comment: >
  
  Yeah christianity was a lot more sane before the fire and brinstone gang. I never liked those sects or found their teachings to ring true.
context: In catholicism, this is known as the Jansenist heresy. Refuting it is one of only three times a pope has used papal infallibility which ended any debate on the matter within the church.  that's just trivia though.
  The counter argument is that god wants you to choose to love and believe in him. God doesn't want to force you to love him. He wants to be chosen. Like the trope of the rich prince who can have any woman he wants pretending to be a poor commoner so that he can find a woman who really loves him. >
  
  Does the rich prince condemn the woman to eternal torture if she doesn't? >
  
  She stays poor and never has anyone love her. Isn't that the same thing? >
  
  I'm pretty sure she could just find another commoner who she does love and live a normal life. That's a pretty far cry from "choose between loving me and becoming wealthy beyond your wildest dreams and not choosing me and being tortured for all eternity." 
  I'm guessing that's why so many (non-Christian) religions had a "middle-of-the-road" afterlife - it makes the divine power in question sound like less of a spiteful, egotistical sadist like our prince here would have to be.