How can a god be omniscience and allow people with free will go to hell?

SimplyNothing · #11 18th October 2009, 05:13 PM

So by dismissing any issues I have with my interpretations of the Bible, I can solve all my problems?

Exactly!!

I cannot reconcile love, with a God who burns ANYBODY for billions of years for a finite life of sin. The whole of the Bible is completely contradictory and absolutely nonsensical if this is the case.

As was explained in the other thread, the words used for hell in the Bible are, Tartarus, Gehenna, and Sheol. Tartarus was a term used for the final judgement of demons. Sheol, or Hades, was considered the waiting place for the dead before the great judgement, and Gehenna was a place that they set diseased bodies and garbage on fire just outside of Jerusalem.

The doctrine of burning, fiery hell was established a few hundred years after the Canon of scripture existed. So to me... it seems like a bogus effort to attain money and control the masses.

I'm not trying to say that there's no afterlife, or even that there's no hell. What I'm trying to say is that hellfire is contradictory to God's nature. I believe that non-Christians are seperated from God, but not burnt for billions of years 'cause they sinned for like 60 to 80.

Can you call some God who burns people for eternity 'cause they sinned for like 25550 days either just or loving?

Jazmyn · #12 18th October 2009, 05:54 PM

Sort of disregards this passage:
"And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name.'" (Rev. 14:11)
We can't really put human judgments on what God does.
Since if His mercy lasts for ever and ever, surely His power must too.

Jaws13 · #13 18th October 2009, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by SimplyNothing

This whole problem is easily solved when we all realize that God doesn't send people to burning torment for billions of years. No qualms

Your Bible disagrees with you. Mat 25:41 "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; Mat 25:42 for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; Mat 25:43 I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.' Mat 25:44 "Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?' Mat 25:45 "Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' Mat 25:46 "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Jaws13 · #14 18th October 2009, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by SimplyNothing

Exactly!!

I cannot reconcile love, with a God who burns ANYBODY for billions of years for a finite life of sin. The whole of the Bible is completely contradictory and absolutely nonsensical if this is the case.

You think our sins are finite? How do you know they do not have eternal consequences for others?

As was explained in the other thread, the words used for hell in the Bible are, Tartarus, Gehenna, and Sheol. Tartarus was a term used for the final judgement of demons. Sheol, or Hades, was considered the waiting place for the dead before the great judgement, and Gehenna was a place that they set diseased bodies and garbage on fire just outside of Jerusalem.

The doctrine of burning, fiery hell was established a few hundred years after the Canon of scripture existed. So to me... it seems like a bogus effort to attain money and control the masses.

I'm not trying to say that there's no afterlife, or even that there's no hell. What I'm trying to say is that hellfire is contradictory to God's nature. I believe that non-Christians are seperated from God, but not burnt for billions of years 'cause they sinned for like 60 to 80.

Can you call some God who burns people for eternity 'cause they sinned for like 25550 days either just or loving?

Your argument is a bunch of empty claims. And yes, I can call God just and loving.

SimplyNothing · #15 18th October 2009, 06:42 PM

Sort of disregards this passage:
"And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name.'" (Rev. 14:11)
We can't really put human judgments on what God does.

I disregard it because I question the books authorship, authenticity, many of its theological concepts, its depiction of Jesus as one who enjoys watching the torture of sinful humans, much of its imagery, plus I'm not really a futurist.

But if I choose to regard it there are a few things I want to clarify.

The word used for torment in Revelation 14:9-11, is the Greek word basanizo. This was a word that referred to the refinement of metal, as with a touchstone.

Secondly, does Revelation explicitly say that the humans remain alive forever during the second death. If so... why is it called... the second death?

We can't really put human judgments on what God does.

Yes we can. Whether it's right to do so or not is the question.

If God is omniscient, and knows what we're going to do and say before we do or say it, and sends people to burning fiery torment for not believing in him, knowing they're not going to believe in him, God is silly.

That's my judgement. Are you saying the fair judgement for sinners is the permanent burning of their bodies while they remain fully awake?

SimplyNothing · #16 18th October 2009, 06:48 PM

Your bible disagrees with you

Perhaps in English.

You think our sins are finite? How do you know they do not have eternal consequences for others?

Maybe you should explain how they do have eternal implications.

Your argument is a bunch of empty claims. And yes, I can call God just and loving.

How is this God either just or loving. His nature is love yeah? His very essence. Burning people for billions of years is NOT LOVING. Cut and dry.

Jaws13 · #17 18th October 2009, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by SimplyNothing

Perhaps in English.

No, in Greek too. Hebrew as well, all the way back in Genesis. Remember when God said they'd die when they ate the fruit? He wasn't talking literally.

Maybe you should explain how they do have eternal implications.

I thought it'd be more entertaining to see you try to prove that they are merely finite. Maybe you should stop trying to shift the burden of proof and give the evidence you think you have.

How is this God either just or loving. His nature is love yeah? His very essence. Burning people for billions of years is NOT LOVING. Cut and dry.

Yeah? And you made the assertion, so you can have fun backing it. It's not cut and dried or we wouldn't be having this conversation.

SimplyNothing · #18 18th October 2009, 09:57 PM

No, in Greek too. Hebrew as well, all the way back in Genesis. Remember when God said they'd die when they ate the fruit? He wasn't talking literally.

Are you joking? Out of all 600 laws and ordinances God made in the bible not once was hellfire described. The only word ever used for the afterlife that wasn't 'heaven' was 'sheol' (which also called the grave, the place of the dead who waited for the resurrection, both Jew and Gentile)

Jeremiah 32:35 says "They built high places for Baal in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to sacrifice their sons and daughters to Molech, though I never commanded, nor did it ever even enter my mind, that they should do such a detestable thing and so make Judah sin. "

God repeatedly commanded the Jews to stay away from all Pagan religions that surrounded Israel. Hell's roots are in paganism. Many of the Pagan religions surrounding Israel at that time had disgusting god's that demanded human sacrifice, and punished people with fire. If such a thought "never even entered God's mind," to have done to a physically living human being... how could he lovingly tell Israel to come to him, and threaten them with eternal fire and brimstone if they didn't?

Sheol was the grave. That is what the OT taught. Otherwise Cain, Onan, The Jews in general, Sodom, Gomorrah, Ninevah would have been warned about it.

You have to understand that the bible's true meaning does get lost in translation. especially when it has been translated several times over. The KJV version of the bible erroneously translates sheol as hell a total of 31 times in the OT alone. And like I said. Sheol is physical death, with hope of a resurrection to life.

I thought it'd be more entertaining to see you try to prove that they are merely finite. Maybe you should stop trying to shift the burden of proof and give the evidence you think you have.

I just did! I repeatedly have! If the doctrine of "eternal life" in burning fire and brimstone doesn't appear once in the Old testament, then it has little theological basis in the new testament at all. This is why in many newer and better translated versions of the bible hell doesn't appear at all in the OT. Now it's called the grave. This is a fantastic switch! The KJV was translated during a period where the church was heavily influenced by Pagan religions. This is the reason for many of the church divisions we have today.

You should read a book called "Pagan Christianity." It's amazing.

"Popular myth: Jesus spoke of Hell more than He did of Heaven. This is not true! Jesus warned the Jews many times of impending destruction, both nationally and individually. He used several different terms to refer to punishment/destruction, some of which were erroneously translated as the same word, "Hell" by Bible translators. We do not deny that God will indeed judge the whole world, nor do we wish to make light of His judgments. We are challenging the belief that His judgment on sin and unbelief is eternal torment/Hell and never-ending separation from God. Certainly, Jesus spent a lot of his ministry warning people to repent or reap the consequences, (particularly "Gehenna.") But could we be reading more into His warnings than He originally intended?
Think about it.......
If Hell is real, why were most of the warnings pertaining to punishment/Gehenna directed to Israel , particularly the Lord's own disciples as well as the Pharisees? The first great cluster of references to Gehenna, are found in the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 5:22, 29, 30), Jesus' great sermon to His disciples in which He warned that one was in danger of Gehenna for the likes of calling someone a fool. This is a far cry from our modern Evangelical interpretation that says not accepting Jesus as your Savior is what sends someone to Hell. Are we perhaps missing the symbolism that Jesus originally intended?
If Hell is real, aren't we taking verses out of context when we warn non-Jewish sinners who are not part of the Mosaic covenant God made with the nation of Israel about consequences for sin which have nothing to do with them since they are not under that covenant?
Since the concept of Hell doesn't exist in the Old Testament, how could Jesus and his disciples teach that salvation was deliverance from a place that is not even found in their Scriptures? And if He was introducing the subject for the first time, why did He do it so casually, as though His listeners already understood what He was talking about?

"Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, He devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him" (2 Samuel 14:14).

If Hell is real, since some English translations use the word Hell for the Greek word "Gehenna," in the New Testament, why didn't this same place (Gehenna) get translated Hell in the many places where it appears in the Hebrew form "ga ben Hinnom" in the Old Testament?
If the Jews did not understand "Gehenna" as a symbol of everlasting torture, but rather as a place of shame, filth, and defilement (where Israel participated in the grossest form of idol worship), why does modern theology ascribe more to the word than the original meaning did? The teaching of Gehenna has evolved in Jewish teachings to include punishment in the afterlife; but even today, Gehenna still does not mean "endless" punishment to the Jews.
If Hell is real how could the Apostle Paul (who was especially commissioned by God to preach the gospel to the nations) say that he had declared the entire counsel of God (Acts 20:27), when indeed he never warned of "Hell" in any of his letters? If Hell is real, wouldn't Paul, of all people, warn of it repeatedly?
If Hell is real, the sin/death of Adam has had a far more powerful effect on the world than the resurrection life of Christ! And yet Paul declares in Romans 5 that Christ's victory is far greater than Adam's transgression! Listen to Paul's confidence in the work of Christ! If Paul believed in eternal hell for the majority of men, how could he write the following verses?
".Just as the result of one trespass (Adam's) was condemnation for all men , so also the result of one act of righteousness (Christ's) was justification that brings life for all men . For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. ( Romans 5:18,19).
"Since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive." (1 Cor. 15:22)
"For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe" (1 Timothy 4;10).
(The above verses are just a few of the many verses where Paul writes of a pre-eminent Christ that far transcends the traditional Christian view. This article is full of many more New Testament references by Paul that display his views of the Christ triumphant, unlimited, all-powerful, all-conquering, and victorious).
If Hell is real, why is it that the only time Paul even mentioned "Hell" in any of his epistles, was declare the triumph of Christ over it? (1 Corinthians 15:55). The word "Grave" in the passage is the Greek word "Hades."
If Hell is real, why is it not mentioned once in the book of Acts in any the evangelistic sermons that were recorded by the early Apostles?
If Hell is real why do some of the best Bible scholars and Bible teachers say it is not in the Greek or Hebrew text? (William Barclay, John A.T. Robinson, Lightfoot, Westcott, F.W. Farrar, Marvin Vincent, etc.)
If Hell is real, why does the word itself come from the Teutonic "Hele" (goddess of the underworld "Hell" of northern Europe ). The description of this ancient mythological place has very little resemblance anymore to the modern Christian image of Hell. See any encyclopedia or dictionary for the origin of the word.

"I will ransom them from the power of the grave (Sheol/Hell); I will redeem them from death. O Death, I will be your plagues! O Grave (Sheol/Hell), I will be your destruction!" (Hosea 13:11-14).

FACT: The apocryphal books of the intertestimental period had a tremendous impact on the Jews in the time of Christ. It is from these books, especially the book of Enoch, that many of the Jewish myths and fables concerning Hell, heaven, demons and angels and many other fables first became a part of Judaism and from there became a part of Christianity. The myths and fables of these books came from Pagan influences (namely Zoroastrianism), during and after the Babylonian captivity of Israel . In fact, Zoroastrianism looks more like modern Christianity in many ways than ancient Judiasm does!

If Hell is real, why did Paul warn Timothy repeatedly to stay away from Jewish myths and fables, the likes of which were influencing many in the early church? Rather than affirming such doctrines, Paul declares them to be profane fables. (1 Tim. 1:1; Tit. 1:14)"

My God is a loving God. I don't care what the English language says. If you think the God I love would send people to hellfire, I'm sad God chose me as one of those people that had to pop into existence.

People tell me there's no such thing as the devil.

"For men are not cast off by the Lord forever. Though He brings grief, he will show compassion, so great is His unfailing love. For He does not willingly bring affliction or grief to the children of men. (Lam 3:31-33)

Everything I've been talking about is all right here. Honest Questions and Answers about Hell

Jaws13 · #19 18th October 2009, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by SimplyNothing

Are you joking? Out of all 600 laws and ordinances God made in the bible not once was hellfire described. The only word ever used for the afterlife that wasn't 'heaven' was 'sheol' (which also called the grave, the place of the dead who waited for the resurrection, both Jew and Gentile)

I'm not talking about 'hellfire', I'm talking about eternal punishment.

God repeatedly commanded the Jews to stay away from all Pagan religions that surrounded Israel. Hell's roots are in paganism. Many of the Pagan religions surrounding Israel at that time had disgusting god's that demanded human sacrifice, and punished people with fire. If such a thought "never even entered God's mind," to have done to a physically living human being... how could he lovingly tell Israel to come to him, and threaten them with eternal fire and brimstone if they didn't?

Sheol was the grave. That is what the OT taught. Otherwise Cain, Onan, The Jews in general, Sodom, Gomorrah, Ninevah would have been warned about it.

You have to understand that the bible's true meaning does get lost in translation. especially when it has been translated several times over. The KJV version of the bible erroneously translates sheol as hell a total of 31 times in the OT alone. And like I said. Sheol is physical death, with hope of a resurrection to life.

All this is irrelevant to the issues I raised with the points you made: red herring. None of this negates Matthew 25, nor does it negate the point I raised about love.

I just did! I repeatedly have! If the doctrine of "eternal life" in burning fire and brimstone doesn't appear once in the Old testament, then it has little theological basis in the new testament at all. This is why in many newer and better translated versions of the bible hell doesn't appear at all in the OT. Now it's called the grave. This is a fantastic switch! The KJV was translated during a period where the church was heavily influenced by Pagan religions. This is the reason for many of the church divisions we have today.

None of what you have posted displays that all sins are finite without any eternal implications for the sinner or for others the sinner interacts with.

You should read a book called "Pagan Christianity." It's amazing.

Yeah, and you should address my points rather than continually going off topic.

"Popular myth: Jesus spoke of Hell more than He did of Heaven. This is not true! Jesus warned the Jews many times of impending destruction, both nationally and individually. He used several different terms to refer to punishment/destruction, some of which were erroneously translated as the same word, "Hell" by Bible translators. We do not deny that God will indeed judge the whole world, nor do we wish to make light of His judgments. We are challenging the belief that His judgment on sin and unbelief is eternal torment/Hell and never-ending separation from God. Certainly, Jesus spent a lot of his ministry warning people to repent or reap the consequences, (particularly "Gehenna.&quot But could we be reading more into His warnings than He originally intended?

None of this addresses the points I raised. I don't care what you deny or don't deny, I want substance. Simply saying 'nuh-uh' isn't an argument.

Think about it.......
If Hell is real, why were most of the warnings pertaining to punishment/Gehenna directed to Israel , particularly the Lord's own disciples as well as the Pharisees? The first great cluster of references to Gehenna, are found in the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 5:22, 29, 30), Jesus' great sermon to His disciples in which He warned that one was in danger of Gehenna for the likes of calling someone a fool. This is a far cry from our modern Evangelical interpretation that says not accepting Jesus as your Savior is what sends someone to Hell. Are we perhaps missing the symbolism that Jesus originally intended?
If Hell is real, aren't we taking verses out of context when we warn non-Jewish sinners who are not part of the Mosaic covenant God made with the nation of Israel about consequences for sin which have nothing to do with them since they are not under that covenant?

No, because it applies to all people everywhere: Romans 3:23, John 3, among others.

Since the concept of Hell doesn't exist in the Old Testament, how could Jesus and his disciples teach that salvation was deliverance from a place that is not even found in their Scriptures? And if He was introducing the subject for the first time, why did He do it so casually, as though His listeners already understood what He was talking about?

"Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, He devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him" (2 Samuel 14:14).

If Hell is real, since some English translations use the word Hell for the Greek word "Gehenna," in the New Testament, why didn't this same place (Gehenna) get translated Hell in the many places where it appears in the Hebrew form "ga ben Hinnom" in the Old Testament?
If the Jews did not understand "Gehenna" as a symbol of everlasting torture, but rather as a place of shame, filth, and defilement (where Israel participated in the grossest form of idol worship), why does modern theology ascribe more to the word than the original meaning did? The teaching of Gehenna has evolved in Jewish teachings to include punishment in the afterlife; but even today, Gehenna still does not mean "endless" punishment to the Jews.
If Hell is real how could the Apostle Paul (who was especially commissioned by God to preach the gospel to the nations) say that he had declared the entire counsel of God (Acts 20:27), when indeed he never warned of "Hell" in any of his letters? If Hell is real, wouldn't Paul, of all people, warn of it repeatedly?
If Hell is real, the sin/death of Adam has had a far more powerful effect on the world than the resurrection life of Christ! And yet Paul declares in Romans 5 that Christ's victory is far greater than Adam's transgression! Listen to Paul's confidence in the work of Christ! If Paul believed in eternal hell for the majority of men, how could he write the following verses?
".Just as the result of one trespass (Adam's) was condemnation for all men , so also the result of one act of righteousness (Christ's) was justification that brings life for all men . For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. ( Romans 5:18,19).
"Since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive." (1 Cor. 15:22)
"For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe" (1 Timothy 4;10).
(The above verses are just a few of the many verses where Paul writes of a pre-eminent Christ that far transcends the traditional Christian view. This article is full of many more New Testament references by Paul that display his views of the Christ triumphant, unlimited, all-powerful, all-conquering, and victorious).
If Hell is real, why is it that the only time Paul even mentioned "Hell" in any of his epistles, was declare the triumph of Christ over it? (1 Corinthians 15:55). The word "Grave" in the passage is the Greek word "Hades."
If Hell is real, why is it not mentioned once in the book of Acts in any the evangelistic sermons that were recorded by the early Apostles?
If Hell is real why do some of the best Bible scholars and Bible teachers say it is not in the Greek or Hebrew text? (William Barclay, John A.T. Robinson, Lightfoot, Westcott, F.W. Farrar, Marvin Vincent, etc.)
If Hell is real, why does the word itself come from the Teutonic "Hele" (goddess of the underworld "Hell" of northern Europe ). The description of this ancient mythological place has very little resemblance anymore to the modern Christian image of Hell. See any encyclopedia or dictionary for the origin of the word.

"I will ransom them from the power of the grave (Sheol/Hell); I will redeem them from death. O Death, I will be your plagues! O Grave (Sheol/Hell), I will be your destruction!" (Hosea 13:11-14).

FACT: The apocryphal books of the intertestimental period had a tremendous impact on the Jews in the time of Christ. It is from these books, especially the book of Enoch, that many of the Jewish myths and fables concerning Hell, heaven, demons and angels and many other fables first became a part of Judaism and from there became a part of Christianity. The myths and fables of these books came from Pagan influences (namely Zoroastrianism), during and after the Babylonian captivity of Israel . In fact, Zoroastrianism looks more like modern Christianity in many ways than ancient Judiasm does!

If Hell is real, why did Paul warn Timothy repeatedly to stay away from Jewish myths and fables, the likes of which were influencing many in the early church? Rather than affirming such doctrines, Paul declares them to be profane fables. (1 Tim. 1:1; Tit. 1:14)"

My God is a loving God. I don't care what the English language says. If you think the God I love would send people to hellfire, I'm sad God chose me as one of those people that had to pop into existence.

People tell me there's no such thing as the devil.

"For men are not cast off by the Lord forever. Though He brings grief, he will show compassion, so great is His unfailing love. For He does not willingly bring affliction or grief to the children of men. (Lam 3:31-33)

Everything I've been talking about is all right here. Honest Questions and Answers about Hell

Good for you, you know how to copy paste. Now, are you going to address my points, or simply dismiss them with a link?

SimplyNothing · #20 18th October 2009, 11:14 PM

Good for you, you know how to copy paste. Now, are you going to address my points, or simply dismiss them with a link?

I've been trying to address your points. I don't think you have any left. Hell is a concept from pagan religions. Hell arose as a concept from the Roman theological schools after Christianity was legalized in Rome in 313 AD. This school of thought was heavily influenced by polytheistic paganism.

Why do you find it so much easier to believe that God wants to burn people in hellfire than to believe that every human being can freely bask in the glory and love of God through the wonderful redemptive work of Jesus Christ?

There's a reason I gave you the link to look at. I also gave you an excellent book to read that adequately addresses the hell heresy.

Lol. Why would I post a link if not to address your points.

Read the link.