A question of honesty

Originally posted by Suzianne
But good luck on getting Christians to reject the entire Bible. You might catch a few that are weak of faith, but overall, I don't see it happening.

It is sonship who raised the idea of rejecting the entire Bible over the issue of his advocacy of "eternal torture" and in the event of people rejecting his interpretation and his attempted moral justification of the notion of justice contained in the torture of non-believers for eternity.

Originally posted by Suzianne
What is untenable to ME, is you constantly co-mingling the varied opinions of various Christians into one, single untenable view of Christianity. This is WHY there are many Christian denominations. We don't ALL hold the same views on everything.

I am not "co-mingling" sonship's and RJHinds' opinions on "eternal torture" with divegeester's opinion on the issue at all.

Originally posted by FMF
divegeester himself has cited the "eternal torture" ideology repeatedly on this (his own) thread. The instance of me supposedly "inserting" the point into this thread was a direct response to divegeester saying [b]"To genuinely believe that another human being deserves to be burnt alive for eternity for not believing in eternal suffering must be one of the saddest indictments of the Christian faith ever posted in this forum."[/b]

Yes well, obviously your entire point in bringing it up AT ALL is to perhaps stick your foot in the crack of the slightly open door you see here with your absurd claim that "IF you think this is ideology is false, then you MUST necessarily reject the entire Bible". You ARE advocating this. To shove the guilt of advocating rejecting the Bible onto sonship is just more misdirection. I GET divegeester's opinion. It matches mine. Your detailing his belief here YET AGAIN is just more misdirection from your advice to "reject the entire Bible". THIS "advice" is what I am taking you to task here for, NOT divegeester's belief, which I am WELL familiar with. I'll say again that I don't see him taking the advice either, so what I'm saying is, save your breath.

(So you can stop the misdirection. It doesn't work on me. And yes, I am perfectly aware that when you write to me in this forum, you are writing for not just me but for your gallery as well, but I'm not buying it, so you really have no "transparent" reason for continuing this method.)

Originally posted by Suzianne
Yes well, obviously your entire point in bringing it up AT ALL is to perhaps stick your foot in the crack of the slightly open door you see here with your absurd claim that "IF you think this is ideology is false, then you MUST necessarily reject the entire Bible". You ARE advocating this.

sonship has advocated this.

Originally posted by FMF
I am not "co-mingling" sonship's and RJHinds' opinions on "eternal torture" with divegeester's opinion on the issue at all.

Perhaps not on THIS issue, but this "co-mingling" of apparently disparate opinions is always there in your denouncements of Christianity.

Originally posted by Suzianne
To shove the guilt of advocating rejecting the Bible onto sonship is just more misdirection.

But it was sonship who said "So if eternal punishment is unjust then we must discard the Bible; for the Bible teaches eternal punishment". not me. On "Loving Jesus" and "eternal torture", page 6.

Originally posted by Suzianne
THIS "advice" is what I am taking you to task here for, NOT divegeester's belief, which I am WELL familiar with. I'll say again that I don't see him taking the advice either, so what I'm saying is, save your breath.

The 'reject the Bible if you reject the "eternal torture" brand of "justice"' opinion is sonship's not divegeester's. Divegeester doesn't subscribe to the "eternal torture" brand of "justice". I see no reason why divegeester would accept sonship's advice seeing as he doesn't accept sonship's version of the theology.

Originally posted by FMF
sonship has advocated this.

Let me add a slight correction. Sonship does not believe the ideology is false, and so HE is not advocating the rejection of the entire Bible.

On the other hand, YOU are advocating the rejection of the entire Bible and therefore latch onto his quote as some sort of justification for divegeester to reject the entire Bible, since divegeester does believe the ideology is false.

But nice try, nonetheless.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Perhaps not on THIS issue, but this "co-mingling" of apparently disparate opinions is always there in your denouncements of Christianity.

You are of course free to confront any misstating of what your ideology happens to be at any time it may happen to occur. I am confronting sonship on the moral underpinning of his concept of "justice" and you seem to be tackling me about it rather than sonship. Indeed, you seem to be "co-mingling" your desire to land some 'butt-kicking/name-taking" forum punches on one hand, and your desire to be coherent and principled about your differences and disagreements with other Christians on the other hand. These are disparate and not especially mutually compatible objectives on your part.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Let me add a slight correction. Sonship does not believe the ideology is false, and so HE is not advocating the rejection of the entire Bible.

Of course sonship does not believe his own ideology is false. Of course he doesn't advocate rejecting the Bible. But he did say "So if eternal punishment is unjust then we must discard the Bible; for the Bible teaches eternal punishment". There are several Christians here that do not believe punishment by way of eternal torture is just. So presumably sonship's "if eternal punishment is unjust then we must discard the Bible" exhortation is aimed at them.

Originally posted by FMF
The 'reject the Bible if you reject the "eternal torture" brand of "justice"' opinion is sonship's not divegeester's. Divegeester doesn't subscribe to the "eternal torture" brand of "justice".

Precisely. Stop misdirecting AGAIN.

divegeester believes the ideology IS false, and therefore THAT is why you submit sonship's quote to divegeester as justification of why he should reject the entire Bible.

I see no reason why divegeester would accept sonship's advice seeing as he doesn't accept sonship's version of the theology.

Really? It's only what you are basing your entire advice on.

"If you think the notion of eternal torture is unjust then, according to sonship, you must discard the Bible. As he said on another thread recently, "...if eternal punishment is unjust then we must discard the Bible". Apparently it's a take it or leave it deal-breaker for a Christian life in sonship's view."

Isn't this what you just said to divegeester? Still can't see it? No, I think you see it quite well, else you would not have launched your campaign to begin with. The only thing I've added since then is that you latch on to this one thread of sonship's only because it meshes with and becomes YOUR advice to divegeester.

Originally posted by Suzianne
On the other hand, YOU are advocating the rejection of the entire Bible and therefore latch onto his quote as some sort of justification for divegeester to reject the entire Bible, since divegeester does believe the ideology is false.

I have never suggested to divegeester ~ in public or in private ~ that he reject the Bible. Not even once. Not even in jest. And I am not suggesting to divegeester that he reject the Bible now.

Originally posted by Suzianne
divegeester believes the ideology IS false, and therefore THAT is why you submit sonship's quote to divegeester as justification of why he should reject the entire Bible.

I am not suggesting that divegeester reject the Bible. I have never suggested to you that you reject the Bible. I have never suggested to sonship that he reject the Bible.

Originally posted by FMF
I have never suggested to divegeester ~ in public or in private ~ that he reject the Bible. Not even once. Not even in jest. And I am not suggesting to divegeester that he reject the Bible now.

Of course not, you probably wouldn't have the guts to sign your name to such an idea, but you promote this quote of sonship's at this precise time in the thread for a reason. The reason is that you are, in fact, advising him in this way and wish to misdirect by claiming "it's all sonship's idea".

Please.

Originally posted by Suzianne

Originally posted by FMF
"If you think the notion of eternal torture is unjust then, according to sonship, you must discard the Bible. As he said on another thread recently, "...if eternal punishment is unjust then we must discard the Bible". Apparently it's a take it or leave it deal-breaker for a Christian life in sonship's view."

Originally posted by Suzianne
Isn't this what you just said to divegeester?

Yes it's what I said to divegeester. It's a comment on sonship's preposterously self-regarding and autocratic pronouncement. It is not in any shape or form me giving "advice" to divegeester. You completely got the wrong end of the stick. I have never, and never would, advise divegeester to reject the Bible.