HOME | DD

Rogue-Ranger In reply to Preston-Draws63 [2020-11-16 03:52:29 +0000 UTC]

Indeed.

I just hope that those who feel unloved and unwanted can learn to accept that.

👍: 1 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to AlexisYokoAlexander [2020-02-11 06:47:13 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to ZeldamonFallsbound [2019-07-28 06:42:27 +0000 UTC]

Thank you and I'm glad you can appreciate this stamp and that you've found DA's Christian community to be so loving. We all have a lot of issues in all our personal lives and the love and support of others is always welcome.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ZeldamonFallsbound In reply to Gaylienz [2019-07-10 20:56:04 +0000 UTC]

Seriously? Why do you feel the need to go on a positive stamp like and comment something like that? I can understand disagreeing with the religion, but doing this is pretty shitty of you

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to Adalack [2019-02-10 11:12:01 +0000 UTC]

Well, I would say that He loves us in a way so far beyond what is even possible for humans, as He knows every hair on our head, knows our days yet to come, and is far more forgiving than pretty much any human.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-10-10 05:33:34 +0000 UTC]

Thank you for the verses. This particular stamp is about God's love for us and is meant to encourage those who feel unloved, but I will definitely keep those verses in mind for personal use and if I make something on any of those topics.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

EmpathicDesign In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2018-10-10 05:59:09 +0000 UTC]

I was under the impression many of your stamps share this same message.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-10-11 02:54:53 +0000 UTC]

Interesting. I make a variety of different stamps all with different messages or at least variations, but, like most people, I make things about what interests me. In my case, that means God, love and forgiveness will come up multiple times. Though, this is my only stamp that says God loves you.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

EmpathicDesign In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2018-10-11 05:03:05 +0000 UTC]

Interesting?

Do these stamps not also imply the same message?
The referred scriptures you apply as context seem to confirm this.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-10-11 06:24:17 +0000 UTC]

I found what you said interesting because you didn't say "similar message" but "same message" and you didn't explain how the verses you chose relate.

All three stamps do mention God and love, but they have different messages and only one has any verse overlap at all and the other none. So, do you mean to say there are some similarities? That I would agree with, as God's forgiveness comes from His love and Christianity being about love naturally involves God's love. It's just that forgiving as God does and Christianity is about love are different messages from each other and from God loves you.

Here's an example of two stamps with the same message:



Do the verses you supplied somehow relate to your comments that you believe many of my stamps share the same message? Also, could you please be more clear on why similarities are important in this context? I appreciate feedback. I just want to make sure I understand.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

EmpathicDesign In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2018-10-11 07:04:07 +0000 UTC]

I actually did; in my elaboration of my former comments, I choose these stamps which, by scripture and by doctrine, promote the same message; that God is loving. Do you disagree?

I see. So you affirm my comment; whether by similarity or by exactitude's, the point that God is loving is confirmed.
I do not believe any further elaboration is required; you have confirmed by your secondary comment "So, do you mean to say there are some similarities? That I would agree with, as God's forgiveness comes from His love and Christianity being about love naturally involves God's love", as is the core of this discussion. God's love is ambiguous; merciful, kind, forgiving. Similarities that speak of the same Truth, that is Christ Jesus.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-10-13 05:55:40 +0000 UTC]

The first stamp is a defense of Christianity as being loving and covers everything, so there would be a small overlap with this stamp, although both obviously have different direct meanings. The second stamp doesn't have any verse that specifically talks about love, only sin and forgiveness (one also mentions compassion), so it requires extrapolation based on other verses not quoted to know it's true God is loving and that's why He forgives and asks us to do the same.

I agree that God is loving and so that aspect of Him will naturally come up when talking about God. I also agree that's important. But if that was your point from the beginning, why make me come up with it for you?

Here's what happened:

I made a stamp saying God loves you, you commented with verses that seemed unrelated, I pointed that out and thanked you, you didn't explain any relation but instead said many of my messages are the same but not how, I asked about that, you didn't answer that either but instead listed two other stamps and said they shared the same message but again not what, I searched for similarities, and then you said what I speculated by guesswork was your point all along, even though you never said what the "same message" was before I came up with something and never once explained how your first comment and verses fits into this point. You even refused to answer if you meant the same or similar, saying it didn't matter.

Can you see why I'd be confused? As I used to say a lot when we talked before, I'm not a mind reader.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

EmpathicDesign In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2018-10-13 06:27:56 +0000 UTC]

I would argue that although the purpose behind the stamps are different, they imply the same truth and doctrine.
Well, God is love. Period. Forgiveness is an act of love, and as a Christian, I am commanded to love unconditionally and forgive those so that I myself may be forgiven.
I am sure you can understand why I see the correlation between these stamps, and why they are mutual in doctrine and not exclusive to each other.

I don't understand. I provided answers for these concerns you raised in regards to my offered statements. Perhaps you read over or missed the purpose of my raising these concerns? If this is the case, I hope my former statements within this comment answer some or all of your questions.

To my despair, I have lost all former recorded discussions as my former laptop purged, so I will need to start again.
Also, if it is not too much to request; would you mind answering my concerns I have raised, written in the comment of another stamp; I am sure you can find which one, as there are few stamps I have written a comment on.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-10-16 03:40:50 +0000 UTC]

Because I don't like conflict, I debated over how to respond both here and to your other reply on my other stamp.

As much as I'd like to just agree and move on, my ethics won't let me do that. Ignoring wouldn't work, as you'd just come back again like this time. Agreeing to disagree didn't work before as you refused. I can't not tell the truth by pretending to agree or omitting things. So, I'm not really left with much choice. Please keep that in mind both here and when I reply to your other reply.

Since you once again completely ignored my request when I asked in response to your other comment, I'll make it here too so it will be harder to keep avoiding:

I'd like to once again respectfully request that you either make your call-out stamp of me more generic by removing my stamps from the description, correct the description, or just remove the call-out stamp entirely.

I have made no call-outs of you. I only commented on that one stamp of yours because it was about me and have commented on no others of yours. Because of that stamp, I was blocked by one of my favorite stamp artists, permanently removing all her stamps from my collection. You still haven't changed the description to remove the false information about me that you wrote back when you were trolling me, leaving all those insults and false accusations across my stamps and trying to bully me out of being Christian. And, every time someone sees the stamp and asks you about what happened, you have not told them the whole truth but interjected false statements.

I did not initiate any of this and had to beg you just to stop since you know I never block anyone. You never once apologized or even showed regret. Now that you've once again come to me to start new discussions, I feel this small request is the very least you can do. It's my hope that how polite you've been here is a sign you're willing to turn over a new leaf.

Just think of how much you disliked it when others did to you what you did to me and you should be able to empathize with my position.

Since it looks like we're going to be communicating again, I'd like to point out things that confuse or frustrate me whenever we talk so that you're aware of them. Afterward, I hope you'll point out things that confuse and frustrate you when we talk so I am aware of them.

I'll begin with this conversation here, as this reply pattern has occurred before:

You began by pasting verses on the following topics: obedience to God's covenant and commands, evil coming from the human heart, warning the wicked, and things God hates. I pointed out what this stamp is about but thanked you for the verses.

You then said "I was under the impression many of your stamps share this same message." Even though I made it clear I saw no connection to the verses, you didn't explain. Instead, you claimed my messages were the same. You didn't say the verses you supplied shared a message, but changed the topic to my stamps share a message. You never made a connection to your supplied verses and ignored my repeated questions about them for the rest of our conversation.

You then asked why I found it interesting and supplied two stamps and said they shared the same message. Even though I again made it clear I didn't understand the connection, you still made no effort to explain. There is no reference to God's love or any explaination. All you said was these two shared a connection and the verses in them confirmed it.

I then tried to find some connection myself since you refused to give clues and acted like I could read your mind. So, I speculated and of course once again asked about your original verses, which of course you still ignored.

Then, in your fourth reply, you said exactly what I guessed was your point all along. You also claimed you clerified the point being God is loving in your previous reply, even though you can clearly see there was no reference before I came up with it.

I then showed you exactly what happened and why it was so confusing and even asked you why you made me come up with your point. I also once again asked about the verses. You just dismissed all of that and elaborated on the point I made in my fourth reply, down to the smallest detail of what I speculated.

The thing is, that speculation was based on finding connections between some of my stamps. It still left your original verses with no connection. And yet you deliberately ignored my repeated requests to explain them the entire time.

I'm sorry that you lost our previous conversations due to your laptop purge, but you know how organized I am. I have them all. And, so yes, I know the connection now of the verses you provided and they're not related to this stamp or to what I came up with and you claimed was your point all along. You were going to make a very different point, one connected to our previous conversations and your new one on the other stamp involving homosexuality and your accusations against me personally.

Maybe you didn't read this stamp before replying. You used to leave all kinds of unrelated comments on my stamps and even argue they said things they didn't and that you don't need to read things before passing harsh judgement on them (and, yes, I have links to all these conversations). Maybe you simply forgot what your point was and so had to force me to come up with one, as you said before that you have a terrible memory and as you've done before not just with me but others too. Maybe you just realized you shouldn't have pasted those verses as an opener here but didn't want to admit to an error, as you used to constantly refuse to take responsibility for your actions and even blamed me for them, which of course frustrated me.

But, since you used those verses both before and then again now when taking about gay people and me in the other conversation you just started, it's pretty clear what you were really thinking when you pasted those verses. Maybe you were testing if I'd reply so you could leave the other comment you wanted to all long leave on the other stamp. Remember how you managed to bring up homosexuality on virtually every stamp and piece of art you commented on, no matter how unrelated? I have links to those too if you need.

Whether you were embarrassed to tell me the truth about your intent, changed your mind, or just couldn't remember your point and needed me to give you one, I'd rather we be direct and honest with each other.

I answered your other comment as you requested, but I'm going to take my time replying again because, in your response, you once again go back to making up things about me and what I said or believe even though it's right there in front of you. I don't want our conversations to once again devolve into what they were before: just you making things up and me constantly correcting you and you demanding answers but ignoring my questions, all while mocking and insulting me.

Just look at what this conversation became in the end: comments.deviantart.com/1/6345…

And there's so many more just like that I can give you links to. That too was a stamp about love that you changed to an excuse to make up a bunch of completely unrelated lies that become so laughably ridiculous by the end that it's absurd. Let's not repeat that.

Now, if it is your memory twisting and distorting reality, own up to that and read over what actually happened again. Don't just make up something new. That always frustrated me to no end before. We're human and we have the right to admit to being confused, as I confessed to in this conversation. I'm always willing to clarify what's unclear.

Maybe try doing what I do and copy my replies to you into a text document and take your time replying. If it's a long reply, do what I do and break it into chunks and reply keeping my words there in your reply so they're always in front of you as you type. I've asked you to do this so many times in the past, but you've ignored it. Given how polite you've been this time around, I really hope that means you'll do this.

Now that I've made it clear what bothers me, please let me know what bothers you. I learned how to be more direct from frustration over how vague you often are, so there's things we can gain from these talks if we're open to learning them.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

EmpathicDesign In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2018-10-16 06:00:56 +0000 UTC]

__

That is what I Would call pride over principals. You have no obligation to reply, you do so because you did not defeat the urge that is compelling you to do so.
If you choose to to reply, I respect you no more or less than if you do. Your choice is your own.

I make no apologies for refusing to agree to disagree; what that would mean would be accepting a stalemate, and I cannot in good conscience do so when the discussion is based on morality, ideology and truth. These three are objective, and when the I am requested a subjective conclusion, I cannot accept. I serve the truth, it does not serve me.

OK. I will assume I missed a question/ request and will answer here: No. I have no obligation, not legally or ethically to do so, and I refuse, just as Response Stamps are not against the community rules. Additionally, this is no different than making a journal warning others to avoid certain artists that they feel could harm/ offend others, of which I am present in many.
As DeviantART is a self regulating community, I see no reason to fulfill this request and will be politely rejecting your request. Thank you.

I am sorry to hear what others have done in regards to you, and I my self have been treated the same way, but I take no responsibility for what has occurred on your behalf, as I have done nothing more than spoken the truth from the information you have given me, and raised these concerns within a single submission.
Again, I make no apologies, I have spoken nothing but the truth from the information you have given me, and what you have told me is in contradiction, even violation of the Word of God, and as a Christian, I am obliged to raise these inconsistencies so other Christians will not be lead astray; some of these inconsistencies came just recently from the other Stamp where you stated that homosexuality cannot be interpreted as sinful without scriptural corruption; you said:
"Since the only way to claim the Bible condemns people for being gay, bi, lesbian, trans, ace, etc is to take scripture out of context, change the meaning of scripture (as many translations already do), or lie about scripture, and these deceptions result in people turning away from God, I believe it is not of God and should be avoided. Even if it angers people to hear the truth, I'd rather be honest than accepted."
The greatest concern here, apart from being completely false, is that no one is interpreting the verses that speak of homosexuality out of context or by scriptural changes. No one. Not even my own step father who is a Presbyterian Minister and a Scholar of Christianity. There is utterly, impossibly, no possible way that people are doing what you claim; but actually, it's the opposite: People who say that homosexuality IS condoned are the one's who ARE changing the scriptures and the context. Are you familiar with the gay bible? It's blasphemous and detestable that the LGBT would alter the Word of God to appease their own views. These are the same people you support and condone, and by supporting people who would mutilate the Word of God, I see it as an imperative responsibility of any Christian to warn others of this kind of horrendous sacrilege.
So, all in all, no I will not be removing any submissions. If you feel this unfair, I am sorry, but I support the truth, it is not my employer, I am it's employee.

Unfortunately, I lost all my previous rebuttals and instead of trying to assume where I was, I began a new conversation, and this time I was hopeful to clear up any and all concerns and inconsistencies; I am even willing to acknowledge my faults and short comings if any became apparent. I am not being unreasonable, I would like nothing more than unity and open lines of compassionate communication.

No, I know why others did what they did to me, and I do not condemn that; I condemn poor friendship, but I thoroughly believe in freedom of speech, even if I don't agree with it.
If people believe I am a bad person, they have the right to express that, and I have the right to defend myself, but those that block me, and they all have, I view as prejudice and childish, but they still have the right of free speech, even though they are actively practicing bigotry and fascism.

Actually, that is not true; by doctrine, all the messages are correlating, even if they speak different by element and topic, they are still speaking with the same tongue, metaphorically, as is my point. All of God's message is by His Word, and all that He says out of love for us. Forgiveness is not different from compassion, just as compassion isn't different from kindness. I hope you understand now.

If you find it difficult to connect the messages of God then perhaps you do not understand God; God's forgiveness is not different from His ability to forgive, bless, protect or save. This is all a part for God's love, but from my understand, you view these as different, which says to me that you do not understand God's love. That is worrisome.

Actually, to connect to our previous discussion I would need to know what they were, and as they're lost, I can only speculate, which I will not, or reply in regards to what I do know, such as that you are a homosexual, you have a male partner, you do not believe that homosexuality is a sin despite the Word of God blatantly condemning it in multiple scriptures and that you frequently talk about love and compassionate to others, which is very nice but is subjective and of no relevance to this debate. This discussion is about truth, not about being nice to others.

I would have thought that after making my loss of data apparent, you would not need an affirmation that I am not completely aware of what I and you have written, what is recorded and what is yet to be rebutted. I did not think I would need to say this, as I made it known that I recorded all our previous conversations for a single and quite obvious purpose: To avoid losing and forgetting information.
When you wrote: "Maybe you just realized you shouldn't have pasted those verses as an opener here but didn't want to admit to an error, as you used to constantly refuse to take responsibility for your actions and even blamed me for them, which of course frustrated me." It made no logical sense to me, as it is clear and apparent that I am not rebutting what I neither remember nor have recorded to rebut; and as all, not some, all of the final recordings were not read but archived, I cannot reply to any, that's right, any rebuts on your part as I have no idea what you had written to me previously.
To be quite honest, I have no remorse for what I have written. I say what I mean and no less. My yes is a yes, my no is a no.

I forgot when I lost all the information on my previous hard drive. If I was embarrassed, I would not have resumed the discussion.
I feel that you did not understand what I meant when I said that my lap top purged; It means that my hard drive became corrupted and I lost all my information, including the recordings of every single on of our discussions and the archived replies from you that were meant to be rebutted.

Well, I have never fabricated nor made up anything about you. I call a spade a spade, and I said what I mean. You said to me that homosexuality is not a sin, so I repeated that. If anyone asked me what you said, I said 'This person says that homosexuality is not a sin". As I am doing nothing more than parroting the information that you have given me, and others do not like that, and I utterly refuse to fabricate and add additionally context that was not presented by you, this means that people are not disagreeing with me but you, and you have no business condemning me when the source of information is nothing more or less than your own views and testimony.
If I could summarize you and what I know of you by your own testimony, and if information about you was requested, it would be this:
Gay.
Has a male partner.
Supports the LGBT.
Says that the LGBT is not sinful.
Says that homosexuality is not sinful.
Christian.
Says that homosexuality is not condemned in the Bible.
Christians will find this deeply concerning, as anyone with even a rough understanding of the Gospels and Torah knows very well that homosexuality is condemned, and they will say that you condemning yourself. You will disagree, but you are disagreeing with the Word of God, not with us Christians, which is why I held a concern that you were being deceptive, a fake Christian, lying to appease and empower the LGBT and spread lies about my ideology. Until this day, you have not laid any of my concerns to rest, but empowered my concerns and suspicions.

That is exactly what I did (And am doing at present). Unfortunately, I lost a great batch of documents that I had yet to reply to.

I hope these replies will rest some of your concerns.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-10-20 07:21:38 +0000 UTC]

Since this conversation deals with how we communicate and brings you up to date on our previous conversations, it seems the most important to address first. This is also the first conversation you've acknowledged my request on, so I'll get to the other comment later. Take your time on this. It took me several days to finish.

For the first time in a long time, I looked forward to your reply. I had hope. I thought that you'd apologize and I'd forgive you and we'd begin making amends. Everything would change. This time it would be different.

I was wrong.

Back when you started that conversation about how "horrible" my apology letter was, you talked about the call-outs people made, about the false accusations and assumptions they made about you. It actually bothered you. But when I told you all the call-outs and insults you made in return were repaying evil with evil, you accused me of taking the side of bullies.

But more recently someone you didn't really know came to you and managed to convince you to remove the people to avoid section on your profile (comments.deviantart.com/4/1637… ). It didn't work when I reminded you how you didn't like being on a people to avoid list.

Another who commented on that stamp about me was upset about what you said, but you told them it only applied to me and they couldn't figure out why you'd single me out. And you actually agreed with them that two wrongs don't make a right, even though I tried so hard to explain that and even tried to make a deal where I'd let you keep trolling me if you'd just stop doing it to others, but you'd never listen when it was me. And, even though you told that person you retract all your call-outs, you wouldn't even touch the very one they complained about, the one about me.

"I retract all of my "call outs". I feel I may have been petty." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7614… )

Yet, as much as you treat me so differently and hold me to different standards, in a way we're not that different, you and I.

You want me to see the errors of my ways, to see what you see as actions or beliefs in conflict with being Christian, right? You want me to just finally see what you see and stop being blinded by beliefs you see in conflict with scripture, especially since I share my beliefs publicly and others may be influenced. Correct so far?

Well, you're not alone.

While I'd like you to take a moment to see how you use scripture and the implications, my main focus has been wanting you to see how insults and lies spread misery and how love and truth were inseparable, especially since it's not just me you interact with. I wanted you to stop and see what I saw, just as you wanted me to stop and see what you saw.

We want each other to listen.

It's still my hope we can one day become friends, but to begin that process, we're obviously going need to work on communication.

Now, I'm going to once again ask something I've asked dozens of times and you've ignored each time but hopefully won't anymore:

With long replies, reply as I do by including my text in bits you reply to and work on it in a text document over time. This will prevent you from continuing to skip things I write and make it way easier for me to follow what you're talking about. It takes time and concentration, but it will help us communicate better, meaning we'll both be less frustrated.

Here, I'll illustrate how much easier it is to follow a long conversation without skipping anything this way:

That is what I Would call pride over principals. You have no obligation to reply, you do so because you did not defeat the urge that is compelling you to do so.
If you choose to to reply, I respect you no more or less than if you do. Your choice is your own.

It's obvious that you want to communicate with me. You left both comments. I am willing to reply, but it's also equally obvious we need to work on communication first and that's two-way.

I stated my principles. They included not agreeing with something I don't agree with and wanting us to openly state what frustrates us so we can communicate better, so I replied because of principles.

The last time I didn't reply, you left a bunch of angry rants. When I begged you to stop and said I won't reply, you became angry and called me a pile of ash. I don't want to anger or hurt you, but I can't lie, so if ignoring you angers and hurts you, what other option did I have?

I also believe in the principle of treating others how I'd want to be treated, which is not being ignored but told the truth so I can learn. If I really wanted to spare my pride, I'd ignore you, as you tend to bring me down (though you always manage to intrigue me). Besides, you always end up coming back, as you did here, so ignoring wouldn't work anyway.

How do I stick to my principles of truth and empathy without being accused of holding pride over principles? Since you made the accusation, perhaps you can offer recommendations?

I make no apologies for refusing to agree to disagree; what that would mean would be accepting a stalemate, and I cannot in good conscience do so when the discussion is based on morality, ideology and truth. These three are objective, and when the I am requested a subjective conclusion, I cannot accept. I serve the truth, it does not serve me.

That's what allowed you to keep arguing and insulting me over and over, but maybe if we agreed to disagree, we could start seeing commutation not as some battle to make me believe what you do or you believe what I do but to listen and try to understand each other.

After all, most of the times I've suggested we should agree to disagree is when we couldn't agree on facts. We're already at a stalemate. It just allows us to move forward.

We both want the other to listen. That means we'll both have to be open to listen ourselves too, or we'll forever just be talking over the other. Communication is a two-way road. Listen to me and I'll listen to you. We don't actually have to agree. Let's just try to be open to understanding.

OK. I will assume I missed a question/ request and will answer here: No. I have no obligation, not legally or ethically to do so, and I refuse, just as Response Stamps are not against the community rules. Additionally, this is no different than making a journal warning others to avoid certain artists that they feel could harm/ offend others, of which I am present in many.
As DeviantART is a self regulating community, I see no reason to fulfill this request and will be politely rejecting your request. Thank you.

You didn't miss a question or remark. It was multiple paragraphs long and repeated for months. If you weren't deliberately trying to ignore it until now, wouldn't you agree that replying including my text would have helped you not keep missing it? Of course. So do that.

I actually suspected that stating it here too might finally get you to acknowledge my request because you were acting so different here, almost like how you treat straight people. As we saw above, you don't dismiss what everyone says the way you so often do with me.

As I've said before, I'm also against it when others make call-outs, as I find it immoral. I had just hoped that having experienced such actions, you'd be able to empathize with me.

So, please let me know what your goal is. Your stamp doesn't warn people or tell them to avoid me. All you do is call me a fake Christian because of things I never said. I want to understand your goal if it's not simply slander. You said it was damage, but of what kind? You never answered any of this.

Please answer: What is your goal with the call-out and, based on the responses you've received, is it meeting that goal?

I am sorry to hear what others have done in regards to you, and I my self have been treated the same way, but I take no responsibility for what has occurred on your behalf, as I have done nothing more than spoken the truth from the information you have given me, and raised these concerns within a single submission.

As previously mentioned, a major frustration I had was you refusing to take responsibility for your own actions and blaming me and others (and even God and the Bible). You trolled me. You made the call-out. You made up the false claims. You told people who asked about it lies. And yet you take no responsibility?

Here's what you wrote in the description of the call-out:

"A person who support homosexuality and calls themselves is a fake.
They're a fake. Period.
A homosexual has no right telling anyone who Christianity commands when they themselves are living in a sin.
I reject this hypocrisy, this falsehood, especially when they say that homosexuality AND heterosexual are BOTH sinful. No."
(www.deviantart.com/empathicdes… )

I never said I support homosexuality. I don't call myself is a fake. I didn't tell anyone who Christianity commands. When I asked what sin you claim I'm living in, you said things that weren't true and go against everything I've ever said about my life. I never said homosexuality or heterosexuality are sinful. You made that up and wouldn't listen when I corrected you over and over and over again.

The first time someone commented asking about the stamp, you denied what you actually wrote, in fact agreeing with what I actually believe, and again falsely claimed that I had said homosexual and heterosexuality are sinful (comments.deviantart.com/1/7512… ). The next person called you out for the hypocrisy of being against call-outs but making a call-out of me and you justified it by saying I claimed God tempted me when I didn't, that I have sex and lie about it, and that I never replied to your friend when I did reply and I was the one who to this day never got a response (comments.deviantart.com/1/7614… ). The next person was frustrated with your circular reasoning and kept telling you to stop and remove the call-out, but you justified it by saying I talked about love too much (one of your biggest pet peeves), that I denied my "homosexuality" despite that never happening, and that I have a "boyfriend" (comments.deviantart.com/1/7512… ). Ironically, they assumed I must have bullied you for you to react the way you did. And then I confronted you these two times in the past week and you justified it as being based on things I told you even though that's plainly not true.

You said both to me and to someone else that other people were also asking you about the stamp via notes because apparently no one understands why you made it or what you're trying to say except for you. But what reason do I have to beleive you didn't also tell them things that weren't true via notes? If everyone's questioning why you did something and you have to keep justifying your actions with false information, what does that say about what you did, especially from a moral perspective?

If you had proof of your claims, you'd have presented me one of the dozens upon dozens of times I asked in the past. Instead, it was I who constantly presented proof of what I actually said.

Can you understand and empathize with how this feels from my perspective? People made false accusations against you and others believed them. You know how it feels. Now take that feeling and expand it beyond yourself.

God is love, so pray and He'll help you.

Again, I make no apologies, I have spoken nothing but the truth from the information you have given me, and what you have told me is in contradiction, even violation of the Word of God, and as a Christian, I am obliged to raise these inconsistencies so other Christians will not be lead astray; some of these inconsistencies came just recently from the other Stamp where you stated that homosexuality cannot be interpreted as sinful without scriptural corruption; you said:
"Since the only way to claim the Bible condemns people for being gay, bi, lesbian, trans, ace, etc is to take scripture out of context, change the meaning of scripture (as many translations already do), or lie about scripture, and these deceptions result in people turning away from God, I believe it is not of God and should be avoided. Even if it angers people to hear the truth, I'd rather be honest than accepted."
The greatest concern here, apart from being completely false, is that no one is interpreting the verses that speak of homosexuality out of context or by scriptural changes. No one. Not even my own step father who is a Presbyterian Minister and a Scholar of Christianity. There is utterly, impossibly, no possible way that people are doing what you claim; but actually, it's the opposite: People who say that homosexuality IS condoned are the one's who ARE changing the scriptures and the context. Are you familiar with the gay bible? It's blasphemous and detestable that the LGBT would alter the Word of God to appease their own views. These are the same people you support and condone, and by supporting people who would mutilate the Word of God, I see it as an imperative responsibility of any Christian to warn others of this kind of horrendous sacrilege.
So, all in all, no I will not be removing any submissions. If you feel this unfair, I am sorry, but I support the truth, it is not my employer, I am it's employee.

The irony is that you accused me of holding pride over principles. At least I apologize when I do something wrong.

I didn't make a gay Bible or claim to support one. In fact, I keep saying how I'm against twisting and misusing scripture. If someone or something deliberately alters the original Hebrew and Greek meaning, it's deceptive. Accidental translation errors happen, but deliberate is deception.

You quoted me and then claimed I said something different. I said you can't claim the Bible condemns people for being gay, bi, lesbian, trans, ace, etc without taking verses out of context, twisting the meaning, etc. We see this when multiple times you used a verse calling for the death penalty for men who have sex from a section that includes exile for sex during a woman's period to condemn someone who doesn't even have sex and dismiss the context (ceremonial laws) and half the verse (the death penalty) as no longer relevant. That's observable proof of misusing scripture for hypocritical selective condemnation.

You also did this with what I said. I talked about people and you changed it to a thing, to homosexuality. You twisted what I said and then claim you'd never do that with the Bible the way you did in your other comment and in previous comments.

These are real, provable actions on your part. Now, if you can show where I've also misused scripture, please show me. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong and apologize.

Unfortunately, I lost all my previous rebuttals and instead of trying to assume where I was, I began a new conversation, and this time I was hopeful to clear up any and all concerns and inconsistencies; I am even willing to acknowledge my faults and short comings if any became apparent. I am not being unreasonable, I would like nothing more than unity and open lines of compassionate communication.

Starting a new conversation to clear up inconsistencies explains why you started the other conversation but not this one, the one I asked about. Why here first and why just the verses? Since you deny all the obvious reasons, what is the real reason?

Do you acknowledge your faults and short comings I have drawn to your attention now or do you still deny them?

I'd also like us to have an open and honest conversation, free from deception and full of compassion. If this is your goal too, it looks like we can agree to do that.

No, I know why others did what they did to me, and I do not condemn that; I condemn poor friendship, but I thoroughly believe in freedom of speech, even if I don't agree with it.
If people believe I am a bad person, they have the right to express that, and I have the right to defend myself, but those that block me, and they all have, I view as prejudice and childish, but they still have the right of free speech, even though they are actively practicing bigotry and fascism.

I also believe in freedom of speech, but wouldn't you prefer if those people who made call-outs about you at least portrayed things accurately? I want this too.

You wanted to be able to object, but they blocked you. You did not block me, so I am able to object, but if you refuse to listen it's no different than if you had blocked me to silence me. Either way, my words go nowhere. Do you understand?

Actually, that is not true; by doctrine, all the messages are correlating, even if they speak different by element and topic, they are still speaking with the same tongue, metaphorically, as is my point. All of God's message is by His Word, and all that He says out of love for us. Forgiveness is not different from compassion, just as compassion isn't different from kindness. I hope you understand now.

Wait...I said the topic was different and you say that's not true and then promptly say the topic is different?

I understand your point, as I came up with it. Of course, it doesn't answer my repeated questions about why you refused to explain and made me come up with your reasoning for you.

Do you have an answer yet?

If you find it difficult to connect the messages of God then perhaps you do not understand God; God's forgiveness is not different from His ability to forgive, bless, protect or save. This is all a part for God's love, but from my understand, you view these as different, which says to me that you do not understand God's love. That is worrisome.

There's no need to patronize me.

I came up with the connection. Every single biblical connection you stated in your replies here was copied from what I said first. You provided no explaination until after I did. This is a provable fact. Just look at our conversation.

So, please don't patronize me by saying I don't understand God's love because I explained connections you just repeated after me.

Actually, to connect to our previous discussion I would need to know what they were, and as they're lost, I can only speculate, which I will not, or reply in regards to what I do know, such as that you are a homosexual, you have a male partner, you do not believe that homosexuality is a sin despite the Word of God blatantly condemning it in multiple scriptures and that you frequently talk about love and compassionate to others, which is very nice but is subjective and of no relevance to this debate. This discussion is about truth, not about being nice to others.

Our previous discussions aren't lost. They're all here on DeviantArt. There's no need to speculate.

But I'm going to point out the obvious here: You claim "I am not completely aware of what I and you have written," not that you just don't know my last replies but your own too. You keep insisting that the data loss somehow wiped your memory too or your memory is just incredibly poor, but yet for some reason you trust that same memory to somehow be accurate when it comes to the things you condemn me for?

Why do you trust a memory you've admitted is poor so strongly? You shouldn't. You should trust what I've told you and not what you "remember." After all, I have proof to show I said what I did. You have none to show I said what you claim I did.

You asked if I am "homosexual" and I said I have same sex attractions. You claimed I have a male "partner." I said I have someone like a brother to me who I love like my parents and said friends can love each other (I have a stamp for that too of course). I said sexual orientations are morally neutral, that it's how we actually live that matters. You keep starting conversations on things about love that don't mention homosexuality and then complain if i talk about love. That's you doing that.

It's ironic that you claim it's all connected, the truth of the Bible to God's love. That's what you claimed. Your words are literally right above this. But of course now you dismiss that same love as having "no relevance," just like you constantly did in our previous conversations.

That's a little too convenient and comes off as deceptive, especially since you just copied love because I said it and never once even hinted at the connection in all this time we've talked. Only I did, and you always resented me when I talked about love in the past, even though it was the actual topic of what you commented on.

"Why talk so casually and constantly about love, respect and togetherness; surely you know that you are wasting time?" (comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… )

"Why do you talk about "healing" and "getting along" and "understanding each other" and "coming together" in every single reply when I do not care now as I have never cared?" (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )

"If you wish to talk about healing and togetherness, I'm sure someone somewhere will join you." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )

"You frequently talk about love and compassionate to others, which is very nice but is subjective and of no relevance to this debate. This discussion is about truth, not about being nice to others." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7664… )

I would have thought that after making my loss of data apparent, you would not need an affirmation that I am not completely aware of what I and you have written, what is recorded and what is yet to be rebutted. I did not think I would need to say this, as I made it known that I recorded all our previous conversations for a single and quite obvious purpose: To avoid losing and forgetting information.

That's why I told you I have it all organized. I was offering to help.

Only there's one thing I'm not quite clear on:

You may have copied my replies and saved them to your computer and those copies are lost, but unless you reply to replies on DeviantArt, they don't actually go away from your notifications. You'd have to either select all my replies and archive them or select all my replies and delete them. Which is it? Your computer didn't do this. DeviantArt is a separate server. You did it. Don't blame your laptop.

The great thing about the internet is none of it's actually gone. Our conversations are all still there. Even if somehow your computer's loss wiped both your notifications and your human brain too (which you'll understand if I find hard to believe), it's still here.

You could have started with the link you ignored in my last reply, but don't worry. I'll supply it again, along with others at the end of this.

When you wrote: "Maybe you just realized you shouldn't have pasted those verses as an opener here but didn't want to admit to an error, as you used to constantly refuse to take responsibility for your actions and even blamed me for them, which of course frustrated me." It made no logical sense to me, as it is clear and apparent that I am not rebutting what I neither remember nor have recorded to rebut; and as all, not some, all of the final recordings were not read but archived, I cannot reply to any, that's right, any rebuts on your part as I have no idea what you had written to me previously.

I understand you don't know my very last replies if you never read them, but we're not talking about that. We're talking about what you wrote and our earlier conversations. I literally said you used the same verses, not me. You.

You should know what you wrote.

It's not just that you used the same verses before to say why you needed to warn homosexuals of their wicked path and how evil coming from the heart of man means love between people of the same sex is sinful, but you used them again in your other reply. You also actually recreated your previous conversations, raising the same accusations you did in the past.

Maybe you didn't really forget?

To be quite honest, I have no remorse for what I have written. I say what I mean and no less. My yes is a yes, my no is a no.

Except all those times you said the opposite of what you meant and kept changing your meaning. At the end of this, I'll link you to all out discussions so you can see your own words.

In a reply to someone else, you wrote: "If I'm a bully, call me a bully.
If I'm a liar, call me a liar.
Whatever I am, whatever I do, call me out on it, because as long as I'm a member of the community, I should be known for who I am and what I do, even if that's a negative and shames me." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7614… )

You want it? You've got it. By the end of this, it should be clear who you are and what you do, at least with me.

I forgot when I lost all the information on my previous hard drive. If I was embarrassed, I would not have resumed the discussion. 
I feel that you did not understand what I meant when I said that my lap top purged; It means that my hard drive became corrupted and I lost all my information, including the recordings of every single on of our discussions and the archived replies from you that were meant to be rebutted.

No, I understand all of this. You told me at the time you archived my replies for later rebuttal and I told you I'd rather not have rebuttals if they were like your previous "rebuttals." You may have forgotten all of this, but I haven't.

I read about how your laptop lost everything before you ever told me directly. I know all of this. But you say, "I forgot when I lost all the information on my previous hard drive." You literally keep saying that you forgot the moment your laptop lost it's data.

I'm sorry, but your computer is not either your brain or DeviantArt. Your laptop was purged, not your memory or the internet. Your replies are still in both those places.

Well, I have never fabricated nor made up anything about you. I call a spade a spade, and I said what I mean. You said to me that homosexuality is not a sin, so I repeated that. If anyone asked me what you said, I said 'This person says that homosexuality is not a sin". As I am doing nothing more than parroting the information that you have given me, and others do not like that, and I utterly refuse to fabricate and add additionally context that was not presented by you, this means that people are not disagreeing with me but you, and you have no business condemning me when the source of information is nothing more or less than your own views and testimony.

Seriously? Well, then would you clarify what I actually believe homosexuality means? I assume you remember or else you can't claim you only add my context. Please show me where I said homosexuality and heterosexuality are sinful, as you claimed in your call-out, or where I twist the Bible. I assume you can do this as you say you don't fabricate anything.

I'll wait.

I will provide you with links to our previous conversations, where you'll once again see me correcting your false claims and then you doing absolutely nothing to correct yourself or stop from repeating them.

So don't patronize me by blaming me for what you do. First it was somehow my fault you made a call-out of me. Now what you tell people is somehow my fault. It doesn't work that way.

I am responsible for what I say. You are responsible for what you say. Own up to that.

If I could summarize you and what I know of you by your own testimony, and if information about you was requested, it would be this:

Interesting how you can remember my "testimony" but not our previous conversations that "testimony" came from. How does that work?

Gay.

You asked if I'm homosexual and I said I have same sex attractions. That's what gay means, so sure.

Has a male partner.

I could give you quite a list of the times I called you out on this and you kept ignoring my correction. I never said that I have a "partner", you did. I said I have a soulmate, someone who I said is like a brother and I love like my parents. It wouldn't make a difference what word you used except that I know you intentionally constantly change it to partner to create a sexual connotation. You deliberately ignore my objections and twist what I've told you so that you can falsely claim, as you have many times, that I'm "living a sinful lifestyle" of sex and all the other things you fantasized about.

I'm not against sex or partners. I'm against lying.

Supports the LGBT.

I never said this. You made it up back when you first commented long ago and you said that I'm wrong to talk about LGBT people when they're and "it", an organization called "the LGBT." I don't support what I don't even understand and never claimed. I don't believe in a support vs opposition binary for types of people. It would be like asking do you support or oppose left handed people? What's there to choose between? They exist and it's how they actually live their lives that matters.

Says that the LGBT is not sinful.

Again, I never said this. You made it up. I said being LGBT is not a sin and showed why (in the other stamp's description). You make people into an "it" (yes, called them "it") and "the LGBT" to try to dehumanize people who are different from you, but I'd like you to at least try to be honest about what I actually said and believe about seeing people as individual human beings. I'm sure you'd like the same when I talk about what you say.

Says that homosexuality is not sinful.

I said sexual orientations are not sinful or even mentioned in the Bible, that it's how we live that matters. Feel free to prove me wrong. Since you actively refused to define homosexuality or homosexual, I had to define it how the dictionary does, even though you didn't like that either.

Christian.

Yes. Though for some reason that really bothers you, as I can link you to the times you kept trying to bully me out of my faith and insisting I can't be Christian and appeal to Satan or I should convert to Islam.

Says that homosexuality is not condemned in the Bible.

And showed it by going through the verses people claim to say it does and putting them back in context and introducing verses those people ignore. You never once disputed any of this by showing a single instance of me twisting scripture. Not once. Feel free to change that. I'll listen.

Christians will find this deeply concerning, as anyone with even a rough understanding of the Gospels and Torah knows very well that homosexuality is condemned, and they will say that you condemning yourself. You will disagree, but you are disagreeing with the Word of God, not with us Christians, which is why I held a concern that you were being deceptive, a fake Christian, lying to appease and empower the LGBT and spread lies about my ideology. Until this day, you have not laid any of my concerns to rest, but empowered my concerns and suspicions.

"...spread lies about my ideology." I see. So that's why it upsets you so much? You feel that every Christian must agree with you because you feel some personal command over the truth? I'm sorry, but you do not represent every Christian anymore than I do. You don't own Christianity.

And "empower the LGBT" sounds like empowering some enemy force. But what does that have to do with being honest and admitting everyone needs Christ instead of claiming, as you did previously, that gay people are sinners just because they don't happen to be straight?

When Christians disagree with each other about everything from being gay to speaking in tongues to predestination, they're disagreeing with each other, not God or the Bible. That's why Paul wrote about not arguing with fellow believers.

We disagree, you and I. Don't blame the Word of God for our disagreement. His Word is what will eventually settle it.

That is exactly what I did (And am doing at present). Unfortunately, I lost a great batch of documents that I had yet to reply to.

If you "had yet to reply to" them, you haven't actually lost anything. Even if you deliberately went through and deleted everything from your notifications on DeviantArt for some reason and then blamed your computer rather than take responsibility for your own actions yet again, it's not gone.

I'll link you to our conversations at the end of this.

I hope these replies will rest some of your concerns.

In a way, yes, but I actually learned more about what frustrates you from what you've told others about me because you're much more open and honest with others. Maybe it's because the sexual assault made you prejudiced against gay people. Maybe you just feel every Christian has to beleive exactly what you do. Or maybe it's something personal agaisnt me. I don't know. But I just wish you'd treat me the way you do some others.

I didn't choose to have same-sex attractions, but being different made me better able to empathize with others who are bullied and marginalized. It tested my parents' love and brought us closer together. So, it's not something I feel bad about. And I'm thankful to God for all he's done to make what could have driven me from Him lead me back to Him and give me new desires for His will and for everyone to experience this kind of unconditional love.

Now for links to our previous conversations and a brief note about each of them. Please keep in mind that this is for reference only and I would like you to continue to limit our conversations to what they are now and not reply on all these old conversations. Agreed?

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6107…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6107…
This was our first conversation, when you tried to correct my statement that "being LGBT is not a sin" by saying "the LGBT" is an organization that supports sin and I tried to get you to explain what you meant, which apparently had nothing to do with the stamp, which you didn't even read the description of.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6107…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6107…
This time you came back simply to say "It's a sin." Naturally I asked you to explain, but instead you started making random unsubstantiated accusations and replying in random places, all while accusing me of things you say and proving you still didn't read the description before making up what it said.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6481…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6481…
You come in swinging here, calling me a liar and fake Christian, but quickly revealing you again never read what you commented on and claim repeatedly and angrily that you don't need to read it before judging it and me for things I never wrote. You spent most of the time being angry over the fact you are upset over something you fabricated and I just kept trying to calm you down with the truth, which you ignored.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6481…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6481…
You started a new conversation on the same stamp on the same day here just to argue the stamp says something it doesn't and to be confused how replies work. Notice how carefully and thoroughly I address everything anyway, answering all your questions and patiently correcting your repeated false statements.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6481…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6481…
Cameron's version of your reply claiming the stamp said what it didn't and being confused with replies, though with more mocking and insults. Still, it's a good resource to understand my position better and see how I never repay insult for insult or evil with evil.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6107…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6107…
This was when you went on your trolling spree, leaving comments all over the place. Here you claim the stamp talks about cake, that I say the exact opposite of what I said, and just start making up silly lies before asking me if homosexuality is a sin here and in a dozen other places at once.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6345…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6345…
You pick the stamp "Christianity Is About Love" to try to start an argument about how I'm lying and I can't prove Christianity is about love, before changing the topic to homosexuality. Again, this is just one of many conversations you started all in the same day.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/5879…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/5879…
Here you pick a random stamp to comment on how naive and unchristian I am for things I never said while saying you don't care about the stamp and you constantly change topics before making up one ridiculous false claim after another. There's absolutely no way to deny this conversation shows just how incredibly difficult it is to communicate with you sometimes.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6345…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6345…
On a stamp saying "I Fight Hate With Love" you argue that love is subjective and I show exactly how I personally define love (using the Bible of course) and you say you agree with my definition before spending the rest of the conversation denying that ever happened and making up increasingly absurd lies that I carefully disprove while you become out of touch with reality. This is a perfect example of how completely alien the truth is to you at times when we've talked. There's absolutely no denying the incredible amount of deception here and there's absolutely no excuse for your behavior.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6263…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6263…
You turn the first of two stamps about prenatal memory into just an excuse to mock and insult me, call me a liar and make up false accusations that I then carefully disprove through direct links. There is absolutely no denying you were trolling me here or that you were lying about me. The facts speak for themselves.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6281…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6281…
On the second stamp about prenatal memory, you take your trolling up a notch by making up lies you literally prove yourself are not true and then just mock me and change the subject.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6116…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6116…
Yet another comment on another stamp from your trolling spree, this time coming full force calling me a hypocrite and fake Christian and then making up things you imagine I do, followed of course by mocking and insulting me for not knowing what you refuse to tell me.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/5109…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/5109…
You randomly pick a drawing saying "Love One Another" to ask if I'm homosexual and I answer that I have same-sex attractions. Not only is this a great resource because I explain a lot about myself and my beliefs, but it also shows what happens when we put both our knowledge of the Bible head to head. This is also the one and only time you ask if I'm gay/homosexual and I answered the same day, which is significant because at many points later you falsely claimed that you had to ask many times or that I denied it, all of which is not true of course.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/7328…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/7328…
On an apology letter that literally everyone but you found wonderful and heartfelt, you commented that it's "horrible" because you personally somehow "speak on behalf of all LGBT people" before being angry over me supposedly speaking on behalf of all Christians and then going into random unrelated topics, including why Islam is terrible. But this is actually a great resource to show that even while you go on and on making up false accusations and insults, I patiently try to help you become empathic and see that the pettiness and repaying in kind that you admit to is in conflict with your stated Christian beliefs.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/5554…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/5554…
You randomly pick a drawing that shows how much I've improved over the years and is about love to simply claim homosexuality is a sin. At the time, you had left so many comments the same day that I didn't follow up with what I wanted to reply: "Love, a blessing."

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/5707…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/5707…
You pick a random stamp to falsely accuse me of resubmitting stamps and then mock and insult me for lies you made up and for not liking you trolling me. This is a perfect example of how obnoxious you act while trolling, but the last reply is also an excellent resource because, despite how you act, I still patiently answer all your questions thoroughly.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6023…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6023…
You comment on a stamp saying "Spread Love" just to once again falsely accuse me of resubmitting stamps and call me an attention seeker, even though I never sought your attention and yet became the target of it. And, of course, I never resubmitted anything. It's just more false accusations as always.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/6107…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/6107…
This time you return to the original stamp with a vengence to insult and mock me, but still refuse to read the description before again condemning me for things I never said or believe but you simply made up.

Full Conversation: comments.deviantart.com/1/7512…
Last Reply: comments.deviantart.com/1/7512…
This is the one and only conversation I started and it was simply asking you to correct your call-out stamp, which you refused before making up even more lies about me. Read it all the way through and you'll see the level of deception you're willing to go to just to condemn, mock and insult me. It's truly ridiculous that, after all that, you'd have the gall to still claim I'm immoral or a fake Christian and should follow advice from you on how I should live my life.

comments.deviantart.com/4/3981…
Cameron's call-out of me filled with mocking, insults and of course the same identical false accusations. I did not reply.

After that, we have our current two conversations, which I doubt I need to link you to, but I can if necessary.

Any one of the comment strings you started above warrants an apology from you, but all together? It ranks among the highest level of trolling I've witnessed on DeviantArt in my nearly eight years here.

It's still my hope you'll have an "Aha!" moment where you realize what you've done and apologise, I forgive you, and we become friends.

With God, anything possible, so it could happen.

You expressed the same hope for me to realize what you see as wrong, but maybe part of the challenge is that we don't see the other as a source of moral authority. Your actions are highly immoral to me and you've said before that "a homosexual has no right" and so you won't follow my advice on how to live anymore than I'll follow your advice on how I should live.

If we won't change, maybe we can at least agree to listen and try to understand and empathize with each other.

It's a start.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

EmpathicDesign In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2018-10-21 05:27:16 +0000 UTC]

I will reply to what is relevant.

Firstly, The call-outs that I have made were not against you but a former friend, and I regret the call-outs that I had made against them. The circumstances surrounding there were meant in an attack form, in response to their attack, so although you are trying to appeal to inconsistency upon my part, I unfortunately have to tell you that these matters are mutually exclusive, but I understand.

We are actually very different. I do not claim scriptural corruption when justifying the blatantly sinful. When God says that something is sinful, I understand that to mean He is claiming is sinful. This is a difference between us; I understand the bible geographically, historically and contextually, and I feel no need to justify or alter context to suit my appeal, this is an inconsistency on your part that has become as clear as day.

If you have any concerns with me, I will ask that you leave them to the side as I have; my concerns are what you are telling and teaching others by your appeal to the Biblical Scripture. This is not personal but object to me; truth for truth, not truth for happy feelings.

We need to learn to communicate? That is a very redundant appeal; there are no concerns in regards to communications between us, at least on my part, I understand you fully, though if I am wrong I have requested clarity on your part but that also does not mean there is a concern with communication. So, I do not understand the appeal, so I will reasonably assume you are once again appealing to human nature and what not.

I see that you are a fan of repeating yourself; Again, I am copying everything to text so I may reply accordingly. I see no need for a third reminder, and I am sure this will suffice.

Actually, you are completely wrong, and have taken a very low and narrow road that is nothing more than an avoidance. I speak because someone else is teaching others of the scripture and lying about what they say. As a Christian, or even as an officer of the law, I could not in good conscience allow someone to spread blatant lies. If you cannot understand moral obligation, then perhaps the Bible is the best thing for you to read, but if you wish to keep altering context to suit you, you will always arrive at the conclusions that you wish for.

So do what exactly?

Perhaps you do find it immoral, but that does not make it immoral, that simply means you disagree; hoever, if someone is spreading lies, is it not your moral responcibility to confront this liar if you know the truth?

I feel that you do not understand what "damage" is. Damage is ambiguous, and not limited to destruction of property, but corruption too.

My goal for this call-out is to bring awareness that you are deliberately corrupting the Christian Scriptures and that you are promoting yourself as a Christian when your intentions and actions are contrary to what God has called Christians too.

I request that you to show me where exactly I have accused God and the bible for my errors.
I have actually made no false claims, and have shown the evidence by your own testimony, not my own, nothing from me but from what you are saying. Again, the issue is not with me but your own inconsistency. If you are frustrated, I make no apologies, you have only yourself to blame for the inconsistencies, as they have come from you, so I would appreciate that you take responsibility, and stop acting like a young child who wishes to point the finger when something is not going there way. Thank you.

It does not matter if you do not call yourself a fake. People who are deceptive rarely do.
I contest what you say, as what I said is true, by your own admissions. If you disagree, then you must reevaluate your own testimony.
Blaming me doesn't make me wrong if I am quoting from you. :/

To be very short and simple, what does the objection of others, or the support (Which I have), have to do with anything? It does not.
Now, I know you will consider my retraction from call-outs as an inconsistency, but that is irrelevant to the stamp, as I retract my bitter action towards others in haste, I do not retract the inconsistencies, the falsehoods and the awareness I have brout to your inconsistencies, as these were not made subjectively, but for the sake of truth and bringing light to others and their deceit. To that, I owe no apologies, as people will always have views that can be either supportive or condemning. I take what I get, but I have no remorse for speaking truth for the sake of truth. If you are not able to comprehend this, or you object, then I cannot say anything to you that can help you understand.

That is not actually true, you have not presented proof of anything you have said to date, of this I am certain. For every demand and request I have made, you have presented conjecture, appeals to love, good nature and compassion (of which has no place or relevance in this discussion). You continue to appeal to the good side of humanity, of God's love and grace, but you do not actually provide proof of anything you say. Everything that I have pressed information you for has gone in full circle with no actual yes's or no's. It took a while to have your homosexuality confirmed, and even though you said you had no issue in exclaiming this attribute about yourself, you were never forthcoming about it, nor did you ever directly affirm it until I pressed you for it.
Now, by affirming your homosexuality, there is already reason to suspect prejudice from your position; that as someone who is gay, you will of course want to defend homosexuality, and you will of course seek to ensure that the LGBT is viewed in a positive light, for to speak against them would condemn you and ensure your rejection from the LGBT.



To this date, I have tried to be very reasonable, and show you that homosexuality is a sin, and until now, you continue to defend it, even exclaim that the biblical condemnation of homosexuality is by biblical corruption. You have made your prejudice very clear.

You said " In fact, I keep saying how I'm against twisting and misusing scripture.", and yet you claimed that homosexuality can only be viewed as sinful if the texts are taken out of context, essentially through the corruption of scriptures. I challenge you to prove that this is possible, and not through one scripture, but by all scripture that condemns homosexuality.
Additionally, by making this appeal, you have confirmed (by your views), Biblical corruption, by directly exclaiming that homosexuality can ONLY, not possibly, ONLY be condemned through corruption. This means that you are not against twisting and misusing scripture, but you enable and support the corruption. The scripture is very, very clear, and condemning of homosexuality, and if you cannot accept that, then goodness knows what else you do not accept. Goodness knows what else is a corruption according to you. Goodness knows what else is out of context according to you. With all this incredible conjecture and the appeal to corruption, why should I, or anyone support your views on Christianity and the Bible? If you can made the clear and comprehensible appeal to Biblical corruption, then I and everyone must take this to mean that your appeals, knowledge and views are based around corruption; therefore, you are not a reliable source of information, especially when the scholars that I know personally contradict and do not support your claims. I will also point out that this is the second time you have appealled to inconsistency. In the past, you told me that a certain surah in the Qur'an was a misinterpretation, and a very popular one at that, of which I showed that the scholars did not support your assertion, and that by their own opinion, is authentic. You dismissed this quickly and then decided to discuss something else.
Again and again and again, your appeals are based on corruption, and yet, one final point, so far, is to do with homosexuality. What else, according to you, is being misinterpreted, or the context ignored or the verses corrupted?

What does it matter to us if others are taking verses out of context? If the bible condemns an action, which it does, and people act differently, then it is them that is held accountable. Does this mean you should be held accountable for saying that homosexuality is not a sin when theres clearly state it is? I agree that you should be held accountable, and I believe you should be held accountable too.
I also acknowledge that you did not reply to the whole of my text, but only in part and your appeal was not made completely to me but the actions of others, which are irrelevant, but if you wish to make it relevant, then you must be held accountable too for taking clearly condemning verses and saying they are not as such and are only made so by scriptural corruption. You condemn yourself, and I am trying to help you here.

I said "I began a new conversation, and this time I was hopeful to clear up any and all concerns and inconsistencies". I did not specify what conversations; and if you believe that means only a singular or specific conversations, then I would be prejudice, but this applies to all conversations, which is why there is no specifics.
You asked "what is the real reason?" This is the real reason. I thought this was apparent in what I wrote, it seems I was mistaken.

I asked "Do you acknowledge your faults and short comings I have drawn to your attention now or do you still deny them?"
You said "I'd also like us to have an open and honest conversation, free from deception and full of compassion. If this is your goal too, it looks like we can agree to do that."
This is not an answer for this question, perhaps a reply for my former point, but not of relevance to this question. Please answer the questions.

I have no power in what people portray me as; I acknowledge what they say, and I defend myself it is wrong, but they can still say what they know and believe, even if it is wrong. I condemn the childish actions, and the lack of study and effort to understand context, but otherwise they are human and I respect their humanity. Their actions will define them; as will their lies, knowledge, truth and beliefs.

You said: "You did not block me, so I am able to object, but if you refuse to listen it's no different than if you had blocked me to silence me. Either way, my words go nowhere."
Of course I wish to object, and they did block me, it is childish, and this will come back to them in time.
You claim that I do not listen to you, and yet I do exactly that. Everything that you tell me I analyze and check for verification, and when it is irrelevant, I dismiss it, just like your reply in the former rebuttal, which was an irrelevant reply.
Unfortunately, this does not apply to you but me. You could easily have blocked me, for all the issues I have apprently caused you, none of which I apologize for, but by giving circular reasoning, appealing to corruption, misleading me by refusing to give direct answers until I pressed you is no different. You take a very humble approach, but your defense and responses are circular. You do not give answers but counter claims against me. You appeal to human nature rather than given direct and exact answers. Essentially, you are beating around the bush every turn that you reply. There is no difference than had you blocked me, and by using these tactics, it says to me a lot more than if you had blocked me, which could be interpreted as simply trying to block out someone you view as a troublemaker, so to speak, but you continue instead to appeal to conjecture, to human nature and God's grace, which is above all else, not an answer to anything. Your views are subjective, where truth is objective.
To be objective: Is homosexuality a sin: Yes. Why? Because the Bible says so.
Your appeal: Is homosexuality a sin: No. Why? Because it has been taken out of context, or the scriptures are being misinterpreted, or the Bible is corrupted (so to speak).
Do the scholars support my views: Yes.
Do they support yours: No.
Therefore, your appeal is wrong, and you are being blasphemous for calling corruption on the Word of God, when the word is authenticated by the scholars, theologians and ancient historians.
Objectivity supports me, your subjective appeal does not. So, please explain to me how you fix these inconsistencies in your beliefs when the scholars and the words affirm my position but condemn yours?

I am not patronizing you; I am telling you what you should already be well aware of, and what you constantly appeal to, yet somehome seem not to understand. Perhaps you like to use these wonderful words in a context that appeals to you with no respect for it's meaning or implementation?
On the contrary, I am not repeating you, these are my conclusions, not yours, so please do not take credit that is not due unto you; as someone who speaks of compassion and kindness, I expect more humility than this.

As I have stated, I can only speculate, which I will not, or use what i know, which I am, and I even gave a short list of what I know. I cannot receit everything from the past, but what I do know I have kept in short points in my mind and important facts to note, which I have noted. So, what you are pointing out that is obvious, is very obvious and correct, as it is exactly what I said; but, you assumed that I remember more than what I do know, which Is not true, and I cannot recite everything, and I am even relying upon rereading to catch up, lest I missed something important. So, thank you for confirming my point.

If I trust you, how do I know you are not lying? Because you say so? Because you claim to be Christian? From the beginning and until now, I do not trust you or your views, as they're full of contradiction and conjecture. I may not remember everything that has been said and done, but I know a person not to be trusted then, is not to be trusted now, and that is something that is not required of a good or bad memory. I am sure you understand.

I claimed no relevance because I am discussing a specific element, a topic. Does that make sense?

I never resented love, I reject your appeal to compassion and human nature when truth is the core of this discussion; it is you that resents me for having an objective appeal when you take a subjective appeal. Truth is not defined by feelings, it's defined by truth. I fear this is something you believe is fluid and/ or ambiguous.

You said: "You may have copied my replies and saved them to your computer and those copies are lost, but unless you reply to replies on DeviantArt, they don't actually go away from your notifications. You'd have to either select all my replies and archive them or select all my replies and delete them. Which is it? Your computer didn't do this. DeviantArt is a separate server. You did it. Don't blame your laptop."
That is exactly correct: I made it very clear that I archived the responses so I may respond to them in kind.
Now, to clarify your confusion: I archived your replies so I may reply to your rebuttal in time; everything before then is irrelevant and rebutted. The notifications where then deleted as the important data was kept on a text document, which you are already well aware of as I have made that much very clear. The archiving this is.
When you said I should not have blamed my laptop, for what must I point a finger at it for? Is your concern that I did not keep your replies in my notifications? I elected to archive them to be replied later, as is my choice and my right. If I had known my laptop would purge, I would not have deleted the replies that are kept in my notifications, so there's no blame on me, nor my laptop as these things are random and unfortunate. So, when you said I blamed my laptop, you made an assertion, and an assumption that I kept them in my notification, which if you consider the fact that I archived them for later, makes the most sense that I would not keep them, as they are stored and saved for later. For this I believe it is fair to apologize for making thoughtless assumptions.

You said: "I understand you don't know my very last replies if you never read them, but we're not talking about that. We're talking about what you wrote and our earlier conversations. I literally said you used the same verses, not me. You.
Then you said: "You should know what you wrote."
Need I point out the rather embarrassing inconsistency you have presented here?
Perhaps I should. It is understandable that I don't know your very last replieS, but what I wrote from our earlier conversations, but I should remember that? Is that not exactly why these discussions are archived so we can very why is said before? I am shaking my head. I truly thoguht you knew this. This is why the discussions are archived and recorded on text. For this exact reason. Perhaps I should be more compassionate to you.

Of course I will reuse verses. There is no obligation to use one verse for one rebuttal. If it is relevant and used, it can be used again. There is not limit or number to it's usage. Perhaps that is something that you enjoy doing but there's no rule or law against using a verse many times. Is this your concern? It seems very minimal, even unimportant.

I have no interest or obligation to humor past remarks, only the discussion at present, and I would appreciate that you remain on topic and discuss what is said now, with truth and reasoning, and not issues that you hold from the past. I may no longer have the rebuttals archived, so I will use what I have now, as is more than reasonable. If you wish to indulge the past, you will do so alone, as the past is gone, and today is now. Thank you.

If you have not forgotten, then you have not forgotten. No concern to me.

Of course I forgot, I am left with whatever else I can remember, but I see your point, you believe that I have gained amnesia and lost all recollections, I can understand that, so I will clarify what I may have been vague with: I have lost all my replies, and all that I had mean to reply with, as part of those archived rebuttals were in part complete. I am left with what I know from the past, small details, notes, impressions, no more or less than than anyone who's held a discussion before. I hope that clarifies what I did not give enough information on.

You said: "Well, then would you clarify what I actually believe homosexuality means? I assume you remember or else you can't claim you only add my context. Please show me where I said homosexuality and heterosexuality are sinful, as you claimed in your call-out, or where I twist the Bible. I assume you can do this as you say you don't fabricate anything."

You said: "Please show me where I said homosexuality and heterosexuality are sinful", except I never said anything that caused this response, it is at random, and the right to inquire is mine as the statement and responsibility to offer proof is your burden, as this came from you. Perhaps you have a point, but you have a duty to proof first.

You said: "Please show me where I said homosexuality and heterosexuality are sinful, as you claimed in your call-out, or where I twist the Bible. I assume you can do this as you say you don't fabricate anything."
I am sorry but that is not my responsibility. You have asked that I prove something, but since you made an assertion against me in the given reply of yours, the burden of proof is not on me, it is on you as you made the statement, and the demand for evidence against you is on you because you made a statement against me. For instance, how can I clarify what you believe what homosexuality means? I cannot, that is impossible, YOU must clarify what it means.
I will wait.

I feel pity that you feel patronized, but as I cannot give answer that you want nor tell you what you wish to here, I have no apologies to give. You have your own sources and yourself to deal with. Blaming me doesn't make me wrong, it jsut means you have not the sources or truth to refute what I say. What else can I do to help you, I am trying here.

You said: "I am responsible for what I say. You are responsible for what you say. Own up to that." Of course you said that. I expected that response. I forgive you.

You said: "Interesting how you can remember my "testimony" but not our previous conversations that "testimony" came from. How does that work?" Quite simply, as explained before, I am relying on what I know of you and remember. Little details and small notes can be quite a lot of evidence.

You said: "You asked if I'm homosexual and I said I have same sex attractions. That's what gay means, so sure". So, will you say this: "I am gay", as it seems that although you do not refute the meaning here, you haven't came forth and said you are gay directly. I am straight. Can you say you are gay as directly?

You said: "I could give you quite a list of the times I called you out on this and you kept ignoring my correction. I never said that I have a "partner", you did. I said I have a soulmate, someone who I said is like a brother and I love like my parents. It wouldn't make a difference what word you used except that I know you intentionally constantly change it to partner to create a sexual connotation. You deliberately ignore my objections and twist what I've told you so that you can falsely claim, as you have many times, that I'm "living a sinful lifestyle" of sex and all the other things you fantasized about."
What is a soulmate:
soulmate
noun: soulmate; plural noun: soulmates; noun: soul-mate; plural noun: soul-mates
"a person ideally suited to another as a close friend or romantic partner."

Your soulmate seems to come across as rather intimate, more so than a regular sibling, but this is the first I have heard of them being a friend, but I shall go with it.
Why does a "partner" have to have a sexual connontation? I have partners I work with, are you saying that I have a sexual attraction/ relations with them?
I have no apologies, you are very bleek and obscure in regards to your relationships. If you were forthcoming and direct, these confusions would not exist. Take responsibility for being obscure please.

You said: "I never said this. You made it up back when you first commented long ago and you said that I'm wrong to talk about LGBT people when they're and "it", an organization called "the LGBT." I don't support what I don't even understand and never claimed. I don't believe in a support vs opposition binary for types of people. It would be like asking do you support or oppose left handed people? What's there to choose between? They exist and it's how they actually live their lives that matters."
You made this stamp:
fav.me/d9q23fv
This says Pro-LGBT. Is this not your opinion? Are you not Pro - LGBT? If you are Pro-LGBT, then you support the LGBT. If I am Pro-Life, then I am against abortion. No explanation needed. You lied.

You said: "Again, I never said this. You made it up. I said being LGBT is not a sin and showed why (in the other stamp's description). You make people into an "it" (yes, called them "it") and "the LGBT" to try to dehumanize people who are different from you, but I'd like you to at least try to be honest about what I actually said and believe about seeing people as individual human beings. I'm sure you'd like the same when I talk about what you say.". You actually said in this comment " I said being LGBT is not a sin and showed why (in the other stamp's description)". You said from your self that it is not a sin. If you make the statement, then you have given testimony. That's all there is to it. If I say "I am guilty" to a judge, that's all there is to it. Guilty or innocent, and you are guilty of lying.

You said: "I said sexual orientations are not sinful or even mentioned in the Bible, that it's how we live that matters. Feel free to prove me wrong. Since you actively refused to define homosexuality or homosexual, I had to define it how the dictionary does, even though you didn't like that either.". I did not say that, I said that you said that homosexuality is not sinful, which is what you said. That's all that is needed to be said, you're diverting by talking about other sexualities which is irrelevant. Again, you lied.

You said: "Yes. Though for some reason that really bothers you, as I can link you to the times you kept trying to bully me out of my faith and insisting I can't be Christian and appeal to Satan or I should convert to Islam."
Because Christianity condemns homosexuality, and as a Christian, a follower of this ideology, I condemn it too. You refuse to do so, so how can you be a Christian if you pick and choose from the Bible and condemn not what God condemns? You cannot. It's as simple as that.

You said: "And showed it by going through the verses people claim to say it does and putting them back in context and introducing verses those people ignore. You never once disputed any of this by showing a single instance of me twisting scripture. Not once. Feel free to change that. I'll listen.". Simple: You are appealing to people who ARE taking them out of context, and these people that ARE taking them out of context are not claiming homosexuality is to be sinful, they're claiming that it is not. You are making an appeal against people who are not saying what you are saying; that's fabrication, and you asked for evidence, and the scholars, my own step father for that matter, says that these verses condemn homosexuality. That's a lie, you never elaborated, you simply appealed to Biblical Corruption and the removal of context, which condemn your own homosexuality.
I never said you twisted the scripture, please stop lying, this is beneath you, I said that your appeal is based on corruption, and it's quite convenient that only the verses that condemn homosexuality and homosexuals (you), are the ones that are corrupt or taken out of context.
But here is the thing: YOU said there is corruption, and the verses are taken out of context, so, prove that the verses I submitted do NOT condemn homosexuality. You cannot, or you would have.

You said: ""...spread lies about my ideology." I see. So that's why it upsets you so much? You feel that every Christian must agree with you because you feel some personal command over the truth? I'm sorry, but you do not represent every Christian anymore than I do. You don't own Christianity." I see you are fabricating and inserting words I have never said. I said my ideology because I belong to God. Jesus is my God. He is my truth, and I follow him. I am sorry that you do not understand this. I represent Christianity just as all Christians do, but standing up for what Christ taught and represents, if you cannot understand this, and you continue to peddle falsehoods along the lines of Biblical corruption and verse taken out of context, people will want to know why you are spreading this conjecture, just as I have, and when you give no explanation, no explanation whatsoever, just appeals to compassion and human nature; they're going to have concerns, and they're going to question if you are a real Christian, who does not tell people what they want to hear, but the truth. Just as Christ called Peter Satan, I call you are fake for giving nothing at all, whatsoever, to show that you are truly following Christ, that you condemn what God condemns, but this appeal to pleasantries is and will always be irrelevant to truth. For even in the court of law, these appeals will not sway a judge or jury.

You said: "And "empower the LGBT" sounds like empowering some enemy force. But what does that have to do with being honest and admitting everyone needs Christ instead of claiming, as you did previously, that gay people are sinners just because they don't happen to be straight?"
The LGBT would be delighted to here someone say that homosexuality is not condemned. What is your opinion when a homosexual visits a church and is told that their homosexuality is condemned?
You're telling them what they want to here, and they want to hear they're not condemned. They want to know they're not going to hell. They want to know God loves them, and even though He does, he does not love what they do. It is ironic that you said: "that gay people are sinners just because they don't happen to be straight?", this says to me you believe they are condemned based on what they desire, but that is not what condemns them, it is acting upon those desires. I have said this before.

You said: "When Christians disagree with each other about everything from being gay to speaking in tongues to predestination, they're disagreeing with each other, not God or the Bible. That's why Paul wrote about not arguing with fellow believers." No, that's not true, and that further shows you're not a Christian, as you claim to be. We Christians do not agree in all the same things, but we all know the truth is from the Bible, whether Christians choose to follow it or not. As Christians, we are all aware of the simple basics of the doctrine; that is that homosexuality is condemned; it is you that is not only disagreeing, but you blatantly claimed fabrications and corruption, and that is against the Bible, not against the people, because the Bible is very clear in it's condemnation of homosexuality, so your objection is not people, it's the Bible. The Bible condemns homosexuality, you condemn the Bible by blaming others, when others condemn homosexuality based on what the Bible teaches. Your full-circle tactics are coming back to you, this time with a metaphorical bullet aimed at your feet, and I am trying so hard to help you with this, but I cannot stop you from the path you are paving.

You said: If you "had yet to reply to" them, you haven't actually lost anything. Even if you deliberately went through and deleted everything from your notifications on DeviantArt for some reason and then blamed your computer rather than take responsibility for your own actions yet again, it's not gone."
I have already answered this.

You said: "In a way, yes, but I actually learned more about what frustrates you from what you've told others about me because you're much more open and honest with others. Maybe it's because the sexual assault made you prejudiced against gay people. Maybe you just feel every Christian has to believe exactly what you do. Or maybe it's something personal against me. I don't know. But I just wish you'd treat me the way you do some others."
I am open and honest with everyone. I am truthful and direct too. These are some of our differences.
If I have a prejudice against homosexuals, what is this concern to you? If my attack has made me prejudice, then I rightfully am so. If a young lady is attacked by a man and she gains an aversion from them, do you condemn or diminish her? I thought you were more compassionate and understanding than this.
I do not even know your name. I learn about people based upon their integrity, their views and how they treat others; and I have treated you exactly how you have treated me.
"Do unto others as they would do unto you", and even then, despite the conjecture, the claims of corruption, I have been exceedingly patient with you, something many people would not be.
You are biting the hand that is trying hard to shake yours. I don't what to do with you?

You said: "I didn't choose to have same-sex attractions, but being different made me better able to empathize with others who are bullied and marginalized. It tested my parents' love and brought us closer together. So, it's not something I feel bad about. And I'm thankful to God for all he's done to make what could have driven me from Him lead me back to Him and give me new desires for His will and for everyone to experience this kind of unconditional love.". That's very good.

Then If I cannot reply to these former conversations, I have no use to them. Surely I can attain all information required by reading the context you provided to otherwise clear scripture?
Otherwise, I will reply to the new comments, and if anything crosses over from the past, and it is relevant, I will reply to them too. I am sure that is reasonable to you.

You said: Any one of the comment strings you started above warrants an apology from you, but all together? It ranks among the highest level of trolling I've witnessed on DeviantArt in my nearly eight years here.
It's still my hope you'll have an "Aha!" moment where you realize what you've done and apologize, I forgive you, and we become friends."
I think what made me laugh slightly was the "troll" remark, after saying I was required to apologize. The irony was not lost on me, so thank you for the laugh. :-D

You said: "You expressed the same hope for me to realize what you see as wrong, but maybe part of the challenge is that we don't see the other as a source of moral authority. Your actions are highly immoral to me and you've said before that "a homosexual has no right" and so you won't follow my advice on how to live anymore than I'll follow your advice on how I should live."
Of course I am not a source of authority; I gain my authority from the Word of God, and all my knowledge and positions too. I appeal to the Bible, you appeal to human nature. Human nature changes, God does not. Imagine I just gave a small shrug.
I am not concerned if you see my actions as immoral, I am not acting based on subjectivity. When I see someone committing a crime, I am legally obliged to do something about it. When someone is lying about my ideology, I am obliged to do something about it.
2 Corinthians 10:5 - "We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ".
1 Peter 3:15 - "But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect".
Philippians - "It is right for me to feel this way about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel."

I will never change, because this is not about me: This is about the Word of God, and His commands. That is where I think you lack the most knowledge; that while you try to be kind and welcoming to others, which I praise and encourage, subjectivity has no place in interpreting Scripture, just as when I read and interpret the Word of God, it is not me that is doing it, it is God that speaks and me that listens, and if I speak what I am told and you disagree, then it is you that was never listening to God in the first place, for as a Christian, if I say what the Bible says, by it's words and interpretation, then it is not me that is speaking, and if you object, then you object to God. I am not God, I will say what the Word says, just like all Christians are meant to do. There are not always going to be pleasantries I am sorry to say, but that's just the way it is.

👍: 0 ⏩: 3

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-11-10 07:15:08 +0000 UTC]

(Part 1)

I've communicated with a lot of different people over the years and even have friends with some similar beliefs to you. We're able to communicate successfully because there's an equal back and forth dialogue. They acknowledge what I say and ask if they don't understand something. We take responsibility for what we each say and apologize and correct ourselves. So I certainly beleive it's possible for us to better communicate and even become friends.

I know I may not always sugar coat what I say, but you've said you value the truth as it is, even if it's hard to hear. You don't want to hear lies or even omissions. I feel the same way; just another thing we have in common. But, if I do something to upset you or say something that comes off as rude, please let me know.

I will reply to what is relevant.

I understand you might not see the point of replying as meticulously as I do, but you skipped important parts and misrepresented the rest. I can't guarantee that replying as I do will help, but it's worth a shot.

When we first began talking, I was casual about it, but then you kept saying I wasn't answering questions I answered or that I was avoiding things and then you'd claim I said or meant different things, so as time went on, I learned to be very thorough with you, to address everything carefully  and repeatedly. Yet you'd still falsely claim I said things I never did or you didn't say things you actually said and mock and insult me as ignorant or avoiding issues, so I started including links to previous conversations to back up what I say and becoming even more meticulous about everything. The problem is that meant it took longer and longer to reply to you as your replies too got longer and less factual. I realize another thing we have in common is that we have both been known to write quite long chunks of text, but this isn't necessarily always ideal. In fact, I've discovered that DeviantArt actually has a comment text limit.

Perhaps we can work out a solution together, one where we manage to address everything important and where repetition isn't necessary. Feel free to make suggestions. Thank you.

Firstly, The call-outs that I have made were not against you but a former friend, and I regret the call-outs that I had made against them. The circumstances surrounding there were meant in an attack form, in response to their attack, so although you are trying to appeal to inconsistency upon my part, I unfortunately have to tell you that these matters are mutually exclusive, but I understand.

I talked about our conversation where you justified your call-outs of others, showed you the conversations you had about the call-out you made of me, and also showed you a conversation where someone managed to convince you to remove a section on your profile for several people you said should be avoided. I did not bring up a call-out you made of a friend you regretted making.

Here's the conversation where you said what I quoted you as saying:

Them: "Okay but you still made a callout on him?? It doesn't matter how "right" you were. If you can't handle the heat you step out the kitchen." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7614… paragraph 1)
You: "I retract all of my "call outs". I feel I may have been petty." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7614… paragraph 1)

To regret call-outs unless they're of me is inconsistent, so are there others you don't regret? The user showed you your stamp about me and pointed out it's hypocritical to do just what you are against (comments.deviantart.com/1/7614… ). That conversation was about the call-out stamp you made about me and is where you stated you retract your call-outs. The user didn't bring up any other call-outs. As you can see, they talked about your call-out of me and your direct response was to retract all call-outs.

Now, it's obvious you did not mean the call-out you two were discussing, as you have made it clear you do not retract the one of me, so your explaination makes sense that you were thinking of call-outs of friends who attacked you. However, hopefully you can see why that didn't come across and realize that, regardless of what you were thinking when you wrote it, you need to articulate it, as no one can read your mind.

Perhaps you should have told them you regret them all except the one you were both talking about, because they were clearly under the assumption you meant all when you said all and so all included the one you two were actually taking about, the one you now say is the exception.

Whether intentional or not, you deceived them into thinking you meant what you said and in the context you said it. They ended the conversation believing you would remove the call-out they brought to your attention to complain about (the one about me) and so their work in convincing you was done. They were mislead.

Again, you've made it very clear you don't really regret or retract the call-out of me, so your explaination makes sense, thank you. Just try to be aware of how others will take your words at face value (the person asked you about the call-out of me and you replied to that by saying you retract "all"). People believe what you say and so you should make sure it's true.

We are actually very different. I do not claim scriptural corruption when justifying the blatantly sinful.

Neither do I. If you have proof I did this, please present it. I have provided you all our conversations for you to find proof in. You can use the "find in page" feature to search for keywords if you don't want to re-read it all.

Empathy is the ability to understand and feel what others feel, to relate and put yourself in their shoes so to speak. Perhaps if you tried this, we'd be able to find common ground. I can see it happening. It'll just take time until the walls to come down.

Here's what I actually wrote:

You want me to see the errors of my ways, to see what you see as actions or beliefs in conflict with being Christian, right? You want me to just finally see what you see and stop being blinded by beliefs you see in conflict with scripture, especially since I share my beliefs publicly and others may be influenced. Correct so far?

Well, you're not alone.

While I'd like you to take a moment to see how you use scripture and the implications, my main focus has been wanting you to see how insults and lies spread misery and how love and truth were inseparable, especially since it's not just me you interact with. I wanted you to stop and see what I saw, just as you wanted me to stop and see what you saw.

We want each other to listen.

Instead of replying to any of this, even just to answer if I was correct in understanding your motives, you ignored it all and just insist we have nothing in common.

It's all right there. You just have to open your eyes and heart. Let the walls come down. I'm not like people who hurt you in the past. Please just give me a chance.

When God says that something is sinful, I understand that to mean He is claiming is sinful. This is a difference between us; I understand the bible geographically, historically and contextually, and I feel no need to justify or alter context to suit my appeal, this is an inconsistency on your part that has become as clear as day.

I understand you believe this to be true, but truth is verifiable. You would therefore need to prove it. Here, I'll demonstrate:

"So, how do you explain your exception of this sin as the Bible clearly condemns not only your personal practices, but the word and all it's usage?
Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."" (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… paragraph 2)

You used a verse about a Levitical law prohibiting men from having sex like with a woman and calling for the death penalty to condemn me, a person who is not under the law but grace, who you don't really believe should be killed (at least I hope not), and who has no sex of any kind with anyone.

You altered context to suit your appeal and applied your own inconsistent views to scripture. This actually happened. There's no denying it unless you go back and hide your comment.

And that's not the only time you've used the same verses to try to condemn me after I told you I'm celibate (comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… and
comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… for example).

Do you really believe I'm under the law, have sex, and should be put to death? If the answer to even one is no, how can you be keeping scripture in context and using it honestly?

I'm not adding to or taking away anything from scripture. I'm not claiming "corruption." I'm just asking you if you beleive scripture fits with how you're using it as it is.

Now, if you have proof I did what you claim, by all means present it. I'll listen.

If you have any concerns with me, I will ask that you leave them to the side as I have; my concerns are what you are telling and teaching others by your appeal to the Biblical Scripture. This is not personal but object to me; truth for truth, not truth for happy feelings.

I objected to you telling people lies about me and about what I've said. Is that not requesting truth?

Maybe it's not your intent to make it about me personally, but that's how it comes across.

If it was really just about what I say and believe, why do you keep making false claims about what I say or believe? Why ignore answers I give to what I believe about issues and just change the subject or twist it? Why would you have kept commenting all over just random insults and accusations, like that I resubmit things or am a fake Christian or my memory is faulty or I'm going to hell? Why be so obsessed with my sexual orientation and making up lies about how I live my life? If it's not about me personally, why not listen?

It's no different than how you treated someone else recently, making personal insults againt them and turning what could have been a debate into trolling (comments.deviantart.com/1/7698… ), even after you were blocked (comments.deviantart.com/1/6921… ).

The thing is, you're not this way with everyone. In fact, you are incredibly nice to quite a number of people, suggesting it is about your personal feelings.

For example, a friend of yours drew a picture entitled "yaoi" depicting two males kissing. Naturally it grossed you out, as you have a lot of negative personal feelings toward male-male physical relationships, but your reaction was mild and even apologetic (comments.deviantart.com/1/7700… ).

Your response was modified based on who drew it rather than what it was. We both know that your reaction would have been very different if I had posted something like that, given even just two males near each other made you heavily criticize me simply because I drew it. You'd never go on and on about the evils of homosexuality and how she's supporting sin and should be ashamed. You'd never troll her works accusing her of lying either. That's because it's personal. Maybe you'd like it to be about the issues only, but your personal feelings get in the way. But one day we'll be friends and that will change.

You say truth is important to you. It is to me too. That's why I correct you. But I don't enjoy it. Please just listen to what I actually say and believe the first time. And, if something's unclear, ask. Don't assume.

We need to learn to communicate? That is a very redundant appeal; there are no concerns in regards to communications between us, at least on my part, I understand you fully, though if I am wrong I have requested clarity on your part but that also does not mean there is a concern with communication. So, I do not understand the appeal, so I will reasonably assume you are once again appealing to human nature and what not.

So, to prove we don't have a problem with communication, you dismissed what I said and pretend it was an appeal to "human nature and what not"? That proves we have trouble communicating.

You didn't even acknowledge that I showed you had made yet another false accusation against me or answer what you expect me to do. It's like all those paragraphs didn't exist even though I was replying to you. Can you empathize with how it feels to be ignored and dismissed solely for the purpose of blaming me for your actions?

See, that's the problem right there. You claim that if you don't understand me fully that you will ask for "clarity" but then you immediately say "I do not understand the appeal, so I will reasonably assume you are once again appealing to human nature and what not."

Read your words again: "We need to learn to communicate? That is a very redundant appeal; there are no concerns in regards to communications between us, at least on my part, I understand you fully, though if I am wrong I have requested clarity on your part but that also does not mean there is a concern with communication. So, I do not understand the appeal, so I will reasonably assume you are once again appealing to human nature and what not."

You literally say you don't understand but you don't ask for clarification like you falsely claim you do when you don't understand. No, instead you just make yet another false assumption. You've been doing this all along when we talked before. You make false assumptions based on nothing I've ever said and dismiss what I actually said as irrelevant or "human nature." Can you imagine how frustrating that is?

Besides skipping most of what I say and virtually all questions I've ever asked, if you truly understand me as you say and yet still make claims I said things I never said, then you are intentionally lying, so if you're not intentionally lying, then you must be misunderstanding me and we need to communicate better.

It's an undeniable fact that you have misstated what I've said and beleive and I frequently take what you say literally at face value when you actually mean something else, so we often end up going over points of confusion rather than just having a direct discussion of the issues. If we can't understand each other, we need to work on communication.

I see that you are a fan of repeating yourself; Again, I am copying everything to text so I may reply accordingly. I see no need for a third reminder, and I am sure this will suffice.

I don't actually like repeating myself. It's just become necessary because you either assume I said something I didn't or you don't respond to many things I say or show any awareness of them.

Thank you for taking my advice to type your reply at your leisure in notes. I do appreciate you taking your time, though I'd also like to say how impressed I am with how fast you can churn out replies. Needless to say, it takes me far, far longer.

I don't wish to appear ungrateful, but the thing I've actually asked the most and again repeated in the section you're replying to is for you to reply as I do and keep all my text above your replies so you don't miss anything and so it's easier to follow.

If it's too difficult to use HTML codes like italics or blockquote alternated between paragraphs, just tell me, but constantly not responding to my request makes me think you skipped it yet again and forces me to repeat myself. If you don't want to, just say, "I do not want to reply like you do by keeping all your text in paragraphs above my responses."

Again, if you have suggestions, let me know.

Actually, you are completely wrong, and have taken a very low and narrow road that is nothing more than an avoidance. I speak because someone else is teaching others of the scripture and lying about what they say. As a Christian, or even as an officer of the law, I could not in good conscience allow someone to spread blatant lies. If you cannot understand moral obligation, then perhaps the Bible is the best thing for you to read, but if you wish to keep altering context to suit you, you will always arrive at the conclusions that you wish for.

I asked you to correct the lies you have told about me and what I've said. I understand moral obligation and do not find requesting the truth a "low road."

Ironically, the part you're replying to here is about how you skipped what I said, which you again skipped. Why not just say you don't want to talk about certain things so I know you at least read what you keep skipping? Communication works best when people feel the other person hears and understands them. Surely you can relate to this, right?

Also, can you show me where I am "teaching others of the scripture and lying about what they say"? I have a lot of works, from art to stamps to writing, that all have verses in them, so please be specific and present proof.

So do what exactly?

Reply as I do, including my text in paragraphs above your response to that section, so I can easily follow what you're replying to and so you don't skip parts or take them out of context. You can use HTML codes, copy an paste from Rich formatting, like MS Word, Wordpad, Stash Writer, etc, or just use quotation marks. You can even reference parts or we can break long replies into separate smaller replies. There are many ways to make this easier. You quote me in parts later on and that helps a lot.

I had to search through what I wrote to even find out what you were replying to here and even that's an educated guess, so if you were asking what I want you to do about something else, let me know.

As always, I'm not a mind reader. I can't tell what you mean unless you make it clear, though I go through enormous effort to try. And of course to be clear for you.

If you have an alternative suggestion, please let me know.

Perhaps you do find it immoral, but that does not make it immoral, that simply means you disagree; hoever, if someone is spreading lies, is it not your moral responcibility to confront this liar if you know the truth? 

I agree it is my moral responsibility to confront lies with the truth, which is what I'm doing here. The reason I find call-outs immoral is because I wouldn't want a call-outs made about me and because they promote social judgmentalism. I value treating others how I'd want to be treated and in direct communication to let them explain or apologize rather than broadcasting my personal feelings about someone or what they've said or done for everyone to form a judgement about someone they don't even know based on what someone else said.

I understand you don't share this sense of morality, but your reasons for disliking other's call-outs of you is the same as mine and you beleive Christ's teachings matter, so I think you can still understand why I feel the way I do.

That's why I tell you directly when you make false claims rather than make a call-out, which would cause more harm than good.

I feel that you do not understand what "damage" is. Damage is ambiguous, and not limited to destruction of property, but corruption too.

So, in our conversation on your stamp where I asked you what your goal was and you said "damage", you weren't answering my question but taking about corruption? That actually makes sense, thank you. You frequently reply to questions by changing the subject. I think I understand, but in the future please remember that I'm not a mind reader.

Keep in mind that you typically use "damage" in this context: "...with the intent of causing damage to me." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6600… ) That was the context I thought you were using it. Thank you for the clarification and I apologize for being wrong.

My goal for this call-out is to bring awareness that you are deliberately corrupting the Christian Scriptures and that you are promoting yourself as a Christian when your intentions and actions are contrary to what God has called Christians too.

I'm guessing damage refers to this particular "corrupting." Do you have an example of where I'm deliberately corrupting Christian Scriptures? I mean, besides the things you claim in the description of your call-out that I never said?

What about an example of my intentions and actions being contrary to what God has called Christians to? My intentions are to spread the message of God's love and forgiveness, but if my actions don't show that I'd like to know so I can improve.

I asked:
Please answer: What is your goal with the call-out and, based on the responses you've received, is it meeting that goal?

So, now that you've answered the first part, can you answer the second part and tell me if your call-out is meeting your goal?

While obviously I don't know what people send to you in notes, no one who has commented publicly regarding your call-out both when talking to you or when talking to me has understood why you made it or agreed with your approach, let alone walked away "aware" of what you wanted them to be aware of. So, what was your goal? To have people avoid me? To have them not listen to me? To block me? To talk to me about it?

Perhaps people have expressed this awareness to you privately, but the fact remains it's still based on false claims in the description, so they can't be made aware of truth where it's lacking.

I request that you to show me where exactly I have accused God and the bible for my errors.
I have actually made no false claims, and have shown the evidence by your own testimony, not my own, nothing from me but from what you are saying. Again, the issue is not with me but your own inconsistency. If you are frustrated, I make no apologies, you have only yourself to blame for the inconsistencies, as they have come from you, so I would appreciate that you take responsibility, and stop acting like a young child who wishes to point the finger when something is not going there way. Thank you.

You told lies about me and what I've said. I corrected you, but instead of addressing any of my corrections or even acknowledging I wrote them, you keep insisting what you claim I said matches what I really said. And when I call you out on that and even provide links to all our conversations for you to present proof for your claims, you blame me for you lying about me and mock me as some child pointing fingers. Can you see how incredibly rude this is to mock and insult me for you not taking responsibility for lies you told?

Do you deny that you made false claims about things I never said in your call-out? Do you deny that you told people who asked about your call-out more false information about things I never said? You skipped that part when presented with what you said and wouldn't even acknowledge what you wrote, but I can paste it again:

The first time someone commented asking about the stamp, you denied what you actually wrote, in fact agreeing with what I actually believe, and again falsely claimed that I had said homosexual and heterosexuality are sinful (comments.deviantart.com/1/7512… ). The next person called you out for the hypocrisy of being against call-outs but making a call-out of me and you justified it by saying I claimed God tempted me when I didn't, that I have sex and lie about it, and that I never replied to your friend when I did reply and I was the one who to this day never got a response (comments.deviantart.com/1/7614… ). The next person was frustrated with your circular reasoning and kept telling you to stop and remove the call-out, but you justified it by saying I talked about love too much (one of your biggest pet peeves), that I denied my "homosexuality" despite that never happening, and that I have a "boyfriend" (comments.deviantart.com/1/7512… ). Ironically, they assumed I must have bullied you for you to react the way you did. And then I confronted you these two times in the past week and you justified it as being based on things I told you even though that's plainly not true.

You keep blaming me for your actions. If you're so convinced you're just repeating me, then simply search through the conversations I provided you with links to and find when I said the things you claim.

Here's what you wrote again, if it helps:

"A person who support homosexuality and calls themselves is a fake.
They're a fake. Period.
A homosexual has no right telling anyone who Christianity commands when they themselves are living in a sin.
I reject this hypocrisy, this falsehood, especially when they say that homosexuality AND heterosexual are BOTH sinful. No."
(www.deviantart.com/empathicdes… )
As is, even just in this conversation, you don't take responsibility for what you make up, but say if I disagree with you saying I said things I never said or with you taking verses out of context to condemn me, I have a problem with the Bible or God.

Neither God nor the Bible are responsible for everything you say and do. You are responsible for what you say and do.

It does not matter if you do not call yourself a fake. People who are deceptive rarely do. 

No, it actually does matter because you claim I called myself a fake. Truth matters.

I copied and pasted what you wrote in the description of your stamp. You wrote I called myself a fake. I did not. Now you say that doesn't matter, even though you made the claim I said it. Making up lies to attack me and then dismissing that you said them when confronted matters to me and honestly I thought it would matter to you too.

Since you ignored it before, I'll go line by line again:

"A person who support homosexuality and calls themselves is a fake."
I never said I support homosexuality and I never called myself is a fake.

"A homosexual has no right telling anyone who Christianity commands when they themselves are living in a sin."
I haven't told anyone who Christianity commands and I asked about the "living in a sin" line and you falsely claimed I do things I do not, like have sex.

"I reject this hypocrisy, this falsehood, especially when they say that homosexuality AND heterosexual are BOTH sinful. No."
I never claimed either homosexuality or heterosexuality are sinful, let alone both.

Your stamp is filled with false claims, and yet rather than face this when I presented it, you ignored all but one line that you took out of context so you wouldn't have to admit you claimed I said what I never did.

You claimed I call myself a fake. You made the other false claims. Take responsibility for what you have written that is not true. Please stop blaming me and God's truth for you making a call-out full of lies and trolling me across a bunch of stamps.

We're both Christian, so surely you too should see how this isn't what God wants you to do, even if you don't care how you treat me personally.

I contest what you say, as what I said is true, by your own admissions. If you disagree, then you must reevaluate your own testimony.

"...by your own admissions." Me denying something is not an admission. It's the exact opposite. It literally means the exact opposite of an admission. Why do you keep making these false claims? Please consider God, if not me.

Claiming I said something does not make it true. I quote you. You can not prove I said the things you claim by quoting me because I never said them.

However, if you wish to prove me wrong, again I provided you with all our conversations to find proof.

Blaming me doesn't make me wrong if I am quoting from you. :/

That line would actually only make sense if I said it. I quote you and then link to where you said it. Can you do the same to defend your call-out or what you tell others about what happened?

To be very short and simple, what does the objection of others, or the support (Which I have), have to do with anything? It does not.
Now, I know you will consider my retraction from call-outs as an inconsistency, but that is irrelevant to the stamp, as I retract my bitter action towards others in haste, I do not retract the inconsistencies, the falsehoods and the awareness I have brout to your inconsistencies, as these were not made subjectively, but for the sake of truth and bringing light to others and their deceit. To that, I owe no apologies, as people will always have views that can be either supportive or condemning. I take what I get, but I have no remorse for speaking truth for the sake of truth. If you are not able to comprehend this, or you object, then I cannot say anything to you that can help you understand.

I showed you how you told false information to each and every person who publicly asked about the stamp and linked you to the actual conversations for proof of what you said. Rather than acknowledge this, you just dismissed it all as "what does the objection of others, or the support (Which I have), have to do with anything? It does not." You didn't deny your claims were false or acknowledge anything at all. When confronted with your own actions, you again pretended you never saw anything. But hiding from the trurh doesn't make it go away. You still did all those things. That's proveable reality.

Why dismiss that you keep lying to others, not even acknowledging I showed you anything, and just claim what you've said is somehow my fault? It makes these conversations unnecessarily long because I have to keep showing you the same things over and over and over again.

And if you weren't acting out of bitterness and haste, why doesn't your stamp's description even make sense grammatically, let alone factually? And why make it right after all those random comments across a bunch of my stamps just complaining and insulting me if it wasn't part of your bitterness and haste?

I too value bringing light and truth where there is darkness and deception, but I'm going to ask that you practice what you preach. You can not spread awareness of truth through deception.

There's a very simple way to resolve this: show where I've said what you claim. I asked last time and every time before, and you've never once even acknowledged that I've asked, let alone presented any proof. Go ahead.

That is not actually true, you have not presented proof of anything you have said to date, of this I am certain. For every demand and request I have made, you have presented conjecture, appeals to love, good nature and compassion (of which has no place or relevance in this discussion). You continue to appeal to the good side of humanity, of God's love and grace, but you do not actually provide proof of anything you say.

You know those links you ignored? If you click on them, they go to other pages. On those pages are all our conversations and conversations you've had with others. If you read them, you'll see you say what I claim you say and I say what I claim I say, but I don't say what you claim I say.

I have linked to proof each time and to all our previous conversations for reference. If you can find proof for your claims, please present them.

As for the last part of what you say, I'm going to speculate on what you may be referring to here.

You used to complain that I talked about love when you commented on things about love or complain if I talked about God's grace when you talked about condemnation. You even complained when I talked about salvation when you'd keep claiming I'm not a real Christian, as if the two are unrelated. You also complained that I used verses about love to describe my relationships based on love when you demanded I use verses about lust for for relationships about love. It could also be the times you kept insisting I admit a verse that mentions nothing applicable to me apply to me, or when you insist LGBT people and their feelings are irrelevant because LGBT is just "the LGBT" and "it".

Also, let's face reality here: You used this paragraph to dismiss that I called you out for saying it's all connected to God's love and then saying it doesn't connect at all. You don't even acknowledge what I actually said. So, do you regret agreeing with me that the messages of the Bible all connect to God's love? Clearly most of the time we've talked and even this time, you don't actually believe it. Maybe it's because it's something I believe and so you'd rather disagree for the sake of disagreeing with me. I don't know, but I'd like to. Can you tell me why you only agreed it's all connected to God's love for a brief time?

Also, do you view our discussions as some kind of a competition and that's why you act like you are trying to "win" at any cost, even by cheating? I know you expressed a love of debates, but how about viewing this just as friends talking?

Everything that I have pressed information you for has gone in full circle with no actual yes's or no's. It took a while to have your homosexuality confirmed, and even though you said you had no issue in exclaiming this attribute about yourself, you were never forthcoming about it, nor did you ever directly affirm it until I pressed you for it.

You clearly didn't re-read our conversations. I answered yes and no but you didn't like my answers or ignored them as "irrelevant."

Once again, you asked once if I'm homosexual and I answered the exact same day that I have same-sex attractions (comments.deviantart.com/1/5109… ). See the links provided last time for more proof. You never pressed me. You just asked a question once and I answered. This was way back in June, when you had just begun trolling me. For months after that, you continued to lie to me and others about what really happened and when it happened, but all our conversations still exist to prove what I've said and disprove what you falsely claim.

Now, by affirming your homosexuality, there is already reason to suspect prejudice from your position; that as someone who is gay, you will of course want to defend homosexuality, and you will of course seek to ensure that the LGBT is viewed in a positive light, for to speak against them would condemn you and ensure your rejection from the LGBT. 

So, rather than make any effort at all to actually show how I'm prejudiced, you assume I am because I'm not straight? You literally base your judgement of me being prejudiced based solely on my sexual orientation. That there is actually what prejudice is. Do you deny this?

It reminds me of those people who insist all white people are innately racist because they're white or all men are inately sexist because they're men and yet don't see they're actually being racist and sexist.

If I'm prejudiced because I understand what it's like not to be straight and what it's like to be condemned for being different, you acknowledged your own prejudice against LGBT people because you were sexually assaulted by someone who identified as gay (see below), so we both have bias. In other words, we're human. Let's just try to be aware of this and focus on open communication.

Some LGBT people already reject me and block me, just as some Christians do. There is prejudice from some LGBT people against Christians and from some Christians agaisnt LGBT people, but that's because Satan wants to divide the two to ensure fewer LGBT people come to Christ and Christians close their hearts from God's love.

I don't seek approval of anyone but God and do not believe in "the LGBT" anymore than the made-up homogeneous "the Christians" that LGBT people are told to hate. I believe in individual people responsible for their own actions. Singling out a whole group of people as the enemy is prejudice, just like if it's people of another race, another country, political group, or so on. There are groups or organizations that claim to help LGBT people or support equality that don't actually help or support equality, just as there are churches that spread hate instead of God's love, but that reflects the individuals in charge there and not all LGBT people or all Christians.

To this date, I have tried to be very reasonable, and show you that homosexuality is a sin, and until now, you continue to defend it, even exclaim that the biblical condemnation of homosexuality is by biblical corruption. You have made your prejudice very clear.

I showed you what I believe and you refused to acknowledge I said anything at all, while I have replied to everything you said and addressed your beliefs. I am incredibly meticulous. Disagreeing isn't prejudice. Distorting and making up lies about what I believe is prejudice. There is a difference.

Can you give an example of me being prejudiced? I need to learn, so just search through our previous conversations and copy something I said. So far all I can gather is I must be prejudiced because you assume so and because I don't always agree with you. That's not actually the definition of prejudice.

What's the reason why you refuse to read the description to the other stamp that actually answers all this and could have resolved any confusion before your first comment? Constantly dismissing what I say and ignoring anything that disproves your lies about me or what I beleive is what really shows prejudice.

I'm not the one obsessed with homosexuality and I don't defend it. It's just a sexual orientation. You're the one who came to me and went though everything I made trying to find anything related to it and when you came up with barely anything from the last few years, you started commenting on random pieces about love or God or Christianity or even prenatal memory and changed the subject to homosexuality. You did this. See the links for proof. Own up to your obsession instead of blaming it on me.

We'd have little to no conflict if we simply both communicated openly and honestly. I'm trying to do my part, but let me know if I can improve.

I understand you believe everyone should be straight and anything else is wrong. I respect you beleive your view is backed up by the Bible. You are free to believe what you wish and I'm free to agree or not.

I believe in reading and studying the scriptures in context and their original languages and sources, but I am a human being, so if I've made any errors in the description of the other stamp or in my replies when addressing each of the few verses people use to single out LGBT people, please let me know. You can do that in our other conversation, as I'll focus more on that there, as this is already long enough.

You said " In fact, I keep saying how I'm against twisting and misusing scripture.", and yet you claimed that homosexuality can only be viewed as sinful if the texts are taken out of context, essentially through the corruption of scriptures. I challenge you to prove that this is possible, and not through one scripture, but by all scripture that condemns homosexuality.

Read the description of the other stamp and read our conversations I linked you to. Also see the examples of you twisting scripture any time you try to use it for condemnation, including in this conversation. I'll also go over some verses later in this reply and also when I reply to your other reply, so you can read my responses.

After you've done that, please state your objections based on what I stated.

Additionally, by making this appeal, you have confirmed (by your views), Biblical corruption, by directly exclaiming that homosexuality can ONLY, not possibly, ONLY be condemned through corruption. This means that you are not against twisting and misusing scripture, but you enable and support the corruption. The scripture is very, very clear, and condemning of homosexuality, and if you cannot accept that, then goodness knows what else you do not accept. Goodness knows what else is a corruption according to you. Goodness knows what else is out of context according to you. With all this incredible conjecture and the appeal to corruption, why should I, or anyone support your views on Christianity and the Bible? If you can made the clear and comprehensible appeal to Biblical corruption, then I and everyone must take this to mean that your appeals, knowledge and views are based around corruption; therefore, you are not a reliable source of information, especially when the scholars that I know personally contradict and do not support your claims. I will also point out that this is the second time you have appealled to inconsistency. In the past, you told me that a certain surah in the Qur'an was a misinterpretation, and a very popular one at that, of which I showed that the scholars did not support your assertion, and that by their own opinion, is authentic. You dismissed this quickly and then decided to discuss something else.
Again and again and again, your appeals are based on corruption, and yet, one final point, so far, is to do with homosexuality. What else, according to you, is being misinterpreted, or the context ignored or the verses corrupted?

Okay, there's a lot to unpack here. You go around and around until somehow you manage to claim that I both am against biblical corruption and therefore enable and support it. My head's still spinning from trying to make sense of that complicated web of deception.

You keep appealing to these imaginary other people I supposedly support who corrupt scripture and make gay bibles and other nonsense. Yet I never once appealed to or even mentioned these people. You made it all up to avoid talking about how you personally misuse scripture. But if you have to keep making up lies to try to criticize my beliefs and avoid facing your actions, you're just running from the truth.

Once again, you will need to show how I support biblical corruption by stating I'm against misusing scripture. Feel free to use the links to our conversations if they help you find evidence to support this.

Here's the truth: I am against twisting scripture, so that's why I called you out when you used a verse about being under the law, having sex, and being put to death to condemn someone who none of that applies to. It's the same reason I pointed out that other verses you used did not talk about what you claimed they did. It's not personal. I just believe in treating scripture with the respect I feel it deserves.

You and I don't have to agree on everything. For example, when I said that Christ overcame temptation and so can we through Him, you insisted I am wrong and felt one verse you took out of context invalidated all the rest of scripture that showed Jesus was tempted and dismissed the gospels and what Paul wrote in Hebrews, literally ignoring all references to the Bible I provided just to avoid even the possibility I could be right to read the Bible as it is written (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… ). Obviously I have stated what I believe is clear in the Bible and why, but you feel strongly I am wrong, which is why you told me so and I defended my position. But would I ever make a call-out telling others you're misusing scripture over this or any other scriptural disagreement? Of course not. So, if you have a disagreement with me, let's discuss it and not resort to call-outs or name calling.

Regarding the Qur'an, you brought up a surah to say that Christians and Muslims can't be friends using a translation that had the word "friends" and I pointed out that there are plenty of Christians and Muslims who are friends. This angered you greatly and you went on and on about how Muslims have to hate and mistreat others and if they don't or ever dare to be friends with a Christian then they've denounced their faith and I'm naive for believing what the Bible says about loving others and on and on. It of course didn't have to do with our conversation or what you commented on, but you absolutely refused to acknowledge my one and only point was to "friends" and why. If there's one thing that sets you off besides homosexuality, it's definitely Islam.

I suppose it's partially my fault for bringing up that I have a friend who is Muslim and LGBT and others who are also Christian and LGBT. But how did I know you'd derail the entire conversation into why Islam is evil?  Please read what really happened: comments.deviantart.com/1/7328…

What does it matter to us if others are taking verses out of context? If the bible condemns an action, which it does, and people act differently, then it is them that is held accountable. Does this mean you should be held accountable for saying that homosexuality is not a sin when theres clearly state it is? I agree that you should be held accountable, and I believe you should be held accountable too.
I also acknowledge that you did not reply to the whole of my text, but only in part and your appeal was not made completely to me but the actions of others, which are irrelevant, but if you wish to make it relevant, then you must be held accountable too for taking clearly condemning verses and saying they are not as such and are only made so by scriptural corruption. You condemn yourself, and I am trying to help you here.

Is this why you don't include what I actually say? To make up what happened?

Below is what you and I said and what you are replying to. It can all be verified here: comments.deviantart.com/1/7664…

You'll notice you talk about others taking verses out of context and blame me for some unknown LGBT people somewhere making some gay Bible. I point out where you, yes you, took a verse out of context. I did not blame you for the actions of others like you did me. No, I asked about what you did. Here, read what actually happened:

Again, I make no apologies, I have spoken nothing but the truth from the information you have given me, and what you have told me is in contradiction, even violation of the Word of God, and as a Christian, I am obliged to raise these inconsistencies so other Christians will not be lead astray; some of these inconsistencies came just recently from the other Stamp where you stated that homosexuality cannot be interpreted as sinful without scriptural corruption; you said:
"Since the only way to claim the Bible condemns people for being gay, bi, lesbian, trans, ace, etc is to take scripture out of context, change the meaning of scripture (as many translations already do), or lie about scripture, and these deceptions result in people turning away from God, I believe it is not of God and should be avoided. Even if it angers people to hear the truth, I'd rather be honest than accepted."
The greatest concern here, apart from being completely false, is that no one is interpreting the verses that speak of homosexuality out of context or by scriptural changes. No one. Not even my own step father who is a Presbyterian Minister and a Scholar of Christianity. There is utterly, impossibly, no possible way that people are doing what you claim; but actually, it's the opposite: People who say that homosexuality IS condoned are the one's who ARE changing the scriptures and the context. Are you familiar with the gay bible? It's blasphemous and detestable that the LGBT would alter the Word of God to appease their own views. These are the same people you support and condone, and by supporting people who would mutilate the Word of God, I see it as an imperative responsibility of any Christian to warn others of this kind of horrendous sacrilege.
So, all in all, no I will not be removing any submissions. If you feel this unfair, I am sorry, but I support the truth, it is not my employer, I am it's employee.

The irony is that you accused me of holding pride over principles. At least I apologize when I do something wrong.

I didn't make a gay Bible or claim to support one. In fact, I keep saying how I'm against twisting and misusing scripture. If someone or something deliberately alters the original Hebrew and Greek meaning, it's deceptive. Accidental translation errors happen, but deliberate is deception.

You quoted me and then claimed I said something different. I said you can't claim the Bible condemns people for being gay, bi, lesbian, trans, ace, etc without taking verses out of context, twisting the meaning, etc. We see this when multiple times you used a verse calling for the death penalty for men who have sex from a section that includes exile for sex during a woman's period to condemn someone who doesn't even have sex and dismiss the context (ceremonial laws) and half the verse (the death penalty) as no longer relevant. That's observable proof of misusing scripture for hypocritical selective condemnation.

You also did this with what I said. I talked about people and you changed it to a thing, to homosexuality. You twisted what I said and then claim you'd never do that with the Bible the way you did in your other comment and in previous comments.

These are real, provable actions on your part. Now, if you can show where I've also misused scripture, please show me. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong and apologize.

Instead of taking responsibility for you taking a verse out of context and falsely claiming I support some gay Bible, you completely ignore what I really said, you blame me for things you did and flat out lie about what we said to each other, even though it's all still there. Why? What is your goal with all this elaborate and neverending deception?

I'm not perfect and I'm sure there are plenty of flaws I need to be aware of so I can better serve God's will, but you can't help me notice them if you're just going to make up lies and blame me and others for your actions. I need a brother in Christ, not an accuser in sin.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-11-10 07:14:23 +0000 UTC]

(Part 2)

I said "I began a new conversation, and this time I was hopeful to clear up any and all concerns and inconsistencies". I did not specify what conversations; and if you believe that means only a singular or specific conversations, then I would be prejudice, but this applies to all conversations, which is why there is no specifics.
You asked "what is the real reason?" This is the real reason. I thought this was apparent in what I wrote, it seems I was mistaken.

That actually isn't an answer. You just said you didn't specify what you were talking about.

I asked why you chose this stamp. It has nothing to do with those inconsistencies since it's not about what you claimed was inconsistent. And, if you did choose it to clear them up, that means you actually did paste the verses to start a conversation about something the stamp's not actually about, meaning the beginning of this conversation was a cover and your denial of that was a deception.

If you don't want to answer a question or your memory won't let you do so accurately, please just tell me rather than all this.

I asked "Do you acknowledge your faults and short comings I have drawn to your attention now or do you still deny them?"
You said "I'd also like us to have an open and honest conversation, free from deception and full of compassion. If this is your goal too, it looks like we can agree to do that."
This is not an answer for this question, perhaps a reply for my former point, but not of relevance to this question. Please answer the questions.

Actually you're quoting me, not you. You just falsely put it was you who said it so you could falsely claim I didn't answer your question in a very clever ploy to avoid answering mine. Feel free to go back and check who said what: comments.deviantart.com/1/7664…

You said you'd be willing to acknowledge your faults and shortcomings if any become apparent (comments.deviantart.com/1/7664… paragraph 5), so I asked if you acknowledge them and instead you pretend you asked it so you can both avoid answering my question and falsely claim I didn't answer your question (which was really mine).

Do you acknowledge the very blatant fault and shortcoming of going to such elaborate lengths of twisted deception just to avoid answering basic questions?

I have no power in what people portray me as; I acknowledge what they say, and I defend myself it is wrong, but they can still say what they know and believe, even if it is wrong. I condemn the childish actions, and the lack of study and effort to understand context, but otherwise they are human and I respect their humanity. Their actions will define them; as will their lies, knowledge, truth and beliefs.

The reason why I asked if you'd prefer that others were honest about you and didn't misstate your actions was to try to get you to empathize with what you've done to me. But, if you truly don't care what others say, I guess that won't work. I care when people spread lies about me, but I guess I'll have to learn not to care if you won't learn to care.

You said: "You did not block me, so I am able to object, but if you refuse to listen it's no different than if you had blocked me to silence me. Either way, my words go nowhere."
Of course I wish to object, and they did block me, it is childish, and this will come back to them in time.
You claim that I do not listen to you, and yet I do exactly that. Everything that you tell me I analyze and check for verification, and when it is irrelevant, I dismiss it, just like your reply in the former rebuttal, which was an irrelevant reply.
Unfortunately, this does not apply to you but me. You could easily have blocked me, for all the issues I have apprently caused you, none of which I apologize for, but by giving circular reasoning, appealing to corruption, misleading me by refusing to give direct answers until I pressed you is no different. You take a very humble approach, but your defense and responses are circular. You do not give answers but counter claims against me. You appeal to human nature rather than given direct and exact answers. Essentially, you are beating around the bush every turn that you reply. There is no difference than had you blocked me, and by using these tactics, it says to me a lot more than if you had blocked me, which could be interpreted as simply trying to block out someone you view as a troublemaker, so to speak, but you continue instead to appeal to conjecture, to human nature and God's grace, which is above all else, not an answer to anything. Your views are subjective, where truth is objective.

Rather than acknowledge your actions, you turned it completely around and claim I've done what you've done, that somehow you dismissing everything and avoiding direct answers by changing the subject or engaging in elaborate deflections and lies is my fault. Look, I provided you with all our conversations. Feel free to to look through them and present evidence to back up your claims. Or you could simply read this conversation and see the lengths you go to so you can do all the things you falsely claim I do.

I confronted you directly about your call-out multiple times. I showed you what you wrote and what you told others. I linked to proof for everything. I'm clear, direct and back up my claims. Rather than acknowledge any of that, you dismissed it as "irrelevant", claimed our conversation happened completely differently than simply re-reading it proves, and then have the gall to say I'm somehow the one who's avoiding direct answers? I'm sorry, but this is incredibly insulting.

Please take a moment to reconsider your actions and statements toward me.

To be objective: Is homosexuality a sin: Yes. Why? Because the Bible says so.

Source?

Your appeal: Is homosexuality a sin: No. Why? Because it has been taken out of context, or the scriptures are being misinterpreted, or the Bible is corrupted (so to speak).

Sexual orientations don't appear in the Bible and you did take the verses out of context unless you believe what they say. But feel free to show me if I'm wrong.

Do the scholars support my views: Yes.
Do they support yours: No.

It depends on the scholars. Though, I should point out that you constantly falsely claim I appeal to others, but clearly you're the one who does.

Therefore, your appeal is wrong, and you are being blasphemous for calling corruption on the Word of God, when the word is authenticated by the scholars, theologians and ancient historians.

Wait, what, that's it? The equivalent of "I said this and I appeal to other unnamed people who agree, therefore it's true."? You're the one who keeps saying I claim the Bible is corrupted, not me. I said people misuse the Bible by taking things out of context and modifying it from the original. This is verifiable because we have the Hebrew and Greek and because you have demonstrated how to twist scripture in your other conversations and even this one.

Objectivity supports me, your subjective appeal does not. So, please explain to me how you fix these inconsistencies in your beliefs when the scholars and the words affirm my position but condemn yours?

Why do you keep appealing to others, saying that other unnamed people somehow make your beliefs objective? Can you quote these other people to back up how you use verses? And why trust strangers over what the Bible says?

So, when I read exactly what the Bible says and read it in context, I'm being "subjective", but when you claim the Bible really means something completely different than what it says, you're being objective? Please explain how this works.

I am not patronizing you; I am telling you what you should already be well aware of, and what you constantly appeal to, yet somehome seem not to understand. Perhaps you like to use these wonderful words in a context that appeals to you with no respect for it's meaning or implementation?
On the contrary, I am not repeating you, these are my conclusions, not yours, so please do not take credit that is not due unto you; as someone who speaks of compassion and kindness, I expect more humility than this.

You keep claiming I don't understand what I myself said and explained to you and you agreed with. So that means you don't understand either, since you said the same thing I did. If you understand what I said, I understand what I said.

You can re-read our conversation if you are confused who said what: comments.deviantart.com/1/7664…

How do I lack humility and compassion simply because what I say can be verified? If you have proof the course of events happened in a different order or you said what I did before me, by all means present it. Our conversation is all out in the open. Nothing's hidden.

As I have stated, I can only speculate, which I will not, or use what i know, which I am, and I even gave a short list of what I know. I cannot receit everything from the past, but what I do know I have kept in short points in my mind and important facts to note, which I have noted. So, what you are pointing out that is obvious, is very obvious and correct, as it is exactly what I said; but, you assumed that I remember more than what I do know, which Is not true, and I cannot recite everything, and I am even relying upon rereading to catch up, lest I missed something important. So, thank you for confirming my point.

That paragraph ran around in circles and then claimed I confirmed your point. Again, clever distraction, but I asked why you trust your poor memory which has been shown is wrong over what I show you I really said and not what you think I said.

Please stop avoiding everything I ask. If you don't with to answer questions, just tell me. Don't keep going to such lengths to create webs of deception just to avoid answering basic questions.

If I trust you, how do I know you are not lying? Because you say so? Because you claim to be Christian? From the beginning and until now, I do not trust you or your views, as they're full of contradiction and conjecture. I may not remember everything that has been said and done, but I know a person not to be trusted then, is not to be trusted now, and that is something that is not required of a good or bad memory. I am sure you understand.

I understand your prejudice and bias skews your perception of reality, but that's why I present evidence of every conversation we've ever had. You will find I never said what you claim and instead said that I claim. Your prejudice toward me has simply made you not trust me and believe lies instead. This "contradiction and conjecture" was fabricated by you either intentionally distorting what I say and believe or just remembering wrong, but truth is verifiable.

Here, I'll demonstrate how to present evidece to back things up. Below is a link to a conversation in which you deny you said things I claim you said. I reply to your repeated denials and claims things happened differently by pasting your words and linking to where they came from to verify the proof. As you can see, everything I say is backed up and contradicts your repeated deceptions. You can use this method too if you indeed are just repeating what I said I believe to prove it:
comments.deviantart.com/1/7328…

I claimed no relevance because I am discussing a specific element, a topic. Does that make sense?

You said it's all connected to love, specifically arguing against the idea of a specific element or topic mattering, yet then forgot that and dismissed love as irrelevant, on a stamp about love no less. No, I don't understand your logic.

I never resented love, I reject your appeal to compassion and human nature when truth is the core of this discussion; it is you that resents me for having an objective appeal when you take a subjective appeal. Truth is not defined by feelings, it's defined by truth. I fear this is something you believe is fluid and/ or ambiguous.

The Bible says truth and love are inseparable. You agreed they are connected. Again, just re-read our conversation for proof. Now you no longer believe that and dismiss love as "feelings" in order to again avoid addressing what I said. That's the problem with deception. It's gets so complicated and convoluted. That's why truth is infinitely better.

You said: "You may have copied my replies and saved them to your computer and those copies are lost, but unless you reply to replies on DeviantArt, they don't actually go away from your notifications. You'd have to either select all my replies and archive them or select all my replies and delete them. Which is it? Your computer didn't do this. DeviantArt is a separate server. You did it. Don't blame your laptop."
That is exactly correct: I made it very clear that I archived the responses so I may respond to them in kind.
Now, to clarify your confusion: I archived your replies so I may reply to your rebuttal in time; everything before then is irrelevant and rebutted. The notifications where then deleted as the important data was kept on a text document, which you are already well aware of as I have made that much very clear. The archiving this is.
When you said I should not have blamed my laptop, for what must I point a finger at it for? Is your concern that I did not keep your replies in my notifications? I elected to archive them to be replied later, as is my choice and my right. If I had known my laptop would purge, I would not have deleted the replies that are kept in my notifications, so there's no blame on me, nor my laptop as these things are random and unfortunate. So, when you said I blamed my laptop, you made an assertion, and an assumption that I kept them in my notification, which if you consider the fact that I archived them for later, makes the most sense that I would not keep them, as they are stored and saved for later. For this I believe it is fair to apologize for making thoughtless assumptions.

I'm sorry if my words came off in a way that hurt you. That wasn't my intention. I'm also sorry if I made an assumption based on what you said that was incorrect. I'm not perfect and make mistakes, but I own up to them and hope you can forgive me.

So, even though you phrase it as "the notifications where then deleted," this is all a long way of admitting you deleted them? At least that speculation was correct.

I'm going to point out the obvious here: After you deleted them, how were you going to reply? Did you keep links to every one of my replies attached to each document? Not based on what you said. So, you'd just wander around until you found them and try to match up a reply with the exact reply before it that it goes to?

In the future, if you absolutely hate seeing things you haven't replied to in your notifications, use the archive feature. It's right next to the delete button when you select multiple replies. It's actually what I thought you did when you first told me you "archived" them, as then you could reply later like you said. The way you did it made replying later almost impossible, especially if your memory is like you say.

I know I've said it before and you've never acknowledged I said it, so here it is again: Please reply from your notifications.

Instead of deleting your notifications, if you always reply from your notifications, it will make things much easier to follow. Remember those times you kept replying to your own comments and couldn't figure out why I didn't get notifications when you did this, even mocking and insulting me for not getting notices when you reply to yourself? Well, in our other current conversation, you pasted your reply to my latest reply on an earlier reply of mine and not on what you're actually replying to. If you're not going to include my text that you're replying to, pasting your replies randomly makes it even harder to follow, as you're not replying to what you clicked reply to, but another reply. As a general note, if you already replied and yet my reply that you think you replied to is still in your notifications, you didn't reply in the correct place. Maybe confusion over this is why you delete replies, but you don't have to.

Don't delete what you intend to reply to. Reply from notifications and they'll go away from your notifications automatically when replied to correctly.

You said: "I understand you don't know my very last replies if you never read them, but we're not talking about that. We're talking about what you wrote and our earlier conversations. I literally said you used the same verses, not me. You.
Then you said: "You should know what you wrote."
Need I point out the rather embarrassing inconsistency you have presented here? 
Perhaps I should. It is understandable that I don't know your very last replieS, but what I wrote from our earlier conversations, but I should remember that? Is that not exactly why these discussions are archived so we can very why is said before? I am shaking my head. I truly thoguht you knew this. This is why the discussions are archived and recorded on text. For this exact reason. Perhaps I should be more compassionate to you.

Your response mocks me for you claiming you can't remember anything you've ever written in the past. You, someone who claims that your call-out is true because it's based on what you remember.

There is no inconsistency in saying you should remember what you typed to me before and have shown you do remember. Why? Because you typed it again. If you lack the archives to look back on, that only leaves your memory, so you couldn't have really forgotten everything you wrote in the past. Simple logic beats elaborate deception.

Of course I will reuse verses. There is no obligation to use one verse for one rebuttal. If it is relevant and used, it can be used again. There is not limit or number to it's usage. Perhaps that is something that you enjoy doing but there's no rule or law against using a verse many times. Is this your concern? It seems very minimal, even unimportant.

Way to change the subject. I pointed out the context you used the verses in and you made it about how I'm somehow trying to make you not reuse verses? Instead of constantly going to these lengths to twist everything just to avoid ever admitting to anything you do or answering simple questions, just say you don't want to to answer. That's it.

I have no interest or obligation to humor past remarks, only the discussion at present, and I would appreciate that you remain on topic and discuss what is said now, with truth and reasoning, and not issues that you hold from the past. I may no longer have the rebuttals archived, so I will use what I have now, as is more than reasonable. If you wish to indulge the past, you will do so alone, as the past is gone, and today is now. Thank you.

Based on where you would be in my reply about here, the only thing I can think you're replying to here is when I quoted you saying you wanted to be told when you lie. Is this whole thing about the past being the past a way to say you no longer want to be told when you lie? Or is this about something else? You don't quote me or make any reference, and I'm not a mind reader, so let me know.

I would point out that the past matters, especially if you keep claiming I said things in the past I didn't.

If you have not forgotten, then you have not forgotten. No concern to me.

Um, I was actually pointing out I remembered and so you could rely on me. I even provided you all our previous conversations since you said you don't remember.

You kept lamenting your loss of our previous conversations, so I'm trying to show you it's not gone. I have it all and have shared it. Does this not matter to you, after all that about how disappointed you were you can't remember? Is nothing helpful? I'm trying here, but I feel like I'm the only one.

Of course I forgot, I am left with whatever else I can remember, but I see your point, you believe that I have gained amnesia and lost all recollections, I can understand that, so I will clarify what I may have been vague with: I have lost all my replies, and all that I had mean to reply with, as part of those archived rebuttals were in part complete. I am left with what I know from the past, small details, notes, impressions, no more or less than than anyone who's held a discussion before. I hope that clarifies what I did not give enough information on.

So, when you said you had yet to reply, you didn't actually mean you had yet to reply. You meant you had yet to finish replies you started, possibility starting a bunch or even finishing some? Okay, that makes sense. It also means you must have read at least some of my last replies, meaning that's included in the small impressions in your memory too. Unfinished replies aside, for things we each previously said, please go off our conversations in the links rather than any vague impressions you have from memory. Our actual conversations will be more accurate than your memory.

You said: "Well, then would you clarify what I actually believe homosexuality means? I assume you remember or else you can't claim you only add my context. Please show me where I said homosexuality and heterosexuality are sinful, as you claimed in your call-out, or where I twist the Bible. I assume you can do this as you say you don't fabricate anything."

You said: "Please show me where I said homosexuality and heterosexuality are sinful", except I never said anything that caused this response, it is at random, and the right to inquire is mine as the statement and responsibility to offer proof is your burden, as this came from you. Perhaps you have a point, but you have a duty to proof first.

You made those claims in your call-out and then claimed you only repeat what I tell you. I can not prove what I never said and you lied and made up. I have linked you to every conversation we've had. Read your call-out description again and then try to find proof I said all the things you claim. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim, which is you.

I can not prove I never said something outside of linking you to all our conversations, which I have done. What do you expect me to link to, a blank page? How is it up to me to prove I never said what you made up? I never said it, so I have nothing to link to because it doesn't exist. That's absurd and incredibly insulting. You must prove I said what I never did. Face up to your words and for once finally prove your repeated false claims or correct yourself and remove your lies.

And stop blaming me for your actions, please. I may be patient, but I am still human. Is all this deception really worth it just to defend a call-out? Why is it that sacred to you? Is it because of your feelings toward me?

You said: "Please show me where I said homosexuality and heterosexuality are sinful, as you claimed in your call-out, or where I twist the Bible. I assume you can do this as you say you don't fabricate anything."
I am sorry but that is not my responsibility. You have asked that I prove something, but since you made an assertion against me in the given reply of yours, the burden of proof is not on me, it is on you as you made the statement, and the demand for evidence against you is on you because you made a statement against me. For instance, how can I clarify what you believe what homosexuality means? I cannot, that is impossible, YOU must clarify what it means.
I will wait.

I didn't make the assertion against you. You claimed you only repeated what I've told you and yet I ask you to prove your words aren't lies by telling me what I actually said that you're supposedly just repeating and present proof and you twist it to somehow be my responsibility to prove your lies for you? That's completely absurd.

I asked you to prove the false claims you made against me and you turn it around and claim I need to prove them. You made the false claims and said you're just repeating me. Please stop avoiding everything. I can't prove I said homosexuality and heterosexuality are sinful because I never did. I can only prove what I really said, not the lies you made up. You have to prove they aren't lies, if you can. You made the claims. You have to prove them.

And, if you can't even tell me what I've said I really believe, how on Earth are you supposedly stating only what I've said in the stamps description? You're not.

I feel pity that you feel patronized, but as I cannot give answer that you want nor tell you what you wish to here, I have no apologies to give. You have your own sources and yourself to deal with. Blaming me doesn't make me wrong, it jsut means you have not the sources or truth to refute what I say. What else can I do to help you, I am trying here.

So, you blame me for you lying about me and you have no appologies to give?

And please stop offering this patronizing and fake pity. It's one thing to blame me for you making a call-out and lying to people. It's another to "pity" me while refusing to apologize at the exact same time.

You did this in our other conversation too (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… ), offering fake pity for how confused and desperate I am because of things you made up. You know how I know it's fake? Because even when I was dealing with grief over loss of loved ones and so I didn't want to debate you (comments.deviantart.com/1/7512… ), your response was this:

Please do not try to gain pity by appealing to death; that is the same for everyone. (comments.deviantart.com/1/7512… )

Imagine if that had been my response to you after you said "Forgive my tardy reply, I am grieving the loss of a parent." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… ). I would never be so cold and heartless. I would never ever treat you the way you've treated me. It's more than just that I'd never go around your stamps leaving a bunch of insults and accusations or make a call-out of you or twist and lie about you. It's also that I'd never show such complete and total lack of empathy as you have to me and sadly others over the time I've known you.

But I still believe you will change one day. I have hope because I know deep down you want from yourself what I want from you.

You said: "I am responsible for what I say. You are responsible for what you say. Own up to that." Of course you said that. I expected that response. I forgive you.

What's to be forgiven for? I stated an obvious truth that we are responsible for what we each say and you felt that needed forgiveness because you don't believe you're responsible for what you say? Who is responsible for what you say then?

You said: "Interesting how you can remember my "testimony" but not our previous conversations that "testimony" came from. How does that work?" Quite simply, as explained before, I am relying on what I know of you and remember. Little details and small notes can be quite a lot of evidence.

No, evidence is evidence. I've linked to all our previous conversations. Feel free to find proof that these "little details and small notes" are true.

You said: "You asked if I'm homosexual and I said I have same sex attractions. That's what gay means, so sure". So, will you say this: "I am gay", as it seems that although you do not refute the meaning here, you haven't came forth and said you are gay directly. I am straight. Can you say you are gay as directly?

Are you asking why I specify I have same sex attractions? Because otherwise you'll make up what I mean by gay. You did just that in our other conversation where you talked in circles to falsely claim that me being gay must mean I have sex because you claim that's what gay really means (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… paragraph 2). So please don't patronize me by mocking how exact I am on my answers. I have to be, and yet you still find a way to twist it into deception.

You said: "I could give you quite a list of the times I called you out on this and you kept ignoring my correction. I never said that I have a "partner", you did. I said I have a soulmate, someone who I said is like a brother and I love like my parents. It wouldn't make a difference what word you used except that I know you intentionally constantly change it to partner to create a sexual connotation. You deliberately ignore my objections and twist what I've told you so that you can falsely claim, as you have many times, that I'm "living a sinful lifestyle" of sex and all the other things you fantasized about."
What is a soulmate:
soulmate
noun: soulmate; plural noun: soulmates; noun: soul-mate; plural noun: soul-mates
"a person ideally suited to another as a close friend or romantic partner."

Your soulmate seems to come across as rather intimate, more so than a regular sibling, but this is the first I have heard of them being a friend, but I shall go with it.
Why does a "partner" have to have a sexual connontation? I have partners I work with, are you saying that I have a sexual attraction/ relations with them?
I have no apologies, you are very bleek and obscure in regards to your relationships. If you were forthcoming and direct, these confusions would not exist. Take responsibility for being obscure please.

"I have partners I work with, are you saying that I have a sexual attraction/ relations with them?" Please don't pretend you and I don't both know exactly what your intent was. I was forthcoming and direct. See our previous conversations for proof. But you kept claiming I can't really be celibate because I have a "partner." You literally said I'm not celibate because of this type of relationship you imagine I'm in (comments.deviantart.com/1/7614… ). You made the sexual connection out of your own bias to condemn me, even changing it to "boyfriend" when you thought the other person might not think "partner" meant what you wanted it to mean and you couldn't risk them believing the truth over you. Own up to your actions.

You once again turn it around to somehow be my fault you lied about me and ask me to take credit for you deliberately lying. I was the exact opposite of "bleak and obscure." Over and over again from the very beginning I was clear, spelling things out for you (comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… ), but you'd keep claiming I really meant something else, escalating your deception each time.

As you can see from the link, I dismissed your use of "partner" at first too, as it truly doesn't have to be sexual, but then it became clear as you continued to twist, distort and lie in your neverending condemnation of me, this personal vendetta that made you completely ignore everything I actually said in favor of your lies and deception:

"I'm sorry, truly I am, I wish I could tell you that the Bible approves of your homosexuality and your choice of partners, but to so so would be lying and a sin on my part, and as much as you disprove and want to condemn me for that, as a Christian, I will accept this and pray that God's love separates you and the boy who has become your spiritual poison and that you may find the love of a good woman so you will gain the true love and Grace of God in your life and relationship." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… )

"How do you feel that God says your relationship with your partner deserves to be hated, not ignored, hated? I highly doubt you could attain less approval from God to be quite honest." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… )

"You did make a point that marriage isn't for everyone, an irrelevant point at that, and I made the point tat being with a female is better; so here is my question, knowing that the companionship of the opposite sex is natural, without shame, proper and approved by God, why not throw your partner into the bin of sin where homosexuality belongs and seek a righteous relationship in the eyes of the Lord?" (comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… )

So please don't insulting my intelligence by claiming you never used "partner" to make sexual assertions that were false. That was the basis of your deception against me.

Also, I'm glad you finally got around to looking up the definition of soulmate. Thank you.

If you still don't understand how I love or why I love others in a way society often calls "inappropriate," read this:

I Love 'Inappropriately'It's never easy to lose someone you care about, at least not for me. I'm more than welcoming of someone new, but I don't like that I have to lose others. I like the adding, but not the taking away.
I still miss everyone I've cared about. It doesn't go away. I just get distracted. When I love, I love unconditionally, meaning even time is a condition that doesn't affect it.
When I was in preschool, my grandma was all the friend I needed and in kindergarten my teacher was about as close as that got. But, in first and second grade, I had one friend my own age. He had a large birth mark on his face, so no one would be his friend except for me.
I gave him gifts and he was nice to me, which was a refreshing change from all the bullying I faced. But, then we moved and I changed schools. I was very sad and, just like everyone else I've known, I still think of him.
In third grade, I made a new friend. Again, it was only because no one else would be his friend. I made him gifts and he genuinely s

You said: "I never said this. You made it up back when you first commented long ago and you said that I'm wrong to talk about LGBT people when they're and "it", an organization called "the LGBT." I don't support what I don't even understand and never claimed. I don't believe in a support vs opposition binary for types of people. It would be like asking do you support or oppose left handed people? What's there to choose between? They exist and it's how they actually live their lives that matters."
You made this stamp:
fav.me/d9q23fv
This says Pro-LGBT. Is this not your opinion? Are you not Pro - LGBT? If you are Pro-LGBT, then you support the LGBT. If I am Pro-Life, then I am against abortion. No explanation needed. You lied.

The stamp actually says "Pro LGBT Equality and Religious Freedom". There is no reference to "I support the LGBT" but to the belief in equal rights for all people. You literally had to cut off all but two words and even change those to make your point and yet you accuse me of lying? That is extremely obvious deception.

You said: "Again, I never said this. You made it up. I said being LGBT is not a sin and showed why (in the other stamp's description). You make people into an "it" (yes, called them "it") and "the LGBT" to try to dehumanize people who are different from you, but I'd like you to at least try to be honest about what I actually said and believe about seeing people as individual human beings. I'm sure you'd like the same when I talk about what you say.". You actually said in this comment " I said being LGBT is not a sin and showed why (in the other stamp's description)". You said from your self that it is not a sin. If you make the statement, then you have given testimony. That's all there is to it. If I say "I am guilty" to a judge, that's all there is to it. Guilty or innocent, and you are guilty of lying.

If I'm guilty of lying, then by all means include what you said that I disagreed with. You only put what I wrote, which gives the false impression you said the exact same thing.

I'll remind you: You again talked about this made-up "the LGBT." I didn't talk about "the LGBT is not sinful" as you asserted, so I corrected you. When we first met, I asked you what this "the LGBT" was and you said it's a political organization that promotes sin (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… ). That's how you defined "the LGBT", so it clearly has nothing at all to do with me saying being LGBT is not sinful.

This "it" is just an excuse to create some fictional boogyman, like how you say "the LGBT" made some gay Bible and I "support the LGBT" and so I support making some gay Bible. These are the hoops you're willing to jump through to blame me and whole groups of people for the actions of others.

Since you became hung up on this before, I'll try to use an analogy: Let's say I said being human is not a sin. That doesn't mean humans aren't sinful. It means being human is not a sin in itself. Likewise, being LGBT is not a sin, but all LGBT people are sinners like everyone else. Since I don't believe in "the LGBT" anymore than I believe all people of one race are "the blacks" or "the whites" in order to blame groups for actions of others rather than believing in individual responsibility, I hope you can at least understand this. We don't have to agree. Just try to understand me.

From a previous conversation:

You said "the LGBT is an organization" and I said "LGBT people". People are not a thing. I said "heterosexuals" and you said that means "heterosexuality." People are not a thing. I said "Christians" and you said "Christianity." People are not a thing. Scientists are not science. Teachers are not education. (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to EmpathicDesign [2018-11-10 07:13:28 +0000 UTC]

(Part 3)

You said: "I said sexual orientations are not sinful or even mentioned in the Bible, that it's how we live that matters. Feel free to prove me wrong. Since you actively refused to define homosexuality or homosexual, I had to define it how the dictionary does, even though you didn't like that either.". I did not say that, I said that you said that homosexuality is not sinful, which is what you said. That's all that is needed to be said, you're diverting by talking about other sexualities which is irrelevant. Again, you lied.

I stated exactly what I had said before and said that's what I said. I spelled it out so there be no confusion since you wouldn't define homosexuality. This can be proven simply by reading our previous conversations. But you just used falsely claiming I lied as a distraction to avoid acknowledging my point that you actively refused to define homosexuality and can't prove your position without deception.

You said: "Yes. Though for some reason that really bothers you, as I can link you to the times you kept trying to bully me out of my faith and insisting I can't be Christian and appeal to Satan or I should convert to Islam."
Because Christianity condemns homosexuality, and as a Christian, a follower of this ideology, I condemn it too. You refuse to do so, so how can you be a Christian if you pick and choose from the Bible and condemn not what God condemns? You cannot. It's as simple as that.

I'm sorry, but no matter how much you believe you can choose who gets to be Christian, you don't have that authority. You're not God and your words are not the Bible. I disagree with you. Show me where I disagree with the Bible and not your interpretation or misuse of scripture. I'm calling out your lies and trolling, not God's. Please stop blaming God and Christianity for your actions. Christians don't always agree with each other on everything, especially issue like this where there's little the Bible says on it.

Let me refresh your memory: You claimed that the Bible condemns me using verses that talk about things I don't do. You literally used the Bible to falsely condemn me. That's slander and a biblical sin. So, I instead showed how I'm condemned as a sinner and then you dismissed it as irrlevant because you kept insisting I am condemned using verses like Leviticus.

I do not pick and choose what I read in the Bible. I just don't believe in lying an making up false accusations and taking verses out of context to condemn others for things they don't actually do.

But let's face facts here. You're using this as yet another cover to avoid responsibility for trying to bully me out of my faith in the past. You made the false accusations and twisted scripture to try to condemn me for lies you made up. You did that. Own up to it. It's not God's fault.

"Perhaps you should consider Islam, where deception is very much the primary Creed; Christianity is to honest for the corruption happy." (comments.deviantart.com/1/5879… )

"Of course, I am sure you have a god, but not the God of Jacob, Isaac and Joseph." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… )

You have repeatedly lied to and about me, trolled and insulted me, mocked and demeaned me, and  yet I have never once said you aren't a real Christian, called you a fake Christian or suggested you convert to another religion. I've never ever questioned your faith. Ever. Once again, I would never treat you how you've treated me, with such contempt and total lack of empathy.

We are both sinful imperfect people and that's why we need Christ. But let's not resort to saying either of us has authority over who gets to come to Christ and be Christian. Let's just leave that up to God and stick to the issues.

You said: "And showed it by going through the verses people claim to say it does and putting them back in context and introducing verses those people ignore. You never once disputed any of this by showing a single instance of me twisting scripture. Not once. Feel free to change that. I'll listen.". Simple: You are appealing to people who ARE taking them out of context, and these people that ARE taking them out of context are not claiming homosexuality is to be sinful, they're claiming that it is not. You are making an appeal against people who are not saying what you are saying; that's fabrication, and you asked for evidence, and the scholars, my own step father for that matter, says that these verses condemn homosexuality. That's a lie, you never elaborated, you simply appealed to Biblical Corruption and the removal of context, which condemn your own homosexuality.
I never said you twisted the scripture, please stop lying, this is beneath you, I said that your appeal is based on corruption, and it's quite convenient that only the verses that condemn homosexuality and homosexuals (you), are the ones that are corrupt or taken out of context.
But here is the thing: YOU said there is corruption, and the verses are taken out of context, so, prove that the verses I submitted do NOT condemn homosexuality. You cannot, or you would have.

I asked you to prove your claims by showing where I did what you claim:

"I speak because someone else is teaching others of the scripture and lying about what they say."

"This means that you are not against twisting and misusing scripture, but you enable and support the corruption."

"My goal for this call-out is to bring awareness that you are deliberately corrupting the Christian Scriptures."

(comments.deviantart.com/1/7664… )

According to you, I'm lying about, twisting, misusing, and corrupting scripture. So, I asked if you have any evidence to back this up. That's the part you quoted. However, instead of finally presenting proof, you claim I'm guilty because I appeal to others who take scripture out of context to claim homosexuality is not sinful. Not only do you not present proof for your previous claims, but you don't for this claim either.

Show me where I appealed to others who take scripture out of context to say homosexuality is not sinful. I didn't appeal to anything of the sort. I didn't bring up these imaginary other people you keep appealing to, like these people who make a gay Bible and so I'm guilty, and now people who take scripture out of context and so I'm guilty of it. I didn't appeal to any of them, you actually did. You appealed to them and then also appealed to others to support your view. It's right there in your reply, just read it.

You ask me to prove the verses you  submitted don't condemn homosexuality. Of course, you don't specify which verses and I don't really care if you believe they condemn homosexuality so long as you don't use them to falsely condemn people who don't do what the verse says. Unlike you, I don't believe you have to believe what I do or else you're not a real Christian.

Since you weren't specific, here's all the verses you've presented in this conversation:

Exodus 19:5 " Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession."

Revelation 14:12 "This calls for patient endurance on the part of the people of God who keep his commands and remain faithful to Jesus."

Matthew 15:18-19 "But the things that come out of a person’s mouth come from the heart, and these defile them. 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts - murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander."

Ezekiel 33:8-9 "When I say to the wicked, ‘You wicked person, you will surely die,’ and you do not speak out to dissuade them from their ways, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. 9 But if you do warn the wicked person to turn from their ways and they do not do so, they will die for their sin, though you yourself will be saved."

Proverbs 6:16-19 " There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him: 17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, 18 a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, 19 a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community."

2 Corinthians 10:5 - "We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ".

1 Peter 3:15 - "But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect".

Philippians - "It is right for me to feel this way about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel."

Well, not to be too obvious, but even taken out of context, these verses still have nothing to do with homosexuality. The way to prove this is true is by simply reading them. Now, if you're already completely convinced the Bible speaks of homosexuality everywhere and that "this is part of the Christian Doctrine" (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… ), then I suppose you'll see it everywhere, but if you read the verses as they are and study the context and origins, you can't come to the conclusion you have based on them.

First, let's address that you'll keep God's commands. This is echoed in John 14:15, which says "If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” And what commandments? Don't eat pork? Don't get tattoos? In John 15:12, Christ says "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you." This is repeated throughout the Bible, that we are to love God and others and that the whole of the law depends on that love alone. "For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" (Galatians 5:14) "And he said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And yhe second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.'" (Matthew 22:37-40)

Now you and I can debate if some aspect of homosexuality (such as sex) violates the law of love, but we can't do that with the verses you provided.

As for wicked things coming from the human heart, again you'd have to already believe homosexuality is a wicked thing, as the verse itself reveals nothing of the sort. I'm not against you believing homosexual sex is part of sexual immorality, so long as you don't apply it to people who don't have sex, as I'm not here to defend acts, just not twisting scripture. However I would like to point out that false testimony and slander are mentioned, so I'd recommend being careful when using this verse to condemn others, as it condemns you too.

As for warning the wicked, again this doesn't reveals what's wicked, so we can both use this verse, you to back up warning me of what you see as wrong and me to back up warning you of what I see as wrong. We've each done our part.

The next verse is a very interesting choice, as I want you to read this part carefully: "haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community." While obviously there's no connection to homosexuality here, let's break it down:

Haughty means arrogant, superior and disdainful, so haughty eyes means to look down on others. Know anyone who constantly says that he doesn't have to apologize, that he is a source of truth, without his own opinion, and mocks others as intellectually and morally inferior?

"I study from an objective point of view, with no opinions of my own, open to non-bias interpretations." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… )

"I have no opinions of my own, all the information I speak is a recitation with no subjectivity or prejudice. Truth is objective, and for someone as subjective as yourself to make another subjective appeal raises a red flag that your testimony is built on bias, and as so, cannot be trusted, as you're emotionally compromised, skepticism is a mercy, one I feel that you do not deserve." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… )

"Or maybe I'm so morally exemplary that I understand these matters better than others." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7499… )

"She's admitting her moral inferiority. Either way, she knows she's in the wrong, and she got schooled." (www.deviantart.com/empathicdes… )

"I can reasonably conclude that any form of intelligence from you is beyond hope." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7384… )

"Do you have a mental deficiency?" (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )

"I have not insulted you; I have raised valid awareness that perhaps you lack the mental capacity to understand scripture." (comments.deviantart.com/1/5707… )

"The people who make these stamps honestly have less common sense than a pineapple." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7079… )

A lying tongue is pretty self explanatory. Do you know anyone who habitually lies? This also connects to a false witness who pours out lies. Know anyone who has been a repeated false witness and pours out lies?

"A person who support homosexuality and calls themselves is a fake.
They're a fake. Period.
A homosexual has no right telling anyone who Christianity commands when they themselves are living in a sin.
I reject this hypocrisy, this falsehood, especially when they say that homosexuality AND heterosexual are BOTH sinful. No."
(www.deviantart.com/empathicdes… )

"As I am doing nothing more than parroting the information that you have given me, and others do not like that, and I utterly refuse to fabricate and add additionally context that was not presented by you, this means that people are not disagreeing with me but you, and you have no business condemning me when the source of information is nothing more or less than your own views and testimony." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7664… )

"I asked him about his homosexuality, he denies it, then affirmed it a few weeks later, and claimed he said he is homosexual from the beginning.. Except he didn't. I asked him about his having a boyfriend, he said he is not sexually active and his homosexual relationship is the desire and will of God." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7512… )

"So, how do you explain your exception of this sin as the Bible clearly condemns not only your personal practices, but the word and all it's usage? Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… )
"It was you that alluded to punishments of death as an appeal and rebuttal, several times in fact, not me." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6107… )

"I speak on behalf of the LGBT, when I say that you embarrass and degrade homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexuality and all orientations, with this hypocritical prejudice and inconsistency." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )
"I did not approve of your letter grammatically, nothing more; my only conversational piece in it's regard is my concern that you feel your are in a position to apologize on behalf of others when we both know that is not true. Nothing more." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )

"Does it come down to me to offer solutions to everything; do you have no common sense?" (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )
"I did not ask if you had common sense." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )

"You cannot be trusted to recite scripture if your views towards it are bias." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… )
"Additionally, I did not make any reference of bias, but rather my concern that you hold your understanding of Scripture and God's ways in such high esteem that you may be oblivious to error in your understanding." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7328… )

See also:
comments.deviantart.com/1/6345…
comments.deviantart.com/1/6263…
comments.deviantart.com/1/7328…
comments.deviantart.com/1/6281…
comments.deviantart.com/1/7664…

Know anyone who's feet are quick to run to evil, who thrives on conflict to the point that, after arogantly mocking and insulting someone, you exclaim "This is fun!" (comments.deviantart.com/1/7698… ) and, after being blocked, you don't want the fun of conflict to end (comments.deviantart.com/1/6921… ), even implying the other person being born was a mistake (comments.deviantart.com/1/6926… ).

The rest of the verse is "a person who stirs up conflict in the community." Know anyone who constantly goes around leaving comments with the intention of starting arguments and creating conflict?

"No you do not. That is not even remotely possible." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"This is an absolute lie." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"What a horrible thing you have written." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"Wrong." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"Your beliefs are naive and completely non-Christian." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"It's a sin." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"Hyocricy." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"You really are a hypocrite and a fake Christian." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"This stamp says 'I want to have my cake and eat it too.'" (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"You have resubmitted this stamp to this group again." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"Love is subjective." (www.deviantart.com/rogue-range… )

"I don't know if you gain sexual pleasure from embarrassing yourself or you just don't know what you're talking about." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6390… )

"There is no such thing as these claims of "toxicity". This is a childish and pathetic claim from the emotionally and morally weak." (comments.deviantart.com/1/7643… )

"If she doesn't like the attention she is receiving, that is her fault for provoking it, and if she gets raped, she should have: 1. Not dressed provocatively. 2. Not engaged with a group that have low moral standards. 3. Not left the house." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6571… )

"No, i want grandkids, and teen daughters getting knocked up young is a sign of bad parenting.
Lesbian daughters are a sign of bad parenting too." (comments.deviantart.com/1/1960… )

"Gay people still having these get togethers to try and get something they don't need?" (comments.deviantart.com/1/4816… )

"There are two genders and infinite mental illnesses." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6828… )

So, while obviously the verse has no connection to homosexuality, it definitely is still one you should keep in mind.

Though, it says God hates those actions, not the people who commit them, as He loves us and is faithful to forgive us when we repent.  So, see, there is value in you admitting your actions and apologizing.

"But if we confess our sins to Him, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all wickedness." (1 John 1:9)

The next verse comes from Paul's explaination in 2 Corinthians about "boasting" of God while being humble ourselves. You didn't really use it to try to prove the Bible is against homosexuality per se, but just took the small section out of context to try to claim I have opinions (on homosexuality, the Bible, etc) and you only speak truth, as if quoting this somehow proves you have no opinions. Still, I'd like you to read a couple verses further:

"If anyone is confident that they belong to Christ, they should consider again that we belong to Christ just as much as they do." (2 Corinthians 10:7)

Consider this when you claim I can't be Christian simply because we don't always agree.

The next verse of course also has nothing to do with homosexuality as there's no mention of anything related, but it's still a good verse to memorize. You already know from my art, stamps, writing and more that I share my hope with gentleness and respect, but do you always do that, especially when you mock others with different beliefs or when you insult others' intellect and morals or judge them as being unworthy of being Christian?

Try to see what these and the other verses are really saying, not what you wish they said.

The last verse you actually used to justify why you need to speak out against what you perceive as lies from me, though not only does it not mention homosexuality or anything of the like, it also talks about the kinship Paul feels for his fellow believers, which actually contradicts what you're using the verse for, which is to condemn me rather than embrace me as a fellow believer you hold in your heart.

So, basically, none of these verses you've supplied in this conversation somehow prove homosexuality is sinful or even mention it, no matter how you may try to twist scripture around.

There's the verse you used in our other conversation that I mentioned, though I feel we've went over it plenty. Still, I can go over Leviticus again. At least you could possibly claim it talks about homosexuality, in specific male-male sex.

First though, do you believe we should apply Levitical law today? Should we exile married couples who have sex at the wrong time of the month? It's a few verses prior. Should we ban haircuts and tattoos? That's in there too. Are certain animals an abomination as they're called there? Should we put men who have sex with men like women to death? That's actually in the very verses you quoted. Are believers under the law still instead of grace, like what the Bible actually says? These are all important questions to ask if you want to determine if you're using the verse in context.

You're welcome to use this verse, but make sure that you are prepared to back up the context by defending the idea that the person you're condemning is under the law and that the rest also applies to them. Obviously make sure the person is actually a man having sex with a man as with a woman and, lastly, either find a way around the part of the verse calling for the death penalty or be prepared to face the reactions of people when you call for their death. Don't just blame God. You're the one using the verse to condemn them, so stand by your actions. You can't say someone else is disagreeing with the Bible if it's you who isn't standing by it's call to kill them. That's hypocritical.

Once you've established all that, by all means use it to claim the Bible condemns homosexuality, but make sure you specify sex acts. You're free to believe this and I'm free to believe differently by believing we're under grace, not the law, and so the verse doesn't apply today, especially not in it's entirety. No killing any gay people for me, sorry.

"For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace." (Romans 6:14)

From my perspective, it seems more effective to lead someone to Christ to free them from the bondage of sin so they are capable of desiring God's will than to try to intellectually convince someone sex is wrong based on a verse that contains a call to kill. After all, I didn't believe in celibacy before God himself led me to it, as it's a spiritual matter, not something you can reason someone into, especially by taking verses out of context. You'll just end up in arguments and people further from Christ if you keep basing your statements on taking scripture out of context.

One last thing. On multiple occasions in the past, you used parts of Romans 1 to try to condemn me for having lust-based sex, which of course I don't have, and then to claim that love is condemned because desires of the heart can be condemnend. Here, I addressed Romans quite thoroughly here:  

comments.deviantart.com/1/6481…
comments.deviantart.com/1/6481…

I could paste it all here or go into our other conversations, but this is getting long as is, so I'll address any more in my reply to our other conversation, since all the verses are already addressed in the description of that stamp that you keep commenting on but always refuse to read.

You said: ""...spread lies about my ideology." I see. So that's why it upsets you so much? You feel that every Christian must agree with you because you feel some personal command over the truth? I'm sorry, but you do not represent every Christian anymore than I do. You don't own Christianity." I see you are fabricating and inserting words I have never said. I said my ideology because I belong to God. Jesus is my God. He is my truth, and I follow him. I am sorry that you do not understand this. I represent Christianity just as all Christians do, but standing up for what Christ taught and represents, if you cannot understand this, and you continue to peddle falsehoods along the lines of Biblical corruption and verse taken out of context, people will want to know why you are spreading this conjecture, just as I have, and when you give no explanation, no explanation whatsoever, just appeals to compassion and human nature; they're going to have concerns, and they're going to question if you are a real Christian, who does not tell people what they want to hear, but the truth. Just as Christ called Peter Satan, I call you are fake for giving nothing at all, whatsoever, to show that you are truly following Christ, that you condemn what God condemns, but this appeal to pleasantries is and will always be irrelevant to truth. For even in the court of law, these appeals will not sway a judge or jury.

So, let me see if I understand: Everything about love and forgiving, salvation and hope in Christ, basically the entire message of Bible, is irrelevant to truth because you and I disagree on one tiny point and you feel that entitles you to ownership over being Christian, to decide who can be Christian? Do you see how absurd and arogant this sounds?

Read over what you wrote. You say that I haven't explained anything or even shown any signs that I'm Christian ("I call you are fake for giving nothing at all, whatsoever, to show that you are truly following Christ."). This is a flat out lie. You must know this, as it's an obvious lie. A one minute glance at what I've said and what I make proves this. So, what's this really about? Why does the idea of me being Christian really offend you so much that you're willing to resort to ridiculous deceptions, mocking and trolling to try to claim I can't be a follower of Christ and somehow everyone else agrees with you, even though they don't?

You said: "And "empower the LGBT" sounds like empowering some enemy force. But what does that have to do with being honest and admitting everyone needs Christ instead of claiming, as you did previously, that gay people are sinners just because they don't happen to be straight?"
The LGBT would be delighted to here someone say that homosexuality is not condemned. What is your opinion when a homosexual visits a church and is told that their homosexuality is condemned?

That's fine. Everyone can believe what they want and worship as they want so long as they are not harming ayone else (I don't count hurt feelings). Even Westboro Baptist "God hates fags" church has a right to practice their distorted version of Christianity. And, of course, I don't believe in "the LGBT" the way you do, but different individuals with different beliefs independent of something as trivial as their sexual orientation or gender identity.

You're telling them what they want to here, and they want to hear they're not condemned. They want to know they're not going to hell. They want to know God loves them, and even though He does, he does not love what they do. It is ironic that you said: "that gay people are sinners just because they don't happen to be straight?", this says to me you believe they are condemned based on what they desire, but that is not what condemns them, it is acting upon those desires. I have said this before.

I was repeating you and asking for you to back up your statement rather than deny you ever said it. After all, that's why you condemnend me, based solely on what I desired.

"Heterosexuality is not condemned, it is sinful acts such as adultery that are condemned.
Homosexuality is condemned all together; adultery, gazing upon others, it does not matter, they are condemned because they're homosexual." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6481… )

"It's the actions by straight people that determine if they're sinning, gay people are automatically sinful." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6481… )

"The Bible condemns homosexuals just for being gay, it doesn't matter if they cheat or look at others, they're already sinning just because they're gay." (comments.deviantart.com/1/6481… )

There are plenty of people already trying to divide Christians and LGBT people in order to keep LGBT people from coming to Christ. It's the one thing far too many Christians and LGBT people agree on, that they're opposing sides and one can never be the other. It doesn't serve God to promote that, so I speak the truth.

No, I'm not telling people they aren't condemned or just what they want to hear. You'll have to prove that false claim too, though you won't be able to. How do I know? You may recall a certain stamp you commented on multiple times actually said gay people are condemned. It's just that I was faithful to scripture and admitted we all are and that's why we all need Christ. Of course, since it doesn't serve your lies about me, you seem to have forgotten. Here it is again: www.deviantart.com/rogue-range…

I don't tell anyone they're not going to hell, so you'll have to prove that false claim too. Though I should note you claim there is no hell (comments.deviantart.com/1/7713… ), so technically speaking you're the one claiming they won't go to hell. You just blame me because...why?

I simply tell them the truth, that we all need to come to Christ, no special rules or exclusions. I don't twist God's Word or make up things to try to single people out. I just want people to come to Christ so they'll be led to repentance and redemption. That is my focus and I'm sorry if you feel trying to find verses that can be twisted to condemn some aspect of homosexuality is more important than Christ and Paul's call to love God and others as the single most important call that overrides all else. I simply feel differently.

You said: "When Christians disagree with each other about everything from being gay to speaking in tongues to predestination, they're disagreeing with each other, not God or the Bible. That's why Paul wrote about not arguing with fellow believers." No, that's not true, and that further shows you're not a Christian, as you claim to be. We Christians do not agree in all the same things, but we all know the truth is from the Bible, whether Christians choose to follow it or not. As Christians, we are all aware of the simple basics of the doctrine; that is that homosexuality is condemned; it is you that is not only disagreeing, but you blatantly claimed fabrications and corruption, and that is against the Bible, not against the people, because the Bible is very clear in it's condemnation of homosexuality, so your objection is not people, it's the Bible. The Bible condemns homosexuality, you condemn the Bible by blaming others, when others condemn homosexuality based on what the Bible teaches. Your full-circle tactics are coming back to you, this time with a metaphorical bullet aimed at your feet, and I am trying so hard to help you with this, but I cannot stop you from the path you are paving. 

You do realize you just keep repeating over and over and over how the Bible says this and that and you're right and I'm wrong and anyone who disagrees with you is disagreeing with the Bible and is a fake Christian, but never actually back up anything you say, right? How about changing that instead of just mocking me?

Also, explain to me how it's not true when I say Christians disagree but it's true when you say Christians disagree. It just comes off as you don't like me so nothing I say is true, even if I'm saying the same thing as you.

And how on Earth is it that every time I show where you, yes you, took things out of context, that somehow I'm disagreeing with the Bible instead of you? Christians disagree on a lot bigger issues than you and I and are still Christians, so please just stop looking for excuses to once again try to bully me out of my faith. It won't work.

You said: If you "had yet to reply to" them, you haven't actually lost anything. Even if you deliberately went through and deleted everything from your notifications on DeviantArt for some reason and then blamed your computer rather than take responsibility for your own actions yet again, it's not gone."
I have already answered this.

You did, yes, thank you. You explained you didn't mean you had yet to reply as you told me and admitted you deleted the notifications.

I had actually hoped that showing you it wasn't all lost and linking to all our previous conversations would help.

You said: "In a way, yes, but I actually learned more about what frustrates you from what you've told others about me because you're much more open and honest with others. Maybe it's because the sexual assault made you prejudiced against gay people. Maybe you just feel every Christian has to believe exactly what you do. Or maybe it's something personal against me. I don't know. But I just wish you'd treat me the way you do some others."
I am open and honest with everyone. I am truthful and direct too. These are some of our differences.
If I have a prejudice against homosexuals, what is this concern to you? If my attack has made me prejudice, then I rightfully am so. If a young lady is attacked by a man and she gains an aversion from them, do you condemn or diminish her? I thought you were more compassionate and understanding than this.

Having a reason to be prejudiced doesn't make it moral or right. Everyone has a reason for what they do, good or bad. Prejudice is still wrong and clearly blinding you to your actions and lies. If I don't point this out, I wouldn't actually have compassion, as prejudice doesn't just hurt others, but yourself too. It's no different than all the art and stamps and writing I make about letting go of other things from the past, like regrets and pain from being bullied. The hatred, fear and animosity fester inside us. That's why God tells us to let it all go. He wants us to forgive and move on, to love those who hurt us, and to let Him heal us inside until our past us gone, as is any prejudice it created within us.

"Cast all your anxieties on Him, because He cares for you." (1 Peter 5:7)

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." (Matthew 11:28-30)

"Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus." (Philippians 4:6-7)

"Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid." (John 14:27)

"Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you." (Ephesians 4:31-32)

“And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.” (Revelation 21:4)

I do not even know your name. I learn about people based upon their integrity, their views and how they treat others; and I have treated you exactly how you have treated me.
"Do unto others as they would do unto you", and even then, despite the conjecture, the claims of corruption, I have been exceedingly patient with you, something many people would not be.
You are biting the hand that is trying hard to shake yours. I don't what to do with you?

You have not treated me how I've treated you, as I didn't go to your stamps and troll you, make a call out full of lies, tell others lies about you, insult and mock you, claim you can't be Christian, and refuse to apologize while blaming you for my actions. No, only you did all that and I refuse to repay evil with evil.

I have been direct and honest with you and treated you how I'd want to be treated. Did I make mistakes, say things I regret and experience frustration or anger? Of course. But I was wrong if I did that and I apologized. I'm even sorry if my words come out harsh here. I don't mean to hurt or upset you, just to convey the truth.

I'm the one reaching out, trying to shake your hand and be friends while you just attack and lie about me. You started all this by constantly coming to me with arguments and insults in the past and then coming back again recently even though I said I'd rather not continue when we last spoke. Anyone else would have blocked you long ago, but I genuinely do want you to stop your behavior and for us to become friends and have open and honest discussions, free of this malice and bitting from you. It can happen and I see it. One day you'll apologize and I'll forgive you and we'll move on and become friends. I believe this, which is why I've confronted you.

Until then, I have to keep laying my burdens on Christ, as I too am haunted by the past. We're not actually that different.

You said: "I didn't choose to have same-sex attractions, but being different made me better able to empathize with others who are bullied and marginalized. It tested my parents' love and brought us closer together. So, it's not something I feel bad about. And I'm thankful to God for all he's done to make what could have driven me from Him lead me back to Him and give me new desires for His will and for everyone to experience this kind of unconditional love.". That's very good.



Then If I cannot reply to these former conversations, I have no use to them. Surely I can attain all information required by reading the context you provided to otherwise clear scripture?
Otherwise, I will reply to the new comments, and if anything crosses over from the past, and it is relevant, I will reply to them too. I am sure that is reasonable to you.

You went on and on about how you couldn't remember our previous conversations and kept making up things I never said and so I presented you with every conversation and you ignore them all?

I suppose it's no coincidence that avoiding them all allows you to once again ignore your actions against me, as you don't even respond to a single thing you did, dismissing it all so you can pretend you never lied and trolled me. You can avoid having to apologize if you keep hiding from your actions.

While obviously I'd prefer you to condense your conversations, if having you to reply to all our old conversations is the only way to get you to read them, by all means go ahead and reply. I may not reply to all if you reply to all, but I want you to finally face up to what you did and finally change and that means facing the past.

You said: Any one of the comment strings you started above warrants an apology from you, but all together? It ranks among the highest level of trolling I've witnessed on DeviantArt in my nearly eight years here.
It's still my hope you'll have an "Aha!" moment where you realize what you've done and apologize, I forgive you, and we become friends."
I think what made me laugh slightly was the "troll" remark, after saying I was required to apologize. The irony was not lost on me, so thank you for the laugh. :-D

You find it funny and ironic that I actually want an apology after you trolled me? I know you have no respect for me, but what about how the Bible calls us to treat others?

I said it warranted an apology, not that you're somehow required to apologize. You have free will. But, if we're going to be friends and have open dialogue between us, it certainly would help to at least acknowledge what you've done rather than ignore it and laugh at me for caring.

I know you're very intelligent. You use your intellect to talk your way out of situations, to manipulate conversations in your favor, and even to play dumb sometimes. But you need to work on your empathy. I've tried many times to explain what you've done by comparing it to what has been done to you, but it doesn't resonate on a deeper emotional level. Others have commented all over your works just arguments or insults based on assumptions and not making any effort to understand. Others have made call-outs of you. So, you have all the intellectual reasons already why you shouldn't have behaved like them toward me. You just need the deeper emotional and spiritual resonance.

Sadly, it doesn't seem I can help you with that, but God certainly can. Truth and love are inseparable according to the Bible, so He can help you become both more honest and loving toward everyone, including me. All you need to do is repent and relinquish your will for His.

You said: "You expressed the same hope for me to realize what you see as wrong, but maybe part of the challenge is that we don't see the other as a source of moral authority. Your actions are highly immoral to me and you've said before that "a homosexual has no right" and so you won't follow my advice on how to live anymore than I'll follow your advice on how I should live."
Of course I am not a source of authority; I gain my authority from the Word of God, and all my knowledge and positions too. I appeal to the Bible, you appeal to human nature. Human nature changes, God does not. Imagine I just gave a small shrug.
I am not concerned if you see my actions as immoral, I am not acting based on subjectivity. When I see someone committing a crime, I am legally obliged to do something about it. When someone is lying about my ideology, I am obliged to do something about it.
2 Corinthians 10:5 - "We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ".
1 Peter 3:15 - "But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect".
Philippians - "It is right for me to feel this way about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel."

You've made this same claim now so many times over the course of our various conversations, that I appeal to human nature. It became your go to excuse to ignore me so much that you started using it to dismiss everything, even scripture. But telling you that you are lying is not about human nature anymore than when you falsely claim I lie. It's about truth. You claim to value it, so please stop ignoring it. Look at and acknowledge all that I presented you with and own up to your words and actions. The proof is all there. Surely you must see the value in facing the truth?

All you have to do is humble yourself enough to admit you're not some unbiased opinion-less truth speaker, but a human being who made mistakes.

Also, in a lot of our previous conversations, you'd keep repeating the same false claim that I was avoiding things that condemned me each time you raised them, but I just carefully showed you how I replied meticulously each time to everything you said and provided links to back this up, but you'd just ignore it as always (comments.deviantart.com/1/6345… for example). The thing is, that's what you've been doing all along. Some day you won't be able to hide from the truth anymore.

I will never change, because this is not about me: This is about the Word of God, and His commands. That is where I think you lack the most knowledge; that while you try to be kind and welcoming to others, which I praise and encourage, subjectivity has no place in interpreting Scripture, just as when I read and interpret the Word of God, it is not me that is doing it, it is God that speaks and me that listens, and if I speak what I am told and you disagree, then it is you that was never listening to God in the first place, for as a Christian, if I say what the Bible says, by it's words and interpretation, then it is not me that is speaking, and if you object, then you object to God. I am not God, I will say what the Word says, just like all Christians are meant to do. There are not always going to be pleasantries I am sorry to say, but that's just the way it is.

You will change one day. The Holy Spirit will convict you. It's inevitable, as God draws His own back to him and you're Christian. You're not this way with everyone but genuinely express concern for some people, so it's not like you're some lost cause. You'll change.

But, in the mean time, please learn to own up to your own actions and statements. When I disagree with you and show you what the Bible really says and you ignore what I've shown you, you're hiding from the truth again and so you can't be representing God, as He is the source of truth. When you ignore the context and text of the verses you quote, you can't just blame God. None of us are always perfect vessels and some day you'll realize that includes you.

Please finally just take responsibility for your actions. You are responsible for what you say and do. Hiding from it and blaming God doesn't make it go away. Truth always has a way of coming out in the end.

Also, if your reaction to this is anger or hurt, tell me, but if your reaction is to once again ignore everything that you said and did and make up more lies, then please don't even bother. Deal with your grief first. This conversation will wait.

Also, replies are slow coming due to many factors. I'm sorry, but it can't be helped.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to cinncinntanbird [2018-10-08 06:18:37 +0000 UTC]

Very true, thank you! We all need a reminder sometimes that God loves us because we may feel bad about ourselves and something we've done and just keep beating ourselves up inside when God wants us to bring that regret and burdens to Him in the form of repentance so He can forgive us and separate that pain from us so we are no longer weighed down by it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cinncinntanbird In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2018-10-09 01:21:31 +0000 UTC]

In the recent days, I lost hope because a teacher has misunderstood me, she thought I was calling her “Worst teacher in school” even though I was trying to say I had the worst day, which was never her fault. But she told me to go outside, I felt so hurt...but I remember that God loves me. I also remember about you.

God forgives us for our sins, and that is why I don’t feel scared anymore.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rogue-Ranger In reply to cinncinntanbird [2018-10-10 05:47:01 +0000 UTC]

God can lift our burdens if we confess our sins, but I also think you should try to apologize and explain the misunderstanding to your teacher so she won't think you don't like her.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cinncinntanbird In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2019-01-26 00:22:00 +0000 UTC]

As I said, I did apologize. I enjoy our lessons more than ever. She was one of the sweetest and kindest teachers in the school, she had a great sense of humor too!

I know that God loves you, His Love is powerful that He has died to show how much he cares for us and is willing to suffer for us, yet He rose again just to show His divine, beautiful Love was more powerful than the darkness inside our hearts. God is wonderful, He is our Shepard.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rogue-Ranger In reply to cinncinntanbird [2019-02-10 07:16:29 +0000 UTC]

That's wonderful to hear! And that sentiment is so beautiful and true!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

cinncinntanbird In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2019-02-11 01:40:35 +0000 UTC]

I have to agree deeply! Jesus truly loves us...that he chose to die for us, then rose again from his strength. I hope you can love yourself as Jesus has loved you, Rogue-Ranger.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to gordonphilbin [2018-10-08 06:15:45 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

gordonphilbin In reply to Rogue-Ranger [2018-10-08 12:00:48 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rogue-Ranger In reply to Crazywulf [2018-10-05 09:41:57 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0