Why We HATE Hell

The repentance of the beginning of the New Testament is to turn back to God the King.

The degradation of man FIRST commenced with Adam stepping out of the authority of God.

" And He said, Who told you that you are naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat? " (Gen. 3:11)

God didn't say "Did you gamble? Did you steal? Did you murder? Did you fornicate?"
God inquired about whether the single line which He established had been transgressed and passed over.

The fall began when Adam left from under the authority of God.
He also took into himself a "poison".

And in the degradation of the Christian church the first step in decline was that the church had left its first love.

" I know your works and your labor and your endurance and that you cannot bear evil men; and you have tried those who call themselves apostles and are not, and have found them to be false.

And you have endurance and have borne all things because of My name and have not grown weary." (Rev. 2:1,2)

It all sounds pretty good doesn't it? But Christ is not political. He pinpoints the source of their decline with infallible insight.

" But I have one thing against you, that you have left your first love."

If you have no love for God whatever you have is only stepping away and down into spiritual degradation. To repent for the kingdom is to turn back to God Himself, the King.
He has the first place. Nothing replaces Him. Nothing can substitute for Him or usurp His priority.

Your responses don't address this. They just side-step it. Any chance you'll actually address it?

I didn't side step anything.
Turning back to God and God's Kingship of course would issue in many specific errors, crimes, transgressions, iniquities and sins being healed. They were to produce fruit "worthy of repentance" (Matt. 3:8)

I have no problem with this. It says that as they were being baptized they were confessing their sins. But if they had not turned back to God they would not have submitted to baptism.

This is why some of the scribes and the Pharisees did not allow themselves to be baptized.

I will side step an idealistic God-less "repentance" which you may teach, as something of just trying to do better or making a resolution of some kind. This is not radical enough and does not go to the root of man's problem.

Originally posted by sonship
I think that you know that there is a God.

I think arguing with fellow human beings about it medicates you into hoping such reasonings will cause this realization to be less real.

ie. "Winning arguments against Christian X will cause there to be no God."

Why not answer FMF's well positioned question instead of flapping about and appearing as if you don't know?

Originally posted by divegeester
Why not answer FMF's well positioned question instead of flapping about and appearing as if you don't know?

How could I possibly know if anyone here today will be among those worshipping the Antichrist with his number? I don't even know if these things will occur in my lifetime or in another hundred or more years.

That the events of Revelation 14 will occur, I am certain.

If you are referring to some other question, I don't obligate myself to answer every question of FMF.

Originally posted by sonship
I read the teachings of some strong Annihilationists.

I have heard them explain that the eternal judgment is non-existence not eternal suffering. Hence the question.

Does that mean that all who do not exist and have never been born are under the judgment of God ?

Give the man a chance to offer a reply.

Isn't anihiliation judgement?

Originally posted by sonship
How could I possibly know if anyone here today will be among those worshipping the Antichrist with his number? I don't even know if these things will occur in my lifetime or in another hundred or more years.

That the events of [b]Revelation 14 will occur, I am certain.

If you are referring to some other question, I don't obligate myself to answer every question of FMF.[/b]

On page 3 FMF asked you this:

Originally posted by FMF
Do you think humans should take this moral example then, and, under certain circumstances, torture people by burning them (while being careful to not let them die), not in search of information that might save lives, for instance, but quite simply because of the thoughtcrimes of the person being tortured and because of our anger and desire for vengeance?

And you dodged answering it with some of your waffle. As you well know you did.

So, what is your response?

Originally posted by divegeester
On page 3 FMF asked you this:

Originally posted by FMF
[b]Do you think humans should take this moral example then, and, under certain circumstances, torture people by burning them (while being careful to not let them die), not in search of information that might save lives, for instance, but quite simply because of the thoughtcrimes of the person be ...[text shortened]... d answering it with some of your waffle. As you well know you did.

So, what is your response?

Bump for sonship.

Originally posted by sonship
Sometimes I don't answer your question/s. Get use to it.

You don't answer the question because your religious brainwashing prevents you from dealing with the question much less answering it. Nor an answer to my charge, that the entire ediface of organized religion is the biggest scam in human history.

So, some clamoring for a reply from me on this:

Let's break it down.

Do you think humans should take this moral example then, and, under certain circumstances, torture people by burning them (while being careful to not let them die), not in search of information that might save lives, for instance, but quite simply because of the thoughtcrimes of the person being tortured and because of our anger and desire for vengeance?

The first part of the complex and leading paragraph is this -

Do you think humans should take this moral example then

I do not think everything God does humans should feel they are to imitate.
Even among humans not everything is appropriate to attempt to imitate.

A trained medical doctor sticks a piece of wood into a child's mouth to examine its tonsils.
When I took my two children to be examined by a medical doctor I latter saw them playing "doctor" at home.

The older child was putting something into the mouth of her baby brother. I strictly forbade her to do that. What was appropriate for the professional medical doctor was absolutely not appropriate for my children to imitate themselves.

The analogy is not meant to be perfect.
The analogy is easy to exploit and form an argument against it.
But the principle holds, I think. Even in the human realm the wisdom, skill, intention of one person for a level of expertise cannot always be appropriately imitated by someone else.

Do you think humans should take this moral example then

If the New Testament is read carefully one can recall that James and John were rebuked by Christ for wanting to miraculously bring judging fire down on a town which rejected Christ's speaking. Obvciousy, He did not want them to imitate what they knew had on an occasion occurred in history.

" And seeing this the disciples James and John said, Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?

But turning, He rebuked them and said, You do not know of what kind of spirit you are. The Son of Man has not come to destroy men's lives but to save them. And they went into another village." (Luke 9:54-56)

A second part of the paragraph -

... and, under certain circumstances, torture people by burning them (while being careful to not let them die),

Of course the question is framed so as to maneuver agreement with its premise.
God keeps men alive in torture and does not let them die.

Putting aside for the moment whether what is taught is men being "kept alive" the first part of the previous reply should be sufficient. But I'll put it this way now -

I see NOTHING in the Bible suggesting that God's dealing with men in their eternal state is something that He expects humans to likewise do in any regard.

The point of Christ's words here is exactly that God has a power and an authority BEYOND what human can do. It follows that they should not try to do what they are not able to.

"And I say to you My friends, Do not fear those who kill the body and afterwards have nothing more that they can do. But I will show you whom you should fear: fear Him who, after killing, has authority to cast into Gehenna; yes, I tell you, fear this One." (Luke 12:4-5)

Though the question is crafted to really say that God is monsterously evil aside from the innuendo the teaching is that He has an authority that man does not have. Therefore it is not a communicable attribute that we are obligated to emulate.

For those who feel they judge God as inferior in morality here I would ask.

On a scale of 1 to 10 with the MOST righteous being 10 and a 1 being the least righteous - where would you place yourself as to compared to where you would place Jesus Christ the speaker of these words in Luke 12:4-5 ?

What do you give yourself?
In comparison what do you give Jesus Christ?

Remember, Jesus did teach that this divine judgement will be in His hands.

"For neither does the Father judge anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, In order that all may honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him." (John 5:22,23)

Cont. latter.

... not in search of information that might save lives, for instance, but quite simply because of the thoughtcrimes of the person being tortured and because of our anger and desire for vengeance?

I am not sure of the meaning of all of this. It is making the question a statement. That is to answer it as it is crafted is to imply you are in agreement with all of its premises.

Though I am not sure what all is meant here, I would say this.
The record of God concerning our lives is totally infallible.
No one else in existence has such wisdom and knowledge about our lives.

He knows the circumstances of the crack baby.
He knows the circumstances of the man who knew no other thing about the Bible except statues of Mary around the house.
He knows the details on the minutest level of the motive, thought life, intention, influences, reasonings behind every action.

Look at the physical universe. Convert in your mind all of that infinite expanse to some form of equivalent moral character. When I do, I see benefits and drawbacks in infinite moral wisdom of God.

Depending on where I am before Him, unspeakable comfort is mine or awesome expectation that I can get away with nothing, is mine. And sometimes it is some of one and simultaneously some of the other.

God is light and in Him is no darkness at all.
All things are laid bare before the eyes of Him with whom we are to give our account.

The attitude of a man about this infinitely penetrating knowledge of us is much influenced by where we stand in relation to God. Whether we are reconciled to God or in rebellion to God greatly colors our degree of comfort or discomfort at such omniscience.

Originally posted by sonship
Let's break it down............

Good grief. To recap...

Question to sonship:
Do you think humans should take this moral example then, and, under certain circumstances, torture people by burning them (while being careful to not let them die), not in search of information that might save lives, for instance, but quite simply because of the thoughtcrimes of the person being tortured and because of our anger and desire for vengeance?

I'll take this yawning chasm of a reply to mean:

No, it's ok for my version of god to do this eternal torture, but it's not ok for man to do it. 'Cos I said so.

Originally posted by sonship
God is light and in Him is no darkness at all.

So you think that supernaturally keeping billions of people alive and burning them in agony for eternity, is the light of god and not darkness?

Originally posted by sonship
I do not think everything God does humans should feel they are to imitate.

But you've described eternal torture as the "perfect morality" and a "moral example". If, as you now say, humans are not to imitate it, what is it, morally speaking? All you're left with is it being a nonsensical, morally repugnant threat. On what basis are you claiming it exemplifies the "perfect morality"?

Originally posted by sonship

I do not think everything God does humans should feel they are to imitate.
Even among humans not everything is appropriate to attempt to imitate.

A trained medical doctor sticks a piece of wood into a child's mouth to examine its tonsils.
When I took my two children to be examined by a medical doctor I latter saw them playing "doctor" at home.

The older child was putting something into the mouth of her baby brother. I strictly forbade her to do that. What was appropriate for the professional medical doctor was absolutely not appropriate for my children to imitate themselves.

The analogy is not meant to be perfect.

Tell me how this stuff about a medical examination is supposed to be an analogy for justice, punishment, morality, vengeance?

Originally posted by sonship
Depending on where I am before Him, unspeakable comfort is mine or awesome expectation that I can get away with nothing, is mine.

But you - as a result of what you think about yourself and what you think about your god figure - have declared yourself already "forgiven" for your immoral acts, and already "saved" - irreversibly so. How is this an example of how, as you put it, you "can get away with nothing"?

Originally posted by FMF
But you - as a result of what you think about yourself and what you think about your god figure - have declared yourself already "forgiven" for your immoral acts, and already "saved" - irreversibly so. How is this an example of how, as you put it, you "can get away with nothing"?

I am a released debtor whose dept was PAID.
I am not a debtor whose dept was overlooked and not paid up.
I am a forgiven person because judgment upon me was executed on the God ordained Substitute - Christ at Calvary.

I did not get away (in a sense).
In Christ I was judged.

On one hand it seems ... seems like free forgiveness.
But there is no such thing to God as this. It seems free to me because Jesus Christ has PAID for me under God's judgment on His cross.

Now I am a son of God. Now I am a son under the Father's discipline to conform me to the image of the Firstborn Son. Along the spectrum of all the possible things at the Father's disposal to perfect His sons, there are still some things which I have a sober fear of. See Hebrews 12 - about 24 verses ( from v.6 - v.29) all the Father has to perfect His eternally redeemed sons.

But as to eternal redemption and eternal life, they are the Christians'.
Whether reward or discipline during the millennial kingdom is mine - remains to be seen.

You misplace blame upon me and love to try to draw me into introspection.
it is the New Testament that declares all who are in Christ as forgiven and saved.

"Who shall bring a charge against God's chosen ones? It is God who justifies.

Who is he who condemns? It is Christ Jesus who died and, rather, who was raised, who is also at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. " (Rom. 8:33,34)

Who is he who condemn? FMF who year after year spews out contempt for "god-figure" and tries to wreck my faith by tempting to get me to be introspective - "Oooo, I am after all a bad, bad, bad person to believe this."

Doesn't work that way.

Try as hard as you can to not believe God exists.
I think you cannot.
Why blame me about my "god figure" ?