This morning while dropping my 16 y/o daughter off at school, she was deep in thought and when I asked her what was bothering her, she said "Think about this...Why do people have to go to hell? If God made all of us and he loves us, why would he let people he love go to hell because they dont believe in Him? It seems so barbaric and mean to send people down there, because a lot of the are good people who dont believe in Him." I responded by telling her that He does love us all and gives us free will to choose whether or not to accept Him as our savior, and unfortunately not everyone choses to accept Him in their heart. I know that didnt answer her question...she want to know why He cant open the door for everyone if He is all powerful. I'm looking for a scripture to help explain this to her and maybe some words of wisdom. She seemed upset when she got out of the car. Please help! Thanks!
Need help answering a question re: God/hell and nonbelievers
- Thread starter Pauline78
- Start date
jehoiakim
Servant
- Jun 24, 2011
- 1,166
- 69
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
This seems out there I know but I came across the theological concept of annihilationism some very big Christian thinkers like ben witherington III and john stott uphold it as scriptural and argue the case. There are also a lot of scriptures that seem to confirm the concept. The idea is not that hell does not exist but it is not permanent and eventually destroyed and man experiences the second death. All those verses saving hell is eternal could be meaning unquenchable which has a very different meaning or in other verses eternal is also used in terms with as long as the sun and stars live so one day the universe will be destroyed and we will start over. Annihilationism might be a concept worth at least entertaining and if you do not think it hold up to scripture after research then dismiss it. Annihilationism did bring me some comfort there however.
Upvote
0
Thank you jehoiaki.
I'll definitely research annihilationism as it sounds very interesting.
Upvote
0
The reason judgement exists is that God won't accept evil forever. We wouldn't even want him to, I don't think. We don't want eternal life to include abuse, war, etc. The core meaning of judgement is rejecting evil.
Now, the question is, to what extent does rejecting evil involve rejecting evil people. On that there are a number of Christian ideas. Which of those ideas you're willing to talk about depends upon how conservative or liberal you are. The traditional Western view (for which there is certainly Scriptural support) is that if you reject God in a definitive way he won't save you. Possibly won't be able to save you. Someone who really refuses to submit to God might find a forced relationship with him intolerable.
Everyone agrees that the fiery pit is a symbol. But what it's a symbol of still isn't very nice. Since God is the source of life, final separation from him isn't going to leave any kind of life we'd want to live. Perhaps it's the best God can do for people who reject him. However I will say that the traditional Western view is that anyone who doesn't have faith in God deserves anything that they get. Including eternal torture.
Note: while many Christians believe that anyone without faith in Christ will be rejected, there is an alternative that I believe is still considered orthodox. It's called "inclusivism." This says that people may be able to respond to Christ even though they don't realize it's Christ. This could be people have haven't heard of Christ or who for one reason or another heard of him in a way that they couldn't believe, even though they're the kind of person who could respond to him. However the assumption is that there are still some people who will end up in hell.
So are there alternatives to hell? Yes, but they aren't normally considered orthodox. The major alternatives are
* conditional immortality or annihilationism. This assumes that those without faith won't be resurrected or that after judgement they will be destroyed. Some people see signs of this in Jesus' teaching.
* universalism. The usual Christian form assumes that God will reconcile everyone to himself. 1 Cor 3:10 can be understood this way, though the usual understanding is that it applies only to Christians. Some people see signs of universalism in Paul's writing. If 1 Cor 3:10 is understood as universalist, it suggests an interesting alternative. Suppose that everything not built on Christ is destroyed. For people who have gone badly enough astray, this could leave them with little beyond what they were like as an infant.
I should note that CF prohibits discussion of any alternative to hell in any forum restricted to Christians. These alternatives are a major topic of discussion in the Unorthodox Theology forum. Parenting is not the place for theological arguments. That's why I'm giving you a summary of the alternatives but not arguing for any one of them. One thing I am willing to say is that some form of judgement seems essential, as I noted in the first paragraph. And I am confident that when we finally see God face to face, we will find that what he is doing is both just and merciful.
If you want to avoid taking a position, you could say:
* The Bible, and Jesus' own teachings, are clear that we are accountable to God, and we will appear before him. If Christ is our savior, Christ will represent us. But even with that, 1 Cor 3:10 suggests that any part of our lives not built on Christ may be lost.
* This is a good thing. We want good to win in the end. That means that God must reject and defeat evil. Do you really want him to allow evil people into heaven without dealing with their evil?
* Christians differ on exactly what form God's judgement will take for those who don't accept Christ. The fiery pit is certainly a symbol, but it's not a symbol for anything you want to happen to yourself.
* I am convinced that when we finally understand what God is doing, we will see that it is both just and merciful.
Now, the question is, to what extent does rejecting evil involve rejecting evil people. On that there are a number of Christian ideas. Which of those ideas you're willing to talk about depends upon how conservative or liberal you are. The traditional Western view (for which there is certainly Scriptural support) is that if you reject God in a definitive way he won't save you. Possibly won't be able to save you. Someone who really refuses to submit to God might find a forced relationship with him intolerable.
Everyone agrees that the fiery pit is a symbol. But what it's a symbol of still isn't very nice. Since God is the source of life, final separation from him isn't going to leave any kind of life we'd want to live. Perhaps it's the best God can do for people who reject him. However I will say that the traditional Western view is that anyone who doesn't have faith in God deserves anything that they get. Including eternal torture.
Note: while many Christians believe that anyone without faith in Christ will be rejected, there is an alternative that I believe is still considered orthodox. It's called "inclusivism." This says that people may be able to respond to Christ even though they don't realize it's Christ. This could be people have haven't heard of Christ or who for one reason or another heard of him in a way that they couldn't believe, even though they're the kind of person who could respond to him. However the assumption is that there are still some people who will end up in hell.
So are there alternatives to hell? Yes, but they aren't normally considered orthodox. The major alternatives are
* conditional immortality or annihilationism. This assumes that those without faith won't be resurrected or that after judgement they will be destroyed. Some people see signs of this in Jesus' teaching.
* universalism. The usual Christian form assumes that God will reconcile everyone to himself. 1 Cor 3:10 can be understood this way, though the usual understanding is that it applies only to Christians. Some people see signs of universalism in Paul's writing. If 1 Cor 3:10 is understood as universalist, it suggests an interesting alternative. Suppose that everything not built on Christ is destroyed. For people who have gone badly enough astray, this could leave them with little beyond what they were like as an infant.
I should note that CF prohibits discussion of any alternative to hell in any forum restricted to Christians. These alternatives are a major topic of discussion in the Unorthodox Theology forum. Parenting is not the place for theological arguments. That's why I'm giving you a summary of the alternatives but not arguing for any one of them. One thing I am willing to say is that some form of judgement seems essential, as I noted in the first paragraph. And I am confident that when we finally see God face to face, we will find that what he is doing is both just and merciful.
If you want to avoid taking a position, you could say:
* The Bible, and Jesus' own teachings, are clear that we are accountable to God, and we will appear before him. If Christ is our savior, Christ will represent us. But even with that, 1 Cor 3:10 suggests that any part of our lives not built on Christ may be lost.
* This is a good thing. We want good to win in the end. That means that God must reject and defeat evil. Do you really want him to allow evil people into heaven without dealing with their evil?
* Christians differ on exactly what form God's judgement will take for those who don't accept Christ. The fiery pit is certainly a symbol, but it's not a symbol for anything you want to happen to yourself.
* I am convinced that when we finally understand what God is doing, we will see that it is both just and merciful.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
motherprayer
Elisha
I've been thinking about how to answer this question when my 8 year old eventually asks it. Some thoughts:
I feel that this is a tremendous opportunity for positive reinforcement of professing her belief. We truly don't have the wisdom to fully answer the question, but because we know it exists in SOME form, this is why it is SO important to love others and show them who Christ really is.
I feel that it is not only good for reinforcement of professing faith, but also good behavior. In order to bring others to Christ, we have to watch how we act and how we speak. If we are combative or hateful, we cannot bring others to Christ at all, so we should show them how He loved us by loving them also.
I know it isn't really an "answer" but I hope it helps maybe a little bit
I feel that this is a tremendous opportunity for positive reinforcement of professing her belief. We truly don't have the wisdom to fully answer the question, but because we know it exists in SOME form, this is why it is SO important to love others and show them who Christ really is.
I feel that it is not only good for reinforcement of professing faith, but also good behavior. In order to bring others to Christ, we have to watch how we act and how we speak. If we are combative or hateful, we cannot bring others to Christ at all, so we should show them how He loved us by loving them also.
I know it isn't really an "answer" but I hope it helps maybe a little bit
Upvote
0
- Oct 21, 2009
- 2,443
- 458
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
God created spiritual beings for the purpose of expressing love. Those beings have complete free will to express that love. Free will also allows for the possibility of those beings rejecting God and His plans. Unfortunately, many people do not agree that God's rules are good and do not want to live by them. These people want to run their own lives without submitting to God at all. Somehow, they feel that God will just let them into heaven because they have behaved about as good, and maybe even better, compared to other people.
The problem with this idea is that God does not grade on the curve. All who enter God's kingdom must be absolutely holy, since no sin is allowed in God's presence. In addition, people must be willing to allow God to prevent them from sinning ever again, since there is no sin in heaven. This means that people must be willing to submit fully to God's will in order to get into heaven. Of course, all humans fall short of God's moral requirements. Therefore, God has made a provision to erase all sins that we have committed in this life and to perfect us so that we cannot sin in the next life. That provision for sin is through the sacrifice of God's son, Jesus Christ. Jesus took the punishment that we deserve and gives us the reward that we do not deserve - eternal life. In accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior, all our sins are erased, and Jesus works to change us into His image (if we allow Him to do so).
Sadly, there are some people who actually prefer hell over complete submission to God. People like to live in their favorite sins and answer to no one. They know that if they accept Jesus as Lord and Savior that God will want them to change their lives, and they might have to give up some of their autonomy.
Today there is more evidence demonstrating the existence of God than at any time in the past. Much of that evidence is presented in discovery after discovery in the various Sciences; especially in Astro Physics. The more evolutionists seek to prove God does not exist; the more evidence they found proving He DOES exist. In addition, there are still thousands of missionaries throughout the world proclaiming the good news of Jesus Christ and the salvation that He offers as a free gift.
Although the gift is "free," it costs us our sin, selfishness, and pride.
I believe that those who go to hell do so more or less, voluntarily; that is to say that at many many points during a person's life, God makes invitation to his free gift of salvation abundantly clear, so that there can be no question; each person makes a conscious eyes-wide-open choice to either accept this gift of eternal life or say, "No thank you." In essence, it is my belief that these people are preferring hell to complete submission to a holy and just God.
Upvote
0
The biggest problem with alternatives to hell is that Jesus himself appears to teach something like the conventional concept of hell. E.g. Luke 16:19. But it's hard to know how seriously to take this. I assume this was a conventional image. Heaven as being with Father Abraham is presumably the 1st Cent Jewish equivalent of St Peter and the pearly gates. Furthermore, Jesus tends towards hyperbole. So I'm sure he expects judgement, but I'm not so sure about eternal torture.
I think NT Wright is correct that the NT does envision the possibility of final destruction. I also agree with him that this probably isn't common. Jesus seems to see most sinners as capable of being saved. The people he rejects are genuinely abusive people. Similarly, Paul makes lots of statements about God saving the whole creation, but he does seem to expect the destruction of people who persecute the Church. I believe there are people who manage to destroy themselves. I view the imagery as suggesting destruction, however, not torture. The OT tradition says that if a human sees God they die. I think it is possible that if a person who has finally rejected God comes before him in judgement, without Christ, he either dies or stops being human. But I think this probably isn't common.
The last novel in the Narnia series has a kind of judgement that is rather like that. It's not a bad book to read in this context. C S Lewis makes a good case for a kind of inclusivism, and also for a judgement where some people are effectively destroyed. In his case the people involved are the Narnian talking animals. What happens to those who reject Aslan [Christ] is when they come before him they lose the power of speech and intelligence and become normal animals. Several people have argued that it may be that people who are destroyed don't entirely cease to exist, but become ex-humans.
I'm an inclusivist. I think it's possible for non-Christians to be saved. However it seems to me that there are some religions that may make self-destruction more likely.
I'm not sure what I'd tell a child. I teach 7th and 8th grade Sunday School. I will tell them that I believe they will come before God and have to answer for what they have done. But I will also say that they will have Christ beside them. I will probably say roughly what I've said here: that there are different Christian interpretations of what hell is, but that the NT seems fairly clear that it is possible for people to be eternally lost. What exact form that takes I don't know, but it's certainly not something I want to happen to them.
I do not think we should try to scare kids with lurid images of eternal torture.
I think NT Wright is correct that the NT does envision the possibility of final destruction. I also agree with him that this probably isn't common. Jesus seems to see most sinners as capable of being saved. The people he rejects are genuinely abusive people. Similarly, Paul makes lots of statements about God saving the whole creation, but he does seem to expect the destruction of people who persecute the Church. I believe there are people who manage to destroy themselves. I view the imagery as suggesting destruction, however, not torture. The OT tradition says that if a human sees God they die. I think it is possible that if a person who has finally rejected God comes before him in judgement, without Christ, he either dies or stops being human. But I think this probably isn't common.
The last novel in the Narnia series has a kind of judgement that is rather like that. It's not a bad book to read in this context. C S Lewis makes a good case for a kind of inclusivism, and also for a judgement where some people are effectively destroyed. In his case the people involved are the Narnian talking animals. What happens to those who reject Aslan [Christ] is when they come before him they lose the power of speech and intelligence and become normal animals. Several people have argued that it may be that people who are destroyed don't entirely cease to exist, but become ex-humans.
I'm an inclusivist. I think it's possible for non-Christians to be saved. However it seems to me that there are some religions that may make self-destruction more likely.
I'm not sure what I'd tell a child. I teach 7th and 8th grade Sunday School. I will tell them that I believe they will come before God and have to answer for what they have done. But I will also say that they will have Christ beside them. I will probably say roughly what I've said here: that there are different Christian interpretations of what hell is, but that the NT seems fairly clear that it is possible for people to be eternally lost. What exact form that takes I don't know, but it's certainly not something I want to happen to them.
I do not think we should try to scare kids with lurid images of eternal torture.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
