This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Looking at common apologetics about Hell.

#1DarkContractorPosted 2/4/2013 4:42:11 PM
I wanted to criticize some of the common apologetics used to answer "How could an all loving God send someone to burn eternally", basically.

Christian universalism- this really isn't Biblically backed up at all. it's a lot of rationalizing about End times. A lot of it is sealed off with the whole "every tongue on Earth will one day confess His name" verse in Phillipians.

However, this verse is clearly referring to a scenario in basically which anointment is complete. Obviously, thpae rejects have already been sent to Hell/perish/whatever. Without this verse, one cannot come up with an argument for Universalism that trumps (or even matches) other theologies about the Christian afterlife.

Now, annihaltionism. Which is, I might add, assuming the Bible is real, imo, the correct theology of Hell. However, in this case obviously Hell in itself isn't necessary for punishment. Our inexistence is adequate. (look at roman 9 and the parable of the hay, us who aren't saved are basically defective God glorifiers and no point keeping a broken human around. of course, this speaks volumes for the whole "We are God's bride/childen" parallel, but thats a topic in itself) Basically, then in God's sovereignty, why create us in the first place? Basically, the person who won't get saved is doomed from birth to literally never accomplish anything that will last, suffer the evils of this world, and his friends and family will grow to know him, only to literally never see him again. God knows all of this from the get go, and refuses to pull the plug. its like say a woman got pregnant and KNEW (for the purposes of this parallel to God, we're going with 'knew' instead of 'predicted') for a fact that the baby would not survive infancy, that we waited up until the very last second, like 8 months and 3 weeks into pregnancy, to commit the abortion.

"In order to draw us closer to him, God won't relent for anything. itd be unfair of him to not persuade, to not demand, and to not threaten us towards him" (to be fair the only person Ive ever seen use this defense is Francis Chan, whom still has my respect. I think he's the best pastor in the modern day, regardless if I believe or disbelieve)

Whhhy not just, y'know, show up? All throughout the Bible God showing up was a far more effective way of bringing people towards him than threatening them. If anything, I would wager there are atheists who WOULD be Christians if not for this threat.


Any other defenses?
---
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
#2DarkContractor(Topic Creator)Posted 2/4/2013 4:43:28 PM
oh and im just going to type "b.o.p." every time someone tells me anything God does is a priori good, btw. you've been warned.
---
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
#3LastManStandingPosted 2/4/2013 4:52:53 PM
Threats are actually big mistakes. Some parents start it off from the beginning threatening children with hell right from the beginning when they do something bad.
God is love, and Christ died for our sins. Any person that goes to hell, basically makes heaven cry as Christ died for that person sins, and he goes to hell. It is a horrible ordeal. People should preach God love from the beginning.
Also another reason why scaring is wrong. Because if a person moves away from God, that person cannot lose hope that he/she can ever come back. People scaring and sentencing others to hell, make that person lose hope. Worst thing in the world you can lose is hope, as you can always come back, always.
---
Divine Mercy - God Loves you as a sinner.
Christ Said: Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy. (Diary 1588) Day of Mercy was declared in 2000
#4DarkContractor(Topic Creator)Posted 2/4/2013 5:09:40 PM
From: LastManStanding | #003
Threats are actually big mistakes. Some parents start it off from the beginning threatening children with hell right from the beginning when they do something bad.
God is love, and Christ died for our sins. Any person that goes to hell, basically makes heaven cry as Christ died for that person sins, and he goes to hell. It is a horrible ordeal. People should preach God love from the beginning.
Also another reason why scaring is wrong. Because if a person moves away from God, that person cannot lose hope that he/she can ever come back. People scaring and sentencing others to hell, make that person lose hope. Worst thing in the world you can lose is hope, as you can always come back, always.


which brings us straight back to the question, why does an all loving God send people to Hell in the first place?

Do you even understand what this topic is talking about?

I honestly think LMS has this giant word document of random (often erroneous) Christian ramblings and he literally just copys and pastes random chunks of it on this board, regardless of relevance.
---
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
#5Lord_IchmaelPosted 2/4/2013 5:19:14 PM
I literally think you use "literally" a lot in contexts where it's not necessary.

Hell itself is a big contradiction imo, one of many that casts doubt on the truthfulness Christianity, and Islam for that matter. Infinite punishment for a finite "crime" if one can even call it that.
#6LastManStandingPosted 2/4/2013 5:19:30 PM
DarkContractor posted...
From: LastManStanding | #003
Threats are actually big mistakes. Some parents start it off from the beginning threatening children with hell right from the beginning when they do something bad.
God is love, and Christ died for our sins. Any person that goes to hell, basically makes heaven cry as Christ died for that person sins, and he goes to hell. It is a horrible ordeal. People should preach God love from the beginning.
Also another reason why scaring is wrong. Because if a person moves away from God, that person cannot lose hope that he/she can ever come back. People scaring and sentencing others to hell, make that person lose hope. Worst thing in the world you can lose is hope, as you can always come back, always.


which brings us straight back to the question, why does an all loving God send people to Hell in the first place?

Do you even understand what this topic is talking about?

I honestly think LMS has this giant word document of random (often erroneous) Christian ramblings and he literally just copys and pastes random chunks of it on this board, regardless of relevance.


I don't understand apologetics well.
I know one think about hell, that we go there ourselves by rejecting the Mercy of God. There is no other way to go to hell.
---
Divine Mercy - God Loves you as a sinner.
Christ Said: Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy. (Diary 1588) Day of Mercy was declared in 2000
#7DarkContractor(Topic Creator)Posted 2/4/2013 5:34:55 PM
From: Lord_Ichmael | #005
I literally think you use "literally" a lot in contexts where it's not necessary.

Hell itself is a big contradiction imo, one of many that casts doubt on the truthfulness Christianity, and Islam for that matter. Infinite punishment for a finite "crime" if one can even call it that.


touche :PFrom: LastManStanding | #006
DarkContractor posted...
From: LastManStanding | #003
Threats are actually big mistakes. Some parents start it off from the beginning threatening children with hell right from the beginning when they do something bad.
God is love, and Christ died for our sins. Any person that goes to hell, basically makes heaven cry as Christ died for that person sins, and he goes to hell. It is a horrible ordeal. People should preach God love from the beginning.
Also another reason why scaring is wrong. Because if a person moves away from God, that person cannot lose hope that he/she can ever come back. People scaring and sentencing others to hell, make that person lose hope. Worst thing in the world you can lose is hope, as you can always come back, always.


which brings us straight back to the question, why does an all loving God send people to Hell in the first place?

Do you even understand what this topic is talking about?

I honestly think LMS has this giant word document of random (often erroneous) Christian ramblings and he literally just copys and pastes random chunks of it on this board, regardless of relevance.


I don't understand apologetics well.
I know one think about hell, that we go there ourselves by rejecting the Mercy of God. There is no other way to go to hell.



trust us, we know, we KNOW, you don't understand apologetics well.

Doesn't an unforgivable sin actually undermine the divinity of Jesus's blood? Was Jesus not holy enough to make the crimson stain left by the rejection of him white as snow?
---
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
#8LastManStandingPosted 2/4/2013 5:41:21 PM
DarkContractor posted...
From: Lord_Ichmael | #005
I literally think you use "literally" a lot in contexts where it's not necessary.

Hell itself is a big contradiction imo, one of many that casts doubt on the truthfulness Christianity, and Islam for that matter. Infinite punishment for a finite "crime" if one can even call it that.


touche :PFrom: LastManStanding | #006
DarkContractor posted...
From: LastManStanding | #003
Threats are actually big mistakes. Some parents start it off from the beginning threatening children with hell right from the beginning when they do something bad.
God is love, and Christ died for our sins. Any person that goes to hell, basically makes heaven cry as Christ died for that person sins, and he goes to hell. It is a horrible ordeal. People should preach God love from the beginning.
Also another reason why scaring is wrong. Because if a person moves away from God, that person cannot lose hope that he/she can ever come back. People scaring and sentencing others to hell, make that person lose hope. Worst thing in the world you can lose is hope, as you can always come back, always.


which brings us straight back to the question, why does an all loving God send people to Hell in the first place?

Do you even understand what this topic is talking about?

I honestly think LMS has this giant word document of random (often erroneous) Christian ramblings and he literally just copys and pastes random chunks of it on this board, regardless of relevance.


I don't understand apologetics well.
I know one think about hell, that we go there ourselves by rejecting the Mercy of God. There is no other way to go to hell.



trust us, we know, we KNOW, you don't understand apologetics well.

Doesn't an unforgivable sin actually undermine the divinity of Jesus's blood? Was Jesus not holy enough to make the crimson stain left by the rejection of him white as snow?


The unforgivable sin is a big misconception. People, including me, thought that it meant uttering a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. That is not the case. I even witness people here trying to do soul suicide by doing that. Nope. It is rejecting of Mercy of God. It saying God I do not believe you died for my sins, because my sins are greater than your Mercy, Self contempt, worst thing you can do.
---
Divine Mercy - God Loves you as a sinner.
Christ Said: Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy. (Diary 1588) Day of Mercy was declared in 2000
#9SilviiroPosted 2/4/2013 5:56:31 PM
Who are we to determine what is the nature of God and the nature of existence itself? If God is as he is described in the Bible then he's probably using the best option available to him. If God does not exist or does not exist as described in the Bible then there is no use debating a Biblical Hell in such a context.

Of course there is always the question of "is Hell a place or a state? Can Hell be on Earth?" To me it is still a split issue. I may currently be in Hell, I don't know.
---
"I have seen everything that is done under the sun, and behold, all is vanity and a striving after wind." -- Ecclesiastes 1:14
#10DarkContractor(Topic Creator)Posted 2/4/2013 5:57:07 PM
neither of those are what it is. I'm not sure what it is, I have a good guess, but I don't know how you could get either one of those interpretations from the text.

also, thanks for strawmanning the tarnations out of me. I''l give you an apologetics lesson, since you said you don't understand them. taking a point and acting like I said it, then rebutting it instead of rebutting what I actually said, it's a strawman.

Anyways, even if I did conform to either of those baseless interpretations, that still doesn't solve the underlying issue of Jesus's blood not being divine enough to redeem it. Why does blaspheme stay red?

the second one, rejecting the power of Jesus's blood to save, is actually pretty funny. So me not believing it was powerful enough to save me actually makes it not powerful enough to save me. Very interesting. So, does Jesus just become a basic human if I believe he was a mere mortal?
---
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.