Eternal Damnation

[Crackerbox]

At the end of this debate, and the votes are counted, and all intellectual arguments have been exhausted, tell me...does the Supreme Being get copied on the memo so Yahweh knows what Yahweh is permitted to do based upon a handful of human beings determing what is correct?

I wonder how much damage is done to the Gospel by such well intentions to persude others of the correctness of these crafted arguments?

Maybe we should spend as much time on Hell as Yeshua did, which is a very tiny amount of the Gospels, and those were largely verses to the believers. As such, what would be the point of sharing that information with nonbelievers?

I find this kind of thing cryptic and poorly executed and a disservice. I wonder how many people having read something like this will then be so turned off by the Christian message? After all, they were told Christianity was a message of Hope and Love about Jesus the Christ, which then turns out to be eternal retribution and torment.

Is it possible that such endeavors are actually impeding Christendom?

There are 3,779 verses in the four Gospels. Jesus spoke about Hell in a miniscule amount of those verses (less than 100). That's less than 3% of the time. Seems like a decent amount of time to spend on it for a whole year.

 

[Gori the Grey]

God does not care enough to be "upset" over something as trifle as an athiest's rejection. God does care enough to punish all sin.

If something doesn't upset him, why would he punish it?

@Crackerbox, Unicorny isn't Christian.

 

[Unicorny]

At the end of this debate, and the votes are counted, and all intellectual arguments have been exhausted, tell me...does the Supreme Being get copied on the memo so Yahweh knows what Yahweh is permitted to do based upon a handful of human beings determing what is correct?

I wonder how much damage is done to the Gospel by such well intentions to persude others of the correctness of these crafted arguments?

Maybe we should spend as much time on Hell as Yeshua did, which is a very tiny amount of the Gospels, and those were largely verses to the believers. As such, what would be the point of sharing that information with nonbelievers?

I find this kind of thing cryptic and poorly executed and a disservice. I wonder how many people having read something like this will then be so turned off by the Christian message? After all, they were told Christianity was a message of Hope and Love about Jesus the Christ, which then turns out to be eternal retribution and torment.

Is it possible that such endeavors are actually impeding Christendom?

That's not for you, me, or anyone else to decide. Numerous individuals turned away from athiesm and began to acknowledge the existence of God based on the study of the fine-tuning of the universe alone, and other evidences only solidified their belief. Albert Einstein acknowledged the existence of God for example.

If someone's not convinced by all the evidences and proof around them, then blind faith and "love" will be the last thing on their mind. As humans, we seek proof, rational evidence, to convince us. As I said, blind faith does not cut it.

Finally, Yeshua/Jesus, etc is a mere mortal. Jesus is not God. Nor did he die for anyone's sins. Your sins are only yours and only God will deal with them accordingly. There's no medium between you and God, or the path to forgiveness, etc.

Jesus was a prophet of God, a mere human mortal. So to suggest he spent in Hell is hilarious.

 

[Crackerbox]

If something doesn't upset him, why would he punish it?

@Crackerbox, Unicorny isn't Christian.

Well, let's say that someone doesn't believe in the Gospels. They think it's nutso. They think eternal torment for a finite life is unfair. They why would they waste an iota of time on discussing it, for it's absurd to them???

I mean, I don't believe in all kinds of spiritual systems but I don't spend time debating their merits. Example: I don't believe in Norse religion. I don't believe that Odin is real. Regardless, I don't care if people believe it as they have Free Will.

So why would I try to persuade people in this manner that my intellectual arguments prove that Norse myth is hokem? It's not only impossible, it's ridiculously intolerant.

But let's speak to the topic. I can spend hours doing exegesis about what the words say in the diverse parts of the Bible discussing Hell, which is actually not a word in the Bible, but Gehenna is as well as Tartarus (since written in Greek). Hell is a Scandanavian word. I could rip apart the argument without breaking a sweat, but what would be the point? Would it convince some atheist that he/she was wrong? If someone is Muslim and a devout one, and believes the Bible is flawed based upon discrepencies between the Quran and the Bible concerning the afterlife, could I convince that person either?

I just don't get it. It's like if I was trying to convince atheists not to disbelieve in God even though devout myself. Would any atheist even bother to read my words, for there would be obvious bias as to make them not penetrate past that bias.

What's more, if I as a fragile human being I think God is immoral for creating Gehenna, then does God go, "Hey, shut it down, Crackerbox says so!" It's like an amoeba telling a human what to do x 1000.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Oh, it's the internet. It's what people do on the internet.

 

[Crackerbox]

That's not for you, me, or anyone else to decide. Numerous individuals turned away from athiesm and began to acknowledge the existence of God based on the study of the fine-tuning of the universe alone, and other evidences only solidified their belief. Albert Einstein acknowledged the existence of God for example.

If someone's not convinced by all the evidences and proof around them, then blind faith and "love" will be the last thing on their mind. As humans, we seek proof, rational evidence, to convince us. As I said, blind faith does not cut it.

Finally, Yeshua/Jesus, etc is a mere mortal. Jesus is not God. Nor did he die for anyone's sins. Your sins are only yours and only God will deal with them accordingly. There's no medium between you and God, or the path to forgiveness, etc.

Jesus was a prophet of God, a mere human mortal. So to suggest he spent in Hell is hilarious.

What are you professing? Is this some sort of Gnostic prostheltizing?

 

[Farm Boy]

It's called a breed of Islam, I think. I've heard its like from Christendom before, hence your confusion is understandable. After all, Crackerbox, thou art.

 

[Unicorny]

the Bible is flawed based upon discrepencies between the Quran and the Bible concerning the afterlife, could I convince that person either?

Eternal torment is fair per OP. As for the Bible: the Bible is the word of God and is true a in its original for which no longer exists. The current corrupted and tampered form of the "Bible" is full of internal contradiction, errors, and the likes.

Word of God cannot contain errors.

 

[El_Machinae]

I'm still confused as to why the punishment is not proportionate to the harms caused.

 

[Farm Boy]

Of course it can Unicorny. Thou art God.

 

[Unicorny]

If something doesn't upset him, why would he punish it

Embodiment of justice.

 

[Crackerbox]

Eternal torment is fair per OP. As for the Bible: the Bible is the word of God and is true a in its original for which no longer exists. The current corrupted and tampered form of the "Bible" is full of internal contradiction, errors, and the likes.

Word of God cannot contain errors.

How can you know the Word of God cannot contain errors if you don't possess a copy of it? Wait, if God can only create perfect things and creatures, then explain why we don't believe in God?

 

[El_Machinae]

What's the "thou art" an allusion to? It's a Heinleinism, I think. Not sure what it means.

 

[Unicorny]

How can you know the Word of God cannot contain errors if you don't possess a copy of it? Wait, if God can only create perfect things and creatures, then explain why we don't believe in God?

What qualities or attributes would you ascribe to the word of God for it to qualify as such in your opinion?

Second, only God is Perfect; and only He can be Perfect. A human being is a creation of God; and so by default he/she can only be less than God, and so less than perfect; otherwise, they'd be God too. Thus a human is naturally imperfect. This goes for the world too.

 

[Crackerbox]

What's the "thou art" an allusion to? It's a Heinleinism, I think. Not sure what it means.

Maybe, "Thou art God!" from Stranger in a Strange Land, the Martian religion created by Robert Heinlein?

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I don't grok why Farm Boy keeps alluding to Stranger in a Strange Land so much in this thread.

 

[Crackerbox]

What qualities or attributes would you ascribe to the word of God for it to satisfy your need of it indeed being the word of God?


Second, God is Perfect; and only He can be Perfect. A human being is a creation of God; and so by default he/she can only be less than God, and so less than perfect. Thus a human is naturally imperfect. This goes for the world too.

The Word of God is what I say it is? Seems weird as I'm imperfect. How could an imperfect being determine that which is perfect?

How could the Word of God be revealed unless written down, communicated, and studied? Who determines what it means?

How do you know God has a penis? If you cannot read the Word of God, then I would presume that based upon Creation, that God would at least be a female not use the male gender as that is what gives life to all things.

 

[Farm Boy]

Don't take the sci-fi too far. It is a reference point, not an end unto itself. In the OP we stipulate that God Is Infinite. A stipulation I am entirely on board with. Unicorny is definitely God. As is Gori. As is Crackerbox.

Btw Crackerbox: God has penises innumerable.

 

[El_Machinae]

What qualities or attributes would you ascribe to the word of God for it to qualify as such in your opinion?

Second, only God is Perfect; and only He can be Perfect. A human being is a creation of God; and so by default he/she can only be less than God, and so less than perfect; otherwise, they'd be God too. Thus a human is naturally imperfect. This goes for the world too.

If God can only create imperfect things, then I guess we needn't expect his Word to be perfect.

Though infinities are confusing. To me, it's 'obvious' that there are more stars than galaxies, but my mathematical friends insist it just ain't necessarily so. You'd think God could also create something 'lesser' while still having the creation be 'infinite'. Like stars and galaxies.

 

[Crackerbox]

Don't take the sci-fi too far. It is a reference point, not an end unto itself. In the OP we stipulate that God Is Infinite. A stipulation I am entirely on board with. Unicorny is definitely God. As is Gori. As is Crackerbox.

Btw Crackerbox: God has penises innumerable.

How do you know? Is it a hunch in your gut that God has diphallia or triphallia or quadphillia? How did you discern that little shaft of enlightenment. Wouldn't such a God in Deism have no need for gender and be sexless as God can create perfectly? Or would a Deist God have both a vagina and a penis?

to

If God can only create imperfect things, then I guess we needn't expect his Word to be perfect.

Though infinities are confusing. To me, it's 'obvious' that there are more stars than galaxies, but my mathematical friends insist it just ain't necessarily so. You'd think God could also create something 'lesser' while still having the creation be 'infinite'. Like stars and galaxies.

So God is the only Perfect thing in God's Universe, and created imperfect things and species who cannot read about God, only rationalize, and we can't rationalize perfectly and we can't read some concise commentary to know if we got the Word of God right, not see what other scholars think based upon decades of study about this Entity that is dispassionate.

It's hard to see the point of Deism but if it makes you feel enlightened, go for it. Most people, sad to say, are not very rational.