Heaven and Hell -Are they for real?

[Scheherazade]

W a r n i n g

Please do not personalise your arguments.

Post containing inflammatory/personal comments will be removed without further notice.

[sixsmith]

All these things are traits of true Christians, even though non-believers can also be similar in many ways. There is a common belief today that one can get into Heaven by being good people and doing nice things. At the core if this idea is an incorrect understanding of what Heaven is. Heaven is the dwelling place of God, but also what will be the New Earth after the End Times. Heaven is a place for believers to be with their God, not for unbelievers to be with someone they rejected. Where is the logic in going to a Heaven you do not believe in and being with a God you rejected all your life? The greatest sin of all is unbelief in God. Actually, this is the only sin that is unforgivable.

I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me (John 14:6).

God can forgive any sin and allow you entrance to Heaven if you confess and place your trust in Jesus Christ as savior. But except through Jesus, there is no way to Heaven. At the second part of this issue there is the misunderstanding that we can make ourselves righteous and worthy of entering Heaven.

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast (Ephesians 2:8-9).

... he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5).

Our own deeds and works can not save us, only by grace can we be saved. We must be reborn in the Holy Spirit and be renewed. Only by the gift of God we can enter Heaven. There is truly no way to Heaven except through Jesus Christ.

So let me see if I have this right. A righteous person who dedicates his life to the alleviation of suffering among his fellow man, yet who does not believe in God, is going to spend eternity in Hell (suffering terribly I assume) for the unpardonable sin of not believing in God, while the ardent Christian, who also happens to be a selfish, wife-beating xenophobe, will be rewarded with a place in Heaven.

It seems, then, that believer or not, our eternal fate is to be decided by God. Fair enough. But what kind of God is it that makes this decision based not on the righteousness of our actions, but rather on whether we believe in him or her. That sounds to me like a morally abhorrent system. Indeed, it seems to me you are positing the existence of a God who is superficial and nepotistic.

[Dekarto]

Wait, wait. So you didn't start being good until you thought there was something in it for you?

I think that that's worse than not being good.

I didn't say that at all. I said that before I was a born-again believer I thought that Christians lived by a lot of "dos" and "don'ts" just to get into Heaven. While this is partially true for some people (especially Catholics who have got a wrong teaching on salvation), I found out that I was wrong once my eyes were opened to the truth. The thing is that once you have been saved and accepted Christ as Savior, you will be born again as a new person. God will come into your life and you will be filled with the Holy Spirit so that it falls natural to be good and do nice things. You can't get into heaven by being just good. You get into Heaven by believing in God and all the good deeds is a result of this belief.

No, I got it. Until he believed in God and Heaven he (or possibly she) "wondered why people bothered to live by a lot of "dos" "don'ts" just to go to some imagenary candyshop after death".

Now, however, he does believe in God and Heaven, and he has a reason to live by the 'dos and donts'.

So the behaviour is reward-driven.

The behaviour is not at all reward-driven. As said, it is a natural result of being born again in Christ.

So let me see if I have this right. A righteous person who dedicates his life to the alleviation of suffering among his fellow man, yet who does not believe in God, is going to spend eternity in Hell (suffering terribly I assume) for the unpardonable sin of not believing in God, while the ardent Christian, who also happens to be a selfish, wife-beating xenophobe, will be rewarded with a place in Heaven.

A true Christian will not be a selfish, wife-beating xenophobe, as you describe it. A person with this behaviour can impossibly know God and is not saved. This "Christian" you describe is not really a Christian and will not go to Heaven. Not all so-called Christians will go to Heaven. Only those who truly believe and walk by faith (and God) in life.

It seems, then, that believer or not, our eternal fate is to be decided by God. Fair enough. But what kind of God is it that makes this decision based not on the righteousness of our actions, but rather on whether we believe in him or her. That sounds to me like a morally abhorrent system. Indeed, it seems to me you are positing the existence of a God who is superficial and nepotistic.

This world is already fallen. Our actions on Earth has no eternal value. To God, a thief is just as bad as a rapist. No sin is worse than any other. This world will pass away and there will be a New Earth and it seems only logical to me that God takes with Him only those who love and worship Him to this New Earth, not unbelievers who have not dedicated a moment of their earthly life to worship Him. It is not a morally abhorrent system. Trust me when I say to you that no evil person, no wife-beater, no selfish a-hole will enter Heaven. These people are not true believers.

[The Atheist]

A true Christian will not be a selfish, wife-beating xenophobe, as you describe it.

Oh no you don't.

[MarkBastable]

To God, a thief is just as bad as a rapist. No sin is worse than any other.

.....

The greatest sin of all is unbelief in God. Actually, this is the only sin that is unforgivable.

[sixsmith]

I didn't say that at all. I said that before I was a born-again believer I thought that Christians lived by a lot of "dos" and "don'ts" just to get into Heaven. While this is partially true for some people (especially Catholics who have got a wrong teaching on salvation), I found out that I was wrong once my eyes were opened to the truth. The thing is that once you have been saved and accepted Christ as Savior, you will be born again as a new person. God will come into your life and you will be filled with the Holy Spirit so that it falls natural to be good and do nice things. You can't get into heaven by being just good. You get into Heaven by believing in God and all the good deeds is a result of this belief.

The behaviour is not at all reward-driven. As said, it is a natural result of being born again in Christ.

A true Christian will not be a selfish, wife-beating xenophobe, as you describe it. A person with this behaviour can impossibly know God and is not saved. This "Christian" you describe is not really a Christian and will not go to Heaven. Not all so-called Christians will go to Heaven. Only those who truly believe and walk by faith (and God) in life.

This world is already fallen. Our actions on Earth has no eternal value. To God, a thief is just as bad as a rapist. No sin is worse than any other. This world will pass away and there will be a New Earth and it seems only logical to me that God takes with Him only those who love and worship Him to this New Earth, not unbelievers who have not dedicated a moment of their earthly life to worship Him. It is not a morally abhorrent system. Trust me when I say to you that no evil person, no wife-beater, no selfish a-hole will enter Heaven. These people are not true believers.

As Mark points out, you initially claimed that not believing in heaven is the sole unpardonable sin, thereby implying that other sins were indeed pardonable. You now claim that no sin is worse than another: a rapist is as bad as a thief. Given that every sin is thus equivalent to the greatest sin, any person who commits a sin (regardless of what that sin was) is unable to enter heaven. Or put another way, if a wife beater is not a true Christian (because of their sinful act), then the thief is not a true Christian (because of their equally offensive act). Of course, there is the separate case of the professed non-believer who lives with compassion and mercy, but their actions are of no interest to God because they do not venerate him. As you suggest one, 'can't get into heaven by being just good. You get into Heaven by believing in God and all the good deeds is a result of this belief.' Before I post any further, can you confirm that I have it right?

[Dekarto]

As Mark points out, you initially claimed that not believing in heaven is the sole unpardonable sin, thereby implying that other sins were indeed pardonable. You now claim that no sin is worse than another: a rapist is as bad as a thief.

I said that not believing in God is the unpardonable sin. And when I later claimed that no sin is worse than another sin, I was of course not talking about the unpardonable sin. I thought I made this clear by the context, but if not, I apologize for not being specific enough and causing confusion.

Given that every sin is thus equivalent to the greatest sin, any person who commits a sin (regardless of what that sin was) is unable to enter heaven. Or put another way, if a wife beater is not a true Christian (because of their sinful act), then the thief is not a true Christian (because of their equally offensive act).

You are making new meanings of my words here. I claimed no sin to be worse than any other (not including the unpardonable sin), not that every wife-beater and every theif is not a true Christian. They are most likely not, but it is not certain. Christians can "slip" or "fall", and sin, but as long as they get back up again and walk with God, it is not certain that they are not true Christians. All sins are individual cases. It would be wrong to say "everybody" or "nobody" when it comes to this matter.

All sin except disbelief in God is pardonable.

Of course, there is the separate case of the professed non-believer who lives with compassion and mercy, but their actions are of no interest to God because they do not venerate him. As you suggest one, 'can't get into heaven by being just good. You get into Heaven by believing in God and all the good deeds is a result of this belief.' Before I post any further, can you confirm that I have it right?

What you are saying here is partially true. The good acts of a non-believer may interest God and even be pleasing to him, but this does not make them free from the punishment they deserve as sinners. Only those who accept their sinful nature and confess to God that they are fallen beings and regret their sins and ask for forgiveness in Christ, can be forgiven. But you are right in that only those who believe in God will enter Heaven, and that good deeds is the result of salvation -- good deeds alone will not save you.

[papayahed]

I said that not believing in God is the unpardonable sin. And when I later claimed that no sin is worse than another sin, I was of course not talking about the unpardonable sin.

Then how come it's not on the top ten list?

[Dekarto]

Then how come it's not on the top ten list?

What are you talking about?

[MarkBastable]

What are you talking about?

i think the reference is to the Ten Commandments, and papayahed is suggesting that 'not believing in God' doesn't appear on the list.

Strictly speaking, she's right - though there is one about not having any other god. It doesn't, to be fair, say you're not allowed to have no god at all. He should have tied that down a bit - it's a possible loophole.

Then again. as there's no reason to pay any attention to the Ten Commandments unless you believe they're straight from God, then you could say that belief in him is a sine qua non of buying in, and so 'Thou'd just better believe in me, or else' is a kinda meta-Commandment.

Thing is though, Jesus offered a simplified or, if you like, a soundbite version of the Commandments that complicates the issue somewhat.

When asked by the Pharisees which was the greatest law he said, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.'"

This, combined with, 'no one enters the kingdom of heaven but through me' is the basis of Dekarto's argument.

I use the word 'argument' in its very loosest sense - that is, not the one that implies logical rigour instigated from a neutral starting point and applied without reference to any premises that aren't externally verifiable and broadly accepted.

[The Atheist]

All sin except disbelief in God is pardonable.

Which allows Jim Jones, David Berkowitz, Timothy McVeigh and Ted Bundy to go to heaven but not Carl Sagan.

That sounds perfectly reasonable.

[MarkBastable]

Which allows Jim Jones, David Berkowitz, Timothy McVeigh and Ted Bundy to go to heaven but not Carl Sagan.

Yeah, if Dekarto's right, it would appear that God didn't really think the process through. And that, it seems to me, is always the problem with the argument that Dekarto presents. Faced with that proposition, a reasonable person has to come to one of two conclusions- either Dekarto's mistaken or God's not too bright.

[The Atheist]

Yeah, if Dekarto's right, it would appear that God didn't really think the process through. And that, it seems to me, is always the problem with the argument that Dekarto presents. Faced with that proposition, a reasonable person has to come to one of two conclusions- either Dekarto's mistaken or God's not too bright.

I'd always seen it more as a massive vanity and insecurity.

If a god is powerful enough to create an entire universe, why would it want people singing its praises every Sunday? Why would it care if people worshipped another god? None of them are real, right?

[MarkBastable]

I'm with you. That thing about believing just seems so arbitrary and pointless. I mean, why not make the unforgivable sin - I dunno - running with scissors or whistling through your teeth. Why did the deity choose something so obviously self-referential and with no other useful purpose?

I'll tell you the answer to that one too, actually: no mortal can understand the mind of God, and it's pretty cosmically impolite to try to, okay, bub?

[JuniperWoolf]

All sin except disbelief in God is pardonable.

I know that this idea was cooked up by some ruler over a thousand years ago in an attempt to prevent people from straying away from the church, but I'll just tell you right now, for a kid it has the complete opposite effect. This was, above all things (the suffering in the world, the really bad track record that religion has piled up over the centuries, etc) the main thing that made me stop going to kid's church after school when I was eleven.

Eleven year old me: "so we can't even ask questions because it might hurt the supreme ruler of the universe's feelings? Screw that, this is a crock. I don't even care if this place gives me snacks, I'm outta here."