Be good, love God or go to hell?

[RND]

Can fear be a the sole motivating factor in producing undying and passionate love?

Go to this page, www.saintbirgitta.com view the video on the front page and you tell me, is this representative of the kind of God you think you serve? Is this representative of the kind of God you desire to serve? Is this representative of the perfect Love that God Himself shed on the cross on Calvary for all to see, and to demonstrate His wondrous devotion to His creation?

For more "fantasy" videos go here: http://doomsdaytube.com/html/scary-hell.html

If God is Love and good all the time does God have the capacity to torture forever and ever?

 

[epistemaniac]

re

If God is Love and good all the time does God have the capacity to torture forever and ever?

why not?

what is necessarily or mutually exclusive about God expressing both wrath and love? of course speaking of God's wrath in more emotive terms (torture etc) tinges the discussion in a way that hints at the fallacy "poisoning the well"... but don't allow yourself to be taken in by this narrower view of the larger perspective on God's wrath and the concept might not be so difficult to grasp or agree with. Clearly the bible indicates that there is such a thing as "the wrath of God". The penalty for rejecting Jesus Christ is condemnation, of receiving the wrath of God. Both people and God are, by their nature, eternal beings. Humans will subjectively experience either the wrath of God or the approbation of God. Since they are eternal they will either eternally subjectively experience wrath or approbation.

For more on this see Jonathan Edward's sermon
http://www.apuritansmind.com/JonathanEd ... Wicked.htm

blessings,
ke

 

[RND]

re

If God is Love and good all the time does God have the capacity to torture forever and ever?

why not?

Because the wages of sin is death, not eternal torture.

what is necessarily or mutually exclusive about God expressing both wrath and love?

Because man is not immortal without God. God does not grant eternal life to those who reject Him. Immortality is conditional.

of course speaking of God's wrath in more emotive terms (torture etc) tinges the discussion in a way that hints at the fallacy "poisoning the well"... but don't allow yourself to be taken in by this narrower view of the larger perspective on God's wrath and the concept might not be so difficult to grasp or agree with.

It's this what "classical Christianity" teaches? Why beat around the bush then? Love me or burn theology paints God's character just exactly the way Satan would have us see God.

Clearly the bible indicates that there is such a thing as "the wrath of God".

No doubt. That's comes from a righteous character.

The penalty for rejecting Jesus Christ is condemnation, of receiving the wrath of God.

Right, not "eternal" torture.

Both people and God are, by their nature, eternal beings.

That means Satan was right then. "You shall not surely die...." You will "live" forever. You will be just like God! Eat! Take a bite!

Humans will subjectively experience either the wrath of God or the approbation of God.

One doesn't have to be dead for this to happen.

Pro 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

Hbr 12:6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?

Since they are eternal they will either eternally subjectively experience wrath or approbation.

Right....the decision will be final, i.e. "eternal."

For more on this see Jonathan Edward's sermon
http://www.apuritansmind.com/JonathanEd ... Wicked.htm

:biglol Jonathan Edwards? How about Greg Boyd?

 

[epistemaniac]

I guess because Greg Boyd is a heretic?

blessings,
ken

 

[RND]

I guess because Greg Boyd is a heretic?

blessings,
ken

Who accuses the brethren?

 

[epistemaniac]

Equivocation.... once again... you are quite adept at that aren't you lol

Its better to think of this accusation coming as a result of biblical discernment. Or put another way, if I am guilty of being like Satan by my accusation, then Paul was too when he condemned the Judiazers, John was when he condemned the Gnostics, and Jesus was when He condemned the Pharisees and all who stand against Him. This commandment and practice of discernment is not limited to those who inerrantly gave us the Scriptures either. Christians have to make judgments as to what is true and false, what is within the bounds of Christianity and what is not, we are to discern between truth and error. Of course, you are free to disagree with me on what lines I see drawn in the sand as far as the biblical testimony regarding things that are adiaphora, matters of indifference or personal conscience, and which fall within or outside the bounds of biblical Christianity. Boyd has stepped outside the bounds of classical historic Christianity by denying Gods absolute exhaustive omniscience. I did not do this to Boyd, he did it to himself when he consciously took that step. See http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibr ... he_Bounds/ for more on this.

blessings,
ken

 

[RND]

Equivocation.... once again... you are quite adept at that aren't you lol

It's your rope.

Its better to think of this accusation coming as a result of biblical discernment. Or put another way, if I am guilty of being like Satan by my accusation, then Paul was too when he condemned the Judiazers, John was when he condemned the Gnostics, and Jesus was when He condemned the Pharisees and all who stand against Him.

Funny isn't it that Paul, and John, and Peter, and James never said they wanted anyone to roast, toast and fricassee forever and ever did they?

This commandment and practice of discernment is not limited to those who inerrantly gave us the Scriptures either.

You mean errantly?

Christians have to make judgments as to what is true and false, what is within the bounds of Christianity and what is not, we are to discern between truth and error.

Not Christianity brother, but rather the Word of God. Christianity can and will burn folks at the stake, put 'em on a rack and willingly condemn whatever they don't understand to a life of "eternal torment."

I run from that type of Christian because they have an extremely limited view of God.

Of course, you are free to disagree with me on what lines I see drawn in the sand as far as the biblical testimony regarding things that are adiaphora, matters of indifference or personal conscience, and which fall within or outside the bounds of biblical Christianity.

Thanks for your permission, but I really didn't need it.

Boyd has stepped outside the bounds of classical historic Christianity by denying Gods absolute exhaustive omniscience. I did not do this to Boyd, he did it to himself when he consciously took that step. See http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibr ... he_Bounds/ for more on this.

Ken, I usually dismiss anything from John Piper outright simply because the Christianity he follows and recognizes isn't the same Christianity I follow and recognize. If Piper would rather pick apart Christians instead of trying to understand God that his business. But frankly I would imagine Greg Boyd doesn't waste much time, energy or thought defending himself from the slings and arrows of the incompetent and the accuser of the brethren.

 

[mutzrein]

Can fear be a the sole motivating factor in producing undying and passionate love?

Fear can never be the motivating factor for knowing Christ.

 

[epistemaniac]

RND, I usually dismiss anything from Greg Boyd or Seventh Day Adventists outright simply because the Christianity he/they follow and recognize isn't the same Christianity I follow and recognize. If Boyd or Seventh Day Adventists would rather pick apart Christians instead of trying to understand God that his business.

There, now that was fun, wasn't it?

And hey, lets always outrightly dismiss those we disagree with... lets not really hear them, or read what they have to say, that would just be unproductive and might lead to us actually understanding the other parties involved in the debate, and thus lead to actual genuine criticisms of their beliefs. We would not want to do that because erecting straw men, easily knocking those down, and just dismissing them if they do not happen to agree with our preconceived notions is just so much easier.

But, re

But frankly I would imagine Greg Boyd doesn't waste much time, energy or thought defending himself from the slings and arrows of the incompetent and the accuser of the brethren.

You obviously do not know much about Greg Boyd, (or John Piper for that matter) or the controversy he and other Open Theists caused within the Evangelical Theological Society, as well as in the General Baptist Convention. Greg Boyd has spent and continues to spend an enormous amount if time both defending AND propagating his views, whether it be directly related to the controversy already spoken of, or whether it be controversy and strife he has caused amongst the brethren elsewhere, so much so that he has been called the "pied piper of Open Theism".

blessings,
ken

 

[RND]

Can fear be a the sole motivating factor in producing undying and passionate love?

Fear can never be the motivating factor for knowing Christ.

Thank you for injecting such sorely needed truth into the conversation.

 

[Sinthesis]

I run from that type of Christian because they have an extremely limited view of God.

I find this thought, coming from somebody advocating Greg Boyd, hilariously ironic. :rolling

 

[RND]

RND, I usually dismiss anything from Greg Boyd or Seventh Day Adventists outright simply because the Christianity he/they follow and recognize isn't the same Christianity I follow and recognize. If Boyd or Seventh Day Adventists would rather pick apart Christians instead of trying to understand God that his business.

I think Greg Boyd and SDA's in general understand the true nature and true character of God better than most.

There, now that was fun, wasn't it?

For who?

And hey, lets always outrightly dismiss those we disagree with... lets not really hear them, or read what they have to say, that would just be unproductive and might lead to us actually understanding the other parties involved in the debate, and thus lead to actual genuine criticisms of their beliefs. We would not want to do that because erecting straw men, easily knocking those down, and just dismissing them if they do not happen to agree with our preconceived notions is just so much easier.

Brother Ken, I haven't injected any fantasy into the discussion......I believe you invoked Jonathan Edwards into the conversation a man that seems to have an idea about heaven and hell that is pure Disneyland fiction.

But, re [quote:3gdcb530]But frankly I would imagine Greg Boyd doesn't waste much time, energy or thought defending himself from the slings and arrows of the incompetent and the accuser of the brethren.

You obviously do not know much about Greg Boyd, (or John Piper for that matter) or the controversy he and other Open Theists caused within the Evangelical Theological Society, as well as in the General Baptist Convention.[/quote:3gdcb530]

I know about the controversy that GB has caused, and I know GB is still standing, still writing and still bringing truth to the people about the character of God - a testament in my eyes that the truth about God will never cease to be told in these last days. And that is sure to light any Pharisees' hair on fire!

Greg Boyd has spent and continues to spend an enormous amount if time both defending AND propagating his views, whether it be directly related to the controversy already spoken of, or whether it be controversy and strife he has caused amongst the brethren elsewhere, so much so that he has been called the "pied piper of Open Theism".

I would rather accept the truth of God propagated as so-called "Open Theism" than continue to listen to the closed-mindedness of stale and inaccurate theology.

 

[RND]

I run from that type of Christian because they have an extremely limited view of God.

I find this thought, coming from somebody advocating Greg Boyd, hilariously ironic. :rolling

I bet....We all support a view of God that best suits our personalities.

 

[JoJo]

Might I also interject my two cents? I said something like this in another thread, but it may be worth repeating here.

I believe that hell is a total separation from God and is where evil reigns. Naturally, God and evil cannot co-exist, so hell would be a total absence of His presence (and an absence of anything good...so it would be torturous). However, I don't believe God is in the business of torturing -- that's satan's job. When a person rejects God/Jesus, he makes the decision to take his chances with eternity, and that means separation from the God he never accepted or believed in.

 

[epistemaniac]

I run from that type of Christian because they have an extremely limited view of God.

I find this thought, coming from somebody advocating Greg Boyd, hilariously ironic. :rolling

I bet....We all support a view of God that best suits our personalities.

obviously...

 

[Joe67]

Pharisee? Sadducee? Which will it be?

The Pharisees stumbled at faith, but ultimately they refused to sanction Paul's death, while the Sadducees followed him to Ceasarea to argue for his condemnation before Felix.

Many of the Pharisaical party joined with those that worshipped Jesus as Lord. They were constantly trying to bring some of the elements of the God-given Jewish bondage into the new covenant worship of the Lord Jesus as our Head and God. There is forgiveness for this stiffness of neck.

A stubborn spirit of being God's counselor is like witchcraft. Being wiser than Daniel leads us into the depths of the sea.

Joe

 

[epistemaniac]

I run from that type of Christian because they have an extremely limited view of God.

I find this thought, coming from somebody advocating Greg Boyd, hilariously ironic. :rolling

you are so right... excellent point! lol....

blessings,
ken

 

[savagesoto]

]

If God is Love and good all the time does God have the capacity to torture forever and ever?

Nope...it contradicts itself

 

[JoJo]

Who tortures? Satan tortures.

 

[savagesoto]

Who tortures? Satan tortures.

I wouldnt be too sure about that. Lets look at Rev 14:10(NIV)
"he, too, will drink of the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb."

Last time I checked the holy angels and the Lamb werent satan