Ezekiel 18-20
Oct. 12th, 2010 09:41 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wolfpurplemoon posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
wolfbiblemoonGod has decided that the children shouldn't suffer for the sins of their parents any longer, why did he say that they should before? This sort of indecisiveness doesn't seem right in an all-knowing deity.
OK, so let me get this straight, a wicked person will die/suffer for their sins, unless they decide to turn away from their sin and do what is just. So, how long can you spend being sinful before the punishment kicks in, because once you're dead you're not going to be able to turn from your sin and become righteous, surely. And just how righteous do you have to become and how long for in order to correct the wrong God thinks you committed?
I haven't even got that straight and now apparently if you're righteous and then start being wicked then you'll die and your righteous acts are not taken into account, which makes even less sense. So, the moral of the tale seems to be, start out bad and become good, not the other way round. I agree with the house of Israel that this is unjust, and God's answer to that charge is not actually an answer because he just calls them unjust back and assures them he takes no pleasure in the deaths of anyone, wicked or good.
OK, so let me get this straight, a wicked person will die/suffer for their sins, unless they decide to turn away from their sin and do what is just. So, how long can you spend being sinful before the punishment kicks in, because once you're dead you're not going to be able to turn from your sin and become righteous, surely. And just how righteous do you have to become and how long for in order to correct the wrong God thinks you committed?
I haven't even got that straight and now apparently if you're righteous and then start being wicked then you'll die and your righteous acts are not taken into account, which makes even less sense. So, the moral of the tale seems to be, start out bad and become good, not the other way round. I agree with the house of Israel that this is unjust, and God's answer to that charge is not actually an answer because he just calls them unjust back and assures them he takes no pleasure in the deaths of anyone, wicked or good.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
IMHO
Date: 2010-10-13 01:51 am (UTC)So, the comparison being made here between the Kingdom of Judah and a Lioness. The Kings of Judah are likened to the Lioness' cubs, which groomed to rule became young lions and during their reign went out into their kingdoms became cruel, oppressive and destructive, even unto their own subjects. This can be both an allegory of the past, but also a warning to the kings of the future for those who may enact such cruelty from a position of power in the future by not following the commands of God. The next parable goes on to describe what happens from insubordination.
Regarding the Vineyard allegory, here there is a perfect summary of recent events. The description of their past when they were "well-behaved", i.e. the watered plant. The plant was flourishing with the branches, strong and suited for kings scepters, meaning the people, since they were submissive, had been cultivated to be the kind of kings that would be compliant to god's demands.
Then they were moved to the dry and thirsty land of the desert because of their disobedience of the mandates they had been given. So the pool from which God had to choose a deferential king was fairly non-existent, giving them even less of an ability to have a good leader to "shepherd" them back to the acquiescent lifestyle.
The last sentence reminds me of when people write cat macros like,"Nosy cat is Nosy" or something, because its like, Lament song is a lament song. LOL
This is just from a literary perspective, obviously; not a commentary on what I would think if there were a deity that actually behaved in this way.
no subject
Date: 2010-10-13 06:50 am (UTC)since you have read to Eze... you question about punishment and sins, did you realise that:
1. you can be punished for the sins of your father (punish up to 3rd-4th generations)
2. you can be punished for your kings' sin
3. you can be punish for the nations' sin
4. and you can be punish for the sins of the previous king because God decides to overlook this generation sin due to He showed favoritism to a certain current king.
and maybe you be punished for your own sin, or the original sin,,,,
not really a win/win situation is it?
no subject
Date: 2010-10-13 02:30 pm (UTC)[a] : Or -making every firstborn pass through the fire
this God make his worshippers to sacrifice their first born (passing through fire)? wow
no subject
Date: 2010-10-14 01:32 am (UTC)Ezekiel is given the parable of three generations of men, grandfather, father and son, whose rewards or punishments are dependent on their own actions. This is consistent with the rest of scripture, however it ran contrary to a common belief, at that time, of how God works.
The language in this story talks about them being put to death. It has less to do with physical life than with spiritual. A sinner who is unrepentant will not have a positive spiritual outcome (everlasting life, Paradise, Heaven, etc.).
God then says that those who repent, who willingly turn toward God, will be forgiven. This is God's Mercy (mercy is sometimes defined as giving someone a second chance, even if they don't deserve it). Similarly, a person, knowing what is right, who willfully turns away from what is right (chooses to turn away form God) will not be forgiven.
This section deals with life choices. Everyone sins, it is how we face that reality that matters. If we choose to reject God's forgiveness (e.g. if we choose to walk away from God as a path for our lives), then yes, we will die (physically and spiritually). If we choose to seek God's forgiveness, then even if we make mistakes, we will live spiritually, forever, even if we die physically.
The people of Israel thought that it wasn't fair that someone who had committed a "big" sin could be forgiven. They also thought that if they did enough good things, that should be enough, however they ignored the intent of the heart (not the physical muscle in our bodies, but the willful decisions made about the core of our existence). God is telling them that because their hearts weren't right, the things they did didn't really matter.
At the end, God is saying that it isn't really about the things they've done, one way or another, it is about their life decisions, such as desiring to follow God that really matter.
Said another way, it isn't about stocking up "brownie points" with God. We don't get points for doing good things, then lose them for doing bad, hoping that we keep a positive balance. Instead, God wants our hearts to be focused on following God, and if we are thus focused, we will do good things generally. If we come to that focus later in life, after doing countless bad things, God is saying that it is never too late for God to forgive. If, on the other hand, we do good things, but decide to turn away and sin, our prior good works aren't enough to save us because our heart decision wasn't in the right direction.
no subject
Date: 2010-10-14 08:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-10-15 12:57 am (UTC)Example: A person grows up not caring about school, society, family, etc. They turn to stealing to survive. After some time, they are arrested. They decide while in jail to change their life. They get an education, become a model prisoner and are released early. They work hard and live a good life the rest of their life. Society teaches that we should forgive this person even though he has done bad.
God is saying the same thing here, although God adds the additional proviso that the person must follow God to receive God's forgiveness. This is not unreasonable. The person can choose to not follow God, but still do good things. That person may not even want God's forgiveness. Should God force forgiveness on the person if it isn't wanted? Clearly, God should not force forgiveness or salvation on someone who doesn't want it, so the only way to gain forgiveness from God is to genuinely seek it and then follow in God's ways. (note that this is further modified in the New Testament (new covenant)).
Similarly, if a person grows up good, doing good things and then decides later in life to become a criminal (rob a bank, embezzle, murder someone, etc.), society doesn't hesitate to arrest that person and put them in jail (or even execute them depending on the crime), because even though that person may have done many good things (built up many brownie points), that person still chose to abandon that and turn to crime.
God is saying the same thing here, if someone follows God as a young person, and then turns away and refuses to follow God any longer, any sins accumulated after that point (and there will inevitably be some) will not be forgiven (again this is modified in the New Testament (new covenant)).
If there's something you don't get in this, please be clear and I'll endeavor to explain it better, but there is only so much I can infer from "Nope, still don't get it." :)
-- Jeff
If we reject God's forgiveness we die physically and spiritually?
Date: 2010-10-15 02:55 am (UTC)Re: If we reject God's forgiveness we die physically and spiritually?
Date: 2010-10-15 03:39 am (UTC)The spiritual death refers to the spirit of the individual no longer being listed in the Book of Life (see Revelation). It isn't a denial that the spirit ever lived, but the spirit, not being in the Book of Life, is finally judged and thrown in the Lake of Fire (the second death; Revelation 20).
A spirit in this state is "dead" to God in the same way that a father may declare that a wayward child is "dead" to the family. This is a certain literary/poetic license to make a point; language/translational difficulties exist here that may allow better phrasing, but English is woefully inadequate in some respects, however the effect is that these "dead" spirits will not be part of the reward that the "living" spirits attain. They will be "dead" to God's eternal blessings.
-- Jeff
Re: If we reject God's forgiveness we die physically and spiritually?
Date: 2010-10-15 07:11 pm (UTC)I appreciate your response. Are you a father? I can conceive of my kids going so wrong that I would want to take them out, so to speak. I, however, can see no circumstances under which I would want to torture them forever. Let's say I live to the ripe old age of 100. If I sin the entirety of my years, morning to night, how does eternal punishment become just? Wouldn't 100 years suffice? Understand, I'm not saying that God couldn't punish me forever, I'm saying a God that would is neither fair nor just. Furthermore, if the penalty for my sins is truly eternal punishment, then Jesus didn't really pay my penalty as I'm told He did. He's not still in Hell is he?
Darryl
Re: If we reject God's forgiveness we die physically and spiritually?
Date: 2010-10-15 08:52 pm (UTC)Remember that this part of the Bible is still the Old Testament (old covenant) which has been superseded (as was intended all along). The rules listed here by Ezekiel applied under the old covenant. At that time, following the Law of Moses was what the Jews were required to do to make it to Paradise. Following the Law of Moses is not a requirement under the new covenant (New Testament). To try to combine Jesus' payment for our sins with the Old Testament writings and laws can lead to massive confusion. I encourage you to read along with Amy and the rest of us as we cover the remainder of the Old Testament and then the New Testament to get a better understanding of what transpires. Without that, any explanation that you may receive won't likely be meaningful.
That said, here goes:
From a Christian (New Testament) standpoint, Jesus' payment of sins grants us an offer of forgiveness and salvation. We, as people, are not required to accept that offer. If someone chooses not to accept the offer, then they implicitly choose to reject Jesus' payment for their sins and they face the known consequences for that choice. It is still their choice completely.
Consider what would happen if someone, over their lifetime, acquired an extremely large debt and then they find that they are having difficulty making the payments, and in fact there is no way for them to earn enough money to cover their debts, no mater what turns of fortune may arise. An altruist could come to them and offer to pay off all of their debts, past, present and future. All that they would want in return would be for the debtor to publicly acknowledge that they owed their financial freedom to the altruist. Further, the altruist will make the offer redeemable for the remainder of the debtors life so that at any time the debtor wants, they can accept the bailout with the same provisions. The debtor can choose to accept this offer, or can choose to reject it. If they choose to reject it, then the debtor faces bankruptcy, ruin, jail, etc. If they choose to accept it, they must, for the rest of their life, acknowledge the altruist as the one who got them out of debt. It seems crazy that someone would reject the payment, but there are people who would, either because they don't believe the altruist has the money, or because they don't want to acknowledge that they needed help or for any number of other reasons.
In the same vein, there are some who reject Jesus' payment, forgiveness and salvation. God doesn't force anyone to accept, God simply says that if people will accept, then God will grant them great benefits, forgiveness, salvation and freedom and if they refuse, God will allow them to suffer the publicly known and readily understandable consequences of their own freely made life choices.
If you claim that this is unjust, then how just would it be for God to force everyone to accept salvation regardless of their own desires. There are people who claim that they'd rather go to Hell than follow God. Should God force them to follow anyway? Should God force salvation on them? No, that wouldn't be just. Justice is consequences (good or bad) according to a person's decisions (good or bad).
-- Jeff
Re: If we reject God's forgiveness we die physically and spiritually?
Date: 2010-10-16 04:04 am (UTC)You said
"God will allow them to suffer the publicly known and readily understandable consequences of their own freely made life choices."
This is ambiguous at best. If you're talking about smokers getting emphezyma(sp?) then that is both publicly known and readily understandable. It also applies to Christians and non-christians alike, and is therefore not applicable to our discussion. If, however, you're talking about eternal punishment (which I sincerely hope you are, as it was the crux of my position), that is most definitely not publicly known and is only understandable in theory (to me at least). Let me clarify. It is not publicly known because you cannot prove it. You take it on faith. And the point about it only being understandable in theory was the gist of my last post. I needn't reiterate that, but I do have to say that I'm not entirely sure you got what I was saying. At the very least you didn't really address it. My take on your debtor analogy would go something like this: You owe an absurd amount of money to someone, let's say 20 million dollars. Out of the goodness of my heart I go to your lender and offer to pay him off...with monopoly money. Please understand that I'm not making light of Jesus. What I'm saying is that if the penalty for my sin is eternal punishment, then if Jesus paid it He'd have to be eternally punished. But no Christian I've ever spoken to actually believes that. Either unbelievers are not eternally punished, or Jesus Christ did not get the job done. You can't have it both ways.
Darryl
no subject
Date: 2010-10-16 08:19 am (UTC)It appears that you are trying to treat sin as some sort of balance sheet. That would be the wrong way to look at it. There is no perfect analogy, but allow me to re-address the one that I used earlier.
I suggested that an altruist would pay off the debtors debts. This isn't exactly what God is offering. A better (but still flawed) way of putting it would be that the altruist arranges for the debt to be forgiven. Not paying it off, but eliminating it as if it never happened. No record of the debt would exist.
The debtor might disbelieve that the altruist would have the ability to do so. The debtor may disbelieve that the altruist would follow through with the promise. The debtor may not even acknowledge the debt in the first place (one of the flaws in this analogy is to accept that the debtor may disavow the debt, this isn't too outlandish however because people today simply walk away from debt as if they never owed it, causing their creditors great loss). If, however, the debtor accepts the altruist's offer, the debtor becomes free of the debt.
We use language referring to Jesus paying for our sins. This is poetic, and it is used somewhat because we talk about our debt of sin, but it is technically incorrect. As I wrote above, Jesus offers forgiveness for our sins. Forgiveness is not payment. If it was payment, the sin would still be remembered on a balance sheet and marked paid. What we are offered instead is for the sin to be blotted out, for it to be eliminated in the eyes of God as if it never happened. That wouldn't require Jesus to be eternally punished, because there is no debt to be paid, rather the sin is wiped out (forgiven) in its entirety.
Of course the previous passage refers to the spiritual reality. In the physical world, the results of sin still exist, and we often still have to deal with them. As you wrote, you were concerned with the concept of eternal punishment. Eternal punishment would exist in the spiritual realm, so your concern is there.
Looking at that briefly, I would ask, what would be an adequate punishment for sin? Should a white lie require 3 months of punishment, while perhaps shoplifting be 1 year? Should murder be 100 years, but rape be 50? Should denying God exists be 200 years, perhaps 1,000? As I said above, sin isn't a balance sheet, instead it is binary. We either have sin in our lives or we do not, there is no greater or lesser sin in regards to the spiritual realm and thus the punishment for having sin is the same. Since all humans sin (with one notable exception), then all humans have sin in their lives. If God won't allow a person with sin into Heaven, then there would be no hope for salvation unless forgiveness is available. Fortunately, forgiveness is available as a free gift for any who want it. Only those who decide to refuse the gift would face eternal punishment.
You said that [the consequences of our decisions] is not known because I cannot prove it. In essence, you are correct. Faith in God, in Jesus, in Salvation is indeed Faith. I can make a case for it, including a convincing case for the existence of the supernatural, but proof of God is beyond the capability of man. By its nature, proof can only apply to the physical world, and God doesn't reside solely in the physical world; God is supernatural and our language and physical laws cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. Effectively, however, one who disbelieves God is like the debtor who would disavow the debt (as I admitted above, it is a flawed analogy). The analogy assumes the debt is real, regardless of the mindset of the debtor.
I can say that the consequences have indeed been made public, and, in fact, in this discussion you do indeed know them. Someone can disbelieve them and that is (and always has been) their prerogative, but it doesn't change that the information is there. If the debtor doesn't believe that they'll go to jail for ignoring their debt, it doesn't change that they knew (or could have learned) what the consequences of their actions were. If the sinner doesn't believe that they will have consequences for their sin if it is not forgiven, that doesn't change that they know (or could have learned) what those consequences were and what they could do to be forgiven.
-- Jeff
What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-17 11:02 pm (UTC)I truly understand what you are talking about with regards to poetic language being used. I grew up in a church and am well aware of the euphemisms. At another time it may be worthwhile to talk about how confusing that can appear to the church's target audience. In addition, I believe quite often Christians use such language because they haven't really examined what they believe, and it's easier to repeat the talking points. But since I am not accusing you of that, I digress.
The bottom line is, sin demands a punishment. One of the attributes of God in the Bible that we cannot get away from (no matter how hard many seem to try) is His wrath. The wages of sin is death, we are told. Your point about us either having sin or not is not lost on me. If we break a part of the law we are guilty of breaking the whole of it, no? So, Jesus came down from heaven, lived as a man, was ridiculed, beaten, and crucified, and took our punishment upon Himself. We cannot lose sight of this, Jeff, for if it was as simple as "whosoever believes in Him shall not perish", then none of that would have had to happen. Jesus could have "just arranged" for our sin to have been taken away. But He couldn't do that, could He? The cup was not taken from Him. So this presents the problem. It's not that I am treating sin as a balance sheet, as you say, but rather that the punishment that was demanded and "paid" by Jesus is not the one that is exacted upon unbelievers. Why is that? To paraphrase one atheist, Jesus has a bad weekend. Yet we suffer eternally. As I said before, I can conceive of having to take my kids out, but never of torturing them forever.
Darryl
Re: What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-20 02:18 am (UTC)Your post ranges a bit and I'll likely miss what you're trying to get to, but here goes. If I miss something that you feel is important, try to ask it concisely.
I'm curious to know where you came up with the idea that forgiven sin requires punishment. When sin is forgiven, then it doesn't exist any longer and there is no demand for punishment for those sins. When Christians accept the gift of forgiveness, their sins are forgiven. Neither the sins, nor the punishment are heaped upon anyone else because they are forgiven, so to answer your earlier question, no Jesus is not in Hell being punished (paying) for sins, because the sins that Jesus redeemed no longer exist.
The attribute of God that I can't get away from is not wrath, but love. God gives second chances repeatedly over the course of the Old and New Testament. Those second chances are a testament to God's love. God's wrath is only evident when despite repeated chances, warnings, etc. People still refuse to consider doing what is right. We don't see God destroying people on their first sin or their 100th sin, instead it only happens when people do not heed the warnings that God provides. The ultimate second chance is Jesus' gift which provides for complete and total forgiveness regardless of how many times one has sinned.
Unforgiven sin does result in punishment, but it is important to understand that people willingly choose that punishment. Here's another (imperfect) analogy that may help.
A father has a daughter. He loves and cares for the daughter, he teaches her about right and wrong, teaches her what things are dangerous and raises her into an adult. When the daughter becomes an adult, she decides to seek a career in modeling. She gets into the modeling "scene" and quickly is introduced not only to modeling, but to drugs and casual sex of which she partakes.
The father sees what his happening and asks her to come back home, she can get a new start. She refuses because she wants to make it on her own and because she sees her father as just trying to hold her back.
As she struggles to make ends meet and become a big model, she is presented with the opportunity to make extra money by going out on "dates" with an exclusive clientèle. She is now engaged in prostitution. Her addiction to the drugs keeps her dependent on her life in prostitution. She is broke and in debt.
Her father continues to reach out to her. He offers to take care of her debts and to welcome her back because he loves her. He contacts her other family and friends and asks them to help reach her.
She continues to avoid them and refuses to leave her situation because she's afraid of the people that she owes money to. She's also ashamed of what she's been doing and doesn't really believe that all of her friends and family will welcome her back. Instead, she decides to clean up her own life and makes a valiant effort, but after a few days of withdrawals, she again turns to the drugs and again has to sell herself to buy them, but now she's in worse shape because she isn't in the modeling scene any longer, she's sunk to a more common low.
The father still reaches out to her and she still rejects him because she fears that he won't love her any longer, because she fears that she can't be forgiven.
Finally she gets sick and dies, having made one bad choice too many.
In this story (which is unfortunately all too common and real), the daughter was punished for her entire adult (responsible) life by her choices. She had countless opportunities to escape the life she chose, but she never took them. She decided instead to remain subject to her poor choices rather than choosing to return to her father who always had the door open for her. Her father didn't punish her. He wanted her to come home. She chose her punishment by refusing his offer. Eventually, when she died, it became too late to escape her punishment.
Re: What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-21 12:31 am (UTC)It does seem like we are just missing each other's points. What I'll try to do is tell you my point as concisely as I can. Then I'll expound on it a bit, and finally I'd like to adress some of the things you said in the last post. So here goes...
I have a real problem with the idea of eternal punishment. I have a problem with it rationally, and I have a problem with it biblically. You've expounded quite a bit on salvation and forgiveness, and I'd say you've done pretty well. But my problem comes in with what happens when people reject God's offer of forgiveness. You said you were curious where I came up with the idea that forgiven sin required punishment. But I never said that. I said sin required punishment. If we are forgiven, it's because Jesus was punished for our sins and we have accepted that. At that point, obviously, we are not punished for it. So Jesus is punished in our stead, or we deny it and take punishment ourselves. Why are the two punishments so fundamentally different? If unbelievers are supposed to suffer eternally, then Jesus would have had to as well, else he didn't really take our punishment. Also, I said earlier that even if I sinned my entire life, eternity does not become just punishment. You gave examples about white lies and other sins and asked me what would be just. But I don't have to have the answer to that. I'm not God. I also used twice the example of my children going wrong and how though I could see myself having to kill them in the most extreme circumstance, I would never have to torture them for the rest of their lives. What would God get out of us being tortured forever? And while we're at it, we can put to rest the cartoon image of Satan sticking us with his pitchfork every chance he gets. The prophecies are clear that he will receive his own judgment. I hope you at least understand where I'm coming from now. Now to address some of the things you said in the last post.
You wrote the following:
"The attribute of God that I can't get away from is not wrath, but love. God gives second chances repeatedly over the course of the Old and New Testament. Those second chances are a testament to God's love. God's wrath is only evident when despite repeated chances, warnings, etc. People still refuse to consider doing what is right. We don't see God destroying people on their first sin or their 100th sin, instead it only happens when people do not heed the warnings that God provides."
I didn't say the attribute, I said one of the attributes. You might like God's love more than His wrath, but his wrath exists all the same. If we pick one attribute to focus on we miss part of who God is. He is love. He is just. He is jealous. He is fearsome. Any picking and choosing we do just leads to a skewed vision of who God is. You said we don't see God destroying people on their first or 100th sin. I could say that is because people sin all the time, so the frame of reference for people in the Bible who sin only once would be nil. But consider David. He was a man after God's own heart, we are told. The first instance we get of him sinning is with Bathsheba. And what happened? God killed his son. How many times did Adam and Eve sin before God cursed them? I am not saying that God does not forgive, I am saying that his wrath can be evident even though he forgives. Now this doesn't pertain to my view on eternal punishment per se, but I wanted to address it.
I want to say again that I appreciate your responses and sincerely hope this finds you well.
Darryl
Re: What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-21 01:35 am (UTC)You wrote: "If we are forgiven, it's because Jesus was punished for our sins...". This is not the case. Jesus was not punished for our sins, Jesus willingly sacrificed for us, but that wasn't punishment. Jesus' resurrection showed that neither sin, nor death had a permanent hold on Him or anyone who follows Him. If we follow Jesus, those sins are forgiven. If the sins are forgiven, then there is no need for punishment of us (or of Jesus) for those sins. Jesus was not punished in our stead, because there was nothing to be punished for, the sins were forgiven (wiped out as if they had never happened).
You ask why the two punishments were fundamentally different, but there aren't two punishments. There is only one. Since Jesus wasn't punished, and since believers' sins are forgiven, the only comparison is the comparison between those who are not believers and those who are. Scripturally, those who are not believers are punished.
The question about just punishments for different sins was to make a point that I may have missed. All sin is sin, there is no greater or lesser sin. If someone has sin, the consequence is, according to scripture, eternal punishment. If someone's sin is forgiven, however, then there is no punishment. As I wrote before, it is binary, not a graduated scale. You may disagree with that, but as you said, you aren't God (and neither am I).
As to your example of your children, let's not suggest that God is torturing these souls. The punishment is known and out there, but they are choosing it themselves. Your statement that you wouldn't torture your children is good, but the story in my prior post addresses that. The father didn't wish for the daughter to suffer, she chose her suffering. The father didn't torture her, but the torture was the result of her choices. Similarly, God doesn't want any of us to be punished, eternal punishment is the result of our choices.
-- continued (darn 4300 character limit)
-- Jeff
Re: What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-21 01:36 am (UTC)--continued from above
I understand your problem with the idea of eternal punishment. I submit that part of the reason for this is that you, like many people, see the people who will be subject to this as "regular folks". They are people, just like you and I, who made the "mistake" of not believing the right way. To that I submit that if we were to look at "regular folks", our lives are filled with sin. Some sins, as humans measure them, are small, and some large, but they are prevalent in our lives and occur every day. You've got thieves, murderers, rapists, etc. out there, and in fact, the sin that you and I commit is no less serious. People can die because of a white lie or shoplifting. If we're lucky, nobody will die because of one of our sins, but we don't know for sure and we do it anyway knowing that it could happen. I'm not saying that we don't try our best and try to do some good, but at the end, we are still sinners, believers and nonbelievers alike, and none of us have the "right" to an eternal reward for our actions.
Let's speculate, for a moment that instead of eternal punishment, God simply ignores those people who don't believe. That at the white throne judgment, when it becomes obvious to everyone that God is real, God separates those who didn't believe and simply doesn't allow them to enter into God's presence. The whole of existence would be beautiful and splendorous for the believers. They would be in the presence of God, and blessings would flow. The nonbelievers would be unable to experience God's presence, stuck in some sort of gray limbo they would be unable to participate in the experiences or blessings that God gives. Would that be any less punishment? Sure, they don't get tossed into a fire, but outside of that, the result would be the same, isolation from God, because isolation from God is the true punishment, and yes, it would last forever because that is what they chose. They didn't want God. They didn't want forgiveness. They didn't want to even consider it, so they chose that isolation. Of course the Scriptures say that there will be a lake of fire and that is absolute, because that is the binary nature of sin. As you wrote when I asked what a reasonable punishment would be, neither you, nor I are God.
You mention God's wrath, and yes, that is part of God's nature and I admitted as much in my post, but it is still true that it comes only after repeated rejection of God. This rejection is a choice. Adam and Eve were exiled from Eden because of their choices, but they were still given long lives and opportunities to reconnect with God. David's son died of illness because of David's choices (including adultery, lying, the murder of Uriah and hypocrisy about it all), but David still had the opportunity to return to a relationship with God. God's wrath is short lived and we have the opportunity to return to a relationship with God as long as we are alive. God also knows when someone is never going to choose that relationship, and when that happens, the consequences are absolute because that is the binary nature of sin.
At the end, whether we like it or not, there's no escaping the fact that the framework was established by God and it is the reality that we have to deal with. We're not discussing whether or not we should create an amendment and have a vote on it, we're simply saying that we don't like the outcome for those who choose not to follow Jesus. I don't like the outcome any more than you do, although I cannot conceive of any reasonable alternative that would somehow be better. I can, however accept it as "just" because of the freedom that people have to make their choices and the fact that they knew the consequences of those choices and still made them.
-- Jeff
Re: What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-23 12:52 am (UTC)I am open to the possibility that I might be wrong about the two punishments. I've been wrong about enough in the past. But I need some clarification. It sure seems like punishment to me, and not that this makes me right, I asked two Christians who told me they believed Christ took our punishment upon Himself. I guess it's the manner of His death and beating that makes me think He was punished. If it was just a sacrifice, couldn't He have just came down from heaven and lived the sinless life and said "Believe in me, and try to do likewise"? His giving up His place in heaven was sure a huge sacrifice. John says that he was the propitiation for our sins, which is a fancy way of saying substitution. Paul uses the same word in Romans. If unbelievers are punished, and believers are not, then it seems that Christ as a substitute would have to have been punished. In Luke 23 Pilate seems to think that Christ was punished and then some.
You said let's not suggest that God is torturing these souls. I'm not so sure He's not. The fact that "they are choosing it themselves" doesn't discount the possibility. If my children know that if they disobey me they will be punished, then when they do disobey me, they choose the punishment themselves. But I dole it out. Consider Job 31. Verse 3 says "Is not calamity for the unrighteous, and disaster for the workers of iniquity?" And in verse 23, "For I was in terror of calamity from God". Nothing happens outside of God's will.
As to the reason for my problem with eternal punishment, yours was a fair assumption. It was also wrong. It's not that I see people as regular folks, but that I see it as logically inconsistent. You wrote:
Let's speculate, for a moment that instead of eternal punishment, God simply ignores those people who don't believe. That at the white throne judgment, when it becomes obvious to everyone that God is real, God separates those who didn't believe and simply doesn't allow them to enter into God's presence. The whole of existence would be beautiful and splendorous for the believers. They would be in the presence of God, and blessings would flow. The nonbelievers would be unable to experience God's presence, stuck in some sort of gray limbo they would be unable to participate in the experiences or blessings that God gives. Would that be any less punishment? Sure, they don't get tossed into a fire, but outside of that, the result would be the same, isolation from God, because isolation from God is the true punishment, and yes, it would last forever because that is what they chose.
My thought is that if God is a consuming fire, then it is possible for unbelievers to be wiped out entirely, with nothing left behind. No spirit lingering in a "gray limbo". Completely erased. So, that would be less punishment.
Looking forward to your thoughts,
Darryl
Re: What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-28 12:35 am (UTC)Sorry for the delay in responding.
The suffering that Jesus went through was not punishment for sins. It was as much as anything the natural consequence of the free choices of his tormentors. Crucifixion, scourging, etc. were very painful and ugly processes. The people who were doing this had accused Jesus of blasphemy and they wanted to harm him. He knew that it was going to happen, and yet submitted himself to it. This was part of his willing sacrifice for us. There was simply no way, with the culture of the times, for him to make the sacrifice without some pain, but it wasn't God punishing him for our sins.
I've heard the same argument from some Christians that Jesus was punished. The scriptures don't really support that line of reasoning. Scripturally, our sins are forgiven. 1 John 1:7-9 says (paraphrased) that the blood of Jesus (his sacrifice) purifies us from all sin. If we confess our sins, God being faithful and just will forgive us. It is absolutely just for us to not be punished if our sins are forgiven, and similarly it is absolutely just for Jesus not to be punished if our sins are forgiven because being forgiven means that the sins are wiped out as if they never occurred.
You asked if it were a sacrifice, couldn't Jesus have lived and not died on the cross (giving up Heaven would be sacrifice enough). Unfortunately no, for several reasons.
First, Jesus was Jewish and he spoke mostly to Jews (although his message was for everyone). One of Jesus' purposes was to fulfill/complete/finish the old covenant. By Jesus' actions, he rendered the old covenant obsolete, but part of the old covenant dealt with a blood sacrifice for sins. This symbolic sacrifice (up until Jesus) was replaced with the true sacrifice of a sinless (perfect, without flaw or blemish) person giving up his life for us. This is a true act of love, to give up one's life for another (See John 15:13), and this shows how much Jesus loved us, that he was willing to give up his physical life for us to be free from sin.
Second, Jesus fulfilled the prophecies about the Messiah. In fact, it would be impossible for anyone today to do so for a variety of reasons. One of those prophecies is that he would indeed be killed and one who would oppose God would be given dominion for a while (see Daniel 9 among others).
Third, the people, who had free will, wanted him dead. Yes, God allows us free will even though we choose to go against God. The free will of the Jews would have left two choices for Jesus: 1) Use Godly power to avoid the people's will -- this would effectively be eliminating free will and would be controlling the people 2) Submit to the people -- although painful, this would result in accomplishing the first two reasons above as well as maintaining God's commitment to free will.
Fourth, defeat of death. Jesus did indeed die, but his resurrection and subsequent appearance to hundreds of people as proof of his resurrection, showed that death could not overcome God. Christians know that death is not the end, but that the promise of resurrection at the end times will be fulfilled, just as it was with Jesus. Without the resurrection, Jesus was just a good man, the resurrection showed that he was much more than that, but the resurrection doesn't come without death.
-- continued --
Re: What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-28 12:35 am (UTC)Propitiation doesn't mean substitution. Propitiation means appeasement, conciliation or placation. John is saying that Jesus' sacrifice appeased the wrath of God so that our sins no longer carried the penalty.
In Luke 23, Pilate, spoke as a person, and yes, Pilate didn't like seeing Jesus tortured by people in this way, but punishment from God? Pilate didn't speak about that.
My point about people choosing their own punishment is to say that God isn't hanging out wanting to punish people. God's character shows repeatedly in The Bible that God wants people to not be punished, and God gives repeated chances to people to avoid the punishment. Further, they are cast into the lake of fire and are burned by it, God isn't standing there, cackling and pressing them into the flames. I submit that God will likely ignore those who are in the lake of fire.
So your solution would be for God to destroy the souls of the sinners. They would cease to exist. As such their punishment would be short (effectively nonexistent) for their sins. As you wrote before, sin requires punishment (and I modified this by saying unforgiven sin requires punishment). So where is the punishment?
The real punishment that God has chosen is for sinners to be separated from God. The lake of fire is just a location, but lacking God's presence would be the bad part.
I'm afraid that I can't assuage your feelings about what will happen to those who refuse the gift of salvation. I accept the punishment that they face (since I really have no say in it), and I acknowledge that in the end, it is God's decision, not mine. Instead, I focus on helping people understand that they can choose a path that won't lead to punishment. The gift is available to everyone "Then [they] shall know the truth, and the truth shall set [them] free" John 8:32
-- Jeff
Re: What God is offering
Date: 2010-10-20 02:18 am (UTC)God gives us repeated chances to make a choice for forgiveness. God wants us all to accept that gift. As you said, "For the wages of sin is death", but the verse goes on to say "but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23 ESV)What God doesn't do is force that gift on anyone. God knows that if someone were forced to believe, it wouldn't be a genuine belief, and that is the requirement to accept the gift, because in order to accept that forgiveness is provided, one must believe that the sin is real and the forgiveness is real and lovingly given. Yes, it is as simple as "whosoever believes in him shall not perish" for us. It is only that simple because of what Jesus did. By willingly giving everything for us, Jesus showed his unconditional love for all of us and by offering forgiveness (not reduced payment or lesser punishment) Jesus allows us flawed people something that we cannot accomplish on our own.
If someone doesn't believe that God will give forgiveness, then they won't accept it. If someone doesn't believe that their sin is real, then they won't accept it, but nonetheless, these are their own choices, and the consequences of those choices are available to be known, even if people don't believe them.
As to the quote from the atheist, it is telling. The atheist clearly knew what the results of not choosing Jesus were or the statement wouldn't have been made. The atheist also somewhat acknowledged that the atheist was willingly choosing that result because the atheist wouldn't choose Jesus. If a person knows the result of a decision and makes that decision anyway, then they willingly choose that result.
-- Jeff
Re: If we reject God's forgiveness we die physically and spiritually?
Date: 2010-10-16 02:24 pm (UTC)I did want to pick up on this though:
...the Old Testament (old covenant) which has been superseded (as was intended all along)
If God intended 'all along' to totally change his mind about who he wants to save and how then what was the point of all the rules he handed down and with keeping all the stuff from the Old Testament? It makes him look pretty indecisive and flaky.
From the point of view of there being no God though it makes perfect sense, because I can see that the society evolved greatly over the time frame of the bible and the old rules no longer applied so new ones were written, but if God is supposed to be all-knowing and behind it all then I just don't get it.
Re: If we reject God's forgiveness we die physically and spiritually?
Date: 2010-10-16 06:13 pm (UTC)If we sin (and all of us do), then we are incapable of being in God's direct presence (going to Heaven) because that sin taints our spirit. God will not tolerate the sin in God's presence. God knew that we would sin, so God provided a way for us to free ourselves of the taint. This is God's Compassion (seeing someone who needs help, and wanting to help them) and Mercy (giving someone a second chance, even if they don't deserve it). This is expressed in God's forgiveness of our sins (if our sins were written down in a list, then forgiveness is effectively erasing them so that they never existed).
In the Christian faith, that forgiveness is offered as a free gift. If we believe (with all of our heart and mind) that Jesus is Lord (one of power and authority in our lives, effectively that Jesus is God) and we believe that Jesus was raised from the dead (evidence of this is coming, in the New Testament), then we have that forgiveness for all sins, past, present and future.
God doesn't force this forgiveness on anyone (forcing us would not be Love). Some do not want it. Some do not want to go to Heaven even knowing that the alternative isn't going to be pretty. I don't understand fully why someone would make such a choice, but that is part of God's Love, that God doesn't control us, but lets us make our own decisions. God provides us with all of the information needed, and we are expected to come to a decision.
God didn't change his mind about who God wants to save, or how. Rather the Old Testament is setting the stage so to speak. As you've seen in my conversation with Darryl, people think of sin as something that builds up in an account, as a debt to be repaid. This is a very natural human reasoning. Of course with debts, there is a human way to get past them, one simply pays the bill. Human beings can accomplish this. God had Moses set up such a system with the Law and the covenant. It was a system not too different from what humans had in other neighboring religions, and I suspect it is what Moses (who was educated as a prince in Egypt and taught Egyptian religion) influenced greatly in the setup. It served its purpose as an object lesson, that humans, even with clear rules and a covenant that worked, wouldn't be able to stick with it and live a sinless life on their own. The Law and the covenant are effectively a way to "earn" one's way into Heaven by following rules (sacrifices, with a proper heart attitude, are the human attempt to "pay" the sin debt). Of course we see how well that went as we've been reading in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, people simply decided not to follow the covenant (except for the sacrifices with an improper attitude) and willfully embraced their sins.
The framework of the old covenant, however was necessary for us to understand Jesus' message. The New Testament supersedes the Old Testament after human beings broke the covenant and rendered it void. In comparison to the Old Testament covenant, which relied on human attempts to follow laws and do things, the New Testament is infinitely easier. Salvation/forgiveness is a gift, freely offered if we simply accept it.
-- Jeff
no subject
Date: 2010-10-14 01:33 am (UTC)The passage about the vine is allegorical to all of Israel. The vine was clearly above all other plants, but that status didn't mean that the vine was immune, the covenant was broken willfully, and eventually the consequence would occur.
Chapter 20 is 4 years prior to the fall of Jerusalem. The leaders, acknowledging that Ezekiel is a true prophet of God, come for a message. God says to remind them of the cycle of Israel's rebellion and God's forgiveness towards Israel for the past 1,000 years. That the people during this time chose to worship idols, chose to follow customs of neighboring nations including sacrificing their firstborn children (even to God) in direct disobedience of God's own prohibition against such worship of idols and such sacrifices. Even at the time that they came to Ezekiel, they continue to persist in worshiping idols as well. God wants Ezekiel to remind them that until they stop this, God will not give them any positive message.
God repeats that Israel will be restored, but that the Israelites will worship God and not idols. Presumably this is because the idols, and the people who worshiped them would no longer be around. At this time, God was using the Babylonians and later other people, to wipe out all of the idol worship in Israel and the neighboring areas.
The allegory of the fire presumably refers to God's punishment against Judah and Jerusalem. The trees are the people, and the fire is the Babylonian attack that will cause the fall of Jerusalem (remember we're still 4 years prior to this happening). Ezekiel shows his humanity by complaining about having to do this (he says the message is too confusing). Presumably he still obeys, however, since we have the message.
Are you following YouVersion's Bible reading plan?
Date: 2010-10-14 02:23 am (UTC)Re: Are you following YouVersion's Bible reading plan?
Date: 2010-10-14 07:53 pm (UTC)