quote:

---

Isaac had a better answer. In his view, the real torment in hell consists, not in burning by material fire, nor in any physical pain, but in the pangs of conscience that a person suffers on realizing that he or she has rejected the love of God:

Also I say that even those who are scourged in hell are tormented with the scourgings of love.

The scourges that result from love—that is, the scourges of those who have become aware that they have sinned against love—are harder and more bitter than the torments which result from fear.

The pain which gnaws the heart as the result of sinning against love is sharper than all other torments that there are.

It is wrong to imagine that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God... [But] the power of love works in two ways: it torments those who have sinned, just as happens among friends here on earth; but to those who have observed its duties, love gives delight.

So it is in hell: the contrition that comes from love is the harsh torment.

---

quote:

---

Meph

I am arguing that God wouldn’t be losing anything at all…AND that, all things considered, it would be better for the entire system of sentient beings. Instead of ANY type of eternal dualism and grief existing, there would only be complete and TOTAL participation in God by persons who either solidified themselves toward God or were compatibilistically compelled by God.

---

quote:

---

Seems you are saying that after God has "tolorated" free will that He would abandon it in the afterlife? Am I right. Are you saying that? I just can't fathom that part.

---

quote:

---

No. Then you would have another kind of "dualism" where SOME experiencing heaven would be willing and the others would be forced

But then, remember that hell is not a place but an experience. And the experience of being free-willing and the experience of being forced are DIFFERENT. So (using "place" metaphorically) the two groups WOULD NOT be "in the same place" anyways.

In Issac's view there is a unity of experience externally. It is God's love. It is just experienced differently.

---

Sorry, POW. This is a misunderstanding of what it would mean to compatibilistically compelled by God. For any being that was compatibilistically compelled by God, they would not EXPERIENCE their compulsion. They would subjectively experience themselves as truly “loving” God. Moreover, again, if Doc’s idea of final states is held, in the end, ALL freedom would be of a compatibilistic type. So wherein would be the dualism? There would just be two TYPES of solidification that took place: self-directed and God directed. These would be different TYPES of the same THING.

*********************

POW:

quote:

---

Perhaps Origin was right, that perhaps ALL would change growing towards that Love. In the mean time it certainly is "hell" though.

---

Perhaps indeed, mein freund, perhaps indeed. To be honest, doesn’t it tax the mind to actually think that a finite being can resist the infinitely loving, glorious, and RESOURCEFUL God who constantly woos with love… for ALL eternity??? Is the finite will truly THAT powerful?? It does make one think…




"Smile. It could be worse." --from a good friend.

quote:

---

Mephi: If God has the power to do this type of compatibilistic determination, why doesn’t God use it such that people who would have self-solidified themselves against God would “love” God, after the end of all probationary periods??

---

quote:

---

I thought compatibilistic meant working together in agreement. Aren’t you talking about all out determinism or control?

---

I’m talking about the state of freedom where choices are made out of a character that has SOMEHOW been formed in the person. Saying that the choices are DETERMINED by the character compatibilistically.


*********************

You said:

quote:

---

Isn’t the rub here, that God would be making them do what they don’t love?

---

Sweet! I was hoping that someone would catch this. Now here’s where we really see how believe about how we were created. If we trluly believe that everyone who sins is essentially operating from a FALSE SELF, then things change. If we truly believe that the beings that God CREATED us ALL to be are only truly fulfilled in loving God, then we could actually say that all that God would be doing by operating on us in the compatibilistic fashion would be to REMOVE our false selves and causing us to live as our true selves. Whereas other people were able to make CHOICES which lead to the overall erosion of their false selves, these other people we so immersed in their false selves that they had to have the choice made FOR them.

Bottom line: I would contend that DEEP DOWN, we ALL want, love, and need God and that God is just giving that TRUE self that has been neglected what it has ALWAYS longed for!


**************************

You said

quote:

---

How does this analogy fit? The prodigal son is repentant, not forced to come home by the father.

---

The ATTITUDE of the father is what I was really looking at. The father didn’t care that the son has chosen his way into a hellish situation. The father did not value his son’s facing the full ramification of his actions more than he just wanted his son back with him! Honestly, the father didn’t seem to care WHY the son had come home. All the father knew was that the son was back. The father didn’t say “Well, you had your chance, y’know.” He was just glad to have his son BACK. This would be like the attitude of God who would raise the eternal ZOMBIES to some sembelance of life compatibilistically.

***************************

You said:

quote:

---

If God were to force people into heaven in this manner, wouldn’t he be changing who they are? It would be like he was recreating them. Making them into robots after all. Perhaps the process would undo them completely.

---

But think about it, Springs. Wouldn’t this “recreation” of them be better than LEAVING them in the eternal state of wraith-like solipsism? They were essentially DEAD in all ways possible. I don’t THINK that they’d be complaining. And remember, the ONLY person who would be aware of the compatibilistic pulling of strings would be God…NOT the persons being compelled! So what would be the big deal?


Good interaction!

quote:

---

If God has to recreate them, then they won't be themselves. So we may as well go with annihilation.

---

quote:

---

The denying over and over is the solidification of character. The probationary period is when that happens. They may not end up who they could have been, but they end up who they are, and I don't see how it is a false self. If you strip away the "false self" there would be nothing left. Once the longing is denied over and over, God gives them up to their own longings.

---

Christ exemplifies the TRUE self: a human being who fully admitted his dependend on God submitted to God with all of his being. Christ was the only being to be a true self throughout his life. To the degree that we more away from this, we are operating by a false self. But that cannot negate that TRUE self within us that is broken, NOT ELIMINATED, by sin. So I would say that if you did strip away the false self, you WOULD have something, however small that may be. And it is within the power of God to take that and expand it.

So why wouldn’t God do so?

Now, reframing this for all…

Can someone give me a REALLY GOOD reason why God would allow finite beings to exist in an eternal state of wraith-like solipsism unto constant disintegration of self and infinite trivialization when…

1) it would not contradict God’s nature to do stop this from happening
2) it would not contradict METAPHYSICAL necessity to stop this from happening
3) it would be fully in God’s ability to stop this from happening

and..

4) God’s doing so would eliminate ALL dualisms eternally such that ALL finite beings would experience THEMSELVES as enjoying God’s love?

Ok. That's enough. I gotta bail.

Waiting,



"Smile. It could be worse." --from a good friend.

Edited by - MephEternal on 06/30/2003 12:28:44 PM

quote:

---

1. For any being that was compatibilistically compelled by God, they would not EXPERIENCE their compulsion. They would subjectively experience themselves as truly “loving” God. Moreover, again, if Doc’s idea of final states is held, in the end, ALL freedom would be of a compatibilistic type. So wherein would be the dualism? There would just be two TYPES of solidification that took place: self-directed and God directed. These would be different TYPES of the same THING.

2. I’m talking about the state of freedom where choices are made out of a character that has SOMEHOW been formed in the person. Saying that the choices are DETERMINED by the character compatibilistically.

---

quote:

---

Bottom line: I would contend that DEEP DOWN, we ALL want, love, and need God and that God is just giving that TRUE self that has been neglected what it has ALWAYS longed for!

---

Meph Man, what if one does not accept ALL of Greg's 6 theses? That is, in the end there is NOT an eternal dualism? That is, there is not an ETERNAL hellish state? Isn't this one of the reasons some opt for annihilationism? Therefore, get rid of that particular notion of the nature of hell.

Just a quick response. Like the topic, because now I see your problems with hell that you mentioned many moons ago!

By the way, if you have $3 million dollars....hmmm...what would that be in Canadian funds?


Brandon
Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you! See, I have engraved you on the palms of my hands; your walls are ever before me.--Isa 49:15-16

quote:

---

Meph Man, what if one does not accept ALL of Greg's 6 theses? That is, in the end there is NOT an eternal dualism? That is, there is not an ETERNAL hellish state? Isn't this one of the reasons some opt for annihilationism? Therefore, get rid of that particular notion of the nature of hell.

---

I would agree with Doc in his quote from page 336 of SATPOE. This is where he talks about the shortcomings of annihilationism:

“First, it is not the traditional view. This cannot be decisive for all who adhere to the Protestant principle of Sola Scriptura, but as I argued in chapter 4, it does put the burden of proof on new perspectives. Though the case for annihilationism is admittedly strong, it is questionable whether it is strong enough to overturn the majority view throughout church history.

Among its weaknesses, the annihilationists’ symbolic reading of Revelation 14:10 and 20:10 is not altogether compelling. Revelation is a highly symbolic book, to be sure, but it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that eternal, conscious suffering is implied in its depiction of the punishment of the wicked. The annihilationist account of the parallel Jesus draws between the eternal reward of the righteous and the eternal punishment of the wicked in Matthew 25:46 is less than persuasive as well. It seems that Jesus is contrasting two different places in which people will dwell (Mt 25:34, 41). Likewise, when Paul associates the anguish of the judged with the eternal punishment of their judgment, it seems logical to conclude that the anguish of the judged is eternal (2 Thess 1:6-9; cf. Rom 2:6-10).

Where does this leave us? For my part, it leaves me in a conundrum. I do not believe that either the traditional prosition or the annihilationists’ position adequately accounts for all the biblical evidence cited in support of the opposing side’s position.”


I’d basically agree with Doc here. If the object really is to reconcile ALL of Scripture, then I believe Doc’s thing is the way to go…and annihilationism is a wash. I mean, for real. If that’s the way that we were going to play it…basically taking some Scripture and relativizing others…, we may as WELL shoot for universalism on moral AND “Scriptural” grounds!

But this makes the situation more precarious. In Doc's ideas, we have THAT some type of merge of annihilationism and eternal conscious punishment occurred…but, if my critiques are correct, we no longer have any real reason, metaphysical or otherwise, WHY God would allow such a horrific fate for anyone. Morality would seem to favor universalism or at WORST, annihilationism. But God does neither.

Hmmm…

So, Brandon, I don’t think it’s that easy. It’s either stick with Scripture and agree with Doc (whose resolution I do think makes the most sense, all biblical data considered)…or relativize Scripture and endorse universalism over annihilationism as long as we are going the relativization route.



"Smile. It could be worse." --from a good friend.


Edited by - MephEternal on 06/30/2003 3:40:46 PM

quote:

---

We’ve already established that, in the open view, God DOES have the power to exhibit compatibilisitic determination. He doesn’t use it very often, but he CAN do it. So, here’s my question . . .

---

quote:

---

My understanding of “compatibilistic determination” would be exerting divine influence in a way that determines the actions of an otherwise free agent, but in a manner that is consistent with the agent’s freely acquired and developed character.

If this is the definition, then it seems as long as the agent’s character is to any degree open to an appropriate response to God, then the agent’s character is not solidified and the agent is still in a probationary state.

On the other hand, if you’re proposing that God could determine the agent’s response to God without regard to the agent’s freely acquired character, then in what sense is this compatibilistic?

---

All compatibilism freedom says is that one’s choices are free to the extent that people are doing what they want. But this says nothing about HOW they come to want what they want. Doc wants to say that it’s mainly by self-solidification by the agents. But there is another way…God directing those wants. It CAN be this way. What you are describing is dealing with a type of micromanaging effect that is LIKE UNTO compatibilism (as I’ve said before)

Actually, if we really wanted to, we could easily say that no matter HOW “solidified” a person is in anti-God behavior, the TRUE SELF that seeks God is never fully extinguished, just really small and unused. And it’s this part of hellbound beings that God works with to do what God does.


Hope this helps,