Re: The Difficulty with Hell and Free Will


guscubed wrote:
mccoy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Navillus wrote:
mccoy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Robert Carnegie wrote:
nmp wrote:
mccoy wrote:

Navillus wrote:
"God gave you the gift of life. He gave you the gift of free will and
choice. You wasting this gift is your choice to make, but you will pay
for that choice with eternal damnation."

Actually this individual is mistaken. The scriptures clearly state
that the "wages of sin is death", and therefore there is no eternal
life in hell fire. When you did, finally you die. God is merciful.

I can't count how many times I've had that line thrown my way. If you
ever really press the person about *why* God feels the need to inflict
eternal pain on his creations, they usually retreat into the realm of
"It's what the Bible says, I believe in the Bible, and I'm not one for
questioning the Almighty."

There is no eternal pain. Read the Bible. Do not count on people to
tell the truth or express the truth correctly. OK?

So, why should we believe *you* then?

This <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell#Christianity> has a nice
collection of references to places in the Bible where hell, eternal
fire, weeping and gnashing of teeth etc. are mentioned.

So this is not the truth, according to you?

The annihilationist should say that there is weeping and gnashing of
teeth first,

There is weeping and gnashing of teeth first. Those who weep will
realize that they have made a mistake. I hope nobody makes that
mistake.


and then there's the eternal fire and the weeping and
gnashing of teeth stop. IIRC, the weeping and gnashing of teeth are to
take place in "the outer darkness", which doesn't sound much like a
fire to me. Nevertheless it's a worry because my teeth aren't too good
anyway as of this date.

The authority of Wikipedia is not particularly the issue, since it's
merely providing an index to Scripture, if not to your choice of
translation. But shouldn't there be more about limbo, recently
de-emphasised by Rome but historically interesting?

And on reflection, if the "church fathers" are to be so much respected
and followed, and if clearly they were not faithful biblical
literalists, then the fundamentalists are wrong... oh yeah, that's been
done.

"The wages of sin is DEATH, but the gift of God is eternal life..."

JM

We're dodging the issue of free will here and focusing on a loose
definition of hell. What is free will if the ultimate choice is either
accept Jesus or perish? What kind of choice is that? God brings us into
the world, allows us to have desires and impulses, and punishes us
eternally for acting on them, and gives us no other options. Unless you
confess that Jesus is your savior. Then it's all gravy.

Interesting viewpoint. Personally I find the situation to be quite
profound. The origin of sin actually resides with Lucifer the former
archangel of God, who, being full of pride sought to be worshipped.

God himself seeks worship - is he full of pride?

He
was able to convince 1/3 of the angels to follow him. Now this brings
up an interesting question. How did he do it? He probably convinced
some of these angels that his philosophy of government would give
these angels satisfaction, more than God could provide. And so these
angels followed Lucifer and were subsequently cast down to earth. At
that point God could have extinguished Lucifer and his followers but
decided not to. It was decided that Lucifer should be allowed to
actualize his principles and values so that the remaining angels
(2/3's) could see the results of Lucifer's principles.

I am largely ignorant of scripture - but I don't remember reading ANY
of this in the bible


Surely you've read that 1/3 of the angels went with Lucifer. How did
Lucifer pull it off?



Since 1/3 were
convinced, those angels that were half convinced by Lucifer, but
weren't sure, needed to see what would become of Lucifer's activities.
If Lucifer was extinguished from the beginning there would always be
those remaining angels who would be wondering as to the truth,and would
have wondered if Lucifer was telling the truth. If his philisophy was
kosher.

I still don't understand why God needs the approval of his angels so
badly. He created them, he can uncreate them or he can make some new
angels who will massage his ego as he desires.

Actually, this message from you that God can make "angels who will
massage his ego as he desires" is a claim from Lucifer in attack on
Christ's character. When Christ layed down is diety and took up the
cross that insinuation was banished from any posibility with the
remaining angels. I think it was wise of God to allow the remaining
angels to to remain alive and to witness the results of Lucifer's
philosophy, rather than destroy them or tamper with their minds. It
shows that God loves his angels and respects them as individuals.



Now it's six thousand years later (after Lucifer killed Jesus, the son
of God, led people to kill each other, initiated crime, violence,
rapes, hate and torture) so there is no doubt as to where Lucifer would
lead the angels. And of course the remaining 2/3rds are now completely
loyal to Jesus.

Hmm, so God let Lucifer unleash all that suffering, even allowing
Lucifer to kill his corporal manifestation - to prove a point to his
angels?

There are a multitude of reasons, but doubt would always remain with
the remaining angels. Lucifer put up his best case and persuaded a
third of the angels to follow him. His invictives and attacks no doubt
cast great aspercion against Christ and his Father. Because God was
merciful it was decided to allow Lucifer to work his philosophy. And
those men and women who understood and followed Christ would be
rewarded eternal life.





Now the question of evil is a duel one. One has to do with the loyalty
of the angels. The second question has to do with Mankind. No doubt
Lucifer questioned Jesus and his authority and cast suspicion upon Him.
Jesus' character was the issue. And by questioning Jesus and his
character Lucifer led 1/3 of the angels astray.

Wait, didn't the angel rebellion take place before Jesus was born?

The very same Christ spoke to Moses.



God in his wisdom
determined that talk is cheap.

God's wisdom also determines that people in glass houses shouldn't look
a gift horse in the mouth before spoiling the broth with a stitch in
time

Jesus could not defend himself through
talk, and no amount of reasoning would convince the angels.

God is again trying to convince his angels? Who has the more power
here?

Lucifer already knew of Christ's power. Since Christ's character was
being challenged it was up to Christ to walk the walk. And he did, It
was Lucifer who desired power and it was Christ who forsook it.



When
mankind had fallen from his first estate, it was decided that Jesus
would pay the penalty for Adam and his descendents.

God sacrifices God to God so that God will forgive his creation for
sinning against God - riiiight, makes perfect sense now.

Actually it does make perfect sense. Say that you were a manufacturer
of furniture. You desired to put out the best product. It turned out
that one of your employees made a mistake and put out a faulty product.
The customer was wroth and desired a replacement. You, as a
manufacturer replace the product and make it good. You do it because
it was the right thing to do. When Man fell God sacrificed his Son
because it was the right thing to do. There are many different things
that God could have done, but he could not abandon his perfect law
because without the law there would be chaos. And since the law
demanded retribution God sent his son to satisfy the demands of that
law. And of course God did this because he loved us.




In this way God
could not only demonstrate the appropriate character of love and trust,
but win the hearts of all the angels.

Again, those hard-hearted Angels making it hard for the ominpotent one
to join their gang

Actually I can relate to this situation myself. There's been times when
my character has been attacked and challenged. I'm sure everyone has
experienced this sometime in their life. You come to work and maybe
someone from the night before stole some money. It just happens that
you were in the store when the money was stolen. You state that you
haven't taken any money but the attitude around you suggests that
everyone is pointing their fingers at you.

Christ's character was disparaged. Lucifer portrayed him as a tyrant
because He wouldn't give in to his demands. But in reality there was a
concession. Lucifer was allowed to prove his philosophy. To prove that
his way was better. And of course since Christ's character was
personally challenged, his faithfulness and his goodness were under
attack. The angels wondered if Christ was really a good being. And so
while Lucifer worked out his philsophy on earth Christ also came down
to earth and showed us how to live. "Love thy neighbor as thyself."
"Woman, has anyone condemn thee? Neither do I." Christ, instead of
exhaulting himself, instead of demanding worship, went to the cross and
sacrificed himself for Mankind.




And the question of mankind, in
this question, is that he would inherit eternal life and live upon a
new earth.

Man is filled with impulses and desires, and much of which has been out
of control. Should God allow mankind to live as is? The answer is no.
God will allow mankind to live as long as possible in his present
state. But mankind cannot rule himself indefinitely. The future of
mankind will be filled with violence, with monstrous creations of
genetic freaks. Mankind is tampering with the weather, with political
control aided by biological weapons and surveillance techniques.
Mankind is creating a world that we don't want to live in. So with
that choice, and that is the only choice there is, would you like to
live in a world with man at the helm? I think not.

Like it or not, we decide our own fate. It may be comforting to appeal
to an all knowing sky-father to sort out all our problems and abrogate
all reponsibility to Him, but a large part of the problems we cause
each other can be attributed to people not taking reponsibility for
their own actions....

There will be a time when you won't be able to determine your own fate
but your fate will be at the mercy to those who have power. It
frightens me more to think of potential future of the world, and thank
God that will never happen.








And yes McCoy, the Bible makes dozens of references to eternal
separation from God and possibly torture. The Bible makes just as much
suggestion that sin is punished eternally (and not just in revelations)
as it suggests that God lets sinners rest in peace.

Sure it does. It says that eternal fire came down from heaven and
burned up Sodom and Gomorrah. But do these two cities still exist? No
they don't. The agent is called eternal fire but the fire went out when
the cities were extinguished. And of course Revelationstates that the
smoke of their torment goes up forever, meaning that the smoke keeps
going up. It says nothing about "eternal" torment.

Apropos of eternal smoke, why does God like the smell of burning flesh
so much?

Why does God allow you to say that he likes the burning of human flesh?

God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever
shall believe on him shall not perish but have eternal life.

JM




"The wages of sin is DEATH, but the gift of God is eternal life..."

JM

.