Reply to : piIinut

In my case I believed in the existence of Hell long before I heard of the Revival Centres and with very little teaching about it by any denomination. 

Yeah but you grew up in Xian country where we are constantly made aware of Xian imagery and beliefs.  I saw The Exorcist as a kid and it scared the bejeebers out of me.  When I joined the RCI and was told I couldn't be possessed by demons as I had the supposed Holy Spirit, I was thrilled.  But I, like you, had not been a church goer.  The RCI hadn't taught me about God, Heaven, Hell, angels, demons, etc.  I learned a lot of that from movies and Heavy Metal record covers.  Your knowledge of heaven and hell prior to joining the RCI is expected really.

And I believed I was going there until I was filled with the Holy Spirit at the ARC. In fact I am certain it was out of love for me that the Spirit convicted me of my guilt and destination when I was a Buddhist in order that I might turn away from my evil life-style.

I am genuinely glad to hear that your religion brings you comfort.  And I say that with no sarcasm...truly.

I have read of societies that had knowledge of Hell without being taught it by missionaries.

Of course.  Hell predates Xianity.  It was borrowed from the Jews who borrowed it from the heathens around them.  Read the earlier books of the Bible and you will find nothing about Hell.

But before you get too comfortable, have you stopped to think about the Islamic Hell?  You and I are headed there.  Or what about the Jewish Hell?  Yep, off we go.  How about the Taoist Hell...could be hot.  The Hindu Hell couldn't be too nice you know...have you seen their gods?  Scary!  What about the Jehovah's Witness hell?  Actually, I am not even sure if they have one.  And you know, seeing as you are preaching what many Xians would see as an abhorrent gospel and fall under the curse of Galatians 1, you are indeed heading to their hell too.  We're all heading to someone's hell Pillnut.

There was an interesting account of a Pacific Island chief who had never been evangelized who died and was shown heaven and hell by a man in white clothing. He was told that's where he and his people were heading if they didn't believe in Jesus. While preparations were being made for his funeral he 'woke up' and told the people what he had seen.

Yes...and lucky he did so too as the whole village was wiped out by measles introduced by the missionaries who turned up later on. 

Ok, I made that bit up.  

But my story might just be as true as yours as far as we all know right?  It was something you only heard of.  My addition can be documented as true for some tribes though.  What about yours?

And let's take it further...did this village repent, get baptized by full-immersion and speak in tongues?  Or did they join the compromising faith only, infant baptising bunch and end up in Hell anyway?  How far are you willing to take this story?  Only as far as it supports your point of view I reckon. 

Selah...

Mr Jonah, I edited your post only as far as removig the MS Office Smarttag code that appear when one sometimes posts from MSWord.  No content was altered.
-  Moderator

---

Hell.If the punishment for sin was an eternity of pain and turtore then Jesus came nowhere near paying this price for us. If he took on all our sin and paid the price for it then he should have endured an eternity of pain and endless suffering.Jesus was rejected by his loved ones, was horribly whipped for a while, nailed to a cross and died before too long. He did this to atone for the sins of billions of people. I have heard of other people thoughout history who have sacrificed much more for fewer people... without the knowledge that they'd be back in three days.Three days later he came back, happy as Larry! He conquered death and rose again.But his temporary sacrifice of life was not good enough to save countless people from suffering in fire for eternity. The concept that people will live in a permanen

---

"Hell" is an old english word that simply means a "hole in the ground"...  eg the grave where all our bodies go to gather and rot to dust...  As far as "eternal states" go I would suggest you do a serious theological research on this important topic and I would suggest you start with uncovering the meaning of the word "covenant" and how it applies in the true Biblical context and concept...  

There is nothing imperfect about the Word of God nor is the Word of God flawed in any way.. The only real flaw is  our own very limited understanding of The Word of God and the imperfection is found in our mortal understanding of the immortal...

anon

"Hell" is an old english word that simply means a "hole in the ground"...  eg the grave where all our bodies go to gather and rot to dust... 

Not that I don't WANT to believe you, but where do you get this information from?  According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, Hell is...

O.E. hel, helle "nether world, abode of the dead, infernal regions," from P.Gmc. *khaljo (cf. O.Fris. helle, O.N. hel, Ger. H?le, Goth. halja "hell") "the underworld," lit. "concealed place," from PIE *kel- "to cover, conceal, save" (see cell). The Eng. word may be in part from O.N. Hel (from P.Gmc. *khalija "one who covers up or hides something"), in Norse mythology Loki's daughter, who rules over the evil dead in Niflheim, the lowest of all worlds (nifl "mist"), a death aspect of the three-fold goddess. Transfer of a pagan concept and word to a Christian idiom, used in the K.J.V. for O.T. Heb. Sheol, N.T. Gk. Hades, Gehenna.

It appears that your definition, while partly right, leaves out the rest of the Old English definition.  But our English word is a translation of the Hebrew word Sheol, and the Greek words: Hades and Gehenna.  To truly understand these words we should be looking to the original languages, not our translation.

There is nothing imperfect about the Word of God nor is the Word of God flawed in any way.. The only real flaw is  our own very limited understanding of The Word of God and the imperfection is found in our mortal understanding of the immortal...

Yawn...  Blah, blah, blah, the book is perfect but we're all flawed.  Yeah, yeah.  So what's the point of a perfect book if no one can can read it perfectly?  It's a moot point if you top to consider the logic.  God gave a perfect book to imperfect men?  That explains all the confusion about the Bible and divided Xian groups then doesn't it?  It's like giving Rubiks Cubes to 3 year olds.

But anyway, no, sorry but your book is flawed...really flawed.  Go down to the NOT CHRISTIAN ROOM and have a look at some of the discussion we have had down there.

For Mister Jonah:

I would hardly consider myself to be flawless and without fault but nevertheless being so imperfect, I need the "perfect word" as faithfully presented to me in order to show me the "perfect word" Himself who is the perfect one one and only....

---

What Is Hell?

.....   a well said commentary

---

A well said coomentary you say...but...this was published byt the Worldwide Church of God in 1977.  The WWCoG was headed by H.W. Armstrong who was the most influencial British-Israelist of the 2nd half of the 20th Century.  His church was also a destructive cult which went through a major reformation in the 90s after Armstrong's death in the 80s.  Longfield was definitely influenced by Armstrong's interpretations of BI.  (Could this be where Lonfield got his ideas of soul-sleep, etc?)  Today's WWCoG is in numerous factions (like the RCs).  Some followed Armstrong's teachings and renamed themselves while those that chose to maintain the WWCoG name renounced all of Armstrong's unique teachings and extreme practices and adopted more Evangelical beleifs similar to conservative Baptists in the USA.  They have acknowledged their past cultish practices and have sought to reform and reinvent themselves as a more moderate church.  The modern WWCoG would not adhere to the article you posted any longer but certainly other factions would.

The group that posted that article on Hell call themselves the Church of the Great God and speak of their history as thus:

After Herbert W. Armstrong's death in January 1986, John Ritenbaugh and his family, among others, watched with growing concern as the administration of the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) changed one doctrine after another. Some of the changes were indeed just clarifications, but others, like healing, Passover, born again, the gospel, the nature of God and our ultimate hope were very significant. No one doctrinal change justified leaving the organization, but the cumulative effect of a multitude of changes and the trajectory of the WCG were worthy of notice.

These concerns gradually intensified and changed to alarm when, in November 1991, the "future aspects" of the gospel were relegated to third place in importance. This means many things, of course, but some of the most obvious doctrines affected were the return of Jesus Christ, the establishment of the Kingdom of God, the resurrection of the dead and the possible prophetic significance of news events. These were considered to be of lesser importance!

To protect their relationship with God and not to interfere with the direction the WCG appeared to be headed, the founding members of CGG (among whom were John and Evelyn Ritenbaugh, John and Dolores Reid, Martin and Susan Collins, and Richard and Beth Ritenbaugh) thought it was best to remove themselves from its fellowship. John Ritenbaugh resigned from the ministry and the WCG in early January 1992. He left them, not in a rush of anger, but with an ever-deepening sense of sadness and loss. He had given almost 33 years of his life to it as a member, deacon, elder and pastor.

Before leaving, the founding members consulted with several ministers of long experience in the church. They decided that the group should simply and quietly remove themselves from the WCG. They did not leave with the idea of starting another church, and none of them ever made any attempt to recruit others to join with them. In fact, John was thinking of going back into the welding business which he had left to go to Ambassador College in 1968!

When word of what had happened began to spread, however, many people began calling and asking whether John would pastor them. After considering their request and ultimately deciding to do so, he immediately established a number of policies he felt were essential to follow the pattern established by Herbert Armstrong when he left the Church of God, Seventh Day.

Now I am not saying that the article on Hell is false simply because a cult published it.  But I will say that when cults say something then one must ask serious questions about their scholarship and the sources they quote.  Look at how the RCs publish BI as fact when it has now been shown to be based on myth, assumption and spurious history, not to mention the RCS constant butchering of the Koine Greek language and misuse of the Strong's Concordance.  When one wants to believe something, then often one's ability to see the facts as they are can be clouded (that goes for all of us) and this especially true for cults who seem to employ an extreme mindset that rejects all points of view that challenge thier beliefs and questions the spirituality of anyone not in their fold.

This article on hell presents two ideas, soul-sleep and total anaihaltion of the wicked.  Neither are new to Revivalists and I suggest those of you with a faith in God do some reading on both and the challenges against these points of view before accepting them as 'Biblical truth'.  To those of you who no longer possess a belief in God: please go about your business.   It's just more drivel really.

keep it real dude... The lord gave me a vision of hell...

it was dark... bad... full of puns and rubber nipples.

Thanks pilinut

It is interesting that the scriptures u have used are the ones that are constantly thrown at people to cause them to submit. Personally I think the issue isn't with 'backsliding' but with the actual conversion experience.

The Hebrew scriptures were written in response to Judaisers trying to get people to go back to the law. The 2 Peter 2 verses are in relation to false teachers/prophets.

From my perspective, if someones conversion is genuine, they will know that they are 'saved'

Mark 4, in my opinion, shows Jesus talking about true and false conversion. So my thoughts are that if someone isn't truly 'saved' in the first place, how can they backslide?

I have had people say to me that it isnt for me to judge others and I don't. I see scripture that points to some who call themselves Christian being turned away at the judgement seat. This would include those who have done all the things that we think they should. (Repentence, baptism etc.) From my perspective the message that brings salvation is one that shows the need to turn to God, without the promise of 'blessing' ie: get saved and be healed, get rich.....so false conversion, in my eyes, is not  a conscious attempt by someone to enter the kingdom of God with evil or malicious intent, but rather that they respond to the message that they hear, and the message is wrong. In their response to the message they are responding genuinely. At altar calls they are told to come forward and give their hearts to Jesus (no scripture evidence for this), say a sinners prayer (again no scripture evidence) and they will then be blessed. This is contrary to Jesus saying that in the world we would have tribulation etc.

I digress.....back to my point. I don't see a Christian backsliding, I would rather ask if they were Christian at all in the first place....and this is the main thrust.........I tend to be one of those people who will say what I believe to be true, so I tell them about repentance, and I would rather that they get peeved at me here, than they stand before the Lord and get told to go away...(I don't think he will say it quite as nicely as that somehow...depart from me you workers of iniquitity).

Any way these are my thoughts. I expect no one else to take them on board.

I

Just to add to the last message.

Hebrew 6:4-6

Is this passage saying that God doesn't allow them back? Or is it looking from another perspective? Is it because the 'backsliders' don't want to come back? If someone is told - come to Jesus - get a new car and it doesn't happen, they turn from what they were told because it is a lie ...and rightly so. If they have come to be a Christian under this type of message, I would think that they were not Christian in the first place. If then someone comes along and brings them a message of repentance that is based on firstly, their sin ....not mankinds in general, but theirs in particular, and then tells them secondly, about the Cross of Jesus and the salvation from hell that it brings, they will not listen. Why? Well they have done the repentance thing before, as far as they are concerned, and it didn't work. Their experience proves it to them. They didn't get what they joined up for. So they won't listen. This to me is what Paul is saying here, that it is impossible to bring them to a place of genuine repentance.

So, they aren't 'backslidden', they simply weren't 'saved'.

Hey pilinut

One of the 'problems' that I have found when looking at scripture is that the reader takes what is written out of context in the sense that they do not allow for the writers 'emotional' input into the words. What I mean by this is that Paul may have been saying that the people concerned could feel that they had been enlightened, but in actual fact hadn't been. We must remember that the 'books' of the New Testament were actually letters of encouragement to the people of God. All too often we have taken the letters of the 'New Testament' and made them into New Testament Law. To use an example ( and Greek scholars- the modern day Pharisees- will not agree), the letter of James is seen as a 'hard word'. When it is read as encouragement, however, it is absolutely brilliant (could have been written by Holy Spirit himself- ) So what I am saying is to look past the literal, law making words and try and see that the writer was not trying to bring judgement or law, but to encourage those who read it to step outside the natural and see the wonderous grace and mercy that God the Father has shown.

It may be of interest to note, that from my experience, those who have been under legalism (and without doubt any one who has been involved in ANY of the RCI/RF/GRC cults have been), will see scripture as being a set of laws or commands to be obeyed. The letters of the New Testament are a wonderful encouragement to us from a Father who sent His only Son. There is more, much more to say, but it is late and this little 'backslider' needs his beauty sleep......

Satan a victim of bad PR, professor says

By Ruth Gledhill

August 07, 2006 12:00am

Article from:

To believe that God created precious life but at the sacrifice of torturing most of it for eternity makes a mockery of christ's death (which is hard enough to understand as it is). You see... he wasn't the only sacrifice needed to make the end result work if that was the case. He also had to allow countless souls endure eternal torture so the chosen ones could have eternal life. It just doesnt work.

A god of love wouldn't bother making life in the first place if the result would be most of it being tortured forever. Not that I know many Gods.

Maybe they do

p.s. Thanks Joey for letting me post part of our conversation... I still think Snakes on a Plane looks fun.

Reply to : Anonymous

Or...

God made us.
God sat back and never intervened in any human affairs.
We broke nothing.
God did nothing.

We have a choice:
1. Thank God for a lovely earth and creation
2. Reject God for allowing all the evil in the world.

It is like being on death row. Your friend dies in your place and the guard says you are free to go.

Who would say that?  Where on earth would a guard or jhudge allow someone else to serve your prison term or death penalty?  Nowhere.  And do you know why?  Because that is NOT justice.  To punish someone else for YOUR sins or crimes is not justice or justice's requirements fulfilled. 

If I raped and killed your child and then my friend was killed in my place and I walked free.  There would be an uproar.  You would be livid.  That is NOT justice or the requirements of justice met.  How dare I go free?  And how dare someone else die that didn't kill your child.  A Current Affair would go berzerk. 

Your analogy is faulty.

You can accept your friend died for you and be free, or you can reject it, say you don't believe it, stay in prison and continue on to your date with death.

Ok, let's stick with your faulty analogy then.  If 'my friend' has already died in my place then why would the jailers carry out the sentence on me?  Hasn't justice already been paid by my friend?  Makes no sense.  Flawed logic and faulty anaology.

Christ is an ETERNAL being - His perfect, sinless life was worthy to pay the complete price for all the sins of the world.

Perhaps.  But that isn't justice.  And yet, the blood of the Lamb cannot truly overcome sin for all mankind.  According to you, it only works for those who believe.

You can accept it or reject it - the choice is yours.

That's just Xian rhetoric.  There is no choice.  It's either love God or burn for eternity in the fires of Hell.  The choice factor is something Xians use to cover for the fact that God is a sadist and burns people up for all eternity.  God created Hell...not the devil.

For God so loved the world that he sent his only son and all for those who don't believe, he created Hell.  Aint love grand? 

You will meet your Maker one day - you choose if it will be a day of rejoicing or a day of regret & torment for having rejected Jesus.

Oh do fuck off!  We're not new to that kind of Xian fear mongering and guit tripping.  Why don't you go to Hell (in my place)?    

---

Everyone has a choice - Everyone has free will.God made us.

---

Nice choice.... love me or I'll allow you to be tortured forever. TLY has already put it perfectly... but *Sigh* - here we go again... I'll address your first major contradiction first then give you a link to our most recent discussion. Is that you R.B. (W)?

We broke the rule. God took our punishment.

Umm... if the punishment is eternal torment, in your opinion, then no... no... he didn't take that punishment. He only had three days of death and I don't think the bible says anywhere that He was tormented during that time. So no, he didn't take the punishment for sin at all. Just an infintisimal part of it. Talk about a god of confusion!

God took our punishment.

... except that most people are still going to be punished eh? You're going to completely ignore our replies, stare stupidly past the logic and sing songs to the loving God who created most people only to have most ot them tortured... aren't you? The topic has been fully fleshed out at the following link I think. But if you feel you could further the conversation and address some of the points brought up there I would be fascinated to hear it.

http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=443300&CategoryID=148056&startcat=1&ThreadID=2614927

I am so sorry that you disagree with what God tells us in the Bible.

No need to be sorry, cheer up. Did I say I disagreed with the bible? I imagine that would be your perception. It's your interpretation of it that I find disagreeable, but I understand where you're coming from. God says a lot of different things to different people. Many have even gone to war from what they believe God told them in the bible.

It doesn't matter if you think it is fair or not. It doesn't matter that you think it is crazy...God made us...He makes the rules...who are we to tell Him how to run things?

If you truly believe the bible then you will notice that he himself admits to being fair, just and not the author of confusion, and not a liar. If you're going to be a respecter of the bible then you can't pick and choose which verses you want to believe in. I'm not telling him how to run things, I'm just reminding people of some of the actualities of what the bible actually says. There's a lot more in there than the stock-standard verses you have highlighted with your yellow pen. 1Tim 4:10 - We have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.

God is love. He has made a way to cover/forgive our pride/sinfulness/disobedience. If we say we don't need God or we don't want God in our lives, then He will let that happen. Hell is just eternity without God.

That's a popular misconception of hell in my opinion because Paul said the NOTHING could seperate you from the love of God (let's not leave that scripture out eh?)... You could look outside of the simple laymen's view of this theory and see if the bible lines up with it. Remember... "all other beliefs are wrong compared to our own" so it's easy to dismiss other people's views. Check out the other discussion if you actually want to study the concept with us. Don't stop learning... don't be ignorant... search out matters... examine scriptures... remember:

Hosea 4:6 - His people are destroyed through lack of knowledge

Prov. 25:2 - It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter

Acts 17:11 - Examine the scriptures regularly to see whether things are so

2 Tim 3:16 - All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction

Reply to : Anonymous

Nah, sorry, but you're deluded...by a 1st century sect of Judaism that even the Jews could see through at it's conception.

Have a nice life friend.  Time to stop.

Reply to : Anonymous

Ok, I want you to know that I, and many non-Xians, understand your logic and argument.  We get it.  So I am not misunderstanding your premise.  But let me show you the problems with your thesis and why I don'tt agree with it.

Is God unfair? No, God is never to be measured by any human standard, certainly not by the human standard of fairness which is also a reflection of man's...what?...fallenness. Are we so foolish as to assume that we who are fallen sinful creatures have a higher standard of what is right than an unfallen and infinitely and eternally holy God? What kind of pride is that? Therein lies the real problem.

But did you stop to ask then how you come to grasp what is right then?  If you say that man is fallen and cannot grasp God's higher ways then how did you do it?  Yes, through the working of the Holy Spirit I suppose right?  But how do you know that you are not, in your fallen state, completely wrong?  The thing is, you don't.  You might well be as deluded as the next guy.

But, it seems to me that non-Xian humanity has a sense of morality and right and wrong.  Enough to maintain societies and personal relationships within those societies.  We punish the criminals, write books praising moral virtue and cry at the injustices of the world.  We do these things in the same ways as the Xians.  There is no evidence to suggest that Xians are somehow more moral or any less fallen in their redeemed natures than the non-believers.

In Psalm 50:21 God said, "You thought that I was all together like you, how wrong you are." So many places in the Bible warn us not to assume that what we believe is the standard by which God must function.

The glaring problem here is that you quote from the Bible to which most of us non-bleievers give no credence.  You cannot argue the 'truth' devised from the writings of agrarian Jews when we think those writings are no more than that.  But then, at the same time, God is anthropomorphised (i.e. described in human terms) IN THE BIBLE over and over again.  God is said to have emotions, gets angry, jealous, surprised, happy, sad, he sits on a throne (meaning he has an arse and a chair) and even changes his mind.  Then you quote other verses that say he's nothing like us.  Well, which one is it?

It says in Psalm 97 verse 2, "Righteousness and justice are the foundation of His throne." Righteousness and justice are the very foundation of the throne of God. That is to say whatever God does proceeds from a base of righteousness and justice. It may not be human righteousness and human justice but it is divine.
In those familiar words of Isaiah 55:8 and 9, the Scripture says of God, "My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord, for as the heavens are higher than the earth so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts." We are in no position as fallen creatures to determine whether what God does is just, right or fair.
In Romans 11:33 the Apostle writes, "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God, how unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways for who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has become His counselor?" You've stepped out of bounds when you say that God does anything that isn't fair.

Bible, Bible, Bible...blah, blah, blah.

My wife has just asked me to get off the PC.  Resistance is futile.  Gonna have to finish this later. 

---

Reply to : all who question GodIs God unfair? No, God is never to be measured by any human standard, certainly not by the human blah blah standard of fairness which is also a reflection of man's...what?...fallenness. Are we so foolish standard by which God must function. blah blah blah  It says in Psalm 97 verse 2, "Righteousness and justice are the foundation of His throne." Righteousness and justice are the very foundation of the throne of God. blah blah blah. That is to say whatever God does proceeds from a base of rig

---

Wow and I thought I could waffle on! You cut and pasted most of that from John MacArthur's writings "Chosen by God". It's plagiarism not to identify the source.. especially when it's verbatim. I'll respond to your scant commentry though. http://www.gty.org/resources.php?section=transcripts&aid=215985

We are in no position as fallen creatures to determine whether what God does is just, right or fair.

We certainly are if we want to understand our 'fallen' state. Don't discard the brain God gave you and the ability to reason with it. Don't ignore the bible invitation for us to 'come and reason together', or to examine or study or discern scripture.

You've stepped out of bounds when you say that God does anything that isn't fair.

Not at all. It's not without bible precedent is it?  Are you saying God can't be bargained with if something doesn't sound fair? Moses bargained with God, just as normal people would attempt to work out situations with other people. Abraham bargained with God. Jacob wrestled with God. Nehemiah actually changed God's mind. Hanna petitioned God. If these guys can do it, we can too, eh? I myself am sure that God would be absolutely fair and everything he does would be fair. He invites us to explore (and his love has no bounds btw, ha) That would make sense with the way I see the bible.

A thing is just because God wills it. He does not will it because it is just by human standards, He sets the standard. Divine justice is of an entirely different order and character than human justice.

I think there are many many standards... yours is just one interpretation of them and of what you see god as. I believe in a Karma type god and/or universe, as in - you reap what you sow. It's In this way, I see the justice of the Universe. I also see fairness, in that I think God has only one "chosen people" and that's the entire human race ... we're all equally worthy regardless of race, nationality, sex, age, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. God isn't a respector of persons in my opinion (and his according to the bible).

God sets the standard of what is just. If you don't understand what God does, that doesn't mean He doesn't live up to your standard, that means your standard doesn't live up to His standard. He is God.

He is god and that's that? So we should all shut up and not discuss anything then? We should just accept everything John Macarthur writes.. or Copeland, or Benny Hinn, or Lloyd longfield, or john khulman, or Noel Hollins? All these people have a different idea of what 'just' means. I'll open my mind outside of the human influences and see if anything makes sense. I'm willing to respect that we each have to find and recognize truth in our own way and our own time. You haven't cornered the market in truth just because you've gone to a different church after leaving Revival.

Remember - your God isn't the author of confusion, but In order for us to know what is and isn't confusion we have to understand the opposite of that - Logic and reason... and it isn't all that hard to see or find.

---

And by the way, justice isn't the issue anyway. You don't want to talk too long about justice when you talk about salvation because if God gave us all justice we'd all be sent to hell. You see, the creator owes nothing to the creature...not even what He graciously is pleased to give to the elect. He doesn't owe that. How then could God be called unjust when whatever He does is just and the fact that He elected certain ones to be saved when they didn't deserve it anyway, how could that be unjust?

---

The Justice-vs.-Mercy Argument
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/incompatible.html

1. If God exists, then he is an all-just judge.
2. If God exists, then he is an all-merciful judge.
3. An all-just judge treats every offender with exactly the severity that he/she deserves.
4. An all-merciful judge treats every offender with less severity than he/she deserves.
5. It is impossible to treat an offender both with exactly the severity that he/she deserves and also with less severity than he/she deserves.
6. Hence, it is impossible for an all-just judge to be an all-merciful judge (from 3-5).
7. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist as both just and merciful (from 1, 2, and 6).

I have heard it said by Christians that the way God judges offenders depends on whether or not they are true believers. If they are, then he is lenient with them, but if they are not, then he treats them with exactly the severity they deserve (which can be pretty bad). By this Christian way of speaking, God is said to be both an all-just and an all-merciful judge. He is all-just in giving everyone an equal opportunity to become a true believer and thereby come to receive leniency, but he is also all-merciful in that every true believer, without exception, receives mercy. This way of viewing matters would be an attack on both premise 3 and premise 4, above.

I would respond by maintaining that premises 3 and 4 come closer to capturing ordinary language than the given Christian way of speaking. According to the latter, God treats some offenders more leniently with regard to what they deserve than he does other offenders. It does not seem that such a judge would (or should) be called "all-just." And similarly, since he does not treat all offenders less severely than they deserve, he would not (and should not) be called "all-merciful" either. Instead of being both all-just and all-merciful, the Christian God, as described, would be neither.

As with many of the previous attacks on the incompatible-properties arguments, this one turns on semantical issues. In a sense, it is all a matter of semantics, for the issue of whether or not certain property ascriptions conflict with certain other property ascriptions depends very much on what exactly they mean. Theists could defend against the arguments by denying that the property terms in question mean what the proponents of the arguments claim they mean. Often such denials lead to still other difficulties for the theist. A full presentation and defense of incompatible-properties arguments should explore such implications and fully pursue the many issues, whether semantical or not. That project is beyond the scope of the present essay.

---

Perfect Justice and Perfect Mercy are both found at the Cross. If you reject that, then you truly have no hope.

---

---

HEY ANONYMOUS...............So you've condemned us all as having 'no hope'. Right?So NOW are you gonna PISS OFF, or are you gonna hang around like a fucking vulture, sadistically ogling over our near-dead carcasses. If you ever wake up from your delusion, do come back though.

---

Perfect mercy and justice can lead to hopelessness?

Hey Love... you know this forum and you're familiar with us. I'll refresh you in case you've been hit to the head with something heavy and solid lately. We're ex-members of Revival churches. Many of us were Catholics before that... and many of us explored mainstream Christendom after Revival. I myself was a regular church goer for 33 years. We know the drill, read the books, saw the movies and bought the t-shirts, and aren't really interested in listening to you peddle it here. Especially if you ignore the ongoing points of discussion in the thread only to throw

I'm sure you get a lot of satisfaction from preaching your cliches and catch-phrase chistianology. I'm sure you feel that God is very happy for you to preach to the lost ones. I spoke to him earlier tonight and S/he said 'Meh'.

There may be better forums for you to do your preaching and evangelising... Try worldlies.com or heathenlookingforhelp.net  -  this is not your new mission, so unless you've come to reason toghether and discuss rather than preach and condemn, then frak off with your rose-coloured stained glas windows or perhaps keep your stuff in the Christian room.

Show some personality and tell us something about yourself... rather than quote-dropping scriptures and sermons.

Guys, relax. I mean no harm. I want the best for you.

Well, thanks.  I appreciate that.

God is the one who says you have no hope if you reject His Son's death for your sins, not me. What i say means nothing. Just because you reject God's and my words and attack me, i will not treat you badly.

There you go again.  No soup for you!  I think M&R was trying to tell you that you don't need to preach to us because we have heard it, know it, and have rejected it.  Time to shake the dust off of your feet as a testimony against us.

As God says, rejoice when others persecute you for My name's sake - so i rejoice! "1 Peter 4:14 If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you."

Now hang on, hang on.  Methinks you had better get a dictionary.  Noone is persecuting you.  You do a great disservice to those who have been/ are being persecuted for their religious, moral and political beliefs around the world by throwing that word around so flippantly.  You have not had your basic human rights violtaed at all.  You have full freedom to preach your message (even here) and have suffered nothing for it.  Others have told you to get stuffed, but that is NOT persecution.  That is disagreement.  Your martyr's complex is not only unjustified, you also insult those who truly suffer for their beliefs (Xian or otherwise).  Reality check time!

Many of the words i speak are for the people who may read these posts as well.

I understand that.  But how about you address them instead.

God will never be found by human reason.

Well aint that convenient.  You have to use a faculty that there is absolutely no scientific evidence for.  We cannot use our five senses, reason, logic, emotions or anything else tangible.  We have to use our spiritual mojo...and even then this mojo has to be zapped by the Holy Spirit.  Do you hear how silly and empty that sounds?  God gave us all these faculties and then hides himself from them and then holds us reposnsible for not seeing him.  I think this kind of doctrine is really just something made up to give believers a reason for all the non-believers in the world.

You seem to seek any means to reject God.

You know, as a non-believer who used to be a believer, I have asked that of myself in the past.  Am I looking for reasons to justify my rejection of the all powerful, living God?  I guess it is a possibility, but I have legitimately found more 'evidence' against the Bible and the claims of Christianity than evidence to support it.  Trust me, I have evidence for both sides of the argument, but if I were to make a list of the 'for and against' then I would have to HONESTLY say that Christianity is more likely UNTRUE than true.  So what else can I say to you?  I reject the faith you hold (and I once held) for legitimate reasons.  Do you want to know what they are?  Do you have the patience to go through ALL of them with me?

All i am saying is - everyone has a choice. If you choose to reject God - then of course you have no hope. He alone is our hope. He makes the rules, He has made the universe and He has made you! I am to share my faith with others. It is your choice to accept or reject God's truth.

You see it that way, and of course you do.  But I am not rejecting God's truth my friend.  I am rejecting a man-made religion in the pursuit of truth.  One of many religions.  And it is your choice to continue to believe a false religion or not.

My sister has been in RCI for almost 15 years. I have researched RCI (especially through this website) and tried to converse with her so many times, but she blindly holds on to "her experience of tongues". As if that will save her. NOT! It has been proven so many times that anyone can speak in tongues - and alien worshippers have been video taped speaking in tongues - proving that tongues is NOT THE SIGN OF SALVATION!!!!! Wake up everyone in RCI! You yourselves say that you can LOSE your salvation if you commit adultery (which is false by the way). So, if you can lose your salvation, the tongues does not indicate you are saved!

I am sorry to hear about your sister.  I hope you get through to her one day.  Perhaps you could show her the 'cultishness' of the group instead of focussing on the beliefs.  That seems to work better for some people in getting them out.

Guys, relax. I mean no harm. I want the best for you.

Look... shut up. You want the best for me like the bloody Jehovah Witnesses want the best for me. If I want you to preach at me I'll ask for it OK.. is that clear? Stop peddling your christian clap-trap.

God is the one who says you have no hope if you reject His Son's death for your sins, not me. What i say means nothing.

You say there is no hope for those that reject Jesus, but my bible says that Jesus will save all - it's a universalist slant, and I know you'll hate it but I would enjoy your interpretation of the following scripture: 1Tim 4:10 - We have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.

Just because you reject God's and my words and attack me, i will not treat you badly. As God says, rejoice when others persecute you for My name's sake - so i rejoice!

Good. If I abuse you and your beliefs even more then that'll give you an orgasm I suppose? Ewwww.... Sadist.

"1 Peter 4:14 If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you." Many of the words i speak are for the people who may read these posts as well.

Then make your own website or do your evangelising in the Christian room of this forum where the needy unsaved dirty heathen worldly masses can flock to to hear your eternal life saving words and will respond whole-heartedly to your espousals of love and rejection and guilt and love and hell and all that modernistic christian crapola.

God will never be found by human reason.

That is a load of rubbish my gal... you found him by human reason. Everyone in the thousands of different religions and types of Christianity found their god by reasoning it out. It would hardly be a choice if we didn't reason it out. Come let us reason together.. do you even read our replies.

He makes the rules, He has made the universe and He has made you! I am to share my faith with others. It is your choice to accept or reject God's truth.

Yes, we've heard your plea for us to choose. I choose to reject your truth because your truth doesn't add up for me. Yeah, I think we've heard about enough from you love.. make your next post the last one please.

My sister has been in RCI for almost 15 years. I have researched RCI (especially through this website) and tried to converse with her so many times, but she blindly holds on to "her experience of tongues". As if that will save her. NOT! It has been proven so many times that anyone can speak in tongues - and alien worshippers have been video taped speaking in tongues - proving that tongues is NOT THE SIGN OF SALVATION!!!!! Wake up everyone in RCI! You yourselves say that you can LOSE your salvation if you commit adultery (which is false by the way). So, if you can lose your salvation, the tongues does not indicate you are saved!

Now see.. that's what we're here to discuss. We can work with that... we can discuss and unpack the Revival doctrine but please DO NOT replace it with your doctrine. Yes, yours is just another doctrine and to the Revivals it is putrid and wishy washy - to me it is simply another humanistic construct piecing together various scriptures to make another law of exclusivity... another chain to put around people's necks.

---

Speaking of the 'universalist' concept.........I recall quite a few years ago in the Perth assembly, when we had an 'ask the oracle' night. I can't recall the context of the question or discussion, but I remember (the late) Pastor Alan Thomas making a comment.He said that there were some scriptures that supported a universalist theory, BUT he said....."I daren't preach it"!

---

Back in our RF we circulated a few of Eby's articles around among the 'oversight', (http://www.hisremnant.org/eby/list.html) particularly the Job essay. We were really taken with them and actually 'marvelled' at them. When you consider that reading the material of other churches was almost 'contraband', it was a big deal to be pouring over Eby's writings.

They had some influence but because they were universalism doctrine, and without a skerrik of tongues to be found, it was soon dismissed. Far too controversial. Controversy is just my cup of tea though luckily.

---

We mostly exist within a basic natural world, appreciating the essential physics of this physiological plane. Yet regularly, we experience or hear about all kinds of paranormal stuff, we may believe in God, mighty miracles, angels, all kinds of spiritual stuff. Many profess or pretend to 'know' about much of this, and wish to teach and indoctrinate others with their belief systems. And there are many things that are very, very convincing for some. It can be very confusing j

---

Sounds like you're onto something to me. Sounds a lot like Quantum Physics too... string theory and all that. The interconnectedness of all things... it's interesting when you look at the universe in a holistic way. Mathematically speaking, there is a lot of evidence that the butterfly effect of the collective human emotional climate can actually affect the physical reality around us. There are behavioural scientists that actually analyse random number generators and compare the randomness against major human events. For instance, the number generator was supposedly affected by the events at the WTC on Sept 11. Sounds far fetched? Doesn't everything?

The romantic dramaticists would love to convince everyone that the universe is run by Darth Vader and Obi-Won Kenobe, and that unseen Stormtroopers are everywhere whispering little thoughts into our heads to deceive us into joining the Dark Side. The only way to escape these Soul Wars is to call upon the Force to make us one with the midichlorians that make up the universe.

God vs Satan, Luke vs Darth... it's all part of the common fablisations of our personal conflicts within ourselves and between each other. Behind every mythology is a vein of truth they say, and whatever that truth may be, is up to the individuals. A recent study suggests that superstition and religion is unavoidable because we're hard-wired to believe in religion. Babies fill in gaps and invent rules to help make sense of the world around them.

Hmmm...did I force you to read my post?

No, but you addressed it to me (Reply to: Moth), and being the obliging and courteous guy I am I read it. My reply was a bit curt at the time and insensitive to your belief system. I apologise for that.. I'm a moody sonofabitch at times -  triggered easily. This is a discussion with real people... expect debate. Talk to yourself in a cupboard if you don't want your beliefs unpacked.

 Are we free to post? Is this a free country? If you don't like it don't read it.....I am allowed to post what I want, just as you are allowed to post what you want.

Forum rule number 5:  No evangelism or proselytizing (preaching). So no, no you can't preach here. This is not a street corner for you to hand out pamphletes and yell out your doctrines and beliefs. You are free, however, to go to the Christian room within this forum and beat your chest to your heart's content and we'll leave you be. If you continue to post your views here though, expect discussion. So far all you do, when your beliefs are challenged, is say, "My truth is the only truth and blah blah blah.. stop attacking me, boohoo". You beliefs are one amongst thousands... buddhists, mormons, Revivalists and JWs are all asked not to preach here... no matter how much they believe it to be the only truth.

If I want you to preach at me I'll ask for it OK...is that clear. I can use the same words back at ya!

Ahh tooth for a tooth eh? Aren't you up to the bit yet where you have to turn a cheek? (me being cheeky again) Perhaps you think I am preaching the universalist doctrine? Maybe... maybe... however, that is the topic of this particular thread, and I'm hoping to discuss it rather than preach it. Also I don't care if anyone takes hold of it, and I don't believe accepting it or rejecting it will send anyone to hell. Sorry if it sounds like I'm preaching to you. Noted.

Please don't compare me to JW's - we are nothing alike.

Oh contrar! Oh contrar! Please read my post again. I do not know you personally and was not comparing you to the JWs. It was the well being wished by you I was comparing to many other churches. My case in point was the JWs because they hound my doorstep hoping and encouraging me to join their ranks because they want the best for me - according to their doctrines and beliefs that is. We're all well meaning with our beliefs just some of us are more pushy or polite than others with it....

You seem to have some issues....

Oh God yes! I have many issues and always will. As soon as I've dealt with them all and folded them all neatly away and reached perfection perhaps you can start praying to me?

Just because you and moth say it is not so...does not make it not so. You and moth did not create the universe, you do not make the rules. Truth will always be truth, even if you guys don't believe it.

Says you! Okay, my turn to use the same words back at you. Read that back to yourself... and use the same logic on yourself. Your version of the bible is not the whole and complete truthful interpretation just because you say so either. The arrogance... ha, I can talk though eh?

Check out the new RCI logo!

and to you...my dear fellow-poster....if you don't like it, don't read it.

Nah, I'll read it anyway.    I like to read the religious ramblings of morons...it's a hobby.

Posts are not "forced on" anyone. If you don't like it, don't you have something better to do with your time than read and respond to my posts by attacking me? Sounds like a pretty sad life. As I said in a previous post - the words are not just for you...they are for anyone who may read them...

As Mothman said, no one attacked you.  We attacked your words.  And oh boy did we attack your words!  Because they were empty, shallow religious ramblings.  Yum yum.

Just because you and moth say it is not so...does not make it not so.

Wow, there are a lot of negatives in that sentence.  I had to re-read it 3 times to make sure I understood.  You are sooooo negative.

You and moth did not create the universe, you do not make the rules.

*Yawn*  Is today the International Day of Stating the Obvious?

Truth will always be truth, even if you guys don't believe it.

...or even if you refuse to see it.  BTW, Jesus isn't God, wasn't born of a virgin, didn't rise from the dead, and he ain't coming back.  See you in Hell!

Reply to : Mothmanreturns

---

Reply to : AnonymousHmmm...did I force you to read my post?No, but you addressed it to me (Reply to: Moth), and being the obliging andcourteous guy I am I read it. My reply was a bit curt at the time and insensitive to your belief system. I apologise for that.. I'm a moody sonofabitch at times - triggered easily.This is a discussion with real people... expect debate. Talk to yourself in a cupboard if you don't want your beliefs unpacked.Are we free to post? Is this a free country? If you don't like it don't read it.....I am allowed to post what I want, just as you are allowed to post what you want.Forum rule number 5:No evangelism or proselytizing (preaching).

---

"Anon" has a point here you two. You Boys can put on here some good reading,though sometimes way over the top for us average readers.I tend to think you two must get bored sometimes,WHEN YOU START TO GET QUITE ARRORGANT , and smart with your replies. Like two school kids ganging up on another for their own pleasures and gratiforcation in a play ground.

Hi Morning Sunshine... I gather... is it? Can't make everyone happy, but I don't think I'll discredit the literacy abilities of the average reader to be as simplistic...  your average readers may have to skip the posts with big words in them - I only actually know about five or six that I repeat ad-nauseum. The school kids analogy is pretty apt though... maybe we are bullies waiting in the bushes ready to pounce, but if someone kept interrupting my conversation in the playground with blurts of  "glazy-eyed preaching" then I'd be tempted to smack them around a little there too.

You certainly are not scoring any respect from some readers when your replies are replied in an arrorgant way at times. COME ON BOYS. YOU MUST BE MORE GROWN UP THAN THAT!!!!!

Perhaps not... I'm not very grown up at all, I'm told more than often, so yeah. You can judge me or respect me however you like... that's the reader's perogative. I do appreciate you pulling me back a little... nobody like arrogance, and I didn't realise I was being overly arrogant until someone told me recently.. meh... point taken.

"Anon" definately has a point here,Your "ARRORGANTS " does come over here as though you are the only ones that are right.So take note from others you two and leave others to their oppinions as well.

Te is only right most of the time... same here - ha ha. We have different beliefs... I don't dismiss as much as he currently does. Maybe in a few years I might, but I'd like to come up with my own conclusions. Remember this thread's topic is about universalism and/or perhaps Llongfield's view of it and I'm hoping it isn't too much to ask that posters keep to the subject rather than veer it off into a random preachy place. Talk about christianity if you like, but in the context of the thread, compare it to what you don't believe about universalism. I offered a few scriptures to explore, but they were ignored and more preaching was given instead. Opinions are welcome as long as there's opportunity to discuss them. I think it's arrogant to state opinions as cold hard facts ... I try not to.

(Gawd, I hate to be a spelling Nazi, but that was the worst spelt word I've seen in a while (Jason and the AGRONAUTS))

Your oppinions can be said back in"A MORE MATURE APPROACH." you guys.

I do think there has been a lot of mature responses and opinions in this thread, but the actual interesting and logical points get ignored if they seem too tricky or challenging to the christian beliefs. I dunno.... when all the provocating thoughts are completely ignored then we may tend to make it a bit of a farce instead.

I definately agree with you" Anon" But you are getting up their noses, because they think you are preaching. Maybe word your posts a bit better.Just helping a good cause.

Preaching is definitely out, and I'm sure s/he has good intentions, but this preaching and telling it like it is comes across with more arrogance than I could possibly muster. Generally, people who use this forum have been preached at enough during their lives. If you have an opinion, then perhaps declare it as so and respect the beliefs of others (yep, I'll try too!). Labelling your doctrine as the only indisputable truth is not welcome, love. We have all thought that about our personal doctrines at some stage... to a fault.

Reply to : Boy Oh Boy [Anonymous]

I'm Rick James, bitch!

Reply to : Mothmanreturns

---

Reply to : Boy Oh Boy [Anonymous]"Anon" has a point here you two. You Boys can put on here some good reading,though sometimes way over the top for us average readers.I tend to think you two must get bored sometimes,WHEN YOU START TO GET QUITE ARRORGANT , and smart with your replies. Like two school kids ganging up on another for their own pleasures and gratiforcation in a play ground.Hi Morning Sunshine... I gather...is it? Can't make everyone happy, but I don't think I'll discredit the literacy abilities of the average reader to be as simplistic...youraveragereaders may have to skip the posts with big words in them - I only actually know about five or six that I repeat ad-nauseum. The school kids analogy is pretty apt though... maybe we are bullies waiting in the bushes ready to pounce, but if

---

Thanks for your reply,I;m pleased you can see pointers in the post I sent.I guess I feel strongly in the fact that like you say, there has been enough abuse and hard feelings and hurt 

Remember, we're in the RCI room here. These guys like a bit of an ass womp - they're the hard-core idiots... they rarely leave their cult and read here anyway (this is me baiting them). The dear christian soul we have been replying to wasn't part of the church though, but seemingly has family in it. For that she has my heart-felt sympathy and I share in her frustrations. I still have family in a Revival church... I don't really care, because she doesn't let it rule her life and she's quite happy there.

So you responding sometimes in a callous way can do more harm. That is a CONCERN that needs to be concided here with you and your friend Tee.

I don't mind being heavy with some christian types because I feel it's interesting to have beliefs challenged. Shouldn't make it personal though. 'Love' can hold her own, it seems. I understand there are some fragile people that come on board. amicable people are treated likewise.There's enough backyard psychologists giving advice and patting the backs of the poor diddums on the forum. You can do the moddle-coddling in the GRC room, and I'll measure out the tone as I see it. Won't always be tame, but I'll try.

Your friend's(Tee's) response here is not worth a reply. Does show exactly the mentality I'M TALKING ABOUT. Gee he likes giving it, but can't take a rebuke back. Maybe his shoulders aren't as big as your Moth.

Good cop, bad cop... all part of the game M.S. - I relate to his random sense of humour...

Though I will SAY you both can give here some very good reading. When you decide to give out some good solid  backing and support.

Sandwiching negatives in between positives is a good strategy... smart.  you've dealt with male egos before it seems. We aim to please... sometimes we just aim to please ourselves. It's a forum and it will disappear one day, probably sooner than later. I'll enjoy myself while I can, and I aim to do mischief, stir the pot and shake the pillars of hell... you know what the good book says:  Moth and rust doth corrupt.

Your friend's(Tee's) response here is not worth a reply. Does show exactly the mentality I'M TALKING ABOUT. Gee he likes giving it, but can't take a rebuke back. Maybe his shoulders aren't as big as your Moth.

Hey, hey hey.  Relax.  It was a joke.  I think  you misunderstood.  Truly.  I took what you said on the chin.  Truly.  "I'm Rick James bitch!" is a line form the sketch I posted above.  I wasn't calling you a bitch.  Ask M&R, I call him 'bitch' all the time (with a Black American use of the word).

Reply to : Te Luo Yi

---

Reply to : Boy Oh Boy [Anonymous]Your friend's(Tee's) response here is not worth a reply. Does show exactly the mentality I'M TALKING ABOUT. Gee he likes giving it, but can't take a rebuke back. Maybe his shoulders aren't as big as your Moth.Hey, hey hey. Relax. It was a joke. I think you misunderstood. Truly. I took what you said on the chin. Truly. "I'm Rick James bitch!" is a line form the sketch I posted above.I wasn't calling you a bitch. Ask M&R, I call him 'bitch' all the time (with a Black American use of the word).

---

Reply to : MothandRust     That's a bit harsh. LOL

Cheers,

Glad

---

There's enough backyard psychologists giving advice and patting the backs of the poor diddums on the forum. You can do the moddle-coddling in the GRC room,

---

---

Reply to : MothandRustThat's a bit harsh. LOLCheers,GladThere's enough backyard psychologists giving advice and patting the backs of the poor diddums on the forum. You can do the moddle-coddling in the GRC room,

---

Yeah, it does sound a bit harsh.. my tongue is kinda in cheek though. Morning Sunshine (boy oh boy)  is much more of a people person than I so I'm saying it's nice to have her around to pull up the crank yankers. Great to have a mix of personalities... We don't all have to be peachy keen jelly beans.

You will have to excuse me this week (month, year, decade), I'm not in a good way. You know that feeling you get when you give your car to a mechanic and await the results? You think it's going to be a fifty buck problem and the little rattle is going to be easily fixed. The problem is that it's never that bloody simple, and if it is, it's a damn rare event. "I've got a bad feeling about this".

---

Hi Tee,Point taken, my friend. But all in all, the message I have been trying to get over to you twofriendly souls as I see it, when reading your input here, and Moth's.( Moth certainly can be on the border of being offensive and abusive, and also yourself at times.) I don't think this really is the way to achieve positive results on the forum in the long term.Gosh how does your wives cope??????? living life with you two????? HAHAHA.YOU GUYS CERTAINLY WOULD GIVE THE ALMIGHTY NOEL HOLLINS A RUN FOR HIS MONEY.YOU BOTH HAVE GOT WHA

---

LIke I said, '...on the chin'.

It is easy to misunderstand the tone of some posts sometimes as there is no inflection in the voice that you would get with spoken words.

But the other thing is, I HATE people who get on here making eternal pronouncements about me and others.  Sorry, but that takes me right back to my time as a fundamnetalist.  The thing that I may not make clear enough is that I was once just as harsh and judgemental as the religious people who post here.  So when I tell people off for being religious nuts, it comes from deep within me and is in many ways a reminder to myself that I was once a tool too.  Does that make sense?  I think you'll see that I really only give shit to the religious posts.

Anyway, excuses, excuses...as I said, 'on the chin'.  Time to tape Hi-5 for my son (yes, we get that in China).  He loves the music and I like being able to expose him to somethings Australian...and I enjoy watching the Filippino girl.

Te luo Yi