A few minutes ago I just looked at a site on carm.org that had explanations as to why “If God is love why would he send billions of people to Hell?” which are topics I wrote about a day or two ago and last year and which related to free will, because groups of certain belief types bring it up. While reading it, I came to this disappointing answer:
Second, if someone says that it is wrong for God to allow someone to be born and who will go to hell, then would he rather have God remove our freedom to rebel against Him so that no one can be blamed for sin? If the critic says he only wants those people born who go to heaven, then how are they truly free and how would that fulfill the ultimate plan of God to sacrifice His Son for the redemption of mankind?
This answer seems Arminian-like to me, because they have an obsession with free will, as in a belief that their free will is above God’s or free of his will (which are wrong and false beliefs). It makes no sense, because by that logic than the angels that never sinned, which God’s Spirit no doubt prevents from sinning (just as it directly or indirectly causes humans whom God loves, to do true good) are not free, or that humans that are “filled with the God’s Spirit” don’t have free will or rather, are “robots” or “zombies” as certain Christians, especially Mormons, would say. It also does not make sense because it implies to other wrong things: 1) that free will is sacred and must not be turned off or it’s some sort of sin God would be committing, and 2) that God could somehow get a person to sin by controlling their will directly, which I think is implied because of this part: “would [you] rather have God remove [your] freedom to rebel against Him … then how are [you] truly free [unless you can do what offends him? (etc.)]” Do you see how sick that sounds? That is how those who hate God, and Arminians think though. It sounds very sick to a person like me who loves God.
“Research Meteorologists See More Severe Storms Ahead: The Culprit — Global Warming” from ScienceDaily.com. Huh? I thought Global Warming was replaced by “Climate Change”, you know, to fool all us intelligent people and newbies in life into thinking no one ever said anything about Global Warming being that it’s gettin’ colder, not warmer (plus the fraud and bad science is gettin’ too risky for liberals to keep betting their “reputations” on). So which is it? Are we back on Global Warming as the appropriate term for whatever is happening in the minds of liberals now? And what in thee Hell is “research meteorologists”? What’s the diff between r.m. and an m? Is that like what skeptics are to scientists, like, cheap knock offs who wish they were scientists, but too lazy and stupid to actually be scientific? Isn’t there anything better for ScienceDaily aka Physorg to report on? How about why certain pizza’s tastes best? I’d say my fave but since I prob won’t get paid for it, no. Anyways: make up your minds liberals and whatever it is you are, stop going back and forth, you can’t have it both ways. Stop being cowards and get saved before you really do burn up, because the next time you burn, it won’t ever stop, and for many of you, it will much worse than a mere few degrees rise in temperature, and you’ll wish you were floating in a lake or ocean once you end up in Hell.
Last night, George Noory had on a guest, Bill Wiese, obviously a Christian, who gave his account of being in Hell. At first George said it was a near death experience, but he was later corrected. Odd that being that he had his own OBE (out of body experience) that he’d mess up the details, especially on a rare incident like seeing Hell. You could say it was disrespectful on George’s part. Anyways, George, who prides himself on keeping his opinion out of the stories he gets, wrecked this story by, guess, injecting his opinion to try and refute this Christian, who was obviously the fundamentalist type, but the good kind, not the “be good by obeying God and not rejecting your forgiveness to get to Heaven” type (also known as Arminians). Unfortunately, sadly, Bill was being cowardly or weak when George rudely tried to refute him: George gave his usual Universalist Christian cliche, “I know a lot of people who don’t believe in God, I have on psychics who don’t do anything wrong, they don’t murder anyone. I think Hell is just a state of mind” reply which he gives when he hears, “If you don’t believe in God you’re going to Hell.” When George, or anyone says that, he’s saying it without evidence, and playing God over right and wrong. In list form, this is what he is doing wrong when he says such a thing:
1) He’s contradicting the commandments, which Jesus also repeated as valid, as did every Christian in the Bible. No one said (as sick Christians do), “Oh that’s legalistic to try and obey God to the letter” or “perfectly”. None said, “Just believe what you want” or “your religion is personal” or “God won’t punish reasonable people” or “right and wrong is whatever George Noory or I say it is.” For George to say that a person is “good”, besides being absurd, since there are hardly even any good true Christians, is also absurd because he’s pretending, obviously pretending, to know the hearts and to have seen the lifetime of deeds of the guests he has on. Can he really know what is going on in over a thousand peoples’ lives, even enough to say they’ve never murdered anyone? So he’s been watching them every hour of their life? That’s like a 16-year-old on facebook or myspace or bebo with over 200 friends, pretending that every single one of them is a close friend, and that they know them. I don’t think so. At best you can really “know” about twenty people after having worked with them for a few years, and a typical 16-year-old American or British person would know at best about 41 people from having been around them often. The Bible clearly states that it is wrong to deny God’s existence and that people who refuse to love him will not be forever tolerated in any place other than Hell. It clearly causes a disturbance of the peace, at the very least God’s, and disgusts every Christian, as in real Christ-followers, to see rebellion. A Christian may not make it apparent right away that you’re disturbing them by acting impure, and they might even find it funny for a a while, but after, it disgusts them. God wants, in the end, the majority of rebellious people be sent away, to disturb only other rebels, and get what they deserve for their hostility.
2) George is contradicting his claim that he doesn’t give his opinion, which he says he doesn’t do because the audience doesn’t want to hear him, but what the guests have to contribute. But he is a hypocrite obviously, a false Catholic (or an example of a typical Catholic, hypocritical), because when he hears the truth about God preached, his evil heart kicks back in it’s taking offense at being called “evil” or “not good”. He’s obviously bigoted, as are all who hate Christians.
3) George is contradicting his teaching that right and wrong is just whatever you believe it to be (even going so far as to teach that Hell is just a state of mind), and might as well be teaching that reality is whatever you want it to be. It’s a contradiction, because when then isn’t what a fundamentalist Christian believes to be just as real? It also shows hypocrisy and bigotry to imply that only Christians and murderers can’t affect anything with their beliefs.
4) It’s also a contradiction for George to imply or say that murderers and Christians can’t affect anything with their beliefs, since his hostile attitude towards them clearly implies that he does believe that what they believe can affect reality. It affects reality in this way: what people believe determines their behavior, including their speech, and many people know this, and so try and change the education people get in school, what they see and hear on the “news”, in movies, what they read in books, even going so far as to make corrupt translations of the Bible to fool people into believing things like that Peter was “the rock” or making it hard to determine if Jesus was not God (something Catholics have done with many translations).
5) By itself, it makes no point to say that “Hell is a state of mind.” If George’s point was simply that Hell was a state of mind, then how does that change that people will be in extreme torment? It’s just as pointless as saying, “I think Heaven is a state of mind.”
6) There is no evidence that Hell is a state of mind.
7) It makes no sense to say that Hell is a state of mind, because Hell is described the Bible as a place, just as it describes Heaven as a place and other locations, and besides that, there is indirect evidence that it does exist from the testimony of Christians and non-Christians whose soul or spirit has left their body. It’s just as much a place as is the bottom of the deepest part of the ocean, which though is rarely seen from eyes behind plastic or glass or from a few feet away, can be seen indirectly in other ways. A person would be thought of as fool to say that the bottom of the deepest part of the ocean is a state of mind, or that the farthest place in the universe from Earth is a state of mind, or that the center of the Earth is a state of mind or that the freezing Arctic is a state of mind.
8) Illogical bias: Does George also believe that Heaven and angels are also a state of mind? If not, why? Clearly he’s biased since rarely if ever does a person say that Heaven is a state of mind, except perhaps people of a certain religion, like Buddhism maybe. For a part Christian like George to dismiss Hell, but not Heaven, makes his bias obvious. He’s effectively saying, “I like this part of the Bible, but I personally hate this part, so don’t believe it.” Why would Heaven be real but not Hell?
9) Hypocrisy: George has, with bitterness in his voice, stated that he would not forgive someone who murdered a family member. He said this after a guest caller made a silly rant about how he had been taught from some spiritual beings or being, that his murdered family member wanted to be murdered (and so everything was okay) and so he forgave the murderer when he found himself next to him. If George isn’t willing to forgive murderers, why should God? Why shouldn’t God send them to Hell forever if George doesn’t believe they shouldn’t be forgiven? Further, the world figuratively speaking, murdered Jesus, and that was God’s family member, as were, indirectly, the millions of Christians who were killed for being Christ-followers. If God were to not forgive those who murdered or who greatly contributed to those murderers, then more than the number of those who killed Jesus and millions of Christians would be permanently unforgiven, and that may be, but the point is, then why would George feel repelled by the thought of many millions of murderers being in Hell?
10) Another contradiction, in a way, is that if George meant by, “Hell is just a sate of mind and therefore just change your outlook on life” is denying that murderers should be punished, because God wouldn’t send anyone to a prison, which is basically, is what Hell is. Basically, Hell i, “a prison below ground without light and in which you are continually in pain.”
11) Encouraging crime: if George was implying the disgusting cliche which is that, “Life is what you make of it” in other words, “Just change how you view things”, he’s teaching (just as other guests on Coast to Coast have, especially, big surprise, “psychics”), that harming people can be a good thing, or neither right or wrong, if that’s how you want to view it, and that painful punishment for harming someone, can simply be viewed as peaceful and pleasurable and a reward for harming people. And that’s also a contradiction of George’s teaching or encouraging people to hate murderers then.
12) George’s attempt to make it seem like God isn’t harsh/hard/strict/wouldn’t forgive by trying to do away with sending the criminals to prison, and just making it a “state of mind” reminds me of the dumb Arminian line that God didn’t design Hell for humans, but for Satan and demons (for example a Pastor Galen (father of the wifeless Pastor Dustin Galen said that), which is bigoted, because it’s making out humans to be inherently better than angels, like saying, “God didn’t make Hell for whites, but for black people”, on top of that it’s not Biblical in that the Bible teaches that angels are greater than humans, sinless in fact, and the Bible teaches that God predestined all things, including what we choose to do (using direct and indirect acts) and nothing in the Bible says Hell was only intended for sinful angels. On top of that, God clearly is going to send billions of humans to Hell, so what difference does it make if it were designed only for demons? And concerning destiny, why would it be good for God to control the wills of demons, but not humans? George seems to be trying to make it so that God doesn’t seem so bad by believing that he wouldn’t actually send criminals to a prison forever, but would only trick them into thinking that they were in Hell. Why would God simply use a mind-trick or senses-trick? So he’s going to have billions of people scattered about screaming in agony bursting with tears writhing in pain screaming blasphemies while they are in the renewed glorified universe of peace? And where would they be? Would they be scattered here and there among the peaceful and good people who are trying to enjoy the renewed universe and Heaven, or all in a big pile right next to God’s throne? Talk about dumb. There’s no point in keeping them around and it’s not just and makes God out to be a liar, being that he promised justice and perfect eternal peace for those who love him, not eternal torment by listening and seeing or feeling up against them those in eternal torment.
13) Another contradiction is that if reality is just a state of mind, as George implied by his Hell statement and his teaching or implying that reality can be affected by intent, is that murder doesn’t have to be considered murder, but like his ranting guest caller who said that his family member wanted to be murdered, a murderer can simply be a person doing a good deed or helping out by fulfilling a request, among other things, including just being an angel in disguise giving the gift of a peaceful death, even if it was by torturing a person to death.
This “reality is whatever I believe it to be and whatever everyone but fundamentalist Christians or Calvinist Christians want it to be” is clearly a hypocritical and nonsensical teaching. Not surprising to me, on the same show, George had on the narcissist (that includes elitist) scientist David Sereda, who was encouraging everyone to intend the oil spill to go away, and talked about supposed evidence from some prestigious university from some prestigious top physicist that your intentions and “karma” could, he implied, affect in a “positive” way, whatever you wanted to be fixed. He didn’t say positive, but that is what he implied. I point that out because he didn’t give any evidence that you could harm something or make water impure by intending it and doing a “good deed”. His mentioning of karma and “meditating” (on intending things to change, like for the oil spill to go away) by the way, is further of evidence of my belief that he is a Buddhist, though I’ve never heard him say or write that he was. And now that I write that, that’s just more evidence that Buddhists are also confused as to what is real or not (and big surprise since they, or many of them at least, believe that nothing exists, and is just an “illusion”). And now that I write about that, doesn’t that sound like what George was teaching: that reality is just an illusion? The illusion, for many millions, if not billions, sadly, is that George and his fellow host Ian Punnet, and their many psychopathic guests, are good teachers of the truth.
7-15-2010: Yesterday night George was asked if he was religious, or someone said, “I don’t know if you’re religious” and George gave this cliche response, “I’m spiritual”, which besides showing him to be a false Catholic, or not one at all, and just a supporter, shows his ignorance of what “spiritual” means. It simply means, “Having to do with that which is spiritual” WHICH IS TRUE FOR EVERYONE, since everyone processes and outputs information, which is a spiritual thing (you can’t see information itself, it can only be represented, though God may be able to see it directly somehow and allow others to).
7-18-2010: On the absurd Time Travelers show George Noory hosted, I think yesterday night, George lied and misquoted Wiese, asking this rambling deluded guest who never stops talking, Dr. Bruce Goldberg, if (George didn’t say his name, or rather forgot) a guest he had on who had seen Hell, was right to say that (with a sarcastic voice) “if you believe in very religious things, you’re going to Hell” which isn’t what Bill said, and shows more how childish Noory is. What is the difference between a religious and very religious thing? Weird. Was it not sufficient to say “religious things” or “trus in God” or “trust in Christ”? Apparently the names “Jesus” and “Christ” are terrible words to Noory, like rays of sunlight to a vampire. Bill Wiese basically said that Christ must be accepted as God’s (only direct) son and that you must accept him as your saviour (from your sins, as in you must ask God to forgive you for them and trust Jesus suffered the punishment you deserved for them: the shedding of his blood, hanging on a tree, and physical death, and suffering an eternity of pain for all your sins, not just some or certain ones, in a prison called “Hell”). What does that have to do with “things that very much have to do with a system of worship”? (which is what Noory said by “very religious things”). Dr. Goldberg gave a disgusting cliche response, which was something about how scare tactics like that are used when their power is threatened. WHAT POWER? Calvinists have great control over the world? I wish. And like Noory and Goldberg have no power or money interest, no customers? On top of that Goldberg is a hypnotist, taking advantage over weak-willed people and who commands people what to do without them resisting him. What hypocrite he is, taking the Bible out of context to make it appear to be a mere threat, and making an arbitrary attack like that. God’s power is not threatened by ranting morons who believe that time travelers exist and are whoever they feel them to be, and who say that they know what dogs see when they die and believe any fanciful story as long as it doesn’t threaten their beliefs. According to Dr. Bruce Goldberg then, every threat of punishment is about a fear of loss of control or power, it’s never about keeping peace or trying to give or restore peace in any way, and there should be no threat punishment to the breaking of any law nor a fear of being punished for breaking any laws, including abusing children, robbing the poor and needy, discriminating against strangers and murdering the innocent; did you expect the opposite belief from a “doctor” who believes that it’s okay to control the will of another person and to take advantage of them for fun and profit?
A few minutes later yet another caller praised George for not being confrontational to his guests. He sure is s sarcastic lying, conniving, jerk towards those who threaten the control (as in influence they have over others) and income that he and his “Psychic Hotline to Heaven” friends have. Hypocrites.
Hell is no more in the mind than Heaven. If Hell is in the mind, why not Heaven? If only painful things are in the mind, why not pleasurable? To those Satan isn’t blinding, it is obvious that there is no more reason to believe that Hell or Antarctica are “states of mind” or that “we make Hell here on Earth” anymore than Heaven is a state of mind and something we make on Earth. Those are stupid atheist and New Age cliches meant to express a denial of Biblical facts/that the Bible is God’s word, or that the Bible makes literal statements about a place called Hell and what it will be like in Hell, after God sets it on fire.
[The members who] sin rebuke before all, [so] that others too [may] have fear.
1 Timothy 5:20
I sometimes feel sad thinking of the astounding amount of people who will end up in Hell, humans, angels, possibly aliens, and perhaps some animals. The number of people in Hell will consist of entire nations from ancient times to modern, in some cases, without even a single person spared among the nations many millions. The terrifyingly large number includes 1000 years of births on Earth’s history, wiped out by a worldwide flood. And even after that for thousands of years after, perhaps not more than a few million were spared. Even after the gospel started to become widely known among non-Jews, it seems that only a few million had been saved over the decades, I guess about 10,000,000 people, but Pagan-Catholic Rome seemed to have murdered nearly all of them, except maybe a few hundred, or even less than that, reducing them to a number so small, that the true gospel was not mentioned in history for hundreds of years after. Why would God allow this to happen? It seems pointless to us who are sinful. One reason I always knew was probably why, was so that no one throughout history could claim that God had hidden alternative ways to “perfection” or that he hadn’t given them a chance to find some fault with him, or that he’d always been in their faces tormenting them everyday with his Law or word and also hindering any supposed progress in defeating him that way. Ultimately though no one can live apart from God as he sustains all and determines what people will think via their heart and external stimuli, but God has allowed billions great breathing room aside from all that, to see if they could succeed without him, allowing them to try every type of possible religion and philosophy. Someone might argue that man was about to defeat God, that he had found a way when they were constructing the Tower of Babel, but that God cheated and prevented us from progressing further. But God can’t cheat, since he didn’t make life to be some game in which he can be defeated and he never said he’d allow anyone to defeat him or become his equal.
Who knows what it was God saw could happen if the Tower builders were allowed to build unhindered. Whatever was going to happen, He prevented it. Aside from that failed course, millions can see that other countless ways apart from God can’t succeed either. It seems that what would have happened at the Tower of Babel, was an eventual progression using technological means at being able to transform our material bodies into fully spiritual immortal ones, and eventually learning how to do anything, including become equal to God in power and wisdom. But God stopped us, and forced us to explore other ways. Someone might argue that that is pointless, to have us explore failed ways, if there was a possible way to succeed, but that God stopped it. Another reason would be that God didn’t want anyone to be able to say that he could be defeated by the so called “collective consciousness (will power)” of the many and therefore only allowed a few million people to rebel against him, because a billion or more could overpower him. Clearly though, many billions can’t overpower God. And this massive very long demonstration shows God is true when he says that he cannot be defeated. Seeing him prove himself true gets rid of any doubt to those he will save, has saved, and will one day be proven to those who hate him, and for all time to those he has saved, by blotting out their names from his book of life, and locking them in Hell forever.
All this by the way, shows that religions which teach that we can become equal to God, are false religions, and that would include the Mormon religion.
Despite knowing all this, some might still think it pointless, since all God had to do to show he couldn’t be defeated, was to allow everything to go along perfectly forever and prevent evil from ever happening and to then declare at some point, “Has anyone ever disobeyed me after hundreds of trillions of years?” or to remove us from time so that there is no future, just an eternal present, at in that state be aware forever that nothing bad will ever happen. The solution is that God had desired a greater glory, greater fame, greater reverence, one that could not have been achieved if he made the universe “simple” like that. So he introduced extreme complexity for himself to work with by allowing extreme evil and madness, the virtual opposite of himself: a lying “god” like Satan, and not just one Satan, but many virtual versions of him in the form of other disobedient angels, and showing that he could defeat this seemingly unbeatable madness with ease in many ways, both physically, and spiritually, including through his spiritual word.
An ancient Roman knew, as many others probably did, why some were allowed and caused to suffer greatly:
“Whenever we crucify criminals, very crowded highways are chosen, so that many shall see it and may be moved by fear of it, because all punishment does not pertain so much to revenge as to example.” – Quintillian
A simpler and clearer explanation of what Quintillian said, and meant,
We punish those who do wrong in front of an extremely large amount of people so that they will all be too afraid to do what is wrong. So not all punishment that exists is simply about revenge, but it is also to prevent harm to others by showing the harm that is done by disobeying their king.
Quintilian (born ca. 35, died ca. 99), also known as Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, was born at Calagurris in Spain, the son of a rhetorician. He studied mainly in Rome, under the orator Domitius After and perhaps the great grammarian Remmius Palaemon, among others. He then went back to Spain, probably as a teacher in his hometown, and returned to Rome in 68, the only certain date in his life. As a teacher of rhetoric, he became wealthy and famous from his lectures and was also an advocate in the law courts. Under the emperor Vespasian he was made a professor of rhetoric with a salary from the state. Among his pupils was Pliny the Younger.
At some time, probably in the early 80s, Quintilian married a very young woman. She died at the age of 18, after giving birth to two sons, who soon died as well. After 20 years of teaching, perhaps in 90, Quintilian retired and devoted himself to writing. Sometime after this, but before Domitian’s death in 96, Quintilian was appointed by him as tutor to his two grandnephews; and through the influence of their father, Flavius Clemens, he received the insignia and privileges of a consul. The date of Quintilian’s death is uncertain: Pliny the Younger, writing about 100, speaks of him in terms which suggest that he was already dead.
Only one work of Quintilian’s has been preserved, the Institutio oratoria (On the Education of an Orator) in 12 books, composed about 92-96, the distillation of his long and successful career as a teacher. It treats of the education of an orator, beginning with the most elementary education. Book 1 sets the tone of the whole collection: it is moderate and practical, based on long experience with the actual behavior and psychology of children… – adapted source
I don’t like the label “Hyper Calvinist”. It’s puke and reminds me of “spaz” atheists. So don’t call me one after reading this.
Who agrees that God destines everything, including who goes to Hell? I believe that it is illogical and unbiblical (and makes Calvinists look stupid) to claim that God doesn’t destine anyone to Hell when it’s claimed that he is the one who is required to save you. Further, think of it this way: does God do anything without knowing the result? Doesn’t God know the result of his action of inaction? Is God the one who decides what will happen or is he not all-knowing? Are there things God is unsure of? Is God only sure of what will happen to a person he intends to save? Further, why wouldn’t God destine someone to Hell when he hardens a person’s heart so that they WON’T do good? Why cut it short at destining someone to Hell if he chooses what sins a person will commit indirectly? Again:
How can anyone say, “God doesn’t destine anyone to Hell,” when he is in control of everything either directly or indirectly and knows the future perfectly and his turning our hearts to him for forgiveness is required for us to be saved from Hell?
I hope that any Calvinists who claim God doesn’t destine anyone to Hell or who says, “Well I don’t know” will stop, and admit the truth so that we aren’t seen as insane idiots anymore by Christians and Arminiests, who use that illogical fudging to turn or keep people away from the only way to eternal peace. It’s not enough to unifiy under the name “Calvinist” anymore than it was enough to unify under the name “Christian”: We must get our gospel straight and stop spreading Hellish confusion and stop pandering and giving Arminiansts room in the Church to spread their deception.
And just what is the problem with saying that God destines anyone to Hell? Everyone knows that false and non-Christians are arbitrary with their condemnation of God anyways, they say, “He’s always angry” and hateful for sending anyone to Hell except Satan and the demons that follow him, or that he’s always allowing the innocent to suffer (and ironically they unkowingly include “Christians” under ‘innocent’, sometimes).
There ar already the “blinded” and “hardened” verses and the punishment verses, so what does it matter if we acknowledge that God does destine people to Hell as well? They already say he is mean when about none of us bring that point up and rarely!
This denying that God destines anyone to Hell allows millions of Arminiests, whether they call themselves or not, to disguise themselves as one of us. How? Because in their confused minds they think that so long as they wet say that God doesn’t destine anyone to Hell that a person can be saved by their own goodness, and if that is true, then God doesn’t need to destine anyone to get eternal life, and if he doesn’t need to, then he doesn’t. If that’s not how they reason then why else would they divide from Calvinists on that point above the others they differ from us on? Why else would they always be babbling about how man has a free will and how God gave us a free will? Their denial that God destines anyone to Hell above destining anyone at all combined with their endless trumping of “free will” and not God’s show how they think. We Calvinists must not give them weasel room anymore and must let the falling away occur, and it will occur when we shut the door to their lies. The longer we allow their foot in the door on this issue, the more people they will deceive and the worse the condemnation of those going to Hell will be. It’s better for the world to revert back to idolatry as Revelation seems to imply will happen, than people continually drawing near to Christ under the false idea that they can earn their way into Heaven or just by saying, “I accept Jesus into my heart,” and ask for forgiveness again and again when they sin and or just doing some good deeds.
Another problem withing denying or hiding that we believe God destines anyone to Hell is that it makes it harder to distinguish a true from a false Christian. The Pentecostal churches are infested with fakes in part, because of true Christians pandering to the fakes and denominations similar to ours, like the Methodists appear to be “as Christian” as us. So, for those Calvinists who keep giving ground to the enemy, stop: draw the line clearly in the sand and stay there.D