Why are Christians under attack ?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes but you are attempting to use my Biblical knowledge against lemon lime and GB. This appears to me to be a divide and conquer strategy despite the fact that I don't profess the same beliefs for I am friends with both and rather enjoy seeing lemon lime and GB talk smack to you and divesgeester.

Well either your "Biblical knowledge" is different from their's or it isn't. I find many Christians' inability to process disagreement fascinating. So you feel liable to being 'conquered' if your "Biblical knowledge" is shown to be in disagreement with lemon lime's "Biblical knowledge". Making yourself sound rather insecure in this way is surely not your intention, is it?

Originally posted by FMF
As someone who studies the Bible carefully, and who has entered into debate, discussion and disputes with non-JW Christians on scriptural matters for many years, what verse do you think lemon lime might be referring to when he claims that there is scriptural support for RJHinds' assertion about 'not believing in eternal torture' is punishable by 'eternal torture'?

You're barking up the wrong tree again. robbie is smart enough to know the difference between what I've said and what you say I've been saying.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Originally posted by RJHinds
"Regardless of what you claim, I would suspect that Grampy Bobby knows what i actually said was correct."

"What did you say?"

Originally posted by RJHinds (Page 14)
I don't remember the exact words, since it has been awhile and he has been repeating his own versions of what I said for so long. However ...[text shortened]... d Brimstone to be punished forever and ever in contradiction to what I believe Christ has said."

Are you trying to make a comment or merely downshifting into your familiar copy/paste mode?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
I have no "issue with rjhinds" or with any other human being which has not already been resolved in private messages, emails, phone calls or face to face conversation.

How did you and RJHinds resolve this issue? Did you decide that divegeester DOES deserve to burn in "Hell" for his "sins" and for not believing in a torturer God, or that he DOESN'T?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"Spirituality: Debate and general discussion of the supernatural, religion, and the life after." -Russ "Debate and general discussion" not overt public criticism of another person's volitional freedom to believe or not believe whatever he or she may damn well choose. Resolving significant differences in private represents the time honored princip ...[text shortened]... rtcomings. -Bob" (Page 14) Well past my curfew. Thanks for our conversation. Enjoy your weekend.

I'll take this blurbage as you checking out of the debate with nothing discussed.

Have a great weekend yourself.

Originally posted by lemon lime
You're barking up the wrong tree again. robbie is smart enough to know the difference between what I've said and what you say I've been saying.

If you reckon there is scriptural support for RJHinds' assertion about 'not believing in eternal torture' being punishable by 'eternal torture', why not just say what it is?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes but you are attempting to use my Biblical knowledge against lemon lime and GB. This appears to me to be a divide and conquer strategy despite the fact that I don't profess the same beliefs for I am friends with both and rather enjoy seeing lemon lime and GB talk smack to you and divesgeester.

Lemon Lime and Grampy Bobby seem to not want to engage in the actual topic. If you scan back over these last ten pages they have contributed nothing to the actual subject in hand.

Incidentally i have noticed that your presence here reminds me of when at school one of the more weedy kids would hang back from the fight hoping to get some action from watching the big boys.

😉

Originally posted by FMF
Well either your "Biblical knowledge" is different from their's or it isn't. I find many Christians' inability to process disagreement fascinating. So you feel liable to being 'conquered' if your "Biblical knowledge" is shown to be in disagreement with lemon lime's "Biblical knowledge". Making yourself sound rather insecure in this way is surely not your intention, is it?

I don't know, I never really thought about whether I feel secure or insecure. Perhaps it never crossed my mind or holds no interest, difficult to say, more difficult is why it should interest you? but I am fairly secure in my understand of scripture.

Originally posted by divegeester
Lemon Lime and Grampy Bobby seem to not want to engage in the actual topic. If you scan back over these last ten pages they have contributed nothing to the actual subject in hand.

Incidentally i have noticed that your presence here reminds of when at school one of the more weedy kids would hang back from the fight hoping to get some action from watching the big boys.

😉

If that's what you think then who am I to deflate your big boy head? as for not wanting to engage in debate lemon lime has asked you to explain Jesus words, as far as i can tell you have failed to do so. Perhaps if you desist from stroking your ego and trying to convince me that you are a big boy you may do better, who can say. You will always be a dweeb to me, perhaps that should cure you of any of your big boy pretensions should they surface again. 😵

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I don't know, I never really thought about whether I feel secure or insecure. Perhaps it never crossed my mind or holds no interest, difficult to say, more difficult is why it should interest you?

You are a regular contributor to this debate forum and most contributions to the debates here interest me to some degree.

Originally posted by divegeester
The topic in hand here is RJHinds telling another Christian that they deserve to burn in hell for eternity for not believing in the doctrine of eternally burning in hell. If you don't want to discuss this them I'm surprised you are here commenting. Or not commenting actually.

Originally posted by lemon lime

You should go to the source, and ask yourself why would Jesus warn his followers about hell as a place to avoid if it wasn't real.

Originally posted by FMF
You are a regular contributor to this debate forum and most contributions to the debates interest me to some degree.

yes but you seem more interested in the behaviour of others rather than the debate itself.

Originally posted by lemon lime
Originally posted by lemon lime

[b]You should go to the source, and ask yourself why would Jesus warn his followers about hell as a place to avoid if it wasn't real.[/b]

3rd time asking?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes but you seem more interested in the behaviour of others rather than the debate itself.

Yes, my interest lies in both the content and conduct of contributors and how each affect each other. lemon lime, for example, has offered virtually no content over the last few pages because he is intent on conducting himself in a certain way. Grampy Bobby, on the other hand, when his content does not get the response he wants ~ and gets called on it ~ he starts conducting himself in certain way. On a message board like this, content and conduct seem inextricably linked.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
... lemon lime has asked you to explain Jesus words, as far as i can tell you have failed to do so.

Ah interesting, so you think Lemon Lime has a case to state that Jesus said there is a place hell fire and therefore it exists? Or do you think Lemon Lime is wrong and is trying to create a smokescreen?