All men sin, but God offers a free gift of eternal life to those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ
I would be tempted to argue that such statement reduces any value that might be found in 'sacrifice', (that isn't really a sacrifice in that nobody actually ceased to exist).
You and I went to a nightclub the other week, you remember? The bouncer told you that you couldn't go in because you were wearing trainers. I went up to the very same bouncer and he let me in even though I was also wearing trainers.
What does this tell us? Well, we don't know why I was let in but we do know - beyond any doubt whatsoever - that it has nothing to do with wearing trainers.
The fact is of course that you're as much a sinner as I, indeed probably more. You however get let in to the party regardless to that fact whereas I, purely because I happen to not have a belief in such entities, get set on fire. What we can say here is that we're unsure exactly why you got let in to the party but we do know it has nothing whatsoever to do with 'sin' or lack thereof.
What we should do is just completely set aside the notion of 'sin' having any relevance whatsoever to going to heaven or getting set on fire for all eternity. It is simply unarguable, (if rationality and logic is of any relevance), to claim otherwise.
So why do you go to heaven whilst someone like me gets set on fire for all eternity? Well, the answer is included in your post: I get set on fire because I don't believe that certain entities exist.
This of course is utter stupidity; Believing that something does or does not exist is completely beyond individual ability to choose - it is an inevitable outcome of being convinced or not being convinced of the truthfulness of available data.
As an example: You could not "choose" to believe in leprechauns - no matter how hard you squeezed. You could sit in front of the mirror all day long and squeeze yourself into a coma, nothing is ever going to change, (other than your position from 'alive' to 'dead' perhaps). You simply cannot possibly or plausibly 'choose' to believe that something exists without being
convinced of its existence by external data.
In the case of Christians this data encompasses being convinced by kalam, teleological, ontological, moral, personal experience, indoctrination by parents or a combination of these factors. You are
convinced by these arguments and hence have no choice but to believe that such entity exists. Should you however be convinced that all of these arguments are the pointless, (and ill-informed), waffle that they are, you wouldn't believe such entity exists - it is an inevitable fact.
So, you are convinced that a god exists and I am convinced that no god exists - be it Yahweh or Marduk, Allah or Jesus, Tiamat or Vishnu.
I am unsure exactly why, in your strange worldview, not being convinced that such entity exists - indeed being convinced of the opposite, somehow warrants eternal torture. If you could explain it to me I'd be very grateful indeed.
Yes - all the data my brain has received and processed might be flawed whereas yours might be spot on. This is a statement that being right deserves bliss whereas being wrong is a crime justly punishable by eternal torment. How is being wrong be a crime?
Regards,