Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
Hmm. I don't know if we could repent hell - that was Professor Kirke's illustration. (mommy, he started it!) Honestly, I wish it were the case that we could repent in hell. Maybe it is. Or maybe hell doesn't exist. For me, looking at the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus told by Jesus doesn't indicate the possibility of repentence in hell. The story has a great ending for Lazarus but a very sad ending for the Rich Man. Maybe Jesus didn't finish the story?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jerry Boam:
I know that it has been removed from one of the creeds that the UMC uses, but isn't there a tradition about Christ descending into hell? The harrowing of hell?

I am not at all familiar with the issues around this idea, but I took it as a way of saying that the salvation offered by God in the person of Christ transcends death--that people who were not saved in this life still have the option to accept the salvation that God desires for them.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
This is one of those places where I think we're better off seeing that God, as King of the Universe, is Righteous Judge as well as loving Father - and we actually have some input into the decision whether we are treated as errant children who need help or treasonous rebels who need dispatching. IT COULD BE that the possibility of repentance in hell exists - but I would not want to hold out that hope to anyone, lest they say, "well, I can always repent later," but never get the opportunity.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

That sounds very merciful: but see what lurks behind it.... The demand of the loveless and the self-imprisoned that they should be allowed to blackmail the universe: that till they consent to be happy (on their own terms) no one else shall taste joy: that theirs should be the final power; that Hell should be able to veto Heaven.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

I know it has a ground sound to say that ye'll accept no salvation which leaves even on creature in the dark outside. But watch that sophistry or ye'll make a dog in a manger the tyrant of the universe.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by professorkirke:
I think (and I am going on my own presumptions, quite arrogantly!) that Demas was saying that though Lewis SAID what you quoted him as saying, his point would necessitate that no one would end up in hell. That would seem to be the way that no one in heaven would have to wait in order to have joy.

But wouldn't true joy and love hold within it the patience to wait for those who have not yet been made complete for whatever reasons?

-Digory

---

quote:

---

There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell.

[italics are originals]

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
I don't want to be caught up in who has the Right™ interpretation of Lewis or the bible because I think there's something I miss when I'm only trying to prove that I'm right.

---

Yes, exactly. When I said I thought you were right about what you were saying about Lewis, I meant you were right to point out that Lewis could've meant either thing. Who knows? Good show.

quote:

---

There's so much I can learn from you ProfessorKirke and Demas and I really appreciate dialoguing with you and all the others about this curious afterdeath (?) experience.

---

I can teach you how to make one sentence take the form of eight paragraphs. That's one of my special gifts.

-Digory

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by professorkirke:
I can teach you how to make one sentence take the form of eight paragraphs. That's one of my special gifts.

-Digory

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by professorkirke:
I think, in my opinion, that this is the wrong approach. "You might get a chance later, but just in case you don't, you should probably just do it now!"

I think that if we encourage people on to pursue the truth of God, they'll find it. "Seek and ye shall find" etc. So, in that light, if you believe that God's nature seems to be saying that he will save everyone, I do not think it is damaging to make that suggestion.

The point of making meaningful decisions in this life is not to secure your future in the next. Our decisions here affect us here, and affect others here, and assist in bringing the Kingdom of God (whatever you believe that means) to earth.

-Digory

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
I'm not sure that it *IS* God's nature to save everyone - I know God is love, in a much more profound understanding of the word than any of us have. But I also know God is not sentimental. And I also know Jesus spent a fair chunk of time warning people to make decisions that will secure their future in the next world, and even the quality of our future in the next world.

---

quote:

---

I wonder to what degree our dismissal of that as a motive (even secondary or tertiary) is a little hell-inspired ("You don't want to be MERCENARY about this! A decision made in fear is a poor decision," etc.) - I'm not arguing that is the case, but I do wonder.

---

In all fairness, I have to concede this point. Part of my belief that there may be no hell is grounded in a desire to not have to preach such, to me, evil sounding theology, and to in some ways coerce people to think just like me or believe just like me about things that we cannot really be sure of.

It's important to remember our motivations, to be sure. I spend enough time pointing out other people's that I am content with conceding my own.

-Digory

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by professorkirke:

quote:

---

Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
This is one of those places where I think we're better off seeing that God, as King of the Universe, is Righteous Judge as well as loving Father - and we actually have some input into the decision whether we are treated as errant children who need help or treasonous rebels who need dispatching. IT COULD BE that the possibility of repentance in hell exists - but I would not want to hold out that hope to anyone, lest they say, "well, I can always repent later," but never get the opportunity.

---

I think, in my opinion, that this is the wrong approach. "You might get a chance later, but just in case you don't, you should probably just do it now!"

...

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Let's suppose you were walking along the side of a river - one you cannot wade or swin across and there are no boats or materials to build a raft available.

On the other side of the river, some 5 miles down, your son/daughter. They are in grave danger - it seems obvious to you that death is imminent, but you believe you can prevent it. (Don't ask how, that is irrelevant).

Now, you know that there is a bridge across just ahead, but it is unstable, and may collapse if you were to try to cross it. However, you have no idea where the next crossing is, if there is one at all between here and your son/daughter.

Do you cross? Or, do you stay on this side and take your chances?

Now, let's say someone tells you "Sure, it will hold. Turst me. I have crossed it myself." Now, do you cross?

If you have a chance, why not take it? Especially if there may not be another?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
As Paul says, the wages of sin is death , not eternal punishment.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

unless you want to embrace an entirely works-based sotierology...

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astro:
Will God allow anyone to go to hell - begs the question - Will God force everyone to to go to Heaven?

Unless you are a Calvinist and believe in Irresistable Grace can you say that people who reject God in life will not be allowed to go on rejecting him in the afterlife?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
One thing I don't think has been mentioned is this; Jesus spoke about hell in this way:

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels."
Matthew 25 v 41

The significance of that verse is deafening, especially in the context of our discussion.

---

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. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I 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?'

45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

I would be careful in looking for a literal map of the afterlife in the parable of the sheep and goats if I were you; that is, unless you want to embrace an entirely works-based sotierology...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

"For as in Adam ALL die, so in Christ shall ALL be made alive!. (I Cor 15.22)

I see no break in a coherant theology. Adam's sin is imputed to the whole human race, hence death. Christ's righteousness is also imputed to the whole, hence eternal life.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by universalist:
Concerning "hell". All of God's punishments are remedial in nature, never punitive. Whatever "hell" is, it must also be redemptive, for every knee shall finally bow in worship of God (never forced: how could God care anything about that?).

But notice the fundamentalist view of Hell:

God created a place in order to punish his enemies forever and ever: a place of eternal suffering.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Heaven and hell are nothing more than the relatively pleasant or unpleasant lives that are the natural result of these associations.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:

---

Heaven and hell are nothing more than the relatively pleasant or unpleasant lives that are the natural result of these associations.

---

Dear Freddy

You've posted these ideas before, but I've never fully understood them. Is this pleasant or unpleasant life people find before and after death in any way interchangeable? can anyone on the wrong end get themselves a place at the good end?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by universalist:
Whatever "hell" is, it must also be redemptive, for every knee shall finally bow in worship of God (never forced: how could God care anything about that?).

---

quote:

---

"I am he," Jesus said. (And Judas the traitor was standing there with them.) When Jesus said, "I am he," they drew back and fell to the ground. (John 18:5-6)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by universalist:
But notice the fundamentalist view of Hell:

God created a place in order to punish his enemies forever and ever: a place of eternal suffering.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by universalist:
But each of us, far less good than God, would never consign our incorrigble children to suffer endlessly. What manner of distorted reasoning thinks that God would torture HIS enemies forever? (while asking us to forgive ours).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by universalist:
In so many ways, our doctrines seem to point to a monstrous God...

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Whether you like it or not, the New Testament can be used both to "prove" eternal damnation and it can be used to "prove" universal salvation.

<snip>

The teaching in Scripture is equivocal. We can interpret it how it sits best with our passions.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Luigi:
Freddy - the problem that I have with your way round this problem (and yes I do think it is an attempt to get *round* the problem) is that the way you try to make hell more palatable is by making it into a slightly disappointing package holiday. And heaven into a slightly less disappointing holiday.

In the end it doesn't seem to fit with any concept of judgement. And it smacks of desperation. For Jesus to use such strong language - hyperbole? - about a divine Thompson's holiday seems bizarre.

---

Luigi,

It only sounds like I'm trying to get around this problem because I am writing in response to it.

What I'm trying to convey is a more realistic idea of the next life than the charicature that Christians typically envision.

Anyone with a belief in life after death must realize that it takes place in a spiritual, not a material or natural, existence. Everything about that existence, then, is determined by the nature of spiritual, as opposed to natural, substances and phenomena.

It's not as if we know nothing about spiritual things, if we have a belief in the Bible. Many places in Scripture speak of such things as "treasure in heaven" and that people must become like children to go there. We know what they mean. We know what spiritual things are. They are internal, as opposed to natural or physical, qualities.

In a world that is spiritual "there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known" (Matthew 10:26).

What is so hard about envisioning a world based on internal qualities? Isn't it obvious how such a world, where internal qualities are visible, facilitates "the judgment"?

And if you think through what would happen in that arrangement, where people retain their basic character from this world, and separate themselves according to this basic, and now visible, character, it seems to me that this explains everything important about the nature of heaven and hell.

What Jesus said was not hyperbole. It was a way of explaining the realities of spiritual life to people who were both simple and materialistic. I guess I'm making it sound like a disappointing holiday to get away from thoughts of flames and pokers.

So is it really that hard to envision a spiritual world without just thinking of airy forms drifting in nothingness? Isn't it clear that the laws of a spiritual world would be strikingly different from those of this world?

--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I see - if you're in Adam you die...

The 'in Adam' bit must mean if you are descended from him, related to him, part of the human race, somehow involved in human existence. It must mean that by being descended from him, we share in his guilt. Yes, I see the logic.

Now, let's extend that logic to the next bit - 'so in Christ all shall be made alive...'

Hmmm, 'in Christ'. What would be the connection here then? We are not biologically related, we're not even racially similar. What could 'in Christ' mean? Paul certainly says that ALL who are in him will be made alive, but I fail to see how everyone is automatically in Christ in the same way that by common humanity they are in Adam.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
For me, this is the point - not all are "in Christ." This is the basis for the call to evangelize, first to Jerusalem, then Judea, and then all the world. If all are already in Christ, why evangelize?

---

quote:

---

Maybe I've said it before in this thread (!!), but I don't see the "downside" of believing a straightforward reading of scripture, in this regard. If I believe hell is a real threat and I therefore share with more passion because I don't want to see friends, family, or folk in general wind up damned, how is that a problem? But if I speak soothing words and say, "don't worry about it, Jesus' death on the cross covers you whether you ever agree with Him or not," and I'm WRONG, I've done them a hideous disservice (and possibly brought their blood down on my head, depending on how much Ez.33 applies to us today).

In grappling with the "once saved, always saved?" question, my brother-in-law said something wise, I think: "We're better off living as if we could lose our salvation," and I think this is a place where we're better off believing hell is a real possibility. I do not see the upside of disbelieving (other than it being more comfortable! and hey, I like comfort - I'm BIG on comfort).

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by professorkirke:
The downside to simply saying "we might as well be safe" is that we chance maintaining a very inaccurate concept of God. I understand that any theology is at risk of this by nature, but this only emphasizes my need to act on what I believe to be true rather than on what will be "the safest choice."

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Dear Mudfrog

Whether you like it or not, the New Testament can be used both to "prove" eternal damnation and it can be used to prove universal salvation. Now I, as a universalist try to explain away the damnation texts or try to find a way of minimising their severity. This is because I passionately desire the salvation of all creation.

Now you do the opposite. You ignore or try to rationalise quite explicit texts which say that all will be ultimately be reconciled to God. But surely you don't do it for the opposite reason, ie that you positively relish in the thought that most of humanity is damned. I don't suggest this of you, but I have met countless Protestants who do that very thing. The teaching in Scripture is equivocal. We can interpret it how it sits best with our passions.

My passion is that ALL will be saved. It seems from what you write here that you positively want that strait gate to be as strait as possible and only include people such as yourself.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
So you can't offer a commentary on the 'as in Christ' text then.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

In Christ, all our saved.
Go into all the world and make disciples.

We have traditionally linked up "salvation" and "discipleship." Looking back on it, I'm not sure they are equivalent. In which case, "evangelism" as we know it is somewhat misguided. -Digory [/QB]

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
So you can't offer a commentary on the 'as in Christ' text then.

---

You'll find such commentary all over the place if you look, Mudfrog. For a start you could read the chapter excerpt from the book The Inscapable Love of God that I mentioned before on this thread.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
So you can't offer a commentary on the 'as in Christ' text then.

---

You'll find such commentary all over the place if you look, Mudfrog. For a start you could read the chapter excerpt from the book The Inscapable Love of God that I mentioned before on this thread.

---

I was actually asking PaulTH about his seeming unwillingness to engage on the meaning of the text and his response to me. I had looked at the text regarding being 'in Adam' and 'in Christ' and asked him for his interpretation, which he chose not to give.

Perhaps he couldn't give one.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Demas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mudfrog:
So you can't offer a commentary on the 'as in Christ' text then.

---

You'll find such commentary all over the place if you look, Mudfrog. For a start you could read the chapter excerpt from the book The Inscapable Love of God that I mentioned before on this thread.

---

I was actually asking PaulTH about his seeming unwillingness to engage on the meaning of the text and his response to me. I had looked at the text regarding being 'in Adam' and 'in Christ' and asked him for his interpretation, which he chose not to give.

Perhaps he couldn't give one.

---

Are you interested in the underlying discussion or in scoring points off PaulTH?

---