Infinite Nature of Sin and Hell

[Solo]

Can anyone explain to me as intellectually as is possible 1. how tormenting anyone for ANY amount of time is beneficial either to the tormenter or the tormentee, 2. how those of the saved who have loved ones currently being tormented will respond, and, 3. where does/will this tormenting actually taking place? Is/will hell be on the New Earth, in heaven, some specially constructed penal colony ...where?

Just want to bump this up in the hope of getting some answers or even guesses.

Perhaps you can answer these questions:

1. How is it possible that a person would accept eternal punishment as payment for their sins, as opposed to repenting from their sins and accepting God's payment, Jesus Christ?

2. How a believer who is saved will not pray unceasingly for those of his family, and being the best example of Jesus Christ so that those who are unbelievers in their family may be saved from an eternity of punishment?

3. The lake of fire will be the eternal place of punishment for the fallen angels, satan, and all unbelievers. It will be located apart from God.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Basically all you're arguing is that, if there is a God above us, He has the right to destroy us. That little rotten kid down the street in "Anytown, U.S.A." has the same right to torture small animals. He has the right because he can? Is this kid "justified" in torturing/destroying because it is in his power to do so?

If the author of the universe who makes the rules says it is ok, then by all means; but if God determines that this stewardship is selfish and non-constructive in his Kingdom, a judgment will be based on rebellion against his Word. You can live by God's rules or by DivineNames rules, but remember that lawlessness has its consequences.

So, are you equating the mere questioning of a God who some believe will torment people for evermore to that of 'lawlessness', Solo? Are you, in fact, suggesting that those who DO question God are THEMSELVES at high risk of eternal torment?

I jotted down the signature of another forum user that I kinda like. It's evidently a quote by Galileo. It goes: "I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect, has intended us to forego their use ..." Do you not agree with this, Solo?

 

[Solo]

Double Post

 

[Solo]

Basically all you're arguing is that, if there is a God above us, He has the right to destroy us. That little rotten kid down the street in "Anytown, U.S.A." has the same right to torture small animals. He has the right because he can? Is this kid "justified" in torturing/destroying because it is in his power to do so?

If the author of the universe who makes the rules says it is ok, then by all means; but if God determines that this stewardship is selfish and non-constructive in his Kingdom, a judgment will be based on rebellion against his Word. You can live by God's rules or by DivineNames rules, but remember that lawlessness has its consequences.

So, are you equating the mere questioning of a God who some believe will torment people for evermore to that of 'lawlessness', Solo? Are you, in fact, suggesting that those who DO question God are THEMSELVES at high risk of eternal torment?

I jotted down the signature of another forum user that I kinda like. It's evidently a quote by Galileo. It goes: "I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect, has intended us to forego their use ..." Do you not agree with this, Solo?

Hey Sputnik,
I am answering the question placed in BradtheImpaler post

That little rotten kid down the street in "Anytown, U.S.A." has the same right to torture small animals. He has the right because he can? Is this kid "justified" in torturing/destroying because it is in his power to do so?

I believe that human reason apart from God's truth is dangerous, but that same reason can fall within God's truth and can lead people to seek God. Human reason apart from God can result in an individual becoming self-serving, and away from God's will for them. Whenever reason and intellect part from God's truth, they must be corralled and re-established inline with God's Word. What do you think?

Do all that you do to the glory of God.

Solo

 

[belovedwolfofgod]

Basically all you're arguing is that, if there is a God above us, He has the right to destroy us. That little rotten kid down the street in "Anytown, U.S.A." has the same right to torture small animals. He has the right because he can? Is this kid "justified" in torturing/destroying because it is in his power to do so?

The rotten little kid from anytown USA didnt create the little animals. We are not discussing the same things here. The little animals and us are created beings. God made us all, we didnt make animals but animals are subject to us for our use. Torturing an animal doesnt glorify God. So, we arent arguing the same thing here. Created-created= no dice. Creator-created= creator owns the created.

SputnickBoy
1. Its justice. Everything moves for equilibrium. If you look at a drop of water in space, it moves so that the pressure exerted on it is in equilibrium all over it. For an unrepentent sinner, he has refused forgiveness in not seeking it. He violated the natural law and the divine laws. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". This transgression was taken care of by Jesus when He took our place of shame. However, in order for us to take care of that, we need to be in Him. Those who wish to be in Him follow after him. Those who arent in Him take the punishment themselves and pay for themselves a debt they cannot pay and will spend eternity paying for. Its justice. It corrects all that is wrong. Its equilibrium. Or at the very least, it is a system seeking equilibrium.

2. I dont really care how those who are saved will respond. I feel for them. I may have lost my mother to that infernal place. But there is nothing I can do. The truth can hurt. Jesus told the truth and it threw people. But He wasnt gonna lie just so people felt better. Sorry if thats not the answer you wanted to hear. And I hope I dont offend anyone by saying it. Work out your own salvation with the Lord. And trust in His mercy.

3. Does it matter physically where it will be? A new heaven and a new earth, yes... and a lake of fire... somewhere... Its in the book of Revelation. I dont know the latitude and longitude of it, nor do I know the space coordinates. There will be a place for it... somewhere...

DivineNames... Im not slighting you. Your comments require a little more time than I have right now. The other answers were a lot easier. Basically, I have been working with some friends and their walks with God, and Im on painkillers (hydrocodone) for my jaw infection... So I will respond Wednesday.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Basically all you're arguing is that, if there is a God above us, He has the right to destroy us. That little rotten kid down the street in "Anytown, U.S.A." has the same right to torture small animals. He has the right because he can? Is this kid "justified" in torturing/destroying because it is in his power to do so?

The rotten little kid from anytown USA didnt create the little animals. We are not discussing the same things here. The little animals and us are created beings. God made us all, we didnt make animals but animals are subject to us for our use. Torturing an animal doesnt glorify God. So, we arent arguing the same thing here. Created-created= no dice. Creator-created= creator owns the created.

Strange logic that allows the Creator to inflict cruelty on His created by virtue of His HAVING created them. By the way, does eternal torment glorify God? Just asking.

SputnickBoy
1. Its justice.

Wrong! How can eternal torment for seventy-odd years of sin be considered a just penalty!

Everything moves for equilibrium. If you look at a drop of water in space, it moves so that the pressure exerted on it is in equilibrium all over it. For an unrepentent sinner, he has refused forgiveness in not seeking it. He violated the natural law and the divine laws. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". This transgression was taken care of by Jesus when He took our place of shame. However, in order for us to take care of that, we need to be in Him. Those who wish to be in Him follow after him. Those who arent in Him take the punishment themselves and pay for themselves a debt they cannot pay and will spend eternity paying for. Its justice. It corrects all that is wrong. Its equilibrium. Or at the very least, it is a system seeking equilibrium.

The saved would never let God get away with it. Seems to me like there would be rebellion all over again ...and with just cause! Annihilating the unfortunate who either didn't hear or didn't listen is one thing. Eternal torment is another ...despite your equilibrium theory.

2. I dont really care how those who are saved will respond. I feel for them. I may have lost my mother to that infernal place. But there is nothing I can do. The truth can hurt. Jesus told the truth and it threw people. But He wasnt gonna lie just so people felt better. Sorry if thats not the answer you wanted to hear. And I hope I dont offend anyone by saying it. Work out your own salvation with the Lord. And trust in His mercy.

You don't really care but you feel for them ...? As well as not being too sure how you feel, you also have a rather callous approach to this issue based on your belief that your loved ones may well suffer eternal torment, BWOG. And, no one is saying that Jesus didn't tell the truth. Jesus presented the truth of the destruction of the wicked within a 'fable' concerning the local garbage dump of Gehenna. He aimed it at an audience who would have known what He was talking about.

3. Does it matter physically where it will be? A new heaven and a new earth, yes... and a lake of fire... somewhere... Its in the book of Revelation. I dont know the latitude and longitude of it, nor do I know the space coordinates. There will be a place for it... somewhere...

Man, you're casual. Yes, there will definitely be a lake of fire. But is IS the understanding of some that the fire will go out when the destruction of the unrighteous has been completed. Furthermore, it would appear that the fire spoken of in scripture occurs here on earth ...not somewhere ...

Based on this scripture hell must be located here on earth ...in fact, this is where hell IS located! But, hell will only last as long as it takes to burn up and cleanse the earth in preparation for a 'new earth'. There will be no sin in the new earth and death and destruction will have disappeared FOREVER. The wicked dead will be no more than stubble (Isaiah 47:14). Ever seen the aftermath of a grassfire? What about Satan? Well, Ezekiel 18-19 tells us clearly that he'll be consumed and reduced to ashes. Satan will come to a horrible end and will be no more! Everlasting stubble in torment? Everlasting ashes in torment of one who has come to a horrible end and is no more? Please ...work that one out and get back to me.

 

[belovedwolfofgod]

I tried to find the Ezekiel passage, the link didnt take me to a verse, I think you typed it in wrong.

Im gonna go with some more explicit verses. I read the Isaiha verse, and it doesnt really say much. Its not opposed to eternal damnation. It just says they will be as nothing and none shall escape. And well, thats true.

•36: He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him. John 3
•8: And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. Matthew 18
•41: Then he will say to those at his left hand, `Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. Matthew 25
•46: And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Matthew 25

1. Your contention to Point number one finally brings this thing full circle to the inifinite aspect of sn.

The saved would never let God get away with it. Seems to me like there would be rebellion all over again ...and with just cause! Annihilating the unfortunate who either didn't hear or didn't listen is one thing. Eternal torment is another ...despite your equilibrium theory.

Cause yeah, the saved could do a whole lot. Did you read my part on Hell being in line with Gods Mercy and Justice? Mercy because He will not force them to accept him despite the consequences. Justice because they violated the natural and divine laws. God said there would be those who would be punished. If a sin can be punished infinitely because it is also in a respect, infinite, then eternal torment is indeed just and the Faithful will understand that.

2. Yeah, I gotta be a little detached from it. Its truly unfortunate, but out of my power. No sense getting worked up.

Final Paragraph: I will deal with this point when I find what I have been looking for on the eternal soul... Sorry for the wait...

 

[belovedwolfofgod]

Implications of negating God's Justice.

I will start off with this:
God is infinite and infinitely holy. Anyone who sins has offended God... This offense is against and infinite God therefore the offense has an infinite consequence... Since God is infinite and the offense has an infinite offense (by offending an infinite God), then the punishment must be infinite - eternal damnation. (“Evenâ€Â)

God must operate within a system of Justice. If God could just allow everyone who wanted to avoid damnation, then there would be no need for Christ. However, I dont think this is the point we are debating at the moment. I just wanted to point out that God operates within a given framework of Justice. Christ had to die, he had to be beaten. He had to submit to the point of death. If we are to use Christ as the example then we have on hell of a task.

It must be said that the pasages which speak of destruction… do not necessarily imply the cessation of existence, for in these passages the terms used for ‘destruction’ do not necessarily imply a ceasing to exist or some kind of annihilaiton, but can simply be ways of referring to the harmful and destructive effects of final judgment on unbelievers.
Wayne Gruden "Systematic Theology"

Matthew 10:28 is sometimes used to support annihilationism where it says “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.†Apollumi, which is translated here as “destroy†does not necessitate obliteration out of existance. It literally means ‘to loosen,’ but often means to destroy or tear apart or come apart. It does not necessarily mean nothing will be left.Those that are “destroyed†in this way are not obliterated out of existence, but lost to God or life or hope forever. This is the same word used in Luke 17:27 and 2 Peter 3:6 to describe what happened to the unrighteous in the flood and Luke 17:29.

Essentially, God realizes that He is life and the source of all of it. If a being exists in a seperated state, they are not "alive". The exist, and are yet dead. If you would like an example, as the baptists would say "If they have not accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal saviour, they are DEAD in sin." Now, Im not a baptist and we differ a lot on salvation, but the sentiment is still the same. God understands that death is seperation for the source of life. Death is existence without him, not a cessation of existence.

In the framework of Gods justice as displayed through Christ, punishment happens. Next, because God is infinite and any who have sinned have offended the infinite God then the offense is infinite and the punishment too can be infinite.

 

[guibox]

It must be said that the pasages which speak of destruction… do not necessarily imply the cessation of existence, for in these passages the terms used for ‘destruction’ do not necessarily imply a ceasing to exist or some kind of annihilaiton, but can simply be ways of referring to the harmful and destructive effects of final judgment on unbelievers.
Wayne Gruden "Systematic Theology"

The problem here is that all instances of destruction then are assumed to NOT mean complete destruction. Hence, we then must look at the context of these words and other words used to describe the fate of the wicked. If the context implies that 'destruction' then does indeed mean annihilation, it must be taken as such.

Matthew 10:28 is sometimes used to support annihilationism where it says “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.†Apollumi, which is translated here as “destroy†does not necessitate obliteration out of existance. It literally means ‘to loosen,’ but often means to destroy or tear apart or come apart. It does not necessarily mean nothing will be left.Those that are “destroyed†in this way are not obliterated out of existence, but lost to God or life or hope forever. This is the same word used in Luke 17:27 and 2 Peter 3:6 to describe what happened to the unrighteous in the flood and Luke 17:29.

The simple fact is, is that 'apollumi' DOES mean 'destroy' and the instances where it does mean 'to lose' do not make any sense in application with the wicked. Where 'apollumi' means 'to lose' is in the instance of Matthew 10:39 - "Whoever shall save his life shall 'lose it' and whoever 'loses' his life for my sake will save it"

However, in the context of Matthew 10:28, 'apollumi' meaning 'to lose' makes no sense. Also it ignores the fact of 'destroying' that is prevelant in the verse. Man can KILL the body, but fear Him who can DESTROY BOTH body and soul'

Hence, unless man simply 'loses' the body, you cannot interpret 'to lose' as the interpretation of 'apollumi' in this instance for God will not just KILL the body (as man will) but also the soul as well.

Essentially, God realizes that He is life and the source of all of it. If a being exists in a seperated state, they are not "alive". The exist, and are yet dead. If you would like an example, as the baptists would say "If they have not accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal saviour, they are DEAD in sin." Now, Im not a baptist and we differ a lot on salvation, but the sentiment is still the same. God understands that death is seperation for the source of life. Death is existence without him, not a cessation of existence.

Being dead in their sins is far from destruction brought on by fire. Being dead in ones sins means that one will eventually die for 'the wages of sin is death, BUT the gift of God is eternal life'. Eternal life will be an existential reality as will death. One cannot be 'dead' and be alive in the judgement. Separation is not 'death' 'perishing' or destroyed'.

These terms are used literally in these instances and all the evidence points towards finality of God's enemies, not an ongoing process.

 

[guibox]

1. Its justice...For an unrepentent sinner, he has refused forgiveness in not seeking it. He violated the natural law and the divine laws. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God". This transgression was taken care of by Jesus when He took our place of shame.

Your problem is that 'hell' is not part of the 'natural law' of sin...death is. If there is a hell, it was created by God specifically for the sole purpose of punishment. If Christ came to save us from Hell, then He came to deliver us from something that He created. He came to save us from Himself. This is a complete contradiction for coming to the earth was love for the sinners but tormenting them for eternity is cruel wrath.

You then serve a two faced God.

Man sinned...through Adam came death because of it. Christ came to give us LIFE. "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life'. 'For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish but have everlasting life.'

These verses explain each other...perishing is death. Eternal life is it's opposite.

Christ came to save us from death, not a fiery hell.

The fiery hell at the end of time is merely a means to an end in which sinners get caught in the crossfire and go down with the ship.

 

[DivineNames]

You can live by God's rules or by DivineNames rules

OK, but what rules have I given?

 

[Solo]

You can live by God's rules or by DivineNames rules

OK, but what rules have I given?

None! :wink:

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Basically all you're arguing is that, if there is a God above us, He has the right to destroy us. That little rotten kid down the street in "Anytown, U.S.A." has the same right to torture small animals. He has the right because he can? Is this kid "justified" in torturing/destroying because it is in his power to do so?

The rotten little kid from anytown USA didnt create the little animals. We are not discussing the same things here. The little animals and us are created beings. God made us all, we didnt make animals but animals are subject to us for our use. Torturing an animal doesnt glorify God. So, we arent arguing the same thing here. Created-created= no dice. Creator-created= creator owns the created

Why does it matter (per the analogy) whether the cruel little kid created the animals or not?

It's his hamster...he owns it...he has power over it...so he sets it on fire :o

He has the right? He is justified in this? Or by that do you mean he just has the power to do it?

 

[SputnikBoy]

WHOEVER - and that would include God - inflicts intentional and unnecessary pain on another is not to be trusted or respected.

 

[SputnikBoy]

The fiery hell at the end of time is merely a means to an end in which sinners get caught in the crossfire and go down with the ship.

Good example. A number of purposes are achieved in the one act.

 

[BradtheImpaler]

Basically all you're arguing is that, if there is a God above us, He has the right to destroy us. That little rotten kid down the street in "Anytown, U.S.A." has the same right to torture small animals. He has the right because he can? Is this kid "justified" in torturing/destroying because it is in his power to do so?

If the author of the universe who makes the rules says it is ok, then by all means; but if God determines that this stewardship is selfish and non-constructive in his Kingdom, a judgment will be based on rebellion against his Word. You can live by God's rules or by DivineNames rules, but remember that lawlessness has its consequences

So do you maintain that God is compassionate, merciful, unselfish, etc., or just that He makes the rules and whatever He does or doesn't do, that's tough?