balancing of the scales
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-04-2013, 02:48 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
All this talk about personal beliefs, makes me wonder what it is you are trying to accomplish.

Are you amending your beliefs for acceptance, to win converts or to win your arguments?

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2013, 02:49 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
(04-04-2013 02:44 PM)Katiegal Wrote:  
(04-04-2013 11:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  A lot of atheists here have a problem with eternal damnation. They think it is unfair to punish somebody for eternity. Their thinking goes like this: Hitler, as bad as his actions were, his actions were finite so it would be unfair to give him an infinite amount of punishment. What these atheists fail to realize is that a finite amount of punishment can be spread over an inifinte amount of time.

Example: Suppose God judged Hitler and found that for his crimes against humanity Hitler deserves to endure X amount of pain. God then decides that the finite amount of pain Hitler is to endure be spread over an infinite time period. So God commands Lucifer that each year Hitler is in hell Hitler is to recieve only half of X. If X starts out as 1 trillion BTUs of heat or pain, Lucifer only dispenses a half trillion BTUs in the first year Hitler is in hell....that leaves Hitler with half a trillion BTUs to endure to satisfy his punishment. However, in the next year Lucifer only dispense a quarter trillion BTUs, in the third year Lucifer only dispenses an eighth and so on and so forth. Hitler never gets out of hell, his finite punishment goes on for eternity.
Well, I know other posters have said this simple because it is so obvious, but I'm not going to read every post so I feel compelled to say it again; atheists have trouble with eternal damnation because it pretty much requires the belief in a god, and since atheists...

Your analysis fails to pass other elementary issues of critical thinking, too.

Precisely the point. I have 0 problems with god, satan, heaven, hell, eternal torment/punishment, unfair punishment, plagues, god's wrath, god's jealousy, etc. Because I do not believe in the absurd, the irrational, or the nonexistent.

Drinking Beverage Eternal punishment in hell is fine by me. So is eternal feasting in Valhalla, living in Hades after death, etc.

Evolve
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
04-04-2013, 03:01 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
(04-04-2013 02:26 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(04-04-2013 02:09 PM)Techgorilla Wrote:  You are correct. If humans are eternal by nature then you wouldn't be granting Hitler anything, you would just be punishing him for a couple of decades.

Except he would suffer for eternity...the initial part would be the most brutal and it would get less intense over time, but it would never end. Just because you could do the last stretch standing on your head doesn't mean it isn't punishment.

Also the initial part could last quit a long time simply by choosing a different fraction.

How can you say an imperceptible amount of pain is suffering. By that definition the pressure exerted on your skin by a mosquito landing in your hair can be called suffering.

Yes you can modify the fraction and make it last a hell of a lot. But the problem is that after a certain point the pain would be so small that it can not qualify as suffering.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2013, 03:11 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
(04-04-2013 11:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  A lot of atheists here have a problem with eternal damnation. They think it is unfair to punish somebody for eternity. Their thinking goes like this: Hitler, as bad as his actions were, his actions were finite so it would be unfair to give him an infinite amount of punishment. What these atheists fail to realize is that a finite amount of punishment can be spread over an inifinte amount of time.

What a lot of theists appear to have a problem with is... there is no eternal damnation. Drinking Beverage

I think in the end, I just feel like I'm a secular person who has a skeptical eye toward any extraordinary claim, carefully examining any extraordinary evidence before jumping to conclusions. ~ Eric ~ My friend ... who figured it out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
04-04-2013, 03:35 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
(04-04-2013 02:42 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(04-04-2013 02:37 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  No, the quotes are definitely not moot. They describe the intensity of the pain in hell; likewise, it also says that the intensity doesn't change.

They are moot because I am not making a point about hell. My point is that a finite punishment can be made to last an eternity....i simply used hellish imagary to make the point bevause this audience is familiar with it. What do your quotes have to do with my point? Nothing.....therefore your quotes are moot in the context of this conversation.

Dodgy

This is my first interaction with you... and... based on this (I'm not going to beat my head against a brick wall), it'll probably be my last.

Have fun.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like kingschosen's post
04-04-2013, 04:11 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
(04-04-2013 11:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  A lot of atheists here have a problem with eternal damnation. They think it is unfair to punish somebody for eternity. Their thinking goes like this: Hitler, as bad as his actions were, his actions were finite so it would be unfair to give him an infinite amount of punishment. What these atheists fail to realize is that a finite amount of punishment can be spread over an inifinte amount of time.

Example: Suppose God judged Hitler and found that for his crimes against humanity Hitler deserves to endure X amount of pain. God then decides that the finite amount of pain Hitler is to endure be spread over an infinite time period. So God commands Lucifer that each year Hitler is in hell Hitler is to recieve only half of X. If X starts out as 1 trillion BTUs of heat or pain, Lucifer only dispenses a half trillion BTUs in the first year Hitler is in hell....that leaves Hitler with half a trillion BTUs to endure to satisfy his punishment. However, in the next year Lucifer only dispense a quarter trillion BTUs, in the third year Lucifer only dispenses an eighth and so on and so forth. Hitler never gets out of hell, his finite punishment goes on for eternity.
Nice try (I'm being generous here), but what part of eternal hell fire do you not understand? There is no half burning this year and a quarter burning next year, etc. Burning is burning.

Why do believers constantly attempt to twist the doctrine to some more acceptable state instead of admitting it's just plain nonsense? Consider

"Religion has caused more misery to all of mankind in every stage of human history than any other single idea." --Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2013, 04:17 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
(04-04-2013 01:11 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(04-04-2013 12:59 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Ok I'm done you have been shown your mathematical error several times and at this point are just being contrary for it's own sake.

There is no error in my thinking, Yours is errant. Any finite number can be divided into infinite parts and while those parts might approach 0 values they would never arrive at 0.


But it will very quickly get to such a small value that it may as well be 0.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2013, 04:28 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
What's entertaining here is that instead of saying "Yeah, I guess that was a bad example," he just hangs on and tries to make it work.

Judging by the temperature of my seat here at work and using the equations provided, I've been in hell for approximately 7.5 hours.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2013, 04:33 PM
RE: balancing of the scales
This entire argument is extraordinarily ridiculous and futile. Does it concern anyone else that this fringe, sudo-argument, is the default position for our christian friend here? I am concerned that he does not claim the divinity of the bible, the supposed miracles of christ, the powers of revelation, or the prophecies of the ancient jews as evidence for his belief. These would all be perfectly natural, and accurate as a representation of what christians the world over actually consider to be good evidence. The fact that he does not attempt any such thing, but relies on a bogus claim concerning the measurement of unmeasurable pain, inflicted on a dead man, in another world, for an unmeasurable amount of time, shows a surprising degree of doubt in his own religion's ability to provide real evidence. Perhaps he doubts the validity of his own faith, deep down? This entire argument is akin to debating the morality of Santa Claus scratching his ass. It is so moot, as to make moot an understatement. The fact that anyone would even bother stooping to this person's level of ignorance and debating mathematics is silly to say the least. To our christian friend, return to us when you have real evidence, and the balls to have a discussion that matters.

Religion, rather than acting as a symbol of truth or justice, merely acts as a symbol of human gullibility and stupidity. Surely no race of beings with any real intelligence would concoct such drivel.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Prometheus762's post
04-04-2013, 04:42 PM
 
RE: balancing of the scales
Hell is a hard one to determine. Jesus gives us descriptions, but it's pretty obvious those are symbolic and abstract. He seems to indicated different types of hell and he never necessitates that hell is forever.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: