Originally posted by @thinkofone
Seems like there was a time that you operated on a much higher level on this forum than you have been. As it is , you post on the same level as romans, becker, DG, et al.

D64 is correct in her assessment of you. You should reread that as well.

Suzianne typically refuses to examine herself critically, let alone concede any error.
Her posting ...[text shortened]... usion.
(As I recall, Suzianne has admitted to being weak in logic and mathematics.)

Again, that's hysterical, coming from a person who, when backed into a corner, just spams the thread with the same post numerous times.

Originally posted by @suzianne
Do you think that someone who kidnaps, tortures, rapes and murders an innocent 8 year old girl is filled with the Holy Spirit? Do you even believe in the Holy Spirit? How about "the love of God", then?

Can anti-semites have "love of God"? Do you think Christians can be anti-semites? Or are anti-semites who say they are Christians not really Christians?

Originally posted by @suzianne
Again, that's hysterical, coming from a person who, when backed into a corner, just spams the thread with the same post numerous times.

If you were to once again operate on a higher level than you do now, perhaps you'd be able to take context into account. Instead you operate on the same level as romans, becker, DG, et al. Sadly it would seem that you're more than content to continue to do so.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
If you were to once again operate on a higher level than you do now, perhaps you'd be able to take context into account. Instead you operate on the same level as romans, becker, DG, et al. Sadly it would seem that you're more than content to continue to do so.

Keep on spamming.

Originally posted by @suzianne
Keep on spamming.

Seriously Suzianne. You really need to pull it together. You haven't been nearly as rational as you once were.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Seriously Suzianne. You really need to pull it together. You haven't been nearly as rational as you once were.

Even 'if' that were the case sir, at least she can hark back to a day where she put forward a rational argument. Can you say the same? (Rhetorical question).

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Even 'if' that were the case sir, at least she can hark back to a day where she put forward a rational argument. Can you say the same? (Rhetorical question).

Certainly more rational than you ever have. But then, you've demonstrated from the time that you started posting on this forum that your purpose is to troll rather than put forth rational argument.

This latest post of yours is yet another example.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
If you were to once again operate on a higher level than you do now, perhaps you'd be able to take context into account. Instead you operate on the same level as romans, becker, DG, et al. Sadly it would seem that you're more than content to continue to do so.

Then there’s reality.

If you have a “cogent argument” to make, we’d love to hear it.

Do you operate on a “higher level” by employing the same catch phrases ad nauseam, by ignoring 95 percent of questions that come your way and expose your false doctrines and by copy-pasting the same one or two Biblical passages over and over?

Is that operating on a “higher level?”

Originally posted by @thinkofone
If you were to once again operate on a higher level than you do now, perhaps you'd be able to take context into account. Instead you operate on the same level as romans, becker, DG, et al. Sadly it would seem that you're more than content to continue to do so.

You forgot to say...

“Then there’s reality.”

“If you have a cogent argument...”

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Certainly more rational than you ever have. But then, you've demonstrated from the time that you started posting on this forum that your purpose is to troll rather than put forth rational argument.

This latest post of yours is yet another example.

Was your post to Suzianne exempt from such trolling?!

"Seriously Suzianne. You really need to pull it together. You haven't been nearly as rational as you once were."

My question to you was marked as 'rhetorical'.Look it up Sherlock.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Was your post to Suzianne exempt from such trolling?!

"Seriously Suzianne. You really need to pull it together. You haven't been nearly as rational as you once were."

My question to you was marked as 'rhetorical'.Look it up Sherlock.

You're a real rational one aren't you?

The troll believes that because he marks one of his trolling ad hom posts as "rhetorical" that a response to it means that the person doesn't understand the word.

The troll also fails to recognize that my post was part of a series of posts exchanged between Suzianne and me.

As I said, "You've demonstrated from the time that you started posting on this forum that your purpose is to troll rather than put forth rational argument."

You keep proving it.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
You're a real rational one aren't you?

The troll believes that because he marks one of his trolling ad hom posts as "rhetorical" that a response to it means that the person doesn't understand the word.

The troll also fails to recognize that my post was part of a series of posts exchanged between Suzianne and me.

As I said, "You've demonstrated f ...[text shortened]... that your purpose is to troll rather than put forth rational argument."

You keep proving it.

Your inability to recognize your own 'ad hom' and trolling posts is irrational in the extreme, as is the touting of your poorly thought through beliefs.

You are by far the most pointless poster in these forums. Merely consider your years of forum engagement with sonship, who after all this time, is still unclear himself as to whether or not you're an atheist. How is that even possible?! Seriously? Doesn't that resonate with you?

We are players in a poker game where 'every' participant has shown their hand, apart from you. Childlike you hold your cards to your chest, beyond examination, while simultaneously claiming you hold all the aces. You're the joker in the pack sir. Nothing less.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Your inability to recognize your own 'ad hom' and trolling posts is irrational in the extreme, as is the touting of your poorly thought through beliefs.

You are by far the most pointless poster in these forums. Merely consider your years of forum engagement with sonship, who after all this time, is still unclear himself as to whether or not you'r ...[text shortened]... e simultaneously claiming you hold all the aces. You're the joker in the pack sir. Nothing less.

And the trolling continues...

As I said, "You've demonstrated from the time that you started posting on this forum that your purpose is to troll rather than put forth rational argument."

You keep proving it.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
And the trolling continues...

As I said, "You've demonstrated from the time that you started posting on this forum that your purpose is to troll rather than put forth rational argument."

You keep proving it.

And I'm still waiting for you to post something rational or account for your own trolling and evasive behavior.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Also from the same page:

“In his final sermon shortly before his death, however, Luther preached: "We want to treat them with Christian love and to pray for them, so that they might become converted and would receive the Lord."

Perhaps he repented of his racism.

The only person that actually bothered to answer the OP question was divegeester, presenting information from the same page as posted. He cited where Martin Luther, shortly before his death, beseeched his brothers and sisters to love the Jews and pray for them. So I agree with divegeester's assessment that perhaps Luther repented.

The rest of the 3 pages devolved into a bar fight like pretty much all the threads.

I just found it odd that his answer went ignored.