But the one I loved died an atheist...

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sadness is definitely out of place in heaven. We will be transformed so that sin has no hold on us.

Sadness is a "sin"?
I don't about you, but if I would be in an eternal paradise, knowing that my loved ones are in eternal torture chamber - I'ld be quite sad about that. Probably I'ld also have an overwhelming feeling of injustice. I'ld find it nothing short of cruel.

I could not be happy, knowing that my loved ones are subject to unimaginable suffering for eternity. And frankly, I wouldn't think very highly of those that could....

It is a good question. My children, my wife and my parents and brothers their wives and families are all saved.

Really? So you know what god's judgement is in advance?

The people in my experience who are not saved are peripheral to my consciousness if I am honest and it is not a major issue for me personally

Do you understand that this strikes me as extremely disturbing?
You just basically said that you do not consider it an issue that people will be subject to unimaginable suffering for eternity. You really are fine with that?

W(C)ould YOU condemn you worst enemy to eternal unimaginable suffering?

I sure couldn't. Nore would I be pleased with it, or even only indifferent, if someone else did either. I'ld find it absolutely shocking, brutal, inhumane, vile, barbaric,... unforgivable, even.

Their memories will be a pain and a burden to them.

And it sounds like you will look down upon them and smile or cheer at their suffering.

 

[CrystalDragon]

Sadness is a "sin"?
I don't about you, but if I would be in an eternal paradise, knowing that my loved ones are in eternal torture chamber - I'ld be quite sad about that. Probably I'ld also have an overwhelming feeling of injustice. I'ld find it nothing short of cruel.

I could not be happy, knowing that my loved ones are subject to unimaginable suffering for eternity. And frankly, I wouldn't think very highly of those that could....



Really? So you know what god's judgement is in advance?



Do you understand that this strikes me as extremely disturbing?
You just basically said that you do not consider it an issue that people will be subject to unimaginable suffering for eternity. You really are fine with that?

W(C)ould YOU condemn you worst enemy to eternal unimaginable suffering?

I sure couldn't. Nore would I be pleased with it, or even only indifferent, if someone else did either. I'ld find it absolutely shocking, brutal, inhumane, vile, barbaric,... unforgivable, even.



And it sounds like you will look down upon them and smile or cheer at their suffering.

I feel like YOU'RE one of the people who actually gets it! Hell is an unjust, brutal, evil concept. And saying that we'll be happy in heaven while other people are tortured in hell for eternity? There's only one way that heaven could be a paradise, then: if we were brainwashed to not care. Having our memories wiped to only want to server God—and IIRC there's Biblical support to that.

So we have afterlife options of being tortured forever, or losing our memories and changing who "we" are so we aren't us anymore but we're blissfully happy so that we just worship God and do nothing else. Purgatory is starting to sound more appealing tbh if that's the case.

 

[mindlight]

Sadness is a "sin"?

No sadness is not a sin. I said it would be out of place in heaven. Given the joy of being in Gods presence.

I don't about you, but if I would be in an eternal paradise, knowing that my loved ones are in eternal torture chamber - I'ld be quite sad about that. Probably I'ld also have an overwhelming feeling of injustice. I'ld find it nothing short of cruel.

None of my loved ones are going to hell. Those who do go there will deserve it and will not consume too much of my thought.

I could not be happy, knowing that my loved ones are subject to unimaginable suffering for eternity. And frankly, I wouldn't think very highly of those that could....

So it is important to share the good news that they do not need to do that if they accept Christ and Gods promises for eternal life.

Really? So you know what god's judgement is in advance?

Yes the scriptures are clear on how a person is to be saved and the promises that God gives one whom he saves. My children and the rest of my family have all accepted Christ as Lord and Saviour

Do you understand that this strikes me as extremely disturbing?
You just basically said that you do not consider it an issue that people will be subject to unimaginable suffering for eternity. You really are fine with that?

I merely meant I do not have the personal desperation associated with someone who knows their loved ones are on a highway to hell and feels that they can do nothing to stop that. Of course it is an immense tragedy that somebody could stubbornly refuse Gods freely offered grace and mercy all their lives. But if at the end they go to hell for that they deserve to be there.

W(C)ould YOU condemn you worst enemy to eternal unimaginable suffering?

My worst enemy is the devil and he is already condemned. As to whether I would judge angels even humans if appointed to such a position and given such authority. I would do what God told me to do and strive to give people what they have asked for with their lives and in light of the fact they have refused Gods mercy and grace. But personally I am glad that it is Gods decision not my own in the end.

I sure couldn't. Nore would I be pleased with it, or even only indifferent, if someone else did either. I'ld find it absolutely shocking, brutal, inhumane, vile, barbaric,... unforgivable, even.

And it sounds like you will look down upon them and smile or cheer at their suffering.

They will probably not register at all in my consciousness. They have after all chosen to reject everything I value and the eternal presence of God which I delight in and which will consume my wholehearted attention. I will have no more in common with such people than darkness has with light and life with death.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Those who do go there will deserve it and will not consume too much of my thought.

Did you just say that you think that I DESERVE to suffer for eternity?

But if at the end they go to hell for that they deserve to be there.

And again...

 

[Hawkins]

I have a number of atheist friends / acquaintances who have lost loved ones. One lost a wife and another a mother and another a father.

My dilemma is this. The good news of the gospel is that regardless of how badly we have lived we can be forgiven our sins and come to know God for eternal life. So even people in the worst situations can find hope in that. Now that should be good news for everyone on a personal level. But there are those who refused that hope and died godless. These people probably will go to hell as a result.

So how do I share the gospel with someone for whom the thought of a recently departed parent or spouse being in hell is an impossibility and something they will never accept. How am I offering them hope if by accepting that hope they are giving up ever seeing the ones they love again?

Our job is to spread the good news, and leave it to God to make a change in hearts.

In the end, it's God's judgment and we have leave that part to God. We trust that our God is a just and loving God.

 

[quatona]

In the end, it's God's judgment and we have leave that part to God. We trust that our God is a just and loving God.

Are there any limits to what you´d consider "loving and just" (when God woudl do it)?

 

[Hawkins]

Are there any limits to what you´d consider "loving and just" (when God woudl do it)?

It's not about limit. It's more about legitimacy. For example, He can't save you without the process being openly witnessed. He can't save not because of ability to do so. It is about how to do so legitimately. If on the other hand, He doesn't do thing with legitimacy, then He can't be a just God and His realm will be a lawless realm.

That's why to pull humans out from our sinful world, He needs Jesus' atonement for our sin. And He did. If He needs to pull humans/angels from hell, He needs a second crucifixion of Jesus, which He said that He won't do.

 

[quatona]

It's not about limit. It's more about legitimacy. For example, He can't save you without the process being openly witnessed. He can't save not because of ability to do so. It is about how to do so legitimately. If on the other hand, He doesn't do thing with legitimacy, then He can't be a just God and His realm will be a lawless realm.

1. I´m wondering who made those laws as the result of which God "has to" do what he has to do, according to you?
2. I had been wondering about the "loving" part more than about the "just" part anyway. So what´s loving about doing what you have to do?

That's why to pull humans out from our sinful world, He needs Jesus' atonement for our sin.

Sounds llike a tad an arbitrary condition to me.

And He did. If He needs to pull humans/angels from hell, He needs a second crucifixion of Jesus, which He said that He won't do.

Who made this rule?
Why won´t He do it - despite being such a loving guy?

 

[TBDude65]

I have a number of atheist friends / acquaintances who have lost loved ones. One lost a wife and another a mother and another a father.

My dilemma is this. The good news of the gospel is that regardless of how badly we have lived we can be forgiven our sins and come to know God for eternal life. So even people in the worst situations can find hope in that. Now that should be good news for everyone on a personal level. But there are those who refused that hope and died godless. These people probably will go to hell as a result.

So how do I share the gospel with someone for whom the thought of a recently departed parent or spouse being in hell is an impossibility and something they will never accept. How am I offering them hope if by accepting that hope they are giving up ever seeing the ones they love again?

You don't. You let those people grieve in their own ways. Your insecurities and your fears are your issues to deal with. If you love and respect those people, you won't put your baggage on them

 

[Hawkins]

1. I´m wondering who made those laws as the result of which God "has to" do what he has to do, according to you?
2. I had been wondering about the "loving" part more than about the "just" part anyway. So what´s loving about doing what you have to do?


Sounds llike a tad an arbitrary condition to me.

Who made this rule?
Why won´t He do it - despite being such a loving guy?

Let me make it simple to you to understand.

God's goal is to make a heaven for Him to live with humans and angels (and any other entities with freewill). Thus He made Law to qualify who can enter heaven as God is sin-incompatible, thus entities with freewill must obey laws in order to live with a sin-incompatible God in a forever realm.

It is that hard to understand, isn't it?

God thus made the rule, to qualify in a way how those entities should be with Him. The end result is, you are with Him (if qualified) or you are not with Him (if disqualified). He made the rules as long as you are under His sovereignty.

Who made the Law in your country/nation? As long as you are living in your country, someone has already made the Law for you to obey. You only choice is to leave the country if you can't live what has already been established.

Simple as that!

 

[quatona]

Let me make it simple to you to understand.

God's goal is to make a heaven for Him to live with humans and angels (and any other entities with freewill). Thus He made Law to qualify who can enter heaven as God is sin-incompatible, thus entities with freewill must obey laws in order to live with a sin-incompatible God in a forever realm.

It is that hard to understand, isn't it?

God thus made the rule, to qualify in a way how those entities should be with Him. The end result is, you are with Him (if qualified) or you are not with Him (if disqualified). He made the rules as long as you are under His sovereignty.

Who made the Law in your country/nation? As long as you are living in your country, someone has already made the Law for you to obey. You only choice is to leave the country if you can't live what has already been established.

Simple as that!

...but doesn´t answer my questions.

 

[Hawkins]

...but doesn´t answer my questions.

So what's your question?

 

[quatona]

So what's your question?

The ones that were in the post you responded to.

 

[Hawkins]

The ones that were in the post you responded to.

You don't have to use complicated english to make thing confusing. Can you use simpler terms to ask the question again? Or to elaborate?

 

[quatona]

You don't have to use complicated english to make thing confusing. Can you use simpler terms to ask the question again? Or to elaborate?

Which of the question was too complicated for you to understand? What do you want to be explained?

 

[Hawkins]

Which of the question was too complicated for you to understand? What do you want to be explained?

Why not just ask the question again which you said I failed to respond to? Is it very difficult for you to ask again or elaborate the question you have asked?

 

[quatona]

Why not just ask the question again which you said I failed to respond to? Is it very difficult for you to ask again or elaborate the question you have asked?

No, I am just not willing to do your work for you when you are too lazy to go back to the previous post in order to reread it.

Post #88.

 

[Hawkins]

No, I am just not willing to do your work for you when you are too lazy to go back to the previous post in order to reread it.

Post #88.

I already read #88 to make the answer. However like I said if my answer won't fit your question, I explained to you that it's because the English used is complicated for your question to be confusing to me. That's why I asked for a elaboration. Yet I don't know why you have to make such a fuss on the matter!

 

[quatona]

I already read #88 to make the answer. However like I said if my answer won't fit your question, I explained to you that it's because the English used is complicated for your question to be confusing to me. That's why I asked for a elaboration. Yet I don't know why you have to make such a fuss on the matter!

Which part is too complicated for you to understand?