I have no "case" to present.
Hello brother Jeff. Well, after sleeping on this, it still is apparent that you do need to present your case, because you have chosen to take issue with words I have spoken. This is why you must present your case:
I tell you that on the Day of Judgment, men will give account for every careless word they speak.
Matthew 12:36
solemnly charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which is useless—to the ruin of those who are listening.
2 Timothy 2:14
if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not destroyed by one another.
Galatians 5:15
Yeshua, knowing their thoughts, said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is destroyed, and a house against a house falls.
Luke 11:17.
- In post #5, while explaining to the one who was enquiring, I said that God was threatening to destroy Ninevah, but because they repented, that pleased Him.
- (The story says that God relented).
- In post #8 you asked me to show where scripture states that God was pleased by Ninevah's repentance.
- I showed you Ezekiel 33:11 that states God's pleasure is not in the death of the wicked, but in their turning from wickedness.
- You then disregarded this statement of the nature of God in order to further your argument that Jonah 3:10 states only that God relented, but does not state that He was pleased by Ninevah's repentance.
- You have not explained why you insisted to say that God's relenting shows that He was not necessarily pleased that they repented, even though Ezekiel 33:11 states that God is pleased when the wicked repent.
Because you have taken this action to speak against me, and I have not recognised the error you have accused me of, the responsibility is in fact yours to explain why you chose to take issue with my words.
The seriousness of this dispute is shown in the following consequences:
- People of other faiths are observing that there is disunity in The Body of Christ, that undermines our ability to present a unified-front, providing evidence for those who are sceptical of the claim that we are proponents of truth.
- In post #36, the original poster stated that he has found the understanding he was seeking, even though our dispute is unresolved. Therefore our dispute is officially unnecessary. According to Matthew 12:36, you are required to answer for speaking those idle, lazy, thoughtless, unprofitable, injurious words (From the Strong's Word Concordance #692: "argos" in the original Greek).
- In post #12, you have used triple question marks, which is an expression of heightened emotion, and in this context, appears to portray anger or impatience. In any case it is an expression of displeasure (Ephesians 4:31). Galatians 5:15 lists "outbursts of anger" along with "hatred", "jealously", "rivalry", "quarrels", "conflicts", "factions" contrasted as indicators of opposite motive to "peace", "patience", "kindness", "gentleness" and "self-control". I wonder if you might attempt to argue that post #12 is demonstrating the fruits of the spirit rather than fruits of the flesh, as it most clearly appears.
I noticed that your signature states you are looking to find someone who is honest, thereby holding honesty in high esteem. I will caution you to be diligent as you consider the appropriate response to give now, because of what is written in Matthew 24:48-51:
if that wicked servant says in his heart, ‘My master is taking a long time,’ and he begins to beat his fellow servants, the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know.
Matthew 24:48-50