S
Silas
Guest
Is God sad about sending people to hell and the coming day of judgement?
"He is not willing that any should perish" during his "strange act".
S
Silas
Guest
Sorry. I don't really know. He is unwilling and it's a strange act for Him.
Does it say somewhere that He is sad?
S
Silas
Guest
What do you mean that he is unwilling and that it is a strange for him?
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
Since I reject all three of the ideas you've proposed (personal god, hell, judgment day), I'd have to say, umm, No?
lol ... so I think you should start your post by admitting to THREE assumptions, or caveats.
I mean, come on, this doesn't even have to be on Liberal Christianity for there to be a decidedly different Christian approach to these three ideas than what you've suggested, Silas. You might start by asking, "IF you assume that some people might actually spend time/eternity in a place or experience called `hell,' what do you think the Almighty Father thinks of this - or how does He regard it, so to speak? Does it make Him sad?"
I'm kind of curious, other than about 5 people here I can think of right off the bat, who even believes in the idea of an eternal hell of punishment and torment anyway? I bet we could dig up an old poll that asks this, couldn't we!
And God, sad? Wow. I'd have to greatly warp my understanding of Deity to even begin to try to make these two concepts meet. Even if, when all is said and done, I ended up saying, "yes," it would be kinda like the algebra professor feeling sad because a third of his class failed the final exam, thus flunking the class! I mean, is this going to cause him some kind of personal grief?
Err, no. The class will repeat their studies, and get it right next time, except that they'll even have an edge over next year's class, since after all, they've seen the material before, and they already know what to expect!
Eternal hell? poppycock!!!
But of course, yeah, I know - some people do believe in such an idea!
cheers,
~Zagreus
S
Silas
Guest
Since I reject all three of the ideas you've proposed (personal god, hell, judgment day), I'd have to say, umm, No?
lol ... so I think you should start your post by admitting to THREE assumptions, or caveats.
I mean, come on, this doesn't even have to be on Liberal Christianity for there to be a decidedly different Christian approach to these three ideas than what you've suggested, Silas. You might start by asking, "IF you assume that some people might actually spend time/eternity in a place or experience called `hell,' what do you think the Almighty Father thinks of this - or how does He regard it, so to speak? Does it make Him sad?"
I'm kind of curious, other than about 5 people here I can think of right off the bat, who even believes in the idea of an eternal hell of punishment and torment anyway? I bet we could dig up an old poll that asks this, couldn't we!
And God, sad? Wow. I'd have to greatly warp my understanding of Deity to even begin to try to make these two concepts meet. Even if, when all is said and done, I ended up saying, "yes," it would be kinda like the algebra professor feeling sad because a third of his class failed the final exam, thus flunking the class! I mean, is this going to cause him some kind of personal grief?
Err, no. The class will repeat their studies, and get it right next time, except that they'll even have an edge over next year's class, since after all, they've seen the material before, and they already know what to expect!
Eternal hell? poppycock!!!
But of course, yeah, I know - some people do believe in such an idea!
cheers,
~Zagreus
The sad and scary thing about your belief is that it will not change reality. There is a God and he will judge everyone according to their deeds. You can be forgiven if you repent and trust in the Christ.
Just the quotes from the previous texts.
I'll provide the references if you wish. Just don't remember off the top of my head...
S
Silas
Guest
Lets look at 2Peter 3:9 in context and see what you think.
The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but ispatient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance (2Peter 3:9).
Who is the "you" in that verse talking about? Look at the verse before it, v8.
But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Verse 8 and 9 in context is talking about the "beloved." Who is the beloved? Look at verse 1..."This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder" (2 Peter 3:1)
According to Peter, that was the 2nd letter to the "beloved." Which means, the answer to the question could be found in the first letter - "1Peter." So, lets go to 1Peter 1:1 to see who the beloved are. When we go there we see:
"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (1 Peter 1:1).
So you see, just from a contextual reading, we see that the verse is talking about a specific group of people. But, lest you think Im wrong, lets look at that in the orignal greek:
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.(2Peter 3:9 KJV).
Notice the words in red: "Some men," "any" and "all." The words "some men" and "any" are the SAME word in the greek, namely, the word "Tis." Here are the definations of the word:
1) a certain, a certain one
2) some, some time, a while
So, it would be just as accurate to translate the verse as thus:
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as certain ones count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that certian ones should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
But, if context and orignal language isnt enough, we have one more exegetical proof that the verse isnt talking about all people indivisually, but all people within a specific context. Look at the word "all," its the word "Pas" in the Greek. The definations are:
1) individually
1a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things,everything
2) collectively
2a) some of all types
What do you think is the best defination for the word "all" in context of what is being discussed?
S
Silas
Guest
Check out this vid on youtube. It deals with the samething I was just trying to explain. How do you see that verse, by the way?
I'll check that out...
I see it as saying that this is a strange thing for G-d to do.
(Okay, checked it out...)
I see what you mean. I'm still not convinced, but I'll study and think about it.
Much thanks,
Mark
p.s. Didn't know they had such nice videos on YouTube.
Last edited:
S
Silas
Guest
I know right! You tube and google vids are suprising me lately, they have a lot of good stuff lately.
What a great witnessing tool!
S
Silas
Guest
You're right!
M
mee
Guest
"Jehovah is not slow respecting his promise, . . . but he is patient with you because he does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance."—2 PETER 3:9.
(Ezekiel 18:23) "‘Do I take any delight at all in the death of someone wicked,’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, ‘[and] not in that he should turn back from his ways and actually keep living?’
(Ezekiel 33:11) Say to them, ‘"As I am alive," is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, "I take delight, not in the death of the wicked one, but in that someone wicked turns back from his way and actually keeps living. Turn back, turn back from YOUR bad ways, for why is it that YOU should die, O house of Israel?"’.........................i dont think the Almighty takes delight in those who will be destroyed . that is why he wants people to repent , then they will not have to be judged as wicked ones. he reads hearts, and what we do know is that only the wicked will be destroyed . noone will suffer in a litral fire that is not a true bible teaching . it will be life or death, and if we are destroyed it will be because we want it that way our choice in the end.
Dondi
Well-Known Member
I think mee gave some good verses. God is grieved at the wicked, those that do not repent. But God in His holiness has no choice if one does not repent.
S
Silas
Guest
Mee did gives some good verses. I agree that God does desire that men turn and live. Yet, I also affairm from scripture that God is both glorfied in His decision of sending people to hell and that he does not cry about it. Note 1 Sam 2:25, for instance:
"If someone sins against a man, God will mediate for him, but if someone sins against the Lord, who can intercede for him?” But they would not listen to the voice of their father, for it was the will of the Lord to put them to death."
Notice Mee, the same Hebrew word is used for all noted scriptures, i.e., 1 Sam 2:25 and Ezk 18:33 and Ezk 33:11. So, Mee, what do we have here? We have one scripture saying that God "desired" to put the sons of Eli to death, and yet does not "delight" in the death of the wicked and that both words "desired" and "delight" are the same Hebrew word (haphez). Is this a contradiction? Of course not. In understanding what the Bible means about "God's will," we must first differentiate between what God desiers and what he actually allows to happen - vis - what theologians call "The Two Wills in God." Throughout the years, it has gone by such names as: "God's sovereign will vs moral will," or "efficient will vs permissive will," or "secret will vs revealed will," or "will of decree vs will of command."
The difference in the two wills is "what God desiers" vs "what God allows to occure" or better stated, "what God commands that we can break" verus "What God decree and we cannot thwart." A good and simply example of the "two wills in God" can be seen in the worst sin ever - the death of Jesus. It is God's will and desire that we do not kill (will of command), yet in the same vein, it was God's will that Jesus be handed over to evil men to have them do whatever they wanted as Acts 2:23 states (will of decree).
"If someone sins against a man, God will mediate for him, but if someone sins against the Lord, who can intercede for him?” But they would not listen to the voice of their father, for it was the will of the Lord to put them to death."
Notice Mee, the same Hebrew word is used for all noted scriptures, i.e., 1 Sam 2:25 and Ezk 18:33 and Ezk 33:11. So, Mee, what do we have here? We have one scripture saying that God "desired" to put the sons of Eli to death, and yet does not "delight" in the death of the wicked and that both words "desired" and "delight" are the same Hebrew word (haphez). Is this a contradiction? Of course not. In understanding what the Bible means about "God's will," we must first differentiate between what God desiers and what he actually allows to happen - vis - what theologians call "The Two Wills in God." Throughout the years, it has gone by such names as: "God's sovereign will vs moral will," or "efficient will vs permissive will," or "secret will vs revealed will," or "will of decree vs will of command."
The difference in the two wills is "what God desiers" vs "what God allows to occure" or better stated, "what God commands that we can break" verus "What God decree and we cannot thwart." A good and simply example of the "two wills in God" can be seen in the worst sin ever - the death of Jesus. It is God's will and desire that we do not kill (will of command), yet in the same vein, it was God's will that Jesus be handed over to evil men to have them do whatever they wanted as Acts 2:23 states (will of decree).
S
Silas
Guest
Oh yeah mee, as for 2Peter 3:9, Peter is talking about the elect saints. Its simply to see that from context alone. No real exegesis is needed to come to that conclussion.