Help me not fear heaven/hell

[Abaddon_ire]

Wrong. Words do not have meanings, they have usages. There is a difference.

I guess you will argue over anything. Words to have meaning and they have usages. Those 2 things are very different and one "usually" depends on the other. To spell it out for you, the usage you had was with an incorrectly defined word. But I digress, so on to your points above.

You are wrong. Take, for example, the word "nice". As in "He is a nice man". It used to refer to someone being an idiot. Hence words merely have usages, not intrinsic meanings.

-You don't need God to have morality. You can be subjectively or socially moral without any God. Your definition of perfectly well is what matters here.

Then what need of any "god"? You are now arguing that your god is utterly irrelevant. Suits me. I agree. Your god is utterly irrelevant to morality. Now what?

-You call salvation blackmail, bribery and extortion. Your definition of salvation is relevant here.

"Love and obey me or burn in hell for eternity". Does that not even slightly resemble a threat?

-If you don't have any evidence for something existing the default position would be that it's unlikely, not impossible.

Correct. How dumb are you really? That's why I am an atheist. No evidence has been forthcoming for any of the thousands of claimed gods. Got some? Of course you don't.

You and I don't know what's on the other side. Evidence is the definition in question there.

The "other side" of what? I have had one of those NDE things, so I bet I know a bit more than you about it. And I have spent years immersing myself in every alternative anything. They all have one attribute in common. No evidence.

- God is omnipotent. He/she/it/housecat has logical limitations. Thiessen defines omnipotent as: “God is all-powerful and able to do whatever he wills. Since his will is limited by his nature, God can do everything that is in harmony with his perfections.” See definitions matter.

Do you not realise that you simply claimed that god is omnipotent because he isn't? That's fatuous. And Thiessen's excuses are risible. If god has limitations then he is by definition NOT omnipotent. Anything further is simply you making up any damn excuse for your god. At all costs.

Any moment now, you are going to backpeddle into the "it's a mystery" bucket of crap.

Well, if "it's a mystery", then it explains fuck all to anyone, doesn't it.