The Problem of Hell v.2

[Davian]

Would the three of you like to put your heads together and debate me in a brand new thread? I am sure that you all could build a case for your position, whatever that position might be....

Private message each other, compile an Opening Remark that is no more than 15,000 words and in the opening remark, state your argument and anything else you wish to defend with whatever evidence, proof, expert testimony, syllogisms, etc. etc. you wish to make use of. Build the case from whatever view you wish to argue from and then I will submit my opening remarks.

If the three of you are not willing or unable to do this, then fine. The refusal will be noted. But it seems to me the three of you would be anxious to show how fallacious my arguments have been and prove yourself to be justified in your views. Maybe you all don't really care. Maybe it is a game to you?

Formal debate is going to be the grounds in which my position is defended. Not tit for tat, back and forth, unstructured arguing which is far too prevalent in internet forums.

If you agree to debate, know that I am not going to help you do your research for you. I am not going to answer questions that you should already know. This is a philosophy forum. If you have'nt even the most basic understanding of its most rudimentary concepts, then you should not be pretending that you do.

I look forward to hearing from the three of you.

By the way, you can choose whatever topic your heart's desire. Just title the Opening Remark with a working thesis statement. You have 24 hours to reply with a yes or no, after that, I will pursue the matter no further.

Thank you.

What quatona said.

If you won't answer questions put to you in an open forum, I do not see why you would behave differently in what you offer as a 'debate'.

 

[Elioenai26]

What quatona said.

If you won't answer questions put to you in an open forum, I do not see why you would behave differently in what you offer as a 'debate'.

Maybe you will reconsider. Maybe quatona will change his mind and you along with him and Archaeopteryx can make a case for yourselves. I wait with bated breath......the clock is ticking....

 

[Davian]

Maybe you will reconsider. Maybe quatona will change his mind and you along with him and Archaeopteryx can make a case for yourselves. I wait with baited breath......the clock is ticking....

The correct term is "bated breath". In this case, it may be appropriate, in that it appears you are attempting to bait us into taking on the burden of evidence, in justifying our views.

I see no need to make a case for myself. You are the one claiming "knowledge of the truth", not me.

Support your claim, or abdicate.

 

[Elioenai26]

The correct term is "bated breath". In this case, it may be appropriate, in that it appears you are attempting to bait us into taking on the burden of evidence, in justifying our views.

I see no need to make a case for myself. You are the one claiming "knowledge of the truth", not me.

Support your claim, or abdicate.

Hehehehe, lol I thought it might be spelled that way lol!

Skavau was the one who said that God was contemptible. Im just asking for him to state his case in a coherent, logical, well thought out, concise manner and to refrain from emotional semi-nonsensical tirades replete with misconstruals of the biblical doctrine of hell.

Maybe you and quatona can help him?

 

[Davian]

The correct term is "bated breath". In this case, it may be appropriate, in that it appears you are attempting to bait us into taking on the burden of evidence, in justifying our views.

I see no need to make a case for myself. You are the one claiming "knowledge of the truth", not me.

Support your claim, or abdicate.

Hehehehe, lol I thought it might be spelled that way lol!

Skavau was the one who said that God was contemptible. Im just asking for him to state his case in a coherent, logical, well thought out, concise manner and to refrain from emotional semi-nonsensical tirades replete with misconstruals of the biblical doctrine of hell.

Maybe you and quatona can help him?

Skavau requires no assistance from me, your emotional semi-nonsensical tirades notwithstanding.

Support your claim of "knowledge of the truth", or abdicate.

 

[Elioenai26]

Skavau requires no assistance from me, your emotional semi-nonsensical tirades notwithstanding.

Support your claim of "knowledge of the truth", or abdicate.

Moving goalposts much? Rofl

 

[Davian]

Moving goalposts much? Rofl

...
Maybe it is a game to you?
...

Is this a game to you?

 

[Elioenai26]

Is this a game to you?

You're the one moving goalposts Davian, not me.

Since you have yet to accept the invitation to debate I have been continually extending to you, I shall have to call it like I see it.

 

[Davian]

You're the one moving goalposts Davian, not me.

Since you have yet to accept the invitation to debate I have been continually extending to you, I shall have to call it like I see it.

I have already clarified the issue with your offer of debate.

As you did not substantiate your previous claim of moving goalposts, I will not ask again.

To clarify, I am not moving goalposts. I am, in effect, providing multiple goalposts, each as you make your various claims. You are failing to reach them. That is the difference.

For example, when asked to define what you mean by 'supernatural', without telling us what it isn't, where did you go?

 

[Skavau]

Hehehehe, lol I thought it might be spelled that way lol!

Skavau was the one who said that God was contemptible. Im just asking for him to state his case in a coherent, logical, well thought out, concise manner and to refrain from emotional semi-nonsensical tirades replete with misconstruals of the biblical doctrine of hell.

Maybe you and quatona can help him?

I've done that repeatedly. Here on this thread and elsewhere.

If you think I'm misconstruing anything on what you believe regarding hell here you're welcome to correct me. So far you have not. In fact, you've answered almost nothing pertaining to my concerns on the topic. Merely asserting that someone is concocting a strawman argument is not the same as demonstrating it.

 

[Skavau]

And in place of this "stuff" which you have totally rejected, what have you accepted as being the truth regarding:

1. The final state of humans once they die
2. The inherent depravity of humans
3. Ultimate Justice

Since you reject the biblical teachings of Hell, sin, and final judgement, what do you maintain is the truth regarding the preceding three concepts?

There's some content here.

You believe in our inherent depravity and I presume use that as a reason for why we all deserve by default eternal torment. Why does our inherent traits, our predisposed disposition either granted by design or corruption from forces beyond our control mean we deserve eternal torment?

How do you determine that this eternal torment you allude to is in fact "ultimate justice"? I consider it quite indistinguishable from ultimate injustice.

 

[dlamberth]

And in place of this "stuff" which you have totally rejected, what have you accepted as being the truth regarding:

1. The final state of humans once they die
2. The inherent depravity of humans
3. Ultimate Justice

Since you reject the biblical teachings of Hell, sin, and final judgement, what do you maintain is the truth regarding the preceding three concepts?

For myself, in the process of making my Beloved God my only reality in life, all of that other stuff you point to just gets into the way. All they are, are concepts. They are not God.

Where you see depravity in human beings, I see the divine activity of God at work. Every Soul is Holy and Sacred. There is only one Divine Justice..and that's Love.

I understand that you need those images of Hell and of a Judgmental God...I don't. For myself, when I got rid of those images of God, it was a freeing experience of Love.

.

 

[brightlights]

[*]It is worth pointing out this. I am an anti-theist. I would reject salvation even if I believed it was true. This, though does not mean that I somehow choose to go to hell. That would be the circumstances God set down. That I may reject heaven would not mean that I would embrace hell. The choice is false.
[/LIST]

As I understand it, Christianity would contend that God is infinitely merciful and will allow all non-believers to enter into relationship with him and live on his planet with him and with his people for eternity. This is through his Son Jesus. That's not the problem. The problem is that many, like yourself, do not want to live with God on his planet with his people.

This is all that we mean by hell -- the absence of God, his goodness and generosity, and his people. Sadly, many refuse this today and will continue to refuse it for all eternity. I have no idea why this would be.

 

[Skavau]

As I understand it, Christianity would contend that God is infinitely merciful and will allow all non-believers to enter into relationship with him and live on his planet with him and with his people for eternity. This is through his Son Jesus. That's not the problem. The problem is that many, like yourself, do not want to live with God on his planet with his people.

This is all that we mean by hell -- the absence of God, his goodness and generosity, and his people. Sadly, many refuse this today and will continue to refuse it for all eternity. I have no idea why this would be.

Do you view hell as eternal torment as well as the absence of God's goodness and generosity?

 

[brightlights]

Do you view hell as eternal torment as well as the absence of God's goodness and generosity?

I view them as one and the same. The absence of God's goodness and generosity is torment. Admittedly I do view the torment as more passive than active.

 

[Skavau]

I view them as one and the same. The absence of God's goodness and generosity is torment. Admittedly I do view the torment as more passive than active.

Why wouldn't God project some goodness and generosity even on those who don't wish to live with him? Rejecting his offer, or not believing his offer is not the same as rejecting those ideals.

 

[Illuminaughty]

I'm sure if Jesus were still alive and he materialize before some non-Christians they might accept his offer. That would be a real presentation of the offer. Someone telling me "this book I have said that Jesus is God , he did all this supernatural stuff, and if you accept him you will be saved" isn't really a good presentation of such an offer even if the offer did in fact exist. I don't find it that convincing and I really have no direct volitional power over what I find convincing were I could trick myself into being convinced for the sake of some pascals wager type thing.

 

[brightlights]

Why wouldn't God project some goodness and generosity even on those who don't wish to live with him? Rejecting his offer, or not believing his offer is not the same as rejecting those ideals.

So you don't want anything to do with God but you would like some of his stuff?

edit: I should also add that this is exactly what's happening to you right now. You are currently living on God's planet, breathing his oxygen, drinking his water, socializing with his people, and enjoying his creation. He is constantly extending his generosity toward you even though you have no interest in acknowledging him.

 

[brightlights]

I'm sure if Jesus were still alive and he materialize before some non-Christians they might accept his offer. That would be a real presentation of the offer. Someone telling me "this book I have said that Jesus is God , he did all this supernatural stuff, and if you accept him you will be saved" isn't really a good presentation of such an offer even if the offer did in fact exist. I don't find it that convincing and I really have no direct volitional power over what I find convincing were I could trick myself into being convinced for the sake of some pascals wager type thing.

A day will come when you will see him face to face. I hope, as you say, that in that case you will accept his offer.

 

[Illuminaughty]

A day will come when you will see him face to face. I hope, as you say, that in that case you will accept his offer.

Have you seen him face to face? I mean, how do you know this?