Questions About Hell

[AlexDTX]

Dear Alex: Do not be slow. Fundy's are not the one's I am trying to convince, in fact I have zero interest in convincing any of us dorks on anything of the Holy. That is in the dept. of the Holy Spirit. One can only express our Father's word and leave the rest to Him.

"Then opened He their minds that they might understand the Scriptures."

You are still trying to convince Christians on a Christian site. Why? And I will ask you another question. Did you, or any other US member in this site, come to Christ because someone else shared Universal Salvation to you?
BTW, keep your smug condescension to your self. I am not slow. I am persistent in what you are refusing to answer.

 

[aiki]

Dear Aiki: The entire context of St. Matthew 25 is regarding servants of the master, poor investors of the master, & two clean Old Covenant animals (both clean) & pure virgins. This cornerstone passage regarding everlasting punishment has failure written all over it, not of righteous and wicked, but of the Lord's servants, investors and goats.

Can you tell us what qualifies these for "everlasting punishment"?

The foundation for “everlasting punishment” Matt. 25=

1._____________________________________________________________?

2._____________________________________________________________?

3._____________________________________________________________?

4._____________________________________________________________?

5._____________________________________________________________?

The Sheep And The Goats - Jonathan Mitchell's Writings

This is an odd and deflective response to all that I put forward in my last post to you. Your response above totally ignores all of the things I pointed out, engaging none of them, just issuing a peculiar description of Matthew 25, void of any concrete grounding, and then giving me a questionnaire. Here's the thing, though: If you can't be bothered to engage directly and thoroughly with my points, why should I bother to address your observations and questions?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Sun? Sin?

I believe every person is a sinner because of Adam and we are naturally under condemnation. As Paul writes we are saved through Christ righteousness, that is received through faith.

I know you do. It’s a popular theology. Leaves human pride fully in tact, unchanged and strong.

Rom 5:17
For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.

Death comes because we sin. “Death reigned” is a metaphor. We still die you know. If Jesus undid it as you understand it, we ought not to die. As it is, we still do. One man brought death and we still die.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Dear Dorothy: The man in the mirror has really bad genes.

Where is the Bible verse on that?

"For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the One who subjected it, in hope."

The creation is all living things except man.

 

[FineLinen]

The creation is all living things except man.

 

[martymonster]

How come neither he nor Eve nor God uses this excuse. In any case, now you blame God for shoddy workmanship. Anything but blame the man in the mirror for the evil deeds the man in the mirror does;

Jer 18:1 The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying,
Jer 18:2 Arise, and go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words.
Jer 18:3 Then I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels.
Jer 18:4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.

There, that should answer your question about what he has done, how he operates, and what he is doing.

 

[zoidar]

I know you do. It’s a popular theology. Leaves human pride fully in tact, unchanged and strong.
Death comes because we sin. “Death reigned” is a metaphor. We still die you know. If Jesus undid it as you understand it, we ought not to die. As it is, we still do. One man brought death and we still die.

How do you mean "leaves human pride fully intact"?

As I see it Paul is talking about spiritual death.

 

[Josheb]

1. Would endless misery benefit the Almighty, as the INFLICTOR?
2. Would endless misery benefit the saints, as SPECTATORS?
3. Would endless misery benefit the sinner, as the SUFFERER?
4. If endless punishment be the "wages of sin," could the sinner ever receive payment in full? (Rom. 6:23)
5. As man is a finite being, can he commit an infinite sin?
6. If man cannot commit an infinite sin, can he deserve endless punishment?
7. If one sin be infinite, can a million be any more?
8. If ONE sin be NOT infinite, can a million of sins amount to an infinite sin?
9. If sin be infinite, can one sin be greater than the other?
10. If sin be infinite, can it be true that, "where sin abounded grace did MUCH MORE abound?" --(Rom. 5:20)
11. If sin be infinite, can it ever be finished or brought to an end?
12. If ONE sin deserves an eternity of punishment, how much punishment will TEN sins deserve?

Moving the goal post. The op's questions were answered. Ignoring those answers and moving on as if they were not answered is fallacious. Should we expect you to discuss your own op or not?

 

[FineLinen]

Moving the goal post. The op's questions were answered. Ignoring those answers and moving on as if they were not answered is fallacious. Should we expect you to discuss your own op or not?

Take 2

Dear Josh: You have the questions, you have the answers you have given. And what answers they are.

Question= Would the infliction of endless punishment be overcoming evil with good?

Your answer=

"Yes. It is good to have an absence of evil."

I have zero problem with evil being ended, and in fact firmly believe when it has accomplished the purpose for which God has designed it, shall be no more.

"I the Lord create good and create evil, I the Lord do all these things."

God our Father does NOT inflict endless punishment. He punishes with one object, and one object only as the Father of all fathers>>>

Change & transformation in Holy perfect rectitude

 

[FineLinen]

1. 1. Would endless misery benefit the Almighty, as the INFLICTOR?
   2. Would endless misery benefit the saints, as SPECTATORS?
   3. Would endless misery benefit the sinner, as the SUFFERER?
   4. If endless punishment be the "wages of sin," could the sinner ever receive payment in full? (Rom. 6:23)
   5. As man is a finite being, can he commit an infinite sin?
   6. If man cannot commit an infinite sin, can he deserve endless punishment?
   7. If one sin be infinite, can a million be any more?
   8. If ONE sin be NOT infinite, can a million of sins amount to an infinite sin?
   9. If sin be infinite, can one sin be greater than the other?
   10. If sin be infinite, can it be true that, "where sin abounded grace did MUCH MORE abound?" --(Rom. 5:20)
   11. If sin be infinite, can it ever be finished or brought to an end?
   12. If ONE sin deserves an eternity of punishment, how much punishment will TEN sins deserve?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Explain the "What if..." question then.

Romans 9:22-24
What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

I don’t think “what if” is the proper translation. I believe it says

“And if God, willing to shew the wrath and to make known His power, did endure, in much long suffering, vessels of wrath fitted for destruction,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭9:22‬

 

[Eloy Craft]

I’ve talked to a fair number of atheists and they all assume/hope there is no existence after death. They don’t desire it at all once the body is dead.

Dorothy we can't even imagine not existing. We can't desire what we can't know.

 

[Eloy Craft]

If God has fully revealed Himself and is rejected, what more can God do? Make a place for the God rejecter that won't. Include Himself.

 

[PaulCyp1]

1. Yes, God is love, and loves every one of His human children perfectly, and therefore equally.
2. God doesn't punish us. He offers every one of us an eternity of perfect happiness with Him in Heaven. But, even though He regrets it, He has to provide an alternative for those who freely choose to reject Him and His offer of Heaven.
3. No, it isn't. It is only for those who are beyond goodness because they have rejected the source of all goodness, God.
4. Yes, He dearly loves every human being, even those who hate or reject Him.
5. Correct.
6. Of course not. God creates every human being free of evil. As we mature, we freely choose good or evil for ourselves.
7. God does not inflict any evil on anyone, since evil is defined as "that which is in opposition to the will of God". God cannot act in opposition to His own will.
8. God cannot be overcome by anything, since He alone is infinitely powerful.
9. God does not inflict eternal punishment. He regretfully send people there who have used their free will to reject Him and Heaven. Forcing them to go to Heaven anyway would be a violation of their free will.
10. See #9.
11. See #9.
12. God could easily do so, simply by revoking our free will, turning us into mere intelligent animals with no spiritual nature and no free will. But He loves us too much to do that to us.
13. Again, it is not an infliction, but a choice we freely make for ourselves. An infliction os something we had no choice about.
14. Goa does not hate the sinner. Like any good parent, He loves every one of His children, even if they turn against Him, freely choose evil. and thereby freely choose Hell.
15. No. Since He is perfect in every way, the only way He could change would be to become imperfect.

 

[Josheb]

God our Father does NOT inflict endless punishment. He punishes with one object, and one object only as the Father of all fathers...

You mean continuous, not endless. Eternity is endless, but it is not continuous for those destroyed, whether their destruction involves slow, gradual, torturous decay or whether it entails instantaneous eradication.

It also appears punishment and suffering are being conflated and the latter confused with God as the causal agent of both. Suffering is a natural (pun intended) consequence of being separated from God but it is not God actually causing that pain. Don't confuse the two.

Adjust thinking, doctrine, and practice accordingly.



And I'm still not seeing any change in the practice of abusively proof-texting scripture.

 

[FineLinen]

1. Yes, God is love, and loves every one of His human children perfectly, and therefore equally.
2. God doesn't punish us. He offers every one of us an eternity of perfect happiness with Him in Heaven. But, even though He regrets it, He has to provide an alternative for those who freely choose to reject Him and His offer of Heaven.
3. No, it isn't. It is only for those who are beyond goodness because they have rejected the source of all goodness, God.
4. Yes, He dearly loves every human being, even those who hate or reject Him.
5. Correct.
6. Of course not. God creates every human being free of evil. As we mature, we freely choose good or evil for ourselves.
7. God does not inflict any evil on anyone, since evil is defined as "that which is in opposition to the will of God". God cannot act in opposition to His own will.
8. God cannot be overcome by anything, since He alone is infinitely powerful.
9. God does not inflict eternal punishment. He regretfully send people there who have used their free will to reject Him and Heaven. Forcing them to go to Heaven anyway would be a violation of their free will.
10. See #9.
11. See #9.
12. God could easily do so, simply by revoking our free will, turning us into mere intelligent animals with no spiritual nature and no free will. But He loves us too much to do that to us.
13. Again, it is not an infliction, but a choice we freely make for ourselves. An infliction os something we had no choice about.
14. Goa does not hate the sinner. Like any good parent, He loves every one of His children, even if they turn against Him, freely choose evil. and thereby freely choose Hell.
15. No. Since He is perfect in every way, the only way He could change would be to become imperfect.

Dear Paul: Your answer to #5=

"Yes, He dearly loves every human being, even those who hate or reject Him."

My question=

When does God who dearly loves every human being cease dearly loving them?

 

[FineLinen]

You mean continuous, not endless. Eternity is endless, but it is not continuous for those destroyed, whether their destruction involves slow, gradual, torturous decay or whether it entails instantaneous eradication.

It also appears punishment and suffering are being conflated and the latter confused with God as the causal agent of both. Suffering is a natural (pun intended) consequence of being separated from God but it is not God actually causing that pain. Don't confuse the two.

Adjust thinking, doctrine, and practice accordingly.



And I'm still not seeing any change in the practice of abusively proof-texting scripture.

Dear Josheb: Can you explain how being separated by any being from their Creator is in union with ta pante?

God is the Source, Guide & Goal of ta pante

 

[Josheb]

Dear Josheb: Can you explain how being separated by any being from their Creator is in union with ta pante?

God is the Source, Guide & Goal of ta pante

Not until you justify the inquiry. There will be no shifting of the burden in your own op. The obligation is on you, as the author of this op, to prove your position, not to pawn that onus off onto others.


I suggest you start by posting a concise thesis statement and then provide a summary of the evidence you think supports your conclusion. Include your scriptural reference (Mt. 8:33? 18:31? 28:19?) and do it without proof-texting.

Or maybe we can cut a lot of the subterfuge out with an answer to a single question: Is it your intent to promote universalism without openly mentioning the term?

 

[FineLinen]

Or maybe we can cut a lot of the subterfuge out with an answer to a single question: Is it your intent to promote universalism without openly mentioning the term?

Dear Josheb: I do not need to "promote" the Restitution of ta pante. Is there any reference to the term in any of the 213 questions that would make you surmise such a jump?

 

[Josheb]

Dear Josheb: I do not need to "promote" the Restitution of ta pante. Is there any reference to the term in any of the 213 questions that would make you surmise such a jump?

You are not addressing the concerns put to this op, nor answering the questions asked. The questions of this op have been answered and addressed. The problem of proof-texting and other scripture abuses has been noted repeatedly, several logical fallacies have been attempted, and blatant disregard for any semblance of parity is obvious.

Titus 3:9-11 ESV
"But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned."​

So you let me know when you're ready to do so..... by doing so.