If these resident theists really talk to god..

[Drich]

Suffering is only 1/2 the equation. Prosperity is the other 1/2. Lord willing maybe one day I will be able to fly all of you here to see the proof of both halves. That day has not come yet, but I think I see it on the horizon.

Whether that particular day comes or not, I have not only found contentment in whatever I have been given, but through it all I also prize what has been taken away. So, I can truly rejoice and say:
The Lord gives and The Lord takes away, blessed be the name of The Lord.

So, just to be real clear, here: FNM called you out on making an arrogant assumption about the people here, and your response to him, to rebut the premise of his argument, is to move the goalposts and, in the process, making a second arrogant assumption?

You're just really intent on ensuring this hole you're in has no bottom, aren't you?

I can see how you would assume this because you guys only wanted to make this about disproving my diagnosis of AIDS. From my Pov however The month it took to go through that whole thing was nothing compared to all of the other ups and downs God has brought me through. This Complete OverView is call a Testimony in most Christian circles. But again seemingly the best I can get in the way if understanding Is what FNM assumed. That I believe in God because all of the bad things that happened in my life. Which I promptly corrected. The good far outweighs the bad, and when communicating a complete testimony one can not just focus on the bad. We have only ever discussed the bad here because that is all you all want to focus on. Which is fine, until one of you assumes my faith is built on the same bad crap your unbelief is based on.

I did not move the goal posts here. I simply brought the rest of the conversation back into view for you all.

---

Even with the help of his almighty god, creator of the universe and possessor of all knowledge, Drich is a colossal failure in defending his delusions..

Then why does every discussion end with personal beliefs against me and not the message I bring?

I look at it this way, because the message can not be destroyed you look to destroy the messenger. Thereby allowing you the option to now dismiss the message. This is how unbelief is maintained when the message itself can not be outright dismissed.

---

So, just to be real clear, here: FNM called you out on making an arrogant assumption about the people here, and your response to him, to rebut the premise of his argument, is to move the goalposts and, in the process, making a second arrogant assumption?

You're just really intent on ensuring this hole you're in has no bottom, aren't you?

I can see how you would assume this because you guys only wanted to make this about disproving my diagnosis of AIDS. From my Pov however The month it took to go through that whole thing was nothing compared to all of the other ups and downs God has brought me through. This Complete OverView is call a Testimony in most Christian circles. But again seemingly the best I can get in the way if understanding Is what FNM assumed. That I believe in God because all of the bad things that happened in my life. Which I promptly corrected. The good far outweighs the bad, and when communicating a complete testimony one can not just focus on the bad. We have only ever discussed the bad here because that is all you all want to focus on. Which is fine, until one of you assumes my faith is built on the same bad crap your unbelief is based on.

I did not move the goal posts here. I simply brought the rest of the conversation back into view for you all.

---

Even with the help of his almighty god, creator of the universe and possessor of all knowledge, Drich is a colossal failure in defending his delusions..

Then why does every discussion end with personal beliefs against me and not the message I bring?

I look at it this way, because the message can not be destroyed you look to destroy the messenger. Thereby allowing you the option to now dismiss the message. This is how unbelief is maintained when the message itself can not be outright dismissed.

Look at how your work personally against me has decomposed from being somewhat scripturaly based attacks to just being personal attacks... If my works were so easy to dismiss then why not stick to saying something revelant? Something topical? Why do the majority of your posts not start till after the subject matter has been set aside in favor of coming after me or just some greater appeal to some social morality?