Would You Choose to Live in Heaven?

[ideologyhunter]

Attributed to Mark Twain, but perhaps apocryphal: "It ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, but it is the parts I do understand."

 

[bilby]

What's to teach?

If the Bible were divinely inspired by an all-knowing god, then either he didn't want people to understand it, in which case teaching is a futile exercise of the blind leading the blind; Or he did, in which case he would have made it understandable to all.

If it needs interpretation, then that's either impossible, or an indication that those who are correctly interpreting it in order to teach others are more skilled than god at making god's will clear. It's passing strange to believe in fallible humans who are more skilled than an all powerful god.

Of course, it's always possible that those who 'teach' it are just using god's name as an excuse to impose their own opinions on others - in the hope that people who would otherwise quite rightly tell them to fuck off, might hesitate to say that to somebody who is god's henchman.

In fact, that's the only reasonable conclusion to reach regarding humans 'teaching' other humans what god wants (whether they use any 'sacred text' or none).

 

[Learner]

What's to teach?

If the Bible were divinely inspired by an all-knowing god, then either he didn't want people to understand it, in which case teaching is a futile exercise of the blind leading the blind; Or he did, in which case he would have made it understandable to all.

You would think so indeed as we mere mortals do. Although there does seem to be some cleverly logic as to why that may be. For example:

IF it were that easy to be understandably clear - those who would be against God or the Faith etc.. would have corrupted ALL the imortant, hidden contexual verses etc., from the very begininng. We'd have something totally different now if the corrupters knew what to look for..

You CAN'T corrupt the text today because "there are copies of copies of copies.." ironically lol, which was what Bart Erhman said for a different argument.

Besides. How much does a person need to understand the bible to be a believer? People from a wide variety understand the core message i.e. Accepting and asking forgiveness from Jesus. The aim and importance of spreading the Gospels seems to work, and most people understand it better in much simpler form of a story.

If it needs interpretation, then that's either impossible, or an indication that those who are correctly interpreting it in order to teach others are more skilled than god at making god's will clear. It's passing strange to believe in fallible humans who are more skilled than an all powerful god.

Of course, it's always possible that those who 'teach' it are just using god's name as an excuse to impose their own opinions on others - in the hope that people who would otherwise quite rightly tell them to fuck off, might hesitate to say that to somebody who is god's henchman.

In fact, that's the only reasonable conclusion to reach regarding humans 'teaching' other humans what god wants (whether they use any 'sacred text' or none).

Theists are discovering new things each day, progressively getting better interpretations, by continuous study, scrutinizing and comparing the relationship between all the aspects we know of the world.

As mentioned above, not knowing what to look for to corrupt and manipulate for future readers. Theists use Daniel as an example, that even he as a prophet didn't understand.


Dan 12:8 I heard, but I did not understand. So I asked, "My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?"

Dan 12:9 He replied, "Go your way, Daniel, because the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end. 10 Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand.

 

[Learner]

I'm not so sure about there being a thin line between the two. But I do hope to gain more humility and become less arrogant.

But how exactly is god less arrogant?

I'm not sure. I'd need some sort of reference to go on before answering.

 

[bigfield]

How much does a person need to understand the bible to be a believer?

As little as possible, seems to be the norm.

 

[Learner]

How much does a person need to understand the bible to be a believer?

As little as possible, seems to be the norm.

I agree, this may apply to a lot of believers. It's advantageous (theistic view); when for example, some "intellectuals" consider those believers to be poor defenders, non-debater-types with apparently poor reasons for believing the faith e.g. the illiterate, uneducated, blind faithers, ordinary Joe's" like aunty Jane working part time in the church charity shop ... because they can ALL be included without needing to meet some "scholarly criteria," so to speak.

John 20:29
Jesus said, “Because you have seen Me, you have believed. Those who believe without seeing are blessed.”

 

[bilby]

How much does a person need to understand the bible to be a believer?

As little as possible, seems to be the norm.

I agree, this may apply to a lot of believers. It's advantageous (theistic view); when for example, some "intellectuals" consider those believers to be poor defenders, non-debater-types with apparently poor reasons for believing the faith e.g. the illiterate, uneducated, blind faithers," like aunty Jane working part time in the church charity shop - because they can ALL be included without needing to meet some "scholarly criteria," so to speak.

John 20:29
Jesus said, “Because you have seen Me, you have believed. Those who believe without seeing are blessed idiots.”

FTFJ

 

[Learner]

reprint

I agree, this may apply to a lot of believers. It's advantageous (theistic view); when for example, some "intellectuals" consider those believers to be poor defenders, non-debater-types with apparently poor reasons for believing the faith e.g. the illiterate, uneducated, blind faithers, & idiots ... because they can ALL be included without needing to meet some "scholarly criteria," so to speak.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's somewhat like the video game (for lack of better analogy). God KNOWS ALL the various fork-road outcomes or results even see various parralleli-universe-thingybob-possibles of satan. It seems reasonable to me (Biblically in concept) WHY it would be neccessary for 'self-thinking' entities to choose his or her OWN path independently BEFORE living in God's intended world to come.

Therefore the question I'd ask:

Simply put (my level grade). Do YOU, would you want to live in a place like God's world or system under Jesus's rule?

People have said no - that's all it boils down to imho.

This is a rediculous way of reasoning. You don't have any way of speculating on how something smarter than you will reason. And a lot of human thinking is embodied, ie it uses your own body as an analogue. Something with another body will think differently than you.

Speculating on the merits of heaven is equally rediculous. Even if Heaven would exist we couldn't begin to speculate whether or not we'd prefer it over Hell. My answer is that even if the Bible was true and accurate, I still couldn't tell you.

 

[Learner]

It's somewhat like the video game (for lack of better analogy). God KNOWS ALL the various fork-road outcomes or results even see various parralleli-universe-thingybob-possibles of satan. It seems reasonable to me (Biblically in concept) WHY it would be neccessary for 'self-thinking' entities to choose his or her OWN path independently BEFORE living in God's intended world to come.

Therefore the question I'd ask: Simply put (my level grade). Do YOU, would you want to live in a place like God's world or system under Jesus's rule?

People have said no - that's all it boils down to imho.

This is a rediculous way of reasoning. You don't have any way of speculating on how something smarter than you will reason.

I was trying to demonstrate (all that I can humanly fathom and muster) 'omniscience' as opposed to a similar reasoning speculation, only this way around, apparently being "smarter than God " for example...

"God can't be omniscient, because He didn't see certain evil events coming, or, what people will do with choices- good or evil and not stop them if the choose wrong etc., i.e. The speculative "proposition" "God is limited."

And a lot of human thinking is embodied, ie it uses your own body as an analogue. Something with another body will think differently than you.

There's bound to be a variety although nothing major. With atheists.. most definately.

Speculating on the merits of heaven is equally rediculous. Even if Heaven would exist we couldn't begin to speculate whether or not we'd prefer it over Hell. My answer is that even if the Bible was true and accurate, I still couldn't tell you.

If you're one of those that debate and ask theists questions like " How can God be good if he 'tortures' people in Hell?" Then you're contradicting yourself.

IF you're going to see both Heaven and Hell equally torturous - one by bordem and the other described above. You're propbably going to be contradicting yourself again.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I'm not so sure about there being a thin line between the two. But I do hope to gain more humility and become less arrogant.

But how exactly is god less arrogant?

I'm not sure. I'd need some sort of reference to go on before answering.

If you were on the religious left and not the religious right the answer would be obvious.

 

[DrZoidberg]

This is a rediculous way of reasoning. You don't have any way of speculating on how something smarter than you will reason.

I was trying to demonstrate (all that I can humanly fathom and muster) 'omniscience' as opposed to a similar reasoning speculation, only this way around, apparently being "smarter than God " for example...

"God can't be omniscient, because He didn't see certain evil events coming, or, what people will do with choices- good or evil and not stop them if the choose wrong etc., i.e. The speculative "proposition" "God is limited."

This is just Thomas Aquinas. It's pure conjecture on what God is or would do. Why bother? Why not just accept it as a mystery? It's this kind of reasoning which makes atheists think that theists have delusions of grandeur. You don't have that data upon which to draw these conclusions. This would be true even if God did exist. Just accept that you have no way of knowing anything about God. You have no idea whether or not to trust the Bible.

And a lot of human thinking is embodied, ie it uses your own body as an analogue. Something with another body will think differently than you.

There's bound to be a variety although nothing major. With atheists.. most definately.

This is not trivial. Human thinking is linear. Things happen in progression. Sentences are put together one word at a time. How would you use pronouns if you literally were one with the universe? How would you describe events if you saw every event in world history happening simultaneously? There's just no way for you to be able to relate to anything God does or doesn't do. There's been quite a few science-fiction stories on this topic. It was the infinite source of creative juice H.P. Lovecraft used as a basis for his stories.

You're just sweeping it aside as if it's a non-issue.

If God really is a creation of humans, then I would agree that it is a non-issue, but then God isn't real and you can stop worshipping him.

Speculating on the merits of heaven is equally rediculous. Even if Heaven would exist we couldn't begin to speculate whether or not we'd prefer it over Hell. My answer is that even if the Bible was true and accurate, I still couldn't tell you.

If you're one of those that debate and ask theists questions like " How can God be good if he 'tortures' people in Hell?" Then you're contradicting yourself.

IF you're going to see both Heaven and Hell equally torturous - one by bordem and the other described above. You're propbably going to be contradicting yourself again.

It's not a question of God's goodness. Have you heard of "The way to hell is paved with good intentions"? God's intentions can be good, but still create something which would feel hellish to us. There's also the issue of that most mortal sins aren't particularly sinful at all, in my opinion. If I meet the dead in the afterlife I don't think I would want to hang out with the people who lived a sinless life. That would be all the most boring people who had ever lived. Why would I want to hang out with people like that for eternity? I can't imagine anything more hellish. It's the sinners that are the fun people.

 

[Learner]

This is just Thomas Aquinas. It's pure conjecture on what God is or would do. Why bother? Why not just accept it as a mystery?

Thomas is Thomas... no influence to my previous post. You ask why bother? You're ignoring that It's a counter to the other "pure speculative conjecture." A hypothetical.

Just as Theists have been telling you... 'God work's in mysterious ways' for centuries! I say the same thing now.

It's this kind of reasoning which makes atheists think that theists have delusions of grandeur. You don't have that data upon which to draw these conclusions. This would be true even if God did exist. Just accept that you have no way of knowing anything about God. You have no idea whether or not to trust the Bible.

Theists having delusions of grandeur; these thoughts are to be expected, when the notion can be mutual.

"Have no idea whether to trust the bible or not." Take a look out there.. do you see the believers? There's no hesitency between whether or not to trust the bible - I am convinced and I am sure, I'm not alone!

And a lot of human thinking is embodied, ie it uses your own body as an analogue. Something with another body will think differently than you.

There's bound to be a variety although nothing major. With atheists.. most definately.

This is not trivial. Human thinking is linear. Things happen in progression. Sentences are put together one word at a time. How would you use pronouns if you literally were one with the universe? How would you describe events if you saw every event in world history happening simultaneously? There's just no way for you to be able to relate to anything God does or doesn't do. There's been quite a few science-fiction stories on this topic. It was the infinite source of creative juice H.P. Lovecraft used as a basis for his stories.

You're just sweeping it aside as if it's a non-issue. If God really is a creation of humans, then I would agree that it is a non-issue, but then God isn't real and you can stop worshipping him.

Theists believe in the same CONCEPT... the difference between them IS the trivial bit.

I don't read Thomas Aquinas (haven't yet) and I actually know a lot less than you would think. Same goes for H.P. Lovecraft. You're over-intellectualizing, over-stating something rather simple, which may make theists think atheists have delusions of Grandeur.

It's not a question of God's goodness. Have you heard of "The way to hell is paved with good intentions"? God's intentions can be good, but still create something which would feel hellish to us. There's also the issue of that most mortal sins aren't particularly sinful at all, in my opinion. If I meet the dead in the afterlife I don't think I would want to hang out with the people who lived a sinless life. That would be all the most boring people who had ever lived. Why would I want to hang out with people like that for eternity? I can't imagine anything more hellish. It's the sinners that are the fun people.

Was not talking about goodness of God... I was pointing it out that you understand the concept. As you're saying in bold. It seems you do have a preference of where to be, and not to be - after all,

 

[Rhea]

Wow.

Genesis 22:1-2 - And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

Ah...you see?
It says offer him.

Did you also read the part where Isaac asks Abraham where the sacrifice is? Abraham doesn't say..."don't be stupid Isaac, you are the sacrifice."

No, he reassures Isaac that God will provide the sacrifice....which of course God does.

But why does he reassure isaac of this? God NEVER PROMISED THAT. Abraham just made that up.

I’m always interested in how religionists parse this. You say “it just says offer!” But the actual bible says the only reason God was happy with him was becauuse he did not withhold his son. Yahweh was only happy because Abraham really meant to burn his son.

Abraham Tested

22 Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

2 Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

3 Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. 4 On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. 5 He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.”

6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”

“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”

8 Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.

9 When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. 10 Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. 11 But the angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

12 “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”

13 Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram[a] caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called that place The Lord Will Provide. And to this day it is said, “On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided.”

15 The angel of the Lord called to Abraham from heaven a second time 16 and said, “I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17 I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, 18 and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed,[c] because you have obeyed me

Ever wonder what permanent damage this did to Isaac? Being tied to the fire and your dad taking put a knife to kill you?

 

[DBT]

What kind of person would demand such a test, a gangster, a warlord, a Mafia boss.....the Creator of the Universe if one existed? If so, what would it say about the character of this Being?

 

[Treedbear]

Ah...you see?
It says offer him.

Did you also read the part where Isaac asks Abraham where the sacrifice is? Abraham doesn't say..."don't be stupid Isaac, you are the sacrifice."

No, he reassures Isaac that God will provide the sacrifice....which of course God does.

But why does he reassure isaac of this? God NEVER PROMISED THAT. Abraham just made that up.
...

Abraham Tested

22 Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

2 Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”
...

...

Seems to be a valid point.

 

[Treedbear]

I'm not so sure about there being a thin line between the two. But I do hope to gain more humility and become less arrogant.

But how exactly is god less arrogant?

I'm not sure. I'd need some sort of reference to go on before answering.

Politics would be the best example. And like war, religion is the continuation of politics by other means. False humility as a show of piety is often used to conceal the ulterior motive of getting others to sacrifice their own interests. But it reveals an exaggerated sense of one's own self-righteous importance. You've been warned.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Thomas is Thomas... no influence to my previous post. You ask why bother? You're ignoring that It's a counter to the other "pure speculative conjecture." A hypothetical.

Thomas Aquinas was nice enough to list all the reasons Christians have ever given for belief in God and for beliefs in God's goodness, omnipotence and omniscience. What is interesting about it is how weak the arguments are. Yet, it's the best Christianity has ever managed to make. That's why he is interesting and why he is relevant for your post.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas

Just as Theists have been telling you... 'God work's in mysterious ways' for centuries! I say the same thing now.

Then why are you speculating on whether Heaven exists or how it is? Why not follow your own advice and accept the mystery?

"Have no idea whether to trust the bible or not." Take a look out there.. do you see the believers? There's no hesitency between whether or not to trust the bible - I am convinced and I am sure, I'm not alone!

Reality isn't up for a vote. The number of people sharing a belief doesn't add to it's credibility. Lot's of people think 5G causes cancer, that Covid-19 is a conspiracy, that vaccines cause autism, that 911 was perpetrated by USA on it's own people, that aliens have visited us, etc, yet I hope you agree these are all ludicrous beliefs?

 

[Learner]

I'm not sure. I'd need some sort of reference to go on before answering.

Politics would be the best example. And like war, religion is the continuation of politics by other means.

I sort of had that inclination. I agree, but it's not unique only to those 'using' religion. You can't miss it.. politics is involved right across the board, in all the other aspects of our lives.

False humility as a show of piety is often used to conceal the ulterior motive of getting others to sacrifice their own interests.

Depending on who's leading the congregation, these things happen. I am assuming you don't think these are the standards according to Christ.

But it reveals an exaggerated sense of one's own self-righteous importance. You've been warned.

Like the above, self righteous importance you'll find is universal. It's not a product of Christianity.

Cheers for that, Jesus has warned us of those types (false humility), coming in His name.

 

[Rhea]

What kind of person would demand such a test, a gangster, a warlord, a Mafia boss.....the Creator of the Universe if one existed? If so, what would it say about the character of this Being?

Another angle of that question is Lion’s claim that Abraham LIED TO GOD in saying he was willing to actually sacrifice his son (15: because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son,) but was NOT ACTUALLY willing to sacrifice his son (LION: No. Abraham knew all along that he could trust God would not take the life of Isaac. The text plainly states that Abraham knew God would provide the sacrifice.)

So Lion claims that Abraham LIED to Yahweh, and Yahweh BOUGHT IT, and this makes a wonderful story of TRUST.


It’s all very incoherent.


It also cannot escape from it’s disturbing theme, that this ‘team building event’ involved terrifying a young child by tying him to a pyre and holding a knife to his throat. That’s really sort of irredeemably pathological.


I feel like the REAL test was, “will you kill your son for me?” And Abraham was supposed to say “No! Holy shit, are you Satan? My God would never ever ask that! The answer is no!” but guess who actually won that battle in heaven and who wrote the bible? Hmmm?