Let us remember the torture and rape of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui

[ClaytonB]

Regardless of where it's locked, inside or outside, presumably it was still God that created it, because God created everything and he's all powerful. Right?

Scripture nowhere states that God "created" hell. In fact, there is no underworld mentioned at all in the Genesis 1,2 creation account. It is not until we get to Exodus 20 that Scripture mentions "that which is under the earth", that is, the underworld (where hell is). In other words, hell is an attribute of the fallen world 9where we presently are) and has nothing to do with God's good creation except that we (through Adam and Eve) are entangled with this fallen world through disobedience. God did not create this problem, we did.

If God created an eternal torture prison, then I'd rather burn in hell than worship him.

The wise thing is to temper your words, Matthew 12:37. You must surely acknowledge that it's possible you've overlooked something, that there is some part of this issue that you haven't quite thought all the way through. That's what we mean by "the fear of God"... acknowledging your own finitude and proneness to mistakes. Hell exists because God is just, and he will not allow the wicked to enter his eternal rest, Hebrews 3:11.

Eternal punishment is just sick and sadistic. Sure, Satan created it okay. But God created Satan, did he not?

Satan was a heavenly creature; man, an earthly creature. Both are creatures of God. Satan also did not "create" hell, he cannot create anything. Hell came about as a byproduct of man's disobedience. If you read Genesis 1:2 carefully in the Hebrew, you will notice that the Spirit of God is hovering over "the great deep" (Hebrew: tehom), which is also the very same great deep which burst upon the earth when the flood happened. In short, God's creative act banished the tehom and man's disobedience ruptured the creation and allowed it to flood back in. This is also a picture of how the wicked end up in hell -- God gives us all the gifts of life when we are born here and when we disobey him, our sin fractures that good order, and death enters through the cracks created by our disobedience and rebellion.

If God is all powerful he can't just abdicate responsibility by saying "satan did it".

Nowhere does Scripture say any such thing.

Be careful about placing bets above your pay-grade ... the no-limits table is truly no-limits, and that's another reason why hell exists and is forever. There is such a thing as a cosmically no-limits bet. Satan made that bet when he rebelled against God, and he will burn forever because of it, Rev. 20:10.

All sin, death and destruction -- including the never-ending lake of fire -- are the result of rebellion against God. Hell is not God's torture-dungeon, it is the torture-dungeon of the wicked themselves, wherein they are tormented not by God, but by their own sin and wickedness, eternally. When speaking of this in the clinical setting of a calm discussion, it can all seem very abstract. But when you are confronted with the cosmic scale of the actual horror of sin, it's no longer an abstraction. The stakes are more real than the stakes at a no-limits poker table. This is why we are to fear God -- no matter how much you imagine you have thought this through, God has thought it through more. And God's rightness in this (and all other) matter is not merely a question of his say-so, it is by all who have believed that the unbelieving will be judged. "I didn't have enough evidence" isn't true, because you were given all and exactly the same evidence as those who believed were given. They believed, and you did not. So, at the Last Judgment, there will be no way out... those who have rejected God and rebel against him to the bitter end will indeed receive the sentence they are demanding. Turn away and trust Jesus because he is the only one who has actually made a sacrifice -- the most costly sacrifice of all -- for you. All others -- whether gods, or men, whether your ego or the material world -- demand you to sacrifice yourself to them. There is only one who has paid the price and, therefore, deserves trust and faith.

 

[TheTexan]

All sin, death and destruction -- including the never-ending lake of fire -- are the result of rebellion against God. Hell is not God's torture-dungeon, it is the torture-dungeon of the wicked themselves, wherein they are tormented not by God, but by their own sin and wickedness, eternally.

And if I'm not a religious person will I be "tormented by my own wickedness" for simply failing to be religious?

 

[ClaytonB]

And if I'm not a religious person will I be "tormented by my own wickedness" for simply failing to be religious?

"Not religious" isn't really the issue. The issue is sin (injury to others made in the image of God, like yourself).

We live in a world in which everything that is ordered, peaceful and good comes from God. Everything other than these -- everything that comes from hatred, malice and spite -- comes from this world itself, which is connected to the tehom of Genesis 1,2, otherwise called the Abyss. Everything that comes from the Abyss belongs to it, and must return to it. (Judas is said to have "his" place; the eighth king of Revelation "belongs" to the seven and goes to "his" destruction, etc.)

If all of that goodness which you are not owed is removed from you, you will be in hell that very moment, Luke 12:20. You might object, "But I did not ask to be here" which is only partly true -- you do not know if you asked to be here, which is different. This is why we must reject all pride, it is fatal. Instead, we have been given the word of God, the very one who created us and everything (good) around us. There is no reason not to trust God's word, and no reason not to believe in Jesus... you lose literally nothing, except hurting others through sin, which you shouldn't want to do anyway if you're really so moral as you make out. In his word, which is eternal (Matt. 24:35), God has explained to us everything that we need to know in order to understand what we are to do in order to escape death and hell. We must repent of sin, and believe in Jesus, obeying whatever he has commanded us to do (that is, to love one another). That is how we are saved. No downside, only upside. Those who reject the Gospel are of the Abyss, they prove thereby that they are children of the devil. Reject the devil's mind-control kool-aid... believe the Gospel and receive life. It's the only way out.

 

[TheTexan]

"Not religious" isn't really the issue. The issue is sin (injury to others made in the image of God, like yourself).

We live in a world in which everything that is ordered, peaceful and good comes from God. Everything other than these -- everything that comes from hatred, malice and spite -- comes from this world itself, which is connected to the tehom of Genesis 1,2, otherwise called the Abyss. Everything that comes from the Abyss belongs to it, and must return to it. (Judas is said to have "his" place; the eighth king of Revelation "belongs" to the seven and goes to "his" destruction, etc.)

If all of that goodness which you are not owed is removed from you, you will be in hell that very moment. You might object, "But I did not ask to be here" which is only partly true -- you do not know if you asked to be here, which is different. This is why we must reject all pride, it is fatal. Instead, we have been given the word of God, the very one who created us and everything (good) around us. There is no reason not to trust God's word, and no reason not to believe in Jesus... you lose literally nothing, except hurting others through sin, which you shouldn't want to do anyway if you're really so moral as you make out. In his word, which is eternal (Matt. 24:37), God has explained to us everything that we need to know in order to understand what we are to do in order to escape death and hell. We must repent of sin, and believe in Jesus, obeying whatever he has commanded us to do (that is, to love one another). That is how we are saved. No downside, only upside. Those who reject the Gospel are of the Abyss, they prove thereby that they are children of the devil. Reject the devil's mind-control kool-aid... believe the Gospel and receive life. It's the only way out.

You're saying two seemingly conflicting things. On the one hand, you're saying that "not religious" isn't an issue. On the other hand, you're saying that I must believe in Jesus in order to be saved from hell.

Which is it?

 

[ClaytonB]

You're saying two seemingly conflicting things. On the one hand, you're saying that "not religious" isn't an issue. On the other hand, you're saying that I must believe in Jesus in order to be saved from hell.

Which is it?

It's a false dichotomy. There is no such thing as "non-religious", this is a modern fiction that has never existed and does not exist. The religious is that which has to do with ultimate questions. Philosophy deals with questions that are too subtle for hard science. Politics deals with questions of civil order and earthly power. But neither science, nor philosophy, nor politics can answer ultimate questions -- what is the meaning of life, why are we here, where did we come from, where is this whole thing going, why is there death, why is there suffering and evil, and so on and so forth. Yet, everyone has some position on those questions, even if they lie with their lips and say they do not... every single step you take is a non-verbal "vote" in life towards one or another answer to every ultimate question. Thus, all men without exception have a religion, the only question is WHAT religion they have. Modern secularism has appointed itself "the adult in the room" and tried to position itself as the exceptional religion by pretending NOT to be a religion at all. In reality, it's the most idiotic religion of all. "The greatest trick the devil ever played was convincing the world he doesn't exist." That is all that secularism is... the devil's own mind-trap, it is his anti-gospel. This is why it is absolutely central to the Gospel that Jesus bodily rose in history as a real historical event -- he defeated the devil's lies, and crushed the devil's ultimate weapon by which he has enslaved all men: the fear of death (Hebrews 2:14,15).

That's why "I'm not religious" isn't the issue at hand... you're just parroting religious propaganda and you -- like almost all other secularists -- don't even realize it.

 

[TheTexan]

That's why "I'm not religious" isn't the issue at hand... you're just parroting religious propaganda and you -- like almost all other secularists -- don't even realize it.

It's not supposed to be a complicated question, it's just, if I am a good person but do not believe in Jesus, am I committing myself to eternal damnation?

And secondly - I'm fine with the concept of hell if people are there by their own will. If they are held there by their own will it's not a prison. If they are held there against their will, it is a prison, and I would blame God for that, for who's else will would be holding them there, if not their own, or God's?

And as a follow up question, if people are indeed in hell by their own will, then why would it be eternal? Does their will not change? A person's will is expected to change over a small lifetime, but it cannot change over an eternity? The concept of hell being a result of man's own will, and simultaneously being eternal, seems to be mutually exclusive concepts.

 

[ClaytonB]

It's not supposed to be a complicated question, it's just, if I am a good person but do not believe in Jesus, am I committing myself to eternal damnation?

It just depends. Can you name one good reason not to believe? I specifically mean, if you were given all the historical evidence/proof/etc. required to be sure that all the claims in the Gospel are true, what reason is there NOT to believe the Gospel?

And secondly - I'm fine with the concept of hell if people are there by their own will. If they are held there by their own will it's not a prison. If they are held there against their will, it is a prison, and I would blame God for that, for who's else will would be holding them there, if not their own, or God's?

No one accidentally "slips" into hell, and God has gone to lengths that are so hard for humans to comprehend, that we find it difficult to believe -- that he gave up his only Son in order to save us (John 3:16). That seems so suspicious to the human mind, that we find it difficult to believe. So, why would God give up his Son, but he's trying to throw everybody into hell? Makes no sense. It makes no sense because it's a demonic slander of God's character, which is fully revealed to us in the person of Jesus Christ (Heb. 1:3) and him alone (John 10:30, John 3:13, etc.).

And as a follow up question, if people are indeed in hell by their own will, then why would it be eternal? Does their will not change?

Hell is like an event-horizon, a point-of-no-return. In the Gospel, we know that death is not a point-of-no-return... in fact, we are all already dead. But we become alive again when we repent of sin, believe in Jesus for eternal life and follow him (obey him). Not so for hell, which is also called the second death. There is no returning from the second death: "Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death." (Rev. 20:14)

A person's will is expected to change over a small lifetime, but it cannot change over an eternity? The concept of hell being a result of man's own will, and simultaneously being eternal, seems to be mutually exclusive concepts.

If you are asking whether there is regret in hell, sure, there is regret, Matt. 27:3, etc. But there is no possibility of change. Think of it like The Count of Monte Cristo (compare to Matt. 21:33-46... the Gospel is indeed a revenge-tale) -- will Fernand, Danglars and Villefort ever "change their mind" regarding Dantes? What would that even mean? They have betrayed him to certain death in the most brutal prison in France, never expecting that he would ever return. Yet he does return. Those who murdered Jesus on the Cross committed a crime far more extreme, and a betrayal far more stinging, than the crime committed against Dantes. They are the very picture of what eternal damnation looks like:

Pilate called together the chief priests, the rulers and the people, and said to them, "You brought me this man as one who was inciting the people to rebellion. I have examined him in your presence and have found no basis for your charges against him. Neither has Herod, for he sent him back to us; as you can see, he has done nothing to deserve death. Therefore, I will punish him and then release him." (for it was necessary for him to release one to them at the feast).

With one voice they cried out, "Away with this man! Release Barabbas to us!" (Barabbas had been thrown into prison for an insurrection in the city, and for murder.)

Wanting to release Jesus, Pilate appealed to them again.

But they kept shouting, "Crucify him! Crucify him!"

For the third time he spoke to them: "Why? What crime has this man committed? I have found in him no grounds for the death penalty. Therefore I will have him punished and then release him."

But with loud shouts they insistently demanded that he be crucified, and their shouts prevailed.

So Pilate decided to grant their demand.

(Luke 23:13-24)

Are these men "changing their mind"? What would it even mean to change their mind? They knew who Jesus was (John 3:2) and they crucified him anyway. God is returning at the end of the Age to wreak vengeance on them for their wickedness. In point of fact, we are all guilty in the crucifixion of Jesus, because each of our sins necessitated that he die there, or else we would surely have perished in hell. Having died to save each of us, it is possible for us to escape hell by faith in him. But for those who reject even his Son, God has nothing but wrath, because all who reject his Son prove thereby that they belong to the Abyss, that they are children of the devil, that they are God's eternal enemies. So, they will be slaughtered (Rev. 19:11ff). The Apocalypse is not a war, it is the final slaughter of all of God's enemies (Isa. 63:1ff, Ezek. 7, etc.) There will be no one in hell who does not deserve to be there. And we all deserve to be there apart from salvation in Jesus. That is the full Gospel.

 

[ClaytonB]

Media Resource Guide for Dr. Aafia Siddiqui from FreeDrAafia.org

Referring to Dr. Siddiqui as "Lady Al-Qaeda"

• Dr. Siddiqui was never charged or convicted of terrorism.

• At her trial no terrorist organizations were mentioned.

• In fact, during Dr. Siddiqui's trial, U.S. District Court Judge Richard M. Berman barred any discussion of what occurred to Dr. Siddiqui from 2003, when she was kidnapped in Pakistan and her children, and 2008 when she allegedly shot at U.S. soldiers as being "off-limits." Her sole charges were related to the incident on July 18, 2008, in Ghazani, Afghanistan.

• The Seeking Information Alert for Dr. Aafia Siddiqui stated, “no information indicating this individual is connected to specific terrorist activities, the FBI would like to locate and question this individual”.

• There was no red notice issued for her immediate arrest by Interpol, but rather a blue notice that she was wanted for questioning.

• The first reference to Dr. Siddiqui as "Lady Al-Qaeda" came from tabloid newspapers in New York when Dr. Aafia was renditioned to the U.S. Despite never being charged or having any direct, provable links to Al-Qaeda or any other terrorist organization, this tabloid introduced title has stuck and continues to be used by mainstream news outlets to this day.


Dr. Aafia Siddiqui Kidnapping in Pakistan & Disappearance for 5-years

• In March of 2003, Dr. Siddiqui, her three children, Mohammed 7-years-old, Mariam 5-years-old, and Suleman, 6-month-old were arrested by Pakistan's Intelligence Agency ISI and CIA in Karachi while on their way to the airport to visit her uncle in Islamabad.

• Evidence of Arrest by ISI and CIA:

o FBI-Wanted Pakistani Woman Detained Dated 03-31-2003

o Transcript of April 21, 2003, NBC Nightly News Report

o Newsweek, "Al-Qaeda in America: The Enemy Within" 6-22-2003. "Siddiqui fled to Pakistan, where she was reportedly arrested."

o DAWN – May 29, 2004, Pakistan Interior Ministry spokesman confirmed that Aafia Siddiqui “was handed over to the US last year”

o “I spoke to an investigative reporter for the Washington Post who informed me that she had reliable sources in both the American and Pakistani government who have verified that Dr. Siddiqui was taken into custody by Pakistani military intelligence in 2003. According to her sources, Dr. Siddiqui was then transferred to CIA custody where she was held in rendition for the last five years with at least one if not two of her children.” Elizabeth Fink Letter to the Court, Case 1:06-cr-00826-RMB, Doc. 10, September 2, 2008.

o Listed as potential victim of CIA imprisonment: Amnesty International September 2006 and Center For Human Rights and Global Justice, Fate and whereabouts unknown: Detainees in the ”war on terror”, New York University School of Law, December 2005.

o Former Foreign Minister of Pakistan from 2002-2007, Khurshid Kasuri in a 2012 Tweet: “#Pakistan, I'm so sorry for handing over the innocent @DrAafiaSiddiqui to the Americans. It was my biggest mistake ever! #PTI @PTIofficial”

• Multiple news outlets report that Dr. Siddiqui was arrested and in custody in Pakistan in 2003. This kidnapping is by authorities is the start of Dr. Siddiqui's 5-year disappearance. It is implausible that authorities during the height of the so-called 'war on terror' would release someone suspected of having links to terrorist organizations after having the individual in their custody. Around this time, thousands of innocent people were arrested with little to no evidence of any connection to terrorist organizations and held in perpetuity at black sites overseas or in Guantanamo Bay. They suffered torture, humiliation, physical and psychological abuse in these sites. Nearly all people detained at these sites never had any charges brought against them.


Ghazani Afghanistan and Alleged Shooting of U.S. Soldiers: Did Dr. Siddiqui Try to Kill U.S. Soldiers?

• On July 17, 2008, Dr. Siddiqui, disheveled and emaciated, and her eldest son reappeared in U.S. occupied Afghanistan, in a city called Ghazani located 120 miles from Bagram, Afghanistan.

• Dr. Siddiqui did not speak the local language and was not dressed in the local clothing of the city. She stuck out.

• Dr. Siddiqui heard the call for the Muslim prayer and went to a local Masjid to perform that prayer. A woman praying at an Afghan Masjid shocked the locals. The locals called the Police, who arrested Dr. Siddiqui.

• Dr. Siddiqui and her son were taken to the Ghazani Police station.

• Dr. Siddiqui was placed in a room uncuffed as she was not viewed as a threat by the Afghans and was sitting on a bed behind a yellow curtain.

• On July 18, 2008, four U.S. soldiers and two FBI interrogators entered the room. They did not know that Dr. Siddiqui was sitting behind the curtain.

• One of the U.S. soldiers allegedly put down his fully loaded M-4 rifle next to the curtain out of what he described as "Respect for the Afghan Culture."

• It is alleged that Dr. Siddiqui, who was 90 lbs. and 5'2" at the time, picked up the M-4 rifle, turned off the safety, raised the weapon and managed to fire off two rounds at U.S. soldiers before an Afghan interpreter wrestled her for the weapon and while he was wrestling with her soldiers shot her multiple times in the stomach.

• No physical evidence was presented in court that shows Dr. Siddiqui ever touched the M-4 rifle. Her fingerprints were not on the weapon, no gunshot residue was on her person or clothing, no shell casings were found, no bullet holes were found, and no one was shot or injured in the small room filled with people. Dr. Siddiqui was the only one injured that day.

• According to Dr. Siddiqui, the soldiers were startled when she appeared from behind the curtain; they yelled "prisoner loose" and shot her.

• All witnesses to the shooting gave differing, contradictory accounts of what transpired.

o Question: How did Dr. Siddiqui and her son, who didn't speak the local language and were not dressed in the local clothing, manage to make their way to Ghazani, Afghanistan? Why would they even go to Ghazani and simply wander the streets with a bag of highly suspicious items, that screamed #IAmATerrorist?


Dr. Siddiqui's Mental Health & Her Trial

• On August 4, 2008, Dr. Siddiqui, a citizen of Pakistan, who allegedly committed a crime on Afghan soil was renditioned to the United States with severe gunshot wounds.

• Dr. Siddiqui was initially deemed mentally incompetent to stand trial by the medical examiner, on November 6, 2008.

• Later, that initial determination was overturned, and she was forced to stand trial.

• During Dr. Siddiqui's trial, she displayed clear signs of severe mental health problems and outbursts, making statements such as:

o JUDGE: “Although, I think it is difficult sometimes, and I may also have to make some verbal statements and comment in order to control the courtroom and the proceedings, if as and when I determine that Dr. Siddiqui should be excused from these courtroom proceedings and that in particular would include either if she waives her right to be here or further outbursts.”

o “Counsel visits are torture for me. If you could stop those, please, I’d appreciate it.”

o “I would like to make the point that I have boycotted this trial. It's an international crime. It's against international law.”

o “I want to make peace and the Americans.”

o “I'm only quiet because I don't agree with all of this. It's lies, hypocrisy, and injustice. I'm just here because I am forced to be here, and I relieve the defense once again from doing whatever they are doing.”

o “Before we begin I, please, just want to let you know I have information about a group that is planning attacks more than 9/11 –.. before this trial ends. So as soon as they want to medicate me so I can't talk, I want to help the President nab this group to finish them and I can do that. So please let this be known in public. This is the only opportunity I have to say this. I am not lying. I swear by God. If I am lying or misleading, may the curse of God be on me. What can I say? But don't take this lightly. They are domestic U.S. groups. They are not Muslims.”

o “Just to add to what I said. The press has to talk to me. I can't work with the agencies, as I have been trying, and this is the last opportunity I have. Once I'm sentenced -- and that's what they want to do. It's important. Please don't ignore me for the sake of God and this beautiful country.

o “They have some stuff here in court, but they also hide it, and then one sentence here and there out of context, that is not fair. And just blame and label, and blame and label, that's all they've been doing, poisoning the jury, poisoning the staff. OK, OK. Ask them to make what I wrote public, and then I want the American public to decide who is what, but this is a whole drama. In fact the poor soldier, I feel sorry for him –“


• Question: Why did the United States force an individual with obvious mental health problems that were repeatedly displayed in multiple outbursts to stand trial?


• Question: What happened to Dr. Siddiqui from 2003 – 2008? How did a high-performing student who received her master's from MIT and PhD. from Brandies University deteriorate to such an extent? Who was married and raising 3-children and showed no signs of mental impairment to deteriorate to such a state within 5-years? What emotional, physical, and mental trauma occurred during that time? Why did the judge bar that from the trial?


Charges of Antisemitism against Dr. Siddiqui

• During her trial, Dr. Siddiqui made antisemitic statements, including calling on jurors to get DNA testing and trying to fire her lawyers because of their Jewish background.

• It is important to remember that Dr. Siddiqui was suffering from and continues to suffer from mental health problems when renditioned to the U.S., forced to stand trial, and to this day. These outbursts are of a woman with severe mental health issues on full display in the courtroom. Dr. Siddiqui made these antisemitic and other statements when she was mentally impaired and should be understood in the larger context of her overall mental health.

• Antisemitism is a serious and growing problem in American and around the world.

• Dr. Siddiqui is currently held at the Federal Medical Center in Carswell, Texas. Why this facility and not another woman's prison? It's because she continues to suffer from severe mental health problems because of her 5-years of captivity.

• It is important to note that Dr. Siddiqui lived in the U.S. for nearly a decade. Brandies University, where she received her Ph.D., has a Jewish population of almost 44%. However, no evidence has been reported that Dr. Siddiqui espoused any antisemitic beliefs during these ten-plus years.

• Dr. Siddiqui, through her attorney, has rejected any hatred against any groups of people. When questioned about these antisemitic and other outbursts during her trial, Dr. Siddiqui rejects those statements.


The 86-Year Sentence at the Sole Discretion of U.S. District Judge Court Judge Richard M. Berman

• Dr. Siddiqui was found guilty on all counts after her trial.

• Dr. Siddiqui's defense team was calling for a 12-year prison sentence.

• At the complete discretion of Judge Berman, he took each of the convictions and maxed them out. Judge Berman added a "terrorism enhancement" at his sole discretion despite no terrorist links being made during the trial. At his sole discretion, he had the Sentence run consecutively, which added up to essentially death behind bars, a sentence of 86-years in federal prison.

• Activists and supporters of Dr. Siddiqui believe this astronomical Sentence is unjust as no one was injured in the Ghazni incident other than Dr. Siddiqui. Along with the fact that no material evidence was presented that Dr. Siddiqui ever shot an M-4 rifle.

The Mainstream Movement to Free Dr. Siddiqui:

• Today, tens of millions of people in the U.S. and around the world support the release of Dr. Siddiqui.

• The Pakistani cabinet has passed several resolutions and declared Dr. Siddiqui, the "daughter of the nation."

• Every Pakistani Prime Minister, including Pervez Musharraf, under whom Dr. Siddiqui was arrested and disappeared, have either apologized for or supported Dr. Siddiqui.

• Hundreds of informal community and social media groups advocate for Dr. Siddiqui worldwide.

• Dozens of civil and human rights organizations in the U.S. and worldwide continue to support Dr. Siddiqui's case, call attention to its implication during the war on terror, and question what occurred from 2003 - 2008.

• The voices calling for the release of Dr. Siddiqui and a revaluation of her case and the evidence are mainstream.


Terrorist Organizations Such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS calling for the release of Dr. Siddiqui

• Terrorist organizations, by their nature, are driven to mainstream themselves. That is how they gain legitimacy, new recruitments, and funding. It is no wonder that Al-Qaeda and ISIS would exploit the legitimate mainstream concerns and emotional attachment by millions of people worldwide to Dr. Siddiqui for their political gains.

• News outlets routinely refer to Dr. Siddiqui as Lady Al-Qaeda. Since Dr. Siddiqui was never charged with or convicted of terrorism or had any provable fact-based linking her to any terrorist organizations, they are forced to bring up prisoner exchanges pursued by Al-Qaeda and ISIS. It is true that these terrorist organizations have tried to and continue to gain legitimacy by exploiting the case of Dr. Siddiqui. For news outlets to aid and abet these terrorist organizations by making that link is reprehensible and unethical.


Dr. Siddiqui's Family and Children Today

• Since being renditioned to the U.S, Dr. Siddiqui has not seen or communicated with her children.

• Her youngest child, Suleiman, has not reappeared and is believed to be deceased.

• Dr. Siddiqui's mother was seriously ill, and a few days before the hostage situation collapsed in Pakistan. She is on a ventilator and may not survive much longer.

• Advocates for Dr. Siddiqui call for her to be deported to Pakistan as she is a Pakistani national so that she can be near her family.


Dr. Siddiqui Attacked at FMC Carswell

• FMC Carswell has proven it is unable to keep Dr. Siddiqui safe.

• On July 30, 2021, Dr. Siddiqui was brutally attacked by another inmate while in her cell. She suffered burns around her face and bruises on her body.

• After the attack, Dr. Siddiqui and her attacker were put into solitary confinement. Why was Dr. Siddiqui put into solitary confinement for nearly 60-days despite being in her cell, not instigating the fight, and being the attack victim? Long-term solitary confinement had a devastating impact on Dr. Siddiqui's mental health. Which since has been approved when returned to the general population.

• Activists believe FMC Carswell and the United States government have proven they cannot keep Dr. Siddiqui safe. That is why they continue their calls to deport Dr. Siddiqui to her native national country of Pakistan to serve out her remaining Sentence

 

[TheTexan]

It just depends. Can you name one good reason not to believe? I specifically mean, if you were given all the historical evidence/proof/etc. required to be sure that all the claims in the Gospel are true, what reason is there NOT to believe the Gospel?

If there were proof then I would believe it sure. But even if I believed it all to be true, that doesn't even necessarily mean that I'd support it. Based on what you're telling me, God seems like a manipulative psychopath. He creates a world full of suffering and the only escape is if you worship him? Otherwise you spend eternity in a fiery torture prison? That's pretty fucked up, not gonna lie. How do I know that "God" is not actually Satan? Maybe Satan won and he has God locked up in a box somewhere and he needs my help? Maybe the real test is to reject God despite the proof, and be a good person knowing that you are going to be sent to eternal torture prison.

I hear what you're telling me but I'm just not able to reconcile the existence of an all powerful God with the existence of an eternal torture prison.

It's just evil. And God has created it, presumably intentionally, because he's omnipotent and created everything.

Are these men "changing their mind"? What would it even mean to change their mind? They knew who Jesus was (John 3:2) and they crucified him anyway. God is returning at the end of the Age to wreak vengeance on them for their wickedness. In point of fact, we are all guilty in the crucifixion of Jesus, because each of our sins necessitated that he die there, or else we would surely have perished in hell. Having died to save each of us, it is possible for us to escape hell by faith in him. But for those who reject even his Son, God has nothing but wrath, because all who reject his Son prove thereby that they belong to the Abyss, that they are children of the devil, that they are God's eternal enemies. So, they will be slaughtered (Rev. 19:11ff). The Apocalypse is not a war, it is the final slaughter of all of God's enemies (Isa. 63:1ff, Ezek. 7, etc.) There will be no one in hell who does not deserve to be there. And we all deserve to be there apart from salvation in Jesus. That is the full Gospel.

So, let me get this straight. I'm guilty of something because of what other people have done?

That seems like something Satan would say, not God. Are you sure God isn't locked up in a box somewhere and needs our help?

 

[ClaytonB]

If there were proof then I would believe it sure. But even if I believed it all to be true, that doesn't even necessarily mean that I'd support it.

OK, then that's the real issue from the standpoint of the Gospel. "Proof" is trivial for God... he is truly all-powerful and proves himself all day every day to believers. But the real issue is why you think God is or might be wrong, in any sense. God is absolutely right and true. "I AM the Truth", Jesus said (John 14:6). Whatever the Good is, that is God. This is true by definition. And this is why rejecting God is always an error, because what you are really rejecting is the Good, and that's a problem.

Based on what you're telling me, God seems like a manipulative psychopath. He creates a world full of suffering and the only escape is if you worship him?

God did not create this world, which Galatians 1:4 calls "this present, evil world." The world God created in Genesis 1 and 2 was very good, Gen. 1:31. Eden was our ideal environment. Because it was corrupted by sin -- by the sin of God's creatures, not God -- God made a way to restore the whole world back to Eden (and better) by recreating it entirely. That is what the Gospel is all about. Jesus came to earth to defeat death, to save all that God has given him (John 6:38,39) and to recreate the world anew (Rev. 21:5) so that we can dwell with him forever, as Adam and Eve were originally intended to.

Otherwise you spend eternity in a fiery torture prison? That's pretty fucked up, not gonna lie.

That's a really recent and, frankly, spiritually ignorant take on the Gospel. God is not a manipulative human cult-leader writ large, this is just another demonic slander against him. God is the Good, and rejecting him is rejecting the Good. Whatever your motives for that might be will be shown in the judgment -- the claim of most people who reject God is "I wasn't given enough evidence" or "I don't believe what people say about him", etc. OK, fair enough, but if that's a lie (and in many cases, it is a lie), that will be exposed in the judgment (Luke 12:2,3). And if it's true that your only obstacle to belief is some logistical issue of having access to the correct information, then that is easily solved.

As to coerced worship, God only accepts free worship (Hosea 6:6, Jeremiah 6:20, 2 Corinthians 8:12, etc.) The whole point of the Gospel is that we come to understand the actual stakes of our condition in this life by the light of God's word and, knowing this, we are moved to flee sin, to run to God and to cling to him for salvation. We are changed so that we want to worship God, rather than remain rebels in this world which is part of a cosmic rebellion which is hidden from the eyes of the lost, concealed by the devil himself (2 Corinthians 4:4).

How do I know that "God" is not actually Satan?

Satan will not sacrifice anything for you, not even the tiniest speck of dust (Matt. 23:2-4). If you want selfishness, Satan is incomparably more selfish than you could ever be, which is why you should want to flee sin. You're not good enough at sin to rule hell, and you will never be. In fact, no one is, which is why hell is eternal fire.

The Almighty Creator, however, sent his Son to die for our sins, John 3:16. If you are forced to choose between two people you never met, one who makes a sacrifice for you, and the other who demands you to sacrifice yourself for them, which do you choose? The choice is obvious. Jesus has proved himself beyond proof by going to the cross on our behalf.

Maybe Satan won and he has God locked up in a box somewhere and he needs my help?

Jesus rose from the dead, that is, he defeated Satan by destroying Satan's most powerful weapon: the fear of death (Hebrews 2:14,15)

God is supreme (John 10:29) which even the Muslims understand. Logically, whatever power is, God is that. God is both all-good and all-powerful, and his power is supreme over all of creation, including the mightiest heavenly beings. No one is even capable of challenging him, let alone overpowering him, (Psalm 2, Daniel 4:35, Deuteronomy 32:39, Isaiah 55:8,9, Psalm 37:10-15, etc.)

Maybe the real test is to reject God despite the proof, and be a good person knowing that you are going to be sent to eternal torture prison.

Which is equivalent to saying God is a madman. God is not a madman because if he were, he would not be great, nor worthy of worship. Life is not a test because a test is a farce. Life is exactly what it seems to be -- it is simply real. And so are our choices, and their consequences, which are eternal, and that is why heaven and hell are also eternal. It is the demonic realm that is a farce, a never-ending "test". Beware of that which presents itself as a never-ending test, there is no truth in it, it is just a lie.

I hear what you're telling me but I'm just not able to reconcile the existence of an all powerful God with the existence of an eternal torture prison. ... And God has created it, presumably intentionally, because he's omnipotent and created everything.

Nowhere does Scripture say "God created hell" or "God created everything". God created everything that is, meaning, that which remains (see Hebrews 12:26-29, Daniel 2:44, etc.) God does not create hell, God's rebellious creatures construct it from their own sin. I already explained this to you. In rejecting God, those who rebel against him prove that they are not of God, that they are of some other origin, and so they are thrown out of God's presence into that which is devoid of God, that is, into the eternal flames of the abyss, which has always burned and always will burn those who hate and reject God.

If you pour gasoline on yourself and light yourself on fire, who besides you is to blame for that? "The devil is making me do this!" No, you are doing it. "My ex is making me do this!" No, you are doing it to yourself. That is the situation of the man who rebels against God to the bitter end. He is pouring the gasoline of damnation all over himself when God has warned him that the spark of Last Judgment is coming and will light him aflame if he does not escape his condition. The man who knowingly rejects God is committing an act of self-immolation.

So, let me get this straight. I'm guilty of something because of what other people have done? That seems like something Satan would say, not God. Are you sure God isn't locked up in a box somewhere and needs our help?

I'll continue the discussion as long as you refrain from mocking. if you want to mock, then your eternal fate is on your own head, I wash my hands of it.

You're right, collective guilt is part of the satanic world-order. We see this still in tribal society which we are not far removed from, by the way. "Those dirty towel-heads all need to die", "Those dirty Gazans all need to die", "Those dirty Russians all need to die", etc. etc. So, this is how the corrupted human mind reasons about power and moral responsibility, as a matter of brute-fact. This is not how God created man and he explicitly repudiates collective guilt in Ezekiel 18:1ff.

The Gospel redeems man within his present condition, subject as he is to this horrifying prison constructed by the devil. The death of Jesus reverses the logic of collective guilt and, instead, provides collective absolution of guilt. "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." (1 Corinthians 15:22) But the banishment of collective guilt isn't the boon you think it would be -- most people are not even decent, so collective guilt makes them seem more righteous than they actually are, since they are ranked by the average rather than by their actual sin. The shift from the pre-Gospel order where guilt was collective, to the Last Judgment, where each man will give a complete and total account of his own sins -- including the most secret sins of his heart, let alone his words and deeds -- means that men will be far guiltier than they were before Christ, see Romans 3:19, etc. That is, God was "grading on a curve" until Christ. So, our collective guilt in Adam is just another facet of God's mercy, Acts 17:30, etc.

 

[TheTexan]

Whatever the Good is, that is God. This is true by definition. And this is why rejecting God is always an error, because what you are really rejecting is the Good, and that's a problem.

Well if God is good "by definition", then if he were actually evil, you'd be defining evil as good.

I'd prefer to determine whether or not God is good by his actions, and not by definition.

God did not create this world, which Galatians 1:4 calls "this present, evil world." The world God created in Genesis 1 and 2 was very good, Gen. 1:31. Eden was our ideal environment. Because it was corrupted by sin -- by the sin of God's creatures, not God -- God made a way to restore the whole world back to Eden (and better) by recreating it entirely. That is what the Gospel is all about. Jesus came to earth to defeat death, to save all that God has given him (John 6:38,39) and to recreate the world anew (Rev. 21:5) so that we can dwell with him forever, as Adam and Eve were originally intended to.

Okay sure but that still just sounds super manipulative. He creates Eden and man, and when man inevitably screws it up (he had to know we would), he further sends his son down to be murdered, and tells people that he died for our sins. Seems just super manipulative to me. And considering that God is all powerful and he doesn't actually need to send his son to die for our sins. He could just wave his hand and accomplish the same result. It wasn't even really a sacrifice considering he was dead for two days and then he was fine again.

Was Jesus's death intended to be a sacrifice or simply a demonstration of God's power?

And if it was the latter, why are we intended to feel guilty about Jesus' death?

That's a really recent and, frankly, spiritually ignorant take on the Gospel. God is not a manipulative human cult-leader writ large, this is just another demonic slander against him. God is the Good, and rejecting him is rejecting the Good. Whatever your motives for that might be will be shown in the judgment -- the claim of most people who reject God is "I wasn't given enough evidence" or "I don't believe what people say about him", etc. OK, fair enough, but if that's a lie (and in many cases, it is a lie), that will be exposed in the judgment (Luke 12:2,3). And if it's true that your only obstacle to belief is some logistical issue of having access to the correct information, then that is easily solved.

Let's say I have proof of God, but I reject God because I think he created an eternal torture prison. Right or wrong, that's my opinion. Does simply having that opinion damn me to eternal torture?

I can live a good life but if I believe God is bad, will I be condemned to hell?

God is supreme (John 10:29) which even the Muslims understand. Logically, whatever power is, God is that. God is both all-good and all-powerful, and his power is supreme over all of creation, including the mightiest heavenly beings. No one is even capable of challenging him, let alone overpowering him, (Psalm 2, Daniel 4:35, Deuteronomy 32:39, Isaiah 55:8,9, Psalm 37:10-15, etc.)

[...]

Nowhere does Scripture say "God created hell" or "God created everything". God created everything that is, meaning, that which remains (see Hebrews 12:26-29, Daniel 2:44, etc.) God does not create hell, God's rebellious creatures construct it from their own sin. I already explained this to you. In rejecting God, those who rebel against him prove that they are not of God, that they are of some other origin, and so they are thrown out of God's presence into that which is devoid of God, that is, into the eternal flames of the abyss, which has always burned and always will burn those who hate and reject God.

If God did not create hell directly, then at the very least he created the conditions that allow it to exist. Further, as God is supreme, he has the power to get rid of hell, but he chooses not to.

Why?

If you pour gasoline on yourself and light yourself on fire, who besides you is to blame for that? "The devil is making me do this!" No, you are doing it. "My ex is making me do this!" No, you are doing it to yourself. That is the situation of the man who rebels against God to the bitter end. He is pouring the gasoline of damnation all over himself when God has warned him that the spark of Last Judgment is coming and will light him aflame if he does not escape his condition. The man who knowingly rejects God is committing an act of self-immolation.

I don't know if I've lived a perfect life, but I sure as shit know I don't deserve an eternity of fiery suffering. I haven't committed any sins of such magnitude that I need God's son to die on a cross for me. If I go to hell because I've "rejected God", that's kind of fucked up, and I would put the blame for that squarely on God considering he is all powerful and supreme.

As far as I'm concerned, if he's claiming all powerful status, then the buck stops with him, and the blame lies with him.

I sure as shit didn't create an eternal torture prison so I don't accept any explanation that says I "did it to myself".

The Gospel redeems man within his present condition, subject as he is to this horrifying prison constructed by the devil. The death of Jesus reverses the logic of collective guilt and, instead, provides collective absolution of guilt. "For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." (1 Corinthians 15:22) But the banishment of collective guilt isn't the boon you think it would be -- most people are not even decent, so collective guilt makes them seem more righteous than they actually are, since they are ranked by the average rather than by their actual sin. The shift from the pre-Gospel order where guilt was collective, to the Last Judgment, where each man will give a complete and total account of his own sins -- including the most secret sins of his heart, let alone his words and deeds -- means that men will be far guiltier than they were before Christ, see Romans 3:19, etc. That is, God was "grading on a curve" until Christ. So, our collective guilt in Adam is just another facet of God's mercy, Acts 17:30, etc.

This is super confusing because the conclusion I am drawing from this is that God seems to have power over guilt. Before Jesus died, guilt was collective, meaning I guess everyone was guilty by default (which seems super fucked up?), and then God sent his son down to die, and through that action guilt became individual instead of collective.

If God has this kind of power, to assign guilt at his discretion, how can it still be true that people "send themselves" to hell? What I'm reading from this, is it sounds like God is making that final determination. Whether someone is guilty or not.

 

[ClaytonB]

Well if God is good "by definition", then if he were actually evil, you'd be defining evil as good.

I'd prefer to determine whether or not God is good by his actions, and not by definition.

You're missing the point -- the point is that if you think that God's actions are not good, then either you're misunderstanding God's actions (which we are naturally prone to do, Isaiah 55:8,9) or your standard of good/bad is in error. That your standard of good/bad can be in error is obvious -- you have surely changed your mind in life about one or more moral questions, because you are fallible and you make mistakes. If you have even the mustard seed of humility required to acknowledge that you can make mistakes, then you can acknowledge that it is possible that you are not correctly understanding God's actions, or not correctly assessing them, or both. Therefore, when we say "God is good", we mean that if you are not understanding HOW God's actions are good, that is because your assessment is faulty, not God. And it can be no other way... if God can "mess up", then we are effectively in hell since the all-powerful being is also evil, which is the most horrifying possible thought. We had better HOPE that God is good, because the alternative is unthinkable. And, praise be to God, he has revealed himself to us in his Son so that we can clearly see that, indeed, God is not only good, he is more good than we can even imagine.

God is not in the dock -- you are in the dock:

Okay sure but that still just sounds super manipulative. He creates Eden and man, and when man inevitably screws it up (he had to know we would), he further sends his son down to be murdered, and tells people that he died for our sins. Seems just super manipulative to me.

When you couch the issue in a sufficiently reductive light, you can make it seem that way. But this trick can be done for any moral situation, you can make the greatest saint who ever lived appear to be a horrible, manipulative monster with the right twisting of motives, etc.

The biblical cosmology divides our history into two orders that are very different from one another. Theologians call these the pre-lapsarian order and the post-lapsarian order. "Pre-lapse" and "post-lapse" just refers to the fall itself, that is, Adam's act of disobedience. We live in the post-lapsarian order, but you are trying to judge the pre-lapsarian order by your lived experience here, which is a fallacy. God did neither intend nor cause Adam to disobey. Adam disobeyed as a matter of his own wrong choice. Appealing to God's omnipotence is a category error -- God has the kind of control over the animals that you are faulting him for not exerting over Adam, yet, Adam was made in God's image, that is, Adam was given the capacity of reason, contemplation and free will, just as God has these, and unlike the animals who do not have these. So, pick a lane --- was God somehow wrong to create a being in his own image, with the capacity for reason, contemplation and deliberate choice, like Adam? If not, then how can you fault God for not reducing Adam to deterministic instincts, which is a mutually-exclusive condition with having free-will? The objection itself is an equivocation... as I said, pick a lane. In the post-lapsarian order, these faculties in man are corrupted and distorted by demonic deception, which is why the world is filled with evil (see again Gen. 6:1ff, especially 6:5).

And considering that God is all powerful and he doesn't actually need to send his son to die for our sins.

"All-powerful" doesn't mean what you're trying to twist it to mean. 2+2=4 is an eternal, unalterable fact of arithmetic that is true in every logically-possible universe, meaning, God cannot make 2+2 equal something other than 4. Trying to pit the power of God against the eternal is silly because God's power itself is one and the same as the eternal... God is all-powerful in the same sense that 2+2=4, these facts are confluent and cannot be placed in contention with one another. So, adolescent objections like "If God is all powerful, how come he can't make 2+2=5?" or "how come he can't make a rock so big he can't move it" are just meaningless word-traps. They are not raising any intelligible objection at all, they are just asking "Why are necessarily impossible things impossible?" Because they just are, because that's how logic works, because these are eternal truths that are true in every logically-possible universe, that's why.

The same goes for the relationship of death and sin. God is life (John 11:25), all life comes from him (Colossians 1:15-17). Sin is death, that is, sin is everything which leads to death. The person who abuses their body with drugs, for example, is sinning not because God is a kill-joy, but because they are breaking down the vehicle of life which God provided for them until they are gathered into the next world. If you destroy life, that is death. Just as with 2+2=4, God's omnipotence cannot conflict with that logical fact... "If God is all-powerful, why can't he make death be the same as life?" Because they are logically mutually-exclusive, that's why. The death of Jesus is the death that we deserved, but did not receive. God arranged for his Son to make this sacrifice so that we can escape the death which we must necessarily receive as a result of sin, because that's how cause-and-effect work. And if God simply "waved away" the consequences of our sins, then he would be unjust and this is precisely the move that the devil was baiting God to make from the very beginning, because that would have given him a basis to accuse God of being just as rotten and unjust as he himself is. The devil understands everything I'm explaining here, and more besides... that's one of the reasons the Gospel is so "weird" to the modern mind. Moderns are errantly assessing the intricacies of a multi-millennial theological argument that the devil has tried to make against God through the lens of Sunday School platitudes. Obviously, this leads to massive confusion.

He could just wave his hand and accomplish the same result. It wasn't even really a sacrifice considering he was dead for two days and then he was fine again.

Would you trade places? Would you go through Gethsemane and Golgotha? If not, then there is no basis on which you can trivialize the sacrifice of Jesus.

Was Jesus's death intended to be a sacrifice or simply a demonstration of God's power? And if it was the latter, why are we intended to feel guilty about Jesus' death?

It is both. As for "feeling guilty", the guilt you need to feel is for your own sins. Those sins, like all of ours, ultimately nailed Jesus to the cross.

Let's say I have proof of God, but I reject God because I think he created an eternal torture prison. Right or wrong, that's my opinion. Does simply having that opinion damn me to eternal torture?

Well, let's dial back the stakes a bit to make the question less abstract and easier to reason about. Suppose you live in a land that is ruled by some king or whatever. This king is reputed to be the most fair and just ruler who ever lived, etc. etc. One day, curious to see why everybody says he's so great, you decide to go watch the royal court of justice from a balcony where the public are allowed to spectate the proceedings. On that day, there happens to be a serial child rapist and murderer brought up to the dock. His charges are read out, and the evidence is shown. He's clearly completely guilty and quickly convicted. Then, the king rises -- "Because I am the most merciful king, and I am so good, I don't want anyone to be tortured or killed in my kingdom, even if they themselves have done a heinous wrong. In every other kingdom of the world, you would be drawn and quartered but I am a gracious king. So, I am hereby commuting your death-sentence and I am commuting your prison sentence to time served. You will be locked in the stocks for the afternoon and, afterwards, you will be released and you will have learned your lesson and you won't ever be naughty like that again."

Now, this is obvious injustice. Justice demands that punishment be proportional to the crime and the worst crimes must receive the worst punishment. Everybody lauds this king as supposedly just and merciful, but he's actually a monster, because he is implicitly giving his stamp of approval for all the crimes committed in this kingdom by refusing to punish them. In reality he is a protector of criminals, he is the opposite of just.

The technical question you are raising about hell is this: is there a sin whose only just punishment would be eternal hell? You cannot think of such a sin. So be it -- after all, you are merely a human. But Jesus informs us that there is such a sin (Mark 3:29) and that, indeed, the Jews who would go on to crucify him were committing that very sin. For God to refuse to give the appropriate punishment for that sin would be the opposite of justice, it would be injustice. Are you claiming that you know, for a fact, that there is no sin that deserves eternal punishment? You cannot know such a thing, because your knowledge is finite; to assert otherwise is simply pride.

I can live a good life but if I believe God is bad, will I be condemned to hell?

The only way you can "live a good life" is by understanding that God is good, so your question is ill-framed.

If God did not create hell directly, then at the very least he created the conditions that allow it to exist.

Which is tantamount to saying that God created Adam in his own image. And how was that wrong, what did God do wrong in so creating Adam?

God did not dispose Adam to disobey, nor cause him to disobey; Adam's disobedience was his own choice. God is not at fault for any of the evil that pertains in this fallen world.

Further, as God is supreme, he has the power to get rid of hell, but he chooses not to. Why?

Again, you are just assuming that there is no sin whose just punishment is eternal hell. You are wrong, and Scripture explains how you are wrong. But you are insisting that you, a mere mortal, have somehow plumbed the limits of possibility and determined that it is logically impossible for an eternal sin to exist. There is an eternal sin, and hell must exist for its punishment.

I don't know if I've lived a perfect life, but I sure as shit know I don't deserve an eternity of fiery suffering. I haven't committed any sins of such magnitude that I need God's son to die on a cross for me.

Under the law, you are guilty to the fullest extent that the prosecutor can charge you. So, you may commit an offense of jaywalking which we all agree is a minor offense; but suppose your act of jaywalking happened to cause a vehicle to veer around you and then strike a bicyclist by trying to avoid you, and then the bicyclist died. The prosecutor is not only going to charge you with the act of jaywalking itself, he's going to charge you for causing a homicide because your actions are what led to the sequence of events that caused a death. Going toe-to-toe with the justice of God is like that, but times infinity. You are certain that the butterfly-effect of all events spinning off from every single glance of your eyes, every smirk on your face, every word you said or didn't say, etc. etc. etc. through your whole life did not lead to terrible consequences you did not expect or anticipate or even know about? You don't know that, no one does, and it is for this reason that we are all guilty of far more than we can even imagine. This is step 1 of the fear of God.

But leaving all of that aside, the real issue is that sin is a slippery-slope. Let's suppose you have been an upright person in the generic sense of uprightness. You never cheated on a business deal, you never stole property, you never damaged anything without paying for it, you never grossly emotionally injured you partner, and so on, and so forth. The problem is not what you have done, but what you will do. We are all set up for failure in this world, and that setup is a demonic conspiracy to drag our souls down into hell, with effect. Sooner or later, if you continue in rejection of God, God will remove his restraining grace from you, and the corruption within will be exposed and the demonic realm will twist you into demonstrating who you really are, apart from God's grace. See the madness of Nebuchadnezzar, for example. Scripture pleads with us to avoid this horrific fate and, instead, to confess our guilt before God and to flee hell. Playing legal-eagle with the Almighty is a fool's errand. The example of all the saints is simple and direct: the saintly man is he who owns up to his sins before God, both the ones he knows about and the ones he does not, repents of them, and begs God for forgiveness. This is the path of righteousness that all saints have followed, and to which the Gospel calls us, because it is the only honest path. All pretense of righteousness before God is just a false-comforting lie and a delusion.

If I go to hell because I've "rejected God", that's kind of fucked up, and I would put the blame for that squarely on God considering he is all powerful and supreme.

You know who else are good at shifting the blame? Women. Think twice about pretending what you will or won't do when face-to-face with the Almighty Creator. Pride is unbecoming in men.

As far as I'm concerned, if he's claiming all powerful status, then the buck stops with him, and the blame lies with him.

Except the Bible debunks that satanic slander in the very first 3 chapters because that's the most obvious objection that every sinner has made to God, ever. Adam made your argument. Cain made your argument. Aaron made your argument. Judas implicitly made your argument. And so on, and so forth. Please, think twice... your accuser on Judgment Day will not be God, it will be your own conscience and the testimony of the saints who believed...

I sure as shit didn't create an eternal torture prison so I don't accept any explanation that says I "did that to myself".

That's exactly what the delusional man pouring gasoline over himself says, too. "I'm just pouring gas on myself, if a spark comes along and lights me on fire, that's God's fault because I haven't lit any sparks, I just poured gasoline all over myself."

This is super confusing because the conclusion I am drawing from this is that God seems to have power over guilt. Before Jesus died, guilt was collective, meaning I guess everyone was guilty by default (which seems super fucked up?), and then God sent his son down to die, and through that action guilt became individual instead of collective.

If God has this kind of power, to assign guilt at his discretion, how can it still be true that people "send themselves" to hell? What I'm reading from this, is it sounds like God is making that final determination. Whether someone is guilty or not.

It is confusing, but this is not "God's fault", it's the fault of two specific individuals: Satan and Adam. Tribal collective guilt is a brute fact of human society. Not sure how you find that confusing, because it's a brute reality we live in right now... how many knuckle-dragging "I STAND WITH UKRAINE" profile photos do you still have on your Facebook feed? I'm willing to bet at least one (if you have FB, that is). God isn't making anybody do that, that is human nature in action. Fallen human nature, that is. God did not create us this way, we became this way after Adam disobeyed and our nature became corrupted by sin (corrupt seed/descent). This corruption was precisely the situation the devil wanted from the beginning (compare Gen. 6:5 with John 8:44). So, you're once again blaming God for the deeds of his disobedient creatures.

If you actually want to understand God's moral character as he has revealed it -- instead of just projecting your own opinions onto Scripture and faith -- start with John 3:16. God, motivated by his love for his estranged creation, chose to sacrifice that which is most precious to him... his Son. He did this in order to make it possible for us to be saved from the worst consequences of our situation, that is, to escape eternal hell. He also preserved his eternal justice so that he is not a corrupt king winking at the savage crimes being committed in his kingdom under the pretense of "leniency". That God would make this sacrifice -- and it is a real sacrifice -- shows his true heart, that he is the only one who is truly good and when we, vile creatures, attempt to pass judgment against him, we are just flailing like a madman at apparitions that only we can see.

 

[TheTexan]

You're missing the point -- the point is that if you think that God's actions are not good, then either you're misunderstanding God's actions (which we are naturally prone to do, Isaiah 55:8,9) or your standard of good/bad is in error. That your standard of good/bad can be in error is obvious -- you have surely changed your mind in life about one or more moral questions, because you are fallible and you make mistakes. If you have even the mustard seed of humility required to acknowledge that you can make mistakes, then you can acknowledge that it is possible that you are not correctly understanding God's actions, or not correctly assessing them, or both.

It's entirely possible that I'm not understanding it correctly. I just think it's a little fucked up that I'll spend an eternity in hell for that mistake, which would in fact prove that I was right to begin with.

Adam disobeyed as a matter of his own wrong choice. Appealing to God's omnipotence is a category error -- God has the kind of control over the animals that you are faulting him for not exerting over Adam, yet, Adam was made in God's image, that is, Adam was given the capacity of reason, contemplation and free will, just as God has these, and unlike the animals who do not have these. So, pick a lane --- was God somehow wrong to create a being in his own image, with the capacity for reason, contemplation and deliberate choice, like Adam? If not, then how can you fault God for not reducing Adam to deterministic instincts, which is a mutually-exclusive condition with having free-will? The objection itself is an equivocation... as I said, pick a lane. In the post-lapsarian order, these faculties in man are corrupted and distorted by demonic deception, which is why the world is filled with evil (see again Gen. 6:1ff, especially 6:5).

I'm fine with free will and its consequences but it sounds like God has designed a system where I am eternally subject to the consequences of other people's free will (e.g., Adam's). If that's the way it has to be, because 1+1=2, then fine, sure. But mortal life is already like that, I thought eternal life was supposed to be different.

If I'm going to be eternally subject to the consequences of other people's free will, is there any way I can just opt out of all of it? Erase myself from eternity? I've had about enough of other people's "free will" affecting my life.

The death of Jesus is the death that we deserved, but did not receive. God arranged for his Son to make this sacrifice so that we can escape the death which we must necessarily receive as a result of sin, because that's how cause-and-effect work.

Maybe I'm just overthinking it but I don't understand the mechanics of how that works. Am I just not supposed to understand it, because mysterious ways etc?

I don't really see the cause and effect relationship between Jesus dying and me being saved.

Would you trade places? Would you go through Gethsemane and Golgotha? If not, then there is no basis on which you can trivialize the sacrifice of Jesus.

If the only two options are to die as Jesus died, or spend an eternity in hell, yea I'd do it.

It wouldn't even be a big deal to me honestly, if I knew eternal salvation was at the end of it. What's a few hours of suffering, compared to eternity?

Well, let's dial back the stakes a bit to make the question less abstract and easier to reason about. Suppose you live in a land that is ruled by some king or whatever. This king is reputed to be the most fair and just ruler who ever lived, etc. etc. One day, curious to see why everybody says he's so great, you decide to go watch the royal court of justice from a balcony where the public are allowed to spectate the proceedings. On that day, there happens to be a serial child rapist and murderer brought up to the dock. His charges are read out, and the evidence is shown. He's clearly completely guilty and quickly convicted. Then, the king rises -- "Because I am the most merciful king, and I am so good, I don't want anyone to be tortured or killed in my kingdom, even if they themselves have done a heinous wrong. In every other kingdom of the world, you would be drawn and quartered but I am a gracious king. So, I am hereby commuting your death-sentence and I am commuting your prison sentence to time served. You will be locked in the stocks for the afternoon and, afterwards, you will be released and you will have learned your lesson and you won't ever be naughty like that again."

Well, if you phrase it differently I might be on board, but the way you've phrased it here, I can't support. I oppose prisons in all of its forms, no matter who is doing the jailing, God or otherwise.

If you were to say God has a great kingdom and he simply doesn't allow evil people to enter his kingdom, then sure I can get on board with that. But sentencing people to eternity in a torture prison, as "justice"? I can never get on board with that, either in this life, or in the eternal.

Now, this is obvious injustice. Justice demands that punishment be proportional to the crime and the worst crimes must receive the worst punishment. Everybody lauds this king as supposedly just and merciful, but he's actually a monster, because he is implicitly giving his stamp of approval for all the crimes committed in this kingdom by refusing to punish them. In reality he is a protector of criminals, he is the opposite of just.

Sure, but an eternity of torture isn't justice. It's just sadistic. If a person is so evil that they can't exist in society, then they should be eradicated. I believe this also in our mortal world. If someone is so evil that they should be sentenced to a life in prison, then just end their life and be done with it.

Prison is slavery and slavery is wrong, in all of its forms, no matter who is doing it, God or otherwise.

And if God's prison is "good" because it's "good by definition", then I simply cannot get on board with that.

The technical question you are raising about hell is this: is there a sin whose only just punishment would be eternal hell? You cannot think of such a sin. So be it -- after all, you are merely a human. But Jesus informs us that there is such a sin (Mark 3:29) and that, indeed, the Jews who would go on to crucify him were committing that very sin. For God to refuse to give the appropriate punishment for that sin would be the opposite of justice, it would be injustice. Are you claiming that you know, for a fact, that there is no sin that deserves eternal punishment? You cannot know such a thing, because your knowledge is finite; to assert otherwise is simply pride.

Slavery itself is a sin. And sentencing someone to prison is enslaving them. You cannot provide justice for a sin by committing another sin.

If they have to be killed in order to stop them from committing further crimes, that's self defense, and not a sin.

But if you actively choose to throw them in a cage and feed them stale pieces of bread for 80 years or eternity, that's not justice, that's evil.

That's just my personal belief anyway.

The only way you can "live a good life" is by understanding that God is good, so your question is ill-framed.

So I can live a life being nice to people and harming nobody, as much as humanly possible, and the only way I can be saved from eternal damnation is to believe "God is good"?

Well, that kind of affirms that God isnt good. If God were good, he'd acknowledge that I lived a good life, and say hey Texan you're a good guy, welcome into my kingdom.

But nope. He says, "you tossed a candy wrapper on the street when you were 5, and you never acknowledged how good I am, so therefore you will burn for eternity."

How is that "good"? The only way that can be good is by definition.

If you're saying it's good because God is good by definition, then that's fine, I accept your view of that, but with the admittedly incomplete information that I have, the only conclusion I can reasonably come to is that it isnt good.

Under the law, you are guilty to the fullest extent that the prosecutor can charge you. So, you may commit an offense of jaywalking which we all agree is a minor offense; but suppose your act of jaywalking happened to cause a vehicle to veer around you and then strike a bicyclist by trying to avoid you, and then the bicyclist died. The prosecutor is not only going to charge you with the act of jaywalking itself, he's going to charge you for causing a homicide because your actions are what led to the sequence of events that caused a death. Going toe-to-toe with the justice of God is like that, but times infinity. You are certain that the butterfly-effect of all events spinning off from every single glance of your eyes, every smirk on your face, every word you said or didn't say, etc. etc. etc. through your whole life did not lead to terrible consequences you did not expect or anticipate or even know about? You don't know that, no one does, and it is for this reason that we are all guilty of far more than we can even imagine. This is step 1 of the fear of God.

Even if someone died as a result of jaywalking it would be a very limited sentence because everyone understands that it was accidental and accidents happen. He wouldn't be sentenced to an eternity in a torture prison for doing that.

So if God's justice is intended to work that way, fiery eternal torture as justice for jaywalking, then that just seems evil to me. Previously you said that God does not throw people in hell for small offenses. But here you seem to be saying that there are no small offenses. At least, no small offenses for anyone that does not believe "God is good". If you believe "God is good", then jaywalking is fine. If you don't believe "God is good", then jaywalking means eternal damnation.

I don't really see the "justice" in that.

You know who else are good at shifting the blame? Women. Think twice about pretending what you will or won't do when face-to-face with the Almighty Creator. Pride is unbecoming in men.

I'm fine with accepting responsibility for my own actions. You and God both seem to be asking me to accept responsibility for Adam's actions and Satan's actions.

I'm a good person and I won't be gaslighted into thinking otherwise. I don't deserve eternity in a torture prison, and that's not "pride", it's the truth.

So if it's God's design that I should suffer eternally for either jaywalking or for failing to acknowledge his goodness, then so be it.

If on the other hand he acknowledges that I'm a good person, and lets me enter his kingdom despite my previous apprehensions of his goodness, then and only then I will know he is "good".

If he rejects me from his kingdom over such trivial offenses, then he's just a prideful sadist, guilty of the same sins he tells us not to commit.

That's exactly what the delusional man pouring gasoline over himself says, too. "I'm just pouring gas on myself, if a spark comes along and lights me on fire, that's God's fault because I haven't lit any sparks, I just poured gasoline all over myself."

It's "delusional" to think I don't deserve eternal torture? That's kind of a fucked up thing to say.

It is confusing, but this is not "God's fault", it's the fault of two specific individuals: Satan and Adam. Tribal collective guilt is a brute fact of human society. Not sure how you find that confusing, because it's a brute reality we live in right now... how many knuckle-dragging "I STAND WITH UKRAINE" profile photos do you still have on your Facebook feed? I'm willing to bet at least one (if you have FB, that is). God isn't making anybody do that, that is human nature in action. Fallen human nature, that is. God did not create us this way, we became this way after Adam disobeyed and our nature became corrupted by sin (corrupt seed/descent). This corruption was precisely the situation the devil wanted from the beginning (compare Gen. 6:5 with John 8:44). So, you're once again blaming God for the deeds of his disobedient creatures.

Okay if the tradeoff is that we get free will but in exchange, Adam and Satan build an eternal torture prison, then that's fine I get it.

But if God's going to let me burn in eternal torture prison, for the crime of not acknowledging his goodness, I'd rather he just not have created me at all.

If you actually want to understand God's moral character as he has revealed it -- instead of just projecting your own opinions onto Scripture and faith -- start with John 3:16. God, motivated by his love for his estranged creation, chose to sacrifice that which is most precious to him... his Son. He did this in order to make it possible for us to be saved from the worst consequences of our situation, that is, to escape eternal hell. He also preserved his eternal justice so that he is not a corrupt king winking at the savage crimes being committed in his kingdom under the pretense of "leniency".
That God would make this sacrifice -- and it is a real sacrifice -- shows his true heart, that he is the only one who is truly good and when we, vile creatures, attempt to pass judgment against him, we are just flailing like a madman at apparitions that only we can see.

How exactly was it a real sacrifice? His son suffered for a few hours and then was reborn. If he lost his son permanently then yea I'd say that's a real sacrifice. But a few hours of suffering? That's just life. I'm sorry Jesus had to be human for a little while? What does that say for the rest of us?

 

[ClaytonB]

It's entirely possible that I'm not understanding it correctly. I just think it's a little fucked up that I'll spend an eternity in hell for that mistake, which would in fact prove that I was right to begin with.

You skipped the part where I explained that sin is a slippery slope. It starts small, and builds its way up. We see this all around us... the dope-head who started with a little pot, then started taking a harder substance, then started breaking into people's cars to steal things to sell to support his drug habit, and is now doing a 10-year prison sentence where he cuts people with razors for the Boss so he can get protection from the Boss. He has skidded down and down from an idle act of self-indulgence to grotesque, barbaric violence. I don't mean to suggest that everyone who smokes a little pot follows this trajectory, but some do, and they are a picture-lesson to us, showing how "minor" sins ultimately lead to hell.

Theologically, if you are guilty of any sin, you are guilty of all sin, James 2:10.

I'm fine with free will and its consequences but it sounds like God has designed a system where I am eternally subject to the consequences of other people's free will (e.g., Adam's). If that's the way it has to be, because 1+1=2, then fine, sure. But mortal life is already like that, I thought eternal life was supposed to be different.

"God has designed a system" <-- This is symptomatic of farcical thinking about the world. The world is not a rat's maze concocted my a mad scientist. The world, insofar as it retains the echoes of God's Edenic creation, is exactly what it seems to be ... a place for us (and all other earthly creatures) to live. Its purpose is to glorify God, because the glorification of God is the maximization of everything that God is, that is, his goodness, love, justice, holiness, peace, kindness, etc.

We are all affected by the actions of others. To think otherwise is yet another delusion.

If I'm going to be eternally subject to the consequences of other people's free will, is there any way I can just opt out of all of it? Erase myself from eternity? I've had about enough of other people's "free will" affecting my life.

I sympathize with what you're expressing here. The illustration I like to use is that this world is like being born into Auschwitz. It's a horrible place, we have no idea why we're here (apart from the Gospel), and the entities that run it are sadistic maniacs. They are also liars and feed us non-stop lies about the Allies who are arriving to rescue us, as the rumors say. The Gospel is that rumor. God's omnipotence does not obligate him to follow our whims and fancies about how he rescues us, anymore than the opinions of Auschwitz inmates were morally binding upon Eisenhower when considering the best routes to follow through Germany. All the help and aid we need has been provided through the Gospel, including supernatural deliverance, beginning with salvation itself, whereby our soul is cleansed from the filth of sin for the first time, and we are able to see both ourselves and the reality of this world clearly.

Maybe I'm just overthinking it but I don't understand the mechanics of how that works. Am I just not supposed to understand it, because mysterious ways etc?

There is an ineradicable element of mystery in the Gospel because it reveals to us God's triune being. Nevertheless, the Gospel is rational and we can understand the basics of it without clouding it with mystery. God is more rational than we are, he is exhaustively rational. Just because something is rational, doesn't mean it's simple or obvious.

I don't really see the cause and effect relationship between Jesus dying and me being saved.

The cause-and-effect relationship is because God is holy and just, and God must enforce his law without partiality. When God sets a law -- such as do not eat of the forbidden fruit -- this law is enforced impartially, otherwise, God would be open to being slandered by rebels like Satan. Which is exactly what Satan is baiting God to do. To exercise partiality and just wave his divine scepter to unilaterally "forgive" Adam for his disobedience. Instead, God did a miracle so surprising that the demonic powers never saw it coming, (1 Corinthians 2:8). He sent his Son to take Adam's death in our place, and thereby to lay the foundation for an entirely new creation, starting with an entirely new people (believers). Those who believe in Jesus are being rescued from the flames of God's wrath into which everything else in this place is already fated. From them, God is building a New Heavens and New Earth (Isaiah 65:17ff, Rev. 21:1ff, etc.) Jesus has the authority to found this new creation because he died to save it, that is, he purchased it from his Father. In this way, God's holiness is preserved, and we are able to receive forgiveness for our sins despite the devil's attempt to slander God's character and bait him into acting with unjust partiality. The death of Jesus is the only way that God could have done this, and this is what he did do, and that is why the Gospel is the eternal revelation of the glory of God to all of creation.

It wouldn't even be a big deal to me honestly, if I knew eternal salvation was at the end of it. What's a few hours of suffering, compared to eternity?

OK, if you can understand that, then you can understand that what the Gospel actually demands of us -- to repent of sin and give up our self-determination in lieu of God's kingdom on earth -- is a light and temporary inconvenience for an eternity of joy and peace in paradise.

Have you seen The Passion of the Christ? If not, I recommend you give it a watch... you seem to be under the ignorant perception that Roman crucifixion was a breeze. It was brutality on a scale unimaginable for moderns, right up there with the breaking wheel, which it's basically a more drawn-out version of.

If you were to say God has a great kingdom and he simply doesn't allow evil people to enter his kingdom, then sure I can get on board with that.

That's exactly what I've been saying through this whole thread.

Sure, but an eternity of torture isn't justice. It's just sadistic.

Again, you're just assuming without justification that there cannot be a sin whose only just punishment is eternal hell. There is such a sin, Mark 3:29.

Note that God doesn't "torture" anyone, yet another slander against him. In his wrath, God casts the wicked out into the abyss, where he has nothing further to do with them, because they are worthless. Revelation paints the imagery of a smoking furnace whose smoke rises forever in God's sight. God knows the wicked are tormented forever in hell because their smoke rises forever (Rev. 14:9-11) but he himself has no direct knowledge or involvement with such worthless matters any more than a king would bother trudging around in a cesspool to see to it that the cess is draining properly.

If a person is so evil that they can't exist in society, then they should be eradicated. I believe this also in our mortal world. If someone is so evil that they should be sentenced to a life in prison, then just end their life and be done with it.

Your seat-of-the-pants conception of justice is deficient. For example, you are completely overlooking the duty of reparation which used to be a core component of justice. With the rise of the modern nation-state, there is no longer any recompensatory aspect to criminal justice, or very little. The punishment is for "rehabilitation" or "prevention" or whatever. But traditional jursiprudence, which is closer to God's justice, requires that the aggressor make the victim whole. Making whole does not necessarily mean repayment in kind unless it's the kind of thing that can be repaid that way. Ultimately, it's up to the victim how they will accept repayment and, for many victims, retributive punishment is what they want. Which again, goes back to how hell exists. As believers in Jesus, we are explicitly commanded to give up our claim to just retribution against those who harm us, and the reason for this is that we have been forgiven without condition, so we are to forgive without condition (see Matt. 18:21-35). Just as Jesus's death on the cross made "space" for us to receive forgiveness from God, so our suffering at the hands of sinners without demanding justice against them makes space for God to forgive them, also. In hell, there is no forgiveness. Everyone is claiming all the rights to which they are entitled under justice. Hell is all justice, zero mercy. And as the saying goes, "eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" -- in hell, everyone is putting out everyone else's eyes, for all eternity.

Prison is slavery and slavery is wrong, in all of its forms, no matter who is doing it, God or otherwise.

The whole point of the Gospel is deliverance from slavery to the devil through the fear of death, Heb. 2:14,15. The Gospel is the original and only anti-slavery movement. The demonic realm has only started virtue-signaling about slavery after it was ended in the West as a result of the Gospel. All of a sudden, the demonic realm became full of accusations about how God is an evil slaver, etc. etc. Made up revisionist nonsense.

And if God's prison is "good" because it's "good by definition", then I simply cannot get on board with that.

That's not what I'm saying, go back and re-read.

If they have to be killed in order to stop them from committing further crimes, that's self defense, and not a sin.

Precisely. God allows sinful men to have some of the light of his kingdom for a duration in the hopes that they will repent but because the rebellion against God is truly an existential attack on him (see Isa. 14:13 and context), his expulsion of sinners from his kingdom is ultimately an act of self-defense. There is only one other place for them to go: the abyss, which is the lake of fire, wherein there is eternal torment because of the absence of God's goodness and grace. This is Bible 101. Sadly, it's so distorted and suppressed nowadays that practically no one knows it anymore.

So I can live a life being nice to people and harming nobody, as much as humanly possible, and the only way I can be saved from eternal damnation is to believe "God is good"?

You cannot actually be good, while thinking that God is something other than good. It's like saying you cannot actually be clean, while thinking that sterilization is dirty. If you do not understand that sterilization is the cleanest that something can be, then you don't understand what cleanness even is. You're medical understanding is out-of-whack.

Well, that kind of affirms that God isnt good. If God were good, he'd acknowledge that I lived a good life, and say hey Texan you're a good guy, welcome into my kingdom.

Well, that most certainly will not happen, Scripture explicitly says so. Only those who believe in Jesus, forsaking sin, and trusting him for salvation, will receive it, Matthew 25:31-46. "When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Mark 2:17)

But nope. He says, "you tossed a candy wrapper on the street when you were 5, and you never acknowledged how good I am, so therefore you will burn for eternity."

Please go re-read what I explained before about the butterfly-effect of sin, and how you ought to fear going toe-to-toe with the justice of the Almighty. If you were charged with something by the Feds and their lawyers were going through all your papers, you would be nervous because who knows what they might dig up in there. God's justice department is infinitely worse. That shouldn't be a big mental leap for you to make.

How is that "good"? The only way that can be good is by definition.

You're misunderstanding how I am using the phrase "by definition". I am not making a statement "you better believe it or else" or "you better stop asking questions". I'm saying that that is the ruler, that is the straight-edge, and if your angles aren't lining up with it, it's not the ruler that is wrong, it's your angles, and so you need to go back and figure out where you went wrong. Scripture tells us this, Nature reveals this to us, and the testimony of the saints and the martyrs back to the very beginning shows this. God is perfectly holy. If you are arriving at some other conclusion, you can be sure that your reasoning went wrong somewhere along the way.

Even if someone died as a result of jaywalking it would be a very limited sentence because everyone understands that it was accidental and accidents happen. He wouldn't be sentenced to an eternity in a torture prison for doing that.

If you jaywalk, and it causes a manslaughter, the prosecutor is going to try to put you away for the maximum possible amount of time he can for that. If you think otherwise, you are laughably naive. There is ZERO "understanding" in the US justice system.

So if God's justice is intended to work that way, fiery eternal torture as justice for jaywalking, then that just seems evil to me.

God's justice is justice to the uttermost. Between two people -- one who has been wronged, and the one who wronged him -- which side is justice on? Obviously, justice is on the side of the one was wronged. God's justice is on the side of the one was wronged, to the uttermost. In this case, he himself is the one wronged. That God does not plead in his own case is one reason why God is triune.

Previously you said that God does not throw people in hell for small offenses.

No, I didn't say that. I said that nobody "slips" into hell by accident. Those who go to hell go to hell for all their offenses, both great and small. And those who do not turn away from their rebellion against God will all surely become guilty of eternal sin, that is, they will be in hell for sin that manifestly cannot be justly punished with any lighter sentence than eternal hell. Nobody is going to be confused or baffled by the justice of what is happening on Judgment Day. Everyone will know that they are guilty, why they are guilty, and why they deserve to burn in hell forever for what they have done. That will happen either now, or later. Better to start understanding it now, and find salvation.

But here you seem to be saying that there are no small offenses. At least, no small offenses for anyone that does not believe "God is good". If you believe "God is good", then jaywalking is fine. If you don't believe "God is good", then jaywalking means eternal damnation.

There are small offenses and large offenses, but whoever breaks the law in any point has broken it at every point, James 2:10. This is what is meant by the fear of God, and this is the reason why everyone ought to understand that they cannot go toe-to-toe with God's justice. Everyone who rebels against God and asserts their righteousness before him will be cut to ribbons with a hurricane of razor-blades that is the justice and holiness of God. None of us stands even the slightest chance of justifying ourselves before God. We are all completely guilty.

I'm fine with accepting responsibility for my own actions. You and God both seem to be asking me to accept responsibility for Adam's actions and Satan's actions.

Your actions suffice. I'm trying my best to answer your unending flurry of skeptical objections. A proper treatment of all of these questions requires a very large book called a Systematic Theology, often 1,500+ pages. You want it all in bullet-points and then complain that there is some very fine point of theology that was not addressed. It's ridiculous.

I'm a good person and I won't be gaslighted into thinking otherwise.

You never told even a single lie, no matter how small? You've never done anything wrong??

If on the other hand he acknowledges that I'm a good person, and lets me enter his kingdom despite my previous apprehensions of his goodness, then and only then I will know he is "good".

Yeah, that's a recipe for an appointment with the Almighty on the Road to Damascus. I pray that God breaks your pride so that you will not be lost entirely.

It's "delusional" to think I don't deserve eternal torture?

It's delusional to think you can justify yourself before holy God. Absolutely no son of Adam can. We are all guilty of sin, and much more sin than we are even aware of.

Okay if the tradeoff is that we get free will but in exchange, Adam and Satan build an eternal torture prison, then that's fine I get it.

That's not an accurate summary but I hope that perhaps you're getting some concept of what Scripture teaches about this.

How exactly was it a real sacrifice? His son suffered for a few hours and then was reborn. If he lost his son permanently then yea I'd say that's a real sacrifice. But a few hours of suffering? That's just life. I'm sorry Jesus had to be human for a little while? What does that say for the rest of us?

Again, the first part of wisdom is to temper your words. You will answer for all of them, and there's no benefit to you to run up the bill for rhetorical points -- after all, what if you're wrong?

The sacrifice of the Son cannot be separated from God's triune being. Yes, it is a mystery, but it is not a farce. The sacrifice at the Cross is not only a real sacrifice, it is the most extreme sacrifice of any, ever. The reason this is hard for some people to understand is because we're like pigs living in a pig-sty... we're so accustomed to sinning and being sinned against that we don't even smell the pig-shit anymore. For Jesus to come to earth at all and take on the form of humanity was, in itself, humiliating; theologians call it the humiliation of Christ. And it was bad enough that he had to live here in the filth that we are accustomed to but, to add insult to injury, he was repudiated as a blasphemer by his own people, and then murdered on false charges. And not just any murder, a public murder of the lowest and most repugnant form. So barbaric was crucifixion that it was illegal for a Roman citizen to be crucified. They might be put to death in any number of ways, but crucifixion was banned for use on Roman citizens.

Crucifixion was brutal in a way that we don't really understand any more. Even the depiction in PoTC is sanitized, obviously, but I recommend you give it a watch because you don't even understand what you're talking about.

 

[TheTexan]

"God has designed a system" <-- This is symptomatic of farcical thinking about the world. The world is not a rat's maze concocted my a mad scientist. The world, insofar as it retains the echoes of God's Edenic creation, is exactly what it seems to be ... a place for us (and all other earthly creatures) to live. Its purpose is to glorify God, because the glorification of God is the maximization of everything that God is, that is, his goodness, love, justice, holiness, peace, kindness, etc.

We are all affected by the actions of others. To think otherwise is yet another delusion.

Ok, so if God didn't design this system, who did?

I sympathize with what you're expressing here. The illustration I like to use is that this world is like being born into Auschwitz. It's a horrible place, we have no idea why we're here (apart from the Gospel), and the entities that run it are sadistic maniacs. They are also liars and feed us non-stop lies about the Allies who are arriving to rescue us, as the rumors say. The Gospel is that rumor. God's omnipotence does not obligate him to follow our whims and fancies about how he rescues us, anymore than the opinions of Auschwitz inmates were morally binding upon Eisenhower when considering the best routes to follow through Germany. All the help and aid we need has been provided through the Gospel, including supernatural deliverance, beginning with salvation itself, whereby our soul is cleansed from the filth of sin for the first time, and we are able to see both ourselves and the reality of this world clearly.

Well there's a pretty big difference. The parents of the people born in Auschwitz were in there right there next to them, and if they had a choice, they'd probably prefer not to deliver a baby at all than to deliver a baby in Auschwitz.

God is living comfortable in his kingdom and deliberately chose to bring people into a world of suffering. He offers people salvation but he also doesn't offer anyone to opt out of existence. He brought men into this world, so it follows that he can bring men out of this world, yet people aren't given that choice. People are only given the choice of either obey His command, or suffer eternally. He's leaving out the 3rd option that is presumably within his power, which is to opt out of both of those choices and simply cease to exist.

If he's bringing people into this world without an option to leave it, that's essentially it's own prison. Eternal existence is a prison. Heaven or hell, there is no escape from either. And that is His design. The deeper we get into this the more I'm convinced that God is evil and he's simply playing games with people's souls.

Your seat-of-the-pants conception of justice is deficient. For example, you are completely overlooking the duty of reparation which used to be a core component of justice. With the rise of the modern nation-state, there is no longer any recompensatory aspect to criminal justice, or very little. The punishment is for "rehabilitation" or "prevention" or whatever. But traditional jursiprudence, which is closer to God's justice, requires that the aggressor make the victim whole. Making whole does not necessarily mean repayment in kind unless it's the kind of thing that can be repaid that way. Ultimately, it's up to the victim how they will accept repayment and, for many victims, retributive punishment is what they want. Which again, goes back to how hell exists.

Well, you kind of really nailed the point in that last sentence. Hell exists because people want retributive punishment. And hell is evil. Creating hell is evil (which I believe you agreed with earlier). So if retributive punishment creates hell, it follows that retributive punishment is evil. Which it is.

I'm all for reparative punishments. Restore someone whole, as much as can be possible. Retributive punishments, such as life in prison, is just petty domination over your fellow man. Evil.

The whole point of the Gospel is deliverance from slavery to the devil through the fear of death, Heb. 2:14,15. The Gospel is the original and only anti-slavery movement. The demonic realm has only started virtue-signaling about slavery after it was ended in the West as a result of the Gospel. All of a sudden, the demonic realm became full of accusations about how God is an evil slaver, etc. etc. Made up revisionist nonsense.

I don't know if that's quite accurate. From what I understand, is that the Bible is pretty clear that God is the only one with true sovereignty. And if you don't have sovereignty, by definition, that means you don't have authority over yourself, e.g., you are to some degree a slave.

You might say that God's slavery is the good kind of slavery, and I wouldn't even argue about that. If heaven means I'm god's slave but I get my 72 virgins, I'm fine with that, that's pretty good slavery. But to say God is "anti-slavery" seems dismissive of the pretty well understood concept I think that he's the only one with sovereignty in his kingdom. It's not an an-cap paradise, it's a monarchy.

You cannot actually be good, while thinking that God is something other than good. It's like saying you cannot actually be clean, while thinking that sterilization is dirty. If you do not understand that sterilization is the cleanest that something can be, then you don't understand what cleanness even is. You're medical understanding is out-of-whack.

You said earlier that God is good by definition because the alternative is just unthinkable.

I'd rather face that truth head on than just assume God is good by definition. Maybe God is evil, and if that is the reality of the situation, I'd rather know that truth, than live in ignorance and bliss in God's kingdom that he allowed me to live in because I overlooked that truth?

You also said God is truth, so am I not seeking God by seeking truth, rather than simply accepting on faith that God is good?

Please go re-read what I explained before about the butterfly-effect of sin, and how you ought to fear going toe-to-toe with the justice of the Almighty. If you were charged with something by the Feds and their lawyers were going through all your papers, you would be nervous because who knows what they might dig up in there. God's justice department is infinitely worse. That shouldn't be a big mental leap for you to make.

Just because the Feds do it also, it doesn't make it right.

You're misunderstanding how I am using the phrase "by definition". I am not making a statement "you better believe it or else" or "you better stop asking questions". I'm saying that that is the ruler, that is the straight-edge, and if your angles aren't lining up with it, it's not the ruler that is wrong, it's your angles, and so you need to go back and figure out where you went wrong. Scripture tells us this, Nature reveals this to us, and the testimony of the saints and the martyrs back to the very beginning shows this. God is perfectly holy. If you are arriving at some other conclusion, you can be sure that your reasoning went wrong somewhere along the way.

I will always do what I think is right. If the Gospel tells me that I'm wrong, then I guess I am wrong.

If I end up burning in hell as a consequence of doing what I think is right, then I suppose that's my fate.

If you jaywalk, and it causes a manslaughter, the prosecutor is going to try to put you away for the maximum possible amount of time he can for that. If you think otherwise, you are laughably naive. There is ZERO "understanding" in the US justice system.

And zero understanding in the eternal judgement system, it would seem.

No, I didn't say that. I said that nobody "slips" into hell by accident. Those who go to hell go to hell for all their offenses, both great and small. And those who do not turn away from their rebellion against God will all surely become guilty of eternal sin, that is, they will be in hell for sin that manifestly cannot be justly punished with any lighter sentence than eternal hell.

Again, you're using the word punishment. This implies that God isn't simply keeping people out of his kingdom, he's actively trying to punish people. Retributive punishment is how hell was created to begin with. So if God is punishing people, then it's God that is creating hell.

Nobody is going to be confused or baffled by the justice of what is happening on Judgment Day. Everyone will know that they are guilty, why they are guilty, and why they deserve to burn in hell forever for what they have done. That will happen either now, or later. Better to start understanding it now, and find salvation.

When I burn in hell the only things I'm going to be guilty of is jaywalking and not bowing to his Lord's sovereignty. Of course it's the latter that is the main offense.

And if I do burn for that, I can live with that decision. I'd rather live in hell than kneel to someone that is evil. And I'm not saying that God is actually evil. But I am saying that if you are right about how you describe him, then yea he's evil. If you're wrong and he turns out to be a good dude then I will gladly kneel.

But if you're right, and he condemns me to hell for merely not praising his name, then I will spend the rest of eternity trying to defeat him. And if it's literally impossible to defeat him as the Gospel says, so be it, I will still spend the rest of eternity trying.

You never told even a single lie, no matter how small? You've never done anything wrong??

Nothing to deserve an eternity in a torture prison. And if God says otherwise then he's just an asshole. He's not perfect either, he won't let me escape this eternal existence. Although it's presumably within his power. And that's a far more guilty thing than anything I've ever done.

Yeah, that's a recipe for an appointment with the Almighty on the Road to Damascus. I pray that God breaks your pride so that you will not be lost entirely.

Based on what you've said, I'm pretty sure I'm well past that point. And I'm OK with that.

Again, the first part of wisdom is to temper your words. You will answer for all of them, and there's no benefit to you to run up the bill for rhetorical points -- after all, what if you're wrong?

Maybe I am wrong. I'm just seeking truth. Which is what I thought I was supposed to do. I will always do what I think is right, and if that ends up landing me in eternal torture prison, that is my fate and I am fine with it.

The sacrifice of the Son cannot be separated from God's triune being. Yes, it is a mystery, but it is not a farce. The sacrifice at the Cross is not only a real sacrifice, it is the most extreme sacrifice of any, ever. The reason this is hard for some people to understand is because we're like pigs living in a pig-sty... we're so accustomed to sinning and being sinned against that we don't even smell the pig-shit anymore. For Jesus to come to earth at all and take on the form of humanity was, in itself, humiliating; theologians call it the humiliation of Christ.

So basically it insulted his pride? I thought pride was a sin.

Life on earth is pretty much defined by pain. We all go through varying amounts of pain, some more than others (see: Aafia Siddiqui). So if Jesus living as a human a little while is this huge giant sacrifice, that kind of says a magnitude of how shitty this life on earth is doesnt it? More of an observation than a question.

And it was bad enough that he had to live here in the filth that we are accustomed to but, to add insult to injury, he was repudiated as a blasphemer by his own people, and then murdered on false charges. And not just any murder, a public murder of the lowest and most repugnant form. So barbaric was crucifixion that it was illegal for a Roman citizen to be crucified. They might be put to death in any number of ways, but crucifixion was banned for use on Roman citizens.

Have you watched The Passion of the Christ? If not, I recommend you take a watch. Crucifixion was brutal in a way that we don't really understand any more. Even the depiction in PoTC is sanitized, obviously.

I haven't seen Passion but I have a pretty good guess what it's about. I might watch it later.

In any case, I think I mostly understand your position, and made up my mind. So feel free to end the discussion whenever.

I've come to the conclusion that your God is a grade-A jerk, based on:

1) He brought me into a world of suffering where the only escape is to submit to his supreme dominion,
2) He won't allow me to cease to exist although it's presumably within his power

So yea, if that means I burn in hell, I'm fine with that choice. And if I spend eternity trying and failing to defeat him, I'm fine with that also. I will always do what I think is right, and if that lands me in hell, then that is my fate.

If God ends up welcoming me (in direct conflict with the scripture), then I'll still be a little pissed that he won't allow me to cease to exist, but I'll just have to make do with 72 virgins which is fine.

 

[ClaytonB]

Well, as always, your answers are unserious. However, the points you raise are worth answering for the sake of lurkers, so I will do so.

Ok, so if God didn't design this system, who did?

It doesn't really matter. The Bible contrasts "this world" with the world God created -- God did not bring about anything that pertains to this world, that is, God is not the creator or cause of death, disease, aging, sickness, war, murder, and so on. All of that belongs to the satanic world order. Whenever a skeptic points to some terrible condition in the world and blames God for it, they are making a ridiculous logical error because God specifically commanded Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree that leads to this place of the knowledge of good and evil. They already knew the good, what was added to them was the knowledge of evil. This place is that place where the knowledge of evil is added. I think you have a pretty good grasp of evil, no? So do I, so does anyone who has been here for more than a few years and isn't a complete moron. In short, this world-order bears the image of its ruler, who is Satan, Matt. 4:1ff, etc.

God is living comfortable in his kingdom and deliberately chose to bring people into a world of suffering. He offers people salvation but he also doesn't offer anyone to opt out of existence. He brought men into this world, so it follows that he can bring men out of this world, yet people aren't given that choice. People are only given the choice of either obey His command, or suffer eternally. He's leaving out the 3rd option that is presumably within his power, which is to opt out of both of those choices and simply cease to exist.

The problem is that you're toying with matters of authority that are above your pay-grade, and you have no idea what you're doing. It's like a village idiot trying to do surgery on himself, with no understanding of any aspect of anatomy or surgical procedures. The best thing he can do is to lay down the scalpel and stop injuring himself. Spiritually, that's what you need to do... stop arguing with God, and stop injuring yourself because that's the only thing that can come from arguing with God, just as the only thing that can come from arguing against physics (which you never raise an objection to) would be to injure yourself.

The deeper we get into this the more I'm convinced that God is evil and he's simply playing games with people's souls.

None are so blind as those who choose not to see.

Well, you kind of really nailed the point in that last sentence. Hell exists because people want retributive punishment. And hell is evil. Creating hell is evil (which I believe you agreed with earlier). So if retributive punishment creates hell, it follows that retributive punishment is evil. Which it is.

Self-defense is a kind of retributive justice. You strike me, I strike you back, and unlike you, I was just to strike you, you were unjust to strike me. So, you're not even logically consistent.

As to the unforgiveness of hell, you are literally demanding that very thing when you challenge God's holiness and when you assert that you can stand before God's justice as a "good person". You are demanding not to be forgiven in the Gospel. And if you persist, and God does not break your rebellion, then yes, you will get exactly what you are asking for.

I don't know if that's quite accurate. From what I understand, is that the Bible is pretty clear that God is the only one with true sovereignty. And if you don't have sovereignty, by definition, that means you don't have authority over yourself, e.g., you are to some degree a slave.

Yes, God is sovereign and man was created sovereign over the earthly creation, which God delegated to him. Which responsibility Adam abdicated through disobedience, which led to the mess we are currently in, including the practice of human slavery. So, no, God is not a slaver nor does he condone slavery.

But to say God is "anti-slavery" seems dismissive of the pretty well understood concept I think that he's the only one with sovereignty in his kingdom. It's not an an-cap paradise, it's a monarchy.

Well, your "understanding" is ridiculously shallow and wrong on most points, including this. You are mixing earthly and heavenly concepts that don't belong together. God is sovereign over all of creation, meaning, over the heavenly and earthly creatures. Adam was created sovereign over the earthly creatures. Man ruling man is something that came with violence after the fall, it was nowhere in God's good order.

You said earlier that God is good by definition because the alternative is just unthinkable. I'd rather face that truth head on than just assume God is good by definition.

You're still completely missing the point. The "by definition" part is about who God is. When you say, "I'd rather face the truth head on" (that God is not good), you're simply not talking about the God of the Bible, you're talking about some other deity you've invented in your imagination because by definition of who God is, he is good. Any other kind of "God" is not the God of Scripture, he's something else you've invented in your mind.

Maybe God is evil

It's a self-refuting thought. Do plants grow in poison? Do animals thrive with disease? Is life possible within necrosis? Obviously not. Death and evil are the breakdown of order, structure and life. Life is the opposite of all of those things, it is inherently harmonious. Evil cannot be the source of being, because it is by its very nature opposed to the things that make being possible. You yourself exude all kinds of antithetical ideas regarding ending your existence, and so on. Those ideas come from that which is evil, they do not come from God. In short, you keep talking about some other entity that is not the God of Scripture, who crated us, and trying to strawman him with your caricatures. It's an exercise in futility. Imagine a being you call "God" however you like, if he does not comport to the God of Scripture, it's just some figment of your imagination.

You also said God is truth, so am I not seeking God by seeking truth, rather than simply accepting on faith that God is good?

Truth and faith are confluent, you are constructing a false-dichotomy between them. If you are indeed seeking truth, then it is necessarily the case that you will arrive at the Gospel, because as I said, God is the Truth. John 14:6, "I am ... the Truth."

Just because the Feds do it also, it doesn't make it right.

Way to miss the point yet again. The point is that you would quite reasonable feel afraid of your records/etc being combed through by the Feds because they have a million ways to charge people for federal crimes. The Feds are unjust but they are thorough. God is just, and he is much more thorough. That's the point.

And zero understanding in the eternal judgement system, it would seem.

Does a king "understand" the enemy army at his gates? Or does he start lobbing missiles at them? God's "understanding" extends until the time of your bodily death, or until the Second Coming, whichever comes first. After that, he will stop "understanding" and you will be judged, like all men.

Again, you're using the word punishment. This implies that God isn't simply keeping people out of his kingdom, he's actively trying to punish people. Retributive punishment is how hell was created to begin with. So if God is punishing people, then it's God that is creating hell.

God's being and kingdom are cosmic. If you are shut out of his kingdom, that is one and the same as being in the lake of fire. Everything that is good is already in God's kingdom. Thus, there is nothing good outside of God's kingdom, that is, there is nothing good in the lake fire, just torment and suffering. This is just logic 101.

But I am saying that if you are right about how you describe him, then yea he's evil.

Rather, your mind is carnal and what it calls good, God has shown to be evil, and vice-versa:

Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. (Romans 8:5-8)

If you're wrong and he turns out to be a good dude then I will gladly kneel.

You will kneel in any case, like everyone, Philippians 2:5-11.

But if you're right, and he condemns me to hell for merely not praising his name, then I will spend the rest of eternity trying to defeat him. And if it's literally impossible to defeat him as the Gospel says, so be it, I will still spend the rest of eternity trying.

You're flying by the seat of your pants and have no idea what you're even talking about.

He's not perfect either

He is absolutely perfect. And you've implicitly acknowledge that you have sinned, which is obvious anyway.

I'm just seeking truth.

If that's actually true, then it is inevitable that you will end up at the Gospel.

Life on earth is pretty much defined by pain. We all go through varying amounts of pain, some more than others (see: Aafia Siddiqui). So if Jesus living as a human a little while is this huge giant sacrifice, that kind of says a magnitude of how shitty this life on earth is doesnt it? More of an observation than a question.

Yes, you could describe this world as something of an antechamber to hell. It's a horrible place. It was not God's intention for us to be here, that happened through the disobedience of Adam who conspired with the rebellious serpent, that is, Satan.

 

[TheTexan]

Self-defense is a kind of retributive justice. You strike me, I strike you back, and unlike you, I was just to strike you, you were unjust to strike me. So, you're not even logically consistent.

Self defense isn't retributive. It's necessary. You're not doing it to punish, you're doing it to stop.

There's a big difference.

Yes, God is sovereign and man was created sovereign over the earthly creation, which God delegated to him. Which responsibility Adam abdicated through disobedience, which led to the mess we are currently in, including the practice of human slavery. So, no, God is not a slaver nor does he condone slavery.

If God won't let me leave this eternal existence that he brought me into, then by definition, I am his slave. Whether I am in hell or in heaven, he is holding me in this existence against my will.

The bible as far as I know doesn't even touch this subject, because there is no good explanation for it. It's slavery.

The point is that you would quite reasonable feel afraid of your records/etc being combed through by the Feds because they have a million ways to charge people for federal crimes. The Feds are unjust but they are thorough. God is just, and he is much more thorough. That's the point.

If you call that justice, then I don't want any part of it.

Does a king "understand" the enemy army at his gates? Or does he start lobbing missiles at them? God's "understanding" extends until the time of your bodily death, or until the Second Coming, whichever comes first. After that, he will stop "understanding" and you will be judged, like all men.

He tells us that we should forgive people and treat people the way we would want to be treated. But then he treats us like garbage unless we follow the gospel exactly.

That's not how I treat people, and I doubt that's how you treat people.

You will kneel in any case, like everyone, Philippians 2:5-11.

What the fuck? I thought you just said man has sovereignty over earthly creations.

This is some doublespeak shit right here Clayton. If man has sovereignty over the earthly creations, they're still made to kneel to Jesus? What the fuck is that shit?

 

[ClaytonB]

If man has sovereignty over the earthly creations, they're still made to kneel to Jesus?

All creatures in heaven and earth must and will bow to Jesus because God must settle accounts regarding the creaturely rebellion that started no later than the Garden of Eden. God is qualitatively unlike us, watch the RC Sproul video I linked above. Falsely equating yourself to God changes nothing in that respect, it just puts you in hazard of hellfire. God's will is to redeem and restore all in this fallen creation that he has chosen to restore, and he has done that through the Gospel. But every knee must bow, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord because the rebellion against God is ultimately a power move, 1 Corinthians 4:20. The rebellion has not been rooted out until all the brigands and traitors are forced to kneel if they will not give up their arms and kneel willingly. You can profess not to understand but if you are actually a moral person, as you claim to be, then when you think about this long enough, you will eventually understand it. The only other alternative is that you're part of the rebellion or joining it, which you've indicated above you're perfectly fine with. Hence, this ultimately comes down to a question of power, not just ideas.

 

[TheTexan]

All creatures in heaven and earth must and will bow to Jesus because God must settle accounts regarding the creaturely rebellion that started no later than the Garden of Eden. God is qualitatively unlike us, watch the RC Sproul video I linked above. Falsely equating yourself to God changes nothing in that respect, it just puts you in hazard of hellfire. God's will is to redeem and restore all in this fallen creation that he has chosen to restore, and he has done that through the Gospel. But every knee must bow, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord because the rebellion against God is ultimately a power move, 1 Corinthians 4:20. The rebellion has not been rooted out until all the brigands and traitors are forced to kneel if they will not give up their arms and kneel willingly.

Okay well then men are not sovereign in hell, and we are indeed his slaves.

God is no better than than Israel carpet bombing Gaza. Except God is worse because he has the ability to relieve his victims of this eternal torture and he denies them that. He'd rather keep us around as his eternal torture playthings.

You can profess not to understand but if you are actually a moral person, as you claim to be, then when you think about this long enough, you will eventually understand it. The only other alternative is that you're part of the rebellion or joining it, which you've indicated above you're perfectly fine with. Hence, this ultimately comes down to a question of power, not just ideas.

I don't understand slavery and I never will.

 

[TheTexan]

There is no middle ground with Jesus Christ; those who are not against Him are on His side, but likewise, those who are not with Him are against Him, and those who do not help Him gather are like Satan the wolf, that catches and scatters the sheep, and seeks to kill and destroy them. (Matthew 12:30)

The only thing I've ever asked for is to just be left the fuck alone and apparently that's too much to ask even in the afterlife. Even in the afterlife, God is going to attack me and make me kneel, because I'm a "rebel". Fuck the afterlife Clayton I don't want any part of it and fuck your vengeful spiteful dick of a God.