Re: Hell (was The Wall)

"Sean McHugh" <seanm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:4826C64B.8D42212C@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> lynx wrote:
>>
>> Chuck Stamford wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>> > How could ANYONE, putting their trust in this Person, and being 
>> > conversant
>> > with the NT, even suggest or allow anyone to believe they questioned 
>> > the
>> > existence of this place of eternal punishment for the wicked; however

>> > Jesus
>> > went on to define the "wicked".  Yet that is EXACTLY what our 
>> > "minister"
>> > Rowland does at every op****tunity.  However, as with so many 
>> > mealy-mouthed
>> > "Christians" these days, they are too cowardly to be "up front" about

>> > it.
>> > They use carefully worded sentences, and they quote others a great 
>> > deal, and
>> > they package the whole thing as a "teaching" exercise.  Well, the
fact 
>> > is,
>> > no one needs a teacher here.  All they need know is how to read, and 
>> > how to
>> > make up their own minds about what they've read.  There is no
question 
>> > Jesus
>> > taught Hell.
>
>> Right again Chuck. There's no question about it. The evidence is 
>> plentiful.
>
>> > The question is, do you believe it?
>
>> Are you asking me?
>
> Yes, despite later letting you off the hook, he was clearly addressing
> you (did I mean someone else?).

Sean, once again you fa****on yourself in some epistemic position to know
for 
a fact what I intended when what I wrote is open to more than one 
interpretation, as indeed, most statements, let alone whole paragraphs,
are. 
When are you going to learn that all doing this does is make you look
rather 
dull of wit.  I find it a remarkable constrast to what you are capable of 
bringing to a debate or discussion, and yet you do it over, and over
again.

Do you have any explanation for that?

Chuck Stamford