Luke 16, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. The rich man is in Hades and begs Abraham to have mercy but it is denied to him. "..and besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, so that those who wish to come over from here to you will not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us"
I have never heard a defense of Hell that doesn't sound far too much like the violent rantings of an angry teenager who refuses to use deodorant who got turned down for the dance or the divorced guy who can't admit to being a lazy slob. Their god, in these scenarios, is the teen or the divorcee: "They were mean to me and it totally wasn't at all my fault! They just don't understand how awesome and great I am! Some day they will, and I'll make them pay for what they did!"
When I was a Christian I had an experience of the love of God once that was so beautiful; I knew in that moment, without a shadow of a doubt, that it was IMPOSSIBLE for God to send anyone to hell. It conflicted with the indoctrination of the church I had received about hell. I left the church not long after. Anyone who believes in an everlasting torment without end for a large portion of humanity, or worse preaches it to others and scares them, simply has not contemplated the matter deeply enough.
I had a similar experience of God’s love and the struggle of how Hell is taught to people. Then I read the church fathers and learned that Universal Restoration of all people was held by many prominent Saints and large portions of the church even today. Happily I am in a church that allows for this view.
@Tiredhike Good for you. I too have read alot about the early church and Universal Restoration. Alot of evangelicals (with few exceptions) and virtually no fundamentalists will tolerate anyone who doesn't share the ECT view.
"Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’" - Matthew 7:21-23 "If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than to have two hands and two feet and be thrown into the ETERNAL fire." - Matthew 18:8 "But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” - Revelation 21:8 "And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night FOREVER AND EVER." - Revelation 20:10 "Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the ETERNAL fire prepared for the devil and his angels." - Matthew 25:41 "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done." - Revelation 20:12 "And these will go away into ETERNAL punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” - Matthew 25:46 "And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment." - Hebrews 9:27 "This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering- since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will suffer the punishment of ETERNAL DESTRUCTION, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed." - 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10 "Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment." - John 5:28-29 "And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and EVERLASTING contempt." - Daniel 12:2 "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it." - Matthew 7:13-14
I believe the entire word of God. That being said, I don't believe anyone was won for by pulling out the hell card. When you receive Jesus he gives us a new spirit and a new heart where you can see his will !
Honestly, I think the best argument against hell is simply that the New Testament isn't exactly clear that there is an actual place that will go on for eternity in which people are going to be tortured and conscious. It's easy to find judgement. It's easy to find that some people will not be welcomed into God's new creation. It's far harder to get to the full-fledged "traditional" view held by most.
@@darkeen42 the problem is that John's gospel is much less reliable than the Synoptics when it comes to Jesus' sayings. Jesus most likely never taught such a thing.
@marcfischer114 okay yeah do you think it's in any way accurate? Because we have no idea what Jesus says none of the gospels were written by anybody that ever met him or even spoke the same language
there's a major thing missing in the shipwreck analogy. The ones who didn't survive didn't just perish in the wreck, but before the wreck occurred they also repeatedly rejected the warnings as well as the offers to be saved from the wreck. I don't think eternal conscious torment is what the Bible teaches, but when we use analogies they've gotta actually work, otherwise we might mislead people or give them the wrong impression of God. Given that the Bible speaks of the "death of the soul", the second death, to be consciously tortured or tormented forever makes no sense. You have to be alive for that. That would be described as being granted eternal life, but tortured. But the Bible is clear, some will have eternal life, and the others won't. On ECT, everyone has eternal life but just some are in joy and others are tormented, which isn't what Jesus or the apostles taught.
Hell is resisting the purification process of the holy Spirit! Purgatory is embracing the purification of the holy Spirit! Heaven is the result after purification!
One of the best arguments against Calvinism is precisely that it is imposible that God demands of us to love everybody as we love ourselves, but He doesn't. It's something similar here. If we wouldn't want for everybody to be tortured eternally then God shouldn't either.
Lots of literalists here, who think that just by quoting a scripture, they settle the argument in their own favour....as though Dr Rouser, or any theologian, has never heard these scriptures, and never studied or reflected upon them..
I don’t think we can know exactly what hell is like but passages like Mathew 25:46 really portray Jesus himself as affirming some kind of eternal suffering. That being said, I am sympathetic to wrestling with such a difficult doctrine. I am a hopeful universalist but it seems unlikely that all will choose eternal communion with God.
Someone who loves you could never hurt you forever, or threaten to do so if you don't do what they say. That's not a part of any definition of love that I could ever find coherent. Rather, it is abuse, and people who emulate this treatment of others are abusive. That's kind of the point Randal is making.
The word used for eternal in Matthew just means an age. It’s a clear mistranslation. That doesn’t at all mean universal reconciliation is true, but it isn’t useful as evidence against it in my mind.
@@weirdwilliam8500 I agree but it doesn’t mean that someone who loves you would force you to make a decision even if that decision is the correct one and any other decision will lead to pain and suffering.
@@derrybrooks7197 can you point me in a direction of resources that back up that claim? All I am finding is that the original Greek aiōnion seems to mean everlasting/eternal. It is also used when Mathew says eternal life. Does that mean we would have to interpret eternal life as “life for an age”?
Even if i did NOT know ANY of the people in the ficticious hell.... How can i experience a loving afterlife with God and my resurrected family, if we all know there are all these souls in pain? What? Do we worship a God of love, or do we worship an evil pos?
The word translated "eternal" is aeon, which means "for an age". I think sometimes that the belief in eternal torment is what allows good church people to throw out people who question their pet doctrines.
But “aeon” is used to refer to the duration of Heaven as well. To interpret it differently for Hell would be a double standard fallacy and an etymological fallacy. Even if you are right, your argument would not provide a valid defense for it. I hope you are well ❤️
Jesus says to sentiments like this: "You do not know what manner of spirit you are of! For the Son Of Man cane not to destroy men's lives, but to save them" (Luke 9:55)! Edwards and Aquinas were both Augustinian (or "Calvinist") , which believes God DID come to destroy men, because that's what "glorifies" Him!
@@alexrothwell2053 Aquinas was Augustinian Catholic. Calvinism is basically Augustinianism rekindled for the Reformation, so that's why I included both names.
Most of our practices are burrowed from the Greeko Roman pagan culture that surrounded the early church. Temples built on sacred tombs, Sermons/ orations, amphitheater around a pulpit, sacred ritual preformed by a separated priest caste distinct from ordinary "laity", and the concept of an eternal soul that must either reside in pleasant heavens or tortured hell... and the hell/ hades being various forms of terrible tortures. Eternal, conscious, burning g torment is not in the Bible. Every instance used to prove eternal conscious burning damnation of the "lost" can be shown to be a figure of speech wrongly interpreted by inserting ideas of hell and damnation burrowed from the folk religions that like to call themselves "Christianity". I would have considered myself quite heretic a few years ago. Now, I literally see the doctrine of eternal torment of the lost as a terrible heresy that undoes the clear message of love that is all over the New Testament!
As I’ve learned, it’s more complicated than that. When Jesus says “Gehenna”, he doesn’t just mean the literal place, but also attaches a supernatural significance to it. This is similar to how the “kingdom of God” is a literal kingdom of Israel, but also established by and intimately connected to God. So while it may not be the Heaven and Hell that are promoted now, it’s closer than you might expect. Keep in mind that Hellenization occurred long before Jesus was even born.
What? Wait! No one talked more about hell than Jesus. No one who more exemplified loving your neighbor than Jesus. So, how do we reconcile the two? None of the two options Randal described satisfy me. The answer balances God's mercy and grace with his justice. There is no pleasure in the destruction of the wicked in hell. But there is justice. There is no love of neighbor if the wicked are allowed to participate in God's mercy without repentance. That would be to turn heaven into the hell we now experience on earth. So, what about the wiping away of all tears? My reading is that those tears are due to the grief for the lost. God himself grieves over the lost as Jesus wept over Jerusalem - which he knew would be destroyed and those who rejected him suffer eternal loss. The grief and tears are resolved by a deep understanding of God's love. No one without a witness. No one is without a Savior. No one will be in hell who did not reject and God's love. We may not see it, but we can believe it, for God says he loves the world and gave his Son for the salvation of the world. There will be tears in the eternal kingdom for the lost. And what will wipe away those tears? The knowledge of God's incredible love and the knowledge that justice must be done for there to be perfect righteousness and peace in the eternal kingdom. God cannot love the redeemed without protecting them from evil. Universal reconciliation, if there was such, would satisfy the grief, but then would there be tears? I see no universalism taught in the Bible. I see justice and love.
“There is no love of neighbor if the wicked are allowed to participate in God’s mercy without repentance.” Why can’t they repent? Wicked people repent and turn to God every day.
@@emersonb.5399 I can only make a reasoned guess based on what we are told in the scriptures. God has allowed humans freedom of choice or free will. They can choose to reasoned to what God reveals about himself, or they can reject it. We are given this lifetime to decide. At the end of life, the choices we have made become eternal choices. Why? They are so by God's decree. Why? Because there would be no justice if every wicked person is allowed eternal life without repenting. And there is no indication that they will repent. Without repentance he or she will remain an enemy of God. We might hope that God will override that final decision to reject God as Randal does, but he has no biblical evidence for that opinion.
An omnipotent God could come up with a better solution. How about just deleting those people who can’t make it to heaven? They’re never going to interact with anyone ever again, so what’s the point of punishment? I agree with you that a kind of Hell (Gehenna) and a kind of New Earth (the kingdom of God) are explicitly present in the gospels. However, I also acknowledge that such a setup is cruel, unnecessary, and unfair. It was also present in Greek culture long before it was reinterpreted in a Jewish context. That’s part of why I’m no longer a Christian: These ideas are not new and don’t accurately reflect the properties God is alleged to have.
I know it’s a common belief that our choice is sealed at death, but I don’t see anything in Scripture to support it. If God wants everyone to come to repentance, why would He prevent that by taking away our freedom of choice? I don’t see how that would be more just than allowing people to repent and seek forgiveness. If a man commits a crime, serves his prison sentence, and becomes a productive member of society upon his release, has justice been denied? Would it be more just if he stayed the criminal that he was, and never changed?
@@emersonb.5399 That is the belief of universalists. If you are a Christian, that would satisfy. But if you are not, as my brother was not, it allows for the neglect of God's offer of salvation. It makes it less than urgent, and it makes the message of the gospel irrelevant. In 2nd Corinthians it says that today is the day of salvation (2nd Cor. 6:2). It does not matter if the "day of salvation" is this moment or this age, it seems to say in either that there is a limited time.
Good work Randal. In my study and learning over the past few years I have landed on the view of Universal Restoration. It falls within orthodox Christian belief. Keep going after these sacred cows brother!
"How can it be that you no longer suffer at all if people that you once loved are suffering unimaginable torment forever in hell?" - Randal Rauser The Bible: "For behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind." - Isaiah 65:17
So we forget all of our unsaved loved ones, our feelings towards them, our relationships with them, and all of the experiences we’ve had with them? At that point can you really say that we’ve been saved? Or has God simply created entirely new people who happen to look like us?
@@emersonb.5399 "Now we see but a dim reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known." - 1 Corinthians 13:12
@@emersonb.5399 "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me; and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for My sake will find it." - Matthew 10:37-39
@langreeves6419 it does these days, but it's the method that's been put to employ since the concept of a hell was instilled into spiritualities, having a need for fear component that is held like an anvil above coyotes head tells me that spirituality is a dead end road.
@@billybobwombat2231 no, fear is a very short term motivator I've never been in a church which used fear, and my current denomination doesn't use fear. I've seen a lot of people in my life have a close call like a wreck or something. They then come to church every sunday... For a few months. Love is how you keep people, not fear. People at my church are there because they experience love.
@langreeves6419 its instilled early, put in the back of the mind and you carry that warning for life, a common thing i see religious people say to those that don't follow their version of God is " you need to think long and hard on your choices, otherwise you gonna go to hell" , its always been used, that's how narcissistic abusers operate, love me or I will hurt you, the bible god tells you in his first four commandments that is how he operates.
Psalm 139:21-23 _21 Do I not hate those who hate You, Lord?_ _And do I not loathe those who rise up against You?_ _22 I hate them with the utmost hatred;_ _They have become my enemies._ _23 Search me, God, and know my heart;_ _Put me to the test and know my anxious thoughts;_ And yet Jesus said, Matthew 5:42-44 42 Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. _43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,_ Is there a contradiction? I think not. David, in this Psalm, hates them that "hate God" and those who hate God have "become his enemies." On the other hand, Jesus is speaking of those who "persecute you.". As for me, with a view to one who desires to boast in the righteousness of the Holly God, and sing praises to His righteous judgments, I look to Jesus. As it is also written: Matthew 7:2 _For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you._ The doctrine of hell makes me praise God, for He takes no pleasure nor is willing that any would perish but has provided a righteous WAY to escape the wrath of God thru Christ Jesus. The issue is not the doctrine but the unrepentant and those who, on this side of eternity, would condemn them rather than to pray for them to escape the wrath to come, by coming to a knowledge of the truth.
In other words, Jesus taught: "Truly, I said to you, you shall love your enemies but hate MY enemies in the same way as I hate them?" Doesn't that turn Jesus into the greatest Hypocrite one can conceive of?
@@marcfischer114 Is it my bad? Does my failure to explain myself brings you to your own conclusion? Or does it reveal your own heart? As you say; > “*In other words, Jesus taught.*” And so you take my bad and turn Jesus into “the greatest hypocrite one can conceive of (who is this “one” of whom you speak)?” First I am quoting two different persons; David in the psalms and Jesus in the gospel. David is similar to all men in that he needs a savior. Jesus, on the other hand, does not. Jesus is the savior and the truth cannot be a hypocrite he is THE TEACHER. David from my perception is giving a reason as to why he “hates” someone and what makes them his enemy. And it focuses on their hatred of God. Jesus, is giving us the way of salvation. Therefore he says, “love your enemies.” We like David, are not free of hatred. We will hate. But even righteous hatred does not profit us because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Therefore, the primary word of Jesus that I quote is: Matthew 7:2 _For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you._ Jesus is teaching us to love and leave those who hate God to the vengeance of God, because vengeance is mine says the LORD. I was not saying, nor did it enter into my mind that Jesus ever said, “love your enemies, but hate mine.” I was giving my opinion that there is no contradiction in what David said and what Jesus taught. Therefore the issue is NOT with the doctrine of hell, but the issue is with the unrepentant. I do not want to put words in your mouth but it would seem that this post of Randal’s would make God a hypocrite for telling us to love our neighbor while He has created a place called “hell” that has an unquenchable fire. God does not need salvation. He is God. He is the judge and not the one being judged. Jesus asked the question. The messiah who’s son is he? in Mark 12: 36 David himself said in the Holy Spirit, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Until I put Your enemies under Your feet.”’ 37 David himself calls Him ‘Lord’; so in what sense is He his son?” In what sense is he his son? And conversely, in what sense is He his Lord?
@@RobSed55 1) Does Jesus hate the same people that the Psalmist hates? 2) Does Jesus love the people that the Psalmist hates but he wants the Psalmist to hate them even though he loves them?
@@marcfischer114 It is written : John 1:16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. The terms, "grace upon grace" is literally, "grace for grace." The way it works in my mind is, I must love even those my flesh is predisposed to hate, so that I may receive grace for grace from God, through Christ Jesus. My answer to question 1 is this. The first coming of Jesus was to bring grace and truth and the Way of salvation. I don’t find Him “hating” anyone. However, he does get “angry” “Mark 3:5 _After looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart._ I am not ready to say “anger” and “hate” are the same thing. We believe that in His second coming, he will hate the same people the Psalmist hates. However, this time around He is teaching the way of salvation and is full of grace and truth. We, the sinner, as the psalmist, have hate which we must leave to the vengeance of God and for the our own salvation sake we must do what Jesus did, when those who hated Him crucified Him, “forgive them for they know NOT what they do.” My answer to question 2 is this. Jesus loves the Father and those whom the Father gave Him. Remember, in this case, the Psalmist is David. David is no longer in the land of the living. It makes no sense to say Jesus wants the Psalmist to love the ones the psalmist hates because they hated that God. That is in the past. Jesus is teaching us who are under the New Covenant in His blood. In my opinion, the hatred that David had, in this Psalm, is righteous. Nevertheless, vengeance is mine says the LORD. David is under the law of Moses. The son of David, the Messiah, is bringing the NEW covenant of faith and forgiveness of sins. However, if we don’t forgive whomever, including those we hate, neither will God forgive us. And me thinks it takes “love” to forgive those we hate, even if it’s righteous hate. Therefore, I do not find any issue with the doctrine of hell. The issue is with the unrepentant. The point is to understand that Jesus did not need salvation, we do. Jesus is teaching us the way of salvation.
If this Zoroastrian hell adapted by Christians is real than we either lose our memories of loved ones in hell or we lose empathy, a trait that makes us human. Either way those in heaven would be less human, more like my HP laptop in the other room.
Complicating this for Catholics and Orthodox is that even though it is defined that there is a sense of suffering, what is emphasized is the separation not some kind of literal burning torture. That and, despite the fact that both traditions teach there is no salvation outside of the church, it is impossible to know exactly who or how many are saved or not. I don't think this completely undercuts your point, however, so it's certainly something to think about. If we were to follow your logic, however, then you would be required to reject either of those traditions as hell with some sense of eternal suffering is de fide and I suppose you could struggle with it but if you deny it then you are basically a heretic and in some sense outside of those churches.
I think that comparison with a shipwreck is not working for ECT, because people in hell got there not by accident, but by being enemies to God, continuously fighting against Church and the Gospel. So in the example it's not my child is reduced to corpses, but an enemy to Christ got what one deverve. John 3:18-19. If believer loves God, so he will not wish anything which is against Lord's will. If God wants to punish sinners for eternity so do believers as well. If one revolts against Him, he makes himself like satan, who did the same. And also how you explain passage Revelation 6: 9-10?
You’re assuming that whoever committed that sin is opposed to God and therefore evil. All three are considered the same in the verse you cited. There’s two problems with this: 1. It doesn’t account for nonresistant nonbelievers who sin but nonetheless remain open to God, who is hidden to them. 2. It assumes that those who reject God are evil by nature. That can lead you to treat them as enemies, as if everything they say is purposefully deceptive, angry, or cruel. Again, it’s a good idea to substitute in family and friends into that role. Even if they’ve sinned and rejected God, are they really deserving of infinite punishment? And would you really be satisfied with that when you get rewarded instead of them?
@seanpierce9386 First, thank you for your answer. Every human being can seek God, love Him and for this be saved by Him. If person dies without testimony and faith, therefore this is what he wanted. If someone even from non-christian land is openhearted for God, He will not leave him, but by some way this person will be babtised and find peace in Church. Next, I don't see reason to state that someone is evil by nature. Evil is not substantial, it's just an absence of good, in our case is absence of God, caused by fighting His will. About family. It's not up to me to decide, who deserve punishment and who is not. God just stated, that "he that believeth not is condemned already". I have muslim and atheist elders in my family and I love them, but I know what God will do, I've tried to convince them, but they rejected my words (I'm a bad discussionist and talker). So this does not change my behavior to them, but this is what they want, God gave them a free will and they use it to get eternal suffering, it's part of His work. Maybe they will atone this, I hope for this. But I know about my grand-grand-parents, they were devout muslims till death and their eternity is horrifyng. Answering to your words about satisfaction, now I'm more scared then satisfacted, but I see the path of christian as learning to know and unite with God's wil.
@@vipmagazinnikov So effectively, you’re dismissing the existence of nonresistant nonbelievers, claiming that all such people will “be babtized and find peace in Church”. This indicates to me that you’ve been fed a narrative and aren’t aware of the circumstances of real people. Where you are born is a consistent indicator of the religion you will follow. That means there’s plenty of people who have never even had the chance to consider Christianity. And there are also those who cannot bring themselves to believe despite wanting to, like myself. When it comes to family, remember that Muslims have their own version of Heaven and Hell. Perhaps this was not their choice, but merely an idea they were indoctrinated into and cannot escape. Perhaps the same applies to you.
@@vipmagazinnikov So effectively, you’re dismissing the existence of nonresistant nonbelievers, claiming that all such people will just become Christian. This indicates to me that you’ve been fed a narrative and aren’t aware of the circumstances of real people. Where you are born is a consistent indicator of the religion you will follow. That means there’s plenty of people who’ve never had the chance to consider Christianity. And there are also those who cannot bring themselves to believe despite wanting to, like myself. Remember that Muslims have their own version of Heaven and Hell. In the case of your relatives, perhaps this was not their choice, but merely an idea they were indoctrinated into and cannot escape for fear of punishment. Perhaps the same applies to you.
@@seanpierce9386 I believe in miracles, God will save all those willing to accept it and will do it in any realistic or unrealistic way. This may be called stupid or any other way, but I also believe in that Jesus was real person, He literally resurrected, performed miracles etc. If He can do it, so He can make any person, whom He foreknew christian.
First, Jesus speaks of the wicked being thrown into an unquenchable fire. Someone being wicked would be defined as sometime who throughout their whole lives rejects God. Hell is very real, that's why Christians must be a living testament to the truth. We live our faith. Look at the saints, you could tell that they loved God above all else through their actions and love for everyone. We should love everyone and pray for everyone, even those who choose evil constantly, because only God can determine the limits of his mercy. But at the end of the day, hell is real, the separation from God for eternity that one chooses by ultimate and final rejection of God's love
as an atheist i feel pity for liberal christians like Randal because he wrestles between an old book and the moral development humanity has experienced since that book was written
Is there an absolute moral standard by which to judge the development of humanity as to conclude that we are now doing better then "when the book was written"?
@@davidgray1060 there is no objective moral standard but there is an agreed upon one among most secular humanists and it is painfully easy to understand: decrease suffering and increase well being in the world for every being able to suffer (which is the opposite what tranditional christianity does now and has always done), the only assumption you need for this is _"suffering is bad"_ which is basic moral intuition and does not need any further justificaiton and by this measure which i (and many and it seems to me Randal does too) hold christianity has been outclassed for centuries (and the same way, our moral standards will be outclassed by future generations because morality is an ever changing ever evolving phenomenon)
What about the sheep and the goats? I'm all for getting rid of ECT, but some sort of hell, if only a terribly painful but ultimately refining fire, are both implicit and explicit in Jesus' teaching. Is not the (healthy) fear of God the beginning of wisdom? Which does not mean that, in the end, all of creation is not redeemed and transfigured.
Hell is compatible with universalism if you let go of the “eternal” part of ECT. Jesus said you will never get out of hell UNTIL you have paid the LAST PENNY. That means it is possible to exit hell. Of course, I think you would need to put your faith in Christ at some point during your stay in hell to even be eligible to exit it.
God is our Father!' As a Father, He knows us personally as His children! No Father could send one of his children to Hell for all eternity. This is a stupid layover from the Middle Ages when people were too stupid to think on their own. We were put on Earth to help other people as Jesus did when He was on Earth. Simple as that! All that "earning" bullsh-- is not Jesus. It is not Christianity! Sitting in a pew for an hour watching ceremony is not going to get me to heaven. It is a simplification of who Jesus was that churches have done for ages!!!
Of course, if one tosses out every objectionable belief from Christianity one can turn it into a humane ideology. But is that an honest or reasonable mode of procedure? Can words mean whatever you want them to mean?
If you're familiar with Bart Ehrman's books, you'll see that the synoptic Gospels do not teach eternal torment and neither do they teach that hell is for unbelievers.
@ I wouldn’t agree with that, but in any case Christian teaching isn’t limited to the gospels. If there is no eternal punishment then it is hard to see why there would be weeping and gnashing of teeth, or precisely the ‘wrath’ prepared. Whatever the case, substitutionary atonement is still an ugly doctrine.
@@cameronroman506 You seem very sure. Despite your ‘argumentum ad Ehrmanem’, eternal torment has been a mainstay of Christian doctrine since the beginning. No doubt you are aware of the New Testament verses. I applaud the attempt to weasel your way out of the horrifying implications of this teaching, but nothing in the gospel makes sense without it.
@ since the New Testament but not in the Old Testament. It used to be believed that people died and God blessed them in this life alone. Have you read the Old Testament? I am open to something new, the only thing I am sure of at this point is most churches are lying.
The Bible mentions hell more than it does heaven for a reason, Because God doesn't want anyone to go there, and because doctrine is always misconstrued by people who don't have the spirit inside them to discern what the word says. It says plainly, We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and for the wages of sin is death. But we were saved by Jesus Christ when we confess with our mouths that Jesus is Lord and that God the Father raised him from the dead. Hell exist for anyone that has to be separated from God because they did not believe or do not believe. Also, if you go to the very beginning in Genesis, you'll see that the serpent who is the devil, He was influencing Adam Eve to make the wrong decision. So where exactly was he staying when he was thrown out of heaven? Hell. But people like you who are spreading misinformation and you are putting people in a dangerous place for eternity. I sincerely hope that you revisit your findings and repent.
The doctrine of hell, especially for innocent unbelievers, is so unspeakably evil that it cannot be true. It would make God just as evil as any genocidal dictator, just on a larger scale. I hope that you're just reciting a script and don't understand what you're saying.
The word used for eternal in Matthew just means an age. It’s a clear mistranslation. They doesn’t at all mean universal reconciliation is true, but it isn’t useful as evidence against it.
@@derrybrooks7197 but the same word is used for believers attaining everlasting life. Does that then mean that eternal does not mean eternal in the phrase "eternal life"?
Christianity has become infected with fear. Believers are actually scared to believe anything different, because of an indoctrinated view they have received about scripture as being "inerrant and infallible". It is also telling that fear filled believers will inevitably quote Matthew 25, but hardly ever Matthew 18, or Luke 15 about the parable of the lost sheep. Jesus keeps searching until he finds it! Then the 99% becomes the 100%.
@@yunusahmed2940Why, at the end of an age would those enjoying life cease to enjoy life in the age after? Perhaps they will enjoy it a whole lot more, when those purified at the end of the first age join them in all future ages❤
@@yunusahmed2940 in all contexts that "aionios" is used it just mean an age or long she, unless the subject of the use is God. So in Matthew it just means that Christian’s will go into an age of life and some to an age of death. Many other places show that life is eternal with Christ given further context, but none I’ve found point to eternal suffering. It’s more likely the wicked will be destroyed
I'm sure he's angry at the sadistic and bloodthirsty caricature of him which the majority of modern Christianity all too gleefully worship and submit to.
Doctrines are the revealed teachings of Christ which are proclaimed by the fullest extent of the exercise of the authority of the Church's Magisterium. The faithful are obliged to believe the truths or dogmas contained in divine Revelation and defined by the Magisterium. The Scriptures do not teach "eternal conscious torment"..The main punishment of hell is eternal self-exclusion from communion with God. A new heaven and a new earth are not literal. It is useless to listen to debates between so called man-made "theologians" concerning their opinions about hell. The Scriptures are your only authority. People in heaven will have no knowledge of someone in hell.
Luke 16, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. The rich man is in Hades and begs Abraham to have mercy but it is denied to him. "..and besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, so that those who wish to come over from here to you will not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us"
I have never heard a defense of Hell that doesn't sound far too much like the violent rantings of an angry teenager who refuses to use deodorant who got turned down for the dance or the divorced guy who can't admit to being a lazy slob. Their god, in these scenarios, is the teen or the divorcee:
"They were mean to me and it totally wasn't at all my fault! They just don't understand how awesome and great I am! Some day they will, and I'll make them pay for what they did!"
When I was a Christian I had an experience of the love of God once that was so beautiful; I knew in that moment, without a shadow of a doubt, that it was IMPOSSIBLE for God to send anyone to hell. It conflicted with the indoctrination of the church I had received about hell. I left the church not long after. Anyone who believes in an everlasting torment without end for a large portion of humanity, or worse preaches it to others and scares them, simply has not contemplated the matter deeply enough.
I had a similar experience of God’s love and the struggle of how Hell is taught to people. Then I read the church fathers and learned that Universal Restoration of all people was held by many prominent Saints and large portions of the church even today. Happily I am in a church that allows for this view.
@Tiredhike Good for you. I too have read alot about the early church and Universal Restoration. Alot of evangelicals (with few exceptions) and virtually no fundamentalists will tolerate anyone who doesn't share the ECT view.
Same here.
@@Tiredhikewhat church allows for this view!?!?
@@julayalo9860no real one. Jesus spoke more about hell and punishment than He did Heaven and reward.
"Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’" - Matthew 7:21-23
"If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than to have two hands and two feet and be thrown into the ETERNAL fire." - Matthew 18:8
"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” - Revelation 21:8
"And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night FOREVER AND EVER." - Revelation 20:10
"Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the ETERNAL fire prepared for the devil and his angels." - Matthew 25:41
"And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done." - Revelation 20:12
"And these will go away into ETERNAL punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” - Matthew 25:46
"And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment." - Hebrews 9:27
"This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering- since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will suffer the punishment of ETERNAL DESTRUCTION, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed." - 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10
"Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment." - John 5:28-29
"And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and EVERLASTING contempt." - Daniel 12:2
"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it." - Matthew 7:13-14
Love where you have taken us here. Excellent reasoning.
David Bentley Hart's "That All Shall Be Saved" is an especially good book on this topic.
His book is almost unassailable. I’ve yet to read a fair critique of it.
I believe the entire word of God. That being said, I don't believe anyone was won for by pulling out the hell card. When you receive Jesus he gives us a new spirit and a new heart where you can see his will !
Honestly, I think the best argument against hell is simply that the New Testament isn't exactly clear that there is an actual place that will go on for eternity in which people are going to be tortured and conscious. It's easy to find judgement. It's easy to find that some people will not be welcomed into God's new creation. It's far harder to get to the full-fledged "traditional" view held by most.
Well the problem is the Bible's contradicting itself constantly. Jesus very clearly said if you don't believe life after death will be suffering
@@darkeen42 the problem is that John's gospel is much less reliable than the Synoptics when it comes to Jesus' sayings. Jesus most likely never taught such a thing.
@marcfischer114 so you just pick and choose what you want to accept. So much for perfect or even near right. Nice Bible you got there
@@darkeen42 the Bible is a collection of fallible and conflicting human thoughts about God.
@marcfischer114 okay yeah do you think it's in any way accurate? Because we have no idea what Jesus says none of the gospels were written by anybody that ever met him or even spoke the same language
there's a major thing missing in the shipwreck analogy. The ones who didn't survive didn't just perish in the wreck, but before the wreck occurred they also repeatedly rejected the warnings as well as the offers to be saved from the wreck.
I don't think eternal conscious torment is what the Bible teaches, but when we use analogies they've gotta actually work, otherwise we might mislead people or give them the wrong impression of God.
Given that the Bible speaks of the "death of the soul", the second death, to be consciously tortured or tormented forever makes no sense. You have to be alive for that. That would be described as being granted eternal life, but tortured. But the Bible is clear, some will have eternal life, and the others won't. On ECT, everyone has eternal life but just some are in joy and others are tormented, which isn't what Jesus or the apostles taught.
Hell is resisting the purification process of the holy Spirit!
Purgatory is embracing the purification of the holy Spirit!
Heaven is the result after purification!
One of the best arguments against Calvinism is precisely that it is imposible that God demands of us to love everybody as we love ourselves, but He doesn't. It's something similar here. If we wouldn't want for everybody to be tortured eternally then God shouldn't either.
Lots of literalists here, who think that just by quoting a scripture, they settle the argument in their own favour....as though Dr Rouser, or any theologian, has never heard these scriptures, and never studied or reflected upon them..
I don’t think we can know exactly what hell is like but passages like Mathew 25:46 really portray Jesus himself as affirming some kind of eternal suffering.
That being said, I am sympathetic to wrestling with such a difficult doctrine. I am a hopeful universalist but it seems unlikely that all will choose eternal communion with God.
Someone who loves you could never hurt you forever, or threaten to do so if you don't do what they say. That's not a part of any definition of love that I could ever find coherent. Rather, it is abuse, and people who emulate this treatment of others are abusive. That's kind of the point Randal is making.
The word used for eternal in Matthew just means an age. It’s a clear mistranslation. That doesn’t at all mean universal reconciliation is true, but it isn’t useful as evidence against it in my mind.
@@weirdwilliam8500 I agree but it doesn’t mean that someone who loves you would force you to make a decision even if that decision is the correct one and any other decision will lead to pain and suffering.
@@derrybrooks7197 I will have to investigate that claim further. Thank you.
@@derrybrooks7197 can you point me in a direction of resources that back up that claim? All I am finding is that the original Greek aiōnion seems to mean everlasting/eternal. It is also used when Mathew says eternal life. Does that mean we would have to interpret eternal life as “life for an age”?
Even if i did NOT know ANY of the people in the ficticious hell....
How can i experience a loving afterlife with God and my resurrected family, if we all know there are all these souls in pain?
What?
Do we worship a God of love, or do we worship an evil pos?
The word translated "eternal" is aeon, which means "for an age". I think sometimes that the belief in eternal torment is what allows good church people to throw out people who question their pet doctrines.
But “aeon” is used to refer to the duration of Heaven as well. To interpret it differently for Hell would be a double standard fallacy and an etymological fallacy. Even if you are right, your argument would not provide a valid defense for it. I hope you are well ❤️
But Revelation 4 also speaks of those who will have their part in "the lake of fire..!"
The lake of fire is clearly not hell.
Jesus says to sentiments like this: "You do not know what manner of spirit you are of! For the Son Of Man cane not to destroy men's lives, but to save them" (Luke 9:55)! Edwards and Aquinas were both Augustinian (or "Calvinist") , which believes God DID come to destroy men, because that's what "glorifies" Him!
Edwards was Calvinist, Aquinas was Catholic
@@alexrothwell2053 Aquinas was Augustinian Catholic. Calvinism is basically Augustinianism rekindled for the Reformation, so that's why I included both names.
I bet the 0D (dimensionless) subspace of a black hole looks like a lake of fire 🔥.
Most of our practices are burrowed from the Greeko Roman pagan culture that surrounded the early church. Temples built on sacred tombs, Sermons/ orations, amphitheater around a pulpit, sacred ritual preformed by a separated priest caste distinct from ordinary "laity", and the concept of an eternal soul that must either reside in pleasant heavens or tortured hell... and the hell/ hades being various forms of terrible tortures.
Eternal, conscious, burning g torment is not in the Bible. Every instance used to prove eternal conscious burning damnation of the "lost" can be shown to be a figure of speech wrongly interpreted by inserting ideas of hell and damnation burrowed from the folk religions that like to call themselves "Christianity".
I would have considered myself quite heretic a few years ago. Now, I literally see the doctrine of eternal torment of the lost as a terrible heresy that undoes the clear message of love that is all over the New Testament!
As I’ve learned, it’s more complicated than that. When Jesus says “Gehenna”, he doesn’t just mean the literal place, but also attaches a supernatural significance to it. This is similar to how the “kingdom of God” is a literal kingdom of Israel, but also established by and intimately connected to God. So while it may not be the Heaven and Hell that are promoted now, it’s closer than you might expect. Keep in mind that Hellenization occurred long before Jesus was even born.
What? Wait! No one talked more about hell than Jesus. No one who more exemplified loving your neighbor than Jesus. So, how do we reconcile the two?
None of the two options Randal described satisfy me. The answer balances God's mercy and grace with his justice. There is no pleasure in the destruction of the wicked in hell. But there is justice. There is no love of neighbor if the wicked are allowed to participate in God's mercy without repentance. That would be to turn heaven into the hell we now experience on earth.
So, what about the wiping away of all tears? My reading is that those tears are due to the grief for the lost. God himself grieves over the lost as Jesus wept over Jerusalem - which he knew would be destroyed and those who rejected him suffer eternal loss. The grief and tears are resolved by a deep understanding of God's love. No one without a witness. No one is without a Savior. No one will be in hell who did not reject and God's love. We may not see it, but we can believe it, for God says he loves the world and gave his Son for the salvation of the world.
There will be tears in the eternal kingdom for the lost. And what will wipe away those tears? The knowledge of God's incredible love and the knowledge that justice must be done for there to be perfect righteousness and peace in the eternal kingdom. God cannot love the redeemed without protecting them from evil.
Universal reconciliation, if there was such, would satisfy the grief, but then would there be tears? I see no universalism taught in the Bible. I see justice and love.
“There is no love of neighbor if the wicked are allowed to participate in God’s mercy without repentance.”
Why can’t they repent? Wicked people repent and turn to God every day.
@@emersonb.5399 I can only make a reasoned guess based on what we are told in the scriptures. God has allowed humans freedom of choice or free will. They can choose to reasoned to what God reveals about himself, or they can reject it. We are given this lifetime to decide. At the end of life, the choices we have made become eternal choices.
Why? They are so by God's decree.
Why? Because there would be no justice if every wicked person is allowed eternal life without repenting. And there is no indication that they will repent. Without repentance he or she will remain an enemy of God.
We might hope that God will override that final decision to reject God as Randal does, but he has no biblical evidence for that opinion.
An omnipotent God could come up with a better solution. How about just deleting those people who can’t make it to heaven? They’re never going to interact with anyone ever again, so what’s the point of punishment?
I agree with you that a kind of Hell (Gehenna) and a kind of New Earth (the kingdom of God) are explicitly present in the gospels. However, I also acknowledge that such a setup is cruel, unnecessary, and unfair. It was also present in Greek culture long before it was reinterpreted in a Jewish context. That’s part of why I’m no longer a Christian: These ideas are not new and don’t accurately reflect the properties God is alleged to have.
I know it’s a common belief that our choice is sealed at death, but I don’t see anything in Scripture to support it. If God wants everyone to come to repentance, why would He prevent that by taking away our freedom of choice? I don’t see how that would be more just than allowing people to repent and seek forgiveness. If a man commits a crime, serves his prison sentence, and becomes a productive member of society upon his release, has justice been denied? Would it be more just if he stayed the criminal that he was, and never changed?
@@emersonb.5399 That is the belief of universalists. If you are a Christian, that would satisfy. But if you are not, as my brother was not, it allows for the neglect of God's offer of salvation. It makes it less than urgent, and it makes the message of the gospel irrelevant. In 2nd Corinthians it says that today is the day of salvation (2nd Cor. 6:2). It does not matter if the "day of salvation" is this moment or this age, it seems to say in either that there is a limited time.
Haven't watched the video yet, just read the title and thought: I've been saying this all along!
I’m still looking for ETC in the OT….
You won’t find it. Jews didn’t really have a solid view of the afterlife until hundreds of years after Christ.
Good work Randal. In my study and learning over the past few years I have landed on the view of Universal Restoration. It falls within orthodox Christian belief. Keep going after these sacred cows brother!
"How can it be that you no longer suffer at all if people that you once loved are suffering unimaginable torment forever in hell?" - Randal Rauser
The Bible: "For behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind." - Isaiah 65:17
So we forget all of our unsaved loved ones, our feelings towards them, our relationships with them, and all of the experiences we’ve had with them? At that point can you really say that we’ve been saved? Or has God simply created entirely new people who happen to look like us?
@@emersonb.5399 "Now we see but a dim reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known." - 1 Corinthians 13:12
It’s an interesting choice to use a verse from a passage about love as a proof text for why we won’t care about our loved ones when we’re in Heaven.
@@emersonb.5399 "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me; and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for My sake will find it." - Matthew 10:37-39
Are you under the impression that the more verses you yank out of context, the more robust your argument will be?
Hell is just the big stick used to instill fear to keep the pews full.
No, it would empty pews, not fill them
@langreeves6419 it does these days, but it's the method that's been put to employ since the concept of a hell was instilled into spiritualities, having a need for fear component that is held like an anvil above coyotes head tells me that spirituality is a dead end road.
@@billybobwombat2231 no, fear is a very short term motivator
I've never been in a church which used fear, and my current denomination doesn't use fear.
I've seen a lot of people in my life have a close call like a wreck or something. They then come to church every sunday...
For a few months.
Love is how you keep people, not fear. People at my church are there because they experience love.
@langreeves6419 its instilled early, put in the back of the mind and you carry that warning for life, a common thing i see religious people say to those that don't follow their version of God is " you need to think long and hard on your choices, otherwise you gonna go to hell" , its always been used, that's how narcissistic abusers operate, love me or I will hurt you, the bible god tells you in his first four commandments that is how he operates.
@@billybobwombat2231 so YOU have in your head.
Don't blame everyone else for what YOU decided to believe and hold onto.
Psalm 139:21-23
_21 Do I not hate those who hate You, Lord?_
_And do I not loathe those who rise up against You?_
_22 I hate them with the utmost hatred;_
_They have become my enemies._
_23 Search me, God, and know my heart;_
_Put me to the test and know my anxious thoughts;_
And yet Jesus said,
Matthew 5:42-44
42 Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you.
_43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,_
Is there a contradiction? I think not. David, in this Psalm, hates them that "hate God" and those who hate God have "become his enemies." On the other hand, Jesus is speaking of those who "persecute you.".
As for me, with a view to one who desires to boast in the righteousness of the Holly God, and sing praises to His righteous judgments, I look to Jesus. As it is also written:
Matthew 7:2
_For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you._
The doctrine of hell makes me praise God, for He takes no pleasure nor is willing that any would perish but has provided a righteous WAY to escape the wrath of God thru Christ Jesus. The issue is not the doctrine but the unrepentant and those who, on this side of eternity, would condemn them rather than to pray for them to escape the wrath to come, by coming to a knowledge of the truth.
In other words, Jesus taught: "Truly, I said to you, you shall love your enemies but hate MY enemies in the same way as I hate them?"
Doesn't that turn Jesus into the greatest Hypocrite one can conceive of?
@@marcfischer114 Is it my bad? Does my failure to explain myself brings you to your own conclusion? Or does it reveal your own heart? As you say;
> “*In other words, Jesus taught.*”
And so you take my bad and turn Jesus into “the greatest hypocrite one can conceive of (who is this “one” of whom you speak)?”
First I am quoting two different persons; David in the psalms and Jesus in the gospel. David is similar to all men in that he needs a savior. Jesus, on the other hand, does not. Jesus is the savior and the truth cannot be a hypocrite he is THE TEACHER. David from my perception is giving a reason as to why he “hates” someone and what makes them his enemy. And it focuses on their hatred of God. Jesus, is giving us the way of salvation. Therefore he says, “love your enemies.” We like David, are not free of hatred. We will hate. But even righteous hatred does not profit us because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Therefore, the primary word of Jesus that I quote is:
Matthew 7:2
_For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you._
Jesus is teaching us to love and leave those who hate God to the vengeance of God, because vengeance is mine says the LORD. I was not saying, nor did it enter into my mind that Jesus ever said, “love your enemies, but hate mine.” I was giving my opinion that there is no contradiction in what David said and what Jesus taught. Therefore the issue is NOT with the doctrine of hell, but the issue is with the unrepentant.
I do not want to put words in your mouth but it would seem that this post of Randal’s would make God a hypocrite for telling us to love our neighbor while He has created a place called “hell” that has an unquenchable fire. God does not need salvation. He is God. He is the judge and not the one being judged.
Jesus asked the question. The messiah who’s son is he? in Mark 12:
36 David himself said in the Holy Spirit,
‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Until I put Your enemies under Your feet.”’
37 David himself calls Him ‘Lord’; so in what sense is He his son?”
In what sense is he his son? And conversely, in what sense is He his Lord?
@@RobSed55 1) Does Jesus hate the same people that the Psalmist hates?
2) Does Jesus love the people that the Psalmist hates but he wants the Psalmist to hate them even though he loves them?
@@marcfischer114 It is written : John 1:16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace.
17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.
The terms, "grace upon grace" is literally, "grace for grace." The way it works in my mind is, I must love even those my flesh is predisposed to hate, so that I may receive grace for grace from God, through Christ Jesus.
My answer to question 1 is this. The first coming of Jesus was to bring grace and truth and the Way of salvation. I don’t find Him “hating” anyone. However, he does get “angry” “Mark 3:5
_After looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart._
I am not ready to say “anger” and “hate” are the same thing. We believe that in His second coming, he will hate the same people the Psalmist hates. However, this time around He is teaching the way of salvation and is full of grace and truth. We, the sinner, as the psalmist, have hate which we must leave to the vengeance of God and for the our own salvation sake we must do what Jesus did, when those who hated Him crucified Him, “forgive them for they know NOT what they do.”
My answer to question 2 is this. Jesus loves the Father and those whom the Father gave Him. Remember, in this case, the Psalmist is David. David is no longer in the land of the living. It makes no sense to say Jesus wants the Psalmist to love the ones the psalmist hates because they hated that God. That is in the past. Jesus is teaching us who are under the New Covenant in His blood.
In my opinion, the hatred that David had, in this Psalm, is righteous. Nevertheless, vengeance is mine says the LORD. David is under the law of Moses. The son of David, the Messiah, is bringing the NEW covenant of faith and forgiveness of sins. However, if we don’t forgive whomever, including those we hate, neither will God forgive us. And me thinks it takes “love” to forgive those we hate, even if it’s righteous hate.
Therefore, I do not find any issue with the doctrine of hell. The issue is with the unrepentant. The point is to understand that Jesus did not need salvation, we do. Jesus is teaching us the way of salvation.
Why would Jesus suffer so much to save us from a finite Hell that either no one went to or else everyone would eventually leave no matter what?
Jesus doesn’t save us from hell, He saves us from sin and death (death being the result of sin).
If this Zoroastrian hell adapted by Christians is real than we either lose our memories of loved ones in hell or we lose empathy, a trait that makes us human. Either way those in heaven would be less human, more like my HP laptop in the other room.
Complicating this for Catholics and Orthodox is that even though it is defined that there is a sense of suffering, what is emphasized is the separation not some kind of literal burning torture. That and, despite the fact that both traditions teach there is no salvation outside of the church, it is impossible to know exactly who or how many are saved or not. I don't think this completely undercuts your point, however, so it's certainly something to think about. If we were to follow your logic, however, then you would be required to reject either of those traditions as hell with some sense of eternal suffering is de fide and I suppose you could struggle with it but if you deny it then you are basically a heretic and in some sense outside of those churches.
I think that comparison with a shipwreck is not working for ECT, because people in hell got there not by accident, but by being enemies to God, continuously fighting against Church and the Gospel. So in the example it's not my child is reduced to corpses, but an enemy to Christ got what one deverve. John 3:18-19.
If believer loves God, so he will not wish anything which is against Lord's will. If God wants to punish sinners for eternity so do believers as well. If one revolts against Him, he makes himself like satan, who did the same.
And also how you explain passage Revelation 6: 9-10?
You’re assuming that whoever committed that sin is opposed to God and therefore evil. All three are considered the same in the verse you cited. There’s two problems with this:
1. It doesn’t account for nonresistant nonbelievers who sin but nonetheless remain open to God, who is hidden to them.
2. It assumes that those who reject God are evil by nature. That can lead you to treat them as enemies, as if everything they say is purposefully deceptive, angry, or cruel.
Again, it’s a good idea to substitute in family and friends into that role. Even if they’ve sinned and rejected God, are they really deserving of infinite punishment? And would you really be satisfied with that when you get rewarded instead of them?
@seanpierce9386
First, thank you for your answer.
Every human being can seek God, love Him and for this be saved by Him. If person dies without testimony and faith, therefore this is what he wanted. If someone even from non-christian land is openhearted for God, He will not leave him, but by some way this person will be babtised and find peace in Church.
Next, I don't see reason to state that someone is evil by nature. Evil is not substantial, it's just an absence of good, in our case is absence of God, caused by fighting His will.
About family. It's not up to me to decide, who deserve punishment and who is not. God just stated, that "he that believeth not is condemned already". I have muslim and atheist elders in my family and I love them, but I know what God will do, I've tried to convince them, but they rejected my words (I'm a bad discussionist and talker). So this does not change my behavior to them, but this is what they want, God gave them a free will and they use it to get eternal suffering, it's part of His work. Maybe they will atone this, I hope for this. But I know about my grand-grand-parents, they were devout muslims till death and their eternity is horrifyng. Answering to your words about satisfaction, now I'm more scared then satisfacted, but I see the path of christian as learning to know and unite with God's wil.
@@vipmagazinnikov So effectively, you’re dismissing the existence of nonresistant nonbelievers, claiming that all such people will “be babtized and find peace in Church”. This indicates to me that you’ve been fed a narrative and aren’t aware of the circumstances of real people. Where you are born is a consistent indicator of the religion you will follow. That means there’s plenty of people who have never even had the chance to consider Christianity. And there are also those who cannot bring themselves to believe despite wanting to, like myself.
When it comes to family, remember that Muslims have their own version of Heaven and Hell. Perhaps this was not their choice, but merely an idea they were indoctrinated into and cannot escape. Perhaps the same applies to you.
@@vipmagazinnikov So effectively, you’re dismissing the existence of nonresistant nonbelievers, claiming that all such people will just become Christian. This indicates to me that you’ve been fed a narrative and aren’t aware of the circumstances of real people. Where you are born is a consistent indicator of the religion you will follow. That means there’s plenty of people who’ve never had the chance to consider Christianity. And there are also those who cannot bring themselves to believe despite wanting to, like myself.
Remember that Muslims have their own version of Heaven and Hell. In the case of your relatives, perhaps this was not their choice, but merely an idea they were indoctrinated into and cannot escape for fear of punishment. Perhaps the same applies to you.
@@seanpierce9386
I believe in miracles, God will save all those willing to accept it and will do it in any realistic or unrealistic way. This may be called stupid or any other way, but I also believe in that Jesus was real person, He literally resurrected, performed miracles etc. If He can do it, so He can make any person, whom He foreknew christian.
First, Jesus speaks of the wicked being thrown into an unquenchable fire. Someone being wicked would be defined as sometime who throughout their whole lives rejects God. Hell is very real, that's why Christians must be a living testament to the truth. We live our faith. Look at the saints, you could tell that they loved God above all else through their actions and love for everyone. We should love everyone and pray for everyone, even those who choose evil constantly, because only God can determine the limits of his mercy. But at the end of the day, hell is real, the separation from God for eternity that one chooses by ultimate and final rejection of God's love
Belief in hell is a rejection of God's love.
Ending up in hell is because of a rejection of God's love.
Rauser wants to, but he does not get to decide what is true and what isn't.
@@garybryson1900 I guess Dr. Rauser forgot to consult you before doing his video.
@@DIBBY40 I would have told him not to make a fool of himself.
@garybryson1900 I look forward to your cogent arguments in a future video.
as an atheist i feel pity for liberal christians like Randal because he wrestles between an old book and the moral development humanity has experienced since that book was written
Is there an absolute moral standard by which to judge the development of humanity as to conclude that we are now doing better then "when the book was written"?
@@davidgray1060 there is no objective moral standard but there is an agreed upon one among most secular humanists and it is painfully easy to understand: decrease suffering and increase well being in the world for every being able to suffer (which is the opposite what tranditional christianity does now and has always done), the only assumption you need for this is _"suffering is bad"_ which is basic moral intuition and does not need any further justificaiton
and by this measure which i (and many and it seems to me Randal does too) hold christianity has been outclassed for centuries (and the same way, our moral standards will be outclassed by future generations because morality is an ever changing ever evolving phenomenon)
What about the sheep and the goats? I'm all for getting rid of ECT, but some sort of hell, if only a terribly painful but ultimately refining fire, are both implicit and explicit in Jesus' teaching. Is not the (healthy) fear of God the beginning of wisdom? Which does not mean that, in the end, all of creation is not redeemed and transfigured.
That is the teaching of universal restoration in the church fathers. Hell is temporary
It's a parable to be contemplated, not a scientific description of the afterlife.
Hell is compatible with universalism if you let go of the “eternal” part of ECT.
Jesus said you will never get out of hell UNTIL you have paid the LAST PENNY.
That means it is possible to exit hell.
Of course, I think you would need to put your faith in Christ at some point during your stay in hell to even be eligible to exit it.
Then everyone will be saved.......with or without faith......
Budweiser is really not a good beer....if you ever come to England, I shall buy you a nice Hazy IPA. Crisp, fruity, subtly hoppy...4-4.5 % alcohol!
God had his own son tortured and murdered. So I'm not convinced that hell is contrary to that.
Only if you believe in penal substitutionary atonement. That’s not a requirement of Christianity.
@emersonb.5399 No. Just requires that Jesus's death was God's intent.
I'll meet you halfway and say the doctrine of eternal hell makes you seem less like Jesus.
Thankyou
Right on, Randal.
God is our Father!'
As a Father, He knows us personally as His children!
No Father could send one of his children to Hell for all eternity.
This is a stupid layover from the Middle Ages when people were too stupid to think on their own.
We were put on Earth to help other people as Jesus did when He was on Earth.
Simple as that!
All that "earning" bullsh-- is not Jesus. It is not Christianity!
Sitting in a pew for an hour watching ceremony is not going to get me to heaven.
It is a simplification of who Jesus was that churches have done for ages!!!
Of course, if one tosses out every objectionable belief from Christianity one can turn it into a humane ideology. But is that an honest or reasonable mode of procedure? Can words mean whatever you want them to mean?
If you're familiar with Bart Ehrman's books, you'll see that the synoptic Gospels do not teach eternal torment and neither do they teach that hell is for unbelievers.
@ I wouldn’t agree with that, but in any case Christian teaching isn’t limited to the gospels. If there is no eternal punishment then it is hard to see why there would be weeping and gnashing of teeth, or precisely the ‘wrath’ prepared. Whatever the case, substitutionary atonement is still an ugly doctrine.
@@davethebrahman9870you don’t agree that Bart Ehrman teaches that or you don’t believe that’s true? Either way you would be incorrect
@@cameronroman506 You seem very sure. Despite your ‘argumentum ad Ehrmanem’, eternal torment has been a mainstay of Christian doctrine since the beginning. No doubt you are aware of the New Testament verses. I applaud the attempt to weasel your way out of the horrifying implications of this teaching, but nothing in the gospel makes sense without it.
@ since the New Testament but not in the Old Testament. It used to be believed that people died and God blessed them in this life alone. Have you read the Old Testament? I am open to something new, the only thing I am sure of at this point is most churches are lying.
It doesn't contradict love of neighbour unless you desire the damnation of other people or deny human free will.
The Bible mentions hell more than it does heaven for a reason, Because God doesn't want anyone to go there, and because doctrine is always misconstrued by people who don't have the spirit inside them to discern what the word says. It says plainly, We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and for the wages of sin is death. But we were saved by Jesus Christ when we confess with our mouths that Jesus is Lord and that God the Father raised him from the dead. Hell exist for anyone that has to be separated from God because they did not believe or do not believe. Also, if you go to the very beginning in Genesis, you'll see that the serpent who is the devil, He was influencing Adam Eve to make the wrong decision. So where exactly was he staying when he was thrown out of heaven? Hell. But people like you who are spreading misinformation and you are putting people in a dangerous place for eternity. I sincerely hope that you revisit your findings and repent.
The doctrine of hell, especially for innocent unbelievers, is so unspeakably evil that it cannot be true. It would make God just as evil as any genocidal dictator, just on a larger scale. I hope that you're just reciting a script and don't understand what you're saying.
But the Bible is heavily, heavily against the idea of Universal reconciliation. Matthew 25:46
The word used for eternal in Matthew just means an age. It’s a clear mistranslation. They doesn’t at all mean universal reconciliation is true, but it isn’t useful as evidence against it.
@@derrybrooks7197 but the same word is used for believers attaining everlasting life. Does that then mean that eternal does not mean eternal in the phrase "eternal life"?
Christianity has become infected with fear. Believers are actually scared to believe anything different, because of an indoctrinated view they have received about scripture as being "inerrant and infallible". It is also telling that fear filled believers will inevitably quote Matthew 25, but hardly ever Matthew 18, or Luke 15 about the parable of the lost sheep. Jesus keeps searching until he finds it! Then the 99% becomes the 100%.
@@yunusahmed2940Why, at the end of an age would those enjoying life cease to enjoy life in the age after? Perhaps they will enjoy it a whole lot more, when those purified at the end of the first age join them in all future ages❤
@@yunusahmed2940 in all contexts that "aionios" is used it just mean an age or long she, unless the subject of the use is God. So in Matthew it just means that Christian’s will go into an age of life and some to an age of death. Many other places show that life is eternal with Christ given further context, but none I’ve found point to eternal suffering. It’s more likely the wicked will be destroyed
Remember that God is a God of love AND wrath !
I'm sure he's angry at the sadistic and bloodthirsty caricature of him which the majority of modern Christianity all too gleefully worship and submit to.
When you're in heaven you don't think about people who are not there!
God gives you a lobotomy to forget the people you once loved. Hmm.
@@joellumsden5992 I would.
Then that is not really heaven.
My comment was miraculously removed by God.
Why, Lord? Why hast thou forsaken me?😫
@@joellumsden5992 I would.
Doctrines are the revealed teachings of Christ which are proclaimed by the fullest extent of the exercise of the authority of the Church's Magisterium. The faithful are obliged to believe the truths or dogmas contained in divine Revelation and defined by the Magisterium.
The Scriptures do not teach "eternal conscious torment"..The main punishment of hell is eternal self-exclusion from communion with God.
A new heaven and a new earth are not literal.
It is useless to listen to debates between so called man-made "theologians" concerning their opinions about hell. The Scriptures are your only authority.
People in heaven will have no knowledge of someone in hell.