An Observation

Originally posted by epiphinehas
[b]In order to buck up this profound nonsense, this time you invented the ...concept of the "heart faith" and the "intellectual faith"!

I did not invent the concept of "intellectual" faith and "heart" faith. It can be found in the book of James:

"You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! Do you want to be s ...[text shortened]... referencing a "heart" faith wherein the will is involved.[/b]

I don't give a fig for any kind of theological scriptures, James' included, and I do not need your mambo jumbo. I asked you specific questions and instead of decent answers I got mere preaching.

Obviously your personal views have not a "holy" or a philosophical basis but surely you are free to live the way you want. However, what is the denomination of yours, which it forces you to set such a "rules" according to your theological beliefs instead of promoting the cornerstone of Christianity -the concept of Love?

Originally posted by black beetle
I don't give a fig for any kind of theological scriptures, James' included, and I do not need your mambo jumbo. I asked you specific questions and instead of decent answers I got mere preaching.

Obviously your personal views have not a "holy" or a philosophical basis but surely you are free to live the way you want. However, what is the denomination ...[text shortened]... logical beliefs instead of promoting the cornerstone of Christianity -the concept of Love?

beetle dude, whats eating you my friend,i have never seen you like this, is it that bad ol putty cat epiphinehas again, man, ive had recourse in the past to censure him for his misuse and mishandling of the word, if he keeps it up, you tell ol robbie and i shall hand him over to Satan for disciplining!

Originally posted by josephw
Spare me your redicule.

If it were so easily resolved, then why is the debate still raging after 2000 years?

Got it all figured out don't you?

Then spare me the preaching.

I guess the debate is still raging because many people wedded to your book are too dim to understand it. No surprise there, really.

No, just the easy stuff.

Originally posted by bbarr
Then spare me the preaching.

I guess the debate is still raging because many people wedded to your book are too dim to understand it. No surprise there, really.

No, just the easy stuff.

You think it's preaching? Then don't read it.(perhaps I do get a bit preachy)

What I said concerning how one is saved, according to the Bible, is true.

While you may not believe God exists, the fact remains that the book does, and what it says about salvation is easy to understand.

But you are right about the people. I don't think it has anything to do with intelligence though. It has more to do with whether they listen to a man or to God.

Originally posted by gaychessplayer
So someone presents an argument that you think is very weak, so that makes him "stupid?" Next, you're talking about "those idiots."

And no, I will NOT look past your rudeness. I think that public forums should obey the "Agree to disagree agreeably" principle. I'm sorry that you do not agree.

For the record, I think that you are extremely intelligent, articulate, and have a lot of interesting things to say.

Well, thanks for your reprimand and your compliment. But you have to see my reaction in the light of the length of time (months and months) several of them post foolishness and try to convince us that they are correct.

Eg. Do you think that God's eternal purpose is to be one with man? It might be man's eternal purpose to be one with God, but the reverse does not apply. (thats from Jaywill).

Epi produces a statement of faith which he calls the gospel, but it includes, sin and death, the death and resurrecution of Christ, hell, repentance, baptism, salvation, salvation guaranteed. .. everything. But not a word about the good works or 'love your neighbour'. In fact he includes a section on works being unprofitable. From what you know of the teachings of Christ would you think that He will say that works is unprofitable ? I dont think so.

Next time I feel I am going to insult someone, i will go have a few cold beers.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
beetle dude, whats eating you my friend,i have never seen you like this, is it that bad ol putty cat epiphinehas again, man, ive had recourse in the past to censure him for his misuse and mishandling of the word, if he keeps it up, you tell ol robbie and i shall hand him over to Satan for disciplining!

Hey rrrobie, one has to wear Chanel No 5 under his kilt in order to just pass over such a profound nonsense, 100 pipers and all; racism and discrimination in the name of Jesus, a person really able to love and accept the human beings! What a shame!

BTW, you 're a Christian to; which denomination of your religion is in accordance with epi's opinions?

Originally posted by black beetle
I don't give a fig for any kind of theological scriptures, James' included, and I do not need your mambo jumbo. I asked you specific questions and instead of decent answers I got mere preaching.

Obviously your personal views have not a "holy" or a philosophical basis but surely you are free to live the way you want. However, what is the denomination ...[text shortened]... logical beliefs instead of promoting the cornerstone of Christianity -the concept of Love?

If you don't accept my explanation, that's OK.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
beetle dude, whats eating you my friend,i have never seen you like this, is it that bad ol putty cat epiphinehas again, man, ive had recourse in the past to censure him for his misuse and mishandling of the word, if he keeps it up, you tell ol robbie and i shall hand him over to Satan for disciplining!

I am convinced that you are a fraud. You have no authority to hand me over to anyone.

The accusations you leveled against me of "misuse and mishandling of the word" you failed to substantiate, and you fled the conversation when challenged.

Originally posted by black beetle
Hey rrrobie, one has to wear Chanel No 5 under his kilt in order to just pass over such a profound nonsense, 100 pipers and all; racism and discrimination in the name of Jesus, a person really able to love and accept the human beings! What a shame!

BTW, you 're a Christian to; which denomination of your religion is in accordance with epi's opinions?

lol beetle, its like how can i say, light and darkness, truth and error, acceptance and rejection, you know like diametrically opposite, as far away as the sunrising is from the sun set, the problem with dudes like him is that they seek to establish there own standards rather than reasonably looking at things objectively and in doing so they establish their own version, thus when we reflect upon their words we cannot see the picture properly because the mirror is distorted, and we get frustrated because we want to ascertain what is the truth of the matter, anyhow, you know, once when i was a teenager sprayed my nether regions with some deodorant (not channel no.5 i hasten to add) and man, i can tell you, it was not pleasant.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
I am convinced that you are a fraud. You have no authority to hand me over to anyone.

The accusations you leveled against me of "misuse and mishandling of the word" you failed to substantiate, and you fled the conversation when challenged.

what are you talking about, i fled the conversation, a Scotsman has never fled anything in his life, and as to whether i have authority or not, it is not i who condemn you, but the scriptures and furthermore, i told you i had no intention of arguing with you, must we stop to kick every dog that barks at us?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what are you talking about, i fled the conversation, a Scotsman has never fled anything in his life, and as to whether i have authority or not, it is not i who condemn you, but the scriptures and furthermore, i told you i had no intention of arguing with you, must we stop to kick every dog that barks at us?

Oh, the scriptures condemn me do they? This coming from a person who claims that the scriptures condemn no one. Or did you forget your little spiel about hell being non-existent?

It is curious how jealous you pretend to be of scripture, and how dedicated you are to disregarding its substance.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Oh, the scriptures condemn me do they? This coming from a person who claims that the scriptures condemn no one. Or did you forget your little spiel about hell being non-existent?

It is curious how jealous you pretend to be of scripture, and how dedicated you are to disregarding its substance.

lol, hehe. tra la la la, it is to laugh, look dude, i did not claim that the scriptures do not condemn no one, after all, i did state that they condemn you lol, secondly that hell is a non existent place in the terms that it is a place of torment i hold to be biblically true, and what is more, i am in the due process of enlightening you on the matter, is it not so, and thirdly i have no problem with scripture, i really love the self evident truths contained in the word of god, but for the words and actions of those who seek to establish their own thinking and in the process supersede the revealed word, what can we say on the matter other than what the scriptures state, that they are guilty of 'adulterating the word of God'. 2 Corinthians 4:2

Originally posted by Rajk999
Well, thanks for your reprimand and your compliment. But you have to see my reaction in the light of the length of time (months and months) several of them post foolishness and try to convince us that they are correct.

Eg. Do you think that God's eternal purpose is to be one with man? It might be man's eternal purpose to be one with God, but the reverse d ...[text shortened]... think so.

Next time I feel I am going to insult someone, i will go have a few cold beers.

37 sixpacks, good ole Raj!? Them belly full but we hungry?!
😵

Originally posted by epiphinehas
If you don't accept my explanation, that's OK.

I cannot, but that's OK;

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
lol, hehe. tra la la la, it is to laugh, look dude, i did not claim that the scriptures do not condemn no one, after all, i did state that they condemn you lol, secondly that hell is a non existent place in the terms that it is a place of torment i hold to be biblically true, and what is more, i am in the due process of enlightening you on the matter ...[text shortened]... he scriptures state, that they are guilty of 'adulterating the word of God'. 2 Corinthians 4:2

In the other thread you claimed that death is the end, and that there is no afterlife whatsoever. Now you claim that hell exists but not so much as a place of torment. I marvel that you do not see how these two conclusions supersede the revealed word.

Regarding death and resurrection: "But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living"" (Matt 22:31-32). This passage exposes your misuse of Eccl. 9:5.

Regarding hell: "And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life" (Matt 25:46). Both heaven and hell are eternal and separate. Therefore, each must occupy its own place.

It is your theology which supersedes the revealed word in order to establish itself.
_________

Anyway, I'm done with our conversation. Thanks.