How could a loving god send people to Hell?

[total relism]

I will be doing a series of threads on common objections to the christian faith/bible. Around 15 in total of the most common objections I have seen on many forums through many years I have been involved on forums. I am looking to use these as references in future so I will only be dealing with discussion on the topic of each thread. So topic number one is...


How could god send those he loves to hell? Those he loved so much as to send his son to die for them.


God sends no one to hell, people chose by free will separation from him 2 Thessalonians 1.9. Hell was prepared for the devil and his angels not for humans Matthew 25.4. Haven was prepared for man Matthew 25.34. There are also various degrees of punishment in hell Matt 11 22-24 Romans 2.6.


“Okay, for the sake of argument, let’s pretend that it is really mean of God to punish people for rebellion and unbelief. For the sake of argument, let’s say that everyone does go to Heaven, regardless of their status in the Book of Life. Wouldn’t it be horribly unfair for God to condemn people who hate Him to an eternity in His presence, whether they like it or not? Heaven wouldn’t be pleasant for those who hate God, because Heaven is the place where we will fully experience God’s presence. Those who love God look forward to Heaven with longing, but Heaven would be nearly as bad as Hell for the unbeliever, because the unregenerate heart hates God."

So in a sense, Hell is God finally giving the unbeliever what he wanted all along. But the absence of God means the absence of everything good, since everything good comes from Him. As C.S. Lewis has written:

"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."

When unbelieving critics talk about Hell, they sometimes speak like it will be full of innocent people (like themselves!). However, the Bible doesn’t indicate that innocent people will spend a single moment in Hell. Rather, Hell is God’s answer to the fundamental injustice of this life. There are many murderers, rapists, and other people who wreak havoc in the lives of others, who never experience judgment in this life. Everyone knows that it is wrong that these people never be brought to account for what they’ve done; something in the human heart demands justice. And Hell is God’s answer.

Randy Alcorn writes:
“Without Hell, justice would never overtake the unrepentant tyrants responsible for murdering millions. Perpetrators of evil throughout the ages would get away with murder—and rape, and torture, and every evil. Even if we may acknowledge Hell as a necessary and just punishment for evildoers, however, we rarely see ourselves as worthy of Hell.”

“There is no one righteous, not even one. There is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one”
Romans 3:10–12

It’s hard to accept that we deserve punishment. But most people have grievances against others—if someone stole from you, or hurt your children, or if you were a victim of something fundamentally unjust, you would want justice; your sense of what is right would demand that the person at fault pay a penalty for wronging you. Every time we break God’s law, that’s an affront to God, and He demands justice, just as we do imperfectly on a smaller scale. If you’ve ever said in your heart, “That person should pay for what he did!” then you fundamentally agree with the idea of Hell, because the doctrine of Hell says somebody is going to pay for every sin, eventually. But the person who goes to Hell must reject Christ, who died so that anyone who repents can be saved. So God is not to be blamed when an unrepentant, rebellious creature chooses a destructive path that leads to Hell.

“I have even heard it said that God created hell as an act of love. God gave us free will and therefore must accommodate those who do not want anything to do with Him. God's love for His followers is eternity in His presence, but those who reject Him must spend eternity separated from Him. So eternal punishment is not for those God hates, but those who hate Him.”
http://www.creationconversations.com...d-hate-sinners

It is not god's fault that many will reject him, his offer is still fair and loving as hell was never meant for man.Man chooses to go there and that choice has nothing to do with gods love or fairness, but mans free will. What of the people who do accept him? Should he not have made them because of those that chose life without god?

“The demand that God should forgive such a man while he remains what he is, is based on a confusion between condoning and forgiving. To condone an evil is simply to ignore it, to treat it as if it were good. But forgiveness needs to be accepted as well as offered if it is to be complete: a man who admits no guilt can accept no forgiveness.”
-C.S Lewis, The Problem of Pain, 124

Is hell literal fire?

Hell was prepared for devil and his angels Matthew 25.41, they are spiritual beings unaffected by physical fire. Hell is described as dark with flames Matthew 8.12, fire if literal would cancel each other out. Fire is a picture of judgment, in Deuteronomy 9 and other places, it says God goes before Israel as a consuming fire, it means judgment. He judges Canaan, yet never burns them or cause fire. The fire of his judgment was not literal fire, but his judgment.

Eternity?

We live in time, time itself is a created thing, so in eternity its not like time passes by forever. we will be outside of time in eternity, something very hard to understand and grasp.


Why did God not create a world were all would be saved?

I think a part of a William lane Craig's debate might help.

“Suppose that God could create a world in which everyone is freely saved, but there is only one problem: all such worlds have only one person in them! Does God's being all-loving compel Him to prefer one of these underpopulated worlds over a world in which multitudes are saved, even though some people freely go to hell? I don't think so. God's being all-loving implies that in any world He creates He desires and strives for the salvation of every person in that world. But people who would freely reject God's every effort to save them shouldn't be allowed to have some sort of veto power over what worlds God is free to create. Why should the joy and the blessedness of those who would freely accept God's salvation be precluded because of those who would stubbornly and freely reject it? It seems to me that God's being all-loving would at the very most require Him to create a world having an optimal balance between saved and lost, a world where as many as possible freely accept salvation and as few as possible freely reject it.”

Read more: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/can-a...#ixzz2HNKHOzoD

But to add onto that, god allows things to happen even though he knows the future. So for example, god punishes certain people for there crimes, yet he waits until the crime is committed. He could punish right off [a murderer] and not allow it to happen. Yet he first allows it and than gives consequence. Same with salvation, he tries to draw near to people who he knows will reject him, Jesus dies for all sinners not just those that would receive him etc.

What was the purpose of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil?

Some say that a lot of trouble could have been avoided if God had just left the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil out of the Garden. But this misunderstands the vital function of the Tree. The other commands God gave Adam and Eve were fairly self-explanatory and had pleasant outcomes for them, but what was the purpose of the command not to eat from the Tree? It may seem surprising, but God had a loving purpose in putting the Tree in the Garden.God created human beings to be in a relationship with Him. But a true loving relationship has to be freely given or chosen—one could program a robot to think it loves its programmer, but that would be meaningless because the robot didn’t have a choice. God wanted human beings to love Him freely, for who He is, not just for what He had given and provided for them. But that required the chance to not love Him, to rebel. The function of the Tree was to give Adam a chance to obey or rebel, and Adam chose to eat the fruit and to rebel against God.There were two pivotal times in history when God freely gave and made a way that mankind could choose to have a relationship with Him, the Creation and the Incarnation. This also highlights why the battle of Creation is so important. The Fall from grace in the original Creation should help us understand our plight in this sin cursed world, and make it that much easier to recognize what God has done through Jesus.
http://creation.com/hell

[Fragony]

There is a lot of discussion within the protestant church, thesis that they got it wrong and there is no such thing as hell

[Sigurd]

What about predestination?

[total relism]

There is a lot of discussion within the protestant church, thesis that they got it wrong and there is no such thing as hell

I disagree fully, JW say no hell, but the bible very much does teach a hell. Some say annihilation but very unlikely I think.

What about predestination?

my opnions
Predestination/free will
Both are true,God knows peoples heart before they are born, he predestines them to be saved. Those that live by faith god foreknow them by faith, he predestined them to be saved.
If predestination is true than no need to evangelize.
Gen 2.19 Ezekiel 18.2-32 luke 13.34 matt 18.14 mark 8.34 Deuteronomy 5.29

[Fragony]

It's no issue to I'm not religious, they think it's some sort of translation-error

[total relism]

It's no issue to I'm not religious, they think it's some sort of translation-error

Just for your info I believe their whoever they are claims are completely baseless.

[Fragony]

Just for your info I believe their whoever they are claims are completely baseless.

It's no claim but a discussion, I never read the bible, only about it, I wouldn't know. All I know is that the discussion exists.

Edit, I made a mistake, within the catholic church, not the protestant

[total relism]

It's no claim but a discussion, I never read the bible, only about it, I wouldn't know. All I know is that the discussion exists.

Edit, I made a mistake, within the catholic church, not the protestant

Ok no problem

[Idaho]

The Bible needs very detailed and careful explanation because it's ancient nonsense wrapped round a few basic truths.

[Idaho]

What was the figurative bit re. Lot offering up his incestuous daughters for gang rape?

[Idaho]

The whole thing is figurative because common sense says so. It's been re-translated, edited, misrepresented, and in the end is the product of man. So it is inherently flawed. The concepts may well be fundamental religious truths, but all the specifics are suspect.

Now, that is not mutually exclusive with faith. If the Bible is divinely inspired, so too is your brain. Using it to live a godly life in accordance with a figurative text is just being a good Christian.

Now, all that said, why come into a thread obviously designed to talk about theological differences just to take snarky shots at religion?

This is a thread on a general discussion board where a prothletising christian is trying to convince us of the rightness of his beliefs. He is specifically wanting to debunk common challenges to those beliefs. These aren't snarky shots. He is quoting scripture as the rules and explanation to our existence. Referencing that scripture is entirely appropriate.

[PanzerJaeger]

I will be doing a series of threads on common objections to the christian faith/bible. Around 15 in total of the most common objections I have seen on many forums through many years I have been involved on forums.

Must you?

As I slogged through the OP, I could only think of how unfortunate it is that so many intelligent people waste the short time they have on this stuff.

[total relism]

The whole thing is figurative because common sense says so. It's been re-translated, edited, misrepresented, and in the end is the product of man. So it is inherently flawed. The concepts may well be fundamental religious truths, but all the specifics are suspect.

Now, that is not mutually exclusive with faith. If the Bible is divinely inspired, so too is your brain. Using it to live a godly life in accordance with a figurative text is just being a good Christian.

Now, all that said, why come into a thread obviously designed to talk about theological differences just to take snarky shots at religion?

this is topic of one of my threads coming soon so stay around.

[jirisys]

The standard run-of-the-mill homohpobic church that I'm forced to go said that Jesus is my husband, the church is his love shack and wants to shag with me.

I guess he just wants people to be gay with him.

~Jirisys ()

[Papewaio]

So an unbelieving agnostic and/or atheist goes to hell?

A heretic goes to hell?

A repentant rapist and/or murderer and/or pedophile who fully sees the errors of his ways and repents is embraced by God and goes to heaven?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So an unbelieving agnostic and/or atheist goes to hell?

A heretic goes to hell?

A repentant rapist and/or murderer and/or pedophile who fully sees the errors of his ways and repents is embraced by God and goes to heaven?

That would be one interpretation.

The key point being - the rapist/murderer recognises the magnitude of his crimes and his utter lack of justification before God. The Atheist claims that, if there were a God, he would deserve to go to heaven.

No Christian believes he deserves to go to heaven - believing you deserve​ something is anathema to Christianity at its most basic level.

It's also worth pointing out that the atheist doesn't want to be with God - so he can't exactly complain when he dies and is separated from God. Saint Augustine said that all men are sick in their souls, a Christian is merely someone who realises he is ill and seeks treatment. For Augustine that realisation was an autonomous act which all humans were capable of.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I will be doing a series of threads on common objections to the christian faith/bible. Around 15 in total of the most common objections I have seen on many forums through many years I have been involved on forums. I am looking to use these as references in future so I will only be dealing with discussion on the topic of each thread. So topic number one is...

Can't you just update this thread? New posts for arguments made by other people on other forums isn't necessary.

However, the Bible doesn’t indicate that innocent people will spend a single moment in Hell.
...
God responds,#“There is no one righteous, not even one. There is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one”#(Romans 3:10–12
it’s hard to understand that we deserve punishment, too.

Aren't you saying that 1) There are no innocent people, since we are all sinners, and thus, seeing as we all deserve punishment since we have all turned away at least partly from God, we should all go to Hell?

CR

[Idaho]

I think it is hubris for men to pretend to know the specifics of who goes to hell and who doesn't. If someone embraces Christianity then they know the path to the afterlife for themselves, if they really believe it.

So you are saying that on top of the confusing and contradictory advice given in the Bible, even if we do figure out some reasoned approach based on scriptures, we still might be wrong as it's all, ultimately unknowable and beyond us?

Why bother with it then? If it's effectively random?

[Idaho]

That would be one interpretation.

The key point being - the rapist/murderer recognises the magnitude of his crimes and his utter lack of justification before God. The Atheist claims that, if there were a God, he would deserve to go to heaven.

No Christian believes he deserves to go to heaven - believing you deserve​ something is anathema to Christianity at its most basic level.

It's also worth pointing out that the atheist doesn't want to be with God - so he can't exactly complain when he dies and is separated from God. Saint Augustine said that all men are sick in their souls, a Christian is merely someone who realises he is ill and seeks treatment. For Augustine that realisation was an autonomous act which all humans were capable of.

The atheist doesn't want to be without god, just that with the brain god has given, and the evidence god has laid out, it seems unlikely to the atheist that Christianity holds more than general life guidance with a lot of hocum thrown in.

[rory_20_uk]

The whole exercise feels like the poor communication officer on the podium "clarifying" something that his boss just said. Intially he was fine as each time a question was asked he pulled out a pistol and shot the person. Increasingly, after runing out of bullets tying himself in knots "interpreting" this.

[spankythehippo]

Generally, most faiths reward good behaviour and punish misdeeds.

Going to heaven should be like a point system. Positive points for good, negative points for bad.

"You walked an old lady across the street? Here, have 5 points."

OH YEAH!

"But you murdered a nun... I'm taking away 200 points."

Goddamn it.

...

Come Judgment Day...

"Let's see now. You're in the positive numbers, so that's good. Still not high enough to be with Jesus. You can stay in the working-class district of Heaven."


See how much more effective this would be with a Divine Leaderboard? People would be competing to get more points, but of course, there would be trolls who would try to get the lowest score as humanly possible.


Now that I'm thinking about it, it does have a few flaws. Well God, if you're out there, feel free to implement my point system in this world. I sure could use a laugh.

[Sigurd]

Generally, most faiths reward good behaviour and punish misdeeds.
Going to heaven should be like a point system. Positive points for good, negative points for bad.
"You walked an old lady across the street? Here, have 5 points."
OH YEAH!
"But you murdered a nun... I'm taking away 200 points."
Goddamn it.
...
Come Judgment Day...
"Let's see now. You're in the positive numbers, so that's good. Still not high enough to be with Jesus. You can stay in the working-class district of Heaven."
See how much more effective this would be with a Divine Leaderboard? People would be competing to get more points, but of course, there would be trolls who would try to get the lowest score as humanly possible.
Now that I'm thinking about it, it does have a few flaws. Well God, if you're out there, feel free to implement my point system in this world. I sure could use a laugh.

...(condensed)

That's the thing... According to Christianity Jesus paid for all sins ever committed against God. Every sin is paid for in full -God's justice is satisfied.
I heard this analogy by an american associate: It's like you having 100 parking tickets in California. The Justice system demands that you either pay them or serve time. But you don't have the money... When you show up in court, all tickets are paid for by this guy down the street. Justice is served as the tickets are paid - and you are free to go... Thanks unknown guy!! whaddayamean I need to believe it happened OR ELSE... ???

Predestination/free will
Both are true,God knows peoples heart before they are born, he predestines them to be saved. Those that live by faith god foreknow them by faith, he predestined them to be saved.
If predestination is true than no need to evangelize.
Gen 2.19 Ezekiel 18.2-32 luke 13.34 matt 18.14 mark 8.34 Deuteronomy 5.29

The co-existence of free will and predestination answer is not satisfactory.
If he predestines someone to salvation, wouldn't he predestine someone to damnation also? Hence back to your original question. Why populate hell with his own offspring? Let me hear the angle of oppositions must exist.

[total relism]

So an unbelieving agnostic and/or atheist goes to hell?

A heretic goes to hell?

A repentant rapist and/or murderer and/or pedophile who fully sees the errors of his ways and repents is embraced by God and goes to heaven?

everyone goes to hell, unless you have never sinned before. If that is the case than you can freeley go to haven. But god and haven are perfect/sinless place and god cant dwell with sin. So we cannot go there assuming you have sinned. But because god loves us, he sent jesus to die for us pay the penalty and by his grace and love for us, we are saved, not because we have earned or worked off so that he must pay us. he pays us even though we cant fully do the work, so he did so himself.


5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
Isiah 53 5-6




god wants not even the sinner to die or be separated from him.


"'Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked?,' says the Lord God, 'And not rather that he should turn from his way and live? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone,' says the Lord God. 'So turn and live! Say to them, "As I live," says the Lord God, "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways. For why will you die?"'" (Ez. 18.23,32; 33.11).

Can't you just update this thread? New posts for arguments made by other people on other forums isn't necessary.


Aren't you saying that 1) There are no innocent people, since we are all sinners, and thus, seeing as we all deserve punishment since we have all turned away at least partly from God, we should all go to Hell?

CR

No because I want to use each thread as reference in future on this forum. Each topic is unique and deserves its own thread I believe.


Yes to second part, what I was saying in bolded part is simply no innocent person will ever be sent to hell. But we are all guilty.

The atheist doesn't want to be without god, just that with the brain god has given, and the evidence god has laid out, it seems unlikely to the atheist that Christianity holds more than general life guidance with a lot of hocum thrown in.

Dont we wish this was true, I offer to debate you personally in a 1v1 debate at twcenter forums, or here if we can. I will show this is not the case at all. But it is your worldview that is determined by your hearts wants that controls how you decide truth and inteprite evidence.

Generally, most faiths reward good behaviour and punish misdeeds.

Going to heaven should be like a point system. Positive points for good, negative points for bad.

"You walked an old lady across the street? Here, have 5 points."

OH YEAH!

"But you murdered a nun... I'm taking away 200 points."

Goddamn it.

...

Come Judgment Day...

"Let's see now. You're in the positive numbers, so that's good. Still not high enough to be with Jesus. You can stay in the working-class district of Heaven."


See how much more effective this would be with a Divine Leaderboard? People would be competing to get more points, but of course, there would be trolls who would try to get the lowest score as humanly possible.


Now that I'm thinking about it, it does have a few flaws. Well God, if you're out there, feel free to implement my point system in this world. I sure could use a laugh.

I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"
Galatians 2:21


I think it comes down to gods perfect holiness and judgment. He cant allow even a few sins go unpunished or he is unjust. I recommend a debate on this topic if your interested.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPWle3mIFBk

.
The co-existence of free will and predestination answer is not satisfactory.
If he predestines someone to salvation, wouldn't he predestine someone to damnation also? Hence back to your original question. Why populate hell with his own offspring? Let me hear the angle of oppositions must exist.

I dont see why its a problem. He does not want any to go to hell.



"The Lord is not willing that any should perish but that all should reach repentance" (2Pet. 3.9).

"He desires all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth" (1Tim. 2.4).

"'Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked?,' says the Lord God, 'And not rather that he should turn from his way and live? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone,' says the Lord God. 'So turn and live! Say to them, "As I live," says the Lord God, "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways. For why will you die?"'" (Ez. 18.23,32; 33.11).



But he predestined those that would live by faith to be saved. Both the ones in havan and hell both chose there own paths, yet god foreknow who would chose each way.

[Ronin]

The co-existence of free will and predestination answer is not satisfactory.
If he predestines someone to salvation, wouldn't he predestine someone to damnation also? Hence back to your original question. Why populate hell with his own offspring? Let me hear the angle of oppositions must exist.

and even if God gave man free will, he still has them living under the threat of hell.
choices made under that kind of intimidation are not exactly free.

[total relism]

and even if God gave man free will, he still has them living under the threat of hell.
choices made under that kind of intimidation are not exactly free.

Please read op,god/the bible see it very differently. Would would you suggest to do with a eternal,guilty, person who rejects god?.

[Ronin]

Please read op,god/the bible see it very differently. Would would you suggest to do with a eternal,guilty, person who rejects god?.

That problem is a corollary of the ideas that man is "eternal" and "guilty"
So I leave that imaginary problem to the people that made it up....I just pointed out the problem exists.

[Kralizec]

Reading the Old Testament gives you the distinct impression that the supernatural was a lot nearer. When God ruined Job’s life as part of a bet, Job is told by his wife that he should curse God for what has been done to him. Read: not deny his existence, which is what most of us would do but which didnt even enter their minds, but curse him. The moral of the story was that God can do whatever he pleases, and piety and respect to God may or may not be rewarded. If not, then the reasons for why not are none of your business and you should shut up. But I digress.

“Rejecting God” is a loaded term that implies that the person is not an atheist at all, but is perfectly aware that God exists, yet refuses to honor him. Since Hell is traditionally said to be extremely unpleasant it’s really quite ridiculous for someone with knowledge of God to refuse to honor him.

If we postulate that God exists, the reason why people like me go to hell would be that we don’t see any compelling reason to think God exists, him having not appeared physically in the last thousends of years despite supposedly appearing several times to the ancient Israelites. “Free will” my arse. I guess they never heard of the term informed choice in those days.

[Beskar]

From Blackadder:

Edmund: Well, well, let's take Hell: You know, Hell isn't as bad as it's cracked up to be.
Graveney: What?
Edmund: No, no, no, no. No, you see, the thing about Heaven, is that Heaven is for people who like the sort of things that go on in Heaven, like, uh, well, singing, talking to God, watering pot plants...
Graveney: Ew...
Edmund: Whereas Hell, on the other hand, is for people who like the other sorts of things: [with relish] adultery, pillage, torture — those... areas.
Graveney: Really?
Edmund: Mm! Give your lands to the Crown, and once you're dead, you'll have the time of your life!
Graveney: Adultery? Pillage? Through all eternity?
Edmund: Yep!
King: (handing over a quill) Lord Graveney, your decision...
Graveney: Very well. (signs) I leave my lands to the Crown, and my soul in the hands of the Lord. May He treat me like the piece of refuse that I am (rubs his hands together, grinning) and send me to Hell.

[Idaho]

How old are you and where are you from Total Relism?

[Papewaio]

Well this version of god sounds more like a odorous burecratic bully then a loving father.

You have free will but if you don't worship me (according to which religion, sect or denomination? Which iteration or edition) I will send you to hell. I'll send your children, your wife and even on a bet with the highest representative of evil will make your life as intolerable as possible.

I will knock up a young lady and get another man to raise my child. This child will make the ultimate sacrifice for ALL mankinds sins, but just as bullying and burecratic and unethical as me is the priesthood so they will make a bunch of caveats and exceptions for this ultimate all encompassing sacrifice that requires tithes and subjugation through the priest hood. So instead of a direct relationship and forgiveness for everything which one would think would include stupidity, hubris, ignorance and lack of understanding... One has to confess to a priesthood, pay an extortion fee for entry we tithe, pray at the correct pew/church/denomination/sect/religion to the correct entity be it priest/saint/son of god or god direct.

Then another set of caveats allow the priesthood to tell each other of their misdeeds and now not have to render unto Caesar his due. Priesthood is above the law of the land as long as they tell each other they have sinned and they feel weally weally sowwy. Higher ups are allowed to cover up misdeeds from traffic tickets to human trafficking as long as the right lip service or money changes hands.

As a parent and an employee I think god fails as a parent and he fails as the head of the company. I'm not impressed by many or any of his franchise priesthoods. I think I'll take my philosophy and moral guidance from a better source. Maybe one that isn't based on Bronze Age fairies at the bottom of the garden. Till he comes out, apologizes to Jesus for not being a hands on dad and really gets over his jealous anger issues ill chalk up his followers to the same category as bronies.