Originally posted by @sonship OP - This thread is NOT about eterenal punishment.
And this thread is NOT about the requirements to enter into the kingdom of God.
But Rajk999 or Divegeester predictably will come in to MAKE this thread about one of those two subjects.
But it was intended to NOT be about their two favorite arguments with me. Let's see how long it takes.
You see, Mr Big Mouth, you can know everything and understand all of the bible, but it is only if you follow the commandments of Christ [which centers around brotherly love and charity] , it is ONLY THEN can you have a hope for eternal life. That is why I keep on telling people the truth. You continue to lead them astray.
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels,
and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries,
and all knowledge; and though I have all faith,
so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity,
I am nothing. (1 Corinthians 13:1-2 KJV)
So according to Paul, you are nothing... if only because your doctrine promotes knowledge and faith and understanding, but denies the critical requirement for eternal life in the Kingdom of God which is love and charity.
Dive is destroying your false doctrines from another angle which Im sure you understand but which you ignore because your allegiance to the doctrines of men overrides the doctrine of Christ.
Originally posted by @sonship Again ??!! And AGAIN? and AGAIN? and AGAIN.?
You've never made a credible moral argument. You've just used circular logic. Your ideology is one rooted in morally incoherent stupendously demented violence and all you've offered is your assertion that it is "perfect morality".
Originally posted by @fmf You've never made a credible moral argument. You've just used circular logic. Your ideology is one rooted in morally incoherent stupendously demented violence and all you've offered is your assertion that it is "perfect morality".
Ask me if I sit around waiting for you to pronounce a Christian's argument as a "credible" and "coherent" moral argument.
You don't have a credible or coherent argument to waver between two definitions of yourself as an "agnostic atheist".
Sounds like your trying to leave some escape route of ambiguity to avoid having weak arguments exposed.