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.
Re: What God is offering
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