The god who burns people alive for eternity

@fmf said
What is the moral purpose of burning someone in flames for eternity for this being "accountable to God"?

Should a person who consistently does the right thing receive happiness and other forms of reward for their long-standing commitment to the right?

Should a person who consistently does the wrong thing be punished?

The answer is yes, and it takes a good bit of sophistry to get out of this very basic sense of cosmic justice.

@fmf said
The "argument" you are making is nothing more than this: 'It's evil because it's evil'. It's deserved because it's deserved'. 'It's their just desserts because it's their just desserts'. 'It is because it is'. This is essentially a dodge.

So you are failing to understand how disbelief itself is a sin? You should have read the St. Dionysius thread, my friend!

Thread 181203

But I will just field this.

OK, so remember, we are asking you to make an ordinary modal judgment and the fact that you do not believe in God is irrelevant.

Let us say there is God.

Let us say that you reject God's teachings and His offer of salvation. Let's say that you believe He is irrelevant, and you do not pursue Him. You do this as someone who is completely aware of the common teachings of God that are spread throughout your culture and society.

How would this not be fundamentally wrong, and how would this person still merit havign salvation?

@philokalia said
Should a person who consistently does the right thing receive happiness and other forms of reward for their long-standing commitment to the right?

Should a person who consistently does the wrong thing be punished?

The answer is yes, and it takes a good bit of sophistry to get out of this very basic sense of cosmic justice.

I get that you believe that the little old lady has "consistently done the wrong" for not being a member of your religion and that she should be punished.

But what is the moral purpose and justification for the punishment that you believe she deserves because you believe she deserves it?

I get that you believe she deserves it. I get that you justify this to yourself by insisting she deserves it because she deserves it?

But I am asking you, what is the moral purpose and justification for a punishment that involved being tortured in burning flames for eternity?

@philokalia said
So you are failing to understand how disbelief itself is a sin?

I know well that Christians believe disbelief is a "sin". Stop dodging. I know what "sin" is. I know that Christians believe there are criteria for entering the "Kingdom of God". I know that you believe that lacking belief is "evil". I know all these things. The question you are dodging is this: what is the moral purpose of torturing the little old lady and never stopping?

@philokalia said
So you are failing to understand how disbelief itself is a sin? You should have read the St. Dionysius thread, my friend!

OK, so remember, we are asking you to make an ordinary modal judgment and the fact that you do not believe in God is irrelevant. Let us say there is God. Let us say that you reject God's teachings and His offer of salvation. Let's say that you believe He is irrelevant, and you do not pursue Him. You do this as someone who is completely aware of the common teachings of God that are spread throughout your culture and society. How would this not be fundamentally wrong, and how would this person still merit havign salvation?

I know you think everyone who hears about your religion is obliged to join it and believe all the things you do. I get that. But that's not an answer to these questions:

[1] What would the moral purpose of torturing her for eternity in burning flames for not being "perfect in all respects to every normal inclination from the moment she was born until she became a little old lady"?

[2] What would be the moral purpose of STILL torturing her - for not being perfect while she was alive - in, say, 20,000,000 years from now?

@fmf said
I get that you believe that the little old lady has "consistently done the wrong" for not being a member of your religion and that she should be punished. But what is the moral purpose and justification for the punishment that you believe she deserves because you believe she deserves it? I get that you believe she deserves it. I get that you justify this to yourself by insisting ...[text shortened]... pose and justification for a punishment that involved being tortured in burning flames for eternity?

My post above this one answers it a bit, but it is rhetorical.

I'll try to be more direct and employ the entry about St. Dionysius's view of evil, which is directly relevant here.

Man is created in the image of God, and has within him the infinite potential for good.

To fail to live up to one's potential for good is to deprive the world of good, and, more importantly, to deprive one's own soul of a fundamental goodness.

Evil is the deprivation of the good -- whether from oneself, or from others.

St. Dionysius:

“They are not altogether without a share in the Good, insofar as they both are and live and think”, and again, “In that they are, they both are from the Good and are good . . . and by privation and fleeing away and falling away from the goods that are appropriate to them they are called evil”.

(There's more here:
https://disfiguredpraise.blogspot.com/2019/05/there-is-no-reason-nor-could-ever-there.html )

By rejecting God, we reject the very premise of the good, and we do not ask to be made good by God. For, to become good actually requires the active grace of God and appeals to God. We also not only reject our status as bearers of Christ who are in debted to God, but we also reject the status of others as bearers of Christ's image.

All of these adds up to a lot of unresolved evil, and a grave deficiency, for ourself and others.

@rajk999 said
EVERYBODY

Not sure what you have in mind here.

Are you saying that the words spoken by Jesus in the verses I cited fall upon deaf ears for ALL Christians? Or something else?

They certainly fell upon deaf ears in the case of Philokalia.

@philokalia said
My post above this one answers it a bit, but it is rhetorical.

I'll try to be more direct and employ the entry about St. Dionysius's view of evil, which is directly relevant here.

Man is created in the image of God, and has within him the infinite potential for good.

To fail to live up to one's potential for good is to deprive the world of good, and, more importan ...[text shortened]...

All of these adds up to a lot of unresolved evil, and a grave deficiency, for ourself and others.

I understand that you think that not having your religious beliefs is "evil".

I understand that think that the little old lady should be punished.

The question is, what is the moral purpose of torturing her in burning flames for eternity?

In moral terms, why would she still be being tortured in, say, 200 billion years from now?

@fmf said
[b]OK, so remember, we are asking you to make an ordinary modal judgment and the fact that you do not believe in God is irrelevant. Let us say there is God. Let us say that you reject God's teachings and His offer of salvation. Let's say that you believe He is irrelevant, and you do not pursue Him. You do this as someone who is completely aware of the common teachings of God that ...[text shortened]... TILL torturing her - for not being perfect while she was alive - in, say, 20,000,000 years from now?

This is just a question that makes the bottom fall out of everything.

We can now ask:

What would be the purpose of rewarding someone eternally?

What would be the purpose of someone who only did good for 70 years to inherit anything more than 70 years of goodness in Heaven?

... Why did God create a world where there is 'good' and there is 'evil' at all?

These questions bring us to the limits of rationality. Hence my statement that the bottom has fallen out.

There are a thousand potentialities that we can all envision as being theoretically just by a variety of different logics, yet not all of them can be true because they are in conflict with one another, yet all of them can be said to have a logic within them.

At a certain point, there is one logic that is the supreme one. This would go unresolved if you reject God, because there can be nothing final and objective in some cosmic sense of right and wrong, but when you believe in a revealed truth, we believe that the logic of our revealed truth is the summum bonum.

That being:

The good inherit eternal life and the Kingdom of God, and those who reject God receive punishment for eternity for their rejection of the ultimate good, and their failures to live up to the good.

It's a hard conclusion to reach for some people because it requires some thinking outside of the box and meta-reasoning.

@philokalia said
By rejecting God, we reject the very premise of the good, and we do not ask to be made good by God. For, to become good actually requires the active grace of God and appeals to God. We also not only reject our status as bearers of Christ who are in debted to God, but we also reject the status of others as bearers of Christ's image.

I get that you strongly believe that rejecting your God figure is to "reject the very premise of the good".

But what is the moral purpose and justification for torturing people who don't believe in your God figure forever and ever?

I'm not asking WHY you think what the little old lady did is bad.

I am not asking you WHY you think what the little old lady should be punished.

I am asking you what is the purpose of torturing her for eternity?

@philokalia said
We can now ask:

What would be the purpose of rewarding someone eternally?

This counter-question is a dodge.

It does not contain an answer to question that you are dodging.

I can understand the purpose of not rewarding someone if they did not meet the criteria for the "Kingdom of God" you believe in.

But what would be the purpose of torturing that old lady for not meeting those criteria and to be still torturing her in 2,000,000,000,000 years from now?

@philokalia said
The good inherit eternal life and the Kingdom of God, and those who reject God receive punishment for eternity for their rejection of the ultimate good, and their failures to live up to the good.

This is one of your 'It is because it is' "arguments".

@philokalia said
It's a hard conclusion to reach for some people because it requires some thinking outside of the box and meta-reasoning.

Is this a bit of self-deprecating humour? Because, to be frank, you are floundering.

Are you really saying here that I need to have your capacity for "thinking outside of the box and meta-reasoning" in order to be able to understand how you feel no need to go beyond the 'It is deserved because it is deserved'-type arguments that you are employing?

@philokalia said
There are a thousand potentialities that we can all envision as being theoretically just by a variety of different logics, yet not all of them can be true because they are in conflict with one another, yet all of them can be said to have a logic within them.

Is this an attempted answer to the question: "What is the moral purpose of still torturing the little old lady in burning flames in 20,000,000 years from now?

@philokalia said
Let us say that you reject God's teachings and His offer of salvation. Let's say that you believe He is irrelevant, and you do not pursue Him. You do this as someone who is completely aware of the common teachings of God that are spread throughout your culture and society.

Let us say that you reject God's teachings and His offer of salvation.

Let's say that you believe He is irrelevant, and you do not pursue Him.

You do this as someone who is completely aware of the common teachings of God that are spread throughout your culture and society.

OK, let's see.

I recognize that Christianity propagates "teachings".

I don't think the teachings are "God's".

I don't think there is an actual "offer of salvation".

I don't believe there is any such thing as "salvation" in any supernatural sense.

I believe your God figure is irrelevant to me but I do not believe it is irrelevant to you and your fellow believers.

I am completely aware of the common teachings of Christianity, I even think some of them are excellent. They are undoubtedly absorbed into my moral compass by way of what I call "nurture".

I recognize that they are spread throughout cultures all around the world just as the teachings of Islam and Hinduism [and others] have.

I know all this but I lack the beliefs needed in order for me to self-identify as a Christian.

What do you think would be a morally sound punishment for this and what would be the moral purpose of that punishment?