Thank you Frodo, but you missed my point.

Here we see Christians, each of whom pray regularly and go to their congregations and listen to sermons/homilies, but they come back here and show no joy in their fellow believers' faith, no respect for the experience of their lives and culture, and no interest in making sure their own understanding is correct.

We are none of us perfect, but you'd never know that from the posts in such threads as this one.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Thank you Frodo, but you missed my point.

Here we see Christians, each of whom pray regularly and go to their congregations and listen to sermons/homilies, but they come back here and show no joy in their fellow believers' faith, no respect for the experience of their lives and culture, and no interest in making sure their own understanding is correct.

We are none of us perfect, but you'd never know that from the posts in such threads as this one.

---

It would seem to me that if someone believes a fellow believer is in unBiblical error that could be Spiritually damaging, the other person may feel that it is the loving thing to warn them, even if it angers them.

Old Bear and BTD, anyone else, Could you give me your answers regarding the Gospel that saves? I realize you may have before, but it's buried in a heap of discussion. Perhaps you could just copy and paste it for me?

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Old Bear and BTD, anyone else, Could you give me your answers regarding the Gospel that saves? I realize you may have before, but it's buried in a heap of discussion. Perhaps you could just copy and paste it for me?

---

Are you not reading the responses to your comments? This was already done.

My response is here: https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/123613/replies/4620583

OldBear's response is here: https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/123613/replies/4616010


So which represents true Christianity, which is what you wanted to find out?

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Old Bear and BTD, anyone else, Could you give me your answers regarding the Gospel that saves? I realize you may have before, but it's buried in a heap of discussion. Perhaps you could just copy and paste it for me?

---

To understand Salvation, I commend you to consider four passages from the Gospels, and the words of our Lord Jesus Christ:

"Then Jesus said to his disciples, "Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."

When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, "Who then can be saved?"
Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."

Matthew 19:23-26

"When one of the Pharisees invited Jesus to have dinner with him, he went to the Pharisee's house and reclined at the table. A woman in that town who lived a sinful life learned that Jesus was eating at the Pharisee's house, so she came there with an alabaster jar of perfume. As she stood behind him at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them.

When the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, "If this man were a prophet, he would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she isthat she is a sinner."

Jesus answered him, "Simon, I have something to tell you."

"Tell me, teacher," he said.

"Two people owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he forgave the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?"

Simon replied, "I suppose the one who had the bigger debt forgiven."

"You have judged correctly," Jesus said.

Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgivenas her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little."

Then Jesus said to her, "Your sins are forgiven."

The other guests began to say among themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?"

Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Luke 7:36-50

"This is the meaning of the parable: The seed is the word of God. Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away. The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life's worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature. But the seed on good soil stands for those with a noble and good heart, who hear the word, retain it, and by persevering produce a crop."

Luke 8:11-15

"Then Jesus went through the towns and villages, teaching as he made his way to Jerusalem. Someone asked him, "Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?"

He said to them, "Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to. Once the owner of the house gets up and closes the door, you will stand outside knocking and pleading, 'Sir, open the door for us.'

"But he will answer, 'I don't know you or where you come from.'

"Then you will say, 'We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.'

"But he will reply, 'I don't know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!'

"There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last."

Luke 13:23-30

Four lessons, all relevant, all timeless.

Oldbear83 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Old Bear and BTD, anyone else, Could you give me your answers regarding the Gospel that saves? I realize you may have before, but it's buried in a heap of discussion. Perhaps you could just copy and paste it for me?

---

To understand Salvation, I commend you to consider four passages from the Gospels, and the words of our Lord Jesus Christ:

"Then Jesus said to his disciples, "Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."

When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, "Who then can be saved?"
Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."

Matthew 19:23-26

"When one of the Pharisees invited Jesus to have dinner with him, he went to the Pharisee's house and reclined at the table. A woman in that town who lived a sinful life learned that Jesus was eating at the Pharisee's house, so she came there with an alabaster jar of perfume. As she stood behind him at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them.

When the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, "If this man were a prophet, he would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she isthat she is a sinner."

Jesus answered him, "Simon, I have something to tell you."

"Tell me, teacher," he said.

"Two people owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he forgave the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?"

Simon replied, "I suppose the one who had the bigger debt forgiven."

"You have judged correctly," Jesus said.

Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgivenas her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little."

Then Jesus said to her, "Your sins are forgiven."

The other guests began to say among themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?"

Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Luke 7:36-50

"This is the meaning of the parable: The seed is the word of God. Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away. The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life's worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature. But the seed on good soil stands for those with a noble and good heart, who hear the word, retain it, and by persevering produce a crop."

Luke 8:11-15

"Then Jesus went through the towns and villages, teaching as he made his way to Jerusalem. Someone asked him, "Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?"

He said to them, "Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to. Once the owner of the house gets up and closes the door, you will stand outside knocking and pleading, 'Sir, open the door for us.'

"But he will answer, 'I don't know you or where you come from.'

"Then you will say, 'We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.'

"But he will reply, 'I don't know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!'

"There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last."

Luke 13:23-30

Four lessons, all relevant, all timeless.

---

But what ARE those lessons? What do they mean with regard to how a person can be saved to eternal life? You're just cutting and pasting bible verses, and that's all.

Instead of just posting verses and expecting people to read them and come to the same conclusion that you have in mind, start by communicating with clarity YOUR view on how someone is saved, and THEN use verses as support for your view. There just isn't any clarity in your post. The Gospel isn't a riddle to be solved by becoming enlightened from reading certain verses.

Jesus spoke in clear, direct language how a person is saved to eternal life. The apostles, especially Paul, did too. And yet, none of those words are included in your explanation. Isn't that a problem?

Frodo, please note that I depend on the words from Christ. BTD depends on his own opinion.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Frodo, please note that I depend on the words from Christ. BTD depends on his own opinion.

---

Here is my answer to frodo's question, "how does a person go to heaven when they die", which OldBear is calling MY OPINION:

"A person goes to heaven when they die, if in their heart they believe in the testimony of the gospel, given to us through the inspired word of God - that Jesus was sent by God, that he was crucified and died for our sins, that he was truly dead and buried, and that he was raised from the dead and now is alive for all eternity with the authority as Lord; and that they place their faith and trust in Jesus' promise that if they believe in him and in what he did, he Jesus will raise them to eternal life as well, to be with God forever."


OldBear doesn't recognize and understand the biblical gospel, calling the above "my opinion".

Know them by their fruits, people.

I'm the one quoting Scripture. And I am the one who answered Frodo's question.

BTD? Welllllllllll ...

Oldbear83 said:

---

I'm the one quoting Scripture. And I am the one who answered Frodo's question.

BTD? Welllllllllll ...

---

Satan quotes Scripture too.

And to say that your response "answers" the question while it clearly does not, and that my response did NOT answer it (which it clearly and directly does), is a pure demonstration of your general incomprehension and confusion.

BUDOS was right about many things.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Old Bear and BTD, anyone else, Could you give me your answers regarding the Gospel that saves? I realize you may have before, but it's buried in a heap of discussion. Perhaps you could just copy and paste it for me?

---

Are you not reading the responses to your comments? This was already done.

My response is here: https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/123613/replies/4620583

OldBear's response is here: https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/123613/replies/4616010


So which represents true Christianity, which is what you wanted to find out?

---

Thank you and I agree with your answer.

I cannot read everything on here, it is quite extensive at times between you and Old Bear. But I do read alot of it.

After looking at both answers, I have to say that I agree with BTDs answer.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Frodo, please note that I depend on the words from Christ. BTD depends on his own opinion.

---

We do need to rely on Scrioture, but you should have an idea of what the Scriptural basis for Salvation is. I believe that we are under the Gospel of Grace as was given to Paul by the risen Christ Himself. Romans 10:9,10-13, 1 Corintjians 15 . Do you agree with those verses accurately define how a person can know that they have Salvation?

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Frodo, please note that I depend on the words from Christ. BTD depends on his own opinion.

---

We do need to rely on Scrioture, but you should have an idea of what the Scriptural basis for Salvation is. I believe that we are under the Gospel of Grace as was given to Paul by the risen Christ Himself. Romans 10:9,10-13, 1 Corintjians 15 . Do you agree with those verses accurately define how a person can know that they have Salvation?

---

Hello again Frodo, and thanks for your post. There is an important warning for us here, if you notice. BTD said that Satan has used Scripture, which is true, but he left off that Jesus response to him was by Scripture, and the reason Jesus' words were true and Satan's were not, is because Satan used the verses out of context. This is why I included the long passages I did, so the context would be clear. Note also two things that every one of the four passages were in Christ's words, and every one of them addressed the matter of being saved.

With that in mind, I now address the passages you referenced, with a look at their context:

Romans 10:9 " If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved"

Romans 10:13 "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

That sounds great, but it runs into problems when you look at Matthew 7:2123, where Jesus plainly says "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven"

The obvious difference is believing with your heart, not just thinking the words will do the trick. And in Romans Chapter 10, Paul warns us of exactly that point. In verse 3 he warns that the 'Israelites', the practicing Jews, have a zeal for God but "they did not submit to God's righteousness". Paul concludes Chapter 10 with quotes from Moses and Isaiah:

"Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says,
I will make you envious by those who are not a nation;
I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding."[j]

And Isaiah boldly says,
I was found by those who did not seek me;
I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me."

But concerning Israel he says,
"All day long I have held out my hands
to a disobedient and obstinate people"

Romans 10:19-21

Now regarding 1 Corinthians 15. I found this passage interesting in the context of our discussion, as it explores the Resurrection. From your question, I believe you meant to ask if I agreed with verses 1-2, which read as follows:

"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain."

This is an important teaching, as it reminds us not to simply accept anything someone says is true, but to test it. Scripture being the obvious place to start.

But again context matters, and part of the question is why a person with no bias should choose to believe Paul ahead of some other preacher. The answer lies in the details of this chapter where Paul affirms the foundation of the Gospel, and how Christ appeared to the disciples and apostles, and per Paul, "and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born." (1 Corinthians 15:8)

Paul establishes his humility in the very next verse, saying " For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of themyet not I, but the grace of God that was with me."

1 Corinthians 15:9-10

Note especially that Paul does not credit the work in him done to his own effort, but to God's grace working in and with him.

Verses 11 through 32 cover the matter of Resurrection, first Christ's and because of Him our own. This is the sure promise for those who believe and persevere.

But Paul never pretends that profession of faith is a one-time thing, however. In verse 34, Paul plainly says
"Come back to your senses as you ought, and stop sinning; for there are some who are ignorant of GodI say this to your shame."

The rest of the chapter returns to talk about the Resurrection Body, but the warning to be careful of our walk, as in verse 50 he warns again "I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable"

In verse 58 Paul finishes with a similar admonition, on a positive note: "Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain."

The verses you cited therefore are trustworthy, because they are consistent with the four passages I cited in Christ's own words.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

historian said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Jesus, to the Church in Ephesus (Revelation 2:6):

"Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."

---

God hates all sin. But He also lives the sinners. It's not incompatible to love people but to hate the things they do. And hating sin does not mean hating people.

Gos is God. He does not operate by our rules.

---

I'm in full agreement. This isn't what I'm arguing against. The point of quoting this verse is to show that hatred can be aligned with God. Jesus praised the church at Ephesus for their hatred of evil works.

Now, the question is: if a believer who is indwelled with the Holy Spirit is moved by the Spirit to hate the same things that Jesus hates, then HOW is having that hate NOT a "fruit" of the Spirit? Doesn't manifesting the "fruits of the Spirit" mean a person is being more and more like Jesus?

---

BTD,
Let's stop circling around this.

Here is the exact statement you made:
"HATE and anger can actually be a fruit of the Spirit."

I have asked you repeatedly whether you still affirm that statement or whether you want to revise it. Instead of answering, you've tried to redirect the conversation, accuse me of misrepresentation, and demand that I answer a different question.

None of that addresses your own words.
Quoting Mark 3 and Revelation 2 does not redefine Paul's list in Galatians 5. Jesus' righteous anger does not turn anger into a fruit of the Spirit. Jesus' hatred of evil does not turn hate into a fruit of the Spirit. Believers hating evil does not turn hate into a fruit of the Spirit.

These are basic category distinctions.

So, you are avoiding your own claim.
You are refusing to clarify it.
You are insisting I answer your question while refusing to answer mine.
And you are accusing me of "dodging" while you dodge the central issue.

I'm not playing that game.

It's a game you know quite well. So, before I respond to anything else, Iet's address the pattern in your replies, because it's preventing any honest discussion.

Once again, here is the exact statement you made:
"HATE and anger can actually be a fruit of the Spirit."

Again, I asked you directly whether you still affirm that statement or whether you want to revise it. You have still not answered that question.

Instead, your responses have followed a predictable pattern (one you know so well):
1. You shifted the topic.
You immediately abandoned your original claim and tried to force the conversation onto a different question about empathy, compassion, and charity. That is a subject change, not an explanation.

2. You accused me of misrepresenting your words.
But you never showed how I misrepresented them. You simply asserted it and demanded I "acknowledge my mistake." That is an evasion tactic, plus, I didn't make a mistake.

3. You demanded I answer your question before you answer mine.
This is your habitual attempt to control the frame of the conversation. As in so many of your posts, you want to dictate the order of discussion so you never have to clarify your own statement.

4. You claimed I was "dodging," while you avoided your own claim.
This is projection accusing me of the very thing you're doing.

5. You quoted Scripture that does not address your claim.
Mark 3 and Revelation 2 show that Jesus has righteous anger and hates evil. That is true. But it does not redefine Paul's list in Galatians 5, nor does it turn anger or hate into "fruit of the Spirit."

These verses do not support your original statement. They simply show that Jesus opposes evil which aligns with the fruit of love, goodness, and selfcontrol, not with anger or hate.

Now, back to the actual issueagain.
You wrote:
"HATE and anger can actually be a fruit of the Spirit."
I have asked you repeatedly:
Do you still affirm that statement as written, or do you want to revise it?

You have refused to directly answer every time.

So, I'm going to be clear as I know how: Until you answer that question directly, there is no meaningful conversation to continue. If you won't clarify your own words, then you're not engaging in good faith, which may indicate you have other motives.

---

^^^^ Can somebody help this guy?

- I tried to make it as easy as possible, even for a complete moron, to see that I already answered his question, even putting it in BOLD.

- I tried to get him to slow down, read and think, and see how he misrepresented my statement.

- I tried to get him to answer my question, and tried to explain how his answer is going toward my argument to support my statement that he is challenging me to defend.

BUDOS won't have any of it. There is something really, really wrong with this person, which was obvious when he/she repeatedly refused to identify obvious marian idolatry and heresy. He has put up seemingly an impenetrable wall of pride that just won't let anything get through that's coming from me. He appears to be hardening his own heart, or even "judicially hardened" by God.

Maybe he'll hear someone else?

---

BTD,

At this point, the issue is no longer about Galatians 5
it's about clarity, honesty, and the ability to stay on the actual topic.

Here is the exact statement you made:
"HATE and anger can actually be a fruit of the Spirit."

I asked you repeatedly whether you still affirm that statement or whether you want to revise it. You said you "fully affirm every word," but every time I asked you to explain how that fits Paul's list in Galatians 5:2223, you failed to do so.

Instead, your responses have followed a consistent pattern:
1. You shifted the topic.
You abandoned your original claim and repeatedly attempted to force the conversation onto a different question about empathy, compassion, charity, and evangelism. That is not clarification it is deflection.

2. You accused me of misrepresenting your words.
But you never showed how I misrepresented them. You simply asserted it and demanded I "acknowledge my mistake." That is an evasion tactic.

3. You demanded I answer your question before you answer mine.
This is an attempt to control the frame of the conversation. You want to dictate the order so you never have to clarify your own statement.

4. You projected your own dodging onto others.
You repeatedly accused meand now othersof "dodging," while refusing to address your own claim.

5. You attacked character instead of addressing Scripture.
Calling people "morons," "blind," "not of God," "compromised," or "judicially hardened" is not theological argumentation.
It is spiritual intimidation.

6. You condemned anyone who disagrees with you.
You have now declared multiple participants "not of God" simply for disagreeing with your interpretation. That is not spiritual discernmentit is spiritual posturing.

7. You attempted to isolate and recruit.
You repeatedly tried to rally others to your side by framing disagreement as spiritual corruption. That is manipulation, not exegesis.
None of this clarifies your statement. None of this explains how "hate and anger" fit Paul's list. None of this engages the biblical text.

Now, for the group, the theological issue is simple.
Paul explicitly lists the fruits of the Spirit in Galatians 5:2223:

• love
• joy
• peace
• patience
• kindness
• goodness
• faithfulness
• gentleness
• selfcontrol

"Hate" and "anger" are not included.
Paul explicitly lists the works of the flesh in Galatians 5:1921:

• hostility
• strife
• fits of anger
• dissensions
• and similar attitudes

These are included.
Jesus' righteous anger in Mark 3 does not redefine Paul's list. Jesus' hatred of evil in Revelation 2 does not redefine Paul's list. Believers hating evil does not redefine Paul's list.
These passages show that Jesus opposes evilwhich aligns with the fruit of love, goodness, and selfcontrol, not with anger or hate.
This is basic category distinction, not complicated theology.

Your question about empathy, compassion, charity, and evangelism is not a prerequisite for clarity.
You keep insisting that everyone must answer your question before you will explain your own statement. That is not how theological dialogue works. You made a doctrinal claim. You were asked to explain it. You have failed to do so. Your question is not a gateway to the discussion. It is a diversion from the discussion.


To the rest of the group:
You have all seen the pattern:

• When confronted with Scripture, he shifts the topic.
• When asked for clarity, he demands others answer his question first.
• When disagreement arises, he condemns the person spiritually.
• When challenged, he attacks character instead of addressing the text.
• When corrected, he reframes his own words retroactively.
• When multiple people disagree, he claims they are "not of God."

This is not exegesis. This is not discernment. This is not theological engagement.
It is manipulation.

So here is the final boundary.

BTD:
You have not explained your statement. You have not defended your statement. You have not clarified your statement. You have only attacked, redirected, and accused.

Therefore, the conversation is over.

If you ever decide to engage the actual biblical questionhow "hate and anger" fit Paul's explicit list of the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5:2223you can present that explanation plainly.

Until then, I'm done responding to the deflection, the accusations, and the spiritual posturing.

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

historian said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Jesus, to the Church in Ephesus (Revelation 2:6):

"Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."

---

God hates all sin. But He also lives the sinners. It's not incompatible to love people but to hate the things they do. And hating sin does not mean hating people.

Gos is God. He does not operate by our rules.

---

I'm in full agreement. This isn't what I'm arguing against. The point of quoting this verse is to show that hatred can be aligned with God. Jesus praised the church at Ephesus for their hatred of evil works.

Now, the question is: if a believer who is indwelled with the Holy Spirit is moved by the Spirit to hate the same things that Jesus hates, then HOW is having that hate NOT a "fruit" of the Spirit? Doesn't manifesting the "fruits of the Spirit" mean a person is being more and more like Jesus?

---

BTD,
Let's stop circling around this.

Here is the exact statement you made:
"HATE and anger can actually be a fruit of the Spirit."

I have asked you repeatedly whether you still affirm that statement or whether you want to revise it. Instead of answering, you've tried to redirect the conversation, accuse me of misrepresentation, and demand that I answer a different question.

None of that addresses your own words.
Quoting Mark 3 and Revelation 2 does not redefine Paul's list in Galatians 5. Jesus' righteous anger does not turn anger into a fruit of the Spirit. Jesus' hatred of evil does not turn hate into a fruit of the Spirit. Believers hating evil does not turn hate into a fruit of the Spirit.

These are basic category distinctions.

So, you are avoiding your own claim.
You are refusing to clarify it.
You are insisting I answer your question while refusing to answer mine.
And you are accusing me of "dodging" while you dodge the central issue.

I'm not playing that game.

It's a game you know quite well. So, before I respond to anything else, Iet's address the pattern in your replies, because it's preventing any honest discussion.

Once again, here is the exact statement you made:
"HATE and anger can actually be a fruit of the Spirit."

Again, I asked you directly whether you still affirm that statement or whether you want to revise it. You have still not answered that question.

Instead, your responses have followed a predictable pattern (one you know so well):
1. You shifted the topic.
You immediately abandoned your original claim and tried to force the conversation onto a different question about empathy, compassion, and charity. That is a subject change, not an explanation.

2. You accused me of misrepresenting your words.
But you never showed how I misrepresented them. You simply asserted it and demanded I "acknowledge my mistake." That is an evasion tactic, plus, I didn't make a mistake.

3. You demanded I answer your question before you answer mine.
This is your habitual attempt to control the frame of the conversation. As in so many of your posts, you want to dictate the order of discussion so you never have to clarify your own statement.

4. You claimed I was "dodging," while you avoided your own claim.
This is projection accusing me of the very thing you're doing.

5. You quoted Scripture that does not address your claim.
Mark 3 and Revelation 2 show that Jesus has righteous anger and hates evil. That is true. But it does not redefine Paul's list in Galatians 5, nor does it turn anger or hate into "fruit of the Spirit."

These verses do not support your original statement. They simply show that Jesus opposes evil which aligns with the fruit of love, goodness, and selfcontrol, not with anger or hate.

Now, back to the actual issueagain.
You wrote:
"HATE and anger can actually be a fruit of the Spirit."
I have asked you repeatedly:
Do you still affirm that statement as written, or do you want to revise it?

You have refused to directly answer every time.

So, I'm going to be clear as I know how: Until you answer that question directly, there is no meaningful conversation to continue. If you won't clarify your own words, then you're not engaging in good faith, which may indicate you have other motives.

---

^^^^ Can somebody help this guy?

- I tried to make it as easy as possible, even for a complete moron, to see that I already answered his question, even putting it in BOLD.

- I tried to get him to slow down, read and think, and see how he misrepresented my statement.

- I tried to get him to answer my question, and tried to explain how his answer is going toward my argument to support my statement that he is challenging me to defend.

BUDOS won't have any of it. There is something really, really wrong with this person, which was obvious when he/she repeatedly refused to identify obvious marian idolatry and heresy. He has put up seemingly an impenetrable wall of pride that just won't let anything get through that's coming from me. He appears to be hardening his own heart, or even "judicially hardened" by God.

Maybe he'll hear someone else?

---

BTD,

At this point, the issue is no longer about Galatians 5
it's about clarity, honesty, and the ability to stay on the actual topic.

Here is the exact statement you made:
"HATE and anger can actually be a fruit of the Spirit."

I asked you repeatedly whether you still affirm that statement or whether you want to revise it. You said you "fully affirm every word," but every time I asked you to explain how that fits Paul's list in Galatians 5:2223, you failed to do so.

Instead, your responses have followed a consistent pattern:
1. You shifted the topic.
You abandoned your original claim and repeatedly attempted to force the conversation onto a different question about empathy, compassion, charity, and evangelism. That is not clarification it is deflection.

2. You accused me of misrepresenting your words.
But you never showed how I misrepresented them. You simply asserted it and demanded I "acknowledge my mistake." That is an evasion tactic.

3. You demanded I answer your question before you answer mine.
This is an attempt to control the frame of the conversation. You want to dictate the order so you never have to clarify your own statement.

4. You projected your own dodging onto others.
You repeatedly accused meand now othersof "dodging," while refusing to address your own claim.

5. You attacked character instead of addressing Scripture.
Calling people "morons," "blind," "not of God," "compromised," or "judicially hardened" is not theological argumentation.
It is spiritual intimidation.

6. You condemned anyone who disagrees with you.
You have now declared multiple participants "not of God" simply for disagreeing with your interpretation. That is not spiritual discernmentit is spiritual posturing.

7. You attempted to isolate and recruit.
You repeatedly tried to rally others to your side by framing disagreement as spiritual corruption. That is manipulation, not exegesis.
None of this clarifies your statement. None of this explains how "hate and anger" fit Paul's list. None of this engages the biblical text.

Now, for the group, the theological issue is simple.
Paul explicitly lists the fruits of the Spirit in Galatians 5:2223:

• love
• joy
• peace
• patience
• kindness
• goodness
• faithfulness
• gentleness
• selfcontrol

"Hate" and "anger" are not included.
Paul explicitly lists the works of the flesh in Galatians 5:1921:

• hostility
• strife
• fits of anger
• dissensions
• and similar attitudes

These are included.
Jesus' righteous anger in Mark 3 does not redefine Paul's list. Jesus' hatred of evil in Revelation 2 does not redefine Paul's list. Believers hating evil does not redefine Paul's list.
These passages show that Jesus opposes evilwhich aligns with the fruit of love, goodness, and selfcontrol, not with anger or hate.
This is basic category distinction, not complicated theology.

Your question about empathy, compassion, charity, and evangelism is not a prerequisite for clarity.
You keep insisting that everyone must answer your question before you will explain your own statement. That is not how theological dialogue works. You made a doctrinal claim. You were asked to explain it. You have failed to do so. Your question is not a gateway to the discussion. It is a diversion from the discussion.


To the rest of the group:
You have all seen the pattern:

• When confronted with Scripture, he shifts the topic.
• When asked for clarity, he demands others answer his question first.
• When disagreement arises, he condemns the person spiritually.
• When challenged, he attacks character instead of addressing the text.
• When corrected, he reframes his own words retroactively.
• When multiple people disagree, he claims they are "not of God."

This is not exegesis. This is not discernment. This is not theological engagement.
It is manipulation.

So here is the final boundary.

BTD:
You have not explained your statement. You have not defended your statement. You have not clarified your statement. You have only attacked, redirected, and accused.

Therefore, the conversation is over.

If you ever decide to engage the actual biblical questionhow "hate and anger" fit Paul's explicit list of the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5:2223you can present that explanation plainly.

Until then, I'm done responding to the deflection, the accusations, and the spiritual posturing.

---

Everyone saw how you "repeatedly asked" me a question... AFTER it was clearly answered. And then, even after you were shown where it was answered, even after it was presented to you in BOLD letters.... you STILL kept saying it wasn't answered. This is as about as pure of a demonstration ever on this forum of hard-heartedness, blindness, and stupidity. You lost all credibility.

Everyone also has seen how you are avoiding the question that answers your question that you're saying I'm not answering. Everyone knows that I have repeatedly told you that my question IS the defense of my statement. Everyone knows that you don't want to answer it, because it defeats your point. Everyone is watching you post long rants in order to avoid this fact. And everyone is watching you repeatedly saying you're "done", and then you keep going with your rants.

I'm actually the one showing you grace, by patiently waiting for you to drop your resentment and pride and to answer the question I posed as a way to have dialogue about my statement. But it's become very obvious to the forum that you just aren't interested in the very "civil discussion" that you were seeking, or interested in getting to the truth of the matter. Rather, in post after post of yours, your goal is merely to attack me in hopes that it marginalizes me in the minds of the people of this forum, so that they can ignore my points, and you can escape having lost the debate in reality.

**** To anyone who actually wants to debate, with honesty and clarity, the view that hate and anger CAN BE fruits of the Holy Spirit - I pose my question once again, in case anyone's forgotten:

Q: In a believer who is indwelled with the Holy Spirit, is their Spirit-moved empathy, compassion, understanding, charity, and desire to share the gospel with others fruits of the Holy Spirit? Yes or no?

Here is an additional question I'll add:
Q: In a believer who is indwelled with the Holy Spirit, is hatred of their own sin a fruit of the Holy Spirit?


Clearly, BUDOS and others don't want to engage the debate with honesty and clarity. Anyone out there willing to do so in good faith, or who simply want to hear my argument? If so, then please answer the question.

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Old Bear and BTD, anyone else, Could you give me your answers regarding the Gospel that saves? I realize you may have before, but it's buried in a heap of discussion. Perhaps you could just copy and paste it for me?

---

Are you not reading the responses to your comments? This was already done.

My response is here: https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/123613/replies/4620583

OldBear's response is here: https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/123613/replies/4616010


So which represents true Christianity, which is what you wanted to find out?

---

Thank you and I agree with your answer.

I cannot read everything on here, it is quite extensive at times between you and Old Bear. But I do read alot of it.

After looking at both answers, I have to say that I agree with BTDs answer.

---

Thanks frodo, for your clarity.
There's just not enough of that here.

This is the Way of Salvation;

"that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
For "whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.""
Romans 10:9-10, 13

The prayer at the end of thia firat post sums this all up, as well.as the prayer in the other thread "A Prayer Of Salvation"

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Old Bear and BTD, anyone else, Could you give me your answers regarding the Gospel that saves? I realize you may have before, but it's buried in a heap of discussion. Perhaps you could just copy and paste it for me?

---

Are you not reading the responses to your comments? This was already done.

My response is here: https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/123613/replies/4620583

OldBear's response is here: https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/123613/replies/4616010


So which represents true Christianity, which is what you wanted to find out?

---

Thank you and I agree with your answer.

I cannot read everything on here, it is quite extensive at times between you and Old Bear. But I do read alot of it.

After looking at both answers, I have to say that I agree with BTDs answer.

---

Thanks frodo, for your clarity.
There's just not enough of that here.

---

Well, I can tell you that if you are going to stand for the Gospel, you will spend most of your time standing alone. God sees it and will reward you at the Judgement Seat of Christ. I spend most of my time alone. It's nice to have this place where I don't have to engauge as much because you and Old Bear spend a lot of time debating. But I am here. As I have stated before, I espouse the Mid Acts Dispensationalist view of Scripture. Which Theology system do you espouse if any? Which Denomination?

Please take the time to read this first post if you haven't yet

.

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Please take the time to read this first post if you haven't yet

---

Actually, if you are new to this thread, read as much of it as you can.

Some of it is enlightening, and a lot of it is illuminating.

Oldbear83 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Please take the time to read this first post if you haven't yet

---

Actually, if you are new to this thread, read as much of it as you can.

Some of it is enlightening, and a lot of it is illuminating.

---

Yes, I appreciate your discussion and input, but the most important reason for this thread is to explain the Way of Salvation. Hence, Please read this first post, THEN discuss it.

"But as it is written: "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.""
I Corinthians 2:9 NKJV

Just a thought fit some people here: If you want more people to take the time to read your posts, try not to write a book. I admit that I might skim something like that, but I usually don't read most of it.