And Hells come back to haunt me

[catfish]

(bolded by me)
'Nuff said. Now do I go to hell because I don't believe your interpretation?

Nope. Why are you giving me trouble because I'm honest enough to admit that I could be wrong? So could you, of course. My position is this: you have come to a conclusion that the majority of the followers of your religion don't seem to hold. Why is it that they're all wrong, and you're right?

Not that it really matters to me, since I don't take the book to conform to reality anyway, and no matter the interpretation I'd still find any form of punishment for the sins I've committed to be ridiculous. But if you're going to make an argument, the least you can do is defend it.

I think my main issue is that you arbitrarly pick a definition that suits your agenda whilst admitting that you could be wrong. Based on what? Popularity? Or because the bible says so? I know why they would want it to be "eternal", but why would you?

I know the definition of the word(s) and their usage as do you. I've had people argue for the literal interpretation which I'm ok with. The Greek literal interpretation though. What happens to eternal if you read it that way?
I also think the term "eternities of eternities" makes no sense while "age of the ages" does. But my reasons don't matter, I don't believe that crap.

So you don't care about what it says, admit it could mean something else, and argue for the "nasty" popular opinion?
And, are you against punishment for crimes too?