Biblical literalists and literalisms

Originally posted by @fmf
You are wrong. It is a straight forward question. Furthermore it is on topic. Here it is again:

Are the "chains" - that you believe the burning non-Christians are hung out on as a deterrence to beings on other planets - literal or allegorical?

You're regurgitating someone else's vomit which has been dealt with. - "chains" and all.

Does Divegeester's old vomit taste good in your mouth ?

- sonship

Originally posted by @gswilm
You're regurgitating someone else's vomit which has been dealt with. - "chains" and all.

Does Divegeester's old vomit taste good in your mouth ?

If I am not mistaken, when you came out with the 'hung out in chains' thing, it was addressed to me. I am 'regurgitating' what you said. You came out with the 'hung out in chains' thing, nobody else. And I have never referred to it as "vomit".

So, are the "chains" literal or metaphorical, to your way of thinking?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Would you care to give me an example of something supernatural that you believe in (like love) that isn't based on circular logic or based purely on the sincerity/certainty of your assertions? You do believe in the existence of love don't you?

You come up with evidence of the "lake of fire" actually existing, and I will tell you if it seems credible.

Originally posted by @fmf
You come up with evidence of the "lake of fire" actually existing, and I will tell you if it seems credible.

How do you know that what seems credible to you really is credible?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
How do you know that what seems credible to you really is credible?

Stop dancing around. Give me your three favourite/strongest pieces evidence that prove there is/will be a "lake of fire". I will tell you whether I find them credible, while at the same time taking you at your word if you tell me that you find them credible.

Originally posted by @fmf
Stop dancing around. Give me your three favourite/strongest pieces evidence that prove there is/will be a "lake of fire". I will tell you whether I find them credible, while at the same time taking you at your word if you tell me that you find them credible.

You're the one dancing around. I asked you for an example of something supernatural that you believe in (like love) that isn't based on circular logic or based purely on the sincerity/certainty of your assertions? What does a lake of fire have to do with this?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You're the one dancing around. I asked you for an example of something supernatural that you believe in (like love) that isn't based on circular logic or based purely on the sincerity/certainty of your assertions? What does a lake of fire have to do with this?

You're the one with the burden of proof, so give me what you feel are your three most credible pieces of evidence and I will tell you whether I think they are credible. I am not interested in your fourth, or fifth, or sixth most favourites pieces. Just the three clinchers for you. And I am not interested in any of your extraneous questions.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I asked you for an example of something supernatural that you believe in (like love)...

There isn't anything "supernatural" that I believe in. Love is not "supernatural".

Originally posted by @fmf
You're the one with the burden of proof, so give me what you feel are your three most credible pieces of evidence and I will tell you whether I think they are credible. I am not interested in your fourth, or fifth, or sixth most favourites pieces. Just the three clinchers for you. And I am not interested in any of your extraneous questions.

Would you mind telling me how you know that what think is credible really is credible? If you think it's credible because you find it credible, that's circular reasoning right there.

Originally posted by @fmf
There isn't anything "supernatural" that I believe in. Love is not "supernatural".

So how do you measure love?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Would you mind telling me how you know that what think is credible really is credible?

I'm not interested in this question. Either provide me with the evidence proving the existence of a "lake of fire" or just forget about it. If you can't say what your evidence is, so be it.

If you think it's credible because you find it credible, that's circular reasoning right there.

There is no need for me to explain anything to you. I am not trying to convert you to or from anything. If I find it not credible while you find it credible, then all we have is a disagreement.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So how do you measure love?

Are you still saying that love is "supernatural" or have you suddenly dropped that? That's a rhetorical question, so there's no need to answer it. Start a thread about 'how to measure love' and see who wants to discuss it with you. I don't.

I am interested in what evidence you have that a "lake of fire" exists.

Originally posted by @fmf
I'm not interested in this question. Either provide me with the evidence proving the existence of a "lake of fire" or just forget about it. If you can't say what your evidence is, so be it.

[b]If you think it's credible because you find it credible, that's circular reasoning right there.

There is no need for me to explain anything to you. I am not try ...[text shortened]... thing. If I find it not credible while you find it credible, then all we have is a disagreement.[/b]

Ok so why should I be interested in your question? The only evidence for a 'lake of fire' that I am aware of is that which is recorded in the Bible.

You say you want evidence that does not involve circular reasoning but when asked about your own circular reasoning you ignore the question.

If everyone simply uses their own standard of credibility no one has to admit to anything and everyone can simply disagree about every thing they want.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Ok so why should I be interested in your question?

You don't have to be interested. Talk to other people, by all means.

Originally posted by @fmf
Are you still saying that love is "supernatural" or have you suddenly dropped that? That's a rhetorical question, so there's no need to answer it. Start a thread about 'how to measure love' and see who wants to discuss it with you. I don't.

I am interested in what evidence you have that a "lake of fire" exists.

Do you believe in the existence of love?

If love is not supernatural what is it and how do you measure it?