Do we "deserve" hell.....

[ArmyMatt]

The seven churches are in revelation. One of them is not charged, if thats what you are referring to.
As for the public display of Gods devotion, I apologize for not knowing the exact local but I remember it actually being in the OT.

To reiterate what was stated above, please take your polemic to St Justin's. And please actually have something to say. Not having anything to back up what you are saying looks silly and is a poor witness

 

[~Anastasia~]

What would be the Orthodox position on such a statement? I was perusing a Catholic forum board and the statement was made that all mankind "deserves" hell. That sounds to me like one is approaching our being and salvation again from a legal position. In other words, rather than saying that hell is a consequence of our choices, it makes it sound like:

"You chose sin therefore you deserve to be punished."

Punishment as law rather than consequence.

Thoughts?

Bet you never expected your question to generate such - diverse - replies.

I hope you have some of the understanding you were seeking.

 

[Lukaris]

I think much of this concept is understood from St. Paul's preaching In Romans 1, 2, & 3 leading to his conclusion in Romans 3:23, "for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." St. Paul's conclusions of mankind's sins in Romans 1 centers on rampant moral degeneracy. In Romans 2 he preaches that there are individuals who may not know the God of Abraham, Isaac, & Jacob but nonetheless are conformed to God in their moral behavior but only God knows who is worthy ( Romans 2:16 ). In Romans 3, St. Paul returns to the collective peril we all face because of our fallen nature ( Romans 3:10 ). I think we have to be careful to note that in a sense, mankind may deserve hell but not everyone does; we all need Jesus Christ as our savior. Just my 2 cents.

 

[prodromos]

What would be the Orthodox position on such a statement? I was perusing a Catholic forum board and the statement was made that all mankind "deserves" hell. That sounds to me like one is approaching our being and salvation again from a legal position. In other words, rather than saying that hell is a consequence of our choices, it makes it sound like:

"You chose sin therefore you deserve to be punished."

Punishment as law rather than consequence.

Thoughts?

We are all going to be exposed to God's holiness at the Resurrection on the last day. Whether we experience that as heaven or hell will depend on our disposition towards God. It's not a case of whether we deserve it or not.

 

[Light of the East]

We are all going to be exposed to God's holiness at the Resurrection on the last day. Whether we experience that as heaven or hell will depend on our disposition towards God. It's not a case of whether we deserve it or not.

This would be the position expressed by Dr. Alexander Kalomiros in his presentation THE RIVER OF FIRE. I have recently read something that stuck with me and I keep meditating upon it. The whole of Creation is a vast experience of God's love. It is like an ocean of love - incomprehensibly large to the human mind. The soul, upon the death of the flesh, is dropped into that ocean of God as a single drop of water into a bottle of wine. It becomes one with the wine, yet retains the properties of water. It is indistinguishable from the wine because of the union of the two, yet retains its unique properties.

And this is what happens when human beings leave their bodies. We drop into an ocean of God's love, which has been likened by the saints to fire. It is a fire which those who have cultivated their theosis here on earth, will find warm, refreshing, and total joy. But those who are immerse in this fire in an ontological state of sin, rebellion, and selfishness, this same fire will be experienced as pain, sorrow, and alienation.

I find this understanding far more in line with the love of God than I do the legal understanding that we somehow "deserve it." God is love. The idea of love never approaches a child with the idea of retribution - that you "deserve it" - but with the idea of loving, restorative correction, which may be painful, but the desired outcome is restoration, not getting even with the child because he angered the parent.

 

[YCGP]

And this is what happens when human beings leave their bodies. We drop into an ocean of God's love, which has been likened by the saints to fire. It is a fire which those who have cultivated their theosis here on earth, will find warm, refreshing, and total joy. But those who are immerse in this fire in an ontological state of sin, rebellion, and selfishness, this same fire will be experienced as pain, sorrow, and alienation.

I think that's beautiful. First time hearing that. Is that Orthodox perspective?

 

[Light of the East]

I think that's beautiful. First time hearing that. Is that Orthodox perspective?

I don't remember where I read it, but yes, it is incredible to meditate upon. And more than that, the ocean of God's love is present in everything that exists.

When I was a Protestant, I had what I would call the typical Protestant view of heaven and eternity, which was - there is God and there is the rest of the universe including me.

But St. Paul says that "in Him we live and move and have our being" In other words, in the ocean of God's love, all that is.....is. And all that exists exists because of God's love. And that I did read on an Orthodox website.

Bottom line..there is no escaping God's love!

 

[ArmyMatt]

I think that's beautiful. First time hearing that. Is that Orthodox perspective?

I would say so

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

I think that's beautiful. First time hearing that. Is that Orthodox perspective?

Yes, Saint Isaac the Syrian and the Macarian Homilies talk extensively about it. All of creation is like the burning bush, and God is the fire. This is what Saint John the Forerunner was talking about regarding the fire of the baptism Christ was bringing.

 

[ArmyMatt]

St Isaac also calls hell the scourge of God's love

 

[Femina]

To be immersed in God's love is to be on fire with glowing desire for our Father and to sleep in the night as if in the light.

 

[robert skynner]

What would be the Orthodox position on such a statement? I was perusing a Catholic forum board and the statement was made that all mankind "deserves" hell. That sounds to me like one is approaching our being and salvation again from a legal position. In other words, rather than saying that hell is a consequence of our choices, it makes it sound like:

"You chose sin therefore you deserve to be punished."

Punishment as law rather than consequence.

Thoughts?

“And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” (Matthew 25:46).


“And <2532> these <3778> shall go away <565> (5695) into <1519> everlasting <166> punishment <2851>: but <1161> the righteous <1342> into <1519> life <2222> eternal <166>.” (Strong’s numberings for Matthew 25:46).


Because the same Greek word ‘aionios’ is used to describe both ‘eternal life’ as well as ‘eternal punishment,’ it’s completely unreasonable to interpret this single word in two contrasting ways within the same verse (Matthew 25:46). If eternal life means forever and ever, and it does mean this, then logically ‘eternal punishment’ must also mean forever and ever. If however the punishment in hell isn’t forever and ever, but is only by a fire, which instantaneously destroys the sinner. Then to be consistent, if the ‘eternal punishment’ isn’t really eternal, i.e. forever and ever, then neither can ‘eternal life’ in heaven be eternal, seeing the same Greek word is used to describe both conditions.

 

[robert skynner]

Eternal separation from God is the consequence of denying His Son, Jesus.

Personally, I’d happen to regard “hell” as referring to an eternal state, where persons will now eternally exist in unveiled God’s universe (presence?). To those who know and love God, existing eternally in such an unveiled presence of God will be bliss, as he or she will have been transformed into his (God’s) likeness, spiritually at our conversion and justification, and physically at Christ’s second coming (Romans 8:23). However, to those whose natures are fallen and unredeemed, the eternal existence of such people in the complete unveiled presence of God will produce intense pain and suffering, to varying degrees, dependent upon their own depravity and depths of sin in disharmony with the omnipresence existence of the holy (and sinless) God.


So, whilst I would personally hold to the position of “eternal conscious torment” for fallen unbelievers, in the (post-second coming) eternal state. None-the-less, I would also postulate as a possible explanation for this, that God himself does not actively punish or consciously torment these lost sinners, so therefore God is not himself responsible for the eternal sufferings of the lost which they will suffer eternally and also to varying degrees. As in my opinion, eternal conscious suffering is just the obvious result of God simply unveiling his presence to creation in the eternal state.


So I’d argue that the “fire,” and to the lake of fire, indicates God’s omnipresent unveiled presence; which produces pain in those who do not know God. At the present time God has actively veiled his presence, as without his presence being currently veiled, all persons across the world would instantly perceive God fully, thereby nullifying the need for faith (trust). So the riddle of hell isn’t that God is some sadist who actively tortures people, by some deliberate act of sadism. God has the complete right to unveil his presence from us, as this is his natural state, and when he does (eternally) unveil his presence, then the lost will suffer (eternally and also to varying degrees), from simply existing as sinful creatures in his presence. In doing so, God is not actively torturing people, God is passive, as it’s the sinner’s sin which causes their own pain and suffering in the presence of the unveiled holiness of God.

 

[~Anastasia~]

“And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” (Matthew 25:46).


“And <2532> these <3778> shall go away <565> (5695) into <1519> everlasting <166> punishment <2851>: but <1161> the righteous <1342> into <1519> life <2222> eternal <166>.” (Strong’s numberings for Matthew 25:46).


Because the same Greek word ‘aionios’ is used to describe both ‘eternal life’ as well as ‘eternal punishment,’ it’s completely unreasonable to interpret this single word in two contrasting ways within the same verse (Matthew 25:46). If eternal life means forever and ever, and it does mean this, then logically ‘eternal punishment’ must also mean forever and ever. If however the punishment in hell isn’t forever and ever, but is only by a fire, which instantaneously destroys the sinner. Then to be consistent, if the ‘eternal punishment’ isn’t really eternal, i.e. forever and ever, then neither can ‘eternal life’ in heaven be eternal, seeing the same Greek word is used to describe both conditions.

Interesting ... I had not especially noticed that word in that context, but it actually makes more sense (from an Orthodox perspective) than you might realize.

Personally, I’d happen to regard “hell” as referring to an eternal state, where persons will now eternally exist in unveiled God’s universe (presence?). To those who know and love God, existing eternally in such an unveiled presence of God will be bliss, as he or she will have been transformed into his (God’s) likeness, spiritually at our conversion and justification, and physically at Christ’s second coming (Romans 8:23). However, to those whose natures are fallen and unredeemed, the eternal existence of such people in the complete unveiled presence of God will produce intense pain and suffering, to varying degrees, dependent upon their own depravity and depths of sin in disharmony with the omnipresence existence of the holy (and sinless) God.


So, whilst I would personally hold to the position of “eternal conscious torment” for fallen unbelievers, in the (post-second coming) eternal state. None-the-less, I would also postulate as a possible explanation for this, that God himself does not actively punish or consciously torment these lost sinners, so therefore God is not himself responsible for the eternal sufferings of the lost which they will suffer eternally and also to varying degrees. As in my opinion, eternal conscious suffering is just the obvious result of God simply unveiling his presence to creation in the eternal state.


So I’d argue that the “fire,” and to the lake of fire, indicates God’s omnipresent unveiled presence; which produces pain in those who do not know God. At the present time God has actively veiled his presence, as without his presence being currently veiled, all persons across the world would instantly perceive God fully, thereby nullifying the need for faith (trust). So the riddle of hell isn’t that God is some sadist who actively tortures people, by some deliberate act of sadism. God has the complete right to unveil his presence from us, as this is his natural state, and when he does (eternally) unveil his presence, then the lost will suffer (eternally and also to varying degrees), from simply existing as sinful creatures in his presence. In doing so, God is not actively torturing people, God is passive, as it’s the sinner’s sin which causes their own pain and suffering in the presence of the unveiled holiness of God.

Actually, this is very closely aligned with an Orthodox understanding of the eschaton. I don't think you'll find any argument here, except that some have put forth the possible hope that even the torment the depraved experience COULD POSSIBLY BE redemptive in some sense, such that they MIGHT not be eternally suffering. But this is only a hope, we do not have any such promise from God, nor can we put it forth to any person as a possible "second chance". We can only hold it, at most, as a hope and so pray for persons, no matter what their condition might be, or seem to be - we never know anyway.

But otherwise, I think you'd find much agreement in Orthodox thinking.

Personally it's much easier for me to understand such a concept of eternal suffering as a natural consequence being in line with a God Who IS love, rather than the idea of one who vengefully and purposely punishes because He is offended.

 

[robert skynner]

Interesting ... I had not especially noticed that word in that context, but it actually makes more sense (from an Orthodox perspective) than you might realize.



Actually, this is very closely aligned with an Orthodox understanding of the eschaton. I don't think you'll find any argument here, except that some have put forth the possible hope that even the torment the depraved experience COULD POSSIBLY BE redemptive in some sense, such that they MIGHT not be eternally suffering. But this is only a hope, we do not have any such promise from God, nor can we put it forth to any person as a possible "second chance". We can only hold it, at most, as a hope and so pray for persons, no matter what their condition might be, or seem to be - we never know anyway.

But otherwise, I think you'd find much agreement in Orthodox thinking.

Personally it's much easier for me to understand such a concept of eternal suffering as a natural consequence being in line with a God Who IS love, rather than the idea of one who vengefully and purposely punishes because He is offended.

Thank you Anastasia. Possible you could give me some link to the orthodox position on hell, so that I could compare it to my own opinions which I have outlined in my post. I am a former evangelical Christian, I've just spent 28 days in prison, for telling the truth about a local group of street evangelists. The court has banned me from naming names, so i cannot tell you what has happened, but now in the UK, when Christian leaders sin and facilitate paedophiles, they go straight to the police to silence whistleblowers such as myself. Britain is now PC mad.

 

[Light of the East]

“And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” (Matthew 25:46).


“And <2532> these <3778> shall go away <565> (5695) into <1519> everlasting <166> punishment <2851>: but <1161> the righteous <1342> into <1519> life <2222> eternal <166>.” (Strong’s numberings for Matthew 25:46).


Because the same Greek word ‘aionios’ is used to describe both ‘eternal life’ as well as ‘eternal punishment,’ it’s completely unreasonable to interpret this single word in two contrasting ways within the same verse (Matthew 25:46). If eternal life means forever and ever, and it does mean this, then logically ‘eternal punishment’ must also mean forever and ever. If however the punishment in hell isn’t forever and ever, but is only by a fire, which instantaneously destroys the sinner. Then to be consistent, if the ‘eternal punishment’ isn’t really eternal, i.e. forever and ever, then neither can ‘eternal life’ in heaven be eternal, seeing the same Greek word is used to describe both conditions.

First of all, to translate "aionios" as meaning eternal is like saying car means duck. Aion is an age. That is the root of the word, therefore, any derivation of it must have some reference to age or an age. Aionios means "of the age" or "age-long." It was Augustine - who didn't know Jack about Greek - who decided that it means eternal. Now would you go to someone who only spoke Russian and didn't understand English and ask him to translate an English Bible into Russian? I think not. Same thing applies with Augustine.

There is another word which always in Greek means eternal. That word is aididion. It was not used. The Greeks knew how to parse the adjectival use of the word properly. The Latins did not.

According to the Greek scholars I have been reading, this is not how the word "aionios" works. It is the subject that determines the quality of the adjective. For instance, if I say that there is a tall dog being walked by a tall man, are they both the same height? No.

There are simply too many verses of Scripture which point to the final restoration of all things to ignore.

 

[Light of the East]

Personally, I’d happen to regard “hell” as referring to an eternal state, where persons will now eternally exist in unveiled God’s universe (presence?). To those who know and love God, existing eternally in such an unveiled presence of God will be bliss, as he or she will have been transformed into his (God’s) likeness, spiritually at our conversion and justification, and physically at Christ’s second coming (Romans 8:23). However, to those whose natures are fallen and unredeemed, the eternal existence of such people in the complete unveiled presence of God will produce intense pain and suffering, to varying degrees, dependent upon their own depravity and depths of sin in disharmony with the omnipresence existence of the holy (and sinless) God.

Exactly what Orthodoxy teaches!

The only caveat I would place in here is that the Patristic Fathers stated that there will be a time when the punishment or torment of being in the presence of God will have produced A.) a proportional and sufficient justice for the sins done and B.) a change in the attitude of the sinner as he/she will come to realize the utter nothingness the sin they clung to in life and the foolishness of continuing to exist in such a state of ruin.

 

[ArmyMatt]

First of all, to translate "aionios" as meaning eternal is like saying car means duck. Aion is an age. That is the root of the word, therefore, any derivation of it must have some reference to age or an age. Aionios means "of the age" or "age-long." It was Augustine - who didn't know Jack about Greek - who decided that it means eternal. Now would you go to someone who only spoke Russian and didn't understand English and ask him to translate an English Bible into Russian? I think not. Same thing applies with Augustine.

There is another word which always in Greek means eternal. That word is aididion. It was not used. The Greeks knew how to parse the adjectival use of the word properly. The Latins did not.

According to the Greek scholars I have been reading, this is not how the word "aionios" works. It is the subject that determines the quality of the adjective. For instance, if I say that there is a tall dog being walked by a tall man, are they both the same height? No.

There are simply too many verses of Scripture which point to the final restoration of all things to ignore.

except that the concept you keep attributing to Augustine, actually began before him. and the restoration of all things does not mean there is no hell. it simply means that those who are restored are tormented by the restoration.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Exactly what Orthodoxy teaches!

The only caveat I would place in here is that the Patristic Fathers stated that there will be a time when the punishment or torment of being in the presence of God will have produced A.) a proportional and sufficient justice for the sins done and B.) a change in the attitude of the sinner as he/she will come to realize the utter nothingness the sin they clung to in life and the foolishness of continuing to exist in such a state of ruin.

or C.) eternal and ever growing torment.

 

[Light of the East]

or C.) eternal and ever growing torment.

Then God loses and is not omnipotent. Man's will is.