I didn't say that. I said armenian theology is trash. Who cares what you choose? You're not important. Anyone that puts the emphasis on themselves is not worth listening to.
Right. Seeing John Wesley on a list of people and then calling the list "a bunch of reformed dudes" was the result of your dismissal of Arminian (Wesley was Arminian, not Armenian) theology. A theology that, based on the above statement, I would venture to say you know little about.
I have to show you why it's rational to interpret it the way I did.
If you have to build up a case for it, rather than just point to a verse, then it's simply incorrect to state that Jesus said it; you should have said something along the lines of "I believe this to be the best explanation once we take into account..." and there would be nothing to argue about. The problem isn't your beliefs, it is how you've lied about the evidence for them. If Jesus said it you shouldn't have to show me why your interpretation of his views is rational. The fact is Jesus did not say what you claim he did. He did, however, clearly tell a dying man that he would be with him in paradise that very day. I don't need to build my case for it or show you why it's rational for me to interpret his words in that way, I can simply say "see Luke 23:43".
Basically, you are overstating your claims. Your point of view may wind up being worth considering (or maybe not...I don't know). But because of the way you have presented it, you're caught in a web of exagerations and lies that makes anything you had to say very difficult to take seriously.
Let's go through what happened in this thread again:
1. You stated that Jesus spent all three days his body was dead in hell. You included a scripture reference for that.
2. I pointed out that the scripture you used doesn't actually say that.
3. You responded by appealing to tradition.
4. I pointed out the origins of that tradition and why it no longer makes sense for us.
5. There was some minor back and forth after which you switched to just calling your view "undebateable" as if just saying that somehow strengthens your view.
6. I pointed out that your "undebateable" position is the minority position and that in fact, contemporary theologians have largely abandoned your "undebateable" view and even some of the most respected and influential church leaders going back to Augustine had abandoned this "undebateable" position.
Then you made a new claim, about Jesus saying something (which he never said) and then we go through this process again.
Don't you see what's going on? All of this could be avoided if you were simply honest in the way you present your view. You have certain doctrines you believe very strongly; that's fine, there is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is to overstate the biblical support for your view. You are pretending that your position is something very clear and undebatable in the bible. The fact of the matter is that your position is not undebateable, it's a contested and indeed minority position which relies on a specific way of interpreting various scriptures (and even words) throughout the bible. If you were just more honest in your approach, there would be nothing to argue against. Instead, you're making bold claims about how undebateable the scriptural support for your fringe doctrine is.
We both have looked at the same passage and said it meant different things. So I've given support to say what it means X, and you get mad because I have to explain myself? I'm sorry it doesn't come to you naturally, but just because you don't initially agree doesn't mean I'm wrong.
No one's angry. I just find it necessary to call out your deceitfulness. Twice now you have made claims that the bible says something which it clearly does not. When challenged, you've had to admit that it doesn't actually say what you claimed directly but that if we first believe various definitions, look at the typology, seek out the founding fathers, etc.. we can eventually interpret certain things the bible says in that way. That's a dishonest way of engaging in discussions. If you need to build a case for your doctrine, you should freely admit that, you should not falsely claim that "Jesus said so" or that a certain scripture says so.