On Hell and Forgiveness

[LadyForCamus]

---

Steve, it’s not my intention to mischaracterize anything. That’s why I posted this in the Christianity section. I’m not interested in a circle-jerk. I appreciate the correction. You have to understand, I have already gotten two diverging positions from theists in this thread, just on the subject of hell alone, so try to have a little empathy for the non-Christian. 😛


I don’t agree with the concept of humans needing atonement in the first place, but if I’m playing by the rules, so to speak, then I have no problem with the above explanation.


If that’s true, then I guess hell wouldn't really be a punishment, would it?

---

Desiring (and having) a relationship is very satisfying process that provides something tangible that you cannot have on your own. God cannot have the same sort of relationships humans can have with each other so, while the comparison is useful for understanding-

How can it be useful for understanding if it is not accurate?  

our relationships are not a mirror to God's relationship with us.

Then your own analogy is false, and should be tossed out.  You don’t get to call on it at times when the biblical narrative fits that of a loving father-god and his children, but then call it a false analogy when it’s pointed out that god behaves in ways they are not consistent with a loving parent. 

Desiring to be merciful can not in any way 'water down' the justice and holiness characteristics. Rather it generates effects like offering the atonement that would otherwise be impossible.

Again, you seem to be saying that god’s justice places limits on his mercy and forgiveness.  What rationale does god use to prioritize his essential attributes?  

Your objection is that God is not evident enough. But do the facts really support that? If that were the case, then there would be less people believing in God every year--not more. So the real problem is that God is not evident to you in a way you are satisfied with. What is the reason you do not believe the billions of people who believe in God?

It’s not so much an objection as a point. My point is that on the one hand, god’s message in life is absolutely, undeniably crystal clear, and yet on the other hand, there does seem to be some potential other, clearer mechanism he could use to reveal himself to us. My follow up question to this point is, why?  For what reason did god design levels of clarity? Why doesn’t he reveal himself in the clearest way possible to everyone on the planet right now?  What is his rationale?

Because we started our existence here, we developed and because the people we are here, we are uniquely designed for physical/relational/loving/moral/purposeful/hopeful existence here AND most importantly, this is where we sinned and fallen short and therefore need the atonement for those sins for phase 2.  God's forgiveness is actually infinite. I don't think there is anything at all puzzling/inconsistent/illogical about a post-death judgement/account for how you lived you life.

If we are uniquely designed for a physical existence, why is that physical existence finite? What is the reason for first, a finite existence, and then an infinite one? What logical reason is there for the construction of phases of life, and why such a disparity in their lengths? The whole thing reeks of a massive contrivance for the purposes of getting people to behave.

To your second point, God’s forgiveness is obviously finite. Our opportunity for salvation has a clear time limit. Why?

What is the reason for finite opportunity for an infinite soul created by an infinite god?

A point of clarification. God forgiving you is not the same as Jesus atoning for your sins. Anyone can forgive. It is possible for me to forgive a drunk driver who hit me. That does nothing to remove the consequences or penalties of the action. Jesus' atonement wipes the slate clean like it never happened. With that understanding, post-death "forgiveness" would have no effect. Due to God's holiness/justice the consequences are set that you 1) cannot be in the presence of God in an unholy state and 2) that universally, sin demands a payment that you cannot pay.

Why can’t god wipe the slate clean? We are his after all. Isn’t he omnipotent? Why can’t jesus atone me for my sins after I’ve died? What is perfect justice anyway, Steve? What does that even mean? This whole narrative seems nothing more than a long series of non-sequiturs and arbitrary assumptions.