Are All Warnings Threats?

@fmf said
Do you have some twisted subconscious need to promote the concept of physical agony into the text and use it to condemn and ridicule those that believe what the Bible actually teaches?

"Some twisted subconscious need". Good grief. These are some pretty harsh words said by one Christian aimed at the beliefs of other Christians. Why are they being said to an agnostic athe ...[text shortened]... ? Why is the theological message being channelled through a non-believer and not delivered directly?

You're being disingenuous. You know as well as I do that you're the one promoting on the pages of this forum the idea that Christians hold to a belief in a "torturer god ideology".

You seem to think you can simply define the terms and infer what you think Christians believe. I'll have none of it.

You can fool your weak minded friend divegeester, but you're not fooling Bible believing Christians.

@secondson said
Of course. That's what the Bible says.
But you seem to think it's all metaphorical, that the lake of fire isn't real; and I suppose you also think that those who reject Christ won't be punished everlasting for their sin, but with all your objections to the literal interpretation of all the verses pertaining to the subject of everlasting punishment, and claiming it's all metaphorical, you fail miserably to explain what you think the metaphorical references refer to.

Yes I think that this invisible but literal lake of burning lava, fire and brimstone isn’t real. I think this for a hundred reasons, not least of which including:

Where is it kept?
What is the point of it?
Why is it invisible, except to the aliens on other planets who sonship claims can see it? Why can’t we see it?
Why a lake of sulphur and brimstone? Why not a wall of a thousand flame throwers for example?
It’s ridiculous
It’s medieval torture
It’s amoral
It’s a genocidal holocaust
It’s out of step with the gospel of mercy and salvation
It’s a metaphor, like the multiheaded beast being risen by a whore is a metaphor (despite KellyJay's dishonest claims to the contrary)

I have no idea what it represents I just know with absolute certainty that it is not real. The onus is YOU to explain your beliefs about it, not me.

The rest of you post isn’t worth of comment as it’s just your usual spite filled abusive invective.

@secondson said
On what authority do you base your belief, besides your own, that physical death is "the end"? What? Did you die and come back to say there's nothing after death?

Yours is the extraordinary claim ~ regarding life after death ~ so you need to come up with the extraordinary evidence, not me.

Out of the many dozens of billions of human beings who have obviously and demonstrably died and ceased to exist, there is not one jot of credible evidence that any of them have gone on to an afterlife.

The notion is merely a religious aspiration and source of solace to those confronted by their own finite mortality.

@secondson said
You're being disingenuous. You know as well as I do that you're the one promoting on the pages of this forum the idea that Christians hold to a belief in a "torturer god ideology".

sonship promotes what I refer to as the torturer god ideology. Unlike me, he actually believes in it.

@secondson said
You're being disingenuous. You know as well as I do that you're the one promoting on the pages of this forum the idea that Christians hold to a belief in a "torturer god ideology".

You seem to think you can simply define the terms and infer what you think Christians believe. I'll have none of it.

You can fool your weak minded friend divegeester, but you're not fooling Bible believing Christians.

You believe that your version of god has purposefully created a place of unimaginable torture for non Christians to be cast into where they will suffer for eternity.

That’s called “torture” old boy.
Deliberate, premeditated torture.

@secondson said
You seem to think you can simply define the terms and infer what you think Christians believe. I'll have none of it.

Whether you have some of it, all of it, or none of it is neither here nor there. There are Christians here at RHP who believe non-believers/non-Christians are tormented in burning flames and conscious, physical agony for eternity. This is said to be an angry revenge for not believing in Jesus and God. My term for it is torturer god ideology, whether you like it or not.

@secondson said
You can fool your weak minded friend divegeester, but you're not fooling Bible believing Christians.

Why are you using me as a proxy through which to express your ideological differences with sonship ~ whose beliefs about eternal torment reflect his "twisted subconscious need", as you put it?

@secondson said
You can fool your weak minded friend divegeester, but you're not fooling Bible believing Christians.

No one is trying to “fool” you Jospehw. I’m trying to free your mind from the decades of dogma you’ve allowed it to be encased in.

Shall I add “weak-minded” to the list of your other insults and ad hominem poison darts?

@fmf said
So a "Lake of Fire" that causes no "physical discomfort" is a metaphorical "Lake of Fire", right? "Fire" that causes no pain is some kind of a metaphor then, yes?

You seem too thick to comprehend what I said. I said the scriptures don't describe "physical pain" with regards to the doctrine of everlasting punishment.

Jesus' own words are quite literal. "Outer darkness, weeping and gnashing of teeth, where their worm die the not". I don't hear anything about physical pain in those words.

The Bible talks about a day of judgment. It's literal. It will happen. Some will receive everlasting life, literally, and the rest everlasting punishment. Literally.

Believe it or not that's what the Bible says.

@secondson said
Your inference that I'm using you as a proxy is nonsensical.

It is exactly what you are doing. Do you actually know what I mean when I use the word "proxy"? You are disagreeing with sonship's torturer god ideology by telling me that you disagree with it rather than telling him.

@secondson said
You seem too thick to comprehend what I said. I said the scriptures don't describe "physical pain" with regards to the doctrine of everlasting punishment.

Presumably, then, fire that causes no pain must be some sort of metaphor?

@secondson said
I said the scriptures don't describe "physical pain" with regards to the doctrine of everlasting punishment.Jesus' own words are quite literal. "Outer darkness, weeping and gnashing of teeth, where their worm die the not". I don't hear anything about physical pain in those words.

So why don't you take it up with Christians who believe there is eternal physical pain?

@divegeester said
Small mercies I suppose.

Nevertheless, you are the person professing these horrible erroneous beliefs, the onus is on you to demonstrate how the scriptures you take from Revelation are literal and not metaphorical like some of the others.

KellyJay spectacularly fails at this also, to the point where he will not even reply to my posts now.

You didn't answer.

You, on the other hand, have not given a good reason to me why when Revelation says "forever and ever" and it concerns something positive, it is to be taken literally, but when it says "forever and ever" for something negative, its not literal.

Why then do you take it literally when it says God and His Christ will reign forever and ever in chapter 11?


Halelujah! And her smoke goes up forever and ever." (Rev. 19:3)


You - "Bad, cannot be true"

[ "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever." (Rev. 11:15)


You - "Good and true. "

" ... and they shall be tormented day and night forever and ever." (Rev. 20:10)


You - "Bad - cannot be true"

"To Him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb, be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever." (Rev. 5:13)


You - "Good and true. "

I don't think you have ever provided a rationale why when pleasant "forever and ever" is literal and when unpleasant "forever and ever" is not.

Explain your rationale.

@fmf said
Presumably, then, fire that causes no pain must be some sort of metaphor?

Lol.

@sonship said
You didn't answer.

You, on the other hand, have not given a good reason to me why when Revelation says "forever and ever" and it concerns something positive, it is to be taken literally, but when it says "forever and ever" for something negative, its not literal.

Why then do you take it literally when it says God and His Christ will reign forever and ever in ch ...[text shortened]... er" is literal and when unpleasant "forever and ever" is not.

Explain your rationale.

Quote my “rational” instead of your own written strawman version of it and maybe I’ll reply.