|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Will God allow anyone to go to hell?
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
I've taken the liberty of opening this thread - though I know it probably would have been better written by someone else. Anyways, this topic is from a tangent started on the "Personal Relationship with God" thread. If it may seem familiar...well its probably also a spin-off from Demas' excellence thread the "Unimportance of Hell." It seems we just can't get enough of fire and flames ![[Biased]](wink.gif) .
The crux of the matter is whether or not we think someone people will end up in hell. Some believe that God saves everyone and will forgive and redeem everyone and no one will suffer eternally the wrath of God. My take is that God won't force anyone to be with him eternally and that some people will end up in hell. I don't know any of this for sure. I just think that God does offer people a choice and I wouldn't want to be with a god that didn't give me the choice not to follow him. I feel that not having that choice would make me a robot - an automan without free will.
So here's the beginning:
quote:
Op'd by someone (?)
If "Jesus" will save, He will do so on the basis of my actions and not whether I felt distant or woozy.
Then LutheranChik responded:
quote:
Actually, Jesus has already saved you independently of any presumed "good conduct points" on your part. The question is whether you're yet aware of that.
Then I posted:
quote:
I find this attitude completely arrogant (I don't mean that LutheranChik is arrogant at all - I mean the idea expressed). I just find the idea that God will save me without considering my choice flat out arrogant and disrespectful. Frankly, I don't want to be with a god that doesn't offer me a choice whether to be with him in eternity or not.
Then ProfKirke:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
If I see you drowning in a lake, and happen to be riding in a helicopter, would you like me to phone down to you first and give you a choice about being saved before I lower down the rope ladder?
Better yet, if you ever happen to be unconscious, should I attempt to get your permission before attempting CPR? If you don't respond, should I leave you under the argument that I did not want to arrogantly violate your sense of free will, and therefore left you there to die?
No offense meant, and not trying to derail the thread's aim, but I wanted to respond to your tangent.
-Digory
Then Mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
That might be a good analogy, Professorkirke, if I were drowning and unconscious.
I believe God provides salvation to all, but it requires us to accept it to be saved. There is no salvation without God's work (it's not Pelagianism) but there is also no salvation without our voluntary acceptance (it's not Calvinism).
And OliviaG:
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
<first aid tangent> According to my first aid training, an unconscious victim gives implied consent. <end first aid tangent>
I do honestly believe that if there is a big salvation-fest at the end of time, not only will there be some surprises at who is there, but some of those folks will be surprised themselves. I don't think it's safe to assume that if you don't feel you have a relationship with God, that means God doesn't have a relationship with you. Your God's mileage may vary. OliviaG
And last from the thread in hell:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
I believe God has already forgiven everyone, and will not require anyone to go to hell.
-Digory
Now that you have heard these thought-provoking discussions, what's your take on the matter? Any other thoughts?
[ 27. February 2006, 22:43: Message edited by: Duo Seraphim ]
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vikki Pollard
Shipmate
# 5548
|
Posted
I was discussing this with one of my daughters the other day. The problem we felt was that if salvation depends on rational choice, it rules out people who have mental disabilities.
If they are allowed to be special cases, then surely we all are? After all, everyone has traits which make them have issues with 'accepting salvation'. Why would a loving God not allow for those too?
However I should add for clarity that according to my beliefs of twenty years ago, I'm damned already for no longer holding those beliefs, which is a bit of a double-whammy!
However, many years ago now I was struck by the lack of stress on the verses which state pretty clearly that all men are saved through Jesus. No qualifiers (I know there are in other places, of course - but it seems to me there has been an awful lot of Pik'n'Mix around this doctrine).
Perhaps I should also come clean and say that I really don't believe in Hell any more. It's a huge relief. Of course, one day it might not be... ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
[ 11. November 2005, 07:00: Message edited by: Vikki Pollard ]
--------------------
"I don't get all this fuss about global warming, Miss. Why doesn't the Government just knock down all the f**king greenhouses?" (One of my slightly less bright 15 year old pupils)
Posts: 5695 | From: The Far Side | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
The fact is that Jesus has 'by his suffering and death made an atonement for the whole world so that whosoever will may be saved.' (Salvationist doctrine).
In other words everyone CAN be saved but there has to be faith in order to appropriate this.
2 issues - those who have never heard, those who cannot 'hear'.
The first is resolved by judgment according to the light received, the second by the fact that God holds some people to be blameless and therefore, graciously, he will bring them into his Kingdom. Those who cannot choose - mentally ill and children, etc are welcomed into his kingdom of love.
There are of course, a whole multitude of people who will be saved 'extraordinarily' because of their circumstances.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vikki Pollard
Shipmate
# 5548
|
Posted
But what about people who are disposed to reject the Gospel? At what point are they exercising free will and rejecting God rather than simply being 'enable to hear' - that is, on a level which allows them to respond by accepting Him?
It could be argued that only someone who is deficient in some way would reject a loving God's approach. It could certainly be argued that there is a whole lot of difference between God's call to us and the spin the various denominations place on God's call to us.
--------------------
"I don't get all this fuss about global warming, Miss. Why doesn't the Government just knock down all the f**king greenhouses?" (One of my slightly less bright 15 year old pupils)
Posts: 5695 | From: The Far Side | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vikki Pollard
Shipmate
# 5548
|
Posted
Whoops, D-cd. Unable, of course... ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
"I don't get all this fuss about global warming, Miss. Why doesn't the Government just knock down all the f**king greenhouses?" (One of my slightly less bright 15 year old pupils)
Posts: 5695 | From: The Far Side | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Neep
Ship's Meerkat
# 5213
|
Posted
On Vikki Pollard's point, I find myself in a similar place: I want to believe that Hell does not exist, and for that and other reasons I'm damned very firmly by the person I was three or four years ago...
The way I seem to have got around it is that I've acquired a belief from somewhere that God accounts for the quote:
traits which make them have issues with 'accepting salvation'
and then effectively gives the whole, healed person the choice of Heaven or Hell. Then, I think it would rather depend on the human's ability to forgive themselves, as God's forgiveness is already offered.
Yes, I'm aware that this idea could very easily be the result of a lot of wishful thinking. I also think it could be the result of thinking about the ideas of a truly forgiving and sympathetic God. I think I arrived from somewhere in between.
--------------------
"Your standing days are done," I cried, "You'll rally me no more!
I don't even know which side we fought on, or what for."
Posts: 293 | From: A burrow, in England | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Petrified
Ship’s ballast
# 10667
|
Posted
My understanding is that all are saved by the cross. I have heard it put that this must be accepted by the savee to be effective, but like others posting I have a problem with this. I would suggest that you have to activly reject it. So my answer to the OP is yes. I suggest that some of the parables (invitation to the feast, foolish virgins etc) confirm this, but for me hell is not fire/brimstone but (as per the foolish virgins) being shut out from God.
--------------------
At this time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o'clock.
SoF a "prick against Bigotterie"
Posts: 540 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Will God allow anyone to go to hell?
IMO, the word 'allow' is key. It assumes God's sovreignty extends to the making of such choices. I think that God can and will make such decisions. I do not accept universalism as an acceptable resolution to what I see in Jesus' teachings concerning 'the outer darkness'. ISTM, that Jesus is quite clear about the real existence of a post-mortem state that is to be avoided at all costs. So yes, in answer to the OP, I think that some people will be 'cast into the outer darkness'. Just what that darkness is and what it entails I'm not certain.
[ 11. November 2005, 08:13: Message edited by: m.t_tomb ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Hi all,
Must say I'm with LutheranChik and Professorkirke on this (as so often ), particularly this : quote:
Actually, Jesus has already saved you independently of any presumed "good conduct points" on your part. The question is whether you're yet aware of that.
. However I don't see that this necessarily violates free will, or an Orthodox understanding, (as I take Mousethief's to be), namely that our perception of that salvation may well depend on our will. If, in this life, we have made, as it were, heaven our home, if our treasures are laid up there, if our values are the values of the Kingdom of heaven, then we will feel at home and comfortable in heaven. If, on the other hand, we hate the things of God, then what to one person might be heaven, to me might be hell.
I'm tentative on this one, but if you were to push me, I would say this is what I believe...perhaps ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
[ 11. November 2005, 08:38: Message edited by: Jolly Jape ]
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vikki Pollard:
But what about people who are disposed to reject the Gospel? At what point are they exercising free will and rejecting God rather than simply being 'enable to hear' - that is, on a level which allows them to respond by accepting Him?
It could be argued that only someone who is deficient in some way would reject a loving God's approach. It could certainly be argued that there is a whole lot of difference between God's call to us and the spin the various denominations place on God's call to us.
Could you unpack this 'disposition' to reject the Gospel? Is it a psychological disposition, a genetic one? What?
Surely, on a spiritual level, we are ALL disposed to reject the Gospel: we all, like sheep, have gone astray.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
This problem, of course, isn't a problem for a Calvinist who believes in predestination to begin with. Modifying Calvinism to Universalism is merely a matter of believing that God elects all.
You can even keep your TULIP if you make the third point Limitless Atonement ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
But for someone who believes that we have to do our part in saving ourselves, that the job isn't all just God's, we have to explain how everyone can measure up to the standard of faith God requires of us.
One analogy I have heard is that of a chess game - if I play a Grand Master the outcome is never in doubt, although I am perfectly free to move as I choose, and the Grand Master neither controls my moves nor has the power to predict ahead of time which move I make. How then, can I escape God, who is all-knowing, and probably good at chess as well?
Here is another thought: Suppose I pray now "Dear God, if I reject your love then please override my faulty and fallen freewill, for I want to spend eternity with you, love Demas"; but after I die I am brought before God and deny him.
Shall the timeless eternal God respect my free choice now? Or my free choice later?
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
One analogy I have heard is that of a chess game - if I play a Grand Master the outcome is never in doubt, although I am perfectly free to move as I choose, and the Grand Master neither controls my moves nor has the power to predict ahead of time which move I make. How then, can I escape God, who is all-knowing, and probably good at chess as well?
I agree, Demas, and think this is a good analogy.
To my mind the chess analogy means that God will not fail to restore peace to the world. It means that the prophetic sayings depicting future of harmony and joy, in which all people will worship God, are going to be fulfilled. That is like a chess game with the Master, the outcome of which is not in doubt.
But in that chess game pieces will be lost on each side. To me this means that everyone has the chance to choose evil, and it is a real choice that some people will make. God couldn't save the whole in any meaningful way without allowing for that freedom of the individual.
A chess game with no pieces lost on one side would not be a chess game.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
I think you're stretching the metaphor a little there, Freddy ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
If anything, the pawns represent what we have to give up as we are drawn towards God - our pride, our hate, our fear.
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
Good point. I hate to think that we are just pawns in the game of life. ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
Before I specifically respond, I wanted to say that this
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
Here is another thought: Suppose I pray now "Dear God, if I reject your love then please override my faulty and fallen freewill, for I want to spend eternity with you, love Demas"; but after I die I am brought before God and deny him.
Shall the timeless eternal God respect my free choice now? Or my free choice later?
is an outstanding question.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
I agree. Not an easy one to answer. It depends, of course, on what you picture that as looking like.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
I wanted to get back to my analogies, and Mousetheif's dismissals.
quote:
Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
Then I posted:
quote:
I just find the idea that God will save me without considering my choice flat out arrogant and disrespectful. Frankly, I don't want to be with a god that doesn't offer me a choice whether to be with him in eternity or not.
Then ProfKirke:
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
If I see you drowning in a lake, and happen to be riding in a helicopter, would you like me to phone down to you first and give you a choice about being saved before I lower down the rope ladder?
Better yet, if you ever happen to be unconscious, should I attempt to get your permission before attempting CPR? If you don't respond, should I leave you under the argument that I did not want to arrogantly violate your sense of free will, and therefore left you there to die?
-Digory
Then Mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
That might be a good analogy, Professorkirke, if I were drowning and unconscious.
Drowning: The important feature of a drowning person, in this analogy, is that they are obviously headed for great danger and no rational person would assume that they might not want to be saved from certain death by drowning.
In the sense that if you believe unsaved souls are destined for hell, then they are in this state as well--no rational person could assume that people would not want to be saved from eternal torture and damnation in the "outer darkness." So to make such an attempt to get their permission before saving them seems unnecessary, since any rejection of being saved from this end is an obvious admission of misunderstanding.
Unconscious: The important feature of an unconscious person, in this analogy, is that they are unable to respond to a question of, "Do you want help?" But as someone else responded on the other thread, CPR guidelines dictate that unconscious people give implied consent.
You do not take no answer to mean "no" from an unconscious person; rather, we've given it the term "implied consent" and taken it to mean yes! Because people are unsure, or unconvinced, or "predisposed to rejecting the gospel," or unable to respond to the call for any number of reasons--these will not be taken as a "no" from God. Rather, I believe there will be a great deal of "implied consent."
And I honestly do not believe there will be much argument or hurt feelings about the matter.
-Digory
PS Thanks, JoyfulSoul, for opening up this thread--I think you did a wonderful job of setting up the question. And great new avatar/title. It's a perfect fit and it helps keep me unconfused whenever you and LutheranChik are in the same thread!!!
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
kayleigh
Apprentice
# 10657
|
Posted
Like some of the other posters here, I don't like the idea that anyone could be sent to hell for all eternity. But, as already noted, Jesus was quite implicit that there is a "darkness.. where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth". That doesn't sound like a place I'd really want to go...
Jesus' atonement on the cross was for all humanity, but it still requires us to believe and turn to God and claim his salvation. John 3:16 says; "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" It doesn't say "so that everyone will have eternal life." Similarly, when Jesus sends the disciples out to spread the Good News, his predictions against those towns that refuse to believe are not good: "If anyone will not... listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town... It will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgement than for that town." (Mt. 10:14-15).
Also, if everyone is saved by a blanket redemption, what point is there in us suffering for or spreading the Word?
So, although I do not like the idea of hell I don't think you can avoid concluding that some people will end up there if they reject the gospel.
As for those people with disabilities that mean they cannot understand or accept the gospel, I agree with someone who said that God will welcome them especially, judging every person on their abilities and merits. After all, we know that above all God's judgement will be just and perfect... and I'm also glad that it's Him making the decisions and not me!
Grace and Peace
~K~
--------------------
"I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes" - Rom 1:16
Posts: 5 | From: England | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by kayleigh:
As for those people with disabilities that mean they cannot understand or accept the gospel, I agree with someone who said that God will welcome them especially, judging every person on their abilities and merits. After all, we know that above all God's judgement will be just and perfect... and I'm also glad that it's Him making the decisions and not me!
The point some are making, and with which I agree, is that this last paragraph of yours utterly and completely contradicts your first few.
First of all, if God judges every person on their abilities and merits, Hell is going to be very, very full (and I will see many of you there, no doubt!).
Second of all, if what you meant was that each person will be judged according to their specific circumstances, then I'd say I think this is right, but that it can't just be extended to those WE feel are inferior to us in some way like those who have disabilities (awww we feel sorry for THEM so they'll probably just make it into heaven okay...). We often forget that we are all riddled with disabilities and flaws and dispositions that make us unwilling to accept God and his grace.
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Surely, on a spiritual level, we are ALL disposed to reject the Gospel: we all, like sheep, have gone astray.
I couldn't have said it better myself, Muddy.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
Oh, and by the way:
Nice to meet you, Kayleigh. Your avatar will be a source of confusion to me, as JoyfulSoul can explain, but it's great having you aboard the Ship.
Hope I didn't scare you off with my quick argument to your thread! You'll soon learn that it just means I like ya...
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
kayleigh
Apprentice
# 10657
|
Posted
Hello Professor, and thank you for your welcome!
No you didn't scare me off - constructive argument and criticism can only help everyone grow in their understanding.
Perhaps I didn't make my point clearly in my last paragraph. I wasn't referring to everybody being judged on their merits, as you are quite correct in saying that we can never make the grade by ourselves and rely solely on God's grace to make us perfect.
I also wasn't trying to come across as "we feel sorry for the disabled and they'll make it into heaven anyway"... I am aware that there are many disabilities from which we can all suffer that make no difference at all to our ability to receive or reject God. I was referring to those people who Vikki Pollard was talking about when she says it "rules out people with mental disabilities" - i.e. those people who are so severely impaired that they cannot understand or receive the gospel at all. I was thinking of the young children that Jesus welcomed in as much as they are too young to understand enough to reject or accept the gospels and yet were welcomed by the Saviour.
I hope that makes a bit more sense, and I still stand by my comment that I'm glad I'm not the one deciding who goes where! We can leave that up to someone a bit more reliable
~K~
--------------------
"I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes" - Rom 1:16
Posts: 5 | From: England | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PhilA
shipocaster
# 8792
|
Posted
This whole idea of freedom and free will is something I would like to pick up on.
What exactly is free will? Is free will simply the choices we make, like for example, the freedom of choosing what to buy or wear? The freedom to choose to take drugs perhaps? Do these choices we have in life amount to our free will? Or is it something else?
Choices certainly are a part of it, but I would argue that they are not the be all and end all of free will.
Have you ever seen a true virtuoso play music? Someone like Yehudi Menuhin, or Steve Vai? Or a sports star doing what they do to such an incredibly excellent level that us mere mortals only dream of? When these people are doing what it is that they do, they are truly free - they exercise free will - at whatever it is. Take Vai as an example. When he plays his music, he is completely free within that music. He has the ability to play any piece of music to an excellent level, and when he is playing he can do anything he wants. But how did he attain that level of freedom? Did he simply choose to play that well?
It is obvious that he did not. Being a virtuoso performer is not simply a choice. It takes years and years of hard, sometimes slavish, work. As a young pupil, Vai must have sounded bad, just like everyone else does when they start to play, but he got good. He must have had some natural talent, probably a lot of natural talent for music and determination to be good, but this was coupled with hard, boring, repetitive work under the strict supervision of a teacher with no freedom at all. He would have had to do exactly what he was told, when he was told and be disciplined to practice every day. Then, as he got better and grew as a musician, he had more latitude to try different things and experiment a bit, to find his own voice in the music and not just repeat and parrot his teacher’s style. Then, he achieved the freedom. Then he got to the point where what he played was good, almost perfect, and became free. But this freedom came through hard work. He made choices to do this work – choice is certainly a large part of free will, but it is not everything. You cannot just choose to be a virtuoso, you must work at it too.
The same is true with people. Babies are born not knowing how to be good adults – they need to learn and work at it whilst growing, and parents guide and teach their children in how to be good and how to grow as adults. But everyone with children knows that the lessons need repeating and repeating and repeating. But would the child feel free at this point? Can a child exercise free will at this point? Would a parent say to a child that they are allowed, that they haver free will to touch a fire? Or are they simply as Vai did, doing boring, repetitive work under the supervision of a teacher? Then the child grows into a teenager, finding out the rules for themselves and working out their own voice, rebelling a bit against their parents rules and learning to make their own decisions.
Then, if the child has learned and been taught well, they will become a virtuoso adult, free to be what they want, to play what they want with their own voice and exercise they're own free will. Obviously, they must play within the rules. You cannot decide to kill someone and then continue being free, but Vai, for all his musical freedom must also play the right notes that fit with the music. But it is how they are played that gives the freedom, and the process a person must go through to become free is a long one.
Learning how to be free, is worth it, but when learning the ropes, like a child does, there is little freedom. Free will is so much more than the choices we make - it is the very lives we lead, learning to be free as we grow both in the world and in Christ.
At the moment I am not a human being, I am a human becoming.
Will God allow me to choose to go to hell? Only if I am a virtuoso adult and am able to make that choice. But then, If I was a virtuoso adult, why would I choose something like that anyway? Surely, doing so would be acting against my own free will.
--------------------
To err is human. To arr takes a pirate.
Posts: 3121 | From: Sofa | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
PhilA, that's a marvelous post. Thank you.
(I have some responses coming later.)
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alaric the Goth
Shipmate
# 511
|
Posted
It has just struck me that what we often mean by ‘free will’ in relation to God is more like ‘free won’t. We ‘won’t forgive’ and go on getting bitter and resentful towards people (or even God himself). We ‘won’t love’ someone: it’s too much like hard work, and might mean saying ‘sorry’. We ‘won’t give’ sacrificially of time/money: What? and have us ‘lose out’ what is ‘ours’?
Fundamentally we ‘won’t be’ the people He chooses us to be and prefer to be something less. In other words, we are inclined to make a lesser version of Satan’s choice (if you believe in his existence, and the traditional story of his fall): Not to be the Great Archangel Lucifer but to be the ‘lowest of the low’, while maintaining the illusion of greatness, but a fear-filled and terrible ‘inverted greatness’.
We ‘choose’ to be ‘prisoners in chains’ when offered true freedom, and delude ourselves that its our ‘exercising free will’ to remain so bound. From God’s perspective, He has left us with the key, and opened the prison door, and even calls our name from outside, under the blue skies of freedom to walk in His will. It is not Him sending us to Hell so much as leaving us there if we have consistently shown that that is where we choose to remain.
..................................................
I liked a lot of what you said, PhilA, and the way you said it, but I need to go away and think about what I agree with.
--------------------
'Angels and demons dancing in my head,
Lunatics and monsters underneath my bed' ('Totem', Rush)
Posts: 3322 | From: West Thriding | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
PhilA, that's a marvelous post. Thank you.
I agree. I love the idea that the virtuoso is more free than the novice, and that freedom is something that we gain, rather than something that we simply have.
Very consistent with Christ's words:
quote:
John 8.31 “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
It does give a very different idea of freedom.
In a sense there are two kinds of freedom. You are free to be good or evil. But you aren't truly free unless you "abide in My word" - that is, become a virtuoso...
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evo1
Shipmate
# 10249
|
Posted
I think the virtuoso comparison is a poor one. It seems to say that someone who has been a good Christian all their life (whatever that may be) is somehow more free than someone who has just come to the Lord - or a flat none believer at that.
This then leads us on the road to salvation by works alone if we are not careful.
The virtuoso when deciding to take up say the violin was just as free at that point in his life to take it up than to not bother than he is twenty years later as an expert. In fact, surely it is a much easier decision for the beginner to decide to stop than for the guy who is now making his living playing.
Sorry about flies in the ointment and all of that.
Love,
Evo1
--------------------
Just think how horrid I would be if I didn't have a Personal Relationship with Jesus
Posts: 1058 | From: Hull, England | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
This then leads us on the road to salvation by works alone if we are not careful.
Certainly.
So how do you understand Christ's words about becoming free by abiding in His word? Do we become free by not abiding in His word? Do we become free either way?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PhilA
shipocaster
# 8792
|
Posted
Of course, its an analogy that breaks down at some point - all analogies do.
I'm not sure it leads to salvation by works though. The analogy works as one demonstrating the true meaning of the word freedom - the freedom that Christ has planned for us. It is not a model that fits with every aspect of our lives and certainly does not lead to salvation, but comes from a position of justification.
Isn't it strange though that salvation is often described as freedom in Christ? Is the goal perhaps to be a virtuoso in Christ? This does not mean that Christ won't accept us unless we make the final goal on our own - that is not how someone becomes a virtuoso - but he is the one who, through grace, is our teacher and our guide. What is important is that we accept his lessons - that we have faith. The Christian life is then about practising these lessons and we keep on practising, and getting it wrong, and Christ keeps picking us up, dusting us down and setts us on our way again. As Alaric the Goth said, we sometimes exercise a 'free won't' because we don't want him to pick us up and help us.
--------------------
To err is human. To arr takes a pirate.
Posts: 3121 | From: Sofa | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PhilA:
Isn't it strange though that salvation is often described as freedom in Christ? Is the goal perhaps to be a virtuoso in Christ?
Yes, I think that this is perhaps the more important point.
People in heaven are free. People in hell are not.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evo1
Shipmate
# 10249
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PhilA:
Of course, its an analogy that breaks down at some point - all analogies do.
I'm not sure it leads to salvation by works though.
Maybe not for you, but see Freddy's comment. [Notice I deliberately referred to "works alone"]
But actually, I'm sorry I was so dismissive, there is something to what you say I think - as usual, I just blundered in and picked out the faults. So again, I'm sorry.
Love,
Evo1
--------------------
Just think how horrid I would be if I didn't have a Personal Relationship with Jesus
Posts: 1058 | From: Hull, England | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
quote:
Originally posted by PhilA:
Of course, its an analogy that breaks down at some point - all analogies do.
I'm not sure it leads to salvation by works though.
Maybe not for you, but see Freddy's comment. [Notice I deliberately referred to "works alone"]
Which comment was that?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PhilA
shipocaster
# 8792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
So again, I'm sorry.
Love,
Evo1
You have nothing to apologise for. If I wanted everyone to agree with me, I wouldn't post on the ship.
--------------------
To err is human. To arr takes a pirate.
Posts: 3121 | From: Sofa | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evo1
Shipmate
# 10249
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
This then leads us on the road to salvation by works alone if we are not careful.
Certainly.
In response to Freddy asking which comment I meant that showed that he had taken this to lead us down the road of "works alone" if we are not careful.
This is the one I was thinking of.
Love,
Evo1
--------------------
Just think how horrid I would be if I didn't have a Personal Relationship with Jesus
Posts: 1058 | From: Hull, England | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
I think the virtuoso comparison is a poor one. It seems to say that someone who has been a good Christian all their life (whatever that may be) is somehow more free than someone who has just come to the Lord - or a flat none believer at that.
This then leads us on the road to salvation by works alone if we are not careful.
I think you may have missed the point of the analogy. PhilA was demonstrating a deeper meaning of the concept of freedom, rather than a means by which we are saved. Though a beginner is free to pick up a violin at any time (one understanding of freedom), s/he is not free to play music with it until s/he learns the instrument (a different understanding of freedom).
Now, something to be said about this is that you could make an argument that yes, the beginner is in fact free to pick up the violin and stike its strings, and who are we to say that it isn't music? This may or may not be true. But the truest form of freedom in music is somebody who knows how to work within the rules and guidelines, and is ABLE to do anything he or she wants. At that point, following those rules and guidelines is inconsequential.
Someone who picks up a violin and plucks one string repeatedly simply because they cannot do anything else is not free in music. Someone who trains for years and knows every in and out of the violin, yet chooses to pluck one string repeatedly, is a genius. (Perhaps that's why modern art is so astounding--though it looks like something my 2 year old niece would do, it comes from someone who is capable of far more, and is thus in fact free.)
The rules and guidelines I mentioned above are not to be analagous to rules of how to live, so as to say breaking them would be "sin". Rather, Christ calls us to discover the rules and guidelines of how his world works. Only when we've become masters of the art of living can we truly be free.
Something like that, perhaps. PhilA's description just resounded in my head in a way that I'd never thought of before, and I'm only just now developing what I think I might mean...
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by kayleigh:
As for those people with disabilities that mean they cannot understand or accept the gospel <snip>
I'm not sure about this. I met a severely disabled person who was physically contorted and could but grunt and moan but had one of the most beautifulest (is that a word?) smiles I had ever seen. I was having a really terrible day and I was in the bookstore waiting in line. This person was in a wheel-chair while his caretaker was complaining to someone else in line about his patient no less!...and this severely disabled person just looked at me and gave me such a warm and loving smile...it really made my day.
I think perhaps this person had a understanding of what Jesus was getting at. Perhaps God is greater than we think or imagine at communicating his love and his good news to every person - no matter what their place in this world.
There are many other good things in this thread that I'm thinking through...
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
Originally posted by Evo1:
This then leads us on the road to salvation by works alone if we are not careful.
Certainly.
In response to Freddy asking which comment I meant that showed that he had taken this to lead us down the road of "works alone" if we are not careful.
This is the one I was thinking of.
Oh. OK. You're right.
So how do you understand Christ's words about becoming free by abiding in His word? Do we become free by not abiding in His word? Do we become free either way?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vikki Pollard
Shipmate
# 5548
|
Posted
There are so many good posts on here that I'm a little scared of posting now... but I'd like to say a couple of things - firstly, that I too have seen people who appeared to have a direct line to God even though they couldn't communicate with other people; secondly that although I find the virtuoso analogy moving and beautiful, on thinking about it I don't believe it is a true one for the present case.
As I understand it, our response to the Gospel is meant to be 'a decision'. Not a series of decisions. I know some would say you have to choose afresh every day, which would fit with the musician idea, but for those who believe we stand or fall by that one moment of commitment to Christ, then it doesn't work.
Mudfrog, I suppose the answer to the question you ask me lies in your own rhetorical response to it. Perhaps we ARE all predisposed to reject God (though in fact I don't see the evidence for that - I see more evidence that we may grow away from doing so as we grow older). In which case, the whole 'free will' idea is a cruel trick.
This might be a red herring for this thread, in which case perhaps we could start another - but I firmly believe one can accept Christ yet reject 'the Church'. (In fact I believe 'the Church' may have missed the most recent revival, when God placed a love for the world and its needs in the hearts of people not even recognised by the Church - but that really is another thread! )
So that would take me back to my point that choosing God may not actually look how we expect it to look.
My daughter at University was saying to me the other night, "How CAN a group of 100 Christians in the CU honestly have the arrogance to believe they are the only ones going to Heaven out of the whole University?!"
I think that's another good question, personally.
[ 11. November 2005, 18:13: Message edited by: Vikki Pollard ]
--------------------
"I don't get all this fuss about global warming, Miss. Why doesn't the Government just knock down all the f**king greenhouses?" (One of my slightly less bright 15 year old pupils)
Posts: 5695 | From: The Far Side | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PhilA:
Will God allow me to choose to go to hell? Only if I am a virtuoso adult and am able to make that choice. But then, If I was a virtuoso adult, why would I choose something like that anyway? Surely, doing so would be acting against my own free will.
This is the idea I find insulting. Its saying that if you are an adult you will chose God's way (what-have-you). I don't think so at all. Its insulting because it is saying that athiests and others are unable to make a choice because they are "children" and not adults.
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vikki Pollard
Shipmate
# 5548
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vikki Pollard:
Mudfrog, I suppose the answer to the question you ask me lies in your own rhetorical response to it. Perhaps we ARE all predisposed to reject God (though in fact I don't see the evidence for that - I see more evidence that we may grow away from doing so as we grow older).
Whoops. That doesn't say what I meant! I mean that people generally seem to accept the idea of God as children and young people, then get more predisposed to reject it later.
Joyfulsoul, I agree. I left my Evangelical faith behind after years of being challenged about its arrogance by my family. In the end I came to agree with them.
Now, if I'm wrong, God may therefore consign me to Hell. Or he may know better than I do myself that I was unable to resist the pressure due to my inherent personality type, and accept me anyway.
It's really much easier not to believe in
Hell.
Anyway what's 'wrong' with having the strength to reject a call to see oneself as inherently sinful? Has nobody else on here ever seen that damage that can do to people? Hasn't anyone else ever suspected that they have been manipulated into living their life for the good of others without any reciprocation from the body which has taught them to do so?
<lights blue touchpaper and watches from a distance>
--------------------
"I don't get all this fuss about global warming, Miss. Why doesn't the Government just knock down all the f**king greenhouses?" (One of my slightly less bright 15 year old pupils)
Posts: 5695 | From: The Far Side | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
quote:
Originally posted by PhilA:
Will God allow me to choose to go to hell? Only if I am a virtuoso adult and am able to make that choice. But then, If I was a virtuoso adult, why would I choose something like that anyway? Surely, doing so would be acting against my own free will.
This is the idea I find insulting. Its saying that if you are an adult you will chose God's way (what-have-you). I don't think so at all. Its insulting because it is saying that athiests and others are unable to make a choice because they are "children" and not adults.
Good point. But there are other ways to look at it. It means that if everyone were truly free they would always choose heaven. It also means that the genuinely "rational" person would be kind, loving, generous, a good spouse, a good employee, etc. It simply redefines "normal" as "good" or "the way it is supposed to be."
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Good point. But there are other ways to look at it. It means that if everyone were truly free they would always choose heaven. It also means that the genuinely "rational" person would be kind, loving, generous, a good spouse, a good employee, etc. It simply redefines "normal" as "good" or "the way it is supposed to be."
But would they? Are you saying that Satan wasn't free?
I don't buy this argument. Adam and Eve were "free" from all sin. Nevertheless, they made a choice (less than savory).
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vikki Pollard:
My daughter at University was saying to me the other night, "How CAN a group of 100 Christians in the CU honestly have the arrogance to believe they are the only ones going to Heaven out of the whole University?!"
I think that's another good question, personally.
She would have a point if those 100 Christians were a closed group with no intention of allowing others in. It's hardly their fault that there are only 100 of them What yould you say if there were only 100 non-believers on campus? Would you say they were arrogant in their assertion of atheism?
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
Are you saying that Satan wasn't free?
I don't buy this argument. Adam and Eve were "free" from all sin. Nevertheless, they made a choice (less than savory).
They weren't "virtuosos", so in a sense they weren't free.
I admit that it's not a great argument. What I like about it is that it means that a person becomes more and more free as they grow spiritually. It means that people in heaven are more free than those in hell. It means that those who sin are slaves to sin. That's all.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vikki Pollard:
quote:
Originally posted by Vikki Pollard:
Mudfrog, I suppose the answer to the question you ask me lies in your own rhetorical response to it. Perhaps we ARE all predisposed to reject God (though in fact I don't see the evidence for that - I see more evidence that we may grow away from doing so as we grow older).
Whoops. That doesn't say what I meant! I mean that people generally seem to accept the idea of God as children and young people, then get more predisposed to reject it later
You might find that what is happening is that the innocence of childhood and the idealism give way to adult cares and busy-ness. As we get a career, marry, cope with children, cope with teenagers, etc, etc, we find no time for public displays or observances of religion. But as late middle age and old age set in, people tend to return to the faith of their formative years.
I was listening to a presentation a couple of years ago by an expert in church statistics, growth and all that stuff. He said that (in the UK) the only age groups that were growing in the church was the retireds and the children. His conclusion: "the grandparents are coming back to church and they're bringing the grandchildren with them!"
Faith does become real as you get older.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
PhilA
shipocaster
# 8792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Joyfulsoul:
This is the idea I find insulting. Its saying that if you are an adult you will chose God's way (what-have-you). I don't think so at all. Its insulting because it is saying that athiests and others are unable to make a choice because they are "children" and not adults.
Do you find it insulting every time someone tells you to do something? If so, surely you find your entire life being insulted. My boss tells me what time I am to get to work for. Its an outrage! Its an insult to my free will! My doctor tells me what I can't have for lunch. How dare he! The children's teacher tells me what time to pick them up from school, etc. etc.
Why is God not allowed to tell you what to do from time to time? Of course, you are perfectly free to ignore your alarm, your doctor and your children's teacher just as you are free to ignore God, but it is completely against your own interests to do that. Because you are on your way to being a virtuoso adult, you can see the stupidity in ignoring your boss etc. - you would loose your job/health/children which would adversely affect every aspect of your life, yet you could choose to do so if you wished. If you find it insulting that your boss etc. tells you what to do, then I do not see how you can ever be happy - you would be insulted all of your life.
Surely its much better to accept the idea that there are somethings that we do because we are on our way to being virtuosos and those are simply the ways of life that we must follow and somethings we do because we choose to. I am sure that if you really do want to negate on your own free will then God will allow you to do that, but it would be to go against your nature as a human being to do that. Many people go all the way through life without ever recognising God at all. I do not believe that those people go to hell though. I have a feeling that when anyone stands before God that denying him and asking if it would be all right if he would mind if he just went to hell, just because he can would be physically impossible.
--------------------
To err is human. To arr takes a pirate.
Posts: 3121 | From: Sofa | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vikki Pollard
Shipmate
# 5548
|
Posted
The CU IS pretty closed, I'm afraid. I doubt 100 atheists would be so militant about telling everyone they were condemned to - er - Heaven...
Hang on here... if anyone who was free 'would choose God', how is that 'free will'??
This simply doesn't hold water, does it?
Mudfrog said: quote:
Faith does become real as you get older.
What if we're just more prone to falling for a line as we get older? Out of desperation as we see death drawing nearer?
Just a thought.
--------------------
"I don't get all this fuss about global warming, Miss. Why doesn't the Government just knock down all the f**king greenhouses?" (One of my slightly less bright 15 year old pupils)
Posts: 5695 | From: The Far Side | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vikki Pollard:
Hang on here... if anyone who was free 'would choose God', how is that 'free will'??
This is true only in a certain sense. Obviously freedom means having the capacity to exercise free will - and so to NOT choose God just as much as to choose God.
The point is that people in heaven are free but people in hell are not, at least not very free.
People in heaven are free because they can do whatever they wish. People in hell are not free because what they wish for is not possible, and so their desires are their prison.
So is choosing slavery a true expression of freedom?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vikki Pollard:
Hang on here... if anyone who was free 'would choose God', how is that 'free will'??
This simply doesn't hold water, does it?
It could. If I offered you two options, one being to have you and all of your family sliced to bits by a giant sword, slowly and painfully, the other to have your family guaranteed to be taken care of for all time, no matter what their circumstances, you would be free to choose between the two, wouldn't you? Because no one in their right mind would choose to have himself and his family sliced up doesn't negate the freedom of the choice.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Actually we are not as free as you might think.
We are dead in trespasses and sins.
We are lost
We are enemies of God.
We are sinners.
We all like sheep have gone astray, we have gone each one to his own way.
There is none righteous, not one.
All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
All this already.
This is the position we stand.
It's not a neutral position.
We are not offered the choice to become all the above or the equal choice to accdept God.
The ONLY choice we are offered is to STAY where we are or to choose life instead.
If we don't choose to follow Christ by faith, then we simply remain where we were.
Our free will is simply that we can choose Christ if we want to.
[ 12. November 2005, 06:55: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vikki Pollard
Shipmate
# 5548
|
Posted
You are saying that the above example is a real choice? Not to a mother it isn't!
Is someone in Heaven still free to choose Hell? Or vice versa? Does our free will end at death? And if so, how is it a true state of being us?
Anyway the point being missed here is that nobody knows for sure. I am still very very suspicious that a lot of this is a construct which has been used down the years to keep people in their place.
My approach used to be, "Well, even if it isn't true, it's best to err on the side of believing it is, because that way I can't lose" (a response from fear rather than loving free will, in my case).
Now my approach is, "If it's NOT true, then I stand to alienate a lot of people I love and perhaps miss out on things in life by being to anal to enjoy them."
This is why I asked the question earlier - do you think God will make allowances for my faulty reasoning, as it is possibly my 'spiritual disability'.
Of course, I may have hit on the truth. It's so hard to know, isn't it!
--------------------
"I don't get all this fuss about global warming, Miss. Why doesn't the Government just knock down all the f**king greenhouses?" (One of my slightly less bright 15 year old pupils)
Posts: 5695 | From: The Far Side | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
