Do "Born again" Churches Seriously Believe This?!

[RiversideGuy]

I got to thinking the other day about something I heard at a fireside a number of years ago when a General Authority said that from the time of Christ 'til now, approximately 70 billion people will have inhabited the earth. That figure of 70 billion stuck in my head after that talk and what I was wondering is do the Christian religions who teach that unless you accept Jesus as your personal Savior you will really go to an everlasting, literal burning lake of fire where you will be tortured day and night forever and ever? When you think of that figure of 70 billion, can you honestly say AT LEAST HALF of those people will be in such a fiery state, especially since most "born again" style religions teach that the majority will NOT make heaven? DOES THIS MEAN THAT WELL OVER 35 BILLION PEOPLE WILL BE BURNING FOREVER AND EVER???!!!! That's over 5x our earth's total population right now!!! I cannot possibly fathom such a thing as that!!! Also, are all these people in the center of the earth right now, according to what most Christian churches teach? What about the people that lived for 4,000 years before the time of Christ where nothing about a lake a fire was ever taught in the Old Testament? Are they in for a fiery surprise when they die? Just honestly trying to understand all of this. Thanks.

When one considres the fact that EVERYONE is worthy of eternal damnation, it is comforting that GOD chose to even provided a means to save anyone at all. There are levels of punishment ----- see Matthew 10:15 "Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew 11:22 "Nevertheless I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you.

Eternity is just a forever now...

I might add that God speaks in terms of rejecting HIS salvation. It is possible that those who have not heard ----- that GOD knows their heart and their responce to such a salvation. It may also be that such people would have rejected HIM anyway and since they didn't hear, their burden is much lighter...

We cannot suppose to judge GOD.

Edited September 18, 2009 by RiversideGuy

[AnthonyB]

Carl62,

If you want to read an interesting take on the question of hell then can I recommend CS Lewis' "The Great Divorce".

I won't do Lewis the disservice of poorly expressing the picture he creates but will quote George McDonald, who is quoted in the book, "No, there is no escape. There is no heaven with a little of hell in it -no plan to retain this or that of the devil in our hearts or our pockets. Out Satan must go, every hair and feather."

So rather then asking how many will God save, you should be asking how many will wholeheartedly surrender and accept the gift of grace through faith that leads to salvation without trying to bring a little of hell with them by refusing through one means or another the free gift. In the end we cannot know or demand how God will treat others, we can just cling to the promises of salvation he has made us and proclaim to all that will hear it.

Edited September 18, 2009 by AnthonyB

[bmy-]

LDS theology on this matter is certainly "kinder and gentler." It seems fairer. But, if it's not accurate, if it does not correctly reflect God's plan of salvation, than the teaching could lull sinners into a false sense of security. So, I opt for the teaching that I find in my Bible, rather than the one I find more attractive.

And this is the middle ground/bottom line. Carl.. if you do not mind me asking -- how is our doctrine really any different? If one does not make it to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom.. it is taught that they are in effect damned. Hell is Hell.. both versions sound painful.

(D&C 43:33) "And the wicked shall go away into unquenchable fire, and their end no man knoweth on earth, nor ever shall know, until they come before me in judgment."

(3 Nephi 27:11) "But if it be not built upon my gospel, and is built upon the works of men, or upon the works of the devil, verily I say unto you they have joy in their works for a season, and by and by the end cometh, and they are hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence there is no return."

Edited September 18, 2009 by bmy-

[RiversideGuy]

And this is the middle ground/bottom line.

But is lukewarm somewhere where GOD desires us to be?

[bmy-]

But is lukewarm somewhere where GOD desires us to be?

Who says that the middle ground must be lukewarm? Perhaps the LDS view is the lukewarm one.. as it is neither hot nor cold

The LDS Church has not always had a ban on alcohol, etc. Even post-Word of Wisdom moderation was still the key. Now.. it's 100% abstinence. It seems plain to me that sometimes God would rather us err on the side of caution.. which seems to be exactly where PC is.

[Carl62]

So rather then asking how many will God save, you should be asking how many will wholeheartedly surrender and accept the gift of grace through faith that leads to salvation without trying to bring a little of hell with them by refusing through one means or another the free gift. In the end we cannot know or demand how God will treat others, we can just cling to the promises of salvation he has made us and proclaim to all that will hear it.

But what if some people in no way, shape or form ever do get to hear it? Suppose an 18 year old kid who lives in China and has only ever known Taoism his whole life goes out and gets killed in a car accident. Where, according to "born again" beliefs on heaven and hell, would he end up? I've even heard it said from many "born again" Protestants that somebody like Mother Teresa would end up burning forever in hell simply because she was Catholic! I guess it's this slightly narrow, black and white view of the Protestant heaven/hell that I'm trying to understand and am wondering what scriptural basis there is for it.:)

[Carl62]

And this is the middle ground/bottom line. Carl.. if you do not mind me asking -- how is our doctrine really any different? If one does not make it to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom.. it is taught that they are in effect damned. Hell is Hell.. both versions sound painful.

Then why did Joseph Smith say that if we could just get a tiny glimpse into the TELESTIAL kingdom ( the one reserved for people who've commited the more serious sins) that it would be so nice that we'd kill ourselves just to get there? I don't know exactly where the quote is, but I've heard it said since day one of my 30+ years in the church. That's why the church does have a "kinder and gentler" view on the afterlife because even though people do sin and fall short of the glory of God, the majority of people for the most part are good, kind hearted people who don't deserve an eternal afterlife that would be equated to that of your most absolute worst horror movie. And for those that never do get the chance to hear the gospel in this life but who are kind to their fellow man, where does that leave them?

[lattelady]

The book of Romans teaches that what God has revealed of Himself through creation gives all mankind an understanding that there is a God. From there, men begin to suppress the truth of Him by "their wickedness." They don't want to believe in God. But it says in Romans 1:19,20 "...since what may be known about God is plain to them because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--His eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."

The native in the jungles of Africa who never had anyone preach the Gospel of Jesus to them can see the truth of God revealed in creation order and know that there is a God. I believe that since God knows the heart of man, the person who recognizes there is a God and longs to know Him, God will reveal Himself to them. God can make Himself known to the person whose heart desires to know Him.

This summer my husband went on a missions trip to Uganda. God brought white people (my husband's group of about 35 people) from across the world to Africa, and my husband went hut to hut meeting people who had never before seen a white person. He told them about God. They were READY to hear that message. It's like they'd been hungering to know about a God they'd wondered about their whole life. When he told them that Jesus had died for their sins, most of them would fall on their knees on the dirt sobbing and through the interpreter would cry out, "Mister, what must I do to be saved? Please, tell me!" They were aware that their sin separated them from a holy God, and that He had died to take their sin upon Himself as a substitute so they might be saved from an eternity in Hell. Their rejoicing in the gift of salvation was beautiful. They would sing and dance and hug my husband and thank him for bringing this message to them. If a person wants to know God, He will reveal Himself to them. We don't have to worry about, "What about the person in a far away country who never got to hear? Is that fair for God to send them to Hell?"

1 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentence."

Edited September 18, 2009 by lattelady

[bmy-]

Then why did Joseph Smith say that if we could just get a tiny glimpse into the TELESTIAL kingdom ( the one reserved for people who've commited the more serious sins) that it would be so nice that we'd kill ourselves just to get there? I don't know exactly where the quote is, but I've heard it said since day one of my 30+ years in the church. That's why the church does have a "kinder and gentler" view on the afterlife because even though people do sin and fall short of the glory of God, the majority of people for the most part are good, kind hearted people who don't deserve an eternal afterlife that would be equated to that of your most absolute worst horror movie. And for those that never do get the chance to hear the gospel in this life but who are kind to their fellow man, where does that leave them?

Damnation is damnation. Which pain is the more severe.. spiritual or physical? The righteous will dwell in 'everlasting burnings' also..

Edited September 18, 2009 by bmy-

[lattelady]

So the LDS church teaches a literal hell of 'everlasting burnings'? I didn't know this. I knew about the three "heavens", and about an outer darkness for sons of perdition, but was not aware of a fiery hell taught in the LDS church. But clearly, there are scriptures that mention it. Is this taught?

[thews]

I believe that God is a loving and just Creator, who has created an eternal hell where rebellious souls will suffer and where "the worm dieth not." If I were forced to attempt to explain why God created such a place, I'd first say it was for the Devil and his minions, and secondly that those who would rebel against God commit an eternal rejection. They would destroy the heavenly kingdom with their sin. Such blatant rebellion against the Creator, whether by a mass murdering atheist like Stalin, or a self-righteous Pharisee who would cheer the Son of God's crucifixion, such is worthy of eternal death.

LDS theology on this matter is certainly "kinder and gentler." It seems fairer. But, if it's not accurate, if it does not correctly reflect God's plan of salvation, than the teaching could lull sinners into a false sense of security. So, I opt for the teaching that I find in my Bible, rather than the one I find more attractive.

Fair enough, but I'll tell you what I think. Adam and Eve listened to the serpent and wondered what God was hiding from them. The lesson they learned from eating the apple was the knowledge of good and evil.

Assume you are a soul and God tells you what love is... would you understand? If he told you what pain was, would you understand? You could probably understand the premis, but you wouldn't really know what these emotions were. Conversely, while we are human we find out first-hand what these emotions are.

Now to the concept of hell. Assume the spectrum of intellect spans ten segments of 10% in each. The capacity for understanding in the top 10% is far greater than the botton 10%. A person of greath depth my read the bible and understand the nuances, while a person in the bottom can pretty much only understand do bad things and go to hell. This is one book and it has to encompass the entire spectrum.

Using this analogy, then the "meek" would be held to a lower standard when compared to the upper 10%. Is that fair? Life isn't fair, judgment is the Lord's and all we have is our own opinion and beliefs.

IMO, in the end we will have learned many things, but unless God showed himself to us and proved it, what we believe is built on faith. That faith is built on truth, our truth, as it forms the opinion known only to us. When we stand before God (again IMO), we will be held accountable for what we decided was the truth.

What I believe to be true is that this earth domain is the perfect paradox. We have people that don't believe in God, and those that do, and a bunch of other things in many ways based on culture for the most part. We will know what life is like without God, where evil exists. If evil doesn't exit in the afterlife, then we will never betray God, for we have knowledge of what it's like to live without him.

This is just my opinion and it's why I don't believe in hell, but what I reaaaaly don't believe in is judgment other than the Lord's judgment. What I believe is the truth to me, and it has to be based on absolute truth. JMHO.

[lattelady]

Thews, if what you believe has to be based on absolute truth, what is the absolute truth in reference to hell? Do you believe that the Bible teaches the reality of such a place of judgment?

[RiversideGuy]

Fair enough, but I'll tell you what I think. Adam and Eve listened to the serpent and wondered what God was hiding from them. The lesson they learned from eating the apple was the knowledge of good and evil.

Assume you are a soul and God tells you what love is... would you understand? If he told you what pain was, would you understand? You could probably understand the premis, but you wouldn't really know what these emotions were. Conversely, while we are human we find out first-hand what these emotions are.

Now to the concept of hell. Assume the spectrum of intellect spans ten segments of 10% in each. The capacity for understanding in the top 10% is far greater than the botton 10%. A person of greath depth my read the bible and understand the nuances, while a person in the bottom can pretty much only understand do bad things and go to hell. This is one book and it has to encompass the entire spectrum.

Using this analogy, then the "meek" would be held to a lower standard when compared to the upper 10%. Is that fair? Life isn't fair, judgment is the Lord's and all we have is our own opinion and beliefs.

IMO, in the end we will have learned many things, but unless God showed himself to us and proved it, what we believe is built on faith. That faith is built on truth, our truth, as it forms the opinion known only to us. When we stand before God (again IMO), we will be held accountable for what we decided was the truth.

What I believe to be true is that this earth domain is the perfect paradox. We have people that don't believe in God, and those that do, and a bunch of other things in many ways based on culture for the most part. We will know what life is like without God, where evil exists. If evil doesn't exit in the afterlife, then we will never betray God, for we have knowledge of what it's like to live without him.

This is just my opinion and it's why I don't believe in hell, but what I reaaaaly don't believe in is judgment other than the Lord's judgment. What I believe is the truth to me, and it has to be based on absolute truth. JMHO.

But don't you feel that God had every intention of allowing Adam & Eve to learn things in His way and at His perfect timing. Satan lied and set up Adam, who actually blamed God for creating Eve.

Satan wanted to become God, himself, and he beguiled Adam & Eve into believing God was holding out on them.

The Bible says that the memory of bad things will be wiped away. Isn't it likely that God will simply bring the select group of saved individuals back to the Garden but without a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. And then things will progress exactly as God originally intended.

[prisonchaplain]

And this is the middle ground/bottom line. Carl.. if you do not mind me asking -- how is our doctrine really any different? If one does not make it to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom.. it is taught that they are in effect damned. Hell is Hell.. both versions sound painful.

(D&C 43:33) "And the wicked shall go away into unquenchable fire, and their end no man knoweth on earth, nor ever shall know, until they come before me in judgment."

(3 Nephi 27:11) "But if it be not built upon my gospel, and is built upon the works of men, or upon the works of the devil, verily I say unto you they have joy in their works for a season, and by and by the end cometh, and they are hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence there is no return."

It's been explained to me that even the Telestial Kingdom is more glorious than Earth. So, the simple different between LDS and evangelical teaching on hell is that your church greatly narrows (from my perspective) that wide and easy way that leads to destruction.

[prisonchaplain]

But what if some people in no way, shape or form ever do get to hear it? Suppose an 18 year old kid who lives in China and has only ever known Taoism his whole life goes out and gets killed in a car accident. Where, according to "born again" beliefs on heaven and hell, would he end up? I've even heard it said from many "born again" Protestants that somebody like Mother Teresa would end up burning forever in hell simply because she was Catholic! I guess it's this slightly narrow, black and white view of the Protestant heaven/hell that I'm trying to understand and am wondering what scriptural basis there is for it.:)

What happens to those who never heard, or were mislead into false teachings about Christ? Not to be crass, but once folk are dead, it's up to God. He'll do right. But, for the living, my job as a believer in Christ, is to make sure that ignorance is the case for as few people as possible. Ignorance is not bliss. Personally, I'd rather be judged for making the wrong choices rather than for not getting to hear the right ones.

And yes...I know that some Protestant/Evangelical/Fundamentalist teachers will give you a more definitive answer--but really, it's not my concern. They are dead. They face the judgment. I simply trust God to do right with those souls.

You go the extra mile, baptizing your members in proxy, believing it will give dead souls a second chance. While there's certainly no harm in conducting those baptisms, my concern is that if lost souls believe they'll have that chance, they may be lulled to think they can play around and enjoy sin now, and always repent after they die. This is not a strong problem, because most non-LDS believe neither in second chances, nor (for total nonbelievers) even in a day of judgment.

It would be nice if your church was right on this matter. But that's my fleshly viewpoint. I don't know that it's so, so I must evangelize as if this life is the only chance we have.

[lattelady]

This is why I believe when Hebrews 9:27 says "Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgement", we're to take it seriously. We have a decision to make. It would be great if we didn't really have to worry about it, and we could just depend on someone getting baptized for our souls later. But that isn't what scripture teaches. We will die, and then we will face a judgement. I want to know where I'm going.

[AnthonyB]

But what if some people in no way, shape or form ever do get to hear it? Suppose an 18 year old kid who lives in China and has only ever known Taoism his whole life goes out and gets killed in a car accident. Where, according to "born again" beliefs on heaven and hell, would he end up? I've even heard it said from many "born again" Protestants that somebody like Mother Teresa would end up burning forever in hell simply because she was Catholic! I guess it's this slightly narrow, black and white view of the Protestant heaven/hell that I'm trying to understand and am wondering what scriptural basis there is for it.:)

Carl,

I'd not tag myself as Protestant pre se but from an LDS perspective I'd fit that category. The vast majority of Evanglelical type Christians believe people without opportunity to respond to the gospel are judged by the light they have been given in the mercy of God, we don't automatically damn them.(Rom 1&2) However that isn't the same as responding hear and now the gospel message, where someone has the plain assurance of many scriptures. Anyone who seems happy for the damnation of others is IMHO clearly not got the heart of God on the issue. God wants none to perish and all to be saved. We like Paul should have the attitude of being willing to put aside our own entry to heaven, if it were at all possible that others might be saved by such an act (which unfortunately they can't).

My issue with how many LDS express things is that, virutally everyone is saved and there isn't much cost to enter heaven. Your path to heaven can appear a wide and broad road that many can easily pass, whereas your path to hell is a narrow road that is exceeding difficult to enter. This comes across as reverse to Jesus' clear statement on the issue.

In Lewis' book he describes a group of dead people who are on the cusp of judgement, it is like a day about to break or night about to fall depending on which way you choose. They are existing in a shadow world between heaven and hell. The people are free to visit heaven from the hinterland or continue their self imposed destruction that is leading to their damnation. He goes through a series of people, who although visiting heaven and being encouraged to respond to God's mercy and love, by signficant people in their lives, find one excuse after another to reject God. They simply will not let go of the evil that is consuming them.

For those who do choose heaven, the hinterland will become as the entrance of heaven. Those that choose hell, the hinterland will always appear to have been part of hell.

LDS appear to believe that people, if given enough time will eventually respond and accept God's mercy. Besides what appears to be a lack of NT support for such an idea, I have two objections. Firstly many people, despite God's clear invitation through scripture, nature and loving believers about them in this life, refuse God. I don't see why nearly everyone would change. if so may reject the message here, I find it hard to reconcile with a near universal acceptance, even if given enough time after death.

Secondly entry to heaven (even if your lowest level exists) must require the absolute willingness to relinquish sin, a journey to on going holiness. LDS clearly have a much more positive of people then I do because in the world I live I think many would, like in Lewis' book, find excuses or small sins that they would not give up. A righteous God must either cure of us of all evil or the smallest evil will fester and painand suffering continue. Heaven cannot be held captive to the whim of some person to maintain even the smallest sin, to refuse to be cured of it and thus spread its evil and misery to others.

[jadams_4040]

I got to thinking the other day about something I heard at a fireside a number of years ago when a General Authority said that from the time of Christ 'til now, approximately 70 billion people will have inhabited the earth. That figure of 70 billion stuck in my head after that talk and what I was wondering is do the Christian religions who teach that unless you accept Jesus as your personal Savior you will really go to an everlasting, literal burning lake of fire where you will be tortured day and night forever and ever? When you think of that figure of 70 billion, can you honestly say AT LEAST HALF of those people will be in such a fiery state, especially since most "born again" style religions teach that the majority will NOT make heaven? DOES THIS MEAN THAT WELL OVER 35 BILLION PEOPLE WILL BE BURNING FOREVER AND EVER???!!!! That's over 5x our earth's total population right now!!! I cannot possibly fathom such a thing as that!!! Also, are all these people in the center of the earth right now, according to what most Christian churches teach? What about the people that lived for 4,000 years before the time of Christ where nothing about a lake a fire was ever taught in the Old Testament? Are they in for a fiery surprise when they die? Just honestly trying to understand all of this. Thanks.

Yes good questions! and my only thought is one of all the "born agains" i have ever talked to dont beleive in works, and if they do, they beleive "works" are something that comes automatically when we have the lord in our heart, I;E charity, service e;t;c... And it always amazes me none of them ever actually have good "works" {consistantly}. SSSooooo i would suppose none of them are going to heaven if the pathway is the manner in which they beleive.:)

[Carl62]

The righteous will dwell in 'everlasting burnings' also..

Where has that ever been taught in LDS doctrine? IF it's anywhere, then that's news to me.

[lattelady]

jadams_4040, your take on "born-again's" is an interesting one. I'm not sure if a "born-again" mistaught you, or if you misunderstood what happens when we have "the Lord in our heart." Though I don't refer to myself as a "born-again Christian", that is precisely what I am. I don't for one minute believe that when the Lord (the Holy Spirit) took up residence in my heart I instantaneously--miraculously--do only good works. I do believe that from the moment the Holy Spirit came to dwell inside of me, I had a new nature and now had an ability that I didn't have before to choose to allow the Holy Spirit to produce good fruit in me--ones I would display like: love, joy, peace, etc. Unfortunately, I still have the old nature, the fleshly one in me that chooses to fulfill SELF, chooses to sin instead of choosing to please God. The difference is: before Christ, I would not and could not choose to please God. With Christ, I can.

Interesting that you would judge those "born-again's" around you as not being able to consistently have good works. I don't actually know anyone who consistently does good works and doesn't fall short in some area. Being born-again doesn't exempt us from failure and sin. We now possess the ability and power to please God, but do we do it perfectly? No. I'm thankful that I still have the assurance of Heaven, because it's not resting on my perfection or my failure--it rests securely on what Jesus did FOR me.

[lattelady]

It says in "Mormon Doctrine" by McConkie pp.349-350 "Hell will have an end...After their resurrection, the great majority of those who have suffered there will pass into the telestial kingdom."

So I learned something new. There isn't just the three "heavens" and outer darkness, there is a place termed "Hell" in LDS doctrine.

[Dravin]

From here: LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Beyond the Veil: Life in the Eternities

“… [The righteous who have died] shall rise again to dwell in everlasting burnings in immortal glory, not to sorrow, suffer, or die any more, but they shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a god, and ascend the throne of eternal power, the same as those who have gone before.”

I've heard the phrase before but I had to look it up, it's originally from a talk given by Joseph Smith.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Dravin

[Carl62]

From here: LDS.org - Support Materials Chapter - Beyond the Veil: Life in the Eternities

I've heard the phrase before but I had to look it up, it's originally from a talk given by Joseph Smith.

Got it. When it said 'everlasting burning', I just assumed it was in reference to hell fire type burning. I didn't know there was a 'good' burning.

[Dravin]

It says in "Mormon Doctrine" by McConkie pp.349-350 "Hell will have an end...After their resurrection, the great majority of those who have suffered there will pass into the telestial kingdom."

So I learned something new. There isn't just the three "heavens" and outer darkness, there is a place termed "Hell" in LDS doctrine.

It can get kinda confusing the term hell is used to refer to two separate places (generally speaking and amongst the LDS). The one that most closely matches the traditional Christian concept of endless torment is outer darkness (Son of Perdition territory). The other one is also known as Spirit Prison where those who didn't learn the Gospel and those who rejected it go and have it taught to them (not described as a happy joy joy place, but not endless), it being a part of the Spirit World you go to when you die, the other part being paradise which probably more closely matches the traditional Christian idea of dying and immediately going to a nice place.

It can lead to interesting conversations, when traditional Christians ask if Jung Wei from 4,000 BC China is going to hell because he is not Mormon, or if ex-Mormons are going to hell technically the answer is yes, its just not the hell they are thinking off. Like terms being used to describe different places (even within LDS lexicon) is fun isn't it?

I may be repeating stuff you already know, but your post made me think of this.

Got it. When it said 'everlasting burning', I just assumed it was in reference to hell fire type burning. I didn't know there was a 'good' burning.

Yeah, generally you don't associate burning with good, particularly with the afterlife, but I liken it to the burning the disciples felt on the road to Emmaus. A burning caused by feeling the spirit intensely, if we talk about a burning in the bosom now in this life one can only imagine the intensity of the spirit in the Celestial Kingdom in the next.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Dravin

[lattelady]

Dravin, thanks for your post. Which "Hell" was McConkie referring to, then, in the quote I posted? the Spirit Prison one? I'm assuming its not the one that includes "good burning", because his quote mentions that their "suffering" would end. Spirit prison would include suffering, I assume? What are your thoughts?