"It's Superstitious"

Mortal wrote:

So you are admittingly trying to cause confusion?

Please don't get so defensive mortal. Questions allow you to demonstrate the validity of your beliefs ( and mine ). And they help pull out the reasons why we believe what we believe.

sentient 6 wrote:

Mortal wrote:

So you are admittingly trying to cause confusion?

Please don't get so defensive mortal. Questions allow you to demonstrate the validity of your beliefs ( and mine ).

I'm not getting "so defensive". It's a legitimate question.

You stated that whether or not I answer your questions was not "as important" because you were asking the questions for other reasons.

And the reason you gave was to cause others to think.

Well....if you really want others to think...

...wouldn't my answers be just as important as your questions?

Why are they "not as important"?

How is that being fair to me and to the other people that you are trying to make think?

If my answers are, as you say, "not as important" as your questions....Then that sounds like trying to stir up trouble and cause confusion.

Ah, someone else get's to ride Mortal's "merry-go-round!"

Mortal wrote:

If my answers are, as you say, "not as important" as your questions....Then that sounds like trying to stir up trouble and cause confusion.

I think you are taking this all wrong. I want you to answer because thats how dialog takes place. But even if you don't, you still will reflect on it whether you like it or not. Thats what I do. And probably  might inspire you to study some more just as it does me.

There is no difference between fallen angels/demons, one in the same, just a variance in nomenclature. You won't find this idea in Church history, in fact I challenge anyone to provide it's origin...now, if you hold to the spurious "serpent seed" doctrine, well, there may be a hint of where this idea came from...

Candlemass wrote:Ah, someone else get's to ride Mortal's "merry-go-round!"

My merry-go-round?

If it were my merry-go-round, I'd have kicked some folks off before they even had a chance to ride.

Candlemass wrote:There is no difference between fallen angels/demons, one in the same, just a variance in nomenclature. You won't find this idea in Church history, in fact I challenge anyone to provide it's origin...now, if you hold to the spurious "serpent seed" doctrine, well, there may be a hint of where this idea came from...

So there is no difference between an angel and a spirit?

But there is a difference between God, Christ and the Holy spirit? They are three separate persons?

Umm....ok(?)

Here are some "answers!"
http://www.sherryshriner.com/fallen_angels.htm

Mortal wrote:

So there is no difference between an angel and a spirit?

You still need to demonstrate that there is...if thats what your keep asserting.

( and boy, I would love to to take a bite out of that trinity comment..but then we would really be traveling down forbidden paths )

Candlemass wrote:Here are some "answers!"
http://www.sherryshriner.com/fallen_angels.htm

Ok, so the belief says that " demons " are the spirits of the dead nephilim ?

Just another attempt to make a caricature out of something he doesn't know about. Pay no mind to him.

Mortal wrote:Just another attempt to make a caricature out of something he doesn't know about. Pay no mind to him.

I am honestly trying to understand what the belief is based on. When you get time Mortal, lay it out if you want. Now, if its something you haven't studied, then just say so and its all good.

Mortal wrote:Just another attempt to make a caricature out of something he doesn't know about. Pay no mind to him.

And you do? You've yet to lay out even a synopsis of your anecdotal statements...

Candlemass wrote:

...great song..

Candlemass wrote:

Mortal wrote:Just another attempt to make a caricature out of something he doesn't know about. Pay no mind to him.

And you do? You've yet to lay out even a synopsis of your anecdotal statements...

I don't really owe you diddly squat...Now do I?

I answer questions because I enjoy discussion. I'll try to answer any question that is thrown at me. But I can't have a personal discussion with someone who only knows how to post links to articles as his way of laying out his views.Nor can I answer a whole barrage of questions at once.

As if "links" are somehow void of credibility.

You don't owe me anything, but you can't accuse others of not knowing what they're talking about when you yourself have proven to know next to nothing. I have also laid out my beliefs apart from links/articles, but backed up by links/articles that are derived from orthodox church history.

Mortal wrote:

Nor can I answer a whole barrage of questions at once.

..whenever you get time.....no worries.

Who wants to bet this thread will be locked in the next 12 hours?

Oh, wait... some folks think gambling is a sin, don't they?

Nevermind. Carry on.

Candlemass wrote:As if "links" are somehow void of credibility. 

Oh yeah...because everything on the interwebz is true.

How silly of me...I forgot about that.

Candlemass wrote:You don't owe me anything, but you can't accuse others of not knowing what they're talking about when you yourself have proven to know next to nothing.

When you are questioned about certain content, you say things like "If you don't understand, nothing I say will dissuade you."

You haven't shown me that you DO know what you are talking about.

So you can't really blame me for that.

Candlemass wrote:I have also laid out my beliefs apart from links/articles

Oh yeah...that's right...

I recall you did post some video.

Well this thread's been going nowhere good for long enough...

Gandalf the White wrote:Who wants to bet this thread will be locked in the next 12 hours?

 13 hours and 6 minutes 

  Glad to know we aren't THAT predictable...