It could be, that we don’t know all the variables. Perhaps GM was a fiddle player. And he had a contest with the devil - and won 
I read the op and skimmed through many comments, and I just have to say that it seems to me that much if not all of St Michael’s concerns could be allayed by following a couple rules I’ve learned in my short years on this earth which I will share: 1.) When dealing with historical people, it is a good idea to practice those things you can discern in them that can be considered good, and disavow those things we can discern are bad. You can even disavow them loudly, but you might also praise their memory for the good just as loud. Martin Luther, George MacDonald, and all of us are both good and bad examples. 2.) Never let yourself get sucked into thinking about how the Lord will judge another. Ever. Just don’t do it. He will judge us all justly with love, and that is enough.
Peace to you all.
TH
And I will add a comment. For any more “insights” - from Michael. 
As we have seen George MacDonald hated the God of Edwards and mocked God’s children. The Bible tells us not to be mockers or hang out with them. Indeed, they mocked Jesus during His sufferings and beatings. But vengeance belongs to God. When God judges the Bible says He laughs and mocks when terror strikes those who mock Christ and His children. But didn’t MacDonald believe God was the God of the beautiful like Edwards? Well, MacDonald called the wrathful God of penal substitution Molech. This is a very serious delusion. How do we explain this by MacDonald then?
Well, Satan appears as a beautiful angel of light. His seductive beauty he first shines seduces into sin and the Bible tells us not to mock. Especially God and His children.
True beauty comes from God who is infinitely beautiful in*** holiness and love*** This is indeed the God of Edwards:
This is why sin against God is so serious. Edwards saw this clearly:
The God that MacDonald loathed as he mocked is indeed the God of true beauty and glory.
If you find joy in the eternal agony of over 90% of humanity throughout the ages, and you believe God finds joy in it too, and if you are unmoved by all evidence to the contrary, there’s nothing more to say. Could you really look upon such eternal torment throughout eternity without compassion? Is this your idea of heaven—watching those people suffering forever?
I find my joy in God’s absolute LOVE for mankind, and his continuous working through Christ to deliver people from destructive wrongdoing in their lives. I find this imagined eternal torment abhorrent.
By the way, on what grounds do you expect to escape eternal torment?
We escape by faith in God or Christ. This faith opens our hearts up to love. Even our enemies. I have faith in God when He says Vengeance is Mine. Rather love your neighbor as yourself while on earth. Moreover, Saints are not cruel and sadistic. As Edwards and Aquinas have stated: It’s not the suffering of those in hell in and of itself that the saints delight in but the glories of God’s love and justice as He protects His children from the contamination and abuse of God haters. Aquinas and Edwards never taught a sadistic delight in the sufferings of those in hell. The saints delight in the suffering of those in hell only in the sense that the glory of God will appear in it. The saints will feel the intense glory of God as he shows His tender love for them by bringing His justice down on evil God haters.
Oh! how glorious and powerful God is, by defending and protecting His few children from all that evil!!
From R.C. Sprouls Reformation Study Bible
From the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible:
Is there an ignore feature available?
It’s like the old philosophical puzzle at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_a_tree_falls_in_a_forest.
Allow me to paraphase:
And let’s examine a fire and brimstone hell - that Michael and Muslims favor:
You’re asking folks to speculate, on what hell and/or Hades is like. And that’s what it is - pure speculation. And when the Bible describes hell or Hades, is it using figurative or direct language? Or in Anglican, New Testament scholar N.T. Wright’s words - abstract or concrete language?
Now if I were to speculate,
I would envision it - like the zombie apocalypse, from the Walking Dead and Fear the Walking Dead. To give this scenario theological plausibility, it’s similar to the P-Zombie concept of Anglican Biblical scholar - N.T. Wright - at youtu.be/vggzqXzEvZ0. And some will probably, just be evil folks - battling the p-zombies or zombies. No punishment from God. And they might say: "
. Or the p-zombies or zombies, might have enough awareness - to say:
.
Or it could be like the Exile hell folks envision. Where we live with other evil people…until we can no longer stand it. And ask to be let out. No punishment from God. e akin to , the Hope of Holy War Joshua Ryan Butler in The Skeletons in God’s Closet: The Mercy of Hell, the Surprise of Judgment .
Or it’s God’s love and our reaction to it - since we are NOT pure. Which is what the Eastern Orthodox envision. Again, no punishment from God.
Then there is the view I favor at Purgatorial Conditionalist , in conjunction with the Eastern Orthodox view.
Either one of the above scenarios, would be acceptable to me. But the Lakota spiritual people I studied with, describe it like the Robin William’s movie - What Dreams May Come at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Dreams_May_Come_(film). They may NOT have the Christian concept of redemption, heaven and hell, etc. But they do have good insights - into afterlife purification.
.
Perhaps it would be fruitful for Michael (and others here), to read Six (or sixteen) views on hell.
The hell article also pointed to the Eastern Orthodox Wiki article at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_hell#Eastern_Orthodox_concept_of_hell, where I agree with their assessment:
Now for a song, dedicated to Michael’s and the Muslims - view of hell:
From the website “Mystics of the Church”
To read more go here:
mysticsofthechurch.com/2013/03/stories-of-hell-in-lives-of-saints.html
MacDonald does deny the vengeance of God. In Unspoken sermons “Justice” page 232 he states:
But vengeance on the sinner, the law of a tooth for a tooth, is not in the heart of God, neither in his hand.
But the Bible says God will repay. Vengeance belongs to Him. This is why it also says:
You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist an evil person. If someone slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also;…Matt.5:38
qaz I would say that though there are those who agree with you, the postings of people who are in difference with you and others here are fodder for some great debate. Take the blessing you have and run with it. This is how we learn. 
But I do understand your frustration qaz. 
“As for me I say that those who are tormented in hell are tormented by the invasion of love. What is there more bitter and violent than the pains of love? Those who feel they have sinned against love bear in themselves a damnation much heavier than the most dreaded punishments. The suffering with which sinning against love afflicts the heart is more keenly felt than any other torment. It is absurd to assume that the sinners in hell are deprived of God’s love. Love is offered impartially. But by its very power it acts in two ways. It torments sinners, as happens here on earth when we are tormented by the presence of a friend to whom we have been unfaithful. And it gives joy to those who have been faithful.”
blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2go … -of-syria/
afkimel.wordpress.com/2013/03/1 … vine-love/
Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER ceases, his mercies NEVER come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.…
Hmmmm…
I read in 21:25 “…and its gates will never be shut by day—and there will be no night there.” Doesn’t that suggest that the city gates are always open to those evil doers who repent and submit to the authority of God?
Hey Paidion!!
The city or new Jerusalem isn’t the new heavens and earth. It’s only a small fraction of the new heavens and earth. The gates of the city are open for the nations in the new heavens and earth. Not the lake of fire even though that’s also outside the gates.
Also Paidion,
The new heavens and earth is the whole world. It’s all things. Every knee bows in heaven, earth, and those saints resurrected from under the earth. The Hebrew phrase “Heavens and Earth” means “all things”. These are the all things reconciled. The nations and the kings of the nations are those in the new Heavens and Earth. The new city of Jerusalem is the center of the new universe. The lake of fire isn’t included in “all things made new.”
As we can see the “all things made new” is separated by the word “but” and then it goes on to describe those in the lake of fire separating the lake of fire from the new city and the new heavens and earth which is where the new city is located.
There’s a wide variety of theological opinion within Christianity. Let’s look at Roman Catholicism - for example. I did open up a thread - regarding the emerging church. This is something that Fr. Richard Rohr likes - and writes about. But a close RC friend, says that Pope Frances also likes it. And rather then a set of rules, it puts more emphasize on the individual - to make decisions, of right and wrong. Of course, the Calvinist CARM and Got Questions sites… have concerns about the emerging church, lacking scriptural integrity.
Or Michael quotes the Catholic saints - on hell. Well, unless the Pope is speaking officially for the church…on theological matters…this is open for various Catholic theological opinions. And how does this matter coincide, with the Eastern Orthodoxy position - on heaven and hell? After all, they also claim to be…the one true church. And Eastern Catholics, are allowed to follow - Eastern Orthodox theology.
Things are not always, so cut and dry - in theological matters.
Take me - for example. I’m in harmony, with what the ACNA and Nicene Creed teaches. But I also:
Consider myself Anglo-Orthodox. And borrow theological tenets - from Eastern Orthodoxy.
Side with the Franciscan contemplation approaches…and experiential dialogue, between Thomas Merton and Zen. Which I emulate, with Buddhist and Yoga, meditation and contemplation approaches.
And believe God wants to bless his children - with good things. Much like TV evangelist, Joel Osteen talks about.
But even more radical:
I could present very compelling arguments…why the tribulation will occur…and why it will bring about - the zombie apocalypse . Or why God probably created, a flat earth in Genesis. But I don’t present them as dogma. 
Ahhh… but what is the TURTLE supported by, grasshopper?
Could it be the stars underneath him?
According to the story, it’s turtles “all the way down”. Which, of course, only begs the question.
“An open mind is really a mark of foolishness, like an open mouth. Mouths and minds were made to shut; they were made to open only in order to shut.” ~~G.K. Chesterton
“The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.”~~G.K. Chesterton
What we suffer from today is humility in the wrong direction. Modesty has moved from the organ of ambition. Modesty has settled upon the organ of conviction; where it was never meant to be. A man was meant to be doubtful of himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed. Nowadays the part of a man that does not assert is exactly the part he ought not to assert. The part he doubts is exactly the part he ought not to doubt - the Divine Reason. The new skeptic is so humble that he doubts if he can ever learn…There is a real humility typical of our time, but it happens that it’s practically more poisonous humility than the wildest prostrations of the ascetic…The new humility makes a man doubtful of his aims which make him stop working all together…We are on the road to producing a race of man too mentally modest to believe in the multiplication table. ~~ G.K. Chesterton
You see this in the Catholic, Ed Feser’s, book "Five Proofs of the Existence of God. Feser takes the reader through classical proofs from Aquinas, Augustine, Aristotle, Leibniz, and Plontinus. He answers all the modern objections to the classical proofs and shows that they all miss the mark or are misconceptions. He’s a Catholic Thomist and doesn’t claim a probable conclusion for the arguments but develops them as demonstrative proofs. He believes in Christ because of History and admits that the philosophical proofs just lead to Theism. As an atheist philosophy professor he use to shoot down the classical arguments in his classes based on all the common objections. He then dug deeper into the literature of these Theistic men and saw the objections were all weak and don’t even touch on what the philosophers actually said or believed. He then rejected his atheism. Here’s what leading philosophers (including Stephen Davis and J.P. Moreland) say about the book:
“A watershed book. Feser has completely severed the intellectual legs upon which modern atheism had hoped to stand.”
– Matthew Levering, James N. and Mary D. Perry Jr. Chair of Theology, Mundelein Seminary
“A powerful and important book. The concluding chapter, where Feser replies to possible objections to his arguments, is a gem; it alone is worth the price of this excellent work.”
–Stephen T. Davis, Russell K. Pitzer Professor of Philosophy, Claremont McKenna College
“Edward Feser is widely recognized as a top scholar in the history of philosophy in general, and in Thomistic and Aristotelian philosophy in particular. This book is a must-read for anyone interested in natural theology. I happily and highly recommend it.”
– J. P. Moreland, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, Biola University
“Refutes with devastating effect the standard objections to theistic proofs, from David Hume to the New Atheists.”
–Robert C. Koons, Professor of Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin
Here’s an interview with Feser on the book: