Am I saved from the Christian point of view?
- Thread starter garyflet
- Start date
I think if I respond to Clete's post, I will end up answering other posts as well. I can see that I haven't made myself clear in what I said here. I'm not afraid of eternal torment. But I don't like the idea of little kids being terribly scared at the prospect of eternal torment. It was the eternal part that really scared me. Eternity is a mighty long time, an unimaginably long time! And to be stuck in a place of torment with no way out for eternity is about the worst thing I could imagine happening to anybody. So to find a way of interpreting the Bible so that hell is a place of destruction and then death, the end of consciousness, is much easier to take, I would think for a little kid. I really don't see how adult Christians can live with the idea. There loved ones thrown into hell? And you mentioned that other Bible-believing Christians believe that the torment isn't eternal. So that gives me hope! Now there have been some posts talking about how hell isn't so bad. Well, I can appreciate the effort, I think these ideas are the result of having compassion for people, I just don't see how they come out of the descriptions of hell in the Bible, nor in Jesus' warnings about how bad hell is.
Now we're talking about what I think today, not from the framework of Christianity. There is nothing for me to "get off lightly" from. I've loved people and hurt no one. I simply don't feel guilty.
None of the descriptions of hell in Dante worried me as a little kid. They are straight from the Bible and have already been quoted. Getting thrown into a place where you are burned up, a furnace, a lake of fire, torment, eternal punishment, etc.
Sorry I didn't write about looking at the Bible, thinking that you or others didn't look at the Bible. Obviously, I know you do, which is why I have asked questions about the Bible! I was actually trying to reassure you that I was not up to no good. I apologize for failing to communicate well here, for only coming across presumptuous and condescending.
After reading this, I looked about in the newbie section for a description of TOL. I only see mention of it being a forum, which I assumed meant discussion as well as debate. I'm looking for a discussion, in a debate you don't ask questions of the other side, nor are you supposed to change your position. I'm not debating, I'm discussing, which means I may not understand or even disagree sometimes.
And yet you have kindly answered my posts. You, Clete, have responded the most! I thank you in particular. Of course, no one is obligated to respond to my posts. All I can say is the subject is not trivial to me in the least. My fear as a child was real. And I wonder how Christians handle the belief in hell. The idea of billions of people burning or otherwise being tormented for eternity describes a tragedy infinitely worse than the worst we've heard about in the history of humanity. But in this thread I've learned about some strategies that I've never heard before, that hell isn't necessarily so bad, that maybe some people would want to go to hell, etc.
Well, historically Protestants believe that the Bible is open to interpretation by anyone. The ministry of some Christians is just to see that it gets translated into as many languages at all and distributed! That is, it is not necessary always to consult a priest or an experts. And as we have already mentioned, even the experts disagree! I'm not saying that experts are not useful, they certainly can be, especially when they know Greek and/or Hebrew and ancient cultures. But ultimately, we all have to decide for ourselves what the Bible is telling us, Christian or not. I went to a college where the Bible was studied as one of the foundational texts of Western civilization. (No, I'm not saying that to promote my qualifications, but to say that everybody has reason to study the Bible.)
However, Jesus seemed to care. Almost all the verses I cited were verses of Jesus talking about hell. It Jesus cares to talk about it, isn't it important? Also in your list of the bare minimum items that people need to believe to be saved is the statement:
We, having rebelled against the God who gave us life, deserve death.
No mention of hell at all! I don't know about you, but when I read that, it sounds like all we deserve is the death of being destroyed, like when I step on a bug and it dies. But maybe you mean more than that? When people are thrown into hell after death, and dwell there eternally, do they deserve that, too?
I'll get to that later.
Well, if there's anything you feel important that I haven't addressed, please let me know and I'll address it.
So does that mean, when interpreting the Bible, that if an expert says the Bible says "not x" and I clearly see the Bible saying "x", that I should believe what the expert says? A problem with your analogy, is that there may be more universal agreement about the nature of rocket fuel injector than there is about a Bible interpretation. You may be able to find an expert that agrees that the Bible clearly says "x".
I do if I'm talking about what the Bible says and you say that the Bible says "Hell is death by cotton candy". But again, I'm not interested in debate, as though there's a position I must stick to and a position you must stick to. I'm interested in discussion. Which, I believe we have been engaging in! I've learned a lot, thanks again
I'm interested in what you and other Bible-believing Christians believe about hell for reasons stated above. And it bears repeating: I've learned a lot!
Of course, this question only makes sense from the Bible-believing point of view. And the Bible says that God is just, so it wouldn't matter what I thought about the justice of hell. Of course, the question may come up, even for the Bible-believing Christian as to how God's justice manifests itself in the afterlife. If all unsaved people just died, that would seem relatively reasonable and probably consistent with the idea that God is just. But as a Bible-believing Christian, I might cite Job, where the answer is that God's behavior is beyond the capability of our puny minds to comprehend or judge.
Of course, if I found myself before Christ, that changes everything, and I would quickly become a believer! That means I would believe it when Jesus said it would be better to lose an eye than to be thrown into hell! Or foot, or hand, etc. And given Jesus' descriptions of hell, being burned alive, furnace, lake of fire, etc." obviously I wouldn't want to go there. What's not to like about Heaven? That I have to worship God a lot? That's no problem!
I understand what Rhema is saying. In most English Bibles, the Greek word "Gehenna" is translated "hell" and Hades is transliterated. Some English Bibles translate "Hades" also as "hell". Gehenna was also known as the valley of Hinnon. But the word "hell" in English has all kinds of associations that Gehenna (and Hades) doesn't. When hell is mentioned, English speaking people think of underground caves where there are fires below that the inhabitants are standing in, maybe devils with pitchforks poking people, etc. But Gehenna, which itself is a transliteration of an Aramaic word, refers to a desecrated valley in which at one point children had been sacrificed to a pagan god Molech. (2 Kings 23:10) The place is mentioned again in Jeremiah 7:29-34. This is a place where God will slaughter those who are disobedient among his own people. Also Jeremiah 16:6-9. Prior to Jesus, the Jews had a belief that Gehenna, an unholy place of slaughter for God's enemies at the Last Judgement. No one was thought to somehow endure or live there in torment, they were killed. The Greek scriptures use the word "Gehenna" for the word that gets translated into the English "hell". However, Gehenna was simply a valley or maybe just a ravine.
Incidentally, Jesus most likely spoke Aramaic, not Hebrew. Rhema is essentially correct in everything he said. Jesus never used an Aramaic word that corresponds well with the English word "hell".
Well, there is more to say, and more notes to respond to, but look at the length of this note!
Regards to all,
Gary
They "handle it" by obeying God.
When I see the great sacrifice Jesus made for humanity, my obedience isn't based on fear, but on love.
But if so many are lost, isn't it true that most of the great sacrifice was in vain? Also I was thinking about how Christians handle the idea of eternal suffering in hell in the case of non-Christians. For example, my brother, a non-Christian, recently died. I loved him very much and it would be extremely disturbing to me to think that he will suffer in hell for eternity. Then there are billions out there who won't or haven't passed Clete's bare minimum criteria to be saved. I guess the solution for the Christian is to focus on Christ and forget about all the lost. Or, as we have seen here, say that hell is not so bad and maybe they want to go there! I can certainly understand the motivation to become a missionary.
While I'm replying here, I should point out an error I made in my previous post. Instead of Jeremiah 16:6-9, I should have cited Jeremiah 19.
Gary
Not for those who have availed themselves of it.
I am saddened, but they made the choices they wanted.
They didn't want God in their lives.
I offer my condolences.
Focus on Christ, and the living.
The devil is no amateur at deception.
You've repeated one of the devil's lies.
Me too.
Thanks.
First of all, no it was in no way, in vain! It's a completely asinine thing to even say! There seems no end to your misunderstanding of the bible (on purpose perhaps?). Is there ANYTHING about Christianity that you object to that isn't Calvinist? I can tell you that, so far, what I've seen from you is a rejection of Calvinism, not Biblical Christianity. If you end up in Hell because of it, you won't have been the first nor will you be the last.
Secondly, it is not my list. It is the list or, if you like, the biblical list, which makes it THE list. If you can refute, one syllable of it, I'd hear it gladly - not that you'll even try to do so.
Third, you ought to be "extremely disturbed" because your brother will indeed suffer in Hell for eternity.
Forth, "to focus on Christ and forget about all the lost" is a contradiction.
Lastly, your disturbance about your brother will pail in comparison to what you'll feel on judgment day.
Clete
P.S. You can edit your own posts at any time.
Also, I'm still mulling over whether your last post to me is worth responding to. I'm starting to suspect that you aren't what you claim to be. I don't like liars and won't waste my time with them. We keep talking about your youth but you're too familiar with this whole topic to have learned this as a child. So, either you're misrepresenting yourself or you're being fed this from someone else (the former being far more likely). How old were you when you decided to drop Christianity and how long ago was that?
Last edited:
Yes, but did he suffer in proportion to the number of people that could be saved in all of history? If he did, yet only a fraction of the totality of people in history took advantage of his sacrifice, then he would have suffered in vain. I don't know if the Bible says anything about that or not.
Well, many of them had never heard of the Christian God. There are nearly 2 billion Muslims who want God in their lives. Do you think they will go to hell anyway, practicing Islam? There are millions of Jews who feel they have God in their lives but don't believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Etc.,
Thank you.
So the idea is to forget about Non-Christian people who have died? Do you think God's love for them disappears when they die?
Well, I'm repeating what I understood a member to say in this thread, and what people have quoted to me that C. S. Lewis has said, but I don't think either was the devil!
Thanks for the discussion,
Gary
The problem is that you're trying to turn this into a mathematical equation.
The value of a human life is infinite.
God's value is infinitely greater.
"Infinite" is not a number. It's a description.
Forget redeeming someone else's life, a man cannot redeem his own life, because in order to do so, he must provide something of equal or greater value. But we know that "all have sinned" (that includes you, by the way).
Those who trust in their wealth And boast in the multitude of their riches,None of them can by any means redeem his brother, Nor give to God a ransom for him—For the redemption of their souls is costly, And it shall cease forever—That he should continue to live eternally, And not see the Pit. - Psalm 49:6-9 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm49:6-9&version=NKJV
Justice demands that payment be made for anything that violates God's standard of righteousness. Wrong must be righted.
The good thing is that God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whosoever believes in Him, shall not perish, but have everlasting life.
So how do we get to that point? Jesus, who is God, who is infinitely greater in value than man, gave Himself as a sacrifice for all men, to pay the penalty of sin, and satisfy the demands of justice.
Think of it this way:
You've broken the law, and you crime is so bad that you cannot pay the fine imposed by the judge, and so you'll be spending the rest of your life working to pay off your debt. But the judge tells you, just after sentencing you, that someone else has already paid your fine, and you're a free man. You don't have to pay that fine. You can walk out of that court room, free of debt. All you have to do is accept that your benefactor paid your fine.
That's what it means for Christ to have died for you, Gary. He died so that you don't have to pay the demands of justice yourself. It's already been paid.
Suffice it to say (since this isn't the thread for the topic) that Allah is not God, and Muhammed is a false prophet. Believing in a false god will definitely not give someone eternal life.
Neither will rejecting the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the One who gave His life for you.
Repent.
I refuse to discuss this topic with you, an unbeliever. There's no point.
Eventually, you will be forgotten. You don't want that, Gary. Ask God to come into your life, and you will never be forgotten.
His patience for you will run out when you die. You should turn to God and ask for forgiveness.
Goodness! Didn't mean to upset you. I thought it might be a non-controversial thing to say, because the idea that most people are going to hell is not only not controversial but also biblical. Then if Christ's suffering was a sacrifice in proportion to everyone's sin, it would seem to follow.
I know next to nothing about Calvinism. But the idea that Christ's suffering was in proportion to our sin is something I concluded as a child. I tried to prevent myself from sinning so as to (retroactively) relieve him of at least a tiny, tiny bit of suffering.
My interest here is not to refute, but to discuss and learn. I'm interested mostly in how Conservative Christians think. For example, I can't imagine being happy with the belief that most of humanity is going to hell where they will suffer for eternity. Once response is to discount the people going there, so they are getting what they deserve, maybe even want. Understanding all this is why I'm especially interested in the line in THE LIST: "We, having willfully done evil things and rebelled against God, who gave us life, deserve death". I note that there's no mention of eternal suffering in hell, just "death". Does that mean that the person fulfilling the list does not need to believe that hell exists to be saved? Also, the person going to be saved does not have to believe, necessarily, that we deserve hell, only death?
Thank you for that. Your including not just the living lost, but also the dead lost, right?
You mean I can change what I wrote previously? I don't see any reason for that yet.
Actually, that was stated in the first post: when I was 14, I'm nearly 68 now. I'm not sure how I have misrepresented myself. When I talk about what I thought as a child, I always note that (I thought). When I'm telling you what I think now, I use present tense. For example, from a note above: "My fear as a child was real. And I wonder [present tense] how Christians handle the belief in hell. The idea of billions of people burning or otherwise being tormented for eternity describes a tragedy infinitely worse than the worst we've heard about in the history of humanity. But in this thread I've learned about some strategies that I've never heard before, that hell isn't necessarily so bad, that maybe some people would want to go to hell, etc." I guess you get a lot of trolls on here, no? Somehow I get the feeling that I'm enjoying our exchange a lot more than you. I do think that there's too many tangents if we respond to every little thing. The only two questions for you that are important to me is the question about how you handle the gloomy end of most of humanity and the question (I guess there are two) about about the line about deserving death in the list . Thanks for any reply.
If He saved just one soul, His one life was not spent in vain.
If they really wanted God in their lives, God would have made Himself known to them, just as He did for the Christians who wanted God in their lives.
They will not find their names in the book of life so will perish.
If men can tell good from bad, their outcome will be decided on how that influenced their decisions on earth.
Nobody goes to the lake of fire unworthily.
What can we do for the dead?
It is written that God hates sinners, ((Psalm 5:5), so death will not stop God's love.
Sin did that already.
Do you feel you have the ability to see who is of the devil, or not?
Follow? How? In the mind of an atheist? I wish that I thought you might be joking!
It's not as if there were fifty options to choose from. If God desired to have a relationship with ANY human beings then there was one and only one price that could have been paid to make that possible while preserving justice. Christ paid it.
I do not believe you.
Practically every doctrine you've said anything about is a Calvinist doctrine. No way that's an accident. Whether you call it Calvinist or not, you've been taught Calvinism and told it was biblical Christianity.
Well, so much for trusting your childhood mind.
Christ's sacrifice was sufficient to pay the sin debt of every man woman and child that has, is or will ever be a member of the human race and that 50 billion times over and then some. In other words, the price paid was of inexhaustibly INFINITE value!
An egregious insult to the value of the price paid for your soul! Your teaching was so inept as to be worse than completely absent. You'd have been better off never walking through the doors of whatever idiotic church your attended as a child.
If a rich man gave you the entire state of Texas as your private playground and you bought him a McDonald's cheese burger in recompense, it would pail in comparison to the insulting value your attempted righteousness pays towards what's been offered to you as a free gift!
Did you ever attempt to repay your grandparents when they gave you a birthday gift as a child? What do you suppose they would have thought had you tried to do so? Do you expect any sort of reciprocation from your children when you give them a gift? Do you believe that they should feel indebted to you for giving them a warm bed to sleep in?
Contradict yourself much?
They think logically.
Remember what I told you from the beginning...
There is no such thing as an irrational truth.
That's because you have almost no understanding of what justice is or how evil people are, including yourself.
True of many but not all.
You are the one making the distinction, not me nor the statement in the list I presented.
Of course, that's precisely what it means. There isn't any need to believe ANYTHING else besides those basic truths in order to be saved. It is the gospel proper, not the whole of biblical truth. In other words, it is the bare minimum. Not the average, nor the norm but the minimum base doctrines of the gospel.
Ignorance of what death entails will not prevent you from being saved.
No, the dead are bound for their judgment. Those who die (physically) without Christ are without hope.
What are you talking about? You just got through stating that "Instead of Jeremiah 16:6-9, I should have cited Jeremiah 19.". That sounds like a reason to me! If you make an error, typo or otherwise, then go back and correct it!
Perhaps you didn't. I missed the statement about your current age.
Look, I am not stupid and don't tolerate being talked down too. If you want to continue, don't ever say anything like this to me again.
CONSTANTLY!
It's barely an exchange. It's me responding substantively to your assertions with little more than additional assertions from you.
Again, you're too versed in this topic for it to be as casual an interest as you're pretending it to be. Someone taught you this nonsense. Someone taught you to be not only be an atheist but to be an anti-Christian. Someone taught you to believe that God is unjust. It's no mistake that whoever did that chose Calvinism to present to you as what Christianity is. You've been lied to, Gary - or you're the source of all this and you're the one doing the lying. Jury is still out on that question. Either way, your childhood fears, both by your own reasoning and by actual biblical teaching, do not touch the perfect Justice that is God Himself.
Clete
Last edited:
Well, we should probably pause here and get this straightened out. I'm not two people and you say the only alternative is that I am a liar. So what statement(s) have I made knowing that the statement was false and yet I asserted it as though it were true.
Thanks for your reply,
Gary
Implying a falsehood is a lie, Gary. A false pretense is a lie.
You're here pretending like you don't know what Christians believe about Hell. I believe you not only know, but are an expert on the topic, even if that is the loosest possible sense of the term "expert". Either that, or you're getting your information (like verses that pertain to the nature of Hell) from someone else and pretending like you just happen to know it. Either way, you're acting in a manner that I do not trust.
If nothing else, the Catholic Rite has a "temporary holding cell" known as purgatory, and a gift of money to the church (known as an indulgence) will create "merit" such that a deceased loved one can be released into heaven by order of the Pope or his designee.
This exact issue, the meritocracy of monetary gifts, known as indulgences, to be ascribed to the account of another, was the start of the Protestant Reformation in 1517. Since then, there's been 500 years of theological chaos.
Dr. Schaeffer, a beloved Presbyterian and Evangelical apologist, tried to make the distinction between feeling guilty and true guilt. But yet once again we run into a conundrum where the Gospel texts of the New Testament speak of people who are righteous, while modern Christians point to other portions of scripture that state no one is righteous.
The Protestant Rite seems to have inherited the doctrine of universal condemnation from the Catholic Rite. Ergo you would BE guilty by the fact of your mere birth. This is why the Catholic Rite (whether the Roman branch or the Orthodox branch) provides for the Sacrament of Baptism at the birth of a child.
And that, right there, was the biggest mistake Martin Luther ever made. Luther translated the Bible into German for the sole purpose of proving to everyone that he and he alone was RIGHT. He was shocked and appalled that anybody could arrive at a different conclusion than he when reading the exact same text. But the proverbial Genie was out of the bottle.
The process of translation (and the propensity of the scribes to lie) is the subject of a whole nuther thread.
But in truth, real experts have a good estimation of what they don't know, and are always willing to change when sufficient reasons are provided. That said, most translations out there are the result of an organization (think church) that wants an English version to read the way they believe. You might find the history (and criticism) of the NIV to be interesting.
Until God talks to you directly. Then your cosmological paradigm goes into the shredder.
Absolutely.
But again, we enter the murk where most people aren't even aware that there are presuppositions that they bring along with them into their attempts to understand, let alone spend the time to consider whether these presuppositions are valid or not. The entire doctrine of Inerrancy can turn into a minefield of misapprehensions. But since most people cannot read Greek, most people are literally unable to read what Jesus actually talked about (as published by his disciples). All we have are words, and the selection of words within the translation process is crucial to the attainment of truth. I can give examples, but it would likely be considered unnecessarily disruptive. There are two verses in Luther's German translation where in once case he added a word, and in another he omitted a word in order that his German scripture conform to his personal belief.
"Biblical scholar Bruce M. Metzger criticized the NIV 1984 edition for the addition of the word "just" into Jeremiah 7:22 so the verse becomes "For when I brought your forefathers/ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices."
- Metzger, Bruce M. (2001). The Bible in Translation : Ancient and English Versions. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. p. 140.
Technically then, the NIV was written by expert lying scribes, a very old problem as attested to here:
(Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV) How can you say, “We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us,” when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?
Translation and Semiotics are fascinating, don't you think?
Oddly enough, there are many Christians that believe Justice and Mercy are opposing attributes. I've often wondered why many Evangelicals cannot see the Mercies of God AS being Just - that the Father in His Gracious Mercies is somehow not Just when He grants Forgiveness out of His own compassion. Indeed, I think this is what Jesus was trying to address... that "Justice" as understood by the human mind is nothing like the Justice of God.
Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
(John 16:7-13 KJV)Thank you kindly. I hadn't thought my words too obscure.
(But he would have read Hebrew in the synagogue.)
And I provide for you a link to the Aramaic New Testament (and translation).
TheAramaicScriptures.com
The Holy Aramaic Scriptures: With a literal English translation and transliteration of The Eastern Peshitta New Testament Text, such as given in The Khabouris Codex.
www.thearamaicscriptures.com
.... Although the "experts" think this was translated from the published Greek texts. There are some interesting issues of interpretation and translation, but not as much as between the KJV & NIV and the initial Greek texts.
It's unfortunate that we have no extant copies of the book of Matthew purported by Origen to have been authored in Hebrew.
3. (4) `Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that first was written that according to Matthew, who was once a tax collector but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who published it for those who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew language.
Kindly,
Rhema
Right Divider
Body part
The scripture says BOTH (that there are righteous men and that no one is righteous)... so do you know how to resolve this?
P.S. It has nothing to do with "modern Christians".
In other words, no, you don't know how to resolve it.
Here's how I know: because your theology does not rightly divide God's word.
I'm waiting on pins and needles!
Hi Clete,
Well, I'm afraid that to come to this forum pretending to be very knowledgeable about hell or the Bible in general would be an even bigger pretense! I don't think that there was any place that I pretended to know very little about hell in this thread. But I am largely self-taught, which means there are going to be gaps in what I know. Also, the subject is something I'm obviously interested in, so I'm interested in different points of view, different opinions on hell. Actually, I've only recently been reading about the time when the Jews began writing about hell and heaven, things I didn't know when I started this thread! For example, some of the verses from Jeremiah that I quoted came from this book and Wikipedia. Maybe you could say I'm a Wikipedia level "expert". I don't know Greek, and I believe I mentioned that. Further, I'm learning things, and sometimes you seem shocked that I don't know something. I had never been taught or heard or read that Jesus' sacrifice was infinite (that I can recall). That was one of the many things I learned on this thread. How can I be any kind of an expert on Christian beliefs? So yes, I am getting my information from someone else in the form of books and the internet, but no, there is no other person whispering in my ear. Everything I write here is my responsibility alone.
It seems to me that the only place in the NT where there being none righteous is mentioned is in Rom 3.
There my be more, but I can't think of any right now.
Rom 3's mention of "none righteous" is Paul's recollection of OT verses that he uses to point out to the Jews that even they, with the Law, are guilty before God and need the Redeemer as much as the Gentiles.
It in no-wise intends to label Christians as unrighteous.