toldailytopic: Are some people born predestined to go to hell?

[Arthur Brain]

For God to "make an effort," so to speak, to get the Gospel preached in some areas so they at least have a chance of receiving a gift and not making sure everybody has that same chance is indeed arbitrary except that their are reasons and purposes behind what he does in that regard and we aren't privy to those purposes, in which case whether a person happens to be born in the right place or not to get that message is still the luck of the draw. But you seem to imply that if God gives the gift to anyone he is obligated to give it to everyone lest he be arbitrary? I don't see that as necessary. Preferable, but not necessary.

But if you believe that God is just/fair then wouldn't everyone have the same opportunity ultimately? You call the eternal torment doctrine a stumbling block for many, which I agree with. It probably alienates more than any other doctrine there is. You seem to be morally opposed to it as well as Scripturally so does the underlying principle not still count here? That's before even bringing the fates of children into the mix....

 

[Krsto]

But if you believe that God is just/fair then wouldn't everyone have the same opportunity ultimately? You call the eternal torment doctrine a stumbling block for many, which I agree with. It probably alienates more than any other doctrine there is. You seem to be morally opposed to it as well as Scripturally so does the underlying principle not still count here? That's before even bringing the fates of children into the mix....

I don't see universalism as being taught in the first place so naturally adjust my doctrine of justice and fairness to accomodate what I do see taught. I can do that without violating conscience because I really don't think fairness means everybody gets a chance at the same blessing. If the alternative for those who don't get the blessing is something as horrific as eternal suffering then yes I would have to violate or repress my conscience (same thing, really) and ignore the Holy Spirit within, or think the conscience and/or the Holy Spirit is the "spirit of humanism" like those who think a just God will send people to eternal torment.

To think a fair and just God will necessarily offer a gift to all is bordering on humanistic thinking imnsho.

 

[WizardofOz]

toldailytopic: Are some people born predestined to go to hell?

I have always thought "no", but then I came across "the horn" and now I am having second thoughts.

 

[Totton Linnet]

What's the 'true church' exactly?



Deliberately rejecting man made doctrines is not exactly the same thing. If you believe eternal torment is taught as biblical it's your call, but it doesn't mean you're correct on the matter.



I think you'll find it stems back considerably further than that, if the founding church fathers and original translators count at any rate....heard of Origen? lain: Your diatribe regarding the world wars is just downright bizarre frankly. :AMR:

Origen is the father of scripture twisters, eternal torment is itself a twist in the way you use it. The teaching of Christ is "these shall go away into everlasting punishment" That is not a man's doctrine which is why men reject it.

The voice which denies this warning is the same voice which said in the garden "you shall not surely die."

You admit then that you do not know the true church, well the true church does not know you so we are quits there.

 

[bybee]

I don't see universalism as being taught in the first place so naturally adjust my doctrine of justice and fairness to accomodate what I do see taught. I can do that without violating conscience because I really don't think fairness means everybody gets a chance at the same blessing. If the alternative for those who don't get the blessing is something as horrific as eternal suffering then yes I would have to violate or repress my conscience (same thing, really) and ignore the Holy Spirit within, or think the conscience and/or the Holy Spirit is the "spirit of humanism" like those who think a just God will send people to eternal torment.

To think a fair and just God will necessarily offer a gift to all is bordering on humanistic thinking imnsho.

If God is Love, then He loves all. Love is available to all. Not all avail themselves of it.

 

[Lon]

at first I thought that was pretty good
but
then after just a little thinking which we all should do

I realized that we were all predestined to go to heaven
and
we were all redeemed by Jesus

Keep thinking with me then. Was Adam really predestined for heaven? I know it is a chicken, egg, chick, chicken proposition here.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Origen is the father of scripture twisters, eternal torment is itself a twist in the way you use it. The teaching of Christ is "these shall go away into everlasting punishment" That is not a man's doctrine which is why men reject it.

The voice which denies this warning is the same voice which said in the garden "you shall not surely die."

How is he? He was one of the original translators so please explain why. If the punishment is everlasting and conscious then I'd say that would amount to torment, wouldn't you? So hardly that much of a 'twist'. If you're familiar with any of the original Greek at all you'll find that 'aionian' doesn't necessarily translate as 'eternal' to start with. Some of the more literal concordances reflect this.

You admit then that you do not know the true church, well the true church does not know you so we are quits there.

Hmm, nice attitude there Totten. I didn't 'admit' any such thing but rather asked you to define what you consider the 'true church'.

lain:

 

[Arthur Brain]

I don't see universalism as being taught in the first place so naturally adjust my doctrine of justice and fairness to accomodate what I do see taught. I can do that without violating conscience because I really don't think fairness means everybody gets a chance at the same blessing. If the alternative for those who don't get the blessing is something as horrific as eternal suffering then yes I would have to violate or repress my conscience (same thing, really) and ignore the Holy Spirit within, or think the conscience and/or the Holy Spirit is the "spirit of humanism" like those who think a just God will send people to eternal torment.

To think a fair and just God will necessarily offer a gift to all is bordering on humanistic thinking imnsho.

Would a just, fair and loving God not avail the opportunity to all? You object to people suffering for ever if they 'miss out' on the chance but think it's ok if they're annihilated despite not even having an opportunity? How is that 'humanistic thinking'?

 

[Krsto]

Would a just, fair and loving God not avail the opportunity to all? You object to people suffering for ever if they 'miss out' on the chance but think it's ok if they're annihilated despite not even having an opportunity? How is that 'humanistic thinking'?

Because it's something John Lennon would come up with? :idunno:

Because there's no name under heaven given to man by which we can be saved than Jesus. How can they believe if they don't hear and someone doesn't go and speak the message?

Why the admonitions to preach if everybody's going to get saved anyhow? It doesn't make any more sense than Calvinists preaching since it's already been determined who's going to get saved and who's not and nobody can do anything about it.

 

[Krsto]

If God is Love, then He loves all. Love is available to all. Not all avail themselves of it.

Well he does make it to rain on the just and the unjust but that's a far cry from everyone getting saved.

 

[Ktoyou]

If you define hell to be the grave then all men are predestined to go there, Enoch being an exception.

If you word that question, "Are some men destined to stay there," then yes, I believe Isrealites of Christ's time were blinded by God so as not to accept the Gospel so were predestined to end up in the grave and stay there without having the opportunity to have eternal life.

What do you mean by 'they just say there' do you believe they die permanently, like your dog, or a chicken??

 

[Arthur Brain]

Because it's something John Lennon would come up with? :idunno:

Because there's no name under heaven given to man by which we can be saved than Jesus. How can they believe if they don't hear and someone doesn't go and speak the message?

Well that's hardly equitable though is it? On the one hand you'll object to a doctrine which states such people will wind up in interminable misery, but seemingly have no issue if they're snuffed out simply for no other reason for having the sheer misfortune to be in such a position where they've no access to that which could bring them life. I don't think you have to be John Lennon to see a bit of a disconnect going on there....

What happens to children under your belief? Do they get an automatic pass or are they annihilated as well? Or is that a grey area?

Why the admonitions to preach if everybody's going to get saved anyhow? It doesn't make any more sense than Calvinists preaching since it's already been determined who's going to get saved and who's not and nobody can do anything about it.

Is spreading a message of "good news" not worth anything in the here and now? Is the message simply about avoiding some sort of unenviable fate?

 

[Krsto]

Well that's hardly equitable though is it? On the one hand you'll object to a doctrine which states such people will wind up in interminable misery, but seemingly have no issue if they're snuffed out simply for no other reason for having the sheer misfortune to be in such a position where they've no access to that which could bring them life. I don't think you have to be John Lennon to see a bit of a disconnect going on there....

What happens to children under your belief? Do they get an automatic pass or are they annihilated as well? Or is that a grey area?

Is spreading a message of "good news" not worth anything in the here and now? Is the message simply about avoiding some sort of unenviable fate?

The main force of the Gospel is the hereafter, as I recall. Yes, temporal benefits, but that's more byproduct than final goal.

I don't believe a newborn infant has sinned so hasn't earned the wages of sin, but doesn't have an immortal soul either, so I suppose once the lights are out, that's it. No more conscious existance. Those who have lived long enough to sin I believe will face God in judgement in a resurrection to damnation. Some say that since "the child of the believer is sanctified by his believing parents" that means they get their parent's reward so there's that possibility too.

You catagorize being snuffed out as "sheer misfortune" (if they weren't lucky enough to hear the Gospel) but most atheists figure it's just man's end to return to the dust and don't really think of that as unfair. It just seems rather, "Duh, the only sure thing in life is death and taxes," and don't curse the forces of nature or evolution. They just accept it as a normal and natural end of human life. Is it "misfortune" only because others get something of great fortune? I never thought of it as "misfortune" to not be Bill Gates' kid. I'm OK with middle class and don't despise the rich kids and glad I wasn't raised in poverty. Not that I wouldn't have enjoyed dating life more if I had had a ton of money to blow every night.

 

[Krsto]

What do you mean by 'they just say there' do you believe they die permanently, like your dog, or a chicken??

Yup. Fear not those who can destroy you body but fear the one who can destroy both body and soul in hell.

 

[Ktoyou]

Yup. Fear not those who can destroy you body but fear the one who can destroy both body and soul in hell.

You are not saying anything here. You did equate hell with being in the grave, or dead. What do you think happens to the soul?

 

[Krsto]

You are not saying anything here. You did equate hell with being in the grave, or dead. What do you think happens to the soul?

It's not immortal, contrary to Plato, so adios amigos.

 

[Ktoyou]

It's not immortal, contrary to Plato, so adios amigos.

Then you are misinformed. Too bad you are not open to the truth?

 

[Arthur Brain]

The main force of the Gospel is the hereafter, as I recall. Yes, temporal benefits, but that's more byproduct than final goal.

Well in essence yes, but a hope in the hereafter is pretty common on this plane.

I don't believe a newborn infant has sinned so hasn't earned the wages of sin, but doesn't have an immortal soul either, so I suppose once the lights are out, that's it. No more conscious existance. Those who have lived long enough to sin I believe will face God in judgement in a resurrection to damnation. Some say that since "the child of the believer is sanctified by his believing parents" that means they get their parent's reward so there's that possibility too.

Hmm, I have to say I have all sorts of issues with this. You're effectively saying that billions of lives are wiped out before they've even reached adulthood and then that's it. Just bad luck, unless one has the great fortune to be sanctified by believing parents. I mean seriously dude, do you not see any problems with injustice in that? Is it sheer 'humanistic' thinking to have a problem with it? You state that eternal torment is a stumbling block to many, which yes it is. How about you're in a position where you're confronted by agnostic parents who've lost a young child. Are they likely to be drawn in with what you describe above?

You catagorize being snuffed out as "sheer misfortune" (if they weren't lucky enough to hear the Gospel) but most atheists figure it's just man's end to return to the dust and don't really think of that as unfair. It just seems rather, "Duh, the only sure thing in life is death and taxes," and don't curse the forces of nature or evolution. They just accept it as a normal and natural end of human life. Is it "misfortune" only because others get something of great fortune? I never thought of it as "misfortune" to not be Bill Gates' kid. I'm OK with middle class and don't despise the rich kids and glad I wasn't raised in poverty. Not that I wouldn't have enjoyed dating life more if I had had a ton of money to blow every night.

Yes but what atheists think is hardly relevant to the point here. You deem one fate as unjust but another acceptable simply because one is less horrific than the other, which to my mind ignores the underlying principle, that being is it fair? In the examples in question there's no way for the person to even make a decision, and yet their eternal fate rests on one or the lack thereof?

 

[Krsto]

Well in essence yes, but a hope in the hereafter is pretty common on this plane.

Hmm, I have to say I have all sorts of issues with this. You're effectively saying that billions of lives are wiped out before they've even reached adulthood and then that's it. Just bad luck, unless one has the great fortune to be sanctified by believing parents. I mean seriously dude, do you not see any problems with injustice in that? Is it sheer 'humanistic' thinking to have a problem with it? You state that eternal torment is a stumbling block to many, which yes it is. How about you're in a position where you're confronted by agnostic parents who've lost a young child. Are they likely to be drawn in with what you describe above?

Yes but what atheists think is hardly relevant to the point here. You deem one fate as unjust but another acceptable simply because one is less horrific than the other, which to my mind ignores the underlying principle, that being is it fair? In the examples in question there's no way for the person to even make a decision, and yet their eternal fate rests on one or the lack thereof?

They might be drawn in if they realize the standard Christian line: they are all going to burn forever unless they repent, is a bunch of hoooey. I think they would be relieved to know one who claims to speak for God and from the scriptures doesn't believe they will burn forever. I think they will be able to accept the fact it's only normal and natural for people's lives to end at the grave since that's what they've come to on their own. Then I show up and say God has a great gift, not everybody gets to hear about it, including your child, but you do. How many will say, "I can't go there because my child couldn't go there?" I don't think they are necessarily going to see that as unfair. Unlucky perhaps, like the one whos lottery ticket wasn't drawn, but not necessarily mistreated or victims of injustice.

 

[Krsto]

Then you are misinformed. Too bad you are not open to the truth?

I'm not sure what you believe but I probably believed it at one time so am informed so if that's the truth I was open to it but have been persuaded by the scriptures of what I believe now. I may be getting older and uglier but I'm better informed now than I was then.