I'd love to hear perspectives on the (now rather cliched) matter of suffering. The most common one I hear is that free will is necessary for actions to be considered meaningful, but also permits evil. I found that an adequate answer until recently, when I thought this doesn't really fit with my idea of heaven. Surely in heaven there is free will, but also there is no suffering.
I'm aware that heaven is a whole different ball game, but why couldn't our current existence have been created in a similar fashion, such that someone is free to do what they want, but that there is no suffering?
Also, I agree with what avistew said, and not just cos I'm a sucker for avistew. I hope I'm not coming across as argumentative. I am genuinely interested in other's mindsets, and am trying to question as respectfully as I can
I wanted to get back to your previous question before the suffering thing, guess I can tackle both. Just in the process of closing an 80 page paper on colonial Native Americans. Will get back to this thread soon.
I'd love to hear perspectives on the (now rather cliched) matter of suffering. The most common one I hear is that free will is necessary for actions to be considered meaningful, but also permits evil. I found that an adequate answer until recently, when I thought this doesn't really fit with my idea of heaven. Surely in heaven there is free will, but also there is no suffering.
I'm aware that heaven is a whole different ball game, but why couldn't our current existence have been created in a similar fashion, such that someone is free to do what they want, but that there is no suffering?
When, if you go back to Genesis (and if you actually choose to believe it), then you'll find that this world isn't actually meant to be perfect. It was meant to be perfect, but, of course, man stuffed up and 'picked the fruit' from the 'tree of the knowledge of good & evil' (which could just be a metaphor for how the events transpired). With this, evil was brought into the world, and this earth was then tainted, tarnished and ruined. As a result, it's caused suffering; suffering in a world that shouldn't have witnessed suffering, but did as a result of man giving in to temptation.
See, the whole "why does God let bad things happen?" argument is completely flawed, because those who voice this argument seem to be discounting and forgetting this part of the belief system (mentioned above). This world isn't perfect, and it's not meant to be perfect because man chose to make it imperfect, and evil was introduced into the world.
In heaven, I doubt God will give man the choice of screwing up everything again. Heaven will be perfect, and, as I think of it, evil will simply be non-existent; it simply won't be there; an act of evil will be an impossibility, like folding a piece of paper 8 times or drawing a four-cornered triangle.
Wow... I'm kind of surprised, that a religious topic is allowed on this forum. Not that this is a bad thing, but I'm just so used to boards where religious and political topics are "forbidden".
9 pages and nobody was eaten alive by anybody with different opinions, this community is very civil.
Hayden. In heaven, is there not free will? It feels difficult to imagine a perfect afterlife if one is not free in this afterlife.
I understand that Genesis outlines how evil came into the world via man's free choice for evil. I just don't understand why this situation was considered necessary if it is not necessary in heaven.
Hayden. In heaven, is there not free will? It feels difficult to imagine a perfect afterlife if one is not free in this afterlife.
There will be free will; people will be free to perform whatever positive acts they like. It's just that evil will not exist; we won't be forbidden from performing acts of evil, we'll just simply not be able to because evil itself won't be there.
At the moment, we live in a world where there is no magic, so we can't perform acts of magic. In heaven there will be no evil, so we can't perform acts of evil.
Sorry if I'm repeating myself here, I'm just trying to make sure I convey my message properly.
I understand that Genesis outlines how evil came into the world via man's free choice for evil. I just don't understand why this situation was considered necessary if it is not necessary in heaven.
That's a question that I've struggled with. Why on earth did God give man the choice the first time if not the second time around, especially if he knew that man would make the wrong decision?
I guess it comes down to God's way of thinking and reasoning. He's described as a fair God in the Bible, after all. How I see it, God initially wanted to give man a choice; he'd given us an earth, he wanted to give us the opportunity to run it how we wanted.
But that, of course, leaves the question of "why won't he do the same thing in heaven?" Well, this time it's sort of different. How I see it, no Christian going to heaven wants there to be evil in heaven; if they do, then they're not really doing a very good job of "being a Christian," since they're screwing up the morals and values associated. In the Bible, it says that Christians should "hate what is evil and cling to what is good." So, if you're going to be a true Christian, then you must despise evil, and if you despise evil then you wouldn't want to have it in heaven in the first place, would you? So it's not as though God is depriving us of this choice the second time around, because he knows that the people going to heaven don't want evil to ruin it this time around.
Plus, with earth, man was dumped there without a choice; we weren't asked if we wanted to live on this earth, so God gave us the choice to decide what sort of earth we wanted then and there. But this time around, with heaven, it's a place that we're going to and a place that we know about prior to entering it. It's a completely different ball game. It's a different choice this time around; now the individuals can make a decision - they can enter into a world free of all evil, or they can stay behind and, well, die. So, as opposed to a choice of what we want our world to be like, we instead have a choice between a world in which there is only goodness, and a world in which you will die.
Sorry if I got a bit rambly then. I hope I got my point across properly. If you don't understand what I'm saying, I'll try to say it in a bit more of a concise, to-the-point manner. Oh, and by the way, you're not coming across as argumentative; simply inquisitive.
My own thought is that there will be essentially no free will in heaven. Sure, we might technically have free will there, but we are with Him constantly and fully, so how could we decide to do anything that separates us from Him?
As far as why evil was necessary in the first place... My own belief is that God, being Himself, is the ultimate teacher, and that the lessons we learn here and the choice that we make to acknowledge our own failure and need for a savior and for grace will make us something special to Him in a way that is different from the rest of His creation.
If you waited until you were on your deathbed before accepting God, would you be allowed to enter Heaven? I ask this because, wouldn't you be able to forgo the inconvenience of all the Christian duties you have to perform throughout your life and just get a free ride? Or is there a cutoff point before you're permanently condemned?
If you waited until you were on your deathbed before accepting God, would you be allowed to enter Heaven? I ask this because, wouldn't you be able to forgo the inconvenience of all the Christian duties you have to perform throughout your life and just get a free ride? Or is there a cutoff point before you're permanently condemned?
Yes, you can accept Christ on your deathbed and be saved, though I don't agree that having a close personal relationship with God is in any way an inconvenience.
I do believe that deathbed conversion can occur,but I think it's more than a cursory claim of "I'm sorry". I think genuine conversion is a product of a lifetime of change concerning the subject.
That is between that person and God, but there is evidence that you can accept Christ on your deathbed and be saved.
Matthew 20:1-16
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire workers for his vineyard. He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard.
“About nine in the morning he went out and saw others standing in the marketplace doing nothing. He told them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.’ So they went.
“He went out again about noon and about three in the afternoon and did the same thing. About five in the afternoon he went out and found still others standing around. He asked them, ‘Why have you been standing here all day long doing nothing?’
“‘Because no one has hired us,’ they answered.
“He said to them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard.’
“When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the workers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first.’
“The workers who were hired about five in the afternoon came and each received a denarius. So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a denarius. When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner. ‘These who were hired last worked only one hour,’ they said, ‘and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.’
“But he answered one of them, ‘I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? Take your pay and go. I want to give the one who was hired last the same as I gave you. Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’
“So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”
My own thought is that there will be essentially no free will in heaven. Sure, we might technically have free will there, but we are with Him constantly and fully, so how could we decide to do anything that separates us from Him?
As far as why evil was necessary in the first place... My own belief is that God, being Himself, is the ultimate teacher, and that the lessons we learn here and the choice that we make to acknowledge our own failure and need for a savior and for grace will make us something special to Him in a way that is different from the rest of His creation.
1.) Humans don't go to Heaven. They were created by God to be caretakers of the Earth and, if Revelations is true, then they fulfill their purpose once all things are said and done.
2.) I always perceived that the whole point of life is allowing them to grow into a people that can fulfill that function.
3.) Metanarrative/Theology/Most people don't study this/Very contentious issue in theology: The metanarrative of the Bible is that mankind was created to be caretakers of the world that was as close to heaven as you can imagine. Despite botching it, there are some that will 'get it', and some that won't, and those that get it are the ones that go on to the post Revelations existence because they're suited for looking out for the world and each other.
Have any of you ever heard the Parable of the Mustard Seed? Most Christians have. Just for reference's sake, here it is:
Matthew 13:31-32
He told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. Though it is the smallest of all seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds come and perch in its branches.”
Most people who talk about this parable refer to how "faith the size of a mustard seed can move mountains." This is true, but there is also something interesting which was pointed out to me some time ago; which is that back in those days in which Christ told this parable, a mustard plant was a weed.
A tiny mustard seed could grow into a big weedy mustard plant that can attract birds, and if you are a farmer you don't want to attract birds to your crops. Further, even if you try to remove the plant, all it takes is one tiny remaining seed to grow the plant back out again.
One thing I never fully got about the idea of Heaven and people saying we will have free will there but the choices will be so obviously 'right' or 'wrong' that it won't be possible to make 'bad' choices once you get there.
Which for me clashes with the reason religious people often give about why we have to live on Earth in the first place, and not be put directly into paradise - how you have to willingly and freely accept God.
But if we have free will in the Christian heaven, but with the difference that making the 'wrong' choices there is practically impossible and really nothing more than a technical possibility that no one would use - doesn't that mean that you could willingly and freely accept God even if you were put directly into heaven?
Seems to me that would make much more sense, seeing as people would be very much more likely to make the correct choice (should Christianity turn out to actually be correct, obviously).
Is it because the Christian god also expects you to have 'faith' that he exists, which would be impossible once you knew it for a fact?
This whole faith thing always seemed really strange to me - why is it so important that one believes in the existence of god?
I mean, it would be one thing if it was meant as having faith in God in the way that you believe in what he's doing and all that - that's something quite different and maybe more understandable.
But just faith that he exists at all... why is that so important? What's the point in this hide and seek game, it seems a bit dumb to me.
Yes, you can accept Christ on your deathbed and be saved, though I don't agree that having a close personal relationship with God is in any way an inconvenience.
I'm not certain I understand your meaning. Are you saying that you believe those that follow Christ will not go to Heaven, but instead exist only on Earth after it is recreated when Christ establishes His kingdom here?
I'm not certain I understand your meaning. Are you saying that you believe those that follow Christ will not go to Heaven, but instead exist only on Earth after it is recreated when Christ establishes His kingdom here?
I'm not sure I agree with that.
Pretty sure Revelations is pretty clear that humans exist on earth following God's return. The New Earth is their dwelling place.
Mind you I also don't believe in a global flood or a literal reading of Genesis, so you're mileage may vary with my interpretation of theology.
One thing I never fully got about the idea of Heaven and people saying we will have free will there but the choices will be so obviously 'right' or 'wrong' that it won't be possible to make 'bad' choices once you get there.
This is an issue of debate. First, let me point out that I don't have all the answers. I don't think we Christians tout ourselves as having all the answers. God has all the answers. As such, God's Word, the Bible, is given to us to provide such answers. The important thing though is this: God loves us very much, desires to have a close and personal relationship with us, we are separated from God by sin and are incapable of redeeming ourselves for it, and God sent Himself as Christ to be sacrificed for us so that our sin can be forgiven and we can be assured a place with Him in Heaven after we die. We don't deserve it, but it is by His grace through our faith in Christ that we are saved.
To say that there is no free will in Heaven to do evil is not true, because Lucifer was cast out of Heaven for seeking to set himself above God. However, I think that it may be accurate to say that evil simply won't be in Heaven and therefore those in Heaven won't be able to commit evil deeds. It's complicated, I know. The truth is that we, as humans, only have a limited understanding of things and have a difficult if not impossible time trying to comprehend all that there it to know about Heaven and, most certainly, God Himself.
Different Christian denominations hold different beliefs about certain doctrines, though I judge them to be unimportant in the grand scheme as really debating over technicalities... nitpicking if you will.
One of these doctrinal beliefs is the issue of "once saved, always saved." This refers to the debate of whether or not accepting Christ's sacrifice makes one saved permanently or if one needs to "recommit" themselves after falling back into sinful habits. What I believe in this matter is that when you are saved, you are saved forever. Christ died for our sin once and for all. To say that you need to be re-saved would be like saying He had to die more than once for you. If however you claim to accept Christ and then later turn away from Him with no desire or intention of returning to Him, then you must not have been serious in the first place so your initial acceptance didn't truly count.
What I mean is this: in Matthew 7:13-14, Jesus says “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." Now, if you'll notice, the gate is mentioned first. This means that when you go through the narrow gate, you've gone through it. Sure, after you've gone through the gate, you're capable of wandering off the road and getting yourself into trouble, but the road is still there and you need only come back to it.
Also, it's not just about believing that He exists. It's about acknowledging Christ's perfect sacrifice, as a man who had no sin, to pay the penalty for your sins and, through His sacrifice, save you from being eternally separated from God.
There are people in this thread who have questioned the validity of the Bible, and whether it it's accurate and such.
Truly, I tell you that the important place to start is with God Himself. I believe in God. I believe that the Bible is "God-breathed," or rather that the Bible is written by man yet inspired by God. And most importantly, I believe that God can and does use the Bible to speak to me and to others, and to lead us in the path He has laid out for us. If you're going to investigate the validity of the Bible, you should first investigate whether or not God cares about you and whether He, being God, is perfectly capable of tweaking/controlling/manipulating/influencing/(whatever you want to call it) the development of the Bible such that He can use the Bible to reach others for Him.
Not that I consider myself an expert or anything. I do have some credentials to my name but who cares about those. But anyway, my paper is done so I can insert my brand of hububbery back into the thread on a more lengthy basis if I missed any question.
Pretty sure Revelations is pretty clear that humans exist on earth following God's return. The New Earth is their dwelling place.
Mind you I also don't believe in a global flood or a literal reading of Genesis, so you're mileage may vary with my interpretation of theology.
My own understanding of what I THINK you're talking about is that God will give yet another chance to those who have not yet accepted His Grace. Literally, they will be raised again to live life again and have yet another shot. And I can't know that it's going to stop at 2. Who knows how many? Perhaps this is already another shot that we're on and we just don't know it?
I think the Bible makes it pretty clear that we'll be with Him.
As far as the flood and details on whether or not Old Testament stories are morality tales or literally real, I'm not sure that our opinions matter so much in the face of Jesus. As far as I know there is no bullet point in Jesus' teachings that tells us that we have to believe that the OT stories are literal truth to see the Kingdom of God, although I do tend to believe that they are mostly literal.
Revelations 21
A New Heaven and a New Earth
1 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”
5 He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” Then he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”
6 He said to me: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water without cost from the spring of the water of life. 7 Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children. 8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”
The New Jerusalem, the Bride of the Lamb
9 One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. 11 It shone with the glory of God, and its brilliance was like that of a very precious jewel, like a jasper, clear as crystal. 12 It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. 13 There were three gates on the east, three on the north, three on the south and three on the west. 14 The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
15 The angel who talked with me had a measuring rod of gold to measure the city, its gates and its walls. 16 The city was laid out like a square, as long as it was wide. He measured the city with the rod and found it to be 12,000 stadia[c] in length, and as wide and high as it is long. 17 The angel measured the wall using human measurement, and it was 144 cubits[d] thick.[e] 18 The wall was made of jasper, and the city of pure gold, as pure as glass. 19 The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, 20 the fifth onyx, the sixth ruby, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth turquoise, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst.[f] 21 The twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate made of a single pearl. The great street of the city was of gold, as pure as transparent glass.
22 I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24 The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25 On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. 26 The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. 27 Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
If you take it as it reads, the New Jerusalem descends from Heaven to Earth and is like a celestial capital, by the account.
A. I'm not quite sure that we ARE meant to take Revelations straight as it's read. I'm not sure how much of it is meant to be literal and how much is not. Assuming you take it all literally...
B. I see nothing that says 'You're stuck here.' It's describing a location that will certainly be inhabited, but certainly it's not the only location in the universe.
C. Even if we WERE stuck here, it's debatable whether or not Heaven is a physical location that one can travel to. In the passage above, nothing separates ourselves from God, and being in the total presence of God may in fact be Heaven.
Hm. Simply because I'm arguing for an earth residing post Revelations community does not mean I think they're 'stuck' there. I think man is intended to continue his exploration.
With regard to trusting in the bible, I am not the sort of person who would say the bible is utterly worthless. There are quite a lot of atheists who will just ignore you the second you start quoting passages from it as evidence for something, and some who full on doubt the very existence of Jesus. This strikes me as pretty unlikely, given the variety of authorship in the NT, and the fact that they don't appear to be just writing mythical stories.
That being said, I don't understand why I should accept the majority of it, especially things which refer to things outside of human experience or understanding.
When deciding what I would be OK with believing, I usually say "I will believe anything so long as the chance of it happening is more likely than the chance of all the evidence being wrong"
For instance:
Jesus knew John the Baptist?
Chance of it happening - Reasonable. People know each other all the time
Chance of evidence being wrong - Kind of unlikely. Lots of people talk about it.
So I conclude Jesus probably knew John the Baptist.
Jesus was born of a virgin?
Chance of it happening - Extremely unlikely. Goes against our knowledge of science
Chance of evidence being wrong - Seems unlikely, but then we only have two people mention it, so it's a reasonable chance.
So I conclude Jesus wasn't born of a virgin.
Is it wrong to apply that rule throughout the NT? Or am I applying it wrongly?
Would love to hear
Dashi, I don't know if you know this, but what you have been saying seems very close to one of the Mormon articles of faith (the 10th to be exact).
"We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon this, the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory."
For instance:
Jesus knew John the Baptist?
Chance of it happening - Reasonable. People know each other all the time
Chance of evidence being wrong - Kind of unlikely. Lots of people talk about it.
So I conclude Jesus probably knew John the Baptist.
Jesus was born of a virgin?
Chance of it happening - Extremely unlikely. Goes against our knowledge of science
Chance of evidence being wrong - Seems unlikely, but then we only have two people mention it, so it's a reasonable chance.
So I conclude Jesus wasn't born of a virgin.
Is it wrong to apply that rule throughout the NT? Or am I applying it wrongly?
Would love to hear
Jesus and John the Baptist were cousins. That is, Mary and Elizabeth (John's mother) were said to be cousins in the Bible, though with Mary being young and Elizabeth being "beyond child bearing years" I'm not sure that they were first-cousins, but to whatever degree, Jesus and John the Baptist were family.
The Bible says that Joseph almost divorced Mary because of the baby so clearly it wasn't his. The only reason why he didn't is because an angel appeared to him and told him what God had done. Also, God was- and is- quite willing and able to use people who were born out of let's say less-than-honorable circumstances for His glory, but in this case that doesn't really fit.
Further, for God Himself to become flesh and dwell among us, just because he can and often does use scientifically explainable means to accomplish His will, that doesn't require Him to be bound by science in doing so. He is God, after all. That is to say, I would think that God- who is responsible for creating time and space itself and creating the scientific laws which we are even only recently discovering- is well within His means to cause a young girl who has never had sex to suddenly become pregnant. Sure it's scientifically unlikely, but this is God made flesh we're talking about.
Dashi, I don't know if you know this, but what you have been saying seems very close to one of the Mormon articles of faith (the 10th to be exact).
"We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon this, the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory."
I'm aware of the article but very close is not exact. I don't believe New Jerusalem is on the American continent. I do believe that the Israelite tribes will be gathered up as witnesses, that's in Revelations too. The rest of the article aligns pretty well with Revelations 21.
I believe in the second coming of our Telltale saviour, Rather Dashing. I just converted to the Church of Dashing. I've seen the light and this needs to be done, I think. See, some day he will return to the forum and give us back the well written and memorable posts for which he was known. Anyone else a Ratherfarian?
I believe in the second coming of our Telltale saviour, Rather Dashing. I just converted to the Church of Dashing. I've seen the light and this needs to be done, I think. See, some day he will return to the forum and give us back the well written and memorable posts for which he was known. Anyone else a Ratherfarian?
Not to be a spoiled sport but can we get the thread back on topic?
Space Dashing is a legit religion. There is just as much proof of his divinity as everyone else who has ever claimed to be a godhead. Why do you hate our religion in space?
We are all religious.
Let me, redefine religion. Any man-made believe aiding him to foolishly, yes, foolishly think he knows what's going on around him is religion.
Let me name some religions based on that definition: Society's Norm, Culture, National identity, Society's Values, ego, super-ego, and Language.
All those are mere fake Idols we all worship.
I don't believe in them, because they are all fake. They are all man made. They are not products of nature, but they are stupid tools we all need to live because we are cursed with a creative and biased mind.
What I know and believe is that I don't know, and that I will never know.
Comments
I wanted to get back to your previous question before the suffering thing, guess I can tackle both. Just in the process of closing an 80 page paper on colonial Native Americans. Will get back to this thread soon.
When, if you go back to Genesis (and if you actually choose to believe it), then you'll find that this world isn't actually meant to be perfect. It was meant to be perfect, but, of course, man stuffed up and 'picked the fruit' from the 'tree of the knowledge of good & evil' (which could just be a metaphor for how the events transpired). With this, evil was brought into the world, and this earth was then tainted, tarnished and ruined. As a result, it's caused suffering; suffering in a world that shouldn't have witnessed suffering, but did as a result of man giving in to temptation.
See, the whole "why does God let bad things happen?" argument is completely flawed, because those who voice this argument seem to be discounting and forgetting this part of the belief system (mentioned above). This world isn't perfect, and it's not meant to be perfect because man chose to make it imperfect, and evil was introduced into the world.
In heaven, I doubt God will give man the choice of screwing up everything again. Heaven will be perfect, and, as I think of it, evil will simply be non-existent; it simply won't be there; an act of evil will be an impossibility, like folding a piece of paper 8 times or drawing a four-cornered triangle.
9 pages and nobody was eaten alive by anybody with different opinions, this community is very civil.
By the way:
Flying Spaghetti Monster FTW!
I understand that Genesis outlines how evil came into the world via man's free choice for evil. I just don't understand why this situation was considered necessary if it is not necessary in heaven.
There will be free will; people will be free to perform whatever positive acts they like. It's just that evil will not exist; we won't be forbidden from performing acts of evil, we'll just simply not be able to because evil itself won't be there.
At the moment, we live in a world where there is no magic, so we can't perform acts of magic. In heaven there will be no evil, so we can't perform acts of evil.
Sorry if I'm repeating myself here, I'm just trying to make sure I convey my message properly.
That's a question that I've struggled with. Why on earth did God give man the choice the first time if not the second time around, especially if he knew that man would make the wrong decision?
I guess it comes down to God's way of thinking and reasoning. He's described as a fair God in the Bible, after all. How I see it, God initially wanted to give man a choice; he'd given us an earth, he wanted to give us the opportunity to run it how we wanted.
But that, of course, leaves the question of "why won't he do the same thing in heaven?" Well, this time it's sort of different. How I see it, no Christian going to heaven wants there to be evil in heaven; if they do, then they're not really doing a very good job of "being a Christian," since they're screwing up the morals and values associated. In the Bible, it says that Christians should "hate what is evil and cling to what is good." So, if you're going to be a true Christian, then you must despise evil, and if you despise evil then you wouldn't want to have it in heaven in the first place, would you? So it's not as though God is depriving us of this choice the second time around, because he knows that the people going to heaven don't want evil to ruin it this time around.
Plus, with earth, man was dumped there without a choice; we weren't asked if we wanted to live on this earth, so God gave us the choice to decide what sort of earth we wanted then and there. But this time around, with heaven, it's a place that we're going to and a place that we know about prior to entering it. It's a completely different ball game. It's a different choice this time around; now the individuals can make a decision - they can enter into a world free of all evil, or they can stay behind and, well, die. So, as opposed to a choice of what we want our world to be like, we instead have a choice between a world in which there is only goodness, and a world in which you will die.
Sorry if I got a bit rambly then. I hope I got my point across properly. If you don't understand what I'm saying, I'll try to say it in a bit more of a concise, to-the-point manner. Oh, and by the way, you're not coming across as argumentative; simply inquisitive.
Cool, thanks. Glad I made sense.
As far as why evil was necessary in the first place... My own belief is that God, being Himself, is the ultimate teacher, and that the lessons we learn here and the choice that we make to acknowledge our own failure and need for a savior and for grace will make us something special to Him in a way that is different from the rest of His creation.
Yes, you can accept Christ on your deathbed and be saved, though I don't agree that having a close personal relationship with God is in any way an inconvenience.
1.) Humans don't go to Heaven. They were created by God to be caretakers of the Earth and, if Revelations is true, then they fulfill their purpose once all things are said and done.
2.) I always perceived that the whole point of life is allowing them to grow into a people that can fulfill that function.
3.) Metanarrative/Theology/Most people don't study this/Very contentious issue in theology: The metanarrative of the Bible is that mankind was created to be caretakers of the world that was as close to heaven as you can imagine. Despite botching it, there are some that will 'get it', and some that won't, and those that get it are the ones that go on to the post Revelations existence because they're suited for looking out for the world and each other.
Most people who talk about this parable refer to how "faith the size of a mustard seed can move mountains." This is true, but there is also something interesting which was pointed out to me some time ago; which is that back in those days in which Christ told this parable, a mustard plant was a weed.
A tiny mustard seed could grow into a big weedy mustard plant that can attract birds, and if you are a farmer you don't want to attract birds to your crops. Further, even if you try to remove the plant, all it takes is one tiny remaining seed to grow the plant back out again.
Which for me clashes with the reason religious people often give about why we have to live on Earth in the first place, and not be put directly into paradise - how you have to willingly and freely accept God.
But if we have free will in the Christian heaven, but with the difference that making the 'wrong' choices there is practically impossible and really nothing more than a technical possibility that no one would use - doesn't that mean that you could willingly and freely accept God even if you were put directly into heaven?
Seems to me that would make much more sense, seeing as people would be very much more likely to make the correct choice (should Christianity turn out to actually be correct, obviously).
Is it because the Christian god also expects you to have 'faith' that he exists, which would be impossible once you knew it for a fact?
This whole faith thing always seemed really strange to me - why is it so important that one believes in the existence of god?
I mean, it would be one thing if it was meant as having faith in God in the way that you believe in what he's doing and all that - that's something quite different and maybe more understandable.
But just faith that he exists at all... why is that so important? What's the point in this hide and seek game, it seems a bit dumb to me.
Ah, I somehow missed that post. Good points.
I'm not certain I understand your meaning. Are you saying that you believe those that follow Christ will not go to Heaven, but instead exist only on Earth after it is recreated when Christ establishes His kingdom here?
I'm not sure I agree with that.
Pretty sure Revelations is pretty clear that humans exist on earth following God's return. The New Earth is their dwelling place.
Mind you I also don't believe in a global flood or a literal reading of Genesis, so you're mileage may vary with my interpretation of theology.
This is an issue of debate. First, let me point out that I don't have all the answers. I don't think we Christians tout ourselves as having all the answers. God has all the answers. As such, God's Word, the Bible, is given to us to provide such answers. The important thing though is this: God loves us very much, desires to have a close and personal relationship with us, we are separated from God by sin and are incapable of redeeming ourselves for it, and God sent Himself as Christ to be sacrificed for us so that our sin can be forgiven and we can be assured a place with Him in Heaven after we die. We don't deserve it, but it is by His grace through our faith in Christ that we are saved.
To say that there is no free will in Heaven to do evil is not true, because Lucifer was cast out of Heaven for seeking to set himself above God. However, I think that it may be accurate to say that evil simply won't be in Heaven and therefore those in Heaven won't be able to commit evil deeds. It's complicated, I know. The truth is that we, as humans, only have a limited understanding of things and have a difficult if not impossible time trying to comprehend all that there it to know about Heaven and, most certainly, God Himself.
Different Christian denominations hold different beliefs about certain doctrines, though I judge them to be unimportant in the grand scheme as really debating over technicalities... nitpicking if you will.
One of these doctrinal beliefs is the issue of "once saved, always saved." This refers to the debate of whether or not accepting Christ's sacrifice makes one saved permanently or if one needs to "recommit" themselves after falling back into sinful habits. What I believe in this matter is that when you are saved, you are saved forever. Christ died for our sin once and for all. To say that you need to be re-saved would be like saying He had to die more than once for you. If however you claim to accept Christ and then later turn away from Him with no desire or intention of returning to Him, then you must not have been serious in the first place so your initial acceptance didn't truly count.
What I mean is this: in Matthew 7:13-14, Jesus says “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." Now, if you'll notice, the gate is mentioned first. This means that when you go through the narrow gate, you've gone through it. Sure, after you've gone through the gate, you're capable of wandering off the road and getting yourself into trouble, but the road is still there and you need only come back to it.
Also, it's not just about believing that He exists. It's about acknowledging Christ's perfect sacrifice, as a man who had no sin, to pay the penalty for your sins and, through His sacrifice, save you from being eternally separated from God.
Truly, I tell you that the important place to start is with God Himself. I believe in God. I believe that the Bible is "God-breathed," or rather that the Bible is written by man yet inspired by God. And most importantly, I believe that God can and does use the Bible to speak to me and to others, and to lead us in the path He has laid out for us. If you're going to investigate the validity of the Bible, you should first investigate whether or not God cares about you and whether He, being God, is perfectly capable of tweaking/controlling/manipulating/influencing/(whatever you want to call it) the development of the Bible such that He can use the Bible to reach others for Him.
Dood I think you had one. Anyway, point made.
My own understanding of what I THINK you're talking about is that God will give yet another chance to those who have not yet accepted His Grace. Literally, they will be raised again to live life again and have yet another shot. And I can't know that it's going to stop at 2. Who knows how many? Perhaps this is already another shot that we're on and we just don't know it?
I think the Bible makes it pretty clear that we'll be with Him.
As far as the flood and details on whether or not Old Testament stories are morality tales or literally real, I'm not sure that our opinions matter so much in the face of Jesus. As far as I know there is no bullet point in Jesus' teachings that tells us that we have to believe that the OT stories are literal truth to see the Kingdom of God, although I do tend to believe that they are mostly literal.
Revelations 21
A New Heaven and a New Earth
1 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”
5 He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” Then he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”
6 He said to me: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water without cost from the spring of the water of life. 7 Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children. 8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”
The New Jerusalem, the Bride of the Lamb
9 One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. 11 It shone with the glory of God, and its brilliance was like that of a very precious jewel, like a jasper, clear as crystal. 12 It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. 13 There were three gates on the east, three on the north, three on the south and three on the west. 14 The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
15 The angel who talked with me had a measuring rod of gold to measure the city, its gates and its walls. 16 The city was laid out like a square, as long as it was wide. He measured the city with the rod and found it to be 12,000 stadia[c] in length, and as wide and high as it is long. 17 The angel measured the wall using human measurement, and it was 144 cubits[d] thick.[e] 18 The wall was made of jasper, and the city of pure gold, as pure as glass. 19 The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, 20 the fifth onyx, the sixth ruby, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth turquoise, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst.[f] 21 The twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate made of a single pearl. The great street of the city was of gold, as pure as transparent glass.
22 I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24 The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25 On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. 26 The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. 27 Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.
If you take it as it reads, the New Jerusalem descends from Heaven to Earth and is like a celestial capital, by the account.
B. I see nothing that says 'You're stuck here.' It's describing a location that will certainly be inhabited, but certainly it's not the only location in the universe.
C. Even if we WERE stuck here, it's debatable whether or not Heaven is a physical location that one can travel to. In the passage above, nothing separates ourselves from God, and being in the total presence of God may in fact be Heaven.
That being said, I don't understand why I should accept the majority of it, especially things which refer to things outside of human experience or understanding.
When deciding what I would be OK with believing, I usually say "I will believe anything so long as the chance of it happening is more likely than the chance of all the evidence being wrong"
For instance:
Jesus knew John the Baptist?
Chance of it happening - Reasonable. People know each other all the time
Chance of evidence being wrong - Kind of unlikely. Lots of people talk about it.
So I conclude Jesus probably knew John the Baptist.
Jesus was born of a virgin?
Chance of it happening - Extremely unlikely. Goes against our knowledge of science
Chance of evidence being wrong - Seems unlikely, but then we only have two people mention it, so it's a reasonable chance.
So I conclude Jesus wasn't born of a virgin.
Is it wrong to apply that rule throughout the NT? Or am I applying it wrongly?
Would love to hear
"We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon this, the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory."
Jesus and John the Baptist were cousins. That is, Mary and Elizabeth (John's mother) were said to be cousins in the Bible, though with Mary being young and Elizabeth being "beyond child bearing years" I'm not sure that they were first-cousins, but to whatever degree, Jesus and John the Baptist were family.
The Bible says that Joseph almost divorced Mary because of the baby so clearly it wasn't his. The only reason why he didn't is because an angel appeared to him and told him what God had done. Also, God was- and is- quite willing and able to use people who were born out of let's say less-than-honorable circumstances for His glory, but in this case that doesn't really fit.
Further, for God Himself to become flesh and dwell among us, just because he can and often does use scientifically explainable means to accomplish His will, that doesn't require Him to be bound by science in doing so. He is God, after all. That is to say, I would think that God- who is responsible for creating time and space itself and creating the scientific laws which we are even only recently discovering- is well within His means to cause a young girl who has never had sex to suddenly become pregnant. Sure it's scientifically unlikely, but this is God made flesh we're talking about.
I'm aware of the article but very close is not exact. I don't believe New Jerusalem is on the American continent. I do believe that the Israelite tribes will be gathered up as witnesses, that's in Revelations too. The rest of the article aligns pretty well with Revelations 21.
Oooh! Oh! Oh! Pick me! Pick me!
He exiled himself for our sins.
Actually, it was more because of our sins. Namely, banter spamming and not clicking on his links.
He left because our sins were annoying.
CHALLENGE ACCEPTED, lCEDHOPE.
Look into his ass.
Space Dashing is a legit religion. There is just as much proof of his divinity as everyone else who has ever claimed to be a godhead. Why do you hate our religion in space?
Let me, redefine religion. Any man-made believe aiding him to foolishly, yes, foolishly think he knows what's going on around him is religion.
Let me name some religions based on that definition: Society's Norm, Culture, National identity, Society's Values, ego, super-ego, and Language.
All those are mere fake Idols we all worship.
I don't believe in them, because they are all fake. They are all man made. They are not products of nature, but they are stupid tools we all need to live because we are cursed with a creative and biased mind.
What I know and believe is that I don't know, and that I will never know.