The silence here is deafening.

I'm amazed that a man in possession of such fine good news and stellar reasoning wishes only to discourse with Christians.  Surely on a forum such as this one you could find some non-Christians to share it with?

Is there in particular reason why you are single minded in your efforts to convert Christians to your POV?  Is there something about your POV that makes you only evangelize Christians and utterly ignore the many non-Christians running around this here forum?

Hey, Tony.  I've been waiting with interest.  But didn't you know that these fellows aren't repudiatable?  They aren't recognizable within the cirles of scholarship?  Okay..a cheap shot..but isn't that the way scholars think at times?  LOL.

Dear Sntjohnny and all pagan Christians, please re-read this and tell me what you think about it.

What exactly do you think it wrong with Allin's and Erskine's ideas about God? about what they think of how Christendom perceives God and His ways?

Thomas Allin wrote:
"The popular creed presents us with a Being who fluctuates between tenderness and wrath: One who has ever-changing plans, and a will that is divided, and baffled. For half His creatures, His love is in fact momentary and His vengeance eternal. For the other half, His pity is eternal and dHis wrath transient. This God is not even Lord in His own house; for the worst and feeblest of His creatures can defeat His most cherished plan; can paralyze the Cross of Christ. In such a God I can see no trace of Him who is almighty and unchanging, whose property is to always have mercy; whose love, tho it must take the form of vengeance against sin, never ceases to pursue the sinners for 'love never faileth'; never to all eternity. Against the popular caricature of God, this . . . is a special protest--that caricature which represents eternal love as turning to hate as soon as the sinner dies; which vainly talks of an Eternal Father, whose judgments mean salvation in one world and change to d--nation in the next; of eternal love, whose fire purifies and refines in time and then beyond the grave turns to mere (purposeless) torture. All this is not alone morally repulsive, but a plain contradiction in terms."

Thomas Erskine wonderfully wrote:
"Hence the painful evasions; the manifold sophistry; the halting logic that (honestly) turns the Bible upside down; i.e., teaching that all men are drawn to Christ means half mankind drawn to the devil; all things reconciled through Christ means the final perdition of half the universe. The notion, which is in fact that of the popular creed, i.e., that God is in the Bible detailing the story of His own defeat, is telling how sin has proved too strong for Him; this notion is worse than absurd. Assuredly the Bible is not the story of sin deepening into eternal ruin--of creation darkened forever by a ghastly hell--of God's own Son worsted in His utmost effort. It is from the opening to the close the story of grace stronger than sin--of life victorious over every form of death--of God triumphing over evil."

Valerie, if you worship a god for fear of being tortured eternally in flames, then, what is different between that and a pagan?

There are some Mormons who are Christian, you know.  
Just as not all Christians are true Christians, there are some Christians who are Christian.

But it is nice that you are one of the rare ones that spoke your mind on this matter and for that, my hat is off to you.

The Bible is contradictory only if the concept of eternality is injected into its holy pages for the Greek words Aion/Aionion.  Young's Literal does not do that.

"... of God triumphing over evil."

Why should He have to? He is the God of evil - and evil serves His purpose. Why should he need to triumph over Himself?