Questions for theists.

[tackattack]

If we're working on the assumption that it does exist, and we'd like to discuss it's attributes if it does exist, then I think we've been over that. Apart from thatI think I've made my points here.

Why is it that you would require me to work from that assumption in the first place? Assuming makes an ass of you and me. Is this seriously the only way a conversation can be had about these subjects? "Let's just assume I'm correct about something and then I'll tell you about a related subject that depends on this assumption as though it weren't a litany of platitudes".....? You'd like to discuss those attributes which you believe in (dismissing those attributes which others believe in) without having anything to offer as to why you are the guy with the solid lead on the subject in the first place?

Why? Because it was implied in the OP. Without discussing within the confines of the OP's implications I'm not asking you to assume I'm right, I'm just preventing this from degenerating into a fruitles debate where
Ao what is this?
T:I believe this is this because this this and this.
A:That's worthless because you still haven't proven this exists! Ha atheists +1

That happens so often. If the question was genuine, I went with it's assumptions because that's the honest response. I'm more than willing to discuss other viewpoints about Hell and the afterlife. That again though presumes, for the sake of the discussion, that it won't degenerate into someone inevitably popping up with.. and now prove Hell is a real place.