Age of Accountability

[Musicmaster]

I have my own view. I think "Hell" is the unfortunate side of those who ally with any which way but with God. They want to live independent of God.

But why would they make such a choice to start with? Free Will gave the angels a single opportunity to go with God or independent from God. And man, though he is given the same choice, somehow has the option already predetermined at birth because his ancestors before him have made decisions that reflect in their posterity.

When someone chooses to make life decisions independent of God, the fruit of those choices result in children who exist in a spiritual atmosphere apart from God. They naturally choose to live independent of God, though they may, at times, choose to cooperate with God.

I think those who are predetermined to separate from God do not have to be at the extreme end of punishment. They can be born as children who have never had the choice to do wrong things, though they have that predisposition within them. I'm sure, if they are to go into eternal punishment, that the punishment will reflect the lack of wrong they have ever done.

In other words, I don't believe Eternal Punishment are all people strug up on violins played by demons, nor do I believe their flesh is cooked eternally in fire. What the "fire" means is that they will be forever removed, with their belongings, from the New Earth. They will remain with this loss for all eternity.

But we don't know what is really out there in "Outer Darkness?" For children who have done little wrong, they may not have the light of New Jerusalem, but they may indeed have a measure of light that affords them something equivalent to who they are, but not be punished for what they did not do.

I get what you're saying, but the one thing I could never get around are the repeated descriptors, time after time after time, the descriptors of fire, heat, smoke of their torment, et al. The idea those things don't meaning what they say, and instead making it all subjective on the basis of applied allegory, I just can't buy it any more. The modern system of allegorizing everything those folks out there don't like by them applying an understanding divorced from a literal sense of the language we read in scripture, subjectivizing it under the auspices of allegorized , they make it all out to be what they want given that there are no defining parameters for their allegories.

Don't worry. I once believed as you, but no more.

MM

 

[EmethAlethia]

Hmmm. Interesting question.

Joh 9:21 but how he now sees, we do not know; or who opened his eyes, we do not know. Ask him; he is of age, he will speak for himself." 22 His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone confessed Him to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue. 23 For this reason his parents said, "He is of age; ask him."

Yes, there is an age when people are held accountable for what they say and do. The question is, as in with the case of being able to go to war, ... does that include the 20-year-olds who have the mental capacity and understanding of a 4-year-old? Think it through. Would you sentence a person proven to have the mental capacity and reasoning of a 4-year-old to death for pointing a real gun at his friends and pulling the trigger after watching a John Wayne movie, while he was playing cowboys and Indians?

Jewish tradition puts the age of adulthood at the ages of 12 for a girl and 13 for a boy ... but mental capacity, and the ability to think and reason through the process is always taken into consideration ... Jesus stepping out on His own at an earlier age, would seem to add something to the considerations.

God is just and holy. David's claim that He would see His child again would seem to point to children without the ability to think, reason, consider, ... at a more advanced level, and the parents being responsible for the actions and words of their children, and Jesus not correcting this practice would, it seems to me, add some Creedance to this.

Here's another issue, from my understanding, in Jewish society, adoption required the person being adopted to be of the age of accountability, and the "New Adult" had to "choose" to be adopted. It took the active "choice" of person considered to be an "adult" to finalize the adoption process. Now consider this ... we are adopted children of God, are we not?

So, what's my final conclusion? Logically, reasonably and rationally, until we are mentally mature enough to reason through and understand all the ramifications and results of our choices and decisions, which rarely occurs before ages 12-13, the responsibility for our actions and words falls to the parents. after this age, the responsibility for all our words and choices falls to us.

The question is, if we consider God as "just" and we would not convict and sentence to death a 20-year-old, with a 4-year-old maturity level, to death for murder because of his incapacity to understand what happened, and why, can we assume God would condemn him to hell for being unable to understand, comprehend and accept the truths of the gospel? To me, that would make God evil and unjust. But think it through and let me know if you believe we should convict a 20-year-old, with a 4-year-olds understanding and reasoning, for murder.

 

[Musicmaster]

Hmmm. Interesting question.

Joh 9:21 but how he now sees, we do not know; or who opened his eyes, we do not know. Ask him; he is of age, he will speak for himself." 22 His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone confessed Him to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue. 23 For this reason his parents said, "He is of age; ask him."

Yes, there is an age when people are held accountable for what they say and do. The question is, as in with the case of being able to go to war, ... does that include the 20-year-olds who have the mental capacity and understanding of a 4-year-old? Think it through. Would you sentence a person proven to have the mental capacity and reasoning of a 4-year-old to death for pointing a real gun at his friends and pulling the trigger after watching a John Wayne movie, while he was playing cowboys and Indians?

Jewish tradition puts the age of adulthood at the ages of 12 for a girl and 13 for a boy ... but mental capacity, and the ability to think and reason through the process is always taken into consideration ... Jesus stepping out on His own at an earlier age, would seem to add something to the considerations.

God is just and holy. David's claim that He would see His child again would seem to point to children without the ability to think, reason, consider, ... at a more advanced level, and the parents being responsible for the actions and words of their children, and Jesus not correcting this practice would, it seems to me, add some Creedance to this.

Here's another issue, from my understanding, in Jewish society, adoption required the person being adopted to be of the age of accountability, and the "New Adult" had to "choose" to be adopted. It took the active "choice" of person considered to be an "adult" to finalize the adoption process. Now consider this ... we are adopted children of God, are we not?

So, what's my final conclusion? Logically, reasonably and rationally, until we are mentally mature enough to reason through and understand all the ramifications and results of our choices and decisions, which rarely occurs before ages 12-13, the responsibility for our actions and words falls to the parents. after this age, the responsibility for all our words and choices falls to us.

The question is, if we consider God as "just" and we would not convict and sentence to death a 20-year-old, with a 4-year-old maturity level, to death for murder because of his incapacity to understand what happened, and why, can we assume God would condemn him to hell for being unable to understand, comprehend and accept the truths of the gospel? To me, that would make God evil and unjust. But think it through and let me know if you believe we should convict a 20-year-old, with a 4-year-olds understanding and reasoning, for murder.

As a Jew, I'm well acquainted with that tradition. However, given the Jew's repeated denials of Truth (who is a Person), I'm not so inclined to believe any longer that tradition within Jewish systems of thought as being empirical and/or infallible by any means when not directly rooted in the clear language of scripture.

MM

 

[randyk]

I get what you're saying, but the one thing I could never get around are the repeated descriptors, time after time after time, the descriptors of fire, heat, smoke of their torment, et al. The idea those things don't meaning what they say, and instead making it all subjective on the basis of applied allegory, I just can't buy it any more. The modern system of allegorizing everything those folks out there don't like by them applying an understanding divorced from a literal sense of the language we read in scripture, subjectivizing it under the auspices of allegorized , they make it all out to be what they want given that there are no defining parameters for their allegories.

Don't worry. I once believed as you, but no more.

MM

I appreciate your non-contentious friendly approach to this. I also once believed as you now do! The reason I changed my view is not out of softness--I'm actually quite rough and unbending on some matters--this isn't one of those matters. This is just an honest reassessment of the facts as I see them.

It is a *language* issue, and not an emotional issue for me. The language of fire was obviously pretty significant in biblical times, because fires destroyed garbage, fields, and houses--it was not really about burning people alive, which is more in line with modern day horror films. God is not a sadist. He *prohibited sadism!*

So, fire, as much as it may sound like a horror film, burning people alive for all eternity, is really about destroying property permanently. And throwing people into this fire forever is just removing them as you might burn up trash or see your house burned down. It is the removal of what once was precious.

I just won't read into this language the language of horror films. God isn't like that.

But eternal punishment is a very real thing. Some people will not change--not even from birth. We will bear the results of the fruit we produce--good children will serve God gladly.

Bad children will never give up their independence. We just want to do good to all so that punishment will be lessened for those who will not repent but yield to God on a limited number of matters. And we want to help others find eternal life and blessings for those who embrace our message and repent of their sins.

 

[Musicmaster]

I appreciate your non-contentious friendly approach to this. I also once believed as you now do! The reason I changed my view is not out of softness--I'm actually quite rough and unbending on some matters--this isn't one of those matters. This is just an honest reassessment of the facts as I see them.

It is a *language* issue, and not an emotional issue for me. The language of fire was obviously pretty significant in biblical times, because fires destroyed garbage, fields, and houses--it was not really about burning people alive, which is more in line with modern day horror films. God is not a sadist. He *prohibited sadism!*

So, fire, as much as it may sound like a horror film, burning people alive for all eternity, is really about destroying property permanently. And throwing people into this fire forever is just removing them as you might burn up trash or see your house burned down. It is the removal of what once was precious.

I just won't read into this language the language of horror films. God isn't like that.

But eternal punishment is a very real thing. Some people will not change--not even from birth. We will bear the results of the fruit we produce--good children will serve God gladly.

Bad children will never give up their independence. We just want to do good to all so that punishment will be lessened for those who will not repent but yield to God on a limited number of matters. And we want to help others find eternal life and blessings for those who embrace our message and repent of their sins.

So, if I may, are you saying that the basis of your change of mine along this line is/was governed by the results of fire in this realm? My understanding of all this is that beyond this life, in eternity, we will be as the angels, denoting the inability to die and to be destroyed. The sense of everything concerning fire in that place is in relation suffering, as was shown about the rich man in Sheol...not Hell, but Sheol.

Thanks for the feedback.

MM

 

[Eli1]

God said that Adam would die the moment he ate from the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam and Eve did not die physically that day. As you say, physical death followed 900+ years later. But physical death was the consequence of spiritual death. And it is the same now. We are all dead in trespass and sin, but physically we live.

Why does this distinction matter? Because people need to know that they are spiritually dead to God. It's not just a matter of forgiveness. We need to be made alive once more! (Ephesians 2:1)

"Works" is anything we do in order to try to make ourselves right with God. Some make Bible study a work, prayer a work or church attendance - even all three. Christians need to realise that we are made right with God by what Jesus did on the cross. So we start from a position of being right with God. "Works" should be the result, the outworking of who are in Christ. Lord Jesus said, "Apart from me, you can do nothing."

Many Christians come up with good ideas, try to get them to happen and ask God to bless the work. Paul describes these things as flammable, that will be burned up (1 Corinthians 3:12 & 13). Our work needs to be instigated by Jesus and achieved by the power of the Holy Spirit, to the glory of God the Father.

The problem with self motivated works is boasting. It leads to pride. It's unfortunate that there are so many talented people who do not need God to empower them. I've learned that I can do nothing of any spiritual worth apart from Jesus. Yet I am active, because Jesus motivates me and enables me. I seek God's leading for my life. I have ideas, hopes and dreams, but I submit them all to God. I've had enough failure and defeat to make me wary of relying on myself.

Thank you for your answer and i pretty much agree with you on everything. When you express yourself in this manner, i can see that things are the same as i understand them. I think a lot of misunderstandings come from how clearly and open we are to each-other when we are discussing a topic.
We should discuss it with the intent to be understood first and then exchange knowledge second.

With this being said, being spiritually alive in Christ still means that we die physically. So we wait for the New Kingdom of God where we're going to be alive Spiritually and Physically.

 

[randyk]

So, if I may, are you saying that the basis of your change of mine along this line is/was governed by the results of fire in this realm? My understanding of all this is that beyond this life, in eternity, we will be as the angels, denoting the inability to die and to be destroyed. The sense of everything concerning fire in that place is in relation suffering, as was shown about the rich man in Sheol...not Hell, but Sheol.

Thanks for the feedback.

MM

Yes, we agree on eternal punishment, eternal existence, and permanent separation from God. I just believe the language indicates the fire is not the literal fire we know, but a fire of sorts.

It is a fire that doesn't burn human flesh, because these are people who are going to be resurrected, not to be physically destroyed, but to be physically restored, even if there is a separation between Pardise and themselves. So this is a different kind of fire--one that destroys one's place in the presence of God, but places them elsewhere, which is the suffering.

It is suffering to be separated from God and Paradise. It is regret and recognition that this separation is the consequence of bad choices.

I just don't think the "fire" is indicated, in context, to be a means of sadistic torture. The context suggests "separation"--not torture. I believe medieval depictions of Hell as a torture chamber may have contriuted to this awful sense of what "Eternal Punishment" means.

It is undesirable as separation from God and His Presence. But it is not undesirable because of the intense suffering characterised by flames burning the flesh for all eternity, which is unimaginably sadistic.

 

[Gideon300]

Thank you for your answer and i pretty much agree with you on everything. When you express yourself in this manner, i can see that things are the same as i understand them. I think a lot of misunderstandings come from how clearly and open we are to each-other when we are discussing a topic.
We should discuss it with the intent to be understood first and then exchange knowledge second.

With this being said, being spiritually alive in Christ still means that we die physically. So we wait for the New Kingdom of God where we're going to be alive Spiritually and Physically.

Amen to that. At my age, I'll be delighted to get a new body. This one is suffering from 74 years of wear and tear............

Communicating in writing is difficult. What is clear and obvious to us may not be so to others. This is especially true if our first languages are not the same.

 

[Musicmaster]

Yes, we agree on eternal punishment, eternal existence, and permanent separation from God. I just believe the language indicates the fire is not the literal fire we know, but a fire of sorts.

It is a fire that doesn't burn human flesh, because these are people who are going to be resurrected, not to be physically destroyed, but to be physically restored, even if there is a separation between Pardise and themselves. So this is a different kind of fire--one that destroys one's place in the presence of God, but places them elsewhere, which is the suffering.

It is suffering to be separated from God and Paradise. It is regret and recognition that this separation is the consequence of bad choices.

I just don't think the "fire" is indicated, in context, to be a means of sadistic torture. The context suggests "separation"--not torture. I believe medieval depictions of Hell as a torture chamber may have contriuted to this awful sense of what "Eternal Punishment" means.

It is undesirable as separation from God and His Presence. But it is not undesirable because of the intense suffering characterised by flames burning the flesh for all eternity, which is unimaginably sadistic.

It's interesting, however, that the once rich man on the side of torment in Sheol (not Hell, but Sheol) called out for Lazarus to dip his finger in water and cool his tongue.

Dare we begin allegorizing that into saying what the clear language doesn't say, we end up dabbling in the darker realm of pure subjectivity since allegory has no absolute basis for interpretation apart from the assumptions and bias of individuals who play in that box of quicksand, thus sinking into the depths of ill repute because of their incessant disregard for the integrity of proper hermeneutics.

Granted, this is a peripheral issue and not worthy of argument. What is of note, however, is that when they out there are willing to apply such subjective rules for interpretation as is characteristic of allegory in peripheral issues, it can reasonably be asked, "Against what ELSE they are applying allegory, such as the more central doctrines that are worthy of our defense against?"

Thanks for the discussion. This is indeed interesting.

MM

 

[homwardbound]

Yes, the only law the new flesh needs is "love everyone" (including oneself).

Which delivers freedom, and kills stress over anything and everything, as each person grows new in trust to Father and Son as Won, at least for me, Hebrews 5:12-Chapter 6
Hebrews 4, 8,9 Amazing love given us all to stand in or not and see from Father, Daddy, PaPa's sight, We, at least me, begin to leave trash in the trash can, remaining forgiven by God in the done work of Son for us to grow up and agree and leave garbage behind us
Pulled out of the garbage can, set at the King's table with real food, not yet knowing how to eat, when given a four foot fork to eat with.
What????????????????? Yep, there are many others there at the table with a four foot fork also, we feed each other, wow, amazing God is good all the time as good is God all the time