@secondson saidConfront the ideology's proponents then. I am an atheist.
There's nothing to subscribe to. It's an illusion. A false idea or concept that has no basis in reality. A figment of the imagination.
There is no god that tortures. Anyone that subscribes to that ideology is delusional.
@divegeester
"It is what most of the Christians posting in this forum believe."
No it isn't. That lie [of a torturer god] is the illusion you and FMF keep propagating both without biblical evidence, or affirmation from those you accuse of believing it. You are under an illusion.
"Deliberately and supernaturally keeping a person alive for eternity in order to make them suffer the agonies of being burnt alive is not a fate I would wish on nor would be justified for the absolute worst human being who had ever lived."
I don't care. The bottom line is you have no say so in the matter of the fate of any other than yourself.
"But hey...your crazed version of God does this to the sinners he loved so much that he initially died for them, but subsequently decided he hated them SO much for denying his existence, that he would do this."
That statement, and its sentiment, can only be ascribed to a mind rife with self induced delusional misconceptions of the reality of the truth of God's Word. It is nothing less than inflammatory language that serves no purpose other than to derail rational coherent debate.
It is a subjectivistic and emotional diatribe meant only to insult the intelligence of those that are otherwise minded.
It is a lie. The kind of thing a troll would say.
@secondson saidProponents of the torturer god ideology- like sonship - don't care for the term "torturer god ideology".
That lie [of a torturer god] is the illusion you and FMF keep propagating both without biblical evidence, or affirmation from those you accuse of believing it. You are under an illusion.
@fmf saidBring a proponent of that ideology to the table. I'll tell them the same thing I told you.
Confront the ideology's proponents then. I am an atheist.
But you can't because there's no one posting in this forum that subscribes to that ideology.
You and divegeester have dug yourselves into a hole. There's no way out.
@fmf saidSonship does not subscribe to the "torturer god ideology" in any way, shape or form, nor does any Christian that knows the God of the Bible.
Proponents of the torturer god ideology- like sonship - don't care for the term "torturer god ideology".
You're making it up.
@secondson saidI've been talking to proponents of torturer god ideology here for a decade. If you missed the hundreds and hundreds of threads, sub-topics, discussions and exchanges, so be it. If you don't subscribe to the ideology yourself, so be it [again].
Bring a proponent of that ideology to the table. I'll tell them the same thing I told you.
But you can't because there's no one posting in this forum that subscribes to that ideology.
You and divegeester have dug yourselves into a hole. There's no way out.
@secondson saidNo I am not making it up.
Sonship does not subscribe to the "torturer god ideology" in any way, shape or form, nor does any Christian that knows the God of the Bible.
You're making it up.
@fmf saidNo one has said they subscribe to that ideology. You're making an unsubstantiated accusation.
I've been talking to proponents of torturer god ideology here for a decade. If you missed the hundreds and hundreds of threads, sub-topics, discussions and exchanges, so be it. If you don't subscribe to the ideology yourself, so be it [again].
@secondson saidI am not. The terminology is mine. The content of the ideology is theirs.
No one has said they subscribe to that ideology. You're making an unsubstantiated accusation.
@secondson saidYou can read sonship's posts for yourself. I am not making anything up. His god figure is one that tortures non-believers/non-Christians for eternity as a revenge for their lack of belief. divegeester and Suzianne, for example, are Christians who do not subscribe to torturer god ideology.
Go get sonship and I'll hear it from him. Until then, you're making it up.
@secondson saidIt's a description of the ideology propagated and not an "accusation". Having had the relevant discussions umpteen times in public on this forum for upward of 10 years, I really do not have to prove anything to you. If you don't like the terminology, so be it.
You're making an unsubstantiated accusation.
@fmf saidSo you admit you made it up?!
I am not. The terminology is mine. The content of the ideology is theirs.
You're being disingenuous. You formulated the terminology encapsulating the content, and then accuse certain individuals of believing it.
You're stuck in irrational circular logic.
@secondson saidDid I make up their ideology? No. I did not make it up. It's their ideology, not mine. It's not yours either, presumably, just as it isn't divegeester's or Suzianne's.
So you admit you made it up?!
@secondson saidThe terminology encapsulates the ideology they espouse.
You formulated the terminology encapsulating the content, and then accuse certain individuals of believing it.