Christopher Hitchens, Bertrand Russell and Voltaire have a conversation

Yep.

Yep, remedial.

Nah.

About what?

You thought right.

Nope. He knows everything. Specifically in this case He knows if you're going to accept His unconditional offer.

Why would think something so stupid?
I see we have reached that point in the discussion where you feel obliged to break my comments up into individual sentences so you can take them out of context. It is kind of sad how quickly that happened.

So anyway, we are clear that you believe God wants Satan to make people suffer for decades as remedial punishment, and further more you agree that there is no moral difference between ordering someone to torture billions and doing it yourself.

So in what moral sense is God not guilty of torturing billions?
 
I see we have reached that point in the discussion where you feel obliged to break my comments up into individual sentences so you can take them out of context.

Stop your whining. We're having a conversation. I reply one by one to your comments. You can do the same.

It is kind of sad how quickly that happened.

You're easily saddened. Have you considered anti-depressant medication?

So anyway, we are clear that you believe God wants Satan to make people suffer for decades as remedial punishment,

If remedial, correct. Do you need me to provide a definition for that word?

and further more you agree that there is no moral difference between ordering someone to torture billions and doing it yourself.

Not really. God is not bound by your twisted view as to what is and what is not moral.

So in what moral sense is God not guilty of torturing billions?

He doesn't do it. Can't be guilty of something you haven''t done. Elementary.
 
Stop your whining. We're having a conversation. I reply one by one to your comments. You can do the same.
I am just pointing that this is a tactic you resort to when you are losing. I note that in your last post you have gone further, and are now breaking up sentences into even smaller chunks. The lengths you go to to twist my words are quite extraordinary, but I guess that is what Jesus wants, right?

You're easily saddened. Have you considered anti-depressant medication?
You really think someone should reach for medication whenever they feel sad? Actually, that explains a lot about your posts.

I earlier said:
So anyway, we are clear that you believe God wants Satan to make people suffer for decades as remedial punishment,
If remedial, correct.
I am assuming remedial punishment is remedial, yes. That is why it is called remedial.

Not really. God is not bound by your twisted view as to what is and what is not moral.
God is not "bound" by anything I do or say or think; I never suggested he was. What I am saying is that it is immoral.

I think it is immoral to torture billions of people for decades. Or to have Satan do your dirty work for you.

I am curious why you think that that view is "twisted". Is it just because God does it? That is to say, God has these people tortured for decades, therefore that must be good, therefore any morality that says God torturing people for decade is wrong must be twisted?

He doesn't do it. Can't be guilty of something you haven''t done. Elementary.
But you agreed that in a moral sense God having Satan torture billions is just as bad (or good, from a Christian point of view) as doing it himself.
 
I am just pointing that this is a tactic you resort to when you are losing.

Sorry pal. Doesn't work that way. You are a participant in our disagreement. You are not an objective voice here. You can no more declare a winner or loser than a footballer (isn't that what you call them over there?) can interrupt a game and declare victory.

I note that in your last post you have gone further, and are now breaking up sentences into even smaller chunks.

Correct; like I'm doing here. I prefer conversation over speeches in a DISCUSSION forum.

The lengths you go to to twist my words are quite extraordinary,

Two problems with that ignorant comment; (1). Obviously keeping the very words you use and not altering them is not TWISTING them. (2). You failed as you so often do to provide an example of any twisting of words on my part.

but I guess that is what Jesus wants, right?

Not sure. The Holy Spirit has never spoken to me about preferred formatting in an internet discussion forum.


You really think someone should reach for medication whenever they feel sad?

If they have such a low bar for sadness that they get depressed by someone preferring a conversational style of discussing over speechifying, yeah.

Actually, that explains a lot about your posts.

Don't keep me in suspense. Do tell me what specifically it explains about my posts that I asked you if you took medication for the easy propensity to get depressed.

I am assuming remedial punishment is remedial, yes. That is why it is called remedial.

GOOD ASSUMPTION! Very good. You assumed remedial meant remedial. Can I assume assuming means assuming? After all, it is called assuming.

God is not "bound" by anything I do or say or think; I never suggested he was. What I am saying is that it is immoral.

Remedial punishment is immoral? Your poor kids. Are they libertines?

I think it is immoral to torture billions of people for decades.

Me too. So I suggest you not do it.

Or to have Satan do your dirty work for you.

Correct. Satan is inherently immoral,

I am curious why you think that that view is "twisted". Is it just because God does it?

God doesn't do it.

But you agreed that in a moral sense God having Satan torture billions is just as bad (or good, from a Christian point of view) as doing it himself.
That is to say, God has these people tortured for decades, therefore that must be good, therefore any morality that says God torturing people for decade is wrong must be twisted?

Whoops. You keep forgetting to provide scriptural support for torture. But oh, that's right. You're not saying it's in the Bible. And oh yeah, you're not claiming any Christian believes there will be torture. You just made it up. You make up stuff and then declare it immoral. Helps you flex those self righteous muscles to keep them from atrophying, right?
 
Two problems with that ignorant comment; (1). Obviously keeping the very words you use and not altering them is not TWISTING them. (2). You failed as you so often do to provide an example of any twisting of words on my part.
And so you helpfully provide with me with just such an example, as seen here:

Remedial punishment is immoral? Your poor kids. Are they libertines?
Here is a great example of you taking my words out of context to pretend I said something I did not.

The discussion is about torture. My position is that torture billions for decades in immoral. And I am sure you know that. Nevertheless, you feel it is morally accept for you to pretend I meant "Remedial punishment is immoral".

I earlier said:
I think it is immoral to torture billions of people for decades. Or to have Satan do your dirty work for you.
At last!
 
And so you helpfully provide with me with just such an example, as seen here:

Looks like you screwed up. You were supposed to be giving an example of me twisting your words. Couldn't do it, could you?

Here is a great example of you taking my words out of context to pretend I said something I did not.

And yet I didn't say you said anything. You're real confused at this point, aren't you? How do you get so confused so easily?

The discussion is about torture. My position is that torture billions for decades in immoral.

You said that in your last post. Now you're repeating yourself.

And I am sure you know that. Nevertheless, you feel it is morally accept for you to pretend I meant "Remedial punishment is immoral".

No problem, since if it's NOT remedial it probably is immoral. Any punishment from God is remedial.
 
Chris: "I deconverted more people than you guys combined."

Bert: "But I kept more from converting than you two combined."

Voltaire: "But you fellows don't have a pithy saying for which you are famous."

Chris: "But your saying was poppycock (that's British for bs). Why would you defend to the death the right to espouse Christian nonsense? Now that you ARE dead, would you still do it? Would you defend my brother?"

Bert: "Your brother will soon retract his nonsense once he gets down here."

Voltaire, after taking another sip of coffee: "But I say, have you noticed the absence down here of those who espouse your brother's beliefs, Chris? You don't suppose they might have been on to something?"

Bert: "Of course not. You're not starting to give credence to that nonsense, are you? Remember my powerful teapot analogy?"

Chris: "I hate the way the behemoth feces swirls around our ankles."

A CHILLING SATANIC VOICE COMES OVER THE LOUDSPEAKER:

"All right, coffee break is over, back to your headstands!"

Voltaire
: "Just as my brown powdered wig was starting to dry out."
Ooh! I can do fictional dialogue too!

stigg: I know what God wants us to do. I know how the universe began. I know of Heaven and Hell and places beyond our reality. I have a personal relationship with God. God talks to me. I know where we go when we die. I know that all other gods are false. I know Jesus Christ died for our sins 2,000 years ago.

LHA: Amazing! Can your prove or demonstrate any of that?

stigg: No.

The End
 
Ooh! I can do fictional dialogue too!

Big deal. Anyone can, even idiots. Here's how:

1. Make up someone.
2. Have them say something.

stigg: I know what God wants us to do. I know how the universe began. I know of Heaven and Hell and places beyond our reality. I have a personal relationship with God. God talks to me. I know where we go when we die. I know that all other gods are false. I know Jesus Christ died for our sins 2,000 years ago.

LHA: Amazing! Can your prove or demonstrate any of that?

stigg: No.

Or same theme:

LHA: I see a rainbow.

Stevie Wonder: Amazing. Can you prove or demonstrate that?

LHA: To YOU? No.

The End
 
[Psssst,,,,,,. folks, is it possible that this shallow man is finally starting to understand the Stevie Wonder analogy? Shhhhhhh.. , don't disturb him. Let him think it through to its logical conclusion.]
We can prove sight to a blind man. You cannot prove your magic 6th sense. Hence your analogy fails.

How? A blind person could hold a series of objects while someone describes them using sight. We'd prove that people have a way to see what the blind can only experience by touch. And you can do it again and again and again.

You cannot prove your magic god-sight exists at all.

Now, if you could prove your magic 6th sense to Stevie Wonder that would be interesting.
 
We can prove sight to a blind man. You cannot prove your magic 6th sense. Hence your analogy fails.

How? A blind person could hold a series of objects while someone describes them using sight. We'd prove that people have a way to see what the blind can only experience by touch.

By touch? So in order to prove the existence of a rainbow you see in the sky to a blind man, you'd get him to touch it? LOL. What does a rainbow feel like? Are rainbows fluffy? Soft? Warm? Sharp?
 
Because He loves them..
No, because he loves being glorified.

Correct. He wants us to realize how good and trustworthy He is.
Yes he can be trusted to do nothing until we beg for his forgiveness, for having failed an impossible task.

Correct. He created us, or MADE us if you will, and gave us free will.

You''re learning something, aren't you?
Knowing all the while exactly what was going to happen.
 
No, because he loves being glorified.

Correct. That too. The Father loves the Son being glorified and vice-versa. And God knows the more we see of His glory, the more inclined we are to seek Him and to share in that glory. Good observation. Thanks.

Yes he can be trusted to do nothing until we beg for his forgiveness, for having failed an impossible task.

Bummer. And you were doing so well there. On the contrary, He can be trusted with our lives.

Knowing all the while exactly what was going to happen.

Correct. He is indeed omniscient. It's like you're on a truth seesaw. Get one right, up you go. Get one wrong, whoopsy daisy, down you go. But then you finish on an upnote.
 
Looks like you screwed up. You were supposed to be giving an example of me twisting your words. Couldn't do it, could you?
Yes I could, and I did. You conveniently gave me one in your previous post. "Remedial punishment is immoral? Your poor kids. Are they libertines?"

No problem, since if it's NOT remedial it probably is immoral. Any punishment from God is remedial.
Okay, so you position is that torturing people for remedial punishment is moral.

I disagree, but I guess we can put that down to differences between Atheist and Christian morality.

Worth noting that most Christians on CARM say the suffering is for eternity. Apparently they do not believe it is remedial, and hence would be immoral. I do admire you for going out on a limb rejecting that deplorable nonsense.
 
Yes I could, and I did. You conveniently gave me one in your previous post. "Remedial punishment is immoral? Your poor kids. Are they libertines?"

Asking you a question is twisting your words? Why not just answer it?

Okay, so you position is that torturing people for remedial punishment is moral.

Nope. You're TWISTING my words. See? Two can play your stupid game.

I disagree, but I guess we can put that down to differences between Atheist and Christian morality.

You disagree with something you made up? Weird.


Worth noting that most Christians on CARM say the suffering is for eternity. Apparently they do not believe it is remedial, and hence would be immoral. I do admire you for going out on a limb rejecting that deplorable nonsense.

What limb?
 
Asking you a question is twisting your words?
It was a loaded question that implied I was against all punishment.

But you knew that, you did the twisting.

Nope. You're TWISTING my words. See? Two can play your stupid game.
But stiggy, " Obviously keeping the very words you use and not altering them is not TWISTING them."

I think torturing people, even if for remedial punishment, is wrong, and you think otherwise - at least when God does it. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
 
By touch? So in order to prove the existence of a rainbow you see in the sky to a blind man, you'd get him to touch it? LOL. What does a rainbow feel like? Are rainbows fluffy? Soft? Warm? Sharp?
So your arguement is that because I cannot touch a rainbow we should all believe that you have a magic 6th sense that let's you talk to God? A sense that you cannot prove in any way?

Okie dokie.
 
Back
Top