"Having the indwelt Holy Spirit"

Originally posted by @philokalia
You're offiical stance on most things is this extremely subtle, simple statement buried int he midst of a 1,000 questions you are throwing out and then when someone doesn't perfectly understand the full intent of a single statement you are like

"Ah ha, you failed to understand,"

and instead of offering an explanation and having an [i]actual debate[ ...[text shortened]... met before, and even if I had met such a person, I would do my best to not hurt their fweelings.

FMF has given you the license to call things as you see them. Don't worry if he whines about it later. 😀

Originally posted by @philokalia
You're offiical stance on most things is this extremely subtle, simple statement buried int he midst of a 1,000 questions you are throwing out and then when someone doesn't perfectly understand the full intent of a single statement you are like

"Ah ha, you failed to understand,"

What nonsense. Deceitful nonsense. The post of mine that triggered that daft slew of attempted put-downs was succinct, cogent and extremely candid.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
If he does not see that what he said is attacking your character, he should call it as he sees it, no?

Of course. And I don't think he is faring very well.

Originally posted by @fmf
What nonsense. Deceitful nonsense. The post of mine that triggered that daft slew of attempted put-downs was succinct, cogent and extremely candid.

😴

Originally posted by @fmf
Of course. And I don't think he is faring very well.

You should call it as you see it. 😀

Originally posted by @philokalia
You're offiical stance on most things is this extremely subtle, simple statement buried int he midst of a 1,000 questions you are throwing out and then when someone doesn't perfectly understand the full intent of a single statement you are like

"Ah ha, you failed to understand,"

and instead of offering an explanation and having an actual debate, you end the topic.

...instead of offering an explanation and having an actual debate, you end the topic.

It was you who ran away from the debate, not me.

Originally posted by @philokalia
But, of course, these words can only describe the nature of this argument tactic. I'd never dare say anything like that about a person I had never met before, and even if I had met such a person, I would do my best to not hurt their fweelings.

And what is it you are claiming was your "argument tactic" in that instance?

Originally posted by @fmf
[b]...instead of offering an explanation and having an actual debate, you end the topic.

It was you who ran away from the debate, not me.[/b]

Dude, I thought that no debate could surely be occurring because the interaction was banal and repetitive. There wasn't any content to latch onto. There wasn't any meat on those bones.

Just like now... You are just breaking things up piecemeal and disputing aspects of the discussion that aren't relevant.

Who wants to spend 30-40 minutes doing that? No one.

Like take now for instance...

No idea what here is substantive.

Literally your only posts are now accusations and appraisals of other things not a part of the debate.

It's like you are a triviality magnet in the midst of people trying to have a discussion. It also feels sometimes like even if there was a point it is immediately lost in the sea of you breakign it up into little fragments and asking repetitious questions leading to nowhere but everyone's mild annoyance.

Originally posted by @fmf
And what is it you are claiming was your "argument tactic" in that instance?

Yeah man, let's stick to a topic and discuss it. We haven't had an argument.

We've had you trying to lure me into an ad hom slap-fight for several weeks.

Originally posted by @philokalia
Dude, I thought that no debate could surely be occurring because the interaction was banal and repetitive. There wasn't any content to latch onto. There wasn't any meat on those bones.

"Banal and repetitive"? I don't think you are being honest. Here it is Thread 175773, page 18 onwards. I see no genuine attempt by you to address the topic at all ~ just a flurry of repeated ad hominems from you. There seems to be a real disconnect between what you do and say and what you think you did and said.

Originally posted by @philokalia
Like take now for instance...

No idea what here is substantive.

I asked you a question on page 2 about "Having the indwelt Holy Spirit" - the thread topic - and in the course of your answer to that you said this:

Second of all, no, I'd never sit here and sow discord and discontent between Christians or hurt people by either attacking their character or building up their ego.

I've been responding to this answer of yours and the claim you made about yourself in it.

Originally posted by @fmf
I asked you a question on page 2 about "Having the indwelt Holy Spirit" - the thread topic - and in the course of your answer to that you said this:

[b]Second of all, no, I'd never sit here and sow discord and discontent between Christians or hurt people by either attacking their character or building up their ego.

I've been responding to this answer of yours and the claim you made about yourself in it.[/b]

More questions? Goody.

Originally posted by @romans1009
Not surprisingly, this post is being ignored by the salvation-by-works and Christians-can-never-sin crowd.

Then, a day or two later, they’ll post the same false doctrines, I’ll respond with these same questions and maybe a few others, they’ll again ignore the questions and we’ll spin around on the merry-go-round ‘til at least the spring and probably longer.

True Christians a group to with you do not belong, will ignore your infantile questions. Your questions resemble the kind people ask when they have evil inside them, rather than good, therefore they cannot do good works. So their questions are designed to claim that since there is no record of how many good works therefore it cannot be a requirement.

The simple answer to your foolish question is this:

Do good works and live righteously as long as God give you life

Those who have the true light of Christ in them will have no problem following Christ and doing good works. True Christians know that they await the judgment of Christ, and never proclaim that they are saved eternally. Your type rail and fight against the commandments of Christ. I have never come across a man proclaiming that looking after his aged mother is doing good works. Your Christian doctrine is from your church and not of Christ.

Originally posted by @fmf
When believers claim to "have the indwelt Holy Spirit", what should non-believers be able to witness in the words and deeds of such people ~ here in this online environment ~ that might confirm or illustrate that their claims are true?

They believe in their heart and confess with their mouth that Jesus died for their sins and rose from the dead.

That's the only confirmation you're going to get here. The rest of it is just debate.

Judge yourself.

Originally posted by @secondson
They believe in their heart and confess with their mouth that Jesus died for their sins and rose from the dead.

That's the only confirmation you're going to get here. The rest of it is just debate.

Judge yourself.

The OP asks for you to provide any evidence you feel there is that can be seen on this forum of people "having the indwelt Holy Spirit". Thanks for the "judge yourself" tip, but unless you offer evidence, there is nothing to judge. Such is the nature of this OP/thread.