quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'd say the absence of a Cosmic Judge who will send you to eternal damnation for not doing (or even believing) the right things is a definite plus point.

---

An alternative solution to that (i.e. other than atheism) is just having a less fucked up view of God.

---

Less fucked up than the traditional, biblical view?

---

As you appear to have understood it? Heck yes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
...there's no weaselling out of this one with guff like "the unrepentant feel the love of God as a burning flame" or "the door to Hell is locked on the inside".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Why are these views "guff"?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
I guess, Marvin, that I have a bit of trouble out of the gate with the conflation of "traditional" and "biblical." There is much about "traditional" views of an afterlife that is not at all "biblical," but that nevertheless rules in popular imagination, popular culture, and, as a result, in too many churches.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Why are these views "guff"?

---

Because they don't change the basic fact of eternal damnation, they just seek to make it look like the sinner's fault rather than God's.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'm not aware that either of those options has ever been considered Biblical or Traditional by any even vaguely mainstream denomination, though.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
Marv, the reason I think your view is fucked up is that you only ever talk about the judgement and condemnation stuff, but never about the endless love of God. I do think that the doctrine of eternal punishment is one of the most messed up Christian doctrines. It might be traditional but IMO it ain't biblical. But either way, as quick as you are to mention the biblical basis for it, you seem to ignore the plethora of verses that paint a very different picture of God as a loving parent. You seem to have a massive problem believing those verses, but not the 'judgement' verses. Why is that?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
...there's no weaselling out of this one with guff like "the unrepentant feel the love of God as a burning flame" or "the door to Hell is locked on the inside".

---

Why are these views "guff"?

Don't you believe in free will?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
If there is a populated Hell then I'm pretty sure I've described it fairly, if perhaps hyperbolically. On the other hand, if my understanding of the traditional, Biblical view of the afterlife is fucked up, then that must mean there is no Hell. And not only no Hell, but no eternal torment at all, of any kind - there's no weaselling out of this one with guff like "the unrepentant feel the love of God as a burning flame" or "the door to Hell is locked on the inside". Whichever way it's put, it still boils down to "if you're the wrong sort of person, God's Will is that you burn for eternity".

There are only two options that don't boil down to that statement, and they're universalism and oblivion (be it for all or just for the Damned). I'm not aware that either of those options has ever been considered Biblical or Traditional by any even vaguely mainstream denomination, though.

So what's fucked up about my understanding of the traditional, Biblical view of what happens to those who are, through their own fault or not, the wrong sort of people for Heaven? What have I missed, here?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
...there's no weaselling out of this one with guff like "the unrepentant feel the love of God as a burning flame" or "the door to Hell is locked on the inside".

---

Why are these views "guff"?

Don't you believe in free will?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
There are only two options that don't boil down to that statement, and they're universalism and oblivion (be it for all or just for the Damned). I'm not aware that either of those options has ever been considered Biblical or Traditional by any even vaguely mainstream denomination, though.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
No, but it might (or might not) be worth pointing out that Gregory of Nyssa made rather universalist noises without censure, and is considered not just a saint but one of the hugely important Cappadocean Fathers. This gives me as a closet universalist hope that I am not a wretched heretic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I thought the popular image of "traditional Biblical view of Hell" is, was sourced far more from Dante than from the Bible. No?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
That's not entirely fair, Mr. Clingford. I was at a time a fairly "mainstream" evangelical (I got better), and I heard a good deal about God's love. Indeed far more than about Hell or God's wrath -- but then this was before the whole "love the faggot hate the abomination" thing really got going.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
That's not entirely fair, Mr. Clingford. I was at a time a fairly "mainstream" evangelical (I got better), and I heard a good deal about God's love. Indeed far more than about Hell or God's wrath -- but then this was before the whole "love the faggot hate the abomination" thing really got going.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:
The more I see the free will card played in answer to geniune theological puzzles the more I see it for what it really is: lazy, disingenuous, para-biblical pseudo-apologetics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
[QUOTE]And I see Calvinist predestination as evil and demonic. So what?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by balaam:
Me, I go for the 4th option, conditional immortality, the soul is not immortal until God gives it eternal life.

"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 6:23

Those are the alternatives death - not eternal death, just death - or eternal life given to those who believe in Jesus Christ.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
The Old Testament, of course, has little to say about an afterlife

---

quote:

---

Do you work wonders for the dead?
     will those who have died stand up and give you thanks?

Will your loving-kindness be declared in the grave?
     your faithfulness in the land of destruction?

Will your wonders be known in the dark?
     or your righteousness in the country where all is forgotten?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:
The more I see the free will card played in answer to geniune theological puzzles the more I see it for what it really is: lazy, disingenuous, para-biblical pseudo-apologetics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by balaam:
There's an alternative to believing in eternal torment without believing in universalism. In fact there's more than one alternative.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:
ISTM, it is more why would a loving, benevolent god create the parameters in which its creations would end up being tormented for eternity? Free will does not answer this question, sorry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by balaam:
There's an alternative to believing in eternal torment without believing in universalism. In fact there's more than one alternative. John Stott, famous conservative evangelical theologian caused a stir in the 1980s when he said he believed in annhililationism.

Me, I go for the 4th option, conditional immortality, the soul is not immortal until God gives it eternal life.

"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 6:23

Those are the alternatives death - not eternal death, just death - or eternal life given to those who believe in Jesus Christ.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

For example, I think that the people getting drunk at the bar night after night are living in torment. Amazingly, they don't agree.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
I recently read, "Jesus Christ, Salvation of All" by Archbishop Luis Ladaria, who is currently Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He deals with the issue of free will in this way. He writes:

"...if human freedom is not considered, and with it the possibility of rejecting the divine offer, then salvation becomes something forced... But it should be maintained that God is not indifferent before the dual possibility of our salvation or damnation...our possible rejection of his invitation means that his plan of salvation is not completely realised...There is only one predestination-that of salvation in Christ."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:
The more I see the free will card played in answer to geniune theological puzzles the more I see it for what it really is: lazy, disingenuous, para-biblical pseudo-apologetics.

---

Not so. That's only true if you see God as a directive and punitive despot. In that case free will is only an excuse for Him allowing you to fall into His trap.

But if the reality is that people are genuinely free to do as they wish, and that the simple fact is that some ways of being are more enjoyable than others, then free will is an essential theological concept.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Why are these views "guff"?

---

Because they don't change the basic fact of eternal damnation, they just seek to make it look like the sinner's fault rather than God's.

---

Why do you think it's God's fault?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
Marv, the reason I think your view is fucked up is that you only ever talk about the judgement and condemnation stuff, but never about the endless love of God.

---

quote:

---

But either way, as quick as you are to mention the biblical basis for it, you seem to ignore the plethora of verses that paint a very different picture of God as a loving parent. You seem to have a massive problem believing those verses, but not the 'judgement' verses. Why is that?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
Hell is merely the fact that things don't work out well for you if you fail learn how to play well with others.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
Marvin, how do you reconcile eternal punishment as initiated by God with, for example, the parable of the lost Son. Eternal punishment (and annihilation) says that, in the end, God gives up. That flies in the face of the father of the prodigal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
Hell is merely the fact that things don't work out well for you if you fail learn how to play well with others.

---

And who decided that "playing well with others" should be what determines whether you experience heaven or hell in the next life?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
But that's just another way of saying that the wrong sort of people - the proud, in this case - aren't welcome in heaven.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by saysay:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
Hell is merely the fact that things don't work out well for you if you fail learn how to play well with others.

---

And who decided that "playing well with others" should be what determines whether you experience heaven or hell in the next life?

---

Because that's what heaven is?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
The one who makes the rules has to be held responsible for their effects.

---

quote:

---

...grant that we may share the divine life of him who humbled himself to share our humanity...

---

quote:

---

If the Word has been made man, it is so that men may be made gods.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mere Nick:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

For example, I think that the people getting drunk at the bar night after night are living in torment. Amazingly, they don't agree.

---

I'm not so sure, Freddy. The noted theologian and philosopher George Jones wrote of his still doing time in a honky tonk prison. He doesn't seem happy at all about it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
The one who makes the rules has to be held responsible for their effects.

---

That is complete nonsense. No reasonable person believes such an idea.

---

quote:

---

If I choose to break the rules that govern my job (for example), should my employer necessarily be held responsible for the consequences?

Of course not!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by saysay:
Because that's what heaven is? Being around people who are really really different from you and getting along?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
The one who makes the rules has to be held responsible for their effects.

---

That is complete nonsense. No reasonable person believes such an idea.

---

No reasonable person believes it? It's the entire basis on which we elect our governments .
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
The task at hand is not so much to fret, but to strive to become by grace what God is by nature.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Now, God has elected every human being to participate in His eternal life after a finite temporal life. I do not think that a moral case can be constructed out of that in any way or form. I suggest that we should respond with gratitude, but really, it is a Jobian moment: this is what God has chosen to do, and it is as such beyond human reckoning of good, bad or ugly. It just is the case.

---

quote:

---

However, given this case, we can ask whether it is just for God to punish or reward in the eternal life according to the temporal life. And I contend that there cannot be any doubt about that.

---

quote:

---

So why should the One who defines justice, God, not follow through?

---

quote:

---

I have no real idea what it will be like when our sequential minds get smashed at the speed of death into the Great Unchanging. But I can just see, just barely see, how the second hand of the clock grinds to a halt for us with the last "Ahhhh..." escaping from our lungs. And how we then complete with a "...men". Or not. And so it shall be, for it is. Eternally now.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
The rejection of eternal punishment generally relies on the false idea that eternity represents an infinite amount of time. But eternity is not an infinite amount of time, and so eternal punishment is not simply some kind of infinite multiplication of temporal punishment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by saysay

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical
If I choose to break the rules that govern my job (for example), should my employer necessarily be held responsible for the consequences?

Of course not!

---

Depends on the job. In some jobs, your commanding officer would be held responsible. And parents are frequently held responsible in some way shape or form when their children misbehave.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
No reasonable person believes it? It's the entire basis on which we elect our governments.

---

Is it really?

I never knew that we should vote a government out of power, which enacts a law banning rape, because people commit rape.

That's a new one to me!

[ 03. October 2012, 09:01: Message edited by: EtymologicalEvangelical ]
 

---

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :
 

quote:

---

Posted by goperryrevs:
Marv, the God you believe in is a vindictive asshole. I think you're totally right to be pissed off at God, and the way things are, given what you believe.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:

quote:

---

Posted by goperryrevs:
Marv, the God you believe in is a vindictive asshole. I think you're totally right to be pissed off at God, and the way things are, given what you believe.

---

I partially agree. But I don't agree that Marvin's god-concept owes anything of substance to evangelicalism. If anything is sounds more like medieval Roman Catholicism.

---

quote:

---

"In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist; one (Ephesus) accepted conditional mortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked." (p96)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
No reasonable person believes it? It's the entire basis on which we elect our governments.

---

Is it really?

I never knew that we should vote a government out of power, which enacts a law banning rape, because people commit rape.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
...plenty of people who believe the same as Marvin (except they do seem to believe that God is Love a bit more than he does)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
If a government passed a law saying that anyone who steps on a crack in the pavement should be punished by torture, the effect would be that a lot of people would be tortured for a completely arbitrary and senseless reason. And I think it would be very reasonable to hold that government responsible for that effect, and to vote them out of power at the first possible opportunity.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
What if someone in this place of love, mercy and compassion decides to be a miserable, evil, arrogant bastard, who delights in making other people's lives a total misery?

What happens to such a person?

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: What if someone in this place of love, mercy and compassion decides to be a miserable, evil, arrogant bastard, who delights in making other people's lives a total misery?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
If a government passed a law saying that anyone who steps on a crack in the pavement should be punished by torture, the effect would be that a lot of people would be tortured for a completely arbitrary and senseless reason. And I think it would be very reasonable to hold that government responsible for that effect, and to vote them out of power at the first possible opportunity.

---

And I would agree with you.

But what the hell ('scuse the pun) has that got to do with the subject of this thread?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
Option #4 - some form of virtual reality heaven where that person can be however he wants to be, and yet not affect anyone else (because all the other people in his heaven are only simulations).

---

quote:

---

And I bet God could create one kick-ass virtual reality if He wanted to. One where the person wouldn't even realise it wasn't real.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
Option #4 - some form of virtual reality heaven where that person can be however he wants to be, and yet not affect anyone else (because all the other people in his heaven are only simulations).

---

Well, that's just a variant of my point #2. God is being asked to be something different from what he is. If God is love, then how can he suddenly be "not love" as a special arrangement to cater for evil, miserable bastards?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc
I don't know what the afterlife is going to look like, but I'm pretty sure that our rules of logic don't apply there. So, this kind of reasoning is pretty senseless to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
How can I focus on the "God is Love" part when I know that if I screw up He'll send me on a one-way trip to the lake of fire? Even if I do believe that God is Love, what difference does it make to the rest of it?

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: Looks to me like a self-refuting comment.

If our rules of logic don't apply to this subject matter, then how are you "pretty sure" that that is the case?

Gut feeling, perhaps??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider
Tormenting them in Hell in the traditionally imagined manner seems a pretty efficient way of being "not love" to me - indeed, "not love" writ far larger than anything Marvin is describing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: What if someone in this place of love, mercy and compassion decides to be a miserable, evil, arrogant bastard, who delights in making other people's lives a total misery?

---

I don't know what the afterlife is going to look like, but I'm pretty sure that our rules of logic don't apply there. So, this kind of reasoning is pretty senseless to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider
Tormenting them in Hell in the traditionally imagined manner seems a pretty efficient way of being "not love" to me - indeed, "not love" writ far larger than anything Marvin is describing.

---

Irrespective of what the "traditionally imagined manner" might suggest, torment is not necessarily the result of "not love", because what if the reality of love is actually that which causes the torment?

I'm sure someone who dedicated his life to murdering Jews, for example, will not feel particularly comfortable when face to face with the reality of God's eternal love for such people. Presumably you think differently.

But I guess some people have an erroneous view of "love" which lacks any kind of moral content, and is just a bland device of total permissiveness.

---

quote:

---

And I suppose in this view, evil people are really, at heart, good people who are just a bit misguided?

---

quote:

---

Freddy: Why would you think that our rules of logic don't apply there?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
If Hell is real, then God has set rules (aka passed laws) that mean people will be eternally tortured for transgressing them. I'm saying that those tormented souls are His doing, and His responsibility, because He was the one who determined that their failures would earn such a punishment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
How can I focus on the "God is Love" part when I know that if I screw up He'll send me on a one-way trip to the lake of fire? Even if I do believe that God is Love, what difference does it make to the rest of it?

---

Because you don't know that if you screw up he'll send you on a one-way trip to the lake of fire. You believe it. And it's that belief that, IMHO, is wrong.

---

quote:

---

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

---

quote:

---

You make it sound like it's possible not to screw up. The Christian gospel isn't "don't screw up". It's "I know you'll screw up, but I love you anyhow".

---

quote:

---

The thing is, that God knows the best for us.

---

quote:

---

I think that the way God made us is so that self-gratification, although it's nice for a bit, isn't actually what makes us happy or fulfilled. We were made to look outside of ourselves.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:
It's also how I interpret Matthew 22:23–30: normal rules don't apply in heaven.

---

quote:

---

Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30 At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."

---

I guess that statement about marriage does imply that things are pretty different. It could be construed as saying that people are sexless, which would make for a different existence than we know. Our loved husbands or wives will not be husband or wives.

Does that throw all logic out the window though?

The New Church interpretation of this passage is that the "marriage" referred to is the heavenly marriage, not literal marriage. The meaning is that people can't reform after death, not that they can't marry. A convenient escape clause, maybe.

But I see your point for Christians who feel bound to take this typically enigmatic statement literally.

Are you sure Et Ev's comment above, "Looks to me like a self-refuting comment" doesn't apply?
 

---

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
...plenty of people who believe the same as Marvin (except they do seem to believe that God is Love a bit more than he does)

---

How can I focus on the "God is Love" part when I know that if I screw up He'll send me on a one-way trip to the lake of fire? Even if I do believe that God is Love, what difference does it make to the rest of it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
People are not "eternally tortured" for transgressing laws. Rather, people choose to do as they wish, and this necessarily works out better for some than for others.

It's not because of a judging, torturing God, but because of the satisfaction or frustration inherent in the wide variety of life choices.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
...plenty of people who believe the same as Marvin (except they do seem to believe that God is Love a bit more than he does)

---

How can I focus on the "God is Love" part when I know that if I screw up He'll send me on a one-way trip to the lake of fire? Even if I do believe that God is Love, what difference does it make to the rest of it?

---

What do you mean when you say "if I screw up"? Are you suggesting that your eternal destinity rests on your performance under the gaze of a non-interventionistic but highly moralistic deity? Are you suggesting that this deity is up in the gods, like some kind of horrible fat theatre critic, waiting to royally trash your meagre performance on life's great stage?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'm sure He loves all those who stand on His left in Matt 25 as well, but that doesn't help them. What difference does that love make to me if it's not going to prevent the lake of fire?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Whoop de do. I may as well be back in infancy with someone making all my decisions for me because they know best. I seem to get about as much say in it as I ever did then...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The reason why it works out better/worse for some is because God has set the system up to work that way. And satisfaction and frustration are merely the results of natural processes that God has put in place inside our heads.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:
What do you mean when you say "if I screw up"? Are you suggesting that your eternal destinity rests on your performance under the gaze of a non-interventionistic but highly moralistic deity? Are you suggesting that this deity is up in the gods, like some kind of horrible fat theatre critic, waiting to royally trash your meagre performance on life's great stage?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
But again, the whole point of a parent is that they want their children to grow up and be able to be themselves, make their own (right) decisions. The whole thrust of this stuff is deification. We're meant to be like God, and he's the one that's doing most of the effort to get us there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
If universalism is God just saying 'balls to it, come on in anyhow, I'll make you a nice little personal heaven anyhow', then universalism is as dangerous a heresy as eternal punishment.

---

quote:

---

Freddy: Does that throw all logic out the window though?

---

quote:

---

Freddy: Are you sure Et Ev's comment above, "Looks to me like a self-refuting comment" doesn't apply?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
People are not "eternally tortured" for transgressing laws. Rather, people choose to do as they wish, and this necessarily works out better for some than for others.

It's not because of a judging, torturing God, but because of the satisfaction or frustration inherent in the wide variety of life choices.

---

The reason why it works out better/worse for some is because God has set the system up to work that way. And satisfaction and frustration are merely the results of natural processes that God has put in place inside our heads.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
If that doesn't count as His responsibility, then Jigsaw in the Saw movies is never actually responsible for torturing or killing anyone - he merely sets up a situation in which they torture or kill themselves.

---

• It assumes that another system is possible that would be better. Yet it offers no suggestion as to what that might be like.
• In making this assumption it buys into the logic of "better" and "worse" which is the underlying issue of the current system. Without qualitative gradations there would be no such thing as happy/unhappy or heaven/hell.
• Beyond that, the central critique of the system - that it is "messed up" - relies on the very logic that it seeks to escape. In a "better" system, you imply, "messed up" would not be a possibility.
• It exaggerates the deficiencies and minimizes the benefits of life on earth as we know it.
• It assumes the literal truth of the biblical descriptions of hell, and discards them on that basis. It ignores the obvious alternative of taking into account Jesus' use of hyperbole and metaphor.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:
What do you mean when you say "if I screw up"? Are you suggesting that your eternal destinity rests on your performance under the gaze of a non-interventionistic but highly moralistic deity? Are you suggesting that this deity is up in the gods, like some kind of horrible fat theatre critic, waiting to royally trash your meagre performance on life's great stage?

---

I've already quoted the passage from Matthew 25. How else do you read it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:
But the text says that we'll be angels. To me, these are beings that are beyond our understanding. To try to reason about how God will deal with our evil to transform us into angels, is to assume a level of understanding of God that I won't commit to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: Looks to me like a self-refuting comment.

If our rules of logic don't apply to this subject matter, then how are you "pretty sure" that that is the case?

Gut feeling, perhaps??

---

Yes, partially. But more than this my trust in Him that He'll sort it out.

---

quote:

---

Duh.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:
What do you mean when you say "if I screw up"? Are you suggesting that your eternal destinity rests on your performance under the gaze of a non-interventionistic but highly moralistic deity? Are you suggesting that this deity is up in the gods, like some kind of horrible fat theatre critic, waiting to royally trash your meagre performance on life's great stage?

---

I've already quoted the passage from Matthew 25. How else do you read it?

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: If you are not saying that, then in what way are you not talking gibberish?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
But again, the whole point of a parent is that they want their children to grow up and be able to be themselves, make their own (right) decisions. The whole thrust of this stuff is deification. We're meant to be like God, and he's the one that's doing most of the effort to get us there.

---

That doesn't sound like a loving parent to me, it sounds more like a pushy one. The sort that says "of course you want to be a ballerina - it's what I've always wanted you to be! Don't you know how much effort I've put in to get you this far? Now stop crying and practice, dammit!"

The loving parent lets their kid make the decisions about what he or she wants to be when they grow up, rather than deciding what they're meant to be for them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
If universalism is God just saying 'balls to it, come on in anyhow, I'll make you a nice little personal heaven anyhow', then universalism is as dangerous a heresy as eternal punishment.

---

Why? I mean apart from the whole "it removes the major motivation for a lot of people to go to church" thing, of course.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas
God has already created a world where sinners can live quite comfortably without being tortured by an awareness of his love. I'm not sure why it is so certain that he would be unable to make a similar arrangement for those sinners after they die.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc
Language is a way in which we humans try to understand our Universe. Logic is a special, highly structurized form of language. Since neither God nor the afterlife is within or limited to our Universe, we can't expect that our logic reasoning will make sense when applied to them.

---

quote:

---

I believe that God will deal with our mistakes after we die. I believe that we will face all that we have done, the good and the bad. But to believe that an Almighty God would be restricted to the three possibilities that you outlined here just because they're logical is just plain silly to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by daronmedway:
But if you really are 100% convinced you've read it correctly then, for your own sanity, apostatise already!

---

What, and guarantee my fate?

quote:

---

Your existential struggles are starting to look like self-harm, Marvin. It's not pretty.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I read it, personally, as a parable about what we do for others being counted in our favour, and indifference to others being considered against us. I think the central message is "what you did for the least of these you did for me"; the sheep and goats and eternal punishment stuff is hyperbolic scene setting.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
This would mean that the phony heaven would be of a temporary nature.

And then what?

Phony heaven, mark 2?

Then...

Mark 3?

and so on ad infinitum.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
So deification is about us becoming the people we're supposed to be with regards to character and disposition.

And yes, we might want to rebel against that. We might want to remain selfish and grumpy. But we'd be wrong.

---

quote:

---

It doesn't solve the human condition.

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: Silly to you, maybe.

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: Anyone who tries to present any kind of argument to undermine the objective validity of logic unfailingly commits an act of self-refutation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I read it, personally, as a parable about what we do for others being counted in our favour, and indifference to others being considered against us. I think the central message is "what you did for the least of these you did for me"; the sheep and goats and eternal punishment stuff is hyperbolic scene setting.

---

OK, I can buy that. But "counted in our favour" - in what way? And against what target? Is there a specific "count" that we have to achieve?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
So deification is about us becoming the people we're supposed to be with regards to character and disposition.

And yes, we might want to rebel against that. We might want to remain selfish and grumpy. But we'd be wrong.

---

I just want to be me. My character flaws are a part of that - I'd no more remain me if you took away my selfishness and indifference towards most of the rest of humanity than if you took away my sense of humour. I'd be a completely different person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I just want to be me. My character flaws are a part of that - I'd no more remain me if you took away my selfishness and indifference towards most of the rest of humanity than if you took away my sense of humour. I'd be a completely different person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

It doesn't solve the human condition.

---

I wasn't aware it was a problem to be solved in the first place.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
I don't care what career or hobbies my daughter ends up doing. She can be a ballerina or a librarian, or whatever. But I do care greatly what kind of a ballerina or librarian or whatever she is. I want her to be a honest, passionate, self-sacrificing, humble, loving, truthful etc. etc. ballerina.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Nah. It's just telling you what's considered good and what's not.

---

quote:

---

if you don't aspire to fairly basic, widespread and generally agreed within Christianity across centuries and denominations qualities like unselfishness and concern for others, why be a Christian at all? Wouldn't something else suit you better?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
Nick Tamen, I should have said, of course, that in no way was I meaning to throw rocks in your direction.

My agitation is more with folk on this thread liabling the Scriptures (and their Author) by alleging that they say this or that one single thing about the afterlife. And, with the Perverted Western Preoccupation with the Four Last Things: Death, Judgement, Heaven, and Hell.

Better be preoccupied with the divinization, the theosis, the deification of humankind.

quote:

---

...grant that we may share the divine life of him who humbled himself to share our humanity...

---

quote:

---

If the Word has been made man, it is so that men may be made gods.

---

It makes me want to belt out, BLESSED ASSURANCE, JESUS IS MINE! The task at hand is not so much to fret, but to strive to become by grace what God is by nature.

If you don't like the proof-texting from the liturgy and the Fathers, go to 2 Pet. 1:4.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
It all sounds like desperate attempts to make God safe to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs:
So deification is about us becoming the people we're supposed to be with regards to character and disposition.

And yes, we might want to rebel against that. We might want to remain selfish and grumpy. But we'd be wrong.

---

I just want to be me. My character flaws are a part of that - I'd no more remain me if you took away my selfishness and indifference towards most of the rest of humanity than if you took away my sense of humour. I'd be a completely different person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas
Even agreeing with your dubious assertions, why not? It's preferable to torturing people.

If God can't cure people, surely he can afford them a little palliative care. If their evilness causes them pain, then put them somewhere they can't hurt anyone but themselves, and give them some high grade morphine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
It all sounds like desperate attempts to make God safe to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
It all sounds like desperate attempts to make God safe to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
But what if God's morphine (his love, kindness and grace) has the opposite effect on them?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc
Yes, if you want to use logic to argue what God can or cannot do in Heaven, then go ahead. But to me, Heaven is beyond my understanding and my God is greater than that. I just trust myself to the Grace of this God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
It all sounds like desperate attempts to make God safe to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I hope you're not too put off by how ugly it all is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
It all sounds like desperate attempts to make God safe to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas
Then he could just give them normal morphine instead.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
I think it is a desperate attempt to replace Marvin's childish and primitive understanding of God into a grown-up version.

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: But if you are going to abdicate thinking, then you have no moral right to go around calling other people's views "silly".

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical:
FWIW, your view is unbiblical, because Jesus prayed that God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven, and he referred to the kingdom of God as the "kingdom of heaven". How can the things of heaven be applied to earth if heaven is run on lines which are so alien to logic?

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical:
An illogical God could be divided against himself (and, as Jesus said, "a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand").

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical:
Furthermore, if logic doesn't apply in heaven, then how do you know that God is a God of grace in heaven?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: But if you are going to abdicate thinking, then you have no moral right to go around calling other people's views "silly".

---

I can't help it, but this is the reaction I have to it. The whole idea that an Almighty God could be restricted by the lines that EtymologicalEvangelical has logically laid out for Him... It just works on my humour nerves.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
It all sounds like desperate attempts to make God safe to me.

---

You talkin' to me?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
I think it is a desperate attempt to replace Marvin's childish and primitive understanding of God into a grown-up version.

---

The grown-up version? What, that there is a hell (which, while not the hyperbolic "lake of fire" referred to in the Bible, is still a pretty unpleasant place to spend eternity), and there are people there, but they totally deserve to be because they're not very nice people?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
A torturer who acts out of love for the victim is still a torturer,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by saysay:
Because that's what heaven is? Being around people who are really really different from you and getting along?

---

Unless you're claiming that that's the only possible form Heaven can ever take in any reality*, all you're doing is begging the question.

---

quote:

---

*= As opposed to, say, separate areas where people who get on with each other can be kept safely away from those they don't get on with.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
It's monstrous. God gives us no choice, no means of escape, and we just have to shrug and accept it. Which is exactly what I was railing against on the other thread, only to be told it was a "fucked up" view of God...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Why not? Why can't He, for instance, just put everyone into their own personal Heaven filled with the things they love and completely free of the things they hate?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'm still stuck on "why should he be the one who defines justice?" And yes, I know it's pointless to even ask that question given that He's God, He can obliterate the entire universe with the merest thought, and that means He's the one who gets to call every shot. But I don't have to like it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Congratulations, that's one of the most terrifying things I've ever read on these boards.

---

Really? I find that quite amusing.
 

---

Posted by Freddy (# 365) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Why can't He, for instance, just put everyone into their own personal Heaven filled with the things they love and completely free of the things they hate?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Why can't He, for instance, just put everyone into their own personal Heaven filled with the things they love and completely free of the things they hate?

---

I, for one, think that this is exactly what happens.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas
Then he could just give them normal morphine instead.

---

What you are basically asking is "why can't God show incorrigibly evil people kindness, given that it is generally accepted that pain alleviation is an application of kindness?"

But what I am saying is that God will show (or is showing, depending on your theology) these people kindness.

But it's the kindness of God (you know, love and all that stuff) which tortures them.

So it's not God's problem, because he is doing all he can to help them. They do not want this help.

As for the idea of "normal morphine": is there a spiritual variety of morphine? I'm not sure that's available on the NHS or the celestial equivalent!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'd say the absence of a Cosmic Judge who will send you to eternal damnation for not doing (or even believing) the right things is a definite plus point.

---

If there is a populated Hell then I'm pretty sure I've described it fairly, if perhaps hyperbolically. On the other hand, if my understanding of the traditional, Biblical view of the afterlife is fucked up, then that must mean there is no Hell. And not only no Hell, but no eternal torment at all, of any kind - there's no weaselling out of this one with guff like "the unrepentant feel the love of God as a burning flame" or "the door to Hell is locked on the inside". Whichever way it's put, it still boils down to "if you're the wrong sort of person, God's Will is that you burn for eternity".

There are only two options that don't boil down to that statement, and they're universalism and oblivion (be it for all or just for the Damned). I'm not aware that either of those options has ever been considered Biblical or Traditional by any even vaguely mainstream denomination, though.

So what's fucked up about my understanding of the traditional, Biblical view of what happens to those who are, through their own fault or not, the wrong sort of people for Heaven? What have I missed, here?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Freddy, it is just plain ridiculous to sell this to Marvin as fulfilling his request for a personal heaven.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
It would be possible for God to create a system where bad attitudes were impossible, but would that really be better?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alogon:
It sounds as though you have no problem with eternal bliss except that it's called heaven and God is there, too.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
The problem with you is that you get much of the analysis right, and then you draw the astonishing conclusion that it would be best to rail and whine about it all, loudly, angrily and incessantly. That makes no sense whatsoever, it is flat out self-contradictory!

---

quote:

---

But the world was not made for you. You, along with the rest of the world, were made for God. If every Divine attempt fails to get you back on track, and boy is He trying hard, then you will be thrown where you belong: into Gehenna, the garbage dump, where the fires burn eternally.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Now, God has elected every human being to participate in His eternal life after a finite temporal life. I do not think that a moral case can be constructed out of that in any way or form. I suggest that we should respond with gratitude, but really, it is a Jobian moment: this is what God has chosen to do, and it is as such beyond human reckoning of good, bad or ugly. It just is the case.

---

It's monstrous. God gives us no choice, no means of escape, and we just have to shrug and accept it. Which is exactly what I was railing against on the other thread, only to be told it was a "fucked up" view of God...

---

quote:

---

Why can't He, for instance, just put everyone into their own personal Heaven filled with the things they love and completely free of the things they hate?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The contradiction is mostly because I'm trying to stop myself believing it. I just can't seem to do it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
And you're OK with that?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
It would be possible for God to create a system where bad attitudes were impossible, but would that really be better?

---

Yes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Revolutionist:
You're assuming that God could make the choice between Heaven or Hell otherwise - that somehow he could grant us an existence independent of himself that wasn't Hell.

But there's no other choice not because God is cruel or arbitrary, but because God is ultimately the source of all life, goodness and happiness. God offers us eternal fellowship with him, and if we refuse that, there can be no possible elsewhere for our happiness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
This is probably going to sound flippant but it absolutely isn't. Anyone who has ever attended a patient on the burns unit of a hospital realises in about a millisecond that the gospel stories of everlasting fire are the product of a seriously sick imagination. I mean, psychotic. The thought of anyone who can imagine that everlasting burning might be a good punishment for any - yes any - human wrongdoing or wrongbelieving, makes me retch. So does the thought of a god who might impose such a punishment.

So who's the sick pervert? God, or his evangelists? Let's hope it's his evangelists, whom we can safely dump, and get on with the business of reimagining an afterlife based on everything else we know about God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
So who's the sick pervert? God, or his evangelists? Let's hope it's his evangelists, whom we can safely dump, and get on with the business of reimagining an afterlife based on everything else we know about God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
It's not flippant at all; it's exactly to the point. How anyone can worship that god is genuinely beyond me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
So who's the sick pervert? God, or his evangelists? Let's hope it's his evangelists, whom we can safely dump, and get on with the business of reimagining an afterlife based on everything else we know about God.

---

Ummm. Or we can intelligently realize that these images accord with the well known New Testament model of metaphor and hyperbole.

Graphic images draw our attention to real issues. Let's not get stuck on the images themselves.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
Ummm. Or we can intelligently realize that these images accord with the well known New Testament model of metaphor and hyperbole.

---

Sorry, but no. An ear of corn producing a hundred grains is hyperbole. A mustard plant being the greatest of all shrubs is hyperbole. I'll even grant - God help us! - that plucking your eye out if it offends you is hyperbole. Being burned over ever square inch of your body for ever and ever and ever is just plain sick.
 

---

Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :
 
But the Bible never actually says anything about people being burned for all eternity. Those are embellishments by later preachers and writers. The Biblical references to hellfire are all to a fire that consumes and destroys eternally -- in keeping with the texts that tell us that the wages of sin is death and that those who do not accept eternal life will "perish."

The only verse in the Bible that describes anything close to eternal punishING (as opposed to the eternal, permanent punishMENT of death, which is the natural state for a mortal creature who has not been given the gift of immortality) is Revelation 20:10 which speaks of "being tormented day and night forever" but this is not in reference to the wicked, or unbelievers, or anything like that -- it's the devil, the beast, and the false prophet. Whoever you believe those entities to be, they are the only ones described as suffering forever -- and in context of everything else the Bible says about life and death, I would suggest those could probably be read as hyperbole anyway.
 

---

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :
 
Now that I can believe, Trudy.

D'you think God will fall for it if I present "Trudy said so" as a defence?
 

---

Posted by The Revolutionist (# 4578) on :
 
In Revelation 20, eternal torment is only explicitly mentioned in verse 10 when the devil, beast and false prophet are cast into the lake of fire. But it goes on to describe the judgement of the dead and to say that "whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire".

Revelation 14 also talks about the "smoke of the torment" of those who worshipped the beast going up forever. Without taking this imagery literalistically, it seems to me clear that human beings are at risk of a fate that is unpleasant and eternal.

But it's not just Revelation, of course. Jesus himself used the image of fire for judgement - for example, Matthew 5:22, 13:41-42, 18:8. If you think that language is too strong, the image too horrific, take it up with him.

Hell and judgment are difficult and disturbing subjects. We need to be careful to separate what the Bible actually teaches, what God has revealed to us, from the cultural baggage those concepts have acquired. But I don't think we can explain them away or ignore them if we take what the Bible says seriously.
 

---

Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :
 
The "lake of fire" is not a place of torture; it's a place of destruction. Jesus describes it in Matt. 10 as the place where both body and soul are DESTROYED. It may still be a metaphor rather than to be taken literally, but the metaphor is not of an everlasting torture chamber but of a giant incinerator -- a place of total destruction of evil.
 

---

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
You, along with the rest of the world, were made for God. If every Divine attempt fails to get you back on track, and boy is He trying hard, then you will be thrown where you belong: into Gehenna, the garbage dump, where the fires burn eternally.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
In my understanding, God has a case against me (and everyone else) and that case is completely just.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
God is a God of justice. If he damns someone eternally, he is just in doing so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
God is a God of justice. If he damns someone eternally, he is just in doing so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

I really, really, don't understand this. It looks like a complete lack of empathy. I'm sure it's not, but I don't know what it is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I can't remember who it was who said, are you delighted that your mother is in hell? If not, why not?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

I really, really, don't understand this. It looks like a complete lack of empathy. I'm sure it's not, but I don't know what it is.

---

I think it is just a downplaying of the reality of what is being said because the person saying it is 'on the right side' and has convinced themselves that they'll not have to suffer the eternal punishment. Anything looks like acceptable punishment if it is for someone else.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:
Anything looks like acceptable punishment if it is for someone else.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

I really, really, don't understand this. It looks like a complete lack of empathy. I'm sure it's not, but I don't know what it is.

---

I think it is just a downplaying of the reality of what is being said because the person saying it is 'on the right side' and has convinced themselves that they'll not have to suffer the eternal punishment. Anything looks like acceptable punishment if it is for someone else.

---

That's a pretty ugly personal characteristic, isn't it?

---

quote:

---

So then you're in a circular argument - what God does must be just because he is just because his is God.

---

quote:

---

And you really have no problem with that concept? Of people you know and love doomed to an eternal torment?

I really, really, don't understand this. It looks like a complete lack of empathy. I'm sure it's not, but I don't know what it is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
I know I ain't contributing much to this thread, but I seem to lack this "adult faith" people are talking about. "Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein" and all that.

---

quote:

---

If it's all about the Wrath, perhaps God might like to pull up his comfy armchair, make a cup of tea, put on some soothing music ...

... and flaming well get over himself.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I can't remember who it was who said, are you delighted that your mother is in hell? If not, why not?

---

I think that was the girl in The Exorcist.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Ah, the usual accusations of sadistic, self righteous glee in the concept of damnation. As if glee or dread had anything to do with what was true.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
The only verse in the Bible that describes anything close to eternal punishING (as opposed to the eternal, permanent punishMENT of death, which is the natural state for a mortal creature who has not been given the gift of immortality) is Revelation 20:10 which speaks of "being tormented day and night forever" but this is not in reference to the wicked, or unbelievers, or anything like that -- it's the devil, the beast, and the false prophet. Whoever you believe those entities to be, they are the only ones described as suffering forever -- and in context of everything else the Bible says about life and death, I would suggest those could probably be read as hyperbole anyway.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Wasn't one ancient view that we should be pleased at God's justice, hence pleased, that some are (justly) sent to hell?

I can't remember who it was who said, are you delighted that your mother is in hell? If not, why not?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I personally also find the whole Jesus business much more comprehensible if there really is this stark separation after death. It is precisely that many people here seem so comfortable with getting annihilated that makes Jesus' actions then seem seriously OTT. Getting yourself tortured to death to keep people from getting annihilated, if they actually quite like the idea, is just strange. If eternal torment is the consequence, then such desperate measures to get through to every last sinner make perfect sense.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Wasn't one ancient view that we should be pleased at God's justice, hence pleased, that some are (justly) sent to hell?

I can't remember who it was who said, are you delighted that your mother is in hell? If not, why not?

---

What about Hitler, Stalin, etc; would you be happy if they wound up in heaven next to you?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
Yes, provided they were truly sorry for what they had done. That would mean that in confronting God at the end of time, they were hit with the full force of the pain and misery they had inflicted and their own responsibility for it.

But surely, after that, repentence and mercy?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Wasn't one ancient view that we should be pleased at God's justice, hence pleased, that some are (justly) sent to hell?

I can't remember who it was who said, are you delighted that your mother is in hell? If not, why not?

---

What about Hitler, Stalin, etc; would you be happy if they wound up in heaven next to you?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
What about Hitler, Stalin, etc; would you be happy if they wound up in heaven next to you?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
Yes, provided they were truly sorry for what they had done. That would mean that in confronting God at the end of time, they were hit with the full force of the pain and misery they had inflicted and their own responsibility for it.

But surely, after that, repentence and mercy?

---

But what if they weren't sorry, and indeed remained proud of what they'd done?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Because that's what Sin is, EM.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
How can he fail? He is God and I am his creature. Surely at the end, all he has to do is reveal Himself to me and, in that moment, I will - conscious of how I have offended, and, at last against Whom I have offended - truly repent.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
Eternal anything cannot be a *just* reward for *temporal* sin/goodness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
And you really have no problem with that concept? Of people you know and love doomed to an eternal torment? I really, really, don't understand this. It looks like a complete lack of empathy. I'm sure it's not, but I don't know what it is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Wasn't one ancient view that we should be pleased at God's justice, hence pleased, that some are (justly) sent to hell?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:
Anything looks like acceptable punishment if it is for someone else.

---

Indeed. Show me someone who has a theology of hell and is perfectly happy with it, and I'll show you someone who has never once considered the possibility that they might end up there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:
Eternal punishment without any opportunity for reform is pointless.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
What about Hitler, Stalin, etc; would you be happy if they wound up in heaven next to you?

---

I'd be fucking ecstatic. Mostly because it would mean that I'd made it to heaven.

In fact, I want Hitler to be in heaven. If he's good enough to go there, then surely I am...

---

You, sir, need have no fear of Hell. (My God's Hell, anyway!)
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 

quote:

---

[Overused] You, sir, need have no fear of Hell. (My God's Hell, anyway!)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
That's a nicely self-defeating argument. If so, and if God intends to make absolutely sure that really everybody gets over the line, then what on earth is He doing hiding himself? He should show Himself, right here and now, whereupon everybody would truly repent, and we all would happily live in the Kingdom ever after. That's not what God is doing though.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
In fact, I want Hitler to be in heaven. If he's good enough to go there, then surely I am...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
In fact, I want Hitler to be in heaven. If he's good enough to go there, then surely I am...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:

---

[Overused] You, sir, need have no fear of Hell. (My God's Hell, anyway!)

---

Would anyone?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
First, punishment is not just for the correction of the perpetrator, but also for the satisfaction of justice.

---

quote:

---

Second, would it not change your behaviour here and now if you came to believe that everlasting hell fire could be waiting for you? Well then, there's at least this point to be considered.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB
First, punishment is not just for the correction of the perpetrator, but also for the satisfaction of justice.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
You're saying that Jesus consented to be tortured, albeit for a finite, temporal period, to persuade me to follow him and therefore avoid everlasting torture.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
This is all still assuming that, at the controls, is a God who *can't stop himself* from inflicting everlasting torture on his creation. But who wants that creation to accept that he loves it absolutely.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
He eats the cake. I return and beat him. He cries and begs me to stop and says, "But mummy, I was really hungry, and the cake looked good, and I didn't know what you meant about something good, and....please don't beat me, mummy."

---

This just ignores all Christian teachings concerning culpability to score very cheap points by highly emotional pleading.

God is not beating up six year olds. Well, He is, of course - in the sense that He is creating and maintaining a world in which a good many six year olds get beaten up, regularly and badly. And that's by far not the worst that God lets happen to six year olds. But since that apparently does not disturb your calculus of Divine love, let's set it aside.

My point was rather that God of course takes into account who you are, where you are coming from, what the situation is, etc. And infinitely better so than any human could ever do. So no, he's not (analogically) going to beat up six year olds for not being able to resist cake.

But the question has to be asked, and it is a serious question, whether you are at all times and concerning all things a "six year old". Or is there perhaps anything, whatever it may be, for which you can be held responsible? Is there some part of your life where you cannot prepare a list of extenuating circumstances a thousand entries deep? Is there ever a moment in your life where for all intents and purposes, you - really you, not some bundle of urges and impulses that propels you beyond all your means of self-control - make a decision? Are you ever grown up enough about anything to be considered as an adult making an informed choice?

Yeah?

Well then, if at that point in time you decide to eat a cake (or was it an apple?), which God most clearly told you to leave alone, then who are you to complain about getting "beaten up" as punishment?

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Infinite puishment for finite sins is not justice. All human sin, however grave, is finite.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas
I am a worm and no man, but even I could make Hitler happy, merely by wiring his brain up to a battery.

If God wishes us to feel happiness, contentment -- or simply not tortured -- then surely he can do so.

I find the assertion that he is simply incapable of making people not feel tortured to be frankly unbelievable.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk
But, more to the point, I wouldn't do that to my child. I wouldn't leave him alone and hungry with a cake out that I have forbidden him to eat. I wouldn't promise him an amazing wonderful something-I-can't-say-what in the future. And if I did do those things, and found that he behaved in exactly the way, biologically, a 6 year old boy is meant to behave, I wouldn't beat him.

Because I love him.

---

Any definition of Love that does not agree with this is not defining anything I would remotely
consider "love"
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 
I think we're forgetting how we reacted when God showed himself and offered his grace and forgiveness for free.
 

---

Posted by Alisdair (# 15837) on :
 
Doesn't it make more sense to understand that those who are condemned are not condemned so much for their crimes/sin (we all fall into that category), but for their rejection of mercy/salvation.

If we are 'free' in any meaningful sense of the word surely we must be free to experience the consequences of our actions. The consequence of rejecting the source of life and love, including the mercy that goes with judgment, is to experience the consequence of the actions that cause judgment to be given. If we're in court and found guilty, it's not the judge's judgment that punishes me but my own actions that demand that judgment be given; and if mercy is offered, but I am too proud/arrogant to receive it why should I blame anyone else for what happens as a result.

Julian of Norwich is famous for her little saying: 'All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well'. Perhaps we can afford to trust that if there truly is a God worthy of trust and love, as expressed through Jesus, then we can be confident that in the end, when face to face with the truth of ourselves, and of God, none of us will feel any need to argue that we were either misunderstood or treated unfairly.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
In fact, I want Hitler to be in heaven. If he's good enough to go there, then surely I am...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
But the Bible never actually says anything about people being burned for all eternity. Those are embellishments by later preachers and writers.

---

quote:

---

originally posted by IngoB

As for annihilation of the wicked, well, people assume that God can annihilate. But, can he? Can the Creator destroy? Can the Maker unmake? Can Being un-be?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
I know this question is a sideline but I hope I may ask it anyway.

quote:

---

originally posted by IngoB

As for annihilation of the wicked, well, people assume that God can annihilate. But, can he? Can the Creator destroy? Can the Maker unmake? Can Being un-be?

---

If the answer to these questions is no, does this imply that there would need to be an after life for all the other animals too ? Or is it that they are not created by God in the same sense as humans ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
In light of what you've said, what do you make of Romans 6:23: "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord"?

---

quote:

---

Romans 2:5-10
But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek.

---

quote:

---

Romans 5:17-19
If, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.

---

quote:

---

Romans 7:9-13
I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, working death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
And, in the same vein, what do you think the word "perish" means in John 3:16?

---

quote:

---

John 3:36
He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.

John 5:28-29
Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth, those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment.

---

quote:

---

Matt 10:28
And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Wasn't one ancient view that we should be pleased at God's justice, hence pleased, that some are (justly) sent to hell?

I can't remember who it was who said, are you delighted that your mother is in hell? If not, why not?

---

What about Hitler, Stalin, etc; would you be happy if they wound up in heaven next to you?

---

Yes, provided they were truly sorry for what they had done. That would mean that in confronting God at the end of time, they were hit with the full force of the pain and misery they had inflicted and their own responsibility for it.

But surely, after that, repentence and mercy?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
.....So what's fucked up about my understanding of the traditional, Biblical view of what happens to those who are, through their own fault or not, the wrong sort of people for Heaven? What have I missed, here?

This could be a really short thread, or it could go for weeks. .......

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Wasn't one ancient view that we should be pleased at God's justice, hence pleased, that some are (justly) sent to hell?

I can't remember who it was who said, are you delighted that your mother is in hell? If not, why not?

---

What about Hitler, Stalin, etc; would you be happy if they wound up in heaven next to you?

---

Yes, provided they were truly sorry for what they had done. That would mean that in confronting God at the end of time, they were hit with the full force of the pain and misery they had inflicted and their own responsibility for it.

But surely, after that, repentence and mercy?

---

But what if they didn't? Or what if Hitler wound up next to the Jewish victims of the Shoah?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Or what if Hitler wound up next to the Jewish victims of the Shoah?

---

quote:

---

And now Paul rejoices with Stephen, with Stephen he enjoys the brightness of Christ.... What a really true life must there be now, brethren, where Paul is not put to confusion although he killed Stephen, but where, instead, Stephen rejoices in the fellowship of Paul; for in both of them love itself rejoices.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the long ranger:
As a parenthesis, the immortal soul appears to be an ancient Greek idea (see Plato). Paul in the epistles appears to be much more concerned about the resurrection of the body than the soul.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
the Jewish assumption seems to always be of body and soul tied together, possibly with a resurrection of both in the future, but no soul living on without a body.

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: Again you are contradicting yourself (but given your view of logic, I don't suppose you are really bothered by that).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
References to the afterlife are scanty in the Hebrew Scriptures for sure, but those that do exist (with the possible except of "Saul" called up by the Witch of Endor) suggest a complete and bodily resurrection, as in Job 19:25, which seems to suggest a renewed body after physical death: "When my skin has been destroyed, in my flesh will I see God"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by egg:
Having been away, I have read through the whole of this long thread, and I am a little surprised that no one has referred to C.S.Lewis’s The Great Divorce, which has always seemed to me to get the position broadly right. God’s forgiveness and welcome into Heaven is always
open, but there are some who refuse to accept it, and prefer to continue in the grey world which is Lewis’s picture of Hell, where they can continue their self-centred existence. An allegory no doubt, but one that for 50 years has formed the basis of my understanding of Heaven, forgiveness and Hell, with free will thrown in. I think Freddy on 2 Oct at 1812 and 2059 (if I remember correctly) has much the same view, though more fully worked out.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by egg:
Having been away, I have read through the whole of this long thread, and I am a little surprised that no one has referred to C.S.Lewis’s The Great Divorce, which has always seemed to me to get the position broadly right.... I think Freddy on 2 Oct at 1812 and 2059 (if I remember correctly) has much the same view, though more fully worked out.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
If we take it in any way literally then it offers me the same problem as all the "softer" versions of Hell (i.e., people live forever in some not-very-happy state, though not being literally tortured by fire). You are still tied to this idea of immortal souls and of a God who allows/requires people to exist forever even though He cannot override the free will of those who insist on choosing selfishness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
you're left with only two options: a God who overrides people's free will and forces Himself on people, or a God who allows/forces those who reject Him to live forever in a miserable state with no hope of reprieve through death.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious
IngoB, I think your reply to me illustrates the extent to which we all read and interpret Scripture with our own preconceptions firmly in place. You are convinced of the reality of an immortal soul and of eternal punishment, so you read words like "death" and "perish" metaphorically, to mean something other than literal non-existence.

---

quote:

---

"He who is unjust, let him be unjust still; he who is filthy, let him be filthy still;..."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs
We took a bunch of kids from our youth club to the cinema one Saturday morning - they could choose between Despicable me and Marmaduke. All the kids - every single one of them - chose Despicable me. Does the 100% take up prove that the kids had no choice, that their free will was overridden? Of course not - they just all agreed what the best choice was.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
... someone, whose whole inner being is built on the foundation of a rejection of love ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
... someone, whose whole inner being is built on the foundation of a rejection of love ...

---

Gosh. Do you know anyone like that? I don't.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
I assume you just asked the group rather each person individually (without knowledge of what any of the others had chosen)? If so, then surely free will would have been influenced by the herd instinct.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
I cannot see how free will can really, genuinely, be free if ultimately every single person will unfailingly choose a certain option (of course, it is theoretically possible that everyone could freely choose a certain option, but it can never be assumed).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
It is abundantly clear to me that some people utterly and totally hate compassion, mercy and kindness towards others. That is, after all, what evil actually is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Those who think that ultimately everyone will just accept the love of God, must assume that evil is not really 'real' at all, and is just an effect of ignorance or poor upbringing or some other mitigating factor.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by goperryrevs
You're making it sound like there are some totally evil people, (beyond redemption?). I disagree with that. Everyone is grey, some dark, some light. Everyone has some good in them.

---

quote:

---

We're all evil, and we all need to be refined and cleansed so that we can enter Life.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
It is abundantly clear to me that some people utterly and totally hate compassion, mercy and kindness towards others ... a deep personal hatred of love, compassion and mercy ... someone, whose whole inner being is built on the foundation of a rejection of love...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
But there are other people who say "sod this, I'm not even going to try to hit the target". They have no intention of even making the slightest effort to do what is right. They deliberately turn their backs on the target and petulantly shoot their arrows in the opposite direction.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
It's easy to come out with all the "these people deserve to be PUNISHED!" stuff when you're crafting such an extreme example of an evil person that it surely cannot be describing one single person in the history of the world*.

*= even Hitler was, by most accounts, a perfectly warm and genial chap when with his friends and loved ones.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I struggle with this kind of binary distinction between those who try but fail and those who don't even try.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
The target has been set up and we are all commanded to try to hit the target. Some people do their utmost (or at least make some effort) to hit the bullseye, but, due to imperfection, perhaps laziness in training, or some defect of personality, fail to hit the target, or get anywhere near the bullseye. However, they tried.

But there are other people who say "sod this, I'm not even going to try to hit the target". They have no intention of even making the slightest effort to do what is right. They deliberately turn their backs on the target and petulantly shoot their arrows in the opposite direction.

There is therefore a world of difference between moral imperfection, on the one hand, and wilful evil, on the other. That is why I have little time for those who look at the actions of an Ian Brady, a Peter Sutcliffe, a Hitler or a Stalin and casually say "But for the grace of God go I", with the implication that we really shouldn't be too angry with these kinds of evildoers, because it would be hypocritical.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Are you seriously suggesting that no one is so evil as to torture and murder a child, for example?

---

quote:

---

The attitude behind such an action is devoid of any goodness whatsoever!

---

quote:

---

As for Hitler being warm and genial to his friends and loved ones: I'm afraid that is not consistent with the love of God, which reaches out to all people. Anyone can love those who are just an extension of one's own ego; that is just a form of self-love. The real test of whether someone is open to the love of God is a willingness to love those outside one's own circle.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin
I struggle with this kind of binary distinction between those who try but fail and those who don't even try. While I don't (at least, not so far in my life!) murder people, I 'petulantly shoot my arrow in the opposite direction' many times each week, if not each day - I stay in bed a few minutes longer instead of getting up to pray; I ignore the impulse to ring up or pop round to see a friend because I'm feeling a bit tired; I don't take an opportunity to do a kind deed, because it would mean changing my plans in some small way. I am a selfish ******* who makes many selfish, ungodly choices each day.

Clearly, my misdeeds are not as grotesque or spectacular as those of people like Hitler, Stalin etc. But I don't think I'm qualitatively different from any of those people whom we might talk of as being irredeemably evil. It's a spectrum and we're all on it at some point, IMO.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
I'm suggesting that even child murderers have compassion, mercy and kindness for some people. Just not all.

Even child murderers have people they love, and people who love them.

---

quote:

---

One action does not define someone's entire being.

---

quote:

---

So let me get this straight: love only counts as love if it's offered to someone you don't love? If you already love someone, then it's impossible for you to love them in a "Godly" way? And, therefore, the people who only love those whom they love have absolutely no love in their lives whatsoever?

Is that seriously what you're saying? And if so, is that the sort of twisted 'logic' that one has to employ in order to drown out the screams of the damned enough to sleep at night?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Are you seriously suggesting that no one is so evil as to torture and murder a child, for example?

---

I'm suggesting that even child murderers have compassion, mercy and kindness for some people. Just not all.

Even child murderers have people they love, and people who love them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

As for Hitler being warm and genial to his friends and loved ones: I'm afraid that is not consistent with the love of God, which reaches out to all people. Anyone can love those who are just an extension of one's own ego; that is just a form of self-love.

---

So let me get this straight: love only counts as love if it's offered to someone you don't love? ...Is that seriously what you're saying? And if so, is that the sort of twisted 'logic' that one has to employ in order to drown out the screams of the damned enough to sleep at night?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
So I would say that you are "aiming your arrow in the right direction", but failing to hit the target through weakness, and not through a wilful commitment to hate the whole idea of hitting the target in the first place! (My analogy is not perfect, of course; no analogy ever is. But I think it makes the point.)

---

quote:

---

..all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
The issue is not absolute good vs. evil, bliss v. agony.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
Even child murderers have people they love, and people who love them.

---

Yes, they may have this kind of 'love', but it is not consistent with the love of God, because if it was, then they would not torture and murder children. It's the love of God, which rules in heaven, not the kind of discriminatory love that is characteristic of human egotism.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

One action does not define someone's entire being.

---

Some actions do, because of their serious nature. If a person is full of the love of God, then he or she would not do certain things.

---

quote:

---

The committing of certain acts - the "bearing of bad fruit" - are only possible if "the tree is bad". The nature of the fruit reveals the nature of the tree.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

So let me get this straight: love only counts as love if it's offered to someone you don't love? If you already love someone, then it's impossible for you to love them in a "Godly" way? And, therefore, the people who only love those whom they love have absolutely no love in their lives whatsoever?

Is that seriously what you're saying? And if so, is that the sort of twisted 'logic' that one has to employ in order to drown out the screams of the damned enough to sleep at night?

---

Nope. That is certainly not what I am saying! If you think it is, then you are seriously twisting my words.

---

quote:

---

some people utterly and totally hate compassion, mercy and kindness towards others ... a deep personal hatred of love, compassion and mercy ... someone, whose whole inner being is built on the foundation of a rejection of love...

---

quote:

---

Of course, the love of God operates in and through relationships between people who love each other!!

---

quote:

---

Hitler may have loved his dog etc, but such love is completely neutralised by his hatred for, for example, the Jews.

---

quote:

---

As for the "screams of the damned": what are the damned expecting God - or me - to do for them?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
As for the "screams of the damned": what are the damned expecting God - or me - to do for them?

---

Giving a shit about them would be a good start. Especially when you've been the one preaching about how the love of God requires us to care about everyone.

---

Irony alert.

So I see we're now all on the same page.
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
eh?
 

---

Posted by Freddy (# 365) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
eh?

---

So in order to be a person fit to live are we then expected to give a rip about the ones in hell? Sounds like this is what you think. And it sounds like EE thinks the opposite.

That is ironic in my book.

[ 08. October 2012, 15:17: Message edited by: Freddy ]
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
So in order to be a person fit to live are we then expected to give a rip about the ones in hell? Sounds like this is what you think.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
Can you not see how it's possible to love one person and hate another, without either the love or the hate being any less "real" for the existence of the other?

---

quote:

---

And I bet that none of those things is anything you've ever been tempted to do. That's always the way with those who lay down lists of Sins That Cannot Be Forgiven.

---

quote:

---

Note the phrasing - this is not a description that allows for the described person to have any love, compassion or mercy in their lives whatsoever.

I therefore replied pointing out that everyone has some love in their lives, to which you answered that "Anyone can love those who are just an extension of one's own ego; that is just a form of self-love. The real test of whether someone is open to the love of God is a willingness to love those outside one's own circle."

What else am I supposed to conclude, other than that you don't think the love people have for their friends and family counts as love for the purposes of declaring them to have "a deep personal hatred of love"?

---

quote:

---

So you're saying that the love in a person's life doesn't count if they also do evil deeds?

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical
As for the "screams of the damned": what are the damned expecting God - or me - to do for them?

---

Giving a shit about them would be a good start. Especially when you've been the one preaching about how the love of God requires us to care about everyone.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
Can you not see how it's possible to love one person and hate another, without either the love or the hate being any less "real" for the existence of the other?

---

Did this mother love or hate her sons, in your opinion?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
Can you not see how it's possible to love one person and hate another, without either the love or the hate being any less "real" for the existence of the other?

---

Did this mother love or hate her sons, in your opinion?

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

And I bet that none of those things is anything you've ever been tempted to do. That's always the way with those who lay down lists of Sins That Cannot Be Forgiven.

---

Yeah, someone who mugs old ladies and tortures children in his spare time doesn't really want to do it, but he just can't help it!! He's really a nice fellow... really he is!!! (Really! Pleeeease believe me!!)

---

quote:

---

In other words, Marvin... if you want to fantasise that a person's actions do not reflect his character, then please carry on. I will continue living on this planet, and you continue living on yours.

---

quote:

---

I was, of course, talking about the love of God. Those who hate the love of God can, of course, possess a certain kind of 'love': self-love, and its objectification in other people who bow and scrape to them and stroke their ego.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

So you're saying that the love in a person's life doesn't count if they also do evil deeds?

---

Correct. That is exactly what I am saying. Because 'evil', by definition, is the antithesis of the love of God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian
Assuming the Daily Mail is telling the truth this is still utterly unapplicable. An applicable comparison would be the mother not just shopping her son into a system that works under classic theories of punishment, but dragging her son by the ear and delivering him unto the tender mercies of the Holy Inquisition to serve life with neither parole nor hope even of death.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
So in order to be a person fit to live are we then expected to give a rip about the ones in hell? Sounds like this is what you think.

---

EE was preaching about how everyone who doesn't utterly detest love must have love for those who are outside of their circle, and I decided to call him on the hypocrisy when he then proceeded to show no love for people outside his circle.

---

Hence my mention of "irony."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
But to be honest, the only reason I care about those who are in hell is because I genuinely fear I'll join them one day.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
You're taking this out of context of my discussion with Marvin. We were talking about the concept of 'love', and I was making the point that there are two different kinds of love, the 'love of God' and a 'love' for one's own family and friends that can exist alongside evil towards people - or certain people - outside one's own circle.

I think the point I am making here is pretty obvious. I am sure Marvin can work it out (or perhaps he really can't - judging by his latest post, which I have just noticed!).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by agingjb:
I personally doubt whether God is doing anything remotely like beating up six year olds, but I think we have to come to terms with a substantial element of Christian tradition that asserts that God hands over unbaptised children to powerful, malevolent, and pitiless entities for perpetual torture.

I know that this is in no way a universal belief, but it has certainly been held by people through whom the traditions of Christianity has been handed down.

"Created sick, commanded to be sound."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
But to be honest, the only reason I care about those who are in hell is because I genuinely fear I'll join them one day.

---

I'm sure this is true of all of us.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical
Yeah, someone who mugs old ladies and tortures children in his spare time doesn't really want to do it, but he just can't help it!! He's really a nice fellow... really he is!!! (Really! Pleeeease believe me!!)

---

Point proved, I think.

---

quote:

---

Either all of a person's actions reflect their character or none of them do. You simply cannot state that all the good actions they do with their friends and loved ones count for nothing while the bad actions they do against others count for everything.

---

quote:

---

So you're saying they're completely incapable of true love? That any love they might have for anyone else is really only love of themselves?

---

quote:

---

Life is not black and white, EE. Good people do evil things, and evil people do good things. There are people who do both on a daily basis that don't really deserve to be called good or evil, and that's where I think most of us lie.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
EE was preaching about how everyone who doesn't utterly detest love must have love for those who are outside of their circle, and I decided to call him on the hypocrisy when he then proceeded to show no love for people outside his circle.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian
How much easier is it then to care about the infinitely worse conditions of Hell?

---

quote:

---

He [the one who worships the beast] shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Interestingly, the Bible reveals that Jesus Christ himself is actually present in hell, while the damned are tormented there. And he is revealed there as the eternal victim of evil, not the inflicter of torment.

---

quote:

---

The reference is Revelation 14:10 -

quote:

---

He [the one who worships the beast] shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb

---

The 'Lamb' is symbolic of Christ with specific reference to the crucifixion (see Revelation 5:6).

---

quote:

---

It is obvious that the torment of the damned is qualitatively completely different from the sufferings of earthly concentration camps, torture chambers, sweat shops and killing fields.

---

quote:

---

This is the torment of those who have rejected the only conceivable method of healing and deliverance. They have rejected it, because that is the very thing that causes them torment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian
Indeed. The Lamb is there. Which means Jesus is watching. Why is he watching?

1: Because God, the All Powerful can't do a damn thing about Hell. Kinda means he isn't all powerful.

---

quote:

---

2: Because unlike God the Father, God the Son has more than a few shreds of humanity and seeks to mitigate the evil that God the Father created in the form of Hell. (This is the classic Two Ways to Live position).

---

quote:

---

3: He's there and brought popcorn because he enjoys exulting in the sufferings of the damned. (As preached the Summa Theologica the saints are all sadists who take pleasure not pity in others in torment).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
No he can't, if he respects people's free will. Remember, it's their choice which keeps the damned in hell. So why blame God?

---

quote:

---

God the Son and God the Father are one in character, will and affection. "He who has seen me has seen the Father"; "I and my Father are one"; "I only do what I see my Father doing" (which, by the way, includes the sufferings of the cross, which is why Patripassianism is irrefutably true.)

---

quote:

---

If you say so. Please do think that if you want to.

The rest of us can meditate on the meaning of the symbolism of 'the Lamb', which speaks of suffering and victimisation. The lamb is the most docile and gentle of creatures, and clearly this shows that hell is a place where God is the eternal victim at the hands of the real sadists - the ones who haven't the guts to repent and grow up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
No he can't, if he respects people's free will. Remember, it's their choice which keeps the damned in hell. So why blame God?

---

1: No it isn't. Hell is eternal. Which means that it is the will of God not the will of the people there.

2: Because God created Hell, created the rules to send people there, and created the rules that keep people there eternally. God is as much to blame for people being tortured in Hell as someone who is simultaneously king, architect, judge, and inventor of all the torture devices is for people being tortured at his command.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Such an outpouring of anger and ignorance against someone who "doesn't exist"!!

Very curious, I must say!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
All this anger based on a profound misunderstanding of God and hell. God does none of these things, and hell is not what you think it is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
Anger addressed against that which doesn't exist is a whole lot less harmful than that addressed against those who hold such doctrines.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
No he can't, if he respects people's free will. Remember, it's their choice which keeps the damned in hell. So why blame God?

---

1: No it isn't. Hell is eternal. Which means that it is the will of God not the will of the people there.

2: Because God created Hell, created the rules to send people there, and created the rules that keep people there eternally. God is as much to blame for people being tortured in Hell as someone who is simultaneously king, architect, judge, and inventor of all the torture devices is for people being tortured at his command.

---

quote:

---

Now if anyone is perplexed and does not understand how it is possible for God's love to render anyone pitifully wretched and miserable and even burning as it were in flames, let him consider the elder brother of the prodigal son. Was he not in his father's estate? Did not everything in it belong to him? Did he not have his father's love? Did his father not come himself to entreat and beseech him to come and take part in the joyous banquet? What rendered him miserable and burned him with inner bitterness and hate? Who refused him anything? Why was he not joyous at his brother's return? Why did he not have love either toward his father or toward his brother? Was it not because of his wicked, inner disposition? Did he not remain in hell because of that? And what was this hell? Was it any separate place? Were there any instruments of torture? Did he not continue to live in his father's house? What separated him from all the joyous people in the house if not his own hate and his own bitterness? Did his father, or even his brother, stop loving him? Was it not precisely this very love which hardened his heart more and more? Was it not the joy that made him sad? Was not hatred burning in his heart, hatred for his father and his brother, hatred for the love of his father toward his brother and for the love of his brother toward his father? This is hell: the negation of love; the return of hate for love; bitterness at seeing innocent joy; to be surrounded by love and to have hate in one's heart. This is the eternal condition of all the damned. They are all dearly loved. They are all invited to the joyous banquet. They are all living in God's Kingdom, in the New Earth and the New Heavens. No one expels them. Even if they wanted to go away they could not flee from God's New Creation, nor hide from God's tenderly loving omnipresence. Their only alternative would be, perhaps, to go away from their brothers and search for a bitter isolation from them, but they could never depart from God and His love. And what is more terrible is that in this eternal life, in this New Creation, God is everything to His creatures.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical
Yeah, someone who mugs old ladies and tortures children in his spare time doesn't really want to do it, but he just can't help it!! He's really a nice fellow... really he is!!! (Really! Pleeeease believe me!!)

---

Point proved, I think.

---

Yep. I've proved the point that I can do sarcasm.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Either all of a person's actions reflect their character or none of them do. You simply cannot state that all the good actions they do with their friends and loved ones count for nothing while the bad actions they do against others count for everything.

---

Incorrect. There are actions which are foolish and reckless which flow from human weakness, and there are actions which are the result of wilful and deliberate evil. There is a clear, qualitative difference.

---

quote:

---

If such people hate those outside their circle, then, yes, they are incapable of true love.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Life is not black and white, EE. Good people do evil things, and evil people do good things. There are people who do both on a daily basis that don't really deserve to be called good or evil, and that's where I think most of us lie.

---

Your conclusion is misguided. I never said that life was 'black and white', hence my explanation for the different types of 'evil' - see above.

---

quote:

---

How did I "proceed to show no love for people outside my circle"?

Evidence, please.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Why are some people screaming in this place of love?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Oh wait...

Why are some people screaming in this place of love?

Hmmm... I wonder why?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Why are some people screaming in this place of love?

---

Why do you assume they would be? Everyone has some love in their lives, and I fail to see why anyone would recoil from having more of it.

---

quote:

---

This is hell: the negation of love; the return of hate for love; bitterness at seeing innocent joy; to be surrounded by love and to have hate in one's heart. This is the eternal condition of all the damned.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Oh wait...

Why are some people screaming in this place of love?

Hmmm... I wonder why?

---

This is the sickest twist of all. "You can't let the wicked into heaven, they wouldn't enjoy it." Sounds like a dowager declaring you mustn't give caviar to poor people, as their digestive systems aren't up to it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Anyway, we seem to be stuck again on the heresy that it's bad people who go to hell. Justification by works?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus
This is the sickest twist of all. "You can't let the wicked into heaven, they wouldn't enjoy it." Sounds like a dowager declaring you mustn't give caviar to poor people, as their digestive systems aren't up to it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
I agree that the doctrines are bad. But I think that better doctrines are the answer, not denial of the whole idea.

Maybe that's the theme of the whole thread.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Drewthealexander:
@Justinian. Imagine an afterlife in which every injustice was remedied, and in which all victims of injustice were compensated. What would that look like to you?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Your views reveal a profound misunderstanding.

Allow me to quote from a talk given by an Orthodox writer called Dr Alexandre Kalomiros, entitled 'River of Fire':

quote:

---

Now if anyone is perplexed and does not understand how it is possible for God's love to render anyone pitifully wretched and miserable and even burning as it were in flames, let him consider the elder brother of the prodigal son. Was he not in his father's estate? Did not everything in it belong to him? Did he not have his father's love? Did his father not come himself to entreat and beseech him to come and take part in the joyous banquet? What rendered him miserable and burned him with inner bitterness and hate? Who refused him anything? Why was he not joyous at his brother's return? Why did he not have love either toward his father or toward his brother? Was it not because of his wicked, inner disposition? Did he not remain in hell because of that? And what was this hell? Was it any separate place? Were there any instruments of torture? Did he not continue to live in his father's house? What separated him from all the joyous people in the house if not his own hate and his own bitterness? Did his father, or even his brother, stop loving him? Was it not precisely this very love which hardened his heart more and more? Was it not the joy that made him sad? Was not hatred burning in his heart, hatred for his father and his brother, hatred for the love of his father toward his brother and for the love of his brother toward his father? This is hell: the negation of love; the return of hate for love; bitterness at seeing innocent joy; to be surrounded by love and to have hate in one's heart. This is the eternal condition of all the damned. They are all dearly loved. They are all invited to the joyous banquet. They are all living in God's Kingdom, in the New Earth and the New Heavens. No one expels them. Even if they wanted to go away they could not flee from God's New Creation, nor hide from God's tenderly loving omnipresence. Their only alternative would be, perhaps, to go away from their brothers and search for a bitter isolation from them, but they could never depart from God and His love. And what is more terrible is that in this eternal life, in this New Creation, God is everything to His creatures.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
What, you mean like the elder son in the Parable of the Prodigal Son, who obviously had some love in his life: love for himself, love for his friends, perhaps even a kind of love for his father? So when his father pleaded with him to have some more love in his life - love for his younger brother - he refused.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
What, you mean like the elder son in the Parable of the Prodigal Son, who obviously had some love in his life: love for himself, love for his friends, perhaps even a kind of love for his father? So when his father pleaded with him to have some more love in his life - love for his younger brother - he refused.

---

quote:

---

The kind of love which loves some and hates others will not count as love in God's heaven.

---

quote:

---

To quote Dr Kalomiros again (as I did a few posts ago):

quote:

---

This is hell: the negation of love; the return of hate for love; bitterness at seeing innocent joy; to be surrounded by love and to have hate in one's heart. This is the eternal condition of all the damned.

---

So, yes, they do scream.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackbeard:


Do you mind me pointing out that much of this thread is based on speculation?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:
All[/i] talk of the afterlife is based on speculation. We'll only know for sure when (if) it happens. Meanwhile we can choose to believe what we like - which depends to a great extent on our experiences and personalities.

---

I wouldn't quite agree with that. Many of us believe that we know the facts with absolute certainty. I know I do.

That may be misguided faith in a mistaken system, but it is not the same thing as speculation.
 

---

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackbeard
All fascinating stuff, of course.

Do you mind me pointing out that much of this thread is based on speculation? also, that if a Bible text shows every sign of being allegorical or symbolic, we shouldn't try to find any meaning outside the purpose of the allegory or symbols?

Discussion, even argument, are fine if they lead to better understanding; not so good if the discussion generates more heat than light.

Every human argument I have seen results in paradox. God has the answer; we don't as yet, and human logic will only take us so far.

So carry on discussing, some good points have been made, but don't assume that you are necessarily right, or that the other fellow is necessarily wrong.

Please.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
..... Many of us believe that we know the facts with absolute certainty. I know I do. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian
But there can be no innocent joy in the knowledge your loved ones are screaming.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackbeard

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
..... Many of us believe that we know the facts with absolute certainty. I know I do. ...

---

Now THAT is SCARY.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'm not aware that either of those options has ever been considered Biblical or Traditional by any even vaguely mainstream denomination, though.

---

No, but it might (or might not) be worth pointing out that Gregory of Nyssa made rather universalist noises without censure, and is considered not just a saint but one of the hugely important Cappadocean Fathers. This gives me as a closet universalist hope that I am not a wretched heretic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider
Can I point out the feckin' great elephant in the room that Adeodatus hinted about?

Most of my loved ones are not "evil, embittered, miserable, arrogant, self-centred bastards". Nevertheless, they are not Christians. Some of them are atheists. According to, if I may quote the OP, the "Traditional, Biblical view of the afterlife", they're going to toast.

Fortunately for my mental health, I do not believe the "Traditional, Biblical view of the afterlife", but if you're going to attempt to defend the "Traditional, Biblical view of the afterlife", then you have to come to terms with Hell not being about, in the main, "evil, embittered, miserable, arrogant, self-centred bastards", but being about everyone who doesn't guess lucky as to which religion is the right one, whether there's a God or not, and exactly what it is that he wants.

The ones who don't guess lucky are apparently due for the flames.

---

quote:

---

Judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackbeard:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
..... Many of us believe that we know the facts with absolute certainty. I know I do. ...

---

Now THAT is SCARY.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
That's interesting, the stuff about mercy being hell for some people, but I have worked with quite a lot of people (as a therapist), who have been so badly abused and traumatized, that they have to reject love, mercy, compassion. They have to fend people off, drive them away, take revenge on them, and so on, but I don't consider them to be the damned. In other words, some of them are recoverable.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
But those in hell cannot abide heaven.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk
Supposing I'm having a party, and almost everyone is having a great time. Then I see someone who *isn't* enjoying themselves. Will I try and find out why not, and, hopefully, do something to make the situation better? Or will I say "They aren't enjoying themselves because they are the wrong kind of people. If they were the right kind of people, they'd be enjoying themselves because my party is great!"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
If there really are two destinations, then this seems like nonsense. "Hell" is an intolerable place. If heaven is intolerable, then it is hell.

If you are imagining one destination, that will be heaven to the righteous and hell to the damned, aren't you supposing that even the presence of God isn't enough to redeem the damned?

How can that be the case when they are his creatures?

Supposing I'm having a party, and almost everyone is having a great time. Then I see someone who *isn't* enjoying themselves. Will I try and find out why not, and, hopefully, do something to make the situation better? Or will I say "They aren't enjoying themselves because they are the wrong kind of people. If they were the right kind of people, they'd be enjoying themselves because my party is great!"

---

quote:

---

EtymologicalEvangelical: But suppose you have to deal with a person who smashes the place up, attacks the other guests, is thoroughly obnoxious and does his / her utmost to make the party a total misery for everyone else. And absolutely no amount of persuasion on your part makes any difference.

What then?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Are you seriously suggesting that those who are evil, embittered, miserable, arrogant, self-centred bastards can effectively veto the joy, peace and relief of those who have finally escaped their clutches?

---

quote:

---

The arrogant will certainly be thrown out, and there will be no concession to the kind of emotional blackmail that your words imply.

---

quote:

---

I would much rather my loved ones be exposed to the reality of the love of God for them, even if the experience is uncomfortable, than for God to try to engineer (contrary to his moral character) some kind of comfortable satanic pseudo-heaven for them where they could indulge their evil to their heart's content.

---

quote:

---

In fact, if my "loved" ones were evil, embittered, miserable, arrogant, self-centred bastards, then they wouldn't really be my "loved" ones anyway, because such "love" would be meaningless, especially as they would also hate me with a burning hatred.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Clearly this shows that only one type of person goes to hell (i.e. receives no mercy), and that is the person "who has shown no mercy": the miserable, self-centred bastard, in other words.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackbeard:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
..... Many of us believe that we know the facts with absolute certainty. I know I do. ...

---

Now THAT is SCARY.

---

Yes, other people's views are often scary.

My point is just that you can't dismiss everyone's beliefs as idle speculation - as if we're all just guessing here. That undermines all of Christianity, and dismisses any belief based on the professed acceptance of some kind of revelation from God.

I'm also quite aware that I could be wrong as rain. Every commitment to a belief carries with it the possibility of being wrong.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
But those in hell cannot abide heaven.

---

If there really are two destinations, then this seems like nonsense. "Hell" is an intolerable place. If heaven is intolerable, then it is hell.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
If you are imagining one destination, that will be heaven to the righteous and hell to the damned, aren't you supposing that even the presence of God isn't enough to redeem the damned?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
How can that be the case when they are his creatures?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
Supposing I'm having a party, and almost everyone is having a great time. Then I see someone who *isn't* enjoying themselves. Will I try and find out why not, and, hopefully, do something to make the situation better? Or will I say "They aren't enjoying themselves because they are the wrong kind of people. If they were the right kind of people, they'd be enjoying themselves because my party is great!"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackbeard:
Freddy, if you read my posts a bit more carefully, you might find that I'm not trying to dismiss everyone's beliefs as idle speculation. I would like beliefs to be founded on something a bit more solid than speculation. But, of course, speculation is not necessarily idle, it can be instructive, and hits a target once in a while.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackbeard:
I don't think I am undermining Christianity (this appears to be a conclusion you have jumped to); quite enough harm has been done by those who insist on always being right in every detail. Better, I think, to concentrate on those essentials we are confident of, and acknowledge that views on non-essentials may differ.

---

quote:

---

Justinian originally posted:
Ah yes. The testbook hypersimplification of the Parable of the Prodigal Son.

---

quote:

---

As demonstrated, the supposedly rhetorical questions are pointing to a story quite different from the actual text of the parable of the Prodigal Son.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
I suppose it is tedious to point this out, but I do so for the benefit of the newcomers: This entire post is delusionally unmoored from the text of the parable.

---

That is hilarious. I hadn't actually read the post. Justinian was clearly joking.
 

---

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 
I found it quite bewildering as well. It seems unmoored from the point that the parable is a parable, rather than an account of a real event. Hence trying to infer actual motives and hidden family rifts and inconsistencies isn't really helpful.

It's like taking my diagram of a son returning to his father, and pointing out that actually the path isn't really shaped like a path and could well be something else. And that the perspective isn't what it first appears, such that the son is in fact walking away. And the son has a rather odd beard and could well be too old to really be the son.

In fact it is my picture, I drew it to communicate a particular idea, and any failings in the drawing or inconsistencies in the drawing don't mean that I was in fact thinking of something else.

If you disagree with the idea or think the idea far-fetched that's perfectly legitimate, but you can't undermine the idea itself because of inconsistencies in the realism of my drawing.
 

---

Posted by Justinian (# 5357) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
I suppose it is tedious to point this out, but I do so for the benefit of the newcomers: This entire post is delusionally unmoored from the text of the parable. It adheres rather to an idiosyncratically tendentious antiChristian reading into the text.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Freddy:
That is hilarious. I hadn't actually read the post. Justinian was clearly joking.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
I found it quite bewildering as well. It seems unmoored from the point that the parable is a parable, rather than an account of a real event. Hence trying to infer actual motives and hidden family rifts and inconsistencies isn't really helpful.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
God the Son and God the Father are one in character, will and affection.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
the normal mainstream Christian reading.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian:
Try addressing that point to Dr. Kalomiros (or EE as the one who cited him). Who was trying to infer actual motives from the parable - and then use that as the basis for a line in Socratic logic. Sauce for the goose...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
You miss the point again. I'm not saying one cannot infer motives, we are obviously supposed to infer motives in the parable. (It can hardly be a parable about human beings otherwise).

The point is that the teller of the parable is in charge of the motives that he gives the characters. You might be able to infer all sorts of other motives that the teller didn't intend. Perhaps some of them even some logically more satisfying to you. But although it might be an interesting academic exercise, it is not relevant to getting at the truth of what the parable teller was trying to communicate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

The arrogant will certainly be thrown out ....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Are you seriously suggesting that those who are evil, embittered, miserable, arrogant, self-centred bastards can effectively veto the joy, peace and relief of those who have finally escaped their clutches?

---

And now we see the system laid bare. Those in heaven are those who want to escape those they do not like, and who have no compassion for their fellow humans.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

The arrogant will certainly be thrown out, and there will be no concession to the kind of emotional blackmail that your words imply.

---

And the saints and decent human beings will follow them to try to help as they are actually concerned about the suffering of others. Leaving heaven as a circle jerk of the self-satisifed who are happy that they no longer have the riff-raff around because they spoiled the view.

The more you describe your heaven and the way it works, the more I want no part of it.

---

quote:

---

And the reality of your God is that he is a monster. Whose so-called love burns people and whose so-called justice involves eternal torment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
No, it is about being protected from abusers and oppressors. It is not about refusing to have compassion, but about certain people refusing to receive compassion.

I suppose in your bizarre and twisted world, you would be quite happy for a rape victim to be forced to live eternally with her abuser leering at her - and perhaps even attacking her? He refuses to show any remorse, but still his victim has to show the evil bastard compassion, because we are supposed to treat unrepentantly evil people with kid gloves.

I am compassionate to the victim and want to see her protected from evil, but you, apparently, seem to insist that she should be raped and abused for all eternity. In other words, you are the one condemning people to eternal hell!! You are the one lacking any sense of justice. You are the one who advocates torture, by insisting victims should live forever with their remorseless oppressors.

---

quote:

---

Try to help them do what exactly?

I can just imagine a "saint and decent human being" going up to someone consumed with arrogance and hatred of God, who is in agony because of his own evil.

---

quote:

---

Saint: "Hi. I'm here to help you understand how much I love you and God loves you, and I want to reassure you that I want to do all I can to relieve your distress."

---

quote:

---

Unrepentant person: "Oh, just fuck off, will you! Piss off back to your shitty heaven and leave me alone." (And then spits in the decent human being's face)

---

quote:

---

What does "decent human being" do then?

---

quote:

---

I think if the "decent human being" returned to heaven, no one in their right mind could call that person 'self-righteous'!

---

quote:

---

No, you're the monster who wants to torture people for ever, by expecting victims to have to live with their unrepentant oppressors.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
EE (and others), you continue to make the mistake of thinking this is about justice. Justice has nothing to do with it. Hell and Heaven are unjust: nobody deserves either.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian
The only question for the judge who chooses between heaven and hell is whether to do something truly nice for someone who doesn't deserve it, or something infinitely vile to someone who doesn't deserve it.

---

quote:

---

Pity that some people find this nice thing so disgusting, and insist on doing something infinitely vile to themselves by refusing to forsake evil.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
You forget the rest of the story, Adeodatus.

"...Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Well, there's no accounting for simplistic readings of the Bible.

The point being, it's the "righteous," not the outcasts, who are spurning God's offer. The outcasts, indeed, are the ones who accept grace most readily.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Well, there's no accounting for simplistic readings of the Bible.

The point being, it's the "righteous," not the outcasts, who are spurning God's offer. The outcasts, indeed, are the ones who accept grace most readily.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
What you aren't getting is that some people don't want eternal salvation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian
The only question for the judge who chooses between heaven and hell is whether to do something truly nice for someone who doesn't deserve it, or something infinitely vile to someone who doesn't deserve it.

---

Well what a relief that we have a God who does something truly nice for all people, who don't deserve it.

Pity that some people find this nice thing so disgusting, and insist on doing something infinitely vile to themselves by refusing to forsake evil.

---

Pity that God created hell as a place to keep such people. His is the power and his the responsibility. What a "relief" we have a God who creates a Place of Torture and then condemns those who won't follow the party line there.

I'm entirely with Adeodatus. No one should go to Hell. And that was an excellent post about why, and who would appear to go there above. I'm just not sure whether or is appropriate.
 

---

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
What you aren't getting is that some people don't want eternal salvation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian
The only question for the judge who chooses between heaven and hell is whether to do something truly nice for someone who doesn't deserve it, or something infinitely vile to someone who doesn't deserve it.

---

Well what a relief that we have a God who does something truly nice for all people, who don't deserve it.

Pity that some people find this nice thing so disgusting, and insist on doing something infinitely vile to themselves by refusing to forsake evil.

---

Pity that God created hell as a place to keep such people. His is the power and his the responsibility. What a "relief" we have a God who creates a Place of Torture and then condemns those who won't follow the party line there.

I'm entirely with Adeodatus. No one should go to Hell. And that was an excellent post about why, and who would appear to go there above. I'm just not sure whether or is appropriate.
 

---

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :
 
(By the way, Hosts, I'm awfully sorry, I don't know where these duplicate posts are coming from. I'm really only pressing "Add Reply" once, honest!)
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
What you aren't getting is that some people don't want eternal salvation.

---

Maybe they don't, but I don't know many people who want scorching fire over every inch of their spiritual bodies for ever and ever and ever, either.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
What you aren't getting is that some people don't want eternal salvation.

---

Maybe they don't, but I don't know many people who want scorching fire over every inch of their spiritual bodies for ever and ever and ever, either.

---

quote:

---

originally posted by egg;
As a matter of interest I looked up the teaching of the Church of England and the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on Hell....I have to say that I do not find this (Catholic doctrine) as satisfying as the doctrine of the Church of England ,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Then why don't they accept God's grace? Why do they withhold themselves from God and their fellow men?

---

quote:

---

Sin is a reality, I believe. God offers his grace freely, and we spit on Him and nail him to a cross all the same. God says to us "Come unto me all ye who are weary and heavy laden" and we run the opposite direction. We say we want grace, but we don't, not really.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Well, there's no accounting for simplistic readings of the Bible.

The point being, it's the "righteous," not the outcasts, who are spurning God's offer. The outcasts, indeed, are the ones who accept grace most readily.

---

But you still don't get it. I don't want the righteous, the self-righteous, the hypocrites, or the sanctimonious bastards to go to hell either. Let me be absolutely clear:

Nobody
deserves
eternal
punishment.

---

quote:

---

Does it matter? God stops asking.

---

quote:

---

When Peter saw him, he asked, “Lord, what about him?”

Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.”

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
I do not believe there is such a thing as a Biblical view of the afterlife - only difficult challenges to us for how we must live this life

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justinian

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical
Well what a relief that we have a God who does something truly nice for all people, who don't deserve it.

Pity that some people find this nice thing so disgusting, and insist on doing something infinitely vile to themselves by refusing to forsake evil.

---

Pity that God created hell as a place to keep such people. His is the power and his the responsibility. What a "relief" we have a God who creates a Place of Torture and then condemns those who won't follow the party line there.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EE:
It really doesn't matter how loving and accepting God is to some people. They will always hate him.

---