‘Eternal suffering’ is nonsensical

Originally posted by @divegeester
I’ve bumped a comment by Nicksten, which he directed at you, at least four times and you’ve been ignoring it. You were posting in another thread on this forum at the very time on at least one occasion.

So I’m only allowed to respond to your posts when it suits you?

Originally posted by @divegeester
I have absolutely no idea what you are waffling on about.

Dishonest of you I think.

You have lots of tricks.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So I’m only allowed to respond to your posts when it suits you?

No, you are free to do what you want; I’m just pointing out what you are doing which is avoiding those bumped posts. You know it, I know, those reading know it. It’s interesting to observe, that’s all.

Originally posted by @divegeester
No, you are free to do what you want; I’m just pointing out what you are doing which is avoiding those bumped posts. You know it, I know, those reading know it. It’s interesting to observe, that’s all.

We have discussed eternal suffering at length. I refer you back to those posts.

Originally posted by @sonship
Dishonest of you I think.

You have lots of tricks.

No, hand on heart, I read your post twice and am not following your train of thought. But as Rajk999 points out, it looks like what you are trying to do is lead me through some convoluted thought process to arrive at torturing billions of people being a morally acceptable thing, which of course it isn’t as you yourself have admitted in this thread.

But hey!! It’s god doing it so it’s “perfect justice”

It’s nonsensical.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
We have discussed eternal suffering at length. I refer you back to those post.

@FMF you were bang on with your prediction.

Originally posted by @rajk999

After you agree to the first two clear statements by Christ he then twists and manipulates it and sets you up for believing in his eternal torment doctrine.

No I didn't. I said just as far as up to question 2.) maybe one could not insist such after death dealings with God are eternal.

Go back and read it.
On second thought if you don't it matters little.

Rajk999,

There is what the Bible says clearly about destruction of the wicked
Then there is the doctrine of eternal torment preached by churches

If destruction means non-existence in Luke 12:4,5 then it is impossible for God to do anything ELSE to a person once he has been killed.

But the point of the two verses is that human harm ends with man killing you. But God should be feared because He is able to do more if He wants to.

You admitted this already in your answering of the questions.

It could not mean in Luke 12:4,5 that God RE-ENLIVENS the killed person to make and keep him alive AGAIN just to punish him.

The reason for this is that then it is TRUE that He can only harm one while living and UP UNTIL death... STILL.

In between those two, churches add such terms and expressions which have roots in the bible but with a twisted interpretation..

You already admitted that eternal punishment of a hurting nature only takes place with the Devil and his angels.

Already to that extent you believe "eternal punishment" is biblical. And that "eternal punishment" (Matt. 25:46) is "the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (vs. 41).

You are inching closer to admitting that eternal punishment is NOT my invention.

Does the torment apply only to the devil and his angels in Revelation 20:10 or does it INCLUDE there two human beings - the beast [Antichrist] and his false prophet?

Does the torment in Rev.14:10,11 apply only to the devil and his angels? Or does it also apply to those human sinners who have the mark of the Antichrist or his name upon them ?

If you say Rev.20:10 and Rev. 14:10,11 include more beings than just the Devil and his angels then you admit that it is not a man-made false teaching that the Bible says some people will go to that awful eternal suffering.

Do you admit this or do you deny this?

If the people who go to the same place as the Devil and his angels had prepared for them, on exactly WHAT BASIS do you assume their experience must be DIFFERENT in terms of conscious awareness of being condemned by God eternally?

What is your basis for assuming their experience has to be different? That is a genuine question.

Originally posted by @sonship
Rajk999,

There is what the Bible says clearly about destruction of the wicked
Then there is the doctrine of eternal torment preached by churches

If destruction means non-existence in [b]Luke 12:4,5 then it is impossible for God to do anything ELSE to a person once he has been killed.

But the point of the two verses is that ...[text shortened]... this is that then it is TRUE that He can only harm one while living and UP UNTIL death... STILL.[/b]

Nonsense. Why do you say that something is impossible for God when Jesus clearly says its possible.

Every single one of your doctrines is at variance with Christ.

Originally posted by @sonship

In between those two, churches add such terms and expressions which have roots in the bible but with a twisted interpretation..

You already admitted that eternal punishment of a hurting nature only takes place with the Devil and his angels.

Already to that extent you believe [b]"eternal punishment" is biblical. And that "ete ...[text shortened]... hat is your basis for assuming their experience has to be different? That is a genuine question.

Again equating eternal punishment to eternal torment.

Originally posted by @sonship

In between those two, churches add such terms and expressions which have roots in the bible but with a twisted interpretation..

You already admitted that eternal punishment of a hurting nature only takes place with the Devil and his angels.

Already to that extent you believe [b]"eternal punishment" is biblical. And that "ete ...[text shortened]... hat is your basis for assuming their experience has to be different? That is a genuine question.

I have answered all those questions already and discussed and quoted references. So rather than get involved with your false conclusions pertaining to these passages I will just list what I think happens:

- People die and their bodies go to the grave while their life force also referred to as the soul goes back to God;
- At some point in the end, God performs eternal judgment, and this is referred to as eternal because the decisions made here are never going to be reversed. The righteous enter the Kingdom of God and the wicked are cast into the lake of fire
- There are some who are neither righteous nor wicked and these the left in the grave
- The lake of fire destroys permanently all the wicked humans both body and soul, This is their eternal punishment because it will never be reversed and there is no hope of life again
- The lake of fire torments for eternity 3 entities only listed in Revelation.

This is basically what the bible says. Truth requires no long analysis or explanation. Its simple and it is fair. Nobody has to sit and watch others being tormented for eternity.

People who live righteously will enjoy eternal life.
People who live wickedly will be punished with weeping and gnashing of teeth in the lake of fire for a time - not for eternity
People who live neither righteously nor wickedly will not be punished but live and die like the beast that perish



-

Originally posted by @rajk999
I have answered all those questions already and discussed and quoted references. So rather than get involved with your false conclusions pertaining to these passages I will just list what I think happens:

- People die and their bodies go to the grave while their life force also referred to as the soul goes back to God;
- At some point in the end, God pe ...[text shortened]... ghteously nor wickedly will not be punished but live and die like the beast that perish



-

"There are some who are neither righteous nor wicked and these the left in the grave."

It's a little peculiar that some Christians would prefer to gloss over such a group of people, especially as they comprise the majority.

FMF: There might be a supernatural being. But, I don't have any reason to believe you have any credible information about it, if it exists.

Originally posted by @sonship
So there might be God but you don't trust me telling you about God. [...] Does your rule play out that there may be God just as long as the untrustworthy deception of Jesus Christ is avoided?

So there might be God but you don't trust me telling you about God. Okay.

No one is stopping you from propagating whatever religious beliefs you want, sonship. I "trust" you to tell me about your own particular religion, yes.

There could be God apart from natural causality, just as long as I remain a deceiver.

I have no reason to be believe you are not earnest and sincere about what you believe. You're often a deceptive poster with your very calculated and frequent use of straw men arguments, your mischaracterizations of what other people have said, and the silly stuff you sometimes get up to when you're being evasive or when you are deflecting, but I have never called you "a deceiver".

If you think I have, please quote the post where you think I did.

How about Jesus Himself as presented in the Gospels?

Well, I am not a Christian, sonship, and that's because I don't believe the claims that Christians make about Jesus by way or the cult of personality and literature that has been constructed around him.

I deserve to be burned for eternity for this, is that right?

Does your rule play out that there may be God just as long as the untrustworthy deception of Jesus Christ is avoided?

And what "rule" of mine are you talking about? Do you feel I have tried to impose some kind of "rule" on you?

Originally posted by @divegeester
@FMF you were bang on with your prediction.

You should ask him if his answer to the question you asked him on 11th January ~ about whether his views on eternal suffering are the same as Nicksten's ~ was provided by a post of his when he was posting as Fetchmyjunk or whether the answer was in a post under his current monicker dj2becker.