Is the time of “miracles” past?

@sonship said
@divegeester

When you didn't to too well to disprove God is triune you responded with
accusations that I am in a cult of personality.

When you couldn't totally discount serious passages about eternal judgement
you responded with complaints that I am in a cult of personality.

When you failed to demonstrate from Scripture Christ's office of Son of God is eternal you ...[text shortened]... w to meet me on the ground of Scripture and stop throwing up "You're just in a cult of personality".

Does your church leadership hold that the other Christian denominations preach the teachings of Satan? Yes or no.

Remember those checkmate questions we were discussing in the other thread. Here’s one.

@divegeester said
Does your church leadership hold that the other Christian denominations preach the teachings of Satan? Yes or no.

Remember those checkmate questions we were discussing in the other thread. Here’s one.

What could be called a teaching of Satan? Anything that isn't reflecting truth, maybe, in which case that would mean anyone saying anything that isn't truth could qualify there. This exchange sounds like a conversation that has a history between you two; I'm just asking, considering some of the other conversations I'm in, I'd like to know what the both of you think and anyone else who wishes to reply to that.

what if i believe in magic?
am i of satan?

@KellyJay

What could be called a teaching of Satan? Anything that isn't reflecting truth, maybe, in which case that would mean anyone saying anything that isn't truth could qualify there. This exchange sounds like a conversation that has a history between you two; I'm just asking, considering some of the other conversations I'm in, I'd like to know what the both of you think and anyone else who wishes to reply to that.

Kelly, notice that by Divegeester apparently boasting that he has a "checkmate question" he is really admitting he is skilled at rhetorical slight of hand and is proud of it. He's tickled with himself that he can be so clever.

Don't you think nearly a decade of so-called "conversation" like this is what Paul described as "perpetual wranglings?" That is with an emphasis on "perpetual" and on "wranglings".

"If anyone teaches different things and does not consent to healthy words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the teaching which is according to godliness
he is blinded with pride, understanding nothing, but is diseased with questionings
and contentions of words, out of which come envy, strife, slanders, evil suspicions,
perpetual wranglings of men corrupted in mind and deprived of the truth, supposing godliness to be a means of gain." ( 1 Timothy 6:3-5)

I don't want to be like this. I have participated in some "perpetual wranglings" with some posters here to no profit to anyone. Pray that we who do want to fellowship and share the gospel (or defend it) here emphasize more godliness, godly living and expression.

With that said perhaps I will consider how I would speak to your post latter.

What could be called a teaching of Satan? Anything that isn't reflecting truth, maybe, in which case that would mean anyone saying anything that isn't truth could qualify there. This exchange sounds like a conversation that has a history between you two; I'm just asking, considering some of the other conversations I'm in, I'd like to know what the both of you think and anyone else who wishes to reply to that.

There are a number of things which could expose Satan's influence within or behind a question.

The very first question that the serpent posed to Eve was of Satan obviously. It had a subtle ingredient in it to cause her to think God was withholding something from her.

Here is the subtle question first poised by God's enemy.

"Now the serpent was more crafty than any other animal of the field that Jehovah God had made. And he said to the woman, Did God really say, You shall not eat of any tree of the garden?" ( Gen. 3:1)

The evil ingredient's of the Devil's ploy is manifold: Ie.

1.) "Eve, do you trust God's word?"

2.) "Eve, did God have the audacity to limit you in any way ?"

3.) "Eve, does God really have your benefit in mind?"

4.) "Eve, isn't it I, the serpent who am really loving and looking out for you?"

5.) "Eve, isn't it God your Creator who is the liar lying to you?"


These are some of the deadly poisoners innuendos injected into the mind if the first woman - a question with poison slanders against God in it. The apostle Paul tells us that the simplicity of love and devotion towards God was attacked by the serpent's cleverness.

"But I fear lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your thoughts would be corrupted from the simplicity and the purity toward Christ." ( 2 Cor. 11:3)

@KellyJay

We need to expose the subtlety of how this was asked.

Does your church leadership hold that the other Christian denominations preach the teachings of Satan? Yes or no.

The question is designed to not accept nuances of explanations or qualifications accompanying either a Yes or a No. It is designed that it could not accept "It depends" "Not necessarily". It is probably designed to be so binary that qualifying aspects of an answer are ruled out.

It also says "other Christian denominations". So it implies that I admit I meet with a division, a denomination - sectarian group excluding other brothers and sisters unfairly,

There is I think another ploy within this ploy. It goes like this:

There are only denominations.
There is no such thing as a gathering of Christians which is not a division in the body of Christ.
To be a Christian who meets with other Christians you HAVE to admit you are
denominated.

Then this carries the implications:
There can be no genuine normal way for Christians to "church" or assemble
together. Practical proper church ground does not exist.

"Other denominations" is designed for Christians who desire to practice biblical receiving of other believers for churching together must admit they are delusional up front. Only divisions in the universal church exist. Only denominations exist. To be a Christian is to be denominated by nature. For there to be a gathering of Christians it is impossible to avoid being denominated.

Whether intentional or not these are some of the subtle implications embodied in the way the question was asked.

That is not all. That is enough for one post.

Oh no the Mark of the Beast was a reference to something that was relevant to the Christians of that time i.e. the image of Caesar Nero's hand or forehead on Roman denarii

@AThousandYoung

Oh no the Mark of the Beast was a reference to something that was relevant to the Christians of that time i.e. the image of Caesar Nero's hand or forehead on Roman denarii

Why do you think the same tactic could not be re-used in a future time?
Don't we see the enemies of God re-cycling and re-using former tactics before
employed?

There was no peace pact made with Israel for seven years by Caesar which he reneged on halfway through the agreement. (Dan. 9:27)

There was formerly no image of Caesar erected that was given the power to speak, and that if you did not worship it you would be killed. (Rev. 13:14)

There was formerly no Caesar having a death stroke from which he revived again astounding the world. (Rev. 13:14)

There was formerly no Caesar given to act specifically forty-two months. (Rev. 13:5)

There was no Roman Caesar accompanied by a miracle working false prophet totally dedicated to him. (Rev. 13:11-13)

There was no Roman Caesar who sat in the temple in Jerusalem proclaiming that he was God. (2 Thess. 2:4) (Antiochus desecrated the temple).

We may say Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Antiochus, Titus the Roman general, and Nero were all nasty to the Jews (and Christians in Nero's case).
This in no sense makes it impossible that a future ruler could employ those crimes and more.

@divegeester said
Does your church leadership hold that the other Christian denominations preach the teachings of Satan? Yes or no.

Remember those checkmate questions we were discussing in the other thread. Here’s one.

Given your eventual and perhaps proximal expiration date, I hope that you will someday outgrow tossing tiles from your Scrabble set at other people, because at this stage it would be absolutely incorrect for us to seat you at the children's table.

@kevin-eleven said
Given your eventual and perhaps proximal expiration date, I hope that you will someday outgrow tossing tiles from your Scrabble set at other people, because at this stage it would be absolutely incorrect for us to seat you at the children's table.

Back 5 minutes and already being a pretentious douchbag.

Way to go.

@divegeester said
Back 5 minutes and already being a pretentious douchbag.

Way to go.

Sir, if a dash of my vinegar helps to prevent you from offending a few others, isn't that a net positive? 😉

P.S. -- Isn't douch*bag considered misogynistic these days, you inconsiderate mutt?

@kevin-eleven said
Sir, if a dash of my vinegar helps to prevent you from offending a few others, isn't that a net positive? 😉

Oh yes your words impact me. Write some more. Let me sit at your feet.

@kevin-eleven said
Isn't douch*bag considered misogynistic these days, you inconsiderate mutt?

Shut up.

@divegeester said
Oh yes your words impact me. Write some more. Let me sit at your feet.

You have already responded to my post, which is more than I ever wished for.

But please don't sit at my feet. I'm not sure yet how I feel about shoe- and sock-sniffers, let alone shrimpers.

@kevin-eleven said
You have already responded to my post, which is more than I ever wished for.

But please don't sit at my feet. I'm not sure yet how I feel about shoe- and sock-sniffers, let alone shrimpers.

Where have you been Kevin, you’ve been missed and talked about you day after day.