Why is scripture so fuzzy about heaven and hell?

MMXX said:

If you're going to play the game of putting me in the role of someone who "doubts the word of God" or is "calling God a liar", and similar purposely false accusations, because I don't agree with your interpretations, then we are done talking.

Click to expand...

Well, UR have a position that often conflicts with scripture and I've noticed a lot of them also doubt authorship of the bible.

MMXX said:

There's no reason why Christian universalism should be unconditional. The condition is always going to be belief and faith in Christ. The difference is the belief in when that's going to take place for everyone.

They believe everyone will have the opportunity and eventually accept Jesus as Lord. Whereas your school of belief is, if a child gets killed before he accepted Christ, he'll be roasting in agony for eternity.

Click to expand...

No, scripture has evidence that children are saved, before they're of an age where they're held accountable, David in 2 Samuel talking about how his dead son won't return to him but he will go to his dead son, Jesus saying that one must become like a child, and suffer the little children to come to me, for such is the kingdom of heaven, etc.
Most believe in an age of accountability and the Torah even kind of hints that it could be as late as 20, as the children under 20 were allowed to enter the promised land but none of those over 20 would be permitted, God would have them wander the wilderness for 40 years until they all died.

Jamdoc said:

No, scripture has evidence that children are saved, before they're of an age where they're held accountable, David in 2 Samuel talking about how his dead son won't return to him but he will go to his dead son, Jesus saying that one must become like a child, and suffer the little children to come to me, for such is the kingdom of heaven, etc.
Most believe in an age of accountability and the Torah even kind of hints that it could be as late as 20, as the children under 20 were allowed to enter the promised land but none of those over 20 would be permitted, God would have them wander the wilderness for 40 years until they all died.

Click to expand...

My comment wasn't about the age of accountability.

Jamdoc said:

Well, UR have a position that often conflicts with scripture and I've noticed a lot of them also doubt authorship of the bible.

Click to expand...

No it conflicts with scriptual doctrine.

Who authored Revelation is a scholarly debate outside of universalism.

In 14 years of talking to Christian unversalists, I've never come across one who doubts the authorship of books of the Bible, outside of those which have been considered questionable by multiple scholars from multiple belief systems. Mainly the authorship of Hebrews and Revelation is uncertain.

What Christian unversalists call into question is the Hebew to English and Koine Greek to English translation of certain words. As do the translators of the KJV vs the NSAB vs the ESV vs the NIV etc.

Jamdoc said:

That's quite a leap of logic to make
I don't see it as being supported.
because the lake of fire is for ever and ever in Revelation 20, and those who worship the beast are also tormented for ever and ever.

Click to expand...

People who take that view tend to translate the word forever and ever to mean an eon (or age) and eon.

The purification takes so long, this may be why the prophet of the beast and those with the mark begin their time in the lake of fire first.

regardless of which school of thinking is "more right" I tend to take the view that God will do more than we can imagine or think. (Ephesians 3:20) So Eternal Torment, Annihilationism, Ultimate Reconciliation, and anything else that a human being can imagine .. is simply "not it." God will do something far beyond what our imaginations are capable of grasping.

Hmm said:

Precisely. You need to understand Universalism before you can represent it fairly, even though it may not be your belief, as you have done here. It's an inconvenient truth to some.

Click to expand...

It seems many are either going by misinformation or just making stuff up as they go along.

Those who debate aginst Christian universalism displaying an actual understanding of it are few and far between.

Oops.

Oops again. Sometimes doing this on a phone can be a challenge.

Jamdoc said:

That's quite a leap of logic to make
I don't see it as being supported.
because the lake of fire is for ever and ever in Revelation 20, and those who worship the beast are also tormented for ever and ever.

Click to expand...

Something to consider:

Edom
Edom was an ancient kingdom in Transjordan located between Moab to the northeast, the Arabah to the west and the Arabian Desert to the south and east. Most of its former territory is now divided between Israel and Jordan.

The destruction of Edom uses the same exaggerated language descriptions as hell in the Bible. Yet none of it lasted forever as it clearly says. And you can certainly pass through it today. For this prophecy to be taken literally it would need to be a smoking tar pit today with a bypass to get around it. Compare verse ten below. (Revelation 14:11)

Isaiah 34:8-11
For the Lord has a day of vengeance,
a year of retribution, to uphold Zion’s cause.
9 Edom’s streams will be turned into pitch,
her dust into burning sulfur;
her land will become blazing pitch!
10 It will not be quenched night or day;
its smoke will rise forever.
From generation to generation it will lie desolate;
no one will ever pass through it again.
11 The desert owl and screech owl will possess it;
the great owl and the raven will nest there.
God will stretch out over Edom
the measuring line of chaos
and the plumb line of desolation.

MMXX said:

My comment wasn't about the age of accountability.

Click to expand...

You assumed "my school of belief" and I showed you wrong. Children do not go to the lake of fire according to "my school of belief". I don't know when the age of accountability is, but there's evidence it could be all the way up to 20.

Either way, worry more about Adults who God DOES hold accountable for sin, rather than little children who Jesus said we must become like and are greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.

MMXX said:

No it conflicts with scriptual doctrine.

Click to expand...

Only if you stretch like gumby and split hairs and try to play translation games instead of believe that God preserves His word so that His meaning can be understood. People are making an eternal bet that God does NOT preserve His word and that it's subject to "translation error", to make it mean what they WANT it to say.

I don't play those games, I trust that God preserves the meaning of His word, it would be unfair of Him to judge us according to books that are mistranslated and can only properly be read in ancient languages.

Who authored Revelation is a scholarly debate outside of universalism.

In 14 years of talking to Christian unversalists, I've never come across one who doubts the authorship of books of the Bible, outside of those which have been considered questionable by multiple scholars from multiple belief systems. Mainly the authorship of Hebrews and Revelation is uncertain.

What Christian unversalists call into question is the Hebew to English and Koine Greek to English translation of certain words. As do the translators of the KJV vs the NSAB vs the ESV vs the NIV etc.

Click to expand...

Hebrews authorship is more debatable. Paul signed his letters, Hebrews isn't signed, the author doesn't claim a name at all.

But Revelation's author does state their name, John. Whether this is the Apostle John or not is the only possible debate if you believe that it is God breathed scripture (God breathed scripture wouldn't contain a lie about the name of its author). I personally believe it was the Apostle. John had history with Jesus and so, a closer relationship and reason for Jesus to reveal these things specifically to him, probably the last surviving disciple who knew Him while He was on Earth.

But to be blunt, I find outside of uncredited books like Hebrews, to main thrust of doubting authorship of books of the bible is to doubt the things contained within them, it demonstrates a weak faith if any faith at all.

Now, that said, I am not meaning this to you personally. I get it, you are not advocating for your own believes but rather explaining those of others you have researched. Sometimes I do the same, explain the doctrines of others while putting together all positions of particular question. I can appreciate that.
But I do question when people need to split hairs on specific definitions and not just trust that God preserves what He means in His word.

If I can't have faith that the bible in my hand is the Word of God and is sufficient for salvation and to base doctrine on... then everything is in the air and we can't put faith in anything can we, aside from vague platitudes of knowing that there is a creator.

Jamdoc said:

If I can't have faith that the bible in my hand is the Word of God and is sufficient for salvation and to base doctrine on... then everything is in the air and we can't put faith in anything can we, aside from vague platitudes of knowing that there is a creator.

Click to expand...

Some people make an idol of a book.

Jamdoc said:

You assumed "my school of belief" and I showed you wrong. Children do not go to the lake of fire according to "my school of belief". I don't know when the age of accountability is, but there's evidence it could be all the way up to 20.

Either way, worry more about Adults who God DOES hold accountable for sin, rather than little children who Jesus said we must become like and are greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Click to expand...

Okay replace "child" with 20 year old (which is still a child to someone my age), even though it doesn't make any difference regarding what I said.

Jamdoc said:

Only if you stretch like gumby and split hairs and try to play translation games instead of believe that God preserves His word so that His meaning can be understood. People are making an eternal bet that God does NOT preserve His word and that it's subject to "translation error", to make it mean what they WANT it to say.

I don't play those games, I trust that God preserves the meaning of His word, it would be unfair of Him to judge us according to books that are mistranslated and can only properly be read in ancient languages.

Click to expand...

That type of speech is applied to many doctrines and theologies one doesn't agree with. It's practically a one size fits all type of rebuttal.

Jamdoc said:

Hebrews authorship is more debatable. Paul signed his letters, Hebrews isn't signed, the author doesn't claim a name at all.

But Revelation's author does state their name, John. Whether this is the Apostle John or not is the only possible debate if you believe that it is God breathed scripture (God breathed scripture wouldn't contain a lie about the name of its author). I personally believe it was the Apostle. John had history with Jesus and so, a closer relationship and reason for Jesus to reveal these things specifically to him, probably the last surviving disciple who knew Him while He was on Earth.

Click to expand...

Have you read church history regarding the canonization of Revelation? Have you read scholarly reviews regarding the three different people named John who could have authored it? Are you aware that several scholars have determined the the use of Greek in Revelation doesn't match the epistles of John the Apostle?

Jamdoc said:

But to be blunt, I find outside of uncredited books like Hebrews, to main thrust of doubting authorship of books of the bible is to doubt the things contained within them, it demonstrates a weak faith if any faith at all.

Now, that said, I am not meaning this to you personally. I get it, you are not advocating for your own believes but rather explaining those of others you have researched. Sometimes I do the same, explain the doctrines of others while putting together all positions of particular question. I can appreciate that.
But I do question when people need to split hairs on specific definitions and not just trust that God preserves what He means in His word.

If I can't have faith that the bible in my hand is the Word of God and is sufficient for salvation and to base doctrine on... then everything is in the air and we can't put faith in anything can we, aside from vague platitudes of knowing that there is a creator.

Click to expand...

Revelation has always been a controversial book unlike any other in the collection of writings that were assembled to create what we call the Bible. That's why there are four distinct views regarding Revelation. And why there are several different doctrines based largely on Revelation. Several of which you probably don't agree with.

Now since there's several interpretations and doctrines of Revelation that you probably don't agree with, does that mean you don't have faith in the word of God? No, it doesn't.

Saint Steven said:

Some people make an idol of a book.

Click to expand...

Ironically the Catholics don't do so nearly as much as do many fundamentalist Protestants.

MMXX said:

Ironically the Catholics don't do so nearly as much as do many fundamentalist Protestants.

Click to expand...

Agreed.
Our Catholic and Orthodox brothers and sisters put Church Tradition above all else. That is there standard of measure. (correct me if I'm wrong) Although these two branches (Catholic and Orthodox) each have there own Traditions to follow. Sometimes in sharp contrast.

MMXX said:

That type of speech is applied to many doctrines and theologies one doesn't agree with. It's practically a one size fits all type of rebuttal.

Click to expand...

Wow, that's solid gold right there.
"... a one size fits all type of rebuttal."

Saint Steven said:

Some people make an idol of a book.

Click to expand...

Jesus used scripture constantly, was Jesus making an idol?
No, He was modeling for us, and being an example, to use scripture to found our doctrines on and defend our positions with.

Without scripture you're basically making up your concept of God as you go. That's gnosticism.

Jamdoc said:

Jesus used scripture constantly, was Jesus making an idol?
No, He was modeling for us, and being an example, to use scripture to found our doctrines on and defend our positions with.

Without scripture you're basically making up your concept of God as you go. That's gnosticism.

Click to expand...

Not really the same thing as someone idolizing the KJV for example.

MMXX said:

Okay replace "child" with 20 year old (which is still a child to someone my age), even though it doesn't make any difference regarding what I said.



That type of speech is applied to many doctrines and theologies one doesn't agree with. It's practically a one size fits all type of rebuttal.



Have you read church history regarding the canonization of Revelation? Have you read scholarly reviews regarding the three different people named John who could have authored it? Are you aware that several scholars have determined the the use of Greek in Revelation doesn't match the epistles of John the Apostle?



Revelation has always been a controversial book unlike any other in the collection of writings that were assembled to create what we call the Bible. That's why there are four distinct views regarding Revelation. And why there are several different doctrines based largely on Revelation. Several of which you probably don't agree with.

Now since there's several interpretations and doctrines of Revelation that you probably don't agree with, does that mean you don't have faith in the word of God? No, it doesn't.

Click to expand...

Doctrines can be a matter of interpretation, that much is true.
but the basis of a translation that doesn't fit with a plain reading of the text being "it was mistranslated" is very flimsy and seems more like a person is trying to argue with God over what He's trying to convey. They've already decided what they want the text to say, and dispute it when the actual text says something that conflicts it.

To be fair there are other doctrines than universalism that do this.

One of the most popular is pretribulation rapture. If you point out Matthew 24:29-31 they'll say "that's not the rapture, because we know the rapture is before the 7 year tribulation" They have put a rule on what God's word can say, and dispute when it goes against their rule.
Similarly, when you try and reach them that Jesus said that Great Tribulation starts after the midpoint, making it no longer than 3.5 years, the same people will again, inject a rule "But we know the tribulation is 7 years"
Instead of taking doctrine OUT of what the text says, they have implemented rules on what the text is allowed to say on a subject and discard anything that contradicts their rule.

Within baptist camps, as much as I agree with them on a lot of things.. there's a teetotalism aspect that isn't particularly biblical. The bible does warn against getting drunk but not to the point of total abstinence from alcohol. If you point out the drinking of wine in moderation as being something good, and acceptable.. they will flip it around and inject their rule on what the bible says, and decides that any mention of wine that IS allowable in scripture, such as Paul advising Timothy to add some wine to his water to help with his stomachaches (probably because the wine killed microbes in the water source he drank from).. well the teetotalers will say the rule is that those allowable uses of wine are actually unfermented grape juice.

The only rule I try to put on what the bible says is that I believe God wants me to be able to understand it without becoming a scholar in ancient languages, so the meaning should be clear no matter what language I read it in.

Jamdoc said:

Jesus used scripture constantly, was Jesus making an idol?
No, He was modeling for us, and being an example, to use scripture to found our doctrines on and defend our positions with.

Without scripture you're basically making up your concept of God as you go. That's gnosticism.

Click to expand...

I'm not anti-scripture, or even anti-Bible. I use it all the time.
Reference is to the extreme position some take.
Some won't consider any thought on the basis of critical thinking, or research outside the echo chamber of Evangelical Apologetics. Speaking of Jesus...

Luke 10:25-30 NIV
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind ’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ ”
28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”
29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead.