I had a childhood friend, Maria, who had a stepfather. Some "step" parents are ok, some are wonderful, some are our worst nightmare. He was the latter, loving to control the household with fear and intimidation. Always making demands and never letting up. Maria always felt condemned, even though this man claimed to love them all (through their mother, mostly). At times he appeared to approve of them, and sometimes even offered affection, when they were submissive and obedient. The ominous threat of punishment was always in the background.
When I went to Maria's house (not very often), he put on such a good show for me sometimes that I almost forgot who he really was. He acted friendly, said I was always welcome there; he even played with us a little. But there was no getting around that overbearing presence he had. Everyone towed the line so as not to upset him.
Usually, when Maria and I were away from her house, I could tell that she didn't want to go home, but she knew better than not to. I had seen the bruises on her and her brothers. Yet her mom always stood behind her husband, never coming to the defense of her children. She never seemed to be concerned that they were afraid, that they weren't happy. Oh, there was a respect in the house for him alright, but there was no love. But the mother was satisfied with the order--the control resulting from the strict regimen her husband ruled with.
One day Maria didn't come to school. There had been a tragedy in that her beloved older brother had died. He had made an attempt to defend himself against the oppression and abuse, and violence erupted. Whether the death was an accident or not didn't alleviate the pain of loss that Maria and her siblings felt. They were devastated. Maria cried to me about never seeing her brother again. Her mother grieved silently, never speaking against her husband for his harshness, while he, himself, showed no remorse. He mainly defended himself and spoke of consequences. Ironically, he was never charged with any wrongdoing.
I was greatly distressed for the children in that home. They had suffered such a tremendous loss, but the injustice of the circumstance left no place for consolation. Then, perhaps worse, was their having to continue living in fear of a sadistic man and his warped concept of right and wrong. Fear, not love, ruled the house. The structure was no different than that of a prison. Peace had no place to lay her head.
Where was justice served in this story? How could it be that children were allowed to be bullied and traumatized because they weren't perfect? What kind of a mother would lose her instinct to protect her children from harm? What kind of a mother wouldn't feel responsible for their safety and protection? Why were cruel, demanding rules bringing death allowed to go un-reprimanded in any way? Why would the enforcer of those rules be regarded as anything other than a heartless dictator? Where is the sorrowful eulogy for a lost life?
The answers to the above questions can be found in any "home" where life has been replaced with death, where extreme control and order have replaced love and spontaneity. I really didn't have a friend named Maria, you see, but the story is very much alive. The darkness represented here is a shadow of another story in a higher reality, for there is no justice (or sanity) for anyone trapped in the dead system of organized religion (mom). She has become one with the tortured views of a false belief system (the stepfather), and turned her back on her betrothed (Jesus).
This mom of religion (the whore of Rev 17:1) is very unstable, having two messages coming out of her mouth. From one side flow praises to a wonderful God who loves us unconditionally, and will never leave us or forsake us. He urges us--requires us--to forgive, as he has forgiven us. But from the other side is a contradiction to that other message, even spoken in muffled tones and avoided--if possible. That ugly little truth in the fine print. Yes, God does love us, but will reject us--eternally and unmercifully--if we fail to do or be such and such.
The requirements depend on where you fellowship and are not always about “accepting” Jesus. They can be about all matter of outward conditions (dress, drink, etc.) that Jesus himself never established. If we have to do anything to be cleaned up for God, what was the point of the crucifixion? However, whatever the criteria is for being eternally separated, I have some specific questions:
If a loving God loves on condition, how can his love be called unconditional? Do we stop loving people just because they die? Do we stop loving family and friends just because we can't see them anymore? Why doesn't God still love someone that I still love? Can a human have a higher love than God? If I care about the rehabilitation and restoration of another person, wouldn't God care also? Isn't a God requiring us to forgive, who can't himself, a hypocrite? What's wrong with this picture? All these questions have high answers and the truth will not come from men, especially blind followers of religion, who speak only what they have been taught.
Oh, I've heard it said that God still loves the separated people, but his hands are tied because they didn't "choose" him. Sorry, but believing that people are on a path to torment and refusing to do anything about it is not an expression of love! It is, however, indifference and apathy---a pure lack of passion. This made-up god doesn't love. This false god also doesn't have a handle on his creation and was a very poor planner. No righteous HOLY creator would turn his back on a creation that he was responsible for. Even I can do better than that! I would never let my own children run off a cliff to their death simply because they "chose to". My own human love surpasses this. (Never mind that Ephesians 1:11 states that all things are determined by God's will and not ours!)
Few people I have challenged to consider these things would even pray about it. So many blank stares or looks of confusion, or resentment. Doesn't scripture state that God seeks those who will worship Him in spirit and in truth? (John 4:23) Why then, won’t people seek God for themselves instead of accepting the rulings of mere men? Maybe their indifference to truth blocks the need. Maybe their fleshly desire to see others suffer is a means to the end. Maybe fear of God, himself, keeps men from daring such a thing. Divine love can dispel that fear. The door is open. We can approach through Jesus Christ. We can ask questions.
Hearts seeking truth will never settle for a blurred understanding of God. We must be sure that what we believe is a pure Word, uncluttered with the religious mind. For example, the word “eternal” means different things according to the Bible translation used, but a concordance will have an accurate rendition. Eternal, as translated in the King James, comes from the word "aion"--meaning an age--a period of time, not forever and ever. A whole new light is shed on a concept that previously had no hope.
Happily, many seekers of truth have come to know that our heavenly Father is not sadistic, for what fellowship has light with darkness? Shades of Dante's "inferno" (fictional place in a poem)! We can serve a god we fear, but we can never love him or trust him. Followers of the doctrine of eternal separation are blinded by a dark spirit that disguises itself as light. No, the real Father of Jesus Christ is NOT represented in religion, for He is not sadistic. No step children in this family, but peace and rest for all. Now that's good news (gospel)!
Note: without disrupting the flow of this book, I would like to recommend a more intense reading of this chapter's subject matter:
http://passionofthelamb.blogspot.com/2011/07/eternal-damnation-justice-system-of.html
