The Loving God / Hell Paradox

[Pahansiri]

Ah, but there are many lessons in life to be learned though, hopefully with the simplest lessons first. Also, as I understand it, those who die as little children, are automatically received into heaven.

and live forever as a baby?

 

[Iacchus]

Where is it you have received this understanding from?

Excerpts from Emanuel Swedenborg's, Heaven and hell ...

The Heathen, or Peoples Outside of the Church, in Heaven.

318. There is a general opinion that those born outside of the church, who are called the nations, or heathen, cannot be saved, because not having the Word they know nothing about the Lord, and apart from the Lord there is no salvation. But that these also are saved this alone makes certain, that the mercy of the Lord is universal, that is, extends to every individual; that these equally with those within the church, who are few in comparison, are born men, and that their ignorance of the Lord is not their fault. Any one who thinks from any enlightened reason can see that no man is born for hell, for the Lord is love itself and His love is to will the salvation of all. Therefore He has provided a religion for every one, and by it acknowledgment of the Divine and interior life; for to live in accordance with one's religion is to live interiorly, since one then looks to the Divine, and so far as he looks to the Divine he does not look to the world but separates himself from the world, that is, from the life of the world, which is exterior life [36.1].

Little Children in Heaven.

329. It is a belief of some that only such children as are born within the church go to heaven, and that those born out of the church do not, and for the reason that the children within the church are baptized and by baptism are initiated into faith of the church. Such are not aware that no one receives heaven or faith through baptism; for baptism is merely for a sign and memorial that man should be regenerated, and that those born within the church can be regenerated because the Word is there, and in the Word are the Divine truths by means of which regeneration is effected, and there the Lord who regenerates is known [37.1]. Let them know therefore that every child, wherever he is born, whether within the church or outside of it, whether of pious parents or impious, is received when he dies by the Lord and trained up in heaven, and taught in accordance with Divine order, and imbued with affections for what is good, and through these with knowledges of what is true; and afterwards as he is perfected in intelligence and wisdom is introduced into heaven and becomes an angel. Every one who thinks from reason can be sure that all are born for heaven and no one for hell, and if man comes into hell he himself is culpable; but little children cannot be held culpable.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Excerpts from Emanuel Swedenborg's, Heaven and hell ...

Thank you. What makes you take this interpretation as true?

 

[Iacchus]

Thank you. What makes you take this interpretation as true?

The fact that I went through a lot of hell before I found out about it? It's also the only sensible explanation I've come across that makes it the least bit bearable.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

The fact that I went through a lot of hell before I found out about it? It's also the only sensible explanation I've come across that makes it the least bit bearable.

Well, if it works for you.

Now, my earlier question... why does freedom require a diversity that includes a negative? Why not a range of positives?

 

[Iacchus]

Well, if it works for you.

Now, my earlier question... why does freedom require a diversity that includes a negative? Why not a range of positives?

Because we would probably all be good little puppets (with no lives of our own) and praising God all the time.

 

[Rolfe]

Hmm. I was raised Catholic, and I have no idea whether the following is actual Catholic dogma, somebody's theory not inconsistent with Catholic dogma, or whether I just stumbled across a renegade CCD teacher or priest....but I was taught that hell isn't a place of fiery torment or picturesque punishment, but rather the state of being eternally separated from God. Like he's ignoring you, I guess. Apparently that's supposed to be pretty awful, mystically or whatever. It certainly sounds more appropriate, in the context of theology, than the rather psychologically-revealing masochist fantasy that seems to be the fanciful notions of Hell.

I think this is basically the point. By this teaching, God has created us with free will. That free will includes the freedom to reject him, and to refuse to be united with him. If he were to over-ride that free will and insist that everyone be united with him whether they chose to or not, then we would not have free will.

Thus, those who are in "hell" have chosen to be there because they have chosen to reject God, and by his own rules he cannot force them to choose otherwise. Now, when that choice becomes irrevocable, and the soul (for want of a better word) cannot reunite with God even should it change its mind, is not stated. Perhaps never.

It has been suggested that this is the substance behind the "purgatory" and "limbo" concepts. That choices can still be made, and if a soul chooses in the end to be reunited with God, it has been in purgatory until then. Whereas if it forever rejects that choice, it has been in limbo all along.

Which of course presupposes that our linear time still in some way applies outwith the boundaries of our universe, which is an entirely separate question.

I think I got a lot of interesting stuff on this from C. S. Lewis's novella, The Great Divorce. It's all allegory, but some very striking concepts in there. There's also some stuff in the same author's The Pilgrim's Regress, expressed in some truly terrible poetry: "God in his mercy made / the fixèd pains of hell...." I think making the point that God limits the misery hell provides, by making it finite and bounded, and not allowing the choices made by those who have chosen to remain there to make their "saved" loved ones forever miserable.

There's also something, I think put into the mouth of George MacDonald, that perhaps in the end all will be saved, we cannot know and we should not speculate too far because it's a very dangerous line of reasoning.

Rolfe.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Because we would probably all be good little puppets (with no lives of our own) and praising God all the time.

So, unless we can directly disobey God and piss him off, we're puppets? There is no middle ground?

 

[Rolfe]

So, unless we can directly disobey God and piss him off, we're puppets? There is no middle ground?

I think, strictly speaking, that that's correct. Any limitation on the range of choices offered means that we do not truly have free will.

Rolfe.

 

[Pahansiri]

The fact that I went through a lot of hell before I found out about it? It's also the only sensible explanation I've come across that makes it the least bit bearable.

I GREATLY respect that. I too have been through what could be called "hell" still and will always live with the results of it, the dreat depression and self hate.

I believe only I can make the changes and make things better and have.

part of my work with my clients is helping them do the same as it is that more then anything that effects the athletes ability to compete as to their own personal greatness. Of course sports are just a metaphor for all life and in reality a meaningless one.

I have ( wrongly) been credited with “saving” clients careers , this is of course wrong. My sessions are very hard and done to 1- get the client in the best physical shape but more so to push a client to the edge to help them see they can attain their goals, to help them to again believe in themselves and see fear is an illusion and pain is impermanent.

I no longer and have not for years taken any meds I needed for me to get off my “poor me” mode and take control of me. To realize that my suffering, my depression is no less or no more greater then others and see clearly that and except it is in this life part of my life and going no where. People make the mistake of believing such things just go away and then when it arises again they crash.

I respect you and your pain as I have said.

For me I tried the turning to religion to fix things it did not work, I had to fix things.

 

[Iacchus]

So, unless we can directly disobey God and piss him off, we're puppets? There is no middle ground?

No, actually I think it has more to do with being a menace to others which, is why I brought up the notion of prison in the first place ... in the sense that we can't get God pissed off that is. To commit an injustice against each other would be contrary to His will, however.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

I think, strictly speaking, that that's correct. Any limitation on the range of choices offered means that we do not truly have free will.

Rolfe.

Fair enough. But what is the importance of complete free will?

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

No, actually I think it has more to do with being a menace to others which, is why I brought up the notion of prison in the first place ... in the sense that we can't get God pissed off that is. To commit an injustice against each other would be contrary to His will, however.

I (amazingly enough, to myself, at least) don't have much problem with this. If Hell is not eternal punishment, and entrance to Heaven is not predicated on saying the right words to the right God at the right time, then I can accept this as a just arrangement.

I don't think you're right, mind you, but your concept of God and punishment presented here is at least not internally inconsistent.

 

[Rolfe]

Fair enough. But what is the importance of complete free will?

Because it allows us to choose to do good rather than compelling us to do good.

If you don't think that this is a good thing, then I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. (Too many "good"s in that answer, but you understand what I mean.)

Rolfe.

 

[Pahansiri]

Because it allows us to choose to do good rather than compelling us to do good.

But you are compelled as hell is hanging over your head.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Because it allows us to choose to do good rather than compelling us to do good.

If you don't think that this is a good thing, then I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. (Too many "good"s in that answer, but you understand what I mean.)

Rolfe.

Agreed, we diagree.

 

[Rolfe]

But you are compelled as hell is hanging over your head.

Er, no, false dichotomy given the definitions of hell kicking around here. And patently false anyway, as I do not always do good.

Rolfe.

 

[Pahansiri]

Life as a human is fleeting in the grand scheme but the heart beat of a humming bird far less actually.

The idea that a loving God will place one in eternal damnation for what is done in the blink of an eye is sad and far from loving.

This being would know ahead of time before the birth of this person, what a person would do, what suffering they would cause others what suffering lead to their act, yet “he” allows it?

Why what is gained? Seems like very cruel and poor planning.

As a parent, if your child at 7 breaks a window do you punish them for the rest of their lives with excruciating pain and suffering?


Would in not be be at least better to just end their existence rather then make them suffer for all time after a life time of suffering.

 

[Pahansiri]

Er, no, false dichotomy given the definitions of hell kicking around here. And patently false anyway, as I do not always do good.

Rolfe.

What is the TRUE definitions of hell ?

 

[Darat]

What is the TRUE definitions of hell ?

Eternity not in the presence of God.