Would God Really Send Someone to Hell?

Michie said:

“Do you think that anyone will be saved against his will?”

“What do you mean?”

Click to expand...

Michie said:

Once Mary had conceded that the doctrine of hell was not logically inconsistent with an all-loving God, I quoted C. S. Lewis from The Great Divorce:

Click to expand...

d taylor said:

It is not that God sends people to hell (actually the lake of fire). But going to the lake of fire is the only option people leave themselves, when they do not trust in Jesus The Messiah for God's free gift of Eternal Life. They face judgment from God, lacking the one thing God requires to spend eternity with Him.​

The Sin of Unbelief – Grace Evangelical Society

Click to expand...

Saint Steven said:

The one thing God requires? That would be conditional love then, right?

Click to expand...

public hermit said:

The idea that God cares more for human freedom than God does for the actual human is absurd.

What is this great good called "freedom" that God cares so much about? It's the ability to choose contrary to the divine will for humanity. So God cares more for the humans ability to choose evil than God does for the human God created in the divine image. In fact, God values the human ability to choose evil so much that God will torture humans forever to ensure their ability to choose evil is honored. In short, God care more for evil and its everlasting persistence than God cares about the humans God created in the divine image.

When your doctrine results in absurdity, it's time to let it go.

Click to expand...

public hermit said:

The idea that God cares more for human freedom than God does for the actual human is absurd.

What is this great good called "freedom" that God cares so much about? It's the ability to choose contrary to the divine will for humanity. So God cares more for the humans ability to choose evil than God does for the human God created in the divine image. In fact, God values the human ability to choose evil so much that God will torture humans forever to ensure their ability to choose evil is honored. In short, God care more for evil and its everlasting persistence than God cares about the humans God created in the divine image.

When your doctrine results in absurdity, it's time to let it go.

Click to expand...

public hermit said:

The idea that God cares more for human freedom than God does for the actual human is absurd.
What is this great good called "freedom" that God cares so much about? It's the ability to choose contrary to the divine will for humanity. So God cares more for the humans ability to choose evil than God does for the human God created in the divine image. In fact, God values the human ability to choose evil so much that God will torture humans forever to ensure their ability to choose evil is honored. In short, God care more for evil and its everlasting persistence than God cares about the humans God created in the divine image.
When your doctrine results in absurdity, it's time to let it go.

Click to expand...

…..Greek has been the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox church since its inception, 2000 years ago +/-. Note, the native Greek speaking Eastern Orthodox Greek scholars, translators of the EOB, translated “aionios,” in Matt 25:46, as “eternal,” NOT “age.”
…..Who is better qualified than the team of native Greek speaking scholars, translators of the Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible [EOB], quoted above and below, to know the correct translation of the Greek in the N.T.?
Link to EOB online:

The New Testament ( The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

The New Testament (The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible)

archive.org

…..The Greek word “kolasis” occurs only twice in the N.T., 1st occurrence Matt 25:46, above, and 2nd occurrence 1 John 4:18., below.

Michie said:

*Permission to post in full*

As a speaker with Catholic Answers, I fly a lot. Part of what I love about flying is meeting those sitting next to me.

On a recent flight I had an opportunity to share my faith with a woman who seemed to believe in everything except the law of non-contradiction: fairies, God, heaven, reincarnation, Catholicism, the law of attraction.

One thing she didn’t believe in was hell.

In fact, after learning what I do for a living, one of the first things Mary said to me was that, though she believed in God, she did not believe in hell.

“Why not?” I asked.

“Because I don’t think that a God who is all-good and all-loving would want to send someone there.”

“It’s certainly not his will that souls be sent to hell.” I said, “We know from Scripture that God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth [1 Tim. 2:4]. and that he does not want any to perish but all to reach repentance [2 Pet. 3:9].

“As a Catholic, however, you believe he already has sent someone, and indeed a multitude of beings, there.”

“What do you mean?”

“Well, Catholics believe that demons are fallen angels. God has at least sent them to hell, yes?”

“I’m not sure I believe that,” Mary said. “But at any rate, I’m talking about us, people on this earth.”

“Do you think that all will be saved?”

“I do.”

“Do you think that anyone will be saved against his will?”

“What do you mean?”

“Well, suppose a person rejects God and does not wish to be with him. Would an all-loving God coerce that person into being saved or would he respect the person’s free choice?”

“Well, I suppose in that case God would respect his freedom.”

“So you can’t rule out the possibility of hell in light of an all-loving God then, right?”

Once Mary had conceded that the doctrine of hell was not logically inconsistent with an all-loving God, I quoted C. S. Lewis from The Great Divorce:

There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, “Thy will be done,” and those to whom God says, in the end, “Thy will be done.” All that are in hell chose it. Without that self-choice there could be no hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. To those who knock it is opened. ”

Interested in learning more? Read my colleague Jim Blackburn’s article, Hell? Yes! Part 1 Hell? Yes! (Part I) and Part 2. Hell? Yes! (Part II)

Would God Really Send Someone to Hell?

Would a loving God really send someone to hell? Here is a helpful dialogue that may help you in your own coversations with non-believers.

www.catholic.com

Click to expand...

public hermit said:

The idea that God cares more for human freedom than God does for the actual human is absurd.

What is this great good called "freedom" that God cares so much about? It's the ability to choose contrary to the divine will for humanity. So God cares more for the humans ability to choose evil than God does for the human God created in the divine image. In fact, God values the human ability to choose evil so much that God will torture humans forever to ensure their ability to choose evil is honored. In short, God care more for evil and its everlasting persistence than God cares about the humans God created in the divine image.

When your doctrine results in absurdity, it's time to let it go.

Click to expand...

public hermit said:

True freedom is love of God and neighbor. To be in Christ is to be truly free, to be free indeed to love God and neighbor. And to be so free is to be fit for everlasting life in the divine presence where righteousness is at home.

God does not destroy being but brings it to perfection. The grace given in this life is to be conformed to Christ. Baptism is a visible sign of this grace. If we are not baptized in the life by the grace of the Holy Spirit then we will be baptized in the next by the fire of God's unmitigated love, which will be punishment as the old nature (the false self that is no-being) is revealed as the nothing that it is.

"People ask, "What is it that burns in hell?" The authorities commonly say that it is self-will. But I say truly that what burns in hell is nothing. Take a comparison. Suppose that someone takes a burning coal and puts it in my hand. If I were to say that it was the coal that was burning my hand, I should be doing the coal an injustice; but if I were to say properly what it is that is burning me, it is nothing, because the coal has something in it that my hand does not have. But if my hand had everything in it that is in the coal and that coal can do, my hand would have all the nature of fire...Since God and all those who are in God's sight have in them, according to their proper blessedness, something that those who are separated from God do not have, that "nothing" alone torments the souls who are in hell...Therefore, if you want to be perfect, you must be naked of what is nothing." Meister Eckhart

I don't disagree with those who believe in punishment for those who are not in Christ. How can we enjoy the presence of unmitigated, eternal love if we do not have love? What I disagree with is the need for that punishment to be eternal. Divine punishment is not punitive but purgative. If a soul's punishment were eternal, then that would mean the nothing of that false self is stronger than the fecundity of the divine goodness, love, and life, which is absurd.

Perhaps the experience of a soul unprepared for divine love is as if it were eternal, keeping in mind that God is the only eternal being-properly speaking, but I sincerely doubt God is unable or unwilling to bring all things under subjection to Christ so that all will bow and say Christ is Lord. That subjection is not a negation of free will. It is a negation of non-being, which is the essence of sin and evil. True freedom is not the ability to choose evil but the inability to do anything other than to choose Christ, which can only be a gift of grace. If that were not the case, then we could be so now without atonement or grace. Alas, none of us are so free. We all long to be free from sin and evil, which is our true nature; even those in Christ long to be so free. I believe we all will be. For some, being confronted by God's unmitigated love will be joyful for what we have been waiting for will be a reality. For others it will be full of sorrow and suffering for the nothing we were will be taken away and shown for what it is. But, I believe, God will be all in all for God is all-powerful goodness, love, and life.

I know some of y'all strongly disagree, and I respect that, but I wanted to make the positive case for the negative case I made above.

Click to expand...

Hmm said:

It's so much easier to say "Christians (from my particular church) Good, all other Christians, Muslims, Zoroastrians and anyone who has ever been to the Zoo, Bad!".

Ignorance is bliss.

Click to expand...

public hermit said:

Apparently, in a sermon on hell, Nyssa let the cat out of the bag and said as much (If I ever find that sermon, I'll share it).

Click to expand...

Hmm said:

Is this the doctrine of "Reserve" as explained here?

This is a long quote but it makes an important historical point. It's an extract from Universalism, the Prevailing Doctrine of the Christian Church During its First Five Hundred Years which contains much more such heresy punishable by eternal torture from our Loving Father:

"We cannot read the patristic literature understandingly unless we constantly bear in mind the early fathers' doctrine of "Economy," or "Reserve." Plato distinctly taught it, and says that error may be used as a medicine. He justifies the use of the "medicinal lie." The resort of the early fathers to the esoteric is no doubt derived from Plato. Origen almost quotes him when he says that sometimes fictitious threats are necessary to secure obedience, as when Solon had purposely given imperfect laws. Many, in and out of the church, held that the wise possessor of truth might hold it in secret. when its impartation to the ignorant would seem to be fraught with danger, and that error might be properly substituted. The object was to save "Christians of the simpler sort" from waters too deep for them. It is possible to defend the practice if it be taken to represent the method of a skillful teacher, who will not confuse the learner with principles beyond his comprehension. Gieseler remarks that "the Alexandrians regarded a certain accommodation as necessary, which ventures to make use even of falsehood for the attainment of a good end; nay, which was even obliged to do so." Neander declares that "the Orientals, according to their theology of economy, allowed themselves many liberties not to be reconciled with the strict laws of veracity."

Some of the fathers who had achieved a faith in Universalism, were influenced by the mischievous notion that it was to be held esoterically, cherished in secret, or only communicated to the chosen few,--withheld from the multitude, who would not appreciate it, and even that the opposite error would, with some sinners, be more beneficial than the truth. Clement of Alexandria admits that he does not write or speak certain truths. Origen claims that there are doctrines not to be communicated to the ignorant. Clement says: "They are not in reality liars who use circumlocution because of the economy of salvation." Origen said that "all that might be said on this theme is not expedient to explain now, or to all. For the mass need no further teaching on account of those who hardly through the fear of æonian punishment restrain their recklessness." The reader of the patristic literature sees this opinion frequently, and unquestionably it caused many to hold out threats to the multitude in order to restrain them; threats that they did not themselves believe would be executed.""

Click to expand...

Noble lie - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org