Q #1 - Why have children ?

[ohio jones]

Yes, we should, shouldn't we ?

You would benefit from the teachings of the Theological Touchpoints podcast.

What is the link ?

They did a multi-part series on hell recently; here's the first one:
https://theologicaltouchpoints.com/podc ... uchpoints/

[Sudsy]

Some Anabaptists such as Greg Boyd provide some worthwhile material on Annihilation and it's scriptural support. This is not just a JW and Seventh Day Adventist view.

See here - https://reknew.org/2008/01/the-case-for ... lationism/

Also here is a short clip where Greg brings up some good questions regarding the traditional view of unending torment

https://www.google.com/search?q=greg+bo ... iFXcqHLRd0

[Josh]

I would agree that the typical Calvinist view that God creates some people just so they can be divinely predestined to suffer eternally doesn’t make sense at all and doesn’t line up with God’s character.

[barnhart]

So, considering having children, does it make any logical sense and seems quite selfish to have children if only 1 in 4 could possibly get to heaven and 3 of 4 will end up in a place of unending torment ?

Your question reminds me of Matthew 22:

23That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 24“Teacher,” they said, “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for him. 25Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. 26The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. 27Finally, the woman died. 28Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?”

29Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven...”

There is a danger of error when we create doctrine on things that are not clear and loose focus the the things Jesus clearly revealed. The Sadducees worried about the logic of future things to the point they missed the work God wanted to do in their time and space.

I think it is safe to assume God has purposes beyond our understanding. If it honored him, he could immediately "beam up" believers before they have an opportunity for error but instead he gives us staggering quantities of time and freedom.

It is interesting to notice Jesus' teaching has more of a "this world" focus and leaves at lot unsaid about the future life. I presume that is because we don't need to know those things.

[Soloist]

Wife: I’ve had conversations with people about the whole annihilation vs eternal hell, and I see both possibilities in the Bible, although it seems like it’s not going to be instant from some of the New Testament teaching, which is what I understand JW‘s and Adventists to be teaching. In that case, it wouldn’t be much worse than what an atheist already believes.

I’m fine leaving that stuff to God, as well as what happens to people who somehow never have heard the gospel. God is the very definition of justice and mercy.

My biggest concern in this is that it seems a lot like the people who are very dogmatic on Jesus turning water into grape juice. If there is a possibility that you are wrong, then you might be calling God evil, which is never a wise thing to do. I think we should make sure not to hold God to our man-made morals, and just accept that there might be some things that we can’t understand that God knows how to do better than we do.

[Sudsy]

You would benefit from the teachings of the Theological Touchpoints podcast.

What is the link ?

They did a multi-part series on hell recently; here's the first one:
https://theologicaltouchpoints.com/podc ... uchpoints/

Thankyou. I will listen to the series as soon as possible and listening up to the 14 minute mark I thought he does a fair overview of the 3 views regarding hell. I appreciate him saying that the view of annihilation is not a recent view but has been around since the early church era. It is often put down as being a sentimental view rather than one based on scripture interpretation. With that outlook one can 'stick their head in the sand', so to speak, and never consider that the traditional view and it's implications should be challenged.

I will get back and give my thoughts on this series after I have heard it all. I have studied this from various sources and it is not just a sentimental belief to me yet one that I personally think is very important to study and not to just write-off as God's ways are above our ways as the seriousness of such a belief and how we respond to it is, imo, extremely important. My unbelieving friends and relatives to be punished and annihilated for their rejection of Jesus is far different than them going into a conscious existence of unending firey torment. This is a big issue in how I understand God and His ways.

Thanks again for the link.

[Sudsy]

What is the link ?

They did a multi-part series on hell recently; here's the first one:
https://theologicaltouchpoints.com/podc ... uchpoints/

Thankyou. I will listen to the series as soon as possible and listening up to the 14 minute mark I thought he does a fair overview of the 3 views regarding hell. I appreciate him saying that the view of annihilation is not a recent view but has been around since the early church era. It is often put down as being a sentimental view rather than one based on scripture interpretation. With that outlook one can 'stick their head in the sand', so to speak, and never consider that the traditional view and it's implications should be challenged.

I will get back and give my thoughts on this series after I have heard it all. I have studied this from various sources and it is not just a sentimental belief to me yet one that I personally think is very important to study and not to just write-off as God's ways are above our ways as the seriousness of such a belief and how we respond to it is, imo, extremely important. My unbelieving friends and relatives to be punished and annihilated for their rejection of Jesus is far different than them going into a conscious existence of unending firey torment. This is a big issue in how I understand God and His ways.

Thanks again for the link.

Well, I read this multi-part series and to me, it was quite disappointing as I have read other critiques of the Conditional Immortality belief that was more of a challenge and as I read this one, I wanted to be able to challenge points he was trying to make face to face. However, I'm not about to get into these disagreements here but I go back to a point I have made before that I see he seems to take lightly and that I find perplexing.

That point being that how can any Christian with the love of God in their hearts believe in unending conscious torment and demonstrate such an uncaring attitude toward those they believe are going there. We can talk all day long about issues involving sanctification or worldly stuff but when it comes to soul winning, that is a different story. I got my salvation and too bad for those who don't, attitude.

Conditional Immortality belief includes a judgment and just penalty for those who reject the offer of salvation followed by annihilation. It does not believe scripture indicates this will be varying degrees of torture that never ends as he presents it in this series. Looking at scripture, especially with regard to the love Jesus had for everyone, imo, does not fit with a view of non-ending torment. Seems to me people often attempt to provide some reasoning on why God is just to deal with unbelievers that way as they hold to this traditional view.

Suppose the story of the rich man going to hades that we read in Luke 16:19-31 was someone close to you, perhaps a child, as it might be for me. I don't know if my son was born again before he died. From this story one could interpret it to mean that those in heaven will be able to look down on those in endless torment and seemingly have an attitude that we don't need to warn people still alive because they have the scriptures to read and if they don't, that is just too bad for them. The rich man pleaded that Lazarus be sent to warn his family but this request was denied by Abraham as it seems the scriptures are sufficient enough. It would seem some Christians interpret this story that way. I sure hope this would not be the case that we can view those in endless torment from our place in heaven. What kind of paradise would that be.

And as the scriptures are the guide to salvation we read in Romans 10:13,14 - 'For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed ? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard ? and how shall they hear without a preacher ? So, I don't think we should sluff off our non-involvement in evangelizing as it gives a very non-caring, unChristlike, selfish way of considering the destination of others.

I don't believe in unending torment in hell like my father did but I respect that he spent much of his time living out his belief and shared the Gospel daily. I admit, I too, should be more involved in the salvation of others for all the benefits salvation brings both now and for eternity. I believe this was the emphasis in the NT early church rather than 'hell fire preaching'. Salvation seems to me was more focused on the here and now abundant life it brings and an expectation of it even getting better in the new heaven and earth.

Anyway, thanks for the link. This topic gets considerable attention on Youtube and it sadly sometimes gets to a point of regarding Conditional Immortality believers as unsaved heretics. I guess that happens on various topics amongst professing Christians.

[ken_sylvania]

[
And so, because you believe the penalty for sin is punishment followed by annihilation you are willing to stand by as people reject the offer of salvation, because their suffering will only be temporary? Is that what you are saying?

No, that is not what I am saying and I think you know that is not what I am saying.

Your comments below seem to suggest that you are not doing your utmost to share the good news of salvation with others. You insist that such a practice would not be compatible with a belief in unending punishment, apparently implying that if you did believe in unending torment like your father did you would be more involved in sould winning.

That point being that how can any Christian with the love of God in their hearts believe in unending conscious torment and demonstrate such an uncaring attitude toward those they believe are going there. We can talk all day long about issues involving sanctification or worldly stuff but when it comes to soul winning, that is a different story. I got my salvation and too bad for those who don't, attitude.
......
.....
I don't believe in unending torment in hell like my father did but I respect that he spent much of his time living out his belief and shared the Gospel daily. I admit, I too, should be more involved in the salvation of others for all the benefits salvation brings both now and for eternity. I believe this was the emphasis in the NT early church rather than 'hell fire preaching'. Salvation seems to me was more focused on the here and now abundant life it brings and an expectation of it even getting better in the new heaven and earth.

[Sudsy]

[
And so, because you believe the penalty for sin is punishment followed by annihilation you are willing to stand by as people reject the offer of salvation, because their suffering will only be temporary? Is that what you are saying?

No, that is not what I am saying and I think you know that is not what I am saying.

Your comments below seem to suggest that you are not doing your utmost to share the good news of salvation with others. You insist that such a practice would not be compatible with a belief in unending punishment, apparently implying that if you did believe in unending torment like your father did you would be more involved in sould winning.

Yes and in my teens and twenties, I was quite involved in various evangelistic ministries. Fear of unending torment in hell was preached from the pulpit with no other possible view. And I personally know of those who have become believers to escape such a place. This method is still used today although I hear little hell fire preaching anymore as it seems the focus is more on the change salvation makes in our current lives. When I look at NT evangelism it seems to me the latter approach is the pattern they used. More of the current impact when one is saved.

And with that said, I agree with those who believe salvation today is sometimes presented more as a free pass into heaven than a radical change of living here and now. Others are so into the radical change that they cast doubts on anyone who does not live a changed life as they believe they should. Some of these wander into a 'works salvation' and live in some fear, that on judgment day, they won't qualify.

I admit my efforts now in soul winning should still desire what Jesus desired that all should come to repentance. Jesus said He came to bring abundant life which sadly has been twisted to mean material gain. My life in Christ should be a life that I eagerly want others to experience. This is the challenge for all of us whether we believe in unending punishing or not. Are we living the abundant life that will not only attract others to Jesus but a life where we will always be ready and looking for opportunity to share the Gospel message of salvation. Do the unsaved see something different about us that attracts them to want to know more as what happened to my father ? One day, he couldn't take it anymore and had to see for himself and slipped into mom's church where he heard the Gospel preached and became born again, radically changed.

In either case, believing in punishing followed by annihilation or punishment of the unending torment kind, if we love others as Jesus did, we will be active in evangelism desiring all to be saved.

What I have questioned here in 'why have children ?' is, if the unending torment is correct and one believes it is, why would anyone take the chance of having a child that could end up in such a state. Sounds very selfish to me. But, since God supports having children, imo, it is more logical that punishment for rejecting salvation through Jesus, will have a penalty but not one of endless torment. And when I read of how some have justified that God is just to send people to endless torment, I do not understand God in that way and the temporary punishing view with it's scriptural supports, to me, is more consistent with the character of God as I understand God. And since we all see through a glass darkly and all of us only know in part presently, I could be wrong and trust that God will someday in heaven allow me to see everything the way He does.

That point being that how can any Christian with the love of God in their hearts believe in unending conscious torment and demonstrate such an uncaring attitude toward those they believe are going there. We can talk all day long about issues involving sanctification or worldly stuff but when it comes to soul winning, that is a different story. I got my salvation and too bad for those who don't, attitude.
......
.....
I don't believe in unending torment in hell like my father did but I respect that he spent much of his time living out his belief and shared the Gospel daily. I admit, I too, should be more involved in the salvation of others for all the benefits salvation brings both now and for eternity. I believe this was the emphasis in the NT early church rather than 'hell fire preaching'. Salvation seems to me was more focused on the here and now abundant life it brings and an expectation of it even getting better in the new heaven and earth.