The god who burns people alive for eternity

@philokalia said
You're right in the sense that works are only half the answer. But I believe that consistently doing good and doing right involves right thought, and actions like prayer, which are indicative of the mental life. So, it is perhaps more encompassing.

Half of what answer?

I’m not asking you for more of what you believe I’m asking you to defend or abandon your disgusting doctrine of death.

And you can’t. All this waffle isn’t an answer.

@philokalia said
First: you are wrong. Revelation talks about a specific group of people, doesn't it?

Not interested in your jazz hands obfuscation about “specific groups”

Let’s say it’s just one person, let’s say it’s just the old lady.

Go.

@divegeester said
Half of what answer?

I’m not asking you for more of what you believe I’m asking you to defend or abandon your disgusting doctrine of death.

And you can’t. All this waffle isn’t an answer.

If you refuse to interact with what I say, we can't have a debate.

@divegeester said
Not interested in your jazz hands obfuscation about “specific groups”

Let’s say it’s just one person, let’s say it’s just the old lady.

Go.

She hasn't worshiped the beast; it seems doubtful that there will be a punishment of her before the lamb.

Unless, of course, int he context of our Orthodox conceptualization of hell as fire, provided in the analysis of the link above, we consider this also the presence of the lamb.

@philokalia said
@FMF brings us two new questions:

"Why fire?"
"Why torture?"

It's been the question here stretching back years.

It's been the question since you started here.

It's been the question all along this week.

Have you really not been able to perceive that?

@philokalia said
If my feeble words can't get through, maybe somethign more powerful like this can have an impact. IDK. Just throwing it out there. ^^

I notice you very deliberately did not use the "Quote" button to ostensibly reply to me. "Feeble" is right.

The questions that prompted you to NOT respond head-on - and to spam bomb me instead with text written by people who are not here to join the debate - are still awaiting you:

I am simply asking you: what is the moral purpose of torturing the little old lady?

What is the moral justification for torturing her?

What is the moral justification and purpose of torture being the form of punishment?

What would be the moral justification and purpose of the torture if it were still being carried out on the little old lady in 200,000,000,000 years' time?

What is the moral purpose of threatening such violence in such a way that something in the region of 60-70% of human beings do not find it credible?

@fmf said
It's been the question here stretching back years.

It's been the question since you started here.

It's been the question all along this week.

Have you really not been able to perceive that?

I actually meant in the sense that two new questions to deal with in the moment.

@fmf said
I notice you very deliberately did not use the "Quote" button to ostensibly reply to me. "Feeble" is right.

The questions that prompted you to NOT respond head-on - and to spam bomb me instead with text written by people who are not here to join the debate - are still awaiting you:

I am simply asking you: what is the moral purpose of torturing the little old lady?

What ...[text shortened]... olence in such a way that something in the region of 60-70% of human beings do not find it credible?

I actually would refer you to the answer that I gave on the why of it on page 28 -- you didn't really interact with that post, but instead repeated the same questions.

https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/spirituality/the-god-who-burns-people-alive-for-eternity.182510/page-28#post_4100657

As for the time thing -- I answered that earlier this afternoon.

Now, there is a new question here (new in the sense that it has immediately been introduced to our afternoons ^^)

What is the moral purpose of threatening such violence in such a way that something in the region of 60-70% of human beings do not find it credible?

I would venture to say that 95% of humans (or so) find it credible, and their practice of religion, or their practice even of mysticism and superstitions, validates the concept that there is a great deal of anxiety behind hell.

The concept of hell exists among Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and many folk religionists. Indeed, my good friend, a Polish journalist, recently wrote an article about the "hell theme parks" in Thailand.

Now, obviously, they do not embrace Christianity, but rather, they embrace other explanations for hell, and thus other means for escaping hell.

This is now a pretty huge divergence from what we are on about.

Should we take it?

@philokalia said
The concept of hell exists among Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and many folk religionists.

I'll engage them on the topic if they turn up here on this message board.

@philokalia said
I actually meant in the sense that two new questions to deal with in the moment.

No, they aren't. They are integral to what we have been discussing.

@fmf said
No, they aren't. They are integral to what we have been discussing.

Oh, geez, I am sorry. I thought it was acceptable to have a perspective on my own concerning what can constitute 'new' in terms of a conversation.

😆

I'll try to not be so overbearing as to speak from my temporal perspective which, SURELY, must be... WRONG!

@fmf said
I'll engage them on the topic if they turn up here on this message board.

Sounds good -- would you craft your 60-70% statement in a different way, then?

@philokalia said
I actually would refer you to the answer that I gave on the why of it on page 28 -- you didn't really interact with that post, but instead repeated the same questions.

No. You are winging it and I think it is only that enormous chip on your shoulder that keeps you grasping at tangents and red herrings and your "It is because it is" mentality"

Piling assertions upon assertions with regard to your religious faith and dogma do not constitute an answer to what is the moral purpose of torturing the little old lady now, if she dies, and to still be torturing her in burning flames in, say, 400,000,000,000 years from now.

If you think you have acquitted yourself well already, good for you ~ feel free to slink away.

As for me, I think I have demonstrated that, in the face of this issue and these moral questions, as has been the case for about 18 months - assuming you don't just blank it out altogether, or disappear altogether - you simply toss off a few assertions drawn from your internalized rote-learning and then you run away.

As long as religionists like you and sonship and KellyJay subscribe to the morally incoherent torturer god ideology, I think it undermines you as moral commentators.

@philokalia said
Oh, geez, I am sorry. I thought it was acceptable to have a perspective on my own concerning what can constitute 'new' in terms of a conversation.

They aren't "new terms" You babbling about them as "new terms" is just deflection/evasion.

@philokalia said
Sounds good -- would you craft your 60-70% statement in a different way, then?

60-70% of human beings do not believe in Jesus.