Question for the Geester

Originally posted by FMF
Just so you know, when you were repeatedly calling me a liar and "diseased", and such like, a couple of months ago, I didn't alert any of your posts.

You could have. Hey, since the fall of man all of us are sometimes "diseased with questionings" and liars too.

Me included.
You're a good man !!

Me? I need the blood of Jesus to cleanse me moment by moment every single day.

Originally posted by FMF
Just so you know, when you were repeatedly calling me a liar and "diseased", and such like, a couple of months ago, I didn't alert any of your posts.

And if you recall I also said "All is forgiven". To which I think you retorted something like - "I don't need your forgiveness."

For my sake, all irritations which would CAUSE me to feel forced to use such offensive language, was forgiven.

Originally posted by sonship
You could have. Hey, since the fall of man all of us are sometimes [b]"diseased with questionings" and liars too.

Me included.
You're a good man !!

Me? I need the blood of Jesus to cleanse me moment by moment every single day.[/b]

You probably would have been better off just simply acknowledging your double-standard, rather than making this sort of fake humility post with a little snarky barb wrapped inside.

Originally posted by KellyJay
True you are correct but that doesn't mean the events talked about there are not true.

Adding this:
Since you do not believe in God how do you measure or come up with what is real and
true and what isn't in scripture?

Do you believe God is everywhere is real?
Do you believe God sees ever thing is real?
Do you believe God anything?
Since the basic ...[text shortened]... r scope of what could be what and how do you view
anything in scripture as nothing but hogwash?

But equally it doesn't mean the events talked about are true either.

In this context, my personal 'disbelief' in God is not the issue and has no bearing on whether or not the original writer of the book was speaking in metaphor or describing actual events. (As he saw them).

Originally posted by divegeester
You probably would have been better off just simply acknowledging your double-standard, rather than making this sort of fake humility post with a little snarky barb wrapped inside.

There is nothing snarky here.

The Lord said to let our speech be seasoned with salt. That is all.

" Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one." (Col. 4:6)

Originally posted by FMF
Just so you know, when you were repeatedly calling me a liar and "diseased", and such like, a couple of months ago, I didn't alert any of your posts.

Nice one. I have also been called lots of not so nice names as well. Does not bother me in the least.

Originally posted by sonship
There is nothing snarky here.

The Lord said to let our speech be seasoned with salt. That is all.

[b] " Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one." (Col. 4:6)

[/b]

If you had really understood Jesus Christ then you would know that it is more important for your words to be truthful than for them to be nice. Jesus was not nice to those who preached mouth worship and promoted outward appearances ... much like you do.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
But equally it doesn't mean the events talked about are true either.

In this context, my personal 'disbelief' in God is not the issue and has no bearing on whether or not the original writer of the book was speaking in metaphor or describing actual events. (As he saw them).

In the book Revelation how could any of it be thought of as real if you do not believe in the
spiritual world? The whole thing would have to be rejected out of hand for you, if God isn't
real nor the spiritual world John could never have been part of reality from the very start.

Revelation 1: 1
The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.

God isn't real in your eyes so how could the any of book be part of reality?

Originally posted by KellyJay
In the book Revelation how could any of it be thought of as real if you do not believe in the
spiritual world? The whole thing would have to be rejected out of hand for you, if God isn't
real nor the spiritual world John could never have been part of reality from the very start.

Revelation 1: 1
The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to s ...[text shortened]... soon take place.

God isn't real in your eyes so how could the any of book be part of reality?

So. Aren't you simply asserting that Revelation is "real" because you believe it's "real"?

Originally posted by KellyJay
In the book Revelation how could any of it be thought of as real if you do not believe in the
spiritual world? The whole thing would have to be rejected out of hand for you, if God isn't
real nor the spiritual world John could never have been part of reality from the very start.

Revelation 1: 1
The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to s ...[text shortened]... soon take place.

God isn't real in your eyes so how could the any of book be part of reality?

Again, I am discussing whether 'the writer' intended the book to be metaphor or actual events (as he saw them).

I am looking at the book objectively. Are you not able to do the same? How does me being an atheist or you being a Christian have any bearing on the intention of the author?

Originally posted by Rajk999
If you had really understood Jesus Christ then you would know that it is more important for your words to be truthful than for them to be nice. Jesus was not nice to those who preached mouth worship and promoted outward appearances ... much like you do.

You do not answer reasonale and specific questions put to you because it would involve being truthful. This is why so many times I carefully put before you some questions to address, and you refuse to address them.

I think you know that if you were truthful about the answers you would see where your errors in your teaching are.

Recent case in point on Matthew 25:31-46.

1.) Do you think this refers to only antichrist and the false prophet ?

2.) Why does Christ SPECIFY it is the same punishment as is "PREPARED FOR THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS" ?

3.) Does going to something "prepared for the devil and his angels" encourage you to think the result will be significantly different than what is prepared for them ?

4.) If Christ wanted to give the impression of a different fate then WHY would He mention that these people are going to the same place as "prepared for the devil and his angels" ?

5.) In verse 41 the place prepared for the devil and his angels is "the eternal fire". And in verse 46 these people go away to "eternal punishment".

Doesn't that reasonably add up to "the eternal fire" is the "eternal punishment" ?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Again, I am discussing whether 'the writer' intended the book to be metaphor or actual events (as he saw them).

I am looking at the book objectively. Are you not able to do the same? How does me being an atheist or you being a Christian have any bearing on the intention of the author?

The writer said God showed him something from the moment he started sharing would anything be real?

Originally posted by KellyJay
Revelation 21:
8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”

You think here the soul dies?

Of course.

Originally posted by sonship
There is nothing snarky here.

The Lord said to let our speech be seasoned with salt. That is all.

[b] " Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one." (Col. 4:6)

[/b]

So what did you mean by "you're a good man" then?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Of course.

Why?