It’s not right that people would go to hell just for not believing in the right God. Put another way, a good and moral God would not condemn people to hell just for not believing in Him. This is a common complaint against exclusive religious systems such as Christianity. Have you ever made this objection? If so I urge you to re-think it.
On the surface it seems like a reasonable objection. But it makes two fundamental mistakes. First, no one goes to hell because they believe in the wrong God according to the Christian worldview. People go to hell for violating the laws of God. God requires moral perfection for someone to spend eternity in His presence; anything short of moral perfection requires an eternal punishment*. Moral imperfection is described as sin. It is man’s sin which relegates him to hell, not wrong belief.
A couple analogies may be helpful. Let’s you are driving your car long distance and are beginning to run out of gas. You see a gas station in the distance and just make it. For some reason the station’s gas pumps are out-of-order and you can’t get gas there. Before making it to the next station, your tank goes empty. Did you run out of gas because the pumps were out-of-order at the last station? No, you ran out of gas because you drove too long without refueling. Now let’s say you are walking down the street and a robber sticks a gun in your face and demands your wallet. After you surrender your valuables, the gunman steps back and shoots you in the chest and you die on your way to the hospital. Did you die for lack of a surgeon? No, you died of a gunshot wound to the chest.
In the case of the gun shot, the surgeon would have been the remedy, not the cause of your death. Likewise, the gas station being able to provide gas would have been the remedy to an empty tank, not the cause of running out of gas. In the same way, trusting in Christ is the remedy, it’s what saves you from hell, not the reason you go to hell. What causes someone to spend eternity in hell is their sin, Christ is the remedy, Christ takes the punishment of those who place their trust in His work. I cannot lay the entire blame on skeptics for this objection. I hear a number of Christians say to atheists and those of other religious faiths that “if you don’t believe in Jesus, you’ll end up in hell”. While this is an accurate description of the situation, it implies non-belief is the cause, rather than belief being the remedy of a greater problem.
The second problem is it would be far more unloving and unjust for God to simply allow everyone an escape from the punishment they deserve. For starters, we have all committed moral wrongs against both God and our fellow-man. Many of our moral wrongs go undetected. Think of all the lies which go undetected. All the hours of pay stolen at work by way of slacking off or extra time on breaks. Remember it’s not just rape and murder which count as moral wrongs against God. What about all the unsolved murders, and child molesters who have never been caught. Without hell, they got away with it. How loving would God be to let evil such as that to go unpunished?
But wouldn’t a loving God just forgive everyone? How would you feel about a Judge who did that. Every defendant who comes into his courtroom, he just asks them if they are sorry, if they’re sorry he dismisses their case and forgives their crimes. What would you think of a judge who did that? Would he be a just Judge? It seems that we can recognize the terrible injustice of this situation, but we overlook the injustice which would occur if God were to just forgive.
Next time you hear this objection, don’t let it stand without correcting the misunderstanding. If you have made this objection, maybe you should take this one out of the quiver. It really is a misunderstanding of why people are punished in hell. Like I said, it’s not entirely the skeptics fault either. Christians, because of poor communication, or even just poor understanding themselves have led people to believe they are hell bound just for having the wrong beliefs. Well, don’t believe it.
___________________________
* Hell is eternal because of who is offended. Slapping an ant won’t likely draw a punishment. Slapping your neighbor’s dog may get you a fine. Slapping a stranger may get you a night in jail. Slapping the President will land you in jail for some period of time. As the status of the one offended increases so does the punishment even for equal actions. Offending an eternal God elicits an eternal punishment.
Sifting Reality 
“People go to hell for violating the laws of God.”
That’s it, huh? Well, I guess I’ll see you and everyone else there.
Christianity… just another fear based religion.
Torture = Evil.
Eternal Torture = Ultimate Evil.
This assumes hell is torture. But what is torture? Aside from some definitions, I would say torture is unwarranted infliction of pain. Or a physical punishment which goes beyond what the crime warrants, the duration of the punishment is not the deciding factor when considering what punishment is torture, it is the crime. Or inflicting pain for no reason. But physical punishment is not necessarily torture. Your reply assumes the punishment in hell is torture. You would have to show the punishment in hell is unwarranted or excessive before you could say it’s torture.
What country do you live in? Your definition of torture is antiquated and not within the real of what modern civilizations consider moral. I guess this should not be surprising though, since the bible condones and elicits significant immorality, and if the bible is your guide, it is no wonder that your view of morality is skewed. I would be happy to discuss this topic if you think that the bible does not.
I continue to find it interesting that you post to people responses like “You would have to show the punishment in hell is unwarranted or excessive before you could say it’s torture.” Do you not see that you have failed to prove any of the points in your article? You require evidence from anyone who points out that your opinion is wrong, yet you supply no evidence at all and start from the perspective that your opinion is correct. Which is it, do opinions need proof points or not? Why do other opinions need proof points, but not yours?
Well, I’ll answer like this. I don’t particularly place much confidence in what “modern civilizations” define torture as, especially the US. Concepts such as torture are defined and redefined depending on opinion polls, and political expediency. I do not think my definition is antiquated at all, some people nowadays think being uncomfortable is torture. Here in the US opinions on what is torture are allowed to be defined by groups such as the ACLU and other advocacy groups, to the point that keeping Qur’ans from Muslim prisoners is considered inhumane conditions, which is nonsense. So, I will work with my definition it is absolutely reasonable.
As for proving my points. What point didnt I prove? I was addressing a common objection about why it is people go to hell. Many people believe the Christian view is that the reason people go to hell is because they don’t “believe in the right God”. Did you need me to find examples of people saying they believe this?
The commenter wasn’t pointing out why he thought my opinion was wrong about the misunderstanding I was addressing, but instead was objecting to the very idea of hell being a just punishment. So it is not unreasonable for me to ask that someone who declared hell is torture to show that hell is in fact torture. What about it is torture? Why is it not reasonable for me to ask that? Had he asked me questions, I certainly would have answered, but he didn’t. Did you want me to offer why I believe people should be punished for breaking the laws of God, or why I think hell is just? I kind of made that point in the footnote, and it wasn’t my overall point. Did you need more detail?
Read a little more carefully, it seems you missed the entire point of my post. Do you want me to supply the Bible verses which say the reason people are damned is because of sin? Surely you don’t think it couldn’t be cited. I took that as a given for my readers, that they knew the Bible taught people go to hell because they sin.
So, which of my opinions expressed in the article need evidence, and I will do my best to find references.
Let me make sure I understanding a few of your points. You wrote that “God requires moral perfection for someone to spend eternity in His presence; anything short of moral perfection requires an eternal punishment*. Moral imperfection is described as sin. It is man’s sin which relegates him to hell, not wrong belief.” This leads me to a few questions / concepts.
No one ever leads a perfectly moral life, that is impossible, as I believe that you pointed out. Even if you do not accept original sin, everyone sins. You then go on to use a very absolute statement .. that “God requires moral perfection for someone to spend eternity in His presence.” These seem like contradictions to me. Do you really mean that a person can have no sin to get into heaven? If not, then how can anyone get into heaven?
Of course no one leads a perfect moral life. This is where Christ comes in. Placing your trust that he is who he claimed to be; that he was put to death for the satisfaction of God’s wrath; that he was raised from the dead to effectually defeat the effects of sin; and that salvation cannot be earned. When this is genuinely believed by someone, the punishment you and I rightly deserve is placed on Jesus’ work on the cross. His righteousness is reckoned to your account in that when you will be judged before God, it is as if you never sinned. Jesus takes the guilt. That is how someone like you and I can attain heaven.
And yet, to the point of your blog, there are people in the world that have never heard of Jesus. In fact, the vast majority of people that have ever lived had no idea who Jesus was or that he existed. Are those people in hell right now?
???
Oh yes, I wasn’t ignoring this, I had originally read it on my phone and wanted to wait until I was at a computer to answer and forgot.
It seems the onjection is this: How can people be held responsible for rejecting Jesus if they have never heard of him? Feel free to clarify if this is not an accurate re-wording of your post, and for now I will address my understanding of it.
People go to hell for breaking God’s law. You already agree that no one leads a perfect moral life. What follows is everyone who does not have Jesus as their mediator is left to take the punishment they deserve.
We have to understand that God is under no obligation to save anyone. Everyone deserves nothing but hell. The fact that there is even one way of escape is generous. Now, the fact that God provides a means of escape to some and not all should not be objectionable. Think about this, lets say you are a fairly compassionate guy. 5 of your friends all at some point come to you and need a loan, being the wonderful Jared you are, you loan each friend $50. For whatever reason you decide to grant to 2 of them not to have to pay you back. Are you being un-fair to not forgive the loans to the other 3? If you offer it to some must you offer it to all in order to be fair? I don’t think so. You aren’t obligated to offer to any in the first place.
Likewise the knowledge of Jesus being available to some is an act of grace. He didn’t have to come at all. Remember, people are not in hell due to a lack of jesus, it is because they broke God’s law. Being unaware of a means of redemption does not make the means of redemption unjust. Is it unjust for a Governor of a State to offer a pardon for one or a few inmates, but not offer a pardon to all the inmates? The inmates are all justly incarcerated ( I know some may be there who are innocent, but you understand the point I’m making, no one would be in hell because of a mistake), he doesn’t have to offer any pardons. No one is being jilted.
So those who do not have their trust in Christ for forgiveness of their sins are in hell. That means there are quite a few people there I imagine.
There are some who would say God judges by the information people do have, not by what they don’t. But even in this case, people do things they know are wrong and still do it anyway. So even with the opportunity to try your best, people still intentionally do what they know to be wrong. Even by a loose standard, I think people would still not make it.
If I understand you correctly, then you do think that many people are in hell because they sinned (as we all do) and had never heard of Jesus and thus could not be forgiven. you do realize that this is MOST of the people that have ever lived.
This points to errors in the metaphors you use in your original post. You equate how it is not God’s fault that people sin. In other posts, you reference an originator and believe God to be the originator of the universe. You also seem to accept the Bible and that God created man and the earth and everything else. So, God made a world, then made people, made it so that those people could not help but to sin, then also made it so that MOST of those people have no possible outcome but an eternity in hell. Seeing as the only thing God did to make hell not an option is acceptance of Christ, but God also made it so that it is impossible for most people to have even heard of Christ.
Using this new basis that you have supplied, you should change your analogies. Most people were placed in a car with a limited amount of fuel and no gas stations at all within driving range. God placed you in the path of a bullet and ensured that there are no surgeons or hospitals anywhere near you to enable you to get help.
By your definition, God is a malevolent being.
As for the OT, I assume that there was a different mechanism at the time for determining entrance to heaven? Christ did not exist, so either all the OT prophets are in hell or there was some other thing going on.
If I understand you correctly, then you do think that many people are in hell because they sinned (as we all do) and had never heard of Jesus and thus could not be forgiven. you do realize that this is MOST of the people that have ever lived.
Well, everyone is in hell because they sinned, but yes, the majority of people who have ever lived are in hell. I am not saying I wouldn’t want it differently, but it appears to be the truth of the matter.
In other posts, you reference an originator and believe God to be the originator of the universe. You also seem to accept the Bible and that God created man and the earth and everything else. So, God made a world, then made people, made it so that those people could not help but to sin…
then also made it so that MOST of those people have no possible outcome but an eternity in hell. Seeing as the only thing God did to make hell not an option is acceptance of Christ, but God also made it so that it is impossible for most people to have even heard of Christ.
But I am not a determinist, I believe people have agency. People and their actions/decisions are not simply dominoes falling, or a train on a rail, people can make decisions.
This was addressed with the Governor/pardon analogy. God is not obligated to give to all what He is not obligated to give at all. Would you say you are malevolent for only offering forgiveness of the loans to just 2 of your friends? By offering to 2 of them, are you also obligated to offer to all 5? I don’t think you are.
Using this new basis that you have supplied, you should change your analogies. Most people were placed in a car with a limited amount of fuel and no gas stations at all within driving range. God placed you in the path of a bullet and ensured that there are no surgeons or hospitals anywhere near you to enable you to get help. By your definition, God is a malevolent being.
Well, seeing as I am not a determinist, I dont need to change them, your adjustments assume a hyper-calvinist view of God’s sovereignty, which I don’t hold to.
As for the OT, I assume that there was a different mechanism at the time for determining entrance to heaven? Christ did not exist, so either all the OT prophets are in hell or there was some other thing going on.
Before the advent one’s salvation was dependant upon looking forward. God promised a Messiah to come and take away sins. In the same way we look backwards into the past and place trust in Christ, those in the OT had to look to the future coming of the Christ and trust God would provide the Messiah. Same method, different frame of reference.
Regardless of believing in determinism or not, there is no possible way that most of the people who ever lived could reach heaven. For them to be able to reach heaven, 1 of 2 things would have to occur: 1. They would not have sinned 2. they accepted Christ. With original sin, 1 is impossible. Even without original sin, 1 is biblically impossible. Is there some case scenario where 1 becomes possible that I am missing? Due to geography and time, 2 was impossible for most of the people who ever lived. This is not a free will issue. If they were never exposed to Christ, then this is not a choice they ever made. Free will never came into play. That is why your governor / pardon analogy does not work. God is placing people in jail, implicitly.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/malevolent
If God created all things and God made it IMPOSSIBLE for people to not go to hell, then god is Malevolent. By your definitions, God did explicitly do these things.
Did the Governor place the inmates in jail? No, they broke the law and it is their actions which landed them in jail. At best you could say they were sentenced by God, but then that is justice. Why must God offer a pardon to everyone when He is under no obligation to offer one to nobody?
If I tie you to a chair in a fashion in which you could not possible escape, then I put a button on the near wall and tell you that you are going to hell unless you press the button .. whose fault is it that you do not press the button? According to you and all of your metaphors, it is your fault.
If God created everything, then God made it so that most people have no possible way of going to heaven. Whose fault is it that most people will not go to heaven. Why is this such a complex problem to grasp? There is no other way to slice it, if this is what you believe, then you worship an evil god.
Personally, I don’t know why you arent getting it. Every time you respond, you have it that God is making you sin. People go to hell for their sin. God does not make you sin. Jesus is the rescue from the punishment you earned, not the punishment that God thrust upon you.
The whole problem with your understanding starts when you say things like “If I tie you to…”, it shows you still think God plays some part in your sin. God isn’t forcing anyone to sin, they do that on their own. He has offered a means of escape, which He is under no obligation to do for anyone. Just because you, I or some person in a place who was unable to hear it is irrelevant since no one goes to hell for not hearing and trusting in Christ. They go to hell as a consequence of their own actions.
Do you believe in original sin? Do you think it is possible to live a sin free life?
??
Sure, I believe we are all effected by Adam’s sin, to the point where none of us will lead a perfectly moral life. I am curious how this will be shown to be God’s fault.
Pretty simply. God made us with sin built in and then gave no possible way to find redemption to the majority of the world. I wonder how you could not see it as god’s fault. Whose fault is it? Certainly not the fault of a newborn child who has done nothing at all. If only free will did come into play, then people would not be damned from the moment of birth.
Did someone tell you people are damned from the moment of birth?
It is interesting how you blame Adam for original sin. Certainly Adam did not have the power to control souls and inflict the stain of original sin on everyone else. This was God’s act as punishment. Basically, you are embracing determinism. By no act of your own, your fate is decided for you. If that is not determinism, what is?
“Original sin” is not a punishment, it was a result of his actions. Like a baby being deformed due to the mother’s drug or alchol abuse is not a punishment, but a result. Additionally, i think hypothetically a person could go their whole life without sinning, since every act is a choice, you could have done otherwise. The fact of the matter is no one will, as a result of the fall, people will sin, but do not have to sin–if you know what I mean. But this is not in any way determinism.
It does not matter what we call it. Do you agree that God instituted original sin? He may have done it in response to an act of Adam, but that is irrelevant. God took the action. You cannot have it both ways, either we are responsible for our actions or we are not.
If so, then God built humans and designed them to go to hell. Barring any other action, that would be the default behavior. This means that all of your metaphors are inaccurate as even if a man did nothing and never sinned post birth, that man is going to hell.
No, I don’t agree our sin nature was instituted. It was a result from Adam’s sin, not a punishment imposed by God. I don’t hold that infants who die go to hell, they haven’t sinned. I don’t think you are intentionally misrepresenting my view. I understand there are many Christians who hold the view you are describing, but ask before you conclude.
This lead me to a few questions. Original sin is viewed differently in different denominations. Which concept of original sin to you you believe? I am unclear as you why you say that Adam created original sin. Adam was a mere man. For him to be able to affect every soul that will ever exist casts Adam as god-like. Genesis 3 covers god meting out the punishments for the actions of Adam, Eve and the serpent. I always attributed original sin as part and parcel of the punishments. Even if it is not, I do not see how Adam could have such gold-like abilities.
I think your difficulty is caused by thinking “original sin” or “total depravity” is something imposed, like a punishment. I think a better understanding of why it is present in everyone is that it is spiritually inherited. I think the way you are understanding it is the Roman Catholic view, that when we are born it is as if we have already sinned. I am working with a definition more similar to but not entirely a reformed view; where because of Adam’s sin, we now have it in our spiritual nature to be inclined to sin. I guess it could be described as more of a character stain, that it is not necessary that we will sin–and there is no particular sin we must commit, but it is inevitable and unavoidable.
I expect that when my life ends, wether by violence, disease or starvation, it truly ends. The synapses in the brain stops and all that is left of me really, aside from a bag o’bones and a greasy stain, are the memories of those that remember me after I die. I am in perfect harmony with this thought and do not desire a life after death. In fact, I find the whole consept rather bizarre.
But let us assume that your analogies are true, and I find my self without gasoline on the roadside. And then it is revealed to me that all those people whom I thought to be a little childish and somewhat annoying, when they told me to buy more gass, were in fact right and I should have bought gass for my car to run to the next gass station. Then what? For making that mistake, the mistake not to have believed or trusted in people who didnt seem to me as trustworhty, I am now rightfully subject to all the eternal horrors of Hell, wich are not that bad, because in a biblical sense they are not torture, and only wery modern and democratically run societies would define them as torture?
All people are criminals and only those criminals that ask for mercy get to be released, and those that did not know how to, or were too stubborn not to, suffer the punishment? So, a wery clever criminal (a psychopath) is released and a dumb one (a sociopath) is punished? Does that sound like a just logic to you?
Hell is a difficult philosophical concept, because we do not have any proof of it. It is only by shear strenght of faith that one believes in it. There is no one that has ever returned from Hell to describe it, but yet it is often depicted in both literature and art. Before this blog I have never heard any christian to describe it as anything short of eternal pain, or in other words, Hell. In my opinion anything that continues for eternity, will turn into torture.
Your analysis and restatement of my analogies seem to miss the point. Your re-analogizing of my examples still imply the reason you ran out of gas is because you didn’t believe people telling you to fill up. That still is not the reason you run out of gas.
Second, God is the sort of being that would not be fooled by a clever psychopath. He knows the true state of the heart and would judge claims of faith on what is actually the case, not just the lip service. So no one would be tricking God into granting a pardon from hell.
On the contrary I see what you are aiming for, it is just that I think you are missing the target. I can not blame you for it, because the target is too high. Anyhow, in your analogy of gass station, the person who ran out of fuel is not to be blamed for the fact that the previous gass station had no service. Yet, he/she suffers the consequenses of running out of fuel. Is this fair? In your other analogy the person who got shot is hardly to be blamed for getting shot, but yet he/she is the one who dies. Is this right? If Jesus is the only remedy to eternal suffering in Hell, then most people in the world go to Hell to suffer eternal pains after their deaths. Is this the work of a just god?
The problem at the gass station is not that there is no fuel. It is rather that there is an overabundance of pumps. All the pumps serve different gass and there is no way of knowing wich one actually serves the kind that does not make your car to explode, because the staff can not agree on what gass is the only right fuel for your car. In fact there are over 3000 different sects of christianity alone in the world and almost each and every one of them claims the singular right to distribute mercy and deliverance from Hell. Not to mention all the other religions, with similar offers. How can you tell, you have made the right desicion? Most people do not make this desicion. They are born to one of these cultural traditions and take it for granted. Should they really be punished with eternal horror, for choosing wrong? Rather harsh. Not the work of a loving or benevolent god in my perspective.
Do you honestly think, that slaking at work is a sin punishable with eternal Hell?
Yes, the problem at the gas station is there is no fuel. The majority of Christians agree on the essential doctrines, even if some do not. It does nothing to undermine the truth of Christianity. Your analogies of the fuel i think is slightly skewed.
To make the point you are shooting for, the substances at the pumps would be Shell, Exxon, Mobile, BP, etc. representing Christianity. And kerosine, water, oil, vinigar, etc. representing the other world religions. Christian denominations are usually within the allowance of variability. The other religious systems would be of different substances. Only one substance will actually properly fuel the car.
And yes, slacking at work is stealing from your employer. All the 2-5 minute extra breaks adds up to thousands of dollars rather quickly. In addition to offending your employer, you offend God. See the footnote for why this is important to the duration of hell.
Do you think that all christian who solemnly believe end up in the same Heaven? So, you would have orthodoxes, catholics, lutherans, anglicans and kalvinists at the same wonderfull place where they no longer have any free will, so they can not sin anymore like hate eachother for the wrong kind of christianity? Are cathars, koptians and aryans there too? What about mormons and jehovas vitnesses and all the minor cults? Have catholics been the only ones who enterd through the horrors of purgatory? So a victim of religious persecution from Magdeburg might meet a nother from Carroburg there? Could they meet their slayers there? Those killers might have been wery sure about the right to do what they did to “heretics”. Sure in their faith that they only did gods work and followed his will? Many of those men were illiterate, so you can not claim they misinterpreted the scriptures, they only trusted priests to point them in the morally right direction.
You said: “He knows the true state of the heart and would judge claims of faith on what is actually the case, not just the lip service.” But if your god is fair and all powerfull would he not also know a good person from among hindus or atheists? Why would he only choose those he saves from among those who worship him? Is that not self centered, random or even evil since he would have the power to be mercifull in accordance to how people lived and not according to their religion? Or do you think that all people who deserve to be saved are among christians? How are they so much better people than the rest of us?
None of my relatives has been a christian since it became legal not to be and many of my friends are atheists. What kind of a person would I be, if I would choose christ, and enjoy myself in Heaven all the while my family and loved ones would be suffering in Hell for all eternity?
Believing in the wrong God is a sin. False idols? You shall have no God before me? Remember that now. As your own bible says, belief in a different God is a sin (Read the ten commandments – don’t worry, you don’t have to read all of them, just the 1st two). Really badly thought out article. Thought appears not to be a strongpoint.
Jews who do believe in the God of the Bible are damned if they do not have their trust in Jesus as the Messiah. So it is the case where belief in the correct God without an acceptance of Christ as redeemer will not be sufficient. So perhaps more than a cursory understanding of Christian theology is needed before the next time you jump to the “gotcha”.
Also if you hold that Muslims worship the same God as Jews and Christian–which I do not– they would also be hell bound without Christ as the escape.
I’ve got to hand it to you, John. You are a very eloquent writer and I appreciate your candid style, but I am amazed at the rubbish stuffed inside your brain and the mental gymnastics you go through with your tortured logic to justify your belief system.
To boil it down to basics, you believe that there is a creator, that he made us inherently flawed and doomed to an eternity of torture in hell unless we accept the Jesus story. That’s one swell god you got there and I appreciate the fact that he gave us a chance for us to be rescued from the very crap he created.
Just like my conversation with Mark Ketchum, this means that we are automatically born in sin and accountable for some schmuck named Adam that upset your deity.
Yes, my tone is somewhat harsh this evening, but it’s truly astounding to hear the excuses for events orchestrated by your god that are utterly nonsensical and evil. Meanwhile, churches keep pumping out the fear of crap they cannot possible prove to prey on people’s emotions.
Yes your attitude is glaring, I wonder why you can’t contain yourself and discuss things civilly?
Any way, no, God didn’t create us inherently flawed, so every point after that you make on that premise is false. Read the comment section here with Jared, it would have answered your objections.
This is the last reminder I will offer to you about your tone. I like the interaction but I don’t interact with people who can’t control themselves. Additionally, the fact that you hide behind a fake e-mail and name annoy me, so feel free to comment if you can keep yourself in check.
I am merely trying to point out the insanity of your beliefs. Sorry if you are offended by someone challenging it.
In your chat with Jared you say “No, I don’t agree our sin nature was instituted. It was a result from Adam’s sin, not a punishment imposed by God. I don’t hold that infants who die go to hell, they haven’t sinned.” and “I think the way you are understanding it is the Roman Catholic view, that when we are born it is as if we have already sinned. I am working with a definition more similar to but not entirely a reformed view; where because of Adam’s sin, we now have it in our spiritual nature to be inclined to sin. I guess it could be described as more of a character stain, that it is not necessary that we will sin–and there is no particular sin we must commit, but it is inevitable and unavoidable.”
… so you believe that sin is inevitable and unavoidable – and as a result, your god will cast you to eternal hell, but it’s not his fault – it’s your choice, he’s just the governor…
Nice.
How is it that you can rationalize your beliefs not to be based in fear?
I think this is a fair question and not “snarky”.
I don’t have a problem with the challenge, just your choice of childish discourse.
I think you are overlooking (not necessarily intentionally, its just the inherent flaw in the nature of the objection) that it is not God who makes an individual sin, it is the individual. I don’t see how it then makes God evil for enforcing the rules.
It most certainly is your god who has set up your entire system and you, as a follower, accept it.
To simply state that your grand creator has infinite power and control over everything that exists, and then to say that we will inevitably sin and then be cast into hell for eternity, but it’s not god’s doing is purely ludicrous. You don’t see how it makes god evil for enforcing the rules to a game that is rigged to fail from the onset?
You must be blind not to see that you believe in a god of conditions.
You seem to think that because God is omnipotent that he must intervene or interfere. Why do you ignore human agency?
@ John Barron:
It looks like you said that all who are born are destined for hell by God’s law without the intervention of Christ, yet you also also say you do not believe that newborns are destined for hell. And hell is eternal.
So all dead newborns born prior to the birth of Our Savior continue to burn in the fires of hell because of a loophole in a sloppily written God law. Sorry this just isn’t working for me. My christology remains a great deal lower than your own at this point as you have raised a serious fallibility issue here.
Earnest, please re-read the post and my following comments. I have said no such thing as people are born destined to hell. Deserving of and destined to are completely different. In fact, in the comments I argue against anyone being destined to hell. I am not a determinist, nor a Calvinist who ascribes to Unconditional Election. So there is no wonder why it isn’t working for you, it’s not what I said.