 |
You asked me why I don't believe in hell. I answered and asked you the same question. You evaded the question several times and now your evasion is "a spat with Jl".Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Are you referring to your frustration? I didn't think you came from a Catholic school. I could be wrong. Do Catholics have a frustration you encountered?Quote:
Didn't mean anything other than I find most people with this sort of frustration have come from a Catholic School.
Well shucks. It's a less entertaining site when you lose your DV persona.Quote:
Nice try, but weak. You just ain't got it.
If you really want me too- You should first understand; "God’s wrath does not contradict His love.Quote:
why don't you say exactly what it is?
Denial of God’s just punishment of sin will only ensure that one experiences it.
Would anybody choose hell rather than heaven? Yes. Why? Pride.
Sad but true.Quote:
Denial of God’s just punishment of sin will only ensure that one experiences it.
Many people have a relationship with God that is based on something you might not understand.
A necessity that most people don't want to Understand or Accept.
The question was about hell, not God's wrath (although the two can be connected which I assume is your point without actually saying so).Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Nonsense.Quote:
Denial of God’s just punishment of sin will only ensure that one experiences it.
Stop skating around the question. It's not about choosing hell, it's about God sending people to hell who don't believe in Jesus. Ask yourself "Why am I evading the question?"Quote:
Would anybody choose hell rather than heaven? Yes. Why? Pride.
"Most people" don't want to understand? Most people? But you are one of the privileged few? I would ask you to explain yourself but I know you won't.Quote:
Many people have a relationship with God that is based on something you might not understand.
A necessity that most people don't want to Understand or Accept.
More scripture to ponder.
47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day.
Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.” 40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?” 41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.
26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish;
This also comes from the Apostle's Creed which Wondergirl has agreed is correct. "The third day he rose from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;from thence he shall come to judge the quick (living) and the dead.
Now of course there are those here who will look at text after text after text after text after text after text and come to the foolish conclusion that it's all just "cherry picking", "misrepresentation", or "Bible Bingo".
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
No mention of hell.
Well, Jesus mentioned hell many, many times, most notably in Matthew 25, and you have chosen to ignore His views since they don't agree with yours, so I don't really know what it would take to convince you. I guess if Obama came out and agreed with the Mt. 25 passage, then maybe you would take his word for it.Quote:
No mention of hell.
Why isn't hell mentioned in the Apostles Creed?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Athos has already tried to school you on Jesus' use of the word "hell". Were you busy sending Facebook messages to Suzy again? You really, really want people you hate to burn forever, doncha!
Anyone who thinks Jesus was referring to the garbage dump as being eternal is a complete loon. Your remaining comments are sixth grade level drivel from someone who cannot defend her position or even articulate what it is.
I will simply add again, for the five hundredth time, that I am simply posting the words of Christ. You seem to have no interest in them. You never quote Him. In reply, all we get is ridiculous nonsense about facebooking and wanting people to burn in hell. You know what I want? I want you to act like a grown up and give a reasoned response to those scriptures, but I have no hope for that at all.
Nobody here is willing to play by your rules...bummer!
Ah, so you want ME to burn in hell too.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
(You just don't get it about the word "hell" as it is found in the Bible, do you.)
No.
Yes.
And in this corner, we have the holy roller who whines above about others insulting and saying nasty things. Heal thyself, o great whiner!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Below is even better. Text after text after text after text and this is what Jl comes up with? But the Bible doesn't contradict itself, he says. What is this, chopped liver?
Right after that from Holy Joe, this:Quote:
“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person.
Does he or doesn't he? Only Joe knows for sure.Quote:
from thence he shall come to judge the quick (living) and the dead.
Quote:
Would anybody choose hell rather than heaven? Yes. Why? Pride.
Stop skating around the question. It's not about choosing hell, it's about God sending people to hell who don't believe in Jesus. Ask yourself "Why am I evading the question?"
Who said that?Quote:
God sending people to hell
That has never been my concern (question). I don't know anything about that.
Is there a need for Hell...This would be what's in question?
And here we have the guy who accuses others of calling names. Why don't you post something of substance? Do you have anything?Quote:
And in this corner, we have the holy roller who whines above about others insulting and saying nasty things. Heal thyself, o great whiner!
Oh good grief. I just saw your "substance".Quote:
“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person.
Right after that from Holy Joe, this:
from thence he shall come to judge the quick (living) and the dead.
It's very simple. In the first quote, Jesus is speaking in the present tense of his time on earth. He did not come then for judgement but rather for salvation. The second speaks of the coming day of judgement when He will judge.
In a gross truncation of a quote which reminds me of your Aquinas debacle, you intentionally misrepresented what He said. The entire quote very nicely answers your question. It is startling that you did not, I suppose, bother to read it for yourself.
"47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. (present tense JL)
48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. (future tense JL)"
"for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words" That would tragically seem to be you, Athos.
If you want to be a deceiver, you must learn to do a much better job.
Yeah, that's me. Here's you:Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Complete loon? Sixth grade drivel? Not even articulate? And you accuse others?Quote:
Anyone who thinks Jesus was referring to the garbage dump as being eternal is a complete loon. Your remaining comments are sixth grade level drivel from someone who cannot defend her position or even articulate what it is.
Here's a fitting Bible verse for you: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
Love it when you bring this up. I'm immediately reminded how your twisted misinterpretation of the Bible has you claiming Jesus sends to hell for eternal torture anybody that never heard of him. Doesn't get any sicker or more evil than that.Quote:
reminds me of your Aquinas debacle
More below:
For a guy who insists on being literal, I see that you provide context when it suits you. Will you now allow others to do the same?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I'm learning by watching you. You are a terrific teacher.Quote:
If you want to be a deceiver, you must learn to do a much better job.
You have a partial point. I did not connect a name with "complete loon", so that's pretty iffy. As to the others, they refer to someone's actions rather than calling names.Quote:
Complete loon? Sixth grade drivel? Not even articulate? And you accuse others?
Please do. You were, however, being deceptive in your mishandling of the text. If not, then explain why you provided the first half of the passage but not the second which clearly showed your point to be senseless. We earnestly await your explanation/admission. Perhaps it was simply a mistake?Quote:
For a guy who insists on being literal, I see that you provide context when it suits you. Will you now allow others to do the same?
When you appear to be deceptive, I point it out and give you an opportunity to explain. You rarely do so since you are simply being deceptive for which there is no explanation needed, but rather a simple admission. If I have, in your view, been deceptive, then by all means point it out. You never do, but I am offering you the chance. Just be specific. "Oh, you're deceptive!" demonstrates nothing.Quote:
I'm learning by watching you. You are a terrific teacher.
See post #179. I wasn't finished before you replied. Pretty quick on the trigger, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I looked. This was not explained.
Bear in mind that I am referring there to the quote by Jesus you referred to concerning judgment and not to the Aquinas quote.Quote:
Please do. You were, however, being deceptive in your mishandling of the text. If not, then explain why you provided the first half of the passage but not the second which clearly showed your point to be senseless. We earnestly await your explanation/admission. Perhaps it was simply a mistake?
I've heard your Aquinas explanation many times. I don't accept it as there is no support out there anywhere for your idea.
By support, you mean of course the internet as "out there anywhere". I hardly think you are studying Aquinas from books in a structured setting. I have, and was taught by men who are scholars of the "Angelic Doctor". I'm aware of the propositions for which Thomas was condemned until much later when he was canonized as Saint Thomas Aquinas by the Catholic Church.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I care not a whit that you don't accept my explanation of Aquinas. You are like Doubting Thomas. Unless it is laid out for you in black and white, you dismiss whatever it may be. Remember that incident about the Navy you wouldn't believe? Well, I turned out to be right, didn't I? That one WAS on the internet and you couldn't find it. How much less would you ever find something by St. Thomas?
Do I trust you? No. Your latest effort at partially presenting a quote, still unaddressed by you, helps to explain why. Asking me to just take your word for it as regards Aquinas won’t work.
What in the world are you talking about?Quote:
Remember that incident about the Navy you wouldn't believe? Well, I turned out to be right, didn't I?
I found the half of the Aquinas quote that you failed to include. Didn't take long. So that's how I would "ever find something by St. Thomas".Quote:
How much less would you ever find something by St. Thomas?
It can be found in the parable of the Prodigal son (I doubt you'll want to hear it). I'll wait till your in a better frame of mind, I can see your busy.Quote:
"Most people" don't want to understand? Most people? But you are one of the privileged few? I would ask you to explain yourself but I know you won't.
The Judgement of God, is not God sorting out the human race into a group that he likes that go to heaven and a group that he doesn't like that go to Hell. By God's grace we don't get what our sins deserve.Quote:
it's about God sending people to hell who don't believe in Jesus.
Only by the grace of God.Quote:
But you are one of the privileged few?
I never asked you to trust me. Nor have I ever asked you to take my word for Aquinas - or anything else for that matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Funny how you have a selective memory when it comes to issues where you have been found wrong.Quote:
What in the world are you talking about?
Not everything is on the internet. As a self-proclaimed former "teacher", that should be very obvious to you.Quote:
I found the half of the Aquinas quote that you failed to include. Didn't take long. So that's how I would "ever find something by St. Thomas".
According to Jl's interpretation of the Bible, that us EXACTLY what God does! I thought you were also an evangelical. If I'm wrong about you, say whether you believe Jesus sends unbelievers to hell for eternal punishment.Quote:
Originally Posted by waltero
Funny how you obviously have NO memory of it. Otherwise you would be specific.Quote:
Funny how you have a selective memory when it comes to issues where you have been found wrong.
Yeah, but the evidence to show your plain deceit about the Aquinas quote was there.Quote:
Not everything is on the internet. As a self-proclaimed former "teacher", that should be very obvious to you.
I haven't interpreted the Bible. I've simply quoted it. You don't like what it says and it makes you angry about it.Quote:
According to Jl's interpretation of the Bible,
You still have not explained your partial quote of this passage. It certainly looks as deceitful as the Aquinas incident. I'll post it again in case you simply forgot to explain.
Quote:
It's very simple. In the first quote, Jesus is speaking in the present tense of his time on earth. He did not come then for judgement but rather for salvation. The second speaks of the coming day of judgement when He will judge.
In a gross truncation of a quote which reminds me of your Aquinas debacle, you intentionally misrepresented what He said. The entire quote very nicely answers your question. It is startling that you did not, I suppose, bother to read it for yourself.
"47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. (present tense JL)
48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. (future tense JL)"
I still don't understand why you get so upset about what I believe. Earlier I asked, "Why is it you care about what I believe?" You replied, "Because your belief re hell is horrible and should never be taught to children (or anyone) as a condition of salvation."
As far as hell goes, I simply believe what Jesus said over and over and over again, so it would seem we must conclude that you believe his teaching of hell is horrible. OK. Fair enough, but I have never, and will never, teach anyone that a belief in hell is a condition of salvation, so I still don't really understand what gets you so wound up about it. Why do you care?
What have you taught children about hell?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I don't do much teaching of children in a Christian setting. If I did, I would feel a responsibility to teach them what Jesus said about hell.
Would you?
When you say ( quoting Matthew) that unbelievers go to hell, you are making belief a condition of salvation.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I oppose evil in all its forms.Quote:
so I still don't really understand what gets you so wound up about it. Why do you care?
I specifically referred to the Navy incident.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
The evidence of the context of the quote was rejected by you. That's on you, not me.Quote:
the evidence to show your plain deceit about the Aquinas quote was there.
You keep saying I'm angry. Somehow, that works for you. The truth is I usually enjoy the chance to expose your bad ideas about almost every subject you get yourself involved in.Quote:
You don't like what it says and it makes you angry about it.
Already answered: here it is - For a guy who insists on being literal, I see that you provide context when it suits you. Will you now allow others to do the same?Quote:
You still have not explained your partial quote of this passage.
Belief in Christ, yes, but not in hell. And as I've said before, I simply posted what Jesus said. Your problem is with Him, and that's a bad situation to be in. "Unless you believe that I (Jesus) am He, you will die in your sins."Quote:
When you say ( quoting Matthew) that unbelievers go to hell, you are making belief a condition of salvation.
Good luck. You're gonna need it.Quote:
You keep saying I'm angry. Somehow, that works for you. The truth is I usually enjoy the chance to expose your bad ideas about almost every subject you get yourself involved in.
There was no navy incident.Quote:
I specifically referred to the Navy incident.
A ridiculous reply in which you never say WHY you only posted half the statement and thus was deceitful. If that's your reply, then you're guilty as charged. Pleading "context" when you were the one who posted half the statement and thus had it OUT of context is ludicrous. We'll just call it Aquinas #2.Quote:
You still have not explained your partial quote of this passage.
Already answered: here it is - For a guy who insists on being literal, I see that you provide context when it suits you. Will you now allow others to do the same?
Here is the disgraceful effort of yours. Your partial quote of the first passage was intentionally deceitful. At least it's out there for everyone to see now. Better to be "Holy Joe" than Deceitful Athos.
Quote:
Right after that from Holy Joe, this:Quote:
“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person.
Does he or doesn't he? Only Joe knows for sure.Quote:
from thence he shall come to judge the quick (living) and the dead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
What would you tell them?Quote:
I have never, and will never, teach anyone that a belief in hell is a condition of salvation
Hardly disgraceful. It reflects your methodology EXACTLY. If one is disgraceful, so is the other (yours).Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
According to you, Christ sends unbelievers to hell. So, yes, belief in hell. You are now misinterpreting a misinterpretation.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Your proclivity to threaten opposing views is typical of your "Christianity". Your need for this goes very deep and goes a long way to understanding your belief.Quote:
Your problem is with Him, and that's a bad situation to be in. "Unless you believe that I (Jesus) am He, you will die in your sins."
You were certainly all up in arms about it, denying what I said about USN reaction, which I proved with a link to the actual event. You refused to believe the evidence of your own eyes.Quote:
There was no navy incident.
Aquinas is mild compared to your position on hell. In a very real sense, St. Thomas anticipated your belief by centuries.Quote:
Aquinas .
Except, of course, that I have posted your deceitful effort. You have nothing of mine to post, so your statement is just whining.Quote:
Hardly disgraceful. It reflects your methodology EXACTLY. If one is disgraceful, so is the other (yours).
There is nothing "according to me". I've simply posted the words of Jesus.Quote:
According to you, Christ sends unbelievers to hell. So, yes, belief in hell. You are now misinterpreting a misinterpretation.
Yeah, right. Post the quotes and we can discuss it. Pretty sure you can't, but we'll see. But if you think I'll take your word for what happened, you are far away from reality.Quote:
You were certainly all up in arms about it, denying what I said about USN reaction, which I proved with a link to the actual event. You refused to believe the evidence of your own eyes.
Your deceitfulness about Aquinas is, by far, the worst performance I've seen on this board. This was pretty bad as well.Quote:
Aquinas is mild compared to your position on hell.
It's very simple. In the first quote, Jesus is speaking in the present tense of his time on earth. He did not come then for judgement but rather for salvation. The second speaks of the coming day of judgement when He will judge.
In a gross truncation of a quote which reminds me of your Aquinas debacle, you intentionally misrepresented what He said. The entire quote very nicely answers your question. It is startling that you did not, I suppose, bother to read it for yourself.
"47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. (present tense JL)
48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. (future tense JL)"
Your posting habits have been here for a long time - time enough for anyone to see what real deceit is like.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Are you now saying you DO NOT believe Jesus sends unbelievers to hell for eternal torture? If you don't believe it, then say so. Don't be afraid.Quote:
There is nothing "according to me". I've simply posted the words of Jesus.
Not my word, your own memory.Quote:
if you think I'll take your word for what happened, you are far away from reality.
Calm down. Surely your belief about Jesus sending sinners and unbelievers to eternal hell is far, far worse than anything your fevered brain can conjure up re Aquinas or anyone else.Quote:
Your deceitfulness about Aquinas is, by far, the worst performance I've seen
I think I'll call your Jesus/hell message JESUS REDUX since you repeat it so often and are so fond of sending so many to eternal torture in God's secret torture chamber.
Come on, Jesus judges and then he doesn't judge. Which is it? I don't think you know.
In other words, you don't have a clue about the supposed Navy story.Quote:
Your posting habits have been here for a long time - time enough for anyone to see what real deceit is like.
I believe that what Jesus said is true. I would encourage you to do the same.Quote:
Are you now saying you DO NOT believe Jesus sends unbelievers to hell for eternal torture? If you don't believe it, then say so. Don't be afraid.
Oh stop lying for goodness sake. It's becoming embarrassing to have to watch. That's already been explained to you. Remember? Present tense, future tense? My fifth graders could have easily understood it and I'm sure you can as well.Quote:
Come on, Jesus judges and then he doesn't judge. Which is it? I don't think you know.
I don't have a Jesus/hell message. I just quote what He said. You don't like it, and it drives you nuts.
I'll post this again for your benefit and for the benefit of those who want to see your deceit at work.
It's very simple. In the first quote, Jesus is speaking in the present tense of his time on earth. He did not come then for judgement but rather for salvation. The second speaks of the coming day of judgement when He will judge.
In a gross truncation of a quote which reminds me of your Aquinas debacle, you intentionally misrepresented what He said. The entire quote very nicely answers your question. It is startling that you did not, I suppose, bother to read it for yourself.
"47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. (present tense JL)
48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day. (future tense JL)"
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:48 PM. |