Hell

[mmksparbud]

Try making a lineage chart.

A lineage line of 3 Zedekias?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

The answer is the same...you are caught up in the riddle. The trees of the forest have eluded you, guarding their hidden truth from attack.

You say you were given confirmation of all that is written so why are you not sharing the answers to these riddles?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

A lineage line of 3 Zedekias?

There are two. I took the time to underscore one and bold the other.

 

[mmksparbud]

(2Ki 24:17 JPS) And the king of Babylon made Mattaniah his father's brother king in his stead, and changed his name to Zedekiah. (1)
1Ki_22:11 And Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him horns of iron: and he said, Thus saith the LORD, With these shalt thou push the Syrians, until thou have consumed them (2)
(1Ch 3:16 JPS) And the sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah his son. (3)

That looks like 3 to me, It's getting g to be too many of them.

 

[ScottA]

You say you were given confirmation of all that is written so why are you not sharing the answers to these riddles?

What did you think I was doing?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

What did you think I was doing?

Dancing around the issue avoiding the question.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

(2Ki 24:17 JPS) And the king of Babylon made Mattaniah his father's brother king in his stead, and changed his name to Zedekiah. (1)
1Ki_22:11 And Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him horns of iron: and he said, Thus saith the LORD, With these shalt thou push the Syrians, until thou have consumed them (2)
(1Ch 3:16 JPS) And the sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah his son. (3)

That looks like 3 to me, It's getting g to be too many of them.

The one in 1 Kings is irrelevant. Far too distant on the timeline from the desolation of Judah. You seem to be using a search function to find all Zedekiahs instead of reading what was happening at the end of 2 Kings.

 

[Butch5]

Do you understand how debate works? The OP said this is off topic.

Go argue with Christians. I simply don't care to discuss your Mormon-esque spin-off of Christianity. Particularly when such a discussion constitutes hijacking of this thread. Particularly when you dodged my question earlier.

Yes, I'm well aware of how debate works. The one making the claim has the burden of proof. You have yet to supply that. I've not dodged your question, however, you've not provided proof. That's not surprising since there is no proof. That description of hell is simply mythology.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Yes, I'm well aware of how debate works. The one making the claim has the burden of proof. You have yet to supply that. I've not dodged your question, however, you've not provided proof. That's not surprising since there is no proof. That description of hell is simply mythology.

If you understand how debate works then why are you going off topic?

 

[Butch5]

If you understand how debate works then why are you going off topic?

I'm not off topic. This is from the OP.

"The conception of hell that I address here is a place of literal torment, where sapient beings are deliberately sent by God for failing to be as flawless as a deity, and where they'll spend eternity with no chance of redeption or mercy."

I'm asking for evidence that such a place exists. Anyone can make up a fictitious place. If we're going to debate the merits of such a place we should verify that such a place exists.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I'm not off topic. This is from the OP.

"The conception of hell that I address here is a place of literal torment, where sapient beings are deliberately sent by God for failing to be as flawless as a deity, and where they'll spend eternity with no chance of redeption or mercy."

I'm asking for evidence that such a place exists. Anyone can make up a fictitious place. If we're going to debate the merits of such a place we should verify that such a place exists.

You are deliberately leaving this part out:

So if you believe that Hell is God's absence, or his presence as experienced through the mind of the unregenerate sinner, or annihilation, or a temporary place of purification, or a conundrum to be solved by trusting that a just God would find a way to do the right thing and save all - this thread might not be for you.

This makes you look entirely dishonest.

 

[Butch5]

You are deliberately leaving this part out:

So if you believe that Hell is God's absence, or his presence as experienced through the mind of the unregenerate sinner, or annihilation, or a temporary place of purification, or a conundrum to be solved by trusting that a just God would find a way to do the right thing and save all - this thread might not be for you.

This makes you look entirely dishonest.

I'm not arguing the case for annihilation so it has no bearing on what I said. The OP states a description of hell. I'm simply asking for proof that such a place exists. If someone is claiming there is a place where people are tormented for eternity, it's only logical to first establish that such a place exists .

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I'm not arguing the case for annihilation so it has no bearing on what I said. The OP states a description of hell. I'm simply asking for proof that such a place exists. If someone is claiming there is a place where people are tormented for eternity, it's only logical to first establish that such a place exists .

It's an assumed premise of the OP. It is not up for debate on the thread. You said you understand how debate works...

 

[Butch5]

It's an assumed premise of the OP. It is not up for debate on the thread. You said you understand how debate works...

It's not up for debate? The OP questions the rational of the very definition. It's not assumed by the OP, it's challenged.

"To me, such a conception of hell reflects *extremely* badly on the corresponding conception of deity, and no argument from authority ("who are YOU to question an all-powerful being?????") will resolve the matter.

So, if you believe that it is literally impossible for any of us to measure up to God's standard, and we are then punished for it - that's like torturing a dog with a branding iron for its failure to comprehend algebra. Or setting up an eight-meter pit (with poisoned spikes at the bottom) for people to jump over when you *know* they'll never get further than 6 m."

 

[Nihilist Virus]

It's not up for debate? The OP questions the rational of the very definition. It's not assumed by the OP, it's challenged.

"To me, such a conception of hell reflects *extremely* badly on the corresponding conception of deity, and no argument from authority ("who are YOU to question an all-powerful being?????") will resolve the matter.

So, if you believe that it is literally impossible for any of us to measure up to God's standard, and we are then punished for it - that's like torturing a dog with a branding iron for its failure to comprehend algebra. Or setting up an eight-meter pit (with poisoned spikes at the bottom) for people to jump over when you *know* they'll never get further than 6 m."

If you think that hell does not literally exist, it's likely because you agree that such a thing would reflect poorly on your idea of God. If so, admit such. If, on the other hand, you don't think that hell literally exists, but that God would be justified in creating one and populating it with unbelievers, then defend that position.

As far as I can see, those are the positions available to you.

I think you should just face the facts: the vast majority of Christians believe in a hell, and this is because the Bible portrays it clearly. I don't want to bother going around trying to prove something that most Christians already believe in, especially when it's off topic. So instead of drudging up my own arguments, I'll let you grapple with this:

https://bible.org/article/what-bible-says-about-hell

When you see that hell is very real, at least in the Christian world, and you combine that with what I presume is a belief that hell should not exist in a world ruled by a loving God, the results will be rational atheism.

 

[Butch5]

If you think that hell does not literally exist, it's likely because you agree that such a thing would reflect poorly on your idea of God. If so, admit such. If, on the other hand, you don't think that hell literally exists, but that God would be justified in creating one and populating it with unbelievers, then defend that position.

As far as I can see, those are the positions available to you.

I think you should just face the facts: the vast majority of Christians believe in a hell, and this is because the Bible portrays it clearly. I don't want to bother going around trying to prove something that most Christians already believe in, especially when it's off topic. So instead of drudging up my own arguments, I'll let you grapple with this:

https://bible.org/article/what-bible-says-about-hell

When you see that hell is very real, at least in the Christian world, and you combine that with what I presume is a belief that hell should not exist in a world ruled by a loving God, the results will be rational atheism.

I don't think you're following me. It doesn't matter what I believe or what the majority of Christians believe. Facts are facts whether they are believed or not. I believe there is a hell. However, it is the definition of that hell that is in question. What Christians may claim is hell doesn't matter. What matters is what can be proven to be hell. If hell is some place of eternal conscious torment then that should be verifiable. If it can't be verified then it can't be claimed as fact. If it can't be claimed as fact is mere conjecture, opinion, or fantasy.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I don't think you're following me. It doesn't matter what I believe or what the majority of Christians believe. Facts are facts whether they are believed or not. I believe there is a hell. However, it is the definition of that hell that is in question. What Christians may claim is hell doesn't matter. What matters is what can be proven to be hell. If hell is some place of eternal conscious torment then that should be verifiable. If it can't be verified then it can't be claimed as fact. If it can't be claimed as fact is mere conjecture, opinion, or fantasy.

Then how do you rule out Zoroastrianism, the dead Greek gods, and all of that? It must be taken seriously, apparently.

 

[Butch5]

Then how do you rule out Zoroastrianism, the dead Greek gods, and all of that? It must be taken seriously, apparently.

What can be proven should be taken seriously. I learned along time ago not to debate peoples opinions. That's why I ask for facts. As I said, what someone thinks hell ma be doesn't matter, i'm interested in what it can be proven to be. That's how I address things. If the Greek gods can be proven then they can be addressed. If it can't be proven that they exist then what is the point in debating about them?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

What can be proven should be taken seriously. I learned along time ago not to debate peoples opinions. That's why I ask for facts. As I said, what someone thinks hell ma be doesn't matter, i'm interested in what it can be proven to be. That's how I address things. If the Greek gods can be proven then they can be addressed. If it can't be proven that they exist then what is the point in debating about them?

How will you prove hell does or doesn't exist? By citing a book written by conquesting barbarians with instructions on slave-driving and no "Thou shalt not rape" law, a book with prophecies that are either ad hoc or outright lies, a book riddled with contradictions, a book filled to the brim with atrocities committed at the command of the God it purports to exist, a book ultimately put together by men with no explicit instructions from God?

 

[Butch5]

How will you prove hell does or doesn't exist? By citing a book written by conquesting barbarians with instructions on slave-driving and no "Thou shalt not rape" law, a book with prophecies that are either ad hoc or outright lies, a book riddled with contradictions, a book filled to the brim with atrocities committed at the command of the God it purports to exist, a book ultimately put together by men with no explicit instructions from God?

That's the logical fallacy of the question begging epithet! It also does nothing to provide any evidence of a place called hell that is a place of eternal conscious torment.