The Good Father

@fmf said
You once described it as being "burned in flames for eternity". Now you are saying "Nobody is being tortured". You're a recent convert to Christianity. Maybe you are still trying to work it all out. Perhaps talking to people who may be a bit brighter than you are, and a little less fervent about their newfound ideology, can help you sort out what it is you really believe.

Oh, trust me, I am always in contact with those brighter than myself. ^^

But thanks for the concern.

@fmf said
This is all morally incoherent for the reasons I have already given. And coherence and credibility are intertwined.

Thankfully, all these burning flames and "cold, outer" places [if you do, indeed, believe that stuff] are in your imagination and are part of your faith and do not affect the real lives of people like me.

Let's hope that, in your real life, your moral compas ...[text shortened]... ed by your brand new religious beliefs and your confusion about what is and is not morally coherent.

You are avoiding the discussion.

So why continue posting if you are just going to insult me and repeat yourself..?

Do you enjoy both of these activities so much? 😆

-Removed-

There's only so many ways to interpret writings, though, and you take radical departures:

- No hell
- No trinity
- No original sin

I am sure you could even add to the list.

Is it really the case that 2k years of Christian theology got it wrong but you are right?

@philokalia said
You are avoiding the discussion.

Nope. I am not. I am dead on-topic. You are ignoring much of what I say. What would be the moral purpose and justification for torturing people for eternity for not sharing your religious beliefs? What would be the moral purpose of giving proponents of your religion a doctrine like this that most human beings do not find credible? What would be the moral purpose of keeping it secret [i.e. there is no evidence that any of this is real] from still living non-believers? You believing it does not make it real. Coherence and credibility are intertwined.

@philokalia said
So why continue posting if you are just going to insult me and repeat yourself..?

I haven't insulted you. And many of your posts - because you appear to be not acknowledging or comprehending what I am saying - I am having to repeat myself.

@philokalia said
Do you enjoy both of these activities so much?

If your superstitious scaremongering is being exposed as morally incoherent, then that is the kind of activity that belongs on a debate and discussion forum like this one. I enjoy discussing matters pertaining to "spirituality".

@philokalia said
Is it really the case that 2k years of Christian theology got it wrong but you are right?

I don't see how this Appeal to Authority helps you discuss issues with divegeester. His belief in Jesus is different from yours. What does "2k years of Christian theology" have to do with it?

@philokalia said
There's only so many ways to interpret writings, though, and you take radical departures:

- No hell
- No trinity
- No original sin

I am sure you could even add to the list.

Is it really the case that 2k years of Christian theology got it wrong but you are right?

Radical how?

- Sheol is not the same as the Christian invention of hell.
- Jesus never said anything about the trinity. Like any other Jew, he was a monotheist.
- Original sin was invented by Augustine of Hippo.

@fmf said
Nope. I am not. I am dead on-topic. You are ignoring much of what I say. What would be the moral purpose and justification for torturing people for eternity for not sharing your religious beliefs? What would be the moral purpose of giving proponents of your religion a doctrine like this that most human beings do not find credible? What would be the moral purpose of keeping it sec ...[text shortened]... ng non-believers? You believing it does not make it real. Coherence and credibility are intertwined.

Of course the correct answer is: "How the hell should I know? God's thoughts are not as our thoughts."

@philokalia said

These are not things that are actively put upon those who go to hell; these are the results of their own choices, and an unavoidable reality of choosing freely to turn their back on God.

I would think that anyone who can manage to turn their back to an omnipresent God should get bonus points and maybe a free three-month extension.

-Removed-

It's a fair question to ask: Why do we flourish in such variety if we are only here to be beaten into conformity by some presumably celibate guys in holy vestments and some abstinent nuns who obviously have a third chromosome? Or some wayward Protestant apostates with car dealerships and gun shops?

@kevin-eleven said
Radical how?

- Sheol is not the same as the Christian invention of hell.
- Jesus never said anything about the trinity. Like any other Jew, he was a monotheist.
- Original sin was invented by Augustine of Hippo.

Despite what some here like to throw around as a debating point, those who believe in the trinity are monotheists as well.

@suzianne said
Despite what some here like to throw around as a debating point, those who believe in the trinity are monotheists as well.

I'm sure they tell themselves that, but what a weird thing to believe.

Believing a thing doesn't make it true.