17 May 22
1 edit
@fmf saidYou can build a case on the circumstantial evidence it is done all the time and come
If you don't know how it started [>1], and are not interested [>2], then the only thing you are doing is assigning values [>3], making up all the whys [>4], and putting up definitions [>5] without a complete view of the whole [>6].
[1] Neither of us knows "how it started", or if it did.
[2] I have not said I am "not interested"; hey now, KellyJay, just because [2a] n ...[text shortened]... r whether you will just blow it off and make some generic assertions about your faith. We shall see.
away with a strong case as we narrow down what makes the most reasonable sense.
All the pieces, all of the reasons we come up with, must consider everything, and it
must all fit together in whatever worldview we hold as valid. If there are unexplainable
things that come into conflict with each as our explanations are pieced together, then
whatever we are trying to put in as an explanation isn't working properly, we don't
have a good picture of the whole. Burying our heads in the sand because we don't
have an eyewitness never flys when something is important and we need to know.
17 May 22
@kellyjay saidIt is your prerogative to believe in and champion whatever scenario that amounts to "strong" circumstantial evidence and the "most reasonable sense" you want.
You can build a case on the circumstantial evidence it is done all the time and come
away with a strong case as we narrow down what makes the most reasonable sense.
17 May 22
@kellyjay saidI have no doubt that this is what you do in your efforts to establish, in your own mind, a worldview that you hold to be "valid".
All the pieces, all of the reasons we come up with, must consider everything, and it
must all fit together in whatever worldview we hold as valid.
@kellyjay saidI have no difficulty imagining your process of dealing with "unexplainable" things and I have no reason to doubt that you have arrived at a personal opinion about "a good picture of the whole" about which you now have firm convictions.
If there are unexplainable
things that come into conflict with each as our explanations are pieced together, then
whatever we are trying to put in as an explanation isn't working properly, we don't
have a good picture of the whole.
17 May 22
@kellyjay saidI suggest you take this point up with someone who is "burying [their] heads in the sand". It appears to me that, when you have encountered "something important that [you] need to know", you have settled on theological answers served up by one of the major religions.
Burying our heads in the sand because we don't
have an eyewitness never flys when something is important and we need to know.
17 May 22
@fmf saidIf all you got is we have to think about it and we will never know🥳, well okay not going to ask you for a likely possible answer.
I suggest you take this point up with someone who is "burying [their] heads in the sand". It appears to me that, when you have encountered "something important that [you] need to know", you have settled on theological answers served up by one of the major religions.
@kellyjay saidI've told you what I think. I answered your questions point- blank - although you have basically blown the answers off. I am not going to try to imagine something that competes with something you imagine to be true. We can but speculate about these things.
If all you got is we have to think about it and we will never know🥳, well okay not going to ask you for a likely possible answer.
The fact that you have encountered a narrative and ideology that appeals to you does not have any bearing on me, nor does it create any onus on me to offer you a corresponding "certainty".
17 May 22
@kellyjay saidThird time of asking, I’ll try and make it even simpler for you as you are clearly struggling:
Hell is a reality; you can make fun of it, and anyone who acknowledges it will not
change things. You can do a lot of things here, all of which, in the end, you will give
an account for; they will either be brought under the blood of Christ, or you will
answer for them directly.
Based on your understanding of scripture, do you think that I am at risk of being being cast into the lake of fire by Jesus, for no other reason than not believing in people being cast into the lake of fire?
17 May 22
2 edits
@divegeester saidA simple answer I have given the ONLY thing you need concern yourself with is Jesus Christ. Not me or disagreeing with me on any topic!
Third time of asking, I’ll try and make it even simpler for you as you are clearly struggling:
Based on your understanding of scripture, do you think that I am at risk of being being cast into the lake of fire by Jesus, for no other reason than not believing in people being cast into the lake of fire?
17 May 22
@kellyjay saidIf you are too scared to speak your mind you shouldn’t feel impinged but my asking you this question and feeling you have to hide behind another of your meaningless religious tropes; just say “I’d rather not say divegeester”
A simple answer I have given
the ONLY thing you need concern yourself with is Jesus Christ. Not me or disagreeing with me on any topic!
I could at least respect you then.
17 May 22
@divegeester saidThe last thing talking to you produces in me is fear!! The only thing that could cause you to be cast into lake of fire 🔥 is the one who laid down His life for your sins. If He went that far to save you and you ended up in Hell anyway you deserved it.
If you are too scared to speak your mind you shouldn’t feel impinged but my asking you this question and feeling you have to hide behind another of your meaningless religious tropes; just say “I’d rather not say divegeester”
I could at least respect you then.
If you deserved Hell and instead He saved you. you did not deserved it, none of us do!