The god who burns people alive for eternity

@sonship said
@FMF

You wrote four assertions and I replied. You didn't cite any verse or verses. Why are you lying about this? What's the matter with you.

This will be the last comment I make about why I removed a post and wrote a replacement which is now published.

To the best of my recollection on this quick action of "Oops" and a re-write - When I read Ghos ...[text shortened]...
Doubter can believe whatever it is you want to believe about this incident.

Case closed for me.

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why you are lying about this. You seem to be all over the shop this evening.

@sonship said
FMF is saying that Divine vengeance and retribution is not morally justifiable, I think.

Why not have a go at justifying it that doesn't amount to only something like 'Its justified because it's justified' or 'You believe it it justified because that is what your belief is' or 'It's justified because your God figure says so'.

FMF is saying that Divine vengeance and retribution is not morally justifiable, I think.

Torture is his word.

Since removing post suspicions some, I leave it here and make a correction.

It is not completely fair to say torture is FMF's word. It does say "tormented" in Revelation 14.

See this can get confusing as a medium of communication - writing back and forth and correcting and editing while responses are being formulated and written.

FMF tries to exploit this as disshonesty on the part of people he disagrees with.

@sonship said
See this can get confusing as a medium of communication - writing back and forth and correcting and editing while responses are being formulated and written.

If you are now trying to distance yourself from the torturer god ideology and you don't think the punishment is torment in burning flames for eternity, arguably the most agonizing intense physical pain that a torturer can inflict on a person, if you quibbling the word "torture" is what you have arrived at, and if it means you are distancing yourself from the ghastly incoherent superstitious "morality" nonsense you peddle day in day put, the I welcome it.

@kellyjay said
From my exposure to man and God I trust He will do all things well. I believe we will all acknowledge He does all things as they should be done, and for those with evil in their lives that should be frightening.

You think God will 'torment them for all eternity' and trust He will do it well?!

@sonship said

The God-man Jesus, the Lamb, does not have to be physically there where they are for what is happening to them to be before Him.

'in the presence of' sonship,...'in the presence of...'

@FMF

Why torture? Morally speaking. Why is torture the punishment?

My use of the word vengeance (that part of my replay) is based on First Thessalonians 1:89.

"Rendering Vengenace to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

They will pay the penalty of eternal destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His strength."

You as appear to believe that divine vengeance is [NOT] [edited] a sufficient moral purpose. To atheism it wouldn't be.

But it says here, ( and we Christians regard it as the truth ) - those who do not know God (would never believe in God) and/or those who do not obey the gospel of Christ our Lord, they must abide under the wrath of God. not for correction to a view of improvement, but for vengeance and probable response to perpetual infraction of God beyond their physical life.

He gave the Gospel that we would be saved.
Had He not provided a way of salvation it would be a different story.

So we are at the same place all of our exchanges ends up. You pretty much saying in other words - "You have not yet forced me to believe in God."

@sonship said
My use of the word vengeance (that part of my replay) is based on First Thessalonians 1:89.

What is the moral justification for using neverending torture as the means of vengeance?

@sonship said
You as appear to believe that divine vengeance is [NOT] [edited] a sufficient moral purpose.

This is an 'It is because it is'-type argument.

Why is the vengeance wrought using torture?

@sonship said
those who do not know God (would never believe in God) and/or those who do not obey the gospel of Christ our Lord, they must abide under the wrath of God.

Why is it morally sound for the vengeance to specifically be 'being tormented in burning flames for eternity'?

@sonship said
not for correction to a view of improvement, but for vengeance and probable response to perpetual infraction of God beyond their physical life.

"Perpetual infraction of God beyond their physical life"?

What "infraction of God" do you believe I will continue to be guilty of after I have died and once the agonizing physical torture is being inflicted?

@sonship said
So we are at the same place all of our exchanges ends up. You pretty much saying in other words - "You have not yet forced me to believe in God."

If you think your dark and depraved ~ and clearly morally inexplicable ~ ideology is likely to have such effect, you are definitely barking up the wrong tree, sonship. I am just interested in how you seem to demonstrate that it's morally inexplicable with your constant circular logic along the lines of 'It's moral because it's moral', 'It;s just because it's just', 'Christ will do it to you because he is divine', 'It's moral because Christ is doing it' and so forth.

@FMF

What is the moral justification for using neverending torture as the means of vengeance?

Why should the unreconciled creature be vindicated? It is God the ultimate reality who should be vindicated.

The un-redeemable rebel has to lose.

Your logic is that the the creature should be able to reject God and win. He doesn't win.

The argument you make I think Job made. Basically Job argued once - "What is it to You God if I sin anyway? How do I harm You if I sin?"

Most of the arguments I hear atheists make curiously can be found somewhere in the bible.

Eternal punishement is eternal losing. It is what God judges must happen.

You want to win?
Justify why that is the absolute moral right.

You want to break even?
"You go your way God and I'll sin against you and go mine. Big deal."
Justify that that is absolute moral right.

You want to just become rejector the Creator and get Him to un-exist
you ? Justify the moral superiority of that demand of you against God ?

@sonship said
@FMF

What is the moral justification for using neverending torture as the means of vengeance?

Why should the unreconciled creature be vindicated? It is God the ultimate reality who should be vindicated.

The un-redeemable rebel has to lose.

Your logic is that the the creature should be able to reject God and win. He doesn't win.

The argume ...[text shortened]... nd get Him to un-exist
you ? Justify the moral superiority of that demand of you against God ?

Why torture?

@FMF

Why torture?

If you and I do not understand why suffering is involved, it is true that a man like Jesus willingly underwent Divine punishment (at least in His mind ) in your place and in my place.

I have to consider the Person and Who He must be.

In the flurry of exchanges I wrote that Job also argued about what did he do to God if he sinned against Him anyway.

In the same book God latter says to Job "Will you condemn Me that you may be justified?"

In the plan of salvation, that seems to be what actually occurred. In Christ God as a man was condemned that you may be justified.

If we reject this, we will be condemned forever (with discomfort) for the guilt of revolt against goodness itself.