You asked: "How do you preach this without preaching what that death is?"
Saint Steven said: ↑
The penalty for sin is death. Christ paid that penalty for all of humanity.
Romans 5:18
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people,
so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
I'm beginning to understand your username. Here's what you said to the same post previously.Everyone dies... my Dad died. Are you saying his penalty wasn't paid because he died?
But, we are on a new page. I know it is hard to remember back that far. - lolYup. Kind of figured that out decades ago when I accepted Jesus. What are you trying to convey here?
I'm beginning to understand your username. Here's what you said to the same post previously.
But, we are on a new page. I know it is hard to remember back that far. - lol
I gotta say the whole article seemed overwrought to me.From a CWR (Christianity Without Religion) article by Brad Jersak titled:
What if you’re wrong about hell?
(Source link: Q&R with Brad Jersak: What if you're wrong about hell?)
Jesus has established His authority in all realms.
The demons believe and tremble.
Exclusion from Love does not mean unable to acknowledge the Lordship of Christ.
From a CWR (Christianity Without Religion) article by Brad Jersak titled:
What if you’re wrong about hell?.....
This all pertains to the "free will" gospel of Arminianism. They depict God as a bully who threatens to torture people forever if they don't say "uncle". Or one who tries to bribe them with everlasting pleasure if they sell their souls to him by doing the same.From a CWR (Christianity Without Religion) article by Brad Jersak titled:
What if you’re wrong about hell?
(Source link: Q&R with Brad Jersak: What if you're wrong about hell?)
Note this is more to read at the link than what I have posted in the OP here.
Comments and discussion welcome.
Q&R with Brad Jersak: What if you’re wrong about hell?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Question:
Recently, in response to my rejection of the hell of eternal torment, one of my readers offered a fairly common objection: “I hope you’re right about that. BUT if you’re wrong about hell, then a lot of people will go there … and it will be your fault. Wouldn’t it be better to play it safe just to be sure?”
The following response was adapted from a much longer essay from Clarion Journal, titled, “Let’s Talk about Hell BETTER or “If You’re Wrong, a Lot of People Will Go to Hell & It’s Your Fault” by Brad Jersak.
Response: The Wager
This high stakes objection is worthy of a careful response.
But for the sake of our wager, let’s say it was. Let’s say that gospel did work. And let’s say Edwards was completely right: that hell is eternal conscious torment and salvation is Jesus’ way out of the white-hot wrath of God. Let’s say eternal conscious torment is the clear and present danger. If so, then we need to determine which gospel will BEST save people from that fate.
- “Wrong about hell” in what way? The implication seems to imply that I don’t believe there’s a hell or that the hell I believe in is not something to worry about. Not so! Of course I believe in hell. I’ve been there. I’ve seen it with my eyes, in my spirit and in my Bible. And now I preach the good news, knowing that Christ conquered hades (Rev. 1:18) to rescue us and he came back victorious with a host of captives (Mark 3:27, Eph. 4:8). I see no reason to believe that my conviction that hell is horrendous but not eternal would endanger a single soul of going there.
- Are we saved by belief in Christ or by belief in hell? I assume that objectors believe that the material cause of our salvation is Jesus Christ and the efficient cause is faith in his name. Nowhere do the Scriptures demand belief in a particular doctrine of hell as a requirement for saving faith. No doctrine of hell entered New Testament evangelism or our confession of faith at baptism. One can check every evangelistic sermon in Acts to verify this.
- The ‘Safe’ Wager: The charge seems to be rooted in a fear-based wager that ultimately bites itself in the behind. The wager goes like this: IF eternal conscious torment is even a possibility, then we’d better warn people about it or they will end up there. Makes sense, right? Well… that might have worked in Jonathan Edwards time. I say might because can we be so sure that those who repent out of fear of being roasted alive forever actually responded in willing faith to Jesus Christ? Did they love him because they’d God’s love in the revelation of the Cross? Or did Edwards merely convince them to convert with the eternal conscious gun to their heads? Is that saving faith?
Here’s the troubling news: preaching eternal hellfire no longer scares people into Jesus arms. Statistically, it creates atheists by the millions. If you’re truly worried about people going to hell, then you had better NOT mention it, because such preaching is among the top stated reasons why people now reject Christ.
This is a fact in the 21st century: people today reject the good news of Jesus Christ when we import hellfire preaching into our gospel. They do this because:
So, if you are truly afraid that people will go to hell, DO NOT tell them about it. But my suspicion is that the greater fear is that we ourselves might go to hell if we don’t get it right, even if we cause others to reject Christ through our hellacious threats.
- It sounds more like medieval mythology than gospel truth. It doesn’t resonate at all.
- It looks more like a B-grade horror movie than something anchored to reality.
- It sabotages the evangelist’s credibility because it doesn’t sound like the foolishness of the gospel (Christ and him crucified). It sounds more like the silliness of radical fundamentalism.
- It enables the listener to defer judgment to an imagined “later” rather than facing all the ways they are already perishing and in bondage to the kingdom of hell today.
I and many other 70ad preterists lean towards that view. [Gehenna Jerusalem]Hell (the lake of fire) has already past. It happened just under 2000 years ago when Jerusalem was burned to the ground (in 70AD) and upwards of 1 million Jews perished. John 3:16 refers to this perishing. I can back this statement up with lots of scripture.
People that I have seen saved have often had personal relationships with Christians that helped them develop a trust for a persons opinions and views and allowed for honest questions. In such relationships we are able to demonstrate Christs love and stand with the people who are trying to find a way out of the swamp of modern moral relativism.
As you already know, there are two kinds of death. Physical and spiritual.You said Jesus died to keep Christians from dying. But why do they die then? doesn't make sense.
The article doesn't say that.Neither my view, Brad's view, yours nor anyone else's view causes anyone to go to hell. That's a blatant false-cause fallacy.
Thanks for your fantastic post.Interesting argument that evangelistically it does not work to mention hell , even though you think it is real and are desperate that lost people do not go there. That Christs love not fear of hell is the reason that people become Christians. Based on my own experiences I must admit it is a trigger word with a lot of non Christians that does discredit Christians in the eyes of the lost because their presuppositions have become so unreal.
My reservation here is that "love" also is a competitive word in the cultures vocabulary. That many people prefer sex or romance to the love of God, or wonder why they cannot seek the love of another god or even an impersonal force characterised as liquid love. So how do we wake people out their deceived states to understand that there is only one love worth having and that also it is pressing need cause refusal may mean hell, even if we cannot talk about it.
People that I have seen saved have often had personal relationships with Christians that helped them develop a trust for a persons opinions and views and allowed for honest questions. In such relationships we are able to demonstrate Christs love and stand with the people who are trying to find a way out of the swamp of modern moral relativism.
Thanks, Dave.This all pertains to the "free will" gospel of Arminianism. They depict God as a bully who threatens to torture people forever if they don't say "uncle". Or one who tries to bribe them with everlasting pleasure if they sell their souls to him by doing the same.
It has nothing to do with the God of the bible or the gospel of grace.
Hell is a none issue. Those who believe the gospel have eternal life. Hell is a stern reality for unbelievers nobody can change. It's not a gun held to the head of anyone forcing them to surrender to the bully god of free will. Even if they do, it's not the God of the bible, but an idol.Thanks, Dave.
So, what does "the gospel of grace" say about all this, in your opinion?
Like the hug and comfort AFTER the spanking.Could the demons be trembling because they fear their conversion more than exclusion from Love? Don't they relish exclusion from Love?
What they don't want big Carl is to know the truth and to be tormented by the fact that they must ultimately repent and submit to God's grace. Which means they tremble for fear of INCLUSION in Love.
Hell is a none issue.
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?