Originally posted by SwissGambit
You're just going to confuse him if you use big words like 'extrapolate'. 😵

Yes, all morons no that...

😞

Originally posted by CalJust
Can either GB or RJH answer the simple question whether a fireman or lifeguard is right in saving somebody from death against their will?

Try to avoid quoting scriptures or religiosity - from a simply human point of view, is the fireman to be praised or reprimanded?

"Job Descriptions/Position Responsibilities reflect humane and ethical considerations as well as insurance policy coverage risk minimization of direct and indirect liability. So a cluster of business factors make maximum effort imperative." gb 1:1 lol

Footnote: If a fireman on a ladder extends a hand and the occupant of the burning building refuses the assistance or if a drowning person ignores the life saving flotation device, maximum effort's been made though the option's been declined.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Yes, all morons no that...

😞

Please try to be a nice gk rat today; merci.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Please try to be a nice gk rat today; merci.

I always am, GB.

Was just repeating RJHinds here.

Anyway, I look forward to reading your well thought out answer to CalJust's question. I thought it was an interesting one.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
I always am, GB.

Was just repeating RJHinds here.

Anyway, I look forward to reading your well thought out answer to CalJust's question. I thought it was an interesting one.

Good. Please see answer above.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
[bFootnote: If a fireman on a ladder extends a hand and the occupant of the burning building refuses the assistance or if a drowning person ignores the life saving flotation device, maximum effort's been made though the option's been declined.[/b]

When you say 'maximum effort' do you mean that the fireman is incapable of grabbing the occupant despite his refusal, or do you agree with Freaky that doing so is morally wrong?
And what are your thoughts as to why said occupant is choosing to remain in the burning building - or should this be no concern of the fireman?

Originally posted by RJHinds
So are you just going to ignore the following two verses?

[b]And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

(Revelation 20:18 KJV)

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

(Revelation 21:8 KJV)[/b]

Wow, is that it?

You are justifying your belief in an everlasting hell for human sinners based on this? Really?

Well let's look at each bit with no context (which is legitimate as you quoted it with no context).

And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

What normally happens to human beings that fall into a burning lake (e.g. oil spill that catches fire engulfing the person).

If a fireman trying to rescue this person, seeing the hopelessness of the situation, said that sadly they were giving up, would you say 'But they are still alive in there, burning in torment'?

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

This is even more explicit. It says that this lake is 'the second death'. How do you reach the conclusion that, by death, the Bible means something else other than death (as opposed to going to heaven for eternal life)?

So, your quotes do not directly support the concept of eternal torment for human sinners.

Then you have to explain what purpose it serves for God, after the final reckoning, to allow people to burn for all eternity in hell. No-one has suggested an answer to this question and it seems entirely illogical and contradictory with the view of a loving God.

There is a general legal interpretation principle that, if a text is ambiguous, and one interpretation is illogical and the other logical, you favour the latter.

But here the text isn't even (particularly) ambiguous. It says you will be thrown in a burning lake and die. I don't see how you can make the leap to an eternal hell of torment from these words alone.

And if you accept the idea of punishing sinners for all eternity, you are left with a God that is not just cruel, but infinitely cruel.

Which makes me, by comparison, infinitely good.

In which case I should be standing in judgement of God, and not vice versa.

Originally posted by twhitehead
When you say 'maximum effort' do you mean that the fireman is incapable of grabbing the occupant despite his refusal, or do you agree with Freaky that doing so is morally wrong?
And what are your thoughts as to why said occupant is choosing to remain in the burning building - or should this be no concern of the fireman?

Originally posted by twhitehead
When you say 'maximum effort' do you mean that the fireman is incapable of grabbing the occupant despite his refusal, or do you agree with Freaky that doing so is morally wrong?
And what are your thoughts as to why said occupant is choosing to remain in the burning building - or should this be no concern of the fireman?

Maximum human effort within the context of a burning building at some measure of risk to the first responder or fireman; cooperation of the victim is required. Same would hold with a boat capsizing or a weak swimmer in over his or her head at high tide in the Atlantic Ocean. Freaky's more than capable of communicating his thoughts and inimitable insights without third party intervention. Sometimes people behave strangely when faced with dire straits: some freeze; some faint; some behave irrationally, screaming obscenities at those trying to assist them; some blame them for letting the disaster happen.

Originally posted by RJHinds
So are you just going to ignore the following two verses?

[b]And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

(Revelation 20:18 KJV)

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

(Revelation 21:8 KJV)[/b]

Not ignoring it. You are misinterpreting it.
Says nothing about torment for ever and ever.
It says DEATH. Not alive and in torment.

Originally posted by RJHinds
What is the verse in the Holy Bible that says there comes a point that if you sin there is no more repentance that will be acceptable. End of story .. no number?

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
(Hebrews 6:4-6 KJV)

Originally posted by Rajk999
Not ignoring it. You are misinterpreting it.
Says nothing about torment for ever and ever.
It says DEATH. Not alive and in torment.

The lake of fire has already been identified as a place of torment from your previous scripture, Spanky. The second death is everlasting torment in the Lake of Fire.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Originally posted by twhitehead
When you say 'maximum effort' do you mean that the fireman is incapable of grabbing the occupant despite his refusal, or do you agree with Freaky that doing so is morally wrong?
And what are your thoughts as to why said occupant is choosing to remain in the burning building - or should this be no concern of the f ...[text shortened]... ing obscenities at those trying to assist them; some blame them for letting the disaster happen.

If it were your grandchild at risk and it would start to behave irrationally and would yell obscenities at you, would you cease the rescue operation because of this?

Originally posted by RJHinds
The lake of fire has already been identified as a place of torment from your previous scripture, Spanky. The second death is everlasting torment in the Lake of Fire.

The Bible does not say the lake of fire is a place of torment. Thats you adding to the Bible.

Also second death means death not torment.

Notice Revelation did NOT say that the beast, the devil and the false prophet died. It said they were tormented.

Normal humans will die in the lake of fire.

For the humans it says death.
For the other beings [probably with souls that cannot die] it says tormented.

Christ was clear [Matt 10:28] God can destroy [ie kill] souls in hell.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"Job Descriptions/Position Responsibilities reflect humane and ethical considerations as well as insurance policy coverage risk minimization of direct and indirect liability. So a cluster of business factors make maximum effort imperative." gb 1:1 lol

Footnote: If a fireman on a ladder extends a hand and the occupant of the burning building refuses t ...[text shortened]... the life saving flotation device, maximum effort's been made though the option's been declined.

Actually (and I am not being sarcastic, but quite sincere when I say this) I can feel for you in the mental gymnastics that you need to make, to avoid the logical conclusion that the God you think you believe in, seems to be less "humane", and heroic, and self-sacrificing than our postulated fireman.

Clearly, there are many other scriptures that point to a totally different kind of God.

So rather than engage in mental acrobatics, why not consider the possibility that God is clearly MORE noble than our fireman friend?

Or, forget the fireman, what would YOU do? And if YOU, being fallible, would be willing to rescue somebody against his will, why do you deny God that prerogative?

Originally posted by Rajk999
The Bible does not say the lake of fire is a place of torment. Thats you adding to the Bible.

Also second death means death not torment.

Notice Revelation did NOT say that the beast, the devil and the false prophet died. It said they were tormented.

Normal humans will die in the lake of fire.

For the humans it says death.
For the other beings ...[text shortened]... ie] it says tormented.

Christ was clear [Matt 10:28] God can destroy [ie kill] souls in hell.

Since the Lake of Fire is a place of everlasting torment for the Devil (Satan), the beast, the false prophet and all the demon angels, then it stands to reason that it is also a place of everlasting torment for those humans resurrected to have their part in the Lake of Fire.

"And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name"

(Revelation 14:9-11).

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal"

(Matthew 25:41-46).