Posted on 10/25/2016 6:51:26 AM PDT by vladimir998
Yeah. Much less troublesome than infant baptismal salvation, torture on the rack to obtain "confessions" and recants, and auto da fe for those who won't knuckle under, eh? /sarc
Alarm clocks are ignored ... satan doesn’t want Catholics to wake up.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. He was a liar. He spread hate. Those are simple facts.
The tract in question was clearly specified in repeated citation of Post #99:
Excerpt from Post #99:
What is your standard against which honesty is measured, vladi?
I found nothing deluding or false in the aspects of Biblical truth and proven history that were employed in constructing the particular tract named by NM, and to which I provided a link for your detailed analysis.
You kept insisting that you were responding to that post, and indeed you were not, for it cannot be that you even read the Post #99 through. Instead, you brought in an argument that did not address my question to you at all.
Now, finally, you disclose that all along you had the wrong tract in mind, which was not the focus. From this reply, Post #137, to which I am responding, you wrote:
The tract in question was Alberto Rivera’s comic. That was one of only two tracts I dealt with in the entire thread. If you were concerned about another tract then you should not have posted to me - but you did.
I specifically, again and yet again, referred you to Post #99, but you did not apparently look at that, and instead kept answering your own mistaken assumptions. So you just kept on repeating the error of not paying attention to the tract in view.
Alberto Rivera was not the issue.
No wonder your repetitive posts were non sequiturs.
“The tract in question was clearly specified in repeated citation of Post #99”
No tract is referred to by name or quoted in post #99 - which you posted to me and NorthMountain. The fact that you referenced something to NM’s post is meaningless to me.
Everything I said about Jack Chick is true. Everything I said about Alberto Rivera is true. You don’t have to like it, but it is true and that won’t change.
And, again, the tract in question was Alberto Rivera’s comic - because that is the one I referred to to you. What you discuss with NM is your affair and you should not have posted to me if you were talking only to him. That was one of only two tracts I dealt with in the entire thread. If you were concerned about another tract then you should not have posted to me - but you did - as I said before.
“Alberto Rivera was not the issue.”
He most certainly was the issue. He’s also a proven liar. Jack Chick was either delusional or a liar. Take your pick.
“No wonder your repetitive posts were non sequiturs.”
No wonder you failed. Alberto Rivera is a liar. You won’t defend him and it’s obvious why. The taint of Rivera is all over Chick.
Come now; we have no 140 character limit here.
Please expand the shorthand for me.
CI = Conditional immortality (only the saved are saved. And what they are saved from is death).
ECT - Eternal Conscious Torment (the lost are eternal, and will suffer for all eternity apart from God).
Rethinkinghell.com has some great information on this. Go to “Explore”, then the scriptures tab. Under that choose the Traditionalism (ECT) and Conditionalism (CI) tabs to see the scriptures used by each side to support their viewpoints. There is also an explanation and rebuttal of the position of each side on most of them. But keep in mind that this site was created by CI adherents. It means it’s biased, but the information and arguments is still excellent.
I’ve tried to expose some of my ECT brothers to this information but they are quite dogmatic in their beliefs. i.e. they refuse to read anything that offers a well thought out and scripturally supported position other than what they already believe. Some of the more “ugly” ones dip heavily into name calling and accusing you of being the spawn of satan for merely disagreeing with their position. Often it turns out they go there because, like many liberals trying to support Hillary, they can’t really support their position, though they always assumed they could.
I used to be one of them.
I wish I was!
Thanks for the good info!
I’m glad I’m back. Our home is the equivalent of a “bug out” location. When things are poppin’, politically, I’m a bit nervous being away from it via commercial airlines...
bTW, In case you didn’t already know, I used to be Cuban Leaf and, before that, Robroy. The new name fits me better.
My exposure to CI is something I can pin to a specific date and source, and it is here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2240648/posts
I was pretty active there as Robroy.
Interestingly, I was actually debating in support of CI even though I didn’t yet believe it. I was simply arguing that the arguments, individually, did hold water. I figured that if what I was seeing was wrong, my arguments would eventually break down. It was a learning experience and was the beginning of solidifying my belief in CI.
1 Corinthians 13:12 King James Version (KJV)For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face:
now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
I use that verse a lot when I find a discussion has become the equivalent of arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Sometimes we have to accept that our knowledge is not complete, and can’t be until we reach eternity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.