Trump, the beast

[3 Resurrections]

Nope. Still missing the point.

How so? The 10 crowned horns on the Sea Beast were 10 Roman emperors from Julius Caesar on down. The deadly wound was not given to one of these 10 crowned horns. It was given to one of the 7 heads, which are compared to literal geographical mountains in John's prophecies. And in Rev. 13, those 7 heads were not given a second comparison to also being kings. That double referent was only the case on the other different Scarlet Beast in Rev. 17.

At any rate, Trump is as far removed from anything to do with Rev. 13 as can possibly be.

 

[Josheb]

How so?

Posts 1 and 2 have nothing to do with whether or not Trump is the beats or consecrated.

 

[TMSO]

In Revelation, the seven heads indicate 7 antichrist empires that succeded each other. they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he does come he must remain only a little while. Rev 17:10.

So, as it teaches here, one of the seven ceased for a while (received the death stroke but healed.).
It seems this will assume the persecuting power of satan embodied in all the nations and governments of the world. So, wherever the world was directed against God's people, wherever it appears in history is that beast.

I believe this head that received a mortal wound that was healed is no other than Rome.

It makes sense considering one of the seven heads ceased for a while and then afterward assumed its role. John must have been speaking of Rome during his day. Consider what Rome did to Christians.

"8 “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and [h]go to destruction. And those who live on the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was, and is not, and will [i]come. 9 Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains upon which the woman sits, 10 and they are seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while. 11 The beast which was, and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven, and he goes to destruction. 12 The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they receive authority as kings with the beast for one hour. 13 These have one [j]purpose, and they give their power and authority to the beast."

These cannot be Empires. Why not? God gave Daniel a vision of only four empires. Four consecutive empires, with a revived fourth to come. (Which could be why it says that there is an eigth that is not counted among the seven, but is an eighth, which is the beast himself, and, as the seven are Roman Emperors, this eighth is one of them in that he is also a Roman Emperor, over a revived Roman Empire. He is also the one in the 70 weeks prophecy, the one who is destroyed at the end of the 70th week. The one who blasphemes God, according to Daniel. Note that in linking to Daniel, this is the fourth of the five beasts, with the ten horns. And as the beast is an eight king, the mark is of him, which God shares that the mark is that of a man, not an empire.

There have only been four successful consecutive empires in the history of the world. There have been other empires (attempted), but they faded away, and did not become another empire. With the four, the Babylonian Empire was given the Medo Persians, and then to the Greeks, and finally the Romans. The Roman Empire ceased to exist in 1453 AD, with the overthrow of Constantinople (Constantine's city) by the Turks. That ended the Eastern Roman Empire. In Daniel's prophecy of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar, Jesus did not come to destroy it all until AFTER Rome had fallen and the iron and clay form of the revived Roman Empire was in place.

 

[Josheb]

"8 “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and [h]go to destruction. And those who live on the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was, and is not, and will [i]come. 9 Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains upon which the woman sits, 10 and they are seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while. 11 The beast which was, and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven, and he goes to destruction. 12 The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they receive authority as kings with the beast for one hour. 13 These have one [j]purpose, and they give their power and authority to the beast."

These cannot be Empires. Why not? God gave Daniel a vision of only four empires. Four consecutive empires, with a revived fourth to come. (Which could be why it says that there is an eigth that is not counted among the seven, but is an eighth, which is the beast himself, and, as the seven are Roman Emperors, this eighth is one of them in that he is also a Roman Emperor, over a revived Roman Empire. He is also the one in the 70 weeks prophecy, the one who is destroyed at the end of the 70th week. The one who blasphemes God, according to Daniel. Note that in linking to Daniel, this is the fourth of the five beasts, with the ten horns. And as the beast is an eight king, the mark is of him, which God shares that the mark is that of a man, not an empire.

There have only been four successful consecutive empires in the history of the world. There have been other empires (attempted), but they faded away, and did not become another empire. With the four, the Babylonian Empire was given the Medo Persians, and then to the Greeks, and finally the Romans. The Roman Empire ceased to exist in 1453 AD, with the overthrow of Constantinople (Constantine's city) by the Turks. That ended the Eastern Roman Empire. In Daniel's prophecy of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar, Jesus did not come to destroy it all until AFTER Rome had fallen and the iron and clay form of the revived Roman Empire was in place.

These first two opening posts are not about the beast or Trump.

 

[Josheb]

The point of this op was to highlight two points. The first is that among us there are many who misuse scripture for either political or, more irrationally, sensationalistic purposes. The second is it is very easy to get drawn into the inanity based on our own weakness (such as biases and personal lusts).

I separated the first and second posts to draw attention to the disparate and potentially competing interpretations, the disparate misuses of scripture. There are other examples that could have been used. One of the other uses of scripture I did not mention in the opening two posts is that Ephesians 6:11 supposedly applies because Mr. Trump was shot as 6:11 in the day . No one explains why it is Ephesians 6:11 that's applicable and not verse 6:11 from some other book of the Bible (the same address from Genesis, Exodus, Nehemiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Matthew, Mark, Luke, Romans and other epistles could have been forced upon the episode). Why would someone think, "He was shot at 6:11 so let's look up the verses in the Bible at 6:11 and see which one fits"? or "Let's make one of them fit"? Is there a precedent in the Bible where that occurs? No! It's a form of numerology and numerology is disdained in scripture! It would have been only slightly more reasonable to look up verses having to with ears (which is what the origins behind Post 2 did). There are more than 100 verses in the Bible that mention the word, "ear." Surely one of them must fit .

Why then did so many fall prey to the nonsense?

I tell you the responses to the opening posts was unexpected. I expected most to see the inanity of BOTH posts and provide other examples of similar inanity and then discuss why some among us misuse God's word these ways, how they created a brief following, and why. Instead, the eschatological mindset present in so many manifested itself showing what, imo, is a stronghold. Perhaps that can be attributed to my posting this in the End Times and Prophecy board. Perhaps responses would have been different had I posted this in the Bible Study, Theology, or Politics boards.

There is absolutely nothing eschatological (or Christological) about Donald Trump getting shot in the ear in Butler, Pennsylvania at 6:11 p.m. on July 13, 2024. He's not the beast and he wasn't being anointed as a priest (or anything else), and he wasn't putting on the armor of God. We can be sure divine providence (both in the generic sense of His will done and in the specific sense of protection) simply because God is sovereign, but to take the seat of God and define that providence for ourselves instead of waiting to see what purpose was served is hubris bordering on idolatry.

We've all read theologians who were imperfect, even among those of our own preferred doctrinal orientation. We've all heard ministers say foolish things when preaching. A few months ago, I was sent a sermon by a Messianic Jewish friend in which a rabbi made predictions associated with astronomical events occurring in April and when not a single one of the predictions came true I asked my friend about that and was immediately subjected to what could accurately be called a raging rant. That rabbi could not possibly be incorrect, and my friend could not possibly have any misguided allegiance at all .

Christian history is filled with examples of scripture being used for political purposes opposed to the will and purpose of God. If something you hear from the television or radio sounds easily to fit your already existing views then that's likely to be a warning to you, not something you should embrace. If it comes too easy, then it probably is too easy.




The daily newscast is not our prophet.

 

[CrowCross]

I'm surprised no one's claiming prophecy fulfilled. Trump gets shot and survives a head wound and no one claims "Prophecy fulfilled! The rapture is near! Get ready! Jesus is coming!"

Seems like your projecting a view...that is being surprised no one is claiming it was prophecy fulfilled.
It kinda seems as if you're creating some sort of strawman argument.

Maybe because it wasn't a deadly/mortal head wound, only the ear.

That makes sense to me prism.

 

[CrowCross]

We are simply told that the antichristian forces are gathered together against Christ and his army and that they are put to rout. The beast rev 13:1) is taken. So is the false prophet, - that is the beat out of the earth, the great deceiver. These two are cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone (Rev 20:10).

What we do know is that the beast system is currently being developed. Here's one of the latest renditions...

French Supermarket Introduces Vein Palm-Reading Payment System In Europe First. Transactions Are Tokenized.... Go to article.​

Now, the above isn't the actual mark presented in Rev 13 but it provides for the develompment of some of the required technology.
Slowly we are being accustomed to this simple and easy process of payment identification and security.
Once this style of technology is employeed all over and used by all....why would anyone not take the mark?

.....16 And the second beast required all people small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, 17 so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark—the name of the beast or the number of its name.

....but, that's only part of what the mark is about.

 

[Josheb]

Seems like your projecting a view...that is being surprised no one is claiming it was prophecy fulfilled. It kinda seems as if you're creating some sort of strawman argument.

?????

The point of citing Revelation's beast is exactly that some claim prophecy is being fulfilled and fulfilled in a very specific way in a very specific event. I did not invent that point of view. Less direct, but no less implicit is the appeal to the consecration ritual. Ecclesiologically speaking, the Church is the royal priesthood foreshadowed by the Levitical Christ that finds its fruition in Jesus the Great High Priest in the Order of Mel. I did not invent any of that.

Those are the facts in evidence, not any projection on my part.

That makes sense to me prism.

Yes, Trump is not the beast because the damage to the ear was not a mortal head wound. Prism is assuredly correct on that point, but the point is irrelevant! The Revelation text does not apply to Trump or the events in Butler, but a lot of Christians think otherwise and most of the respondents to this op took the (misguided) eschatological bait. Most of the posters here thought it was valid and legitimate to think of the shooting as eschatologically germane when it is not. The correct answer is not "Trump's not the beast because the head wound wasn't lethal." The correct response is "Trump is not the beast because Revelation has NOTHING to do with what that happened that day."

What we do know is that the beast system is currently being developed.....

And you haven't read through the thread, have you? I'll tell you the same thing I told everyone else in this thread who thought the first post was actually about Revelation's beast.

IT IS NOT ABOUT THE BEAST! ​

Post 47 has nothing to do with this op. It is the thinking that there is any relevance that is the problem to be solved. The daily newscast is not a prophet. They are not the purveyors of meaning in scripture at all.

 

[CrowCross]

?????

It seemed as if you were saying eschatological christians were sayin Trump was the beast because he suffered a head wound.

Maybe it's the way you wrote it.

Yes, Trump is not the beast because the damage to the ear was not a mortal head wound. Prism is assuredly correct on that point, but the point is irrelevant! The Revelation text does not apply to Trump or the events in Butler, but a lot of Christians think otherwise and most of the respondents to this op took the (misguided) eschatological bait. Most of the posters here thought it was valid and legitimate to think of the shooting as eschatologically germane when it is not. The correct answer is not "Trump's not the beast because the head wound wasn't lethal." The correct response is "Trump is not the beast because Revelation has NOTHING to do with what that happened that day."

We also know Trump isn't the beast because the tribulation hasn't started yet.

 

[Eleanor]

Deleted.

 

[Josheb]

It seemed as if you were saying eschatological christians were sayin Trump was the beast because he suffered a head wound.

That is not what I was saying, nor what I said.

Seems like your projecting a view...

Maybe it's the way you wrote it.

No, it has everything do with the existing biases inherent in Christians who think Revelation's beast AND/OR Exodus's consecration rituals AND/OR Ephesians armor are relevant when they are not and how they lead to misuse of scripture, politicization, and division (his being the beast and his being consecrated are two completely irreconcilable misuses of scripture). Those who did not think Trump's shooting was prophecy fulfilled still gave the premise enough credence to deny it. There was a response of antithesis. The opening two posts are intended to be cautionary, not affirming of either position.

We also know Trump isn't the beast because the tribulation hasn't started yet.

That is irrelevant. The op is not about whether ANYONE is the beast, and this was explained to everyone.

Let

it

go​

Read posts 1 and 2 TOGETHER. Look then at the first few responses. THEN look at how I replied to all four of them: They all missed the point!!! It is too or mutual and collective shame that anyone bought into the premise Trump was the beast AND/OR Trump was consecrated, AND/OR he was wearing God's armor.

ALL THREE USES OF SCRIPTURE ARE MISUSES OF SCRIPTURE
AND NO ONE SHOULD THINK ANY OF THOSE MISUSES VALID
OR GIVE THEM ANY CREDENCE.​

But everyone here did, even after I explicitly stated the point was being missed.

Maybe it's the way you wrote it.

And now I am getting made out to be the bad guy when every single one of us should have rolled our individual and collective eyes at BOTH of the first two posts and unanimously said, "That is insane. All of it - BOTH views - are irrational." No one did and, as a result, I ended up surprised.

Leviticus 3:40
Let’s examine and search out our ways, and let’s return to the LORD.

Psalm 119:59
I considered my ways and turned my feet to Your testimonies.

Psalm 139:23-24
Search me, God, and know my heart; put me to the test and know my anxious thoughts; and see if there is any hurtful way in me, and lead me in the everlasting way.

2 Corinthians 13:5
Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you—unless indeed you fail the test?

Ephesians 4:14
...we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of people, by craftiness in deceitful scheming...


The daily newscast is not our prophet or the vehicle through which meaning is ascribed to scripture, but there are a lot among us who think that is the case (one of the was a leading politician).

 

[Marty]

That is not what I was saying, nor what I said.

No, it has everything do with the existing biases inherent in Christians who think Revelation's beast AND/OR Exodus's consecration rituals AND/OR Ephesians armor are relevant when they are not and how they lead to misuse of scripture, politicization, and division (his being the beast and his being consecrated are two completely irreconcilable misuses of scripture). Those who did not think Trump's shooting was prophecy fulfilled still gave the premise enough credence to deny it. There was a response of antithesis. The opening two posts are intended to be cautionary, not affirming of either position.

That is irrelevant. The op is not about whether ANYONE is the beast, and this was explained to everyone.

Let

it

go​

Read posts 1 and 2 TOGETHER. Look then at the first few responses. THEN look at how I replied to all four of them: They all missed the point!!! It is too or mutual and collective shame that anyone bought into the premise Trump was the beast AND/OR Trump was consecrated, AND/OR he was wearing God's armor.

ALL THREE USES OF SCRIPTURE ARE MISUSES OF SCRIPTURE
AND NO ONE SHOULD THINK ANY OF THOSE MISUSES VALID
OR GIVE THEM ANY CREDENCE.​

But everyone here did, even after I explicitly stated the point was being missed.

And now I am getting made out to be the bad guy when every single one of us should have rolled our individual and collective eyes at BOTH of the first two posts and unanimously said, "That is insane. All of it - BOTH views - are irrational." No one did and, as a result, I ended up surprised.

Leviticus 3:40
Let’s examine and search out our ways, and let’s return to the LORD.

Psalm 119:59
I considered my ways and turned my feet to Your testimonies.

Psalm 139:23-24
Search me, God, and know my heart; put me to the test and know my anxious thoughts; and see if there is any hurtful way in me, and lead me in the everlasting way.

2 Corinthians 13:5
Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you—unless indeed you fail the test?

Ephesians 4:14
...we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of people, by craftiness in deceitful scheming...


The daily newscast is not our prophet or the vehicle through which meaning is ascribed to scripture, but there are a lot among us who think that is the case (one of the was a leading politician).

Maybe the OP makes sense to you because it was your thought why not just explain it in the OP instead of making a statement that everyone missed the point?

I never replied to the OP I only had a discussion with you because you replied to a comment I made to someone else and then you told me that I missed the point. You then told me that what I said was irrelevant when it actually wasn't irrelevant because I was replying to someone else.

To clarify I never said that your OP was about Trump so maybe a general statement that everyone missed the point isn't quite accurate

 

[Josheb]

Maybe the OP makes sense to you because it was your thought why not just explain it in the OP instead of making a statement that everyone missed the point?

Because missing the point was part of the point. My surprise is not that some missed the point, but that everyone missed the point. If there weren't people who misused scriptures like the three examples given, then it would not be possible to ever write an op like this; there'd be no basis for it. But people do misuse scripture and do not see their own error. There are also those who accept and believe and follow those mistaken people and their mistaken misuse of scripture.

Usually, some, if not most, people catch the error and either ignore the nonsense or point out the misuse of scripture.

Understand what I just said. I did not say, Others point out the specific claim is mistaken,." I said the point out the misuse, the method, not (just) the content, or specific claim(s) made. In this op there are three completely different claims, but all of them are wrong and all of them are based on the exact same misguided methodology.

I never replied to the OP....

Are you now defending the practice of entering a thread and not replying to the op? Stow that dross.

I never replied to the OP....

Post #31 proves otherwise.

To clarify I never said that your OP was about Trump so maybe a general statement that everyone missed the point isn't quite accurate

Post #9 has nothing to do with the op whether you said the op was about Trump or not. Post 9 (and all the o

A demonic being influencing a nation and it’s leaders like we see in Daniel chapter 10

To which "leaders" would that post be referring?


Now I did not specify the category of those that tend to make these kinds of mistakes because that's not the focus of my point, anyone can misuse scripture, and I did not want to unnecessarily divide or polarize respondents out of the gate, but the folks who made these specific claims, the ones who misused scripture for eschatological and ecclesiological purposes are all modern futurists and, more specifically Dispensational Premillennialists. It's a problem because those of us who are Dispensationalists and/or aren't premillennial get sucked into the non-discussions unawares. @prism is 100% correct to say, "Maybe because it wasn't a deadly/mortal head wound, only the ear," but that has nothing to do with the subject or purpose of the op. As I stated previously, these claims serve as bait and the dissent is a response of antithesis that never gets to the underlying problem, and it occurs only because 1) the claim is deemed sufficient enough to warrant a response topical to the claim, and 2) the second post was ignored. Who here in the thread posted about both claims together and their inherent contradictory conditions? Both claims cannot possibly be true. God did not consecrate the antichrist. The premise is prima facie absurd! No one said anything about that! The thread turned into a debate over the identity of the beast, which, again, has nothing to do with the point these two opening posts make indirectly (two opposing views both based on a common misuse of scripture). Even after I declared the point and purpose of the thread the problem of misusing scripture for eschatological and ecclesiological (and political) purposes remains undiscussed.

 

[Arial]

The point of this op was to highlight two points. The first is that among us there are many who misuse scripture for either political or, more irrationally, sensationalistic purposes. The second is it is very easy to get drawn into the inanity based on our own weakness (such as biases and personal lusts).

Perhaps the point should have been stated in the OP.

I'm surprised no one's claiming prophecy fulfilled. Trump gets shot and survives a head wound and no one claims "Prophecy fulfilled! The rapture is near! Get ready! Jesus is coming!"

Revelation 13:3
I saw one of his heads as if it had been slain, and his fatal wound was healed. And the whole earth was amazed and followed after the beast.

Maybe it's because he's still wearing the bandage . Yeah, that's it. The wound hasn't yet healed. Just wait until he starts mandating chip implants .

Nothing there indicating your stated point way down in post #45, even though a great deal of posts were dedicated to people missing the point. The OP is wide open as to what your purpose was and wide open to exactly what happened that you are complaining about.

Maybe not too surprised, though. US Representative Lauren Boebert says the ear piercing means he's been consecrated.

Exodus 29:20
And you shall slaughter the ram and take some of its blood and put it on the lobe of Aaron’s right ear and on the lobes of his sons’ right ears, and on the thumbs of their right hands, and on the big toes of their right feet, and sprinkle the rest of the blood around on the altar.

Exodus 21:5-6
But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not leave as a free man,' then his master shall bring him to God, then he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall pierce his ear with an awl; and he shall serve him permanently.


How could he possibly be the beast?

Nothing there either that states your point of the OP. The OP title is simply Trump, the beast. Maybe if it had been titled something along the lines of "Misuse of Scripture In Identifying Prophecy Fulfillment" would have made your aim clear. You could also have stated in either Post 1 or 2, that the scriptures you quoted were an example of the misuse of Scripture, and then maybe the following posts would address that.

All I am saying is, people are not mind readers, tone such as irony or sarcasim rarely translate onto the written page, and we must not be too quick to judge others shortcomings when, if we are not quick to anger, we find the oops actually lay with ourselves.

Peace.

 

[Josheb]

Perhaps the point should have been stated in the OP.

I've already addressed that matter. The absence was intentional, and I was relying on what I thought would be self-evidently obvious.

The OP is wide open as to what your purpose was and wide open to exactly what happened that you are complaining about.

Not if Post 2 was read .

All I am saying is, people are not mind readers...

They do not have to be mind-readers. That is a red herring.



What do Post 1 and Post 2 have in common?

 

[Arial]

I've already addressed that matter. The absence was intentional, and I was relying on what I thought would be self-evidently obvious.

It obviously wasn't so why not fix the issue instead of getting upset with what is evidently considered the stupidity of the rest of humanity?

Not if Post 2 was read .
They do not have to be mind-readers. That is a red herring.

I forgot. Some people are never wrong, and put a great deal of energy into waffling and self defense to make sure everyone knows that.

What do Post 1 and Post 2 have in common?

1. Both are written by you.

2. Both make a statement and then quote scriptures. No reason is given for quoting the scriptures and one could easily take it to be that the scriptures are supporting the statement made. That is the usual way or at least expected way of supporting statements made of a Christian forum.

3. Post #1 expresses surprise that someone hasn't done something.

4. Post #2 then says "No, not surprised and then presents someone did do what post 1 was surprised no one had done.

5. Post #11 OP comes back and gets mad at everyone for missing a point that was never made clear.

 

[Josheb]

It obviously wasn't...

Yes, it was.
No, it wasn't.
Yes it was.
No, it wasn't.

I am not having that conversation with you.

I forgot. Some people are never wrong, and put a great deal of energy into waffling and self defense to make sure everyone knows that.

Post #56 was reported for violating rules 2, 3, 6 and 7.

 

[Josheb]

What do Post 1 and Post 2 have in common?

1. Both are written by you.

2. Both make a statement and then quote scriptures. No reason is given for quoting the scriptures and one could easily take it to be that the scriptures are supporting the statement made. That is the usual way or at least expected way of supporting statements made of a Christian forum.

3. Post #1 expresses surprise that someone hasn't done something.

4. Post #2 then says "No, not surprised and then presents someone did do what post 1 was surprised no one had done.

5. Post #11 OP comes back and gets mad at everyone for missing a point that was never made clear.

My bad. I'll clarify the question. What do the claims of both posts have in common?

Both misuse scripture. Both "interpret" the exact same event misusing scripture. Both incorrectly interpret the exact same event misusing scripture for political purpose under the guise of eschatology and ecclesiology.

 

[Arial]

. Both incorrectly interpret the exact same event misusing scripture for political purpose under the guise of eschatology and ecclesiology.

Now wasn't that easy, and didn't it belong in the OP instead of in post # 58?

 

[Arial]

Post #56 was reported for violating rules 2, 3, 6 and 7.

2: Grant others the courtesy to be understood and acknowledge their views. Be gentle, patient and tolerant with one another (Ephesians 4:2) and as far as it depends one each of us (Rom. 12:18), be on good terms with one another, speak truth in love (Mathew 7:12, 1 Corinthians 13:1-13).

I don't see the violation. The "report" button is not to be misused

3: Please make a conscious effort to post your opening posts in the appropriate board. Please specify a specific point(s) of inquiry or comment so that others understand the subject to be discussed. Please also make a conscious and deliberate attempt to post content relevant to the point of inquiry or comment specified in an opening post. For example, not every post is about end times. Not every thread on soteriology is about all of salvation. Do not hijack others' threads for your own purpose or agenda.

You are the one that violated the first part of that rule in bold and have been violating the second portion since post #11

6: Use self-control and focus on reconciliation when discussing differences. Disagreements exist, but that is not a license to post divisive content or violate the forum's rules. No bickering. Address the issue or specified subject or topic, not the person. Do not make derogatory personal remarks or your posts will be removed from the thread. Repeated offenses may result in temporary or permanent suspension.

You are the one who has been violating that since post #11.
You are the one who has been violating that rule since post #11.
You have been doing that since post #11.
I was simply answering your question.
7: No trolling - content posted for the purpose of baiting others or soliciting emotional provocation. No flaming, insults, or remarks used to intentionally upset members. Intentional disruption of this nature may result in immediate termination of your membership.

Trolling? Really? Truthfully, I was trying to stop your rule violations by pointing out the unreasonableness of your comments. Don't abuse the the report button just because you are upset.