God's love is an absurdity

[mangy_dog]

Liquid, while I do appreciate Cbailey2’s response regarding love and the 40 year study of a Yale graduating class; the study referred to has been debunked clearly as a myth propogated by a whole host of motivational teachers who have used it to make the same point Cbailey is suggesting. However, if the study had been conducted I personally believe it would be accurate. Our purpose in living would be found in the search and revelation of true love. The Greek, Agape type of love. Love that doesn’t seek its own. (So let the myth continue.)

Since nobody has a definitive answer, let’s speculate regarding our “purpose” for existing; as you suggested.

First, I seriously doubt the God of religion is a very accurate image. To damn the vast majority of humanity who never were consulted on their desire to exist and then add a little more drama with the threat of endless torment of these unfortunate experiments is about as far from the definition of Agape as possible. The typical defense of such a God is to describe how loving it is to have “free will” with the opportunity for eternal bliss. Tell that to the masses who missed the boat and are stuck with results of their human bent towards selfishness and foolish choices. That’s why many people reject the God of religion.

If there is a purpose in existing it would be for the God of creation to take a “free will” being and expose him to genuine agape love, for as long as it takes, and as much as it takes for him to “get it”. Love without end and love without failure. None of this “love means we have the right to send ourselves to Hell”, stuff. Genuine love would never give up on something it created when it has the power to do otherwise… and this idealistic God of my fantasy has all the power and time and love to do it.

Maybe it’s another myth but I really think that God, not only exists, but he intends to teach every soul he creates this kind of love. That would be perfection. Just like the parable of the 99 sheep… he ends up with 100% in the end. How he does it may be different in each of us but none would escape or fail the test if this is God’s divine purpose.

Experiencing and learning the reality of unconditional love is the only thing that is universally beneficial and desired by all of us. And if you don’t desire it then all that means is that God isn’t done with you, yet! Agape (true love) never fails; it couldn’t by my definition.

If we all came into existence without such knowledge and we all remained in the classroom until it was accomplished… that would be a faith and a God worth pursuing. It wouldn’t be a fear driven “absurd” kind of kinky love, but rather the type of love that perfected each and every one of us.

I personally think there is a good chance that this is the God we have the opportunity to believe in and he isn’t disturbed by all the bad press, poor biblical exegisis, or wrong image we portray of him; because he wins in the end, no matter what we teach or believe.

I don’t know which is more mis-leading: the title of this thread or you rantings on “agape” and “god of religion”.

You seem to have a hard time accepting the fact that the Catholic church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first pope…265 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI.

You do not seem to have a problem with “God is Love”. That’s good! However you do seem to be fuzzy on why He created us with intellect and will.

Love must be freely given and not demanded or brainwashed into you in a classroom. If the God of your fantasies were to do things your way…we would be nothing more than toys for His amusement…trained pets.

If we are to be like His Son, Jesus, then we must follow the plan He laid out for us, for our salvation.

Lucifer had a similar problem with God’s Love and God’s plan and look where it got him.

 

[Detales]

“If there is a purpose in existing it would be for the God of creation to take a “free will” being and expose him to genuine agape love, for as long as it takes, and as much as it takes for him to “get it”. Love without end and love without failure. None of this “love means we have the right to send ourselves to Hell”, stuff. Genuine love would never give up on something it created when it has the power to do otherwise… and this idealistic God of my fantasy has all the power and time and love to do it.” This is one of the sanest statements I’ve seen on these fora. Thank you Mhz. You are far from alone. This is an approximation of the Teaching that predates christainism by at least three thousand years, and is in fact the foundation from which it deteriorated into its present unfortunate form of demeaned dualistic paternaism.

Mhz, thank the God that “You seem to have a hard time accepting the fact that the Catholic church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first pope…265 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI.” That is a lineage which may be actual and historical, but which has, as far as I can see, completely bifurcateed the Teaching of the Master upon whom it claims it’s foundation. There is some accuracy in the statement paraphrased as “Jesus taught and gave us freedom from religion, and Paul destroyed His work.”

Here is a statement from someone who has, IMO, like the Church, usurped Divine authority and claimed for himself the authority of dogma: “* However you do seem to be fuzzy on why He created us with intellect and will. *” forgetting that “Love must be freely given and not demanded or brainwashed into you in a classroom. If the God of your fantasies were to do things your way…we would be nothing more than toys for His amusement…trained pets.” is exactly a description of the misled “faithful.” not only of the Church, but of all Abrahamic religions in their current condition. The person who said that exaclty described catechism classes in my experience.

At least the caveat that “If we are to be like His Son, Jesus, then we must follow the plan He laid out for us, for our salvation.” has a grain of Truth in it, despite it being obviously misunderstood in this instance by this poster, who is an example of what the Church has wrought.

“*Lucifer had a similar problem with God’s Love and God’s plan and look where it got him.” * The fall of Lucifer, the Light Bearer, is exemplified by the adoption of the bifurcated at-odds-ment of God and Man such as allows the kind of statements quoted above. Why do you think the devil is shown with horns and a pitch fork? Those are the symbols of the divided mind not yet unified in the way and by the Agape that you so rightly delineate, Mhz. Thank you again. The God of Love is alive as your own expression of compassion.

 

[Cbailey2]

Liquid, while I do appreciate Cbailey2’s response regarding love and the 40 year study of a Yale graduating class; the study referred to has been debunked clearly as a myth propogated by a whole host of motivational teachers who have used it to make the same point Cbailey is suggesting. However, if the study had been conducted I personally believe it would be accurate. Our purpose in living would be found in the search and revelation of true love. The Greek, Agape type of love. Love that doesn’t seek its own. (So let the myth continue.)

Sorry, it wasn’t a Yale class, it was a Harvard class. If it is a “myth propagated by a whole host of motivational teachers,” then they have managed to dupe David Brooks, the Atlantic magazine, and Harvard University itself.

nytimes.com/2009/05/12/opinion/12brooks.html?_r=1
theatlantic.com/doc/200906/happiness
adultdev.bwh.harvard.edu/research-SAD.html

I don’t know where you came up with the canard that the study I reference “is myth” but perhaps you should do some research before labeling things as such.

 

[theistgal]

Lucifer had a similar problem with God’s Love and God’s plan and look where it got him.

Hmmm… according to what I read, Lucifer is almost as powerful as God Himself … has his own kingdom and slaves and everything. Even got God to kill and torture a whole family (see Job) just to settle a bet.

So where did it get him, again?

 

[Cbailey2]

“If there is a purpose in existing it would be for the God of creation to take a “free will” being and expose him to genuine agape love, for as long as it takes, and as much as it takes for him to “get it”. Love without end and love without failure. None of this “love means we have the right to send ourselves to Hell”, stuff. Genuine love would never give up on something it created when it has the power to do otherwise… and this idealistic God of my fantasy has all the power and time and love to do it.” This is one of the sanest statements I’ve seen on these fora. Thank you Mhz. You are far from alone. This is an approximation of the Teaching that predates christainism by at least three thousand years, and is in fact the foundation from which it deteriorated into its present unfortunate form of demeaned dualistic paternaism.

Mhz, thank the God that “You seem to have a hard time accepting the fact that the Catholic church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first pope…265 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI.” That is a lineage which may be actual and historical, but which has, as far as I can see, completely bifurcateed the Teaching of the Master upon whom it claims it’s foundation. There is some accuracy in the statement paraphrased as “Jesus taught and gave us freedom from religion, and Paul destroyed His work.”

Here is a statement from someone who has, IMO, like the Church, usurped Divine authority and claimed for himself the authority of dogma: “* However you do seem to be fuzzy on why He created us with intellect and will. *” forgetting that “Love must be freely given and not demanded or brainwashed into you in a classroom. If the God of your fantasies were to do things your way…we would be nothing more than toys for His amusement…trained pets.” is exactly a description of the misled “faithful.” not only of the Church, but of all Abrahamic religions in their current condition. The person who said that exaclty described catechism classes in my experience.

At least the caveat that “If we are to be like His Son, Jesus, then we must follow the plan He laid out for us, for our salvation.” has a grain of Truth in it, despite it being obviously misunderstood in this instance by this poster, who is an example of what the Church has wrought.

“*Lucifer had a similar problem with God’s Love and God’s plan and look where it got him.” * The fall of Lucifer, the Light Bearer, is exemplified by the adoption of the bifurcated at-odds-ment of God and Man such as allows the kind of statements quoted above. Why do you think the devil is shown with horns and a pitch fork? Those are the symbols of the divided mind not yet unified in the way and by the Agape that you so rightly delineate, Mhz. Thank you again. The God of Love is alive as your own expression of compassion.

Can you please enlighten the rest of us with facts to substantiate your claims? From what you write, it seems as if you fashion yourself a bit of light bearer or Prometheus yourself.

Obviously, my objections are many to what you have written - some I can’t challenge without more information (namely, what teaching is 3000 years before Christianity? what proof do you have that what Jesus taught is any different than what Paul wrote? what is your issue with catholic teaching on free will? how are horns and a pitch fork a symbol of a divided mind?). Some I believe are just incorrect assessments.

You seem to have a view that love can wear people down until finally they accept that love and return it but receiving God’s love is an action: we must accept God’s love in order to be transformed by it. God does every thing He can to call His lost sheep back to Him but if they decide to reject His call, they will eventually wander so far away from Him that they can no longer hear His voice.

I guess my major question for you though is where does your theology come from? Can you provide me with any references to major theologians or scholars that outline your beliefs? Or are they self-generated - an amalgamation of modern and ancient, pagan and protestant?

Finally, in response to this: “That is a lineage which may be actual and historical, but which has, as far as I can see, completely bifurcated the Teaching of the Master upon whom it claims it’s foundation.” Can you tell me what are the two distinct divisions in the teaching of the Master? Is bifurcated (“to divide into two parts”) really what you wanted to say here?

 

[Mhz]

Sorry, it wasn’t a Yale class, it was a Harvard class. If it is a “myth propagated by a whole host of motivational teachers,” then they have managed to dupe David Brooks, the Atlantic magazine, and Harvard University itself.

nytimes.com/2009/05/12/opinion/12brooks.html?_r=1
theatlantic.com/doc/200906/happiness
adultdev.bwh.harvard.edu/research-SAD.html

I don’t know where you came up with the canard that the study I reference “is myth” but perhaps you should do some research before labeling things as such.

No offense intended.

I did do my research because I thought it was a great example and I wanted to confirm it before I used it. The Yale study is the one quoted by the motivational teachers. That’s the one I researched; and it apparently never happened.

I don’t know anything about a Harvard study.

Have a good day and I’ll check out your Harvard quote. Good stuff.

Thanks. Mhz

 

[authenticity]

Honestly, the more I think about it, the angrier I get. I somehow feel called to deepen my understanding of my faith. But some things annoy the blits out of me.

Constantly, God is proclaimed as omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent – and ALL LOVING. God is continually pronounced as all loving and merciful. It’s one of the fundamental core beliefs in Catholicism. I WANT to believe this. But realistically, somebody who damns people to hell is not ALL loving if you ask me…

If a mother has a child. She will love that child forever despite what that child does. Even if her child rapes, murders, steals, bombs cities and whatnot; the mother will continue to LOVE that child forever. Yes, she may be distraught, forever saddened, and angry with her child’s actions – but her love will never cease, and she will always welcome her child into her love. Furthermore, she would not want ANYTHING BAD to happen to her child regardless of the things he has done. WHY? BECAUSE SHE LOVES HIM FOREVER AND HER LOVE WILL NEVER CEASE. This is what love is!

And when I hear such things as, “Thou shalt be condemned in hell and burn forever”, or “Thou shall be engulfed in eternal flames for eternity” – I seriously get angry.

WHO IS MORE LOVING HERE?

The mother who loves her child forever and forgives her child forever and will always welcome her child?

Or

A God who loves ALL; but if they trespass against him he will condemn thee to hell for ETERNITY?

A couple things:

Love and justice cannot contradict each other. The commandments that God gave us are directions on how to love Him and each other. Also, God can not break His own commandments because this presents another contradiction (a perfect God cannot create imperfect law).

That means heaven is reserved for those who keep God’s law because that is what puts a soul in the reciprocation of God’s love for us. It is about our love for Him.

When a person dies, there are three possible states that person could be in relative to God:

1. They love God as He has loved them and have purged the sin on their souls. They go to heaven.
2. They do not love God, either as He has loved them or even in some lesser fashion. Therefore they do not see their sins as being wrong. They go to hell.
3. They love God in an imperfect manner, having sins still needing to be purged. They go to purgatory.

None of these states are because God doesn’t love us unconditionally. It is based on our condition of loving God. People are damned according to the choices that they make and have no one to blame but themselves.

The problem I have with your line of thinking is that it makes God’s law arbitrary. God loves us so much, that he should let us do whatever we want and still get into heaven.

Is that what a good parent does? No. A good parent loves their child so much that they correct them when they do wrong, teaching them the consequences of certain actions. By doing so they teach the child how they can be happy and prosper. If the child doesn’t obey and they end up unhappy and defeated, that isn’t because their parent didn’t love them. They choose not to reciprocate that love by being obedient.

 

[Mhz]

I don’t know which is more mis-leading: the title of this thread or you rantings on “agape” and “god of religion”.
You seem to have a hard time accepting the fact that the Catholic church is the one, true church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as its first pope…265 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI.

I do have trouble with such a statement. Let me ask you; are you implying that membership in the Catholic Church a requirement for heaven? And does a non-member suffer eternal torment? How about baptism? How about the sacraments? What is essential and what is not?

However you do seem to be fuzzy on why He created us with intellect and will.
Love must be freely given and not demanded or brainwashed into you in a classroom. If the God of your fantasies were to do things your way…we would be nothing more than toys for His amusement…trained pets.

I appreciate the fact that I have options in this life and I can freely make choices each day; but the only truly “free will” being is God himself. The rest of us have free “choice”, at best. And you are right that nobody wants to be forced to love God. I’m not even sure you can choose to love someone; either you love them or you don’t.

Where there is liberty there is freedom. The history of the Jews shows how their liberty and freedoms were lost as they added law after law. God was trying to prove a point under the Old Covenant. The New Covenant gave us back our freedom and here we are packing it back on again. Men seem to like laws and rules. We are no different than the law driven Jew if we add to the finished work of the cross… are we? Is it possible that your statement “we MUST follow the plan” indicates more of the trained pet idea then God waiting on his love to do its work in our hearts and minds. And there is no time limits with God.

But why not chose him now? There is a popular Christian chorus “Come, now is the time to serve him”.

Come, now is the time to worship
Come, now is the time to give your heart
Come, just as you are to worship
Come, just as you are before your God
Come

One day ever tongue will confess You are God
One day ever knee will bow
Still the greatest treasure remains for those,
Who gladly choose you now

God knows that he has bought and paid for every soul that he has ever created. And now he waits for life and death circumstances to bring us to him. He knows that one day every knee is going to bow to him in adoration and love; so there is no need for him to panic or damn anyone. That’s human reasoning. But, the greater treasure remains for those who don’t wait and miss a relationship they can have with God today. What a shame to pass into the next life and find out; “I could have had a V8!”

I don’t think I’m fuzzy regarding our ability to use our intellect and our liberty to chose; but most humans are very fuzzy on how powerful God’s love is. Since we are his design and we live within his purpose; I’d bet on God’s agape love to be more patient than our stubborn “free will”, any day. But the question remains: why not chose him now!

 

[johngh]

I used to feel the same way, but I have realized that I was looking at it the wrong way the whole time.

If someone goes to hell, it is not because of God. It is not because he does not love us enough…it is because we reject him. Despite his enormous love for us, God still gives us the choice to accept or reject him. And honestly I think the fact that he gives us that choice shows us he loves us even more. After all, love is ultimately a choice and an action. God will always say yes to us, but we still have the ability to reject him.

 

[johngh]

I do have trouble with such a statement. Let me ask you; are you implying that membership in the Catholic Church a requirement for heaven? And does a non-member suffer eternal torment? How about baptism? How about the sacraments? What is essential and what is not?

Sorry for the double post but I feel the need to respond to this. I don’t know if you were asking his personal opinion or the opinion of the Church, but I can tell you the official position of the Church, because I have talked to a priest about it before.

I said that I didn’t think God would punish someone who leads a good life just because they didn’t believe in Christ. After all a lot of people are born in places where Christianity is practically non-existent. I think ultimately what God wants is for us to be good people, because that will show him we love him more than anything else. And the priest agreed with me.

He said the way the Catholic Church puts it is “The Jew, or the Muslim, or the Atheist (or whatever else) that wakes up in Heaven will be pleasantly surprised to discover that it was Christ that got them there”.

 

[liquidpele]

Sorry for the double post but I feel the need to respond to this. I don’t know if you were asking his personal opinion or the opinion of the Church, but I can tell you the official position of the Church, because I have talked to a priest about it before.

I said that I didn’t think God would punish someone who leads a good life just because they didn’t believe in Christ. After all a lot of people are born in places where Christianity is practically non-existent. I think ultimately what God wants is for us to be good people, because that will show him we love him more than anything else. And the priest agreed with me.

He said the way the Catholic Church puts it is “The Jew, or the Muslim, or the Atheist (or whatever else) that wakes up in Heaven will be pleasantly surprised to discover that it was Christ that got them there”.

There’s actually a term for it: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_Christian

 

[Cbailey2]

I do have trouble with such a statement. Let me ask you; are you implying that membership in the Catholic Church a requirement for heaven? And does a non-member suffer eternal torment? How about baptism? How about the sacraments? What is essential and what is not?

Interesting thoughts and I’m sorry about the study. Hope you find it interesting. I just wanted to offer a thought on the above statement. We can’t manifest our love in anyway that we feel - if our loved one asks for help with the dishes, we can’t say “oh honey, I love you so much I’m going to let you do them yourself!” Our love is demonstrate in an action that was not ours to choose: our only choice is whether we say “yes” to that action or say “no.” Similarly, if our child asks us to attend his or her soccer game or piano recital and we know it means a lot to them and yet we still miss it (for a reason that is not particularly important), then how much can you claim to love your child?

Catholics believe God has asked us to do some very specific things to show our love for Him- the seven sacraments. Does that mean you can’t show love for God outside of those things? No, not at all - you can show your love in many, many ways. But if your Father goes out of His way to specifically ask you to do some things and you don’t do them, claiming “I love my Father so much that I’m going to ignore the things He asked me to do,” are you really loving your Father or are more interested in loving yourself?

Love implies responsibility. It doesn’t mean we get to choose what we want to do - it means being responsible to another and doing something in spite of necessarily wanting to.

In order to get to heaven, true love of God is essential but that love isn’t a free love: there is no such thing as free love. Love inherently obliges us to another. I’ve written this elsewhere on the forum - I don’t recall if it was here. Consider this analogy: heaven is like a diamond engagement ring that God is offering us. He loves us so much He wants us to be with Him forever. We all, of course, like diamonds (forget about blood diamonds for a moment): they are bright, shiny, durable, and rare. All of us want the diamond ring that He is offering to us. But only some of us will accept it, because diamond rings come with conditions: they are freely given and freely received but they come with an inherent promise and duty. By accepting an engagement ring, you bind yourself to a certain code of conduct, you bind yourself to fidelity to the person. Those who love the diamond but aren’t so crazy about the suitor will reject the diamond and the conditions of engagement that go with it. But those who love the suitor will gladly accept the diamond, not because the diamond is the object of their affection, but because they really love the Giver. And then there are those that love the Giver for a time but eventually no longer want to put in to the marriage what it takes to make the marriage work and their relationship ends in divorce. Again, not because God is at fault, but because they were too selfish to do the things it takes to make a marriage work.

 

[Mhz]

Sorry for the double post but I feel the need to respond to this. I don’t know if you were asking his personal opinion or the opinion of the Church, but I can tell you the official position of the Church, because I have talked to a priest about it before.

I said that I didn’t think God would punish someone who leads a good life just because they didn’t believe in Christ. After all a lot of people are born in places where Christianity is practically non-existent. I think ultimately what God wants is for us to be good people, because that will show him we love him more than anything else. And the priest agreed with me.

He said the way the Catholic Church puts it is “The Jew, or the Muslim, or the Atheist (or whatever else) that wakes up in Heaven will be pleasantly surprised to discover that it was Christ that got them there”.

I guess you and Cbailey2 are saying the same thing.

In your perspective, and your priest, God judges on a curve. Is that correct?

How would someone ever know if he qualified or was good enough under such a system? What you are saying is that how you live earns you heaven.

I may be over thinking this… but why sacrifice your son if all it takes is a good life to enter the kingdom of God?

 

[Cbailey2]

I guess you and Cbailey2 are saying the same thing.

In your perspective, and your priest, God judges on a curve. Is that correct?

I’d agree that God judges on a curve or rather, each test is entirely different - to those whom much is given, much is expected. If you’ve got a difficult life, I think God accounts for that also.

How would someone ever know if he qualified or was good enough under such a system? What you are saying is that how you live earns you heaven.

No, we’re not saying anything we can do earns us heaven: before Christ, there was no path to heaven, and without Christ, that way doesn’t exist. You can’t oblige a gift giver to give you a gift that he doesn’t owe you. God doesn’t owe us anything, regardless of what we do. However, I think we are saying that our lack of love and faith invalidates us of that gift: faith is not just something you think. If Christ is the way the truth and life, and there are certain things you must do to walk that path, saying “no thanks, I like my path better” doesn’t get you to heaven.

I may be over thinking this… but why sacrifice your son if all it takes is a good life to enter the kingdom of God?

I don’t see how this invalidates Christ’s sacrifice at all. But here’s another question for you: if God was just going to compel human beings into heaven, why not compel them to follow His law before the fall? If He forced us to fall, then He is a suicidal or murderous God.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Why only two choices? Why only heaven or hell. If i can’t bring myself to believe in a god instead of sending me to hell? Why does he not just do following. Not let me into heaven, and not condem me to hell? Just having nothing to do with me and leave me to kick about the cosmos for eternity, that would be kinda cool. Alot more fun than sitting on a cloud listening to jesus and harps :heaven::harp:. JK

Also the whole idea of original sin is a pretty week one, even us mear humans realise it would be ridiculous to punish children for the crimes of their parents.

Also people have not really given this heaven prize their full thought. Lets say a christian couple die in a plane crash. Due to their deaths their kids struggle to maintain their faith. As a result they drift from religion and die atheists. How on earth could the parents be happy in heaven knowing their children are to be tortured for eternity!!!. I know i couldn’t.

 

[liquidpele]

Why only two choices? Why only heaven or hell. If i can’t bring myself to believe in a god instead of sending me to hell? Why does he not just do following. Not let me into heaven, and not condem me to hell? Just having nothing to do with me and leave me to kick about the cosmos for eternity, that would be kinda cool. Alot more fun than sitting on a cloud listening to jesus and harps :heaven::harp:. JK

Also the whole idea of original sin is a pretty week one, even us mear humans realise it would be ridiculous to punish children for the crimes of their parents.

Also people have not really given this heaven prize their full thought. Lets say a christian couple die in a plane crash. Due to their deaths their kids struggle to maintain their faith. As a result they drift from religion and die atheists. How on earth could the parents be happy in heaven knowing their children are to be tortured for eternity!!!. I know i couldn’t.

Ever seen the movie “What dreams may come” ? That was the only version of heaven I could ever really accept, although I don’t think most Christian teachings are in-line with such an idea, but it was a cool system in my opinion.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Ever seen the movie “What dreams may come” ? That was the only version of heaven I could ever really accept, although I don’t think most Christian teachings are in-line with such an idea, but it was a cool system in my opinion.

Not seem it, but i’ll give it a watch.

 

[authenticity]

Why only two choices? Why only heaven or hell. If i can’t bring myself to believe in a god instead of sending me to hell? Why does he not just do following. Not let me into heaven, and not condem me to hell? Just having nothing to do with me and leave me to kick about the cosmos for eternity, that would be kinda cool. Alot more fun than sitting on a cloud listening to jesus and harps :heaven::harp:. JK

I think what you are missing is that this whole universe is here to glorify God, including you.

Also the whole idea of original sin is a pretty week one, even us mear humans realise it would be ridiculous to punish children for the crimes of their parents.

Sin does punish people who are otherwise innocent. If I were to go rob a bank today and get sent to prison, I’m not the only one who gets punished. My family also suffers. Not just because I won’t be there. It’s sets a bad example for my children. It’s like a chain reaction.

Also people have not really given this heaven prize their full thought. Lets say a christian couple die in a plane crash. Due to their deaths their kids struggle to maintain their faith. As a result they drift from religion and die atheists. How on earth could the parents be happy in heaven knowing their children are to be tortured for eternity!!!. I know i couldn’t.

Every soul in hell has chosen to be in hell. While I certainly do not wish anyone would end up there, especially my children, I respect people’s right to make their own choice. I would rest easy in heaven knowing that all people were given the opportunity to make a fully conscious decision as to where they would be going.

The mistake in your hypothetical situation is that the love of God is sentimental and that human beings are at the center of the universe, instead of God.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

**I think what you are missing is that this whole universe is here to glorify God, including you. **

Even if that were true, why could god still not just deny me access to heaven, instead of sending me to hell?
**
Sin does punish people who are otherwise innocent. If I were to go rob a bank today and get sent to prison, I’m not the only one who gets punished. My family also suffers. Not just because I won’t be there. It’s sets a bad example for my children. It’s like a chain reaction.**

Do we lock the kids up, for the parents crime?

**Every soul in hell has chosen to be in hell. While I certainly do not wish anyone would end up there, especially my children, I respect people’s right to make their own choice. I would rest easy in heaven knowing that all people were given the opportunity to make a fully conscious decision as to where they would be going.

The mistake in your hypothetical situation is that the love of God is sentimental and that human beings are at the center of the universe, instead of God.**

So you could be happy in heaven knowing your kids are going to be tortured forever? Nice. :nope:

 

[MindOverMatter]

How on earth could the parents be happy in heaven knowing their children are to be tortured for eternity!!!. I know i couldn’t.

There not your children silly. They are produced by genes.