Let's try this for a FIFTH time, since you can't seem to actually defend these peeps...and, instead, you blather endlessly, paragraph after lame paragraph, of which, no one reads.
1. If you actually
read what you wrote, here (in yet another of your customary butchery jobs against the English language), you would know that you are not even requesting anything from me. What you wrote is purely emotive. It's just some incoherent grumbling; that's all you are left with (and
that, as a
matter of course) since you war against
truth.
2. You need not
try to act like a fool; you obviously
need to try NOT to act like a fool. So far you have not tried to not act like a fool (or (sadder yet), if you
have tried, you have dismally failed the trial), since, so far, you've consistently acted like a fool.
3. Your post (#469), is not merely the FIFTH time you've acted like a fool on TOL. On the contrary, you've acted like a fool (and, for all to see!)
way more times than just FIVE. In fact, in your post, #469,
alone, you've acted like a fool at least FIVE times. Multiply
that by the number of times you've
already copy/pasted your own words which you have, for a fourth or fifth time, just now copy/pasted once again to create your latest post, #469! So, you've acted like a fool 20 or 25 times, at the very least. But, even then,
that doesn't even take into account the fact that, in every post of yours that was a Submitted Reply to one of
my posts (which is quite a lot (and I, for one, am not going to even try to count them!)) you have done
nothing but act like a fool, and embarrass yourself in your failure to defend your peculiar error, your
eisegesis against what Paul wrote. So, stop lying; stop fudging the numbers; it's loud and clear that you've made yourself look like a fool many,
many more times than
just FIVE.
Now, you wrote:
Contrary to popular modern belief, ‘The God of this age’, (ho Theos tou aionos toutou), actually pertains to Jesus Christ and NOT Satan, and provides yet another potent scriptural proof for Jesus’ deity.
Here, you are asserting that the 3rd century is MODERN. So, why are you so addicted to acting like a fool by claiming that the 3rd century is MODERN?
Since you, yourself, have already admitted that Origen's recognition that Paul referred to Satan, rather than to Jesus, as "the god of this world" is EXEGESIS, rather than
eisegesis, what, exactly, do you mean when you tell someone to DEFEND it?
Only a fool will say that one needs to DEFEND EXEGESIS. Since EXEGESIS is TRUTH, against
what, exactly, does EXEGESIS need to be
defended? Against fools who contradict the EXEGESIS/TRUTH? What can fools do against EXEGESIS/TRUTH other than to contradict it?
And, why do you call
your peculiar error--your
eisegesis of Paul's phrase, "the god of this world"--"exegesis", since you have already acknowledged, repeatedly, that the EXEGESIS of Paul's phrase is that Paul was referring to Satan, rather than to Jesus? There is, and can only be, ONE EXEGESIS of the phrase, whereas, there are (or, at least, could be) MANY EISEGESES of it. You obviously don't even know what EXEGESIS is.
You
should have spent your time learning how to think systematically,
rationally (which you obviously never did learn), rather than trying to learn how to make people think that you know Greek, when you obviously don't know a lick of Greek. I guarantee you that
nobody reading your posts has ever come away mistaking you for a Greek scholar of
any level. At the very least, you should
first learn how to write
meaningfully and
coherently in English, before you try to tackle anything else. Perhaps you could enroll yourself in a remedial English course? It's no wonder that you
abhor the English Bible (and those who believe it) as much as you do, while
pretending to love the Greek (of which you can't read a lick).