A Good God would not send a decent Atheist to hell.

[marketandchurch]

This was the post that got me banned on Christian Chat:

Then God doesn't care about the goodness and decency of an atheist, a buddhist, etc. And if that is the message you are telling me, then there is no point to being a good person. There is no point of fighting on behalf of the oppressed, as America did, in WWII. The only purpose of fighting the Japanese, and beating back the Nazi's should have been so that we could bring more people to christ...is that what your saying? Should America be sending food and aid to heathens in Haiti? Should America be helping out muslims in disaster relief fallowing a natural disaster, unless it is to bring them to Christ? Is a person's only value to you, there potential to become a convert? They have no humanity beyond that?

You have an old testament my_adonai, and you are to be as obsessed with its obsessions, as you are with the new testament's. And the Old Testament's preoccupation is fighting evil, championing the good, and making a more ethical existence, during this lifetime.

And unless you think Christians alone can make this lifetime a little better, a little less genocidal, with a little less starvation, a little less torture, etc, it is an unethical message to peddle, that a good God would demand goodness, unless one doesn't believe in his son. Then one's goodness is pointless. One might as well not care about not gossiping behind other people's back, destroying someone's dignity in public, sleeping with a coworker's wife, extorting an elderly couple that one was hired to help, raping a pre-pubcescent child, killing another human being because of their skin color, etc, etc, etc.

Apparently, I was challenging people's faith, and was just there to be anti-christian, in saying that a Good God would not send to hell decent people, simply because they do not believe in his Son. I got all sorts of less then appetizing replies, saying I'm screwed for eternity, if I don't accept Jesus. I feel that I am not alone, even within the Christian community, in thinking this as I've heard many catholic priests, and mainstream protestant pastors, while I was growing up, distancing themselves from such a belief. I don't know where people on this forum stand, but I'll put it up for debate:

• Topic of Debate: A Good God would not send to hell a decent person, simply for not believing in his son.

If you agree with me, and are a Christian, please square your response with the rest of the New Testament. What I'm looking for is scriptural consistency to back up your position, and more importantly, how one will then re-read the entire message of the New Testament, if one wants to hold that position. I say this because I don't want you to drop scripture, simply because it doesn't conform to your own personal beliefs, but I am looking for how one can reinterpret the New testament, if one drops that central tenant, & for the rest of us, impediment, to everlasting life. Is there room for this? Or is the New Testament rigidly in the affirmative about Christ being the only way to heaven? Which is fine. That's their theology, but let's see where this goes.

[Choir Loft]

[Replying to post 831 by Choir Loft]

It is not a matter of a sinner not being willing because why should a sinner be willing if he cannot believe?

God caused man to fall, and carnal man can believe until God draws him for he is dead in trustpaases and sin.

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw (Greek drag) him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Because all carnal men can not believe because to beleve they need to be spiritual. They are not spiritual, they are carnal earthy and in a fallen nature.

1 Corinthians 2:13-15 (Amp)
14But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated.

Coming from a man who denegrates the (Divine )Gift of Reason as "corrupt", "depraved" or "fallen," (Paul) any "carnal" or "natural" man should accept that designation as a badge of honor.

Proud to be "natural". To me a "natural" man, Christianity seems "artificial" at least Paul's version of it, articifially grafted onto Judaism, and not inherent to it at all, NOT organically sprouted from Judaism, and on a shaky corrupt foundation, built by NT writers and "apostles" with bricks composed of out-of-context "prophesies".

Paul I sure was a very natural man like all of us but with in him there something no natural man would ever see or understand especially a man's whos religion Paul came out of.

Paul's I respect more as a spiritual man more then the other 12 and Chrisitanity became even more alive like no other because of Paul, but how can someone who is in a belief system that died the moment Christanity was born see what Paul had seen.

If God was still behind the religion Paul came out of then these past 2000 years would of not have been as terrible for these people who refuse to see the truth of what Paul experenced. This is a fact of history sad but true

I detect no small amount of anti-semitism in your remarks.

Judaism did not die the moment Christianity was born. Jewish houses of worship across the world bear testimony that Judaism is far from dead. Jewish custom, tradition and the Jewish homeland of Israel exist in real time and space.

If God was not in it, it would not have happened.

God is indeed still behind Judaism. The evidence is obvious if not admitted. To state otherwise is to ignore fact, reality and the existence of the Jewish people and their faith. It is a blatant act of bigotry and hatred if not illiterate subjectivism.

Repent and pray that God will give you a clear mind and a clean heart.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

[Benoni]

[Replying to post 831 by Choir Loft]

It is not a matter of a sinner not being willing because why should a sinner be willing if he cannot believe?

God caused man to fall, and carnal man can believe until God draws him for he is dead in trespasses and sin.

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw (Greek drag) him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Because all carnal men can not believe because to beleve they need to be spiritual. They are not spiritual, they are carnal earthy and in a fallen nature.

1 Corinthians 2:13-15 (Amp)
14But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated.

Your interpretation is only partially correct. God did not cause man to fall, but God does reserve the right of judgment as to who will be saved and who will not be saved.

God did not cause man to fall because He does not tempt, did not tempt, will not tempt into disobedience to His will. That would be tantamount to accusing God of having a dual personality - schizophrenic. He cannot and will not oppose His own will, neither will He cause any other creature to do so.

The fact that other creatures (angels and men) choose to disobey God's will out of a sense of willful pride cannot be directly attributed to sin on God's part. Disobedience is sin and sin is disobedience.

God cannot disobey God's own will any more than the opposer can work against its own kingdom of opposition to the designs of heaven.

The passage of John 6:44 and 1 Cor 2:13-15 underlines the spiritual principle that no man can come to God unless that man is drawn to Him. In other words, God alone decides who is saved and who is not saved.

The next question, which isn't asked, ought to be obvious.

What is the criteria for God's decision to save some but not others?

There are only two answers. One is that His decision is arbitrary and the second is that He has well defined reasons for His decision.

Nowhere in scripture or experience is it suggested or testified that God does anything on a whim. The creator of the universe has reasons for everything He does. Therefore we are left with the second reason as a conclusion - that God has reasons for saving some and not others.

And the Bible gives the reason.

The reason is that God hates and even laughs at human arrogance and pride. On the other hand, God honors and hears and has pity toward those who come to Him in humility and with a soul deep petition for mercy. He has demonstrated a consistent willingness to alter His plans of judgment toward those who come to Him in this way.

The process is called reconciliation and the entire body of work in The Holy Bible is a testimony to God's intent to save man from his own lost-ness. But it cannot be done unless man comes to God with a humble and contrite heart. God will then complete the work and draw the man to Himself.

God does hear the prayer of mercy uttered from a humble heart and God does act upon it.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

I see you pretty much believe the way the most chrisitians believe and pretty much totally disagree with all you are saying.

I want to start with two points because this is a very HUGH area to discuss and I sure if willing this will take a lot of post to hash out . The Book of Genesis does not clarify why Adam sin, nothing is mentioned about why he did so most assume Adam had a choice, which the Bible does not address. But the Bible does address this point very clearly.

Also you are wrong; ultimately all born in Adam will be made alive in Christ. Why would the sin of Adam be so powerful that Jesus blood is not capable of reversing the total curse?

[Benoni]

[Replying to post 831 by Choir Loft]

It is not a matter of a sinner not being willing because why should a sinner be willing if he cannot believe?

God caused man to fall, and carnal man can believe until God draws him for he is dead in trustpaases and sin.

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw (Greek drag) him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Because all carnal men can not believe because to beleve they need to be spiritual. They are not spiritual, they are carnal earthy and in a fallen nature.

1 Corinthians 2:13-15 (Amp)
14But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated.

Coming from a man who denegrates the (Divine )Gift of Reason as "corrupt", "depraved" or "fallen," (Paul) any "carnal" or "natural" man should accept that designation as a badge of honor.

Proud to be "natural". To me a "natural" man, Christianity seems "artificial" at least Paul's version of it, articifially grafted onto Judaism, and not inherent to it at all, NOT organically sprouted from Judaism, and on a shaky corrupt foundation, built by NT writers and "apostles" with bricks composed of out-of-context "prophesies".

Paul I sure was a very natural man like all of us but with in him there something no natural man would ever see or understand especially a man's whos religion Paul came out of.

Paul's I respect more as a spiritual man more then the other 12 and Chrisitanity became even more alive like no other because of Paul, but how can someone who is in a belief system that died the moment Christanity was born see what Paul had seen.

If God was still behind the religion Paul came out of then these past 2000 years would of not have been as terrible for these people who refuse to see the truth of what Paul experenced. This is a fact of history sad but true

I detect no small amount of anti-semitism in your remarks.

Judaism did not die the moment Christianity was born. Jewish houses of worship across the world bear testimony that Judaism is far from dead. Jewish custom, tradition and the Jewish homeland of Israel exist in real time and space.

If God was not in it, it would not have happened.

God is indeed still behind Judaism. The evidence is obvious if not admitted. To state otherwise is to ignore fact, reality and the existence of the Jewish people and their faith. It is a blatant act of bigotry and hatred if not illiterate subjectivism.

Repent and pray that God will give you a clear mind and a clean heart.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

No I am not anti-semitism I just did not appriciate this persons attack on Paul, yes the shell of the Jewish faith has been around for sence the time of Christ, but it has no life in it

Who are you to tell me to repent???

My heart is cleaner then yours

[Choir Loft]

[Replying to post 838 by Benoni]

Who am I to judge? The phrase 'judge not that ye be not judged' is often used by those who attempt to avoid the consequences of their own sin or to even recognize it. In this way they attempt to force others into silence. The same 'others' who show them the error of their ways. They wish to silence others but refuse to be admonished themselves.

They can dish it out, but they can't take it.

Who are you to judge the Jewish faith? Do you know the hearts of every Jewish man and woman? Do you know how they pray to God in earnest or whether they pray in hypocrisy? How do you know the intent and hope and practice of Judaism? Are you able to know the deepest part of each Jewish heart?

Are you god?

If not, then you are only human. Humans have limited abilities as you have aptly demonstrated in your own posts. You are guilty of personal bias, ignorance and have expressed it by denying the existence of Judaism and the spiritual capacity of the Jewish people. You know nothing of their condition because you are not able to know THEM. Yet you judge. In this you sin.

You have exposed yourself to everyone who reads your posts. There is bigotry toward Jews in every word and no little disrespect of their spiritual condition. You accuse, therefore you open yourself to an equal amount of accusation.

Judge not - for you are judged.

Because you have sinned I recommend you repent and make peace with God. Who am I to tell you to repent? Where did I get the authority to do so? You gave it to me yourself when YOU judged others who are innocent of your accusations. You allowed me to judge you because you judged others.

It is time for you to drink the cup you've prepared for others.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

[Choir Loft]

[Replying to post 837 by Benoni]

Benoni wrote the following:
"I want to start with two points because this is a very HUGH area to discuss and I sure if willing this will take a lot of post to hash out . The Book of Genesis does not clarify why Adam sin, nothing is mentioned about why he did so most assume Adam had a choice, which the Bible does not address. But the Bible does address this point very clearly.

Also you are wrong; ultimately all born in Adam will be made alive in Christ. Why would the sin of Adam be so powerful that Jesus blood is not capable of reversing the total curse?"

Your first paragraph is confusing and inconsistent. You really should work on making your thoughts clear and distinct. In the second sentence of the first paragraph you said that Genesis doesn't say why Adam sinned yet in the last sentence of the same paragraph you say that it does. Which is it? Do you know?

Your second paragraph reveals you to be a Universalist - a philosophy recognized as heresy, illogical and in opposition to every major religious philosophy on the planet. The major disagreement is that Universalists believe that everybody can be saved (a fact which can be disputed by mere observation of the species).

Most religions (and all 3 of the major ones) have established a behavioral and spiritual scale of behavior upon which all men are to be judged. It's called morality. Those who pass the test get good grades and ultimately dwell in eternal paradise. Those who fail the test are assigned to a rather unpleasant destiny forever.

Apart from spiritual/metaphysical revelations it ought to be obvious even to those who doubt eternity at all that there are good folks and bad folks (even a few who are down right evil). Justice demands the punishment of wickedness in life if at all possible. Some suggest that the notion of justice is but an extension of social norms into eternity. I believe there's more to it than that, but one doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to understand the human desire to 'balance the scales' as it were. Universalism denies all this - as well as spiritual revelations to the contrary.

The Universalist dogma does not recognize the human desire (and social design) for justice. It's a childish way of looking at things that says everybody will be treated the same when they shouldn't be. Jesus said that when a man grows up it is time to put away childish things. Universalism would be one of those childish things one ought to put aside.

Nowhere in any of the pages of the Holy Bible (or any other sacred text for that matter) is it said or implied that all who are human (born of Adam's race) will be saved. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the blood of Jesus totally reversed the Adamic curse. The solution isn't universal. Let me put a fine point on the subject.

Don't get me wrong. The blood of Jesus is essential to solving the problem of human rebellion and sinful nature which opposes God's will. The blood of Christ doesn't solve the problem universally. It's not like adding chlorine to city water to clear the fluid of disease. The blood of Christ solves the problem individually.

The Bible is very clear that not all will be saved. Jesus said so Himself. During the passover in Egypt, God sent word that all the first born would die in the final plague. Those who applied lamb's blood to their doorways would be spared. And so they were. God honored His promise of deliverance. God also honored His promise that those who did NOT apply the blood would die. The passover salvation principle was individual, not universal.

The passover was a type of salvation that is reiterated by the blood of Jesus. Those upon whom the blood is applied will be saved. Those who don't - aren't. Neither in ancient Egypt nor in the present day is blood based salvation universal. In fact, it's quite the opposite. It shows in bloody relief that there is a separation between the saved and the unsaved. It is not a universal principle.

The blood of Jesus Christ does not 'reverse' Adam's curse. It does two things. It provides for the punishment that justice demands and it deals with the problem of sin not by reversing it but by starting all over with a new man, a new person.

"You must be born again."
- Jesus

Herein lies the mystery of salvation. The sinner becomes a new person in Christ. He is not reversed. He is remanufactured/refurbished as it were. Most of the epistles of the New Testament describe the new nature of the new man in Christ and how to live the life it demands.

It's more than a bloody paint job.

It's an altogether new life IN CHRIST.

and it's not for everybody...

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

[Benoni]

[Replying to Choir Loft]

HOGWASH, you are judging me because I rebuked this biggot for attacking Paul.

Most Hebrews on the same level as most carnal religious believers and no nothing about the realm of the spirit.

Do you really think Hebrews have the Holy Spirit to lead and guide them to all truth???

So explain to me how a Hebrew is spiritual??

[Benoni]

Choir Loft

Benoni wrote the following:
"I want to start with two points because this is a very HUGH area to discuss and I sure if willing this will take a lot of post to hash out . The Book of Genesis does not clarify why Adam sin, nothing is mentioned about why he did so most assume Adam had a choice, which the Bible does not address. But the Bible does address this point very clearly.

Also you are wrong; ultimately all born in Adam will be made alive in Christ. Why would the sin of Adam be so powerful that Jesus blood is not capable of reversing the total curse?"

Your first paragraph is confusing and inconsistent. You really should work on making your thoughts clear and distinct. In the second sentence of the first paragraph you said that Genesis doesn't say why Adam sinned yet in the last sentence of the same paragraph you say that it does. Which is it? Do you know?

I am an artist not a writer and my writing skills are pretty limited; I do the best I can and if you are confused; just ask away and I will be clearer on the next post.

Yes Adam sinned, that was never my point; my point being Genesis does not say why Adam sinned, it is assumed by you and most other believers.

[Benoni]

Choir Loft

Your second paragraph reveals you to be a Universalist - a philosophy recognized as heresy, illogical and in opposition to every major religious philosophy on the planet. The major disagreement is that Universalists believe that everybody can be saved (a fact which can be disputed by mere observation of the species).

Most religions (and all 3 of the major ones) have established a behavioral and spiritual scale of behavior upon which all men are to be judged. It's called morality. Those who pass the test get good grades and ultimately dwell in eternal paradise. Those who fail the test are assigned to a rather unpleasant destiny forever.

And you accuse me bigotry?

You are a bigot when it comes to the Universal faith.

You call it Hersey?

Interesting?

I noticed you love to see yourself write but you do not like to quote chapter and verse to back your claim the Universalism is heresy?

On the other hand I believe those who believe Jesus is going to damn trillions of people to eternal torture are heretics and are false prophets and false teachers among. Notice I have chapter and verse to back up my claim not bigotry.

2 Peter 2
1But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

[Benoni]

Apart from spiritual/metaphysical revelations it ought to be obvious even to those who doubt eternity at all that there are good folks and bad folks (even a few who are down right evil). Justice demands the punishment of wickedness in life if at all possible. Some suggest that the notion of justice is but an extension of social norms into eternity. I believe there's more to it than that, but one doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to understand the human desire to 'balance the scales' as it were. Universalism denies all this - as well as spiritual revelations to the contrary.

You know nothing about being a Christian Universalist? No one never said the wicked will not be punished (Greek: prune/chastised) we just do not believe it is forever do to mistranslations of the Bible by corrupt religious bigots.

The Universalist dogma does not recognize the human desire (and social design) for justice. It's a childish way of looking at things that says everybody will be treated the same when they shouldn't be. Jesus said that when a man grows up it is time to put away childish things. Universalism would be one of those childish things one ought to put aside.

This statement is childish and has no foundation in truth and is based on your ignorance and childish understanding

Nowhere in any of the pages of the Holy Bible (or any other sacred text for that matter) is it said or implied that all who are human (born of Adam's race) will be saved. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the blood of Jesus totally reversed the Adamic curse. The solution isn't universal. Let me put a fine point on the subject.

Really????

Romans 5:18-20 (Weymouth’s)
It follows then just as the result of a single transgression is a condemnation which to the whole race, so also is the result of a single degree of righteousness is a life giving acquittal which extends to the whole race. (19) for as thought the disobedience of one individual the mass of mankind were constituted as sinners, so also though the obedience of one, the mass of mankind will be constituted righteous. Now law was brought in later on so that the transgression might increase, but sin increased, grace is overflowed.

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Amplified Bible (AMP) Acts 15 14Simeon [Peter] has rehearsed how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people [to bear and honor] His name. 15And with this the predictions of the prophets agree, as it is written, 16After this I will come back, and will rebuild the house of David, which has fallen; I will rebuild its [very] ruins, and I will set it up again, 17So that the rest of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles upon whom My name has been invoked,

Rom 11:32: For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

Luke 3:6: And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.

AND MANY MORE verses

[Benoni]

Don't get me wrong. The blood of Jesus is essential to solving the problem of human rebellion and sinful nature which opposes God's will. The blood of Christ doesn't solve the problem universally. It's not like adding chlorine to city water to clear the fluid of disease. The blood of Christ solves the problem individually.

The Bible is very clear that not all will be saved. Jesus said so Himself. During the passover in Egypt, God sent word that all the first born would die in the final plague. Those who applied lamb's blood to their doorways would be spared. And so they were. God honored His promise of deliverance. God also honored His promise that those who did NOT apply the blood would die. The passover salvation principle was individual, not universal.

The passover was a type of salvation that is reiterated by the blood of Jesus. Those upon whom the blood is applied will be saved. Those who don't - aren't. Neither in ancient Egypt nor in the present day is blood based salvation universal. In fact, it's quite the opposite. It shows in bloody relief that there is a separation between the saved and the unsaved. It is not a universal principle.

The blood of Jesus Christ does not 'reverse' Adam's curse. It does two things. It provides for the punishment that justice demands and it deals with the problem of sin not by reversing it but by starting all over with a new man, a new person.

"You must be born again."
- Jesus

Herein lies the mystery of salvation. The sinner becomes a new person in Christ. He is not reversed. He is remanufactured/refurbished as it were. Most of the epistles of the New Testament describe the new nature of the new man in Christ and how to live the life it demands.

It's more than a bloody paint job.

It's an altogether new life IN CHRIST.

and it's not for everybody...

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

I agree the Passover feast speak of the blood of Christ covering our sins but you never mention the seven other feasts in the OT.

The Feast of Tabernacle does cover all men’s sins Jesus blood does reverse the curse of Adam and

"And over it the cherubim’s of glory shadowing the mercy seat." [Hebrews 9:5].
"Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." [Romans 3:25].

"And He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." [1 John 2:2].


Now, as we follow on into the thoughts before us, we discover that the word given as "mercy seat" is the same word in the Greek which is given as "propitiation," being the word "hilasterion" and meaning TO APPEASE, TO SOOTHE, TO CONCILIATE.

We read that God hath given Jesus Christ to be a propitiation for our sins, and we could equally read it, God hath sent forth Jesus Christ to be our mercy seat. All that the "ARK OF THE COVENANT" described in the Old Testament, as a part of the inner sanctuary, the Holy of Holies, is fulfilled in Christ, for HE BECAME OUR MERCY-SEAT.

As we examine the " Ark of the Covenant," and in particular the MERCYSEAT, there is a truth which we would include here to form the background, that it may lend its glory to the greater vision which we shall be considering.