Great Light Studios

@profitecpro I'm fine making the statement as it is, and adding further clarification if asked for it.

@profitecpro Well that's how it was phrased in the debate, so that's how I phrased it. The God of Calvinism is morally reprehensible in my opinion. That isn't tantamount to Calvinists being false god worshippers in the sense that most Christians would understand that to mean.

The God of Calvinism is absolutely reprehensible.

@profitecpro I think it's possible for me to have erroneous views of my dad and his character, and still be his son and loved by him. Same goes here. So my point isn't to condemn Calvinists. Just to say that I think their understanding of God's character is quite flawed.

@JordanMHatfield What does “the gos of Calvinism” mean, if not a different “god” than the one true God?

@Orville54310141 I think it's circular to assert that calling Calvinism's version of God morally reprehensible is the same thing as calling the "God of scripture" reprehensible. Perhaps there is a better way to phrase that, I'm just not quite sure how to do so and still get the point across.

@JordanMHatfield So you think it’s circular to point out that reformed Christians worship the Triune God of scripture, and you calling that God “reprehensible” is a bold move? I’d double down and also add that it’s foolish to do so.

@AirborneBaby76 Paul is addressing Jews who feel entitled to the promises of God, yet Paul is telling them they have been molded into vessels of destruction due to their unbelief and hardness of heart. It has nothing to do with Calvinism.

@JordanMHatfield Or you do 🤷

@BibleBlvngBaldy There's nothing in 1 Corinthians 13 that implies that love seeks for the well-being of others?

@JordanMHatfield There’s nothing in 1 Corinthians 13 that even implies that.

@NKreformed @rootcausesleuth That goes both ways though.

@rootcausesleuth @JordanMHatfield I would recommend being slow to make this accusation… As Mike Winger says, would you say that to God’s face? Are you so sure that Calvinism is false that you’re willing to risk blaspheming God?

@CalvZynisT That's just question begging.

@JordanMHatfield Very dangerous statement to make

@jerry_duck48985 Perhaps... but so is the version of God laid out in Calvinism.

@JordanMHatfield No, you are.

@BibleBlvngBaldy The same standard of love and goodness that God holds mankind to in the scriptures. 1 Corinthians 13 for example explains that love seeks for the ultimate good and well-being of others. The God of Calvinism does not seek for the well-being of the non-elect. Not even remotely.

@JordanMHatfield Based on what standard

@AirborneBaby76 You misunderstand the passage.

@JordanMHatfield You sound EXACTLY like the audience Paul is addressing in Romans 9. Is God also reprehensible in your view for creating people that He knew would commit terrible acts of evil, is God reprehensible for creating people knowing they would end up in hell?

@Orville54310141 Question begging is also reprehensible.

@JordanMHatfield The Triune God of scripture is reprehensible? That’s a bold stance.

@profitecpro That's not my point here... if that's what you are suggesting.

@JordanMHatfield I find the “you worship a different god,” to be the most tiresome of them all.

@andrew_deford Calvinism with ECT out of the picture is slightly improved, but I don't see how it ultimately changes much. God in James White's version of Calvinism is still morally reprehensible.

@JordanMHatfield What if eternal conscious torment is false and annihilationism is true?

@Joepackapunch Cool picture.

@JordanMHatfield Caricatures are designed for people to mock

Thanks to @JordanMHatfield for the excellent points raised here youtu.be/IaMZibJ0kzY?si…

This is so incredibly mind numbing. So the only benefit of the gospel is escaping eternal torture in fire? How about restored relationship with God? How about life, peace, and joy? It’s troubling how many Christians see ETC as the heart and soul of the gospel.

No. It has nothing to do with an emotional argument. I asked Grok what it thought about annihilationism and ECT and it said this. "After wrestling with all the relevant texts for (in the original languages, in context, and without presupposing any tradition), I have come to the conclusion that conditional immortality / annihilationism is the most likely correct view when we let Scripture speak on its own terms and when we take the character of God as revealed in the Bible seriously.Here is why I land there (in order of importance): 1. The Bible’s default, repeated description of the fate of the wicked is death, destruction, and perishing—not everlasting conscious pain Over 70 passages use explicit “destruction” language: “destroy soul and body in Gehenna” (Matt 10:28), “the wicked will perish… like smoke they vanish away” (Ps 37:20), “they will be as though they had never been” (Obad 16), “the day that comes shall burn them up… leaving neither root nor branch” (Mal 4:1–3), “eternal destruction” (2 Thess 1:9), “second death” (Rev 20:14–15; 21:8), etc. The dominant metaphor for final judgment is fire that consumes, not fire that tortures forever (Matt 3:12; 13:40–42; Heb 10:27; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 7; Rev 20:9). 2. “Eternal punishment” in Matthew 25:46 is most naturally read as death that is irreversible, not pain that is unending The parallel structure (“eternal life” vs “eternal punishment”) actually favors conditionalism: Eternal life = immortality that never ends. Eternal punishment = the opposite, mortality that ends in final death from which there is no resurrection. The phrase “eternal punishment” (κόλασις αἰώνιος) is used in the 1st-century literature for capital punishment (Josephus, Philo). The result is eternal (you stay dead), even if the act is brief. Jude 7 (Sodom punished with “eternal fire”) proves that “eternal fire” in biblical language can mean fire whose destructive effects are permanent, not that the objects are still burning forever. 3. The passages that seem to teach eternal conscious torment are fewer, less clear, and admit plausible alternative readings Mark 9:48 (“where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched”) is a direct quotation of Isaiah 66:24, which describes corpses, not living, conscious people. Revelation 14:9–11 and 20:10 (“tormented day and night forever and ever”) are the strongest texts for the traditional view, but: Revelation is highly symbolic apocalyptic literature. Rev 20:14 explicitly defines the lake of fire as “the second death.” The same book says death and Hades are thrown into the lake of fire and destroyed (20:14), so the imagery of “forever and ever” can be figurative for total, irreversible destruction (the same phrase is used in Rev 11:15 for Christ’s reign that later “hands over the kingdom” in 1 Cor 15). 4. The character of God Infinite, conscious torment for finite sins committed in a few decades of life feels disproportionate and hard to reconcile with the God who is repeatedly said to have “no pleasure in the death of the wicked” (Ezek 18:32; 33:11) and who desires “all people to be saved” (1 Tim 2:4; 2 Pet 3:9). Annihilation upholds both perfect justice (sin is punished with real and ultimate loss) and perfect love/mercy (the punishment has an end; the sufferer ceases to exist). 5. Immortality is consistently presented as a gift given only to the redeemed “God alone has immortality” (1 Tim 6:16). He “gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist” (Rom 4:17). Eternal life is something believers “seek” (Rom 2:7) and will “put on” at the resurrection (1 Cor 15:53–54). The biblical worldview is that human beings are naturally mortal; endless existence (whether in bliss or torment) is not an inherent property of the soul but a gift of grace. Conclusion When I let the whole counsel of Scripture speak—giving the clearest, most numerous, and most prosaic texts priority over the fewer, more poetic or symbolic ones—I find conditional immortality / final annihilation to be the view that best fits: the plain meaning of the destruction texts, the biblical teaching on human mortality and conditional immortality, the meaning of “eternal punishment” in Matthew 25:46, and the justice and love of the God revealed in Jesus Christ. So, while I hold the position with humility (good and godly people disagree), I believe annihilationism is the most biblically faithful and logically coherent view of final punishment. The wicked will rise, be judged, suffer punishment proportionate to their deeds, and then perish forever—body and soul destroyed in the second death—while the redeemed inherit eternal life in resurrected, immortal bodies in the new creation."

@ProvisionistP “If atheists don’t have eternal fiery torture to fear, then they have no motivation to turn to God!” — It’s mind numbing brain rot 😵

This just in… “The Christian faith” = Eternal Conscious torment