If Christianity is true, then those to be damned must have been destined to be damned from before the beginning of time (after all, God knows everthing down to the exact time your ten millonth hair falls out, and nothing happens that is not His will anyway. You can't surprise Him.)
The question I've always had is as follows: why keep the sinners around, in a conscious state? Why not just annihilate them? Yes, God should not have to allow sinners into his Heaven - but why preserve their existence then? After all, what use are they - to serve as an object lesson for those in Heaven? If so, then it will still be possible for man can have another "Fall" after the Divine Judgement. The possibility of sin will always be there. lurking like a tiger... and sooner or later (given eternity!) another angel will get proud and "here we go again" with the drama.
So, I see only ONE way that the "eternal torture in Hell" scenario can work. It is a yin-yang sort of deal in which ultimate happiness cannot exist without the complementary existence of eternal suffering. To "power" Heaven's happiness, an equal amount of misery has to exist. God therefore uses the torture of skeptics and heathens as fuel for the happiness of the saints.
Talk about TANSTAAFL ("there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.") Is this a credible theory, given that it makes God subject to an external principle? Any answers you have, give them please!
The question I've always had is as follows: why keep the sinners around, in a conscious state? Why not just annihilate them? Yes, God should not have to allow sinners into his Heaven - but why preserve their existence then? After all, what use are they - to serve as an object lesson for those in Heaven? If so, then it will still be possible for man can have another "Fall" after the Divine Judgement. The possibility of sin will always be there. lurking like a tiger... and sooner or later (given eternity!) another angel will get proud and "here we go again" with the drama.
So, I see only ONE way that the "eternal torture in Hell" scenario can work. It is a yin-yang sort of deal in which ultimate happiness cannot exist without the complementary existence of eternal suffering. To "power" Heaven's happiness, an equal amount of misery has to exist. God therefore uses the torture of skeptics and heathens as fuel for the happiness of the saints.
Talk about TANSTAAFL ("there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.") Is this a credible theory, given that it makes God subject to an external principle? Any answers you have, give them please!