Thanks APL. Same to you. My end goal is indeed peace, including, Eschatologically, Sabbatical socio-economic peace (Isa 58; GC 637.1|Ezek 34:25; 37:26) however, and in this GC, Matt 11:12...

What question are you referring to? I did something like 8 posts, where I quoted what you wrote, and asked questions, and made points for you to respond to.



Your approach looks to be to make a theory based on one or two passages, and try to harmonize everything else to that. There are several others on this thread. We can appeal to them to see what there perspective is, but I think there would be agreement on this point.



I'm reading what you post on this forum. I don't recall your responding to DA 761, which speaks of Satan's being "cast down" at the cross, when the angels became aware of his true character. I don't know what your thoughts are in regards to that. When you went through the chapter, in "It Is Finished," you didn't quote this portion, nor comment on it.



Sarcasm is easier than evidence.



I'm sorry you think name calling is an acceptable way for Christians to dialog regarding spiritual things. I hope you change your mind regarding this.



I'm sorry you have chosen to resort to name-calling and sarcasm as opposed to presenting evidence for the points of view you hold. I hope you'll change your mind, and decide to continue a civilized discourse. I'm interested in your ideas.

Tom: Read my blog post on the “War in Heaven”. I care more for the substantive rather than the “pretentiousably” diversionary externals (e.g., Matt 23:25, 26ff).

And really, don’t feel sorry for what I may have ‘decided’ to do. I know it’s in my best interest! When a discussion ceases to be an equally-invested discussion, it is no longer worthwhile for me.

I know who you're talking about. Do you know that I know that? I think so, IIRC.

This is rather ironic, since you're the one who's made it such. MM and I have been discussing things for years. One posts something, the other voices disagreements, explains why, and the discussion goes back and forth until one or both (usually we both agree) that it's been "talked out" for the time being. Often we return to the subject later.

I've taken the time to address your points, ask you questions, and make counter-points. If you don't wish to continue the discussion, that's fine, but there's no need for excuses, or name-calling, or false accusations.

...I really don’t get it Tom. You want to continue this discussion and want me to continue addressing your question yet you outrightly refuse to read my answer on the “War in Heaven” on my blog, which resolves that issue, instead preferring to accuse me of being a ‘violent warmonger’ who colors my reading of the Bible and SOP according to that paradigm’??1 What’s the real story here. Do I have to beg you not to so blindly falsely accuse me??? And since that is what you want to blindly assume and moreover, falsely, generalizingly believe about me, then what’s the point of continuing the discussion. You’ve freely made your choices, then, at least, live with them!! And as your selectively, one-sided Theodicy view goes, you should clearly understand here where the entire blames lies for this cessation of “discussion”.

Like I perceived before, you obliviously see absolutely nothing wrong with your conduct here. I don’t have the time, patience or desire to deal with that self-obliviousness. That is typically relativist though, the only thing that matters is what [u]you’ve[u] done last.

Yes, I know you know him. :-)

We are flesh and blood, are you not? Is there something in us apart from our body? A soul, which is separate from our body? NO. Do we inherit our sinful nature? Yes. (See Romans 5). So, yes, I will look at the natural world to see what may have gone wrong. Something that has changed us, and something for which there is nothing we can do of ourselves to fix it. Sin is not supernatural.

I knew this would be “glibly” taken. Of course sin is not supernatural, or else it would not have freely originated, and that in Heaven. However as the SOP says that the Fruit of Life had “supernatural” powers, then what it provided, and by sequitur implication, protected against/from was duly supernatural. Hence my comment. ‘No need to take prescription medicine for a common cold!’

(Btw, I do not understand “supernatural” to be something “magical,” as expressed on my blog, I see God as always operating on a scientific, level, I.e., a science level we don’t, and probably never will comprehend. I understand “supernatural” here to be capable of altering what is natural and thus: “to this extreme degree of the natural science”. So that “supernatural” code corrupting that you need to come externally from Satan, I see as being the result of the removal of that preventive ‘“supernatural” power/ingredient’ from the Fruit of Life.)