• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why would God send good people to Hell just because they dont believe he exists?

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
True. It is mere supposition that a being that powerful must have been given that power by God. There is this verse: Mt 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels:
He is an Archangel since he has authority over angels.
So is captain but there can be many captains. Also there are many archdioceses.

So, you say each ship has it's own captain?
Who is the Captain of God's ship of state?
That would mean one and only one singular ship of state that God is using.
Jesus would be Captain. "Hail to the Chief!" [singular]

Always in Scripture archangel is singular. One of a kind or unique.
There is only one singular archangel in Scripture.
That is the archangel of 1st Thess [4v16] who is the Lord, not Satan.

Satan is a 'counterfeit archangel' and does Not have the ultimate authority over 'all' angels. The 'fallen away' angels [demons] are not all of the angels.
According to Rev. 12 the 'fallen angels' are cast down to earth.
Please notice two sets of angels at Rev 12v7.
First, the 'fallen angels' are evicted out of heaven.
Then, at Rev. [19v14] the armies of heaven [unfallen angels] follow Jesus.
Compare Matthew [25v31] as to which angels are with Jesus.

The symbolic fire of Matt [25v41] is only for Satan and his angels.
No humans are in that 'fire'. That symbolic 'fire and sulphur' is the 'second death' of Rev. [21v8] when Jesus has Satan destroyed. -Hebrews 2v14 B.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
If that's true then it means, as I've said, that the eating of the fruit changed nothing as far as our nature and predilection to sin. We today have no more of a sinful nature than Adam and Eve did and we didn't get our sinful nature from their eating of the fruit. Basically this means that the story is irrelevant and their eating the fruit had nothing to do with why we sin.
Would I be at fault if I didn't understand that taking the fruit would be a sin?

Yes, you would not be at fault if you were not told or warned beforehand not to eat as Adam was forewarned and told not to eat at Gen 2v17.
Adam knew what eating already was because Adam ate other foods.
Adam's sinless nature did not mean he could not change that sinless nature by his own desire. [James 1vs13-15]. Just like Satan's original sinless nature did not prevent Satan from turning himself into Satan the Devil.

Yes, right, the eating of the fruit did Not change human perfection into human imperfection [sinful nature]. The eating of forbidden fruit was braking the law.
It was the criminal act of law breaking that gave us the leaning or predisposition to sin. Once Adam disobeyed the law [do not eat] then Adam lost his sinless nature. That was not an overnight sentence of death but up to a thousand-year death. That criminal act [sin] is what caused sinful nature, not the fruit itself.

Because we are Not responsible for Adam's deliberate sin, we are not held accountable as Adam was. Because we are Not accountable as Adam for our sinful nature, then our death frees or acquits us from sin as Romans [6v7] says. Being freed or acquitted by our death, does not mean innocent, but like a judge can pardon a person so the crime [sin] charges no longer stick.
Still, that means we can not resurrect oneself or another, so we need someone who can do that for us. Jesus can and he will.

So, except for those of Matt [12v32;Heb 6vs4-6; 10vs26,27] the majority of mankind will be resurrected to either heavenly life reigning with Jesus over earth [Rev 20v6;5vs9,10;14v4], or be resurrected on earth during Jesus messianic [1000-year] reign over earth.
-Psalm 72v8
 
The Hebrew word behemah' refers to usually domestic or tame animals.
But also on occasion to beast or wild beast.
In other words behemah' can be rendered as referring to:
domestic or tame animals, beasts, or live stock and cattle.
[Gen 1v26; 9v10; 34v23; Psalm 107v38].

The Hebrew term *chaiyah' [living creature] is used to refer to wild beasts
or wild animals such as at Gen. 1v28; 3v14; Isaiah 56v9.

[Greek term zo'on [living creature] is also rendered as animal.]
- Rev 4v7; 2 Peter 2v12.

The Hebrew word re'mes denotes moving animals including creeping ones
which comes from the root ramas' meaning to move; to creep.
Gen. 6v20; Eze 8v10; Gen. 1v28.

So, the serpent of Gen. [3v1] was a living creature [*chaiyah'] meaning:
a living soul that was not a human- Numbers 31v28.

So then why did Muffled say: "So the idea that the Serpent was simply a beast of the field doesn't wash."
 
Yes, you would not be at fault if you were not told or warned beforehand not to eat as Adam was forewarned and told not to eat at Gen 2v17.

Adam was forewarned not to eat of the tree but he was not told that to do so constitutes disobedience and therefore would be a sin, he was only told that he would die. In addition, since they had no experience with sin and did not understand the concept of good and evil, it never would have occurred to them that the serpent was deceiving them. So how can they be held accountable for not avoiding sin if they were not given an understanding of it?

You see, because they did not understand the concept of good and evil and the concept of deception, not only were they not able to recognize the lie on the part of the serpent, they were not even able to see that it contradicted what God told them and so it never would have occurred to them to question it.

Like I've been saying, the only way they could understand that eating the fruit was wrong was to eat the fruit. This is why the story doesn't work.

Adam knew what eating already was because Adam ate other foods.
Adam's sinless nature did not mean he could not change that sinless nature by his own desire. [James 1vs13-15]. Just like Satan's original sinless nature did not prevent Satan from turning himself into Satan the Devil.

Yes, right, the eating of the fruit did Not change human perfection into human imperfection [sinful nature]. The eating of forbidden fruit was braking the law.
It was the criminal act of law breaking that gave us the leaning or predisposition to sin. Once Adam disobeyed the law [do not eat] then Adam lost his sinless nature. That was not an overnight sentence of death but up to a thousand-year death. That criminal act [sin] is what caused sinful nature, not the fruit itself.

How? It's still not clear here as to how exactly the effects of their eating of the fruit got transmitted or passed on to us.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Adam was forewarned not to eat of the tree but he was not told that to do so constitutes disobedience and therefore would be a sin, he was only told that he would die. In addition, since they had no experience with sin and did not understand the concept of good and evil, it never would have occurred to them that the serpent was deceiving them. So how can they be held accountable for not avoiding sin if they were not given an understanding of it?
You see, because they did not understand the concept of good and evil and the concept of deception, not only were they not able to recognize the lie on the part of the serpent, they were not even able to see that it contradicted what God told them and so it never would have occurred to them to question it.
Like I've been saying, the only way they could understand that eating the fruit was wrong was to eat the fruit. This is why the story doesn't work.
How? It's still not clear here as to how exactly the effects of their eating of the fruit got transmitted or passed on to us.

If someone told you Not to eat something in particular because when you eat it you will die, would you still eat it ?
Wouldn't you consider that person's warning as a guide for you?
So, Adam did have particular knowledge of being able to self-determine for himself what was good or evil. [live or die was in Adam's own hands]

Was Adam deceived? No.
Was Eve deceived? Yes. According to 1st Tim [2v14] only Eve was deceived.
Was Satan deceived? No. Satan had No temptation placed in front of him,
but Satan sure 'failed in love' for his Father/ Creator.
No where in Scripture do we get the idea that Adam was also deceived.
In effect, Adam by deliberately eating committed suicide.
By Adam deliberately eating he apparently did not want to live without Eve.
Kind of like a Romeo and Juliet.
[Wonder if that A&E scenario is where Shakespeare got his idea?]

Scripture does not hold 'them' [A&E] both responsible.
Only Adam is held responsible. Please see: Romans 5 vs12-19

What answer did Eve give the serpent or covering cherub at Gen. 3 vs2,3 ?
In verse 4 is Satan's first lie.

Doesn't Eve knowingly tell the serpent: Not eat, not touch or result is: death ?

It is not the effects of eating or touching that passed on imperfection to us.
We are created to have everlasting life if we listen to our Heavenly Father.
Adam knew the command [not eat] came from his Creator; his God.

God was saying if you do not follow my guidance, If you do not listen to me,
If you ignore my no-trespassing warning, you can not continue to live.

The tree represented Not some sort of general truth but very specific.
Would you want to just deliberately disregard a trusted loving parent ?
If you deliberately did not show honor to your loving parent, do you really love him? Or, would your love and respect for that parent be called into question?

Love, honor, trust, respect [even worship] was called into question by eating what they were not supposed to be eating.

So, the forbidden fruit was Not poisonous.
The fruit itself did not possess any harmful or toxic substances.

What caused death was disrespecting, not listening, not honoring, not trusting, not worshiping their benevolent God and Creator as instructed Not to eat.

If Adam ate and did not die, then God would be a liar. [Titus 1v2]
What God [Creator] said came true. -2nd Samuel 22v31

So, the 'transmission' effects came to us by the breakdown of Adam's DNA.
Adam chose death over life. God gave Adam Adam's own choice.
Adam, as our family head, could only pass down to us what he himself had.
Adam 's choosing death passed down death to us.
Adam's breakdown in physical perfection caused sickness leading to death.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
So then why did Muffled say: "So the idea that the Serpent was simply a beast of the field doesn't wash."

The serpent was used or manipulated by Satan using the serpent just like a ventriloquist would use his dummy to do his bidding.

Think about this: The angel who turned himself into the devil and satan, according to Ezekiel [28vs14-16], was placed or stationed in Eden to have the position of being a covering cherub.
Covering as in being an overseer of the garden of Eden.
He was placed there to be a safeguard for Adam and Eve.
So, Satan used his appointed position to take on such undo importance that by his wrong ambition apparently he allowed, or he cultivated, such a selfish desire as to have humans worship him over their God and Creator.
Satan is truly a megalomaniac !
 
If someone told you Not to eat something in particular because when you eat it you will die, would you still eat it ?
Wouldn't you consider that person's warning as a guide for you?
So, Adam did have particular knowledge of being able to self-determine for himself what was good or evil. [live or die was in Adam's own hands]

No. he did not. First of all, the text clearly says that their eyes were opened after they ate the fruit. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that they didn't understand good and evil before they ate the fruit. Secondly, it's debatable that they even understood what death was.

Was Adam deceived? No.
Was Eve deceived? Yes. According to 1st Tim [2v14] only Eve was deceived.
Was Satan deceived? No. Satan had No temptation placed in front of him,
but Satan sure 'failed in love' for his Father/ Creator.
No where in Scripture do we get the idea that Adam was also deceived.
The text says: "[FONT=&quot]When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.[/FONT]"

He was standing right next to her. So what, are you saying Adam was not deceived only because he wasn't the one doing the talking?

In effect, Adam by deliberately eating committed suicide.
By Adam deliberately eating he apparently did not want to live without Eve.
Kind of like a Romeo and Juliet.
[Wonder if that A&E scenario is where Shakespeare got his idea?]
Where did you get this idea from?

Scripture does not hold 'them' [A&E] both responsible.
Only Adam is held responsible. Please see: Romans 5 vs12-19
Wait, you're telling me that Adam was not deceived yet he is responsible? How?

What answer did Eve give the serpent or covering cherub at Gen. 3 vs2,3 ?
In verse 4 is Satan's first lie.

Doesn't Eve knowingly tell the serpent: Not eat, not touch or result is: death ?

It is not the effects of eating or touching that passed on imperfection to us.
We are created to have everlasting life if we listen to our Heavenly Father.
Adam knew the command [not eat] came from his Creator; his God.
So did Eve.

God was saying if you do not follow my guidance, If you do not listen to me,
If you ignore my no-trespassing warning, you can not continue to live.
Is that the extent of the significance of morality, everlasting life? Doesn't morality have a more practical purpose?

The tree represented Not some sort of general truth but very specific.
Would you want to just deliberately disregard a trusted loving parent ?
If you deliberately did not show honor to your loving parent, do you really love him? Or, would your love and respect for that parent be called into question?

Love, honor, trust, respect [even worship] was called into question by eating what they were not supposed to be eating.

So, the forbidden fruit was Not poisonous.
The fruit itself did not possess any harmful or toxic substances.

What caused death was disrespecting, not listening, not honoring, not trusting, not worshiping their benevolent God and Creator as instructed Not to eat.
Eating the fruit didn't cause death, God caused it. He could have chosen to be merciful and not curse mankind with death.

So, the 'transmission' effects came to us by the breakdown of Adam's DNA.
Adam chose death over life. God gave Adam Adam's own choice.
Adam, as our family head, could only pass down to us what he himself had.
Adam 's choosing death passed down death to us.
Adam's breakdown in physical perfection caused sickness leading to death.
You still haven't explained how all this came about at the genetic level. It's easy to say things like "...the 'transmission' effects came to us by the breakdown of Adam's DNA" but I'll bet you don't even really understand what that means.
 
Last edited:
The serpent was used or manipulated by Satan using the serpent just like a ventriloquist would use his dummy to do his bidding.

Think about this: The angel who turned himself into the devil and satan, according to Ezekiel [28vs14-16], was placed or stationed in Eden to have the position of being a covering cherub.
Covering as in being an overseer of the garden of Eden.
He was placed there to be a safeguard for Adam and Eve.
So, Satan used his appointed position to take on such undo importance that by his wrong ambition apparently he allowed, or he cultivated, such a selfish desire as to have humans worship him over their God and Creator.
Satan is truly a megalomaniac !

First let me say that this chapter and these verses in Ezekial are prophesies against the prince and king of Tyrus and against a place called Zidon. Specifically, verses 1-11 are about the prince of Tyrus; verses 12-19 are about the king of Tyrus and verses 13-26 are about Zidon.

Having said that, what I've been saying all along is that those verses in Genesis say nothing about Satan. For the upteenth time, it says the serpent was the most cunning of all the wild creatures "that the Lord God had made." Again, for the upteenth time, why was this distinction made if it actually wasn't the serpent deceiving them?
 

9Westy9

Sceptic, Libertarian, Egalitarian
Premium Member
God doesn't send anyone to hell...:)

Objection. If so then a) Why does hell exist? b) Did God create hell and if not who did and with what power?

I could go into my theory that a benevolent god can't exist but I'll probably just create a new thread for it once I iron out the details

*EDIT* Anyone can answer the questions.
 

waitasec

Veteran Member
Objection. If so then a) Why does hell exist? b) Did God create hell and if not who did and with what power?

I could go into my theory that a benevolent god can't exist but I'll probably just create a new thread for it once I iron out the details

*EDIT* Anyone can answer the questions.

a) hell is for other people... funny how that works.
b) no... there is no hell in the after life we just :sleep: ...well there is hell on earth maybe, in which case, people created that for themselves
:beach:
 
Last edited:

9Westy9

Sceptic, Libertarian, Egalitarian
Premium Member
a) hell is for other people... funny how that works.
b) no... there is no hell in the after life we just :sleep: ...well there is hell on earth maybe, in which case, people created that for themselves
:beach:

That's probably the best answer I'm going to get xD
 

krsnaraja

Active Member
How did Jesus get to hell or end up in hell ?__________________

- Acts 2 vs27,31; Psalm 16v10

Did you know the King of Hell is Yamaraja. Jesus went to hell to give instructions to Lord Yamaraja. Yamaraja is one of the 12 mahajanas (great souls ) of Krishna. Jesus is the elder half brother of Krishna. He is Balarama ( search google ).
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Objection. If so then a) Why does hell exist? b) Did God create hell and if not who did and with what power?
I could go into my theory that a benevolent god can't exist but I'll probably just create a new thread for it once I iron out the details
*EDIT* Anyone can answer the questions.

Are you referring to the 'biblical hell' [sheol] , or the pagan-myth hell ?

There is a difference in the non-biblical hell myth, and the Bible's hell [sheol].

Jesus was in the Bible's hell according to Acts [2vs27,31]
The biblical hell [sheol] exists because death exists. [Romans 6v23]
Jesus death sent Jesus to the Bible's hell [sheol].

Jesus taught the dead sleep the deep sleep of death. John 11vs11-14.

Jesus was educated in the Hebrew OT Scriptures that also teach the dead sleep in death at Psalm 6v5; 13v3; 115v17; 146v4; Daniel 12vs2,13; Ecc9v5.

So, the Bible hell [sheol] is just the common grave of mankind.
The common grave that comes to an end during Jesus messianic [1000-year] reign over earth according to Revelation [20 vs13,14]

After everybody in the Bible's hell are 'delivered up' [resurrected] out of the Bible's hell, then, and only then, is emptied-out hell [gravedom] cast into a symbolic second death of no further existence anywhere.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Does he have mercy on anyone in there that is begging for a second chance at life since the begining of time?

King Solomon, known for his God-given wisdom, wrote us at Ecclesiastes 9v5 that the dead know nothing. The dead are not conscious.

So, while Jesus was in the Bible's hell [sheol] Jesus was in a deep sleep like unconscious state until God resurrected Jesus out of the Bible's hell or gravedom back to the spirit realm.

Jesus knew he would be in a deep sleep like state at death because that is what Jesus taught in John chapter 11.
 

krsnaraja

Active Member
Does he have mercy on anyone in there that is begging for a second chance at life since the begining of time?


Blessed John Paul II`s definition of hell in Vatican II is this, " Hell is when a person does not anymore remember God ( whether he is living in the White House or prison )."
 
Top