Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Proof

@philokalia said
We can have certainty and strong postures about what we believe to be true.

It is your prerogative to propagate whatever far-fetched ideology you want. That is what a forum like this is for, in part. Neither of us talking about our perspectives conjures up any real moral imperatives for each other.

@fmf said
No, I don't agree with any "assessment" that is founded on such a lighweight gimmicky bit of debating.

Stuff that appeals to your superstitious disposition does not in any sense or form create "massive consequences" for anyone else, not matter how ardent you are.

And regardless of you slapping on variants of 'what if I am right?' for good measure.

If you present morally ...[text shortened]... elieving it is not going to work and is not enhanced by "If there is [my] God..." thought exercises.

There's a lot going on here.

First, you deny something that is obviously true. If there is God (and we have been referencing the Christian God, as you will reference later in your post), it is important.

You deny it to be something of a showman, I guess.

But I guess the real argument comes at the end:

If you present morally coherent and credible arguments that make sense of your ideology of eternal torment, I will most likely subscribe to it. But the idea I will be tortured forever for NOT believing it is not going to work and is not enhanced by "If there is [my] God..." thought exercises.

Alright, so what do you think eternal torment consists of?

And why do you think humans would not ever deserve eternal torment?

Also, you yourself have pointed out that Dive here does not believe in hell and that he is a Christian... Why, then, does this aspect make it so you do not believe in God if you apparently recognize that some Christians can choose to not believe in hell?

@fmf said
Arguments along the lines of "If I am right then you will see I was right" or even "I am right and you will find out when you die that I was right all along" ~ in lieu of a joined-up, persuasive, moral arguments ~ are about as wishy-washy and narcissistic as it gets. Try it out on someone else.

Wow, it looks like you forgot what the original discussion was based on.

I am not saying believe in my God because you'll find out when you die.

I was saying that your bumbling statement in THIS post was silly:
https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/spirituality/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-proof.181437/page-51#post_4065302

The obligations that Christians think they have to their God figure are a matter for Christians only.

Obviously, they are a matter for everyone if Christians are right.

Your statement was simply incorrect.

@philokalia said
Nobody's personal lives are actually relevant to their arguments.

Unless the hypocrisy of someone's personal life ~ which they have chosen to share in public ~ makes nonsense of them being here, on a message board like this, peddling their proscriptive ideology, especially if they believe they are "forgiven" for it and will be "saved". Of course it's relevant to them putting forward their arguments.

@philokalia said
Wow, it looks like you forgot what the original discussion was based on.

I am not saying believe in my God because you'll find out when you die.

I was saying that your bumbling statement in THIS post was silly:
https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/spirituality/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-proof.181437/page-51#post_4065302

[quote]The obligations ...[text shortened]... ly, they are a matter for everyone if Christians are right.

Your statement was simply incorrect.

It's true to say that the obligations that Christians think they have to their God figure are a matter for Christians only.

@philokalia said
Alright, so what do you think eternal torment consists of?

You yourself said it is torment in burning flames for eternity.

@philokalia said
Obviously, they are a matter for everyone if Christians are right.

Your statement was simply incorrect.

If you are right, then just argue the case in a way a non-believer can derive some moral coherence from and then they can lead their lives accordingly. Just falling back on 'if I am right there will be "massive consequences" for you' is weak and it's a kind of cop-out posture. It's just a dud. It makes you sound like I am the first atheist you have spoken to.

@philokalia said
Why, then, does this aspect make it so you do not believe in God if you apparently recognize that some Christians can choose to not believe in hell?

The torturer god ideology is not the reason I am not a Christian. I have explained that many many times, including to you. Perhaps it was in some of the many posts of mine you reply to but carefully don't use the "Quote" function. I am only interested in the moral dimension of the demented torturer god ideology and the fact that no Christians here can make a case for its coherence.

@philokalia said
I was saying that your bumbling statement in THIS post was silly:
https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/spirituality/extraordinary-claims-require-extraordinary-proof.181437/page-51#post_4065302

It's not bumbling at all.

@philokalia said
"get it. But you should also know that people like me believe that supposed Christians who claim that all LGBTQ people are "sinners" and hate them and want to legislate against them do not have the spirit of Christ in them."
(Suzanne)


Is homosexuality not a sin?

Sin or not, he would not treat any LGBTQ as you do.

In fact, he commanded us to love our neighbor, as we love ourselves.

As far as I know, he did NOT say, "Oh, you know, except for the fags, the lezzies, the trannies.... They can die in hellfire. Good riddance."

Isn't NOT following his commandment a sin?

@fmf said
Unless the hypocrisy of someone's personal life ~ which they have chosen to share in public ~ makes nonsense of them being here, on a message board like this, peddling their proscriptive ideology, especially if they believe they are "forgiven" for it and will be "saved". Of course it's relevant to them putting forward their arguments.

I can't stop having sex with my girlfriend or she will leave me. She already says I put religion before her, and she says that she didn't sign up for any of this. So, she says I need to continue fulfilling my sexual duties to her as I did before my conversion, and that we already have been doing for years before then.

Upon consulting relevant people, I was told a path forward, and I have taken it.

Please, heap your criticisms on me. I deserve it. I should've been living this proper life from decades ago but I haven't been.

I am guilty.

But I will choose to have this sin to avoid heartbreak and perhaps the greater sin of destroying a fruitful relationship.

Use it against me if you like.

I'm not ashamed of it.

@philokalia said
Please, heap your criticisms on me. I deserve it.

Personally, I think it's totally fine for you to sleep with your girlfriend as long as there is not any morally unsound dimension to the relationship. What criticisms do you think I "heap" on you?

@fmf said
You yourself said it is torment in burning flames for eternity.

Sure, the position is something like this:

According to the saints, the “fire” that will consume sinners at the coming of the Kingdom of God is the same “fire” that will shine with splendor in the saints. It is the “fire” of God’s love; the “fire” of God Himself who is Love. “For our God is a consuming fire” (Heb 12.29) who “dwells in unapproachable light” (1 Tim 6.16). For those who love God and who love all creation in Him, the “consuming fire” of God will be radiant bliss and unspeakable delight. For those who do not love God, and who do not love at all, this same “consuming fire” will be the cause of their “weeping” and their “gnashing of teeth.”

Thus it is the Church’s spiritual teaching that God does not punish man by some material fire or physical torment. God simply reveals Himself in the risen Lord Jesus in such a glorious way that no man can fail to behold His glory. It is the presence of God’s splendid glory and love that is the scourge of those who reject its radiant power and light.

. . . those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God . . . But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed! (Saint Isaac of Syria, Mystic Treatises).

https://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/spirituality/the-kingdom-of-heaven/heaven-and-hell

@fmf said
The torturer god ideology is not the reason I am not a Christian. I have explained that many many times, including to you. Perhaps it was in some of the many posts of mine you reply to but carefully don't use the "Quote" function. I am only interested in the moral dimension of the demented torturer god ideology and the fact that no Christians here can make a case for its coherence.

So you would say that Dive fundamentally doesn't understand the Bible because he rejects this ideology, which you appear to say is necessary for a Christian to believe to be a Christian, right?

... And you don't want to discuss this at all?

Tell me, why would people inherently not deserve hell?

@suzianne said
Sin or not, he would not treat any LGBTQ as you do.

In fact, he commanded us to love our neighbor, as we love ourselves.

As far as I know, he did NOT say, "Oh, you know, except for the fags, the lezzies, the trannies.... They can die in hellfire. Good riddance."

Isn't NOT following his commandment a sin?

He told us to be a light to the world so that we could save others, right...

I am sorry if I am failing in that.

Do you have a recommendation on how to engage them on the topic?