09 Oct '14 15:57>2 edits
Originally posted by FMF
The notion that there's eternal torture in burning agony for being an unbeliever is not a threatening topic for me. It's only threatening for those who believe there's truth in it.
The notion that there's eternal torture in burning agony for being an unbeliever is not a threatening topic for me. It's only threatening for those who believe there's truth in it.
You simply mentioned it as a threatening topic.
Back to the traffic example. A speeder of 75 mph in a 15 mph zone may not believe at all that he will receive a ticket. Perhaps he sees no policeman ever in the neighborhood and has no reason to think he will ever be stopped.
So he is not "threatened" by a discussion on the matter. That is just his subjective feeling which doesn't guarantee there will never be any consequences. He doesn't know there will never be consequences. He assumes there will never be.
Since this is an analogy I hear the objection that maybe a driver NEVER exceeds the speed limit so is unconcerned altogether.
I suppose the parallel would be " I do not feel concern for any consequences for not believing in the Son of God because I never determined not to believe."
But the warning is to unbelief. Rationalizing " But I never did not believe " might be thought as exemption from culpability. I think at best that is just some kind of gamble. If God turns out to be true you have gambled on God being somewhat of a dummy, not too intelligent. You may be gambling on your ability to muster before God a good argument that will subdue Him.
Now I may be drifting. So let me make sure I am addressing your comment.
This "threatening topic" is not threatening to YOU. It is only threatening to those who believe such nonsense. I think that is your drift.
I encourage people to READ the Bible for themselves. This did wonders for me. I don't encourage people to take everything second or third hand but to read with the horses mouth of the Holy Spirit impressing upon their hearts that which God wants them to know.
If some one came from a gathering in which eternal hell was preached and complained that that was a "threatening topic" I would encourage them to pick up a New Testament, indeed the Bible in general, and begin to read. Maybe God will impress them with the warning of eternal separation from God. Maybe He will impress them with something else.
My question to you - Is a so called "threatening topic" a topic necessarily of something not true ?
I think the subject of sink holes opening up in the middle of a neighborhood, swallowing up cars and houses, is a "threatening topic". But such things do in reality occur as I have noticed in the news.
Probably arguing over whether eternal separation from God is a "threatening topic" or not is fruitless to dispute. Does a "threatening topic" necessarily mean that truth is not being related ?
Some of us are mad because God is a God of ultimate. His love is ultimate. But His love being ultimate does not make His displeasure not ultimate as well. We are dealing with an Ultimate Governor who is ultimate on more than one side of His being.
Can I say it one more time? The Bible deals with an Ultimate Governor Who is ultimate in MORE than just ONE angle of His character.
And He has decreed that He incarnated and died a death on His cross to redeem us out from under the curse of infraction against His perfect moral law. He commands us to believe into the Son of God.
I pointed out in the past, which got me sharp criticism - In the whole Gospel of John I cannot find the word repent or repentance anywhere. God commands us, at least in THAT basic book on eternal life, to believe in the Son of God.
The real issue here is are we in a position to determine what should be the consequence of disobeying the command of God to believe in the Son of God ? We may argue "That is not big deal. There should be no penalty. There certainly should not be an eternal punishment."
But a congress of rapists might convene and decide simarly - "Rape is no big deal. We decide that there really should be no penalty for the crime of raping someone. It is not that bad. Why, maybe it is not even a crime at all."
Can we be trusted to decide what God should do with those who refuse to believe into the Son of God ? Probably our vested interest forbids us from deciding what that penalty should be.
Length calls for me to stop here. Sorry if you feel evaded.