- Aug 21, 2003
- 29,128
- 6,154
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Same old accusations of irrelevant and/or out-of-context and/or sheer speculation.
I gave a simple, straight-forward answer to your earlier opinion that
by giving verses that strongly suggest if not outright say the ultimate fate of the wicked is to be destroyed. But I forgot that only your interpretation of destroy stands (and don't give me that post again; half of terms easily sound more like literal death supporting our view).
Is this what you call being civil, accusing me of saying only my interpretation of destroy stands? You make the assertion that "half of the terms sound more like literal death supporting [y]our view" Can you give me a few examples? Nah! Didn't think so.
It's so obvious you just up and turned your suggestion of destruction around to refer to eternal torment just to be able to post that again and blow me off with sounding like you're the only intelligent arguer here, with sentences such as this:
DA said:Have you read any of my posts? Can you give me a good reason why I should read and interact with your post when you ignore mine?
In the post I responded to you did not adress anything I said.
One good reason? Easy. What I posted was a straightforward answer in the form of example verses in reply to what I thought you meant as a straight-forward statement. There's no reason for me to think you meant destroy in your post, about the eternal fate of the wicked not being indicated whether or not Satan is destroyed, to mean what the traditional argument for hell means by destroy (eternal conscious ruin/suffering/ect.). You had to have meant destroy in the way that the annihilationist side of this argument would have meant it, otherwise as the arguer of the traditional side your post makes no sense, because that would be you asking for proof that the wicked humans suffer the same fate as the eternal torment of Satan. But no, instead you just say that's not what I meant to make me look like a moron who is incapable of understanding your sophisticated point of view.
I have read this a few times but I'm still not sure what you are saying here. If Satan is destroyed i.e. no longer exists taht does not prove that the same thing happens to wicked humans. But I see the devil being tormented day and night for ever and ever, Rev 20:10, not destroyed.
But whatever, before this time I tried being civil and addressing your arguments before in some way without being passive-aggressively insulting in spite of the fact that you just act like everyone else is foolish and missing plain points all of the time.
I don't see that I am doing anything differently than anyone else posting here. I state what I believe and post evidence to support that. And I don't see anyone disproving what I post. What I do see is people posting verses which they think supports a different view. Which seems to be saying, "My scripture trumps your scripture."
So I'm out of this discussion because I'm not learning anything new here and no one is ever going to concede any point no matter what anyone else says and there's no sense in my getting angry over posts like yours.
I would be willing to concede something if someone was disproving my arguments but so far nobody is doing that. I try to disprove arguments by showing the meaning of words for example the word translated "destroy" most of the time cannot mean cease to exist.
Upvote
0