The Problem of Hell v.2

[Elioenai26]

Perfection? Inability to be in the presence of evil? Being non-physical?
Omnipotence? Omniscience? Omnibenevolence? Creatorship of everything from nothing? Being eternal? Being the Alpha and Omega? Being supernatural? Being the objective source of morality?

Incorrect.

I also made it known that I wanted to discuss this with Skavau.

 

[Elioenai26]

Look, is this going anywhere?

Either you have an argument or you don't. I presume you do really believe that all non-Christians are going to hell to receive eternal torment, right?

You stated that you were in an argumentative mood, and yet when someone endeavors to enter into a civil discussion with you according to your own format for discussion, you cannot respect their course of argumentation.

Why is that?

Now I will ask you again, what makes us humans unique according to the bible?

 

[Skavau]

You stated that you were in an argumentative mood, and yet when someone endeavors to enter into a civil discussion with you according to your own format for discussion, you cannot respect their course of argumentation.

Why is that?

Now I will ask you again, what makes us humans unique according to the bible?

This is feeling drawn out and the tedious thing is I can see where it is going.

Also you originally asked me "What attributes do God's image bearers possess?" not what makes us unique. Perhaps you mean the same thing. We're imperfect, we have a conscience?

 

[quatona]

Incorrect.

See, that´s why I encouraged you to simply give the answer to your leading question that you consider "correct" (including the criteria by which you tell those properties that are supposed to be imaged an those that aren´t) instead of playing this silly game.

I also made it known that I wanted to discuss this with Skavau.

Well, you don´t always get what you want.

 

[Elioenai26]

This is feeling drawn out and the tedious thing is I can see where it is going.

Also you originally asked me "What attributes do God's image bearers possess?" not what makes us unique. Perhaps you mean the same thing. We're imperfect, we have a conscience?

As humans created in God's image, we possess a mind, will, and emotion. We possess the capacity to love, to reason, to enter into relationships and express this love for the glory of God. As God's image bearers, we were created to chiefly glorify God, to have dominion over the works of His hands and to enjoy Him in intimate relationship forever.

This is a rough summation of what it means to be created in God's image and this is what separates us from the animals, creeping things on the ground, the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea.

Now, tell me, what is love? How do you see it, and then I will tell you what the bible says about it.

 

[Skavau]

As humans created in God's image, we possess a mind, will, and emotion. We possess the capacity to love, to reason, to enter into relationships and express this love for the glory of God. As God's image bearers, we were created to chiefly glorify God, to have dominion over the works of His hands and to enjoy Him in intimate relationship forever.

The idea that we were created without our consent to chiefly "glorify God" and be with him in an "intimate relationship" seems implicitly tyrannical. What if someone rejects this agenda for them? What if someone is unaware of that agenda and even of their origins?

Also your question seems to bare almost no meaningful resemblance to the answer you've given.

This is a rough summation of what it means to be created in God's image and this is what separates us from the animals and creeping things and the birds of the air, and this fish of the sea.

Now, tell me, what is love? How do you see it, and then I will tell you what the bible says about it.

This is completely and utterly irrelevant to the debate.

Love, generally as an emotion towards another is a powerful attraction and affection to someone. It can be purely platonic but it can also take on the properties of being romantic.

 

[Elioenai26]

The idea that we were created without our consent to chiefly "glorify God" and be with him in an "intimate relationship" seems implicitly tyrannical. What if someone rejects this agenda for them?

Then God loves you enough to let you have your own way.

What if someone is unaware of that agenda and even of their origins?

The bible teaches us that everyone knows God exists, and that He is worthy of worship honor and glory, no one is unaware. Not one. For God has made Himself known through what has been created, so that no man has an excuse. He has given us a conscience and the capacity to know right from wrong, as you have already born witness to.

Also your question seems to bare almost no meaningful resemblance to the answer you've given.


This is completely and utterly irrelevant to the debate.

This is the debate.

Love, generally as an emotion towards another is a powerful attraction and affection to someone. It can be purely platonic but it can also take on the properties of being romantic.

Love is a choice, above all.

We choose to love someone and we must allow the object of our love to have the choice to love us in return. Love cannot compel or force, it can only draw, and leave itself open to rejection.

If you reject God's love, then He will allow you to go your way. If you die in this rejection, despising and hating God's "tyrannical" ways, why do you think you would want to spend eternity with Him?

 

[Skavau]

Then God loves you enough to let you have your own way.

Does he?

Does this mean I won't be tormented in hell? Because that isn't my wish.

Nor is it the wish of Muslims, by the way who unlike me actually do wish to live with God.

The bible teaches us that everyone knows God exists, and that He is worthy of worship honor and glory, no one is unaware.

This is incoherent.

Firstly, the idea that we are aware of God being worthy of worship, honour and glory makes no sense. That is a value judgement, not a fact. You either accept that or you do not. I do not. At least not your rendition of God.

Secondly, I am not aware of God's existence. Do you think I am lying to you when I say that?

Not one. For God has made Himself known through what has been created, so that no man has an excuse.

The existence of stuff does not demonstrate the existence of God.

He has given us a conscience and the capacity to know right from wrong, as you have already born witness to.

Presumably he has decided to make himself exempt from this right and wrong differentiation.

My snark aside, that I have an appreciation and acceptance of what one ought and ought not does not mean that there is good reason to believe it derives from God.

Love is a choice, above all.

We choose to love someone and we must allow the object of our love to have the choice to love us in return.

I think this is untrue, to a degree. You cannot force yourself to love another. If you could, then far fewer marriages would collapse.

If you reject God's love, then He will allow you to go your way. If you die in this rejection, despising and hating God's "tyrannical" ways, why do you think you would want to spend eternity with Him?

I'm not asking to spend eternity with him. That is and never was the foundation of my argument. I'm asking why my rejection of God deserves eternal torment.

 

[Elioenai26]

Does this mean I won't be tormented in hell? Because that isn't my wish.

I will have to quote quatona here...

"Well, you don´t always get what you want."

Nor is it the wish of Muslims, by the way who unlike me actually do wish to live with God.

Jesus said that He was the only way to God the Father. If Jesus was indeed who He said He was, then He would know. He also knows the hearts of men. Shall not the Lord of all the earth do what is right?

You either accept that or you do not. I do not.

That is your choice to make.

Secondly, I am not aware of God's existence. Do you think I am lying to you when I say that?

You are aware that He exists, do you know why I say that?

I'm asking why my rejection of God deserves eternal torment.

According to the Bible, there is heaven where the love, power, majesty, and glory of the Most High God will be experienced by all them that love Him, and there is Hell, where all who do not love Him will be in anguish over their own selfishness and hatred of all that was good and pure. This hatred and selfishness is arguably self-perpetuating, increasing throughout all eternity. We are eternal beings either way. And sin against a Holy, Eternal, Righteous God merits eternal condemnation.

That is why I beg you, be reconciled to God, tomorrow is promised to none of us.

 

[Skavau]

I will have to quote quatona here...

"Well, you don´t always get what you want."

Right, so when you said:

"Then God loves you enough to let you have your own way. "

That was in fact untrue. Can I expect more casual dishonesty?

Jesus said that He was the only way to God the Father. If Jesus was indeed who He said He was, then He would know. He also knows the hearts of men. Shall not the Lord of all the earth do what is right?

It doesn't matter what Jesus said there. There are theists outside of Christianity that do love God. They may have an incorrect understanding of God. They may believe that an entirely different God exists but they still believe and love God regardless. That it is inaccurate should not matter. Their motives would be pure. Their objectives almost identical to God's plan.

What would they be guilty of other than being incorrect? Why would they deserve eternal torment?

That is your choice to make.

Except it isn't. My convictions are informed by my observations, experience and my knowledge. They are not as trivial as mere preference.

You are aware that He exists, do you know why I say that?

Because the Bible claims I am?

So when I describe myself as an atheist you think I am lying? Yes or no.

According to the Bible, there is heaven where the love, power, majesty, and glory of the Most High God will be experienced by all them that love Him, and there is Hell, where all who do not love Him will be in anguish over their own selfishness and hatred of all that was good and pure.

This is a strawman and a slur. First of all, my rejection of the God you believe in is a reaction to your description of him. I would refuse to accept and glorify the God you believe in because he allows torment. Because he watched passively as billions suffer. That is beyond any evil that any individual, any nation or any empire could commit even in fantasy. It literally is the most reprehensible concept ever imagined and yet your supposedly all-loving God approves of it.

Second of all, those who "do not love" God are not all by default selfish and hateful of goodness. That is a slur. You simply have no way of knowing it either.

This hatred and selfishness is arguably self-perpetuating, increasing throughout all eternity.

If it is so, then God would be better to just end our existence. Or offer those in hell some kind of refuge away from their torment. Or even reform them. The suffering in hell is needless and petty.

We are eternal beings either way. And sin against a Holy, Eternal, Righteous God merits eternal condemnation.

This is just a claim. No reason to accept it.

 

[Elioenai26]

It doesn't matter what Jesus said there.

This sums it up.

Because the Bible claims I am?

Because you maintain that objective moral values exist. Remember your position on torture? On child abuse?

So when I describe myself as an atheist you think I am lying? Yes or no.

I think you are confused.

This is just a claim. No reason to accept it.

Then don't.

 

[Skavau]

This sums it up.

No, it doesn't. Read what I said afterwards:

"There are theists outside of Christianity that do love God. They may have an incorrect understanding of God. They may believe that an entirely different God exists but they still believe and love God regardless. That it is inaccurate should not matter. Their motives would be pure. Their objectives almost identical to God's plan."

Because you maintain that objective moral values exist. Remember your position on torture? On child abuse?

This depends entirely on how you are using the word "objective". At any rate that I do unequivocally condemn torture and child abuse (which is more than you when referring to the former) does not mean that I believe in a God. The two have nothing to do with each other.

I think you are confused.

But am I lying? After all, you did say previously:

The bible teaches us that everyone knows God exists, and that He is worthy of worship honor and glory, no one is unaware.

If I am confused, in contradiction or whatever that wouldn't mean that I actually believed in God - it would just mean that I am ignorant.

So stop mincing words and answer me: Do you think I am lying about being an atheist?

Then don't.

I don't. I thought you were arguing for torture in hell as morally justified? On your first actual on-topic post on it not only do you simply rehash an argument I've probably had with you before you don't bother to defend my request for you to support it, nor do you address my counter-argument.

Are you even trying?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The bible teaches us that everyone knows God exists, and that He is worthy of worship honor and glory, no one is unaware. Not one. For God has made Himself known through what has been created, so that no man has an excuse. He has given us a conscience and the capacity to know right from wrong, as you have already born witness to.

Then the Bible is wrong.

 

[Elioenai26]

Then the Bible is wrong.

So you say. I would rather take God's word.

Ultimately the choice is yours.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

So you say. I would rather take God's word.

Ultimately the choice is yours.

Perhaps the Bible's authors were merely being poetic? Wouldn't be the first time, would it Elio?

 

[Elioenai26]

Perhaps the Bible's authors were merely being poetic? Wouldn't be the first time, would it Elio?

Poetry, allegory, hyperbole, metaphor, and numerous other literary devices were utilized by the men of God in writing the Holy Scriptures. And yes, metaphor is used several times in describing Hell.

 

[Elioenai26]

Are you even trying?

I have written what I felt is necessary. You have the information you requested. What you do with it is entirely up to you.

 

[Skavau]

I have written what I felt is necessary. You have the information you requested. What you do with it is entirely up to you.

You have written even less than your prior defense for hell in this thread. You also wrote your defense in apparent ignorance for the fact that I've covered it before in previous defenses.

To say I am disappointed is an understatement, actually. I was hoping for some heavy back and forth but you baulk too easily at questions. You can't even tell me if you think I'm lying about being an atheist despite saying earlier that everyone knows that God exists.

 

[Elioenai26]

You have written even less than your prior defense for hell in this thread. You also wrote your defense in apparent ignorance for the fact that I've covered it before in previous defenses.

To say I am disappointed is an understatement, actually. I was hoping for some heavy back and forth but you baulk too easily at questions. You can't even tell me if you think I'm lying about being an atheist despite saying earlier that everyone knows that God exists.

As I stated before, argumentativeness is not a trait I find admirable or useful.

I apologize for letting you down.

 

[Skavau]

As I stated before, argumentativeness is not a trait I find admirable or useful.

I apologize for letting you down.

So from this exchange, know this.

I won't accept you lecturing me on morality.

From where I stand, you're an apologist for torture and fascism. Eternal torture at that. This is literally one of the most evil things man could ever dream up and yet it is a decision of the God you believe in. You literally with seemingly no problem accept that God decrees permanent torture for all non-believers and you go with it. Do I think lower of you for that? Yes. I hope that the fact you actually believe that of and for non-believers troubles you.

It would trouble the hell about of me. No pun intended.