The Structure of Revelation 14

Originally posted by sonship

In the "great commission" in Matthew 28 Jesus said He was with the disciples unto the close of the age. And He said they should teach the nations all about what He Himself taught.

My Lord did not say - "But first you have to check your methods and procedures and success rate with Atheists to gain their nod of approval."

Expected response:

" Then you do not care about how you live the Christian life before people.
And any evil method is ok. " for example

That is how I expect FMF will likely exploit this last post.

IE. "Then you don't care if you damage millions by your religious activity?"

Oops. Talking about myself again as "always, always, always, always" .... sigh

Originally posted by sonship
Expected response [from FMF]: "...any evil method is OK".

That is how I expect FMF will likely exploit this last post.

Seriously, sonship. What on earth are you on about?

Originally posted by sonship
Oops. Talking about myself again as "always, always, always, always" .... sigh

This is what I posted: Why is it then that you are always, always, always talking about [1] what you think about yourself, [2] what you think about supernatural beings, and [3] what you think supernatural beings think about you?

When you quoted it - and replied - on the previous page, you even left the comma in after "yourself" and simply deleted the rest.

Originally posted by FMF
Seriously, sonship. What on earth are you on about?

I don't think I should write more about myself at the moment.

Originally posted by sonship

FMF: You once claimed that I may have been personally responsible for hundreds of people in this community facing eternal torture after they die as a result of them reading my posts.

Because that conversation was LONG LONG ago, I will not re-study the context, subject matter, and particulars of that argument.

Huh? I directed you to it only a few weeks ago when I asked about it, and you said you'd looked at it. So it certainly was not "LONG LONG ago" that you saw "the context, subject matter, and particulars of that argument". You are being economical with the truth, sonship.

Originally posted by FMF
This is what I posted: Why is it then that you are always, always, always talking about [1] what you think about yourself, [2] what you think about supernatural beings, and [3] what you think supernatural beings think about you?

When you quoted it - and replied - on the previous page, you even left the comma in after "yourself" and simply deleted the rest.

Did you yet recommend that thread or threads authored by you, FMF, which you think offered very much spiritual help, as opposed to my failure to do so ?

Are you just going to evade, and have "business as usual" ?

Since I offer no spiritual help to non-Christians, where can all the non-Christians go to get all the spiritual help from you ?

Thread name/s please.

Originally posted by sonship
I don't think I should write more about myself at the moment.

I am asking you about this:

Expected response [from FMF]: "...any evil method is OK".

That is how I expect FMF will likely exploit this last post.

Where or when have I ever said anything even remotely like "Any evil method is OK"?

Originally posted by sonship
Did you yet recommend that thread or threads authored by you, FMF, which you think offered very much spiritual help, as opposed to my failure to do so ?

I addressed this at length two or three weeks ago in a few relatively lengthy posts addressed directly to you and in response to you questioning me about what spiritual content I think there is in my posting history and you completely blanked it out and did not respond.

Originally posted by FMF
How many people do you think you have converted here? You once claimed that I may have been personally responsible for hundreds of people in this community facing eternal torture after they die as a result of them reading my posts. How is it that you feel able to estimate that I may have done that to "hundreds of people" and yet you have never taken it upon yourself to estimate how many people in this community you have saved from eternal torture?

Can't see why this would even interest you if eternal torture did not exist?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Can't see why this would even interest you if eternal torture did not exist?

What I am interested in is the impact that sonhip's often extreme and misanthropic religionist zeal has on his behaviour. I think this often unpleasant... (and utterly joyless, to my way of thinking, anyway) ...zeal is a direct and unambiguous product of his spiritual ideology. And I think this is the right forum on which to discuss it or confront him about it.

Originally posted by FMF
What I am interested in is the impact that sonhip's often extreme and misanthropic religionist zeal has on his behaviour. I think this often unpleasant... (and utterly joyless, to my way of thinking, anyway) ...zeal is a direct and unambiguous product of his spiritual ideology. And I think this is the right forum on which to discuss it or confront him about it.

Do you think that your beliefs are true and Sonships beliefs are false?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Do you think that your beliefs are true and Sonships beliefs are false?

Well, I think sonship's beliefs about things like eternal torture for a thoughtcrime amount to incoherent moral nonsense, and I've said so many times. So I obviously don't have any reason to think there's any truth whatsoever in stuff like that. I think he is mistaken.

Whatever beliefs he might have about the need for compassion, empathy, tolerance... I am sure there are things that would ring true for me, but I simply don't see anything credible or true in the claims he makes about supernatural events and beings. Obviously not. Can't you tell?

There's your answer. I feel like I have said that, or words to that effect, a hundred times in the last year. You mustn't have read any of those posts.

Originally posted by FMF

Where or when have I ever said anything even remotely like "Any evil method is OK"?

You have a total misunderstanding of my post there.

Maybe my fault for leaving out the question mark. ... ?

Originally posted by FMF

What I am interested in is the impact that sonhip's often extreme and misanthropic religionist zeal has on his behaviour.

I think what someone should be more interested in is whether what the Christ taught is true or false.

Your interest in how it effects the behavior of the messenger is not altogether irrelevant. But I think it is secondary.

If Christ's words are true, they are true regardless of how interesting a study of the effect they have on the messenger's behavior.

If you know all of Christ's words convey false things, then even if it has very nice effects on my behavior, the more pertinent point is that the teaching is false.

As it stands I think you are just changing the subject in order to make this discussion about the messenger's behavior. It is deflection, changing the point to be about something else you hope will tie the messenger up in discussing instead.

Oh, and then you can hypocritically condemn the messenger for "always, always, always, always" writing about himself.

1.) Draw the messenger into discussion about the messenger's personality.
2.) Criticize the messenger for always, always, speaking about himself.

I think this often unpleasant... (and utterly joyless, to my way of thinking, anyway) ...zeal is a direct and unambiguous product of his spiritual ideology. And I think this is the right forum on which to discuss it or confront him about it.

Genetic fallacy.
"The source of the teaching makes the teaching false."

FMF seems to argue that the level of joy that the critic can "approve" of determines if the teaching of Christ is true or false.

Let's say the messenger suffers from clinical depression. Can the teaching of Christ in its full scope be true regardless?

I say, Yes it could. And indeed it is.