Discussing/Debating beliefs

[StefanM]

On the contrary, if God condemned every person in the world to hell, He would be entirely just, because all men have sinned (Romans 3:23). What He would not be is merciful.
If even one person is saved, God is merciful, because that person is receiving mercy.
However, we know that there is a vast crowd of people, so huge that no one can number it, that will be saved (Revelation 7:9). So we praise God for His wonderful mercy and grace, which is what the Bible does regularly.

What I would like is for Agent 47 to tell us whether he thinks that crowd would get bigger or smaller if
a. Man had free will (whatever that may be).
b. If there were not Irresistible Grace.

And why he thinks so.

Even if just, still sadistic.

 

[Yeshua1]

An omniscient and omnipotent god who would create a world in which every person without exception would be tormented forever hits levels of sadism that one cannot even fathom.

How about th Godofthe Bible, who created Man and gve Him a paradie, who then rejected it, and He then set forth His own Son to die for sinners? You are are describing Satan, not God on this positing of yours!

 

[Yeshua1]

On the contrary, if God condemned every person in the world to hell, He would be entirely just, because all men have sinned (Romans 3:23). What He would not be is merciful.
If even one person is saved, God is merciful, because that person is receiving mercy.
However, we know that there is a vast crowd of people, so huge that no one can number it, that will be saved (Revelation 7:9). So we praise God for His wonderful mercy and grace, which is what the Bible does regularly.

What I would like is for Agent 47 to tell us whether he thinks that crowd would get bigger or smaller if
a. Man had free will (whatever that may be).
b. If there were not Irresistible Grace.

And why he thinks so.

Think the correct answer to your questions would be NONEwould be saved!

 

[Yeshua1]

Even if just, still sadistic.

How so? Would be like you having a child that killed smneone, and got the chair fo that deed. Would execute the sentence, and still feel for thir own child!

 

[StefanM]

How so? Would be like you having a child that killed smneone, and got the chair fo that deed. Would execute the sentence, and still feel for thir own child!

Intentionally creating a universe where the end result is that everyone is in conscious torment for eternity is incomparable to your example. Death is one thing. Eternal torment is another.

If the whole design was to create an outcome of 100% eternal torment, that's sadistic.

 

[Yeshua1]

Intentionally creating a universe where the end result is that everyone is in conscious torment for eternity is incomparable to your example. Death is one thing. Eternal torment is another.

If the whole design was to create an outcome of 100% eternal torment, that's sadistic.

God created the Universe for His glory, an made a in his own image, andloved us enougt o not damn all of us, and gae His own Son fo our stead!

 

[StefanM]

God created the Universe for His glory, an made a in his own image, andloved us enougt o not damn all of us, and gae His own Son fo our stead!

Well, except for the ones he didn't elect, right?

 

[Yeshua1]

Well, except for the ones he didn't elect, right?

No, as they also will be to His glory in the end, as God shows to all His right ways and Holiness, and how he allowed them "to havetheir way"
Does God ever make mistakes, bad choices?

 

[StefanM]

No, as they also will be to His glory in the end, as God shows to all His right ways and Holiness, and how he allowed them "to havetheir way"
Does God ever make mistakes, bad choices?

I meant he didn't love them enough.

 

[Yeshua1]

I meant he didn't love them enough.

Is God required to love all equally?

 

[StefanM]

Is God required to love all equally?

I never said that. I just find it unsustainable with the concept of hell in mind to think of God extending love of any real value to those condemned for eternity.

It's more consistent to just say he loves the ones he saves, and he basically hates the ones he doesn't.

 

[JonC]

Even if just, still sadistic.

I understand the concern (particularly since God is Creator), but why sadistic?

 

[StefanM]

I understand the concern (particularly since God is Creator), but why sadistic?

To create a universe with 100% hell rate? It's gratuitous.

 

[JonC]

To create a universe with 100% hell rate? It's gratuitous.

It wouldn't make sense to me, but I don't know if it would imply that God actually derived pleasure from the act (God does judge the wicked while "taking no pleasure").

There seems a responsibility in the Creator/creature relationship implied by God's own nature. I don't mean that God can't exercise judgment or express wrath, but the focus may have to be in accord with God's nature and design. When God exercises wrath and judgment, this is not "hate" for a creature but love for Creation. What is in mind is that reconciliation that dwarfs what existed in Eden.

Anyway....sorry for rambling....I get your point.

 

[StefanM]

It wouldn't make sense to me, but I don't know if it would imply that God actually derived pleasure from the act (God does judge the wicked while "taking no pleasure").

There seems a responsibility in the Creator/creature relationship implied by God's own nature. I don't mean that God can't exercise judgment or express wrath, but the focus may have to be in accord with God's nature and design. When God exercises wrath and judgment, this is not "hate" for a creature but love for Creation. What is in mind is that reconciliation that dwarfs what existed in Eden.

Anyway....sorry for rambling....I get your point.

We're speaking of a theoretical alternate deity anyway. I don't know of any Christian who believes that God actually sends 100% of humanity to hell.

A deity that did so would be sadistic and would have to take pleasure in it. It's not like anything else would be available to take pleasure in.

The problem of hell is a major, major issue for Christianity as-is. It wouldn't even be remotely defensible with this alternate deity.

 

[Yeshua1]

I never said that. I just find it unsustainable with the concept of hell in mind to think of God extending love of any real value to those condemned for eternity.

It's more consistent to just say he loves the ones he saves, and he basically hates the ones he doesn't.

I can love your child, bu really love my own!
he loves His covenant people in that fashion...

 

[StefanM]

I can love your child, bu really love my own!
he loves His covenant people in that fashion...

I'm not roasting your child in hell forever.

 

[JonC]

We're speaking of a theoretical alternate deity anyway. I don't know of any Christian who believes that God actually sends 100% of humanity to hell.

A deity that did so would be sadistic and would have to take pleasure in it. It's not like anything else would be available to take pleasure in.

The problem of hell is a major, major issue for Christianity as-is. It wouldn't even be remotely defensible with this alternate deity.

Hypothetical is always problematic; it exists in a context of exaggeration.

 

[MennoSota]

To create a universe with 100% hell rate? It's gratuitous.

To have 100% of humanity in rebellion to the Sovereign King of the Universe and yet the King patiently withholds destroying rebels because the Sovereign King mercifully chooses to spare some is wonderfully amazing grace.

 

[StefanM]

To have 100% of humanity in rebellion to the Sovereign King of the Universe and yet the King patiently withholds destroying rebels because the Sovereign King mercifully chooses to spare some is wonderfully amazing grace.

Meh