>No, I’m sorry but you clearly don’t have much knowledge of Christianity or religion in general.

And you clearly don't know my background. I may be atheist now but I wasn't in the past. Also there is no need to disparage an entire demographic as you just did to atheists. I have said nothing negative or insulting about Christians, so I humbly request you do the same. Either way we're not debating the validity of your religion here, we are discussing a specific point.

>Even if one were to assume your ignorant argument is true, it’s also not really relevant. The fact that God is a “King” doesn’t somehow confer the same properties onto human kings or governments. Again, basic theology 101 here.

And how is this statement relevant? Did I say God being "king" confers the same properties onto human kings? No I didn't. Again, basic English 101 here, if I didn't say something no need to argue against it.

What I did say is god is an example of a dictatorship because it fits the definition of the word.

https://www.wordreference.com/definition/dictatorship

Colloquially, as referenced in the source above, the definition of the non-government usage of the word "dictatorship" is "absolute, imperious, or overbearing power or control" which is an apt description of Gods dominion over reality.

>These are quite interesting topics but the level of discussion (exemplified by your remarks here) is often at such a low level, it’s kind of embarrassing, honestly.

One thing that's not very christian is to insult others and to call them "embarrassing." You've been calling me ignorant throughout this conversation. It's obviously done for the purposes of being insulting because in normal human interactions nobody will disparage another party for being stupid, embarrassing or ignorant even if they believe those qualities are true. From this logic it can only be concluded that your remarks are actually deliberate and targeted insults. Very unchristian-like, given that I've only called you "ignorant" as a retaliation. The christian thing for you to do is to apologize.

“And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. You have heard that it is said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”

Matthew 5:40-43 ESV

Given that I've done nothing to take advantage of you, the proverb above is an even greater reason why you should walk two miles with me and to stop with the deliberate insults. You are obligated to continue the discussion in a way that is more christian-like.

>None of what you said or linked to is the mainstream or even acceptable fringe of Christian thought.

What I did to get those resources is I googled "God is king" then I randomly selected sources from the top results. So basically what happened here is google's selection algorithm (which conventionally chooses the most popular results) obviously is buggy and delivered me many fringe results along with mainstream ones. This along with my random selection of sources by happenstance also avoided results that were mainstream. I'm serious, this is categorically a possibility and is, according to your observations, unequivocally what occurred here.

What will be definitive and completely possible is you finding me the same amount of sources from better mainstream christian sources to prove your point. Logically if what you say is true, your sources should be easier to find then how I found mine. Obviously you should avoid google, as the algorithm is buggy. I suggest you use duck duck go and some other search term that will get you what you want.

Also I would say 5 different sources citing your point, along with the search term and the search engine you used to find those sources will help me verify how mainstream your point is, because clearly it is unlikely for both google and another search engine to both be buggy and by happenstance deliver fringe results.

In short, your point here is that god is not a "king" or a "dictator" even though the bible has a quote directly saying he is "king". It's quite possible that mainstream christian thought has come up with some other symbolic definition of the word "king" to make the religion more compatible with modern society. I however have not seen ANY sources for that possibility but you are claiming that not only have you seen resources for it, it is mainstream christian belief. Prove it then.

Now that I laid it all out... give me your sources or give me your excuses. Choose.