A Sign From the Lord

Originally posted by @secondson
[b]"It's unfortunate that you refuse to accept that truth about yourself."

There it is. The real reason for you starting this thread is to bash the church and Christians. Fortunately you have the troll filling in your gaps in the assault.[/b]

So how exactly is the documentary "biased" in showing an interview of a prosecutor that was involved in one of the cases?

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Listen SecondSon. It's obvious you aren't all that bright and never have been. Think back to when you were in school. Honestly ask yourself if you were ever in any real danger of being amongst the brightest. Shouldn't you humbly accept the truth about yourself?

You're pretty bright aren't you? Well, here I am amongst the brightest and observing their wisdom in action. I'm so grateful for the likes of you pointing out how stupid I am because I can't cipher out what you're really talking about.

I so happy I'm dim witted. Just dumb enough to know who Jesus is. Maybe, hopefully, someday you'll understand who the Word of God says Jesus really is and you'll find out how dim witted you are.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
So how exactly is the documentary "biased" in showing an interview of a prosecutor that was involved in one of the cases?

I don't know. I haven't seen it. I'm assuming it is since you're using it as a platform for church and Christian bashing.

Relax. Rajk should be along any minute to help bolster your cause.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Exactly.

Originally posted by @rajk999
"They do exactly the same thing except there are not dire consequences like in this case. They would take all kinds of things as signs from God that they are on the right track when in fact they are just going down the road that they want to be on and using the signs as excuses like the prosecuetor in this case."


"Exactly."

Exactly the kind of post you were expecting from Rajk. You have your hook firmly set in his nose.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Evidently like you the prosecutor was looking for a sign, thought he got one and interpreted it that way. It shows the folly in employing such a methodology whether it be with " an accused person's life on the line" or otherwise. That he did so with in this case is truly tragic. I shudder to think how many other times he has done so.

From what I've se ...[text shortened]... istians employ such methodologies and delude themselves into thinking they are doing God's will.

Except I said, I wouldn't pursue it with someone's life on the line. So that sets me apart from the prosecutor.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
The following is taken from an interview with a prosecutor from a documentary about a team of investigators that seek to prove the innocence of those wrongfully convicted.

In this particular case, four people were shot execution style in a bowling alley. The individual convicted had a history of mental health issues and confessed to the crime. However ...[text shortened]... approach be allowed to hold a position that can have such a large impact on the lives of others?

"If that wasn't a sign to me that I was doing the right thing and that the Lord was with me through all the process, then I don't know what is."

This OP has got to be one of the most sophomoric I've ever seen. The prosecutor was only just converted apparently after the trial began. A babe in Christ.

In the above quote he states that if the email wasn't a sign he doesn't know what is. Immature and naive. The whole thing is a setup from start to finish inferring that the life of a man is in the hands of a superstitious Christian looking for signs instead of facts.

Perfect material for a set up for church and Christian bashing.

Two really bright guys ThinkOfOne and Rajk are.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Still a "sign" either way. In what you've described, they take their own thoughts as "signs" which can make them even more dangerous than the prosecutor.

If you don’t know the difference between a carnal thought, motivation and desire and a thought, motivation and desire from God’s Holy Spirit, there’s little I can say or do to explain it - it has to be experienced.

Paul spoke in Galatians of the importance of walking in the Spirit and not in the flesh. It’s the same principle. One walks in the Spirit by reading God’s Word on a regular basis and by praying to be led by the Spirit and to be within God’s will and an instrument of God’s will.

Originally posted by @romans1009
If you don’t know the difference between a carnal thought, motivation and desire and a thought, motivation and desire from God’s Holy Spirit, there’s little I can say or do to explain it - it has to be experienced.

Paul spoke in Galatians of the importance of walking in the Spirit and not in the flesh. It’s the same principle. One walks in the Spirit ...[text shortened]... by praying to be led by the Spirit and to be within God’s will and an instrument of God’s will.

Gee roman, that's an awful lot of churchy doctrine you're pouring out. Rajk is sure to cut you down to size for that. Don't even think of tangling with ThinkOfOne. He's one of the bright ones you know.

Originally posted by @secondson
Gee roman, that's an awful lot of churchy doctrine you're pouring out. Rajk is sure to cut you down to size for that. Don't even think of tangling with ThinkOfOne. He's one of the bright ones you know.

I’m sure they’ll claim it’s church doctrine but it’s straight out of the Bible (Galatians specifically though I’m sure there are many other places.)

Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
Except I said, I wouldn't pursue it with someone's life on the line. So that sets me apart from the prosecutor.

Don't forget that the prosecutor was newly born again. The investigators found a babe in Christ to humiliate. The documentary was a setup.

Notice how ThinkOfOne didn't provide the whole of the program or a reference for locating it. He quoted just enough of it to pursue his agenda of church and Christian bashing. I wager the rest of the documentary did the same.

Originally posted by @romans1009
I’m sure they’ll claim it’s church doctrine but it’s straight out of the Bible (Galatians specifically though I’m sure there are many other places.)

It was sound biblical doctrine.

Originally posted by @tom-wolsey
Except I said, I wouldn't pursue it with someone's life on the line. So that sets me apart from the prosecutor.

I understood that from your post.

My point was that the methodology is unsound regardless of how much is on the line.

Originally posted by @secondson
I don't know. I haven't seen it. I'm assuming it is since you're using it as a platform for church and Christian bashing.

Relax. Rajk should be along any minute to help bolster your cause.

Following is your original assertion:
<<Instead you take your cues from what was probably a biased documentary... >>

Following is what I wrote in response:
<<The documentary was about "a team of investigators that seek to prove the innocence of those wrongfully convicted." How exactly is the documentary "biased" in showing an interview of a prosecutor that was involved in one of the cases? The prosecutor said what he said.>>

It was an illogical assertion.

Originally posted by @secondson
Don't forget that the prosecutor was newly born again. The investigators found a babe in Christ to humiliate. The documentary was a setup.

Notice how ThinkOfOne didn't provide the whole of the program or a reference for locating it. He quoted just enough of it to pursue his agenda of church and Christian bashing. I wager the rest of the documentary did the same.

Don't forget that the prosecutor was newly born again. The investigators found a babe in Christ to humiliate. The documentary was a setup.

The prosecutor was no longer "newly born again" by the time of the interview. If I recall correctly, the man had already spent more than a couple of decades in prison by then. There's also the fact that the documentary wasn't about Christianity. Once again it was about "a team of investigators that seek to prove the innocence of those wrongfully convicted." The prosecutor just happened to say what he said.

You repeatedly show how you draw the most nonsensical conclusions.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
[b]Don't forget that the prosecutor was newly born again. The investigators found a babe in Christ to humiliate. The documentary was a setup.

The prosecutor was no longer "newly born again" by the time of the interview. If I recall correctly, the man had already spent more than a couple of decades in prison by then. There's also the fact that the ...[text shortened]... pened to say what he said.

You repeatedly show how you draw the most nonsensical conclusions.[/b]

So adding more information after the fact is very clever.

From the OP we're told the prosecutor was born again just after the start of the trial. Then when was it that he said he was looking for a sign? Decades later, or immediately after his conversion at the start of the trial?

How long did the trial last? 3 months, six?

If the documentary was about "a team of investigators that seek to prove the innocence of those wrongfully convicted", then what's the point in including the information concerning the prosecutor's conversion?

And why did you and Rajk use that information to bash the church and Christians if the documentary was about something else?

Why did you pinpoint and post the part of the documentary that included the prosecutor's statements about his conversion and seeking a sign if the documentary "wasn't about Christianity", but was "about a team of investigators that seek to prove the innocence of those wrongfully convicted?"

Because it provided an opportunity and a platform to launch your church hating and Christian maligning agenda. That's why.