God sends people to Hell

[ManBearPig]

This is one of my pet peeves, so I thought I'd make a topic about it. It's quite common on these forums that a Christian will say

God doesn't send people to Hell. People send themselves!

Not only is this completely nonsensical (would anyone ever say thieves "send themselves" to prison?), but also unbiblical, since the Bible unequivocally declares God to be a Judge, regularly "damning" people and "casting" them into pits and whatnot.

So does God send people to Hell? If so, why do so many Christians refuse to admit it?

[Jester]

So in that sense we are not born with "Original Sin", BUT we are born with the consequences of "Original Sin".

Well said (as was your entire posit). That seems to be an excellent conclusion

[joer]

Thanks jester! It's been a pleasure joining into discussion with you and all on this thread.

Peace be with you Jester, and all our brothers and sisters!

[Greatest I Am]

So in that sense we are not born with "Original Sin", BUT we are born with the consequences of "Original Sin".

Well said (as was your entire posit). That seems to be an excellent conclusion

Not much difference having the sin or consequence thereof.

Both scenarios show God inflicting woes to this new soul. This is false and not allowed in God's universe. We are born pure and perfect, if we are to believe that Jesus died for our sins. His death was a reminder to us of a condition that already existed, namely that God had covered our sins from the beginning.

God takes responsibility for His works as we all should.

Regards
DL

[Jester]

Not much difference having the sin or consequence thereof.

Both scenarios show God inflicting woes to this new soul. This is false and not allowed in God's universe. We are born pure and perfect, if we are to believe that Jesus died for our sins. His death was a reminder to us of a condition that already existed, namely that God had covered our sins from the beginning.

I suppose we’re branching a bit closer to the hair-splitting section of the debate (which always strikes me as good; it comes with a feel that we’re starting to understand one another on the basics). To that end, I’d say that Christianity teaches that we each are born into a fallen world, which would mean that we cannot avoid the presence of sin and wrong thinking, but we are also born into a world where God has provided a way out if we desire it. I think that’s a balanced claim regarding the issue.

[Greatest I Am]

Not much difference having the sin or consequence thereof.

Both scenarios show God inflicting woes to this new soul. This is false and not allowed in God's universe. We are born pure and perfect, if we are to believe that Jesus died for our sins. His death was a reminder to us of a condition that already existed, namely that God had covered our sins from the beginning.

I suppose we’re branching a bit closer to the hair-splitting section of the debate (which always strikes me as good; it comes with a feel that we’re starting to understand one another on the basics). To that end, I’d say that Christianity teaches that we each are born into a fallen world, which would mean that we cannot avoid the presence of sin and wrong thinking, but we are also born into a world where God has provided a way out if we desire it. I think that’s a balanced claim regarding the issue.

Good.

The world we are born to is, as always, Perfect for man to grow mentally towards God. Seeing this Perfection is difficult. Many trees in this particular forest to see through.
We choose our lifestyle and end in heaven.

I have debated the idea that there is no hell. It's existence would be a blot on God's universe and is therefore not allowed if God is to be Perfect.
This indicates though that we do not have a choice or we loose the freedom of choice that we enjoy till death or the end time.

It is likely that at that point all souls would obviously choose heaven over a non-existing hell.
Could this be why the notion of hell was included in religion, to keep the illusion that we still had choice after death?

The possibility also may exist that to maintain choice after death, End time occurs upon death for all of us and we can choose to stay in heaven or reincarnate back on earth to help teach the way to others.
I do not like the idea of reincarnation because it would entail placing a mature soul into a new body that seams to have forgotten all that it knew of a previous life. How this helps in the teaching of the way is unclear. This sounds more like an eastern type philosophy and although possible, does not quite do it for me. Any thoughts on this?

Regards
DL

[Jester]

I have debated the idea that there is no hell. It's existence would be a blot on God's universe and is therefore not allowed if God is to be Perfect.
This indicates though that we do not have a choice or we loose the freedom of choice that we enjoy till death or the end time.

I’m still in disagreement with this particular point. I do not consider Hell to be essentially a physical place. I consider it to be a specific attitude that brings pain to one’s self and others. In this case, I do not think it would contradict the concept of a perfect God to say that he allows others to have a negative attitude while warning them that this is a bad idea.

It is likely that at that point all souls would obviously choose heaven over a non-existing hell.
Could this be why the notion of hell was included in religion, to keep the illusion that we still had choice after death?

I personally believe that there are some that will choose Hell. I believe that there is ample evidence that human beings are capable of deeply self-destructive choices. As such, making this kind of decision would be a very real danger.

The possibility also may exist that to maintain choice after death, End time occurs upon death for all of us and we can choose to stay in heaven or reincarnate back on earth to help teach the way to others.
I do not like the idea of reincarnation because it would entail placing a mature soul into a new body that seams to have forgotten all that it knew of a previous life. How this helps in the teaching of the way is unclear. This sounds more like an eastern type philosophy and although possible, does not quite do it for me. Any thoughts on this?

I personally am open to the idea that there is some kind of choice after death. I consider it to be possible (though unlikely) for a person to abandon the self-destructive attitudes that are the nature of Hell and look to God (enter Heaven) after death. That is (of course) personal theology that I do not want to present as the attitude of all or most Christians. Under this thinking, Hell is not a place outside of God’s “governing authority” but a result of God’s unwillingness to force others to love him.
As for the issue of reincarnation, I’m in agreement that it does seem to run counter to the idea of learning; I think that we westerners are often quick to forget that the Hindus consider it a curse to be escaped. Some might argue that it would erase some of the negative attitudes of a person and give him/her a “fresh start” in the purest sense of the term. I’m not certain that this would be much (if any) help to an individual (depending on one’s theology regarding the nature of the conversion experience).
Discussing the issue as it regards the Christian concept of the afterlife is difficult in general, however, as one cannot really draw the idea of reincarnation from Christianity.
Interesting stuff, though. It's always fun to wonder.

[Jester]

Peace be with you Jester, and all our brothers and sisters!

And to you. I've loved reading your comments.

[joer]

Jester wrote:

I consider it to be possible (though unlikely) for a person to abandon the self-destructive attitudes that are the nature of Hell

Greatest I am wrote:

I have debated the idea that there is no hell.

My friends I made this post last year on a similar thread. You both may find the thread of interest. I find ideas of hell most similar to Jester above statement of “self destructive attitudes” as well as similar to Greatest’s idea of “no hell”:

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/p ... te&p=54528
Post 14: Thu Mar 09, 2006 4:25 am

Nice Posts Everybody. I find them all interesting and worthy of merit and recognition. I think the views expressed must have been stated and debated in they're changing forms for centeries all the way to the present.

I understand Juliod's multiple mentions of “Everlasting Fire".

Just look how the Bible warns of the eternity and permance of hell!

He also says, see Matt 25. (I assume Matt. 25:31-46)

My preception of these ideas evolves with accruement of knowledge and entertainment of varying ideas over time.
Sin - to me is making a mistake or missing the mark, like in old Anglo times when a arrow "sinned", it missed the mark. So basically when your doing something "wrong" instead of "right". But "wrong is basically "missing the mark".
Now when we do something wrong we "suffer" the consequences of that wrong doing.
So Hell- to me is "suffering the consequences" of our "wrong" doing. It's really kind of a natural occurrence. It's not imposed on us by GOD but is a result of our "free will" choice. God doesn't make us choose wrongly, we do it on our own.Now some of us constantly and consistently choose to do the "wrong" thing. Maybe some of you can conceive of such a person. Maybe a hardened criminal, repetitive murderer, some person who shows no remorse and has no intention of ever changing. This might be a person who would "suffer" the consequences of their actions as long as they're alive. And if they lived eternally it might be referred to as an "Eternal Hell".

Joe Blackbird – reminds me of Hades and other old concepts of God & Hell.
It has become apparent to me that many argument are based on old concepts of God, Hell or other Concepts that have been evolving over time. Some where along the line I became aware of the concept that GOD reveals God's self to human kind in a form that they can comprehend at that stage of their human development. So if GOD needs to be seen as a Burning Bush, or if GOD needs to be seen as the creator of an infinitely complex universe with multitudes of galaxies with all the complexities of Space, extremely small particles like quarks, varieties of energy sources, a DNA strand that contains 1 x 10 to the 605th power possibilities of a human individual in less than 5% of it's genetic code, than God will be seen in the most complete way we are able to see GOD.

And Hell evolves from "Hades" to us "suffering" consequences from our own mistakes.

Nyril says our Sin debt has been paid. I don't have a good answer for that except, if we think of living backward and missing the mark of living a good life as "Sin Debt" Then the teachings of Jesus of how to live right even unto showing Mercy (by not judging us) as we killed him in our backward ways so that future generation would understand how to live right, you might say the living of His life as an example to us was our "Ransom" from our "Sin Debt".

Which brings us to DrProctopus who rightly says"
I think Christians need to put more consideration towards the idea of mercy and kindness. So true! We all can put more consideration towards the ideas of mercy and kindness.

I like McCulloch- ideas best.

For the benefit of any cognitively impaired deities, here is a partial list:
1. Annihilation - those beings who live out their lives without gaining redemption shall cease to exist.
2. Universal redemption - Love them anyway. Just as I am. Redeem your divine sacrifice even for those who have rejected it. Why not?
3. Reincarnation - give them another chance to get it right.

So Scropia- eternal suffering is of our own choosing IMHO. God be with you and may the Holy Spirit continue to guide you in the Paths of GOD.

Page 5 on the same thread had this great post by Topaz:

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... c&start=40

Post 41: Mon Oct 16, 2006 11:08 pm Post subject: Re: Is hell eternal or not?
Is hell eternal or not?
No, it is not eternal.

From Rev 20:15 which is the last verse, it says that all those whose names are not written in the book of life was cast into hell. This is the second death.

Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

After this, we see another scenario : a new heaven + a new earth + ALL THINGS NEW. This means ugly hell is no more. Ugliness, suffering, does not exist anymore in God’s creation b/c He creates ALL THINGS NEW.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

Rev 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Greatest I am might remember this page. Page8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... c&start=70

Greatest I am wrote:

It's existence (hell) would be a blot on God's universe and is therefore not allowed if God is to be Perfect.

This following discorse Greatest, reminds me of serveral points touched on in this discussion.

This part reminds of what you say of God:

This young person was much troubled by a feeling of injustice because of the presence of evil in the world alongside the good. He said: "How can God, if he is infinitely good, permit us to suffer the sorrows of evil; after all, who creates evil?" It was still believed by many in those days that God creates both good and evil, but his teacher never taught such error. In answering this question, his teacher said: "My brother, God is love; therefore he must be good, and his goodness is so great and real that it cannot contain the small and unreal things of evil. God is so positively good that there is absolutely no place in him for negative evil.

Sounds like what you said, right Great?

Then this part sounds like what Jester and I refer to in our concepts of sin:

Evil is the immature choosing and the unthinking misstep of those who are resistant to goodness, rejectful of beauty, and disloyal to truth. Evil is only the misadaptation of immaturity or the disruptive and distorting influence of ignorance. Evil is the inevitable darkness which follows upon the heels of the unwise rejection of light. Evil is that which is dark and untrue, and which, when consciously embraced and willfully endorsed, becomes sin.

Then this part sounds like what we (jester and I) call “free will”
"Your Father in heaven, by endowing you with the power to choose between truth and error, created the potential negative of the positive way of light and life; but such errors of evil are really nonexistent until such a time as an intelligent creature wills their existence by mischoosing the way of life. And then are such evils later exalted into sin by the knowing and deliberate choice of such a willful and rebellious creature. This is why our Father in heaven permits the good and the evil to go along together until the end of life, just as nature allows the wheat and the tares to grow side by side until the harvest." The young person was fully satisfied with his teacher’s answer to his question after their subsequent discussion had made clear to his mind the real meaning of these momentous statements.

Now if you look at my post on sin back on Page 2 of the thread almost a year ago, and look at this discourse you can see where I might get some of my ideas.

Jester wrote:

I've loved reading your comments.

I like yours too Jester. I'm especially impressed because of your age. Your perspective seems to have been tempered by wisdom. But SO YOUNG. I’m impressed with Topaz’s interpretation also. I’m a firm believer that when a truth is ready to be known it is discovered in many places at the same time. I’d be curious as to the sources that helped to form your perspectives Jester.

Greatest I am…
Jester…
Others…
May the Peace and Love of God be with you.

[Greatest I Am]

I have debated the idea that there is no hell. It's existence would be a blot on God's universe and is therefore not allowed if God is to be Perfect.
This indicates though that we do not have a choice or we loose the freedom of choice that we enjoy till death or the end time.

I’m still in disagreement with this particular point. I do not consider Hell to be essentially a physical place. I consider it to be a specific attitude that brings pain to one’s self and others. In this case, I do not think it would contradict the concept of a perfect God to say that he allows others to have a negative attitude while warning them that this is a bad idea.

Satan or bad ideas were cast out of Heaven once already. God would not likely want us in Heaven if we still "bring pain" with us. Our time on earth is where we are purged of negative attitude.

It is likely that at that point all souls would obviously choose heaven over a non-existing hell.
Could this be why the notion of hell was included in religion, to keep the illusion that we still had choice after death?

I personally believe that there are some that will choose Hell. I believe that there is ample evidence that human beings are capable of deeply self-destructive choices. As such, making this kind of decision would be a very real danger.

I can't see anyone jumping into fire unless they have a death wish. On the off chance that souls can be tired of life, I think that at that point God would do the right thing and outright destroy the soul. Compassion of God.

The possibility also may exist that to maintain choice after death, End time occurs upon death for all of us and we can choose to stay in heaven or reincarnate back on earth to help teach the way to others.
I do not like the idea of reincarnation because it would entail placing a mature soul into a new body that seams to have forgotten all that it knew of a previous life. How this helps in the teaching of the way is unclear. This sounds more like an eastern type philosophy and although possible, does not quite do it for me. Any thoughts on this?

I personally am open to the idea that there is some kind of choice after death. I consider it to be possible (though unlikely) for a person to abandon the self-destructive attitudes that are the nature of Hell and look to God (enter Heaven) after death. That is (of course) personal theology that I do not want to present as the attitude of all or most Christians. Under this thinking, Hell is not a place outside of God’s “governing authority” but a result of God’s unwillingness to force others to love him.
As for the issue of reincarnation, I’m in agreement that it does seem to run counter to the idea of learning; I think that we westerners are often quick to forget that the Hindus consider it a curse to be escaped. Some might argue that it would erase some of the negative attitudes of a person and give him/her a “fresh start” in the purest sense of the term. I’m not certain that this would be much (if any) help to an individual (depending on one’s theology regarding the nature of the conversion experience).
Discussing the issue as it regards the Christian concept of the afterlife is difficult in general, however, as one cannot really draw the idea of reincarnation from Christianity.
Interesting stuff, though. It's always fun to wonder.

True.
It is possible that all negativity disappears when the soul joining with the Godhead.
Understanding of anything and everything may automatically erase any negativity left in the soul. This would create my Perfect Heaven and destroy the necessity of Hell.

As an asside, how goes your thesis. Any roadblocks yet.

Regards
DL

[Jester]

There was a great deal to chew on in this one, but the short version is that I think that it was very articulate and full of truth.

I was actually feeling a bit heretical in my suspicions that Hell is not necessarily eternal, but your reference to Topaz’s comments calmed me about the issue. I’ve checked my concordance, and haven’t yet found a scripture that makes the claim that it is eternal. Thus, (though I need to keep searching) I’m much more at ease about the issue.
I’ll have to thank Topaz as well (and while I’m on the subject of gratitude, I miss Joe Blackbird. I really enjoyed his presence when I first joined.)

Then this part sounds like what we (jester and I) call “free will”
"Your Father in heaven, by endowing you with the power to choose between truth and error, created the potential negative of the positive way of light and life; but such errors of evil are really nonexistent until such a time as an intelligent creature wills their existence by mischoosing the way of life. And then are such evils later exalted into sin by the knowing and deliberate choice of such a willful and rebellious creature. This is why our Father in heaven permits the good and the evil to go along together until the end of life, just as nature allows the wheat and the tares to grow side by side until the harvest." The young person was fully satisfied with his teacher’s answer to his question after their subsequent discussion had made clear to his mind the real meaning of these momentous statements.

Those are excellent terms for describing it. I’ll have to remember that.

I’d be curious as to the sources that helped to form your perspectives Jester.

Aside from having a great number of BRILLIANT friends and teachers (to which I owe a great deal), my favorite source is the sermons of a minister by the name of Tim Keller. You can get samples of them here. I think it’s well worth checking out.