The god who burns people alive for eternity

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

You missed the part where I said...

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.

@fmf said
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 b ...[text shortened]... be to the morally incoherent torturer god ideology, I think it undermines you as moral commentators.

This is getting thoroughly tedious...

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.

I have addressed this statement already in the form of talking about...

- Cosmic justice.
- St. Dionysius's concept of evil as a deprivation of the good.
- Free will -- it's a choice that we have made, freely, to separate ourselves from God.
- The balance between infinite reward / infinite punishment due to the eternity of our souls as a natural feature. This is a topic I will want to talk about more later.
- I have hinted that we could talk about time even in a very different way (though this is also a departure from the normal range of ideas here).

I have pointed out limitations... For instance, I have no idea who goes to heaven/hell, and what is the "cut off" point for heaven. I've simply suggested answers and drawn upon a rich tradition where I can to back them up.

These answers have been reasonable as far as reasonable can be - because we know that reason has limitations.

Instead of attacking the reasons within them, you have generally opted to repeat the questions over & over again, as if the previous statements were not substantial enough.

I feel like you are not debating in good faith. ^^

Now, would you like to make some new sorts of arguments?

Today, we have perhaps made collectively over 100 posts in this thread and I feel like there's precious little that has been said that is new in this thread, and the bulk of the new things all come from me, while you merely have phrased questions differently.

Do you have anything new to bring up?>

Or will continue to attack via repetition?

@philokalia said
You missed the part where I said...

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, m ...[text shortened]... eans for escaping hell.

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

I'll engage them on the topic if they turn up here on this message board. The Muslim notion of posthumous torment is quite different from yours, that much I do know. So is the Jewish one. We can debate it with one or more Muslims or Jews if they come here to propagate their faith.

However, this red herring doesn't absolve you of the obligation to answer the moral questions I have asked you. If you think your obligation has already been fulfilled like I said, feel free to slink away. I will cite this thread when the issue arises again in order to substantiate my claim that you run away from it.

@philokalia said
Cosmic justice.

How is mentioning this a moral purpose or justification of torturing the little old lady for eternity in burning fire?

@philokalia said
St. Dionysius's concept of evil as a deprivation of the good.

How is mentioning whoever-he-is's "concept of evil a moral purpose or justification of torturing the little old lady for eternity in burning fire?

@kellyjay said
This mythical lady ever lie, cheat, steal, gossip, hate anyone, harbor hateful or desires in her heart, I assume she didn't indulge into any of the more gross sins, was she perfect in all respects to every normal inclination all other people have from the moment she was born until she became a little old lady?

Can you draw a square circle?

Any of those things warrant eternal suffering?

And nothing mythical about it. There are billions of such woman and men that your God has apparently sent to eternal torment.

@philokalia said
Free will -- it's a choice that we have made, freely, to separate ourselves from God.

Saying "free will" is not a moral justification for torturing the little old lady. Do you think saying "free will" constitutes a moral justification for torturing the little old lady in 500,000,000,000 years from now?

@philokalia said
The balance between infinite reward / infinite punishment due to the eternity of our souls as a natural feature.

How does mentioning the word "balance" justify torture? How does it give torturing the little old lady a moral purpose?

@philokalia said
These answers have been reasonable as far as reasonable can be - because we know that reason has limitations.

"Reasons" = assertions about what you believe. I know what you believe. But what is the moral purpose of torturing the little old lady forever and what is the moral justification for inflicting the worst possible type of physical pain on her, and to be still doing it in one trillion years from now? I have heard your assertions about what you believe... the Bible says what the Bible says... she is "evil" because she is "evil"... she must be punished because she must be punished... etc. etc. But what is the moral purpose of making that punishment eternal torture in burning flames?

@philokalia said
I feel like you are not debating in good faith.

Ah yes, this old chestnut. Slink away. Be my guest.

@fmf said
I'll engage them on the topic if they turn up here on this message board. The Muslim notion of posthumous torment is quite different from yours, that much I do know. So is the Jewish one. We can debate it with one or more Muslims or Jews if they come here to propagate their faith.

However, this red herring doesn't absolve you of the obligation to answer the moral questions I ...[text shortened]... this thread when the issue arises again in order to substantiate my claim that you run away from it.

I would be interested in hearing about the Muslim concept of hell. I thought it was quite similar to our own, and I was only impressed that there was a concept of levels to heaven and that the 'people of the book' may enter heaven as well.

However, this red herring doesn't absolve you of the obligation to answer the moral questions I have asked you. If you think your obligation has already been fulfilled like I said, feel free to slink away. I will cite this thread when the issue arises again in order to substantiate my claim that you run away from it.

See, now we have an interesting problem.

I can't run away.

You apparently can't argue, but can only ask questions, and even when you think my arguments do not reach the threshold, you only repeat the question.

Half a dozen times here you have argued against me by simply omitting what I say and then pretending it was left unsaid!

What are we going to do?

@fmf said
"Reasons" = assertions about what you believe. I know what you believe. But what is the moral purpose of torturing the little old lady forever and what is the moral justification for inflicting the worst possible type of physical pain on her, and to be still doing it in one trillion years from now? I have heard your assertions about what you believe... the Bible says what the Bib ...[text shortened]... etc. etc. But what is the moral purpose of making that punishment eternal torture in burning flames?

I actually covered why fire on page 30:

https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/spirituality/the-god-who-burns-people-alive-for-eternity.182510/page-30#post_4100706

I have actually also answered the far more general question of why eternity at many different points -- one of them included in the above post.

How about you try to answer post #4100706 and we can have a debate?

That'd be my suggestion.

If you are unwilling to debate the content that I have provided in any of these posts, how am I the one "slinking" away?

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

I want to talk about the OP, not your waffley obfuscation and attempts to avoid the central topic.

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

This is just another dodge.

@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.

😆

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

You don't have a perspective, not on the OP.

What you have is copy pasted waffle, obfuscation, deflection and what was it... oh "meta-reasoning"