God being perfect

[Joshua260]

We just need to see trends and ive been watching them for years. The teaching of a fiery hell were people scream and grind their teeth is very founded in scripture.

Actually, I believe your view of hell and the fate of sinners in hell is confused.

Here's a few issues:

1) no where does the bible say that God tortures anybody in hell.
2) it's pretty obvious that even though Jesus affirms the existence of hell, the description of hell sometimes includes metaphorical descriptions. For example, fire doesn't seem to work the same way on people when they are in hell (the fire doesn't burn flesh like in life). Also, sometimes hell is describe as being at the bottom of a pit, and other times it is described as being bottomless. So, even though there is a hell, I believe the language used to describe it is more tailored to our ability to understand the true nature of it (there's lots of examples of this type of literary device found in scripture). Yes, there is torment, but that is a result of one's decision. I think the "torment" described is what people will experience when they realize that they have been permanently severed form the presence of God. If they had decided to accept God's free offer of salvation, they wouldn't have ended up there. Did you know that some popular atheists have actually said that they would rather burn in hell than be made to live with God? They actually hate God MORE than hell itself. Why? Because when God comes into the picture, our sin becomes blatantly exposed. We are "naked" before God. You know, many of us were where you are now, so we totally get the atheists thing, and we know what it's like to relentlessly avoid admitting our sinful nature.

So your depiction of God torturing people in hell really doesn't line up with reality. Lots of atheists use this straw-man argument because they know that many Christians have a difficult time with the issue. I think the reason is because most of us would rather focus on the love of God than the judgement of God.

 

[Johnnz]

Johhnz

What you propose would be a very sloppy and unwise use of metaphors. To say that when Jesus said he would cast people into a burning place where they scream and gnash that he didnt mean anything similair to those actions would mske Jesus a bafoon who cant communicate wisely.

Or else his audience was very familiar with their scriptures and cultural metaphors and understood Jesus from within their perspectives. For Jewsih people in NT times some final justice for the oppressed and exploited was a primary focus. Torture did not feature. Get rid of the Inferno clutter in your thinking.

He told people stories of people on fire in hell. He even used the valley of Gehenna to demonstrate it.

Demonstrate or illustrate? I go for the latter as a picture of lives wasted.

To say he didnt mean anything like the words and images he used is extremely problematic and you then interpret it as you will, there is no scripture validating your conclusion.

You seem to have little understanding of how imagery forms such an integral part of the Biblical account. Jesus as the God Shepherd, the True Vine are literal?!!

Even if the fire isnt literal its still a place of torture and torment and my point still stands. Considering horrifying scriptures as metaphors and coming up with your own meaning that is far from the pictures and words used is not good exegesis.

Point stated but not accepted as accurate. You have never 'flown home' (i.e. rushed), never been 'over the moon' (i.e. very happy)? Imagery abounds in everyday speech.

John
NZ

 

[Hikarifuru]

Johnnz

Youre being pedantic and using confirmation bias. I do understand your reasoning but i just dont see how you actually believe it yourself.

 

[Hikarifuru]

Joshua

You know, many of us were where you are now, so we totally get the atheists thing, and we know what it's like to relentlessly avoid admitting our sinful nature.

If you struggled to not admit you had a sinful nature then you were nothing like me. You still believed in sin and i dont. Im atheist, your statement implies you likely were not. You were probably a believer who thought god made no sense, but thats not what atheism is. Lots of atheists have been christians not many christians have been atheist AFTER they were intellectually competent.

 

[Joshua260]

Joshua



If you struggled to not admit you had a sinful nature then you were nothing like me. You still believed in sin and i dont. Im atheist, your statement implies you likely were not. You were probably a believer who thought god made no sense, but thats not what atheism is. Lots of atheists have been christians not many christians have been atheist AFTER they were intellectually competent.

You're assumption is incorrect. I became a theist only after I decided to investigate the claims of Chriatianity. It was only after that I realized that I recognized and admitted my sinful nature.

You may remember that we once discussed the possibility of one self-deceiving themselves because of desires, and you actually agreed that this was a possibility (shocking that we could agree on something, eh?). It is my belief that some atheists do that.

 

[Hikarifuru]

I didnt assume or say you were anything, i said you likely were. You have to believe in sin to relentlessly struggle to not admit it.

Its obvious that we could agree on somethings. Id have to completely objectify you in order to not think so.