Have you ever met any non-believers who...

@fmf said
You are the forum's Colonel Kurtz.

I don't know about anyone else, but this comment strikes me as fairly alarming.

Colonel Kurtz was Marlon Brando's character from Apocalypse Now.

Can anyone here imagine the posting avalanche that would follow had sonship said this to FMF? Yet it passes everyone by fairly innocuously, when it is anything but.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I'm still taken aback that people still think this is logical.

@sonship said

"Talk about it. Talk about it. Talk about it."

Gotta move on...

@suzianne said
Can anyone here imagine the posting avalanche that would follow had sonship said this to FMF?

sonship has said much worse.

@suzianne said
I don't know about anyone else, but this comment strikes me as fairly alarming.

Colonel Kurtz was Marlon Brando's character from Apocalypse Now.

You travel up the river [i.e. discussing morality with sonship] and you arrive in the heart of darkness [i.e. sonship's torturer god ideology]. See: Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" or the film "Apocalypse Now". I think it is an apt reference: don't see how it's "alarming".

@FMF

You travel up the river [i.e. discussing morality with sonship] and you arrive in the heart of darkness [i.e. sonship's torturer god ideology]. See: Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" or the film "Apocalypse Now". I think it is an apt reference: don't see how it's "alarming".

I don't think there is any imaginative fiction by which we could compare what the Bible reveals about eternal destinies. (I have no idea or interest in Colonel Klutz (?) or a Hollywood movie to furnish insight into eternal destinies revealed from the mouth of Jesus Christ).

It is nice that you are conversant on art films.

Not even Dante's Divine Comedy (Dante's Inferno) does any justice to the Bible's revelation. It is just man's creative imagination doing the best he can to convey his kind of limited and erroneous understanding of the Scripture.

I gave everyone a chance to prove that physical death meant non-existence in the Bible in a thread dedicated to that premise. No one was able to demonstrate that physical death in the Bible means non-existence.

This in the fact that Jesus spoke of "an eternal sin" must mean that God's eternal reaction to the lost one's "eternal sin" goes on as long as the eternal sin has its guilt - forever.

If one can blaspheme God now in an environment of relative peace for so long under God's merciful patience, once separated from God forever yet not non-existent, there is no reason why suddenly such blasphemy should be less in that state.

The eternal sin calls down eternally what God response to it for eternity.

The lost cannot expect God to suspend His right judgement.
The eternal sin invokes God to eternally let one know what God thinks of his perpetual rebellion.

The good news (which you say is bad news really) is that we can have the Son of God be the substitute of that judgment we on His cross for our eternal redemption rather than our eternal sin.

I don't think we should look for parallels from Holywood to understand this. We should receive the good news of Christ the Savior as good news by receiving Him in faith.

"All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and him that comes to Me I will by no means cast out." (John 6:37)

It is highly likely that anyone reading these discussions for so long should know enough to be saved. Inserting imatination concerning what we do not know in a hope to force God to appear incompetent of unrighteous concerning high numbers of people ("billions are going to be tortured" ) may seem a comfortable rationale to disbelieve in Christ.

I don't think it will be reliable in the end. Don't bank on telling God "I did not respond to your offer to me because I imagined great unfairness on Your part would be a good reason to reject the Gospel."

@sonship said
@FMF

You travel up the river [i.e. discussing morality with sonship] and you arrive in the heart of darkness [i.e. sonship's torturer god ideology]. See: Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" or the film "Apocalypse Now". I think it is an apt reference: don't see how it's "alarming".

I don't think there is any imaginative fiction by which we could compare ...[text shortened]... ves Me shall come to Me, and him that comes to Me I will by no means cast out." (John 6:37) [/quote]

The reference to Colonel Kurtz is to finding him way upstream on the psychological river stranded in his heart of darkness, spitting chips about his ghastly doomsday ideology.

@sonship said
Don't bank on telling God "I did not respond to your offer to me because I imagined great unfairness on Your part would be a good reason to reject the Gospel."

If this is a reference to my perspective, you are mischaracterizing it. I don't believe there is an "offer". Meanwhile, your mundane and demented notions of "morality" and "justice" are far-fetched and incoherent. I have good reasons to reject the workings of your mind but I don't think you are imparting any information about a creator god or moral law giver here.

@sonship said
I gave everyone a chance to prove that physical death meant non-existence in the Bible in a thread dedicated to that premise. No one was able to demonstrate that physical death in the Bible means non-existence.

So?

@sonship said
I don't think we should look for parallels from Holywood to understand this.

I think the parallel from Conrad/Hollywood is apt for understanding you.

@sonship said
This in the fact that Jesus spoke of "an eternal sin" must mean that God's eternal reaction to the lost one's "eternal sin" goes on as long as the eternal sin has its guilt - forever.

This is recitation, not an argument. You always cower away from making a coherent moral argument about torturing non-believers for eternity - its purpose and its effect - and end up reciting dogma you have rote-learned. Like Colonel Kurtz, lost in the deep dark jungle, yours is a philosophy of incomprehensible violence and brutality served up as revenge for not subscribing to your philosophy. You have tapped in to something that's the cultural and psychological product of the human imagination at its most depraved.

@fmf said
This is recitation, not an argument. You always cower away from making a coherent moral argument about torturing non-believers for eternity - its purpose and its effect - and end up reciting dogma you have rote-learned. Like Colonel Kurtz, lost in the deep dark jungle, yours is a philosophy of incomprehensible violence and brutality served up as revenge for not subscribing to you ...[text shortened]... mething that's the cultural and psychological product of the human imagination at its most depraved.

Really??

A Christian poster in an online forum on the internet represents to you "the human imagination at its most depraved"?

Really?

@suzianne said
Really??

A Christian poster in an online forum on the internet represents to you "the human imagination at its most depraved"?

Really?

You have misread what I posted... I think deliberately, but you will no doubt deny it.

"The human imagination at its most depraved"?

The conception of the torturer god ideology ~ the ideology founded on meting out literally neverending incomprehensible violence and brutality as revenge for not believing in the Christian God ~ is the cultural and psychological product of the human imagination at its most depraved.

That's what I said and that's what you read - and understood - although you have pretended that I said something else.

The concept of the Christian torturer god ideology is the human imagination at its most depraved.