Hell – is it Relevant Today?

[Byblos]

Do I detect an inclination towards Universalism?

Not exactly sure to whom you're addressing this nor how you came to that conclusion. Please explain. The idea was to explore original sin with no prior conceptions (if that's possible, I'm not certain). That hardly qualifies as universalism.

[Fortigurn]

Would it be just for God to blast the wicked off into non-existence or grant them a place they like, a place without God — banished from God. Would this be in accord with perfect Justice?

Interesting????
-
-
-

Indeed.

What BW has written, and Byblos has agreed to, is the number one argument I'm presented with by Universalists - 'It would not be just for God to destroy the wicked or grant them a place without God, it would not be in accord with perfect justice'.

[B. W.]

Yes, this does pose an interesting beginning — How sin came into being through the serpent and why God allowed this to happen. I do have scriptures as to why but choose to hold these back for the time being. Could it be that God's perfect Justice permits his creatures of renown to have an ability to reason and think own their own so that God is not the author of sin?

Yes, I can see it that way. Sin is the direct consequence of free will. Without the will to sin, there can be no will to choose God. Without the will to choose or reject God, there can be no judgment. They could all be interrelated.

Response: Yes, without a design that permit's moral autonomy, i.e. free will, there could be no judgment as God would be guilty of designing sin. The Bible teaches much concerning God's personal attributes such as being— A Just God, A Perfect God, A God who cannot sin, an all-powerful sovereign God, etc. That shows that in His great wisdom He could feasibly design such a design for all His creatures of renown: like angelic host and humanity.

Could it be, that this justice also will not deny even the most wicked the right to exist? Could God give life as a gift and leave the gift up to the recipient on how they chose to use this gift?

Neat, and very possible.

Response: Yes, indeed possible! From the use of this gift — God can then rightly judge, sentence, convict, absolve, all in accordance to the full meaning of His righteousness and His Justice. The sin would be the creatures own — not His. God would be inclined to provide a place — stage — to reveal what was truly known to be in the these creatures hearts and also make a place to confine till He brings about His Goal — The New Heavens and Earth.

Would it be just for God to blast the wicked off into non-existence or grant them a place they like, a place without God — banished from God. Would this be in accord with perfect Justice? Interesting????

Indeed.

Response: Yes, the absolute Fairness and Mercy of God fully exposed!!

[B. W.]

Response: Yes, indeed possible! From the use of this gift — God can then rightly judge, sentence, convict, absolve, all in accordance to the full meaning of His righteousness and His Justice. The sin would be the creatures own — not His. God would be inclined to provide a place — stage — to reveal what was truly known to be in the these creatures hearts and also make a place to confine till He brings about His Goal — The New Heavens and Earth.

Let me add - a place of confinement would be Hell as it exist now, not the Lake of fire of the future. Death and Hell will be tossed into the Lake of Fire future tense. Hell - is a place that confines made in accordance with God's perfect Justice and Mercy.
-
-

[Cook]

It seems we've already started to encroach into aspects of culminating discussion about hell and punishment (and whether hell is relevant today). From my own perspective, origin and nature of sin is not satisfactorily resolved yet, and I'm more than willing to still explore it, even with discussion interest in justice and God's judgments increasing.

B.W., I like much of your final reasoning in these posts. At the very end you throw in a difficulty for me, that Hell is best seen as a place of confinement. Perhaps it depends on how you visualize Hell, but is not the traditional view of Hell that it is a place of torment. Even if you are only confined there, the torment is present, so this is de facto punishment. But people have various views on Hell, so maybe you view it as seperation from God, in accordance with "God's perfect Justice and Mercy." If you think that it is torment then we're back to the beginning of how torment is in any way shape or form in accordance with eternal justice and mercy. I have difficulty accepting that it is.

.
.
.

I've just gone back and re-read the beginning of this thread on hell's relevance and see again your earlier position. I'm a representative of the viewpoint that you and Puritan Lad were against, like Fortigurn I see it that righteousness precludes eternal torment. That was the discussion I was most interested in seeing unfold.

[B. W.]

It seems we've already started to encroach into aspects of culminating discussion about hell and punishment (and whether hell is relevant today). From my own perspective, origin and nature of sin is not satisfactorily resolved yet, and I'm more than willing to still explore it, even with discussion interest in justice and God's judgments increasing.

Response - let's stick with exploring original sin - sorry for the rabbit trail.

B.W., I like much of your final reasoning in these posts. At the very end you throw in a difficulty for me, that Hell is best seen as a place of confinement. Perhaps it depends on how you visualize Hell, but is not the traditional view of Hell that it is a place of torment. Even if you are only confined there, the torment is present, so this is de facto punishment. But people have various views on Hell, so maybe you view it as separation from God, in accordance with "God's perfect Justice and Mercy." If you think that it is torment then we're back to the beginning of how torment is in any way shape or form in accordance with eternal justice and mercy. I have difficulty accepting that it is.

Response: Please let me clarify what I mean by confinement. I chose that term based on exploring the subject of original sin in an unobtrusive way to avoid going back and exploring torment. Yes, Hell is a place of Torment. The term Confinement means to incarcerate and those in Hell are confined to torments as you so state.

What I was doing was simply using the forum of this open discussion to explore what original sin is and why people will be punished for it. Look at my terms and postulations as hypotheses that need testing in the arena of ideas, not as dogma. Feel free to Test them - ask questions — probe — answer - let others respond how they will, was and is my goal here. Please, in no way was I trying to be offensive to anyone's sensibilities and that was why I used the term - confinement.
-
-
-

[Locker]

I am back, troops!

Great discussions and deep ones too! Let's see what we have so far, Cook brought up a good point about tracing original sin back to the devil and B. W. had some deep answers that would suggest how this happened. After reading the short comments and going back over my bible — wow — makes sense! Also, I see no hint at universalism from anyones response, just good food for thought.

If I am reading correctly, sin originated with the serpent, and the serpent sinned on its own due to God's designing — free will because that places the responsibility for sin on those that sin and not God. Well, that is deep and can answer much. If anyone wants to add to this — please do and keep it going as I am learning much comparing it as I read in my bible.

Next, could original sin be defined? Can it? So far we can call it 'immaturity', 'moral failure', etc…

What was it that Adam and Eve did that caused this sin to spread? They rebelled, they sought knowledge of good and evil, was it an immature grasp to live without God? Do we have that same motive in today's world?

Can someone post the Hebrew definitions for the words: tree, knowledge, good, and evil that is used in the Genesis accounts (Chapter 2 and 3). Also, the phrase, your eyes will be opened — what does that mean and suggest? Maybe we can locate an answer in these words and phrases that may help us.

[Cook]

B.W., good, glad to hear others want to still poke around at the origin of sin. So torment discussion is in stasis temporarily, that's good and fine by me. Your post earlier about having Bible verses but not wanting to lay them out reminded me of when Jesus was once asked a question, but he didn't immediately quote this or that, instead he replied, "How do you read scripture?" Gave people pause to use their own brains for a second, which is always a good exercise in my book! And I'm glad people here are likewise of that open mindset for offering hypotheses and testing these sorts of questions.

Not to take away from the newer requests just posted by Locker, but I still have a few outstanding items I'm curious about on the origin of sin. As I asked Fortigum, what are the opinions about the origin of Satan's evil? What I am getting at with it is that some people are inclined to the viewpoint that all creation was perfect until humanity, Adam and Eve, introduced sin. If so, then the ink blot we see in non-human creatures -- various devils that possess people in the New Testament, and Satan himself -- would have its pedigree in the human failure of the Garden. The alternative, as I see it, is that the capacity of sinfulness -- having the gift of free will, but choosing to use it in unGodly wrong ways -- is more widespread and not the unique wreckage of humans screwing up. And as I've said regarding the serpent in the Garden, I even see Genesis 3 as indicating a note of sinful rebellion prior to humanity's embrace in eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge.

My own viewpoint is similar to what I am reading from your posts, B.W.. That God gives free will as a gift to his creatures. I may not agree with Fortigum in saying all angels are perfect, but I see that they are closer to God and closer to perfection. I hypothesize that they are less likely to choose error. Going back to earlier terminology, they are more mature. But not *perfectly* mature. We know the Father is perfectly mature and his Son Jesus is perfectly mature -- infallible. For those with Trinity beliefs, the third person of Trinity, the Holy Spirit, is also perfectly and eternally mature. Below these personalities is a range from what I can tell (others certainly have different viewpoints on this count). And humans seem far far down the rungs. As far as I know, the lowest rung (animals not having the power of choice and survivability).

At this point, may I return to a post I posed to you B.W. a few pages back that got lost, ask again for your opinions. This is the post where I listed out different types of immaturity. My attempt here is to get at what Locker is asking, "could original sin be defined." We know for a fact that people when they are born are immature in dimensions of physicality and character. When we talk about original sin, "The Fall", we talk about a quality of sinfulness in my opinion which is beyond immaturity, which is only correctible by redemption. We talk in terms of a debt that must be repaid and cannot be forgiven or repaid by our own efforts. God being a Father and having infinite parental insight into immaturity would be able to see what his children are growing toward, and I don't see Hell -- eternal debt punishment -- as the answer for that aspect of wrong choices. Yes, Hell as ultimate judgment for those fully identified with sin, but I see punishment for correction purposes as every likelihood for immaturity (which would not be from Hell but everyday you-reap-what-you-sow wisdom growth in the school of hard knocks). And so what part of children's behavior, or even adult behavior, is beyond the bounds of immaturity. Does that point the way toward grasping what is the debt of unforgiveable original sin. I hypothesize that fathers and mothers are able to have better insights into this since they have kids of their own that they are able to see as immature or evil. A long post, hopefully ir retains some sense.

[Byblos]

Would it be just for God to blast the wicked off into non-existence or grant them a place they like, a place without God — banished from God. Would this be in accord with perfect Justice?

Interesting????
-
-
-

Indeed.

What BW has written, and Byblos has agreed to, is the number one argument I'm presented with by Universalists - 'It would not be just for God to destroy the wicked or grant them a place without God, it would not be in accord with perfect justice'.

What B.W. wrote was a question and what I agreed to was that it was interesting.

[B. W.]

At this point, may I return to a post I posed to you B.W. a few pages back that got lost, ask again for your opinions. This is the post where I listed out different types of immaturity. My attempt here is to get at what Locker is asking, "could original sin be defined." We know for a fact that people when they are born are immature in dimensions of physicality and character. When we talk about original sin, "The Fall", we talk about a quality of sinfulness in my opinion which is beyond immaturity, which is only correctible by redemption. We talk in terms of a debt that must be repaid and cannot be forgiven or repaid by our own efforts. God being a Father and having infinite parental insight into immaturity would be able to see what his children are growing toward, and I don't see Hell -- eternal debt punishment -- as the answer for that aspect of wrong choices. Yes, Hell as ultimate judgment for those fully identified with sin, but I see punishment for correction purposes as every likelihood for immaturity (which would not be from Hell but everyday you-reap-what-you-sow wisdom growth in the school of hard knocks). And so what part of children's behavior, or even adult behavior, is beyond the bounds of immaturity. Does that point the way toward grasping what is the debt of unforgivable original sin. I hypothesize that fathers and mothers are able to have better insights into this since they have kids of their own that they are able to see as immature or evil. A long post, hopefully it retains some sense.

I'll try to answer this as best as I can. I see within kids, a bent toward asserting their rights, and a wanting things their way, at other's expense. Sure this is immaturity, and we as parents can correct much of this. Since this is so, I kind of view this life, in the here and now, as our Heavenly Father disciplining us when we need it. The bible says the same thing about disciplining His Children He loves — which means us who love God. Again, my opinion, it seems to me that God wants to prepare us for the life to come and here on this planet, it seems we are learning what this is.

Also, it looks like God designed a plan in which the kinks and defects will be removed in order to truly make a new heavens and earth possible without the sin and death. Maybe, we had to learn this, from the school of hard knocks, so we do not repeat the mistakes of the past. Now, as for those that reject God's plan, and God, He will grant them a place fitting for their actions.

Again, my opinion, unforgivable original sin, would be rejecting God at all cost and forgivable original sin comes when we confess, owe up to, and take responsibility for our original sin — thus learn from it not to repeat it. The only way to do this is by the grace of God and relying on His plan for our salvation: Like when a child admits wrong doing without excuses verses another who makes excuses and passes the blame.

What is original sin? It maybe more than just immaturity but that is the reason for this topic — to explore it. Next, I do not think God sends a person to Hell for making wrong choices but rather throws them there because they have become irredeemably corrupted by this original sin.

In other words, in my opinion — people send themselves there. I'll use this example to try to explain what I mean better: There was a man who wanted fame and notoriety but failed at everything to achieve it legally, he commenced robbing banks and killed along the way. He knew this course was wrong but justified his actions as good intentions to help the poor and since He was poor, well God helps those who help themselves.

Now there was a judge in the county who sat on the bench and obeyed the law. He commuted sentence to the guilty and decided cases on the cases own merit fairly. One day the bank robber was caught and brought before the judge and the judge sentenced the man to life in prison and the deputies escorted the man there. Did the judge send the man to prison or did the man send himself?
-
-
-

[B. W.]

I am back, troops!

Great discussions and deep ones too! Let's see what we have so far, Cook brought up a good point about tracing original sin back to the devil and B. W. had some deep answers that would suggest how this happened. After reading the short comments and going back over my bible — wow — makes sense! Also, I see no hint at universalism from anyones response, just good food for thought.

If I am reading correctly, sin originated with the serpent, and the serpent sinned on its own due to God's designing — free will because that places the responsibility for sin on those that sin and not God. Well, that is deep and can answer much. If anyone wants to add to this — please do and keep it going as I am learning much comparing it as I read in my bible.

Next, could original sin be defined? Can it? So far we can call it 'immaturity', 'moral failure', etc…

What was it that Adam and Eve did that caused this sin to spread? They rebelled, they sought knowledge of good and evil, was it an immature grasp to live without God? Do we have that same motive in today's world?

Can someone post the Hebrew definitions for the words: tree, knowledge, good, and evil that is used in the Genesis accounts (Chapter 2 and 3). Also, the phrase, your eyes will be opened — what does that mean and suggest? Maybe we can locate an answer in these words and phrases that may help us.

Yes - looking at the word meanings and how they apply would be most helpful. Anyone up to it? If not, give me sometime to check this part out.

This does cause one to think about what original sin really is and how it spread, etc..,

[Locker]

Again, my opinion, unforgivable original sin, would be rejecting God at all cost and forgivable original sin comes when we confess, owe up to, and take responsibility for our original sin — thus learn from it not to repeat it. The only way to do this is by the grace of God and relying on His plan for our salvation: Like when a child admits wrong doing without excuses verses another who makes excuses and passes the blame. What is original sin? It maybe more than just immaturity but that is the reason for this topic — to explore it. -

Interesting point: this gives me an idea - unforgivable and forgivable original sin could be what Jesus is alluding too in Mark 7:20-23 and Paul write about in Ephesians 2:3 and Romans 7:18. Maybe original has to do with the heart.

I do know that the Hebrew word used for heart means the center and seat of the affections, will, reason, where the issues of life come forth — hence the throne room of the soul. Maybe original sin began there — in the heart and spread to us all???

This sin would be unforgivable if the heart remains hard and forgivable if it is changed and given new direction. Is that what you mean B. W.?

As for children — they do grow up and time comes when parents must let them go. When that happens, our kids are responsible for their own actions and deeds, not the parents. Cook — are you suggesting that parents are responsible for their adult children's actions and deeds?

Maybe the original sin of Adam and Eve and even the serpent began in the heart. If that is the case — how did God design the heart and still be innocent from creating this sin from its design? I know God is innocent — but the design of the heart seemed to become corrupt somewhere along the line. Maybe that is the original sin???

[B. W.]

Interesting point: this gives me an idea - unforgivable and forgivable original sin could be what Jesus is alluding too in Mark 7:20-23 and Paul write about in Ephesians 2:3 and Romans 7:18. Maybe original has to do with the heart.

I do know that the Hebrew word used for heart means the center and seat of the affections, will, reason, where the issues of life come forth – hence the throne room of the soul. Maybe original sin began there – in the heart and spread to us all???

This sin would be unforgivable if the heart remains hard and forgivable if it is changed and given new direction. Is that what you mean B. W?

Response: Yes, you can say that is what I mean. I do think original sin has something to do with the heart.

Maybe the original sin of Adam and Eve and even the serpent began in the heart. If that is the case – how did God design the heart and still be innocent from creating this sin from its design? I know God is innocent – but the design of the heart seemed to become corrupt somewhere along the line. Maybe that is the original sin???

Response: Interesting points. However, let me look into the Hebrew definitions used in Genesis 1-3 and see if anything points at the heart. Someone else may know more about the subject of the Heart than I do and may have a better answer or idea...

[Cook]

I'll try to answer this as best as I can. I see within kids, a bent toward asserting their rights, and a wanting things their way, at other's expense. Sure this is immaturity, and we as parents can correct much of this. Since this is so, I kind of view this life, in the here and now, as our Heavenly Father disciplining us when we need it. The bible says the same thing about disciplining His Children He loves — which means us who love God. Again, my opinion, it seems to me that God wants to prepare us for the life to come and here on this planet, it seems we are learning what this is.

I agree with your viewpoint here. Almost entirely at least. From Jesus' parable of the prodigal son and other teachings I don't limit "His children He loves" to only "us who love God". Fatherly love not having this quid pro quo quality in my view.

Again, my opinion, unforgivable original sin, would be rejecting God at all cost and forgivable original sin comes when we confess, owe up to, and take responsibility for our original sin — thus learn from it not to repeat it. The only way to do this is by the grace of God and relying on His plan for our salvation: Like when a child admits wrong doing without excuses verses another who makes excuses and passes the blame.

Again I mostly agree, with slightly different shadings of view. The word "original" almost seems optional in your first sentence, such that it could as easily read, "Again, my opinion, unforgivable sin would be rejecting God at all cost and forgivable sin comes when we confess, owe up to, and take responsibility for our sin — thus learn from it not to repeat it. " If that sentence reads true to you, as it does for me, then the slippery distinction of what is "original sin" gets away again unfortunately.

As for children — they do grow up and time comes when parents must let them go. When that happens, our kids are responsible for their own actions and deeds, not the parents. Cook — are you suggesting that parents are responsible for their adult children's actions and deeds?

No, not at all. I'm saying that since God is a Father to us, being a parent perhaps helps in the ability to see as God sees, especially in terms of realistic judgment and forgiveness. "The wages of sin is death." Well the wages of a kid stealing a piece of candy from a store is certainly not a death sentence, much less death dealt from a loving parent. What is the type of sinfulness that brings about those wages? B.W. seems to say that it is by becoming "irredeemably corrupted" that people send themselves to such judgment. I would agree with this.

Maybe the original sin of Adam and Eve and even the serpent began in the heart. If that is the case — how did God design the heart and still be innocent from creating this sin from its design? I know God is innocent — but the design of the heart seemed to become corrupt somewhere along the line. Maybe that is the original sin???

I'll bring up something B.W. said a few posts ago: "Again, my opinion, it seems to me that God wants to prepare us for the life to come and here on this planet, it seems we are learning." Perhaps God in His wisdom simply is not depriving us of learning, when he allows for the capacity of sin, giving creatures like us free will even though we seem so prone toward choosing wrongly.

[B. W.]

Here are the Word definitions you ask for:

Genesis 2:9

Tree — means a tree

Knowledge — da'ath — insight, intelligence, understanding, wisdom, cunning, technical knowledge that are gained from the senses; It denotes a moral cognition gained primarily through the senses through experience.

Good — Tov — goodness, pleasant, beautiful, excellent, lovely, fruitful, righteous, kind, and virtue of the correct nature/kind. It denotes a moral goodness.

Evil — Ra or Rah — bad, inferior quality, mischievous, malignant, noxious, severe, malice, mischief, evil, causing woe and unhappiness; It denotes a moral deficiency of unethical actions and methods.

Genesis 3: 22

Know — means to perceive, know, understand intimately, or denotes an intimate familiarity with something or someone — to know it deeply and all to well.

If anyone else has anymore - please feel free to add what they have to post. These definitions are from a wide array of sources and i combined them here: Theological Word Book of the Old Testament. Old testament Word Studies, Vines, and various web sites.

Question: From these, can we see what was partaken of?
-
-