"lynx" <none@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:IILVj.277$IK1.248@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chuck Stamford wrote:
>> "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?
>>
>
> I do. He's an arrogant twit!
Sigh. I see you refuse to get off the fence on yet another issue, Pete.
;-)
All the best,
Chuck Stamford
|
