 |
Are you following your own advice? (Hint: The answer is "no".) BTW, many people have been converted after long periods of discussion. C.S. Lewis comes to mind, for instance. With Athos I am trying to learn to be steady, truthful, and as kind as the situation allows. Wouldn't hurt things if you would jump in on the side of the truth from time to time. Your reluctance to do so is baffling.
Now you're becoming a bully.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I totally agree! There are better ways to win souls than with endless discussions and arguments.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Remember, you have been disqualified from being the civility police here. Your own behavior did not measure up or even come close, and you would not even discuss it on a PM.Quote:
Now you're becoming a bully.
Who disqualified me? the bully?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Check your PMs, Bully Boy.
I think clete would be amazed to find out he is being bullied. He can handle himself and is not a dainty little flower. As for you, your tolerance and cheering for sickening comments on this board is legend. You have no credibility at all. It’s what happens when you lower your standards to accomplish a political objective. If you want respect, then let your outrage become objective.
The only person trying to bully me is you, schoolyard style, grow up jl
So you are a dainty little flower after all? Disappointing. You know full well I was not "bullying" you. Good grief.
Just so you get the message, POQ mate!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
So you want to be treated daintily??? Oh well.
If you really believe that, " Wouldn't hurt things if you would jump in on the side of the truth from time to time. Your reluctance to do so is baffling," is some kind of "bullying", then you are a far different man than I had assumed. Here, that's tame. Here, that's just asking a simple question.
Talk to the hand
https://www.bing.com/th?id=OIP.XZD9Y...5&pid=3.1&rm=2
No thanks.
I agree, WG. However, when I discovered Jl was bad-mouthing me and dissing me behind my back when I was not even on the board, I decided to give him a taste of his own medicine. Like all bullies, he doesn't like being on the receiving end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Jl combines troll with stalker and, of course, denier of fact - his long-term character.
ok this is becoming a mob
What you mean is - You try to avoid answering the question at all costs, even to the absurdity that "there is no book called 'the Gospel'". That is about the dopiest statement you've ever made. And you've made some real lollapaloozas.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Sorry I must have missed the part where you denied ever saying unbelievers go to hell for eternal punishment. For the record, will you now state your belief about unbelievers going to hell for eternal punishment?Quote:
I've changed nothing.
You certainly have my agreement on that!Quote:
Because it makes no difference what I believe.
You're avoiding the question afraid to put your answer in your own words - putting the onus on a book. Yet, you ask others not to provide quotes or books or links, but to put it in their own words. Smells of hypocrisy.Quote:
Truth is not established by what I believe. It is established by what the Bible says, and that's why I continually resort to the Bible
LOL. You have never "encouraged" me to read the Bible. You have THREATENED me to believe as you do since, as you claim, you have "the truth".Quote:
It's why I continually encourage you to believe the Bible as do I.
Wrong! I believe the Bible has several ways of interpreting it, as I've explained to you. You have only one way, and a bad way at that.Quote:
And so we arrive at the source of our disagreement. You consider that the Bible means...whatever you think it means.
That's the bad way.Quote:
I believe it is a literal representation of God's will.
I think you're cherry-picking again. I think you throw out quotes without context. I think the quote has nothing to do with the discussion. I think you're threatening again. What do you think of that?Quote:
So when Jesus said, "Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God," I think He literally meant what He said. What do you think of that?
I believe that what Jesus said in Matt. 25 about judgment is the truth. "41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’"Quote:
Sorry I must have missed the part where you denied ever saying unbelievers go to hell for eternal punishment. For the record, will you now state your belief about unbelievers going to hell for eternal punishment?
Now you can argue with Him. And please don't make your pitiful usual appeal to "cherry picking" and "context". It is a straightforward, clear statement. Context helps you none at all. As to cherry picking, as you well know I can supply more than twenty other passages which say the same thing.
Good. We agree. So why do you keep asking?Quote:
Because it makes no difference what I believe.
You certainly have my agreement on that!
As I said, we disagree.Quote:
I believe it is a literal representation of God's will.
That's the bad way.
I think it has everything to do with the discussion.Quote:
I think you're cherry-picking again. I think you throw out quotes without context. I think the quote has nothing to do with the discussion. I think you're threatening again. What do you think of that?
So THIS amounts to, "...Jl was bad-mouthing me and dissing me behind my back when I was not even on the board." Wow. How sensitive you are. "With Athos I am trying to learn to be steady, truthful, and as kind as the situation allows."
THAT is dissing??? Really???
Consider this: Christians believe God to be omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omnipresent. Right?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Let's take omnibenevolent. It means all-loving. Christians believe God's love is unconditional. Jesus even went so far as to say, "Love your enemy" - a shocking statement for the time.
Then there's omniscient. This means God is all-knowing. Before any of his creatures came to be, God knew what their lives would be. Obviously, we know that some of these creatures (actually, the great majority) do not/did not believe in Jesus, so God must have known this too. You still with me?
Now, take that passage from Matthew you quoted. Compare it to God's omniscience and omnibenevolence.
Which one is true - Matthew's passage or God's love? Both can't be true. Would an unconditionally loving God cast his creatures into his personal torture chamber for all eternity simply because they never heard of or believed in Jesus? Of course not!
That should lead you to questioning if your interpretation of the Bible is the correct one.
God’s love and goodness led Him to sacrifice His only Son so that people can avert judgment. Hard to imagine how you could find more goodness and love than that.
What about all those billions who never heard about that sacrifice?
we are supposed to tell them, go ye into all the EarthQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:05 AM. |