BINDNER@auvm.auvm.edu (12/06/90)
Recently my brother and I were discussing hell, a reason a friend of his stopped practicing religion. Apparantly, she has quite practicing (she was devout) because she couldn't endorse it as a concept (would a merciful God have a hell). This got me to thinking about the motivation people have for believing in a hell. Marx said religion was an opiate of the masses because of the promise of heaven. I think Karl was off his nut. Religion and the masses interact in a different way. When people are persecuted their comfort comes not from their reward in heaven, but the very human thought that their persecutors are going to hell. When a society such as ours exists where there is no persecution (or little among the main stream - I can't speak for minority communities) there is really no one the average person wants to send to hell, which makes it a difficult concept, as people get involved in all sorts of introspective morality trips. If no one were persecuting me I wouldn't like the concept of hell either (no one is at the moment, but life is change). This brings up a collateral point on a possible motivation for the practice of religion, spite. If a large number of people justify their faith by the desire to see others burn, what kind of faith is that? I can see the point in celebrating God's justice, but the social implications are not pretty. I'll further state that, though some may use the above to invalidate faith, I think it could be used to challenge religious leaders. Christ came to preach mercy and forgiveness, even of enemies, as well as justice. The church should preach this, as it is more uplifting than a constant call for moral behavior (which is needed on earth, but has little place in the overall justice of God) or a denunciation to the oppressed which builds hate (as opposed to comfort - in human motivation there is a fine line). Also, those of us who are comfortable need a swift kick in the ass, as we in fact may be the unwitting oppressor. That's all for now, Michael [As usual let me say that I find speculation on the motivations of people who hold views other than our own to be a useless activity. Postulating psychological reasons for a belief is a great way to avoid having to consider its merits, but doesn't really settle much. Christians who believe in hell usually say they do so because they find the concept in Scripture. And in fact it's there pretty solidly. Those of us who would like to avoid it require very fancy footwork indeed to do so. Christians -- like it or not -- think that our religion is based on revelations from God. At some point we may have no better answer for why we think something than that it's part of the revelation. --clh]
ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) (12/11/90)
In article <Dec.6.04.03.54.1990.23913@athos.rutgers.edu>, BINDNER@auvm.auvm.edu writes: > Recently my brother and I were discussing hell, a reason > a friend of his stopped practicing religion. Apparantly, she > has quite practicing (she was devout) because she couldn't > endorse it as a concept (would a merciful God have a hell). I'll answer you question with another quesition. Would God be merciful to the rest of us if he sent Adolp Hitler to Heaven? God is merciful. That means that He doesn't punish us for a many of the bad things that we do, but that does NOT means that we are completely free of punishment. If God didn't ever punish us, then none of us would have much reason, other than for the love of God, to do what is right. Elizabeth
gbyrd@mcnc.org (Gregory T. Byrd) (12/13/90)
In article <Dec.11.01.01.55.1990.7693@athos.rutgers.edu> ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) writes: > >I'll answer you question with another quesition. Would God be merciful >to the rest of us if he sent Adolp Hitler to Heaven? > I'm sorry, but I believe that the fate of Hitler's soul is none of my business. I can't see how condemning Hitler provides "mercy" for anyone else. (His death, on the other hand, had a real impact.) ...Greg -- ...Greg Byrd MCNC/Digital Equipment Corp. gbyrd@mcnc.org P.O. Box 12889 (919)248-1439 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
geoff@pmafire.inel.gov (Geoff Allen) (12/13/90)
ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) writes: >Would God be merciful >to the rest of us if he sent Adolp Hitler to Heaven? True. God is a God of both justice and mercy. The amazing thing is that His mercy can override His justice. Adolph Hitler was just as capable of receiving salvation as the rest of us, and could have had it without doing anything different from what any of us have done to receive it. That is absolutely amazing. A more contemporary example would be Ted Bundy. To most, the thought of Ted Bundy going to heaven is inconceivable. But if you've heard his interview with James Dobson shortly before his execution, he certainly *sounded* like a Christian. Only God and Bundy know for sure, of course, but we could very well be spending eternity with ``brother'' Ted Bundy! (And he'll probably be singing louder than the rest of us! -- See Luke 7:47) We have an amazing God, but he doesn't give out a blanket salvation to everyone. It is our duty to humble ourselves and ask for it. -- Geoff Allen \ Since we live by the Spirit, uunet!pmafire!geoff \ let us keep in step with the Spirit. geoff@pmafire.inel.gov \ -- Gal. 5:25 (NIV)
mib@churchy.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) (12/13/90)
In article <Dec.11.01.01.55.1990.7693@athos.rutgers.edu> ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) writes:
If God didn't ever punish us, then none of us
would have much reason, other than for the love of God, to do what is
right.
That's funny. I always thought the whole point of the gospel was that
we should do it precisely for the love of God and for no other reason.
If we are good solely to avoid punishment, that's pragmatics, not
goodness.
-mib
--
Michael I. Bushnell \ This above all; to thine own self be true
LIBERTE, EGALITE, FRATERNITE \ And it must follow, as the night the day,
mike@unmvax.cs.unm.edu /\ Thou canst not be false to any man.
CARPE DIEM / \ Farewell: my blessing season this in thee!billy@tcom.stc.co.uk (Billy Khan) (12/14/90)
To Elizabeth and the other guy...athos? In article <Dec.6.04.03.54.1990.23913@athos.rutgers.edu>, BINDNER@auvm.auvm.edu writes: >> Recently my brother and I were discussing hell, a reason >> a friend of his stopped practicing religion. Apparantly, she >> has quite practicing (she was devout) because she couldn't >> endorse it as a concept (would a merciful God have a hell). I have always looked at Hell as being a place...simply without the presence of God. God gave his son, Jesus as a way out for all of us, he has shown amazing mercy by doing this, when in all fairness he had every right to turn around and say 'Get lost'. >I'll answer you question with another quesition. Would God be merciful >to the rest of us if he sent Adolp Hitler to Heaven? Just out of curiosity, what would your answer be Elizabeth? >God is merciful. Very true, isn't he wonderful? > That means that He doesn't punish us for a many of the > bad things that we do, but that does NOT means that we are completely > free of punishment. Now just a minute, God punishing us? I'm not too sure on that. Repremand a little, maybe. Punishing sounds a little strong to me. god might allow us to be punished by our own sinful desires, but thats to teach us a lesson. He doesn't just punish us for things we have done wrong, he loves us, and respects our wishes, when we go off track he will show us the way back, usually gently, unless we ignore him time and time again. > if God didn't ever punish us, then none of us > would have much reason, other than for the love of God, to do what is > right. I agree a bit. If nothing ever went wrong in the world, then what reason would their be to believe in God, but I still stand by my original point. I don't know about you, but its the Holy spirit that makes me do what is right. anyway, there you go, Drew. [athos is the name of the system on which I normally do moderation, so it shows up in message ID's. It's not a person. Or not quite. Of course the system is named after Athos, one of the Three Musketeers. (It's odd that everybody knows about the Three Musketeers, but when we named machines after them, everybody thinks we named Aramis after the perfume. The other one is Porthos.) --clh]
st0o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Steven Timm) (12/14/90)
Why is there a hell? Let me suggest a parallel:
It's late December and Chicago is cold. You and a bunch of friends
are about to fly to Florida for a vacation with sun and fun.
As you are boarding the plane behind the rest of your friends, you hear
a trickling sound. You look to the wing and see a stream of liquid running
from engine no. 1. It looks and smells like aviation gasoline.
You see a mechanic walk by. What's wrong with the engine? you ask.
It has a fuel leak--probably it'll blow soon after takeoff, he says.
But I'm not going to fix it--I work for American and that's a United jet.
Obviously concerned, you quicly board the plane to warn your friends.
But convincing them of the joys of driving 24 hours across snowy roads
is not an easy job. And nobody likes to say the word "CRASH" in
an airport. What are you going to do?
My point is that the idea of punishment is necessary in Christianity.
All the "thou shalt nots" and warnings of punishment are God's way of
saying, "HEY! IF YOU CONTINUE IN YOUR ROAD TO SIN YOU ARE GOING TO
***DIE***!"
Steven Timm Physics Department Carnegie Mellon
"Shame on you, and shame on you again
for converting me into a bullet and
shooting me into men's hearts." Richard Harris c 1972ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) (12/14/90)
In article <Dec.13.04.09.26.1990.243@athos.rutgers.edu>, gbyrd@mcnc.org (Gregory T. Byrd) writes: > In article <Dec.11.01.01.55.1990.7693@athos.rutgers.edu> ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) writes: > > > >I'll answer you question with another quesition. Would God be merciful > >to the rest of us if he sent Adolp Hitler to Heaven? > > > > I'm sorry, but I believe that the fate of Hitler's soul is none > of my business. I can't see how condemning Hitler provides > "mercy" for anyone else. (His death, on the other hand, had > a real impact.) > Ok then. So much for that. We will forget about any particular person. How can God be merciful even if He allows people to go to hell? Very simple - God gives ALL of us a chance to get to heaven. Whether or not we accept His gift of salvation, which is the only gift that will get us to Heaven, is up to us. Therefore, God is merciful because He gives everyone a chance to get to Heaven. People, on the other hand, are not merciful upon themselves because they reject God's gift of salvation. I have used this illustration before. Suppose that you are starving, and I offer food to you. Because you are stubborn and haughty, you refuse to accept my gift of food. Well then, will you blame me if you starve to death? Will you tell me that I am unmerciful because you starved yourself to death? Therefore, God is merciful. It is people who are unmerciful upon themselves. God does not actually send anyone to hell. We get there all by ourselves. Elizabeth
djo@pacbell.com (Dan'l DanehyOakes) (12/17/90)
In article <Dec.13.04.09.26.1990.243@athos.rutgers.edu> gbyrd@mcnc.org (Gregory T. Byrd) writes: >I'll answer you question with another quesition. Would God be merciful >to the rest of us if he sent Adolp Hitler to Heaven? A Catholic friend of mine observed that one interesting model for Purgatory is that you get to Heaven, and Jerry Falwell (or Jim Bakker, or Archbishop Sheen, or whatever Christian "leader" you personally find smarmy and offensive) is waiting to greet you at the gate with the kiss of brotherhood. Purgatory? Yes: You must be purged of your prejudices against your fellow Christians... ..I think this can be taken further and say we must be purged of our prejudice against our fellow _sinners_ ("There is not one who is holy, not one!"); God will forgive and save whom God forgives, and, while we know something about the mechanism of Grace because God-as-Jesus told us before laying down His life for us, we do _not_ know to whom Grace has been, or will, be granted. An excellent exercise is to pray for the souls of those you think utterly damned. Mona boba yoda, rupu dzhunay doda! -- Folk song in some Eastern European language my grandfather used to sing. I have no idea what it means. The Roach
JMK5@Lehigh (12/17/90)
In article <Dec.11.01.01.55.1990.7693@athos.rutgers.edu> ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) wrote: > If God didn't ever punish us, then none of us would have much reason, > other than for the love of God, to do what is right. If I may elaborate on Elizabeth's comment, I believe the fear of God and the love of God are interlinked. If we truly and deeply love God, we would fear His displeasure so much that His displeasure alone would be sufficient punishment. Why then does God punish? Perhaps (mere speculation on my part) some people don't truly love God. Michael Kafes
geoff@pmafire.inel.gov (Geoff Allen) (12/19/90)
djo@pacbell.com (Dan'l DanehyOakes) writes: >An excellent >exercise is to pray for the souls of those you think utterly damned. And it's amazing how many of those are actually closer and come to Christ more readily than those we think have a chance. -- Geoff Allen \ Since we live by the Spirit, uunet!pmafire!geoff \ let us keep in step with the Spirit. geoff@pmafire.inel.gov \ -- Gal. 5:25 (NIV)
BINDNER@auvm.auvm.edu (12/19/90)
I see no one took my bait. I'm asking a non-theological question here: to what extent is a belief in hell social, and a result of persecution? What then happens to hell when persecution stops? I'm not trying to say hell doesn't exist. What I'm implying is that those who are not suffering for the Lord should watch themselves, as they may be the cause of another's suffering. Michael
uriel@oak.circa.ufl.edu (Scott Whitmore) (12/24/90)
In article <Dec.19.04.19.45.1990.27805@athos.rutgers.edu>, BINDNER@auvm.auvm.edu writes: >I see no one took my bait. I'm asking a non-theological question >here: to what extent is a belief in hell social, and a result of >persecution? What then happens to hell when persecution stops? I, for one, take no particular pleasure in dreaming about how all my enemies are one day going to roast for opposing me. In fact, such a nasty attitude seems positively diabolical to me... Christ DID say to pray for those who persecute you. And NOT, "I'm praying for you, buddy, because you sure are gonna need it after this! Thank God you have someone RIGHTEOUS such as MYSELF who's willing to pray for you!" (Humility is also a virtue...) >I'm not trying to say hell doesn't exist. What I'm implying is >that those who are not suffering for the Lord should watch themselves, >as they may be the cause of another's suffering. I don't think there's any way to avoid being a source of suffering for *someone*... nor a way to avoid suffering whether you're doing it for the Lord or not... could you better explain what you mean? > >Michael Scott -- Scott Whitmore Internet: uriel@maple.circa.ufl.edu 24-510 Tolbert Hall or uriel@maple.decnet%pine.circa.ufl.edu Gainesville, FL 32612 (USA) Friendly Neighborhood Standard Disclaimer "The Devil...the prowde spirit...cannot bear to be mocked." --Thomas More (?)
cms@gatech.edu (12/24/90)
In article <Dec.19.04.19.45.1990.27805@athos.rutgers.edu>, BINDNER@auvm.auvm.edu writes: > I see no one took my bait. I'm asking a non-theological question > here: to what extent is a belief in hell social, and a result of > persecution? What then happens to hell when persecution stops? > I'm not trying to say hell doesn't exist. What I'm implying is > that those who are not suffering for the Lord should watch themselves, > as they may be the cause of another's suffering. I believe it was Plato who said something to the effect that the purpose of the religion is to provide a system of belief for the common people wherein the good are rewarded and the evil are punished. People cannot be ruled without such a system of belief. At any rate, when I was in the library, I saw Dante's immortal poem in three different volumes: The Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradisio. The Inferno's pages were well-worn and dog-eared; Purgatorio's pages were slightly worn; Paradisio's pages were stiff and brand-new. There's a fascination with hell that transcends the ages. Heaven, I think, is almost regarded as a boring place. Live while you can, eventually you'll go to heaven, is an unfortunate attitude. The Catholic attitude that we'll be very busy in heaven doing the work of the Lord, being the Lord's messengers along with the angels (meaning "messengers," of course), carrying prayers and messages hither and yon, helping people on earth, etc. -- I find this attitude much more appealing than the standard harp-player-heaven evident in cartoons. As a Catholic, I will be with God and be able to serve God in many interesting ways when I am in heaven. I'm glad I'm a Catholic! On the other hand, I heard Pat Robertson talking about heaven once reflecting what I thought was a very Catholic attitude: he said that, in heaven, we will be very busy doing the work of the Lord, and he also made mention of possibly working on other planets, although that was fanciful speculation, but after all, God is God of the whole universe, he said. I'm not terribly familiar with the Protestant concept of heaven in the modern world. For Luther and Calvin, the righteous soul (not based on works, I gather, but righteous by God's grace, exemplified by works, I suppose) looked forward to communion with God; Catholic enough so far. Catholic heaven-thinking builds on medieval mysticism, promoting mystical inwardness, union of the soul with God, promoting (essentially) monastic values among the devout laity. The intimacy of the soul with God, spurred by devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, tended to overshadow the heavenly humanism of the Renaissance. Both Protestants and Catholics made a move away from the worldly. I suppose it's worth noting that the Reformation included no disputes over the nature of heaven itself, just on how to get there. Luther said, "We will be equal to St. Paul, St. Peter, our beloved Lady, and all the saints in their honor and glory." Luther also talked about the different rewards that different saints receive, though. Luther's opinion of the vision of God was essentially the same as Augustine's, that there are different degrees of merit and reward, but it's the same heaven for everyone. Calvin explained that different Christians receive different rewards but all are equally close to the divine. In fact, neither of them emphasized the rewards very much in their writings. Back to hell again, Luther thought the earth was the center of the universe, the upper regions pure, with lower regions progressively impure. At the Last Judgment, God will purify the world by fire and everything impure will be burned at the center of the earth, making the whole world pure (except for the bowels). Like the Reformation itself, Luther imagined the End of the World to be a reformation or renovation of the world rather than its total destruction. For Luther, as for others, heaven meant complete annihilation of rank; no more distinctions between servant and master, or fathers and sons, for that matter. This may be a reflection of Luther's own personal situation. Luther wrote that he had no doubts that he and his dying father would "shortly see each other again in the presence of Christ," but this didn't mean that their household would be reestablished, nor did it mean children would continue to be submissive to their parents. This caused Calvin to say that, because children need authority figures, heaven can have no children; and because women need authority figures in their husbands, husbands and wives will be torn apart. When Zwingli tried to convert the King of France, Francois I, to Protestantism, he promised the King that in heaven Francois would enjoy the company of his ancestors, biblical prophets and saints, and even such characters as Hercules, Socrates, the Catos and Scipios (the King of France remained true to his Catholic faith). Luther reproved Zwingli for including pagans in his list, even though he himself wrote that he _hoped_ to meet Cicero. Calvin was alone among the reformers who dismissed meeting people in heaven as irrelevant next to being with God. Christian renewal came initially from the Council of Trent followed by theologians, mystics, bishops and priests and cardinals and other religious orders, and Catholic laity. Catholic Reformers endorsed the Catechism of the Council of Trent (1566) that heaven "consists in the vision of God and enjoyment of His beauty who is the source and principle of all goodness and perfection." A Jesuit catechism says that even a prince comes to heaven without royal attire. "There is no room for royal splendor in Paradise. Before the deity, evven the dauphin is naked." This explains all the pictures of heaven and hell in which everyone is always naked. I've seen representations of Christ as the right hand of God completely naked. Catholic representations of heaven are typically dotted with virtuous and often _virgin_ saints. An Italian Dominican friar Antonino Polti filled his Paradise with angels and saints like John the Baptist, Augustine, and Jerome (who is also to be found in a Protestant paradise), and the founders of various religious orders, virgins, martyrs, and saints, without any Protestants or pagans. The Queen of Heaven is, of course, the most prominent of the saints in many artistic renderings of heaven. Mary, of course, is the Queen of Saints and presides over all the other saints, who all surround God. In other words, the saints surround Mary, the center of Paradise, who in turn surrounds God. Protestants rejected the presence of Mary. However, Protestants could not totally eliminate the feminine from heaven, so found other methods, such as Giles Fletcher's depiction of God's gentleness and love as Lady Mercy. Lady Mercy gave her breasts to weary travellers to quench their fiery thirst, etc. Well, I seem to have discussed heaven more than hell, which was the original question. Like many things, however, it may not be possible to discuss hell without a clearer understanding of heaven. Catholic heaven, in my estimation, tends to emphasize our relationship with God. Imagine two poles set perpendicular to each other. Oh, like this: | | _____ The vertical beam is our relationship with God; the horizontal beam is our relationship with our fellow human beings. Although a Christian representation, I understand this has its roots in Judaism. At any rate, if you bend the vertical (your relationship with God), you're not only breaking off your relationship with God, you are, de facto, breaking off your relationship with your fellow human beings. Similarly, if you break or bend the horizontal, you are, de facto, breaking off your relationship with God. Heaven is the same situation. To be in relationship with God means to be in relationship to your fellow human beings; to be in relationship with your fellow human beings means to be in relationship with God. This is heaven. Some Protestant views of heaven in the absence of a relationship with those saints who have gone before us ignore the necessary relationship with God in terms of our relationship with our fellow human beings. From my reading, I gather such representations of heaven are few and far between, but perhaps our Protestants readers can give us more information on that. In my Bible class last night, my teacher asked me, "Where did you learn that?" and I said, "Well, that's what I was taught in Sunday school." I've discovered that most of my strongest beliefs are centered in "what I learned in Sunday school." So, to Catholics and Protestants, "What did you learn in Sunday school about heaven and hell?" > Michael -- Sincerely, Cindy Smith emory!dragon!cms
jclark%sdcc6@ucsd.edu (John Clark) (12/25/90)
In article <Dec.11.01.01.55.1990.7693@athos.rutgers.edu> ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) writes:
...Regard a queston on the existence of hell ...
+
+I'll answer you question with another quesition. Would God be merciful
+to the rest of us if he sent Adolp Hitler to Heaven?
+
I don't beleive this justifies the exsitence of some 'eternal' state
of 'hell'. If the God punishes then surely the punishment cannot be
eternal in the sense of a conscious entity knowing that he was being
punished during that period.
As for the argument for 'obeying' the God due to the punishments
otherwise, this seems to be close to some 'justification' by works
which will not work either.
--
John Clark
jclark@ucsd.edujclark%sdcc6@ucsd.edu (John Clark) (12/25/90)
In article <Dec.13.04.09.43.1990.254@athos.rutgers.edu> geoff@pmafire.inel.gov (Geoff Allen) writes:
+
+True. God is a God of both justice and mercy. The amazing thing is
+that His mercy can override His justice. Adolph Hitler was just as
...
+
+A more contemporary example would be Ted Bundy. To most, the thought of
Ah yes the good God who will allow some at the last breath of an
abysmally evil life to enter the kingdom but deny entrance to
someone whose most major sin was not seeing the Christian plan.
--
John Clark
jclark@ucsd.edufarkas@eng.sun.com (Frank Farkas) (01/07/91)
In article <Dec.25.00.57.09.1990.4430@athos.rutgers.edu>, jclark%sdcc6@ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes: >In article <Dec.11.01.01.55.1990.7693@athos.rutgers.edu> ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) writes: >...Regard a queston on the existence of hell ... >+ >+I'll answer you question with another quesition. Would God be merciful >+to the rest of us if he sent Adolp Hitler to Heaven? >+ > >I don't beleive this justifies the exsitence of some 'eternal' state >of 'hell'. If the God punishes then surely the punishment cannot be >eternal in the sense of a conscious entity knowing that he was being >punished during that period. > >As for the argument for 'obeying' the God due to the punishments >otherwise, this seems to be close to some 'justification' by works >which will not work either. >-- > >John Clark >jclark@ucsd.edu Interestingly, the modern day revelation which the prophet Joseph Smith received on this subject is as follows: Doctrine and Covenants (D&C) 19:10-13 ===================================== "For, behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore-" "Eternal punishment is God's punishment." "Endless punishment is God's punishment." Basically, what this revelation says is that punishment will not be for ever. In D&C Section 76 the revelation received by the prophet Joseph Smith and by Sidney Rigdom, via a vision, explains the three levels of heaven, and the type of individuals which will go into each one of them. It also explains that only the sons of perdition will be cast out into eternal darkness. To become a son of perdition one has to know, not just to believe, that there is a God and that Jesus is the Christ, the living son of God, and yet turn against God. I don't know what it means to be cast out into eternal darkness. I assume that it is a place which is void of any influence from God, where there is no "light" at all, just "darkness". Paul spoke about the concept of the three levels of heaven. I Corint 15:41-42 ***************** "There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. So also the resurrection of the dead. ..." It is obvious that Paul didn't believe that all those who will go to heaven will receive the same glory. He clearly states that one may receive glory which is comparable to the sun and another which is worthy only to a glory which is comparable to the brightness of the dimmest star in the heavens. Interestingly, Paul defines three levels (the sun, moon and the star), and differences within one of the levels (the stars). 2 Corint 12:3-4 =============== "I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I can't tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such a one caught up to the third heaven." It is clear to me that if Paul was caught up to the third heaven, there must be at least a first and a second heaven also. The idea that there is only one heaven and one hell can't be supported if it implies that all who will go to heaven will receive the same glory, and all those who will go to hell will receive the same punishment, forever. There is clearly a problem with the ortodox Christian view of heaven and hell. It appears that the ortodox Christian beliefs violates the idea that God is just and fair. The following story tries to illustrate the problem. A bank robber killed one of the tellers, and got caught. He was sentenced to die, however, prior to his execution, which took many years to bring about, he was converted and accepted Jesus Christ. He went to heaven while the teller went to hell. The teller complaint, and said that he wished that he would have received the time and the opportunity to accept Christ. It is clear that many Christians and non-Christians have a proplem with the ortodox Christian believes regarding reward and punishment. Only new revalations received can clear the problem, such as the ones quoted above, and others which deals with the opportunity which is provided to those who didn't have the chance to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ in this life, but will receive it in the spirit world (reffer to I Peter 3:18-19 & 4:6 and D&C 138). For God to be God, he needs to be just and fair, amongst other things. With brotherly love, Frank