No; you may not lay down insults and then tell the insulted person not to reply.
Radiance3 wrote:
================
Based on your response, I concluded
that Agnostic has no God.
Your conclusion is mistaken.
Agnostic means (essentially) not knowing. I said (in an earlier post) that I'm mostly agnostic. Then I even said that a god exists.
I've spent a lot of time (that is, my life) trying to be a good person. This is to live in agreement with what I think God is.
Radiance3 wrote:
What ever supreme being you mentioned. That could be Lucifer. Agnostic believes that their god could or may exist, and may not exist. That statement indicates that agnostics are godless. As proven by your behavior.
Fact is you lied
No, I did not lie. Rather, you did not believe what I said.
Radiance3 wrote:
and accused the innocent president Trump. He has been proven innocent all the way by the investigator Durham. It took him time and carefully diagnosed the problems created by the criminal Hillary, and her troops. You continue to accuse him and support the lies of another agnostic 336Robin, along with all the l*****ts at OPP, and MSM's who are complicit with the crimes of Hillary Clinton.
There's nothing wrong with being a "l*****t", not in this context of political left and political right.
It may be that you have been taught, or influenced into thinking, that there's something wrong with "left" and "l*****ts".
It would make at least as much sense to be so critical or derogatory about the political "right". "right" doesn't mean they're correct, it only means they're on a particular side of a political scale. Similarly, "left" is a particular side of a political scale.
Radiance3 wrote:
The Supreme God , which you did not mentioned who is that supreme you are talking about?
Don't ask if you don't want an answer.
The supreme being I mentioned is my concept of God, to the best of my ability.
A concept of "God", that is, thinking about what God is, is too important to delegate to someone else. (That's my opinion on the matter, for myself. You can do wh**ever you want, for yourself, of course.) So I did my own thinking about it, to the best of my ability.
You can have your concept of God too, wherever you get it from, but, when you say:
"you don't believe to the true God"
as you said in this quote:
Radiance3 wrote:
The Supreme God , which you did not mentioned who is that supreme you are talking about? Supreme Lucifer is likely it, since you don't believe to the true God.
then you are presuming that you have a better understanding of God than I do. That's no better than that I would presume to have a better understanding of God than you do. We can think what we like about each other, but should have the decency not to insult about it (that is, to have the decency to not make openly personally judgmental derogatory comments about it, in the way you are doing).
Radiance3 wrote:
All all Scriptures I addressed to you, you labeled as insult.
No, I didn't. A few posts back, I very specifically quoted (using marks like this: " " ) what you said, that I then called an insult, and there was no Scripture within that quote (within the marks that are like this: " " ).
Radiance3 wrote:
You are insulted by the word of God. Therefore you have no god but Lucifer. You've rejected all the Scriptures, I shared you.
No. I even said something positive about 1 Corinthian 13 (from which you had quoted); and then you made a positive comment about my response to it. Now you appear to have forgotten that exchange, and now you act very negatively, saying that I had "rejected all the Scriptures".
You are too careless, and too quick to judge too.
There's no problem in you having wh**ever belief or faith or religion you may have, as long as you don't impose it on other people. You judging me (or making these derogatory comments you are making, in the way that you are doing) is an imposition. It's as bad as if anyone else tried to judge you, and make such derogatory comments about you, according to their own belief, faith, or religion.
Radiance3 wrote:
You also accused me of being disrespectful by sharing you the word of God which offended you.
No; I did not criticize you for sharing the word of God; I criticized you for some of the things you said which were not the word of God, not Scripture, and not Bible quotes.
If you would slow down and read exactly what I'm saying, then you would understand what I'm saying, instead of jumping to conclusions based on some other idea you have.
Radiance3 wrote:
Out, I don't want you talking to me anymore. God said," Blessed is the man who does not keep the company of the wicked. " Psalm 1:1 [/i]
Fine, you don't have to talk to me, and you don't have to read what I write, and you don't have to respond if you don't want to. But for the sake of what's Good, don't insult me and then try to forbid me from replying! Your most recent insult, this time, is the second-to-last most recent word you wrote: "wicked" -- not because it's in a Bible quote, but because you're obviously implying that I'm wicked. You're wrong to imply that I'm wicked. You're either (a) mistaken about that, or (b) too arrogant in how you judge a person, or both (a) and (b). It's as bad as if I were to imply that you are wicked, either with or without a Bible quote.
I could quote Bible verses all day at you too. There are plenty to choose from, which say nearly all manner of things. Usually I try to express my thoughts in my own words, and that's ok; but there's nothing wrong with you quoting Bible verses; that's ok too. Just don't try quoting a verse about "wicked" right after mentioning me in the same context; that's just so obviously insulting.
If you truly want this conversation to end, either be silent, or say something reasonable without judging anybody.