Quote:
Originally Posted by Thankful Jane
First you say you don't buy my definition, which means you think I gave one. Next you say the burden on me is to give a definition. So which is it?
|
Sorry, Jane, but this won't fly. It was your implied definition I said I wasn't buying. You have one, of course. What you don't have is a clearly stated one.
Quote:
|
I'll take this as your way of refusing to answer my question. That's okay by me. I will also take your refusal to mean that you don't have a definition or that if you do, you don't care to share it and help us understand what you believe about the topic, or that you just want to give me a hard time.
|
Huh? I've got no reason to refuse to answer your question. I would define evil spirits as the minions of Satan flying around a person, tempting, taunting, influencing. Was there any of that going on in Lee's quarters that you know of? Got any recorded phone calls with that kind of evidence?
Quote:
|
I'm more than willing to be proven wrong in my assessments, but not just by a few statements that people don't think there are demons involved. I'd like to see the scriptural basis for saying this.
|
If some whacko decided to make the claim the George W. Bush was influenced by evil spirits in initiating the Iraq war, dontcha think they'd need to offer a little evidence? Would the rest of us be required to prove he wasn't?
Quote:
|
I don't remember making this statement. If I did, please quote me so I can see the context.
|
It was on the other forum. Do you really expect me root back through all that and find your quote? You did say the following in this thread: "
I believe that a mixture of demonic influences would be found in the hierarchy that was sown among us in the USA from the early days. ... In what was about to happen, you see not just demonic influence, but demonic control, not over just the leaders, but the common saints."
It's statements like this I'm reacting to.
SC