1/05/2010

Happy About Hell?

I am astonished at some on the internet who accuse me of being happy / glad / satisfied / gleeful that God would send some people to hell. From Ray Comfort’s blog:


Do you think "happy" would be the right word to use to describe that state of mind of those who were saved in the lifeboats of the Titanic as their loved ones and others were being swallowed into an icy grave? No doubt they were unspeakably grateful that they are saved, but it would be entirely inappropriate to use the word "happy" to describe their circumstance.

There’s not a day that goes by that I’m not horrified at what’s in store for those who die in their sins…


Ray says it well.

8 comments:

Steve Martin said...

Of course we are not happy about the prospect of some people goping to hell.

We deserve to go to hell, also!

But by His grace, we are redeemed!

I do see this glee at the fate of others, though, in some people. I think it is terrible, and I would hate to think what the Lord thinks about it.

"Judge not, lest you be judged." (comes to mind)

Anonymous said...

Born to be tortured one of the most disgusting views I have ever encountered in my life.

http://www.humanismbyjoe.com/some_violent_heartless_believing_hell.htm

"The twelfth-century theologian Peter Lombard had the same attitude. "The elect will come forth to behold the torments of the ungodly," he taught, "and at this spectacle they will not be smitten with sorrow; on the contrary, while they see the unspeakable sufferings of the ungodly, they, intoxicated with joy, will thank God for their own salvation."

Saint Thomas Aquinas, one of the most influential Catholic theologians of all time, likewise declared that "in order that nothing may be wanting to the happiness of the blessed in Heaven, a perfect view is granted them of the tortures of the damned."

The popular eighteenth-century Puritan clergyman Jonathan Edwards added, "The sight of hell's torments will exalt the happiness of the saints forever." He also proclaimed: "Can the believing husband in Heaven be happy with his unbelieving wife in Hell? Can the believing father in Heaven be happy with his unbelieving children in Hell? Can the loving wife in Heaven be happy with her unbelieving husband in Hell? I tell you, yea! Such will be their sense of justice that it will increase rather than diminish their bliss." "

J. K. Jones said...

The people you reference not only believed in hell, they also believed in the use of physical coercion to convert others. It is not possible to do that in the first place. In the second, it is wrong to do so based on Christ's teachings.

I affirm the seperation of church and state. Your argument simply does not apply to me.

Anonymous said...

"The people you reference not only believed in hell, they also believed in the use of physical coercion to convert others. It is not possible to do that in the first place. In the second, it is wrong to do so based on Christ's teachings."

You're right I forgot that you are a worshipper of a splinter sect of mainstream christianity and are then free to make up whatever beliefs that you want. (No True Scottsman)

"I affirm the seperation of church and state. Your argument simply does not apply to me."

Of course an argument of Church v State doesn't apply to you, I wasn't making one.

J. K. Jones said...

I have not made up any new beliefs on my own. But, either way, you cannot legitimately criticize me for beliefs I do not hold, no matter what kind of names you apply. "No True Scottsman" indeed.

Church vs. State is the only way your objection holds.

J. K. Jones said...

Steve Martin,

Right on.

JK

Anonymous said...

Whatever wacky tabacy bible floats your boat.

Church V State: There's no argument there. When I raise objection that applies to it, I'll let you know.

J. K. Jones said...

Every one of the examples given on the web site you pointed me to was of a person who affirmed the use of coercion to convert others. That is closely linked to a state church of some form, and each of the examples was a supporter of a church which attempted or achieved establishment.


How is it that church vs. state does not apply?

Search This Blog