Hypothetical question for anyone

@ghost-of-a-duke said
In your OP you said 'For theists and atheists..."

Perhaps you should have limited it to theists. (Bearing in mind it was just a dig at Sonship).

The scenario is for both atheists and theists because it is a moral situation within which most people can theorise how they might behave in this thought experiment.

Obviously you cannot and you shouldn’t allow that to reflect negatively on yourself and feel the need to descend into accusations about “digs”.

@chaney3 said
Caveat: a warning of specific stipulations, conditions or limitations.

In the Bible version of God/Jesus, the caveat is that one must BELIEVE it's all true in order to get to Heaven.

I personally don't know if I can believe that, which puts me at odds with Christianity, so I can probably not answer your scenario correctly.

Why are you giving a warning? About what, exactly?

@divegeester said
Why are you giving a warning? About what, exactly?

The caveat (warning) is in John 3:16.

One MUST BELIEVE.....or else.

@chaney3 said
The caveat (warning) is in John 3:16.

One MUST BELIEVE.....or else.

How does this impact my hypothetical scenario?

@chaney3 said
The caveat (warning) is in John 3:16.

One MUST BELIEVE.....or else.

Cherrypicking + adding to the bible = False doctrines

Stop cherry picking. Instead read more of what Jesus said to get a complete and correct doctrine. Dont add. Proof of your adding is your constant reference to people burning in hell for eternity or going to heaven. The bible says no such thing.

@divegeester said
So if you “knew” (Hypothetically speaking) that a God existed and that it would be burning people who didn’t believe in it, alive for eternity, you would NOT be out there trying to get people saved?

You see the issue I have here is with people like @sonship who spend a huge amount of time on this forum writing pages and pages and pages of stuff for no one to actually ...[text shortened]... in his local community who will be burnt alive for not believing in his version of the loving jesus.

No , no and once again , NO .
Any entity which would burn people alive for eternity is pure evil .
Any person who serves or worships such a despicable creature is to reviled or pitied .

@caissad4 said
Any entity which would burn people alive for eternity is pure evil .
Any person who serves or worships such a despicable creature is to reviled or pitied .

Yes I agree fully, but that wasn’t what I was asking.

@divegeester said
How does this impact my hypothetical scenario?

Because I don't believe that God attaches caveats to us.....in order for us to love Him.

Meaning..... that sending us to hell for not believing in Him is, in essence, forcing us to love Him, which I doubt very much is His character.

We may use our free will to decide, of course, but hell is likely not a valid alternative, because God is good, and bigger than that.

@chaney3 said
Because I don't believe that God attaches caveats to us.....in order for us to love Him.

Meaning..... that sending us to hell for not believing in Him is, in essence, forcing us to love Him, which I doubt very much is His character.

We may use our free will to decide, of course, but hell is likely not a valid alternative, because God is good, and bigger than that.

Forcing people to love/obey God through fear sounds more like a human thing, than a God thing.

@divegeester said
Yes I agree fully, but that wasn’t what I was asking.

I answered your question .
Reread my answer .
Hint , I said no .

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Forcing people to love/obey God through fear sounds more like a human thing, than a God thing.

Agreed.

@caissad4 said
I answered your question .
Reread my answer .
Hint , I said no .

“Yes” or “no” weren’t the answers, it’s ok, don’t worry about it.

@chaney3 said
Because I don't believe that God attaches caveats to us.....in order for us to love Him.

Meaning..... that sending us to hell for not believing in Him is, in essence, forcing us to love Him, which I doubt very much is His character.

We may use our free will to decide, of course, but hell is likely not a valid alternative, because God is good, and bigger than that.

I still don’t see how this affects my scenario. Like a few others in the thread, you seem to be answering a question which hasn’t been asked.

@caissad4 said
Any entity which would burn people alive for eternity is pure evil .Any person who serves or worships such a despicable creature is to reviled or pitied .

Any person who serves or worships such a despicable creature is to [be] reviled or pitied .

I know what you mean but for me this exhortation goes a little too far. I don't care about what may or may not be the thoughtcrimes of others, preferring instead to look at the actions they take as a result of their beliefs.

Holding the belief that being burned alive for eternity [for a lack of belief] is "perfect morality" simply highlights the moral emptiness at the very core of such a person's thinking.

No matter what morally sound actions such a person might take, their moral compass is broken, to my way of thinking. Touting eternal torture as the "ultimate" morality, to me, is human darkness at its darkest - so dark that all the waxing lyrical in the world about the goodness of Jesus cannot redeem it or illuminate it.

The ludicrous torturer God philosophy, such as is espoused by tragic figures like sonship, in and of itself, does not harm me or impinge upon me. So "reviling" it goes too far, for me.

Seeing as I have used the word tragic, maybe "they are to be pitied" is nearer the mark.

@divegeester said
“Yes” or “no” weren’t the answers, it’s ok, don’t worry about it.

You asked:

"So if you “knew” (Hypothetically speaking) that a God existed and that it would be burning people who didn’t believe in it, alive for eternity, you would NOT be out there trying to get people saved?"


How is 'yes' or 'no' not a valid response?