Kumbaya My Lord

Originally posted by @divegeester
You're just angry sonship.

This is discussion forum and protocol and basic honesty dictates that posters give credit to their sourses, you never do. You like to reflect the ideas of others as though they were your own. I don't like this, I think it is dishonest. I also disagree with many of your very strange beliefs and call you out over them.

I ...[text shortened]... rum then I suggest, as has been suggest many many times before, that you start a blog somewhere.

As calm and unflappable as your posture is your arguments are not correspondingly effective.

On the trinity - weak arguments from you.
On annhilation - weak arguments from you there too.

You posture yourself like you object and, I can't STAND people's disagreement.
Oh, I can take disagreement in spades.
I am not impressed with disagreements not backed with better reasons but instead advice to go start a blog.

As for the things I seek to minister here not being mine?
They are mine, Some expressions which I find useful just may not have all originated from me.

As for not giving credit to influences?
That is simply a lie.

As for reflecting the ideas of others?
You not liking it doesn't account for much more than your likes and dislikes.

If you HAD a legitimate case about me stealing others' writings to make them appear original it is strange that you have not yet accepted the offer to formally complain to whatever original publishers about it.

In short there is nothing much more here than your personal dislike for some posters' style. A style which you dishonestly claim is plagiarism when I constantly provide source links - SO THAT PEOPLE CAN GO AND READ MORE - Duh.

Now the emotional part,
I forgive you but I don't think I will discuss anything more with you.
Don't over play the mad issue.

Anything personal is forgiven.
But "Go off and start a blog" doesn't do the job for you as would well reasoned interpretations which effectively counter the "strange" ideas you don't agree with.

"Go off and start your blog" is not an effective substitute for better arguments on the three-oneness of God. Nor is that advice an effective demonstration of saving your weak arguments on annhilationism.

The most important thing that the record needs to be made clear about is this:
Sounding LIKE other ministers of the word of God is no crime in and of itself.
You mean to cause me to feel bad about it.
I feel great about it - backfire on you.

And I WANT people to go and READ MORE from the sources that I sound like or quote.
You don't seem to get this obvious clue.

Rather than conceal sources of some influence I ENCOURAGE readers to check out MORE those sources.

Here it goes again.
Great reading and teaching at www.ministrybooks.org

Originally posted by @sonship
As calm and unflappable as your posture is your arguments are not correspondingly effective.

On the trinity - weak arguments from you.
On annhilation - weak arguments from you there too.

You posture yourself like you object and, I can't STAND people's disagreement.
Oh, I can take disagreement in spades.
I am not impressed with disagreeme ...[text shortened]... ORE those sources.

Here it goes again.
Great reading and teaching at www.ministrybooks.org

Stop pouting sonship.

This is a debate and discussion forum and disagreements occur all the time. You are not above it, you and your ideas are not beyond challenge or reproach. If you don't like being challenged on your beliefs and ideas and if you can't engage in the fray without indulging in these emotional outbursts, then I suggest you find another outlet for your thoughts where you won't be challenged. I've been a paying active member of this website for nearly a decade and I am not going to stop challenging ideas which I disagree with just because the other party gets a pout on.

If you are going to claim that people on other worlds are witnessing the eternal burning in hell as a warning to them, then repeatedly deny saying it, virtually call me a liar for claiming you did, then when proven that you did just blame the person from who's book you LIFTED it, then disappear in a huff and refuse to apologise...then I'm afraid you are going to get some flack old chap.

Originally posted by @divegeester

Stop pouting sonship.

No effective rebuttal of trinitarian thought or eternal perdition yet.

This is a debate and discussion forum and disagreements occur all the time.

Didn't say otherwise.

You are not above it,

Never said i was above it. Next?

you and your ideas are not beyond challenge or reproach.

Never said they were. I said that you objections are weakly argued.
You seem to know they are so opt to dismiss the poster as being more appropriately a blog writer.

Who do you suppose you're fooling with this maneuver?

If you don't like being challenged

Never said I didn't like being challenged.
In fact I have said such ideas as I have written SHOULD be examined carefully and tested.

I admire the Bereans who search the Scripture to see if these things are so.
And for the record there are a number of poster here I get along with reasonably well whom i KNOW do not agree with all I have written.

No effective counter argument on the triune God or eternal perdition yet.
When you launch a good counter argument I will admit that THAT is a good counter argument.

We're not the first Bible readers to examine these concepts in the last 2,000 so years.
We won't be the last.

I saw your Shema argument.
I countered it.

I saw your arguments that God WOULD NOT punish forever except by non-existence.
It was weak as we compare it to the words of Scripture.

I saw your argument about parables and taking details too literately.
That I thought was a little more valid.
But I pointed out that even taking Luke 16 on Lazarus and the rich man as a parable, the parable seems to have the POINT of being aware that God can punish AFTER physical death.

My question to you - was Jesus unrighteous to tell us that story with those details then, i they were misleading ? No reply do I remember getting from you on that question.

Its just a parable is 1.) questionable and 2.) doesn't do much for the point the parable seems to TEACH.

No effective counter argument did I ever see to that.
"Go start a blog" I saw.

on your beliefs and ideas and if you can't engage in the fray without indulging in these emotional outbursts,

Regardless of how much you posture this up be sonsip not being able to tolerate disagreement, it has not been demonstrated that what the real problem is is that you have no effective counter to stuff I wrote that you don't like.

Being familiar by now with your modis opandi, I don't expect much else from you.
You'll buckle down and REPEAT, REPEAT, REPEAT your caricature about aliens that you posture I INSISTED upon, when I didn't.

Then we hear about space aliens and torture racks.
NO effective examination of Scripture to prove words coming out of the mouth of Christ should not mean something horrible awaits those who utterly reject Him.

"Hear Oh Israel - the Lord your God is one" was examined more than once.
I have no problem of saying to a disagreeing poster - "Now that what you have said here, I think is a good argument for your side."

I may not agree. But I can recognize something that causes me to reconsider.
You don't ever have much along those lines. Sorry.

But you do repeat your caricatures, dusting them off and trying them once again for perhaps a new crowd of readers.

When are you going to bring up the space alien thing and the hanging in chains ?
We're about due another rehash of that, in accord with your custom.

then I suggest you find another outlet for your thoughts where you won't be challenged.

Look genius - not standing to be argued against is not the same as not bothering to re-answer the same old repeated weak arguments from the same unteachable poster.

Who do you think you're fooling with this "Sonship cannot stand to be disagreed with" line ??

Your spinning vain repetition of bad arguments as mighty victories of debate.

I've been a paying active member of this website for nearly a decade and I am not going to stop challenging ideas which I disagree with just because the other party gets a pout on.

I like the way you slipped that one in there - ' Oh I pay MONEY here to participate."
That's good.
That doesn't do much for your weak counter arguments of my supposed "strange" ideas.

But that was cute the way you slipped financial commitment in here to maybe add some needed heft to your disagreements with me.

If you are going to claim that people on other worlds are witnessing the eternal burning in hell as a warning to them, then repeatedly deny saying it, virtually call me a liar for claiming you did, then when proven that you did just blame the person from who's book you LIFTED it, then disappear in a huff and refuse to apologise...then I'm afraid you are going to get some flack old chap.

I don't take back a WORD of that original discussion.
Public use rules of written material allow for me loosely paraphrasing Robert Govette's book on that matter of deterrence in punishment.

You repeat this because it is the only ace you think you have.
If you had a more effective or even ANOTHER argument for annhilationism or no deterrence I think you would have found one by now.

Furthermore I think some better arguments are OUT there.
Maybe you're too lazy to research some.

I don't think you ever proved that it was totally unreasonable to think that in God creating ALL THINGS NEW, that He just might create other beings.

And if God made an OPEN DISPLAY of His victory over opposing forces of evil in the paste, WHY on earth is it SO outlandish to think He might do so more in the age of the eternal future?

" ... Stripping off the rulers and the authorities, He made a display of them
openly, triumphing over them in it." (Colossians 2:15)

If in the past God made an open display of His triumph over mighty evil enemies of God, why in principle is it so outlandish to think He would do so again ?

AN OPEN DISPLAY of His triumph over rebellious evil forces, Dive.
So what is so "strange" that Govette says eternal punishment would be a open display as a deterrent to any possible future observers of this or any possible world ?

And if all you have is " Sonship can't take disagreement" please follow it with "gobble gobble!" ... silly turkey.

You seem angry and upset sonship.

Divegeester prides him self in suppsedly being able to wear out someone he disagrees with with repetition.

He thinks posting here obligates a poster to re-argue down the same weak complaints again and again with the same person.

If you don't monotonously re-argue his caricatures, he says that you're someone who can't stand to be disagreed. Cute but phony.

I don't know who he thinks he is impressing with this tactic. Maybe it is Divegeester who can't stand not being able to put forth a counter argument that is effective on what he considers a strange belief.

"Argue perpetually and repetitiously with my poor counter arguments forever here."

If you don't you get the strut braggadocio from Divegeester that you can't stand to be disagreed with. Throwing in a boast of his financial support to the website is then suppose to help his weak case.

Originally posted by @divegeester
You seem angry and upset sonship.

A few words about me seeming to be so angry and upset might help your feeble counterpoints.

Originally posted by @divegeester
You seem angry and upset sonship.

You sound like you like to chit chat in a trolling manner.
And when your ideas are dealt with with some discussion, "Go write a blog" is your only defense.

If you cannot defend your chit chat little liners, don't blame me for verbosity.
You just don't have that much that can be well defended on some subject.

Originally posted by @sonship
I saw your argument about parables and taking details too literately.
That I thought was a little more valid.
But I pointed out that even taking [b]Luke 16 on Lazarus and the rich man as a parable, the parable seems to have the POINT of being aware that God can punish AFTER physical death.

My question to you - was Jesus unrighteous to tell us that ...[text shortened]... is " Sonship can't take disagreement" please follow it with "gobble gobble!" ... silly turkey.[/b]

What was strange about your hung out in chains and space aliens thing is how you denied you'd come out with it, then you tried saying you couldn't remember coming out with it, then you suggested divegeester had lied about you coming out with it, and then when he produced it, you denied that it was merely a bit of Alex-Jones style boggle eyed fulmination, and then you denied that you had simply plagiarized it, and then you disappeared in a cloud of your own damaged vanity for a couple of weeks. And here you are, back, spitting poison chips Eladar style. Definitely strange stuff. 😛

Originally posted by @fmf
What was strange about your hung out in chains and space aliens thing is how you denied you'd come out with it, then you tried saying you couldn't remember coming out with it, then you suggested divegeester had lied about you coming out with it, and then when he produced it, you denied that it was merely a bit of Alex-Jones style boggle eyed fulmination, and th ...[text shortened]... weeks. And here you are, back, spitting poison chips Eladar style. Definitely strange stuff. 😛

It's part of what makes coming here so interesting.

Originally posted by @sonship
You sound like you like to chit chat in a trolling manner.
And when your ideas are dealt with with some discussion, "Go write a blog" is your only defense.

If you cannot defend your chit chat little liners, don't blame me for verbosity.
You just don't have that much that can be well defended on some subject.

What I see is just one big bundle of vain religious pomposity sonship. You don't like being challenged on your strange beliefs, you behave like FMF has just described, you lack the humility to apologise for insinuating I am a liar and you frequently strop off in a huff.

Could someone point out the exact words "space aliens" to me in this post ?

God's design after life is past, is to destroy the uncorrected.
Corrective dealings have not done them any good. ...

Warning has failed. God will show that He loves righteousness and hates iniquity. If there are laws and threats attached warning of the breaking of those laws, those consequences cannot be a paper posturing. They must be executed. He must be a Righteous Governor.

He will not prove to be a careless faker.
He will prove to mean what He has patiently warned of with mercy and tolerance. Now the uncorrected sinner has been hardened by God's longsuffering. The character of God as Creator and King will fall upon him since His character as Savior has been rejected.

The saved will glorify God with their endless happiness. But the lost will glorify Him with their endless woe. They will be hung out in chains of punishment as an example to deter other worlds. That punishment is designed to deter others from like guilt is evidenced so often in the Bible.

Originally posted by @sonship
Could someone point out the exact words [b] "space aliens" to me in this paragraph ?[/b]

It's clearly a reference to whatever creatures or beings you imagine are living on those "other worlds" that you were babbling on about, whom you - or the guy you plagiarized - reckoned would be "deterred" by people [here on earth] ~ with different beliefs from you ~ being hung out, burning, on chains for eternity, by your god figure.

Originally posted by @sonship
Could someone point out the exact words [b] "space aliens" to me in this post ?

God's design after life is past, is to destroy the uncorrected.
Corrective dealings have not done them any good. ...

Warning has failed. God will show that He loves righteousness and hates iniquity. If there are laws and threats attached warning of the bre ...[text shortened]... shment is designed to deter others from like guilt is evidenced so often in the Bible.

[/b]

Other worlds are in space, the beings living on them are "aliens" by definition. Therefore: space aliens.

We can get to: "the lost will glorify him in their eternal woe" strangeness as soon as you are ready.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Other worlds are in space, the beings living on them are "aliens" by definition. Therefore: space aliens.

We can get to: "the lost will glorify him in their eternal woe" strangeness as soon as you are ready.

" And I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more." (Rev. 21:1)

"And He who sits on the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And He said, Write, for these words are faithful and true." (Revelation 21:5)

1.) How do you know creating all things new means this won't involve other lives ?

2.) Did I insist, or did Govette insist, that there will be observing creatures on other worlds ?

Since you nor I know of what "a new heaven and new earth" created by God may entail, any persistent representation that I do know or insisted upon it, is sensational hype on your part.

... a tempest in a teapot being exploited for all you think you can get from it.