« Michael Licona’s New Research on Gospel Differences | Main | Challenge: Diversity of Evidence Prevents Us from Knowing What Was Written »

January 25, 2016

Comments

Hi Brett,

You made some lucid and salient comments. This short two to three minute video makes a few strong counter-points right towards the end. The guy displays some strong moral character.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VbMAwN0u7I

Sorryyyyyyyy Brett !!!!!

The website didn't seem to be working and thus the multiple posts. Feel free to delete the extras or all of them (as a penalty for messing up).

Thanks

It's no problem, Michael. I left the last one on there for you. I wrote a post on the topic of the atheist's challenge a while back: How Will Those Saved by God's Grace View Hell? At the root of the atheist's video is a hidden assumption, and it's this: We don't really deserve Hell. If he's right, his answer follows. But if God is right that we deserve Hell, then my answer follows. But it's important to understand that that's where the real conflict is between the two views.

Thank you Amy. Very thoughtful of you.

That guy in the video, if I recall correctly, indicated he is an atheist however I know deist, theist, liberal Christians, new agers, etc who all share his valid concern that eternal damnation is cruel and unusual punishment. To be eternally damned to a "lake of fire" is beyond our imagination and if there is a supreme being that does that he/she/it is no god and not somebody you want to hang out with, in my opinion. Wouldn't this supreme being spend eternity feeling their pain too?

Thanks again Amy

My experience has been that many who were friends and loved ones became bitter enemies as I grew in Christ.

"At the root of the atheist's video is a hidden assumption, and it's this: We don't really deserve Hell."
- It´s not really "hidden" and I see the assumption as more of a "if [insert person that lived an equally or more moral life than I did and who died as a non-Christian here] truly deserves hell, then so do I, and what I do or do not believe about religious claims does not change that in any way what-so-ever."

Another thing I observed in Michael's video was an assumed "bully role" played by God. This happens when people assume salvation is by works and that unless you perform certain duties, God will torture you forever. While at the same time he supposedly "buys off" devotees with rewards.

And those who refuse this supposed tyranny, choosing to live in sin for "good and noble reasons" are actually better people than those who comply.

In the Bible however, Salvation is by grace. It restores to life those who sinned - at Christ's expense. Jesus suffered the penalty for their sins in their place. Their belief is not a choice, it is a by product of restored spiritual life and evidence that Jesus paid for their sins.

As in the video, those who think salvation is by works assume you are saved because you choose to believe, but the opposite is true, you believe because you are saved.

dave,
"Jesus suffered the penalty for their sins in their place."
- Well, if the penalty is an eternity in hell, then this cannot be true, because the Christian story doesn´t involve Jesus going to hell for eternity.

"And those who refuse this supposed tyranny, choosing to live in sin for "good and noble reasons" are actually better people than those who comply."
- That is neither said nor implied in the video.

@ Andy,

Pt. 1 - God was satisfied that Jesus fully atoned for the sins of the elect.

Pt. 2 - The speaker implies this when he says people must choose to believe, without evidence, or else.

dave,

Re #1 - but that doesn´t change the fact that "Jesus suffered the penalty for their sins in their place" would be wrong if the "penalty" is "eternity in hell", because Jesus did not suffer that penalty.

Re #2 - he doesn´t say anything about someone being "better" than someone else merely because of what they do, or do not, believe.

>> "if [insert person that lived an equally or more moral life than I did and who died as a non-Christian here] truly deserves hell...

>> I know deist, theist, liberal Christians, new agers, etc who all share his valid concern that eternal damnation is cruel and unusual punishment.

Michael and Andy have struck the core of the objection to hell. By some incident of God's timing (some people would call this "dumb luck") I was doing a study of Micah 2:7 Should the descendants of Jacob be asked: Has the Spirit of the LORD become impatient with you? Has he done these things? Are his words good for those who live honestly?

Many scholars hold these words to be part of the complaint lodged against Micah's attack on the land grabbing wealthy class. In their defense, they spoke of the times of prosperity and sophistication following the era of Jeroboam II and Uzziah. Times were good; the wealthy saw this as an indication of God's favor. In the rest of the chapter, Micah attacks the theology of the false prophet which would sanction the greedy dealings of the land plunder and the regimes which support them.

Now, what caught my attention was Micah's use of the Hebrew YaSHaR for the phrase "who live honestly." YaSHaR, and not the usual TSaDiQ. YaSHaR deals with a moral uprightness which knows how to live a life favorable to society; TSaDiQ is stiffer, as it is translated righteous and means a conformity to the laws and will of God, a much higher standard than YaSHaR.

It is the status of the standard of morality that we approve of that is at stake here. A flimsy reliance on YaSHaR devolves into a theology of the scribes and Pharisees (Mt. 5:20); Jesus says this must be surpassed. This must have been a shocker for Jesus' listeners, since the scribes and Pharisees were the paragons of all worth calling a moral, impeccable life. But it was quite peccable. A "close, but no cigar" righteousness.

Your claim that many a liberal Christian would find hell a disgusting doctrine. It is better to say it is unpalatable, against one's liking. But my liking or disliking something does not make it the more/less real I also would say many a liberal Christian would impugn the ideas of grace and salvation merited in Christ. Would they prefer a "pay it forward" theology, a social Gospel? If by jettisoning the ideals of God's grace in being the sole way to heaven, we may have a liberal, but do we then have a Christian?

And please do not bring up the No Real Scotsman argument. That is an invitation to fuzzy thinking in this issue.

@ Andy,

Scripture says God is satisfied with Jesus' death on the cross as being the payment for the sins of the elect. Since Jesus is perfect could his death be worth more than an eternity of sinners in Hell?

So, would the speaker in the video be a better person choosing not to comply with a god he perceives to be tyrannical, than to cop a deal and avoid Hell?

dave,

"Scripture says God is satisfied with Jesus' death on the cross as being the payment for the sins of the elect. Since Jesus is perfect could his death be worth more than an eternity of sinners in Hell?"
- I don´t see death as valuable at all, but that is moot because my point was that it is inaccurate to say that "Jesus suffered the penalty x" if Jesus actually suffered the penalty y.

"So, would the speaker in the video be a better person choosing not to comply with a god he perceives to be tyrannical, than to cop a deal and avoid Hell?"
- The speaker in the video doesn´t even believe in God in the first place. His point is rather that IF there is a God and IF people that lived an equally or even more moral life than he did still went to hell, THEN he doesn´t think that he deserves heaven either.

@ Andy,

It still remains, Scripture says God is satisfied with Christ'd death as the payment for the sins of the elect.

So what if the speaker is an atheist? Shouldn't he be better informed about what the Bible teaches before venting?

Hell is only hell because of the sin there. The torment of the damned is precisely the sins of the damned and all the consequences of them that go on and on and on.

You think Jesus suffered the sins of those on earth?

Jesus is suffering all the sins there are in earth and in hell.

You think Jesus just kinda forgot about His suffering?

Jesus suffers the torment of Sin in the only way an eternal being can suffer it: eternally.

So you are right Andy, Jesus actually suffered the penalty y, not penalty x.

But y >>>> x

The guy in the video is pretty sharp. He is not really concerned about of himself on judgment day since he is an atheist; he is using that as a method of making a point.

He is illustrating how crazy the belief is in two polar extremes of eternal damnation and heaven, particularly eternal torture. His point is that a loving, caring, compassionate person would be torn apart knowing billions of people are suffering forever (how could a person not care, that’s my comment by the way). So God either changes who you are so you don’t care and thereby violating freewill, or said person doesn’t need to be changed, they don’t give hoot about others, in which case said person doesn’t deserve to be in heaven. That’s his point and yes, he understands the belief in Jesus stuff but he is pointing out how ironic this entire belief system is.


"Hell is only hell because of the sin there"

WL just made that up. Here is what the "word of God" says....

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels"

Hell has been prepared by God.

>> Hell has been prepared by God.

Michael,

Your (mis)quote of Mt. 25:41 fails on two levels.

1. The verse "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" does not implicate God as the originator of hell. The verse only speaks of hell "prepared for." not prepared by. It is equally granted that the demonic rebellion created the situation that made hell possible, the ultimate separation from God.

Devil's fault.

2. Note in particular that hell was originally prepared for "the devil and his angels," not meant for humankind. The fact that there will be some in rebellion against God is a sad fact that the utilization of hell expanded only because humanity also craved the separation from God that instigates hell.

Man's fault. Might even say "blew it big time."

So God either changes who you are so you don’t care and thereby violating freewill, or said person doesn’t need to be changed, they don’t give hoot about others, in which case said person doesn’t deserve to be in heaven. That’s his point and yes, he understands the belief in Jesus stuff but he is pointing out how ironic this entire belief system is.

Or there's the third option I explained in the post that I linked to: The saved person recognizes justice and is amazed by undeserved grace. Like I said, Scott's (the atheist's) dilemma only holds if hell isn't just. This is why his video doesn't point out any sort of "irony" for Christians, only for atheists. An atheist who rejects the idea of God's perfect righteousness and justice and our evil will of course have Scott's issue with it. But a Christian who thinks that we will be able to see the perfect justice of hell will not have his problem.

And here he makes a mistake that atheists often make: They don't actually evaluate Christianity, they evaluate a Christian/atheist hybrid and find it doesn't make sense. In Christianity, God is just, hell is just, and we will see the truth of that in the end. That's the story he should be evaluating. But he isn't. In his (non-Christian) story, God is unjust, hell isn't deserved, and therefore, what follows is that anyone who is okay with it is a terrible person. But you see, what he's objecting to isn't actually Christianity, it's a hybrid story he just made up.

Atheists often illegitimately do this. I wrote about it previously here.

If you're going to evaluate the Christian story, evaluate the Christian story. In order to do that, you have to take into consideration all of Christianity. In Christianity, God is perfectly just and righteous, and He's a perfect judge, not allowing any evil or rebellion to go unpunished. He upholds justice perfectly. Whatever hell is, this is what it accomplishes. I may pity the murderer who is in jail today, but I don't protest it. That's justice, and I recognize it. I would recognize it even if it were a family member. In the same way, perhaps we will pity those who face perfect justice, but we won't protest justice. Justice is good. At the same time, we will recognize that the only reason we're not in exactly the same place is because of God's undeserved grace towards us. I think that will be the overwhelming sense that hell will bring to those who are saved.

DGFisher,

You dated yourself in another blog so I’ll date myself too …. Remember Flip Wilson and “the devil made me do it”. I guess Flip got that line from God :)

Your brothers in Christ over on learnthebible.org believe God created hell, see the link below
http://www.learnthebible.org/creation-of-heaven-and-hell.html

Ok, the verse doesn’t explicitly say who or what created hell so you are just as presumptuous to claim god did not create hell.

Then you say that “some are rebelling against God”, not sure what you mean but as you and I know Jesus talked about the wide and narrow paths so if the “rebels” are those on the wide path then it is not “some” but most of humankind that is going to eternal fire.

Then you say that “humanity also craved the separation from God” is a wild and exaggerated statement. In my office there is one “born again” Christian, everybody else just feels that the evidence is lacking, they are not rebelling. In fact the founder of the company had (he passed away) two Ph.D’s, one in Theology and another in Philosophy and was a Presbyterian minister for many years but died as an atheist. He had not rebelled at all; it was his studying that lead him to his conclusion. No doubt you have come to a different conclusion, which is fine, but the point is just because somebody does not share your belief system doesn’t = they are rebelling against God/god.

Amy,

Remember the verse… faith, hope and love, these three but the greatest is love? If love endures forever and you have loved ones burning in the lake of fire forever can you see the problem? Either god changes you and violates freewill or you don’t need to be changed, in other words you are narcissistic, which is the ironic part of this mess.

"WL just made that up."

Since that view of Hell is one of the oldest in Church history...No.

"Hell has been prepared by God."

And how is that incompatible with the claim that Hell is Hell because of sin?

"but the point is just because somebody does not share your belief system doesn’t = they are rebelling against God/god."

Wouldn't that kind of depend on which belief system is true?

Do you think it is possible for someone to be a rebel or a traitor without realizing it? I do.

WL,

"Jesus is suffering all the sins there are in earth and in hell. You think Jesus just kinda forgot about His suffering? Jesus suffers the torment of Sin in the only way an eternal being can suffer it: eternally."

Jesus is eternally suffering?

That is just bizarre. Is this the Pagan Greek Philosophy thing again?

ἡτοιμασμένον

Michael,

This is essentially the word we are arguing over. This Greek doesn't mean create; more along the lines of prepare or provide. As for the learnthebible site you noted:

Of the five separate doctrinal statements this organization made, I disagreed with the point made in the third section; this is a position even LTB admitted was controversial. It was an essential building block to the out-right statement of God's creation of hell made in point four. I point this out as the breakdown point this site made.

Again, the Greek word used never implies creation of new material, but rather rudimentary changes in situations not involving new material. For example, take hunger. I do not need to create an empty stomach for the occasion. I need only allow for a sequence of missed meals and snacks, and voila starvation. Hell was not a new creation so much as a novel situation one finds oneself when abandoning God. I leave this notion to be peer reviewed by the STR following. I am open to better understanding of this difficult problem as how one pops open hell.

As for the Flip Wilson quote (the devil made me do it), we all knew back then that this was a lame excuse, an effort to dodge responsibilities and consequences.

Ah, if only Flip had it right.

Hi DG,

Your defending the faith and I respect that. However the verse from Matthew that I quoted did in fact translated the Greek word as "prepared" so there is no argument about that. My primary purpose of quoting said verse was to counter Wisdom Lovers claim that "Hell is only hell because of the sin there". So I believe that statement is refuted by the word "prepared." However it does seem to suggest that if "the eternal fire" was "prepared" then there was a preparer, no? If not then your argument seems similar to the atheist argument for abiogenesis in that nothing creates something, which is also ironic. We are talking about a lake of fire coming into existents not an empty stomach so I don't think your analogy is spot on.

Also is seems ironic that some Christian apologist fight to the death over the idea that God has anything to do with hell and the lake of fire and yet claim that it is entirely just. If it is entirely just why worry about it? Simply for the sake of truth? I don't think that is it. Perhaps there is in all of us an intuitive feeling that eternity in a lake of fire is not just?

Oh, Amy, by the way I didn't mean to imply (in my earlier post) that you are narcissistic, I was speaking in general terms.

Blessings

Amy,

"If you're going to evaluate the Christian story, evaluate the Christian story. In order to do that, you have to take into consideration all of Christianity. In Christianity, God is perfectly just and righteous, and He's a perfect judge, not allowing any evil or rebellion to go unpunished.
...
That's justice, and I recognize it. I would recognize it even if it were a family member. In the same way, perhaps we will pity those who face perfect justice, but we won't protest justice. Justice is good. At the same time, we will recognize that the only reason we're not in exactly the same place is because of God's undeserved grace towards us."

Two points here:
1. Imagine that there is a human judge, lets call him Judge Jones, who is as just as is humanly possible. Everyone on trial in his courtroom gets the exact same sentence: death by slow torture. Circumstances or severity of the crime are irrelevant, Judge Jones tries to be as godly in his justice as is humanly possible and does not allow to go any evil unpunished. Therefore, there is death by slow torture for the serial rapist and death by slow torture for the girl that stole something from the cookie jar and death by slow torture for everyone else.
Now, do you think Judge Jones is indeed as just as is humanly possible? Remember that I defined him to be as just as is humanly possible, so if you don´t want to make the mistake that you accuse atheists of making, you have to consider ALL of the judge Jones story, and that involves him being as just as humanly possible.

2. You don´t actually seem to like justice at all. What you want is "undeserved grace". You have to make up your mind here, do you want "justice" or do you want "undeserved grace"?

GH5-

Which sins did Jesus not die for?

>> Your defending the faith and I respect that.

So I assume you are attacking the faith and I should be good with that? Granted Michael, you do have a finely woven sense of civility.

>> However it does seem to suggest that if "the eternal fire" was "prepared" then there was a preparer, no?

You seem to disagree with the precise shading of the Greek word in Matthew involving a dire consequence rather than God's capricious creating activity. Hell is the tragic response to the rebellion of devils and its transported rebellion to mankind (Gen. 3). In that light, is God vindicated? Or, what if Lucifer and his bunch continued to praise God in heaven and Adam and Eve noshed from the correct trees in the Garden, and then God instituted hell?

Then you'd have a proper gripe. As it is, ignoring the one factor that calls for a provision of hell is dishonest. Much like a policeman, who one being bludgeoned by a felon fires his service revolver into his assailant ... and is derided for police brutality.

>> Also is seems ironic that some Christian apologist fight to the death over the idea that God has anything to do with hell and the lake of fire and yet claim that it is entirely just. If it is entirely just why worry about it? Simply for the sake of truth?

Yep. Pretty much so.

I like the point about not worrying about it. It is the God of justice. But I view hell in the way I walked on the ice of my boyhood Lake Winnebago. It is dangerous to walk on ice. Lots of water underneath you to drown you with should the ice give way. But a practiced eye shows one the solid ice and the thin ice. A little caution is needed, but safety is assured.

Same with hell. For the rebellion of sin, hell is just. For the forgiveness of sins gained in Christ (this we call God's grace), hell is as real as being struck by a meteor while standing on Mars.

Hell is real, but for those who know Christ ... do I look worried?

This is the chasm. You say "hell" and cry foul. I say "hell" and add "pfffff!"

By the way Michael, you seem to fixate on hell as the "lake of eternal fire."

Do you take this as a literal representation, or a metaphor of the horrors of hell?

WL asks,

"Which sins did Jesus not die for?"

The Goat Head answers:

Well, WL, all of them.

What does that have to do with your claim that Jesus is eternally suffering for our sins?

GH5-

So, just to be clear, Jesus died for all sins?

What about sins committed in Hell?

What about sins committed in the future? He doesn't even know what they are.

WL,

Sins committed in Hell? How would that work? So you know how things work in Hell? More of your pagan Greek Philosophy stuff?

And why couldn't Jesus' death atone for sins in the future?

What does all this have to do with Jesus suffering eternally?

I'm just asking GH5.

You're the one who said he died for all sins.

Surely sins will be committed in Hell, or will everyone there be saints?

And how can Jesus die for a sin that He doesn't know about?

WL,

I have no idea how things do or will work in Hell.

Nor do I know the precise mechanics of how Jesus dying for our sins works. Why do you think Jesus wouldn't be able to die for a possible future sin?

DG,

I don’t intend to attack as you put it; if it sounds like I’m attacking I haven't communciated as well I would have preferred. I like parts of Christianity, there is some truth here and there, but many parts are, in my opinion, nonsensical and thus I try to bring some common sense into play.

The Christian would describe God something like infinite, eternal, unchangeable, wise, all powerful, holy, just, good, etc. and "man" is born a sinner and unable to avoid sin even if he desire to not sin, accorrding to your belief system. Therefore your policemen anology is poor to say the least. A better, not a lot better granted, would be if a policemen in an armored vehicle fires a missle at a guy for walking on the wrong side of the street and the guy didn't even know there was a rule regarding what side of the street he could walk on.

Regarding if I take hell fire literally I'm just repeating what the Bible says. Apparently you don't take the fire part literally but nonetheless you say hell is real. You move the goalposts according to fit your argument, there is no logic to accept one and not the other. As another example here is a verse from the Book of Revelation....

"he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; "

When I say "why worry about it" I meant why worry about how hell came into being, not if you were worried about going to hell. If hell is a just place then God is not "in trouble" for having something to do with it and if God is omnipotent (and nobody else is) he likely has some direct or indirect involvement.

Then you write "This is the chasm. You (that's me) say 'hell' and cry foul. I (that's you) say 'hell' and add 'pffff!' "

Yes and that is why I did my orginal post. The Christian argues the docrtine of hell because it is just another dogma to be defended. The is no apparent heart wrenching grief out of love for your fellow brothers and sisters of this world. Did you even watch the referened video to its end? That was the key point of the video. Please view the video again and pay close attention to the very end of it. That guy says what I want to say but expresses himself better than I do. Here is the link again for your convenience......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VbMAwN0u7#sthash.do30Rbj0.dpuf

>> Therefore your policemen analogy is poor to say the least.

No, my analogy is solid. If you wish that the policeman is to be villainized regardless to the pain he suffers, you are of a "blame God" mindset. With such a preconception, God cannot do anything right. Lose that misconception, and you'll start to understand it is not merely defense of dogma.

>> You move the goalposts according to fit your argument

No, I practice proper Biblical hermeneutic, considering if the flames are real, or a picture of the misery total separation from God produces.
I was wondering if the sensationalism of the pictures of Revelation (a tough book to interpret) produced a feeling of sadistic fury, which one might attribute to God.

Did review the video from TB. His mistake was made at the 1:05 mark. He simply doesn't understand the divine plan of salvation, and his parody of this shows a predilection to not get his options correctly placed. He keeps talking about living an ethical life; that's Santa Claus theology, and is not one whit close to the Christianity of grace. And not knowing this leads him to create a false dilemma. It's only a botched refutation of Pascal's wager. And what is up with flicking the Bic other that cheap theatrics.

I fear we shall always be at odds about the subject of hell, whether we take it as a threat and complain, or take it as a warning and be thankful for an out.

Either god changes you and violates freewill or you don’t need to be changed, in other words you are narcissistic, which is the ironic part of this mess.

Michael, did you even read the answer I linked to?

Perhaps there is in all of us an intuitive feeling that eternity in a lake of fire is not just?

Sure, there could be, but that doesn’t mean it’s based on truth. I once read a blog being written by a murderer in prison, and in one of the posts, he said he was a good person. There, in the midst of the prisoners, he might seem that way—but only because he’s only comparing himself to other bad people and isn’t confronted with a clear picture of what is truly good.

But this applies just the same to us. We compare ourselves to the other sinners around us, and we end up looking pretty good! That doesn’t mean we have an accurate understanding of our true goodness. Isaiah was a very prophet of God, but when he came face to face with God, his response was “Woe is me! For I am a man of unclean lips!” It’s not until we’re in front of God that we’ll be able to see our own sinfulness as it really is. For now, we tend to compare ourselves to other sinners and think we’re doing pretty well. When we’re in front of perfect righteousness, every bit of our sinfulness will be revealed, and we’ll see that God’s judgment is perfectly just.

I’m very confident this is true (that we have an inaccurate understanding of what we deserve), for the better I know God (and the more I learn about people who are much better people than I am), the more aware I am of my own moral failures and the more grateful I am for grace. As my understanding of myself gets more and more clear, I’m thankful for the perfect peace I have knowing that God has shown me perfect grace to cover it!

Andy,

1) As soon as you say, “Circumstances or severity of the crime are irrelevant,” you’re no longer talking about a judge that’s analogous to God. The Bible is clear that some punishment will be worse when the crimes are worse. As for human judges, human judges don’t punish crimes against God, nor do they have the authority to judge every single bit of evil. Only God does that.

2) I don’t have to decide at all. You can start with this to understand how God has reconciled His justice and His grace. Undeserved grace isn’t unjust. It’s in a separate category. God can show a person grace without compromising His justice when Jesus bore all the punishment for that person’s sin on the cross. But nobody has a right to this grace—that is, nobody has a right to complain an injustice has been done if he isn't given grace. It’s just if they go to hell. It’s just if Jesus bore hell for us. It’s God’s prerogative to show grace to whomever He decides to show grace.

"I have no idea how things do or will work in Hell."

Neither do I, but I'm pretty sure sinners will be there...just a guess.

"Nor do I know the precise mechanics of how Jesus dying for our sins works. Why do you think Jesus wouldn't be able to die for a possible future sin?"

You're the one who says Jesus died for all sin, and that he can't know the future.

WL,

"'You're the one who says that Jesus died for all sins".

So? How does that have anything to do with your assertion that Jesus is eternally suffering ?

And how does my saying that the future is only partially knowable by God bear on your idea that Jesus is continually and eternally suffering?

Hi Amy,

I missed the link but to be fair to you I just scrolled up and viewed it. I've got a CEO (my boss) on my case to get some reports done and since I don't want to get fired I gotta go and therefore I cannot do any response right now that would be worth reading. I'll just say the person made some good points and some that I would strongly dispute and leave it at that.

Regarding your point about comparing ourselves with others; that is not something I do nor am I interested in. I don't care if someone is very bad, bad, average, good, very good or cleansed in the blood of Jesus. None of them are going to hell because there is no hell to go to.

You are a good sport for keeping my original post, thanks again.

GH5-

Since Jesus couldn't have paid for future sins on Calvary, according to your view, when does He get around to paying for them?

WL,

I see no reason why Jesus couldn't have died for future sins on the cross.Why do you think that would be impossible?

What sins? He didn't even know that there will be any future sins on your view.

Amy,

"1) As soon as you say, “Circumstances or severity of the crime are irrelevant,” you’re no longer talking about a judge that’s analogous to God."
- But that only means that "justice" when referred to humans and "justice" when referred to God are two completely different things, even diametrically opposed to each other in some cases, but they are referred to by the same name.

"The Bible is clear that some punishment will be worse when the crimes are worse. As for human judges, human judges don’t punish crimes against God, nor do they have the authority to judge every single bit of evil. Only God does that."
- So what? Doesn´t change the fact that a human judge who tries to emulate God by dishing out the maximum sentence for everything would be called ridiculously unjust, but God is supposed to be "just" for doing just that, and that again shows that there are two completely different concepts that are both called "justice" although they have literally nothing whatsoever to do with each other.

"2) I don’t have to decide at all. You can start with this to understand how God has reconciled His justice and His grace. Undeserved grace isn’t unjust. It’s in a separate category. God can show a person grace without compromising His justice when Jesus bore all the punishment for that person’s sin on the cross."
- Giving someone something that (s)he does not deserve is the exact opposite of justice. And thinking that you getting something that you don´t deserve would become just because someone else was punished for what you did, is an absolute travesty of justice.
If you want justice, then you want what you deserve, nothing more and nothing less. If you want more than you deserve, then you cannot sincerely claim that you desire justice, because you evidently do not.

WL asks about Jesus dying to atone for future sins...

"What sins? He didn't even know that there will be any future sins on your view."

I don't see a problem with Jesus' death atoning for all possible future sins.

But what does this have to do with your idea that Jesus is continually and eternally suffering?

GH5-

So Jesus died on speculation?

He died for past sins. OK. But apparently He endured punishment for every possible sin for every possible future...even though, for all He knew, every bit of that suffering was unnecessary.

Also, Man, it seems, was in need of a savior even before the Fall, because it was always possible that he would sin.

Tell me where in the Bible does it say that Jesus died for all possible sins for all possible futures?

GH5-

Tell me also, does He remember any of this punishment? Or has it all faded away?

Understanding what took place in the spiritual realm before the earth was created will open a door to a person who is searching.Is there a God or not?I've often ended (when trying to get a soul for God's kingdom) the conversation with, If I'm wrong and your right,no one will lose anything, but what if I'm right? Are you willing to take that chance. I confess, a lady said yes, and the tears began to fall.

Once again answering WL,

"Tell me also, does He remember any of this punishment? Or has it all faded away?"

Well, I have no reason to think that He would choose to forget.

"So Jesus died on speculation?"

Nonsense.

"Also, Man, it seems, was in need of a savior even before the Fall, because it was always possible that he would sin".

Again nonsense. Man sinned. Then needed a savior. Quite easy for a being as smart as God to predict the future. Even without seeing it as a certainty.

"Tell me where in the Bible does it say that Jesus died for all possible sins for all possible futures?"

Of course it doesn't spell that out, just like that. Just as it doesn't spell out your view, grafted on from pagan greek philosophy, that God somehow exists "outside of time" and that He created the universe as a completely determined 4 dimensional block.

But what does any of this have to do with your idea that Jesus suffers endlessly for our sins?

The comments to this entry are closed.