Originally posted by twhiteheadRefresh my memory, who is mischaracterizing who again?
Once you told me what thread it was, I did go there. And I confirmed that you were mischaracterizing what went on. And I have even quoted you admitting that you were posting confusing and incorrect statements.
I went back and read the whole thread, so I know what you're referring to. That short quote doesn't accurately represent what you say it represents. Not everyone there seemed to be confused or felt compelled to tell me what I was saying rather than respond to it. You were confused and couldn't understand it, and felt the need to put that onto someone else... like you always do.
Originally posted by lemon limeYou are mischaracterizing what went on in that thread.
Refresh my memory, who is mischaracterizing who again?
I went back and read the whole thread, so I know what you're referring to. That short quote doesn't accurately represent what you say it represents. Not everyone there seemed to be confused or felt compelled to tell me what I was saying rather than respond to it. You were confused and couldn't understand it, and felt the need to put that onto someone else... like you always do.
Yes, I didn't understand what you were trying to say, because you had difficulty articulating it properly. Neither I nor humy were jerking you around, nor were we ignoring the fact I was saying time and not space. You fully admitted that you yourself were not being clear what you were trying to say. And nothing in that thread has anything whatsoever to do with my original comment in this thread. Your pretense that I have difficulty understanding time is ludicrous and nothing more than a wild attempt at changing the subject because you really don't want to discuss what you said in this thread.
You could have been a bit more honest and simply said that you didn't want to discuss it and left it at that.
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadA readers lack of comprehension isn't always the fault of the writer.
You are mischaracterizing what went on in that thread.
[b]I went back and read the whole thread, so I know what you're referring to. That short quote doesn't accurately represent what you say it represents. Not everyone there seemed to be confused or felt compelled to tell me what I was saying rather than respond to it. You were confused and couldn't u ...[text shortened]... e been a bit more honest and simply said that you didn't want to discuss it and left it at that.
If you complain often enough about people you don't understand because they are 'confusing' and 'incoherent', then it becomes apparent that isn't always the case.
-Removed-Originally posted by divegeester (Page 35)
But I am a Christian, how can a Christian deserve to go to hell?
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby in reply to divegeester
It's not a question of what we "deserve". We deserve nothing but have chosen to accept a grace gift which is eternal:
"All believers in Christ [---> including divegeester and gb] are secure for time and eternity. Jesus Christ proclaimed, "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand" (John 10:28-29b).
And: Ephesians 4:30 Confirms that believers are "sealed for the day of redemption."
And: John 3:15-16 Confirms that whoever believes in Jesus Christ will "have eternal life." If it could be taken away, it wasn't ever "eternal" to begin with. If eternal security isn't true, the promises of eternal life in the Word of God are erroneous.
And Paul's powerful statement for eternal security in Romans 8:38-39, "For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord."
Our eternal security is purchased by Christ; promised by the Father; and sealed by the Holy Spirit."
..........................................................................
Originally posted by divegeester
"Either way the move is still yours to provide coherent support to whatever it actually is that may, or may not, happen to me as a consequence of not believing the doctrine of eternal suffering." divegeester, you're as safe as the Apostle Paul!
Originally posted by lemon limeNo, it isn't. But in this case it quite clearly was. Both I and humy had difficulty understanding you.
A readers lack of comprehension isn't always the fault of the writer.
If you want a challenge, see if you can find someone else who actually understood what you were trying to say in that thread and is willing to go on record here that what you were saying was clear.
1 edit
-Removed-Let's suppose for a moment you really are concerned about this, about a loved one who might end up in hell while you get to enjoy heaven. So let's just say it's true, and you would feel anguish in heaven over a loved one suffering in hell, and this thought preoccupies you while you are still alive here... now imagine going to your reward only to find out that you are in hell and your loved one is in heaven.
Would you then feel anguish that your loved one in heaven is distressed over you suffering anguish in hell?
Originally posted by FMFCome on FMF! You were a Bible believing Christian for 28 years and you don't know what the Bible says about that? You know the answer, and if you don't then you were never a Bible believing Christian, because all Bible believing Christians know why God will punish the unbelieving world.
What is the purpose behind your God figure seeking revenge against ~ and torturing ~ those who don't believe any of this?
Your problem is that you never believed God, so you seem to think you need to press this issue for the sole purpose of entrapping your adversary in a debate over words all day with this line of questioning.