On Hell and Forgiveness

[Amarok]

1. Love is a clear example of a moral virtue (if not the clearest).

No. That is an emotional state 

2. Killing babies for no reason constitutes a lack of love and therefore a lack of moral virtue.

Then your god is immoral.

3. Yahweh is considered all-loving and therefore defined as having the greatest possible moral virtue at all times.

No, yahweh kills babies for no reason and is therefore by definition immoral

4. Positive outcomes (harmony, structure, creation, trust, relationships) are better the Negative Outcomes (chaos, destruction, distrust, isolation) for conscious creatures

Sure. your god has no interest in those. Why?

5. Greater moral virtue is better than lesser moral virtue because it regulates other attributes for more positive/less negative outcomes. 

Sure. But your god is always the lesser and even obviates morals. Why?

6. More positive outcomes is better than more negative outcomes.

OK that is just stupid and flies in the face of your god.

7. Therefore Yahweh is greater than a god that kills babies.

Except your god kills babies. And that is unforgiveable.

Oh no Abbadon when there invisible friend does it there most be some higher reason that they can't tell about .But it's gotta be their because god is good because he's good because he's good .....

And note Steve actually has not shown that killing babies for no reason (i'm not sure that's possible ) is wrong .

[GrandizerII]

No, the Bible clearly shows that Jesus experienced fear. I'm on my phone now, so can't quote Bible passages, but you should know which ones I'm referring to if you really are a theologically astute Christian.

Looking forward to that reference...

You know exactly what I'm talking about. Don't play dense.

And Jesus is God. So Jesus the God experienced fear. Jesus the man and Jesus the God are not two different people according to mainstream Christianity.

Precision in language is so underrated! Jesus is not ONLY God. So when one is describing attributes of God, one is NOT also describing attributes of Jesus. I should not have to point that out to one with a "good understanding of the Christian theology". So, it unless you can produce that passage that says Jesus feared for himself you are wrong on multiple levels. Man...you are efficient!

I sure as hell am efficient!

You want precision in language. Here: If Jesus the man experienced some weakness (such as fear), then Jesus the God (who is the exact same person as Jesus the man) also experienced that weakness. That's the logical implication of such a paradox. Not my problem it doesn't suit your beliefs.

Reminds me somewhat of that debate regarding whether Mary is the mother of God or not. If there's one thing Catholics got it more right than Protestants on, it's that following logically from the doctrine of Christology, Mary is indeed the mother of God (the Son).

[LadyForCamus]

Grandizer is back!!! ❤️

*happy dance*

[Amarok]

Looking forward to that reference...

You know exactly what I'm talking about. Don't play dense.

Precision in language is so underrated! Jesus is not ONLY God. So when one is describing attributes of God, one is NOT also describing attributes of Jesus. I should not have to point that out to one with a "good understanding of the Christian theology". So, it unless you can produce that passage that says Jesus feared for himself you are wrong on multiple levels. Man...you are efficient!

I sure as hell am efficient!

You want precision in language. Here: If Jesus the man experienced some weakness (such as fear), then Jesus the God (who is the exact same person as Jesus the man) also experienced that weakness. That's the logical implication of such a paradox. Not my problem it doesn't suit your beliefs.

Reminds me somewhat of that debate regarding whether Mary is the mother of God or not. If there's one thing Catholics got it more right than Protestants on, it's that following logically from the doctrine of Christology, Mary is indeed the mother of God (the Son).

The Trinity is nonsense to begin with

---

Grandizer is back!!! ❤️

*happy dance*

I know it wonderful having another great mind to strike down apologist nonsense

[GrandizerII]

The Trinity is nonsense to begin with

Trinity, Hypostatic Union, and several other Christian doctrines.

[SteveII]

Looking forward to that reference...

You know exactly what I'm talking about. Don't play dense.

Wow! I though you would just drop it when you couldn't find it. You want to double down. No, I don't know what you are talking about. Please provide 

Precision in language is so underrated! Jesus is not ONLY God. So when one is describing attributes of God, one is NOT also describing attributes of Jesus. I should not have to point that out to one with a "good understanding of the Christian theology". So, it unless you can produce that passage that says Jesus feared for himself you are wrong on multiple levels. Man...you are efficient!

I sure as hell am efficient!

You want precision in language. Here: If Jesus the man experienced some weakness (such as fear), then Jesus the God (who is the exact same person as Jesus the man) also experienced that weakness. That's the logical implication of such a paradox. Not my problem it doesn't suit your beliefs.

LOL. You're arguing against your point. I'll repeat: So when one is describing attributes of God, one is NOT also describing attributes of Jesus BECAUSE Jesus had two natures: a divine nature and a human nature. These are not hard dots to connect...

Reminds me somewhat of that debate regarding whether Mary is the mother of God or not. If there's one thing Catholics got it more right than Protestants on, it's that following logically from the doctrine of Christology, Mary is indeed the mother of God (the Son).

Yeah, that Mary is the mother of God does not follow any logic, at all. It is telling that you think that though.

[The Grand Nudger]

There is no single "doctrine of christology" to follow from, lol.  There are many, and they lead in different directions.

[Amarok]

There is no single "doctrine of christology" to follow from, lol.  There are many, and they lead in different directions.

Oh no Khem it's always been one doctrine. If you ignore history and use nothing but pro apologist tripe 

[GrandizerII]

You know exactly what I'm talking about. Don't play dense.

Wow! I though you would just drop it when you couldn't find it. You want to double down. No, I don't know what you are talking about. Please provide

Really, Steve? Are you playing here? Or you seriously don't know what it is I might be talking about here. It's not like this is something I concocted personally myself out of nowhere. This is something that Christians themselves ponder among each other all the time.

I'll assume that you really have no clue, so here:

Mark 14:35-36 (and similar passages)

I sure as hell am efficient!

You want precision in language. Here: If Jesus the man experienced some weakness (such as fear), then Jesus the God (who is the exact same person as Jesus the man) also experienced that weakness. That's the logical implication of such a paradox. Not my problem it doesn't suit your beliefs.

LOL. You're arguing against your point. I'll repeat: So when one is describing attributes of God, one is NOT also describing attributes of Jesus BECAUSE Jesus had two natures: a divine nature and a human nature. These are not hard dots to connect...

Repeating doesn't make your point less wrong. You are going on about how Jesus and God are two distinct entities, but that's not what I'm disputing here in this thread. I'm saying the following instead:

If Jesus the Man did something, then Jesus the God also did that same thing. Since Jesus experienced weakness, and Jesus is God (note I didn't say Jesus is the whole of Trinity or whatever), then Jesus the God (who is the exact same person as Jesus the Man) also had to have experienced that weakness.

For an atheist like me, this is all nonsense. But if you presume the Hypostatic Union, that's where it leads.

[Amarok]

Wow! I though you would just drop it when you couldn't find it. You want to double down. No, I don't know what you are talking about. Please provide

Really, Steve? Are you playing here? Or you seriously don't know what it is I might be talking about here. It's not like this is something I concocted personally myself out of nowhere. This is something that Christians themselves ponder among each other all the time.

I'll assume that you really have no clue, so here:

Mark 14:35-36 (and similar passages)

LOL. You're arguing against your point. I'll repeat: So when one is describing attributes of God, one is NOT also describing attributes of Jesus BECAUSE Jesus had two natures: a divine nature and a human nature. These are not hard dots to connect...

Repeating doesn't make your point less wrong. You are going on about how Jesus and God are two distinct entities, but that's not what I'm disputing here in this thread. I'm saying the following instead:

If Jesus the Man did something, then Jesus the God also did that same thing. Since Jesus experienced weakness, and Jesus is God (note I didn't say Jesus is the whole of Trinity or whatever), then Jesus the God (who is the exact same person as Jesus the Man) also had to have experienced that weakness.

For an atheist like me, this is all nonsense. But if you presume the Hypostatic Union, that's where it leads.

Now watch Steve stick his nose up at you and insist your wrong because he says so ....