Messages

201

Wild Emails @ CLE / Define 'Tantrum'

« on: December 15, 2022, 11:26:00 AM »

STAS FROM REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
Peace be with you Chris Time wise I' ll be traight to the point. Do you know a brother that can help me with everithing BTC. Ex:  Some contact info so that I can talk to him on this topic. Please. Thank you for your time. May the Lord bless you and your family.
I'm sorry, but that is not what this ministry is for. You'll have to do research on your own.
Yes I understand, but I was hoping you would introduce me to a brother in the Lord that has advanced knowledge on this topic. Isn't that what we as brothers are supposed to do? help one another? It would take little to none of your time, neither hurt your ministry. BTW if your ministry is of the Lord is it a hard thing for a minister of God to give a short answer to a yes or no question? But instead you chose to write a long sentence just to let me know that you are not going to answer my question and sent me into the world to find information among the heathens. Now tell me if I judged you by the appearance? How about Hebrews 13:2 Matthew 5:42 Tet I did not ask for money or some big thing. The Lord rebuke thee.

P.S. How about the time you spend commenting on BTC on your Telegram Channel? If I didn't believe you were in the Lord I wouldn't even bother to contact you, let alone wasting time rebuking you, but now I have to, even to remind you that you are a person not a corporate entity, yet you replied like one. SHame on you.
Well, if I'm that evil, you should definitely depart from this ministry. If I were in your position, I wouldn't get information from someone as wicked as I am because I wouldn't trust it.

I hope you have a great day.
END OF DISCUSSION
And that's why I titled this post "Define 'Tantrum'." I mean that. Go look it up.
TRANSLATION: "Peace be with you... unless I don't get what I want!" Interesting... that's the exact philosophy of the mafia.

I want to be clear: My news channel is NOT part of my ministry. Yes, it's called "CLE News," but only because I didn't know what else to call it. In fact, if for any reason, that news channel gets in the way of my ministry, or starts causing problems like this, I'll shut it down in a heartbeat. I didn't start that channel for my benefit; I started it for others because I know we're in a war right now, and I just wanted to keep everyone informed so they can make wise decisions on what they ought to do depending on where they live.

I have made it clear before that I do NOT hand out financial advice, nor am I going to send you to someone to get financial advice. That is NOT what I am here to do in ministry. It is NOT what Jesus Christ called me to do.

If there is anyone reading this that does not like that, then I hope you depart in peace, and I wish you good health on your way.
Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.
-3Jo 1:2

If any of you want to discuss those matters on this forum, that's perfectly fine. In fact, that's the reason I created this forum, so Christians would have a place to have such discussions if they want to. These kinds of emails, however, I do not want to waste my time dealing with because I don't have time for these kinds of tantrums. I'm just about done with another book I'm going to release soon, so I'm going to get back to working on that now, and I hope everyone reading this has a great day today.

202

What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Christian Music: For the Love of Money p2

« on: December 12, 2022, 05:05:41 PM »

203

Introduce Yourself / Re: Scott's Introduction

« on: December 12, 2022, 09:50:45 AM »

Sorry I'm late to the forum on this one, saw his original post and something didn't sit quite right on a quick skim through, was hoping it was just me missing something.

A lot of us here do not speak rashly, and go quiet when we see some things that are odd, even if we do not know how to explain them yet. I didn't respond to him initially either; as you can tell if you go look at the timeline. That is usually how you know that a number of us see something wrong with a new member; days go by and no one says anything, typically because they're waiting to see what someone else might say to them, or what the new member might say or do.

I'll give you an example. His first post was on Nov 28th. Tonya responded to him on Dec 5th, a week later, and he responded later that day, indicating that he was checking the forum daily that whole time. No one said a word for an entire week. Of course, you will have to ask everyone else their particular reasoning for that, but the first major red flag for me was his response to her, in which he started out saying:
"Thank you for welcoming me, Tonya"

I would presume the average person would not see anything wrong with his response. However, I thought about my perspective if I were joining, and I would wonder if anyone was active on the forum after a week of hearing nothing. Maybe there were not many people on it. I might even think that I did something wrong, or perhaps no one saw my post. However, those thoughts are analytical to factual data (i.e. objective thinking), and also inward judgment that I might be the cause of a problem.

These were NOT Scott's first thoughts. His first thought was more along the lines of, "It is wrong for these people not to welcome me in. Don't they understand how great I am? I will compliment this woman who did, so others will feel bad for not doing so." And the results of his attitude were seen the second he was challenged on something. Just look at my first response to him and tell me if you saw anything that was rude or unreasonable. In Scott's mind, he is holy, righteous, and intelligent, and if someone pulls the red carpet out of from under him by daring to question him, he will look down his nose at them as unholy people that are not worth his time.

Think about this for a moment: What if I am a false convert? What if there are others here who are false converts? Why would he not want to reason with us in order that we might be saved? However, people like Scott do not think like that because, typically, they do not carry understanding of the Word of God like they claim to.

He then did a lot of grandstanding, in which he was trying to make himself out to be some intellectually superior person that all of us should respect. He ended his (faulty) definition of repentance with the following words: "I prefer to have my faith built up in accordance with the knowledge of God's words."

To me, that was a strange addition. Instead of looking to see if Tonya agreed with his explanation, he started talking about his "preferences." We are called to following the doctrines of Jesus Christ in His Word. It is NOT a personal preference issue, so why would he say that he "prefers" it?

Furthermore, it was really weird because if you are coming to a place where everyone else claims to adhere to the Word of God, why would you need to say that? Would not your words and actions reflect that automatically? For example, if you went to a restaurant with a bunch of friends, and one of them said, "I prefer to eat food at this restaurant," would you not be confused by that statement? Is that not the reason you all came to the restaurant?

Scott speaks with a lot of pomp. So, to me, it was fairly clear from the start what he was doing, and I was not sure if he was just going to leave on his own because, often, someone who does not get attention will just depart to a place where he can get more of it. However, he kept pushing with us for a reason that I could only guess, but never know for sure (nor could I ask him because he is a proven liar).

We are typically more welcoming to an atheist than we are to a "Christian" who feigns humility. At least the atheist is more forthcoming with what he believes, even if he deceives himself. Each one of them thinks we cannot tell who they are by what they say, but we practice patience with them anyway in hope that they might be willing to hear the truth, just as the Lord has been patient with us. It is only when they start lying and railing that we have to cut things off.

204

Introduce Yourself / Re: Scott's Introduction

« on: December 11, 2022, 09:52:31 PM »

Nothing else to say because Tim nailed it.

If anyone wants more evidence of Scott's hypocrisy, you can see here that he made long posts with many details when talking about Covid:
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1630.msg13618#msg13618
But when asked about his beliefs, he tucked tail and ran, while lying and falsely accusing us for daring to question him.

Here's another example where he was also using italics for specific quotes, and he knew how to utilize the "Scripture" button at the top to highlight Bible text:
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1631.msg13620#msg13620
But suddenly those things became too complicated for him when we dared to question him, and miraculously, he could not find the time all week long.

205

What's New @ CLE / Re: (WEEKLY TEACHING) Christian Music: For the Love of Money p1

« on: December 11, 2022, 09:48:05 PM »

That's a good and effective part of coming out of the clouds of deception in this world,  in my opinion.

That comment coming from a guy we had to ban from this forum because he lied repeatedly, falsely accused others, and refused to answer some basic questions he was asked about what he believes. The hypocrisy of some people who pose as disciples of Christ is staggering.

206

Introduce Yourself / Re: Scott's Introduction

« on: December 10, 2022, 10:44:47 AM »

Scott lied again:

his points were initially misunderstandings, which I explained and yet  he did not even apologize

No problem; I'm sorry if I got the wrong impression somewhere; maybe we can figure this out.

http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1628.msg13649#msg13649

Because you kept lying, I am now only going to give you one more post Scott. That's all the opportunity I'm going to give you to respond to the three points I made to you above. If you cannot do that, I'm showing you the door. I have stated in my teachings more than once that I cannot have conversation with people who lie to me and others to save face.

207

Introduce Yourself / Re: Scott's Introduction

« on: December 10, 2022, 10:33:06 AM »

I did begin to explain myself in my first reply to Christopher.

Let's break this down slowly. That statement is true.

I apologized

That's technically true. You did apologize for one thing in your first response to me, but I didn't believe you had anything to apologize for yet. The problem arose when you started lying towards the end of your first response, and you kept puffing yourself up in subsequent posts.

and corrected my errors

Where? You said "errors" plural. Please list out the errors you corrected; I'd like to see that. Here is the ONLY thing you corrected:
My use of the word "action" was incorrect and a misuse of the word for a general definition. Please forgive my mistake.
And the funny thing is, your "correction" here was your attempt to defend your INCORRECT definition of repentance, and since that point, you have only written complaints, and have NOT been willing to discuss the subject. This is really weird. I've gotten no explanations from you, and laundry list of accusations. I gotta' admit, it is a rare occurrence that we get someone this difficult to have a basic conversation with.

also corrected the errant use of the scriptures that he quoted out of their contexts.

No, you didn't. I used Romans 3 to correct the incorrect statement you made. You refused to acknowledge that you used a context (in your original introduction post) that made your statement incorrect. You also refused to acknowledge when I went back and quoted you and demonstrated it, and that is why I addressed everyone else when I wrote it because I said:
I don't think you're going to listen to me at all on this point, but I'm going to explain it for everyone else's sake.
And here we are. Interesting question for everyone else: How did I know he wouldn't listen? Words have meaning, and there were a lot of indicators in his speech.
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
-Mat 15:18

I guess he doesn't like it when someone corrects him because his response was further railing false accusations against me and now it appears more members have come to demand that I answer every one of his fallacious accusations, which multiply every time I respond and none of you can see that this is wrong?  Do you all think that the way I've been treated here is good?

Scott: Is lying good, or evil? I know it's simple, but we've gotten to the point that I need to ask you that question because I cannot tell what you believe.

Now, concerning Scott's copy and paste (i.e. spam) of large sections of Scripture... this is completely passive aggressive, and does not demonstrate that he has any knowledge or understanding of the Scriptures he is posting. There is no explanation given to any of the Scripture, nor why he is posting it, in the context of the conversation. He is attempting to give IMPLIED meaning and accusation without explaining himself, and he thinks this justifies him. Any of us here could copy and paste chapters of Scripture, but there is no point to it in conversation unless there is explanation to go along with it. This passive aggressiveness is what the Bible calls murmuring, or a complain half-suppressed, and God hates that:
Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer.
-1Co 10:10

So now Scott is starting to cross the line into spam, which is a violation of the rules of our forum. I'm trying to be longsuffering here, but my patience is wearing thin.

This is going to take some time.  I will begin today, but it may take me a week or so to respond to every point of of the 10,000 words that have been set against me.  I do not have access to a computer at the moment,  so texting on a smartphone and using this forum trying to use the quotations feature is not easy unless I just quote every word altogether

That's understandable. I am at a computer, but I have spent many hours this week working on these responses to you, and it's taking up my time with work I need to do for new teachings I'm publishing. However, I will simplify this for you in three points, so perhaps it is easier to respond.

1. Do you believe that the word 'repent' means "to turn from sin" AND/OR "to change one's mind?" This question is the MOST IMPORTANT of the three, and I'll explain why later.

2. Concerning the word 'Christian' and its use, you said:
I noticed that there have been others that have come here with a similar conviction and were not welcomed.
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1628.msg13644#msg13644
I told you that you needed to provide evidence to back up your statement. How many others? Please provide the links and quotes so we can all see the evidence you gathered. I'm still waiting for that because you have not provided it. If you cannot back that up with evidence, then you lied (as I pointed out) and made a false accusation.

3. Concerning the same topic, you said:
I did wonder if this would become a point of contention, which I do not want. I am a born again believer in Jesus Christ,  the Lord.  If someone wants to call me a Christian,  then so be it.
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1628.msg13644#msg13644
Not only did you bring up the subject more than once, but you went onto this forum searching for the topic to read other threads about it, and then you commented on threads that were years old to bring up the subject again. Thus, I pointed out that you lied:
That's not what you believe. If your belief was "so be it," then you wouldn't have brought it up in the first place and made a big deal out of it, and you wouldn't have hunted down other threads with that topic and commented on them.
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1628.msg13644#msg13644
My question: Why are you lying to us?

I would like you to respond to those three points, if you are willing. If you respond by spamming chapters of Scripture with no explanations, or complaining about how mistreated you are, I will ban you myself. Have a great rest of your day.

208

Introduce Yourself / Re: Scott's Introduction

« on: December 09, 2022, 12:54:03 PM »

So rather than praying and responding in the Spirit of Christ, it becomes 100 more points of contention.  The flesh lusts for a lot of things and all of them are evil and at enmity with God. One such lust is to strive and to devour. I am not your enemy

So rather than responding in the Spirit of Christ, you just keep whining in contention. Perhaps you should put down your strife and explain your grievances to us so we can understand you.

Again, if you refuse, just say so. It's not complicated.

209

Introduce Yourself / Re: Scott's Introduction

« on: December 09, 2022, 11:24:04 AM »

There is no lack of misunderstandings to maneuver here and I do hope to address every point, reasonably, when I have some down time, soon.  I will pray on this matter and provide all things honestly in the sight of God and man. I am not your enemy.

As soon as I read this, I was thinking, "Yep, he's probably going to leave here in a huff."

Two major points for everyone to consider:
1. There is no lack of misunderstandings to maneuver here
Let me roughly translate that: "You're all wrong." Scott just didn't want to be that direct, and frankly, I would respect the directness much more.

2. I will pray on this matter
Whenever there is a contradiction, conflict, or argument with a professing Christian (not necessarily one who is born again, but one who claims to be), and they begin their sentence with "I will pray on this matter," it is nothing more than an attempt appear righteous on the outside. It's a major warning sign of a serious problem.

If a disciple of Christ cannot solve a matter in his own power, prayer is understandable, and we are called to pray on it. If someone does not know what the right decision is to make in a difficult situation, prayer is understandable. However, it's not understandable if someone has to go pray to figure out if they're going to fix a broken window or feed their children; things that are normal operating procedure.

Likewise, we who are born again in Jesus Christ are called to peace, charity, understanding, and reconciliation (which is Christian or "brethren" doctrine 101), and these things ought to be normal operating procedure. So if Scott needs to go into prayer for that, he's either grandstanding, or he lacks peace, charity, understanding, and reconciliation in his heart, so much that he cannot even have a reasonable conversation with someone who he disagrees with, and that is VERY concerning. If he is a brand new Christian that was just saved recently, I could understand this, but I did not get that impression from his OP.

Christopher, if you are born again and have the Spirit of Christ in you,  would you please take some time and pray in the Spirit about this and after you have prayed unto God, revisit my introduction freshly and read your subsequent responses and tell me if you really think that your replies to me have been righteous?

Which part? I don't know about you, but I typically proof-read my posts about 3 or 4 times before I publish them. I do that with just about everything I write that is of any length because I am always judged for what I say and do, first by God, then by other Christians, and then by the public at large, so I need to take for what I say.
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
-Mat 12:36

I caught you in two lies Scott. We do not ignore those things among brethren. We can forgive that, but not without repentance on your part, and if you want to insist you didn't lie, then you either need to reason the matter out together with us so we can come to an understanding, or you need to depart. If you are unable to do either of those things, then I'll wish you well on your way and show you the door.

However, if you're expecting me to re-read my posts for a 4th or 5th time, and then get an emotional "feeling in the bosom," (kind of like how Mormons want people to "feel the truth") I have no idea what game you're playing. Is there some reason you are unable (or unwilling) to come to this discussion and reason the matter out together in peace and charity?
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
-Gal 5:22-23

I can answer every point,  rightly.

Whenever you're ready, but just keep in mind that when you have to add in the word "rightly," that indicates deception. Someone who is honest does not have to say they are honest; they simply speak honestly.

I would like to resolve the misunderstandings and find fellowship among the saints of God that are here. What I do not want to do is to have strifed, debates, finger pointing,  railings,  accusations back and forth.

I'm sure you believe you look good by saying that, but what you're really offended by is rebuke and correction.
Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die.
-Pro 15:10
I can handle correction. I've said wrong things before on this forum, and apologized for those things. I can provide evidence that I am correctable and rebukable. However, I don't think you're used to correction Scott. That's why you're making this much harder than it needs to be.

And Tim made an excellent point:
I thought you said you would address the points made to you and “provide all things honestly before God and man.” Now you’re asking someone else to address you about what they said.

I think it would be best for Christopher to respond to my last reply addressing him before proceeding.

Translation: "I'm gonna' give Chris one last chance to beg for forgiveness before I lay into him."
It's okay. Lay into me. I can take it, even if I did something wrong. I've been doing this the better part of two decades now, so I can handle a basic conversation. We all love the truth of Christ's doctrine here, so if you have that truth laid in your heart, then there should be no conflict with you reasoning out your case, and we encourage you to do so.

I did not say that "I will address every point."  I said "I hope to" and am able to.

This provides some evidence that you do not pay careful attention to what you say. Of course, you did say you "hope to", but you failed to mention what you followed that up with:
I will pray on this matter and provide all things honestly in the sight of God and man.
Of course, this was just more grandstanding. One does not have to say that if one simply provides all things honestly; the evidence will be clear to all. However, in your attempt to grandstand by paraphrasing Proverbs 3:4, you ended up giving your word to provide those things, without realizing that you did it. That's why Solomon also wrote:
Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.
-Ecc 5:2

I would prefer that Christopher changes his mind and maybe even be grieved over the way he's dealt with me

I'm responding as I read through this; I haven't read everything he's written so far, and so I did not see this comment until this point. Now do you all see what I mean? Let me repeat what I said earlier:
----------
There is no lack of misunderstandings to maneuver here
Let me roughly translate that: "You're all wrong." Scott just didn't want to be that direct, and frankly, I would respect the directness much more.
----------
Now that he has spoken more, it proves that my analysis of his words was correct. His attitude is that he is right, he came here to educate us, and if any of you question that, then you are not right with God. We've seen this many times on this forum. I just don't understand that attitude because all my righteousness comes from Jesus Christ, not from myself, so the idea that a man cannot be wrong in anything he says and does... I just don't see how it's possible one could be born again in Jesus Christ and live his life with that attitude. Maybe it is possible, but I don't understand it.
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
-Rom 10:4

Why can't you just reason with us in the same way God wants to reason with mankind?
Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
-Isa 1:18

without railing accusations and character assaults, you know,  a genuine love for God and man,  who is created in His image? If he has the Spirit of Christ and prays in the Spirit, I shall rejoice.

The problem is that we who are born again in Christ don't just pray with the spirit; we pray with the understanding also.
What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
-1Co 14:15
I love you enough to tell you the truth, even if you hate me for it. Are you going to love me enough to tell me the truth, or are you just going to keep complaining?

I know that debates and strifes are common when people disseminate the truths that upset people and that is exactly  the nature and reason for the persecution of the saints of God.  It always has been. In these days of mostly text conversations,  people seem to have more misunderstandings than ever before and much of that comes from reading  with preconceptions or presumptions of intent with the intent to respond.But I'm not your enemy and I'm not coming here with evil intent or evil, corrupt communication

I pointed out that you have a faulty definition of repentance that is not the Biblical definition of repentance, and then I caught you in two lies and pointed them out. That's it. Everything else you said here is pomp. Whenever you want to address the matter at hand, I'm waiting for it... but at this point, you're starting to waste my time, and I really need to get back to work.

Ellie says:
So, you want Chris to be grieved over what he said to you even though you aren't even explaining to him why he was wrong? Is that how you think correction is supposed to work between brethren? You just tell someone they're wrong but you give absolutely no explanation, reasoning, or evidence about why, and then you expect them to understand and be grieved over it?
Good point, but I'm used to that. We've seen people do that many times before just on this forum alone. They want me to repent for daring to question them, but they don't want to say that directly because it's make them look bad.

Tim says:
What you’re really doing is accusing everyone else involved of wrongdoing and making them admit to something they are not guilty of so that you don’t have to explain yourself (you’re trying to force them to do it for you). In order to honestly explain yourself, then you need to explain yourself. That’s not difficult to understand. If you think there has been a  misunderstanding, then how does it logically make sense for the ones that misunderstood to explain it when you claim to know the answer? What you’re doing doesn’t make sense except with the understanding that you’re doing all this in dishonesty.
Also a good point. Part of the evidence for this is that Scott had to come here to say that he had no time to respond. Why even do that at all? Just wait until you have time. No one's in a hurry.

The posts Scott made of him complaining are causing more contention than anything else. However, we need to keep in mind that, so far, all the evidence is pointing to Scott putting on an outward appearance to look "righteous" in all these small posts, instead of just addressing the matter at hand in full when he (allegedly) has time, which would be a lot easier and faster.

Some of the most entertaining speeches in the world come from a child who thinks he can talk his way out of being caught taking a cookie.

210

Introduce Yourself / Re: Scott's Introduction

« on: December 07, 2022, 12:09:10 PM »

I perceive a communication problem here. 
In my introduction,  I was trying to summarize some of what "I believe." I said that "I believe that truth can be found -to- (I meant "by" ) anyone that sincerely seeks after the truth (generally speaking). " People can discover the truth in many things when they really want to search a matter out, the truth is discoverable.  Just a few examples:  9/11, the moon landing,  covid, central banking, macro evilution, pharmaceutical products, etc

I did not say that anyone can receive the things of the Spirit of God,  nor did I say that any natural man can know the things that God reveals through His Spirit (the context of 1 Corinthians 2). Nor did I say that anyone seeking after God will find Him.  I did not say that anyone understands God or is not under sin (the context of Romans 3).

Are you saying that unless a man is broken and helped by God, through his Holy Spirit,  a man cannot discover the truth in anything?

In another thread, you just complained about our attitudes with you, but I don't see any self-reflection on that very point. Your first paragraph was fine, and understandable. I don't have any problem with someone clarifying what they meant in a particular context. However, the problem was in your second paragraph and that last sentence, and it slaps of arrogance and contention. After I said that, I don't think you're going to listen to me at all on this point, but I'm going to explain it for everyone else's sake.

Here is what Scott said in his OP:
I believe that truth can be found to anyone that sincerely seeks after the truth and recognizes that we haven't always been taught the truth... quite the contrary, actually.  I have found the King James Version of the Bible to be true and I believe that when reading the words therein,  in their context,  rightly dividing the words without adding to any of them or removing any of them,  there is the best foundation of truth.

So the context of Scott's words were first speaking of the truth, and then he immediately attached the concept of truth to the King James Bible, which would lead anyone reading his paragraph to conclude that he was saying that anyone can find spiritual truth if they're looking for it. So while Scott's first paragraph in his response to me was perfectly fine and understandable, he started adding in what he was NOT talking about. Why would it matter what he was NOT talking about?

When he adds in the question "Are you saying that unless a man is broken and helped by God, through his Holy Spirit, a man cannot discover the truth in anything?"... my question is this: Why are you adding in some sort of challenge? Is that necessary? If what I said about the Scriptures was true, why not just agree with what I said, and then point out that was not what you were referring to, and maybe even apologize that you gave the wrong impression, and then I can apologize for getting the wrong impression. Would that not be better? That's how peace and reconciliation is made, but that is NOT Scott's goal here; he is here to fight, and every paragraph he writes is convincing me of that more and more.

Just to give an example from another thread he posted in, Scott said:
I had hoped to find the holy brethren here and maybe fellowship among the saints.
It'd be great if the main theme wasn't strife of words to no profit
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=717.msg13647#msg13647
It just demonstrates that viciousness against us for... I'm not sure what the reason is yet. I just keep seeing this attitude from Scott, in which I'm getting the impression of him saying in his mind, "I'm going to come in there and educate them, and if they question me, I'm going to show them how evil they are." I mean... really? If that's not the impression he intends to give, he's not doing a very good job of showing something otherwise.

Now in regards to repentance,  I answered that "generally speaking" noting that the context is important.

That's a bit strange to me that you would say that because, apparently, the context of your first paragraph in your introduction post wasn't that important, but now, suddenly, it is?

My use of the word "action" was incorrect and a misuse of the word for a general definition. Please forgive my mistake.

That was a surprisingly different response. No problem; I'm sorry if I got the wrong impression somewhere; maybe we can figure this out.

I do not view the repentance of salvation shown in scripture that all men are commanded to, to be a verb; it is clearly a change of one's mind and thinking that is coupled with godly sorrow. Salvation is not found in the deeds of men.
Repent, repenteth,  repentest, repentance, repenting and repentings all have their place in their contexts, applied, rightly divided.

The word 'repent' is a verb though. The concept of repentance can be used as a noun or verb, like many other words. However, the Bible does not define repentance as a "change of one's mind." That's part of what I was explaining in my last response, and that definition creates numerous contradictions in other verses of the Bible.

Let me repeat what you said:
repentance follows godly sorrow over the realiziation of offence or harm caused to others based upon one's decisions (mostly sin) and is the action of changing one's view, choice and sometimes direction
This means that you do NOT believe that repentance means "grief," or expanded for mankind, "grief and godly sorrow." That is what we believe here. You have stated that you believe that repentance is "to turn from sin" and "to change one's mind." I was trying to explain that we are not in agreement, which is why I referred to my book on the subject which goes over tons of Scripture on the subject, including the first time the word 'repent' is defined in Scripture, to show that repentance is grief of the heart:
And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
-Gen 6:6
There is No Saving Grace Without Repentance

I have suffered much "as a Christian" and I am absolutely not ashamed to suffer "as" such, because the world (which persecutes believers) identifies believers in Christ to be Christians, and many believers identify themselves in today's world,  as such,  therefore,  will I suffer with patience, unashamed. I'm often called that by others.  It's just that when referring to the brethren,  I call them (and myself) believers and saints.

They call themselves believers and saints too. So when they call you that, what are you going to change it to then? Others have come here and said they are part of "the way" because Jesus said He's the way, truth, and life. What happens when everyone starts adopting "the way" identifier? Are you going to change to something else?

When do you stop running and stop playing the "pronoun" game? I would much rather spend that time exposing the false converts and rebuking them that they might hear the Gospel of Salvation.

I noticed that there have been others that have come here with a similar conviction and were not welcomed.

Scott, that is a flat-out lie. If you want to make that claim, then back it up. Show us the quotes. Don't make accusations without evidence. There have been others come here saying the same thing, but when we showed them the Scriptures, they left and never came back, or in some cases (as it is with your case) they contend against us with viciousness when we are trying to reason with them from the Scriptures.

If you want to lie about people to try and get your way, or to make yourself seem "holier-than-thou" on that subject, this isn't the right place for you. I just want to make that clear, so we don't waste each others' time.

I did wonder if this would become a point of contention, which I do not want. I am a born again believer in Jesus Christ,  the Lord.  If someone wants to call me a Christian,  then so be it.

You're lying again. If you want to have peaceful discussion, you need to be honest. That's not what you believe. If your belief was "so be it," then you wouldn't have brought it up in the first place and made a big deal out of it, and you wouldn't have hunted down other threads with that topic and commented on them.

I'm glad that we both believe that anyone that has the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ should be willing to share their testimony! 
How did you come to the faith? Have you published your testimony?  I have been encouraged much by your articles and have not seen your testimony of your conversion. I'd love to know how you came to the faith.

I have an "About" page where I provide all that information on my website; it's all public.
http://www.creationliberty.com/about.php

211

Bible Discussion / Re: The term Christian.

« on: December 07, 2022, 11:18:48 AM »

Or we could just not make this an issue to be divided over. 
Then, Scott, why do you keep bringing it up? This isn't the first time, and you've only recently joined. If anyone is trying to divide us over this topic, it's you. However, I don't think you're trying to divide as much as you're trying to get everyone here to speak the way you want to speak, instead of having rational discussion over the matter. I don't find you very welcoming to speak with when you flat-out IGNORED what Ellie just said to you.

------------------------
For example you quoted another person in the thread, and expressed your agreement:
The term Brethren is used 229 times after the Gospels but the term Christian is used only one

Ellie responded:
the points Tim made were much more sound than doing a key word search and counting the number of times a word is used (I'll add that I've seen people use that method to claim that you don't need to repent to be saved just because the word isn't used as much as the words "believe" or "faith" in the new testament. It's not a sound method of rightly dividing the truth--you can create false doctrines and make false assumptions by doing that)

You then responded to her by repeating the same thing without addressing her argument:
let's use the most common identification in the Bible
------------------------

This is a pattern we've seen many times before because we've had this forum for many years now. It's someone who comes here and thinks that, from the moment they join, they are going to start changing everything that we say and do, and refuse to actually discuss a matter to reason it out. You are showing this exact same pattern, as well as another dangerous pattern, which is making decisions about what one believes based on counting words from a search engine, rather than understand the philosophy of the doctrine through the interpretation of the context, and that is somewhat expected since you put such a heaven emphasis on you being a "avid student of science," perhaps looking for statistics rather than meaning. (I am unsure yet, but I can only go by what you have shown me so far.)

Now, if that is not accurate analysis of what you are doing, then please, give us something that does not reflect that so we can have a better impression of you. Because the following you wrote, is giving us major warning signs that you are here to start contention, not here to have a peaceful discussion between brethren...

I find it very unsettling that I merely explained why I chose "other" and have no problem with others using the term Christian,  and the welcome I get is misused,  out of context false reproof and condemnation for things that I didn't even say.  The welcoming committee needs to brush up on applying the scriptures and walking in the Spirit of Christ rather than exercising  (completely wrong) corrective responses.
The only thing I'm agreeing with you so far on is that you selected a proper adjective, in that your conversation is probably best described using the word "unsettling." In what way is correction wrong?
Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die.
-Pro 15:10
You have attempted to correct us, so why is it that you're "correction" is right, and our correction is wrong? Ellie gave you reason why your statements were incorrect to Scripture, and you did not give any counter-reason for it; you just repeated the same narrative over and over.

Part of the reason that I believe you haven't gotten much response yet on this forum is because others have seen this attitude in your writing; they usually keep quiet when they sense danger, and wait to read more before commenting further. I was quiet for the same reason, and more evidence is shown by your sarcasm:

Thanks for such a warm welcome.
I had hoped to find the holy brethren here and maybe fellowship among the saints.
This is passive aggressiveness, which is a form of murmuring that God hates. Why do you have this entitled attitude with us? What is it that we did wrong to you for us to deserve that? Murmuring is where you withhold the hatred in your heart, while making snide comments that are designed to try to make others feel bad for daring to question what you believe. That's not the attitude we hold here among our brethren; perhaps you may be used to that with whoever you fellowship with, I don't know, but it's not how we operate here.

If you want us to treat you a certain way, and we are not doing what is right, then by all means, SHOW us a better example.

212

Introduce Yourself / Re: Scott's Introduction

« on: December 06, 2022, 09:20:55 AM »

I believe that truth can be found to anyone that sincerely seeks after the truth and recognizes that we haven't always been taught the truth... quite the contrary, actually.

There isn't very many others responding on here right now, and I wanted to wait a bit before I did because I didn't want to start out of the gate pointing out disagreements, but I guess since no one else is responding, I wanted to say that I do not believe what you believe on that matter. I believe that the only ones who can can find the truth are those who are helped by the Holy Spirit, in which God has to reach out to them first in their broken state.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
-1Co 2:14
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
-Rom 3:10-11

How I found CLE: In searching for other resources that publish less commonly known truths,  I came across some very well written and well sourced articles on CLE. That's how I found the forum link and have only read a few posts, but wanted to engage with others that enjoy learning and sharing what they've learned.

Please don't be surprised when I compliment that you read the instructions to post here first; there's only about a 50% success rate in people doing that.

Now in regards to my religion association, I do not claim myself to be a "Christian" and that might cause some to wonder,  but it's really because I've decided to identify myself,  as the Lord identifies His people, rather than claiming that particular title.  I do not have any ill against those that do identify themselves with the term "Christian." I just do not.

You can do whatever you want to do, but those of us here who are born again in Jesus Christ are Christians according to Scripture:
Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.
-1Pe 4:16

I do not attend the businesses that have "church" in their name,  neither do I have fellowship with those that do.  My life has become a very lonely one,  as most people that call themselves "Christians" and even those that are in the faith,  are drawn to the congregational gatherings of the businesses where the clean and the unclean find fellowship with many false converts and I've learned that people would rather agree to disagree than to stand corrected when in error.

That's understandable to most of the people who are here. The phrase "agree to disagree" is often used by liars. This is not so in every case because, disagreements are acceptable among subject opinions (e.g. what's the best flavor of jam?), but when it comes to philosophy (i.e. ways of thinking) and truth, the phrase "agree to disagree" is a cop-out used by those who are running from the truth, and are completely unprepared to have a discussion on a particular topic, but don't want others to know that.

You're welcome! I think anyone that has the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ, should always be ready to share their testimony!

I agree with that too, however, you would be surprised how many people come here or write to me emails complaining about giving their testimony on here, in that they do not want to do it, and do not think they should have to. That makes no sense when we consider the Gospel of Salvation and what it means. Imagine, for a moment, that a woman was pushed out of the way of a car and saved, but the man who saved her died because he was hit by the car... and then she refused to talk about what he did for her to anyone, especially publicly. That's weird.

what I've observed (generally speaking), repentance follows godly sorrow over the realiziation of offence or harm caused to others based upon one's decisions (mostly sin) and is the action of changing one's view, choice and sometimes direction (usually toward God).

This is another part I wanted to write a disagreement with the section I highlighted. Turning from sin and changing one's mind (i.e. "the action of changing one's view, choice, and sometimes direction") is called "conversion." Repentance prefaces that, but is not defined that way in Scripture because God lists them separately:
Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Repent, and turn yourselves from your idols; and turn away your faces from all your abominations.
-Eze 14:6
Repentance and conversion go hand in glove, but they are not the same. If one were to define repentance as you have done, it would include turning from sin, which would be works unto salvation because they would have to amend their life before receiving the grace of God. I talk about that more in the book I just finished a few months ago:
There is No Saving Grace Without Repentance

213

What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Christian Music: For the Love of Money p1

« on: December 05, 2022, 01:34:22 PM »

214

What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Hell is Real And Many People Are Going There p4

« on: November 28, 2022, 01:47:48 PM »

215

What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Hell is Real And Many People Are Going There p3

« on: November 21, 2022, 02:48:46 PM »

216

What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Hell is Real And Many People Are Going There p2

« on: November 14, 2022, 11:57:21 AM »

217

What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Hell is Real And Many People Are Going There p1

« on: November 07, 2022, 02:05:37 PM »

218

Introduce Yourself / Re: Chris' introduction

« on: November 05, 2022, 10:02:58 AM »

For me, at first, it wasn't even a perception of all the world, but rather, it was a simple process of logic: If the Gospel of Salvation is just "believe on Jesus," then why does Jesus turn away "believers on Jesus" to hell?

Most churchgoers do not even want to start discussing that question, let alone answer it, but my journey to answer it led me to a complete understanding of the Gospel of Salvation, and that it all happened to me without my understanding of what it was, and despite 20 years of church-ianity indoctrination.

The difference is that disciples of Christ do not care what the answer is, they just want the answer because they want what Jesus Christ is offering. The world is very concerned to not hear any answer that disagrees with their preconceived beliefs, and that, in my opinion, is one of the major red flags when discerning a false convert.

219

What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Wolves in Costume: Kent Hovind p25

« on: October 31, 2022, 04:40:41 PM »

220

Introduce Yourself / Re: Chris' introduction

« on: October 30, 2022, 06:25:07 PM »

"why so many people don't understand the concept of repentance is because so many have tried to... make it so vague that it could apply to anyone"

This.