Why an eternal hell?

[dollarsbill]

I can't rememberany bible verse saying God is evil off the top of my head. Yes, there are scriptures speaking of God's wrath, and there are scriptures speaking of God being righteous. God would be just in inflicting infinite torture if there was some being that deserved it. God can not torture people forever and be righteous at the same time.

He can indeed torment sinners in fire forever. Do you know anyone who can stop Him? I don't know anyone.

 

[dollarsbill]

No, I just don't think "fear of the Lord" means to be afraid of the Lord.

Contradiction.

 

[dollarsbill]

Not punished forever in the sense of being continually and consciously punished. Just like if you say someone are eternally dead - that doesn't mean to be continually in a state of dying, it means to be dead. Or eternal life, for that matter - it's not about becoming more and more alive as time goes, it's being alive and then staying alive, kinda like the Bee Gees.

Then we MUST ignore the NT terms everlasting and forever. Including eternal life. That is, if we are consistent.

 

[dollarsbill]

No, because that is somthing fundamentally different than eternal and pointless torture.

Pointless is your word, not God's.

 

[FredVB]

I remember in bible college we dealt with "Oh God" that is commonly used to express _________fill in the blank.

"Oh God, the house is on fire"
"Oh God, that car wrecked"

It's just a secular use that expresses more seriousness, we all do it.

Of course "Oh God" is commonly used in sex talk. It refers to an out of world experience, although in secular use no one is thinking about God, they're thinking about a great experience. I'm sure many believers probably use the same word, but not thinking of God, more likely expressing an out of world experince. Maybe some use it in such a way to glorify God during sex, but I doubt it, it's just not our nature to involve God in the actual sex act, although I wouldn't see it as a problem if people were serious.

I don't think because we use God often in general terms to express shock or joy, etc...makes it "in vain" , more of a cultural habit to express with more force.

I think when we willingly use his name in vain out of disrespect it becomes an issue.

Thank you for making the point of how generally this is done in our culture. And no, not all do it. I am not perfectly good, but I avoid it. There is disrespect of Yahweh God with anything using a reference to him without meaning, as is done with wide acceptance in our culture with such phrases, blatant or otherwise, it violates his commandment for us, it is for us to not disrespect him but to always have respect for him, this applies to the Father and the Son, any reference should be with meaning to communicate about him or to him, and that should not be without respect.

 

[createdtoworship]

Did I say it was? I would say that "buddy" really is either. But, if you are stuck on the notion that it is somehow wrong and/or degrading and/or sinful to refer to God in informal or slangy terminology, the onus is on you to explain why you think that. If that is your own personal feeling, I can respect that. If you are going to belittle other believers who don't share your conviction, I can't respect that.

Imagine standing before the throne of God and saying, hey buddy!

Thats what I am talking about if you practice the presence of God you wont' say such things. And this is what the third commandment is speaking of.

 

[createdtoworship]

God's name is Yahweh (or Jehovah; it has also been translated as "the LORD" and "I am" in English). If you use one of these names in an irreverent way, you are violating the 3rd Commandment. Fortunately, I don't often hear people using any of these words as slang (sure, you hear God, Jesus Christ, and the like in improper contexts, but rarely the actual name of God). If we are going to make this a 3rd Commandment issue, let's focus on what the 3rd Commandment actually refers to.

Personally, I would say it comes down to a matter of the heart. If you are disrespecting God in your heart, it doesn't really matter what words you use to do it. It's wrong, not because the Law says so, but because it betrays a lack of love for God. And, isn't that what the Christian life really boils down to: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength and love your neighbor as yourself?

buddy, homeboy, or peep is not something we would say to God's face because it's not respectful and it's something said in vain.

 

[seeingeyes]

seeingeyes,

So is God being doing justice and what is right when he sends unrepentant people to Hades and Gehenna?

Oz

You tell me.

I'm just trying to define 'justice' as God defines it.

God bless

 

[holo]

Contradiction.

Fearing the Lord doesn't mean to go around being scared of God. God is, after all, our father, friend, saviour, the one who loves us all more than we can even imagine, the one who died for us while we were still sinners, quick to forgive, and so forth. That doesn't take anything away from his might and awesomeness, but it does mean you have no reason to be afraid of him.

 

[dies-l]

Imagine standing before the throne of God and saying, hey buddy!

Thats what I am talking about if you practice the presence of God you wont' say such things. And this is what the third commandment is speaking of.

One beautiful thing about God is that even though he had the right to demand such formality, He doesn't. And no, this topic has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Third Commandment.

 

[holo]

Then we MUST ignore the NT terms everlasting and forever. Including eternal life. That is, if we are consistent.

No, but we must understand what the writers meant, and that often means looking at the original language and context (Armisted is more knowledgable than me in that field and has made several interesting posts about it). We must also see how each verse (or our understanding of it) harmonizes or contradicts what the bible says otherwise. Example: when I suggested to some people it may not be a good idea to go around literally screaming in tongues in the middle of town in the middle of the night, I was met with the bible verse "touch not the Lord's anointed." And true, one shouldn't touch the Lord's anointed. But seen in relation to the rest of what the bible says, it's completely unreasonable to assume that that was a proper application of the verse. When it comes to punishing people infinitely beyond what they deserve, that's goes CLEARLY against EVERY verse that says God is a righteous judge, not to mention the ones dealing with His love and omnipotence. Those are the verses you have to ignore

 

[holo]

Pointless is your word, not God's.

True. But what may be the point?

 

[FredVB]

Fearing the Lord doesn't mean to go around being scared of God. God is, after all, our father, friend, saviour, the one who loves us all more than we can even imagine, the one who died for us while we were still sinners, quick to forgive, and so forth. That doesn't take anything away from his might and awesomeness, but it does mean you have no reason to be afraid of him.

Even though it is true God is our father, friend, saviour, the one who loves us all more than we can even imagine, the one who died for us while we were still sinners, and quick to forgive, you recognize something of him having might and awesomeness, Yahweh God holds our life always in his hands, more than one holding a loaded gun pointed at us, when it is time for us to depart it is according to him, and he is judge in all things, and there is reason to be afraid of him in going contrary to him. He is absolutely loving, but his grace and mercy from this is for those who are restored on his terms, and he he is fearsome in his might.

 

[holo]

It's become popular today for professing evangelicals to join the ranks of Pinnock, atheists, and agnostics in protesting the doctrine of hell.

Agreeing with an atheist, Jehova's Witness, a Mormon, or a buddhist for that matter, on something, doesn't mean you're wrong.

But when you examine the biblical evidence, without an agenda, you'll find we sound a lot like Jesus and the apostles.

I disagree, I don't see Jesus and the apostles saying that unbelievers will be tormented for eternity. It's especially noteworthy that Paul doesn't mention anything like it, even once in his letters.

So, how could someone who claims to be faithful to Scripture ridicule the idea of eternal punishment? What is at the heart of their rejection of a never-ending hell? It's simple, really--they minimize the seriousness of human sin and guilt, and they distort the perfection of divine justice. That's the crime of Protestant Liberalism and every false religion.

That's unfair. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm rejecting the bible or "minimizing sin."

We are defending the perfection of divine justice. To do something infinitely worse than satan himself has ever done, to the vast majority of people ever born, that's a perversion of any type of justice, especially a divine sort of justice. Infinite torture would require an infinite sin, and there's no such thing.

One of the most basic tenets of justice is that the punishment must fit the crime. So, if the ultimate punishment for those who die without Christ is hell, then what is the crime? What do men do to merit the eternal sentence of hell? Put plainly, they sin.

So let's say you sneak ahead of me in traffic. I should then be justified in breaking your fingers, gouge your eyes out, pour gasoline on you and set you on fire - for starters. Sounds unfair, like it doesn't fit the crime? But what if I was perfect and sinless myself, then it would surely be righteous and fair to punish you like that. You see what I'm getting at.

 

[holo]

I'm about to give up on CF as the God-shrinkers are seen in too many threads here (including this thread). Those who take God at His word and want to listen to what the Scriptures say, instead of making the Scriptures mean what a human mind invents, are decreasing.

Amen.

 

[holo]

Who are you to decide what eternal damnation looks like. That is the domain of the absolutely pure, holy, infinite God of love. When you begin to understand God's almighty, holy, perfect and absolutely truthful nature, you might not run off at the mouth like this.

Right back at ya.

Not one person in this world, including you and me, will get more or less than they deserve from the absolutely pure Lord God Almighty. His justice is absolute and we ALL will get it.

My point exactly. Speaking for myself, I'm really glad I won't get what I deserve, but rather the grace provided by Christ. But I do know that don't deserve eternal suffering. Nobody deserves that.

 

[holo]

He can indeed torment sinners in fire forever. Do you know anyone who can stop Him? I don't know anyone.

Nobody can stop him, but God can not be righteous and infinitely evil at the same time.

 

[Precisely]

The first post made me cringe when I read "No Bible quotes, just opinions." Someone is very confused on where their authority should be. Scripture does not teach two sides of the argument. Scripture teaches an eternal hell. Man teaches the other stuff by twisting scripture.

God can not be righteous and infinitely evil at the same time.

If your definition of evil is "sinful," then I agree with you. If you go with the biblical definition of evil being calamity, then I disagree with you (Isa 45:7).

 

[seeingeyes]

We are defending the perfection of divine justice. To do something infinitely worse than satan himself has ever done, to the vast majority of people ever born, that's a perversion of any type of justice, especially a divine sort of justice. Infinite torture would require an infinite sin, and there's no such thing.

How come no one wants to talk about what justice is? I try to bring it up in these threads, but no one wants to hash it out.

Am I losing my mind that the definition of 'justice' might be relevant to the discussion of hell? Sometimes I get the feeling that I'm standing on a soapbox preaching the evils of nail polish.

So give it to me straight, Holo. I trust your discernment. Am I one of those people?

 

[Precisely]

Holo's argument is under the assumption that God works by the justice system and mentality of human men, rather than the justice system on earth being merely a "shadow" of the spiritual and Holy justice of Almighty God. Filled with flaws and filled with a misunderstanding of human depravity, the holiness of God, and the evil heart.