1 edit
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
The question I asked Dive was about what would not be in the presence of an omnipresent God.
Ghost asks:
Can you clearly validate this claim (through scripture) that God is depicted as existing everywhere, as opposed to having a distinct location?
Psalm 139 includes these words -
Where shall I go, away from Your Spirit,
And where shall I flee from Your presence?
If I ascend into heaven, You are there;
If I make my bed in Sheol, there You are.
If I take the wings of the dawn and settle at the limits of the sea,
there also Your hand will lead me,
And Your right hand hand will cover me.
And if I say, surely darkness will cover me,
And the light around me will be night;
Even the darkness is not dark to You,
And night shines like day." (Psalm 139: 7 -12)
The Psalmist expected that there existed no place that could not be where God's presence was in some sense.
Now a question to you. Does the believer not knowing EVERYTHING about eternity SO THAT there are things which she cannot explain well, does this cause you to rationalize that what cannot be fully explained will not be real ?
@philokalia saidI recall you posting something that you said was a "description" that was different from the one you had offered in the past. If it is a "description [you're] not qualified to give", of what use is it to our discussion? If you think there is no moral purpose in torturing non-believers [...it's interesting that sonship has not taken this up with you because he believes that torturing non-believers is your God figure's "perfect" and the "ultimate" moral action...] then it means you believe that divine torture is pointless, and that is your answer to the OP.
It is my own perspective! That's why I brought in the description provided by a theologian.
A description I'm not qualified to give because I'm not as learned.
@philokalia saidThanks for taking the time to try what was presumably your best to explain your notions about supernatural things to me. So... "Hell" is not part of your God figure's creation, it is not created by anyone, those consigned to "damnation" send themselves to it by choice - i.e. that's where they want to go - despite having no credible reason to believe it even exists, and the ensuing torture in burning flames for eternity ~ which after 18 months you have suddenly declared to be a metaphor, I'd probably have done the same if I'd been you ~ is administered by nobody and has absolutely no moral purpose and the flames do not destroy people, as flames usually do, but you hadn't thought about that, you seemed surprised by the question, but never mind, and all this is a good enough bit of dogmatized speculation and conjecture about what happens after death that, although you don't care for it being termed malignantly narcissistic, you believe that it makes plenty enough divinely-inspired moral sense to believe that, if anyone hears about your arguably bizarre and unsubstantiated beliefs and thinks they are nonsense, then they will be tortured in burning flasmes - which may be in fact a metaphor or something the very holy and "qualified" St. Someone of Somewhere said was the "splendour" of the "scourge of love" - for eternity for rejecting it as incoherent and far-fetched. Thanks. I will pass it on to people, perhaps.
I'm sorry to hear that you think that way but I do hope that it is good for thought for some people.
@fmf saidIt's very doubtful thst sonship believes in it in the way that you described it.
I recall you posting something that you said was a "description" that was different from the one you had offered in the past. If it is a "description [you're] not qualified to give", of what use is it to our discussion? If you think there is no moral purpose in torturing non-believers [...it's interesting that sonship has not taken this up with you because he believes that tortur ...[text shortened]... n...] then it means you believe that divine torture is pointless, and that is your answer to the OP.
...
But sure, Idk, what do you think of the description.
@philokalia saidI think it's mumbo jumbo in service of a morally incoherent and narcissistic ideology.
But sure, Idk, what do you think of the description.
@philokalia saidsonship has described eternal suffering as the "perfect" and "ultimate" morality, and he has stated he believes that the neverending suffering "glorifies" his God figure and is intended as a deterrent to "other worlds". You can be as doubtful about that as you want. You, on the other hand, have stated that punishment by torment in burning flames for eternity has no moral purpose.
It's very doubtful thst sonship believes in it in the way that you described it.