Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children

[Roberto]

Homer said: "Do you mean from a human point of view, such as you might judge the Father by what a good human father would do? And if "omnibenevolent" is determined from God's point of view, how would you know, seeing that "His ways are not our ways"?"

I t seems to me that a clear distinction of how we differ from God is presented here:
1: In Romans.
Romans 12:19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord.

2: In 1 Corinthians.
1 Corinthians 11:32 Nevertheless, when we are judged in this way by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be finally condemned with the world.

Humans fathers are never to condemn. God does condemn. Human fathers are never to take revenge, but it is God's to repay, to avenge.

[steve]

Roberto,

Thank you for your input.

Whenever there is a complaint that is arbitrated by a third party, one person will be vindicated (justified) and the other will be declared wrong (condemned). The latter term seems harsh to our ears, but it may or may not involve harsh punishment. If we say that a person's argument is self-condemned, we mean it shows itself to be wrong. I believe that earthly fathers have to be in this role between their children who wrong each other. They have to decide in favor of one over the cause of another.

Vengeance is the settling of a score. It is very much in keeping with the idea mentioned above. The command in Romans is that we should not avenge ourselves because (it is asserted) God will avenge us. This is not the same as avenging Himself, though He may on occasion do that also. Avenging us means settling the score between us and our persecutors in a just manner. Nothing anyone has done to me will justly that they be repaid with eternal torture. Even annihilation may be un-called for. If someone murders me, they have not permanently ended my existence, so it is not clear that permanently ending their existence would be the fitting and equitable punishment.

God will settle all scores, because He is just. Once He has avenged us, or Himself, however, there remains the question of what He does with the one who has been thus punished. Is that person tortured, annihilated or restored? The answer to this question is not implicit in the word vengeance, and must be sought beyond these texts.

[Roberto]

Hi Steve,
Thanks for your response. I will ponder it in my heart.
Robert

[Homer]

Hi Michelle,

I'm not ignoring you. It is so easy to get sidetracked answering others but I owe you a reply.

You wrote:

Further, you and the UR agree that God places a very high value on man's free will and so will not violate it. So where your first disagreement comes, it seems to me, is not whether God's desire for a man to repent discontinues the moment of his death, but, rather, whether man's free will disappears when he is faced with the certainty of his judgement; when his knowledge is apodeictic (thanks for this word, I love it.)

You make the point that we must take the coming judgement by faith and imply that once this judgement is carried out, the rebellious one would, as a matter of course, bow his knee and confess Christ is Lord. So at the point of judgement, man's free will has disappeared, and so, sadly, his confession is displeasing to God.

I would not say it quite that way. God has "fixed a time" when all will be judged. The "game (of life) is over" and things will never be the same. It will be impossible for a person to have faith as the scripture defines it, "certain of what we do not see", Hebrews 11:1. We are saved by faith, I think most all agree, but how will those in hell be saved? Considering John's description of seeing the risen, glorified Christ, Revelation, 1:17, "I fell at his feet as though dead", I can not imagine any will not be forced by the circumstances to acknowlege Jesus as Lord at the judgement. Can we call that confession faith rather than an acknowlegement grudgingly made in resentment and despair? And what will the confession mean, that they accept and gladly submit to his lordship or only a reluctant admission of His sovereignty, which is an obvious conclusion?

The UR seems to say instead that man's free will is still intact; that judgement carried out does not guarantee yielding to God immediately, but might, over time, as so often happens this side of death, convince the sinner of God's grace in the face of our rebellion. A man's repentance under this circumstance, according to the UR, is still a free will choice and a delight to heaven.

I can not grasp the fantastic idea that a person in hell is brought to a free will repentance any more than a person being water-boarded gives up secrets voluntarily. This side of death a person still operates on the principle of faith.

On the other hand, your own view of hell (while minus the heat, still very unpleasant) does not even include the bowing of knees or confessing tongues. You say that those who are sent there are happy to be where they find themselves, their hearts so hardened that, again, free will is a non-issue; they will not be making any changes in their thinking.

At the end of your response to me you said:

I can not buy the idea that the person in the flames of hell repents of his free will. That seems to be a no-brainer to me.

I have heard dozens of testimonies about people coming to the end of themselves, the end of their rope, the dead end of the road they were on, when they came to themselves and realized that they needed to commit to the Lord. These phrases seem to speak of "hell on earth." I'm sure that you would not disparage the testimony of one who comes to the Lord in this manner. Was God coercing him as well? Is his confession of faith less valid because his options seemed fewer?

Some speculation on my part for sure. Perhaps they are where they have chosen to be but are angry and resentful, and with the passing of time become even more so. And perhaps they do not want to be there and it is too late.

I will certainly not disparage any of the testimonies you mentioned. I myself prayed for my brother for about 20 years. I used to pray that God would bring about circumstances that would cause him to repent. I actually prayed that God would bring this about "without hurting him too bad". Then, on a visit, he was very open to my discussing things of God with him. Later he started attending church and finally over the phone (he lives about 500 miles away) he told me he had made a public confession at church. Praise God!

And this brings up a sort of dilemma for us non-Calvinists. When we pray for God to save someone, what do we really hope He does? Interfere with their free-will or no? If no, then it seems His ability to answer our prayer is somewhat limited. Perhaps a little Calvinism creeps in when we pray.

[steve7150]

I can not imagine any will not be forced by the circumstances to acknowlege Jesus as Lord at the judgement. Can we call that confession faith rather than an acknowlegement grudgingly made in resentment and despair? And what will the confession mean, that they accept and gladly submit to his lordship or only a reluctant admission of His sovereignty, which is an obvious conclusion?








As you know Homer , one does not get the opportunity to confess Christ at the judgment, it's simply straight into the lake of fire if your name is not found in the book of life.
We do not really know what the lake of fire is? We do know it's not hell because death and hell (hades) are thrown into the lake of fire.
We do know that Paul said three times every tongue will confess Christ as Lord (certainly not in this life) and that Paul never uses the word "confess" as a forced submission.
We do know John said several times in Revelation that "every nation" will praise the Lord. Not people from every nation, but every nation.
We do know that Christ is judge and that he knows if a confession is sincere.
We do know that it is his God given title and mission to be the Savior of the world.
We also know many people were not saved by faith, like Paul & Peter & John & James & Mary & James and Thomas and his disciples and the 500 & others because they saw the risen Christ. Even Christ's disciples in the upper room after his resurrection had to be rebuked by him for their lack of faith.
Whatever justice is, unbelievers will receive justice in the lake of fire before they get the opportunity to confess Christ as Lord.

Merry Christmas everyone!

[Michelle]

Hi Michelle,

I'm not ignoring you. It is so easy to get sidetracked answering others but I owe you a reply.

You wrote:

Further, you and the UR agree that God places a very high value on man's free will and so will not violate it. So where your first disagreement comes, it seems to me, is not whether God's desire for a man to repent discontinues the moment of his death, but, rather, whether man's free will disappears when he is faced with the certainty of his judgement; when his knowledge is apodeictic (thanks for this word, I love it.)

You make the point that we must take the coming judgement by faith and imply that once this judgement is carried out, the rebellious one would, as a matter of course, bow his knee and confess Christ is Lord. So at the point of judgement, man's free will has disappeared, and so, sadly, his confession is displeasing to God.

I would not say it quite that way. God has "fixed a time" when all will be judged. The "game (of life) is over" and things will never be the same. It will be impossible for a person to have faith as the scripture defines it, "certain of what we do not see", Hebrews 11:1. We are saved by faith, I think most all agree, but how will those in hell be saved? Considering John's description of seeing the risen, glorified Christ, Revelation, 1:17, "I fell at his feet as though dead", I can not imagine any will not be forced by the circumstances to acknowlege Jesus as Lord at the judgement. Can we call that confession faith rather than an acknowlegement grudgingly made in resentment and despair? And what will the confession mean, that they accept and gladly submit to his lordship or only a reluctant admission of His sovereignty, which is an obvious conclusion?

The UR seems to say instead that man's free will is still intact; that judgement carried out does not guarantee yielding to God immediately, but might, over time, as so often happens this side of death, convince the sinner of God's grace in the face of our rebellion. A man's repentance under this circumstance, according to the UR, is still a free will choice and a delight to heaven.

I can not grasp the fantastic idea that a person in hell is brought to a free will repentance any more than a person being water-boarded gives up secrets voluntarily. This side of death a person still operates on the principle of faith.

On the other hand, your own view of hell (while minus the heat, still very unpleasant) does not even include the bowing of knees or confessing tongues. You say that those who are sent there are happy to be where they find themselves, their hearts so hardened that, again, free will is a non-issue; they will not be making any changes in their thinking.

At the end of your response to me you said:

I can not buy the idea that the person in the flames of hell repents of his free will. That seems to be a no-brainer to me.

I have heard dozens of testimonies about people coming to the end of themselves, the end of their rope, the dead end of the road they were on, when they came to themselves and realized that they needed to commit to the Lord. These phrases seem to speak of "hell on earth." I'm sure that you would not disparage the testimony of one who comes to the Lord in this manner. Was God coercing him as well? Is his confession of faith less valid because his options seemed fewer?

Some speculation on my part for sure. Perhaps they are where they have chosen to be but are angry and resentful, and with the passing of time become even more so. And perhaps they do not want to be there and it is too late.

I will certainly not disparage any of the testimonies you mentioned. I myself prayed for my brother for about 20 years. I used to pray that God would bring about circumstances that would cause him to repent. I actually prayed that God would bring this about "without hurting him too bad". Then, on a visit, he was very open to my discussing things of God with him. Later he started attending church and finally over the phone (he lives about 500 miles away) he told me he had made a public confession at church. Praise God!

And this brings up a sort of dilemma for us non-Calvinists. When we pray for God to save someone, what do we really hope He does? Interfere with their free-will or no? If no, then it seems His ability to answer our prayer is somewhat limited. Perhaps a little Calvinism creeps in when we pray.

Thank you, Homer, for your response. I appreciate that you hold your views so passionately, but also admit that there are parts that are speculative and that even, perhaps, a little Calvinism creeps in at times. God bless you and yours especially during the holidays!

[jriccitelli]

I thought I would give a rest to this for the holidays, so I hope we had a Merry Christmas, now back to hell, for everyone who works, I mean…

1) God loves every person (affirm/deny)
Yes; In the general sense, but I can’t see this written or affirmed verbatim in scripture. God seems to (quite often) collectively speak of people(s) in a general sense. God often speaks of hating the sinner and certain people(s). Jacob I loved, Esau I hated. Scripture can also read that God loves everyone collectively and then tests each of them. God also seems to judge them (sometimes) as if He knows they will follow the ways of their fathers.

2) Jesus died to save every person (affirm/deny)
Yes; ‘If’ you repent, ‘believe’ He died for you, and ‘trust’ Him, etc.
Yet; Not everyone ‘wants’ to be saved or corrected, this is confirmed in this world, at least.

3) God is not in a hurry or under externally imposed time limitations.
Yes; He is not in a hurry, but God ‘has’ set a time, and it is not externally imposed.

4) God can do nothing for, and has no interaction with a person after death.
No; God can and does have interaction with a person after death, certainly at the Judgment.
(As I have said; they 'may' have a chance to 'repent', but I think God 'has' tested many 'already', and I would strongly disagree 'all' repent, and that Hell is not final, and neither turned into purgatory).

5) God would save a person who truly repents, right up to the moment before death.
Yes, of course.

6) This is because God loves the sinner, right up to the point of death.
The ‘because’ is not ‘clear’ from scripture (Note Q.1). I have noticed that the predominate ‘because’ explanation for Gods redemption in scripture (notably Israel) is “For My Name sake”, or because of his promise.

(Scripture paints a picture of finality in Gods judgments. Many verses ‘do’ cut them off ‘prior’ to physical death. After all we see God putting people to death ‘Himself’, and commanding others to put people to death. I think God takes the prerogative to do what He must, what other reason can anyone give for God putting people to death? What ‘other message’ would a person get from God executing people? Remember I love people (I try the best I can), but I expect God will do as He said; Judge fairly and punish the wicked)

7) God stops loving people after they die, though they are the same people He loved a moment before they died.
No; Because this assumes 6, you did not say whether or not the ‘people’ are already His, assuming you mean unbelievers, of course He does not have to stop loving anyone, but He certainly has the prerogative to give up.

8) God loves a person at one point, and hates that same person at another only because that person had the effrontery to stop breathing.
No; Yet, God is the one who imposed a length of life upon man, at first God allowed a couple hundred years of life for man, then he shortened it, why?

9) A man is not a worse sinner a moment after death than he was a moment before death
Affirm.

10) Some of the people God has saved during this lifetime have been as bad as any sinner who dies unsaved
Affirm.

11) If God wished, He could give postmortem opportunities for repentance.
Yes.

12) A God who is determined enough to save everyone (so as to die for them all) would probably not wish to lose them simply because they have experienced death
Yes.

13) There are passages in scripture that speak of God using punishments to correct sinners
Yes.

14) It would be possible for God to judge someone severely in time, but to save him in eternity.
Yes.

15) There are passages which teach God's ultimate, irretrievable loss of sinners, which no reasonable exegesis could see differently.
Yes; Yet I am not sure what you are defending with this question, as this would affirm annihilation, since extinguishing them would render them irretrievable (If you are trying to say the ‘irretrievable’ sadness God would feel or something, I am not sure what you mean)

16) Despite these considerations, it is more likely that God will eternally deprive Himself of souls for whom Christ died, than to give sinners further opportunities to repent postmortem.
Yes, “God is able of these stones to raise up children”. Why would God put up with rebellious humans when he can have ‘repentant people’ who fear and love Him? God will have tested and found those who choose life, and loved Him freely without coercion.

Steve wrote; I can give unequivocal answers to these questions from my understanding of the issues.
You can and so can I.

You seem to think I have pre-suppositions, and you do not. Most important is whether or not we ‘Believe’ His Word(s), that is the ultimate question.
Because my focus is ultimately evangelism, I am interested in whether or not a person ‘believes’ Gods words, in order to be saved.

Most of these questions center around two things; 1. Can God ultimately do anything He wants?
Affirm; Of course, in fact it would be wrong to say God ‘could not’ even ultimately say; - forget the Earth after all I’m moving on to something else – poof, done. God ‘could’ ultimately deny everything He has ever said, who can argue with Him?
So these questions should retain the context of Biblical definitions, because all 'we' can do is trust that what He ‘has promised He would do, He will do’, and rest in the fact that He ‘has’ performed what He has already promised, and will continue to do so.

[jriccitelli]

And 2; It seems most of your answers are hinged are on your interpretation, or definition, of the meaning of love. A complex word no doubt, but the Bible (God) usually defines it’s own words itself, so Love, in the Scriptures also must incorporate Justice, and be considerate of mans ‘freewill’. God loves, but has granted to every man the freewill to either love, or love me not.

Steve wrote; There are two sets of verses that come up in this discussion: 1) verses about judgment, and 2) verses about God's universal love for humanity. Now, we have several options:
a) Ignore the verses about judgment;
b) Ignore the verses about universal love;
c) Interpret all the verses in a way that harmonizes judgment with universal love.
It is clear that your approach is (b). Mine is (c). No one here is arguing for (a).

I stated awhile back that I was wanted to know where (?) someone had explained away the abundance of judgment, warnings and killing chapters and verses in scripture. The answer I get ‘seems’ to be ‘that was fulfilled historically’, or (I must hypothesize here since I do not know if anyone said;) ‘These were temporal judgments meant to correct them’, or ‘these were warnings of the temporal not post resurrection’. As I said, I do not think these answers can explain away all these verses, or even half of them. I see my approach is (c) since my theology reconciles 'all' principles such as Love and Justice, Judgment, Wrath, Penalties, Hell, destruction, Testing, Faith, Gratitude, Repentance, Separation, Remnants, where a theology of UR seems to sweep the other principles away when it substitutes Hell as the answer and redefines Hell.
I stated that most the verses gone over previously were ‘hell’ verses, or ‘every knee will bend’ or such, I have not seen much of a list of wrath verses answered, so I posted them in the hope of a response.
I am also fully aware that God's love is immeasurable and God is full of compassion, even restoring those whom we would think were forever lost, yet the context of Repentance, Obedience, Fear, Remnants, and destruction are consistent throughout scripture from beginning to Revelations 20.

Then the LORD passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth; 7who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations’ (Exodus 33:6-7)

Even as God forgives, God still notes that He 'will' punish, if so; Where, if after death? It must be hell, unless you believe there is a purgatory.
Even as Jeremiah tells of Israel and Judah’s restoration, and Gods Love for them, Jeremiah reminds us of a remnant, and reminds us of repentance;

The LORD appeared to him from afar, saying,
“I have loved you with an everlasting love;
Therefore I have drawn you with lovingkindness… (31:3)
‘Thus says the LORD,
“Sing aloud with gladness for Jacob,
And shout among the chief of the nations;
Proclaim, give praise and say… ‘O LORD, save Your people,
The remnant of Israel.’ (31:7)
I have surely heard Ephraim grieving,
‘You have chastised me, and I was chastised,
Like an untrained calf;
Bring me back that I may be restored,
For You are the LORD my God.
19‘For after I turned back, I repented;
And after I was instructed, I smote on my thigh;
I was ashamed and also humiliated
Because I bore the reproach of my youth.’
20“Is Ephraim My dear son?
Is he a delightful child?
Indeed, as often as I have spoken against him,
I certainly still remember him;
Therefore My heart yearns for him;
I will surely have mercy on him,” declares the LORD.’ (Note 31:19)

It seems God will have mercy on a remnant that has repented after learning from their chastisement, any thoughts on this? That is all I am asking from ‘any’ UR proponent ‘or’ someone who knows the UR position without holding to it.

(Please do not chastise me for posting the scripture, I would think to be able to read it in the surrounding context helps, rather than having to search somewhere else. It also qualifies the verse)

[steve]

I stated awhile back that I was wanted to know where (?) someone had explained away the abundance of judgment, warnings and killing chapters and verses in scripture. The answer I get ‘seems’ to be ‘that was fulfilled historically’, or (I must hypothesize here since I do not know if anyone said;) ‘These were temporal judgments meant to correct them’, or ‘these were warnings of the temporal not post resurrection’. As I said, I do not think these answers can explain away all these verses, or even half of them.

There is a difference between explaining away some verse of scripture, and merely explaining it.

The former is an attempt to get rid of the verse and its implications so as not to allow it to make a contribution to the body of evidence under consideration; the latter is called exegesis. It means drawing from the verse its actual meaning without reading something into it that it neither states nor implies.

I do not (and never will) explain away any verse of scripture. I wish to draw my theological understanding from the most correct, exegetical approach to every scripture in the Bible. This is why I have not followed you in reading postmortem judgment into passages that give no hint that such is under consideration.

Since you feel that not even half of the verses about judgment that you have cited can be limited to "this-worldly" judgments (meaning that you believe that over half of them speak of postmortem judgments) could you please present three or four of the judgment passages from the Old Testament (where most of your cited texts are found) which you believe give internal or contextual evidence of referring to judgment beyond the grave?

I don't mean a hundred lines of cut-and-paste text with half a dozen lines underlined. This is not explanation. Please simply provide the lines which you think should be underlined, and give your reasons for applying them to postmortem punishment. It should be a simple exercise, if the evidence is favorable to your interpretations.

[jriccitelli]

Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, I don’t know where not to turn, it seems the whole Old Testament speaks of Judgment.
Judgment on what?

Judgment on Sin.

Sodom, Tyre, Moab, Babylon, Egypt etc. all were judged because they were ‘sinners’.
Do we think God punishes one nation for being proud and haughty and allow another to pass by without notice? Do we think God destroys one nation for idolatry and harlotry and lets another go by without being punished? No these things happened as an example of what to expect if we do not repent of our sins. Many people do escape punishment in this world but these Judgments are meant to make us shudder at the thought that we too will face a judgment by the same God who judged these nations. Israel made that mistake, they assumed that since they were Gods chosen that they wouldn’t fall under the same judgment, but they did.

When God pronounces Judgment on Ephraim in Isaiah 28 I immediately consider the judgment on drunkenness, yet it is a symptom of their rebellion and stubbornness, of their hypocrisy and false assurance because of their ‘religious’ ritual (think of Isa. Chap.1).
We have to see that no-one is going to get away with rebellion, stubbornness hypocrisy and religious ritual - they met their punishment, for others who die before they’re caught and punished, they are fooling themselves to think they will not meet the same punishment.

“Alas, sinful nation, People weighed down with iniquity, Offspring of evildoers, Sons who act corruptly!”

When I read this I do not need chapter and verse to check and see if this applies to me, I can see that ‘I’ was weighed down with iniquity, ‘I’ am the offspring of evildoers, I was a son who acted corruptly. The same God who judges His own people will indeed judge me also if I do not repent.

All these Judgments are warnings to Everyone! It says all these things were written as our ‘example’. Even common disasters are warnings of our temporal balance between life and death, Isaiah uses common examples as descriptive symbols of judgment;

Your land is desolate, Your cities are burned with fire,
Your fields—strangers are devouring them in your presence;
It is desolation, as overthrown by strangers.
The daughter of Zion is left like a shelter in a vineyard,
Like a watchman’s hut in a cucumber field, like a besieged city.

Desolate, burned with fire, strangers devouring their fields, like a shelter in a vineyard, Like a watchman’s hut in a cucumber field… not only does God tell them to observe their surrounding situation, but God tells them to look back and take notice of the surrounding judgments of others;

“Unless the LORD of hosts had left us a few survivors,
We would be like Sodom,
We would be like Gomorrah”

Are we supposed to think this only applies to the Israelites? This is to us, just as it was to them – a warning – look if I did not spare them I will not spare you, are we better than them?
Are we more special? No, the same God who Judges sin here, will judge sin everywhere;

Hear the word of the LORD, You rulers of Sodom;
Give ear to the instruction of our God, You people of Gomorrah.

God (or Isaiah) reminds them that there is no favoritism with His judgments, by calling them by the same name as that of a nation He had already judged God was saying ‘look’ you are sinners – they were sinners, repent or else the same fate awaits you;

Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean;
Remove the evil of your deeds from My sight.
Cease to do evil,

Repent, do works of repentance (sounds like the baptiser);

‘Come now, and let us reason together, Says the LORD,
Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow… “If you consent and obey, You will eat the best of the land; “But if you refuse and rebel, You will be devoured by the sword.” Truly, the mouth of the LORD has spoken’

‘But if you refuse, You will be devoured by the sword’, if we think this only applies to a ‘historical event’ we may be fooling ourselves.

For the LORD of hosts will have a day of reckoning
Against everyone who is proud and lofty
And against everyone who is lifted up,
That he may be abased.

I do not see how anyone could not be a bit fearful of this pronouncement, is it only against one nation, is for a certain people? Is not this a judgment on sin, and without partiality?
Is it not against ‘all’ who are who is proud and lofty and against everyone who is lifted up?

13And it will be against all the cedars of Lebanon that are lofty and lifted up,
Against all the oaks of Bashan,
14Against all the lofty mountains,
Against all the hills that are lifted up,
15Against every high tower,
Against every fortified wall,
16Against all the ships of Tarshish
And against all the beautiful craft.

Is it only Bashan and Tarshish that are proud and lifted up? Haven’t we all been guilty of the same sins?