God's Wrath

[Todd]

Todd,

I haven't read the post at the link you provided yet, ...[\quote]

I have edited my previous post for those who may not want to read the lengthy essay I provided in the link.

Is it possible that when the bible refers to the "dead"; or someone who is "dead in their trespasses and sins"; or someone being "dead while they live" that it is using the term metaphorically to describe the future state of that sinner. For example, if someone punched me in the nose I might say, "Oh you've done it now. You are dead!" Of course, that person is not physically dead, but they do face some wrath that I plan to dish out. Maybe that's a bad analogy, but hopefully you see my point.

Yes, this is possible, but it doesn't solve the dilemma of the destruction of death as the last enemy.

Todd

[kaufmannphillips]

Perry wrote:

Someone like, say, Isaac Asimov, who lived a long and pleasant life (by earthly standards), would die eternally, without ever having even known how wrong he was to promote atheism, or even that there was an opportunity for him to have a shot at eternal life. This seems to be very violent against the idea of justice.

What is justice?

[Paidion]

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. (Rev 20:12,13 ESV)

When John says that he saw the dead in his vision, why can it not refer to those who died physically, but who are now (in John's vision) alive physically because the resurrection has occurred and they been brought back to life? In short "the dead" does not refer to those who are now dead ("now" being from the perspective of event in John's vision), but those who were dead in the past.

[Perry]

What is justice?

What, you mean you don't know?

[Todd]

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. (Rev 20:12,13 ESV)

When John says that he saw the dead in his vision, why can it not refer to those who died physically, but who are now (in John's vision) alive physically because the resurrection has occurred and they been brought back to life? In short "the dead" does not refer to those who are now dead ("now" being from the perspective of event in John's vision), but those who were dead in the past.

Paidion,

John could mean it just as you have described, but since he is speaking metaphorically, one can't know for certain.

Todd

[Paidion]

How do you know he was speaking metaphorically?

Is he not simply describing what he saw in his vision? And might not that vision be depicting what will actually take place on judgment day?

Perhaps the "books" are metaphors. For God doesn't need books to remember what everyone has done.

[jriccitelli]

Seems to me scripture has always been speaking of 'that coming great and terrible day of the Lord', 'That Day' has been a warning to all the living throughout scripture, yet many have already died, have they escaped judgement?

I do not know how God could justify allowing a person to harm others and not pay for their crimes, simply because they die. Millions of people have been killed and mutilated by men who have never paid for or suffered for their crimes at all, they simply died. There are millions who have committed sins for which death alone is not 'just' payment for their sins (Albeit relief to those living). Much can be lost by 'one' mans sin, and although no amount of punishment can ever undo a sin, punishment is necessary to deter any future sin.
Millions of people have led rich comfortable prosperous lives directly as a reward of their oppression, exploitation, taxation, corruption, slavery, etc., of other humans and never suffered, or paid, at all. Millions more lived 'rich and well' in full knowledge of benefiting from their own families, kings, and dictators (above mentioned) corruption and sin. Some were caught and tried, but for certain the majority never paid a red cent.
(Are you saying their unfulfilled happiness, and occasional sniffles made up for their atrocities?)

I believe it is a sin to not defend the innocent, and a sin to allow injustice to continue against the defenseless, the slave and the captive.
It would be unjust to not punish sin.

Millions think they are getting away with murder, and I know 'millions' of murders and 'millions' of rapes (billions) have occurred throughout the past 20 centuries, without ever having been brought to light or justice. Do you think this is just?

Traffic laws are the simplest example of deterrent punishment; would you say getting a ticket is 'not' a deterrent?

[jeremiah]

hey todd,

with regard death being the last enemy to be destroyed, it seems only by conflating categories does any such "dilemma" emerge. in 1 corinthians 15:54,55 which you quoted earlier. i would grant you that if we had no other information about the nature of the resurrection than, yes the wording may be construed ambiguous as to whether paul in the preceding verses was describing the dead rising generally, or a specific group's particular quality of raising. jesus spoke on a number of occasions how some will be raised to aeonian life, while others on the same day would be raised to aeonian condemnation. i think it's therefore safe to assume paul has a particular category in mind. then death is swallowed up in victory with respect to those given aeonian life immediately upon being raised. the judgment and condemnation that follows for those who turned from the holy commandment is simply another category. do you not see two categories to be drawn from this passage regarding judgment day ?:
romans 2:4-9
Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according to his deeds: to them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: but unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
i see a strong distinction drawn here between two particular groups that will receive opposite rewards when the righteous judgment of God is revealed.

in revelation 20, to say we can't know for certain since he's speaking in metaphors(granted FSA), i think is an illogical appeal to mystery. to recognize the symbolic nature of john's vision as a whole is one thing. but your treatment of the beginning of v12 seems more to take metaphors ,whose function must retain some cohesion to the form it describes, and then declare an enigma thereby removing any hope of making sense out of words at all. metaphors don't function in that way. i'm not willing to deny the possibility that aeonian punishment may be a fire that purifies. but there are too many judgement passages, as well as those which speak of being severed from Christ, for me to conclude that there will be zero post mortem punishment for those not in Christ. for the salvation of our souls is the end of our hope, not a current reality to all, but an escatological fulfillment to those in Christ, on the last day (as i understand the scriptural witness anyway )
grace and peace be with us...

[Paidion]

JR, how is it possible for anyone to pay for their crimes? Supposing someone has wronged you. Does making him suffer for his wrongdoing make it right? If so, would you be willing to become his friend once he has "paid" the price? Actually I don't think his suffering does anyone any good — not even himself unless it helps to deter him from repeating his crime. But punishment does not appear to be an effective deterrent in general. If it were, one would expect the murder rate in U.S.A. to go down after capital punishment was restored in many states. But it actually went up! In Canada, after capital punishment was eliminated, one would expect the murder rate to go up. But it actually decreased throughout the years since it was done away with.

When someone does me a great wrong, I don't want to see him punished. I want to see him repent (have a change of heart and mind). If the person truly repents, I can fully forgive him and restore my relationship with him. As far as our relationship goes, it's just as if he had never sinned!

But I fully agree with you concerning our moral obligation to defend the innocent. Putting the unrepentant offender in prison will certainly prevent him from re-offending as long as he is there. But if he has repented, it won't do him any good whatever, nor will it do anyone else any good.

Unfortunately, man looks at a person's past actions, and seeks retributive punishment to "make him pay." God looks at a man's present condition, and if He finds him unrepentant, He seeks a way to lead the man to repentance, and to reformation through His enabling grace.

It is not harshness which leads a man to repentance, but love. This is born out in the following verse which Jeremiah quoted:

Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? (Rom 2:4 ESV)

[jriccitelli]

God does not put aside all punishment and have 'only' kindness, He does 'both'. This is pretty consistent with scripture.
You have raised children, I presume. I love them too, but it would not be love if I did not spank or punish them occasionally when they did wrong. A woman asked me why my dog doesn't need a leash when I walk him, I said because he loves me, and knows I love him, but the dog has certainly been scolded a number of times, believe me they would not behave except for having their punishment, fair and educational.

I know you are opposed to the death penalty, but do you not know the extremes the innocent people have to go through to insure that prisons are secure from escapes?
Do you know how dangerous it is for prison guards to keep these guys, do you know how many more are subjected to the violence and murder within our prisons by these guys? Most men have to join violent gangs to keep from being a victim themselves.
Do you want to be a prison guard? Do you want to have your nephew share a cell block with these guys, when he is only in there for drug dealing or something (It happens all day)? Are you the doctors and nurses obliged to care for these violent criminals?
A rape or assault victim, and their family, should never have to endure the rest of their life fearing these violent offenders may get out (which happens every day) or escape.

Capital punishment is not my idea; it is from Exodus 21, and earlier in Genesis chap. 2.
Never the less only a ‘very small’ number of offenders are put to death in countries that have legal Capital punishment, therefore almost making null the whole notion. Keep in mind about 15-16,000 murders happen per year, I don’t know the exact statistics but roughly 10,000 people are convicted of murder ‘each’ year, yet in our country we have put to death less than 50 persons a year. Note also the 80-90,000 (reported) forced rapes per year, yet less than 50 persons facing death, some deterrent that is.
Only 1300 death penalties since 1976! How many murders have there been since 1976, I know it must be more than 400,000. Murder went up as well ‘all’ crime, violent and none violent went up ‘ten fold’ into the 1990s from 1976!
If 100 % of convictions rather than .001% were put to death there would be a little more consideration on the part of offenders. Remember the biblical mandate held that not only were most of the Ten Commandments punishable by death but other sins as well.