Posted on 12/06/2004 12:44:58 PM PST by Lindykim
"Is it morally and theologically acceptable to hope anyone goes to hell? ... One...need not be a conservative Christian to believe in some form of hell for the evil. All one need be is a rational believer in a just God. For if there is a just God, it is inconceivable that those who do evil and those who do good have identical fates. A just God must care about justice, and since there is little justice in this world, there has to be in the next. And belief in the next world is also not confined to Christianity. As the Encyclopedia Judaica ... (edited largely by non-religious Jews) notes in the first sentence under the heading 'Afterlife,' 'Judaism has always believed in an afterlife.' ... Much of humanity has been adversely affected by modern-day terror. The lives of millions -- virtually all Palestinians and Israelis, for example -- have been terribly affected by Arafat. And there are hundreds of thousands of people whose lives have been destroyed or shattered by him. At the same time, other than a few sycophants enriched by some of the billions of dollars he embezzled from the Palestinians, no one has had a better life because Yasser Arafat lived. ... Yasser Arafat single-handedly made nihilistic acts of cruelty routine, even respectable. ... Thanks to him, the Palestinian name is identified among people of goodwill with barbarity just as the German name came to be associated with barbarity as a result of Hitler. ... Just as any decent human being would want good people to be rewarded in whatever existence there is after this life, they would want the cruelest of people to be punished. So, of course, I hope Yasser Arafat is in hell. ... If you think that is hard-hearted, consider the alternative, that one of the most corrupt and cruel human beings of the past half-century is resting in peace. Whoever isn't bothered by that is the one with the hard heart." --Dennis Prager
I pray that they receive justice.
Then what's the point of living a moral life? If your fate is determined at the time of your birth (which was an idea that the Classical Greek and Roman religions accepted, btw) why follow any religious rules?
I would say no.
Short answer is no.
The decision is not ours to make. It is made by God who told us to love one another. He did however give us the guidelines to salvation and we can make an enlightened judgment on soneone else's eternal future. Hopimg that someone goes to hell is not what we were instructed to do.
I'll settle for wishing someone dead, but never for wishing them in Hell. I have my own soul to worry about.
bttt
If one accepts the above doctrine, there really isn't any point at all.
If your fate is determined at the time of your birth (which was an idea that the Classical Greek and Roman religions accepted, btw) why follow any religious rules?
I think the answer that the Calvinists found, like the Roman Stoics and the Greek Cynics, was of founding a supporting culture.
The Stoics knew that their fate was sealed no matter what they did, but they chose to behave nobly thinking that this was their destiny. Likewise, each good thing a Calvinist did strengthened him in the conviction that he was one of the elect and his desire to do more good things he took as signs of his election to the point where living a moral life "felt" like a compulsion, a continual proof of one's convictions. At what point does moral behavior stop feeling like an externally-imposed duty and start feeling like an internal need?
Emerson wrote some interesting essays that touch upon the Calvinist culture of New England, and his belief that his comparatively freewheeling nature was set in motion by being told at an early age by aunt that it was a shame that such a sweet little boy as he was predestined to eternal hellfire. He knew that no matter how he aimed to please his aunt, who was herself elect and was a good judge of such matters, he would still be damned and this inspired in him his critical examination of his relgion and culture.
The amount of time doesn't matter. I believe no one ever died before he would have repented. God gives us all we need to come to him. Some do. Some don't.
No, not exactly the same, but, again, the issue of going to Heaven is whether one measures up to the Perfect Glory of God.
No human does so --- all sin --- except one. One who got a raw deal.
But, yes, Christian theology is not horseshoes --- getting close does not get you there. (In Christian parlance "works" don't save you.)
Your thought of well-I-might-as-well-take-drugs-and-go-on-a-killing-spree is not a new one
The Gnostics and various other groups (including those who took the opposite track --- "Christians" (in name, at least) who took his salvation as a license to do horrid things) make your argument about 2000 years ago.
It became a real problem in Corinth, where some had Church-sponsored orgies, if I recall correctly.
In fact, these "license" disputes take up much of Paul's writings in the back of the Bible (the "letters" area). Go get an NIV study bible and read the notes on these topics, if you want answers.
THAT SAID, faith without works is dead. A sincere acceptance of Christ's sacrifice changes you. It changed me. You don't want to sin. (Now, if you are like me; you'll still sin --- albeit perhaps less and you have help resisting temptation.)
But one reason I have less desire to sin is because it is spitting in the face of Christ's sacrifice. It's a slow and steady drip to becoming a better person.
Indeed, this sounds a bit Star Trekky --- but Christ/God exists outside time, so knowing that, this makes more sense. Christ pre-paid for my sins through his suffering. I have no desire to add to his suffering by being a jackass. The thought of me causing the thorns to hurt a bit more keeps me in line, sometimes.
I am also so grateful, I do not want to disappoint Him.
It might not be acceptable, but there are a few people like the hijackers, and Arafat that one hopes are getting what they deserve. Maybe it isn't so much hoping, but it is more knowing that they most likely are. It isn't our choice but their own if they suffer that fate.
The error of the unbeliever is expressed in the saying, "Though having eyes, seeing not."
because god hopes, "that none should perish". 2 Peter 3:9
This is a false premise. It is possible for some to do evil, some other to do good, and all to be saved. If the the evil-doers come to know God, repent, and are forgiven, they are saved just like those who do good, repent, and are forgiven.
The common thread between them is not the nature of their deeds but the status of their souls. Another way to say it is that the evil-doer and the doer of good both have sin in common.
No need to wish them along. They're getting there nicely by themselves!
I personally do not believe it is morally acceptable to hope anyone goes to hell. The best of us (I'm not talking about me) are guilty of too much bad, for which we without the Redemption by Jesus Christ, would merit hell, just as much as the evilest monster who ever lived, to ever wish that upon anyone.
I am all for the trial, conviction and execution of those preditadors who prey upon the innocent and the helpless. If they make their peace with God before they die, I am elated. I expect the same just and merciful God who forgives and redeems those who have slain others before they were prepared to die, to grant the same mercy and opportunity for salvation to their victems. I believe he does.
The pain of Hell is being separated from God.
Of course not.
Any Christian would know this.
Why not?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.