• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Does Hell Exist?

hell (1).jpg

A Response to the Skeptic's Annotated Bible (SAB) - Does Hell Exist?

The answer to the question is no. Hell as most people know it is a Christian adoption of pagan mythology, and isn't a Biblical teaching. The skeptic points out three possible interpretations. Those that don't go to heaven are tormented forever in hell; Those that don't go to heaven, just die; and Everyone goes to heaven after they die. None of these are correct Biblical teachings. The Bible teaches that a few people go to heaven to judge and rule with Christ Jesus, the rest of the people who have ever (or will ever have) lived will either live forever in paradise Earth or suffer everlasting destruction. Not a literal torment, as in hell, but a simple death.​

SAB: Yes, God tortures some people forever after they die.

No. Not literally. The Greek basanizo or related terms, can mean being restrained, as in Matthew 18:34 where the tormentors are jailers. (See Revelation reference below in this section #2) In modern colloquialism it is similar to telling someone if they jump off a cliff, they'll be sorry, not meaning sorry in a literal sense because they'll be dead. Romans 6:7. (Compare Translations) The wages of sin are death.

Daniel 12:2 doesn't convey the idea of hell. The meek shall inherit the earth and the disobedient will be destroyed.

Matthew 13:41-42 is a parable about the harvesting of crops after the weeds have been burned, beginning in verse 39. Jesus compares the disobedient to the weeds that would have been thrown into the fire and burned so that the crop may live. Fire was, in Bible times, the most thorough means of destruction.

Matthew 18:8-9 is a reference to Gehenna. Gehenna was a literal place which came to represent spiritual destruction. A figurative everlasting fire.

Matthew 22:1-14, the illustration of the marriage feast, is actually a pretty good account of Christianity. The King (God) invites his subjects (Jews) to the marriage feast of his son (Christ) and bride to be (anointed 144, 000) but they refuse. The first call went out from 29 - 33 CE during missionary work of Jesus' disciples (the King's slaves). The second call began at the wedding dinner (Pentecost 33 CE) and continued to 36 CE but still the subjects refused and even began to kill the slaves of the King. He became enraged and his armies destroyed them (70 CE). Since the subjects of the King had refused, he sent his slaves outside of the city (Jerusalem) to gather any who would attend (Gentiles) beginning in 36 CE. First the Roman army officer Cornelius and his family and continuing to this day. The man without the wedding garment is the apostate, who will be removed and thrown into the darkness. Which brings us to the next verse given by the skeptic:

Matthew 25:41, 46 - Verse 41 is a reference to the lake of fire which is symbolic of everlasting destruction and verse 46 is interesting in that the KJV uses the term everlasting punishment, or in other translations, cutting off. From the Greek kolasin, which literally means "lopping off or pruning."

Mark 9:43-48 is a reference to Gehenna, mentioned above. Gehenna was a literal place which came to represent spiritual destruction. A figurative everlasting fire.

Luke 16:22-24 is the illustration of Lazarus and the rich man. It isn't a literal/historical account. Jesus would later say that no man had ascended to heaven. (John 3:13)

John 5:28-29 in the KJV is a pretty poor translation. Compare John 5:29. Damnation comes from the Greek anastasin kriseos and the Latin resurrectionem iudicii, far more accurately translated as "judgment" or "resurrection to judgment." It is a reference to the resurrection of the unrighteous. (Acts 24:15) Those who have not been given the opportunity to know Jehovah God, though unrighteous, will be resurrected and given the opportunity to do so.

2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 deals with the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction of the disobedient.

Revelation 14:10-11; 20:10; Revelation 20:14-15 indicates that the wicked are tormented, from the Greek basanizo or related terms, which can mean being restrained, as in Matthew 18:34 where the "tormentors" are "jailers."

SAB: No, those that don't go to heaven, just die.

This is actually the closest interpretation to the truth according to the Bible. If it were reworded to say those that don't go to heaven or live forever on earth just die it would be correct.

Deuteronomy 29:20 - The book of God's remembrance is used throughout scripture to symbolize him taking note of those who are righteous and those who are not. The righteous to live and the unrighteous to die. This doesn't indicate that the righteous go to heaven or the unrighteous to hell, but that the meek shall inherit the Earth and live forever upon it and the unrighteous will suffer everlasting destruction. Death.

Psalm 1:4-6 - Interesting because the Hebrew word here translated as wind is the Hebrew ruach, which can also be translated as spirit. Not that this implies some spiritual connotation - quite the contrast - ruach simply means any invisible active force like breath, wind, or spirit. Like chaff, the thin covering on wheat and barley which is blown away with the wind after harvest the ungodly will be "blown away" in the end. Useless to a perfect creation without sin.

Psalm 34:16 - Interesting that the "remembrance" being removed can also be translated as the "mention" of them being removed. They are no longer remembered or talked about. Dissolved along with their sin.

Psalm 37:1-2; 37:20 refers to the corrupt evildoers who, through injustice and malice advance while the righteous gain nothing through wrongdoing. Those who rape, murder, steal, cheat and lie to get what they want corrupt the system, or world. Their demise would cease this destructive pattern.

Psalm 69:28 again refers to the book of life, those noted by God as deserving of life in a perfected heaven and earth, free from sin.

Proverbs 10:25 is a variation of both the chaff in the wind and the end of sin, death and destruction. The results of sin may seem like a storm now, but there are better days ahead.

Proverbs 24:20 reflects the sentiment in some verses mentioned earlier. Not only will the wicked be destroyed but the illumination of their works will be a thing of the past. Their corrupt system ended along with its effects.

Obadiah 1:16 - Again, the remembrance and mention of them will be no more. Forgotten.

Romans 6:21, 23 indicate an end to sin, which is disobedience to Jehovah, the creator, and brings death. These are interesting scriptures in the context of a discussion about hell, because if the wages of sin are death, then at death the debt of sin is paid in full. To suffer beyond that in a literal fiery torment would be overcharging. Romans 6:7 makes it clear when it says: "For he who has died has been acquitted from [his] sin."

1 Corinthians 3:17 - It is important to realize what exactly is meant here by the "temple" or "church" of God. It isn't, of course, a building which houses a congregation. It is the congregation itself. The people. As 1 Corinthians 3:9, 16 indicates. In addition to persecutors this may also apply to apostate Christianity who spiritually destroy God's true congregation.

2 Corinthians 2:15-16 - The Roman soldiers would parade victorious through the city of Rome and burn incense in the altars, perfuming the air. To the Romans it was a sweet smell representing honor, promotion and riches. But to their captives it represented the unpleasant reminder that they would be executed at the end of the parade. Likewise, to those who accepted the Christian message and those who reject the message.

Galatians 6:8 - The indulgence of sinful human desires corrupts one in a way that leads to death.

Philippians 3:18-19 - These verses properly convey the idea that the sinful will be destroyed, but don't imply that the righteous will all go to heaven. On an unrelated note, the KJV uses the word cross where torture stake or pole should have been used. Jesus didn't die on a cross.

James 1:15 - A sinful nature leads to destruction and death. Through sin we all die, but if, during a brief life in faith, we avoid a sinful nature which corrupts the spirit as well as the flesh and so there is the hope of a resurrection to eternal life without sin rather than eternal destruction.

James 4:12 - Not everyone agrees with the morality dictated by the lawgiver, whether God or man, but as men we have no authority to question the morality of God. We may still not agree, but God the lawgiver has the authority to judge.

James 5:20 - Interesting because some Christians think that being "saved" is predestined, but this verse along with others considered in this article indicate that the sinful can turn back from destructive ways, and the righteous can turn to sinful ways.

SAB: No, everyone goes to heaven after they die.

1 Corinthians 15:12 - This chapter isn't dealing with mankind in general, but rather only those who have "fallen asleep in death in union with Christ." 1 Corinthians 15:18.

1 Timothy 4:10 - Christ gave himself a corresponding ransom for all, but not all will accept it. 1 Timothy 4:10 points this out. Paul said that Jesus was a savior for all men, potentially, but specifically for the faithful.

1 John 2:2 - "Our sins" refers to the sins of the anointed Christians (144, 000) like John himself, who would judge in heaven with Christ, but also the people of the world who have the possibility of resurrection to everlasting life in paradise earth.

SAB: No, everyone dies. There is no heaven or hell.

Put simply, the Biblical words heaven and hell mean, respectively, high and grave.

Joshua 23:14 - Joshua was dying with the hope of resurrection. God is in hell in the sense that his attention is fixed upon the grave to resurrect the faithful. Like Joshua. (Ecclesiastes 9:10; Amos 9:1-2 Compare; Proverbs 15:11; Psalm 139:8 Compare)

Job 7:9; 14:10-14; 20:7 - At Job 7:9 Job may have been referring to the permanence of death in this world or he might have been pointing out that resurrection was out of his control. At Job 14:10 there is some variation between the Masoretic Hebrew texts and the Septuagint. The former says "Where is he?" and the latter says "he is no more." Compare Job 14:10. But, interestingly, at Job 20:7 there is no such variation. One thing is sure, Job believed in the possibility of resurrection. (Job 14:13-15)

Psalm 6:5; 31:17; Psalm 88:5; 115:17; Ecclesiastes 3:19-21; Ecclesiastes 9:2-6; Isaiah 38:18 all have to do with death and the grave. In the case of hell, it is really easy to sort the theological - the pagan influenced apostate Christian doctrine - from the scriptural truth.

First, the wages of sin are death, not a literal torment in hell. (Romans 6:7) The soul is mortal/destructable so it can't be tortured literally forever in hell. (Ezekiel 18:4 compare; Matthew 10:28) The Biblical soul is the life/blood of any breathing animal or human. The Hebrew word translated soul literally means "breather." The immaterial soul of pagan origin, (Socrates/Plato) as well as spirit creatures - Satan and his demons - wouldn't be harmed by literal fire. (Exodus 3:2) Hell and death are thrown into the figurative lake of fire which is symbolic of everlasting destruction. Meaning they are no more. Destroyed. (Revelation 20:14) The meek inherit everlasting life on earth. (Psalm 37:11; Matthew 5:5)
 

Attachments

  • hell.jpg
    hell.jpg
    80.9 KB · Views: 1
The bible gives a description of love and its values, which are moral values attributed to God, where we are told that God is Love, therefore an embodiment of morality, justice, empathy, patience, protective and nurturing .....yet elsewhere we have numerous descriptions of God breaking each and every one of these values, with God acting contrary to these very same values.

1 Corinthians 13; Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.''

1 John 4:7-8; Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Always with the illogical emotional.

If the son of a rich man disobeys and disrespects his father's house and with his disregard burns his father's house to the ground you would call his father holding him accountable and pressing charges against his son, resulting in him being sent to prison as an unloving act. The illogical, emotional skeptics sees the "God of the 'Old Testament'" as being, angry, jealous murdering monster and a soldier as a hero, and the "God of the 'New Testament'" as a more kind, loving, and gentle "God" even though the circumstances of each are remarkably different and the amount of people "murdered" by the former is remarkably fewer than the latter at the conclusion than the former at the beginning.

The argument not only doesn't make any sense but it is factually nonsensical. Because it is ideological and emotional. Illogical. But you can't tell that to the skeptic for two reasons, he wrongly thinks he is smarter than the other and yet he doesn't think, he feels.
 

The argument not only doesn't make any sense but it is factually nonsensical. Because it is ideological and emotional. Illogical. But you can't tell that to the skeptic for two reasons, he wrongly thinks he is smarter than the other and yet he doesn't think, he feels.

No, it’s because the bible is made-up bullshit.
 
Unbelievers want to believe in hell because it reflects poorly on that.
You are confusing that with Belief.

No. I'm calling it ideology.

We sarcastically indulge them in their fantasies to get their attention. (just as we are doing with you)

No. You just think you do, while the possibility of the same being done to you by your opposition infuriates you.

The believer doesn't have to concern themselves with abortion,
You are not paying attention. The Cults they belong to absolutely do concern themselves with abortion. And individual sheep fallow along.

No. You're not paying attention. The believer doesn't have to concern himself with abortion because he doesn't abort. The believer doesn't have to concern himself with his opposition's abortion, that is his opposition's problem and likewise his opposition needn't concern himself with his lack of abortion.

You must not live in the US, if you haven't seen the protests at abortion clinics.

I do live in the US and I have seen them and I recognize the conflict not that of the unbeliever and the believer but rather the ideological struggle between two groups of idiot ideologues.

The apathetic atheist doesn't care, and along with me, a true believer, scratches their head in wonder at the idiotic spectacle.

The militant atheist is too stupid to realize that he is in the same sinking ship of fools as his opposition.

It's a class struggle. The militant fundimentalist atheist doesn't even have the sense to know that their own objection is nothing to do with God, the Bible, religion, faith, spirituality. He doesn't even have a cursory or child's knowledge of any of those things. He is just sociopolitically frustrated as a minority in a fake quasi theocratic society.
 
DLH will not say what the bible means to him, maybe he does not understand the question.
 
Apparently there are four places in the world named Hell.
 
The bible gives a description of love and its values, which are moral values attributed to God, where we are told that God is Love, therefore an embodiment of morality, justice, empathy, patience, protective and nurturing .....yet elsewhere we have numerous descriptions of God breaking each and every one of these values, with God acting contrary to these very same values.

1 Corinthians 13; Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.''

1 John 4:7-8; Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Always with the illogical emotional.

If the son of a rich man disobeys and disrespects his father's house and with his disregard burns his father's house to the ground you would call his father holding him accountable and pressing charges against his son, resulting in him being sent to prison as an unloving act. The illogical, emotional skeptics sees the "God of the 'Old Testament'" as being, angry, jealous murdering monster and a soldier as a hero, and the "God of the 'New Testament'" as a more kind, loving, and gentle "God" even though the circumstances of each are remarkably different and the amount of people "murdered" by the former is remarkably fewer than the latter at the conclusion than the former at the beginning.

The argument not only doesn't make any sense but it is factually nonsensical. Because it is ideological and emotional. Illogical. But you can't tell that to the skeptic for two reasons, he wrongly thinks he is smarter than the other and yet he doesn't think, he feels.

What I quoted gives a description of the attributes of love, and tells us that God is Love....and in the very same book we are told that God is cruel, vindictive, orders genocide, kills, etc, which is clear contradiction of the given principles of love.

This not emotion. It's cold, hard logic, where you have no way of resolving the contradiction. Which is why you try to invoke emotion as a means of defending the indefensible.
 
The bible gives a description of love and its values, which are moral values attributed to God, where we are told that God is Love, therefore an embodiment of morality, justice, empathy, patience, protective and nurturing .....yet elsewhere we have numerous descriptions of God breaking each and every one of these values, with God acting contrary to these very same values.

1 Corinthians 13; Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.''

1 John 4:7-8; Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Always with the illogical emotional.

If the son of a rich man disobeys and disrespects his father's house and with his disregard burns his father's house to the ground you would call his father holding him accountable and pressing charges against his son, resulting in him being sent to prison as an unloving act. The illogical, emotional skeptics sees the "God of the 'Old Testament'" as being, angry, jealous murdering monster and a soldier as a hero, and the "God of the 'New Testament'" as a more kind, loving, and gentle "God" even though the circumstances of each are remarkably different and the amount of people "murdered" by the former is remarkably fewer than the latter at the conclusion than the former at the beginning.

The argument not only doesn't make any sense but it is factually nonsensical. Because it is ideological and emotional. Illogical. But you can't tell that to the skeptic for two reasons, he wrongly thinks he is smarter than the other and yet he doesn't think, he feels.

What I quoted gives a description of the attributes of love, and tells us that God is Love....and in the very same book we are told that God is cruel, vindictive, orders genocide, kills, etc, which is clear contradiction of the given principles of love.

This not emotion. It's cold, hard logic, where you have no way of resolving the contradiction. Which is why you try to invoke emotion as a means of defending the indefensible.
He has his own personal interpretation of the bible which is the same as that of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, though he denies being a JW.

Nowhere does he say why his interpretation is right and the others wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DBT
The bible gives a description of love and its values, which are moral values attributed to God, where we are told that God is Love, therefore an embodiment of morality, justice, empathy, patience, protective and nurturing .....yet elsewhere we have numerous descriptions of God breaking each and every one of these values, with God acting contrary to these very same values.

1 Corinthians 13; Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.''

1 John 4:7-8; Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Always with the illogical emotional.

If the son of a rich man disobeys and disrespects his father's house and with his disregard burns his father's house to the ground you would call his father holding him accountable and pressing charges against his son, resulting in him being sent to prison as an unloving act. The illogical, emotional skeptics sees the "God of the 'Old Testament'" as being, angry, jealous murdering monster and a soldier as a hero, and the "God of the 'New Testament'" as a more kind, loving, and gentle "God" even though the circumstances of each are remarkably different and the amount of people "murdered" by the former is remarkably fewer than the latter at the conclusion than the former at the beginning.

The argument not only doesn't make any sense but it is factually nonsensical. Because it is ideological and emotional. Illogical. But you can't tell that to the skeptic for two reasons, he wrongly thinks he is smarter than the other and yet he doesn't think, he feels.

What I quoted gives a description of the attributes of love, and tells us that God is Love....and in the very same book we are told that God is cruel, vindictive, orders genocide, kills, etc, which is clear contradiction of the given principles of love.

This not emotion. It's cold, hard logic, where you have no way of resolving the contradiction. Which is why you try to invoke emotion as a means of defending the indefensible.
He has his own personal interpretation of the bible which is the same as that of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, though he denies being a JW.

Nowhere does he say why his interpretation is right and the others wrong.
I['m not going to look for it. DLH has said he is right and all Christian versions are corrupt and pagan.
 
Unbelievers want to believe in hell because it reflects poorly on that.
You are confusing that with Belief.
DLH:
"No. I'm calling it ideology."
We sarcastically indulge them in their fantasies to get their attention. (just as we are doing with you)
DLH:
"No. You just think you do, while the possibility of the same being done to you by your opposition infuriates you."
What? Non-sense. How would taking offence, show belief?

The believer doesn't have to concern himself with abortion because he doesn't abort. The believer doesn't have to concern himself with his opposition's abortion,
Sure, they don't 'have to' concern themselves. But they absolutely DO stick their nose into what others do with their own bodies. While you never see unbelievers protesting at maternity clinics.
I do live in the US and I have seen them and I recognize the conflict not that of the unbeliever and the believer but rather the ideological struggle between two groups of idiot ideologues.

The apathetic atheist doesn't care, and along with me, a true believer, scratches their head in wonder at the idiotic spectacle.

The militant atheist is too stupid to realize that he is in the same sinking ship of fools as his opposition.

It's a class struggle. The militant fundimentalist atheist doesn't even have the sense to know that their own objection is nothing to do with God, the Bible, religion, faith, spirituality. He doesn't even have a cursory or child's knowledge of any of those things. He is just sociopolitically frustrated as a minority in a fake quasi theocratic society.
Oh, right. You and 'true believers' are just sitting on the sidelines. BULLSHIT.
It is not a ball game. This 'both sides of the same coin' narrative you are spinning is a half assed way of telling us to shut-up.
We are oppressed. Xians have been oppressing/suppressing everybody else for 2K years.
I, for one, will not back down. Especially now when the NATionalist Christians (NAT-C) are taking over the government.

Abd you have clearly taken a side.
 
Last edited:
Oh, right. You and 'true believers' are just sitting on the sidelines. BULLSHIT.

I don't vote or in any way influence legislation on anything. I'm no part of the world beyond what is necessary. I would die before ever fighting in a war. I think the 'true believers' have nothing to do with abortion, prayer or creationism, evolution or anything else in the schools or courthouses, or LGBTQ (whatever, ad infinitum and nauseum). But then again, interestingly, that hasn't changed since I was a 'true unbeliever.'

It's more about stupidity than theism or atheism. The tree is in the middle and the nuts are on both sides. The believers I've known that weren't traditional apostate Christendom and the unbelievers I've personally known that, likewise, weren't militant have that in common. Don't take evolution seriously, don't give a SHIT about BULLSHIT on either side.

It is not a ball game. This 'both sides of the same coin' narrative you are spinning is a half assed way of telling us to shut-up.

No it isn't. I don't think you should shut up, I think you have a valid complaint and we actually have more in common then you would like to think. I don't think any of you I've ever encountered were terribly bright, certainly not as bright as you seem to think, but neither am I. I just have enough sense to keep away from mob mentality, whether theistic or atheistic. Religious or political.

Though, sometimes I think you should shut up. Just not generally speaking.

We are oppressed. Xians have been oppressing/suppressing everybody else for 2K years.

BULLSHIT. Sort of. As Roger Waters, a well known atheist says in my all time favorite album, which I bought in 1992, just one year before becoming a believer.

What God wants God gets God help us all.

The monkey looked up at the stars
And thought to himself
Memory is a stranger
History is for fools
And he cleaned his hands
In a pool of holy writing
Turned his back on the garden
And set out for the nearest town
Hold on hold on soldier
When you add it all up
The tears and the marrowbone
There's an ounce of gold
And an ounce of pride in each ledger
And the Germans killed the Jews
And the Jews killed the Arabs
And the Arabs killed the hostages
And that is the news

It all makes perfect sense
Expressed in dollars and cents
Pounds shillings and pence

Roger Waters Amused to Death Lyrics



I, for one, will not back down. Especially now when the NATionalist Christians (NAT-C) are taking over the government.

Live by the sword . . . . on either side.

Abd you have clearly taken a side.

No. I sit back and watch.
 
Last edited:
The Kingston Trio and The Merry Minuet




They're rioting in Africa. They're starving in Spain.
There's hurricanes in Florida and Texas needs rain.
The whole world is festering with unhappy souls.
The French hate the Germans. The Germans hate the Poles.
Italians hate Yugoslavs. South Africans hate the Dutch.
And I don't like anybody very much!
But we can be tranquil and thankful and proud
For man's been endowed with a mushroom shaped cloud.
And we know for certain that some lovely day
Someone will set the spark off and we will all be blown away.
They're rioting in Africa. There's strife in Iran.
What nature doesn't do to us will be done by our fellow man.
 
I have no idea who Waters is and what the words DLH posed mean in conrext to the OP.

Bible based Zionist Jews in Israel are acting on what they believ is a=n over 2000 year old god given right to land Palestinian S are on.

Waters incorporates political themes in his work and is a prominent supporter of Palestine in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. He supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, and describes Israel's treatment of Palestinians as apartheid


Oh, he was part of Pink Floyd, I was not into that music.



George Roger Waters (born 6 September 1943) is an English musician and singer-songwriter. In 1965, he co-founded the rock band Pink Floyd as the bassist. Following the departure of the songwriter, Syd Barrett, in 1968, Waters became Pink Floyd's lyricist, co-lead vocalist and conceptual leader until his departure in 1985.

Music became a pop culture ideology in the 60s....

I was more into Regretful Dead. Garcia speakss form the beyond.

Scarlet Begonias



Well, I ain't always right, but I've never been wrong
Seldom turns out the way it does in a song
Once in a while, you get shown the light
In the strangest of places if you look at it right



A friend of the devil is a friend of mine
 
Last edited:
What God wants God gets God help us all.
Funny quote. But there's not a shred of truth in it.
No. I sit back and watch.
Yeah right. So how much time do you spend in believer forums, telling them to ignore non-believers?
How about you actually 'sit back' and Stop Posting Here.
 
What God wants God gets God help us all.
Funny quote. But there's not a shred of truth in it.

Well, I think it's sarcastic in a sense, God is used as a political tool.

No. I sit back and watch.
Yeah right. So how much time do you spend in believer forums, telling them to ignore non-believers?

I've only ever, in 30+ years, posted on maybe three believer forums and I post the same stuff here. Only then if there are unbelievers. I don't usually talk to believers.

How about you actually 'sit back' and Stop Posting Here.

Sounds good to me you grouchy old cunt.
 
Back
Top Bottom