1 edit
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeYou have misinterpreted my intent. My contention is that merely professing to be a Christian does not actually make one a Christian. Alex Neil that treacherous dog!
I think, personally, it is a common courtesy in these forums for us to accept we are who we say we are. Am i an 'alleged' atheist, are you an 'alleged' JW? Are we both 'alleged' human beings? (Did Norwich 'allegedly defeat Middlesbrough?)
If we can't even accept we are who we say we are, how can we discuss anything?
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobI have already posted what I think makes a true Christian above. Here it is again.
So what 'makes' a True Christian?
1. The first thing to notice is that true Christians would have love among themselves.
"By this all will know that you are my disciples—if you have love among yourselves" - John 13:35
2. Again its not enough to simply identify yourself as a Christian, you must be living and practicing these beliefs -
“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of the heavens,” but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.” (Matt. 7:21) thus professing to be a Christian is of little value, practicing Christianity is what counts.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAre the Jehovah's Witnesses the only 'True Christians' in your eyes?
I have already posted what I think makes a true Christian above. Here it is again.
1. The first thing to notice is that true Christians would have love among themselves.
"By this all will know that you are my disciples—if you have love among yourselves" - John 13:35
2. Again its not enough to simply identify yourself as a Christian, you mus ...[text shortened]... 1) thus professing to be a Christian is of little value, practicing Christianity is what counts.
2 edits
Originally posted by lemon limeBut you said RBHILL's posts were 'Not incoherent to anyone who is sober.' - which I agreed with, and still do. I do not think we disagree on what RBHILL meant to say, either.
[b]If I've got that wrong, here is your chance to correct me.
Either one of us could be wrong, and there's really only one way to find out what RBHill meant. We can ask him. I don't know if he will answer or not... but if he does, he can either say I was wrong about what he meant or say I was right. Or is this too difficult to understand?
...[text shortened]... he's shown me... because this is what he deserves, and only a hypocrite would complain about it.[/b]
Where (I think) we differ is on the correctness of RBHILL's claim that Dive is the one who needs to provide substantiation. You think RB is correct (right?); I think he's not correct.
I'm not interested in your personal feud with Dive. I'm interested in the debate topic, "Does the Bible really mention eternal suffering?". If you are also interested in this topic, and you in fact agree with RBHILL's contention, as I suspect, please provide some reasons why you think the No-side should be the one to provide justification. Thanks.
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeI showed Dive this passage from the book of John and now he is demanding to know if I am a trinitarian.
Indeed, though on this occasion they were expressed by a Christian.
===========================================================================================
John 1:1-5English Standard Version (ESV)
The Word Became Flesh
1 (A)In the beginning was (B)the Word, and (C)the Word was with God, and (D)the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 (E)All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 (F)In him was life,[a] and (G)the life was the light of men. 5 (H)The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
===========================================================================================
Do you know who the Word is in this passage? [upper case 'W' indicates "the Word" is a person] I'm asking you because there are atheists who know, but Dive is a 'Christian' who apparently doesn't know (or doesn't care to know).
I don't expect to see atheists arguing in favor of the existence of God, and I also don't expect to see Christians working to discredit Christianity. Dive isn't just attacking some particular denomination, it appears he is also attacking all of Christianity.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemI don't know what you've seen over the past year or so. But what I've seen is Dive demanding proof and not providing any of his own. This has been his MO with me as well, so I'm not just speculating over how he has been with anyone else.
But you said RBHILL's posts were 'Not incoherent to anyone who is sober.' - which I agreed with, and still do. I do not think we disagree on what RBHILL meant to say, either.
Where (I think) we differ is on the correctness of RBHILL's claim that Dive is the one who needs to provide substantiation. You think RB is correct (right?); I think he's not ...[text shortened]... ovide some reasons why you think the No-side should be the one to provide justification. Thanks.
edit: Let's put our cards on the table and get real for a moment. If Dives particular brand of theism appears reasonable and plausible to atheists, then what does that tell you? I can tell you what It doesn't mean, it doesn't mean there are atheists who believe there is (or could be) a God... it tells me something else.
Originally posted by lemon limeI would say, as an atheist, that no 'brand of theism appears reasonable or plausible' let alone divegeester's.
I don't know what you've seen over the past year or so. But what I've seen is Dive demanding proof and not providing any of his own. This has been his MO with me as well, so I'm not just speculating over how he has been with anyone else.
[b]edit: Let's put our cards on the table and get real for a moment. If Dives particular brand of theism appears ...[text shortened]... mean there are atheists who believe there is (or could be) a God... it tells me something else.[/b]
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobThey are the only ones that i know of who have love among themselves and who are carrying out Gods will. If you know of any others then let it be known.
So, to the best of your knowledge, Jehovah's Witnesses are the only 'True Christians'?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI love everyone and am carrying out Gods will. (Indirectly and unknowingly via my conscience; aka Gods inner voice). Am i a true Christian?
They are the only ones that i know of who have love among themselves and who are carrying out Gods will. If you know of any others then let it be known.
Originally posted by Proper KnobOne time I asked why no atheists were attacking the 'Christian' divegeester and Wolfgang told me it's because dives theism is reasonable. So at least one atheist here has said it's reasonable. And I don't know if the person who said Dive is "plausible" is an atheist or not... but if I had to guess I would say 'is'.
I would say, as an atheist, that no 'brand of theism appears reasonable or plausible' let alone divegeester's.