..and the apostasy is complete.

sentient 6 wrote:..and no Kerrick, this theological discussion is only a figment of your imagination. This is not real. Maybe a dream, even.

Yeah this thread has been long due for a closure but just when it starts to get ugly... someone responds with a respectful post so I've been letting it be.

d@v!d wrote:

Mortal wrote:Let me explain a few things that I notice here in this video that Candlemass posted.

The first question that was asked to Bell: "Do you believe that this is an area where actually God's ahead of the church? That affirming same sex partnerships is actually a God thing? And that we will eventually all get to see that in the course of time?"

Ok....First thing I notice here is how this guy uses the term "same sex partnerships", but yet is apparently referring to "gay marriage".

If he is asking about gay marriage, why not just say "gay marriage"??

Why confuse the matter by using the politically correct term "same sex partnership"?

I think Bell may have even noticed this because it seems as if he has a confused look on his face as if to say "What exactly do you mean by "same sex partnership?".

If I were in Bell's place, and had to answer that dude's question, I'd point out that there is nothing wrong with same sex partnerships. As a matter of fact, they are called friendships.

I would have then asked those two dudes about their own "same sex partnership". And if "same sex partnerships" are so wrong and should be frowned upon, then why do they have a partnership.

Two males partnering together to form a radio program = SAME SEX PARTNERSHIP

I'm sure the conversation would have come back to "gay sex...gay sex...gay sex", though.

Bell tried to answer the question, and the conversation did turn to gay sex.

I think you might be reading too much into the vernacular used. It could be a British English thing too. Really, one has to be dumb not to understand those prases don't mean the same thing. Bell isn't dumb. He is rather articulate.

Don't you think it would be dumb not to define your terms when asking such a serious question? When you are looking for a specific answer, it would be wise to be clear in your terms and not use terms that are so subjective.

Bell may be articulate, but he's not a mind reader.

Mortal wrote:It seems that you do not even know the difference between confused, fallen, and apostate.

Forgive me my imprecision in using the terms. I do know the differences. Cut me some slack this is the internet you know.

It seems you don't even understand that repentance is still available in this situation.

You might think that because of my vehemency, but I do believe in the possibility of repentance. I'm just gambling on it's lack of probability.

Do you enjoy witch hunts? Do they make you feel superior and more Holy than others?

I take offense that you would even ask me such questions. For the sake of clarity I'll address them anyhow.
No, I don't enjoy them as I won't participate in them. I don't need to put others down to lift myself up.

The real question you needed to ask and which I'll answer is: ¿Por qué está harto Don Ramon? (Why is Don Ramon ticked off?)

I have a vehemency against false gospel teachers as I see them as a type of soul murderer. The most important message to learn in life is the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Anyone who deludes its message makes the way that much more difficult to find. They lead people to damnation. That's what bugs me so. I'm not so upset about up and up lies like athiesm, or hinduism, and such, but I'm jealous for the gospel. I hate people who twist it for filthy lucre.

Kerrick wrote:

sentient 6 wrote:..and no Kerrick, this theological discussion is only a figment of your imagination. This is not real. Maybe a dream, even.

Yeah this thread has been long due for a closure but just when it starts to get ugly... someone responds with a respectful post so I've been letting it be.

I think we are all behaving well even while disagreeing.

As for me, I'm feeling super fine so far.

Mortal wrote:Don't you think it would be dumb not to define your terms when asking such a serious question?

Yes, it's important to define your terms.

When you are looking for a specific answer, it would be wise to be clear in your terms and not use terms that are so subjective.

True.

Bell may be articulate, but he's not a mind reader.

I didn't see Bell anywhere at a loss as to understanding what the other guys where asking.

d@v!d wrote:

Kerrick wrote:

sentient 6 wrote:People will ultimately listen to the bible teaches that support what they want to believe, but surely one side is built on a better foundation than the other. Isn't it a bit self serving for people who claim Christ, but also claim to be gay, to go through and stripe the bible of its condemnation of gay behavior ? Where does it end ? People can twist and distort anything that they find in the bible that they disagree with. And the root cause is because people want the bible to conform to their desires, instead of vive versa.

Yup...  My church is in the final stages of seceding from the denomination it was originally founded in because of exactly this.  Our parent denomination has denied the Bible's complete holy inspiration and has thus chosen to pick and choose what is "truth" and what isn't, homosexuality being just one of the examples.  We are conforming God's Word to our culture, not the other way around... 

I'm glad for your sanity.

d@v!d wrote:You might think that because of my vehemency, but I do believe in the possibility of repentance. I'm just gambling on it's lack of probability.

No disrespect intended here, but I think your vehemency is misplaced. In other words, you seem mad for all the wrong reasons. And that is why I wonder about your views on repentance.

Calling someone an "apostate piece of trash" and saying that they are a "goner" doesn't show me that you do consider repentance at all. As a matter of fact, to me, it seems tantamount to calling them a moros.

Wondering what a moros is?

Moros is the Greek word for "fool" as Christ used in Matthew 5:22 when He said "whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."

d@v!d wrote:I take offense that you would even ask me such questions.

I wouldn't ask unless I felt there was good reason to ask.

If you are offended, I hope it moves you to consider all that I just said here in this post.

Mortal wrote:Calling someone an "apostate piece of trash" and saying that they are a "goner" doesn't show me that you do consider repentance at all. As a matter of fact, to me, it seems tantamount to calling them a moros.

Well, I said I did. So you are just going to have to take my word for it. I think that I've adequately explained the motivation for the things I say.

Mortal wrote:No disrespect intended here, but I think your vehemency is misplaced. In other words, you seem mad for all the wrong reasons. And that is why I wonder about your views on repentance.

Actually, I wonder just the opposite for you. You seem so keen to save Bell's reputation from his 'interrogators' and take no offense at the heresy he speaks, you might wonder who's side you're on.

d@v!d wrote:

Mortal wrote:Calling someone an "apostate piece of trash" and saying that they are a "goner" doesn't show me that you do consider repentance at all. As a matter of fact, to me, it seems tantamount to calling them a moros.

Well, I said I did. So you are just going to have to take my word for it. I think that I've adequately explained the motivation for the things I say.

Actions speak louder than words. That's why I don't always take people's word.

And really?

Christ warns us NOT to call anyone a moros, but yet you can somehow adequately explain why it's ok for you to do so??

Again, there's just too much out of place in what you are saying.

d@v!d wrote:Actually, I wonder just the opposite for you. You seem so keen to save Bell's reputation from his 'interrogators' and take no offense at the heresy he speaks, you might wonder who's side you're on.

Do you think that because I am not willing to go along with you calling him names?

No, I'm not trying to save Bell or his reputation. I don't even know all that much about Bell, so why would I try to save his reputation like you are trying to claim?

All I know is that the interview took less than 1 minute before it went downhill.

Is it too much to ask that the dude at least address Bell's answer to the first question before he starts rambling on about gay sex?

If he meant gay sex, then he should have said "gay sex" in his question.

In response to Bell's answer to the first question, the dude says "It is the grounding for that statement that I find interesting." in an attempt to justify him flipping script and changing the subject to gay sex.

But Bell didn't say anything about gay sex because he wasn't asked about gay sex. He was asked about same sex partnership and gave an answer about same sex partnership.

The dude wanted to talk about gay sex so bad it was irritating him. You could even see the irritated look he had on his face.

Mortal wrote:Actions speak louder than words. That's why I don't always take people's word.

And really?

Well, watch and be amazed!

Yes, really, I thought it would be enough. I guess I need to elaborate some?

Christ warns us NOT to call anyone a moros, but yet you can somehow adequately explain why it's ok for you to do so??

Yes He does, but that is in the context of flying off the handle and holding murder in your heart over a relatively trivial matter. That doesn't apply here.

Again, there's just too much out of place in what you are saying.

I don't think so, but maybe I should elaborate more?

d@v!d wrote:Actually, I wonder just the opposite for you. You seem so keen to save Bell's reputation from his 'interrogators' and take no offense at the heresy he speaks, you might wonder who's side you're on.

Do you think that because I am not willing to go along with you calling him names?

If it were mere name calling, then no. I'm not here to merely call names. This guy is Bad news and ought to be decried.

What words do most people have for a child molester, or the guy in ISIS cutting of heads or burning a man to death, or name another horrendous act? There are lines that we draw and when one crosses it they are called out in the most despicable terms. People like Bell cross that line for me as I have explained my perspective on the value of the gospel.

No, I'm not trying to save Bell or his reputation. I don't even know all that much about Bell, so why would I try to save his reputation like you are trying to claim?

If you say you aren't trying to save his rep, I'll take that at face value. What I've seen from you so far is no condemnation of his heresy but rather quibbling about how he was treated in that discussion video and how wrong I have been to call him names. What do you think about him?

All I know is that the interview took less than 1 minute before it went downhill.

Maybe so. Maybe you have a point as to how they are trying to hoodwink him, but I say that what more apparent in less than 1 minute is the man is a wolf in sheep's clothing. He is evil. Whether they were tactful or respectful or not in their tactics, I'm glad to have seen this to know where this clown stand and to be able to warn others to shun him.

What I'm more concerned about d@v!d, is your assertion that he is beyond the grace of God and repentance...

Candlemass wrote:What I'm more concerned about d@v!d, is your assertion that he is beyond the grace of God and repentance...

OK, I don't believe that any human being is potentially beyond grace or repentance while there is still breath. I have no certain knowledge about this man's destiny, but judging from the fruit it looks really bad. Maybe the Lord will rescue him from his folly, but it would be a shock to see. It's not as if he is some hardened hedonist like most are. He reads the Bible and intentionally distorts it for money and fame. Not too unlike the Pharisees did. The sames ones whom Jesus told that they had passed the point of no return when they blasphemed the Holy Spirit. I don't know if Bell has blasphemed the Holy Spirit, but making a mockery of the Word of God like he does might rank up there. I don't know. Whatever it is, Bell isn't the typical sinner.

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. ² And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. ³ And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.

None of know his heart, let alone if he is enticing unstable souls and has eyes full of adultery, or if he's gorging himself at the "love feats"...

I do not believe he is a credible pastor either, and I would warn others to steer clear of his teachings as well...

d@v!d wrote:Well, watch and be amazed!

Yes, really, I thought it would be enough. I guess I need to elaborate some?

No need to elaborate with words. I will be watching for action, though.

d@v!d wrote:If it were mere name calling, then no. I'm not here to merely call names. This guy is Bad news and ought to be decried.

What words do most people have for a child molester, or the guy in ISIS cutting of heads or burning a man to death, or name another horrendous act? There are lines that we draw and when one crosses it they are called out in the most despicable terms. People like Bell cross that line for me as I have explained my perspective on the value of the gospel. 

You act as if Bell has committed the unpardonable sin.

You called him some really harsh names also. You said he was "apostate trash" and a "goner".

Are you really prepared to damn his soul?

d@v!d wrote:If you say you aren't trying to save his rep, I'll take that at face value. What I've seen from you so far is no condemnation of his heresy but rather quibbling about how he was treated in that discussion video and how wrong I have been to call him names. What do you think about him?

I have expressed my thoughts on Bell. Perhaps you didn't see it so I'll try again.

I have a limited view of Bell. I do not seek out his books, lectures, videos or whatever.

What you are perceiving as my overall defense of Bell is really only based on this video alone. I'm really not saying anything at all about Bell outside of what I've seen in this video.

d@v!d wrote:Maybe so. Maybe you have a point as to how they are trying to hoodwink him, but I say that what more apparent in less than 1 minute is the man is a wolf in sheep's clothing. He is evil. Whether they were tactful or respectful or not in their tactics, I'm glad to have seen this to know where this clown stand and to be able to warn others to shun him.

Well...I'm afraid you won't be able to convince anyone with a limited view such as me.

You have not effectively shown me anything at all from this video that would support your claims.

You also will not be able to show me any just cause for damning his soul with your harsh name calling.

d@v!d, I really wish we could go into more depth about WHY this name calling and damning of souls is so wrong and should be avoided. I also wish that you could show me, from this video alone, where you think the just cause is for calling him such harsh names.

Mortal wrote:You act as if Bell has committed the unpardonable sin.

Give the man a biscuit!

You called him some really harsh names also. You said he was "apostate trash" and a "goner".
Are you really prepared to damn his soul?

Go back and reread me cuz you don't get it.

I have expressed my thoughts on Bell. Perhaps you didn't see it so I'll try again.

I have a limited view of Bell. I do not seek out his books, lectures, videos or whatever.

Again, you don't understand and it is too exasperating for me to try to elaborate to you. Go reread or just file it in the circular file or maybe the mystery thread(forget about it.)

You have not effectively shown me anything at all from this video that would support your claims.
You also will not be able to show me any just cause for damning his soul with your harsh name calling.

If you can't see it in under a minute, then so be it. I can only lead you to the water...

d@v!d, I really wish we could go into more depth about WHY this name calling and damning of souls is so wrong and should be avoided. I also wish that you could show me, from this video alone, where you think the just cause is for calling him such harsh names.ss

Name calling isn't something I enter into lightly. There IS a time and place for it though.
The gospel is precious. Those who would pervert it receive little pity from me.
As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

d@v!d wrote:Give the man a biscuit!

Keep your biscuit. The man has not committed the unpardonable sin.

d@v!d wrote:Go back and reread me cuz you don't get it.

What is it that I'm not getting?

d@v!d wrote:Again, you don't understand and it is too exasperating for me to try to elaborate to you. Go reread or just file it in the circular file or maybe the mystery thread(forget about it.)

Give it a go. I'll wait. I'd really like to see how you think he has committed the unpardonable sin. When you are done, I'll show you why I think it's not even possible for anyone to commit the unpardonable sin at this time. Repentance is still available.

I'll also show you why I think the unpardonable sin doesn't come until later on in prophecy. Repentance will not be available at that time.

d@v!d wrote:If you can't see it in under a minute, then so be it. I can only lead you to the water...

I don't drink polluted water.

d@v!d wrote:Name calling isn't something I enter into lightly. There IS a time and place for it though.
The gospel is precious. Those who would pervert it receive little pity from me.
As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

I think it IS something that you enter into lightly. And the way that you seem to be going about it has absolutely no time and place for it.

I'm having a real hard time believing that your emotions are any kind righteous indignation.

Mortal wrote:What is it that I'm not getting?

Too much. Including the fact that I'm done trying to explain.

I think it IS something that you enter into lightly. And the way that you seem to be going about it has absolutely no time and place for it.
I'm having a real hard time believing that your emotions are any kind righteous indignation.

Wonderful! You have an opinion. I've said what I've said and that is what remains.

d@v!d wrote:Too much. Including the fact that I'm done trying to explain.

You seem to give up way too easily. Not only on this conversation, but on others spiritual well being as well.

d@v!d wrote:Wonderful! You have an opinion. I've said what I've said and that is what remains.

Are you worried because you think I'm saying that you MUST agree with MY opinion?

You seem to be trying to turn this into a Mortal vs. d@v!d thing.

It should be a Mortal AND d@v!d vs. the problem thing.

I wonder why it only has to be me that understands you. Why can't you take the time to try to understand where I'm coming from?

Is it because I am just too "apostate", a piece of "trash",  a "goner" and not even worth your time?

Mortal wrote:

d@v!d wrote:Too much. Including the fact that I'm done trying to explain.

You seem to give up way too easily. Not only on this conversation, but on others spiritual well being as well.

d@v!d wrote:Wonderful! You have an opinion. I've said what I've said and that is what remains.

Are you worried because you think I'm saying that you MUST agree with MY opinion?

You seem to be trying to turn this into a Mortal vs. d@v!d thing.

It should be a Mortal AND d@v!d vs. the problem thing.

I wonder why it only has to be me that understands you. Why can't you take the time to try to understand where I'm coming from?

Is it because I am just too "apostate", a piece of "trash",  a "goner" and not even worth your time?

Give up? No, never. Wisdom of knowing which battles to choose. Like a man incapable of reason, you are a like brick wall. I can keep beating my head against it, do nothing to the wall and be bruised or I can walk away and save myself unnecessary bruises. If you WERE (subjunctive mood) reasonable, I'd continue to discuss the issues. Even as I write you off as another crazy person I met on the net, there's something that you ought to consider since you seem so keen for justice. Your madness is abusive and unjust. Nobody enjoys trying to discuss something and having their thoughts ignored, twisted around and then thrown back on them in a negative manner. I doubt in your pride or madness that you'll accept what I just said, so it is said as a public statement as to why I won't further engage you as long as you act like this. If I am wrong here and you are indeed sincere, please go back to everything I have written in regards to your questions and make sure you understand them before you further engage me.

God bless, David

I shall engage you on the battlefield and smite thee!

Candlemass wrote:I shall engage you on the battlefield and smite thee!

Lol. I don't doubt that for a second. Too scary...

I'll tell you what, d@v!d. Let's make it easy. Instead of typing out a long post explaining things and repeating yourself, why don't you simply "quote", in a new post,  the main points of your previous posts. Would you take the time to highlight the main points that show HOW the unpardonable sin was committed in that situation with Bell? Could you also highlight the main points that explain WHY it is ok to call a person "apostate trash" and a "goner"?

That should be simple and quick to do.

Mortal wrote:I'll tell you what, d@v!d. Let's make it easy. Instead of typing out a long post explaining things and repeating yourself, why don't you simply "quote", in a new post,  the main points of your previous posts. Would you take the time to highlight the main points that show HOW the unpardonable sin was committed in that situation with bell? Could you also highlight the main points that explain WHY it is ok to call a person "apostate trash" and a "goner"?

That should be simple and quick to do.

No, if you can't read and think, just forget it.

d@v!d wrote:

Mortal wrote:I'll tell you what, d@v!d. Let's make it easy. Instead of typing out a long post explaining things and repeating yourself, why don't you simply "quote", in a new post,  the main points of your previous posts. Would you take the time to highlight the main points that show HOW the unpardonable sin was committed in that situation with bell? Could you also highlight the main points that explain WHY it is ok to call a person "apostate trash" and a "goner"?

That should be simple and quick to do.

No, if you can't read and think, just forget it.

Challenge ON!

I'll go back and take another look. I'll get back with you later.