The Problem of Hell Redux

Before I begin my defense and refutation, I want to bring us back to the actual debate at hand. In round 1, my opponent stated their position to be hell is incompatible with Christianity (1). Christianity is entirely based upon the Old and New Testaments in the Bible. Christians believe the bible is the infallible word of God. Therefore, any scriptural references provided are infallible, according to my opponent's guidelines. Defense 1: Free-will Ethics: principles that govern a PERSON'S or group's behavior. We cannot apply a human ethical system to something which is not human. This is not saying man can know nothing about God because, since this is arguing from a Christian perspective, the Bible conveys truths about God and these truths are what we know about Him. God is not human. You cannot apply human ethics to God nor can you apply human rationality to something non-human. Man chooses their fate quite simply, if they have faith in God and love God, they go to heaven. If they do not have faith in God and do not love God, they go to Hell. God could force man to "love" Him. Would that truly be love? God wants man to consciously choose to love Him. If you choose not to God is not going to force anyone to be with Him. They made their decision. God loves all man, even those who do not love Him back. He will not force anyone who does not want to, to be with Him for all eternity. My opponent argues God cannot entrust man to make decisions about our own fate. But, I have provided several passages which must be considered INAFLLIBLE for the scope of this debate proving my point. God HAS entrusted man to create their own fate. My opponent continues to apply a human morale scale to something which, most assuredly, is not human. Christianity believes God is not human. Therefore, people cannot apply human morals to God. People choose their own fate, whether or not this is moral by man's standards has absolutely no relevance when it comes to something which is not man. To God it is moral or he would not do it. God is completely righteous (or justified) in all that He does (2, 3, 4, 5,6). God is completely just when it comes to Hell. He does not sentence people there. Man sentences themselves. God does not just "sit back" as my opponent suggests, if God had just sat back and done nothing. Then there would be no Bible. There would be no Jesus Christ to save man. There would be no prophets. There is a Bible, Christians believe Jesus Christ did come to save man, and Christians do believe there are prophets. Furthermore, Man chooses to go to Hell by choosing to deny and not love God. If a rational person does not accept God, they are accepting Hell. Man does have all the facts, God has shown He is true love, Heaven is true bliss, and Hell is true suffering through the Bible. If a person chosen to not love God then they can blame nobody but, themselves. Man has all the tools for their decision. If they decide to not love God, they have decided to go to Hell. D2. We cannot apply human ethics to God because God is not human. We cannot make any assumptions about God other than those seen in the Bible. Which God revealed to man. The truths I stated in my opening argument were the ones revealed to man through the Bible. Pro attempting to apply human ethics to God which assuredly cannot be done. God is not human. D3) Memory God does not erase memories of bliss, only pain. In heaven, Man does not know what pain is. They cannot perceive pain in any way. They have forgotten what it is. My supposition is the Biblical position, and thus the Christian position, on this matter. You forget ANYTHNIG which pains you going as far as not knowing what pain is and you only know joy. This is supported multiple times in the Bible, my opponents suppositions are not. Sources: 1. Round 1 of this debate 2. Psalm 33:4 3. Nehemiah 9:7-8 4. Psalm 45:6 5. Psalm 89:14 6. Psalm 97:2