I understood your point the first time round, and you've said nothing new but what my previous comments doesn't overturn.
Perhaps I was mistaken in assuming that you didn't understand my point. However, nothing of what you said overturned my argument. You stated that it was "God's plan" and that Jesus gave him credit. That doesn't overturn what I said. You've simply avoided my point. Whether you've understood it or not, you've clearly proven your JW-like ability to dance around the subject.
You've demonstrated quite well you're proficiency at reading into other peoples statements only what you desire to get out of them, but not anything like they said, didn't say, nor even implied.
Exactly what statement have I read into? I've commented only on what either you or Borgfree have stated directly. He stated that the picture makes him proud. He then stated:
"You and other JWs enjoy the freedoms that those men fight and die for, then you ridicule them and the Pastor who blesses them!"
You accused him of being an idolater because of an assumption you made based upon that statement. He never stated that he didn't have the right to those freedoms. Are you so thick-headed that you don't believe that freedoms can be withheld from individuals despite their "rights" to those freedoms? The acts of those soldiers allow us to make full use of our rights. Yes, God gave us those rights. But, believe it or not, man has the power to restrict some of them. Or don't you believe that there are some people locked behind bars who aren't afforded the "right" to walk free? Perhaps you are the one who is in need of lessons on not reading into others' statements.
No one ridiculed those soldiers in the picture I posted.
I never said anyone DID ridicule those soldiers. Borgfree stated such as noted above. I gave you that example only in defense of Borgfree's position. No doubt, he made that statement based on personal experiences/opinions. Again, I read into nothing. However, as a point of reference, I would like to call your attention to the statement you made as follows:
That there is no mistake in having identified the "weeds" correctly is proven by this picture:
You related that picture (soldiers and a priest) to identification of weeds, and thus a connection to Satan. If that isn't ridicule, maybe you could enlighten me as to what is.
By the way, oh master of scripture, Webster defines idolatry as:
1 : the worship of a physical object as a god
2 : immoderate attachment or devotion to something
Would you please explain to me how Borgfree's statement satisfied either of these definitions? Maybe you need to give me the new light on what "idolatry" really means.
The "governments" came to exist as a result of man's original rejection of God's own rule. Ever since then, God has TOLERATED man's rule (in the form of governments) for a specific reason. Too, the Scriptures are full of references which show that Satan is the ultimate one behind man's system of self-rule.
I understand that it's a ridiculous argument. That's exactly why I brought it up. Please refer to my question of "So where does one draw the line at what is part of God's will and what is a matter of choice by the individual?" Of course the state of the world is as it is because of man's rejection of God. Yet man still had the choice. Just as Jesus still had the choice. Choose to reject God, or not? Choose to sacrifice, or not? Credit has to go somewhere. So, if all credit goes to God for Jesus sacrifice, all credit should go to God for man's rejection. Otherwise a double standard is in effect.
