the English, so why bother?

Now, will you answer my question, seeing I have now twice answered yours?

Scripture please...[/QUOTE]

How can God love somebody somewhere they are not, lol.

Honestly, some people's kids.

Kind of skipping over the fact that your ignorance has been displayed in the public record, aren't you?

This is about as Theologically astute as you and the rest of your pseudo-Calvinist friends reiteration that the "Only the saved are saved!"

And just like your buddies...you are irrelevant to the OP. You refuse to address any Scripture, points, or questions posed to you.

How does that make you feel my little cheerleader friend, who apparently spends more time perusing you-tube than he does in study of God's Word.

Anyone who has seen even a smattering of my posting would not try to evade with such a moronic response.

Answer the question: is Scripture in error here? Is Paul in error?

Did he misspeak in saying that it is the will of God that all men be saved?

He doesn't say "Everyone is going to be saved, but that it is God's will that all are.

Kind of like another verse you guys wrest the meaning of to your own twisted and perverse meaning:


2 Peter 3:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.


In your minds...God is willing that some, and according to the commentary of one fellow...that he is willing that many perish.

You need to begin in Chapter One of Romans, then go to Chapter Two. Then reread. Or, watch it again on you-tube, whatever floats your boat.

I have already addressed this once in this thread, but here it is again:


Romans 1:18-22

King James Version (KJV)

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,


Remind you of anyone?


Then in Chapter Two:


Romans 2:14-15

King James Version (KJV)

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)


What that means is that prior to the revelation of the Mystery of the Gospel the same manifestation of the Love of God was given unto all men in the revelation of God they had at that time, where we see Gentiles in obedience to God and the revelation they had, which was an internal revelation as well as that provided in Creation.

So among those even those who lived in the Fiji Islands, Hawaii, Alaska, American Samoa, centuries ago, there would have been the same provision that we have today, the revelation of God. It was not the revelation of the Mystery of the Gospel, because that was not revealed in those days, as it was the Hidden Wisdom of God preached by the Apostles.

Now surprise me. Address the post, and try to do it without another smokescreen.

God bless.


I can see why you stick with videos.


God bless.

 

Instead of just jumping in with your clique, try actually reading the post.

You need to work on your humor...also.

You missed the point, and to be honest, I expect the same level of integrity from you as I am seeing in the rest of these guys.

If you can honestly say that you think Iconoclast is being honest, then I am not going to be surprised.

If you had read the post you would already know.

Why do you think the spelling was pointed out.

Do you really think spelling is that much of a matter to me?

Am I the one who pointed out your convent theology?

It isn't but the fact that someone can lie through his teeth and gain support from professing Christians...is reprehensible.

There is not way you can agree with the premise of the thread and maintain your integrity. No way at all.

The quoting is sloppy the theology worse, and you are not helping him by supporting him, just as you do not help anyone by not saying what is on your heart.

So go back and read the post and see if he quoted word for word as he claims.


God bless.

 

Why let up now. It is clear that you will not respond to my posts. Maybe you need to start another thread.

You have no intention of responding, do you?


God bless.

 

You keep making remarks like big boy and big man...tough guy, eh?

You have already run, and the more you post the more you prove that.

You refuse to answer anything, and to be honest, I am not going to cater to your foolishness.

That was the problem to begin with...you will not properly quote, you will not properly respond. All you have offered is an appeal to your buddies, and more of the same nonsense from the first thread, and you still won't admit that you missed the entire OP.

That has got to be embarrassing.

There is nothing surprising in this, except the fact you can't see your fear. Address the Scripture. All of it.


God bless.

 

It was answered, and that has already been addressed...again.


And again we see your false claim of word for word quoting:

Kind of missed that, didn't you?

Now we see the real intent of this thread...a second chance for Iconoclast. Well, you know what they say about repeating history.

Not part of post 17.

And my answer can be seen in that thread as well as this one now.

You were successful...it was misguided.

For the obvious fact that all sides can answer it.

The false premise does not exclude those of us that actually study from answering the question.

Well, some of them can't. Thanks for being the poster child.

Maybe, only slightly.

You certainly can't.

You can't even properly understand an OP.

But then again, neither did the OP.

What Biblical answer?

Could you actually show that to me?

No, I understood then, and still do, that which escapes you. Should have titled the OP "This is my thread and I don't want anybody messing it up by bringing the Bible into it!"

You did. But then I don't expect you to understand what a colon is (hint, not speaking about an internal organ.

Let me recreate the context for you (and another hint, I will use a colon right after the parentheses (let me know if you need to know what that is too)):

This should have read "pretty good," but pretty works too, it was a pretty good answer. But, as mentioned above, I take issue with his statement in the quote.

And again we see you slice and dice, because you have no interest in what others say.

You are once again shown to violate the premise of your own thread. That's a familiar theme for you guys, isn't it?

You said in this OP:

Now let's see the entire post this stems from:

And so far, it looks like you are doing exactly this, lol. Gosh, just didn't know who I was dealing with, did I.

I mean, every post you have done in this thread has been properly quoted, so no-one would mistake who said what. Word for word. You have shown how nothing I have said is on topic.

Your just a unique debater, Iconoclast, there is no denying that.


Continued...

 

Not sure why you would say this, I have never claimed inspiration in my writings.

And I have dealt with Rippon.

I'll be waiting for his responses in this thread, which I'll be waiting for along with yours.

I have backed all of this up with Scripture.

Scripture you claimed not to see.

Let me show you the Covenant:


Isaiah 42:5-7

King James Version (KJV)

5 Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

6 I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;

7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.

Can you show anything in Post #17 that warrants this statement?

In fact, anything I have ever said that warrants this statement?

What happened to word for word?

Just did. You could also try to actually read what you so sloppily quote. Quite a bit in there dealing with God's love for the world.

Again, you think you have aright to ask questions when you run away from all of mine?

Right.

Could you tell me the relevance of this rabbit trail?

Could you actually attempt to focus on the issues at hand?

I'm still waiting for all this Scripture you speak of that denies the Love of God for the world. Your theology states "For God love a few people, so He sent His only Begotten son, that whosoever was Elect might not perish, but have everlasting life."

You are a pseudo-Calvinist that denies the sovereignty of God, beginning first with His Word.

You have to change it to fit your corrupt version of theology.

Calvin would likely avoid letting people think you actually derived this garbage from anything he said. Paul is probably smacking Calvin in the back of the head right now.

Again?

How about...


John 16:7-9

King James Version (KJV)

7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;


Baby steps me boyo, baby steps.

When you can grasp the Comforter's Ministry to the lost, here called the world, as it is in many places, then you will see that what was in place was natural man, dead in trespasses and sins, alienated from God, and in need of enlightenment.

You do.

You caricaturize God's love and make it exclusive to only the Elect, rather than agreeing with Scripture.

Posted many verses you conveniently ignore...in both posts.

There is no debate.

For that to take place you actually have to address what your antagonist says.

You have not done that.

I don't see an either or scenario here:

1 Timothy 4:9-11

King James Version (KJV)

9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation.

10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

11 These things command and teach.


Now who are those who are not "...those that believe?"

It shows God's love extended to the lost before salvation. That the audience is the Church does not change that fact.

This is the answer, lol.

It is saying, "I see, you don't want anyone who opposes your false premise to participate. "I guess maybe the OP would rather not have what she wants to believe be challenged?

More like...basket case, lol.

God bless.

 

Yes, simple is an apt description.


God bless.

 

No, it was an appeal to your buddies because you can't stand on your own.

Actually, it takes time to address every poster in two threads. I don't have the luxury of your slothful habits in posting.

Because it matters to me that the public knows who said what.

You, on the other hand...can post hastily drafted nonsense that everyone here know does not keep the context of the discussion.

And I'll bet there is not one person here who will continue with your insistence that you are on topic, lol.

I hate to tell you this, Iconoclast, but friends like that are not really your friends. Enjoy it, though.

It's the truth.

Explain why you evaded the Scripture presented to you in the other thread.

And it's made clearer in every post.

Well, partially. You are still slicing and dicing.

Shown quite a few already. How many more before we are done?

Not an excuse, just the facts.

You know it, I know it, and anyone with a shred of integrity knows it.

That is correct, and I want to thank you for this thread because it illustrates what I said in the first post more clearly, and in a more defined way.

What Scripture? lol

A verse out of Romans 5 that isn't even relevant?

Not really, my sympathy for you grows, so I will likely curtail my tendency towards humor.

You see, when I deal with people so obviously hostile to Scripture, and especially when there is a gang of little rascals of them, it is heart breaking. TO think, so many posts to your account and you couldn't work your way through even a few simple verses. Must be shameful to have been exposed to Christian Theology for so long and still be so clueless. You really have my sincerest sympathy.

And before you protest, remember...you know you have avoided my points and questions as well a the Scripture provided to establish the basis of my views. But go talk to your buddies, they'll pat you on the back for a good job, and your cleverness. Doesn't really cover that knowledge your heart is speaking to you, does it?

Her spelling was not the focal point...your dishonesty was.

It was her spelling that told me right away that you had not quoted it.

Right. Just like your answering my points, and supplying this voluminous amount of Scripture I can't comprehend.

That is my hope, it is actually an interesting thread. Very revealing. I especially like it when your cheerleaders try to help you, lol.

Actually, I am answering every off-topic evasive post one both threads.

You know it, I know it...they know it.

It's actually your sad tale, my friend, not mine.

Ouch.

It just makes it worse when you have not shown me to have lied about anything.

The record will show, and any who read can judge. Not my concern. You are just one in a long list of antagonists openly hostile to God's Word.

You know it, I know it, and God knows it.

Well, maybe you really don't know it...

It's okay with me.

I had planned on this being my last day, but I guess I'll have to stick around and see this through.

Your running away didn't start today. As the posts in this thread will show your evasion began in the very first exchange.

I should have my head examined for catering to someone like you, but who knows, perhaps some good will come out of it.

I'm not the one giving out my travel plans.

Sitting in a truck, or bus, how cushy.

Me, I work in attics, under houses, and just sitting around all day seems pretty comfy.

If you want to hear some complaining, I can guarantee you I have more to offer than you do.

The truth will prevail, regardless of whether you learn anything from it or not.

Can't wait until you get to the posts dealing with the Scripture I have presented. So far, nothing.

Do you always borrow your antagonist's lines?

But then, your faith is definitely borrowed as well. can't find it in Scripture. lol

Yep, it is me being dishonest oh great one. All must bow before the debate skills of someone who can't even quote properly. Again I will ask, is that due to sloth? Or can you not figure it out, even with specific instruction?

Or, is it because if you actually properly quoted your antagonist...you'd be faced with having to address them.

No matter, I'm here for you, my friend.


God bless.

 

Thought I would also point out another dishonest quote:

Because it is not designated, the reader would assume you are quoting me, but there is nowhere I said this.

Then you say...

Right.


God bless.

 

Again your dishonesty, or sloth, is evident. You post this as Post #20, when in fact this...

Now class, has Iconoclast represented his antagonist with honesty here?

Does Iconoclast think he has earned the right to ask anyone questions?

I agree, he hasn't, so we will let Iconoclast keep his questions for after school.


God bless.

 

That is why I have offered verse after verse that does.


1 Timothy 4:9-11

King James Version (KJV)

9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation.

10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

11 These things command and teach.


Try that one on for size...again.

So those who did not receive the revelation of God were not benefitting from the love of God bestowed on the world?

Be careful, you are going to ruin your record and actually stray near the issue...



Romans 1:20-21

King James Version (KJV)

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.


How is it that they knew God...but were kept in the dark about His love? Do you have the atheist view that God did not express love to unbelievers in the Old Testament?

What motivated God to redeem Israel...who were not born again believers?

Who fell in the wilderness because they were unbelievers and without faith?

God redeemed them from bondage to Egypt just...because?


How about this man...


Mark 10:21

King James Version (KJV)

21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

...was he a born again believer, eternally indwelt by God?

Was he elect?

Let's take a look at some people with idols:


Exodus 32:3-5

King James Version (KJV)

3 And all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron.

4 And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.

5 And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, To morrow is a feast to the Lord.


How does that compare with...


Romans 1:21-24

King James Version (KJV)

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:


Yet God loved Israel. Deny it. Were they all Elect?


God bless.

 

You are not going to erase the clear statement that cannot be denied:


2 Peter 3:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

It only refers to the Elect?

So His promise was...?

His longsuffering was for...?

As shown in the other thread, lol, the longsuffering of God is so the Lost can come to salvation:


2 Peter 3:9-13

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Now who again is it that the Lord is showing patience to?

Well the Elect only, of course. They are the center of the universe...lol.

Oh now it is the savingly love of God.

Sorry, but that OP never changed, and it didn't change in this thread:

You constantly err insisting on a post-salvific context, completely missing the OPs questions.

In a manner of speaking, yes.

Though you do not see your error there either, lol. How many times has the question been pointed out?

You don't agree, because you see an Arminian value quality in the Elect that no man possesses. Because you are blind to the basics, and trying to understand Election, you fail miserably and fall into an Arminian error which has a quality that Scripture denies.

Guess it wouldn't do any good to post a verse speaking about all falling short either.

None righteous.

I am sure you can tell me how the Elect bypass the need for the Convicting Ministry of the Holy Spirit, expressly taught by Christ as being sent to convict unbelievers of sin. Something else repeatedly shown you...in both threads.


Continued...

 

Don't you worry about her, she has more backbone than you and you fellow cheerleaders combined.

And your asking for me to respond is hollow, my friend. You have quite a bit of Scripture you have left unanswered. Still working on it, so bear with me.

Just one of me, a number of you.


God bless.