Why is scripture so fuzzy about heaven and hell?

[Jamdoc]

2 Timothy 4

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

 

[coffee4u]

Presumably God would have foreseen that the vagueness in the Bible about heaven and hell would lead to different interpretations and the arguments we see today about Infernalism, Annihalism and Universalism.

Did He have a good reason for keeping things so undefined?

Mark 4:11-12 seems to suggest so when it talks about why Jesus used parables:

11 And he said to them, “To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything comes in parables, 12 in order that
‘they may indeed look but not perceive,
and may indeed hear but not understand;
so that they may not turn again and be forgiven.’ ”
​

Is it a deliberate ploy intended to make us reflect on these things as honestly as we can?

Or was it because that Jesus didn't want us to think too much about heaven and hell but instead to focus on living a Godly life while on earth?

Would it have been impossible for Him to have been clearer because our natural fear of the unknown, of "that undiscovered country from whose bourne no traveler returns" (Shakespeare), would have led us to interpret His words to conjure up the infernalist vision of something like ECT whatever He had said? The purpose of such a vision would be to justify and authenticate our fears to ourselves.

Or are there other reasons?

This is quite a gloomy topic but the the Good News is that God comes to find us in our misunderstanding and fear and brings us home. This is the universalist vision.

I don't think it is undefined at all. It isn't really about heaven, heaven is merely the waiting room. Likewise hell is also a waiting room for the souls who kept their sin. I think too much attention is given to heaven and hell when the attention should be on the new earth and on the second death.
Revelation 20 and 21.
11Then I saw a great white throne and the One seated on it. Earth and heaven fled from His presence, and no place was found for them. 12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne.

And there were open books, and one of them was the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their deeds, as recorded in the books. 13The sea gave up its dead, and Death and Hades gave up their dead, and each one was judged according to his deeds. 14Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death—the lake of fire. 15And if anyone was found whose name was not written in the Book of Life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

21 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.
2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

Those in hell with have the second death and be no more.
Those in heaven will go to the new earth.

 

[ozso]

Universalism makes all of Jesus, and the apostle's warnings to be in vain.
You could excise all those verses out, because they're meaningless unless there is punishment as Jesus warned.

Some synonyms for punishment are: discipline, correction, penance, requital, retribution, vengeance. Universalists believe that discipline and correction fits best. Others believe that retribution and vengeance fits best.

 

[Jamdoc]

Some synonyms for punishment are: discipline, correction, penance, requital, retribution, vengeance. Universalists believe that discipline and correction fits best. Others believe that retribution and vengeance fits best.

Doesn't fit the level of warning we're given.
Because if you want to talk about corrective chastisement this is what we're given in Hebrews 12

5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

and Romans 8

17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

That's encouragement, not warning.

That's not at all the same language that is used when warning about hell.
Hell is not corrective.
Hell is condemnation.

as I mentioned a few posts above, Jesus said it'd have been better for Judas to have never been born, because of what is going to happen to him for his betrayal of Jesus. Jesus said woe unto that man.

This was not corrective.
This was not something you encourage someone through because when you come out of it the rewards are worth all the suffering. That is the encouragement through chastisement that if the Lord is chastising you on Earth for your sins He's correcting you, because He loves you. So you are to take heart in the fact that no matter your suffering in the chastisement, God loves you and is doing things for your own good and you'll see at the end of it all it was all worth it. Personally, sometimes it's the only way I know God still loves me, as bad as that is.. I don't get a bunch of blessings. I do however get a lot of chastisement. I used to think, I'm so unlucky, why am I the only one who got caught and got in trouble for something everyone else was doing?
Now I realize "those poor bastards who think they got away with it", and I pray for them, and wish I had a means to contact them because I knew them before the days of social media and can't find them.

Anyway,
That's not what Jesus says with regard to Judas.
He says Judas is going to receive wrath so badly, that it'll have been better to have never been born.

does that sound like corrective action that will result in an outcome that will eventually be seen as good and worth it to you?

 

[ozso]

Doesn't fit the level of warning we're given.
Because if you want to talk about corrective chastisement this is what we're given in Hebrews 12


and Romans 8


That's encouragement, not warning.

That's not at all the same language that is used when warning about hell.
Hell is not corrective.
Hell is condemnation.

as I mentioned a few posts above, Jesus said it'd have been better for Judas to have never been born, because of what is going to happen to him for his betrayal of Jesus. Jesus said woe unto that man.

This was not corrective.
This was not something you encourage someone through because when you come out of it the rewards are worth all the suffering. That is the encouragement through chastisement that if the Lord is chastising you on Earth for your sins He's correcting you, because He loves you. So you are to take heart in the fact that no matter your suffering in the chastisement, God loves you and is doing things for your own good and you'll see at the end of it all it was all worth it. Personally, sometimes it's the only way I know God still loves me, as bad as that is.. I don't get a bunch of blessings. I do however get a lot of chastisement. I used to think, I'm so unlucky, why am I the only one who got caught and got in trouble for something everyone else was doing?
Now I realize "those poor bastards who think they got away with it", and I pray for them, and wish I had a means to contact them because I knew them before the days of social media and can't find them.

Anyway,
That's not what Jesus says with regard to Judas.
He says Judas is going to receive wrath so badly, that it'll have been better to have never been born.

does that sound like corrective action that will result in an outcome that will eventually be seen as good and worth it to you?

I wasn't trying to compare the punishment of the saved with the punishment of the unsaved

Jesus said it'd have been better for Judas to have never been born, because of what is going to happen to him for his betrayal of Jesus.

That's not what Jesus says with regard to Judas. He says Judas is going to receive wrath so badly, that it'll have been better to have never been born.

The parts in red are what you filled in. Jesus didn't actually say that. That's what gets traditionally filled in, because what Jesus said is ambiguous.

When it comes to something like this, I start wondering if there are similar statements in the Old Testament.

So far I've found Ecclesiastes 4:1-3

Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun:

I saw the tears of the oppressed—
and they have no comforter;
power was on the side of their oppressors—
and they have no comforter.
2 And I declared that the dead,
who had already died,
are happier than the living,
who are still alive.
3 But better than both
is the one who has never been born,
who has not seen the evil
that is done under the sun.

Although that's the only other time I've come across "better to have never been born" in the Bible so far.

I think what Jesus said about Judas could perhaps be more innocuous, such as it would have been better to have never been born than to have died in such disgrace. Even if Judas were to make it into heaven, who would want to be Judas?

 

[Jamdoc]

I wasn't trying to compare the punishment of the saved with the punishment of the unsaved



The parts in red are what you filled in. Jesus didn't actually say that. That's what gets traditionally filled in, because what Jesus said is ambiguous.

When it comes to something like this, I start wondering if there are similar statements in the Old Testament.

So far I've found Ecclesiastes 4:1-3

Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun:

I saw the tears of the oppressed—
and they have no comforter;
power was on the side of their oppressors—
and they have no comforter.
2 And I declared that the dead,
who had already died,
are happier than the living,
who are still alive.
3 But better than both
is the one who has never been born,
who has not seen the evil
that is done under the sun.

Although that's the only other time I've come across "better to have never been born" in the Bible so far.

I think what Jesus said about Judas could perhaps be more innocuous, such as it would have been better to have never been born than to have died in such disgrace. Even if Judas were to make it into heaven, who would want to be Judas?

Well, it comes down to the fuzziness of rewards then, because not a lot of clarity is there, but for a believer, Jesus, and Paul, and all the apostles encouraged through whatever suffering we go through, "for great is your reward in heaven" IE, it's worth it.
You don't say "woe unto that man" and "it had been good for that man if he had not been born" when there's a reward at the end that makes it all worth it.

Nor do you say woe unto that man and it had been good for that man if he had not been born" if they just cease existing, then their being born does not matter either way.
Non existence means they have no memory of any pain or joy whatsoever, it's a totally neutral state.
Can you remember before you're born?
Do you have experiences before you were conceived?
I sure don't, my first memories are earlier than most people I know of, and they're few and far between and about the age of 2 is the first ones I remember at all.
I'm pretty sure prior to conception, I didn't exist. God may have known who I'd be, since He knows all things and knows the future, but I didn't exist.
and Atheists already expect to be just like that.
and if it were true, then there is no judgement for them, because any suffering they'd do before being annihilated? Meaningless. It'd be like they'd never been created.

There is only judgement if you go on forever, one one form or another.
But universalism would make the suffering worth it because you still get the reward at the end.

So only ECT makes sense of all the warnings and has justice.

 

[ozso]

Well, it comes down to the fuzziness of rewards then, because not a lot of clarity is there, but for a believer, Jesus, and Paul, and all the apostles encouraged through whatever suffering we go through, "for great is your reward in heaven" IE, it's worth it.
You don't say "woe unto that man" and "it had been good for that man if he had not been born" when there's a reward at the end that makes it all worth it.

Paul also says one's reward can be burned up and that person will only get there as through flames. So that seems to indicate there will be those in heaven without any reward. They'll enter "naked" as some put it.

Nor do you say woe unto that man and it had been good for that man if he had not been born" if they just cease existing, then their being born does not matter either way.
Non existence means they have no memory of any pain or joy whatsoever, it's a totally neutral state.
Can you remember before you're born?
Do you have experiences before you were conceived?
I sure don't, my first memories are earlier than most people I know of, and they're few and far between and about the age of 2 is the first ones I remember at all.
I'm pretty sure prior to conception, I didn't exist. God may have known who I'd be, since He knows all things and knows the future, but I didn't exist.
and Atheists already expect to be just like that.
and if it were true, then there is no judgement for them, because any suffering they'd do before being annihilated? Meaningless. It'd be like they'd never been created.

People leave legacies though. If it's another thousand years before the return of Christ, Judas and Hitler will still be held in contempt.

There is only judgement if you go on forever, one one form or another.
But universalism would make the suffering worth it because you still get the reward at the end.

So only ECT makes sense of all the warnings and has justice.

If you're convinced of that, then that's how you're going to see everything that you believe confirms it. Confirmation bias. Personally I'm not so sure how things are going to work out. So I'm able to view the matter from other angles.

 

[Saint Steven]

I think somebody has been feeding you some bad information. "How We Got Our Bible", by Chuck Missler is on Amazon for 99 cents. It will tell you the truth and has many references to backup everything he says. Many writers will not do that but rather just give one their views whether it be right or wrong. I think you will find it is nice to know the Bible is exactly translated correctly, not without error but without error affecting any and all doctrines that Jesus Christ through it
66 books taught.

The Amazon book price seems to be $9.99, not 99 cents.

I watched the video presentation.
I made a few observations that should be addressed.

To be clear, I'm not making a statement against these things. I am pointing out big holes and contradictions in the points presented.

The presenter begins by talking about authority, but then goes on (8:05) to say, "Scripture declares its divine authority and integrity" citing 1 Corinthians 4:1-2, 2 Corinthians 5:20, 1 Thessalonians 2:13 and Revelation 1:1-3, 22 9:9-10, 18 Therefore, no proof of authority is given from any outside source. (I think some could be identified)

I imagine that other religions could make the same claim. That their holy book is self-authorizing.

The presenter also claims (9:05) that there are hidden codes in the text that would fall apart if you changed even one letter. Then (9:38) says that error is introduced in the human translation of the texts. Even though he declared at the start that our Bible (the translation) is"God-breathed". This seems contradictory. Does this mean that every word of the original manuscripts was divinely inspired, but God was "hands-off" during the translation process? If so, how come?

More to come.

 

[Der Alte]

Paul also says one's reward can be burned up and that person will only get there as through flames. So that seems to indicate there will be those in heaven without any reward. They'll enter "naked" as some put it. * * *

Unbelievable! This is an underhanded way of referring to a popular UR out-of-context proof text.
Here is the passage being referred to, in-context.

1 Corinthians 3:9-17
(9) For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.​

NB: this entire passage 1 Cor 3:9-17 is addressed to a select group, NOT all mankind. That group is "labourers together with God," "God's husbandry," "God's building" not sinful non-Christians.

(10) According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
(11) For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
(12) Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
(13) Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
(14) If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
(15) If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
(16) Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
(17) If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.​

.....UR-ites regularly quote vs. 15 as if it referred to the mundane, ordinary, regular works of unsaved mankind. There is not one verse in the entire Bible which states that unsaved mankind can be saved simply by having their mundane, regular, etc. works burned.
Every reference to "man" in this passage i.e. "every man", "any man" including vs. 15 refers to the group in vs. 9 NOT all of sinful mankind.
"Any man's work" vs. 15 refers to those from the group in vs. 9 who have built on the foundation of Jesus Christ, vss. 11-12, NOT all sinful mankind. The regular, mundane, ordinary, works of mankind does NOT, cannot save anyone.

Galatians 2:16
(16) Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.​

Vs. 17 clearly shows the passage does not support UR because it says "(17) If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy;"

 

[Der Alte]

Some synonyms for punishment are: discipline, correction, penance, requital, retribution, vengeance. Universalists believe that discipline and correction fits best. Others believe that retribution and vengeance fits best.

Greek has been the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox church from its inception, 2000 +/- years ago. Who better than the team of native Greek speaking scholars who translated the Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible [EOB] know the correct meaning of the Greek words in the N.T.?

EOB Matthew:25:46 When he will answer them, saying: ‘Amen, I tell you: as much as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 These [ones on the left] will go away into eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] punishment, [κόλασις/kolasis] but the righteous into eternal [αἰώνιος/aionios] life.”​

The New Testament ( The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
…..The Greek word “kolasis” occurs only twice in the N.T., Matt 25:46 and the second occurrence is 1 John 4:18.

EOB 1 John 4:18 here is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear, because fear is connected with punishment.[ κόλασις/kolasis] But the one who fears is not yet perfect in love.​

Note the native Greek speaking Eastern Orthodox Greek scholars who translated the EOB translated “aionios” as “eternal.”
The Greek word translated “punishment” in Matt 25:46 is “kolasis.” Some folks claim “kolasis” really means “prune” or “correction” but according to the EOB Greek scholars it means “punishment.” 1 John 4:18 there is no correction the one with “kolasis” is not made perfect.

 

[Saint Steven]

@earthmover

He discusses the authentication (22:00) of the Bible. He uses Matthew 5:17-18 as an authentication. (see below) Again, self-authenticating.

Consumer retail today depends on customer reviews for authentication. Why? No one trusts a company that toots their own horn. (obvious bias)

Compare with what Jesus said in Luke, after his resurrection, to explain this statement in Matthew. (at the bottom of this post) Jesus is not authenticating the whole Bible but is referring to the specific passages that refer to him.

Matthew 5:17-18 NIV
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Luke 24:44 NIV
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

 

[Saint Steven]

@earthmover

He then discusses (24:47) inerrancy and infallibility. In reference to the original autographs (manuscripts) However, translators had to choose (human error?) which manuscripts were most reliable. This footnote illustrates this. Which of these manuscripts was "inerrant and infallible"?

Footnotes

1. Mark 16:8 Some manuscripts have the following ending between verses 8 and 9, and one manuscript has it after verse 8 (omitting verses 9-20): Then they quickly reported all these instructions to those around Peter. After this, Jesus himself also sent out through them from east to west the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation. Amen.

 

[Jamdoc]

Paul also says one's reward can be burned up and that person will only get there as through flames. So that seems to indicate there will be those in heaven without any reward. They'll enter "naked" as some put it.

Well unless you believe you can be unhappy in heaven/the new earth, then won't it still all be worth it? If it's possible to be miserable in heaven, then I suppose you might say woe to that man even if they're in heaven, but, is that really heaven anymore?

People leave legacies though. If it's another thousand years before the return of Christ, Judas and Hitler will still be held in contempt.

From a person who doesn't exists' point of view? They wouldn't care, they don't exist, they are unconscious of how people view them. If this life was all we had and then it's unconsciousness? Nothing matters. I wouldn't care about literally anything anymore. Why do you think so many atheists are hedonists and nihilists?
If nothing matters in the long term, just go do what feels good while you do exist. "Let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die."

If you're convinced of that, then that's how you're going to see everything that you believe confirms it. Confirmation bias. Personally I'm not so sure how things are going to work out. So I'm able to view the matter from other angles.

I'm convinced of what scripture teaches.
Not trying to stretch it to mean what I want it to mean to tickle my itching ears because in my sinful flesh I think it sounds too harsh for someone who was a "good person" is tortured forever.
We have to trust God is doing what is just, but God has given us warnings, THAT is the corrective action, that we are warned about the consequences of our sin throughout the bible.
and Jesus warned that it'd be better to go into eternal life half blind, maimed, and lame than to go full body into hell, and that it'd be better to have never been born than to be Judas Iscariot... and it was not "better for us" or even "better for Jesus" but better for Judas Iscariot himself to have never been born.

 

[Saint Steven]

@earthmover

He claims (35:08) that the Apocrypha in non-canonical. This is not true. The Latin/western Church that gave us the canon included the Apocrypha. Protestants have discarded it, or removed it from the original canon.

This begs the question: If the original manuscripts of the canon were inspired, inerrant and infallible, why did the Protestants remove them from the Bible?

 

[Saint Steven]

@earthmover

He speaks (38:38) about the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) being the "Bible" that the early church used. Shouldn't this be the "Scripture" mentioned in 2 Timothy 3:16 ???

What became of the inerrant and infallible original manuscripts? And the Bible code that depended on the original texts. Is that suddenly unimportant?

 

[Saint Steven]

@earthmover

He discusses (42:17) the differences between the Masoretic and the Aramaic, said that in that translation, Enoch led the teaching against God. Which differs from the KJV, of course. (Hebrews 11:5)

 

[Saint Steven]

@earthmover

Then (44:42) he tells us that the only complete manuscripts are from the 4th to 10th centuries AD. From which our modern translations come. Are these still inerrant and infallible original manuscripts? Do they contain the Bible code referred to earlier? (nope) Not the original language.

Here is an author/presenter that gives a different view on the subject.

Focus 2017 Keynote 1: The Bible Tells Me So - Peter Enns

 

[Water and Fire]

God is going to save everyone. If you aren't only using Christ for fire insurance, then you will get precisely what you have been working towards... not burning in hell for all eternity.... because that was never going to happen anyway.

 

[Saint Steven]

God is going to save everyone. If you aren't only using Christ for fire insurance, then you will get precisely what you have been working towards... not burning in hell for all eternity.... because that was never going to happen anyway.

Welcome to the forum.

 

[Water and Fire]

Welcome to the forum.

Thanks man!

I've been here quite a bit. I just lost access to my other account.