Why do people go to Hell?

I will leave it simply by quoting your verse, but highlighting a word you misssed ...

Unbelief is held in parallel with disobedience. There is no cause effect relationship. There is a parallel construction here. The Bible still says that man goes to hell for sin. Unbelief is simply one of those sins.

I think Moses would beg to differ with you on this.

 

You will always have the problem of the text. You have put a lot of thought into getting around those verses. I find it inadequate to deal with the text itself however.

We will have to leave it at that, then. For that is precisely how I feel about your argument, Pastor. Jesus spent ever so much time trying to raise our eyes past what we see to reality. He spent time showing that the problem was in the heart. That is the point of the Sermon on the Mount. That is the point of his rage against the Pharisees in Matt. 23.

Nor did you ever respond to the questions I had about some verses above. So best for me to get back to other things.

The question which opened this thread was why a man went to hell. I responded with the way the Jesus Himself answered that question in John 3:16 and on.

You know something? If Adam and Eve had BELIEVED God's word instead of trusting in their own minds, sin would not have entered the world through them (or him). The original sin was the disobedience that comes from a lack of belief. It started in their hearts, and their actions were simply the result of that.

 

I agree with that completely. But that doesn't mean that the acts committed were meaningless or somehow without due penalty. Heb 2 says that every sin will receive the due penalty.

I don't think I saw these. Sorry ... If it wasn't in a post to me, I probably didn't read it. I didn't see any verses you asked me to address except for John 3:16ff which I addressed on the top of this page.

And I responded with not only what Jesus said in John 3:16, but with the full accounting of Scripture about why people go to hell.

This, in and of itself, is a problem for your position. Notice what Adam and Eve were not charged with. They were not charged with the sin of "unbelief" but with the sin of "disobedience." Unbelief may have been teh cause, but it is not what they were punished for. They were given one responsibility: Don't eat of the tree. The human race was not plunged into sin because of their unbelief, but because of their sin in eating of the tree.

I still do not believe you have given any kind of accounting for why unbelief is the only sin not fully paid for at the cross. That is a major inconsistency. You claim that man can't go to hell for his sins because Jesus paid for them all at the cross. I contend that if Jesus paid for all sin, then unbelief must be included. Therefore, man cannot go to hell for a sin already paid for. He cannot go to hell for unbelief.

Yet I have listed numerous passages that make man's sins the reason he will not enter the heaven. I have not seen you address those passages.

At the heart of it is Scripture. Scripture teaches that man's sins keep him out of heaven.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5:19-21 19 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, 21 envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

These passages, among others, attribute man's place in hell to his sins, not solely to his unbelief. That is an insurmountable argument. These are the explicit statements of Scripture.

It is true that man's only relief is belief/repentance. But as I pointed out, the absence of belief does not mean the absence of sin.

 

dr396,
unbelief is what causes people to be sent to hell.Hbr 3:12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
The love of sin is what keeps them in that unbelief.

 

Criminy. If a man's sins keep him out of heaven, then Jesus died for nothing!

Jesus taught that the root of all sin was in the heart. James taught the same in his first chapter. The sins themselves have been atoned for. The unbeliever is cast out. That's the message of the Gospel.

"What must I do to be saved?"

The answer was 'believe,' not 'stop sinning.' A believing heart, however, is a changed heart that does not WANT to sin.

Look at your Galatians verse again. These are deeds "of the flesh" and the flesh dies and rots. Why does the flesh behave this way? Because of the condition of the heart. The heart that chooses to refuse Christ continues hardening itself against what is good and true until God says, in effect, "You want it? You got it."

In Galatians it says "those who PRACTICE such things." It is the unbeliever who practices them, not the believer!

Or look at your Corinthians verse -- "the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God.." Our righteousness is entirely in Christ, not in our lack of sinning! The key, again, is belief or unbelief (the lifestyles are evidenced by the heart).

I just can't let you keep telling people they are going to hell because they sin. That is not the point of the Gospel at all! They are going to hell because they refuse Christ. The sins are atoned for. In full. Job done. "It is finished". Debt paid in full.

 

The issue that is being argued here is limited atonement. Helen against and Larry for.

Andy

 

No, its not limited vs unlimited atonement. The commonly accepted view of the general (or unlimited) atonement, is that Christ's atonement while PROVISIONAL for all, is only APPLIED to believers. Unbelievers die with their sins still on their account, and they go to hell for their sins.

 

That's not what the Bible says. The Bible says they are condemned for unbelief. What part of that statement of Jesus' is so hard to understand????

 

I don't think the issue is limited atonement. I think the issue is whether or not unbelief is a real sin. While Helen says, "The Bible says they are condemned for unbelief," she misses the point that the very same Bible says they are condemned by their actions, that it is their actions that keep them out of heaven and send them to hell. I have already cited these passages ...

 

and I already responded to those passages. The clue is right there in those passages themselves.

 

Let's put it this way. Not all who oppose limited atonement argue as Helen does, but many, such as Robert Lightner in his The Death Christ Died, make it an important part of their arguement. Here is an excerpt:

My guess is that this goes to the heart of the issue and the fact that unbelief is a real sin just becomes a hermenutical difficulty.

I say all this as someone who is on the fence as far as limited atonement goes. I can live with "sufficient for all; efficient only for the elect" but I'm also not ready to give up "Christ died for (an unqualified) you."

Andy

 

Ahh, but I'd like to know if Lightner is teaching that the atonement is actually applied to all men, or if he is teaching that the rejection of Christ's work means the atonement is never applied, and thus those who reject His work remain in their sins. If He is teaching the first, he is not teaching general atonement as traditionally taught. And if He is teaching the first, is He perhaps teaching a moral government theory of the atonement rather than a substitutional one (which both general atonement and limited atonement claim to be)?

 

My 30 year old son was just here. He is a Bible teacher in his church and we were discussing this thread. He said something that really started me thinking...

Sin is defined by the law. This we know.

Nowhere in the law is there a COMMAND to believe. Belief is always given as a choice. Unbelief is a choice.

Unbelief, in terms of the law of the Bible, is not a sin, it is a choice.

I had not thought of it that way before, but I think he is right.

All sin was atoned for on the cross. Whether or not you believe on Christ is your choice. If you do not believe, despite the truth you are shown in this life, then you stand condemned. You are also, according to Romans 1, fully given over to the sinful lifestyle you have preferred in refusing the truth, who is Christ.

I'm still thinking about this, and if someone can show me a place where unbelief is actually a sin in and of itself, as defined by the law, I will be interested to see it.

 

Hi Helen: When Paul says that the love of money is the root of all evils, he implies that unbelief in the promises of God is the taproot of every sinful attitude in our heart. He said it even more plainly in Rom.14:23,"whatever is not from faith is sin." The absence of faith gives rise only to sinful motives and acts. does this sound extreme? Yes. But it is simply a clear expression of Paul's God-centeredness. And that which does not come from satisfaction in God, and through God's guidance and also for the glory of God, is in fact God-less thus it is sin.

 

Thank you, Brutus, but first, the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. It is only 'a' root and not 'the' root....

Nor do I think unbelief is the 'taproot' of sin, for in Genesis 8:21, God mentions to Noah that the tendency in the heart of every man from childhood is evil. And yet we know that many children believe quite simply in God!

We have rebellious natures from birth, long before we can believe or not believe in anything.

And when Paul says that whatever is not from faith is sin, he is not stating that faith is lack of sin. Conversely, he could not be stating that lack of faith itself is sin, simply that it gives rise to sin.

I'm really serious about wanting to know if, in the Law, there is a statement about unbelief being a sin in and of itself. I know it gives rise to sin, but that is not the same thing as being a sin itself. Is it simply a choice, albeit a deadly one?

 

Mark 1:15 and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."
John 10:38 but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father."John 12:36 "While you have the Light, believe in the Light, so that you may become sons of Light." These things Jesus spoke, and He went away and hid Himself from them.
John 14:1 "Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me.
John 14:11 "Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves.

These are a few verses where belief is commanded. So of course unbelief is sin. It is listed in Rev 21:8 as one of several sins that send people to hell. In Jude 5, it is given as the reason why people were destroyed. In Hebrews 3:18-19 (that you yourself cited earlier) it is parallel with disobedience.

The bottom line is that people are commanded to believe in Christ for salvation and to do so is called "obedience to the gospel" (cf Rom 1:4); to fail to do so is called disobedience (cf 2 Thess 1:8). So to try to say that unbelief is not sin is certainly not tenable.

 

Larry, I thought it was untenable, too, but when Scott and I started talking about it, I began to see it another way. If you want to be saved, you must believe. That is not in question here.

But it is the OT Law -- the Pentateuch -- which defines sin. There is no 'thou shalt believe' stated.

People have always been called to repent. Noah was not even the FIRST preacher of righteousness! But even 'thou shalt repent' is not in the law!

It is a command if you want to be saved; it is the 'then' of an 'if/then' statement: IF you want salvation THEN you must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

As I think about it, I can see that this will not be something we could ever agree about, for you, as a Calvinist, are locked into a certain theology which would forbid the idea of unbelief not being a sin.

But the law, all the way through it, has to do with people's words and actions, not the conditions of their hearts.

Belief/unbelief is a condition of the heart -- a matter of true free choice according to the Bible. From your heart come your actions and words, which may or may not be sinful. But the condition of the heart itself is simply that -- its condition. I can find nowhere in the Law where it is to be punished because it is a sin to have the wrong condition of the heart.

Edit: that didn't come out right. People are sent to hell because they are not saved! And that has to do with the condition of the heart. But the Law as expressed in the first five books of the Bible gives no penalty for conditions of the heart. The closest we find is "Thou shalt not covet." I'm talking about legal matters defining sin, as given through Moses here...not matters of the ultimate destiny of a man, which is truly a matter of the heart's condition.

I will grant this, as I think this through. There is a biblical distinction between Sin, and sins. There is one Sin -- rebellion/disobedience. The form it takes are 'sins' in the plural from what I can see. Unbelief is definitely tied in with rebellion and disobedience, but it is not the same as the sins as defined by the law.

The list in Rev. 21:8 is interesting, for cowardliness is included. Cowardliness in what way and what circumstances? It is not mentioned. We don't know what acts are being referred to by 'coward' -- but I presume that they would involve acts that would result in harm to others and/or disparage or deny God. The King James simply defines it as 'fearful'. The word is 'deilos,' It is from the root meaning 'dread' and Strong's then says that by implication it means 'faithless.' 'Faithless' makes more sense to me but I'm sure the translators had their reasons for the words they used.

"The vile" is also listed there. The word is 'bdelyssomai' and is only used twice in the NT. The other time is in Romans 2:22: "You who say that peole should not commit adultery, d you commit adultery? You who ABHOR idols, do you rob temples?" The KJV translates the word 'abominable' in Revelation and "abhorrest" in Romans. That's an interesting one deserving some thought!

At any rate, the list in Revelation has to do with both heart attitudes and wrong actions, so yes, there is a point that they are all considered sin.

I'm not trying to fight. I'm trying to do a serious Bible study here.

I was about to push the "add reply" button when I decided to do one last thing: look up "unbelieving" as it is used in the Rev. verse. It is 'apistos'. It does not mean unbelieving. It is the opposite of 'pistos' -- which means trustworthy.

It is the untrustworthy, not the unbelieving who are in with the vile and the cowardly, etc., according to the Greek. I don't know why translators chose to use 'unbelieving' instead. It does not mean that. It really should not have been translated that way -- that is very misleading.

 

Helen: Perhaps I was not clear in what I meant. So I'll try again.All sins come from unbelief in the promises of God. All the sinful states of our hearts are owing to unbelief in God's super-abounding willingness and ability to work for us in every situation of life so that everything turns out for our good. Anxiety, misplaced shame, indifference, regret, covetousness, envy, lust, bitterness, impatience, despondency, pride--these are all sprouts from the root of unbelief. When Paul said in 1 Tim.6:10, " The love of money is the root of all evils," He didn't mean that there's a connection between every sinful attitude and money--that money is always on your mind when you sin. He meant that all the evils of the world come from a certain kind of heart, namely, the kind of heart that loves money. To know what it means to love money you have to ask, what is money? Money is simply a symbol that stands for human resources. Money stands from what you can get from man not from God; " Ho everyone who thirsts, come to the waters. He who has no money come buy and eat! Is.55:1. Money is the currency of human resources.So the heart that loves money is a heart that pins its hopes, and pursues its pleasures, and puts its trust in what human resources can offer.So the love of money is virtually the same as faith in money--belief, trust, confidence, assurance that money will meet your needs and make you happy. Therefore the love of money, or belief in money, is the flip side of unbelief in the promises of God. Jesus said in Mt.6:24, you cannot serve God and money. You can't trust or believe in God and money. Belief in one is unbelief in the other. A heart that loves money, banks on money for happiness, believes in money, is at the same time not banking on the promises of God for happiness. So when Paul says that the love of money is the root of all evils he implies that unbelief in the promises of God is the taproot of every sinful attitude in our heart.

 

Brutus, that is a fantastic way of saying everything right up until the last sentence. But then you run smack into God's pronouncement to Noah in Genesis 8. But I love the rest of it, and thank you for taking the time to write it.

 

Helen,

Believing is the same thing as obeying the first commandment to treat God as holy.

...because you have not believed me, to treat me as holy.... (Numbers 20:12)

Also look at Numbers 14. The reason God was going to destroy Israel was "that they did not believe in Me." Moses intercedes for them asking that God "pardon the INIQUITY of this people." And so God PARDONS them. If unbelief isn't a sin, why does Moses ask God to pardon them? Why does God pardon them is unbelief does not need pardoning?

And Deuteronomy 9:23

When the LORD sent you from Kadesh-barnea, saying, 'Go up and possess the land which I have given you,' then you rebelled against the command of the LORD your God; you neither believed Him nor listened to His voice.
Not believing God and not doing His commandments and not listening to God are equated. Once again, not believing is not fulfilling the first commandment.