Eternal Conscious Hell Fire is completely Justified

[createdtoworship]

Even if it were true that an angry thought should be punishable by death, which it obviously isn't, there would still be a limit to the punishment. Let's say for the sake of argument that an angry thought was worth a billion whip lashes. If you do the math, you simply won't ever get to an infinite number of lashes. You're basically saying that any sin must be punished infinitely. It doesn't matter how many sins there are in total.

And you're portraying God as simply unable to forget or forgive. That doesn't fit with the idea of God being almighty. Who or what is forcing God to punish anybody for anything? If God is judging righteously, then his punishment must be righteous as well, meaning that people get what they actually deserve. And nobody deserves eternal suffering, because they don't sin eternally. That doesn't fit with any idea of justice. It's the opposite of justice. It's like you hitting me once and me hitting you back an infinite number of times, because your first offense of hitting me didn't "disappear". It's not fair or logical by any stretch of the imagination.

It looks more like you (against your will and reason, I presume) believe that God will torture most of us forever, and so you're trying to devise a way in which that can make sense. But it can't. You can't say that God is both almighty and unable to forgive, or that he's going to torture people infinitely while at the same time judging righteously.

an angry thought is not worth a billion whip lashes, that is not enough, because according to God's word an angry thought is equivelent to murder. The difference is not out thoughts versus action, although there is an issue there, but the issue you are having is how God views sin. If we realized that every angry thought was murder, then we would understand why we are punished eternally for hundreds of thousands of angry thoughts.

 

[holo]

an angry thought is not worth a billion whip lashes, that is not enough, because according to God's word an angry thought is equivelent to murder. The difference is not out thoughts versus action, although there is an issue there, but the issue you are having is how God views sin. If we realized that every angry thought was murder, then we would understand why we are punished eternally for hundreds of thousands of angry thoughts.

No. Let's say an angry thought equals murder (which again, it obviously doesn't, especially if God is anything near righteous in his judgments). That would mean a thousand angry thought should be punished by a thousand deaths, right? Again, a finite punishment for a finite sin. It seems to me you're trying to appeal to the amount of sin, but according to your view, a child that only had time for one single angry thought before she died, still deserves eternal punishment for that one sin, am I correct?

 

[createdtoworship]

No. Let's say an angry thought equals murder (which again, it obviously doesn't, especially if God is anything near righteous in his judgments). That would mean a thousand angry thought should be punished by a thousand deaths, right? Again, a finite punishment for a finite sin. It seems to me you're trying to appeal to the amount of sin, but according to your view, a child that only had time for one single angry thought before she died, still deserves eternal punishment for that one sin, am I correct?

sir, you are right now. How do you punish a thousand deaths, and that is moderate, it would be more like 50,000 deaths or more if you counted every single time we were angry in traffic, or angry at lines in the store. How do you punish someone with the death penalty 50,000 times. Doesn't is start to justify endless torture? Now to address the finite being punished with infinite. The finite is not really finite, as I have mentioned before, the soul is massless. That means that time does not affect the soul. When we die, our soul keeps living, because it has no beginning or end theoretically speaking. Now since the soul is infinite, the sins of the soul are also to be punished in an infinite way. Lets rationalize this, say an soul that does an infinite sin, a sin that will never be erased in all of eternity, God will remember it forever. That sin, if we simply punished it in a finite manner, it would not do it justice because the soul will live past the judgement expiration date. So for example putting someone do death for murder, well the soul does not die, so that punishment did not fit the crime. There are only a few problems with this theory, and that is that souls are created by God at a specific period in the past. And to answer this, we only need to know that a time susceptible being can be placed into a timelessness at any point, we will call them events because time won't be a factor. So there only need to be an event in which the soul is placed into a timelessness. And that is certainly possible. One may argue that can't the soul be pulled out of timelessness for judgement, and that is possible too. However the scriptures don't seem to mention that, as heaven has an eternal aspect, as well as hell. So apparently after birth of the soul, it lives forever. And it makes sense because according to general relativity mass is accelerated by time and some other things, but if you don't have mass you don't have time. So in conclusion, putting someone to death for a murder, is not fair punishment. The crime still exists in the eternal domain. One must punish the crime in the eternal domain as well to fully punish the crime.

 

[holo]

sir, you are right now. How do you punish a thousand deaths, and that is moderate, it would be more like 50,000 deaths or more if you counted every single time we were angry in traffic, or angry at lines in the store. How do you punish someone with the death penalty 50,000 times. Doesn't is start to justify endless torture?

Not at all. A gazillion quintillion brazillion thousand sins are still not infinite sin.

And again, what about those who die young, after only sinning once in their life? You think they'll receive infinite punishment too, right, so why even try to argue with the amount of sins? It's irrelevant.

Now to address the finite being punished with infinite. The finite is not really finite, as I have mentioned before, the soul is massless.

So what? Is there some kind of natural law that then dictates it must suffer forever? If so, who made that law, and why?

That means that time does not affect the soul.

Makes no sense whatsoever.

When we die, our soul keeps living, because it has no beginning or end theoretically speaking. Now since the soul is infinite, the sins of the soul are also to be punished in an infinite way.

So, as I asked you before, if you were to live forever in your physical body, and committed a crime, you should be sentenced to lifetime in prison, right? Not because you deserved it, but because your body lives forever. Since it lives forever, your crime never "goes away."

Lets rationalize this, say an soul that does an infinite sin, a sin that will never be erased in all of eternity, God will remember it forever.

Again: so what? I'll always remember a lot of bad things people have done to me. I've forgiven them. Just because I remember it forever doesn't mean I'm forced to punish them forever.

One must punish the crime in the eternal domain as well to fully punish the crime.

First of all, "one must"? Why "must" anyone do such a thing? Also, such a scenario means justice is never done: no matter how long or how bad God tortures you, it will never actually pay for your crime.

I'll have to ask again, because I can't seem to get a grasp on how you judge something to be good or bad: Did Anne Frank deserve to be gassed? If so, why?

 

[createdtoworship]

Not at all. A gazillion quintillion brazillion thousand sins are still not infinite sin.

And again, what about those who die young, after only sinning once in their life? You think they'll receive infinite punishment too, right, so why even try to argue with the amount of sins? It's irrelevant.

So what? Is there some kind of natural law that then dictates it must suffer forever? If so, who made that law, and why?Makes no sense whatsoever.So, as I asked you before, if you were to live forever in your physical body, and committed a crime, you should be sentenced to lifetime in prison, right? Not because you deserved it, but because your body lives forever. Since it lives forever, your crime never "goes away."Again: so what? I'll always remember a lot of bad things people have done to me. I've forgiven them. Just because I remember it forever doesn't mean I'm forced to punish them forever.First of all, "one must"? Why "must" anyone do such a thing? Also, such a scenario means justice is never done: no matter how long or how bad God tortures you, it will never actually pay for your crime.

I'll have to ask again, because I can't seem to get a grasp on how you judge something to be good or bad: Did Anne Frank deserve to be gassed? If so, why?

again, sir let me explain it once again. Sins of the soul are eternal. So say you kill someone, getting the death penalty does not punish your soul, because your soul is not the body that died getting the death penalty. Only the flesh died, the soul went on unpunished. So the soul must die, and since the soul is eternal, that death is eternal. Does that make sense?

 

[createdtoworship]

here is a 4 minute gospel message by a rapper named "propaganda"

 

[holo]

again, sir let me explain it once again. Sins of the soul are eternal. So say you kill someone, getting the death penalty does not punish your soul, because your soul is not the body that died getting the death penalty. Only the flesh died, the soul went on unpunished. So the soul must die, and since the soul is eternal, that death is eternal. Does that make sense?

No, frankly it still doesn't make sense. It raises more questions: What is a "sin of the soul"? I suppose you mean the soul is the "real" you, what makes you a conscious being. If you suffer, isn't it your soul that suffers? Or is the soul sort of asleep until the body dies? How does it work?

If the soul must die, then ok, the soul must die. Eternal death is the exact opposite of eternal life. If God goes by the eye-for-an-eye way of doing things, then murdering someone must be punishable by death. Death, not eternal life in hell. If God judges you to eternal life in hell, he is literally punishing you infinitely more than you deserve.

I'll repeat the questions you didn't answer:
Is there some kind of natural law that then dictates it must suffer forever? If so, who made that law, and why?
----
So, as I asked you before, if you were to live forever in your physical body, and committed a crime, you should be sentenced to lifetime in prison, right?
----
First of all, "one must"? Why "must" anyone do such a thing? Also, such a scenario means justice is never done: no matter how long or how bad God tortures you, it will never actually pay for your crime.
----
I'll have to ask again, because I can't seem to get a grasp on how you judge something to be good or bad: Did Anne Frank deserve to be gassed? If so, why?

In short, torturing someone forever is what I'd expect satan to do, not God.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

here is a 4 minute gospel message by a rapper named "propaganda"

Here’s a video by Sam Harris...

 

[createdtoworship]

No, frankly it still doesn't make sense. It raises more questions: What is a "sin of the soul"? I suppose you mean the soul is the "real" you, what makes you a conscious being. If you suffer, isn't it your soul that suffers? Or is the soul sort of asleep until the body dies? How does it work?

If the soul must die, then ok, the soul must die. Eternal death is the exact opposite of eternal life. If God goes by the eye-for-an-eye way of doing things, then murdering someone must be punishable by death. Death, not eternal life in hell. If God judges you to eternal life in hell, he is literally punishing you infinitely more than you deserve.

I'll repeat the questions you didn't answer:
Is there some kind of natural law that then dictates it must suffer forever? If so, who made that law, and why?
----
So, as I asked you before, if you were to live forever in your physical body, and committed a crime, you should be sentenced to lifetime in prison, right?
----
First of all, "one must"? Why "must" anyone do such a thing? Also, such a scenario means justice is never done: no matter how long or how bad God tortures you, it will never actually pay for your crime.
----
I'll have to ask again, because I can't seem to get a grasp on how you judge something to be good or bad: Did Anne Frank deserve to be gassed? If so, why?

In short, torturing someone forever is what I'd expect satan to do, not God.

sir I answered those questions repeatedly. A sin of the soul is eternal because the soul is eternal. A simple death that is eternal is not enough for numerous infractions. Look at it this way, mankind has deemed it just to kill a murderer for killing one man in premeditation. So then if they kill billions of people, a single death is not justice. It's just that that is the end of our justice system, the capital punishment. But someone who kills a billion people should be put to death a billion times yes? As the bible says, a life for a life. God will exact punishment in a truly just way. Secondly, eternity is not a buch of time, you have a problem with this one. Eternity is outside of time. So eternal punishment is not billions of years in a firery hell, it is simply in a hell that is outside of time. The soul is eternal and cannot die, so it must undergo continual death, while not achieving it. This is eternal anquish. That is the only punishment that is truly just, for say someone who kills a billion people. Now if you can agree with that point, we can move on. Do you agree someone who kills a billion people should undergo a billion deaths? Which is impractical in the least, so putting a person in eternal hell that is outside of time, would be just at that point yes? If you can't agree to that, then you must reread the other posts, I don't know how to explain it much better than that.

 

[createdtoworship]

Here’s a video by Sam Harris...

boring. I tried, but I could not watch it. If you summarize it, I would not be afraid of addressing any of his points. But I simply could not bring myself to watch it.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

boring. I tried, but I could not watch it. If you summarize it, I would not be afraid of addressing any of his points. But I simply could not bring myself to watch it.

I knew you wouldn’t.

It wasn't really for you. It was for other people to view.

 

[createdtoworship]

I knew you wouldn’t.

It wasn't really for you. It was for other people to view.

I am not sure it will hold their attention. Just saying.

 

[holo]

sir I answered those questions repeatedly.

But you're contradicting yourself. Because on the one hand you say Anne Frank didn't deserve to be gassed, yet you're saying she deserves eternal torture. Those statements are mutually exclusive.

A sin of the soul is eternal because the soul is eternal.

Again, what exactly is a "sin of the soul"? Is there, in contrast, such a thing as "sin of the body"? What does it mean?

A simple death that is eternal is not enough for numerous infractions.

Maybe not, but again, you believe that people who die after committing a single sin shall receive infinite punishment for that one sin, right?

Look at it this way, mankind has deemed it just to kill a murderer for killing one man in premeditation. So then if they kill billions of people, a single death is not justice. It's just that that is the end of our justice system, the capital punishment. But someone who kills a billion people should be put to death a billion times yes?

OK, but a million deaths is still not infinite deaths.

As the bible says, a life for a life. God will exact punishment in a truly just way. Secondly, eternity is not a buch of time, you have a problem with this one. Eternity is outside of time. So eternal punishment is not billions of years in a firery hell, it is simply in a hell that is outside of time. The soul is eternal and cannot die, so it must undergo continual death, while not achieving it.

In that case, again, God is unable to give you the punishment you deserve. No matter how long or how bad he tortures you, you will never actually pay for the crime.

You seem to be saying that God is forced by something, or someone, to keep torturing you. Why is that? Can't God do as he pleases?

This is eternal anquish. That is the only punishment that is truly just, for say someone who kills a billion people. Now if you can agree with that point, we can move on. Do you agree someone who kills a billion people should undergo a billion deaths?

You're again making two mutually exclusive claims: both that they deserve a million deaths and that they deserve infinite agony. If I were to inflict infinite agony on someone, then yes, a just punishment would be infinite agony for me.

Or, if I were to commit a sin "outside of time", then I guess the punishment should be "outside of time" as well. But nothing we do in life is "outside of time". If your crime demands a punishment of death, then anything other than death wouldn't be justice, would it?

 

[createdtoworship]

But you're contradicting yourself. Because on the one hand you say Anne Frank didn't deserve to be gassed, yet you're saying she deserves eternal torture. Those statements are mutually exclusive.Again, what exactly is a "sin of the soul"? Is there, in contrast, such a thing as "sin of the body"? What does it mean?Maybe not, but again, you believe that people who die after committing a single sin shall receive infinite punishment for that one sin, right?OK, but a million deaths is still not infinite deaths.In that case, again, God is unable to give you the punishment you deserve. No matter how long or how bad he tortures you, you will never actually pay for the crime.

You seem to be saying that God is forced by something, or someone, to keep torturing you. Why is that? Can't God do as he pleases?You're again making two mutually exclusive claims: both that they deserve a million deaths and that they deserve infinite agony. If I were to inflict infinite agony on someone, then yes, a just punishment would be infinite agony for me.

Or, if I were to commit a sin "outside of time", then I guess the punishment should be "outside of time" as well. But nothing we do in life is "outside of time". If your crime demands a punishment of death, then anything other than death wouldn't be justice, would it?

sir your entire argument revolves around infinite punishment for finite sins. Yet being outside of time is not infinity. It's not an infinite amount of time, it literally is no time. So your argument fails on a pivotal manner. The soul is massless and according to general relativity it is it a timeless domain, so it must be punished in a timeless domain. It is non physical, so it cannot be punished with death of the body.

 

[holo]

sir your entire argument revolves around infinite punishment for finite sins. Yet being outside of time is not infinity. It's not an infinite amount of time, it literally is no time. So your argument fails on a pivotal manner. The soul is massless and according to general relativity it is it a timeless domain, so it must be punished in a timeless domain. It is non physical, so it cannot be punished with death of the body.

Semantics. Whether or not it's "outside of time" still means eternal, infinite suffering. Punishment with no end. As you say, infinite punishment for finite sins.

Just because you can say it's "outside of time" doesn't in any way make it just.

 

[holo]

And yet again, what exactly is a "sin of the soul", and as opposed to what?

And again, what or who is forcing God to torture someone infinitely? If he is indeed almighty, that means he wants to do it. Again, it's exactly what you'd expect satan to do if he had the chance.

 

[createdtoworship]

Semantics. Whether or not it's "outside of time" still means eternal, infinite suffering. Punishment with no end. As you say, infinite punishment for finite sins.

Just because you can say it's "outside of time" doesn't in any way make it just.

And yet again, what exactly is a "sin of the soul", and as opposed to what?

And again, what or who is forcing God to torture someone infinitely? If he is indeed almighty, that means he wants to do it. Again, it's exactly what you'd expect satan to do if he had the chance.

There is no verse that says he tortures infinitely, he tortures eternally, that is outside of time. It's not millions and millions of years in a linear fashion. It's outside of time.

so it's justified because it's not the same as being infinitely tortured, as that is your only refutation to what I said.

now that I refuted that refutation you have nothing else you can debate.

so we are done.

 

[holo]

There is no verse that says he tortures infinitely, he tortures eternally, that is outside of time. It's not millions and millions of years in a linear fashion. It's outside of time.

so it's justified because it's not the same as being infinitely tortured, as that is your only refutation to what I said.

now that I refuted that refutation you have nothing else you can debate.

so we are done.

Again, semantics. Eternal and infinite and "outside of time" mean the exact same thing. Or, if it doesn't, please explain how suffering eternally would be different from suffering infinitely. (Or how and why something that was committed "in time" should be paid for "outside of time" in the first place - how is that just?)

OF COURSE it's not justified, and I think you know it. Not only is it not justified, it's the ultimate evil. It's repaying sin with punishment that is LITERALLY infinitely worse. It's unimaginably worse.

So no, you haven't refuted anything. You don't even try to answer my repeated questions like what "sin of the soul" even means, or who/what forces God to torture anybody (let alone most of the people he ever created and supposedly loves). But it seems clear by now that you can't.

I can just repeat what I said earlier, that torturing someone infinitely, or outside of time if you will, is exactly what I'd expect satan to do, not God. Just as a thougth experiment, if we imagine satan won the battle and God lost, and satan got to do whatever he pleased. What do you think he would've done differently than God to our eternal souls?

 

[holo]

It gets more absurd the more you think about it. Imagine that you get born and right after the "age of accountability", you tell a lie, and then you get sick and die. Straight to hell. After three hundred billion years of continuous conscious suffering, you say "hey God, this is unfair! You're making me suffer infinitely for a single lie!" God answers, "now see, that's where you're wrong, child. You're not suffering infinitely, you're suffering eternally. Therefore, this is exactly what you deserve."

 

[createdtoworship]

Again, semantics. Eternal and infinite and "outside of time" mean the exact same thing. Or, if it doesn't, please explain how suffering eternally would be different from suffering infinitely. (Or how and why something that was committed "in time" should be paid for "outside of time" in the first place - how is that just?)

OF COURSE it's not justified, and I think you know it. Not only is it not justified, it's the ultimate evil. It's repaying sin with punishment that is LITERALLY infinitely worse. It's unimaginably worse.

So no, you haven't refuted anything. You don't even try to answer my repeated questions like what "sin of the soul" even means, or who/what forces God to torture anybody (let alone most of the people he ever created and supposedly loves). But it seems clear by now that you can't.

I can just repeat what I said earlier, that torturing someone infinitely, or outside of time if you will, is exactly what I'd expect satan to do, not God. Just as a thougth experiment, if we imagine satan won the battle and God lost, and satan got to do whatever he pleased. What do you think he would've done differently than God to our eternal souls?

it's not semantics the words infinite is not the same as eternal. They are literally different words, so you have no argument.

now I am done with this, as this is somewhat circular at this point. So if you have something new to bring to the plate let me know.

but semantics has nothing to do with it.