It seems she likes acting like she never claimed I said a whole bunch of things about her that I never did.
Many of your posts contain snippets of statements submitted by various posters without mentioning to whom you refer. People are allowed to reply to your posts in order to clarify what you claim has been stated.
Rather than indicate [name of poster] says this or [name of poster] says that, you take a phrase here ... a phrase there ... combine phrases submitted by more than a few posters into a rant against so-called "FWers" or "freewillers".
Is no one allowed to respond to your diatribes?
here's an example of what I mean:
Numerous times in your diatribes you have stated that "FWers" or "freewillers" claim "the gospel is not hid" ... which is a snippet of a statement made by me and/or others.
Numerous times I have replied to clarify that the gospel is not hid by God ... that it is satan who tries to hide the gospel ... that God is much more powerful in revealing the gospel than satan is at hiding the gospel.
You have referred to me as a "FWer" or a "freewiller" ... so how am I (or anyone else) supposed to know that you were not referring to what I (or others) had submitted concerning the gospel being hid?
You cannot have it both ways, Magenta ... you cannot cloak whoever you are quoting in darkness ... then not expect me (and/or others) to realize "oh Magenta wasn't saying that about me" ... when you quote snippets using words submitted by me (and/or others).
Your "plausible deniability" wrapped in your innuendo schtick is tiresome ...
.