Board index ‹ Heaven and Hell

[Mr. Mike]

If Satan loves punishing people in hell, why does god keep sending people to hell? Isn't that like offering a sacrifice to Satan? It would seem that satan is god's favorite, and that's why he created a place just for him and his minions to enjoy themselves torturing sinners. Please clear my confusion. I'm an atheist.

[jimwalton]

Your initial premise is where the problem lies. Satan doesn't punish people in hell. Satan is in hell as a punishment from God (Matt. 25.41). Satan is not in charge of hell. Satan doesn't rule hell. Hell is not Satan's domain or his kingdom. All Satan does in hell is suffer punishment. Satan doesn't punish others there. He and his minions don't do any torturing. They are victims there, not perpetrators.

[Mr. Mike]

So, if satan is suffering in hell, why does everybody keep blaming him for their problems? His minions are there too so, who's creating evil then?

[jimwalton]

Satan and his minions aren't in hell yet. That is a future destiny for them. For now Satan is the prince of this world (Jn. 12.31). He lives here and operates here, deceiving people and driving them away from God. He creates a certain amount of evil, but the Bible also says that he's not the main perpetrator of evil. Evil comes from our own hearts (James 1.14; Matt. 12.35). Satan doesn't need to create evil in us—it's already there, and we create it ourselves. That's why we need to be redeemed and made new. Jesus offers to end our slavery to sin and to recreate our hearts in new life. People blame Satan for their problems because it's more convenient to blame someone else than to see the flaw in one's own life.

[Mr. Mike]

So, you're saying god can't defeat satan, but it's not satan's fault we're evil, but god's for making us that way. So, if I'm not to blame satan, who should I blame?

> "Satan doesn't need to create evil in us—it's already there, and we create it ourselves."

Why did god create us with evil in us? Why can we create evil if it was not part of god's plan? Is god's plan that weak that we can wreck it? Or is god's plan to create us evil just for his enjoyment?

[jimwalton]

> You're saying god can't defeat satan

I'm not saying that God can't defeat Satan. Never said nor implied that. God can and will defeat Satan, all in good time. There's a plan that is being followed.

> It's not satan's fault we're evil, but god's for making us that way.

God didn't make us evil. God made us good. The Bible is very clear about that. But since humans have free will (a necessary element of love), we were free to choose whether we would love or not. Humans chose against God, against love of God, and therefore chose disobedience and ultimately evil. God didn't make us that way; Satan didn't force us in that direction; it was a choice of ours, and so we are at fault. Satan is not to blame—we are.

> Why did god create us with evil in us?

God didn't create us with evil in us. Free will isn't free if we are forced to choose the good, and love isn't love if it is forced and required (have you seen the movie "Ruby Sparks" from 2014?). God created us good, offered us both love and life, and we chose a different direction.

> Why can we create evil if it was not part of god's plan?

Because we are free to choose our behavior. When a person gets married, they are still free to love or not love, to live out their commitment or not, or to remain faithful or not. The plan of marriage doesn't negate their free will.

> Is god's plan that weak that we can wreck it?

God's plan is to have a relationship with us. It's not a weak plan, but it requires the choice to love, because love is always a choice. God's plan is to love us, to invite us to love him back, to make it possible for us to love him back, and to offer all the forgiveness, mercy, and grace necessary for an unbounded relationship. As with any love relationship, the other person has to want it, has to enter it willingly, and to live it freely.

> Or is god's plan to create us evil just for his enjoyment?

This is way off the mark. This idea is totally foreign to anything the Bible teaches, that Christians believe, or that makes sense in the context of what the love of God is all about and what the character of God is like. God created us good for his enjoyment. His desire for us is life. His plan for us is a relationship of love.

[Mr. Mike]

Where does "eternal punishment" fit within love?

About free will, how can god be omniscient when we have free will? How?

Does god know everything or not? If he does, there's no free will. Think about it.

[jimwalton]

You should be aware that there are great efforts to understand the teaching of the Bible about eternal punishment. There are certainly verses that talk about eternal punishment, but they don't necessarily include all of those who are separated from God. There are verses that talk about God reconciling all things to himself (Rom. 11.15; 2 Cor. 5.19; Col. 1.20), and so some theologians think that God will continue his work of reconciliation even into "eternity", such that those who "serve their time" will at a later date be reconciled with God. There is another position called "semi-restorationism" where, after appropriate punishment, those who desire a relationship with God will be partially restored, and those who do not, even after punishment, will opt to remain separated. The point is that, consistent with everything else the Bible teaches, a person's relegation to hell will be something the person will choose ("I don't WANT to be with God!") rather than a destination forced upon one against their will. While the Bible speaks about eternity, possibly only those who stay eternally defiant will be eternally punished.

> Omniscience and free will

Time and knowledge are odd realities. Once Einstein determined and proved that time was not a constant, and since the nature of knowledge (epistemology) is still not totally understood (ultimately we really don't know, at essence, how we know that we know anything), condemning the juxtaposition of omniscience and free will is a shaky proposition at best. If you've seen the recent movie "Interstellar" (Matthew McConaughey, 2014), at the end of the movie they portray some very interesting (though still sci-fi) possibilities about time, presence, knowledge and actions. Without giving a spoiler if you haven't seen it, McConaughy's character, Cooper, is able to breeze freely in the background without the limitations or constraints of time. He can know without interfering with decisions or events, because he can see it all—past, present, and future—at the same time. Granted, it's fanciful Hollywood sci-fi, but at the same time it's reasonable physics. Think about it. Knowledge doesn't imply causality. God can have all knowledge without necessarily interfering with free will.

[Mr. Mike]

> God can have all knowledge without necessarily interfering with free will.

That's immoral. If I love my children and I see one of them is about to have a lamp fall on his head, I try to keep him from getting hurt. I don't care if it's his fault. I have to help him. I can and do interfere with free will if it keeps others from suffering. I have morals.

[jimwalton]

It sounds like you are misthinking free will, God's intervention, and morality. Without free will we would not be human. There would be no such thing as love, kindness, forgiveness, mercy or grace, because all our actions would be determined, and the attributes would have to be defined differently. They would all only be robotic constraint, and we would cease to be human.

The ability to choose and decide is very different from protection. A necessary part of love, kindness and care is protection. Any loving parent will protect their child, but no matter how much you love your children you can't force them to love you back. That must be chosen and exercised by their will.

When God gave humanity their right and ability to choose, he didn't withdraw his protection. In Genesis we find that he put the man and woman in a protective environment and provided for their every need. The world was functioning optimally, and God was in relationship with them and watching over them. But he couldn't force them to love him. He warned them about the fatal fruit, and he was clear about the consequences. He desire for them was life, and his motive was both protection and nurture, but they had to choose. If he deprived them of the ability to choose they would cease to be human. That would have been immoral.

In addition, to address your second slam, God intervenes a lot to reduce suffering and to redeem it after it happens. We are not in a position to judge what has not happened because God prevented it, or from what disasters and grief we have been saved by God obstructing it. There are some prophecies in the Bible (some in Isaiah) where God's punishment on the people is to merely withhold his hand of protection, and the prophet tells of the horrors that will now happen because God's stops protecting. It's enough to let us know that God very probably protects us in many ways that we don't even dream of, and in our ignorance we think our lives are just "the way they are." God's protection of us is, again, very moral of him, since it seems he even protects many people who scorn him and who are opposed to him.

What you can't do, as a parent, is prevent your child from every self-imposed danger and injury. If your kid is an adolescent, you'll learn very quickly that they use their free will, at times, to your heartbreak, and there's nothing you can do to stop it. They choose their path and its consequences. It doesn't make you immoral, because I know many parents in that kind of situation who do everything in their power to stop their kids. But their kids have to CHOOSE it. You falsely accuse God of immorality without thinking all the way to the edges with what you are saying.