'Nobody Goes to Hell': Minister Labeled a Heretic

[Michie]

One Minister Challenges the Idea of Hell and Loses His Congregation


Virtually every religion throughout human history has some notion of a horrible life after death. And though the threat of fire and brimstone is not preached as fervently in this age of reason, one man in Tulsa, Okla., knows just how hard it is for modern believers -- and their religious institutions -- to let go of the medieval vision of hell.

"If I say everybody's going to heaven, then I can't raise money from you to get me to keep people out of hell," Carlton Pearson said with a wry smile.

Continued- http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3362554&page=1

[chaoschristian]

He lost his church but he found his faith.

[porterross]

So he has the power to keep people out of hell, does he? :doh: Bad theology combined with an out of control ego is a dangerous thing. :sigh:

[Willtor]

One Minister Challenges the Idea of Hell and Loses His Congregation




Continued- http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3362554&page=1

That's pretty wild stuff. But I don't see how he was able to recognize hell, here, and conclude that there was no eternal hell.

[Michie]

I don't get it either.

[Willtor]

I don't get it either.

On the other hand, I'm certainly glad he didn't keep it to himself. I'd imagine it would be pretty tempting to tow the line to maintain a congregation that size, especially if one sees it as one's life work. So I definitely give him props for that.

[Michie]

I think he is on television too isn't he?

Think he used to have a show on one of the Christian channels.

[Criada]

I admire the man for having the courage to stand by what he believes.
But seriously dodgy theology!!

[Sophrosyne]

that is old news...... that happened years ago here in Tulsa
Carlton now preaches in places like unitarian churches and such.

[Michie]

that is old news...... that happened years ago here in Tulsa
Carlton now preaches in places like unitarian churches and such.
Old news, new news. Anything to get a conversation & interest going in a new forum is good by me. :)

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

INteresting article..ill be honest..i have often wondered if this earth is really hell..sometimes life is so horrible and full of so much suffering i feel like i must be in hell..either that or purgatory..i seriously wouldnt be surprised if i find out someday i am right..i also understand his concern about the suffering baby muslims..they suffer here on earth..and then in hell for eternity..something aint right about that! thats why i try not to think about hell too much..it mustn be fire and brimstone..it might not even be eternal..i guess none of us will know till the end..

[Criada]

INteresting article..ill be honest..i have often wondered if this earth is really hell..sometimes life is so horrible and full of so much suffering i feel like i must be in hell..either that or purgatory..i seriously wouldnt be surprised if i find out someday i am right..i also understand his concern about the suffering baby muslims..they suffer here on earth..and then in hell for eternity..something aint right about that! thats why i try not to think about hell too much..it mustn be fire and brimstone..it might not even be eternal..i guess none of us will know till the end..
:hug: :hug:
But we can trust in His love and mercy! :)

[Avatar]

INteresting article..ill be honest..i have often wondered if this earth is really hell..sometimes life is so horrible and full of so much suffering i feel like i must be in hell..either that or purgatory..i seriously wouldnt be surprised if i find out someday i am right..i also understand his concern about the suffering baby muslims..they suffer here on earth..and then in hell for eternity..something aint right about that! thats why i try not to think about hell too much..it mustn be fire and brimstone..it might not even be eternal..i guess none of us will know till the end..
Agree with all you said RTM.

[edb19]

I'm thinking that heretic is appropriate.:(

edie

[Albion]

Apparently he feels that for God to be God he cannot punish forever most of his creatures. That is not a new idea in Christianity, but it's certainly one that is hard to square with the Bible. In the end, he compromised a promising career but followed his conscience, so I have to give him that, even if I disagree with his theology.

[Izdaari]

Apparently he feels that for God to be God he cannot punish forever most of his creatures. That is not a new idea in Christianity, but it's certainly one that is hard to square with the Bible. In the end, he compromised a promising career but followed his conscience, so I have to give him that, even if I disagree with his theology.
I agree. His theology may be dubious, but ya gotta give the guy props for following his conscience.

But you can have a mega-church with a gentler approach; Joel Osteen is a perfect example. The reason Pearson lost his mega-church is because he built it on one doctrine and tried to switch it to another. It's not hard to figure that wouldn't work.

[Albion]

I agree. His theology may be dubious, but ya gotta give the guy props for following his conscience.

But you can have a mega-church with a gentler approach; Joel Osteen is a perfect example. The reason Pearson lost his mega-church is because he built it on one doctrine and tried to switch it to another. It's not hard to figure that wouldn't work.

I appreciate that point, but as I understand it he simply became convinced that Hell is not what we usually think. Then he was stuck between his congregation and his conscience. To have kept on as usual, keeping his sincere convictions a secret from his congregants would have been what some other pastors might have done, so I give this man some credit.

And from what I can tell, he took the loss of his congregation without bitterness, knowing that what he had come to believe was probably not going to be well received by them.

[Robby]

Take away hell and you take the fun out of fundamentalism!

It never fails to amaze me how people can believe their god has created a place of eternal, conscious torment and still call their religion "good news". Pearson is right; the clergy need hell because its their bread and butter. Take that away and all you have is some jive-talking witch-doctor in the pulpit.

[Izdaari]

I appreciate that point, but as I understand it he simply became convinced that Hell is not what we usually think. Then he was stuck between his congregation and his conscience. To have kept on as usual, keeping his sincere convictions a secret from his congregants would have been what some other pastors might have done, so I give this man some credit.

And from what I can tell, he took the loss of his congregation without bitterness, knowing that what he had come to believe was probably not going to be well received by them.
I don't disagree at all. He did what he saw as right, knowing it wouldn't be popular with the congregation he'd spent so much time building up. It wouldn't make sense to do that, except if he were following his conscience.

[Albion]

Take away hell and you take the fun out of fundamentalism!

All right. I recognize that as a good one-liner.;)

It never fails to amaze me how people can believe their god has created a place of eternal, conscious torment and still call their religion "good news".

Well, the point there is that -- believing there is such a place and that we all deserve to be there -- God has provided an uncomplicated way that allows all of us to avoid going there. I'd call that Good News, just as I would use such language to describe a decision by the government to allow anyone to avoid paying taxes just by checking a box on the form saying you elect not to. That would certainly qualify as news and good, too.

Pearson is right; the clergy need hell because its their bread and butter. Take that away and all you have is some jive-talking witch-doctor in the pulpit.

On the contrary, I find that in most churches these days Hell is seldom mentioned and yet the sermons are quite intelligent and meaningful. I suppose it depends upon which church one is attending, but I can't agree that if there is no "Hell talk" that there is nothing else of theological importance to speak on.

[Joykins]

I'm not entirely sure our concept of hell is as much biblical as it is traditional. With nods to people like Albion who come from, well, traditions where Tradition is authoritative, I guess that is enough. I personally find it confusing.

[Robby]

Well, the point there is that -- believing there is such a place and that we all deserve to be there -- God has provided an uncomplicated way that allows all of us to avoid going there. I'd call that Good News, just as I would use such language to describe a decision by the government to allow anyone to avoid paying taxes just by checking a box on the form saying you elect not to. That would certainly qualify as news and good, too.

But get one whiff of your child's flesh as it fries eternally and all that goes out the window.

On the contrary, I find that in most churches these days Hell is seldom mentioned and yet the sermons are quite intelligent and meaningful. I suppose it depends upon which church one is attending, but I can't agree that if there is no "Hell talk" that there is nothing else of theological importance to speak on.

It sells itself. The horrifying teaching of eternal torment is embedded in our consciousnesses; while many preachers don't talk about it, its still the backdrop of their whole shtick. Its the one million lb. gorilla in the room.

[dayhiker]

I remember hearing about hell when I was a kid. I also remember hearing that if one hadn't accepted Christ by the time they die they would spend eternity in hell.

The thing that didn't make any sense to me was if someone hadn't accepted Christ before they die but then realised they were willing to call on Christ for salvation and wanted to love Jesus how would God turn a deaf hear to that call. I certianly can't imagine not responding if I hear someone call for help/salvation. I sure know I don't have the love that God has.

All this lead me to the conclusion since there is limited Biblical description of what actually happens after death that if one calls on Jesus after they die that Jesus wouldn't turn a deaf hear.

I don't think everyone will make it to heaven tho. As the story of the rich man and Lazereth points out, even the rich man once he knew in the afterlife wasn't willing to repent and call on the name of Jesus.

So the ones that will be in hell will want to be there and the ones who want to be in heaven with Jesus will be there. That's were I want to be for sure.

dayhiker

[Albion]

But get one whiff of your child's flesh as it fries eternally and all that goes out the window.

I'm sorry, but I don't try to rationalize God or his plans for his creatures by reference to the family album, nor make him into my image. Sure, we'd like in theory for everyone we love to be saved eternally, but that is not the way it is--evil rewarded equally with righteousness.

But I also think that, judging by your comment, you may be affected in your appreciation of the subject by several possible additional mistakes.

1. My child (if you mean little child, kid) will not be lost forever if he dies before the age of accountability. The church has never taught that.

2. Hell is a spiritual place or condition. No "flesh" burns there in any case.

3. We the living do not know what Hell will be like exactly.


It sells itself. The horrifying teaching of eternal torment is embedded in our consciousnesses; while many preachers don't talk about it, its still the backdrop of their whole shtick. Its the one million lb. gorilla in the room.

You must be attending a very unusual church or, if not that, have a colorful imagination. In reality, few Christians do think much about Hell these days, as has been confirmed by many polls and studies.

[Albion]

I remember hearing about hell when I was a kid. I also remember hearing that if one hadn't accepted Christ by the time they die they would spend eternity in hell.

The thing that didn't make any sense to me was if someone hadn't accepted Christ before they die but then realised they were willing to call on Christ for salvation and wanted to love Jesus how would God turn a deaf hear to that call.

You mean, accept Christ after death--in the spirit world?

I certianly can't imagine not responding if I hear someone call for help/salvation. I sure know I don't have the love that God has.

Well then, let's bring this down to a real life comparison. Let's say you are the judge in a trial in which Hitler or a serial murderer like the BTK killer is charged with crimes. They ask not to be punished. What do you do? Do you dismiss the charges against every such person brought before you? What of their victims, then? What of those who did NOT live like that?

All this lead me to the conclusion since there is limited Biblical description of what actually happens after death that if one calls on Jesus after they die that Jesus wouldn't turn a deaf hear.

It's a rationalization, though, isn't it? It's making a religion for oneself out of human emotions and then attributing the final result to God. Cannot God have his own standards? And it is the Father, not Jesus, who will judge. Does that affect your thinking? Possibly it might.

So the ones that will be in hell will want to be there and the ones who want to be in heaven with Jesus will be there.

That's what Emanuel Swedenborg thought, if that's where you are getting this from. If not, you might enjoy reading his writings, since not many people in Christian history agree with what you have written here (previous paragraph)--but he did.

Finally, I respect your opinion, and everyone is entitled to what he honestly thinks on this mysterious and difficult subject. I am merely taking the conventional Christian side in discussion with you in the hopes--not that you will quicky agree with me--but that you will look at all this in a slightly different way, given some new ideas to consider.

[DailyBlessings]

I'm sorry, but I don't try to rationalize God or his plans for his creatures by reference to the family album, nor make him into my image. Sure, we'd like in theory for everyone we love to be saved eternally, but that is not the way it is--evil rewarded equally with righteousness.

But I also think that, judging by your comment, you may be affected in your appreciation of the subject by several possible additional mistakes.

1. My child (if you mean little child, kid) will not be lost forever if he dies before the age of accountability. The church has never taught that.

2. Hell is a spiritual place or condition. No "flesh" burns there in any case.

3. We the living do not know what Hell will be like exactly.Or if it exists. Where are you getting this notion of a solely spiritual punishment from? Not from Scripture, which as far as I can see never talks about souls without bodies. In the Hebrew Scriptures, body and soul die together, and in the New Testament they are raised up together. And actually, the church long taught that children went to hell if they died before baptism. I believe it was wrong to do so, but in any case the "age of accountability" is a much more recent invention. And I'm not sure why you would be anguished to see your four year old be tortured, but happily turn the crank when your sixteen year old goes to the rack.

[Willtor]

Robby, I think the stereotypical Hell-fire sermons were the sensational horror-flicks of their day. The Christian doctrine of Hell is probably as old as Christianity, but I don't think it's treated in the way you describe except in, as you say, jive-talking witch-doctor pulpits.

[Robby]

Albion- Well then, let's bring this down to a real life comparison. Let's say you are the judge in a trial in which Hitler or a serial murderer like the BTK killer is charged with crimes. They ask not to be punished. What do you do? Do you dismiss the charges against every such person brought before you? What of their victims, then? What of those who did NOT live like that?

I'll just respond to this since I don't have a lot of time *cough-work-cough*; but you mentioned the victims.....according to Christian teaching, many victims of Hitler will suffer eternally as well, which makes it spurious to bring him or any other murderer as an example.

[Michie]

Jesus spoke of hell quite a bit. More so than anyone else.


Matthew 5:22 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&verse=22&version=31&context=verse)
But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca, ' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.
Matthew 5:21-23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&verse=21&end_verse=23&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Matthew 5 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 5:29 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&verse=29&version=31&context=verse)
If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
Matthew 5:28-30 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&verse=28&end_verse=30&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Matthew 5 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 5:30 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&verse=30&version=31&context=verse)
And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.
Matthew 5:29-31 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&verse=29&end_verse=31&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Matthew 5 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=5&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 10:28 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=10&verse=28&version=31&context=verse)
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Matthew 10:27-29 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=10&verse=27&end_verse=29&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Matthew 10 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=10&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 18:9 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=18&verse=9&version=31&context=verse)
And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.
Matthew 18:8-10 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=18&verse=8&end_verse=10&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Matthew 18 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=18&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 23:15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=23&verse=15&version=31&context=verse)
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.
Matthew 23:14-16 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=23&verse=14&end_verse=16&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Matthew 23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=23&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Matthew 23:33 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=23&verse=33&version=31&context=verse)
"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?
Matthew 23:32-34 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=23&verse=32&end_verse=34&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Matthew 23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=23&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Mark 9:43 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&verse=43&version=31&context=verse)
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.
Mark 9:42-44 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&verse=42&end_verse=44&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Mark 9 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Mark 9:45 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&verse=45&version=31&context=verse)
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell.
Mark 9:44-46 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&verse=44&end_verse=46&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Mark 9 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Mark 9:47 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&verse=47&version=31&context=verse)
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell,Mark 9:46-48 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&verse=46&end_verse=48&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Mark 9 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=9&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Luke 12:5 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=12&verse=5&version=31&context=verse)
But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him.
Luke 12:4-6 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=12&verse=4&end_verse=6&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Luke 12 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=12&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
Luke 16:23 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=16&verse=23&version=31&context=verse)
In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.
Luke 16:22-24 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=16&verse=22&end_verse=24&version=31&context=context) (in Context) Luke 16 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=16&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
James 3:6 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=66&chapter=3&verse=6&version=31&context=verse)
The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.
James 3:5-7 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=66&chapter=3&verse=5&end_verse=7&version=31&context=context) (in Context) James 3 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=66&chapter=3&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)
2 Peter 2:4 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=68&chapter=2&verse=4&version=31&context=verse)
For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment;
2 Peter 2:3-5 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=68&chapter=2&verse=3&end_verse=5&version=31&context=context) (in Context) 2 Peter 2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=68&chapter=2&version=31&context=chapter) (Whole Chapter)

[Albion]

Or if it exists. Where are you getting this notion of a solely spiritual punishment from? Not from Scripture, which as far as I can see never talks about souls without bodies.

Oh, my. So you think that the body you now inhabit will actually be burned in a real, physical fire in the afterlife?

In the Hebrew Scriptures, body and soul die together, and in the New Testament they are raised up together.

I think I see where you are coming from. Soul Sleep--is that it?

And actually, the church long taught that children went to hell if they died before baptism.

No, it hasn't. The Roman Church taught for the past 500 years, until very recently, that they go to Limbo, not Hell.

And many Eastern Christians--taking the view of some in the early church--don't believe there is a Hell in any case, a view held by a few Western Christians. So while there are some Christians who probably do think that any child who dies in infancy goes to Hell, it's very much a minority opinion.

And I'm not sure why you would be anguished to see your four year old be tortured, but happily turn the crank when your sixteen year old goes to the rack.

Well, since that's rather ridiculous to postulate, and since I don't believe in such a scenario, no answer seems necessary.

[Michie]

*snip*No, it hasn't. The Roman Church taught for the past 500 years, until very recently, that they go to Limbo, not Hell. *snip*

No. Limbo was never taught as doctrine but a line of thought hatched by Augustine. The Church trusts children to the grace & mercy of God.

[Albion]

Albion-

I'll just respond to this since I don't have a lot of time *cough-work-cough*; but you mentioned the victims.....according to Christian teaching, many victims of Hitler will suffer eternally as well, which makes it spurious to bring him or any other murderer as an example.

Oh no, it does not. But you have to follow and understand the example.

It is intended to ascertain if the idea that no one should be punished for wrongdoing ever, at any time, no matter what the offenses, is what is believed. If anyone says "that's right. No one should be punished for what he did or didn't do in this life," then it's appropriate to say that Jesus will not care if any of us did what he asked of us in this life.

But the decision is up to the reader. How do you feel about it? I personally think 1) he meant what he said, and 2) God is just as well as merciful.

[Albion]

No. Limbo was never taught as doctrine but a line of thought hatched by Augustine. The Church trusts children to the grace & mercy of God.

Now it does, but for 500 or so years Limbo was taught by the RCC as its doctrine. And Augustine was only incidentally involved with it, not that that makes much difference. The Church taught Limbo and that was its position. It absolutely did not teach that these children went to Hell! That was the allegation, you remember.

What you may be thinking is that the RCC did not make it a dogma, but it certainly did teach Limbo as the Church's answer to the question of the destiny of unbaptised children who die before the age of accountability.

[Michie]

As far as Jews & others dying without knowledge of Christ or whatever-


14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

The Jews and the Law

17Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and brag about your relationship to God; 18if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of infants, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth—

In other words, God is the judge. He knows the heart. Those outside of Christ will be judged according to their conscience & knowledge.

[Michie]

Now it does, but for 500 or so years Limbo was taught by the RCC as its doctrine. And Augustine was only incidentally involved with it, not that that makes much difference. The Church taught Limbo and that was its position. It absolutely did not teach that these children went to Hell! That was the allegation, you remember.
No it did not teach limbo as doctrine in any official capacity. It was Augustine's line of thought which was discussed but never officially taught as dogma or an absolute truth. It was a thought that children would be denied presence in the beatific vision. But it was always thought. Pondering. It was not official.

What you may be thinking is that the RCC did not make it a dogma, but it certainly did teach Limbo as the Church's answer to the question of the destiny of unbaptised children who die before the age of accountability.
I urge you to go back into history & look up the official teachings of RCC. There is a difference in pondering the thoughts of the Church Fathers & official dogma.

Limbo was never dogma. While the thought was discussed it was basically an 'I don't know' answer with thoughts from Church Fathers.

[Albion]

As far as Jews & others dying without knowledge of Christ or whatever-

In other words, God is the judge. He knows the heart. Those outside of Christ will be judged according to their conscience & knowledge.

I don't think any of us disputes the idea that God judges. However, in this thread it was first denied that there can be a Hell, then that children could go there.

Both of those concepts are contrary to standard and historic Christian church teaching, as was said.

What all the rest of these sidebars are supposed to mean to the above is hard to tell, but maybe they belong on their own threads.

[Michie]

I don't think any of us disputes the idea that God judges. However, in this thread it was first denied that there can be a Hell, then that children could go there.

Both of those concepts are contrary to standard and historic Christian church teaching, as was said.

What all the rest of these sidebars are supposed to mean to the above is hard to tell, but maybe they belong on their own threads.
You know what gripes me in all these ponderings on hell?

I do not relish the thought of hell. But Jesus spoke of it more than anyone in Scripture. Now to me, there has to be something to it. A place where I don't want to be.

But as far as what it consists of, we really don't know.

But to leap from these pondering & to claim there is no such place seems to be saying Jesus was mistaken or worse.

It really does amaze me at times. *shrug*

Not griping at you Albion but at the general trend.

[Albion]

No it did not teach limbo as doctrine in any official capacity.

Yes, it did, although you are apparently not ready to deal with that. No matter, it isn't essential to our discussion in any way. It came up only because someone else said, wrongly, that the RCC teaches that these children to go Hell. You don't believe that to be accurate, so it's all just a side affair. There is a Hell.

never officially taught as dogma

I said that already. But it was a doctrine and the church's position on the matter. The RCC teaches as its faith many items of belief, you know, which have not been made into must-believe dogma, but that doesn't mean that she doesn't have a position and doesn't expect it to be accepted as true.

I urge you to go back into history & look up the official teachings of RCC. There is a difference in pondering the thoughts of the Church Fathers & official dogma.

I urge you to do the same. Or ask your pastor. In fact, I have just read an official publication from an earlier time. It might be interesting for you now to read an official publication with an imprimatur from a Cardinal Bishop the following statement: "The Limbo of the Children means the state of natural happiness enjoyed by those who die in original sin, without ever having been guilty of grievous personal sin."

[Michie]

Yes, it did, although you are apparently not ready to deal with that. No matter, it isn't essential to our discussion in any way. It came up only because someone else said, wrongly, that the RCC teaches that these children to go Hell. You don't believe that to be accurate, so it's all just a side affair. There is a Hell.
Having studied a couple years before joining RCIA & joining the RCC I know what I say to be true. But a lot of people are confused on this issue. It was never an official stance/dogma of the Church. But as you said, off topic.

I said that already. But it was a doctrine and the church's position on the matter. The RCC teaches as its faith many items of belief, you know, which have not been made into must-believe dogma, but that doesn't mean that she doesn't have a position and doesn't expect it to be accepted as true.
As I said, not my impression through my studies or discussions in RCIA.

I urge you to do the same. In fact, I have just done, before being asked. It might be interesting for you now to read an official publication with an imprimatur from a Cardinal Bishop the following statement: "The Limbo of the Children means the state of natural happiness enjoyed by those who die in original sin, without ever having been guilty of grievous personal sin."

But your failing to recognize that while some accepted that line of thought by Augustine it was never an official teaching. It was never a required belief by those within the RCC. While some old nuns & priests might had given that line of thought & believed it themselves, none of them could say that was the official stance & belief of the RCC. There are many various beliefs within the RCC today that are by no means dogma or required belief.

I have read over this & have no qualms with what I'm relaying to you in this matter. :)

[Michie]

Oh, and back on topic. I have read through this thread & seen comments of bravery & following conscience on speaking out about there being no hell.

I totally disagree. It is no great leap today to delete & add to Scripture & expect empty church pews. The trend is to go to the Church that conforms to worldly beliefs in some circles.

[Albion]

Having studied a couple years before joining RCIA & joining the RCC I know what I say to be true. But a lot of people are confused on this issue. It was never an official stance/dogma of the Church. But as you said, off topic.

Oh, my friend, before you heard of RCIA, I was teaching for the Church. If you care enough, study up on this before being so sure.

But your failing to recognize that while some accepted that line of thought by Augustine it was never an official teaching.

I've already covered that.

It was never a required belief by those within the RCC.

We've covered that also when we touched upon the matter of dogma vs. doctrine, but it is not as though the many teachings of the Church which have not been declared dogma are not considered by her as right and her official position.

While some old nuns & priests might had given that line of thought & believed it themselves,

Nope. They have nothing to do with it (which was why referred you to something official.)

[Michie]

Oh, my friend, before you heard of RCIA, I was teaching for the Church. If you care enough, study up on this before being so sure.



I've already covered that.



We've covered that also when we touched upon the matter of dogma vs. doctrine, but it is not as though the many teachings of the Church which have not been declared dogma are not considered by her as right and her official position.



Nope. They have nothing to do with it (which was why referred you to something official.)
Well we are at an impasse it seems.

No biggie.

You may have well taught & bring up letters by Bishops but that does not make it official in the eyes of the Church until it is declared by the Pope excathedra. Never was. So that is as simple as I can get with it. I know what I studied & what I was told. There are many schools of thought in RCIA as there are teachers but there are only so many official teachings. :) I'll leave further thoughts on this to myself.

And didn't you say this was offtopic anyway?

I see no reason to debate an non-existant place or a pondering by an ancient Church Father that was never declared an official document of faith.

It's about that place called Hell which is mentioned in Scripture.

No offense, just saying.... I don't think either one of us are going to budge on this issue so it might be better to move on. Let go let God & all that. ;)

[DailyBlessings]

oops

[DailyBlessings]

Oh, my. So you think that the body you now inhabit will actually be burned in a real, physical fire in the afterlife?Nope. Nor anyone else, but that is beside the point- I certainly trust Christ in the matter of my own salvation.

I think I see where you are coming from. Soul Sleep--is that it? No. I was discussing the Hebrew notion of Sheol, which is the only glimmer of "hell" in the Old Testament but certainly not identical to the Greek concept. If you really must put me in a "box", my views are more akin to those of the Eastern Orthodox church and the early church fathers, but mostly I don't think it is a healthy topic to dwell on. I do soundly reject the notion of hell as a spatial area of supernal torment, because I feel it contradicts the gospel. Gehenna as Christ discussed it is a real thing, but the confusion of pagan traditions that makes up the "conservative" perception of Hell does not reflect it.

No, it hasn't. The Roman Church taught for the past 500 years, until very recently, that they go to Limbo, not Hell. Limbo was conceived of as the "mildest condemnation", but still Hell. Augustine and his followers were not inventing a realm but rather postulating on the nature of Hell.

And many Eastern Christians--taking the view of some in the early church--don't believe there is a Hell in any case, a view held by a few Western Christians. So while there are some Christians who probably do think that any child who dies in infancy goes to Hell, it's very much a minority opinion.As well it should be. But not because of a mystical "age of accountability". 11 year olds are no more or less sinful or accountable than 15 year olds. All people share in the state of sinfulness that humanity shares, and rational thought, however one might define that, has little to do with it.

[Robby]

Can someone please explain to me how eternal suffering is "justice"? There is not one thing that anyone has ever done to me that warrants everlasting punishment; I will go as far to say that I don't want god hurting anyone who has ever hurt me. And that all we humans can do as far as "sin"; hurt each other. We cannot, I repeat, we cannot hurt a supreme being.

[Michie]

Can someone please explain to me how eternal suffering is "justice"? There is not one thing that anyone has ever done to me that warrants everlasting punishment; I will go as far to say that I don't want god hurting anyone who has ever hurt me. And that all we humans can do as far as "sin"; hurt each other. We cannot, I repeat, we cannot hurt a supreme being.
I don't know if it is eternal in the sense of everlasting suffering.

[porterross]

No. Limbo was never taught as doctrine but a line of thought hatched by Augustine. The Church trusts children to the grace & mercy of God.


Yet baptism as early as possible is always a good idea. Jesus commanded that all nations be baptized. :crosseo:

Should there not be the opportunity for baptism, God's mercy is indeed relied upon as His own words can put us at ease.


Exodus 33:19

Then He said, “I will make all My goodness pass before you, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before you. I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.”



This was emphasized by St. Paul in Romans.



Romans 9:14-16

What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!


For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION."
So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.



We simply don't know how compassionate God might be on those who repent the instant before their death, nor should we pretend to. For those who willfully deny Christ as their Savior, Scripture is pretty clear on what their pleas for mercy after the fact will get them as Michie has pointed out quite effectively. :thumbsup:

For those of you who don't think eternal separation from God is the definition of hell, then I suggest you take inventory of all that surrounds us and even our very existence as they are all and only due to the grace of God because He loves us. Without Him, there is nothing and I don't believe the human mind can even conceive of the void that will be without His gifts of beauty.:bow:

[Albion]

Keep in mind that the point concerned the comment, "the church long taught." This has been understood by everyone posting since that comment was made to refer to the Roman Catholic Church.

So although I would agree with you about what the Bible teaches and most of the rest of what you wrote, all of that is actually off the subject of what the Roman Catholic Church taught for most of time since the Middle Ages, i.e. Limbo.

[Joykins]

I thought Limbo was postulated to be the part of Hell that wasn't very bad. At least, well, all my knowledge about Hell comes from the _Inferno_ anyway.

[DailyBlessings]

Keep in mind that the point concerned the comment, "the church long taught." This has been understood by everyone posting since that comment was made to refer to the Roman Catholic Church.

So although I would agree with you about what the Bible teaches and most of the rest of what you wrote, all of that is actually off the subject of what the Roman Catholic Church taught for most of time since the Middle Ages, i.e. Limbo.
The protestant church also discussed limbo, at times. It was a major factor in the debate over infant baptism.

[Albion]

I thought Limbo was postulated to be the part of Hell that wasn't very bad.

Sorta. Hell in that sense I think refers to the underworld more generally.

Limbo was believed to be a place where children who had died without baptism but before the age of accountability went. Theologians taught that you can't go to Heaven with sin...and all of us are born with Original Sin...but God is also too merciful to send a toddler to the punishments of eternal Hell who had not committed any sin on his own. Therefore, Limbo. Not Heaven but not Hell. It was believed to be a place of happiness but not the ultimate happiness known by those in Heaven who see God. By the way, it is also taught that there was a Limbo of the Patriarchs. Although the Limbo of Children is more often referred to, you remember that all those who were otherwise deserving, like Moses, but who had died before the Crucifixion were not thouht able to go to Heaven until Christ freed them to go there after his crucifixion. While we do not know exactly what Jesus did between the crucifixion and the resurrection, many speculate that he visited these people, not those in the depths of Hell.

[Joykins]

One of my previous pastors taught a schema where Hell was the underworld basically and there was a part called Paradise (or "Abraham's bosom") where the righteous pre-Christians went and when Jesus died he went to the Paradise part, and took all the righteous pre-Christians to the real Heaven so now Hell is all a place of punishment and Heaven is accessible now for the redeemed.

This sounds a lot like what I read in the _Inferno_ but not identical.

[dayhiker]

Hi Albion,
I’m responding to your post #25 back on page 3.
Yes, I do think God would accept a person who repented after death in the spirit world. While not quite the same there are testimonies of people with near death experiences who have. Some have said to me, "Well everyone would accept Christ then." But the rich man didn’t repent or show any interest in repenting. I’ve also talked to a number of people who clearly stated they don’t want to be in heaven. One guy said very forcedly to me that he would escape hell to throw God off His thrown and sit there himself. The exact centime of Satan.
I have heard of Emanuel Swedenborg and once read a summery of his teaching, but I’ve not read any of his teaching. Its just coincident that I’m saying the same thing as he is.
I am a where that I’m not in agreement with the conventional teaching of the church. I once believed it, but have had problems with it for a while now.
dayhiker

[Albion]

Hi Albion,
I’m responding to your post #25 back on page 3.
Yes, I do think God would accept a person who repented after death in the spirit world.

I didn't question that. You were clear in stating this as your belief.

While not quite the same there are testimonies of people with near death experiences who have. Some have said to me, "Well everyone would accept Christ then." But the rich man didn’t repent or show any interest in repenting. I’ve also talked to a number of people who clearly stated they don’t want to be in heaven. One guy said very forcedly to me that he would escape hell to throw God off His thrown and sit there himself. The exact centime of Satan.
I have heard of Emanuel Swedenborg and once read a summery of his teaching, but I’ve not read any of his teaching. Its just coincident that I’m saying the same thing as he is.

OK

I am a where that I’m not in agreement with the conventional teaching of the church. I once believed it, but have had problems with it for a while now.
dayhiker

I understand. I took a shot at showing you why you might reconsider, but that's all. You are free to believe as you do without me blasting you for it. You can perhaps see that in my uncritical reference to Swedenborg who held a similar view to yours, i.e. we don't have to say that there is no Hell since there can be one for those who do not want to go to Heaven.

He still held, though, that our character is what determines our wishes in this regard and that this is totally formed before death--so that would differ from what you are saying.

[Albion]

One of my previous pastors taught a schema where Hell was the underworld basically and there was a part called Paradise (or "Abraham's bosom") where the righteous pre-Christians went and when Jesus died he went to the Paradise part, and took all the righteous pre-Christians to the real Heaven so now Hell is all a place of punishment and Heaven is accessible now for the redeemed.

This sounds a lot like what I read in the _Inferno_ but not identical.

Your pastor has a lot of company in holding that view.

But that deals with Paradise, which is what the Limbo of the Patriarchs amounts to. The Limbo that most people discuss--including on this thread--is the other one, the one for unbaptised children.

[Willtor]

Can someone please explain to me how eternal suffering is "justice"? There is not one thing that anyone has ever done to me that warrants everlasting punishment; I will go as far to say that I don't want god hurting anyone who has ever hurt me. And that all we humans can do as far as "sin"; hurt each other. We cannot, I repeat, we cannot hurt a supreme being.

I don't think justice is what it is typically understood to be in terms of, say, a modern Western justice system. In most of the parables that deal with hell the justice is poetic. The tables are turned on the oppressors and there's some "Aha!" moment where the poor and the oppressed are vindicated.

As to the parables that deal more with God as Judge, I don't think they're meant to be taken in isolation from everything else. Granted, I do take them quite seriously and I think the image they present is valuable... just not as a complete picture.

You say you don't want God to hurt anyone who's hurt you. I think that's virtuous and I wouldn't argue with you. But do keep in mind that in most of the pictures presented you aren't on that side of the equation. I don't say this to demonize you or argue that you're a bad person. Probably you're a great person. But you and I are some of the affluent elite. And our sort are consistently and decidedly not the ones in the place of Lazarus who find ourselves in the bosom of Abraham. Probably, what we know of transgression is not what is being measured.

Lastly, I would like to be direct regarding, "We cannot, I repeat, we cannot hurt a supreme being." It seems to me that if what we do to the "least of these" we do to God, even if God doesn't experience hurt in a way that is directly analogous to what we experience, I think it is proper to say that one can behave in a way that draws His ire - even if "anger" in this context doesn't remove Him from His repose.

[Gukkor]

Seeing this story on Dateline one day almost a year ago is what put the final nail in the coffin for me in regards to the doctrine of an eternal Hell.

[Albion]

Ordinary folks like ourselves can speculate on God's doings all we want, but all that matters is what God actually wants to do. And we know as much about that as he wants us to know in this life. And where do we find it? Yes, in his revealed word, the scriptures.

We may say that If we were God, we'd do things differently, but we are not God. For example, some say that they wouldn't send a divine Son to die, just forgive everyone without all that trouble. Some think that if they were God, they'd not let anyone suffer at all IN THIS LIFE, let alone debating about any suffering in Hell after this life is ended. And so on. But none of that matters since we are not, in fact, God, and he who is God can do as he pleases.

So, does the Bible say that there is a Hell, or does it not? It is extremely difficult to say that, on the basis of the Bible, there is not a Hell. Verse after verse speaks of one. Jesus taught that there is one.

Against this, what does it matter what we would like God to do, drawing upon our human emotions and limited intelligence to try to understand divine justice? Nothing at all. What matters is what he wills...and that he has advised us of in his Word.

[dayhiker]

Albion,
I agree with you on what we feel isn'tgoing to change what God does. He has a plan that is being worked out in this world. Now the Bible gives us a very powerful view of what God is doing. But there are also some serious limitations in God's revelation.
A study of history reveals that the enlightenment had a power influence on the founding of America. But neither the enlightment or America are talked about in the Bible.
Your right that hell is mentioned a lot in the Bible. I've no doult that hell is real and people will spend all eternity there. But reading all the Bible says its pretty hard to look at one person and say they are going there, no doult. And people make a lot of comments about so and so is definately going to heaven. In reality we just don't know.

With all the Bible says about forgiveness, anyone who is willing to forgive to the point of saying I don't want God to judge anyone who hurts me, sounds like they are obeying God's word to me.

just some thoughts,
dayhiker

[Albion]

Albion,
I agree with you on what we feel isn'tgoing to change what God does. He has a plan that is being worked out in this world. Now the Bible gives us a very powerful view of what God is doing. But there are also some serious limitations in God's revelation.
A study of history reveals that the enlightenment had a power influence on the founding of America. But neither the enlightment or America are talked about in the Bible.
Your right that hell is mentioned a lot in the Bible. I've no doult that hell is real and people will spend all eternity there. But reading all the Bible says its pretty hard to look at one person and say they are going there, no doult. And people make a lot of comments about so and so is definately going to heaven. In reality we just don't know.

With all the Bible says about forgiveness, anyone who is willing to forgive to the point of saying I don't want God to judge anyone who hurts me, sounds like they are obeying God's word to me.

just some thoughts,
dayhiker

Thanks for your response, Day. I certainly agree that we don't know for a certainty which individuals will go to Hell, or of other related matters concerning Hell. What I was reacting to was the idea that there can't be one. That is contrary to the Word of God, even if it does make us uncomfortable, as naturally the thought of Hell does.

[Nobella]

Now this is a hot topic, as I myself watched this man rise to untold success in South Tulsa Ok,(he was also very popular on television)....I always thought of Higher Dimensions as a very fancy church and sure enough Carlton P. was an excellent preacher.
I just never felt led to go there in all the 11 years spent in Tulsa not once did I visit there.
As far as what he is teaching now, that there is no Hell (No penalty for SIN and disobedience to God),and EVERYBODY IS going to Heaven(Good and bad reap Heavenly reward),:holy::doh: .......although NOONE can know who's going where...., but Praise God we do have what the word teaches: there is a real hell and there is a real heaven,...... these NEW revelations are just the same OLD Devil trying to deceive even the elect!

Nobella,

[tattedschmoe]

One Minister Challenges the Idea of Hell and Loses His Congregation




Continued- http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3362554&page=1

hope it is ok for me to post on this topic here.

personally, i like this man and his integrity. i find it odd with such a background that he came to this conclusion but in the end, i admire him for dealing with the problems that the doctrine of eternal hell does bring. now do i agree with universalism? can't answer that one. its just as speculating that oneself is going to heaven while others are going to burn and rot in hell. the afterlife is of no concern to me because i find it bad to be living your life in the hope of a life that isn't here yet.

but i appreciate his attempt to give us a message that reaches to us today, instead of a message that is post-today.


Now this is a hot topic, as I myself watched this man rise to untold success in South Tulsa Ok,(he was also very popular on television)....I always thought of Higher Dimensions as a very fancy church and sure enough Carlton P. was an excellent preacher.
I just never felt led to go there in all the 11 years spent in Tulsa not once did I visit there.
As far as what he is teaching now, that there is no Hell (No penalty for SIN and disobedience to God),and EVERYBODY IS going to Heaven(Good and bad reap Heavenly reward),:holy::doh: .......although NOONE can know who's going where...., but Praise God we do have what the word teaches: there is a real hell and there is a real heaven,...... these NEW revelations are just the same OLD Devil trying to deceive even the elect!

Nobella,

i was just wanting to ask one question with this. i'm not trying to start off some debate here, but a certain part of your post lead me to ask a question...is punishment for sin defined as eternal punishment and that is it?

[jive4005]

While I agree that some people will indeed end up in hell, I greatly suspect that God, in His infinite love, will find a way (Way-maker) to save many, many of His kids. I've seen people call out for buddah or allah or other gods... and Jesus was the one who actually showed up! Gods ability is as limitless as His love. That's the God I know.

rev

ps: when you get to heaven, I think you and I will be amazed at all the "sinners" would "made it in!"

[Nobella]

hope it is ok for me to post on this topic here.

personally, i like this man and his integrity. i find it odd with such a background that he came to this conclusion but in the end, i admire him for dealing with the problems that the doctrine of eternal hell does bring. now do i agree with universalism? can't answer that one. its just as speculating that oneself is going to heaven while others are going to burn and rot in hell. the afterlife is of no concern to me because i find it bad to be living your life in the hope of a life that isn't here yet.

but i appreciate his attempt to give us a message that reaches to us today, instead of a message that is post-today.

[/COLOR][/SIZE]
i was just wanting to ask one question with this. i'm not trying to start off some debate here, but a certain part of your post lead me to ask a question...is punishment for sin defined as eternal punishment and that is it?
I beleive that one has to repent for one's sins. I believe that the wages of sin is death,......eternal separation form God in a place of torment........God does forgive sin and everyone has access to forgiveness, once a person has repented and truned away from the sin. You know God knows our heart and he knows when we sin willfully and without repentance, he also knows when we are struggling and fighting with certian sins, he is a just God not to worry.......I hope I have helped you!

Nobella,

[Albion]

Albion,
I agree with you on what we feel isn'tgoing to change what God does. He has a plan that is being worked out in this world. Now the Bible gives us a very powerful view of what God is doing. But there are also some serious limitations in God's revelation.

If you mean that the Bible requires us to be able to read and understand and that the business of translating from the original lanuages is difficult, I'd agree. If you mean that the revelation itself is limited, I couldn't agree to that since to do so is to say that the foundation of our faith is unreliable and that God failed in his purposes as well.

A study of history reveals that the enlightenment had a power influence on the founding of America. But neither the enlightment or America are talked about in the Bible.

No one should think that the Bible tells every last "truth" that can be known--on every subject. The Bible itself defines its purpose, and that is to bring us to eternal life through the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ. It does not attempt to tell us how to frame in the new garage, although I suppose there is a right way and a wrong way to go about that.

Your right that hell is mentioned a lot in the Bible. I've no doult that hell is real and people will spend all eternity there. But reading all the Bible says its pretty hard to look at one person and say they are going there, no doult. And people make a lot of comments about so and so is definately going to heaven. In reality we just don't know.

Yes, people say the darndest things in the name of the Bible, but that really doesn't make the Bible more or less than it is.

[mozart250]

Oh boy..this is one doctrine that I struggle big time with.

On the one hand I have problems with a God who is "torturer-in-chief". I mean our Supreme Court has decided the electric chair is cruel and unusual punishment. What about eternal torture by fire. I think it is cruel that Joan of Arc endured the flames for maybe 30 minutes or so.

But then again I don't know what to do with those Scriptures that seem to teach hell.

But wait there are even more troubling issues.

For example we have the issues of children and the mentally impaired. Are aborted children in hell? Are babies in hell? Are the severely mentally impaired in hell?

Most would say no. For the children we have come up with this "age of accountability" loophole (what the magic age is I dunno) where apparantly young children are exempt from the tortures of hell.

OK that solves that.

Except that it doesn't. We now have a cutoff point problem.

No matter how you cut it, you have this scenario.
* Person 'A' dies and in heaven. His age (or age + other factors) is right below the cutoff point.
* Person 'B' dies and is in hell. His age (or age + other factors) is right above the cutoff point.

In reality there is very little difference between person 'A' and 'B' except the cutoff point.

Now in real life we have other arbitrary cutoff points. A person who gets a 70 on an exam passes a course while a person who gets a 69 on an exam fails.

However it seems really arbitrary when the difference here is eternity with Christ or the torments of hell.

Anyway..these are the issues I mentally struggle with and the questions that I have.

[edb19]

No "age of accountability" in Scripture though.

God shows mercy to whom He shows mercy - I have to believe that includes children and those whose mental comprehension doesn't allow them to know and understand God.

One reality is that Scripture talks more of God's holiness and His wrath than it does of His love. It's a fact we need to acknowledge.

IMO - the best way to deal with it is to fulfill the Great Commission - share Christ and Him crucified, the foolishness of the Cross. We need to make clear the substitutionary atonement of Christ's' death. We do a disservice to others when we gloss over the fact that we are sinners and the consequences of those sins and that Christ died for our sins, when we make Christianity "crossless."

[mozart250]

And now in the interest of fairness may I present the other side of my brain.

Having read some of the links on the minister in question (and googling him) it is obvious that he disbelieves in hell because "God told him".

Isn't "God told me" the foundation of Mormonism, Jehovah Witness, and assorted other cults and sects. So why should I believe what God told this guy as opposed to what God told Charles Russel.

The polite name for this theology is Restorationalism. 1800-2000 years of church theology is wrong until God revealed the real truth to $the_name_of_our_group 1900 years or so after the fact. Except there are hundreds of restorationalist groups to choose from. Which one has it right.

(Now of course Catholics use essentially this same argument against Protestants but that is a separate issue).

The other thing I picked up is that this guy has moved into "theological liberalism". He now is a pastor (in a liberal denomination) of an "inclusive" church with respect to gays and lesbians. The problem with liberalism is that there is absolutely no authority outside of ones own self and what you believe is a matter of what you want to believe and what feels good.

I'm sorry but I would much prefer to struggle with faith from an external authority (in the case of us Protestants that being the Bible but in the case of Catholics their three-pronged authority) and wrestle with things that I don't like but my authority teaches, than to have my faith reduced to pick'n'choose according to what feels good with absolutely no external authority.

[Nobella]

hope it is ok for me to post on this topic here.

personally, i like this man and his integrity. i find it odd with such a background that he came to this conclusion but in the end, i admire him for dealing with the problems that the doctrine of eternal hell does bring. now do i agree with universalism? can't answer that one. its just as speculating that oneself is going to heaven while others are going to burn and rot in hell. the afterlife is of no concern to me because i find it bad to be living your life in the hope of a life that isn't here yet.

but i appreciate his attempt to give us a message that reaches to us today, instead of a message that is post-today.

[/COLOR][/SIZE]
i was just wanting to ask one question with this. i'm not trying to start off some debate here, but a certain part of your post lead me to ask a question...is punishment for sin defined as eternal punishment and that is it?

All I know is that the word of God says the he is fair and just, and that there is a price to pay for sin,
I cannot phantom that the wicked and the righteous deserve the same fate, Heaven? Really do you suppose we have lived to fight the good fight in vain, God forbid that the evil one is equal to the saints. No this cannot be, i cannot agree that even Hitler and murderers and rapists all go to heaven and therefore meaning that there is no consequence for sin.

Nobella,

[gtmyers]

I beleive that one has to repent for one's sins. I believe that the wages of sin is death,......eternal separation form God in a place of torment........God does forgive sin and everyone has access to forgiveness, once a person has repented and truned away from the sin. You know God knows our heart and he knows when we sin willfully and without repentance, he also knows when we are struggling and fighting with certian sins, he is a just God not to worry.......I hope I have helped you!

Nobella,
I agree with you Nobella. There is a hell. The whole idea of there not being one would mean there would be no penalty for sin and no need for Christ to die for our sin.

[Nomenclature]

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves" — Matthew 7:15

[k2svpete]

I agree with you Nobella. There is a hell. The whole idea of there not being one would mean there would be no penalty for sin and no need for Christ to die for our sin.
So seperation from your God and maker, to be returned back to the dust that you were formed out of, never to be rememebered isn't punishment?

That is how it is written in the bible. The reader must remember that hell=hades=the grave/covered place. It's not a place of eternal torture etc. That is a fallacy borne out of reading scripture out of context and without understanding what the words actually mean.

This guy has woken up to that. If 'hell' was such a big part of eternity, don't you think that Jesus and the OT writers would have harped on it a bit? It's a choice we all have, choose God or death.

[Albion]

So seperation from your God and maker, to be returned back to the dust that you were formed out of, never to be rememebered isn't punishment?

That is how it is written in the bible. The reader must remember that hell=hades=the grave/covered place. It's not a place of eternal torture etc. That is a fallacy borne out of reading scripture out of context and without understanding what the words actually mean.

This guy has woken up to that. If 'hell' was such a big part of eternity, don't you think that Jesus and the OT writers would have harped on it a bit? It's a choice we all have, choose God or death.

Correct me if I'm wrong about this, but I don't remember him as saying that, just that God would not confine any sinner to an eternity of being outcast from him. That would mean no Hell as we have understood it. While the extinction of the soul has little following among Christians, the ultimate redemption of all souls following some period of "rehabilitation" does have a place.

[k2svpete]

My post was based on the comment quoted and the belief of hell as a place of eternal punishment as per popular belief. I confess that I do not know exactly what this preacher has stated other than what has been quotoed in the posts thus far.

There is o redemption for people who have not come to God through Christ. The bible is pretty clear on that point, regardless of how many people subscribe to that belief.

[Albion]

My post was based on the comment quoted and the belief of hell as a place of eternal punishment as per popular belief. I confess that I do not know exactly what this preacher has stated other than what has been quotoed in the posts thus far.

There is o redemption for people who have not come to God through Christ. The bible is pretty clear on that point, regardless of how many people subscribe to that belief.

Thanks. When I read the information about the Rev. Pearson, I find him saying this: "We may go through hell, but nobody goes to hell."

That means, I think, that he believes in a Hell where those in it are conscious. What is denied is Hell AS A PLACE OF ETERNAL TORMENT. He does not appear to agree to this view which you stated: "to be returned back to the dust that you were formed out of, never to be rememebered."

He seems clearly to believe that the conventional idea of Hell is wrong for the reason that it is wrong to think of it as everlasting or torture, but that he does not subscribe to the idea of anyone being annihilated.

[Anglian]

Thus far this discussion has proceeded along lines familiar to western Christianity, but that is not the whole of the Christian tradition, and I should like to add some thoughts from my own tradition from the blessed Mar Isaac (known in the west as St. Isaac of Nineveh).

In Chapter XXXIX of the 'Second Part' of the writings of Mar Isaac we read much about Gehenna. I would like to share two passages with my brothers and sisters here. There is much more, but these two give a flavour of what he says:


That we should imagine that anger, wrath, jealousy or such like have anything to do with the divine Nature is something utterly abhorrent for us; no one in their right mind, no one who has any understanding (at all) can possibly come to such madness as to think anything of that sort about God. Nor can we possibly say that he acts thus out of retribution, even though the Scriptures may on the outer surface posit this. Even to think this of God and to suppose that retribution for evil acts is to be found with Him is abominable. By implying that He makes use of such a great and difficult thing out of retribution we are attributing a weakness to the (divine) Nature. We cannot even believe such a thing can be found in those human beings who live a virtuous and upright life and whose thoughts are entirely in accord with the divine will - let alone (believe it) of God, that He has done something out of retribution for anticipated evil acts in connection with those whose nature He had brought into being with honour and great love. (II/XXXIX. 2)

St. Isaac goes on to write:

This is how everything works with Him, even though things may seem otherwise to us: with Him it is not a matter of retribution, but He is (always) looking (beyond) to the advantage that will come from His dealings with (humanity). And one such thing is this matter of Gehenna.
I am of the opinion that He is going to manifest some wonderful outcome, a matter of immense and ineffable compassion on the part of the glorious Creator, with respect to the ordering of this difficult matter of (Gehenna's) torment: out of it the wealth of His love and power and wisdom will become known all the more - and so will the insistent might of the waves of His goodness. (II/XXXIX. 5-6)

I hope this might add another voice to the discussion here.

In peace,

Anglian

[Maddi777]

Excuse me for jumping in a bit late, but in my opinion and thinking.... nobody is in either heaven or hell right now. Otherwise, what would be the point of Judgement Day, if they were. I belive on that day, heaven and hell both will begin to fill up.

Our bodies are dead - yes... but the spirit is just sleeping for now.

[Chococat]

This is something I have struggled with for all my life as a Christian. At first I used to believe no one went to Hell (at least on a permanent basis) but alas the Bible is clear that some will spend eternity there.:cry: :sigh: If there was no eternal Hell then why would God have allowed His Son to undergo such a horrible ordeal on the Cross if there was really no need for it? Plus if God has given us freewill that must mean people are free to reject Him and in essence condemn themselves to Hell. I believe it is ultimately a person's choice as to whether to be saved or condemned.

[Izdaari]

Anglian,

Thanks much for the thoughts from St. Isaac. Very interesting stuff. :thumbsup: