Divegeester's Judgement Quandry

@sonship said
Divegeester,

" [Christ] Whose winnowing fan is in His hand. And He will thoroughly cleanse His threshing floor and will gather His wheat into the barn,

but the chaff He will burn up with unquenchable fire." (Matt. 3:12)

Is that my version of Jesus Christ or the Bible's version of Jesus Christ ?

Is the chaff, literally chaff? It’s parabolic sonship.

Let go of your hatred of the lost, they won’t be “glorifying Jesus in their endless woe”

You are wrong.

Ever admitted you were wrong about something in this forum?

@divegeester

Right now you have a surrender evasion rather than any checkmate questions.

Are the words "and severity" not in your version of Romans 11:22

"Behold then the kindness and severity of God ..."

Your ancient manuscripts don't have "and severity" in the original language there ?

@sonship said
@divegeester

Right now you have a surrender evasion rather than any checkmate questions.

Are the words "and severity" not in your version of Romans 11:22

"Behold then the kindness and severity of God ..."

Your ancient manuscripts don't have "and severity" in the original language there ?

I’m not interested in your question until you answer mine. You mocked me for claiming my questions to ToO were “checkmate” questions. Well here I am taking your mocking and rubbing your pious nose it it.

Checkmate question sonship:
Will my rejection of your trinity teaching in any way preclude me from being spirit filled and therefore from being saved?

@divegeester

Is the chaff, literally chaff? It’s parabolic sonship.

Let go of your hatred of the lost, they won’t be “glorifying Jesus in their endless woe”

You are wrong.

Ever admitted you were wrong about something in this forum?

I just said within 24 hours ago that I would probably rephrase something different.

And I also said with 24 hours ago that I admitted that "the lost" certainly would indicate people.

Your red herring on me is beside the real point.

It is possible that I interpret John the Baptist's words about unquenchable fire wrongly. Maybe you water it down to try to make them indicate something NOT dreadful.

The overall impact of the passage is COMFORT contrasted with DREADFUL warning. All things considered - non-existence doesn't fit.

You know it doesn't. And that is why you continually opt out of replying to my question about "eternal destruction" meaning non-existence.

Your conscience knows you cannot twist the Bible to that degree.

@sonship said
Your red herring on me is beside the real point.

This whole thread is a red herring!

Have you ever admitted in this forum that you were wrong about one of your doctrines or beliefs?

Are you ready to take on my checkmate question?

Sonship.

You mocked me for claiming my questions to ToO were “checkmate” questions. Well here I am taking your mocking and rubbing your pious nose it it.

Checkmate question sonship:
Will my rejection of your trinity teaching in any way preclude me from being spirit filled and therefore from being saved?

@divegeester

You really would like to change the subject.

"Go back to the trinity. Go back to the trinity, please."

I'm not going to chase after your red herring destraction from your quandry of being ashamed that there is a teaching from the lips of Jesus Christ about eternal punishment.

If you want to be ashamed of His words, YOU go ahead and be ashamed.

I may not like some things I read. But I don't obsess over being in denial that Jesus said them. And His apostles whom He instructed us to listen to also, said them in faithful obedience to His message - to ALL of His message without being partial.

How does my switching SUBJECTS and talking about the Trinity make "the eternal fire" of Matt. 25:41 not mean "eternal punishment" in verse 46?

Explain please how leaving this subject and talking about - filled with spirit - trinity - etc. CHANGE Matthew 25:41,46 ??

@sonship said
@divegeester

You really would like to change the subject.

"Go back to the trinity. Go back to the trinity, please."

I'm not going to chase after your red herring destraction from your quandry of being ashamed that there is a teaching from the lips of Jesus Christ about eternal punishment.

If you want to be ashamed of His words. YOU go ahead and be ashamed. ...[text shortened]... also, said them in faithful obedience to His message - to ALL of His message without being partial.

Are you starting to understand why I call them “checkmate” questions sonship?


Will my rejection of your trinity teaching in any way preclude me from being spirit filled and therefore from being saved?

@sonship said
How does my switching SUBJECTS and talking about the Trinity make "the eternal fire" of Matt. 25:41 not mean "eternal punishment" in verse 46?

Explain please how leaving this subject and talking about - filled with spirit - trinity - etc. CHANGE Matthew 25:41,46 ??

When you answer my checkmate question, which you mocked me about...then I will answer a question of yours.

How’s that for a fair deal?

@divegeester

Checkmate question sonship:
Will my rejection of your trinity teaching in any way preclude me from being spirit filled and therefore from being saved?

When you are doing badly in one chess game do you insist that you go back to another that you think you won?

Christ and eternal judgment are an embarrassment to you it seems.

I consider what I may not like in the Gospels in light of these words -

"For whoever is ashamed of Me and of My words, of this one will the Son of Man be ashamed when He comes in His glory and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels." (Luke 9:26)

You're ashamed of His words about the eternal fire being the eternal punishment in Matt. 25 aren't you ?

@divegeester

You use BOLD here like me to show that this is really important. Fine.

Checkmate question sonship:
Will my rejection of your trinity teaching in any way preclude me from being spirit filled and therefore from being saved?

Your evasive switching of subjects with a big red herring (that HAS been addressed many times already) is noticed probably by more posters than just me.

If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ he is not of Him.
Romans 8:9. If you are "not of Him" you need to be concerned for your salvation.

I don't care how you discuss layers of finer doctrinal concepts about the nature of God.

How does this make "the severity" go away from the oracles of God which tell us "Behold then the kindness AND SEVERITY of God" ?

The former debate doesn't change what is written about the severity of God needing to be seen WITH His kindness, does it?

You don't have some checkmate escape from the issue.
What you are doing is tossing the chess board and all of its pieces away in chaotic anger, and being nostalgic about another past game.

Divegeester,

Time to tell me again to calm down and not be flustered maybe.

But first tell me about this passage -

for true and righteous are His judgments; for He has judged the great harlot, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and He has avenged the blood of His servants at her hand.

And a second time they have said, HALLELUJAH! And her smoke goes up unto the ages of the ages." (Rev. 19:1-3)

If I say "If you talk about the Trinity just like me you're saved"
Does it change this passage?

If I say "if you don't talk about the Trinity just like me you're not saved."
Does THAT change this passage either?

Seems either way, there the hallelujahs that the smoke of God's enemies goes up forever regardless of the other discussion, doesn't it?

Divegeester, concerning your checkmate question.

I imagined myself answering - "You have to use exactly every phrase, expression, and example I use about the Trinity to be saved."

But the New Testament still reads "But I will show you whom you should fear: fear Him whom after killing , has the authority to cast into Gehenna; yes, I tell you, fear this One." (Luke 12:5)

But if I imagine answering your checkmate question - "Dive you may not use the same illustrations, explanations, examples, attempting to explain the Trinity and be saved." The verse is still there in my NT.

"But I will show you whom you should fear: fear Him whom after killing , has the authority to cast into Gehenna; yes, I tell you, fear this One." (Luke 12:5)

Replying to your nostalgic checkmate question one way or the other seems to have no effect at all on what I am told in Luke 12:5 about God's power to punish beyond physical death. Jesus' mouth spoke these words.

Trinity discussions one way or the other don't make His words go away.

@sonship said
@divegeester

Checkmate question sonship:
Will my rejection of your trinity teaching in any way preclude me from being spirit filled and therefore from being saved?

When you are doing badly in one chess game do you insist that you go back to another that you think you won?

Christ and eternal judgment are an embarrassment to you it seems.

I co ...[text shortened]... med of His words about the eternal fire being the eternal punishment in Matt. 25 aren't you ?

I take it that even though you mocked my for claiming I had certain questions for certain posters that put them in a metaphorical checkmate... you simple don’t have the fortitude to put your courage where your mouth is.