So did everyone go to Hell before Jesus?

I wonder who we could meet during the Dark Hour. :shock:TSNAKE617

Righto.

Your statement is wrong. They did not have to be perfect, rather, they had to try to follow the ten commandments, and if they broke one of them, for example, adultery, they would then have sin. The way they got rid of the sin was to sacrifice a unblemished lamb. This is why when Jesus died, he was referred to as the lamb of God, which takes the sin away from the world. So when Jesus died, he died for sins. Past. Present. Future. The sins of the past were swept away, and those of the present, and of the future. This way, they did not go to hell.

Any other religious Questions?

Moppy64

Ok, so in the Old Testament you pretty much had to be perfect to go to heaven - but in the New Testament, Jesus saves you for your sins and with faith in him, you go to heaven.

So are all the people who existed and died before Jesus rotting in hell since Jesus hadn't come yet to save them?

Cwagmire21

No, before Jesus everyone went to Denny's. Shad0ki11

I usually hear 2 explanations

1: Jesus' blood atoned for their sins as well. by keeping the faith Jesus' blood was enough to atone for their sins

2: They sacrificed a lamb to atone for their sins

the former explanation is much more likely.

[QUOTE="mastersword007"]Just one question, before I leave. This may sound a bit cheesy/corny, but it's the only way to see another side of this:
Let's say that's the way it works. Let us say a man brutally rapes and kills the daughter of a kind and innocent family, but feels TRULY sorry and goes to heaven.
What about the daughter of which the life was forcibly taken after humiliation? What about the parents that lost a part of their life? Can you immagine what kind of pain they will feel for the rest of their life? No matter how much they'll try, they will never TRULY get over it.
The girls life will be ended in a horrible way and she will never ever see her parents (and vice versa) or daylight again , yet the killer will still be able to go to heaven in the end.

After ruining the life of an innocent, after ruining the life of a family, is feeling TRULY sorry, confessing and repenting, really enough to go to heaven?WtFDragon

The short answer is: yes.
That's a hard thing to hear for some, which I think is closely tied to a lack of ability in some people to truly understand (let alone offer) forgiveness. But there it is -- genuine repentence is salvific.

But will their lives end "in a horrible way," as you posit? No, not at all -- for whatever they've been through, they are today very positive people who try and live life in an optimistic, full way.

Every human -- even the most wretchedly sinful -- must be saveABLE, or else it is meaningless to believe in the promise of salvation that Christ brought; if the potential does not exist for Christ to save everyone, then Christ is not God, and Christ can save no one.

1. I understand completely, but just because you are able to forgive, doesn't always mean you should.mastersword007

Granted...but the flip side of this is that you should forgive when in fact it is genuinely warranted. The human sense of justice, imperfect as it is, does not always see when this is, however.

2. You haven't read carefully. I said raped and MURDERED (Well, killed actually). That changes the entire story.I know that rape only does not end a life, but murder obviously does.

3. That's what I just can't accept. While everyone could be saveABLE (So god could bring them into heaven at any time), that does not mean that everyone SHOULD be saved. For all we know, HITLER could have been EXTREMELY sorry of his actions after murdering millions of Jews and is sitting in heaven right now.mastersword007

I note the distinction partway through my reply, actually. What was perhaps not so clear, though I tried to make it so, was that I was speaking not to specific events but to general principles.

As to Hitler unlikely. Possible, but unlikely. We shall have to wait and see.

Your sense of justice is flawed, however. Who the individual is, as a person, is not typically static; the man who acts out in violence in his youth may become a most ardent pacifist in middle age. Even the most wretched sinners are still more than just their terrible actions, and even those who have perpetrated the most horrible crimes can come to understand that they were wrong, and strive to do all within their power to repent and make right that which they have wronged. We are not defined by any one action we undertake, although some actions are more severe than others.

That is simply wrong. Some actions should NOT be forgiven, whether they feel sorry or not.
You get a choice. If you still do such a thing after so many warnings, you have got to pay for it.

All I'm saying is that if it's possible to get into heaven if you feel extremely sorry, repent etc...
Then the rules written in the Bible become somewhat pointless.mastersword007

I call bollocks. ;)

Laws against murder are not made pointless because someone gets 15 years for the crime instead of 25, or instead of the needle. The laws still define the expected standard, and enable us to note when a deviation from the norm has been committed.

The moral laws are no different -- they tell us what is expected, and set out the boundaries that, when crossed, consitute an immoral action. These laws, however, are not invalidated by the fact that we can still be forgiven for contravening them. Indeed, it could be argued -- should be argued, really -- that the whole point of the moral laws taught in the Bible is not to say to us "don't do these things," but to say to us "you have not done these things; you have sinned...yet even for you, there is yet hope." Because we're all sinners. We're not all murderers, we're not all rapists...but we're all sinners. We all do immoral things, and we can all be forgiven for them.

Again, if Christ cannot forgive EVEN THE MOST WRETCHED SIN, then Christ is powerless. He is not God. He cannot save us. And we are doomed for it. Only if Christ can save even the most debased among us does His salvific power and message have any meaning. Our minds, which occlude our understanding of what is truly just with all sorts of human baggage, struggle against grasping this truth, but there it is. All sins can be forgiven.

That is not to say, however, that all sins WILL BE forgiven. There's a large gulf of difference between noting that everyone is saveABLE and asserting that everyone WILL BE saved. In plain point of fact, not everyone will be saved, because not everyone will choose to go down the path of genuine repentence. But for those that do embark on that narrow, difficult path, there will be salvation...even after the most wretched life imagineable.

And if you really think about it, that's the truest justice: not just that those who deserve to be punished are punished, but that those who understand the magnitude of their wrongdoing, and understand the righteousness of the punishment that they are due, and in the face of that damning knowledge still persist in seeking forgiveness they fully understand is not owed to them by way of honest and genuine repentence (which may take many forms, including all manners of temporal punishment) are saved at the end of it.

That's the point of the prayer of the good thief. He knows he deserves what he got, knows that his rightful place is on the cross that is slowly killing him. He knows, moreover, that for his crimes, he deserves the dark end he has come to. He still reaches out to Christ. And Christ, being both just and merciful, does not let him fall.

How good for us that Christ would do this. For the magnitude of all human sin, even the sins of those of us who do not rape and kill, is such that if God shared our occluded sense of justice, we would all be damned. Because in human terms, whether it's due to the quality or quantity of our sins, none of us deserves to be forgiven.

Oh, and as to your "off topic" question: Volipotence and voliscience.

[QUOTE="mastersword007"]

Granted...but the flip side of this is that you should forgive when in fact it is genuinely warranted. The human sense of justice, imperfect as it is, does not always see when this is, however.

[QUOTE="mastersword007"]2. You haven't read carefully. I said raped and MURDERED (Well, killed actually). That changes the entire story.I know that rape only does not end a life, but murder obviously does.

3. That's what I just can't accept. While everyone could be saveABLE (So god could bring them into heaven at any time), that does not mean that everyone SHOULD be saved. For all we know, HITLER could have been EXTREMELY sorry of his actions after murdering millions of Jews and is sitting in heaven right now.WtFDragon

I note the distinction partway through my reply, actually. What was perhaps not so clear, though I tried to make it so, was that I was speaking not to specific events but to general principles.

As to Hitler unlikely. Possible, but unlikely. We shall have to wait and see.

Your sense of justice is flawed, however. Who the individual is, as a person, is not typically static; the man who acts out in violence in his youth may become a most ardent pacifist in middle age. Even the most wretched sinners are still more than just their terrible actions, and even those who have perpetrated the most horrible crimes can come to understand that they were wrong, and strive to do all within their power to repent and make right that which they have wronged. We are not defined by any one action we undertake, although some actions are more severe than others.

That is simply wrong. Some actions should NOT be forgiven, whether they feel sorry or not.
You get a choice. If you still do such a thing after so many warnings, you have got to pay for it.

All I'm saying is that if it's possible to get into heaven if you feel extremely sorry, repent etc...
Then the rules written in the Bible become somewhat pointless.mastersword007

I call bollocks. ;)

Laws against murder are not made pointless because someone gets 15 years for the crime instead of 25, or instead of the needle. The laws still define the expected standard, and enable us to note when a deviation from the norm has been committed.

The moral laws are no different -- they tell us what is expected, and set out the boundaries that, when crossed, consitute an immoral action. These laws, however, are not invalidated by the fact that we can still be forgiven for contravening them. Indeed, it could be argued -- should be argued, really -- that the whole point of the moral laws taught in the Bible is not to say to us "don't do these things," but to say to us "you have not done these things; you have sinned...yet even for you, there is yet hope." Because we're all sinners. We're not all murderers, we're not all rapists...but we're all sinners. We all do immoral things, and we can all be forgiven for them.

Again, if Christ cannot forgive EVEN THE MOST WRETCHED SIN, then Christ is powerless. He is not God. He cannot save us. And we are doomed for it. Only if Christ can save even the most debased among us does His salvific power and message have any meaning. Our minds, which occlude our understanding of what is truly just with all sorts of human baggage, struggle against grasping this truth, but there it is. All sins can be forgiven.

That is not to say, however, that all sins WILL BE forgiven. There's a large gulf of difference between noting that everyone is saveABLE and asserting that everyone WILL BE saved. In plain point of fact, not everyone will be saved, because not everyone will choose to go down the path of genuine repentence. But for those that do embark on that narrow, difficult path, there will be salvation...even after the most wretched life imagineable.

And if you really think about it, that's the truest justice: not just that those who deserve to be punished are punished, but that those who understand the magnitude of their wrongdoing, and understand the righteousness of the punishment that they are due, and in the face of that damning knowledge still persist in seeking forgiveness they fully understand is not owed to them by way of honest and genuine repentence (which may take many forms, including all manners of temporal punishment) are saved at the end of it.

That's the point of the prayer of the good thief. He knows he deserves what he got, knows that his rightful place is on the cross that is slowly killing him. He knows, moreover, that for his crimes, he deserves the dark end he has come to. He still reaches out to Christ. And Christ, being both just and merciful, does not let him fall.

How good for us that Christ would do this. For the magnitude of all human sin, even the sins of those of us who do not rape and kill, is such that if God shared our occluded sense of justice, we would all be damned. Because in human terms, whether it's due to the quality or quantity of our sins, none of us deserves to be forgiven.

Oh, and as to your "off topic" question: Volipotence and voliscience.

For some reason, I understand your point of view completely and I agree somewhat.mastersword007

Cool. To be fair, I see where you're coming from. I don't fault what is a very human, and then not unsensibly so, sense of justice on your part. I simply note that human justice is related to actual justice only in the sense that a partially occluded photo is related to the actual image.

However (See bold),
1. I'm going to have to object. I haven't talked about the magnitude of the crime.
Of course people can change and of course sins can be forgiven.
I however, find that a person must sometimes pay for some of the crimes he has committed.

A petty thief could be forgiven and be sent straight to heaven if he or she repents.
A murderer could also be forgiven for his actions, but must pay a price.
I am not saying that he should go to hell for all eternity, but he should be punished to some extent.
How much or how long, however, is god's decision. That is still forgiveness, since God saves him from eternal damnation.

That would mean that God could save anybody and will if they repent. That doesn't however mean that you will be able to get into heaven immediately.mastersword007

No, people must not SOMETIMES pay. Rightly speaking, we ALL deserve to pay, ALWAYS, for the sins/crimes we commit. Don't mistake me here: we all deserve damnation. Not one of us should be redeemed.

But then, Christianity has never denied as much. We fully acknowledge that we have done nothing to merit the salvation Christ promises, fully recognize that we do not deserve it in the least. John the Baptist had it exactly right when he noted that he was unworthy to do so much as stoop to untie the Lord's sandal; how much less worthy are we of salvation? And yet, the gift of salvation sits before us, offered though we do not merit it in the least. This is just one of many great paradoxes at work in the Universe.

No matter to what extent we are punished for what we've done, we don't deserve salvation at the end of it. That's something above and beyond, which is offered out of only the fullest and most pure form of love possible, the love that God is. Even the most righteous do not deserve it, and would fall short but for that love.

What I say next, I say without any sense of irony: your thinking is rather Catholic. See, we have this thing which I previously referenced, called Purgatory:

Purgatory (Lat., "purgare", to make clean, to purify) in accordance with Catholic teaching is a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God's grace, are, not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions.

The faith of the Church concerning purgatory is clearly expressed in the Decree of Union drawn up by the Council of Florence (Mansi, t. XXXI, col. 1031), and in the decree of the Council of Trent which (Sess. XXV) defined:

"Whereas the Catholic Church, instructed by the Holy Ghost, has from the Sacred Scriptures and the ancient tradition of the Fathers taught in Councils and very recently in this Ecumenical synod (Sess. VI, cap. XXX; Sess. XXII cap.ii, iii) that there is a purgatory, and that the souls therein are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, but principally by the acceptable Sacrifice of the Altar; the Holy Synod enjoins on the Bishops that they diligently endeavor to have the sound doctrine of the Fathers in Councils regarding purgatory everywhere taught and preached, held and believed by the faithful" (Denzinger, "Enchiridon", 983).

Further than this the definitions of the Church do not go, but the tradition of the Fathers and the Schoolmen must be consulted to explain the teachings of the councils, and to make clear the belief and the practices of the faithful.

TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT

That temporal punishment is due to sin, even after the sin itself has been pardoned by God, is clearly the teaching of Scripture. God indeed brought man out of his first disobedience and gave him power to govern all things (Wisdom 10:2), but still condemned him "to eat his bread in the sweat of his brow" until he returned unto dust. God forgave the incredulity of Moses and Aaron, but in punishment kept them from the "land of promise" (Numbers 20:12). The Lord took away the sin of David, but the life of the child was forfeited because David had made God's enemies blaspheme His Holy Name (2 Samuel 12:13-14). In the New Testament as well as in the Old, almsgiving and fasting, and in general penitential acts are the real fruits of repentance (Matthew 3:8; Luke 17:3; 3:3). The whole penitential system of the Church testifies that the voluntary assumption of penitential works has always been part of true repentance and the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV, can. xi) reminds the faithful that God does not always remit the whole punishment due to sin together with the guilt. God requires satisfaction, and will punish sin, and this doctrine involves as its necessary consequence a belief that the sinner failing to do penance in this life may be punished in another world, and so not be cast off eternally from God.

VENIAL SINS

All sins are not equal before God, nor dare anyone assert that the daily faults of human frailty will be punished with the same severity that is meted out to serious violation of God's law. On the other hand whosoever comes into God's presence must be perfectly pure for in the strictest sense His "eyes are too pure, to behold evil" (Habakkuk 1:13). For unrepented venial faults for the payment of temporal punishment due to sin at time of death, the Church has always taught the doctrine of purgatory.

So deep was this belief ingrained in our common humanity that it was accepted by the Jews, and in at least a shadowy way by the pagans, long before the coming of Christianity. ("Aeneid," VI, 735 sq.; Sophocles, "Antigone," 450 sq.).

Which, I note, is something like what you're getting at.

2. While I do agree that we would all be damned, that's why mankind should try to improve itself. If we live by these rules, humans will always stay their same shameful and sinful selves. Though, I'm not saying that we should be judged in human terms either. We'd all be doomed >_>mastersword007

Sin is a part of the human condition; there is no escaping that. Whether in 2 years' time or 2,000, sin will still be a part of the human condition. We'll still murder, steal, rape, and do all manner of other immoral things. Jettisoning these laws and teachings, then, would do the opposite of solve the problem.

[QUOTE="Moppy64"]

Righto.

Your statement is wrong. They did not have to be perfect, rather, they had to try to follow the ten commandments, and if they broke one of them, for example, adultery, they would then have sin. The way they got rid of the sin was to sacrifice a unblemished lamb. This is why when Jesus died, he was referred to as the lamb of God, which takes the sin away from the world. So when Jesus died, he died for sins. Past. Present. Future. The sins of the past were swept away, and those of the present, and of the future. This way, they did not go to hell.

Any other religious Questions?

sSubZerOo

Furthermore the ten commandments is relatively new piece of law.. Man existed far far FAR earlier than that.. Now whether you believe in a young earth or not, I could care less.. there is evidence that humans lived far earlier than 10k years..

[QUOTE="Moppy64"]

Righto.

Your statement is wrong. They did not have to be perfect, rather, they had to try to follow the ten commandments, and if they broke one of them, for example, adultery, they would then have sin. The way they got rid of the sin was to sacrifice a unblemished lamb. This is why when Jesus died, he was referred to as the lamb of God, which takes the sin away from the world. So when Jesus died, he died for sins. Past. Present. Future. The sins of the past were swept away, and those of the present, and of the future. This way, they did not go to hell.

Any other religious Questions?

Crypto138

Sorry, should have specified. The death of Christ was for all sins, but they atoned their sins by the lamb, and by my saying that h died or sins past, present, and future, i meant tat IF we were to accept Him, that sin would be washed away. So by Him dying for our sins, He gave us a choice, Him or death.

Just something that was buggin me, Why would god care about what we do ? When it's really Who we are that counts... and half the time, " God " makes up who we are.......Virus214

God has a path made for all of us, but we have free will, and deviate from it. The reason why He cares? He loves us.

[QUOTE="Moppy64"]

Righto.

Your statement is wrong. They did not have to be perfect, rather, they had to try to follow the ten commandments, and if they broke one of them, for example, adultery, they would then have sin. The way they got rid of the sin was to sacrifice a unblemished lamb. This is why when Jesus died, he was referred to as the lamb of God, which takes the sin away from the world. So when Jesus died, he died for sins. Past. Present. Future. The sins of the past were swept away, and those of the present, and of the future. This way, they did not go to hell.

Any other religious Questions?

MFaraz_Hayat

No, they have to accept Him, the choice of Salvation is there, but they must make the choice.

[QUOTE="Moppy64"]

Righto.

Your statement is wrong. They did not have to be perfect, rather, they had to try to follow the ten commandments, and if they broke one of them, for example, adultery, they would then have sin. The way they got rid of the sin was to sacrifice a unblemished lamb. This is why when Jesus died, he was referred to as the lamb of God, which takes the sin away from the world. So when Jesus died, he died for sins. Past. Present. Future. The sins of the past were swept away, and those of the present, and of the future. This way, they did not go to hell.

Any other religious Questions?

Crypto138

See page four of this disscussion, this q came up with another guy as well.

[QUOTE="Moppy64"]

Righto.

Your statement is wrong. They did not have to be perfect, rather, they had to try to follow the ten commandments, and if they broke one of them, for example, adultery, they would then have sin. The way they got rid of the sin was to sacrifice a unblemished lamb. This is why when Jesus died, he was referred to as the lamb of God, which takes the sin away from the world. So when Jesus died, he died for sins. Past. Present. Future. The sins of the past were swept away, and those of the present, and of the future. This way, they did not go to hell.

Any other religious Questions?

sSubZerOo

Furthermore the ten commandments is relatively new piece of law.. Man existed far far FAR earlier than that.. Now whether you believe in a young earth or not, I could care less.. there is evidence that humans lived far earlier than 10k years..

Please note: The Ten Commandments are, what I believe to be, the principals upon which Hebrew law existed. Check out Exodus, a helluva bunch of rules for that type of thing are laid down.

One interesting explanation is that Jesus died he saved all humanity (past and future).

The belivers in the old testiment were looking forward to his coming and we are living with that in the past.

I'm not sure if thats correct though..

I'm pretty sure that in the old testiment were offering animal sacrifices as payment for thier sins but that wasn't enough, It could only delay the punishiment that God's law required. So when Jesus died that was the sacrifice to end all sacrifices.

One interesting explanation is that Jesus died he saved all humanity (past and future).

The belivers in the old testiment were looking forward to his coming and we are living with that in the past.

I'm not sure if thats correct though..

I'm pretty sure that in the old testiment were offering animal sacrifices as payment for thier sins but that wasn't enough, It could only delay the punishiment that God's law required. So when Jesus died that was the sacrifice to end all sacrifices.

alphamale1989

Ok, it was the sacrifice to end all sacrifces. When Jesus died, the veil of the Temple was ripped in two. This was symbolic, as it meant man and God were now close, no longer seperated by sin.

But, the sacrifice actually did cleanse them of their sin. The rewards of sin is death, and you had to pay that price. Hence, the sacrificial lamb.

No they will not , it says very clearly in the Qura'an that anyone that lived and died before the massengers appeared are called the "ignorant" . which means they weren't going to know that there was a god because no one told them therefor they will go to one of the low levals of heavan .

Go read some Qura'an and you will figure out all of these questions

No they will not , it says very clearly in the Qura'an that anyone that lived and died before the massengers appeared are called the "ignorant" . which means they weren't going to know that there was a god because no one told them therefor they will go to one of the low levals of heavan .

Go read some Qura'an and you will figure out all of these questions

Bahaa3000

[QUOTE="Bahaa3000"]

No they will not , it says very clearly in the Qura'an that anyone that lived and died before the massengers appeared are called the "ignorant" . which means they weren't going to know that there was a god because no one told them therefor they will go to one of the low levals of heavan .

Go read some Qura'an and you will figure out all of these questions

Moppy64

[QUOTE="Bahaa3000"]

No they will not , it says very clearly in the Qura'an that anyone that lived and died before the massengers appeared are called the "ignorant" . which means they weren't going to know that there was a god because no one told them therefor they will go to one of the low levals of heavan .

Go read some Qura'an and you will figure out all of these questions

Moppy64

The Qur'an is considered a holy book just as the Bible is. They are considered God's word in their respective religions.

[QUOTE="Moppy64"][QUOTE="Bahaa3000"]

No they will not , it says very clearly in the Qura'an that anyone that lived and died before the massengers appeared are called the "ignorant" . which means they weren't going to know that there was a god because no one told them therefor they will go to one of the low levals of heavan .

Go read some Qura'an and you will figure out all of these questions

Shad0ki11

The Qur'an is considered a holy book just as the Bible is. They are both considered God's word in their respective religions.

It can be considered to be a number of things, but then wht did God not say that the Bible, AND the Qura'an is Truth? The Qura'an is considered for many religions, yet there is only one true religion, and that is Christianity. Which God founded. And if the Qbook (Qura'an, I just shortened it) is for many religions, how can it then be ever specific? The Bible was finished with Revelations, the last book of the Bible, where the Rapture was foretold. I do not think the Qbook is part of the Christian belief then.

[QUOTE="Shad0ki11"][QUOTE="Moppy64"] Er, what? God stated that the One True Word of God was the Bible, not the Qura'an. If the Qura'an is part of the Bible, please tell m where.Moppy64

The Qur'an is considered a holy book just as the Bible is. They are both considered God's word in their respective religions.

It can be considered to be a number of things, but then wht did God not say that the Bible, AND the Qura'an is Truth? The Qura'an is considered for many religions, yet there is only one true religion, and that is Christianity. Which God founded. And if the Qbook (Qura'an, I just shortened it) is for many religions, how can it then be ever specific? The Bible was finished with Revelations, the last book of the Bible, where the Rapture was foretold. I do not think the Qbook is part of the Christian belief then.

Qur'an:Islam::Bible:Christianity.

To be quite honest it's a regional thing. Many people in the middle east follow Islam and are indoctrinated just like how many people in the west are indoctrinated into Christianity. Both sides are going to say that they're the true religion and the other is false. You're only saying that Christianity is the one true religion because you were probably indoctrinated or "born again" and you're not allowing yourself to question God or see the bigger picture.

Open your mind. It will help you understand many things that not even the Bible can teach you.

Very true. I am a born again, and I searched for two years before I chose Christianity. I am willing to question God, my point is though, that the Qbook was for the Muslims. If the Bible is the one true, how can the Qbook be ad-on? Is there something in the Qbook that relates to the Bible.Moppy64

Would buying a Qur'an, or reading it online then comparing it with the Bible help you answer your own question?

Will be back tommorow, so dont think I've run off. :-)Moppy64

And by the way, you did run off. :P