Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Hell is separation from God

dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place where God abandons such souls, ie. a place completely devoid of God.

How then can Christians claim God is omnipresent?

In fact, how can he be omniscient since there is a place (Hell) where he has no clue what is going on?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 1:49:01 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place where God abandons such souls, ie. a place completely devoid of God.

How then can Christians claim God is omnipresent?

In fact, how can he be omniscient since there is a place (Hell) where he has no clue what is going on?

Omni present doesn't mean Omni-Active

Why is this a straw man. Well for one you present the Argument of the opposing side. You dictate the specifics of the imaginary opponents case. Perhaps it would be less Strawman like if you cite or quote from some REAL christian proposing this idea.

Instead of posting straw man's, why don't you just post an argument for why you reject God no matter what evidence is presented to you?
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 2:07:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place completely devoid of God.
It doesn't matter what Christians claim, Dee. Until Christian claims respect falsification, it's irrelevant whether they respect coherence or consistency.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 2:20:51 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 2:07:35 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place completely devoid of God.
It doesn't matter what Christians claim, Dee. Until Christian claims respect falsification, it's irrelevant whether they respect coherence or consistency.

That doesn't even make sense. For something to be falsifable in the first place it has to be coherent and self consistent...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 7:04:07 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 1:49:01 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place where God abandons such souls, ie. a place completely devoid of God.

How then can Christians claim God is omnipresent?

In fact, how can he be omniscient since there is a place (Hell) where he has no clue what is going on?

Omni present doesn't mean Omni-Active

So?

Why is this a straw man. Well for one you present the Argument of the opposing side. You dictate the specifics of the imaginary opponents case. Perhaps it would be less Strawman like if you cite or quote from some REAL christian proposing this idea.

Real Christians have proposed this idea:

http://biblehub.com...

And others take it in a local sense, denoting banishment or separation - that the wicked will be expelled from that joy and glory which reign in the presence of Christ; they shall be banished away from the presence of the Lord. This last interpretation seems to be the correct meaning; it gives to the proposition its full force. And from the glory of his power; not a Hebraism for "his mighty glory" (Jowett), but from that glory which has its origin in his power - the wicked will be banished from the manifestation of his power in the glorification of his saints. The punishment of the wicked on its negative side is here stated. As the presence of the glorified Jesus will constitute the happiness of heaven, so banishment from his presence will constitute the misery of hell, because the soul is then cut off from the source of all good and of all holiness.

Banishment from his presence means God is not present there.

Instead of posting straw man's, why don't you just post an argument for why you reject God no matter what evidence is presented to you?

I don't think you understand what a strawman is. People put up a strawman to knock down when fallaciously trying to refute an argument. I am not refuting any argument, I am making one.
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 7:07:15 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 2:07:35 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place completely devoid of God.
It doesn't matter what Christians claim, Dee. Until Christian claims respect falsification, it's irrelevant whether they respect coherence or consistency.

Yes, that is a definite problem. You can't logically refute a position which wasn't arrived at by logic. Still, it doesn't hurt to chip away. :-)
DanMGTOW
Posts: 1,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 7:41:34 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 1:49:01 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place where God abandons such souls, ie. a place completely devoid of God.

How then can Christians claim God is omnipresent?

In fact, how can he be omniscient since there is a place (Hell) where he has no clue what is going on?

Omni present doesn't mean Omni-Active

Why is this a straw man. Well for one you present the Argument of the opposing side. You dictate the specifics of the imaginary opponents case. Perhaps it would be less Strawman like if you cite or quote from some REAL christian proposing this idea.

Instead of posting straw man's, why don't you just post an argument for why you reject God no matter what evidence is presented to you?

i reject the god of the bible, because i haven't seen any evidence for or of your god.
then again if the bible is an accurate representation of your god, then your god is an evil, sadistic, tyrant that doesn't deserve my praise or worship.
for instance 1 samuel 15:1-4 KJV
the way i read it your god commands people to kill infants.
if your god told you to kill infants, would you obey your god?
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 7:49:59 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 1:49:01 AM, Mhykiel wrote:

Instead of posting straw man's, why don't you just post an argument for why you reject God no matter what evidence is presented to you?

Here's an idea. Instead of trying to derail my thread, why don't you start a thread where you lay out your evidence for God?

Hell will freeze over first. Or should I say God will pay Hell a visit first? Lol.
VirBinarus
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 7:59:16 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 7:07:15 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/19/2016 2:07:35 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place completely devoid of God.
It doesn't matter what Christians claim, Dee. Until Christian claims respect falsification, it's irrelevant whether they respect coherence or consistency.

Yes, that is a definite problem. You can't logically refute a position which wasn't arrived at by logic. Still, it doesn't hurt to chip away. :-)

So if someone is told by a scientist that "water, on Mars, would have been green", and the person believes the scientist. Is it now impossible to logically refute the person?
"Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."
1 thessalonians, 5:11
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 8:19:56 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 7:59:16 AM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 3/19/2016 7:07:15 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/19/2016 2:07:35 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place completely devoid of God.
It doesn't matter what Christians claim, Dee. Until Christian claims respect falsification, it's irrelevant whether they respect coherence or consistency.

Yes, that is a definite problem. You can't logically refute a position which wasn't arrived at by logic. Still, it doesn't hurt to chip away. :-)

So if someone is told by a scientist that "water, on Mars, would have been green", and the person believes the scientist. Is it now impossible to logically refute the person?

That's how it works. It's a maxim (general truth) so it is not absolute but ...

If they are convinced by an authority they accept (not by evidence or logic) that water on Mars is green, it would be futile to try to dissuade them of that belief by logic alone. The only thing that might do it is a greater authority. Since with theists there is no greater authority than God, it is generally true that nothing can dissuade them.
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 10:18:42 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 7:59:16 AM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 3/19/2016 7:07:15 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 3/19/2016 2:07:35 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/19/2016 1:20:24 AM, dee-em wrote:
Some Christians claim that the punishment of Hell is no more than what atheists and sinners want - a place completely devoid of God.
It doesn't matter what Christians claim, Dee. Until Christian claims respect falsification, it's irrelevant whether they respect coherence or consistency.

Yes, that is a definite problem. You can't logically refute a position which wasn't arrived at by logic. Still, it doesn't hurt to chip away. :-)

So if someone is told by a scientist that "water, on Mars, would have been green", and the person believes the scientist. Is it now impossible to logically refute the person?

What's so outlandish about green water anyway?

https://en.wikipedia.org...
tarantula
Posts: 866
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 12:08:48 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
If hell means separation from the deity, should it exist, I am all for it, as Satan couldn't be any worse.
VirBinarus
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 12:38:20 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 12:08:48 PM, tarantula wrote:
If hell means separation from the deity, should it exist, I am all for it, as Satan couldn't be any worse.

So you can't complain that God is evil for sending people there then.
"Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."
1 thessalonians, 5:11
tarantula
Posts: 866
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 2:21:06 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 12:38:20 PM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 3/19/2016 12:08:48 PM, tarantula wrote:
If hell means separation from the deity, should it exist, I am all for it, as Satan couldn't be any worse.

So you can't complain that God is evil for sending people there then.

The deeds attributed to the deity in the Bible are evil if they had any validity.
bulproof
Posts: 25,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 2:33:34 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/19/2016 12:38:20 PM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 3/19/2016 12:08:48 PM, tarantula wrote:
If hell means separation from the deity, should it exist, I am all for it, as Satan couldn't be any worse.

So you can't complain that God is evil for sending people there then.
According to your lot, your god does nothing of the sort.
Could people actually agree on something before we turn it to mush?
Here's one I cooked earlier.
Is jesus god?