Biden DOJ Attempts To Stop Arizona Election Audit

[JonC]

You doth protest too much, methinks.

But, if you wish, pick a theological point--just one--that I've been dishonest or erroneous about, and we'll hash it out. Interminable posts about generalities are a tedium in which I don't wish to engage for long.

I do protest when you are dishonest about what I have stated I believe.

1. You were dishonest when you said I support Biden.

2. You were dishonest when you presented me as "anti-Trump".

3. You were dishonest when you posted I believe in "a wrathless cross".

4. You were dishonest when you said that I view the GOP and the DNC as the same.


We are talking politics. So let's go with #1 (we can keep it simple and see just how dishonest you really are).

Prove you are not dishonest. Provide a post (any post) where I offered support for Biden (beyond praying for our leaders).

 

[JonC]

Maybe. Or perhaps we have a different understanding of her being involved in something. Or both.

Could be. I define political involvement as joining a political party and/ or lending your voice to that power.


I define the Church as Christians who assemble as a congregation (not an organization or building).

 

[Aaron]

I do protest when you are dishonest about what I have stated I believe.

1. You were dishonest when you said I support Biden.

2. You were dishonest when you presented me as "anti-Trump".

3. You were dishonest when you posted I believe in "a wrathless cross".

4. You were dishonest when you said that I view the GOP and the DNC as the same.


We are talking politics. So let's go with #1 (we can keep it simple and see just how dishonest you really are).

Prove you are not dishonest. Provide a post (any post) where I offered support for Biden (beyond praying for our leaders).

We've already been around that block. Pick something else.

Maricopa County Heating Up

 

[Revmitchell]

I do protest when you are dishonest about what I have stated I believe.

1. You were dishonest when you said I support Biden.

2. You were dishonest when you presented me as "anti-Trump".

3. You were dishonest when you posted I believe in "a wrathless cross".

4. You were dishonest when you said that I view the GOP and the DNC as the same.


We are talking politics. So let's go with #1 (we can keep it simple and see just how dishonest you really are).

Prove you are not dishonest. Provide a post (any post) where I offered support for Biden (beyond praying for our leaders).

To be fair I also believed you thought that the gop and the dnc are the same based on previous statements. But with you it’s always hard to tell what you actually believe about anything

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Could be. I define political involvement as joining a political party and/ or lending your voice to that power.

I define the Church as Christians who assemble as a congregation (not an organization or building).

This should probably become a separate thread. But I'll go ahead and post here for now.

Consider these scenarios. Round One.

1. A Christian man is an employee of a company

2. His wife, a Christian, attends a function sponsored by the company.

3. Their family, all of whom are already Christians, attends a company-wide picnic.

4. The Christian couple starts a company of their own.

5. Only the wife is a Christian in #2.

6. Only one of their offspring is a Christian in #3.

7. The man is so outstanding in his field (don’t do it, SGO) that he wins a Nobel Prize.

In which of these cases is the Church involved?

In all cases, my answer is none. The Church is not involved, only the individual Christian(s). In #5 and #6, no Christian mentioned is involved in the company. No matter how much influence they themselves have in those entities, the Church herself is not involved in those entities. Nor does the involvement of the Christians mean that the Church is involved in the industries associated with the company.

 

[JonC]

We've already been around that block. Pick something else.

Maricopa County Heating Up

This is a political thread.

YOU said I support Biden. Yet I voted for Trumo twice, never supported a Democrat, and never voiced any support for Biden.

We're you lying?

That is the question. No need to go elsewhere.

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus


But we can. You referred to me as "anti-Trump. Yet I was a Republican (now I don't participate), believe Trump to be the best President in recent history, and posted this several times. Prove I am anti-Trump.

Or were you being dishonest here as well?

 

[JonC]

To be fair I also believed you thought that the gop and the dnc are the same based on previous statements. But with you it’s always hard to tell what you actually believe about anything

I am not sure how you thought that, but perhaps I should clarify (it was probably my bad on that one).

What I posted was that the GOP and DNC had opposite and opposing platforms. I said the DNC platform is the sins Paul lists in Romans while the GOP platform is in line with Christian morals. Then I posted that both the DNC and GOP are ultimately powers of this world, and neither party proclaims Christ in their platform. Each takes credit for any hood policy, never giving the glory to God.

I posted that they are opposite sides (opposing platforms) of the same coin (the same political system).

I understand that you take that to mean the GOP and DNC are the same.

I guess you could say they are the same thing (secular political parties, same political systen/ worldly power). But they are opposing platforms. They are about opposite on most (if not all) important issues. That is why I said they are opposite sides of the same coin.

Does that help clarify?

 

[JonC]

This should probably become a separate thread. But I'll go ahead and post here for now.

Consider these scenarios. Round One.

1. A Christian man is an employee of a company

2. His wife, a Christian, attends a function sponsored by the company.

3. Their family, all of whom are already Christians, attends a company-wide picnic.

4. The Christian couple starts a company of their own.

5. Only the wife is a Christian in #2.

6. Only one of their offspring is a Christian in #3.

7. The man is so outstanding in his field (don’t do it, SGO) that he wins a Nobel Prize.

In which of these cases is the Church involved?

In all cases, my answer is none. The Church is not involved, only the individual Christian(s). In #5 and #6, no Christian mentioned is involved in the company. No matter how much influence they themselves have in those entities, the Church herself is not involved in those entities. Nor does the involvement of the Christians mean that the Church is involved in the industries associated with the company.

I would say all of the examples. We function individually as a part of one body and remain accountable to the whole.

This is probably why we disagree. I think we sometimes just talk past one another.

 

[Aaron]

... it’s always hard to tell what [ @JonC ] actually believe(s) about anything.

That's by design.

 

[Aaron]

This is a political thread.

YOU said I support Biden. Yet I voted for Trumo twice, never supported a Democrat, and never voiced any support for Biden.

We're you lying?

That is the question. No need to go elsewhere.

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus


But we can. You referred to me as "anti-Trump. Yet I was a Republican (now I don't participate), believe Trump to be the best President in recent history, and posted this several times. Prove I am anti-Trump.

Or were you being dishonest here as well?

Asked and answered.

Start a new thread if you need to.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

I would say all of the examples. We function individually as a part of one body and remain accountable to the whole.

This is probably why we disagree. I think we sometimes just talk past one another.

Aye, it happens a lot, does it not, this talking past each other due to unrealized differences?

As for the view that the Christians in all those scenarios equate to the Church being involved in the company or the company's business, I suspect most companies (a Christian mom & pop may possibly be excluded) would be surprised at this view, as they do not acknowledge much less follow dictates of the Church. They do not answer to the Church. They're in it for the money, not to spread God's word or to advance God's kingdom. However, they do answer to the government. And then, not a few seek to influence politics, some quite successfully. Such a view seems to unavoidably entangle the Church in this world's affairs.

 

[JonC]

Asked and answered.

Start a new thread if you need to.

There is no answer. You just make a false claim and say it is true.

The issue is you know you are being dishonest but you just keep it up. "Asked and answered"? No. Asked and evaded.

You are never able to back up your claims. You just blow smoke and think people are fooled into believing your words have meaning.

We have two counts here where you essentially admitted to dishonesty. You cannot back up your words because you know they are false. This is "sinning with a high hand" - not against me (I really do not care...or matter) but against God.

You make claims about God's Law and its relevance while violating that standard at every turn.

 

[JonC]

Aye, it happens a lot, does it not, this talking past each other due to unrealized differences?

As for the view that the Christians in all those scenarios equate to the Church being involved in the company or the company's business, I suspect most companies (a Christian mom & pop may possibly be excluded) would be surprised at this view, as they do not acknowledge much less follow dictates of the Church. They do not answer to the Church. They're in it for the money, not to spread God's word or to advance God's kingdom. However, they do answer to the government. And then, not a few seek to influence politics, some quite successfully. Such a view seems to unavoidably entangle the Church in this world's affairs.

I agree in part. But I am not speaking of "dictates of the church". I am speaking of "walking in the light".

A Christian who decides to be a porn star (extreme example) should be confronted by their congregation. It is church business as that person is a part of the church.

 

[Salty]

This should probably become a separate thread. But I'll go ahead and post here for now..

Good ideal, this thread will be closed sometime this afternoon

 

[Salty]

six hour warning
This threat will be closed no sooner than 3 pm EST / Noon PDT

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

I agree in part. But I am not speaking of "dictates of the church". I am speaking of "walking in the light".

A Christian who decides to be a porn star (extreme example) should be confronted by their congregation. It is church business as that person is a part of the church.

Yes, extreme, but we agree on it. The Church should deal with the Christian. The product is base. It has no proper place.

However, government is another matter. One would have to be an extreme anarchist to say there should be no government, no law and order. The Bible does not support such a position, that is, each person doing what is right in his own eyes. I can’t imagine you do either.

While one can govern wrongly, as one can do business wrongly, one can also do each rightly. There are those who challenge the latter, that is, the idea that business can be done rightly. It looks to me like the two are closely related, linked even.

Christians should be promoting doing it rightly in both cases, and exerting effort toward that in both cases, including serving in and running businesses and serving in and running government.

 

[Reynolds]

To be fair I also believed you thought that the gop and the dnc are the same based on previous statements. But with you it’s always hard to tell what you actually believe about anything

I agree Rev.

 

[Aaron]

There is no answer. You just make a false claim and say it is true.

The issue is you know you are being dishonest but you just keep it up. "Asked and answered"? No. Asked and evaded.

Whatever. I posted my answer.

You are never able to back up your claims. You just blow smoke and think people are fooled into believing your words have meaning.

We have two counts here where you essentially admitted to dishonesty. You cannot back up your words because you know they are false. This is "sinning with a high hand" - not against me (I really do not care...or matter) but against God.

You make claims about God's Law and its relevance while violating that standard at every turn.

Fine.

When you want to discuss something we haven't before, let me know.

 

[JonC]

I agree Rev.

I understand.

When I said they were opposite & opposing platforms but opposite sides of the same coin, the coin being secular world powers looking for a political solution to spiritual problems I did not mean the GOP and DNC are the same.

 

[JonC]

Whatever. I posted my answer.

Fine.

When you want to discuss something we haven't before, let me know.

Your answer, that I did not mean what I posted, was ignorant and insufficient. It was not a legitimate answer.

We have not discussed anything. I posted and you attributed to me positions I never held nor expressed.

I was asking you to back up your claims, not for a discussion, because of the dishonesty of your posts. My hope is you would be able to recognize and overcome the sin so that in the future discussion could be had.

As it stands, you have a very bad habit of attributing beliefs to others that they do not hold, then going on a tirade combating strawman as if they were real.

You have, to my knowledge, never actually debated anything on this board. A member disagrees with you and then you assign to them whatever position you want to argue against, all the time pretending they actually hold that view....not because of what they posted but because you cannot truly debate religion or politics (you are blind to everything but your own preconceived notions).