What is the purpose of an everlasting punishment in hell?

[Minor Axis]

I'm not questioning the truth of the bible statements I am questioning the source of GIA's conclusion. It is that simple. I'm not questioning anything other than this. Eternal punishment yes but where is the eternal "torture" mentioned?

This is not a point worth arguing over. You are missing the forest for the trees.

Maybe you can help me find where I have made such claims? Where have I stated I disagree about a final destination and where have I stated someone in hell is offered a second chance?

Go review your own posts, you took issue with "eternal".

 

[BornReady]

Go review your own posts, you took issue with "eternal".

I misunderstood at first too but I think doombug is saying the punishment is eternal in its effect. Someone could argue capital punishment is eternal in that the criminal will be dead forever. This is not to say I think an unbeliever deserves punishment. I think people should be punished or rewarded for their actions not their beliefs.

Edit: One more thing. I believe death is eternal. But I don't think death is a punishment. Death is just a fact of life.

 

[doombug]

This is not a point worth arguing over. You are missing the forest for the trees.

Incorrect. The point is the whole basis of what GIA claims. If the basis of his premise is false then his premise is not correct.

Go review your own posts, you took issue with "eternal".

Are you kidding me? Here is what I stated earlier:

Well GIA you refuse to answer any questions. Maybe it is just too much for you to handle. So I'll make it simple and ask you one question that pertains to your premise: How did you come to the conclusion there is "everlasting punishment" in hell?

You are wrong.

It's not that I mind quoting myself but since I'm so out numbered here could you do your own fact checking.

 

[Minor Axis]

Are you kidding me? Here is what I stated earlier:

You are wrong.

There you go. When GIA referenced "eternal torture" you took issue with both words multiple times, was it torture, was it eternal, was it souls. And you still are, your implication that what GIA is saying is false or without basis. In this discussion, the Bible is the authoritative document. You've been given multiple references in the Bible speaking of Hell being a final destination with eternal burning, whether you want to describe that as punishment or torture, and you are still on GIA's case trying to prove what exactly? The question has been answered multiple times. You just don't like GIA's attitude. Is it because he is questioning your Bible?

 

[doombug]

There you go. When GIA referenced "eternal torture" you took issue with both words multiple times, was it torture, was it eternal, was it souls. And you still are, your implication that what GIA is saying is false or without basis. In this discussion, the Bible is the authoritative document. You've been given multiple references in the Bible speaking of Hell being a final destination with eternal burning, whether you want to describe that as punishment or torture, and you are still on GIA's case trying to prove what exactly? The question has been answered multiple times. You just don't like GIA's attitude. Is it because he is questioning your Bible?

I have stated my case here. GIA is making a claim that "eternal punishment for human souls" exists. I say it is up to him to prove it. He has failed to do so along with everyone else. The scripture that has been referenced doesn't back up what he is saying. That is it in a nutshell. You don't like it because you know it is the truth.

 

[Minor Axis]

I have stated my case here. GIA is making a claim that "eternal punishment for human souls" exists. I say it is up to him to prove it. He has failed to do so along with everyone else. The scripture that has been referenced doesn't back up what he is saying. That is it in a nutshell. You don't like it because you know it is the truth.

It's not GIA making the claim, it's the Bible that makes the claim and it's you that's trying to say no the Bible does not say that. This is a big waste of time discussing this type of information with a Theist. I've been able to go round'n round with you up to now. You've been hit over the head more than enough times with adequate evidence but your faith prevents you from seeing or considering other alternatives. Do yourself a favor and stop claiming to be open minded on Biblical issues.

 

[doombug]

It's not GIA making the claim, it's the Bible that makes the claim and it's you that's trying to say no the Bible does not say that. This is a big waste of time discussing this type of information with a Theist. I've been able to go round'n round with you up to now. You've been hit over the head more than enough times with adequate evidence but your faith prevents you from seeing or considering other alternatives. Do yourself a favor and stop claiming to be open minded on Biblical issues.

You have proven nothing. The quotes provided do not back up the premise, it is that simple. The premise is based on false information because the bible doesn't make this claim.

 

[Minor Axis]

You have proven nothing. The quotes provided do not back up the premise, it is that simple. The premise is based on false information because the bible doesn't make this claim.

I have proven that there is enough grounds to question what's in the Bible whether you like it or not.

 

[doombug]

I have proven that there is enough grounds to question what's in the Bible whether you like it or not.

And that isn't enough to base this premise on. If you want to have the discussion that's OK but to claim this premise is based on scripture is dishonest. It is based on mere assumption at best which has been my point all along.

 

[Minor Axis]

And that isn't enough to base this premise on. If you want to have the discussion that's OK but to claim this premise is based on scripture is dishonest. It is based on mere assumption at best which has been my point all along.

Only to the assimilated. To the rest of us, there is absolutely. Questions indicate the premise of a document is suspect. Being sold on the Bible you don't believe there is a premise to question. That is your problem. A substantial number of people in this forum disagree with the confidence you have in the truth of the Good Book. Hence the energetic circular discussion.

 

[doombug]

Only to the assimilated. To the rest of us, there is absolutely. Questions indicate the premise of a document is suspect. Being sold on the Bible you don't believe there is a premise to question. That is your problem. A substantial number of people in this forum disagree with the confidence you have in the truth of the Good Book. Hence the energetic circular discussion.

The only circular discussion is what you provide. My side is simple. The bible is a book with words written in it. GIA took his premise from this book. What is written in this book to back up his premise? All GIA has to do is show these words written in this book. That doesn't make me a "believer" as you so desperately want to show but have failed. It only makes me someone who examines the truth.

 

[Minor Axis]

The only circular discussion is what you provide. My side is simple. The bible is a book with words written in it. GIA took his premise from this book. What is written in this book to back up his premise? All GIA has to do is show these words written in this book. That doesn't make me a "believer" as you so desperately want to show but have failed. It only makes me someone who examines the truth.

So does this book represent truth? If not why are you spending all of your time in this forum defending it?

 

[doombug]

So does this book represent truth? If not why are you spending all of your time in this forum defending it?

I'm not defending the book I am questioning the premise made by GIA. Why do you spend so much time defending a premise based on nothing?

 

[Codrus]

Why do you spend so much time defending a premise based on nothing?

for some reason the term "Military Intelligence" popped into my head after reading this

 

[doombug]

for some reason the term "Military Intelligence" popped into my head after reading this

I was thinking more of the term "open minded Atheists" .....

 

[Codrus]

I was thinking more of the term "open minded Atheists" .....

 

[doombug]

sshhh... don't tell the Agnostics they are busy being open minded to everything except the truth...

 

[Codrus]

 

[BornReady]

Nice diagram. Some people are confused when I say I'm an agnostic and an atheist. Well almost an atheist. I believe in Cod.

 

[Codrus]

Nice diagram. Some people are confused when I say I'm an agnostic and an atheist. Well almost an atheist. I believe in Cod.

you are truly wise beyond your years