Originally posted by divegeesterSo you reckon Grampy Bobby is "completely wrong" when he tells me that I am a permanent member of "Christ's Royal Family" despite the fact that I am an "unbeliever"?
It is my belief that what Grampy bobby and many other people believe about the consequences of unbelief is wrong. Completely wrong.
Originally posted by FMFNo, he is in my opinion, completely wrong about eternal torture. He is also completely wrong to assume he knows what your eternal state is.
So you reckon Grampy Bobby is "completely wrong" when he tells me that I am a permanent member of "Christ's Royal Family" despite the fact that I am an "unbeliever"?
Originally posted by divegeesterYou worded this carefully:
I'm surprised at this apparent lack of comprehension from you FMF; is it feigned? You're not trolling through the tulips here are you?
"I completely take your word for it that you believe you were once a Christian and you now believe you are not."
So my question is point blank and a response to your deliberate wording.
You take me at my word that I believe I am not a Christian
Does this suggest you believe I might still be a Christian, despite what I believe about myself?
Originally posted by divegeesterThere is no "offence", just fascination. If I am an "unbeliever" now, do you ~ like Kelly Jay ~ think that I was therefore never a "believer"? Kelly has sought to cancel out almost three decades of being a Christian with stuff about me "lying" and "faking it". This is an attempt at "superimposing" surely?
I'm not "insisting" anything FMF. You are free to believe whatever you wish and whatever you believe has no impact on what I believe and visa versa. But here you are asking others what they believe about your particular circumstance, and when they respond you seem to take some sort of mild offence or objection by saying those people are "insisting" and " ...[text shortened]... uperimposing" their beliefs onto you, that is simply not the case. Certainly not from me anyway.
Originally posted by FMFI believe it is possible, yes. However this does not mean that i believe you are still a "Christian" (I use the term in its broadest sense) and clearly you don't believe that and I believe you in that. But...it is possible from my perspective that you are a "fallen away" and it is possible you are a "never was". I don't know which, no one does. My perspective is just my perspective of course, you believe that you were "never was" because your perspective of the Christian god and the experience you had has changed. That is your reality now and I totally understand and accept it as you genuine belief.
You worded this carefully:
"I completely take your word for it that you believe you were once a Christian and you now believe you are not."
So my question is point blank and a response to your deliberate wording.
You take me at my word that I believe I am not a Christian
Does this suggest you believe I might still be a Christian, despite what I believe about myself?
Does that answer your question?
Originally posted by divegeesterHow is it you think I might only "believe" that I am not a Christian when I clearly do not subscribe to any of the claims that Christians make about Christ? Isn't subscribing to these beliefs a prerequisite for being a Christian?
That is your reality now and I totally understand and accept it as you genuine belief.
Originally posted by FMFAgreed, it's not polite to dismiss someone's belief as lying or faking. I'm sure you are not.
There is no "offence", just fascination. If I am an "unbeliever" now, do you ~ like Kelly Jay ~ think that I was therefore never a "believer"? Kelly has sought to cancel out almost three decades of being a Christian with stuff about me "lying" and "faking it". This is an attempt at "superimposing" surely?
Originally posted by divegeesterRajk999 aside, none of the Christians want to chase him down ~ and I don't suppose he would engage them genuinely even if they did. Instead some of the Christians want to talk about whether I am a still a Christian or never was a Christian etc. etc. It's very interesting. 🙂
I can only assume he means Christians, those who are as Jesus put it, "born" into it. You will have to chase him down on this as I could be misinterpreting him.
Originally posted by divegeesterYou, however, think I might still be a Christian regardless of what I have revealed about myself, right? That was what your careful wording in that earlier post meant, yes?
Agreed, it's not polite to dismiss someone's belief as lying or faking. I'm sure you are not.
Originally posted by FMFI think it is helpful to stop using the word "Christian" as this denotes the temporal expression of faith not the eternal positon. You are asking about your eternal position I think, and this is dependent on you being spiritually born into gods Kingdom. I think you know this but I'll play along anyway.
How is it you think I might only "believe" that I am not a Christian when I clearly do not subscribe to any of the claims that Christians make about Christ? Isn't subscribing to these beliefs a prerequisite for being a Christian?
As I said very clearly earlier, once you are born into gods family you cannot be born out of it. This is my understanding of the wider gospel as depicted in scripture. Whether or not you were born into it is a matter between you and god.
Originally posted by FMFI'm happy to chase him down a couple of laps 🙂
Rajk999 aside, none of the Christians want to chase him down ~ and I don't suppose he would engage them genuinely even if they did. Instead some of the Christians want to talk about whether I am a still a Christian or never was a Christian etc. etc. It's very interesting. 🙂
Originally posted by FMFI think I have been very clear about that and given reasons why and without denying you the right to your honest belief about yourself. But to go with you the extra mile...yes I beieve it is possible that your eternal state is safe. However I don't know and nor do you, although I accept that you believe you don't need to know anymore.
You, however, think I might still be a Christian regardless of what I have revealed about myself, right? That was what your careful wording in that earlier post meant, yes?