the simple answer:
basically suicide is violating the commandment 'thou shalt not kill' and you would die without receiving forgiveness for that sin.
BUT if you had done some other sin and died of a heart attack or traffic accident without seeking and receiving forgiveness would you think you would lose your salvation ? of course not, you would think that God's grace would cover your forgetfulness.
First of all, I'd like to thank archaeologist2 for his courage in facing and responding to a difficult issue.
But I have to take issue with the logic as presented here in this first part of his/her response.
Let's clarify the language at the start: The commandment has been translated "Thou shalt not kill" in the past (see almost any ancient English translation), however, the larger context (the Old Testament, and Israel's national practices) makes it clear that this translation is too general a wording to transmit the intent.
(1) The Commandment (Exodus 20:13) does not include animals for instance, but is intended to apply to people only, or else the sacrificial laws and even rules for Israelite diet could not be carried out.
(2) It is still wrong also to wantonly or maliciously (or even needlessly) kill animals. The rules for exceptions to the Sabbath (saving an ox from a pit for instance) make plain that part of good stewardship involves care and compassion even for animals.
(3) Thus on other grounds (other laws and instructions) we could EXTEND this commandment to include animals, although we could not rightly extend also the PUNISHMENT (death penalty) for such lesser crimes. It must be understood that the death penalty under Mosaic Law only applies to killing humans: Killing an animal requires only replacement or a court-imposed fine.
(4) This commandment is not intended to prevent lawful authorities from carrying out punishments under the Law of Moses, including the death penalty. Again, therefore it cannot apply to ALL cases of killing, but rather UNAUTHORIZED killing. The Law specifically states there is NO penalty (and hence no sin) in killing someone in self-defence who has invaded your home at night, intending themselves to kill you. (see Exodus 22:2 for instance).
(5) This is why many translations rightly substitute the word "MURDER" for "KILL". This narrows the language sufficiently to cover the intention of God's Commandment.
Thus from the starting gate we learn that not all killing is forbidden under the Law, but only a certain subset, namely unauthorized and wrongly motivated killings.
This limitation should also apply to suicides. Not all self-killings may be a case of "murder". Some may be in fact accidental, and in other cases could be negligence causing death (of self). These are hardly cases equivalent to "murder".
A person could also be deceived through false information, and act in error, even though they intended to kill themselves. It is an established and universal principle of law that INTENT and KNOWLEDGE are critically important in determining guilt in any case where a crime or "sin" is suspected.
-------------------------------------------------
Having got that out of the way, here is what I find wrong in your above reasoning. You suggest that killing yourself (by the nature of the case) leaves out any opportunity to repent, and hence (I suppose) you could not receive forgiveness.
But this is a false notion on two counts:
(1) Often people commit an irreversable act resulting in their death, but do not instantly die, and so have plenty of time to regret and "repent" of their choice. Taking poison for instance, a person might change their mind, but unfortunately cannot undo the result. Or even jumping off a cliff or shooting themselves might result in a prolonged "death" in which second thoughts are sure to occur.
(2) From a technical point of view, those who class suicide as a kind of "murder" do it by counting the killing of self as "equal to" the killing of someone else. But this is the absolute MOST that can be claimed. One cannot claim that killing yourself is WORSE than killing someone else, since then,
(a) you would make yourself more important than others, which is pure arrogance, especially for a sinner, and
(b) people clearly have more authority over themselves than over others when it comes to personal responsibility for sin. That is why its wrong to kill others in the first place. We don't have the authority and power to kill other people.
(3) But it is well-known that murderers (those who kill OTHERS) can indeed repent, if God so grants time and opportunity, even if God has to force it on them (as in the case of Paul, who formerly murdered Christians). Even the robber on the cross beside Jesus was able to repent, although not escaping the penalty of the Law.
(4) From this we conclude that even murderers can sometimes find repentance and salvation. If that is so, and suicide is no worse than murder (of others), then a loving and reasonable God would also provide as much opportunity for repentance to suicides as He does for murderers.
(5) God is not irrational or unreasonable, and so would not penalize a murderer for simply being "efficient". Killing someone slowly has to be at least as sinful as killing someone quickly, and so we must also conclude that a quick and successful (instant) suicide cannot be worse than a long protracted one. A loving and reasonable God would have to provide as much grace in one case as in the other.
(6) Finally, people commit suicide for quite different reasons on the whole than the reasons people commit murder. (i.e., dispair, hopelessness, guilt, shame, lack of a future, unbearable pain or suffering etc. on the one hand for suicide, while selfishness, wickedness, meanness, greed, lust, anger, fear, etc. would be the main reasons for murder.) A loving and just God who judges the HEART and righteously, must make such distinctions in judging a suicide versus a true murder.
this does not mean you have permission to commit suicide; at no time does anyone have permission to sin.
Agreed. But it has to be actually determined that the killing was in fact a "murder", and therefore also a sin. We don't hold police, executioners, homeowners or even soldiers normally guilty of "murder" when they kill in various circumstances deemed mandatory (although God might find them guilty).
A case for suicide could be argued equally strongly, or even euthanasia in cases of unbearable pain, extreme age, hopeless medical conditions, or lack of any possibl quality of life.
what nazroo is talking about is completely off the topic and is a different case. when one sacrifices themselves for others, that is NOT committing suicide but making a sacrifice. a very big difference.
I appreciate your sentiment here, but you are playing fast and loose with ordinary language in order to achieve a distinction that is NOT built into the definitions of these words themselves, or their usage, but is rather a philosophical position.
In most dictionaries, and in common usage, heroic acts are often referred to as "suicidal" (and their outcome is often death).
Thus unfortunately, Jesus selfless act, in surrendering Himself to free His apostles at his arrest was certainly a SUICIDE.
On your second attempt to change the meaning of a word, namely "SACRIFICE" you are also wrong.
The definition of sacrifice has nothing to do with suicides performed selflessly or for the benefit of others.
Both in the Old and New testaments, "sacrifice" is a substitutionary death, but the knowledge, intent, will, and cooperation of the victim is irrelevant.
What Jesus did was both a suicide, and a "special" kind of sacrifice, in that He sacrificed Himself, and in that the victim (Jesus) in this case had knowledge of the substitution, and was a willing participant.
In sacrificing HIMSELF, Jesus committed suicide. In doing it willingly, Jesus performed a special selfless act of mercy, which is again completely outside the definition of ordinary Biblical "sacrifice" as a word.
Peace,
Nazaroo