Luke 1:17 does not fulfill Malachi 4

[Mr. M]

Luke 1:17 He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn
the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of
the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

If John had succeeded, then Malachi 4:6 would have been fulfilled.
Clearly, he did no such thing.
Notice the Malachi prophecy says that Elijah “will turn the hearts”,
not try to turn them. This prophecy is for all Israel, and remains unfulfilled.
Malachi 4:
1 For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven,
And all the proud, yes, all who do wickedly will be stubble.
And the day which is coming shall burn them up, says the Lord of hosts,
That will leave them neither root nor branch.
2 But to you who fear My name, The Sun of Righteousness shall arise
With healing in His wings; and you shall go out and grow fat like stall-fed calves.
3 You shall trample the wicked, for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet
on the day that I do this, says the Lord of hosts.
4 Remember the Law of Moses, My servant, which I commanded him in Horeb
for all Israel, statutes and judgments.
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet
Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.
6 And he will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,
And the hearts of the children to their fathers,
Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.

The result of Christ coming to Israel was quite the opposite.
Matthew 10:
34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come
to bring peace but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against
her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.

That is a different prophecy...
Micah 7:
6 For son dishonors father, daughter rises against her mother,
Daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies are
the men of his own household.
7 Therefore I will look to the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation;
My God will hear me.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ continues to divide households, especially among
Jewish families. Elijah comes to restore ALL things. Only then will Jesus return.
Acts 3:21 Heaven must receive Him, until the time of the restoration of all the
things that God spoke about long ago through the mouth of His holy prophets.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Luke 1:17 He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn
the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of
the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

If John had succeeded, then Malachi 4:6 would have been fulfilled.
Clearly, he did no such thing.
Notice the Malachi prophecy says that Elijah “will turn the hearts”,
not try to turn them. This prophecy is for all Israel, and remains unfulfilled.

It is amazing to me that you would suggest that John the Baptist failed to accomplish what he was put on the earth to do. No, he did not! There is no scripture which indicates that he failed in his mission. It does not say that he would turn the hearts of all parents to their children and all children to their parents. He wasn't sent to force anyone to do anything. He was sent to tell people about the good news of the impending arrival of the Messiah, Jesus, and to baptize them in order to prepare people for Him and he did that for many people.

What people did with that news that he shared was up to each person to decide. To think that all of them needed to respond positively in order to fulfill the prophecy is unreasonable.

If you think John the Baptist failed in his mission then do you think Jesus failed as well? This is what Peter said about Jesus and what He came to do:

Acts 3:24 “Indeed, beginning with Samuel, all the prophets who have spoken have foretold these days. 25 And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, ‘Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed.’ 26 When God raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways.”

Did Jesus fail to turn each of them from their wicked ways? Is it saying that all of them had to turn from their wicked ways in order for Jesus to have been successful in His ministry? If that was the case then He would have failed. But, I'm not willing to say that Jesus failed, are you?

Jesus did what was necessary to turn everyone from their wicked ways, but each person must choose how to respond. If someone doesn't respond favorably, that doesn't mean Jesus failed to turn them from their wickedness. He succeeded in doing all He had to do, but each person is responsible for their own actions. This is how John the Baptist's ministry should be understood as well. He did not fail.

 

[Mr. M]

What people did with that news that he shared was up to each person to decide. To think that all of them needed to respond positively in order to fulfill the prophecy is unreasonable.

If you think John the Baptist failed in his mission then do you think Jesus failed as well? This is what Peter said about Jesus and what He came to do:

Were John and Jesus working at cross purposes then?

to turn
the hearts of the fathers to the children,

The result of Christ coming to Israel was quite the opposite.
Matthew 10:
34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come
to bring peace but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against
her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.

That is a different prophecy...
Micah 7:
6 For son dishonors father, daughter rises against her mother,
Daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies are
the men of his own household.
7 Therefore I will look to the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation;
My God will hear me.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ continues to divide households, especially among
Jewish families. Elijah comes to restore ALL things. Only then will Jesus return.

If you aren't going to actually read the post, and respond only to the title, I would prefer
that you did not waste your time with writing such a long response, that does not even address
what was in the OP. I have re-posted by quotation, but nowhere do I suggest that anyone
failed in their mission. If you aren't going to consider all options, then this isn't a discussion
forum, it is you holding rigidly to an already formed opinion. So I ask you, why does Jesus
say "I came not to bring peace, but a sword", and quote, Micah 7:6 being fulfilled?
How does that align with John's stated purpose? He himself claims that he was just a voice
crying out in the wilderness. You will have more to consider here, as you have not searched
out all of the scriptures, yet talk to me as if I am making something up. What about Malachi 3?
The Messenger Of The Covenant

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Were John and Jesus working at cross purposes then?

What do you mean?

If you aren't going to actually read the post, and respond only to the title, I would prefer
that you did not waste your time with writing such a long response, that does not even address
what was in the OP. I have re-posted by quotation, but nowhere do I suggest that anyone
failed in their mission.

What did you mean when you said this then:

"If John had succeeded, then Malachi 4:6 would have been fulfilled.
Clearly, he did no such thing. "

You said John didn't succeed. That means you're saying he failed. How else should someone understand what you said?

If you aren't going to consider all options, then this isn't a discussion
forum, it is you holding rigidly to an already formed opinion.

Is that not what you're doing by getting upset at me challenging your view? Who said I haven't considered other options? I have. And I don't agree with yours. Are we not allowed to disagree on this forum? I get the sense that you're not used to having your views challenged.

So I ask you, why does Jesus
say "I came not to bring peace, but a sword", and quote, Micah 7:6 being fulfilled?
How does that align with John's stated purpose?

What do you mean? You're not being clear with your questions. I don't know what you're talking about here, so please clarify.

He himself claims that he was just a voice
crying out in the wilderness. You will have more to consider here, as you have not searched
out all of the scriptures, yet talk to me as if I am making something up. What about Malachi 3?
The Messenger Of The Covenant

Don't tell me what I have searched out or not. You don't know me at all. I guarantee I have searched out the scriptures just as much as you have. But, I come to different conclusions than you. It happens.

 

[Mr. M]

What do you mean?

Again, it is in the post spiritual. The prophecy you are assigning to John says, "to turn the hearts
of the Fathers to their children. Compared to:

The result of Christ coming to Israel was quite the opposite.
Matthew 10:
34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come
to bring peace but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against
her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.

That is a different prophecy...
Micah 7:
6 For son dishonors father, daughter rises against her mother,
Daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies are
the men of his own household.
7 Therefore I will look to the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation;
My God will hear me.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ continues to divide households, especially among
Jewish families. Elijah comes to restore ALL things. Only then will Jesus return.

"If John had succeeded, then Malachi 4:6 would have been fulfilled.
Clearly, he did no such thing. "

You said John didn't succeed. That means you're saying he failed. How else should someone understand what you said?

I am not saying John failed. I am saying it was not his fulfillment to attain, that comes only at the
end. That should be obvious. You are saying, that he did what he could, but many rejected. Okay,
that was true then, but it is not truth. Realize that in the heavenlies, this happened 2 days ago.
....

Is that not what you're doing by getting upset at me challenging your view? Who said I haven't considered other options? I have. And I don't agree with yours. Are we not allowed to disagree on this forum? I get the sense that you're not used to having your views challenged.

I am not upset at all. Do think you can attribute emotions through your WiFi. Look at your first
question in this post. This is the second time I am answering. Jesus is clearly at cross purposes to
"turning hearts of fathers to children", if he says that he is dividing fathers against sons, fulfilling a
different prophecy. That is what I think you should have seen by now if you were considering what
I am posting. I am still trying. If you had responded to
.....

Matthew 10:
34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come
to bring peace but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against
her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.

That is a different prophecy...
Micah 7:
6 For son dishonors father, daughter rises against her mother,
Daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies are
the men of his own household.
7 Therefore I will look to the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation;
My God will hear me.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ continues to divide households, especially among
Jewish families. Elijah comes to restore ALL things. Only then will Jesus return.

If you have responded to this already, I just haven't gotten there yet. I am reading through
your post.
...

Don't tell me what I have searched out or not. You don't know me at all. I guarantee I have searched out the scriptures just as much as you have. But, I come to different conclusions than you. It happens.

Great! Then where is your response to the Matthew 10/Micah 7 prophecy? Otherwise, you are
drawing very wrong conclusions. I am certainly familiar with being challenged. I am also very used
to posting a response with scriptures that never are replied in return. Maybe you need more time,
but you can drop the "hostile witness", posture. Nothing of that is true. You say you have searched
out the scriptures already, so it should not take you long to factor in the other verses. Okay?

 

[Mr. M]

Don't tell me what I have searched out or not. You don't know me at all. I guarantee I have searched out the scriptures just as much as you have. But, I come to different conclusions than you. It happens

If this is the case, then I can assume that you have already considered this also.
The Messenger Of The Covenant

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Again, it is in the post spiritual. The prophecy you are assigning to John says, "to turn the hearts
of the Fathers to their children. Compared to:

You're not understanding these passages. For one thing, Luke 1:17 makes it clear as to what John was meant to do and it quoted Malachi 4:6 directly. You can't try to apply that to a future time regarding the literal Elijah when Luke 1:17 applies it to John the Baptist.

You're misunderstanding what Jesus was saying. He too, of course, wanted to turn the hearts of the children to their parents and the hearts of the parents to their children. Do you think otherwise? When He said He didn't come to bring peace, but a sword, He knew that not everyone in each family would accept Him. He knew families would be divided because of their strong opinions about Him. That's what He was talking about.

It isn't that Jesus didn't want them all to believe in Him and love each other. But, He knew that was not going to happen for every family. And He knew that what people decided about Him would be the difference between eternal life and eternal death, so when people disagree on something so important as that, it brings division and Jesus knew that.

I am not saying John failed. I am saying it was not his fulfillment to attain, that comes only at the end. That should be obvious.

What is obvious is that you are directly contradicting what the text says. Look at it more carefully.

Luke 1:13 But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to call him John. 14 He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth, 15 for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born. 16 He will bring back many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. 17 And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Follow along in this passage from beginning to end. Can you see in verse 13 that it's talking about John the Baptist. I would hope that you can at least recognize that much. It goes on to say in verse 15 "he will be great in the sight of the Lord". You understand that's still talking about John the Baptist, right? Then in verse 16 it says "He will bring back many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God.". That's still talking about John the Baptist. Are you still with me? Then in verse 17 it says "he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord". That's still talking about John the Baptist. Would you agree?

So, it seems to me that you are denying that John the Baptist succeeded in turning "the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord", are you not? You said before that he didn't succeed in doing that.

You are saying, that he did what he could, but many rejected. Okay,
that was true then, but it is not truth. Realize that in the heavenlies, this happened 2 days ago.

I don't know what you're talking about here. Please clarify. You are hard to follow at times.

I am not upset at all. Do think you can attribute emotions through your WiFi. Look at your first
question in this post. This is the second time I am answering.

Again, you are hard to follow at times, so I have no choice but to ask you to clarify what you're saying at times.

Jesus is clearly at cross purposes to
"turning hearts of fathers to children", if he says that he is dividing fathers against sons, fulfilling a
different prophecy. That is what I think you should have seen by now if you were considering what
I am posting. I am still trying.

Why would you interpret scripture in such a way that you have the purpose of John the Baptist contradicting the purpose of Jesus? Can't you see that doesn't make any sense? When your interpretations lead you to nonsensical conclusions like that, you need to realize that you're not interpreting something correctly and try again.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

If this is the case, then I can assume that you have already considered this also.
The Messenger Of The Covenant

Of course I have. I didn't just read Malachi 4 in isolation. Malachi 3 also speaks of John the Baptist. If you're trying to get me to post on that thread as well, no thanks. I think posting in 2 threads about this topic is enough.

 

[Mr. M]

You're misunderstanding what Jesus was saying. He too, of course, wanted to turn the hearts of the children to their parents and the hearts of the parents to their children. Do you think otherwise?

If John came to turn fathers hearts to their sons, how is this not at
cross purposes to Christ's words here??

Matthew 10:
34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come
to bring peace but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against
her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.

That is a different prophecy...so which was fulfilled to your understanding?
Micah 7:
6 For son dishonors father, daughter rises against her mother,
Daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies are
the men of his own household.
7 Therefore I will look to the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation;
My God will hear me.
For the third time, I am asking you to clarify your understanding of this post.
I am not drawing contradictory conclusions, I am asking you how does this fit with
your conclusions? You have yet to indicate that you even read post #1 where this
is found. How can I conclude anything other than that you are responding to the
title of the thread only? Go back to square 1. Do you really think that you have
taken into account the Matthew 10 quote as a clear reference to Micah 7:6?
The Gospel of Jesus Christ continues to divide households, especially among
Jewish families. Elijah comes to restore ALL things. Are you sure that is what
John did? Where do you find any scripture to support that conclusion? Andrew and
Peter were with John when they met Jesus. They walked away from their father and
his fishing boat, two sons abandoning their father and his livelihood. Do you think
that did not cause a small stir? James and John, sons of Zebedee did the same.
How do you think the father felt about it?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

If John came to turn fathers hearts to their sons, how is this not at
cross purposes to Christ's words here??

Matthew 10:
34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come
to bring peace but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against
her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.

That is a different prophecy...so which was fulfilled to your understanding?
Micah 7:
6 For son dishonors father, daughter rises against her mother,
Daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies are
the men of his own household.
7 Therefore I will look to the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation;
My God will hear me.
For the third time, I am asking you to clarify your understanding of this post.
I am not drawing contradictory conclusions, I am asking you how does this fit with
your conclusions? You have yet to indicate that you even read post #1 where this
is found. How can I conclude anything other than that you are responding to the
title of the thread only? Go back to square 1. Do you really think that you have
taken into account the Matthew 10 quote as a clear reference to Micah 7:6?
The Gospel of Jesus Christ continues to divide households, especially among
Jewish families. Elijah comes to restore ALL things. Are you sure that is what
John did? Where do you find any scripture to support that conclusion? Andrew and
Peter were with John when they met Jesus. They walked away from their father and
his fishing boat, two sons abandoning their father and his livelihood. Do you think
that did not cause a small stir? James and John, sons of Zebedee did the same.
How do you think the father felt about it?

I addressed this in one of your other threads relating to this topic.

 

[Mr. M]

I addressed this in one of your other threads relating to this topic.

Cool. Then you are aware that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was never about turning the
hearts of fathers to their children. But the exact opposite. Glad we settled that then. Thanks.
Christ Brings Division
Matthew 10:
34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword.
35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter
-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.
37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son
or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.
38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.
39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Cool. Then you are aware that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was never about turning the
hearts of fathers to their children. But the exact opposite. Glad we settled that then. Thanks.
Christ Brings Division
Matthew 10:
34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword.
35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter
-in-law against her mother-in-law;
36 and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.
37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son
or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me.
38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.
39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

Actually, I see that I addressed this already in this thread in post #7. Did you somehow miss that? I explained my understanding of what this means there. Why would you want to interpret scripture in such a way to conclude that Jesus had a different purpose than John the Baptist, knowing that John the Baptist was preparing the way for Jesus?

 

[Mr. M]

Why are you acting like I agree with you on this when I don't? Just find my post in that other thread and respond to that. No need to do that here. I'm not going to say the same thing twice in two threads.

I have no idea what other thread you are talking about. This is the only one discussing
Matthew 10:34-39. So now you are saying that you disagree that the Gospel divides homes?
Never mind. I think we have covered all the bases. Good Day.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I have no idea what other thread you are talking about. This is the only one discussing
Matthew 10:34-39.

You're discussing it in the one called Not Peace, but a Sword as well. You're creating so many threads that even you are not able to keep up with it. I was thinking I addressed it in the When Elijah Comes thread, but it was in this thread in post #7.

So now you are saying that you disagree that the Gospel divides homes?

Of course not.

 

[Mr. M]

Actually, I see that I addressed this already in this thread in post #7. Did you somehow miss that? I explained my understanding of what this means there. Why would you want to interpret scripture in such a way to conclude that Jesus had a different purpose than John the Baptist, knowing that John the Baptist was preparing the way for Jesus?

.
I did not interpret anything. Jesus said it. The Gospel brought division in homes between parents
and children, etc...continues to do so today.
It is your insistence that John came to fulfill all of the Malachi prophecy and restore the hearts
of the fathers to their children that puts YOU at odds with what Jesus said. Not Me.
When Elijah comes to complete the prophecy, there will be no cross purposes. It is your
interpretation that is creating the friction. Mine aligns perfectly. John came in the spirit and
power of Elijah to declare the coming of the Lord. His own testimony is of a very narrow
interpretation of the prophecies in Malachi 3 and 4, which are clearly unfulfilled. When John
baptized Jesus, as the scriptures testify, it was to fulfill all righteousness. Not fulfill all of
Malachi 3 and 4, or Isaiah 61, etc.., concerning the restoration of Israel.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

.
I did not interpret anything. Jesus said it. The Gospel brought division in homes between parents
and children, etc...continues to do so today.
It is your insistence that John came to fulfill all of the Malachi prophecy and restore the hearts
of the fathers to their children that puts YOU at odds with what Jesus said. Not Me.

No, your interpretations are putting John the Baptist at odds with Jesus. That's not a good idea at all.

Do you actually think that Jesus didn't want to turn the hearts of the children to their parents and the hearts of the parents to their children as John the Baptist did? Of course He did. And He accomplished that in many cases. But, He also knew that wouldn't be the case in some families because of their very differing views about Him. What someone believes about Jesus is so important that if someone disagrees on that, it will cause division and it has many times. That doesn't mean Jesus wanted it to happen. He just knew it would.

When Elijah comes to complete the prophecy, there will be no cross purposes.

Show me the scripture which says that Elijah would come more than once to complete the prophecy. I see one mention in Malachi 4 of the coming of Elijah, not two.

It is your interpretation that is creating the friction. Mine aligns perfectly.

Not even close. But, you can, of course, claim that all you want. Doesn't make it true.

John came in the spirit and power of Elijah to declare the coming of the Lord. His own testimony is of a very narrow interpretation of the prophecies in Malachi 3 and 4, which are clearly unfulfilled. When John baptized Jesus, as the scriptures testify, it was to fulfill all righteousness. Not fulfill all of
Malachi 3 and 4, or Isaiah 61, etc.., concerning the restoration of Israel.

What part of Malachi 4 do you think John the Baptist fulfilled? You come across as though you don't believe he fulfilled any of it.

Luke 1:13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John...17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

This couldn't be any more clear that John the Baptist was the one to fulfill the part about turning the fathers to the children. Do you believe he accomplished that? In other posts you seemed to indicate that he didn't succeed in doing that. Is that what you meant to say?

 

[Mr. M]

What part of Malachi 4 do you think John the Baptist fulfilled? You come across as though you don't believe he fulfilled any of it. Again, Luke 1:17 is VERY CLEAR that John the Baptist was the one to fulfill the part about turning the fathers to the children. Do you believe he accomplished that?

We have covered all this, that is enough for now. We will eventually find out if and when Elijah
returns. Until then, the Gospel continues....

 

[Spiritual Jew]

We have covered all this, that is enough for now. We will eventually find out if and when Elijah
returns. Until then, the Gospel continues....

We covered it, but it's sill unclear if you agree with Luke 1:17 which says that John the Baptist would "turn the hearts of the fathers to the children". Please clarify if you believe he did that or not. Yes or no?

Also, Elijah has already come, so we don't need to wait to find out if and when.

Matthew 11:11 Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it. 13 For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.

It's unfortunate that you're not willing to accept that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come even though Jesus Himself said so. Jesus knew that people like you would have trouble accepting that and that's why He said what He did in Matthew 11:14. He didn't say John the Baptist was the Elijah to come in part but Elijah himself will also come at a later time. He said John the Baptist was the Elijah to come. Period.

 

[Mr. M]

Also, Elijah has already come, so we don't need to wait to find out if and when.

You have made your position clear, and we are in disagreement. You don't get to demand
a final ultimatum from me. If you missed it in my last post, I am finished with this discussion,
you should move on.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

You have made your position clear, and we are in disagreement. You don't get to demand
a final ultimatum from me. If you missed it in my last post, I am finished with this discussion,
you should move on.

What final ultimatum did I demand? I don't recall doing that. I asked a question that you are free to answer or not. That's not an ultimatum.