Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)

Forum Quick Jump

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 12/17/2004 10:23 AM (GMT -6)

How would you rate the overall plausibility of Meph's ideas on the "Craig/Talbott" thread?

Similitude
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968

Posted 12/17/2004 3:10 PM (GMT -6)

Meph,

I couldn't help but put "heretic" given your options! Eyebrow

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus seems to suggest that the idea is very implausible biblically. From a purely logical point of view, it's hard to argue with. But it's hard, psychologically, for me to imagine how a person would change after eons of torment. It would seem that torment would work it's result rather quickly or not at all. And the parable seems to affirm just that idea. But I'm open to refutation.

Moreover, since I think the most literal reading of the bible indicates a permanent death state for the non-elect after the ressurection unto judgement, the whole question is moot for me. I don't see the idea of God having eternal mourning over the perishing of the non-elect. I see God feeling better for FINALLY meting out justice. I simply don't know how to make sense of both 1) the WRATH of God abiding on the impenitent, and 2) God being consumed with sorrow over those same impenitent ones.

wjs

One Love
Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888

Posted 12/17/2004 3:44 PM (GMT -6)

Jefscott:

quote:
From a purely logical point of view, it's hard to argue with. But it's hard, psychologically, for me to imagine how a person would change after eons of torment. It would seem that torment would work it's result rather quickly or not at all. And the parable seems to affirm just that idea. But I'm open to refutation.

I'd agree with the working quickly, too. I just have to put the "eons and eons" thought as a possibility for those who need the idea of LOOONG time of suffering. (You'd be surprised, man. Some people seem like they really want the "unsaved" to fry for a WHILE! ;) )

Well, now. Judging by the votes, it looks like I have some work to do as far as plausibility. Hmmm...where to begin? I'd like to know where the implausibility primarily lies. For those of you who'd like to share more privately, hit me up at my email. It'll be kept confidential, of course! Big Smile

yielded@hotmail.com

Thanks for the input, all.

Evil

Similitude
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968

Posted 12/18/2004 5:46 AM (GMT -6)

Meph,

Another thought that occurred to me last night was this. John and I were discussing something a while back that touches on universalism. Paul talks of sufferings that made the Thessalonians worthy or fitted to the kingdom of God. He also speaks of REIGNING with Christ if we SUFFER with Him. So, do UNbelievers suffer with Christ? The passages seem to imply that they do NOT.

Thus, even IF universalism is true, unbelievers would seem to have to wait until AFTER Christ's reigning with His brethren before they could be resurrected to Christ's presence. This, in turn, brings us right back to the problem of LONG periods of torment. So, even IF universalism is true, an unconcious death makes more sense of all the passages to me. Any thoughts? Objections? Rotten tomatoes? Smile

wjs

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:58 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual