Originally posted by robbie carrobieI asked josephw several times what he meant exactly by directing that Bible verse at divegeester.
yes and this clause, 'an enemy of God', from the verse was directly introduced into the discussion by you to determine whether he was 'an enemy of God'. Is that the case?
Originally posted by FMFReally FMF, you were not asking them if divesgeester was 'an enemy of God' but what Joseph meant.
I was interested in what other people thought josephw meant. I think he was just trying to insult a fellow Christian and was using the Bible to do it.
FMF you are wriggling like a worm on a hook, but whatever i am loathe to see a man left in the lurch.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNo one answered 'yes I think divegeester is an enemy of God' so I don't know what or who made "the charge" you have mentioned repeatedly and consequently it's not clear why you are expecting divegeester to exonerate himself.
Really FMF, you were not asking them if divesgeester was 'an enemy of God' but what Joseph meant.
FMF you are wriggling like a worm on a hook, but whatever i am loathe to see a man left in the lurch.
-Removed-No, you're lying. joseph never said you are an enemy of God. For several pages now robbie has been trying to get you to admit exactly where that charge originated.
You may think you're being clever by claiming this is a charge that has been made about and against you, but seeing as how you are both the accuser and the defendant maybe you should try making a deal with yourself... for instance, if you plead guilty to manufacturing a phoney complaint against yourself, then you (also acting as judge and jury) can let yourself off with a slap on the wrist and tell yourself you never want to see your ugly mug in your court again.
