The Brown Brink
Well-Known Member
I don't worry about hell at all.
"Good works" show faith.
Hell wins none of my consideration.
"Good works" show faith.
Hell wins none of my consideration.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I don't worry about hell at all.
"Good works" show faith.
Hell wins none of my consideration.
Non-Christians are just as capable of producing good works as Christians are. Some might argue even more so in some cases.
"If we could pay for our own sins, then Christ's death was unnecessary."
I don't think that way. (But we don't have to agree on this--not a salvation issue) I would say that Christ's Blood is the propitiation--so that I am not required to pay for my sin.
"Yes, there are different levels of punishment in hell, but that does not indicate different lengths of 'time' spent in an 'eternity'. Those terms are mutually exclusive. No time exists in eternity. Where you land, you land. Forever and ever."
If punishment went on forever and ever, I wouldn't say that there is a different level of punishment for anyone. Someone who stole a loaf of bread because he was hungry would be given the same punishment as someone who murdered many people and took sadistic delight in it. An eternity of punishment is after all, an eternity of punishment. I believe that separation from God is permanent for the unsaved, of course. But then, why would anyone want to be eternally with God the Father and God the Son if he/she rejected them in this life? Of course, that is the ultimate punishment--to be away from the only source of life in the universe and therefore to be in eternal death. But not the same as eternal, conscious, painful torment to my mind.
Non-Christians are just as capable of producing good works as Christians are. Some might argue even more so in some cases.
Unbelievers are certainly capable of love and good works--no Christian would deny that. But, they do not have the love of the Father in them--His agape love. It is THAT love which comes from God and saves us. "He loved us while we were yet sinners..." and "We love Him because He first loved us." Those who do not love God break one of the Commandments every single day of their lives.
I wouldn't call hell and much of the Old Testament "loving"...
God's justice demands a hell and that ultimately is part of His love. How loving would I be if I, as a judge, insisted that hateful and murderous criminals be let loose on an unsuspecting and law-abiding populace? The Old Testament certainly pronounces wrath and punishment on the enemies of God--those who sin against Him. But what else would you have Him do?
"It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of an angry God..." (and that is in the New Testament Book of Hebrews). He is coming again in judgment (that is the purpose of the declaration of the "woes" of the Book of Revelation).
There's a difference between jailing people to keep the good members of society safe from them, and torturing the criminals in burning agony, without end, for all eternity.
Nicely said.1. God knows all and is the Creator of everything. Yes, He does and is.
2. He knew ahead of time that Satan would exist and become the chief fallen angel that he is. Yes, but Satan is not solely responsible for the evil, rebellious heart of Man. Satan doesn't send us to hell. We do that to ourselves.
3. God knew we would all labor under the curse and power of our sinful nature. Yes, He did, which is why He made a way through Christ for all who would be saved to be saved.
Did God, then, purposely plan on having most of humanity suffer the fate of eternal hell? Did He want this to happen? Obviously not. "God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." If God is perfectly good, which He must be to be God, then, of all the possible worlds He could have made, He made our world which He knew in His omniscience would produce the maximum number of people who would freely choose salvation. I don't see, then, that God was aiming to have the majority of people He made go to hell. That was never His goal. As a good God, His intention was to create a world of free moral agents in which the number of people who would be saved would be maximized. If there had been a possible world that would have done this better, being a good God, He would have created it. It doesn't appear to me, then, that God has done some great evil in creating a world where so many go to hell. That is the consequence of our free moral agency, not some evil intent on God's part. God has done all He could, given our freedom to choose as we like, to maximize the salvation of humanity.
Selah.
I'm afraid you've taken up a Jesus who is little more than the embodiment of your own moral, and philosophical, and theological preferences. The Jesus you love is not the Jesus revealed in the Bible. You have made Christ just a mirror, a reflection, of who you are (or wish to be). Jesus was an example of tolerance? How so? He called the Pharisees "whitewashed tombs" and "brood of vipers" and "sons of hell." He tossed the moneychangers out of the temple. He told sinners to cease from their sin. He warned of a future divine judgment no one could escape. He said flatly and explicitly that no one could come to God the Father except through himself. This is not the speech and conduct of a tolerant person!
Jesus was compassionate; this is true. Accepting, though? He did not accept the Pharisees; he did not accept the Sadducees; he did not accept religious hypocrisy; he did not accept false teachers; he did not accept false doctrine; he did not accept the temple being made a place of commerce; he did not accept the sin of those he healed; he did not accept that there were alternative routes to God besides himself. And so on.
Jesus was inclusive? See above. Consider also the Sermon on the Mount:
Matthew 5:19-20
19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
This doesn't sound particularly "inclusive" to me... In fact, it sounds rather like he's threatening the exclusion from the kingdom of heaven of any who break the commandments and teach others to follow suit.
Matthew 5:21-22
21 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.'
22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.
Whoa! More threats, more exclusion, more condemnation of any who hold hatred in their heart toward another and who call their brother a fool. Jesus isn't sounding at all inclusive here...
Matthew 5:27-29
27 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not commit adultery.'
28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.
Yikes! What's happened to your inclusive Jesus?! He sounds pretty severe, and condemning, and restrictive in his preaching, not inclusive. If a guy even looks on a woman with lust in his heart for her he's an adulterer? This makes most men today guilty of adultery! That's not a very inclusive moral standard for Jesus to establish!
And so it goes. You can read through the Gospels for yourself and see that the Jesus you've imagined in your head or absorbed from popular culture is not the Jesus revealed in the Bible. You seem to have adopted a rather sterile, milksop, fluffy bunny Jesus who is utterly contrary to the real Jesus.
As for Jesus teaching about being the Way - the only Way - to God, well, suggesting that he was vague and open-ended about what he meant is just patently false. He did say, "no man comes to God the Father except through me." That sounds pretty precise and narrow. Jesus also said:
John 3:14-15
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.
John 10:9
9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.
John 11:25-26
25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.
26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?"
The apostles who followed in Christ's footsteps and established the Early Church understood Jesus to be preaching a very singular way to God:
Acts 4:10-12
10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.
11 This is the 'stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.'
12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."
Getting it wrong about Jesus can have eternally devastating consequences. It is only the Jesus of the Bible, the historical Jesus described in Scripture, not the Jesus you prefer to imagine and conform to modern notions of tolerance, relativism and pluralism, who can save. Your Jesus cannot save anyone. But the Saviour revealed to us in the pages of the Bible, the Jesus who is narrow-minded, and restrictive, and critical can "save to the uttermost." I would urge you to think carefully, then, about which Jesus you really want.
Selah.
God's justice demands a hell and that ultimately is part of His love. How loving would I be if I, as a judge, insisted that hateful and murderous criminals be let loose on an unsuspecting and law-abiding populace? The Old Testament certainly pronounces wrath and punishment on the enemies of God--those who sin against Him. But what else would you have Him do?
"It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of an angry God..." (and that is in the New Testament Book of Hebrews). He is coming again in judgment (that is the purpose of the declaration of the "woes" of the Book of Revelation).
I don't think anyone has proved that your last statement is true. The only ones who the Bible mentions as being the subjects of eternal torment are Satan, the Antichrist, the False Prophet and those who take the Mark of the Beast. The rest of the unsaved are said to suffer "the Second Death" (Revelation 2:11, 20:6, 20:14 and 21:8)
Matthew 25:46
46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Frankly, I believe that Jesus was speaking to His Jewish hearers about the end of the Messianic Kingdom in Matthew 24 and 25. At that point, mortal man will have been given EVERY chance to follow Him (Satan will be bound during the Millennial Kingdom--long and blessed life will return. Isaiah tells us that "only the wicked will die at 100"). Jesus' Jewish hearers were very familiar with the concept of the Messianic Kingdom--they were still asking about it in the Book of Acts ( 1:6). Note that in the Acts passage, Jesus gives them a mild rebuke and tells them of the gift of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, a far greater gift than the Messianic Kingdom, which He knew that they would never be able to keep. Isaiah was the most common scroll in circulation in those days in addition to the scrolls detailing the Law of Moses.
Even with all of those advantages (great knowledge of the Lord, no wars, no hunger, long life, and Satan being bound during all but the last part of the Kingdom Age), the subjects of the Millennial Kingdom will rebel at the end. It is my belief that it is those rebels, who will walk by their own wickedness instead of the righteousness which comes from God alone, who are being spoken of in the Matthew 25:46 passage. Further, I believe that they will know exactly what they are doing and, like those who take the Mark of the Beast, at the end of this present age, they will suffer eternal torment for their absolute hatred of God. They will be like their master, Satan.
Christ here offers a parallelism to his audience, a common technique in Jewish thought and literature. He parallels the eternal life of the righteous with the everlasting punishment of the wicked. Implicit in the parallel is that the duration of the everlasting punishment of the wicked is as enduring as the eternal life of the righteous. Just as there will never be an end to the eternal life of the righteous, there will never be an end to the everlasting punishment of the wicked.
Jesus begged the Father to forgive those who sinned out of their ignorance. "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Most, in that day--especially the Gentiles--did not understand even what constituted sin because they had little to no learning in the Scriptures.
Oh, but "punishment" refers to annihilation, not the conscious torment described in Scripture. "Everlasting punishment" just means the annihilation of the wicked is permanent, never to be reversed or undone. But this plays falsely with the term "punishment." One cannot punish a rock or a tree; one cannot make a rubber ball or a broom handle suffer any sort of punishment. No, punishment necessarily entails consciousness. Where there is no consciousness, there can be no punishment. It is false, then, to say that annihilation is everlasting punishment. Annihilation ends punishment; it prevents it. What wicked person, knowing the just end of their wicked deeds is everlasting punishment in hell would not find annihilation a much-preferred alternative? The oblivion of annihilation is the expected end of most of the unrepentant wicked. They don't think of it as punishment but the the common fate of all, good or bad. It is the very fact that annihilation awaits at the end of life rather than the divine wrath and justice of God that godless people are prompted to throw off as many moral constraints as possible and live as selfishly and wickedly as they can! In no sense, then, is annihilation a punishment.
Selah.
I don't know about you, but I can't imagine anything worse than annihilation--truthfully, I can't even imagine it.
There is no question there is a hell, and that sin demands punishment. The question is the character of God. He is justice, and eternal punishment is not justice.
Are you expecting to live forever with God in His eternal kingdom? I think it is pretty evident that you are. Obviously, in comparison to such an end, annihilation would seem a terrible fate indeed. But the lost who have rejected God, who have adopted a godless, naturalistic view of life, don't share your expectation. As I said, they expect oblivion."
Unfortunately, for them, there's a bit of a catch. They must first be punished for their sins in the place of torment (in Hades--and Hades is NOT the same place as Gehenna--"the lake of fire"). It is true that oblivion would be a mercy after their sojourn in Hades. But we serve a merciful God.
When their body dies, that will be the utter end of them. Annihilation, then, isn't thought of by them as a punishment. It is the natural end of every human life however that life is lived. Perhaps if they believed they had a joyful eternity to lose, the prospect of annihilation might be disturbing, but they don't. Besides, what wicked, unrepentant, rebellious sinner would want to spend eternity in the presence of the holy God they've willfully denied and disobeyed or suffer eternally His just wrath? Annihilation would be far more preferable to either of these alternatives. So, again, annihilation isn't the horror for many others that you imagine it to be. What's more, annihilation can't properly serve as punishment since it ends consciousness which is integral to any and all punishment.
Selah.
Matthew 25:46
46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Christ here offers a parallelism to his audience, a common technique in Jewish thought and literature. He parallels the eternal life of the righteous with the everlasting punishment of the wicked. Implicit in the parallel is that the duration of the everlasting punishment of the wicked is as enduring as the eternal life of the righteous. Just as there will never be an end to the eternal life of the righteous, there will never be an end to the everlasting punishment of the wicked.
Oh, but "punishment" refers to annihilation, not the conscious torment described in Scripture. "Everlasting punishment" just means the annihilation of the wicked is permanent, never to be reversed or undone. But this plays falsely with the term "punishment." One cannot punish a rock or a tree; one cannot make a rubber ball or a broom handle suffer any sort of punishment. No, punishment necessarily entails consciousness. Where there is no consciousness, there can be no punishment. It is false, then, to say that annihilation is everlasting punishment. Annihilation ends punishment; it prevents it. What wicked person, knowing the just end of their wicked deeds is everlasting punishment in hell would not find annihilation a much-preferred alternative? The oblivion of annihilation is the expected end of most of the unrepentant wicked. They don't think of it as punishment but the the common fate of all, good or bad. It is the very fact that annihilation awaits at the end of life rather than the divine wrath and justice of God that godless people are prompted to throw off as many moral constraints as possible and live as selfishly and wickedly as they can! In no sense, then, is annihilation a punishment.
Selah.
Everlasting life is the gift of God to the saved, everlasting death is the opposite and is just. What makes you think annihilation is not a punishment? It is what God said would happen if Adam and Eve sinned. He did not say if you eat of the tree you will be punished forever. Again---the Jews were tortured, starved and gassed to death, but because they rejected Christ, now they must be resurrected and be tortured forever---they were better off under Hitler, at least under him, their suffering came to an end.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?