Originally posted by @fmfI think you are a blind man listening to other people talk about a work of art you have
I am not contending that this is a "popularity contest". You have introduced that notion into this conversation, not me.
The issue of "who agrees with whom" is par for the course on a debate and discussion forum. Philokalia has asserted that there is no real, serious claim that divegeester is a Christian. Do you concur?
You claim that it does not matter ...[text shortened]... an - as I once used to. Do you think he is a liar in much the same was as you think I am a liar?
never seen and are unable too. Your views, your ability to grasp the simple fundamentals
of the Christian faith are toast, explaining anything to you I think would be pointless you
have been going at this for years, and you are no closer to understanding than you
ever were.
What I think of dive has nothing to do with you, and it is none of your business.
08 Jul 18
Originally posted by @fmfOn page 26 of this thread:
Reading the whole thread demonstrates how your aim - as it was ad nauseam back in those days as you cropped up in thread after thread offering that same bit of banter - was obviously to declare that divegeester was not a Christian. In fact you and he did not really have much in the way of theological disagreements.
But In order to put a fine point on some s ...[text shortened]... [up until your "mid-sixties", no less] to a torture god ideologue in the space of "a day or so".
"It would be arrogant to presume to know what anyone else remembers or believes, so if that's how you remember it and you want to call it "not believing" that is your prerogative.
During that 40 years I learned to trust God, regardless of whether or not I understood what I was reading. I struggled with the idea of eternal torment, but this does not mean I disbelieved it."
I did not suddenly change my mind. A point of scripture I had trouble understanding was clarified for me, and I learned something I didn't know.
Can you say the same?
Originally posted by @kellyjayMore clumsy and, if I may say so, rather sanctimonious deflection.
I think you are a blind man listening to other people talk about a work of art you have
never seen and are unable too. Your views, your ability to grasp the simple fundamentals
of the Christian faith are toast, explaining anything to you I think would be pointless you
have been going at this for years, and you are no closer to understanding than you
ever were.
What I think of dive has nothing to do with you, and it is none of your business.
Originally posted by @lemon-limeYou somehow went from "I thought everything was destroyed in the Lake of Fire" to a proponent of torturer god theology in the space of "a day or so" on a single thread. Banter-fuelling theological point of contention with divegeester: sorted. Implication: you are now a "True Christian" and he isn't. Follow up: declare divegeester a "Christian in name only" over this issue of divine torture. Mission accomplished. Your beliefs and principles are not ones I would want to emulate.
On page 26 of [b]this thread:
"It would be arrogant to presume to know what anyone else remembers or believes, so if that's how you remember it and you want to call it "not believing" that is your prerogative.
During that 40 years I learned to trust God, regardless of whether or not I understood what I was reading. I struggled with the idea of e ...[text shortened]... nderstanding was clarified for me, and I learned something I didn't know.
Can you say the same?[/b]
Originally posted by @fmfOn page 25 of this thread:
You somehow went from "I thought everything was destroyed in the Lake of Fire" to a proponent of torturer god theology in the space of "a day or so" on a single thread. Banter-fuelling theological point of contention with divegeester: sorted. Implication: you are now a "True Christian" and he isn't. Follow up: declare divegeester a "Christian in name only" over ...[text shortened]... torture. Mission accomplished. Your beliefs and principles are not ones I would want to emulate.
"No, I said I didn't know what "and their worm does not die" meant.
Grampy Bobby then posted a link explaining what it means. The "worm" is that part of you that will forever experience (feel) remorse and regret."
That was my response to Dive saying:
"I remember you getting involved a couple of years ago. You were undecided wether or not you believed in eternal suffering until Grampy Bobby came along and posted something about the “worm” and then all of a sudden you BELIEVED!"
It seems odd that you just happen to 'remember' this exactly the same way divegeester remembered it.
08 Jul 18
Originally posted by @lemon-limeYou went from believing everything is destroyed in the "Lake of Fire" to being a proponent of torturer god theology in the space of a few days. Hey presto! You have an actual theological point of difference with divegeester to add grist to your personal animosity so that you can ooze more 'banter' about how you are a Christian and he isn't.
On page 25 of [b]this thread
"No, I said I didn't know what "and their worm does not die" meant.
Grampy Bobby then posted a link explaining what it means. The "worm" is that part of you that will forever experience (feel) remorse and regret."[/b]
08 Jul 18
Originally posted by @fmfYou're repeating yourself.
You went from believing everything is destroyed in the "Lake of Fire" to being a proponent of torturer god theology in the space of a few days. Hey presto! You have an actual theological point of difference with divegeester to add grist to your personal animosity so that you can ooze more 'banter' about how you are a Christian and he isn't.
Who are you trying to convince, me or you?
08 Jul 18
Page 24 of this thread:
"You're a 'Christian' (presumably a follower of Christ's teachings) who takes issue with many of his teachings... this makes about as much sense as an avowed atheist claiming he believes in God.
The atheists here believe Christians are fools, and apparently so do you."
Originally posted by @lemon-limeThe change happened to you in the space of "a day or so" on that thread in 2015. divegeester went from being a Christian with more or less the same beliefs as you to being 'not a real Christian' ~ apparently largely due to his failure to change his opinion in the space of "a day or so" in the same way you had. It was comical. Are you not convinced?
You're repeating yourself.
Who are you trying to convince, me or you?
08 Jul 18
Originally posted by @fmfAre you not convinced?
The change happened to you in the space of "a day or so" on that thread in 2015. divegeester went from being a Christian with more or less the same beliefs as you to being 'not a real Christian' ~ apparently largely due to his failure to change his opinion in the space of "a day or so" in the same way you had. It was comical. Are you not convinced?
Yes, I am not convinced.
08 Jul 18
Originally posted by @lemon-lime to divegeesterThere are probably hundreds of millions of Christians who believe that everything is destroyed in the "Lake of Fire" [just like you did until those fateful few days in 2015 when you were in your mid-sixties] and who - just like divegeester - do not believe that torturing non-Christians in flames for eternity is a part of Christ's teachings. Have they all been "Christians in name only" since 2015 when you had your change of opinion?
"You're a 'Christian' (presumably a follower of Christ's teachings) who takes issue with many of his teachings... this makes about as much sense as an avowed atheist claiming he believes in God."
Originally posted by @lemon-limeAnd with the link you provided in mind, it turns out we remember it correctly.
It seems odd that you just happen to 'remember' this exactly the same way divegeester remembered it.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by @philokaliaWhat is the point of debating {or making a 'real serious claim' ) on whether a person is/is not a Christian?
I would choose to just not participate in these sorts of threads if it was someone else... I've given too many arguments about it and felt that there hasn't even been meaningful interaction with all of the work that i have done about this.
I am just here to emphasize that Dive has never successfully squared any of this with the Bible.
And, perhap ...[text shortened]... igious and bad, and there is no real, serious claim of Dive's Christianity at this point, right?
Originally posted by @fmfA wannabe wolf in sheep's clothing needs to do more than simply wear a wool patch on his sleeve.
And with the link you provided in mind, it turns out we remember it correctly.
If Dive wants to play the Christian then who am I to say no, he can do as he pleases. But if he wants to be convincing in this role he needs to up his game. He (and you) might be able to befuddle someone new at this, but you are both too lazy and unimaginative to sustain the level of deception and treachery needed to keep anyone interested and coming back for more.