finite SINNING punished with INFINITE torture?

[Andre]

It seems to me that the article posted plays with the definition of infinity and is ultimately self-contradictory. Furthermore we are addressing God, not math.

I doubt that the article is contradictory. In my engineering / physics studies, I encountered this subject many times. While the layman understandably thinks all infinities are the same, this is simply not the case. Now what implications this added knowledge has on the present issue, I have not thought about.

But if we are going to argue either way and make reference to the notion of "infinity", we need to have a proper understanding of it. And we are talking about both God and math.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

When the angel in Revelation raises his hand and declares that time shall be no longer, it can be argued that at that point an infinity begins and never ends.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I doubt that the article is contradictory.

Doubt away.

Now what implications this added knowledge has on the present issue, I have not thought about.

Obviously

But if we are going to argue either way and make reference to the notion of "infinity", we need to have a proper understanding of it. And we are talking about both God and math.

No, "we" are talking about God. "You" brought up math, which is a different subject. God's infinity means that he is without bounds or limits in his infinite attributes. God's infinity with respect to time is called his eternity. God's infinity with respect to knowledge is called omniscience.

In this case, God's holiness is infinite, and any crime against his holiness is therefore a crime whose just payment must be infinite.

 

[Andre]

No, "we" are talking about God. "You" brought up math, which is a different subject. God's infinity means that he is without bounds or limits in his infinite attributes. God's infinity with respect to time is called his eternity. God's infinity with respect to knowledge is called omniscience.

In this case, God's holiness is infinite, and any crime against his holiness is therefore a crime whose just payment must be infinite.

Not a correct characterization of what is happening here. Clearly people are deploying the concept of infinity in respect to the issue of infinite torture for finite punishment. You do so yourself when you state:

Think about what you just said. If the debt for each sin is infinite torture (which I object to the use of torture since it is not how the Bible describes it), then the debt for two sins is not two infinite tortures. That is illogical infinite cannot be increased. There is no such two infinites (dying for two people or more). Infinite is without limits. Since Christ's death is an infinite payment, he can pay the infinite debt of all sinners and each sinner.

When you say "infinite cannot be increased" you are, whether you realize it or not, deploying the standard "secular" concept of what infinity is and leveraging it for your argument. More power to you. But you cannot then try to argue that we are "talking about God and not about math".

If you are going to use the concept of infinite anything - infinite knowledge, infinite holiness, whatever - you are using a mathematical concept to characterize God. There is no way to say that God has an infinite amount of "x" and then try to say that the content of the mathematics of infinity is an unrelated subject.

Infiinity is a mathematical notion - when you talk infinity, you talk mathematics.

 

[Ed Edwards]

It seems to me that the article posted plays with the definition of infinity and is ultimately self-contradictory. Furthermore we are addressing God, not math.

Amen, Brother Larry -- Preach it!

But God who is infinitely complex could send His
Son to die for the salvation of any finite number of sinners
-- and not even strain Himself. So all the alleged paradoxes
noted above are plays on an inaccurate understanding
of the mathematics of infinity -- NOT true statements about
God at all.

 

[Ed Edwards]

When the angel in Revelation raises his hand and declares that time shall be no longer, it can be argued that at that point an infinity begins and never ends.

Likewise at the moment I was saved from ALL my sins by
Messian Jesus - at that moment an infinity of time began,
continues till today, and will last FOR EVER (never end).

This scripture blows the paradoxes noted above out
of the water:

John 3:16 (KJV1611 Edition):
For God so loued ye world, that he gaue
his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer
beleeueth in him, should not perish,
but haue euerlasting life.

 

[Andre]

Amen, Brother Larry -- Preach it!

But God who is infinitely complex could send His
Son to die for the salvation of any finite number of sinners
-- and not even strain Himself. So all the alleged paradoxes
noted above are plays on an inaccurate understanding
of the mathematics of infinity -- NOT true statements about
God at all.

Greetings Ed:

I am not sure that I understand your comment here. My claim is that as soon as we start to make statements where we characterize God as having an infinite amount of "x" or we assert that God can forgive an infinite number of sins, or whatever, we are necessarily invoking the concept of infinity. And infinity is a mathematical concept, so if you are going to use it in an argument, you need to use it properly. And the fact of the matter is that "some infinities are bigger than others".

So one cannot try to leverage off the mathematical properties of infinity on the one hand (e.g. make the statement "That is illogical infinite cannot be increased") and then, when it is discovered that this statement is false, assert that "math has nothing to do with it".

Now perhaps it is innapropriate to use the mathematical concept of infinity to characterize God. But I strongly suspect that some people want it both ways here. They want to use the mathematics of infinity to argue a point and then deny the relevance of the concept when a more accurate representation about the concept of infinity is forthcoming.

I happen to think that efforts to put forth a concept of infinity that is divorced from the mathematical one is doomed to conceptual failure. I expect that "when called on it", it will turn out that the "non-mathematical" version is really just the mathematical one with a different label slapped on it.

Can you please clarify your thoughts on the use of the concept "infinity" to characterize God?

 

[DHK]

But this brings up a good question for those who believe that FINITE sin should require "INFINITE TORTURE" for their family friends and loved ones that do not go to heaven. How do you talk yourself into believing that FINITE beings guilty of FINITE sin - should be punished by INFINITE TORTURE?

IF God is INFINTE and the punishment demanded of FINITE beings is ALSO INFINITE - Then it stands to reason that God only pays the debt of ONE sinner.
Bob

A faulty premise will always lead to a faulty conclusion.
First man is not a finite being as you claim. He is an infinite being. Unlike the aminals which are destroyed and will perish, man will not. He is made in the image and likeness of God. Part of that image is that man is a spirit being just like the angels are spirit beings. Animals are not. They have souls, but not spirits. The Hebrew word "nephesh" bears this out. Man is able to communicate with God because God gave him a spirit. When that spirit is made alive with the Holy Spirit man is born again, and made part of God's family. Either way he is an infinite creature.

Paul says:
2 Corinthians 5:1-2 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

This body is but a tabernacle, a temporary "tent." We will live forever, for we are spirit-beings. Some day we will receive a glorified body. Some day the unsaved will "stand" before God at the GWT judgement. The "stand" indicates that they also will have a body. There is a second resurrection. Resurrection always refers to the body. We are infinite. We will live forever--some in heaven and some in Hell. You make your decision here on earth. That decision is based soley on receiving Christ by faith and faith alone.

 

[Andre]

In respect to the non-perishability of the human person, I submit the following claims for your consideration. I have some reason to believe the person who compiled these statements is in fact a reliable source, but I fully admit that I have not verified the veracity of them:

"According to Basil F. C. Atkinson, Martin Luther listed as the last of five cardinal errors of the papal Church the immortality of the soul, and was followed in this view by William Tyndale. (Ref. 6) Luther, in his Assertion of All the Articles Wrongly Condemned in the Roman Bull of 29 November, 1520, rejected this Roman Catholic doctrine, calling such an idea a "monstrous opinion" out of the "Roman dunghill of decretals"!"

"In 1548 John Calvin published his commentary on Paul's first letter to Timothy. He observed (at 1 Tim. 6:16) that the soul's coming into existence and its continuance depend entirely on God, so that "properly speaking, it does not have an immortal nature"; and in support of this he cited Acts 17:28."

"Thomas B. Strong in his Manual of Theology wrote in 1903: "The doctrine of the immortality of the soul is precarious and obscure in a very high degree."

 

[DHK]

"Thomas B. Strong in his Manual of Theology wrote in 1903: "The doctrine of the immortality of the soul is precarious and obscure in a very high degree."

People often use the words "soul" and "spirit" interchangeably. The doctrine the immortality of the soul is referring to the same thing as the spirit. It is a fine theological distinction.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Not a correct characterization of what is happening here. Clearly people are deploying the concept of infinity in respect to the issue of infinite torture for finite punishment.

Yes, but not a mathematical concept of infinity as your article was talkign about. We are not talking about mathematical formulas but about the character of God.

When you say "infinite cannot be increased" you are, whether you realize it or not, deploying the standard "secular" concept of what infinity is and leveraging it for your argument. More power to you. But you cannot then try to argue that we are "talking about God and not about math".

I think you are misguided here. The concept of infinite that I employed is the theological concept used with respect to the infinite perfections of God.

If you are going to use the concept of infinite anything - infinite knowledge, infinite holiness, whatever - you are using a mathematical concept to characterize God. There is no way to say that God has an infinite amount of "x" and then try to say that the content of the mathematics of infinity is an unrelated subject.

I don't think we can really talk about an "infinite amount" since it cannot be characterized that way.

Infiinity is a mathematical notion - when you talk infinity, you talk mathematics.

It is also a theological notion, and when we use it theologically, I don't think we are using it mathematically. We are talking about the fact that God has no limits.

 

[Amy.G]

Does this thread count as infinite torture?

 

[Alcott]

That must depend on who the moderator is.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Here is a 'fact' (Mathematical proposition) of infinite sets:

An infinite set can be divided into any finite
number of infinite subsets.

Here is it's application:

We Christians saved by Messiah Jesus are
to spend an infinite time set (the Millinnia of Eternity)
in Heaven. There may be many Billions of Saints
(2 or 3 now, many more if the Lord taries) -
but even 200 Billion is a finite number.
So we can divide up eternity into
an infinite set of time for each person to inhabit
heaven (the infinite set of time).
I will get to spend an infinite amount of time
ALONE with Jesus. You will get to spend
an infinite amount of time with Jesus.
I will get to spend an eternity alone visiting with
Brother Alcott or Sister Amy.G.
It behoves me to be kind to my Brother & Sister
cause I'm stuck with them for an
infinite time (AKA: eternity).

 

[BobRyan]

Think about what you just said. If the debt for each sin is infinite torture (which I object to the use of torture since it is not how the Bible describes it), then the debt for two sins is not two infinite tortures.

I am sorry but that statement is totally illogical.

It would be like saying that Christ can not be infinite God if the Father is ALSO infinite God.

Two infinites where each is its own entity are not only possible but as Christian we REQUIRE it when speaking of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

Obviously.

The point remains.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Matt Black]

Bob, may I recommend you read What did the Cross achieve: the logic of penal substitutionary atonement by J I Packer. Your objections to PSA are old and are similar to those of Faustus Socinus; essentially, Socinus had two objections to PSA:-

1. Finite sins do not deserve infinite punishment.
2. Jesus' atoning death, because it was finite (one death only, three days only in the grave, no eternal punishment etc) could not provide satisfaction for infinite punishment.

Packer's article demolishes both Socinian objections: re #1, because of the very nature of sin, it severs for all eternity the relationship between mankind and God (assuming no Cross here, of course); although both the offence (sin) and offender (sinner) are finite beings, the Being Who is sinned against is infinite in His perfection and therefore the consequence of sin is eternal separation from that Being (which is effectively eternal punishment); re #2, because Jesus Himself was infinite, perfect and infinitely perfect, His sacrifice, whilst finite in temporal duration, nevertheless provided infinite satisfaction for the sins of mankind and was the perfect substitute for the infinite suffering which would otherwise be our lot.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I am sorry but that statement is totally illogical.

No it's not. Infinite means without bounds or limits. And if something is without limits then by definition you can't expand something that has not limits to begin with.

It would be like saying that Christ can not be infinite God if the Father is ALSO infinite God.

No it's not like that at all. Two entirely different topics.

Two infinites where each is its own entity are not only possible but as Christian we REQUIRE it when speaking of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

But each isn't its own entity.

 

[BobRyan]

Each sin is its own sin -- each sin requires its own payment its own debt. For each sin the debt is EITHER infinite OR it is not.

As usual - it is left to me to state the obvious.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, may I recommend you read What did the Cross achieve: the logic of penal substitutionary atonement by J I Packer. Your objections to PSA are old and are similar to those of Faustus Socinus; essentially, Socinus had two objections to PSA:-

1. Finite sins do not deserve infinite punishment.
2. Jesus' atoning death, because it was finite (one death only, three days only in the grave, no eternal punishment etc) could not provide satisfaction for infinite punishment.

My argument is that Christ DID pay for the sins of the world that His atonement IS substitutationary and EXACTLY matches the debt owed.

As Col 2 states the certificate of debt - written against us - the ticket - the debt of payment owed as defined by God's Law was exactly paid and it is BECAUSE the payment for each fininte sin is FINITE torment!

And in fact that is the ONLY way it works.

Packer's article demolishes both Socinian objections: re #1, because of the very nature of sin, it severs for all eternity the relationship between mankind and God (assuming no Cross here, of course)

The fact that the sinner "is DESTROYED both BODY AND SOUL in fiery hell" Matt 10:28 does NOT require that we speculate for "infinite torture" here.

Because of that - the payment of debt IS exact as paid for by Christ FOR all sins of ALL sinners that have ever lived.


If we take the "each sin requires an infinite payment ALL on its own" then His sacrifice, whilst finite in temporal duration, nevertheless needed to infinite satisfaction for a single sin of even ONE member of mankind and though He was the perfect substitute for the infinite suffering owed for just ONE sin of ONE person - suffering which would otherwise be the lot of that ONE person for that ONE sin -- it can not go beyond that for it is fully comsumed by the INFINITE requirement for torture for that ONE sin - IF such a story were in fact true.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Each sin is its own sin -- each sin requires its own payment its own debt. For each sin the debt is EITHER infinite OR it is not.

As usual - it is left to me to state the obvious.

In Christ,

Bob

If that is true then you are eternally lost with no chance for salvation--if this is what you truly believe. You (as in every person) sin every day. I know that there are many self-righteous people on this board that will deny this fact. The very denial of it will prove it true. Wicked or impure thoughts, things that you may have said that you now regret, or even things that you may not have done that you should have done. There are sins of omission, as well as commission. We sin every day.
Jesus paid the penalty for all of our sins once; and once for all.
Each individual sin does not need to be paid for. That is an unbiblical if not totally ridiculous concept. Christ took the full burden of sin, for every person, of all generations upon himself when he paid the penalty of all those sins at Calvary with his blood. The price was his shed blood. It was an infinte price by an infinite God for the infinite penalty done by man, the infinite creature that he had created. They would live forever -an infinite amount of time in eternity--either with Christ or without Christ. The difference would be if they had refused or rejected Christ, the one who had paid the infinite price for the infinite penalty of their infinite sin.