Is Heaven a Place of Complete Bliss? (Thought Experiment)

[POI]

You are involved in a car wreck with your spouse and children. Sad news... None of you survive.

You regain consciousness and find that you are in what looks to be Heaven. You see what you believe to be YHWH standing before you. Indeed, it is YHWH. You then look around to see if your closest loved ones are near by. You notice they are all absent. You then first ask YHWH, "where are my kids and spouse?" YHWH replies, "they now reside in hell." You ask why? YHWH responds, "because they were not selected for this realm". You then inquire further, and ultimately beg and plead for God to reconsider their decided fate. But of course, you know that God is all mighty and knows what is best. You also ask God what hell is like for them. He again responds, "well, you've read my Book, right?" You then ask Him, point/blank, "are they in a place of eternal torment then?" He states, "yes".

Question:

Is Heaven a completely blissful place, moving forward? If so, why?

[TRANSPONDER]

Peace to you,

That's the relevant point. Tam of course can appeal to the need for Justice, or at least retribution and prevention of wrongdoers doing it.

I did not appeal to justice or retribution. Just protection of innocent people. Protection from God for His children from those who would do them harm? Who can legitimately fault that?

Where do I start? Suppose this is God protecting 'His children' on earth as against what in heaven? Who are 'His children?' Christians? A particular denomination of Christians? Christians who are one of the few who interpret scripture correctly? And the non - correct believers can look out for themselves? Even worldly authorities are supposed to look out for everyone.

Or would 'everyone' be His Children? Very good, though the obvious legitimate fault with that is He isn't doing it very well. Axiomatically, it would hardly be expected to look any different if there was no god looking out for any of us.

But then, the offer of heaven (with or without the threat of Hell) is not about protection of innocent people, members of a Church or not. It is about punishment and retribution dished out for not Believing right - not deeds, works or accomplishments. It IS about heaven and by topic - drift, hell and any afterlife the thread topic is, not about divine policing of the earth.

I try to avoid the 'Oh that's not the topic' quibbles, but you must see that God protecting His Children from harm (which in the Old days was done by seeking out and burning any who diverted from or questioned whatever the Orthodoxy was at the time, so we might be thankful that Theocracies are only limited to Muslim countries unless things go very wrong in 2024) and it is nothing to do with the very real threat of punishment and retribution promised by the Bible for all who do not turn, repent and be saved.

[POI]

You are involved in a car wreck with your spouse and children. Sad news... None of you survive.

You regain consciousness and find that you are in what looks to be Heaven. You see what you believe to be YHWH standing before you. Indeed, it is YHWH. You then look around to see if your closest loved ones are near by. You notice they are all absent. You then first ask YHWH, "where are my kids and spouse?" YHWH replies, "they now reside in hell." You ask why? YHWH responds, "because they were not selected for this realm". You then inquire further, and ultimately beg and plead for God to reconsider their decided fate. But of course, you know that God is all mighty and knows what is best. You also ask God what hell is like for them. He again responds, "well, you've read my Book, right?" You then ask Him, point/blank, "are they in a place of eternal torment then?" He states, "yes".

Question:

Is Heaven a completely blissful place, moving forward? If so, why?

There is no "eternal torment" except apparently for the "false prophet, the devil, and the beast" (Revelation 20:10). Those who are not written in the book of life, simply face a second death after their deeds are judged. (Revelation 20:15) As for "heaven", as in the kingdom of God, that will be on earth, with David as king, ruling from Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:16) & (Ezekiel 37). There will be no "bliss" for the disobedient, who will receive no rain in that circumstance (Zechariah 14:18), as in the nations/Gentiles, being ruled by a rod of iron (Revelation 19:15). As for the non murderers, liars, and immoral, they will be within the gates (Revelation 22:14-15). Those outside, the "murders, etc., will look inside and weep and gnash their teeth (Matthew 13:41-42). If someone is inside the gates, it would probably be your non lying family, with someone, who does not love the truth, being on the outside. They will probably see the justice in the results, whereas the lovers of lies, will continue to rant, and gnash their teeth.

The thought experiment still applies to you, all-the-same. I will lump you in with "Tam".

You find that you are in Heaven, a place of complete bliss. Your closest family and/or friends are gone. How will you achieve complete and total immediate bliss, and only bliss as you are in a perfect blissful place, without God assigning some sort of action upon you?

Well, you are representing a false choice.

Being that we appear to have countless sects to "Christianity", the given (thought experiment) may not apply to all of them If you feel this (thought experiment) does not apply to your particular flavor of Christianity, then maybe you should not have engaged at all. To instead offer up "how Christianity really is', is only to offer up a brand new argument; where the exchanging interlocutor instead is left to justify alternative interpretations, (with Bible verses). Which I certainly can, and have started to do with "Tam".

What I will not do, in this thread, is go chasing every alternative 'interpretation' from the Bible. This thread would never end, and nothing could ever be resolved. This is partially why the title of this thread states "(thought experiment)"

The provided concept pertains to the typical Protestant view, as well as any other adjacent belief and/or translation to the text from the Bible...

Thus far, seems that either (Protestant adjacent) believers are either not seeing this thread, or not engaging?

Or maybe you should not start your "thought experiment" on a false premise. Your "protestant" reformers began their journey on the premise that the Roman church was the "whore of Babylon", which is to say a daughter of Babylon, and they are in fact daughters of that "whore of Babylon", which is to say, like mother like daughter (Ezekiel 16:44). Which is to say they are both the blind leading the blind (Matthew 15:14), and for you to follow their lead, the ultimate fate of taking this illusionary "thought experiment" seriously, is to fall in the same hole.

Well, I no longer ascribe to any of what the Bible asserts, as it does not look to be grounded in reality. It's an (a priori / faith) based proposition, where two earnest readers can formulate mutually opposing conclusions, and where both parties can site chapter and verse to support their mutually exclusive conclusions to boot; which at best, for you, represents a creator who has no problem being the purveyor of confusion to the masses. And at worst, is instead a man-made book alone, with presented inconsistencies.

Maybe we can start by investigating (your translations) instead? You do not see any inherent problems with them? It's all consistent? Not really sure how that is possible, without omission of some verses? You might be wise in re-evaluating the apparent pitfalls of your conclusions; and then ask yourself... Is it "not as bad", "just as bad", or "worse" than that of the "Protestant" perspective... Where one must attempt to reconcile "perfect bliss", while in heaven?

If you start out with thinking that the Catholic church is holy,

Um, I literally just told you I do not ascribe to any of it The Bible appears to be a collection of stories and assertions, created by man. --- Some likely true, some likely false, some likely legend, some likely lore, some likely other... My participation here, in this (thought experiment), is to ask a large populous of Christians, how they would reconcile bliss in heaven, while knowing some of their closest loved ones are away from them eternally; by way of torment or other? Seems as if no "traditional Christian" wants to field this topic thus far? I only seem to be getting responses from more fringe-based Christian ideologies. And like I already said prior, my objective, in this thread, is not to debate which version of Christianity IS the correct interpretation So pardon me if I do not chase the rabbit trails here....

along with their canon, which is the starting point of the Protestant faith, then you apparently have one foot in a pit (Proverbs 20:25). If you think that the false gospel of grace/cross, put forward by the false prophet Paul, is on par with the gospel of the kingdom, then you are probably starting your race with one leg tied to an arm. Without those false starting points, there is not much of a problem in seeing the truth. And where did you get your notion of "perfect bliss", and your idea of heaven? They kind of seem like the traditions of men. The kingdom is described as when each one will sit under their own vine (Micah 4:4), which would only be "blissful" for someone who doesn't mind trimming their own vines, and making their own wine. Plus, that vine will be on earth, and not on some star ship in space. Your "Protestant perspective" seems limited to certain sects. I get Jehovah witnesses visiting my house every so many years, and their vision seems different, as well as the story by the very few Mormons coming to my door. According to Joseph Smith, to become a "god" they must have multiple wives, and then they will rule different worlds. I don't know, but from what I have heard, having multiple wives, with many children, is hard on the wives as well as the children, and it can't be easy for some guy who thinks he is a god, and yet can't keep harmony in his own house. Wading in the traditions of men, is like wading in a mud or tar pit. A good way to get nowhere. Yeshua came to be a light upon the Law and the prophets, in which the focus is the "kingdom of heaven". The problem is that the "wicked" cannot understand (Daniel 12:10), for they have not eyes to see (Matthew 13:13), and therefore they must first turn from wickedness/lawlessness, to righteousness, (Ezekiel 18:21) by confessing their sins, repenting, producing good fruit, and getting baptized (Matthew 3). The alternate solution is to have the blind lead the blind, and both falling into a pit.

Tell me when it's my turn to cherry pick passages from the Bible, in direct opposition to your 'translations'? We could be here until we both die of natural causes.

Please keep in mind that I'm here as a casual observer. It would be no different than me discussing any other work of fiction. You know, like your run-o-da-mill book club meeting, where two or more interlocutors go head to head about various topics/translations about a book we both just read.

If you feel your translation has no part in my inquiry, then please do not waste mine, or your time, attempting to defend an alternative view. Maybe create a new topic, about how "Catholics/others are wrong", and stop wasting my time here.

Thanks

You can "cherry pick" to your hearts content. Now whether you make sense is another matter. As for dying of "natural causes", I am thinking that the kingdom of "heaven" is at hand (Matthew 24), which kind of puts your coming death as probably being not of "natural causes" but one preempted by a "great earthquake" (Revelation 16:18-21) whereas "islands fled away", "mountains were not found", and "huge hailstones of one hundred pound each, came down from heaven upon men". As for you being a "casual observer", that is like saying someone throwing a lighted fire into a theatre is a "casual observer". As for "two interlocutors" going head to head, you apparently want to set the rules in line with your made up book you "just read". Your observations line up with traditions of men, and little to do with what is in the book, as if you read someone else's book report. I suggest that before you do your book club meeting, that you actually read the book. As for your "time", if you are here, you apparently have time to waste.

If I had a nickel for every time I was speaking to the person who has the (right interpretation of the Bible), I would be rich. And yet, the 'interpretation' is usually (different) from person to person. Confusion much?

An argument can be made for grace alone, grace by faith, grace by works, grace by both faith and works, or other. One can cherry pick the Bible to 'validate' all of it. It's quite possible you can have it wrong. And so can I. I myself, at least acknowledge, that we have no clue what God's selection process will be? Why, because the book looks to suggest differing criteria, in differing locations.

I can just as easily ask why you are here? Do you have time to waste? Why would a theist spend time conversing with a majority of unbelievers? I, myself, am a product of indoctrination. I see this as a mental exercise, and am interested in how other people tick and think. It keeps my brain sharp.

I'm going to try and circle this discussion back, one last time....

Assuming everyone is not placed in heaven. And assuming you are placed in heaven. And assuming some of the loved ones you currently cherish are not placed in the same realm as you.... How would you reconcile any bliss in heaven, knowing your closest loved ones are either destroyed by God, placed in another realm by God, or other by God; eternally?

[2ndpillar2]

There is no "eternal torment" except apparently for the "false prophet, the devil, and the beast" (Revelation 20:10). Those who are not written in the book of life, simply face a second death after their deeds are judged. (Revelation 20:15) As for "heaven", as in the kingdom of God, that will be on earth, with David as king, ruling from Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:16) & (Ezekiel 37). There will be no "bliss" for the disobedient, who will receive no rain in that circumstance (Zechariah 14:18), as in the nations/Gentiles, being ruled by a rod of iron (Revelation 19:15). As for the non murderers, liars, and immoral, they will be within the gates (Revelation 22:14-15). Those outside, the "murders, etc., will look inside and weep and gnash their teeth (Matthew 13:41-42). If someone is inside the gates, it would probably be your non lying family, with someone, who does not love the truth, being on the outside. They will probably see the justice in the results, whereas the lovers of lies, will continue to rant, and gnash their teeth.

The thought experiment still applies to you, all-the-same. I will lump you in with "Tam".

You find that you are in Heaven, a place of complete bliss. Your closest family and/or friends are gone. How will you achieve complete and total immediate bliss, and only bliss as you are in a perfect blissful place, without God assigning some sort of action upon you?

Well, you are representing a false choice.

Being that we appear to have countless sects to "Christianity", the given (thought experiment) may not apply to all of them If you feel this (thought experiment) does not apply to your particular flavor of Christianity, then maybe you should not have engaged at all. To instead offer up "how Christianity really is', is only to offer up a brand new argument; where the exchanging interlocutor instead is left to justify alternative interpretations, (with Bible verses). Which I certainly can, and have started to do with "Tam".

What I will not do, in this thread, is go chasing every alternative 'interpretation' from the Bible. This thread would never end, and nothing could ever be resolved. This is partially why the title of this thread states "(thought experiment)"

The provided concept pertains to the typical Protestant view, as well as any other adjacent belief and/or translation to the text from the Bible...

Thus far, seems that either (Protestant adjacent) believers are either not seeing this thread, or not engaging?

Or maybe you should not start your "thought experiment" on a false premise. Your "protestant" reformers began their journey on the premise that the Roman church was the "whore of Babylon", which is to say a daughter of Babylon, and they are in fact daughters of that "whore of Babylon", which is to say, like mother like daughter (Ezekiel 16:44). Which is to say they are both the blind leading the blind (Matthew 15:14), and for you to follow their lead, the ultimate fate of taking this illusionary "thought experiment" seriously, is to fall in the same hole.

Well, I no longer ascribe to any of what the Bible asserts, as it does not look to be grounded in reality. It's an (a priori / faith) based proposition, where two earnest readers can formulate mutually opposing conclusions, and where both parties can site chapter and verse to support their mutually exclusive conclusions to boot; which at best, for you, represents a creator who has no problem being the purveyor of confusion to the masses. And at worst, is instead a man-made book alone, with presented inconsistencies.

Maybe we can start by investigating (your translations) instead? You do not see any inherent problems with them? It's all consistent? Not really sure how that is possible, without omission of some verses? You might be wise in re-evaluating the apparent pitfalls of your conclusions; and then ask yourself... Is it "not as bad", "just as bad", or "worse" than that of the "Protestant" perspective... Where one must attempt to reconcile "perfect bliss", while in heaven?

If you start out with thinking that the Catholic church is holy,

Um, I literally just told you I do not ascribe to any of it The Bible appears to be a collection of stories and assertions, created by man. --- Some likely true, some likely false, some likely legend, some likely lore, some likely other... My participation here, in this (thought experiment), is to ask a large populous of Christians, how they would reconcile bliss in heaven, while knowing some of their closest loved ones are away from them eternally; by way of torment or other? Seems as if no "traditional Christian" wants to field this topic thus far? I only seem to be getting responses from more fringe-based Christian ideologies. And like I already said prior, my objective, in this thread, is not to debate which version of Christianity IS the correct interpretation So pardon me if I do not chase the rabbit trails here....

along with their canon, which is the starting point of the Protestant faith, then you apparently have one foot in a pit (Proverbs 20:25). If you think that the false gospel of grace/cross, put forward by the false prophet Paul, is on par with the gospel of the kingdom, then you are probably starting your race with one leg tied to an arm. Without those false starting points, there is not much of a problem in seeing the truth. And where did you get your notion of "perfect bliss", and your idea of heaven? They kind of seem like the traditions of men. The kingdom is described as when each one will sit under their own vine (Micah 4:4), which would only be "blissful" for someone who doesn't mind trimming their own vines, and making their own wine. Plus, that vine will be on earth, and not on some star ship in space. Your "Protestant perspective" seems limited to certain sects. I get Jehovah witnesses visiting my house every so many years, and their vision seems different, as well as the story by the very few Mormons coming to my door. According to Joseph Smith, to become a "god" they must have multiple wives, and then they will rule different worlds. I don't know, but from what I have heard, having multiple wives, with many children, is hard on the wives as well as the children, and it can't be easy for some guy who thinks he is a god, and yet can't keep harmony in his own house. Wading in the traditions of men, is like wading in a mud or tar pit. A good way to get nowhere. Yeshua came to be a light upon the Law and the prophets, in which the focus is the "kingdom of heaven". The problem is that the "wicked" cannot understand (Daniel 12:10), for they have not eyes to see (Matthew 13:13), and therefore they must first turn from wickedness/lawlessness, to righteousness, (Ezekiel 18:21) by confessing their sins, repenting, producing good fruit, and getting baptized (Matthew 3). The alternate solution is to have the blind lead the blind, and both falling into a pit.

Tell me when it's my turn to cherry pick passages from the Bible, in direct opposition to your 'translations'? We could be here until we both die of natural causes.

Please keep in mind that I'm here as a casual observer. It would be no different than me discussing any other work of fiction. You know, like your run-o-da-mill book club meeting, where two or more interlocutors go head to head about various topics/translations about a book we both just read.

If you feel your translation has no part in my inquiry, then please do not waste mine, or your time, attempting to defend an alternative view. Maybe create a new topic, about how "Catholics/others are wrong", and stop wasting my time here.

Thanks

You can "cherry pick" to your hearts content. Now whether you make sense is another matter. As for dying of "natural causes", I am thinking that the kingdom of "heaven" is at hand (Matthew 24), which kind of puts your coming death as probably being not of "natural causes" but one preempted by a "great earthquake" (Revelation 16:18-21) whereas "islands fled away", "mountains were not found", and "huge hailstones of one hundred pound each, came down from heaven upon men". As for you being a "casual observer", that is like saying someone throwing a lighted fire into a theatre is a "casual observer". As for "two interlocutors" going head to head, you apparently want to set the rules in line with your made up book you "just read". Your observations line up with traditions of men, and little to do with what is in the book, as if you read someone else's book report. I suggest that before you do your book club meeting, that you actually read the book. As for your "time", if you are here, you apparently have time to waste.

If I had a nickel for every time I was speaking to the person who has the (right interpretation of the Bible), I would be rich. And yet, the 'interpretation' is usually (different) from person to person. Confusion much?

An argument can be made for grace alone, grace by faith, grace by works, grace by both faith and works, or other. One can cherry pick the Bible to 'validate' all of it. It's quite possible you can have it wrong. And so can I. I myself, at least acknowledge, that we have no clue what God's selection process will be? Why, because the book looks to suggest differing criteria, in differing locations.

I can just as easily ask why you are here? Do you have time to waste? Why would a theist spend time conversing with a majority of unbelievers? I, myself, am a product of indoctrination. I see this as a mental exercise, and am interested in how other people tick and think. It keeps my brain sharp.

I'm going to try and circle this discussion back, one last time....

Assuming everyone is not placed in heaven. And assuming you are placed in heaven. And assuming some of the loved ones you currently cherish are not placed in the same realm as you.... How would you reconcile any bliss in heaven, knowing your closest loved ones are either destroyed by God, placed in another realm by God, or other by God; eternally?

I must agree with your assessment, that you "have no clue what God's selection process will be", and that you are a "product of indoctrination", and that "you can have it wrong". As for you keeping your "brain sharp", well, there may be some room for argument on that point. Your indoctrination seems to have left you in the dark as to what the message of "Law and the prophets", which includes the prophet Yeshua, actually has to say. The ones destroyed, by the sword from the mouth of the Word of God, would be those with the mark of the beast with two horns like a lamb, per Revelation 19:21, of which one of those horns like a lamb (Christ like), is the false prophet Paul. As for your loved ones being "destroyed", well, the grave/Sheol/pit, is the destination of the dead, no matter what you or they believe. No one escapes death (Jeremiah 31:30), regardless of what the false prophet Paul, and your indoctrination by men may teach. As for "eternity", those who wind up in the 2nd death, the lake of fire, there is no "eternity", for it is the 2nd death, for they do not have everlasting life, for they never tasted from the tree of life. If you are going to do mystical thought processes on the contents of the Bible, you might want to become more invested in what it actually states, and find the source of the misinformation involved within and apart from it. As for the "kingdom of heaven", it precedes the last judgment, the lake of fire by 1000 years (Revelation 20:4). The kingdom of heaven will be here on earth, and those outside of the gates of Jerusalem, will be the liars and murderers, and those within the gates will be happy to have the gates closed (Revelation 22:14-15). You seem to be wrong on almost every count, and I don't even think many of the Protestant persuasion, who have actually read the bible, will go along with your analysis. For the most part, they all believe in the millennium. You apparently seem to think you are wise and educated, but it is those who think they are wise and education, who are apparently found without understanding (Matthew 11:25), which you apparently admit. Maybe you should read Daniel 12:10 to find out why you are in the dark. Or if you like the dark, you can always choose to remain in that state of being. As of today, the U.S. is still a free country, at least to a point. You can choose the truth, or choose to retain your level of indoctrination, and be a slave to this world and its leader. It is not a matter of how people think, which is generally at a low level, mostly based on faulty/fake information, but on how they act. If you have no "bliss" now, don't expect any later on, with or without your relatives. Hell on earth is a real state of being. No need to project into the future. People make their own hell. As for why I converse with people, it is because I enjoy it, plus I am way past retirement age, and can pretty much do what I want, when I want too.

[JoeyKnothead]

Peace to you,

That's the relevant point. Tam of course can appeal to the need for Justice, or at least retribution and prevention of wrongdoers doing it.

I did not appeal to justice or retribution. Just protection of innocent people. Protection from God for His children from those who would do them harm? Who can legitimately fault that?

But who'd protect innocent folks from the wrath of those acting in God's name?

Kill the homos!

Kill the adulterers!

If I saw someone stoning a homosexual, who do I displease by trying to intercede? I'd much rather go to Hell for doing what's right, than to please a hateful, wrathful god.

It's all well and good to think God has an escape clause here, "Y'all be good now."

But the law is in the book.

It sits there, hoping, praying, wishing folks'd stone the homos and adulterers, but then offers plausible deniability in other ways.

Not unlike the politician who fans the flames of hatred and violence, only to seek cover behind executive privilege when those flames engulf the innocent.

[POI]

The thought experiment still applies to you, all-the-same. I will lump you in with "Tam".

You find that you are in Heaven, a place of complete bliss. Your closest family and/or friends are gone. How will you achieve complete and total immediate bliss, and only bliss as you are in a perfect blissful place, without God assigning some sort of action upon you?

Well, you are representing a false choice.

Being that we appear to have countless sects to "Christianity", the given (thought experiment) may not apply to all of them If you feel this (thought experiment) does not apply to your particular flavor of Christianity, then maybe you should not have engaged at all. To instead offer up "how Christianity really is', is only to offer up a brand new argument; where the exchanging interlocutor instead is left to justify alternative interpretations, (with Bible verses). Which I certainly can, and have started to do with "Tam".

What I will not do, in this thread, is go chasing every alternative 'interpretation' from the Bible. This thread would never end, and nothing could ever be resolved. This is partially why the title of this thread states "(thought experiment)"

The provided concept pertains to the typical Protestant view, as well as any other adjacent belief and/or translation to the text from the Bible...

Thus far, seems that either (Protestant adjacent) believers are either not seeing this thread, or not engaging?

Or maybe you should not start your "thought experiment" on a false premise. Your "protestant" reformers began their journey on the premise that the Roman church was the "whore of Babylon", which is to say a daughter of Babylon, and they are in fact daughters of that "whore of Babylon", which is to say, like mother like daughter (Ezekiel 16:44). Which is to say they are both the blind leading the blind (Matthew 15:14), and for you to follow their lead, the ultimate fate of taking this illusionary "thought experiment" seriously, is to fall in the same hole.

Well, I no longer ascribe to any of what the Bible asserts, as it does not look to be grounded in reality. It's an (a priori / faith) based proposition, where two earnest readers can formulate mutually opposing conclusions, and where both parties can site chapter and verse to support their mutually exclusive conclusions to boot; which at best, for you, represents a creator who has no problem being the purveyor of confusion to the masses. And at worst, is instead a man-made book alone, with presented inconsistencies.

Maybe we can start by investigating (your translations) instead? You do not see any inherent problems with them? It's all consistent? Not really sure how that is possible, without omission of some verses? You might be wise in re-evaluating the apparent pitfalls of your conclusions; and then ask yourself... Is it "not as bad", "just as bad", or "worse" than that of the "Protestant" perspective... Where one must attempt to reconcile "perfect bliss", while in heaven?

If you start out with thinking that the Catholic church is holy,

Um, I literally just told you I do not ascribe to any of it The Bible appears to be a collection of stories and assertions, created by man. --- Some likely true, some likely false, some likely legend, some likely lore, some likely other... My participation here, in this (thought experiment), is to ask a large populous of Christians, how they would reconcile bliss in heaven, while knowing some of their closest loved ones are away from them eternally; by way of torment or other? Seems as if no "traditional Christian" wants to field this topic thus far? I only seem to be getting responses from more fringe-based Christian ideologies. And like I already said prior, my objective, in this thread, is not to debate which version of Christianity IS the correct interpretation So pardon me if I do not chase the rabbit trails here....

along with their canon, which is the starting point of the Protestant faith, then you apparently have one foot in a pit (Proverbs 20:25). If you think that the false gospel of grace/cross, put forward by the false prophet Paul, is on par with the gospel of the kingdom, then you are probably starting your race with one leg tied to an arm. Without those false starting points, there is not much of a problem in seeing the truth. And where did you get your notion of "perfect bliss", and your idea of heaven? They kind of seem like the traditions of men. The kingdom is described as when each one will sit under their own vine (Micah 4:4), which would only be "blissful" for someone who doesn't mind trimming their own vines, and making their own wine. Plus, that vine will be on earth, and not on some star ship in space. Your "Protestant perspective" seems limited to certain sects. I get Jehovah witnesses visiting my house every so many years, and their vision seems different, as well as the story by the very few Mormons coming to my door. According to Joseph Smith, to become a "god" they must have multiple wives, and then they will rule different worlds. I don't know, but from what I have heard, having multiple wives, with many children, is hard on the wives as well as the children, and it can't be easy for some guy who thinks he is a god, and yet can't keep harmony in his own house. Wading in the traditions of men, is like wading in a mud or tar pit. A good way to get nowhere. Yeshua came to be a light upon the Law and the prophets, in which the focus is the "kingdom of heaven". The problem is that the "wicked" cannot understand (Daniel 12:10), for they have not eyes to see (Matthew 13:13), and therefore they must first turn from wickedness/lawlessness, to righteousness, (Ezekiel 18:21) by confessing their sins, repenting, producing good fruit, and getting baptized (Matthew 3). The alternate solution is to have the blind lead the blind, and both falling into a pit.

Tell me when it's my turn to cherry pick passages from the Bible, in direct opposition to your 'translations'? We could be here until we both die of natural causes.

Please keep in mind that I'm here as a casual observer. It would be no different than me discussing any other work of fiction. You know, like your run-o-da-mill book club meeting, where two or more interlocutors go head to head about various topics/translations about a book we both just read.

If you feel your translation has no part in my inquiry, then please do not waste mine, or your time, attempting to defend an alternative view. Maybe create a new topic, about how "Catholics/others are wrong", and stop wasting my time here.

Thanks

You can "cherry pick" to your hearts content. Now whether you make sense is another matter. As for dying of "natural causes", I am thinking that the kingdom of "heaven" is at hand (Matthew 24), which kind of puts your coming death as probably being not of "natural causes" but one preempted by a "great earthquake" (Revelation 16:18-21) whereas "islands fled away", "mountains were not found", and "huge hailstones of one hundred pound each, came down from heaven upon men". As for you being a "casual observer", that is like saying someone throwing a lighted fire into a theatre is a "casual observer". As for "two interlocutors" going head to head, you apparently want to set the rules in line with your made up book you "just read". Your observations line up with traditions of men, and little to do with what is in the book, as if you read someone else's book report. I suggest that before you do your book club meeting, that you actually read the book. As for your "time", if you are here, you apparently have time to waste.

If I had a nickel for every time I was speaking to the person who has the (right interpretation of the Bible), I would be rich. And yet, the 'interpretation' is usually (different) from person to person. Confusion much?

An argument can be made for grace alone, grace by faith, grace by works, grace by both faith and works, or other. One can cherry pick the Bible to 'validate' all of it. It's quite possible you can have it wrong. And so can I. I myself, at least acknowledge, that we have no clue what God's selection process will be? Why, because the book looks to suggest differing criteria, in differing locations.

I can just as easily ask why you are here? Do you have time to waste? Why would a theist spend time conversing with a majority of unbelievers? I, myself, am a product of indoctrination. I see this as a mental exercise, and am interested in how other people tick and think. It keeps my brain sharp.

I'm going to try and circle this discussion back, one last time....

Assuming everyone is not placed in heaven. And assuming you are placed in heaven. And assuming some of the loved ones you currently cherish are not placed in the same realm as you.... How would you reconcile any bliss in heaven, knowing your closest loved ones are either destroyed by God, placed in another realm by God, or other by God; eternally?

I must agree with your assessment, that you "have no clue what God's selection process will be", and that you are a "product of indoctrination", and that "you can have it wrong". As for you keeping your "brain sharp", well, there may be some room for argument on that point. Your indoctrination seems to have left you in the dark as to what the message of "Law and the prophets", which includes the prophet Yeshua, actually has to say. The ones destroyed, by the sword from the mouth of the Word of God, would be those with the mark of the beast with two horns like a lamb, per Revelation 19:21, of which one of those horns like a lamb (Christ like), is the false prophet Paul. As for your loved ones being "destroyed", well, the grave/Sheol/pit, is the destination of the dead, no matter what you or they believe. No one escapes death (Jeremiah 31:30), regardless of what the false prophet Paul, and your indoctrination by men may teach. As for "eternity", those who wind up in the 2nd death, the lake of fire, there is no "eternity", for it is the 2nd death, for they do not have everlasting life, for they never tasted from the tree of life. If you are going to do mystical thought processes on the contents of the Bible, you might want to become more invested in what it actually states, and find the source of the misinformation involved within and apart from it. As for the "kingdom of heaven", it precedes the last judgment, the lake of fire by 1000 years (Revelation 20:4). The kingdom of heaven will be here on earth, and those outside of the gates of Jerusalem, will be the liars and murderers, and those within the gates will be happy to have the gates closed (Revelation 22:14-15). You seem to be wrong on almost every count, and I don't even think many of the Protestant persuasion, who have actually read the bible, will go along with your analysis. For the most part, they all believe in the millennium. You apparently seem to think you are wise and educated, but it is those who think they are wise and education, who are apparently found without understanding (Matthew 11:25), which you apparently admit. Maybe you should read Daniel 12:10 to find out why you are in the dark. Or if you like the dark, you can always choose to remain in that state of being. As of today, the U.S. is still a free country, at least to a point. You can choose the truth, or choose to retain your level of indoctrination, and be a slave to this world and its leader. It is not a matter of how people think, which is generally at a low level, mostly based on faulty/fake information, but on how they act. If you have no "bliss" now, don't expect any later on, with or without your relatives. Hell on earth is a real state of being. No need to project into the future. People make their own hell. As for why I converse with people, it is because I enjoy it, plus I am way past retirement age, and can pretty much do what I want, when I want too.

It would appear you have cherry picked my response (i.e.):

"If I had a nickel for every time I was speaking to the person who has the (right interpretation of the Bible), I would be rich. And yet, the 'interpretation' is usually (different) from person to person. Confusion much?

An argument can be made for grace alone, grace by faith, grace by works, grace by both faith and works, or other. One can cherry pick the Bible to 'validate' all of it."

Nothing you have asserted is new. Been debating this stuff for years.... You can go on making claims and assertions, but you do not appear interested in addressing the origin of the OP. I'll slim it down, since you instead want to harp on rabbit trails.

So here's my assertion(s), in relation to the OP, followed by one question.... Please address it, or please go away. Your preaching is merely a dime a dozen.

- Not everyone makes it to Heaven.
- In fact, more won't make it, than will make it.
- If you make it, it's safe to say some of your loved ones won't.
- God will be the one to determine one's final fate.
- God will also be the one to send such a person to that fate.

Question: How will you truly enjoy Heaven, knowing you are eternally apart from your closest loved ones? Please answer, or be gone from this thread
-

[tam]

Peace to you

Peace to you,

Peace to you,

Peace to you,

Peace to you,

[Replying to POI in post #60]

From post 46 I think:

For the sake of argument, pretending such a thing is possible, I would mourn my loved ones (if they were gone forever). I would accept the decision (as in that loved one was going to cause harm and pain to innocent people, in the Kingdom, etc, for all time.) But I am sure I would mourn the death of a loved one, same as I suspect someone might mourn who believes death is the end, even now.

Not that I would have 'perfect bliss' if my loved one decided to attack and harm innocent people (for all time).

This is why I stated you almost answered the question.

If it's God's judgment, then you do not know how He will judge, unless you can read His mind. Sure, you can pluck out verses from the Bible, but so can I. If it should turn out His judgement does not align with your moral compass, you might find that you resent Him for dispatching one or more of your closest loved ones.

At this point, you're basically just telling me that I would not feel the way that I told you I would feel.

I think it's a little more than that On the one hand, you state that you would have a very deep connection to your closest loved ones. But then, on the other hand, you seem to somehow down-play how much you would mourn their destruction by God?

Would you mourn if you serial killer (adult) child was imprisoned for life (or given the death penalty) so as to keep them from harming and murdering other people? Would you not be sad that your (adult) child did these things, and because of that, they are not going to be with you, that they are going to miss out on the blessings that they could have had? Would you blame the judge for the sentence, or would you accept it as being something necessary to protect others?

Haha... You seem to think you know how God judges morals?

Why didn't you answer the questions - specifically the final question?

Let's think-tank this for a moment... Where does murder rank upon the 10 Commandments? Which ones are listed above murder? Oh, that's right... "Worshiping other gods before Him", "dishonoring your parents", and "not keeping the Sabbath" are apparently deemed higher on that list; verses murder.

I don't know why you're on the topic of sin or even of ranking sin. You were asking about blaming or resenting the Judge (God), but in the scenario that I presented, would you blame any judge for doing what needed to be done to protect innocents?

Further, you seem not to provide any protest to the Bible's notion that more than 50% will not make the cut. Hence, it's highly probable some of your closest loved ones won't make it.

I thought you didn't want to argue 'interpretations'?

And yet, you have given me no shortage of 'translations.' Not sure why you are shying away now?

Because I already responded to this, re: saving entire households (which you have ignored) as well as people of the nations who do NATURALLY the requirements of the law (and so will be declared righteous), and the sheep who are non-Christian, but who are also invited into the Kingdom, even called blessed.

The whole 'more than 50% won't make the cut' is on you to support. Not that a percentage has any bearing on WHO 'makes the cut' anyway.

Do you acknowledge that "narrow is the path to Heaven", according to the Bible?

I've never seen that statement.

Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Narrow is the way (and gate) that leads to LIFE, and few find it. And that is true. Because Christ is the Gate, and the Way, and we must enter through Him in order to enter into life (which Christ is also the LIFE). But this is speaking about those who come to and are in Christ, of which there are few.

But there are others - many others - who enter into the Kingdom as subjects of that Kingdom (while Christians reign as king-priests with Christ for a thousand years, in the Kingdom). These other ones are also blessed, these other ones also receive the gift of eternal life. This is due the great mercy and love of God and of His Son - the kind of love that begets love.


Peace again.

[tam]

Peace to you Joey!

Peace to you,

That's the relevant point. Tam of course can appeal to the need for Justice, or at least retribution and prevention of wrongdoers doing it.

I did not appeal to justice or retribution. Just protection of innocent people. Protection from God for His children from those who would do them harm? Who can legitimately fault that?

But who'd protect innocent folks from the wrath of those acting in God's name?

There won't be anyone acting falsely in God's name, in the Kingdom.

Kill the homos!

Kill the adulterers!

Or - a person could look and listen to Christ, the true image of God, the one who reveals God to us as God truly is - and follow His example and direction.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

(Even Christ did not condemn the woman caught in adultery - and He is the only One who could have cast that first stone - but instead saved her life and forgave her. If we are following Him, then this is the example that He set for us.)

Go and learn what this means: "I desire mercy, not sacrifice."

Christ said that to the Pharisees who wanted to condemn others. Because God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Hosea 6:6).

If I saw someone stoning a homosexual, who do I displease by trying to intercede?

I imagine you would displease the people stoning the homosexual, but that is about it.

Love is the law that is from the beginning (from God), and against love there is NO law (Galatians 5:22, 23). Love also covers over a multitude of sins. And of course, God desires mercy, not sacrifice.

It's all well and good to think God has an escape clause here, "Y'all be good now."

But the law is in the book.

Not everything in the book (or even in what is written about the law) is correct:

"How can you say we are wise for we have the law of [the LORD], when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely." (Jeremiah 8:8)

Even if something is correct, not everything in the law shows what was true from the beginning. Remember, Israel was hard-hearted. Some laws were given as an allowance for those hard-hearts.

"Moses gave you this law because your hearts were hard, but it was not this way from the beginning." (Mark 10:5, Matthew 19:8)

**

If a person wants to know God (and what God wants) - the God and Father of Christ - then one needs to look (and listen) to Christ.

No one and nothing else reveals God as God truly is. No one and nothing else is the Image and Truth and Word of God.

And Christ gave us a very specific example on stoning an adulteress (which one can expand to anyone else who could have been brought to him for any offense to be stone). We are NOT to do such a thing. Because none of us are without sin; none of us could cast that first stone. Christ could have - but HE DID NOT. He forgave her. He saved her life (in every way possible) and He showed her mercy (which is what he told the Pharisees to go and learn), and He forgave her.

It doesn't get much more clear than that.


He also said to forgive those who wrong us, to bless those who curse us, to NOT judge or we will be judged in the same way that we judge others, to forgive and we would be forgiven, to be merciful and we would be shown mercy, to love even our enemies.





Peace again to you Joey!
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[brunumb]

Is Satan at work here encouraging people to quote entire nested posts into useless incomprehensibility and wasted space? Please people, be a bit more selective.

[JoeyKnothead]

Peace to you Joey!

Thanks, and you tell em I said to fix you up a mess of it yourself

There won't be anyone acting falsely in God's name, in the Kingdom.

Well about that, I kinda forgot the OP topic, and how you was just explaining stuff in terms of your theology. I saw you'd posted, and, per standard operating procedure, had to read me what it is you did.

In my defense, genetic testing's confirmed me and stupid share us most the same dna.

I retract and deny I ever said me any of that I just there retracted.

[TRANSPONDER]

Peace to you Joey!

Peace to you,

That's the relevant point. Tam of course can appeal to the need for Justice, or at least retribution and prevention of wrongdoers doing it.

I did not appeal to justice or retribution. Just protection of innocent people. Protection from God for His children from those who would do them harm? Who can legitimately fault that?

But who'd protect innocent folks from the wrath of those acting in God's name?

There won't be anyone acting falsely in God's name, in the Kingdom.

Kill the homos!

Kill the adulterers!

Or - a person could look and listen to Christ, the true image of God, the one who reveals God to us as God truly is - and follow His example and direction.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

(Even Christ did not condemn the woman caught in adultery - and He is the only One who could have cast that first stone - but instead saved her life and forgave her. If we are following Him, then this is the example that He set for us.)

Go and learn what this means: "I desire mercy, not sacrifice."

Christ said that to the Pharisees who wanted to condemn others. Because God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Hosea 6:6).

If I saw someone stoning a homosexual, who do I displease by trying to intercede?

I imagine you would displease the people stoning the homosexual, but that is about it.

Love is the law that is from the beginning (from God), and against love there is NO law (Galatians 5:22, 23). Love also covers over a multitude of sins. And of course, God desires mercy, not sacrifice.

It's all well and good to think God has an escape clause here, "Y'all be good now."

But the law is in the book.

Not everything in the book (or even in what is written about the law) is correct:

"How can you say we are wise for we have the law of [the LORD], when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely." (Jeremiah 8:8)

Even if something is correct, not everything in the law shows what was true from the beginning. Remember, Israel was hard-hearted. Some laws were given as an allowance for those hard-hearts.

"Moses gave you this law because your hearts were hard, but it was not this way from the beginning." (Mark 10:5, Matthew 19:8)

**

If a person wants to know God (and what God wants) - the God and Father of Christ - then one needs to look (and listen) to Christ.

No one and nothing else reveals God as God truly is. No one and nothing else is the Image and Truth and Word of God.

And Christ gave us a very specific example on stoning an adulteress (which one can expand to anyone else who could have been brought to him for any offense to be stone). We are NOT to do such a thing. Because none of us are without sin; none of us could cast that first stone. Christ could have - but HE DID NOT. He forgave her. He saved her life (in every way possible) and He showed her mercy (which is what he told the Pharisees to go and learn), and He forgave her.

It doesn't get much more clear than that.


He also said to forgive those who wrong us, to bless those who curse us, to NOT judge or we will be judged in the same way that we judge others, to forgive and we would be forgiven, to be merciful and we would be shown mercy, to love even our enemies.





Peace again to you Joey!
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Well you are producing your own model of an ideal society and picking bits of the Bible to 'support' that. So let's sideline the topic (heaven) and the world we live in now and consider this ideal Kingdom of the future. Are you telling me that when God's kingdom comes (presumably with Jesus coming as God's ruling messiah) good people are going to be living in it and the rest not? How does one place the cut between someone who is just a little bit better in deeds than someone who didn't? And can those who live in the kingdom be happy knowing that you didn't make it because you (for example) dared to say that not everything in the Bible was correct? It makes no more sense than heaven and hellthreat.

That's quite apart from this wriggle of God's kingdom (heavenly or earthly) being based on selecting Good People. So what about nobody making the cut other than through Jesus? It's said again and again - Good Deeds are not enough. You have to Believe in Jesus. Thus Good people will not make the cut because they had the wrong beliefs and less good people will make it because they did. How is that a just system?

Like I say, Heavenly life or an eternal earthly one in God's Kingdom. Either way, it is not a good or just system and nobody could live with it eternally unless their brains were removed and replaced with cotton candy.