@fmf saidSo now I'm a coward. You talk too much smack.
All it would take is a wee bit of courage on your part for you to stand up for the God figure you believe in when someone else has described it as being radically different from your version.
Sonship and I love and serve the same God.
@josephw saidNot at all. I listen to what he believes about his God figure. And I listen to what you believe about your God figure. They are markedly different. He has even described eternal torture in flames as being the "perfect morality". I just read what you write and read what he writes and see the difference. It's not "irrational" at all.
That's irrational.
07 Jan 22
@pb1022 saidI don’t claim that, it is other Christians here which do so.
Can you or divegeester cite Scripture to back up your claims that people in hell are “burned alive for eternity” and are “tortured in burning flames for eternity?”
I mean, seriously.
Give the book, chapter and verse that says people in hell are “burned alive for eternity” or “tortured in burning flames for eternity.”
Sonship
Josephw
KellyJay
Why don’t you take it up with them in any of the dozens and dozens of threads there has been over the years?
07 Jan 22
@josephw saidHave you had your head up your bottom for the last ten years.
Neither does anyone else.
That rhetoric is yours and divegeester's.
07 Jan 22
@josephw saidGreat. Have you put that directly to sonship?
If, in fact, sonship does argue that man's original purpose "was for man to become God", I would have to argue with that.
I find no such thing in the scriptures.
How can the finite become infinite? Man will always and forever be finite because man had a beginning and God did not.
Man will never be God.
07 Jan 22
@josephw saidIs sonship's use of 'God-ized' (when referring to man) irrational?
That's irrational.