What is the point of eternal suffering?

@philokalia said
It would not be pointless in terms of it being reasonless, but it could potentially be pointless in terms of not having an end goal beyond the act that is occurring.

So you agree that the concept of eternal suffering is in fact pointless and without reason?

@philokalia said
Oh no, people are not created destined for hell.

People are created with free wills, and the desire is for all to come to Christ, but there is not interference with the free will of another.

Is the fact that some will go to hell foreknown? Yes.

But it is what is deserved for their choices. They were not created for that end, but chose that path.

Never-mind all that bluster about free will, please address the OP.

@philokalia said
[quote] Revelation 14:9-10 A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on their forehead or on their hand, they, too, will drink the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and o ...[text shortened]... to heavily preface this: I am not a theologian and not qualified to speak on this in any grand way.

So Jesus is present for the torture but not looking at it, is that your view?

@philokalia said
[quote] Revelation 14:9-10 A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives its mark on their forehead or on their hand, they, too, will drink the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and o ...[text shortened]... to heavily preface this: I am not a theologian and not qualified to speak on this in any grand way.

So where Revelation says that the endless suffering is occurring in the "presence of the Lamb", it is not meant to be taken literally?

@philokalia said
Oh no, people are not created destined for hell.

People are created with free wills, and the desire is for all to come to Christ, but there is not interference with the free will of another.

Is the fact that some will go to hell foreknown? Yes.

But it is what is deserved for their choices. They were not created for that end, but chose that path.

This sounds like a case of 'It is because it is'.

@philokalia said
But I have to heavily preface this: I am not a theologian and not qualified to speak on this in any grand way.

You don't speak about anything in a "grand way", so we are not in danger of mistaking your wafflely jazz-handed blusterings in this particular thread as being anything other than the usual, you.

@philokalia said
People are created with free wills, and the desire is for all to come to Christ, but there is not interference with the free will of another.

Bearing in mind that I do not consider us to be discussing something real but, instead, we are discussing the god figure at the centre of the ideology you just so happen to subscribe to, wouldn't this "desire" for all to "come to Christ" be more sincere if the supposed revelation of the god figure were more credible, therefore enabling it to reach more people.

Or is the number of people the revelation reaches/convinces [and the number of people who will be tormented in burning flames for eternity i.e. do not "come to Christ"] the exact number your god figure "desires"?

@fmf said
What is the moral purpose of it occuring?

Your question has a wrong assumption in it: It assumes that God created hell for a moral purpose. He didn't.

Hell occurs because it is the consequence of unrepentant sin, and the choices that people have made for themselves throughout their life.

It occurs for a reason that is independent of any "moral purpose" fashioned by God, so it is an invalid question.

As many things that man chooses for himself occur without a sound moral grounding, the hell that some create and choose for themselves would also apparently serve no moral purpose either.

@fmf said
So Jesus is present for the torture but not looking at it, is that your view?

I am not actually sure. It isn't specific enough and I haven't studied it enough. I do not think it is incredibly relevant, either.

@fmf said
Bearing in mind that I do not consider us to be discussing something real but, instead, we are discussing the god figure at the centre of the ideology you just so happen to subscribe to, wouldn't this "desire" for all to "come to Christ" be more sincere if the supposed revelation of the god figure were more credible, therefore enabling it to reach more people.

Or is the numbe ...[text shortened]... urning flames for eternity i.e. do not "come to Christ"] the exact number your god figure "desires"?

It will never be good enough for some people, right? If God does not literally personally appear to people to convince them (even when they do not want this and have closed their hearts off to it), God is supposed to be guilty of it.

It's hard to respond to something like this because there can be no criteria that will ever satisfy the complaint that is honest.

@philokalia said
Your question has a wrong assumption in it: It assumes that God created hell for a moral purpose. He didn't.

Hell occurs because it is the consequence of unrepentant sin, and the choices that people have made for themselves throughout their life.

It occurs for a reason that is independent of any "moral purpose" fashioned by God, so it is an invalid question. ...[text shortened]... hell that some create and choose for themselves would also apparently serve no moral purpose either.

So, in torturing people who don't believe in Jesus in burning flames for eternity, your god figure has no moral purpose that you are aware of?

If I don't believe in eternal torture then obviously I cannot "choose" it. Does that mean it won't happen to me because there is no one to inflict it on me?

@philokalia said
It will never be good enough for some people, right? If God does not literally personally appear to people to convince them (even when they do not want this and have closed their hearts off to it), God is supposed to be guilty of it.

Why would a creator being leave such a lack of proof of the veracity of Christianity in so far as only 1 in 3 people in the world subscribe to it - at best? There could be more convincing evidence and a more credible revelation and people would still have the free will to believe something else, surely?

How would a more convincing revelation that embraced more human beings and inspired more people to live the Christian life - and gain from its communal and personal benefits - be an abrogation of "free will".

@philokalia said
I am not actually sure. It isn't specific enough and I haven't studied it enough. I do not think it is incredibly relevant, either.

Whether or not Jesus is there, in person, overseeing the torture of billions of people that you say has "no moral purpose" is not relevant to whether or not what you are describing - and claiming to be real and true - is coherent or credible? Are you sure?

@fmf said
So, in torturing people who don't believe in Jesus in burning flames for eternity, your god figure has no moral purpose that you are aware of?

If I don't believe in eternal torture then obviously I cannot "choose" it. Does that mean it won't happen to me because there is no one to inflict it on me?

Where are you getting that description?

People who do not desire communion with God end up in hell. People who are baptized into the Church of God and repent of their sins are admitted into the Kingdom of God. The gray areas, I do not know about -- nobody really does.

What is the moral goal of hell? There isn't one. It's the end itself.

What is the reason that hell exists? Because people send themselves there through their actions and desires (desire is a redundant word here because desires are actions).

And the choice that results in hell is not the choice of hell specifically, as a thing, but the choice to not repent of one's sins and seek communion of God.

At least, this is how I believe it is to be understood.

@philokalia said
As many things that man chooses for himself occur without a sound moral grounding, the hell that some create and choose for themselves would also apparently serve no moral purpose either.

This will be a relief to many non-believers, I think. So, your god figure didn't create "hell", and I haven't created "hell", so I clearly don't choose to go to it [and no one has created it], and your god figure doesn't send anyone there and he doesn't torture anyone. So I will die and that will be the end of that. Just as I thought.