Just to throw a slightly different perspective on things (completely derail the thread and annoy everyone...)
I think that when we boil Christianity down to a system of one right and one wrong choice leading to this destiny or this we miss the essence of the message. When Peter preaches to 3000 in Acts 2 he tells them all of the great wonders Jesus had been doing, the miracles and signs, and how he was crucified by them, but raised up by God. He was the Lord and Messiah, whom you crucified.
And then he stops. And the people respond. He hasn't mentioned heaven or hell, and the people respond just the same. This isn't scare tactics, this isn't TWTL, nor is it a "choose this and live, that and die" system. It is simply a case of telling truth, inspired by the Spirit, a truth which convinced 3000 people to respond (if you take Acts to be authentic, but it is likely this kind of situation is, considering that the theology of Peter wouldn't have been too dissimilar to Luke, who was writing very early anyway, and the numbers are likely to be necessary for the rapid growth of Christianity in the 1st century, taking into account the ratio of those converted against those willing to give their lives for the sake of mission)
The disciples clearly believed in an eternal place of suffering for those who don't accept forgiveness, and the glorious new heaven and new earth resurrection for those who do, but those are the consequences for our choice, not the motivation for the choice itself (although it can be). If someone told me that if I didn't believe in the toothfairy I'd go to hell I would probably be 0.5% worried that it might be true, but if I didn't feel the claims of the toothfairy were convincing no amount of scare would make me pledge my life to her (can fairies be male?). People accept the claims of Christianity and accept the love and grace that the cross and resurrection have made accesible to us, and their eternal destiny is a consequence of that. First God loved us, then we love God, then either stick with him for eternity or, well, don't.
Of course I'm not saying you can't boil it down to the response+choice if you so desire, but it isn't the way the New Testament puts it. If we discuss Christian concepts such as hell without the Christian belief in the cross in mind it makes little sense, which is kind of the point really.
no subject
I think that when we boil Christianity down to a system of one right and one wrong choice leading to this destiny or this we miss the essence of the message. When Peter preaches to 3000 in Acts 2 he tells them all of the great wonders Jesus had been doing, the miracles and signs, and how he was crucified by them, but raised up by God. He was the Lord and Messiah, whom you crucified.
And then he stops. And the people respond. He hasn't mentioned heaven or hell, and the people respond just the same. This isn't scare tactics, this isn't TWTL, nor is it a "choose this and live, that and die" system. It is simply a case of telling truth, inspired by the Spirit, a truth which convinced 3000 people to respond (if you take Acts to be authentic, but it is likely this kind of situation is, considering that the theology of Peter wouldn't have been too dissimilar to Luke, who was writing very early anyway, and the numbers are likely to be necessary for the rapid growth of Christianity in the 1st century, taking into account the ratio of those converted against those willing to give their lives for the sake of mission)
The disciples clearly believed in an eternal place of suffering for those who don't accept forgiveness, and the glorious new heaven and new earth resurrection for those who do, but those are the consequences for our choice, not the motivation for the choice itself (although it can be). If someone told me that if I didn't believe in the toothfairy I'd go to hell I would probably be 0.5% worried that it might be true, but if I didn't feel the claims of the toothfairy were convincing no amount of scare would make me pledge my life to her (can fairies be male?). People accept the claims of Christianity and accept the love and grace that the cross and resurrection have made accesible to us, and their eternal destiny is a consequence of that. First God loved us, then we love God, then either stick with him for eternity or, well, don't.
Of course I'm not saying you can't boil it down to the response+choice if you so desire, but it isn't the way the New Testament puts it. If we discuss Christian concepts such as hell without the Christian belief in the cross in mind it makes little sense, which is kind of the point really.