Damnation Question

[SputnikBoy]

It's not a difficult question for me because I do not believe that God destines people for hell, but rather that they do it themselves, by rejecting Him and choosing to live in their flesh.

Sputnik: I don't think that anyone is suggesting that a penalty should not be paid for one's sinful behavior ...it's the EXTENT of the punishment that seems to be the problem. Even Adolph Hitler and other Nazi criminals ever committed enough sins to warrant (literal) ETERNAL punishment. The majority of prison inmates are incarcerated for a period of time and then released. As it should be. Even then, their punishment doesn't involve torture. Nor should it.

Please bear in mind that 'a sin' in this particular case might be one's not having accepted Jesus Christ in their lives, not that they were a mass murderer. Eternal torment because one made the (bad) choice not to accept Jesus ...is that not somewhat extreme? Of course it is. And, any professed Christian who REALLY believes that God expresses His ultimate love for His earthly treasures by torturing them for 'merely' not having accepted Him, worships a very strange God indeed.

I, personally, don't believe that God will do what so many Christians appear to WANT Him to do. I also believe that they arrive at this bizarre concept through a gross misunderstanding of the scriptures. They surface read only. They take as literal what is figurative or symbolic and arrive at a doctrine that makes God out to be a tyrant. And, most appalling for me, is that the majority of Christians seem to be quite okay about this misconception. They don't even want to hear another side that is based on a more complete understanding of the particular scriptural texts in question. They close their minds and instead cling to their cherished beliefs ...on this AND other issues.

Some will even DEFEND this doctrine of eternal torment with great relish and zealousness. Why? Just my opinion, but I think we live in a society today that has been programmed to be angry and hateful. I remember Phil Donahue making the comment about Americans (which can also be applied to Australians), "It seems these days as though everybody wants to execute someone." Hatred and intolerance and 'getting back at people who have wronged us' is displayed in epidemic proportions today. And, with people in this frame of mind, how can their God POSSIBLY be any different? To the individual, I feel, God is often a reflection of one's heart.

 

[von]

McQuacks- That is right, we choose where we will go. It seems to me that we tend to want to live however we choose and then escape Hell. We want all of god's mercy and grace for nothing. Sad as it may be, it doesn't work that way.
Someone commits murder, what? Is it cruel to put them in prison for the rest of their life or should we say, oh, it's okay, we love you just the same? No punishment necessary!

 

[SputnikBoy]

McQuacks- That is right, we choose where we will go. It seems to me that we tend to want to live however we choose and then escape Hell. We want all of god's mercy and grace for nothing. Sad as it may be, it doesn't work that way.
Someone commits murder, what? Is it cruel to put them in prison for the rest of their life or should we say, oh, it's okay, we love you just the same? No punishment necessary!

Sputnik: Again, von, the point is not that one escape their just deserts, if need be. That really isn't the issue since no one is arguing that particular point. The issue is in relation to the 'severity' of the punishment administered to the sinner by God. We're talking about everlasting torment for perhaps 70-odd years of a person's life. Hardly just. Even in your illustration above you have the murderer spending a life time in prison. A life time in prison is far different from one's suffering for eternity for not having accepted Jesus. Can you not see the dilemma here? I truly believe that we need to question the scriptures (or at least other's interpretation of the scriptures) in cases such as this.

By the way, not intending to be picky or/and off-topic, but Christians should certainly be ministering to WHOEVER may be serving time in prison. It might be the general consensus of society that criminals be locked up, have the key thrown away, and forgotten; however, Christians have a wonderful opportunity to befriend those who possibly need Jesus the most. While I realize that the phrase you used, "we love you just the same," was for the benefit of the illustration, you actually spoke the truth. There are some wonderful people who minister to prison inmates and offer them hope through Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, these people are all too few.

We need a serious revival in our laodicean churches where every living Christian soul who is able is out in the mission field. The mission field may be our own street, CERTAINLY our local prison.

 

[kwag_myers]

I feel worthless! I feel hopeless! But I still know that God loves me. And that He will never forsake and give up on me, even if it takes a quadrilion years.

Would Christ give His very life for someone who is worthless? No. You where bought with a great price and you are a very important part of God's plain in the earth (1 Corinthians 7:23).

Again, I'll repeat that hell was never intended for man. However, man chooses hell when he refuses to have a repenting heart (2 Peter 3:9). This is what Jesus was referring to in the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11).

I have a prodigal son of my own and I can tell you that I have given him everything he needs to live in God's Kingdom. Yet, he chooses to live according to his own will and not the will of God. My son knows Jesus as his Savior, but not as Lord. Do I stop loving him? Of course not. But I cannot force my son to live the life I know he should be living. That would only cause him to reject me. So, I wait, praying that one day my son gets his fill of eating pig slop and returns to his place in God's Kingdom.

God also loves those who reject Him. He does not force His will on them and His heart is that they will someday repent. But He knows that some will never repent and therefore must suffer the consequences that were never intended for them.

 

[von]

Sput_ Please don't think that I have no compassion for people. I truly do. I have great friends who have a prison ministry. But that even makes my point stronger. Using prisoners as an example. they chose the life of crime, which would eventually lead to eternal damnation. (their choice), when they accept Christ they make another choice, just like everyone elso. I wouldn't want to have no free will. It is true though, hell was not intended for man, it was intended for the devil and his angels.

 

[DivineNames]

Good point von. I wonder how many earthly fathers would send their sons out to die for even one other person.

Perhaps lots of them would, if they could easily bring them back to life a few days later!

Secondly, and this is a point of theological dispute I believe, but the divine person may not even have died, it may only have been the human nature that died. And whatever the case, he (or 'it'- the human nature) comes back to life 3 days later.

 

[DivineNames]

Again, I'll repeat that hell was never intended for man.

That Hell was created for naughty Angels, I can't see that this helps to avoid the problem at all.

 

[von]

Question- What good is in any man that he does not deserve eternal punishment?

 

[Gendou Ikari]

1. What about the Aborigines who lived on Australia can God damn them because they did not know? How is it their fault that they were born there?

2. What about babies, do they go to hell once they die? Do they get a free ride into heaven?(If so, then my parents should have killed me. Scratch that... don't want to live in heaven with an evil god.)

 

[DivineNames]

2. What about babies, do they go to hell once they die? Do they get a free ride into heaven?(If so, then my parents should have killed me. Scratch that... don't want to live in heaven with an evil god.)

Yeah, in that circumstance, the kindest thing to do would be to go around with a cricket bat smashing babies brains out.

 

[von]

The bible says that before Jesus returns everyone from evey nation will have heard the gospel and had opportunity of salvation.
As far as babies go. No, I don't believe all babies go to Heaven, sorry. Don't get me wrong I wish all babies went to Heaven and I don't think that it is fair that they don't but the Bible teaches that it is throught the parents salvation that children are made clean.

 

[SputnikBoy]

The bible says that before Jesus returns everyone from evey nation will have heard the gospel and had opportunity of salvation.
As far as babies go. No, I don't believe all babies go to Heaven, sorry. Don't get me wrong I wish all babies went to Heaven and I don't think that it is fair that they don't but the Bible teaches that it is throught the parents salvation that children are made clean.

Sputnik: I think that the text you're referring to, von, was intended for those during a time period when the world was very patriarchal. I don't believe that one is saved through their parents' salvation today. Slaves, women, children were under the 'cultural thumb' of male dominance in times past. They were unable to make choices of any kind and this was culturally and, evidently, scripturally acceptable. Not so today. I believe each individual is responsible for his/her decisions in life.

As for babies who die before their time ...who knows? Whatever we come up with on these type forums is no more than speculation. Because God knows the end from the beginning, perhaps He knows the decisions that EVERYONE would have made for themselves ...even babies had they been allowed to live. Example: I became a Christian in 1988. If I had died for some reason or other in 1987, would God have known that, in 12 months time, I'll accept Jesus Christ in my life? And, would God's knowing that fact 'save me' even though I hadn't accepted Jesus at the time of my death? Hmmm ...! I'm not for one moment implying that God Himself has 'programmed' each of us previously ...not at all. All I'm saying (speculating) is that God KNOWS IN ADVANCE the choice each individual will make. That idea, I feel, is the only one that makes sense.

Um ...I guess we've gone somewhat off-topic.

 

[DivineNames]

Secondly, and this is a point of theological dispute I believe, but the divine person may not even have died, it may only have been the human nature that died.

If the divine person did genuinely die, then could all three persons of the Trinity die? What kind of God is that?

Also, if the three persons are ONE God, then it should be inconceivable that they be separate. If one person of the Trinity can die and the other two persons still exist, do they not appear to be separate?

 

[von]

Sput- I'm refering to I Cor.7:14. I see no place in the Bible where it speaks of an age of accountability like so many of the churches teach.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Sput- I'm refering to I Cor.7:14. I see no place in the Bible where it speaks of an age of accountability like so many of the churches teach.

Sputnik: Yes, von, that was the text I was referring to in my previous post. Other than the view I gave, I don't know what that text means. Anyway, gotta go, I have an appointment in one hour!

 

[von]

Well, it makes sense to me because God is no respector of persons. He told the Children of Israel when they were in battle to destroy every one. Men, women, and children. It was to destroy a wicked bloodline. So, it seems to me that it would be the same with an unsaved family. Their children would not be covered by the blood.

 

[kwag_myers]

1. What about the Aborigines who lived on Australia can God damn them because they did not know? How is it their fault that they were born there?

2. What about babies, do they go to hell once they die? Do they get a free ride into heaven?(If so, then my parents should have killed me. Scratch that... don't want to live in heaven with an evil god.)

"Who [is] this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?" (Job 38:2). I suggest that you read the last four chapters of Job before you speak anymore out of your ignorance of God. Then read my signature.

God is love, His very nature is love. His will is that no one should perish. Again, you are trying to blame God for something He didn't do and you are making assumptions without any basis.

Secondly, and this is a point of theological dispute I believe, but the divine person may not even have died, it may only have been the human nature that died.

If the divine person did genuinely die, then could all three persons of the Trinity die? What kind of God is that?

Also, if the three persons are ONE God, then it should be inconceivable that they be separate. If one person of the Trinity can die and the other two persons still exist, do they not appear to be separate?

According to the Bible, my wife and I are one. Yet, either one of us could die and still the other lives. When we refer to "one God" we are referring to three beings that are in unity, total agreement, and submissiveness to one another.

Also, I've addressed the "divine person" dying in your "more divine mystery" thread http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=17992.

 

[DivineNames]

According to the Bible, my wife and I are one. Yet, either one of us could die and still the other lives. When we refer to "one God" we are referring to three beings that are in unity, total agreement, and submissiveness to one another.

This would appear to be "Social Trinitarianism". This may be your view of the Trinity, it may be some other Christians view of the Trinity, but this is not universal.

It probably isn't monotheistic.

 

[von]

Divine Names- Are you saying that Christ did not die that only His nature died? Please clarify in case that I am misunderstanding you.
It may not be universal to believe that the trinity exists of three persons but it is obvious throughout the scriptures.

 

[kwag_myers]

This would appear to be "Social Trinitarianism". This may be your view of the Trinity, it may be some other Christians view of the Trinity, but this is not universal.

It probably isn't monotheistic.

Social Trinitarianism, as defined here: http://branemrys.blogspot.com/2005/02/faith-and-philosophy-and-trinity.html:

(1) There are three really distinct Persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit);
(2) Each of the Persons is God;
(3) There is only one God;

So, based on point (3), your statement, "It probably isn't monotheistic." is incorrect. Monotheistic, as defined by Webster's, is the belief in one God.

Also, my statement isn't Social Trinitarianism, either. I don't believe that Jesus is God, but is part of the Godhead.

When I say, "we" I am referring to all those who believe in the Godhead. I should have qualified that.