[Sontagged]

I take the FR rules against personal abuse seriously, after so many decades of being here, because I understand that another name for Satan is “slanderer” if not “the accuser of the Brethren”...

I try to limit my online criticisms of internet strangers to their opinions and arguments and logic.

NOT personal attacks.

So can you show me where I called anyone personally an “idiot” as you wrote?

I don’t think that’s what I’ve written...

I’ve written that this is an idiotic false teaching, that Christ was bloodless at the Resurrection..

And I’ve used dramatic and humorous language that this is creating a “Frankenjesus” in order to point out the error in this false teaching... (LOL, it is funny...)

And now I’ve proved it by posting an article by a man who traced the historicity of this false teaching back to its roots.

I notice that no one who previously held or currently holds to this false teaching, has bothered to admit their error...

... but instead they are attacking me personally. And this is not a mole-hill Biblically.

Again, this false teaching about a bloodless risen Christ encroaches upon John’s admonition that believers ‘test the spirits”, because anti Christ is already in the world... and the spirit of anti Christ always denies that Jesus is come in the flesh.

I’ve tested the spirits about this false teaching and been proved accurate.

So limit your discussion to the Biblical prooftext, this isn’t about me, a person you do not know on the internet..

And LOL, all you did was repeat the Bibiclal truths of what I’ve previously written as if what I said was not true!

Just admit I was right, if not on these threads, at least to the Lord in your prayer closet, so you can affirm to Him that you do indeed “love the Truth”

Because as you know, the Lord says that He will send strong delusion upon those who no longer love the Truth...

That’s why I’ve used language like Frankenchrist, in describing this false teaching about a bloodless Resurrected Christ.

[boatbums]

I take the FR rules against personal abuse seriously, after so many decades of being here, because I understand that another name for Satan is “slanderer” if not “the accuser of the Brethren”... I try to limit my online criticisms of internet strangers to their opinions and arguments and logic. NOT personal attacks.

To coin a phrase, "What do you want? A medal?" You may think you have obeyed the "letter" of the rules, but I think you have missed the "spirit". When words like, "how idiotic and strange your..." are used, it's not out of the realm of comprehension that you ARE being quite personal in your comments/attacks and ARE being divisive. I agree with IMARDMD1 that there isn't any point in trying to argue with someone who is so convinced of their point they refuse to hear someone else's even though I disagree that he blames this on a woman's inability to think rationally and only want to nag. I know many men that do the same.

You've only "proved" in this article that someone else agrees with you on what I, and others, see as a minor issue. The ones you have insulted - yes personally - I have no doubts will agree with you on what the gospel is. I think you may have missed this. You can certainly have the last word. As a woman, I don't need to.