| Author | Message | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 1014 Registered: 7-2003  |
You are absolutely right, Chris...it is a hard doctrine. I'm so confused by people who act like we "want" to believe this...are they trying to say we are happy to see people suffer? I don't understand what possible "gain" is to be had by trying to make scripture say this if it truly doesn't. Sounds like we are so sedistic. Just doesn't compute.... | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2455 Registered: 12-2003  |
I agree, Chris; we can't ignore what God has revealed about Himself without creating a graven image which we would rather worship. The Bible never pictures God as angrily roasting sinners. He is not willing than any should perish. Jesus' death atoned for all the world's sin; He bore the curse for all our sin. Our salvation or lostness is about whether or not we are willing to yield to the Holy Spirit's call to follow Jesus. We are saved or lost depending upon what we do with the Sin-Bearer. God has totally provided atonement for us through Jesus Christ. That's why we're not saved or lost based on anything we do. Without Jesus, eternal punishment would have been everyone's fate. Because of Jesus, God does not judge us based on our own potential righteousness. He judges us based on whether or not we respond to Jesus and God's promises of redemption. God poured out His anger and wrath toward sin on Jesus. He bore God's wrath for sin. The lost go to eternal punishment because they refuse the Sin Bearer. They suffer in the place that was created not for wicked humans but for the devil and his angels. They go there because they remain in darkness in spite of the Light. Hell is a difficult doctrine. But the consequence of not responding to God's call to accept the Giver of eternal life must be equal in significance to the result of accepting Him. Even the laws of physics (which are part of the Law of God by Whom all things hold together) says that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Annihilation is not an equal and opposite reaction to living eternally in relationship with God. Physics aside, we have, as Chris quoted above, the words of Jesus Himself. He hasn't clearly explained how hell (or eternal life) will look, but He has given us enough information to take it seriously as something real. Grateful for a sovereign, just, and merciful God, Colleen | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 9 Registered: 6-2005 |
Chris - Nothing in what I read tells me that I have to believe in the fire being eternal literally and the people burning literally forever. I believe that when God withdraws His presence/life sustaining from us we will suffer immensely - but that it will not be eternal in the suffering - the effects are eternal. I just do not see how a just and righteous God could benefit - how there is a call for - what good will come from eternal everlasting literal punishment. I would not do that to someone that I love - Jesus asked if a son asked his father for a fish would he give him a stone? How much more so your heavenly father... I do not think that this lessens the suffering - but people are not going to go to heaven to "avoid hell" right? People will be in heaven because they want to be with Jesus for life eternal - they will be people who like truth - happiness and eschew/do not enjoy backstabbing, lying, cheating, killing etc. . . My point I guess is that in my upbringing in the Adventist church I was constantly given the "they will show a video of all the things that you did wrong" - the scare them straight method - what I find much more appealing is the "your sins have been forgiven and forgotten - I remember them no more". I have NO PROBLEM with final punishment - (actually I think that it is Christ withdrawing His life sustaining that will be hell and kill the un-repentant) but to state that the physical punishment goes on foreven is not only "hard" as you put it but un-reasonable and I do not see that the writings demand that interpretation. Thanks for responding. Bill | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1008 Registered: 7-2003  |
Well Bill, from my perspecitve, I think if we let scripture speak for itself without attempting to explain it away, eternal Hell is pretty self evident. I'm not sure how Jesus could have made it any plainer that the punishment of Hell continues eternally. I just don't know what else He could have said to make His point. We have to accept scripture as written otherwise we make the Bible less than authoritative. If I have used poor exegesis with the texts above I am willing to accept correction. Would you care to exegete each of the texts above line by line in support of your postion? With love and respect, Chris | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 698 Registered: 3-2005 |
This was the most difficult doctrine for me to accept. But, it was Luke 16, the story (not a parable) of the rich man and Lazarus. I had to come to the conclusion that either I had to accept Jesus' words at face value, or find some other way to explain them away. What other point would Jesus have of telling that true story, if the punishment was not eternal. And then all the other references to hell by Jesus on top of that. But, one thing I know. God is righteous and just. It is a matter of trusting what the Bible actually says. But I think there is room for interpreting that hell may not be a literal fire. There is a lot of symbolic language in the Bible, but I see no way around the fact that we were created with eternal spirits, and that the punishment will be eternal. Scripture also refers to eternity as "blackest darkness", so it could be the mental anguish of living apart from God in some dark corner of the universe. We don't have all the answers. Stan | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2462 Registered: 12-2003 |
I agree, Stan. I'll never forget how stunned I was early in our FAF daysÖIt was sometime in 1999, and we had invited Gary Inrig, our pastor, to an FAF meeting to discuss what happens after death. He mentioned the parable of Lazarus and rhe rich man to illustratre his point about conscious punishment or bliss. We interrupted him immediately, saying, "Oh, but that was just a parable to illustrate the point that even the rich can't undo their bad choices after they die." Gary looked puzzled for a moment, and then he said, "Jesus would never have used an untruth to teach a truth." I realized in that instant that we easily accepted the explanation that the Lazarus story was "just a parable" and not real because--well, because we accepted that Ellen did such things, and we had been conditioned since our earliest days to see lying as justifiable if it served a greater purpose. (Think "Jesus held his hand over the mistake in the chart so people would get ready for his coming...") God, though, does not lie, and he does not play tricks. He does not use deception to train us, and he would not tell an untruth to teach a truth. Wow. We can completely trust what He says and take Him at His word. Colleen | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 699 Registered: 3-2005 |
Colleen, I agree, but what evidence is there that that was a parable? Jesus did not introduce it as a parable. He used a proper name Lazarus. He never did that in any of His parables. He told this story as if it were actual fact. That is what makes it especially hard to explain away. Stan | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 10 Registered: 6-2005 |
I don't "exegete". Not in public anyway <grin>. That is not my forte. Let me ask you this question - if you die - is it eternal? Therefore the "hell" or its effects are also eternal. As I read the texts that you listed I can see hyperbole in them - they are meant to sound scary. I believe that "hell" is going to be separation from God. That it will be permanent. I do not believe that Two hundred trillion years after we have gotten to heaven that there will be a place that Jesus can look down to to check to see if the sulphur and fires are still hot and that the stench of our torture is still adequate. 1. the price for sin HAS been paid - so their is no requirement for suffering 2. the righteous would also be in hell if they KNEW their loved ones were suffering still 3. a loving God does not need or exact a forever on-going punishment. Bill | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 367 Registered: 7-2000 |
Catalyst, I can see that you're problem is the way you approach the Bible. You need to spend some time with the 'thought inspiration' thread and study out the differences between thought inspiration and verbal inspiration. The conclusions that you are making can only be supported if you believe in thought inspiration. As an example, your last two statements are offered (seemingly) as if they were Biblically based when in fact they aren't found in the Bible. Further, even thouogh they contradict the Bible you still cling to them. Finally, your first statement was this: 1. the price for sin HAS been paid - so their is no requirement for suffering This is an excellent example of the 'proof texting' of Adventism. True, the price for sin has been paid. Not true is that there is no requirement for suffering---as Chris has shown from a long list of texts above. William Miller did this same sort of exegesis even though the folks of that time told him that his methodology was wrong. The SDA church incorporated his flawed methods and that is a huge problem too get over when leaving the SDA church. I mean this kindly----you need to join a Bible believing/studying church and relearn how to study the Bible. | ||
| Wooliee Registered user Username: Wooliee Post Number: 34 Registered: 6-2005 |
Catalyst, I too am struggling with the concept of Hell. Revelation 20:13-14 says: "The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." Doesn't second death mean that they are gone for good? Verse 10 says that the devil, the beast, and the false prophet will be tormented day and night and forever and ever, and they deserve to be because they are the authors of evil, sin, and wickedness. But what about the poor guy who just thought it all sounded too good to be true, but lived a decent life otherwise? Does he deserve to be tormented forever? I am glad that God's ways are higher than mine. It gives me an incredible headache to try and figure this all out. In the end I always trust that He is sovereign and just. Julie | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 1018 Registered: 7-2003 |
I also see some presumption in the conclusions: "the righteous would also be in hell if they KNEW their loved ones were suffering still" ... The scripture doesn't speak to what we will know in "eternal life" land about the goings-on in the "eternal punishment" land. That is an SDA line that might find it's origins in philosophy, but not scripture. I'm going to expand on Stan's point about Luke and parables (and I've posted it before, so forgive the duplication). Look at the definition of a parable: From G3846; a similitude (ěparableî), that is, (symbolically) fictitious narrative (of common life conveying a moral), apoth gm or adage: - comparison, figure, parable, proverb. If the stories were not really possible, it loses its value to teach a lesson that people can relate to. See if that's not consistent throughout the parables in Luke... In Luke 8:4 Jesus begins telling the parable of the sower and the seed....As you read through the parable, I'm sure you would find all events something that could and does happen, but there is also a moral truth told as Jesus explains beginning in 8:11. In Luke 10:29, we have the story of the good Samaritan. Jesus does not identify this as a parable, but whether it is an actual event or not, it is possible it could happen, and contains a greater moral lesson. In Luke 12:16, Jesus begins a parable about a rich man who is gathering his fruit for himself, then dies with all this earthly gain, but void of heavenly gain. Again...a story that can happen in real life with a moral lesson. Luke 12:41, Jesus tells another story in response to Peter asking about him speaking in parables. Again, a real to life story with a deeper moral lesson too. Luke 13: 6, Jesus speaks the parable of the fig tree not producing fruit... Luke 13:18, Jesus uses the mustard seed and leaven analogies to teach about the kingdom of heaven.... Luke 14:7, Jesus speaks the parable about the wedding feast... Luke 15:3 Jesus speaks the parable about 100 sheep, and losing one.... Luke 15:8 is the woman who loses a coin.... Luke 15:11 begins the story we know as the prodigal son... Luke 16:1 begins with a story about a certain rich man and his steward .... Luke 16:19 begins the story of another certain rich man and Lazarus .... Luke 18:1 begins another parable about a judge and a widow ... Luke 19:12 begins a parable about a certain wellborn man with the slaves and the mina... The final parable in Luke begins in chapter 20:9. It is about a certain man with a vineyard and the vinedressers.... For every single one of those parables/stories, people say the events are possible and could have really happened ... EXCEPT for the story of Lazarus and the rich man. (Luke 16). HOW is that consistent with any of the parables and stories told in the entire book of Luke? Many people, not just SDAs think all these stories are parables, and just not identified as such, but whether he is quoting real life happenings or not, they all COULD happen. There is no reason I can see from the text to exclude the story of Lazarus and the rich man EXCEPT that it disproves a doctrine SDAs have already decided and they have to have an explanation that brushes away questions. Hope this helps .... Sorry for the length, but there is no way to prove the point without mentioning every story/parable. Luke is very consistent in his usage. Interpretation becomes inconsistent to exclude the story of Lazarus as even possibly real. | ||
| Patriar Registered user Username: Patriar Post Number: 148 Registered: 3-2005 |
Melissa: Thank you for that information. I was wondering if SDAs were the only ones who believe that the story of Lazarus and the rich man was a parable. I appreciated the context, too...so no worries about the length. Patria | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2464 Registered: 12-2003 |
Melissa, thank you. Stan, I totally agree. I didn't mean to imply that the story of Lazarus was "just a parable..."! I meant it in the context Melissa explains above. Jesus' parables were stories that could have happened; they were grounded in reality. The story of Lazarus is the same kind of story. Thank you for catching my unclear labeling! Colleen | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 707 Registered: 3-2005 |
Melissa, excellent summary of the parables vs stories. And Colleen, whether it was a story or a parable, I agree that to say that Jesus would teach a false doctrine is absurd. Stan | ||
| Cindy Registered user Username: Cindy Post Number: 787 Registered: 7-2000 |
Melissa, Thanks from me also for that summary; it was helpful! I'm also always amazed at the courage you've been given by God to face your particular family challenges! grace, cindy | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 11 Registered: 6-2005 |
Just checking - 1 billion two hundred trillion years after we get to heaven, Jesus is still going to be stoking the fires of hell to punish people for the things that they did wrong... Either He will be creating a miracle to keep us all alive by feeding us since no one will be growing food and taking care of the excrement or we will still be working? Pain is currently caused by trauma - he will also have to be working a miracle because that much torment without sleep will also degrade our systems and so he will be having to perpetuate all our systems just so that we can receive our just punishment. That is your theory? Long after all the worlds and all the righteous have declared that God is righteous and that Jesus is worthy to be in charge and no one remembers sin any more there will still be a place marred by sin and its after effects that no one sees or knows about (since sin will not re-occur) and miracles will be worked to keep it self perpetuating??? Again - just checking to see if I am misstating the theory? Bill | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1009 Registered: 7-2003 |
Bill, so far you have not offered your careful sytematic analysis of all that scripture has to say on the duration of Hell. The issue is not what you or I think, the issue is "What does scripture say?" Unless and until the Bible is acknowledged by all parties as the final authority on this matter, we lack common ground on which to base our discussion. Three questions for you, Bill: 1) Do you believe that all of scripture is the innerant, infallible, verbally inspired Word of God? 2) Do you believe that the Bible and the Bible alone is the absolute authority and the sole authority for doctrine, including the doctrine of Hell? 3) Are you willing to offer a systematic presentation of scripture supporting annialationism? Chris | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 636 Registered: 7-2004 |
In my reading about the fate of the wicked the Bible says that they will be destroyed. The best description of this that I have ever heard goes something like this (bearing in mind that this is simply a metaphor, and is intended for our three-dimensional minds to grasp something that God will handle in a much more dimensional fashion). Picture the body & soul of the lost as a cup. If God had said that the cup would be annihilated, then the cup would merely disappear. God says the "cup" will be destroyed. Smash the cup, and the substance that made up the cup remains, but now that it is smashed to bits it can never serve its original purpose. A pile of shards cannot be used in the same manner as a cup can no matter how you try to sweep the shards together. Nor is the cup able to sweep itself together--it is simply a smashed and broken thing. That is how I view the destruction of the wicked. They are conscious of their separation from God and their lack of purpose, and this awareness will last forever, not physically, but in "outer darkness." The wicked won't need to be fed or housed, and they will not need a planet upon which to exist. They are bits of purposeless awareness, knowing only separation and aloneness. Jesus also stated in his greatest treatise on this subject that there is a great chasm, a fixed divide, separating the lost from the saved. The difference is that in his story of the Rich Man and Lazarus, the saved were in a waiting place called "The Bosom of Abraham." The saved waited there until their redemption price had been paid. In another place the scriptures say that God will wipe away every tear from our eyes, so I believe that an all-powerful God will remove from our knowledge any awareness of the fate of those who will be lost. Belva | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 302 Registered: 7-2004  |
For me, the question of annialihation or eternal punishment lingered far longer than any other SDA distinctive. I still don't think that the answer is a salvational question. But there are two thoughts that have really struck me about how the understanding of this doctrine impacts other thinking. The first thought is the idea that we have some basis for deciding what is "fair" for an eternal God to do. I think God's response to Job should answer any of our ideas about judging His fairness. My second thought is that we, as sinful beings, underestimate just how awful sin is to a holy God. | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 12 Registered: 6-2005 |
Chris - Many people over the years that I have been alive have told me "what the Bible says". People before my time have been telling other people "what the Bible says". No matter what you say the "Bible says" I have to test it with what I believe a rational and just God would do. I have to decide what I believe - No matter what you say the Bible says on this matter - I will not and do not believe that there is any logic to eternal suffering. We as humans - no matter how heinous the crime do not allow horrible and unreasonable suffering. Someone said here that we have no idea how horrible sin is to a righteous God - I believe that is correct. But even while we were sinners He died for us - He knows the hairs on our head. I believe that when we sin we crucify Him all over again. This loving God will destroy the wicked (or will withdraw His life sustaining presence and we will die) permanently. Our feeble understanding of that, has said that it is eternal etc. . . No matter what you say the Bible says - there is no need for eternal burning punishment - There will be a universe without sin and its effects. Thank you for your efforts - but I also believe that this discusssion is NOT salvific. Which is a good thing because I believe that this eternal punishment thing would lead people to TRY and make the decision for heaven to AVOID hell. (The totally incorrect and wrong reason to go to heaven.) I appreciate your ferver and belief that your view of God and what the Bible says is correct. I categorically reject what you say the Bible says about this subject as it does not make any rational sense or meet any theological need - (note that is different that "what the Bible says" <grin>). At this point I think that we must agree to disagree. Thank you for your viewpoint. Bill ps - to answer your questions - 1. no - not to the point that you obviously use it/take it 2. I do not use any other authority in my Christian experience - no 3. No - at this point I am only willing to tell you what I believe for myself - I have spent the last few days studying "annihilationism". Some people say QUOTE HERE"Annihilation would demean both the love of God and the nature of human beings as free moral creatures. It would be as if God said to them, "I will allow you to be free only if you do what I say. If you donít, then I will snuff out your very freedom and existence!" This would be like a father telling his son he wanted him to be a doctor, but when the son chose instead to be a park ranger the father shot him. Eternal suffering is eternal testimony to the freedom and dignity of humans, even unrepentant humans. END QUOTE Amazing - Well - we each choose our own physician - In His love, Bill |
