How Soon Before You Can Make An Eternal Judgment?

[jgh7]

Let's say you absolutely have to decide if someone goes to a good or bad place.

Is it even possible to ever make a judgment like that? Should everyone automatically go to the good place? Or the bad place?

Or is the whole system of eternal good and bad just a bad idea to begin with?

[Divine Insight]

Let's say you absolutely have to decide if someone goes to a good or bad place.

Well, to begin with, if I were totally omniscient and knew precisely what a person had done, knew all their intentions, and their thoughts, then I would be in a position to "judge them" at any given moment.

However, deciding whether they should go to a good place or a bad place doesn't make a lot of sense to me. What are these places for? Rehabilitation or endless punishment or reward?

Is it even possible to ever make a judgment like that? Should everyone automatically go to the good place? Or the bad place?

The simple dichotomy of either a "Good Place" or a "Bad Place" sounds pretty simple-minded and unproductive. What would be the purpose of the "Bad Place"? If not to cure a person then what?

Also, if having bad intentions is, --- well bad ---, then shouldn't people who have bad intentions be recognized as being "sick"? Is so, shouldn't they be healed instead of sending them off to be punished?

It's unclear why the "Judge" in this case is totally helpless in terms of curing people.

Or is the whole system of eternal good and bad just a bad idea to begin with?

It certainly seems like a bad idea to begin with.

Surely an omnipotent creator could "heal" the people who are mentally "sick".

And what good would it do to punishment for the rest of eternity anyway?

So no, the whole idea seems to me to be something from an extreme nightmare. It would seem to me that any creator who is forced into this scenario as being his only options would be an extremely limited creator.

In terms of the Jesus story, Jesus could supposedly cast evil demons out of people. If that's the case, then why not just cast the evil demons out of everyone who exhibits evil behavior?

And where did these evil demons come from in the first place?

And why weren't they already cast into the "bad place" if that's the plan?

What are evil demons running around on the loose for in any case? Supposedly possessing innocent people.

I mean, why would Jesus cast evil demons out of Mary Magdalene if Mary Magdalene was an evil person who deserved to be cast into a bad place?

Something's clearly amiss here.

If Mary Magdalene was innocent and worthy of saving from demonic possession then why isn't everyone?

Why was she possessed by evil demons in the first place?

[jgh7]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

Interesting reply. Sorry for my poor wording of the OP. I don't want to sway people's opinions with any religious references. I just want to see if the concept of a "good" eternal place and a "bad" eternal place is a best solution or if there's a better one for the way life is for us now.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

Well, to begin with, if I were totally omniscient and knew precisely what a person had done, knew all their intentions, and their thoughts, then I would be in a position to "judge them" at any given moment.

How would you know that you were omniscient? You'd believe it sure...but how could you tell? You'd have a great deal of knowledge, but how could you tell you have all the knowledge? There are things we know that we don't know (for example, we know right now that we don't know whether or not exoplanets actually have life on them) and there are things that we don't know that we don't know (can't list any examples here obviously!)
As far as I can see, the concept of an omniscient entity is flawed.

[Neatras]

[Replying to post 4 by rikuoamero]

I guess the fallback answer would be, "Any knowledge that can be known at this time is also known by the omniscient being," and extrapolate that over a time period so that "all knowledge" is in the possession of the omniscient being. I wouldn't stress about this part too much, this thought experiment goes to waste if we don't at least grant this much about an entity's qualities.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

Well, to begin with, if I were totally omniscient and knew precisely what a person had done, knew all their intentions, and their thoughts, then I would be in a position to "judge them" at any given moment.

How would you know that you were omniscient? You'd believe it sure...but how could you tell? You'd have a great deal of knowledge, but how could you tell you have all the knowledge? There are things we know that we don't know (for example, we know right now that we don't know whether or not exoplanets actually have life on them) and there are things that we don't know that we don't know (can't list any examples here obviously!)
As far as I can see, the concept of an omniscient entity is flawed.

I certainly agree with you on this point. But if we grant the hypothetical that we have omniscience, then we've already granted it as a hypothetical. All you are doing is questioning the validity of the hypothetical.

I think also, that if we truly did have "omniscience" (and it was indeed complete), then we would not only know precisely how someone is thinking, but we would also know precisely why they are thinking that way.

Moreover, if we were their omniscient omnipotent creator, then we would be fully responsible for the very cause of their thinking. Therefore if they are thinking poorly (in a way that we consider to be "bad"), then we would have no one to blame but ourselves for having created them to think that way.

The very idea of a creator God who punishes his very own flawed creations is an extremely ignorant and poorly thought out idea to begin with. Any religion that makes this assertion is no doubt a false religion.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

Interesting reply. Sorry for my poor wording of the OP. I don't want to sway people's opinions with any religious references. I just want to see if the concept of a "good" eternal place and a "bad" eternal place is a best solution or if there's a better one for the way life is for us now.

How would sending someone to an eternally "bad" place be a solution for anything?

What would it solve?

[ttruscott]

Let's say you absolutely have to decide if someone goes to a good or bad place.

Is it even possible to ever make a judgment like that? Should everyone automatically go to the good place? Or the bad place?

Or is the whole system of eternal good and bad just a bad idea to begin with?

I have no problem letting GOD decide and accepting HIS understanding of the situation. I used to but not any more. I can accept the convictions of a righteous judge while knowing I do not have the capabilities myself to be a righteous judge.

[puddleglum]

[Replying to post 7 by Divine Insight]

How would sending someone to an eternally "bad" place be a solution for anything?

What would it solve?

How would cleaning the trash out of your home and putting it in a dumpster be a solution for anything? What would it solve?

The answers to both sets of questions are the same. The word translated Hell is Gehenna. That was the name of a valley near Jerusalem where the trash from the city was taken and burned.

God created a perfect universe in which there was no need of a Hell. That changed when Satan rebelled against God and there was sin. Hell was created for Satan and his angels as a solution to the problem. People who choose to follow Satan by sinning will share his punishment.

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 9 by puddleglum]

If isolation from a perfect universe was indeed the problem hell was supposed to solve, then there is no reason why hell must be a "bad" place.