Ice

This might be a tad off-topic, but I did learn of one concept of Hell which 'appealed' to me - that Hell is simply the withdrawal of God's grace, attention, face, etc for eternity. Now that we're still alive, we still have the ability to experience the grace of God. Once we are in Hell, we know he exists, but we no longer feel his grace, which, someone once told me, will hurt more than fire and brimstone will.

Queen of Swords

My father told me once that the Jews are indeed burning in hell, and, moreover, that they deserve it because they asked for it. "When did they ask for their families to be tortured and gassed?" I said. "When they killed Jesus. They said, 'let his blood be on us and our children.' So God allowed them to be punished in the Holocaust."

If the Jews hadn't killed Jesus, wouldn't we all be hellbound? God should have given them medals or something, but he allows them to die for doing something which was necessary in order for him to forgive people. Go figure.

spurly

Christ-on-a-stick:

To answer your question I would say "yes". If the Jews did not accept their Messiah before their death, then they will miss out on an eternal relationship with God.

There is only one exception I can think of. If they had never heard of Jesus Christ, then they would be judged based on the revelation they knew (see Romans 1 for this argument).

Kevin

spurly

QOS:

As a Christian, this statement that your father made makes my stomach turn. It's that kind of hatred that turns many people away from God.

I was just reading the passage you quoted in the Bible today and a totally different thought popped in my head. When the Jews said, "let his blood be on us and our children", they got a lot more than they were asking for, and something they did not understand.

They got his blood that still flows today for forgiveness and to bring people back into a relationship with God. They were able to be covered with the blood that saves. It's ironic, in a way that only God could plan.

Kevin

christ-on-a-stick

Kevin, Does it NOT "turn your stomach" to imagine someone being held captive, tortured and ultimately gassed to death - only, upon death, to find themselves eternally suffering in the fiery pits of hell, and having it be called "right" and "good"?

I see that you are consistent, at least, in your beliefs; however, it strikes me as frightening and abhorrent, to be honest, that you would characterize as "good" and "loving" a deity who would do such a thing.

Let me ask you this; do you believe that the Holocaust was a Bad Thing (TM)? If so, why? Why was it bad for the Jews to suffer as they did in Hitler's death camps? I realize that you might invoke that it "wasn't Hitler's right to inflict such suffering", but think about it: if they were deserving of ETERNAL torment for their non-belief, why were they not in their earthly lives "deserving" of much lesser pain?

It seems hypocritical to say that as mortals it was a great injustice and tragedy for them to suffer pain, but suddenly upon death it became "just" for them to be tortured forever.

Think about it. Please.

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by spurly
As a Christian, this statement that your father made makes my stomach turn. It's that kind of hatred that turns many people away from God.

COAS has already expressed my own thoughts on what's truly stomach-turning, but let me just add that I didn't see any hatred in what my father was saying, only logic. The Jews killed Jesus, an innocent man, the son of god. Therefore, they deserved to pay for it. Are we not all sinners and do we not all deserve eternal torture? If the answer to that is yes, then I fail to see how the Jews did not deserve a little temporary torture to go along with their eternal suffering, especially if, as the bible says, they asked for it.

spurly

Was the holocaust a bad thing? Without a doubt. Why? Because one man and his regime were stealing the gift of life from countless millions of people. They were snuffing out the life that God gave them. And it wasn't just Jews. Christians, homosexuals, and anyone else who struck Hitler's fancy were included in his death camps.

Why was it a bad thing? Because Hitler was setting himself up as the ultimate judge, putting himself in the place that is reserved only for God.

Why was it a bad thing? Because families were destroyed.

Does this mean that if God sends someone to Hell, separating themselves from his love for eternity is is a wicked thing? Not necessarily. That is a big jump that can not be logically taken.

God, because he is God, knows the heart. His decisions will always be fair and just - unlike Hitlers. Those who love God will be able to do so for eternity, those who do not, will be able to not love God for eternity.

If you have any other questions, please feel free to post them.

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by spurly
Those who love God will be able to do so for eternity, those who do not, will be able to not love God for eternity.

Those who do not love god will be tortured for all eternity. In other words, either you love god or you suffer unendingly. There is no choice involved. God, in this scenario, comes off as a jealous stalker who says, "if I can't have you, no one will" and then kills you.

There is nothing fair or just about this decision. In fact, it's worse than any decision Hitler ever made, because even Hitler was not capable of torturing people unendingly.

spurly

QOS:

There is tons of choice involved, and it has been that way from the beginning. God has always given us a choice whether or not to live in relationship with him. As a matter of fact, giving us that choice - and mankind abusing that choice - is what has the world in many of the messes in which it finds itself today.

God made a choice in the very beginning not to create robots who had to love him. It was a risky choice, but it was the only choice he could have made because he is a God of love and love, by its nature, can not be forced.

He even loves those who do not love him. And he simply waits, hoping that eventually they will want to return his embrace.

Was it a tough thing to give us that choice? Probably, because he knew his heart would be broken. But love without choice is not love at all.

Kevin

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by spurly
There is tons of choice involved, and it has been that way from the beginning. God has always given us a choice whether or not to live in relationship with him.

Unless, for example, the person never heard of the gospel, in which case they died in their sins and burned in hell?

Also, god's giving us this "choice" is like a stalker giving you the choice of marrying him or eating a bullet. If you see any differences between this analogy and god's "live in a relationship with me or burn in hell for ever", please point them out.

God made a choice in the very beginning not to create robots who had to love him.

He chose instead to create creatures who could, instead of being forced to love him, be tortured in hell for all eternity if they happened to make the wrong choice?

I'm not sure that's a great deal better.

It was a risky choice, but it was the only choice he could have made because he is a God of love and love, by its nature, can not be forced.

If love cannot be forced, why doesn't he allow people to choose to love him after they die? Why does he punish the people who don't love him?

He even loves those who do not love him. And he simply waits, hoping that eventually they will want to return his embrace.

Does he wait until after they die and they are presented with incontrovertible proof of his existence and his love?

Or does he send them to heaven or hell at that point?

Was it a tough thing to give us that choice? Probably, because he knew his heart would be broken.

I'd feel much more sorry for him if he wasn't torturing people for all eternity because they didn't happen to believe in him.

But love without choice is not love at all.

Agreed. It is coercion. To give someone the choice of "loving" you or suffering endlessly is coercion.