The god who burns people alive for eternity

@sonship said
@divegeester

I have no plans based on your scenario.

So you HOPE that "my scenario" is absolutely and utterly impossible ?

If I go with that then what prevents me from assuming that the Bible has LIED?

I think the burden should be borne by YOU to do some mighty reinterpreting rather then just complain what others see there.

Either that or ...[text shortened]... and take some time to explain -

HERE is how we should understand these several verses.

That is the issue if scripture is being metaphorical it is still expressing a point and if it is literal it is reality and truth. Neither of those does away with Hell and judgment. If nothing can be offered to show it means something other than what is said, it means what it says!

@kellyjay said
That is the issue if scripture is being metaphorical it is still expressing a point and if it is literal it is reality and truth. Neither of those does away with Hell and judgment. If nothing can be offered to show it means something other than what is said, it means what it says!

But what is the moral justification for the punishment being neverending physical agony?

@fmf said
But what is the moral justification for the punishment being neverending physical agony?

Moral justification only makes sense within a framework of moral absolutes. Why does anyone need to justify anything within a framework of moral relativism where everyone is right in their own eyes?

@dj2becker said
Moral justification only makes sense within a framework of moral absolutes. Why does anyone need to justify anything within a framework of moral relativism where everyone is right in their own eyes?

If KellyJay can't make a case, then so be it. Him insisting that eternal torture makes moral sense because he also insists that his beliefs about eternal torture are moral absolutes, all he is doing is offering an "It is because it it"-type argument.

@dj2becker said
Why does anyone need to justify anything within a framework of moral relativism where everyone is right in their own eyes?

You seem to be suggesting that KellyJay is right because he believes he is right about "moral absolutes" and therefore he is right in his own eyes. That's him being subjective, not objective.

@dj2becker said
Moral justification only makes sense within a framework of moral absolutes. Why does anyone need to justify anything within a framework of moral relativism where everyone is right in their own eyes?

Can you please contribute a post to this forum that doesn't include the word 'absolute.'

Thanks in advance.

@dj2becker said
Interpretation of the Bible is tricky. Something that has helped me a lot with interpreting the Bible, is the 8 levels of understanding Scripture, as described by Moises Silva.

It requires that, when reading Scripture, we look at it through various lenses:

1) Linguistic level (different translations, words used, how is the sentence constructed)

2) Socio-historical ...[text shortened]... mentaries on the text)

8) Personal meaning (what does the passage mean to me in this day and age)

And when all is said and done, YOU end up picking which parts you want to believe. In your case, you believe the parts that line up with the dogma that you've been taught and find a way to discount the parts that don't.

And many, like you, lack to integrity to acknowledge this fact.

Once again:
"If you believe what KJ posted isn't nonsensical, by all means formulate a cogent argument to that effect. If you remain true to form, you'll refuse."

And of course once again you've refused.

With a posting history that reveals someone who offers little other than mindlessly regurgitating the dogma that you've been taught, it's as expected. You've done that with this latest post of yours as well.

@thinkofone said
And when all is said and done, YOU end up picking which parts you want to believe. In your case, you believe the parts that line up with the dogma that you've been taught and find a way to discount the parts that don't.

And many, like you, lack to integrity to acknowledge this fact.

Once again:
"If you believe what KJ posted isn't nonsensical, by all means formulat ...[text shortened]... that you've been taught, it's as expected. You've done that with this latest post of yours as well.

If you don’t accept them all you are cherry picking.

@kellyjay said
If you don’t accept them all you are cherry picking.

lol.

@thinkofone said
lol.

Funny uh, Jesus is either who the scriptures say or not, it is the same with all other doctrine. If you only look at a handful of verses that suits your private beliefs than you are judging the Word not allowing it to justify or condemn you.

@kellyjay said
Funny uh, Jesus is either who the scriptures say or not, it is the same with all other doctrine. If you only look at a handful of verses that suits your private beliefs than you are judging the Word not allowing it to justify or condemn you.

Funny uh

What can anyone do but laugh? You're talking in circles.

@thinkofone said
Funny uh

What can anyone do but laugh? You're talking in circles.

Really cherry picking scripture to prove a point is not rightfully dividing the Word. Which is why so many only quote a handful of verses and ignore others outright!