Fearful????
Like tomder says, stick to the topic of the thread.
|
Fearful????
Like tomder says, stick to the topic of the thread.
Of course you're fearful. It's as I've said many times, when you feel a little pressured, you just avoid the question. You view it as dangerous to your position, as well you should. Of course you can always prove me wrong.
I suspect you unknowingly helped the cause of truth by bring up the three creeds, all of which support a coming day of judgment.Quote:
"You say you've read it (the John 3 passage), but you have not accepted and loved and believed it. Do that first, and then we can talk more."
Or you can choose to reject it, but you need to make up your mind before we can continue.
I accept Jesus' statements that he's the only way, and belief - a terrible word for it in today's American English, "trust" would be much better - in him is crucial to reconciliation with God.Quote:
from Me (Athos)
Here's your answer: Of course, they do. Anyone who leads a good life as described by WG goes to heaven. It doesn't matter what they believe. It only matters how they behave, and that the behavior is informed by a good conscience.
drom DW
That's where we differ.
Kindly please explain the difference. I don't want to assume something that isn't true.
No, I understood. But it's still poor exegesis. Again, both letters are addressed to believers, not to the wider world. Believers are to show their trust in Jesus by their actions, and if the actions aren't there, something is very wrong. Neither has any application to non-believers.Quote:
Quote Originally Posted by dwashbur View Post
That is bad exegesis. Both letters were written to believers, those who have already received Jesus and are part of His church. 1 Peter was written to a collection of churches, 1 John was written to the church of Ephesus to correct some gnostic heresies. The "us" is believers. The church. If you rip those verses out of those contexts, you do violence to the text.
You definitely misunderstood my two different uses of "us".
The last thing I am is "fearful". I've read your nastiness and guile and deception when responding to me and others on this site. No matter what response I give you, it's wrong, according to you, because it's coming from me. No, thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
My point was I had memorized two of them before I could read. They're a sequel to baptism.Quote:
I suspect you unknowingly helped the cause of truth by bring up the three creeds, all of which support a coming day of judgment.
We read two different creeds, then. They give the BASIS on which God will judge, which I believe is what JL wants to talk about. Someone's dodging.Quote:
Quote Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
You mean of the creeds you don't believe?
Only God can judge, according to those creeds.
Good posts, DW. I really don't WANT to talk about judging. I'd much rather talk about Jesus, but the idea that there is no judgment and everyone, regardless of belief, will be saved is simply not based on the Bible.Quote:
We read two different creeds, then. They give the BASIS on which God will judge, which I believe is what JL wants to talk about. Someone's dodging.
Your comment on "trust" vs. "belief" was a good one.
You are most welcome to correct me for, "nastiness and guile and deception" at any time you see it, but just a general post like that is actually just nastiness itself. You are doing what you accuse me of doing. I do wish you would engage and answer questions, but I know you well enough by now that I don't expect it to happen. Too bad. Surprise me!!Quote:
I've read your nastiness and guile and deception when responding to me and others on this site.
That's ALL you've been talking about!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Jesus = love. And no one has said everyone will be saved.Quote:
I'd much rather talk about Jesus, but the idea that there is no judgment and everyone, regardless of belief, will be saved is simply not based on the Bible.
See!!! There ya go again! Antiphrasis!!!Quote:
You are most welcome to correct me for, "nastiness and guile and deception" at any time you see it, but just a general post like that is actually just nastiness itself. You are doing what you accuse me of doing.
Ask me a reasonable question without a gotcha hidden in it.Quote:
I do wish you would engage and answer questions, but I know you well enough by now that I don't expect it to happen. Too bad. Surprise me!!
Have done so many times. You see a "gotcha" behind every bush. I don't see questions as "gotcha". I believe that if I cannot defend my position by answering penetrating questions, then I need to change my position. That's why I answer your questions. It's also why, I think, you don't answer mine. DW sees this in you as well. "Someone's dodging."Quote:
Ask me a reasonable question without a gotcha hidden in it.
That one made me laugh. Being nasty is OK for you but not for anyone else. My, my, my.Quote:
See!!! There ya go again!
No matter what answer I give, according to you, it's wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I added Antiphrasis to my answer. You must have been typing and missed it.Quote:
That one made me laugh. Being nasty is OK for you but not for anyone else. My, my, my.
Thank you for replying.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
A follow-up question: How then do you explain the millions who lived before Jesus and never heard of him? And the billions who lived since Jesus and never heard of him? Does Jesus' statement that he's the only way, and is crucial to reconciliation with God apply to those groups? Do they go to hell?
I'm sure you've heard this before and I anticipate your answer.
Another thought is: If they go to hell for not accepting Jesus/God, why did Jesus/God create them in the first place, knowing they would spend eternity in terrible suffering? Being omniscient, Jesus/God must have foreseen that they would be sinners or non-believers, but he created them anyway.
What do you expect when, for instance, you read clear statements in the three creeds you referred to plainly saying that Jesus will return in judgment, and you simply refuse to accept it because, I guess, it clashes with your preconceived ideas?Quote:
No matter what answer I give, according to you, it's wrong.
I copied and pasted and so missed nothing, so it would certainly seem you added it AFTER reading my response. But even at that, it makes no difference. You made a nasty post and now you're trying to distance yourself from it. I would suggest you try and set a good example.Quote:
I added Antiphrasis to my answer.
The man who won't answer even the simplest question just posted at least five for someone else. Go figure.
I haven't refused to accept that. You really want those non-white non-Christians to burn in hell, don't you!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You first.Quote:
I would suggest you try and set a good example.
No. You just stay in your "safe space" of being noncommittal. But as I've said many times, show me to be wrong! State your belief about Jesus and Him coming to judge.Quote:
I haven't refused to accept that.
Thank goodness you don't make stupid, hateful statements.Quote:
You really want those non-white non-Christians to burn in hell, don't you!
Judging doesn't mean condemning. Judging, like at the county fair, means assessing. It says nothing about reward or punishment.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Wow! You can be so nice at times!Quote:
Thank goodness you don't make stupid, hateful statements.
Call someone a racist and you can expect a little blowback. You had it coming. It was a dumb, thoughtless statement for which there is not a scrap of evidence.Quote:
Wow! You can be so nice at times!
Judging at the county fair? Really? This is from the Athanasian Creed you made reference to and claim to believe. Sound like a county fair to you?
He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.
Who wrote that? Using what agenda?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Thus, a schizophrenic man who murdered his wife and three children will go to hell? Especially if he's a Muslim?
It was your reference that you now reject. Talk about weird. You are trying to make excuses for the very creed you brought up yourself. Why? Because, as always, it does not agree with your preconceived ideas.
You have absolutely no idea what I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Read the next paragraph in my post before this one.
Of course I do. You have opened up enough to state a few things.Quote:
You have absolutely no idea what I believe.
Your paragraph was a desperate effort to change the subject since you are doing so poorly here. I'm done with this lunacy. You appeal to three creeds, and when you find out that they all speak of a coming day of judgement, then you try to back off and change the subject. You can have the last comment. It won't help you. Any fair minded person reading this knows what you are doing.
Thus, you believe a schizophrenic man who murdered his wife and three children will go to hell? Especially if he's Muslim or Hindu or Jewish?
What's God's standard, His rating system, on the Last Day?
And He'll have over 117,000,000,000 people to judge, don't forget.
Excellent points! I eagerly await comments and explanations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Me too, but based on past experience, I don't think any will be forthcoming. I hope I'm wrong.
The people who are too fearful to answer even the most basic questions claim to want answers from DW. It's just too pathetic to describe.
Ask me one basic question. Here. Now.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Happily, but I know you won't answer it. You'll dance around and parry, but you will not answer it. It's been put before you many times, and avoided many times. I'll reword it a bit to make it easier, but I have also included the original form that has been reposted (and run from) perhaps a dozen times, and completely avoided on every single occasion.
Reworded. Having read, as you claim, the John 3 passage that was quoted many moons ago, do you agree with its content, especially the portion that is underlined? I have posted it below to help.Quote:
"You say you've read it (the John 3 passage), but you have not accepted and loved and believed it. Do that first, and then we can talk more."
Or you can choose to reject it, but you need to make up your mind before we can continue.
16 “For hGod so loved ithe world,9 jthat he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not kperish but have eternal life. 17 For lGod did not send his Son into the world mto condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 nWhoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not obelieved in the name of the only Son of God.
No lecture please. Ask me one basic question. (Subject. Predicate. Prepostional phrase. Subordinate clause. An adjective or two. One adverb is permitted.) Here. Now.Quote:
The people who are too fearful to answer even the most basic questions....
Yawn. For the second time in fifteen minutes.Quote:
Having read, as you claim, the John 3 passage that was quoted many moons ago, do you agree with its content, especially the portion that is underlined? I have posted it below to help.
You know that's not what I'm asking for.
Please ask in plain English.
I rest my case. It went exactly as I said it would. Never fails.
I will help you with my simple request by reviewing third-grade language arts with you, in particular, "What is a question?" and how to properly write one.
Lololol.Quote:
Originally Posted by wondergirl
Evasion, thy name is "Wondergirl". I can put it no better than I did earlier. You always hold true to form.
Quote:
I know you won't answer it. You'll dance around and parry, but you will not answer it. It's been put before you many times, and avoided many times. I'll reword it a bit to make it easier, but I have also included the original form that has been reposted (and run from) perhaps a dozen times, and completely avoided on every single occasion.
My my. You get nasty when you get exposed, don't you? "I will help you with my simple request by reviewing third-grade language arts with you, in particular, "What is a question?" and how to properly write one."
Strangely, I taught a number of third graders who could have understood that question.
The more I think about this, the more funny it becomes. You said, "Ask me one basic question. Here. Now," trying to appear big and bad. So I ask a question that most middle schoolers could have understood. But, as it turns out, it wasn't simple enough, and so the complaining started. "Oh! Oh! That question is not 'basic' enough! It is too complex, too complicated. I cannot understand such complex issues."
Please. I'm really not trying to be ugly, but I've never met anyone like the two of you who are so fearful of answering even the most basic, fundamental questions. It is truly mystifying to me. If I was that uncertain of my beliefs, I wouldn't post. I'd just read.
The TWO of you?! How did I get in the middle of this brouhaha?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
It ain't fear, Charley. You want to be in charge. All I'm asking for is that your question be asked more simply, more straightforwardly. No ruffles, twists, turns, subordinate clauses.
Examples:
How old is this planet we live on?
Do you believe in angels? Why or why not?
You don't even believe that. It's just a dodge. End of story.Quote:
It ain't fear, Charley. You want to be in charge. All I'm asking for is that your question be asked more simply, more straightforwardly. No ruffles, twists, turns, subordinate clauses.
This is clearer:Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Do you agree with the content of the John 3 passage, especially the portion that is underlined?
Here's another question:
Does a person born as a Muslim in the Middle East have the same opportunity for salvation as a person born in America?
Just to illustrate the siliness that goes on here, look at this comparison.
This is WG's "improved" version. "Do you agree with the content of the John 3 passage, especially the portion that is underlined?"
This is the relevant portion from my version. "...do you agree with its content, especially the portion that is underlined?"
Hmmm. At any rate, note that the question remains unanswered.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:47 PM. |