BUDOS said:

---

Why are you saying "folks "?
Are you assuming everyone reads your posts?

---

Right there! Do you see?

You're getting all bent up and snarky over me simply saying "Folks" which is just a way to address whomever may be reading, and you're trying to attribute it to a narcissistic motivation. Do you see that?! You're simply WANTING to see that in what I write. And then you're asserting it as the reality, and it's all confirmation bias from there. This is exactly what I'm talking about.

Pretty arrogant. I remember a while ago, you lost it, and then you had to apologize to the board for your reaction, saying that I "got the best of you". Might I suggest that the same thing is happening now?

For those looking for the thread discussion, the adults will get us back to it in a while.

Thanks for your patience.

Oldbear83 said:

---

For those looking for the thread discussion, the adults will get us back to it in a while.

Thanks for your patience.

---

Mirror?

I'm the one trying to have the discussion. The hecklers have shown up, and need to be dealt with.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For those looking for the thread discussion, the adults will get us back to it in a while.

Thanks for your patience.

---

Mirror?

---

Yes, you might want to use one.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For those looking for the thread discussion, the adults will get us back to it in a while.

Thanks for your patience.

---

Mirror?

---

Yes, you might want to use one.

---

I'm not the one who passed that judgement, am I?

Do you honestly not see the irony in your comment?

Why? Since when do you or me think anyone in a forum can force anyone to respond, especially at your order? A person can dare, ridicule, demean, utilize their individual gift for vitriol, etc. but that person is completely at the mercy of the decision of the other, and whether or not they want to put up with whatever individuals like you seem to love to dish out.

If I recall correctly I believe that you issued me one some time back. However, you refused to accept my answer and referred to me as a liar. Some might think you used that flimsy excuse as a ruse not to answer my question.

So, the characteristics mentioned above continue to be exhibited by one or perhaps both of us.

And although you have the choice to not respond or ignore, just like anyone else so do I. So do your thing.
It's your choice.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For those looking for the thread discussion, the adults will get us back to it in a while.

Thanks for your patience.

---

Mirror?

---

Yes, you might want to use one.

---

I'm not the one who passed that judgement, am I?

Do you honestly not see the irony in your comment?

---

Please look at your posts here in the last two days.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For those looking for the thread discussion, the adults will get us back to it in a while.

Thanks for your patience.

---

Mirror?

---

Yes, you might want to use one.

---

I'm not the one who passed that judgement, am I?

Do you honestly not see the irony in your comment?

---

Please look at your posts here in the last two days.

---

What about them? Why are you guys so vague in your critique, and never actually present something substantive?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For those looking for the thread discussion, the adults will get us back to it in a while.

Thanks for your patience.

---

Mirror?

---

Yes, you might want to use one.

---

I'm not the one who passed that judgement, am I?

Do you honestly not see the irony in your comment?

---

Please look at your posts here in the last two days.

---

What about them? Why are you guys so vague in your critique, and never actually present something substantive?

---

Tone is its own message.

BUDOS said:

---

Why? Since when do you or me think anyone in a forum can force anyone to respond, especially at your order? A person can dare, ridicule, demean, utilize their individual gift for vitriol, etc. but that person is completely at the mercy of the decision of the other, and whether or not they want to put up with whatever individuals like you seem to love to dish out.

If I recall correctly I believe that you issued me one some time back. However, you refused to accept my answer and referred to me as a liar. Some might think you used that flimsy excuse as a ruse not to answer my question.

So, the characteristics mentioned above continue to be exhibited by one or perhaps both of us.

And although you have the choice to not respond or ignore, just like anyone else so do I. So do your thing.
It's your choice.

---

You threw the stones, I challenged you first. And you're not backing them up. It's all YOUR choice.

If you're not going to respond to my challenge, then I have no obligation to respond to yours.

You attributed narcissim to my "Folks" comment, a clear demonstration how your issue with heavy confirmation bias gets in the way of fair, honest thinking. I really couldn't have demonstrated it any better.

Some years ago, I had an employee who was smart, hard-working and did a lot of things well.

But she disliked some of her co-workers in the team, and would speak and act rudely towards them all the time. This behavior was noticed by more senior executives in the company.

So at a review, I pointed out this problem to her, and she was dismissive. She felt only her positive qualities mattered, and disputed that her rude behavior was even happening.

So it happened that a few months later, I was promoted to a higher position, and the director who promoted me, also promoted a member of my team to take my old role. The guy promoted happened to be someone the woman with the rudeness problem most hated.

Sometimes, you can try to help someone who refuses to accept that help.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For those looking for the thread discussion, the adults will get us back to it in a while.

Thanks for your patience.

---

Mirror?

---

Yes, you might want to use one.

---

I'm not the one who passed that judgement, am I?

Do you honestly not see the irony in your comment?

---

Please look at your posts here in the last two days.

---

What about them? Why are you guys so vague in your critique, and never actually present something substantive?

---

Tone is its own message.

---

I know the game. So does everyone else. "Tone" is just a way to argue against someone that's saying what you don't like, but you can't argue against. You and others, for some reason, just don't like someone forcefully telling the truth. You guys cast aspersions, then run away from the challenge to substantiate it. It's a very tiresome game, and it detracts from real, substantive debate.

And again, the incredible irony of you critiquing "tone".

Oldbear83 said:

---

Some years ago, I had an employee who was smart, hard-working and did a lot of things well.

But she disliked some of her co-workers in the team, and would speak and act rudely towards them all the time. This behavior was noticed by more senior executives in the company.

So at a review, I pointed out this problem to her, and she was dismissive. She felt only her positive qualities mattered, and disputed that her rude behavior was even happening.

So it happened that a few months later, I was promoted to a higher position, and the director who promoted me, also promoted a member of my team to take my old role. The guy promoted happened to be someone the woman with the rudeness problem most hated.

Sometimes, you can try to help someone who refuses to accept that help.

---

But were you the rudest person there, and trying to lecture others about their rudeness?

If nothing else, the message has been made clear.

Proverbs 26:4-5 is not a contradiction.

Do you know why?

You continue to fail to see that your responses to me and so many others are objective evidence of your issues, some of which I attempted to help you understand earlier.

I certainly understand why so many of the others feel the way they do about you. And with your issues I understand why you say you don't care. And that's one of the reasons why you never, ever, really win. Never.
Think about that. And after you do, unfortunately I know you won't change. Not that you can't. You choose not to. Therefore, you choose to lose when you could choose to win so many, and in the end, yourself.

BUDOS said:

---

You continue to fail to see that your responses to me and so many others are objective evidence of your issues, some of which I attempted to help you understand earlier.

I certainly understand why so many of the others feel the way they do about you. And with your issues I understand why you say you don't care. And that's one of the reasons why you never, ever, really win. Never.
Think about that. And after you do, unfortunately I know you won't change. Not that you can't. You choose not to. Therefore, you choose to lose when you could choose to win so many, and in the end, yourself.

---

My responses to you are only returning the level of disrespect that you're giving me. Are you seriously this unaware of what you're doing? Even after you criticized me for the "folks" comment?? Isnt' that the objective evidence of YOUR issues? Please.... the arrogance of you constantly thinking it's the other guy with the problem.

It's never been about me winning. It's been about the truth winning. And I believe it has. The proof? You and others (and I really don't think you understand the faultiness of the company you're keeping here) never had anything to say against what I said. And it's clear you've been reading everything I wrote. You're only left with the option of attacking me personally. THAT'S what's been made evident in all this.

Folks, it's not just by coincidence that those indignant about my "tone" and making it the focus all happen to be exactly the same people who either:

• directly believe/engage in Marian idolatry, or
• completely balked at or outrightly refused to call it out when asked

All of them, save perhaps one. Obviously, I'm hitting a nerve with those who apparently are compromised in the same way. Not an accident, imo.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Folks, it's not just by coincidence that those indignant about my "tone" and making it the focus all happen to be exactly the same people who either:

• directly believe/engage in Marian idolatry, or
• completely balked at or outrightly refused to call it out when asked

All of them, save perhaps one. Obviously, I'm hitting a nerve with those who apparently are compromised in the same way. Not an accident, imo.

---

Hmmmm

I will address the following first when you posted this:

Pretty arrogant. I remember a while ago, you lost it, and then you had to apologize to the board for your reaction, saying that I "got the best of you". Might I suggest that the same thing is happening now?

My comment where you quote that you got the best of me was referring, at least primarily, to the emotions you set off within me. I allowed you to do what you often intend, to focus as much or more on demeaning others and falsely assuming you are superior to anyone whom you suspect may challenge you--instead of attempting to maintain a constructive dialogue. You lost the argument. In my opinion, you failed to accept my explanation therefore allowing yourself to deflect and not respond to my question. Your personal issues once again caused you to fail.

Now, as for hitting a nerve, in my opinion that is more your focus than attempting to maintain a meaningful dialogue, opting instead to hide behind a flurry of demeaning vitriol with your interpretation of whatever topic is under discussion. I don't know if you realize it or not, but it is okay not to be perfect--which you are not. The last and only one which was perfect got crucified. Based on your method of debate this is what you are trying to do to many of those who attempt to participate in these discussions--crucify them. Just like a Pharisee; and that is Sad-u-cee.

Now, that you have convinced me that you truly are blind as to how ineffective you often are due to your presentation style, you respond and then let's attempt to get back to where these others can restart their discussions and help each other learn more about their topics of interest. As is beneficial to their mental health, hopefully they will skip such entries as ours and focus on helping each other. Let's try not to butt in with our "stuff;" however, I recognize that we may continue to correspond.

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Folks, it's not just by coincidence that those indignant about my "tone" and making it the focus all happen to be exactly the same people who either:

• directly believe/engage in Marian idolatry, or
• completely balked at or outrightly refused to call it out when asked

All of them, save perhaps one. Obviously, I'm hitting a nerve with those who apparently are compromised in the same way. Not an accident, imo.

---

Hmmmm

I will address the following first when you posted this:

Pretty arrogant. I remember a while ago, you lost it, and then you had to apologize to the board for your reaction, saying that I "got the best of you". Might I suggest that the same thing is happening now?

My comment where you quote that you got the best of me was referring, at least primarily, to the emotions you set off within me. I allowed you to do what you often intend, to focus as much or more on demeaning others and falsely assuming you are superior to anyone whom you suspect may challenge you--instead of attempting to maintain a constructive dialogue. You lost the argument. In my opinion, you failed to accept my explanation therefore allowing yourself to deflect and not respond to my question. Your personal issues once again caused you to fail.

Now, as for hitting a nerve, in my opinion that is more your focus than attempting to maintain a meaningful dialogue, opting instead to hide behind a flurry of demeaning vitriol with your interpretation of whatever topic is under discussion. I don't know if you realize it or not, but it is okay not to be perfect--which you are not. The last and only one which was perfect got crucified. Based on your method of debate this is what you are trying to do to many of those who attempt to participate in these discussions--crucify them. Just like a Pharisee; and that is Sad-u-cee.

Now, that you have convinced me that you truly are blind as to how ineffective you often are due to your presentation style, you respond and then let's attempt to get back to where these others can restart their discussions and help each other learn more about their topics of interest. As is beneficial to their mental health, hopefully they will skip such entries as ours and focus on helping each other. Let's try not to butt in with our "stuff;" however, I recognize that we may continue to correspond.

---

I know who I'm deaing with in you guys. Your complete failure and unwillingness to call out obvious and egregious Marian idolatry means you're compromised to the truth. You're trying, but you can't run away from this. It's on the record. And the same people are attacking me now. There's no mystery there. So spare me your compromised judgements.

Won't you address your comment where you ascribed narcissistic motivations to my innocuous "folks" comment? Or are you trying to run away from that too? Doesn't that pretty much sum up the entirety of your "dialogue" here in this thread? The arrogance, of believing you are in the position to judge hearts and ascribe evil motivations to people, simply because you declare it to be so. And then spend YOUR WHOLE TIME here tending to that mission, and then have the unbelievable audacity to claim that I'M the one getting in the way of discussions?

***** Here's what seems to be happening - I state my views logically, dispassionately, and apparently, quite effectively. Doing so hurts the other person, not because of my "tone", but rather because of the strength of the case I'm making, which is proving theirs wrong. Having no real argument against it, the other person resorts to intellectually dishonest and faulty reasoning, logic, and games as a defense mechanism. Or, they resort to ad hominem attack. This continues, over and over and over. If you cared to look at my posting history, you'll see this is the case. I'm gracious to you, until you decide to disrespect me and the conversation by employing this kind of foolish intellectual dishonesty and personal attacks. So I CALL YOU OUT. If you're making very un-intelligent arguments, I CALL IT OUT. And I don't pull punches, I call it like it is, and I don't apologize for it, because it's fully warranted. And then, all the sudden, compromised peope jump on me for being the bad guy. The same compromised people who had displayed the very intellectual dishonest tactics I was describing (like YOU). And the personal attacking of me, of what you perceive to be my character faults, is the defense mechanism, the "release" from the anger, hatred, envy, etc resulting from the fact that your pride in your views was damaged. And so you attack the source. This is EXACTLY why they killed the prophets, apostles, and Jesus. Because they couldn't attack the truth they were saying. It's from the same spirit.

So quit all your projections and your defense mechanisms in this pathetic post of yours, and stand up to me like a man, and answer for your aspersions you cast on me. Answer my challenge. We'll go one by one on your list:

1. Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

Now provide the support for this accusation. Show us how you just know in all your omniscience that I present knowledge to prove others inferior rather than to educate. Show us how you know that I'm doing it all for control. Show us how this just isn't your weak-minded projection based on what you WANT to believe.

Show us, you despicable liar.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Proverbs 26:4-5 is not a contradiction.

Do you know why?

---

I would like to hear your insight into it. I think it's just focusing on two different outcomes of handling foolish people.

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Proverbs 26:4-5 is not a contradiction.

Do you know why?

---

I would like to hear your insight into it. I think it's just focusing on two different outcomes of handling foolish people.

---

Verse 4 counsels us not to buy into the logic of foolish people.

Verse 5 suggests using their own logic to show their error.

As an example, consider when the Pharisees asked Jesus to confirm whether it was right or not to pay taxes to Caesar. They meant to trap Jesus by making Him either offend the Romans (making Him guilty of Insurrection) or appear a collaborator.

Knowing this, Christ instead asked for them to produce the coin used for the tax, a denarius. He then - as we know - asked whose image was on the coin, and said the famous line, 'render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's'

Jesus both refused to play by their rules, yet showed how their own logic worked against them.

He also proved at least one of them an hypocrite, by the way. Jesus said this while in the Temple, and under Jewish law no foreign coin was to enter. Yet at least one of them had a Roman Denarius on his person when Jesus asked to see one.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Folks, it's not just by coincidence that those indignant about my "tone" and making it the focus all happen to be exactly the same people who either:

• directly believe/engage in Marian idolatry, or
• completely balked at or outrightly refused to call it out when asked

All of them, save perhaps one. Obviously, I'm hitting a nerve with those who apparently are compromised in the same way. Not an accident, imo.

---

Hmmmm

I will address the following first when you posted this:

Pretty arrogant. I remember a while ago, you lost it, and then you had to apologize to the board for your reaction, saying that I "got the best of you". Might I suggest that the same thing is happening now?

My comment where you quote that you got the best of me was referring, at least primarily, to the emotions you set off within me. I allowed you to do what you often intend, to focus as much or more on demeaning others and falsely assuming you are superior to anyone whom you suspect may challenge you--instead of attempting to maintain a constructive dialogue. You lost the argument. In my opinion, you failed to accept my explanation therefore allowing yourself to deflect and not respond to my question. Your personal issues once again caused you to fail.

Now, as for hitting a nerve, in my opinion that is more your focus than attempting to maintain a meaningful dialogue, opting instead to hide behind a flurry of demeaning vitriol with your interpretation of whatever topic is under discussion. I don't know if you realize it or not, but it is okay not to be perfect--which you are not. The last and only one which was perfect got crucified. Based on your method of debate this is what you are trying to do to many of those who attempt to participate in these discussions--crucify them. Just like a Pharisee; and that is Sad-u-cee.

Now, that you have convinced me that you truly are blind as to how ineffective you often are due to your presentation style, you respond and then let's attempt to get back to where these others can restart their discussions and help each other learn more about their topics of interest. As is beneficial to their mental health, hopefully they will skip such entries as ours and focus on helping each other. Let's try not to butt in with our "stuff;" however, I recognize that we may continue to correspond.

---

I know who I'm deaing with in you guys. Your complete failure and unwillingness to call out obvious and egregious Marian idolatry means you're compromised to the truth. You're trying, but you can't run away from this. It's on the record. And the same people are attacking me now. There's no mystery there. So spare me your compromised judgements.

Won't you address your comment where you ascribed narcissistic motivations to my innocuous "folks" comment? Or are you trying to run away from that too? Doesn't that pretty much sum up the entirety of your "dialogue" here in this thread? The arrogance, of believing you are in the position to judge hearts and ascribe evil motivations to people, simply because you declare it to be so. And then spend YOUR WHOLE TIME here tending to that mission, and then have the unbelievable audacity to claim that I'M the one getting in the way of discussions?

***** Here's what seems to be happening - I state my views logically, dispassionately, and apparently, quite effectively. Doing so hurts the other person, not because of my "tone", but rather because of the strength of the case I'm making, which is proving theirs wrong. Having no real argument against it, the other person resorts to intellectually dishonest and faulty reasoning, logic, and games as a defense mechanism. Or, they resort to ad hominem attack. This continues, over and over and over. If you cared to look at my posting history, you'll see this is the case. I'm gracious to you, until you decide to disrespect me and the conversation by employing this kind of foolish intellectual dishonesty and personal attacks. So I CALL YOU OUT. If you're making very un-intelligent arguments, I CALL IT OUT. And I don't pull punches, I call it like it is, and I don't apologize for it, because it's fully warranted. And then, all the sudden, compromised peope jump on me for being the bad guy. The same compromised people who had displayed the very intellectual dishonest tactics I was describing (like YOU). And the personal attacking of me, of what you perceive to be my character faults, is the defense mechanism, the "release" from the anger, hatred, envy, etc resulting from the fact that your pride in your views was damaged. And so you attack the source. This is EXACTLY why they killed the prophets, apostles, and Jesus. Because they couldn't attack the truth they were saying. It's from the same spirit.

So quit all your projections and your defense mechanisms in this pathetic post of yours, and stand up to me like a man, and answer for your aspersions you cast on me. Answer my challenge. We'll go one by one on your list:

1. Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

Now provide the support for this accusation. Show us how you just know in all your omniscience that I present knowledge to prove others inferior rather than to educate. Show us how you know that I'm doing it all for control. Show us how this just isn't your weak-minded projection based on what you WANT to believe.

Show us, you despicable liar.

---

To my knowledge I have no documentation that you fit that characteristic. It is my opinion that you do exhibit some of the others listed. Is there a particular reason you only picked that one?
So, in your opinion, I am a despicable liar. Well I don't think you are. I don't always disagree with you and I don't always disagree with your interpretation of what you believe is the truth. Perhaps I also fit some of the characteristics of both lists. Why don't you list which ones you believe fit me and which ones fit you? Let's put that projection issue to the test.

As for the challenge business, just as you have no obligation to respond to my post, I have none to respond to yours. However, apparently you once again overlooked the past incident where you refused to meet your end of a "challenge." As I recall you kept insisting that I lied in my response to your "requirement" that you would not respond to my question to you. Since you chose to interpret my response as a lie, you refused to answer my question. I wonder if that sounds familiar. You know where someone responds to your response and you basically call them an idiot, or something worse, and indicate that response represents false teaching and is therefore a lie.

You got issues dude, just as so many have attempted to tell you, in different ways. It's costing you in so many ways, probably more than just personal. You seem to have made it obvious that your belief system is closed and that you will not allow anything in which might question it. I'm not sure Jesus would approve, but that is not for me to say. Jesus consistently portrays closedmindedness as:
A refusal to listen
A resistance to selfexamination
A preference for tradition over truth
A heart that has grown dull or hard
A blindness that is chosen, not imposed
And He applies this most sharply to the Pharisees because they believed they already knew everything God wanted to say. (plenty of quotes by Jesus if you want to check).

Again, if you would just take some time away and think about what others have tried to tell you, then, as when Saul became Paul, so many of us would listen more seriously to your words that your vindictive tone and vitriol.
As it is, I think that I am not the only one who thinks that you missed your time as a Pharisee. I just hope you have a different destination.

Tell you what, you get the last word. Have at it. I'll holler back at ya later. Let's let the other guys get back to discussing and debating Biblical/spiritual issues and in a manner unlike yours and mine.

Take care BTD, and I mean that.
"People cannot make you hate them, define you, or make you obsessively think about them, only you can do that." Stewart Stafford

Oldbear83 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Proverbs 26:4-5 is not a contradiction.

Do you know why?

---

I would like to hear your insight into it. I think it's just focusing on two different outcomes of handling foolish people.

---

Verse 4 counsels us not to buy into the logic of foolish people.

Verse 5 suggests using their own logic to show their error.

As an example, consider when the Pharisees asked Jesus to confirm whether it was right or not to pay taxes to Caesar. They meant to trap Jesus by making Him either offend the Romans (making Him guilty of Insurrection) or appear a collaborator.

Knowing this, Christ instead asked for them to produce the coin used for the tax, a denarius. He then - as we know - asked whose image was on the coin, and said the famous line, 'render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's'

Jesus both refused to play by their rules, yet showed how their own logic worked against them.

He also proved at least one of them an hypocrite, by the way. Jesus said this while in the Temple, and under Jewish law no foreign coin was to enter. Yet at least one of them had a Roman Denarius on his person when Jesus asked to see one.

---

Oldbear,
He also proved at least one of them an hypocrite, by the way. Jesus said this while in the Temple, and under Jewish law no foreign coin was to enter.
Yet at least one of them had a Roman Denarius on his person when Jesus asked to see one.

Wow, that finding is so cool!

Although I normally get on this forum from time to time, as with others, I often find your entries interesting and at times thought provoking. You have had me challenge some aspects of my belief system, and some of that has to do with your approach and wording.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

curtpenn said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If the Jews didn't have an infallible authority to decide what is Scripture, then how did they get it right, according to Jesus himself? Therefore, you've defeated your own argument that an infallible authority is necessary to decide Scripture. Read that again and again, if you have to. Because I'm sure you're logic will fail you in understanding this as it has all others.

---

Which Jews got it right? Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, or the Zealots? They all had different canons and VERY different interpretations of those canons.

This tells us nothing of the NT. Jesus wasn't around to affirm any of the books of the NT.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

This shows you really don't understand Scripture. Jesus was talking to the disciples in John 16:13, not the whole church. It's plainly obvious from Scripture that the church was NOT without significant error, as Paul's letters and Jesus' letters to the seven churches clearly reveal. And from whom did those churches receive their correction? The pope? No. From Paul, and from Jesus themselves.

"Whoever listens to you, listens to me...." - yes, HIS APOSTLES. And the only thing we have that today that we know is from the apostles, is in Scripture and nowhere else. Thank you, you've made the argument for sola scriptura.

---

Actually, you just made the case for apostolic succession. The apostles appointed successors as they passed away. We see the in Acts as Matthias replaced Judas.

Do you really think that Jesus just gave authority to the 12 and didn't intend for it to pass to others? That would negate what he said in Matt 16:18. Acts confirm that His Church did continue.

---

You're just arguing in circles, repeating arguments already answered and defeated. Your arguments always are filled with terrible logic, complete non sequiturs and bad eisegesis. And sadly, you're not capable of basic logic and reasoning, or intellectually honesty, to even realize or acknowledge it. So obviously, there's nothing that can be said that will have an effect. I gave you a chance, but I just can't keep correcting your continual errors in thinking.

---

This describes you perfectly.

---

Clanging empty vessel, for you in turn.

Folks, when this evil, vulgar, clanging empty vessel shows up to attack me and defend your beliefs, what does that tell you?

---

It tells them they are not alone in seeing you as the sanctimonious asshat you actually are.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

---

Unfortunately, there are some here who just can't/won't seek and evaluate the truth of what's said, but who'd rather attack those who are saying it.

---

This is a perfect description of your MO. Well said.

BUDOS said:

---

" Where is your response where you actually deal with what's being said, rather than trying to personally attack me for how you perceive I say it?

You obviously are reading all my posts through your thick lens. I seem to bother you a great deal, when I'm just saying what is true. That's pretty revealing."

Obviously I am neither a Bible scholar nor a psychiatrist or psychologist, so I just did some searches based on a collection of your responses to a variety of posts and the below site popped up. I don't think every characteristic fits and like I said, I am not qualified to form any type of declarative judgement.
However, in my opinion, there are multiple items which describe how I believe you often come across, but not always. You know so much and would have so much more influence and educate us more effectively if you did not come across so negative, angry and bitter. So often it is that which causes the person to lose sight of the content and focus more on the tone of your message, often resulting in a give and take inferior to what otherwise would happen.

" A narcissistic Bible scholar often weaponizes extensive scriptural knowledge to establish superiority, demand admiration, and control others, rather than to serve or enlighten. They display grandiosity, lack empathy, twist doctrines to fit their agenda, and react to criticism with rage or victimhood.

Key Characteristics:
Weaponized Scripture:
Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority.

---

Bingo.

Thank you BUDOS. Your courtesy and calm presentation are well appreciated, by me and I am sure by others.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

"People who constantly argue seek control and power over others. You cannot reason with them, so it's better to withdraw from an argument than try to prove them wrong." ~Nicola Davies

---

The Discussion should be about seeking the real truth no matter where it leads you. Be a genuine truth seeker and God will lead you to the truth.

---

Unfortunately, there are some here who just can't/won't seek and evaluate the truth of what's said, but who'd rather attack those who are saying it.

---

Outing yourself again.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that your response helped to confirm the characteristics indicated in my post, as does many of your previous responses to others.

---

No, that's called confirmation bias, on top of a running defense mechanism.

I've done NONE of these things, which you posted:

" Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority."

You're a despicable liar. Why don't you post my comments where you claim I'm demonstrating these? That's a challenge.

My responses to others, which may be sharply critical, I believe to be completely warranted. You don't. You're free to feel the way you want. But you'll excuse me if I discount your judgement of others, given that you're really not offering much here except to engage in ad hominem.

---

And "despicable liar" isn't ad hominem…. Sure, sure.

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Folks, it's not just by coincidence that those indignant about my "tone" and making it the focus all happen to be exactly the same people who either:

• directly believe/engage in Marian idolatry, or
• completely balked at or outrightly refused to call it out when asked

All of them, save perhaps one. Obviously, I'm hitting a nerve with those who apparently are compromised in the same way. Not an accident, imo.

---

Hmmmm

I will address the following first when you posted this:

Pretty arrogant. I remember a while ago, you lost it, and then you had to apologize to the board for your reaction, saying that I "got the best of you". Might I suggest that the same thing is happening now?

My comment where you quote that you got the best of me was referring, at least primarily, to the emotions you set off within me. I allowed you to do what you often intend, to focus as much or more on demeaning others and falsely assuming you are superior to anyone whom you suspect may challenge you--instead of attempting to maintain a constructive dialogue. You lost the argument. In my opinion, you failed to accept my explanation therefore allowing yourself to deflect and not respond to my question. Your personal issues once again caused you to fail.

Now, as for hitting a nerve, in my opinion that is more your focus than attempting to maintain a meaningful dialogue, opting instead to hide behind a flurry of demeaning vitriol with your interpretation of whatever topic is under discussion. I don't know if you realize it or not, but it is okay not to be perfect--which you are not. The last and only one which was perfect got crucified. Based on your method of debate this is what you are trying to do to many of those who attempt to participate in these discussions--crucify them. Just like a Pharisee; and that is Sad-u-cee.

Now, that you have convinced me that you truly are blind as to how ineffective you often are due to your presentation style, you respond and then let's attempt to get back to where these others can restart their discussions and help each other learn more about their topics of interest. As is beneficial to their mental health, hopefully they will skip such entries as ours and focus on helping each other. Let's try not to butt in with our "stuff;" however, I recognize that we may continue to correspond.

---

I know who I'm deaing with in you guys. Your complete failure and unwillingness to call out obvious and egregious Marian idolatry means you're compromised to the truth. You're trying, but you can't run away from this. It's on the record. And the same people are attacking me now. There's no mystery there. So spare me your compromised judgements.

Won't you address your comment where you ascribed narcissistic motivations to my innocuous "folks" comment? Or are you trying to run away from that too? Doesn't that pretty much sum up the entirety of your "dialogue" here in this thread? The arrogance, of believing you are in the position to judge hearts and ascribe evil motivations to people, simply because you declare it to be so. And then spend YOUR WHOLE TIME here tending to that mission, and then have the unbelievable audacity to claim that I'M the one getting in the way of discussions?

***** Here's what seems to be happening - I state my views logically, dispassionately, and apparently, quite effectively. Doing so hurts the other person, not because of my "tone", but rather because of the strength of the case I'm making, which is proving theirs wrong. Having no real argument against it, the other person resorts to intellectually dishonest and faulty reasoning, logic, and games as a defense mechanism. Or, they resort to ad hominem attack. This continues, over and over and over. If you cared to look at my posting history, you'll see this is the case. I'm gracious to you, until you decide to disrespect me and the conversation by employing this kind of foolish intellectual dishonesty and personal attacks. So I CALL YOU OUT. If you're making very un-intelligent arguments, I CALL IT OUT. And I don't pull punches, I call it like it is, and I don't apologize for it, because it's fully warranted. And then, all the sudden, compromised peope jump on me for being the bad guy. The same compromised people who had displayed the very intellectual dishonest tactics I was describing (like YOU). And the personal attacking of me, of what you perceive to be my character faults, is the defense mechanism, the "release" from the anger, hatred, envy, etc resulting from the fact that your pride in your views was damaged. And so you attack the source. This is EXACTLY why they killed the prophets, apostles, and Jesus. Because they couldn't attack the truth they were saying. It's from the same spirit.

So quit all your projections and your defense mechanisms in this pathetic post of yours, and stand up to me like a man, and answer for your aspersions you cast on me. Answer my challenge. We'll go one by one on your list:

1. Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

Now provide the support for this accusation. Show us how you just know in all your omniscience that I present knowledge to prove others inferior rather than to educate. Show us how you know that I'm doing it all for control. Show us how this just isn't your weak-minded projection based on what you WANT to believe.

Show us, you despicable liar.

---

To my knowledge I have no documentation that you fit that characteristic. It is my opinion that you do exhibit some of the others listed. Is there a particular reason you only picked that one?
So, in your opinion, I am a despicable liar. Well I don't think you are. I don't always disagree with you and I don't always disagree with your interpretation of what you believe is the truth. Perhaps I also fit some of the characteristics of both lists. Why don't you list which ones you believe fit me and which ones fit you? Let's put that projection issue to the test.

As for the challenge business, just as you have no obligation to respond to my post, I have none to respond to yours. However, apparently you once again overlooked the past incident where you refused to meet your end of a "challenge." As I recall you kept insisting that I lied in my response to your "requirement" that you would not respond to my question to you. Since you chose to interpret my response as a lie, you refused to answer my question. I wonder if that sounds familiar. You know where someone responds to your response and you basically call them an idiot, or something worse, and indicate that response represents false teaching and is therefore a lie.

You got issues dude, just as so many have attempted to tell you, in different ways. It's costing you in so many ways, probably more than just personal. You seem to have made it obvious that your belief system is closed and that you will not allow anything in which might question it. I'm not sure Jesus would approve, but that is not for me to say. Jesus consistently portrays closedmindedness as:
A refusal to listen
A resistance to selfexamination
A preference for tradition over truth
A heart that has grown dull or hard
A blindness that is chosen, not imposed
And He applies this most sharply to the Pharisees because they believed they already knew everything God wanted to say. (plenty of quotes by Jesus if you want to check).

Again, if you would just take some time away and think about what others have tried to tell you, then, as when Saul became Paul, so many of us would listen more seriously to your words that your vindictive tone and vitriol.
As it is, I think that I am not the only one who thinks that you missed your time as a Pharisee. I just hope you have a different destination.

Tell you what, you get the last word. Have at it. I'll holler back at ya later. Let's let the other guys get back to discussing and debating Biblical/spiritual issues and in a manner unlike yours and mine.

Take care BTD, and I mean that.
"People cannot make you hate them, define you, or make you obsessively think about them, only you can do that." Stewart Stafford

---

I'm going through that list one at a time to expose you as the liar that you are. So as it stands, **you admit that first entry of your list is not true, yet you still posted it in your laughable google-diagnosis of me. I'm holding you to account on what you say, so don't cower, man up. So let's go to the second:

2. They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

So go ahead and explain how your omniscience allows you to make such a judgement. Point to where I even suggested such a thing. Explain how this isn't nothing more than you wanting to believe this, just the same as when you ascribed narcissism to my "folks" comment. Tell us how this isn't you just pulling things out of your behind in order to build your ad hominem straw man. Explain, liar.

Oh, and don't bother using the "others saying the same thing argument". The others you are referring to are compromised to the truth in the same way that you are. They have expressed the very kind of evil attitude and "tone" that you are railing against, yet somehow you are completely silent. That's because you are a BS artist. You're compromised. So I put very little stock in your judgement. Also, let me remind you that I challenged you first, and you failed to respond to it, but offered your challlenge in return. You can't point to my refusal to answer your challenge, if you rebuffed first. That's not how this works.

So answer up, liar.

curtpenn said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that your response helped to confirm the characteristics indicated in my post, as does many of your previous responses to others.

---

No, that's called confirmation bias, on top of a running defense mechanism.

I've done NONE of these things, which you posted:

" Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority."

You're a despicable liar. Why don't you post my comments where you claim I'm demonstrating these? That's a challenge.

My responses to others, which may be sharply critical, I believe to be completely warranted. You don't. You're free to feel the way you want. But you'll excuse me if I discount your judgement of others, given that you're really not offering much here except to engage in ad hominem.

---

And "despicable liar" isn't ad hominem…. Sure, sure.

---

No, it isn't, if what I'm asserting is that his statements are untrue and he knows it. Please learn basic logic terms before trying to argue them, lest you make yourself look dumb. Good lord, how many intellectually challenged people are there here?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

curtpenn said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that your response helped to confirm the characteristics indicated in my post, as does many of your previous responses to others.

---

No, that's called confirmation bias, on top of a running defense mechanism.

I've done NONE of these things, which you posted:

" Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority."

You're a despicable liar. Why don't you post my comments where you claim I'm demonstrating these? That's a challenge.

My responses to others, which may be sharply critical, I believe to be completely warranted. You don't. You're free to feel the way you want. But you'll excuse me if I discount your judgement of others, given that you're really not offering much here except to engage in ad hominem.

---

And "despicable liar" isn't ad hominem…. Sure, sure.

---

No, it isn't, if what I'm asserting is that his statements are untrue and he knows it. Please learn basic logic terms before trying to argue them, lest you make yourself look dumb. Good lord, how many intellectually challenged people are there here?

---

You cannot prove anything so you call him a despicable liar. That is an ad hominem, moron.

curtpenn said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

curtpenn said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BUDOS said:

---

Perhaps you should reflect on the fact that your response helped to confirm the characteristics indicated in my post, as does many of your previous responses to others.

---

No, that's called confirmation bias, on top of a running defense mechanism.

I've done NONE of these things, which you posted:

" Memorized knowledge is used as ammunition to prove others inferior and justify personal control.

.Grandiosity & Entitlement:
They believe they are uniquely enlightened, interpreting complex texts better than anyone else.

Lack of True Empathy:
They are often selfish and unholy, acting with a "False Self" that centers on their own reputation.

Manipulative Teaching:
They may twist biblical narratives to serve their own interests and, if challenged, play the victim to gain sympathy.

Performative Piety:
They emphasize the appearance of holiness (preaching, acting) but lack the humility or "fruit" required of a leader

.Revenge & Grudges:
They are often unforgiving and will seek vengeance if their authority is questioned, leading to alienation.

Fake Vulnerability ("Fauxnerability"): They may share fake weaknesses to appear relatable, while maintaining a facade of moral superiority."

You're a despicable liar. Why don't you post my comments where you claim I'm demonstrating these? That's a challenge.

My responses to others, which may be sharply critical, I believe to be completely warranted. You don't. You're free to feel the way you want. But you'll excuse me if I discount your judgement of others, given that you're really not offering much here except to engage in ad hominem.

---

And "despicable liar" isn't ad hominem…. Sure, sure.

---

No, it isn't, if what I'm asserting is that his statements are untrue and he knows it. Please learn basic logic terms before trying to argue them, lest you make yourself look dumb. Good lord, how many intellectually challenged people are there here?

---

You cannot prove anything so you call him a despicable liar. That is an ad hominem, moron.

---

I just proved his statement was false above, and he admitted it. That is if you care to read, or even know how to read, I think that makes YOU the moron.

Either way, you are STILL using the term ad hominem incorrectly. It's never an ad hominem to declare that someone's assertion is a lie, and thus the person is a liar, because you're attacking the falseness of the assertion. You don't even need to actually prove it's false or a lie. This is just basic stuff. Not that basic stuff makes any sense to you, of course.

The definition of ad hominem:

ad hominem
[ad hmnm]
adjective
adverb

ad hominem (adjective)
[ol]

(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining:
"an ad hominem response"

[/ol]