[Athos]

(Love) is not the syrupy sweet love that WG seems to have in mind.

You're reading that into her posts. Her obvious point is that Jesus was first and foremost about love.

Himself in Matthew 25 where He lovingly welcomes those who belong to Him, but condemns those who don't to eternity in hell, a truth repeated several dozen times in the NT (My -ATHOS- emphasis)

And just yesterday you denied this very thing when I said it was your belief. So much for honest dialogue on these pages.

[Wondergirl]

You think Jesus, Paul, John, David, and Jonathan were all gay, and you really wonder what you might be deceived about?

You have inside information they weren't?

It's like I've said many times. You make up your mind about what you believe, and then you look for any little scrap of scripture that might in some small way support it.

That's EXACTLY what you do, Mr. Cherrypicker! And that's another reason I don't spout suportive Bible verses on this site (or any other site).

You really have no concern about what the Bible says. You said that everything Jesus did was about love. I pointed out many places where that was not true.

The Bible is not the same book written by the ancient scribes (who were human just like you and me). E.g., the word "homosexual" wasn't in the Bible until 1946 (hmm, wonder how THAT happened??). The word Paul used meant pedophile.

Your response is to just breezily move on to something else.

If you say something worth responding to (incorrect, outrageous, ignorant), I'll respond, and I have done so many times.

[Wondergirl]

You have no idea what love is.

In each of your examples Jesus is correcting others. Loving others is disciplining - like a parent scolds a child. You think love is some weak woosy thing. It's not. Jesus expressed his idea of love saying, "Greater love hath no man, that he lay down his life for his friend". Hardly a sentimental idea.

Terrific response, Athos! For instance, my very loving and Christian materal grandfather whipped his sons with a belt if he heard about or caught them sinning. After each beating, he hugged each son and made sure they understand why he had beaten them and that he still loved them. All of the sons, my uncles, turned out to be faithful husbands, loving fathers, and honest, hard-working employees.

[jlisenbe]

And just yesterday you denied this very thing when I said it was your belief. So much for honest dialogue on these pages.

You're lying again. What I denied was a belief about CHILDREN going to hell. Learn to tell the truth.

[jlisenbe]

You have inside information they weren't?

I don't have any inside information that you and Athos aren't gay, or Joe Biden, or AOC, or practically anyone you can name. That doesn't mean I'm going to make the stupid and irresponsible accusation that you are gay, or pedophiles, or bank robbers, or communists, or anything else for that matter. That's not how it works.

Terrific response, Athos!

His response was largely absurd. Jesus was not correcting, for instance, the Pharisees. Read it in Mt. 23. You will readily see that He was condemning them. " So you testify against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Fill up, then, the measure of the guilt of your fathers. 33 You serpents, you brood of vipers, how will you escape the sentence of hell?"

But I am glad to find out that you are in favor of corporal punishment for children.

That's EXACTLY what you do, Mr. Cherrypicker!

Show me where. You mean like the 24 passages I posted about hell that even a low performing third grader can see is not cherry picking but a tidal wave of evidence? Go to court with 24 reliable witnesses and see how fast you can win your case.

The Bible is not the same book written by the ancient scribes (who were human just like you and me). E.g., the word "homosexual" wasn't in the Bible until 1946 (hmm, wonder how THAT happened??). The word Paul used meant pedophile.

The word used prior to 46 was "sodomite", which is a synonym for homosexual. Tell the truth. The Greek word translated "homosexual" does not mean pedophile. No one outside of you and one supposed scholar believes that. It is EVERYWHERE translated as homosexual, sodomite, or some synonym of those words. No Greek lexicon in existence translates it "pedophile". That's ridiculous.

I noticed that neither of you bothered to address how Jesus clearly described Himself as a judge at the end of time who will send people to an eternal hell.

[Athos]

You're lying again. What I denied was a belief about CHILDREN going to hell. Learn to tell the truth.

You're quick to call others liars when YOU are the liar-in-chief. Either by outright falsehoods or changing what someone said by adding or deleting a word or otherwise changing the meaning to suit your belief.

This is done so often by you that I wonder why you feel no shame doing it when it's so obvious. Then I realize it's part of your admiration and imitation of Trump the master dissembler who lives by the dictum of Roy Cohn - deny or lie until you're blue in the face.

For over two years you have claimed time and again that those who do not believe in Jesus spend all eternity in hell being eternally punished. In fact, you supported the claim by citing many Biblical verses which you claim to be proof of the statement. No matter that I debunked those verses as being misinterpreted by you, that's your right to refuse any claim I may make even in the face of irrefutable logic.

Now you are denying you believe that statement about Jesus and hell, at least when it comes to children.

What I denied was a belief about CHILDREN going to hell.

That's an excellent example of your inability to see the logic involved. It's very simple. If unbelievers go to hell, and some children do not believe (maybe they never heard of Jesus since they lived far away or even before Jesus walked the earth) they would still be condemned to hell by your own logic.

There were other examples - the Chinese peasant woman who lived 10,000 miles away from Jesus and who never heard a single solitary thing about him. She went to hell.

For every example I gave you, you simply quoted another verse from the Bible.

As you got hemmed in by your own logic, you started to backtrack a bit, probably because you began to see the absurdity of your claim. When I asked you yesterday to state your belief in the matter, you failed to do so. Your reply was to call me a liar as I quoted above. And I note there is still NO DENIAL of your claim re unbelievers.

You will probably reply to this post with your usual "blah, blah, blah", indicating no interest on your part. But you've overused that reply too, so don't expect too much credence with that tactic.

[jlisenbe]

Very simple. I have never said children go to hell. You lied when you said I did. End of story.

[jlisenbe]

This is the statement in question where you lied. "According to your own stated belief, the children will wind up in hell to be eternally tortured because they did not believe in Jesus." I have never stated that...period.

Your outrageous statements? How about this, one that WG, as usual, passed on.

You enjoy all those sinners being thrown into hell, don't you? Some would say it's your passive-aggressive way of getting even with all those who were more successful in life than you. It's never about God satisfying his justice. It's about you getting revenge.

[Athos]

Very simple. I have never said children go to hell. You lied when you said I did. End of story.

If unbelievers go to hell, and children are unbelievers....................................... ....................????

Your only defense is to charge lying. Pretty weak.

[Athos]

This is the statement in question where you lied. "According to your own stated belief, the children will wind up in hell to be eternally tortured because they did not believe in Jesus." I have never stated that...period.

Nitpick much?

Do you believe that children who are not believers go to hell? Yes or no. No one is holding their breath waiting for your answer.

Your outrageous statements? How about this, one that WG, as usual, passed on.

You enjoy all those sinners being thrown into hell, don't you? Some would say it's your passive-aggressive way of getting even with all those who were more successful in life than you. It's never about God satisfying his justice. It's about you getting revenge.

What has WG got to do with it?

I stand by that statement. It's true of many fundamentalists of the stripe who condemn others to hell for believing differently. You yourself do it. Is it about revenge for you?

[jlisenbe]

You…lied…period.

[Athos]

You…lied…period.

Still no answer.

[jlisenbe]

You…lied…period.

[Athos]

You…lied…period.

Repeating something doesn't make it true. Only children do that until they grow out of it.

Against my better judgement, I'll give you a lesson in English sentence construction as to meaning.

The content of my statement is absolutely true.

For years you have been saying unbelievers go to hell. Many times I have asked you does that include people who never heard of Jesus, like babies and children and an old peasant women working in a rice paddy in China. As an answer, you quoted another Bible verse supporting your claim as I described it.

Anybody who has been around here for those years would know immediately what I'm referring to and that the statement is correct. What probably confused you and led you on a tear was that I could have put it in italics or bolded it instead of putting it in quote marks. Quote marks are less preferable, but even so your reaction was over the top, completely ignoring the meat of the sentence.

Classic definition of picking a nit.

All together now - You...lied...period.

[Wondergirl]

But I am glad to find out that you are in favor of corporal punishment for children.

How do you get that out of my story about my grandfather?

[Athos]

How do you get that out of my story about my grandfather?

Jl gets whatever he wants out of stories/posts. He doesn't hold much for facts - they get in the way.

[dwashbur]

This is the statement in question where you lied. "According to your own stated belief, the children will wind up in hell to be eternally tortured because they did not believe in Jesus." I have never stated that...period.

Your outrageous statements? How about this, one that WG, as usual, passed on.
You enjoy all those sinners being thrown into hell, don't you? Some would say it's your passive-aggressive way of getting even with all those who were more successful in life than you. It's never about God satisfying his justice. It's about you getting revenge.
Jun 30, 2021, 03:56 PM
jlisenbe
Very simple. I have never said children go to hell.

But you have not explicitly said they don't. Athos has asked you multiple times to just say it out loud, and you seem reluctant to do so.

What is one supposed to conclude under such circumstances?

Romans 1 teaches that everyone is judged by what they do with how much (or little) they know. Children know diddly. So they're judged on their innocence and God welcomes them.

See? That's not so hard. Now you try it.

[Wondergirl]

James 2:
24 You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

25 In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction?

[jlisenbe]

But you have not explicitly said they don't. Athos has asked you multiple times to just say it out loud, and you seem reluctant to do so.

What is one supposed to conclude under such circumstances?

Romans 1 teaches that everyone is judged by what they do with how much (or little) they know. Children know diddly. So they're judged on their innocence and God welcomes them.

See? That's not so hard. Now you try it.

Already have. I have very explicitly stated in the past that I do not believe children or infants go to hell.

Athos lied when he said this. "According to your own stated belief, the children will wind up in hell to be eternally tortured because they did not believe in Jesus." I've never said that.

I have not stated my belief about hell and judgment for a simple reason. If he will not accept the words of Jesus, then why should he accept my words?

[Athos]

But you have not explicitly said they don't. Athos has asked you multiple times to just say it out loud, and you seem reluctant to do so.

What is one supposed to conclude under such circumstances?

Romans 1 teaches that everyone is judged by what they do with how much (or little) they know. Children know diddly. So they're judged on their innocence and God welcomes them.

See? That's not so hard. Now you try it.

The problem Jl has with agreeing that children do not go to hell (and saying it out loud) is that it brings down his house of cards which is his false belief that Jesus condemns unbelievers to hell for eternal punishment.

If children are not included in his "unbelievers", it is a simple step to others not being included like the millions who lived before Jesus and those who never heard of Jesus like that peasant woman working in a rice paddy in China who lived an exemplary life.

You've left Jl in a conundrum of his own making.