Why is scripture so fuzzy about heaven and hell?

[Jamdoc]

How about just seeing it as losing an eye is preferable to being enslaved in sin?

A lot of people who are enslaved by sin are already in hell on earth.

If sin has no actual punishment attached to it, many people enjoy sin.
Look at fornication
Unless God is going to punish fornicators, then most people would choose to fornicate... well.. look at our world.
Most people don't believe they'll be judged, so they gladly engage in hookup culture and seek out pleasure in fornication, and many people who have regular sex are a lot happier than those who live celibately for religious reasons.

I'm certainly not happy about living celibately, but I strongly believe I'm not ordained to be married either.
So that leaves me with bitter celibacy. It's not joyful, and I definitely don't feel like it'd be better to lose an eye or arm than to fornicate just to do it.
But if it's something that earns judgement from God? well.. then I guess bitter celibacy it is.

Or how about, stealing movies, music, and video games online... you haven't directly hurt someone, since you haven't physically taken something away from them that they'd normally sell, you've acquired a digital copy of something you may not have bought anyway, but since you got it for free, sure you'll listen to it, or watch it, or play it... if there's no judgement for such an action, what's the harm? It's a gain for you to sin in this way if there's no punishment from God attached to it.
But if God will judge you for it?
Why risk it?

 

[ozso]

If sin has no actual punishment attached to it, many people enjoy sin.
Look at fornication
Unless God is going to punish fornicators, then most people would choose to fornicate... well.. look at our world.
Most people don't believe they'll be judged, so they gladly engage in hookup culture and seek out pleasure in fornication, and many people who have regular sex are a lot happier than those who live celibately for religious reasons.

I'm certainly not happy about living celibately, but I strongly believe I'm not ordained to be married either.
So that leaves me with bitter celibacy. It's not joyful, and I definitely don't feel like it'd be better to lose an eye or arm than to fornicate just to do it.
But if it's something that earns judgement from God? well.. then I guess bitter celibacy it is.

Or how about, stealing movies, music, and video games online... you haven't directly hurt someone, since you haven't physically taken something away from them that they'd normally sell, you've acquired a digital copy of something you may not have bought anyway, but since you got it for free, sure you'll listen to it, or watch it, or play it... if there's no judgement for such an action, what's the harm? It's a gain for you to sin in this way if there's no punishment from God attached to it.

People who practice those sins are punished with guilt and fear of being caught etc. And as you say, the threat of eternal torment does not seem to keep unbelieving sinners from doing whatever they want to do. And even many Christians freely sin knowing all they have to do is confess it later. Many others believe once they're saved, they're always saved no matter what they do. So how does the doctrine of eternal torment prevent most people from sinning?

 

[ozso]

Not particularly responding to this post but I will point out again that attempting to question authorship and therefore authenticity of Revelation's message is a bad way to defend your doctrine.

It's not my doctrine. It's a doctrine that I think might be correct. And the authorship of Revelation along with its authenticity has been questioned for hundreds of years.

 

[Jamdoc]

People who practice those sins are punished with guilt and fear of being caught etc. And as you say, the threat of eternal torment does not seem to keep unbelieving sinners from doing whatever they want to do. And even many Christians freely sin knowing all they have to do is confess it later. Many others believe once they're saved, they're always saved no matter what they do. So how does the doctrine of eternal torment prevent most people from sinning?

They're only feeling guilty if they've been convicted that it's wrong, by conscience or by the holy spirit.

Let's use pornography as an example.
It's legal, therefore there's no legal consequence of viewing it, it's free and overwhelmingly abundant, so it's not like you're somehow causing someone harm that you should feel guilty of, not even indirectly since that stuff is all over the internet anyway, so you choosing not to view it doesn't prevent someone from being exploited, so largely, in an earthly means, there's no harm to others consequence of viewing it. It's very commonly socially acceptable, and tends to be secretive, just something between you and your computer or phone, so no social consequence to it. You're not actually having risky sexual contact with anyone so there's no risk of unwanted pregnancy or sexually transmitted disease, so there's no physical consequence to it.

The only possible consequence is on a spiritual level, that it is sin and alienates you from God, and that God will judge you for it.

Now we come down to soteriology.
Even in OSAS or people just confessing sins and being forgiven, what this sin does is shatters your assurance in your salvation, because we know that someone practicing these sins is not of God

1 John 1

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

1 John 2

3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

IE, if we willfully keep sinning, are we sure about our beliefs and our fellowship with God if we're out acting like an unbeliever just living in the flesh?

There is that conviction that in fighting sin, we show ourselves that we're in Christ, that He is fighting for us. But if we don't fight? If we just give in to sin, and have no remorse or conviction or repentance? It questions your salvation, and leaves the potential for being punished forever over your sin.

In UR... since there is no consequence.. now you really do have license to sin.. because ultimately there's no way to not be saved.

So something like Pornography then has 0 consequence, because you'll get reconciled to God anyway, and you don't have to worry about well maybe you aren't saved because you viewed porn, because you're guaranteed salvation at some point anyway.

and unbelievers? They view porn guiltlessly, it is an enjoyable experience for them, and sometimes, even a social thing, I mean that's basically what strip clubs are.
Paul describes it as having their conscience seared. The sin itself doesn't bother them.

 

[ozso]

They're only feeling guilty if they've been convicted that it's wrong, by conscience or by the holy spirit.

Let's use pornography as an example.
It's legal, therefore there's no legal consequence of viewing it, it's free and overwhelmingly abundant, so it's not like you're somehow causing someone harm that you should feel guilty of, not even indirectly since that stuff is all over the internet anyway, so you choosing not to view it doesn't prevent someone from being exploited, so largely, in an earthly means, there's no harm to others consequence of viewing it. It's very commonly socially acceptable, and tends to be secretive, just something between you and your computer or phone, so no social consequence to it. You're not actually having risky sexual contact with anyone so there's no risk of unwanted pregnancy or sexually transmitted disease, so there's no physical consequence to it.

The only possible consequence is on a spiritual level, that it is sin and alienates you from God, and that God will judge you for it.

Now we come down to soteriology.
Even in OSAS or people just confessing sins and being forgiven, what this sin does is shatters your assurance in your salvation, because we know that someone practicing these sins is not of God

1 John 1

1 John 2


IE, if we willfully keep sinning, are we sure about our beliefs and our fellowship with God if we're out acting like an unbeliever just living in the flesh?

There is that conviction that in fighting sin, we show ourselves that we're in Christ, that He is fighting for us. But if we don't fight? If we just give in to sin, and have no remorse or conviction or repentance? It questions your salvation, and leaves the potential for being punished forever over your sin.

In UR... since there is no consequence.. now you really do have license to sin.. because ultimately there's no way to not be saved.

So something like Pornography then has 0 consequence, because you'll get reconciled to God anyway, and you don't have to worry about well maybe you aren't saved because you viewed porn, because you're guaranteed salvation at some point anyway.

Many don't view it that way though. They go by Matthew 18:21-22, that God will forgive them 70 times seven ie perpetually. And Matthew 12:31 "Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven". And that hell only pertains to unbelievers.

and unbelievers? They view porn guiltlessly, it is an enjoyable experience for them, and sometimes, even a social thing, I mean that's basically what strip clubs are.
Paul describes it as having their conscience seared. The sin itself doesn't bother them.

So like I said, the treat of eternal torment doesn't deter them from sin.

Personally I don't avoid sin for fear of eternal torment. I avoid sin because I know that it's toxic and mainly that it's an offence to my Lord whom I love. That it puts up a wall between me and my Lord.

 

[Jamdoc]

and I mean, Romans 7

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

Without the law to convict us.. we were probably quite happy in our sin.

 

[Jamdoc]

Many don't view it that way though. They go by Matthew 18:21-22, that God will forgive them 70 times seven ie perpetually. And Matthew 12:31 "Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven". And that hell only pertains to unbelievers.

While this is true, here's the idea.
If you say you believe that climate change is going to melt all the ice caps and flood all the low elevation cities you wouldn't build beachfront property would you? You'd know it was going to get flooded and destroyed, so best buy something up a good couple hundred feet to prevent being flooded.

Yet a bunch of people like the Obamas, who tout this climate change belief.. buy oceanfront property in Martha's Vineyard. Does that look like they actually believe their climate change doomsday?

So if you similarly, say you believe in a God that judges sin, and then go off and live like the devil.. what's that say about your belief? Do you really believe God is going to judge?

So like I said, the treat of eternal torment doesn't deter them from sin.

Personally I don't avoid sin because I fear eternal torment. I avoid sin because I know that it's toxic and mainly that it's an offence to the Lord I love and serve. That it puts up a wall between me and my Lord.

It's because they don't believe.
That's the issue, they don't believe that God is real, thus no final judgement, thus, they live as their flesh leads them without any guilty conscience.

So being freed just from a guilty conscience and slavery to sin.... belittles salvation, because for those who don't believe.... they don't feel trapped in sin or enslaved to sin, or guilty.
They enjoy their sin.

The only time being freed from sin feels like any kind of salvation, is if you are convicted by the law of God. Which means you have to believe in a God, a God that has objectively determined right and wrong, and knows when you do wrong, and will judge you for it.
Now convicted by that belief and that law, you look for is there any way out of this?
That's where the Gospel comes in and why it's good news.

 

[ozso]

While this is true, here's the idea.
If you say you believe that climate change is going to melt all the ice caps and flood all the low elevation cities you wouldn't build beachfront property would you? You'd know it was going to get flooded and destroyed, so best buy something up a good couple hundred feet to prevent being flooded.

Yet a bunch of people like the Obamas, who tout this climate change belief.. buy oceanfront property in Martha's Vineyard. Does that look like they actually believe their climate change doomsday?

So if you similarly, say you believe in a God that judges sin, and then go off and live like the devil.. what's that say about your belief? Do you really believe God is going to judge?

It's because they don't believe.
That's the issue, they don't believe that God is real, thus no final judgement, thus, they live as their flesh leads them without any guilty conscience.

So being freed just from a guilty conscience and slavery to sin.... belittles salvation, because for those who don't believe.... they don't feel trapped in sin or enslaved to sin, or guilty.
They enjoy their sin.

The only time being freed from sin feels like any kind of salvation, is if you are convicted by the law of God. Which means you have to believe in a God, a God that has objectively determined right and wrong, and knows when you do wrong, and will judge you for it.
Now convicted by that belief and that law, you look for is there any way out of this?
That's where the Gospel comes in and why it's good news.

Rather than keep going though endless versions of basically the same scenario/analogy, it's a matter of the notion that if everyone eventually gets saved, then people are going to sin because there's no fear of eternal torment. I think all those same people still sin anyways because even if there is eternal torment, they either think it doesn't apply to them or they don't believe in it in the first place.

 

[ozso]

MMXX said: ↑
* * * But what's germane is Der Alte's claim that a hell of eternal torment was a widely held predominate view among Jews during the time of Jesus' ministry. * * *

A blatant, deliberate falsification of what I said. Read my post again. I did NOT say that. What I said was,
"In Israel before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery eternal punishment and they called it both Ge Hinnom and Sheol written in the 225BC LXX and the New Testament as Gehenna and Hades

That's what I was talking about.

Right after that I said.
"There were different factions within Judaism; Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes etc. and different beliefs about resurrection, hell etc. These differing beliefs do not disprove anything in this post."
I think we're done here.

But nonetheless according to you, "in Israel before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery eternal punishment and they called it both Ge Hinnom and Sheol". Now we're done. Good day.

 

[Der Alte]

That's what I was talking about.
But nonetheless according to you, "in Israel before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery eternal punishment and they called it both Ge Hinnom and Sheol". Now we're done. Good day.

Not quite, you can run but you can't hide. Is that a lie? Is that what you are trying to imply?

[1]1925 Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch … in the "valley of the sons of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). … the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a);[“Soon” in this paragraph would be about 700 BC +/-, DA]​

Note: This is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT any assumed/alleged bias of “modern” Christian translators. DA
…..This refutes the false narrative that the fifteen [15] times Jesus mentioned “Gehenna” He was referring to the valley of GeHinnom/Gehenna where trash and bodies were supposedly always burning.

”(I)n general …sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai [30 BC-90 AD] wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell(B.M. 83b).
“But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab [Talmud]. 33b). All that descend into Gehenna shall come up again, with the exception of three classes of men: those who have committed adultery, or shamed their neighbors, or vilified them (B. M. 58b).[/i]
“… heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b).[Talmud] “When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [שאול/Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; [Talmud] comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). ...​

 

[ozso]

Not quite, you can run but you can't hide. Is that a lie? Is that what you are trying to imply?
[1]1925 Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch … in the "valley of the sons of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). … the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a);[“Soon” in this paragraph would be about 700 BC +/-, DA]
Note: This is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT any assumed/alleged bias of “modern” Christian translators. DA
…..This refutes the false narrative that the fifteen [15] times Jesus mentioned “Gehenna” He was referring to the valley of GeHinnom/Gehenna where trash and bodies were supposedly always burning.
”(I)n general …sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai [30 BC-90 AD] wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell(B.M. 83b).
“But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab [Talmud]. 33b). All that descend into Gehenna shall come up again, with the exception of three classes of men: those who have committed adultery, or shamed their neighbors, or vilified them (B. M. 58b).[/i]
“… heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b).[Talmud] “When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [שאול/Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; [Talmud] comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). ...

Your statement of:

Der Alte said: ↑
What I said was,"In Israel before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery eternal punishment and they called it both Ge Hinnom and Sheol

Still stands. That's what I mentioned. Anything else you have said is irrelevant to my pointing out that particular statement.

 

[Der Alte]

Your statement of:

Der Alte said: ↑
What I said was,"In Israel before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery eternal punishment and they called it both Ge Hinnom and Sheol

Still stands. That's what I mentioned. Anything else you have said is irrelevant to my pointing out that particular statement.

Are you saying that the statement is false? I quoted 3 Jewish sources all of which equate Gehenna with Hell. Jewish sources also equate sheol with hell. Quoted above.

 

[Hmm]

Are you saying that the statement is false? I quoted 3 Jewish sources all of which equate Gehenna with Hell. Jewish sources also equate sheol with hell. Quoted above.

There's no point continuing to ask the same questions of the same person once they have answered you. No-one's calling you a liar just because they don't find your evidences credible. That's not how debate works.

 

[ozso]

Are you saying that the statement is false? I quoted 3 Jewish sources all of which equate Gehenna with Hell. Jewish sources also equate sheol with hell. Quoted above.

The only thing you established, regarding what people in Jesus' time believed, was an except from the book of Judith written in 100 BC and a crying rabbi from Jesus' time. Everything else was from at least the 2nd century.

You need to go back to the drawing board to better substantiate your claim, that "In Israel before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery eternal punishment".

 

[ozso]

There's no point continuing to ask the same questions of the same person once they have answered you. No-one's calling you a liar just because they don't find your evidences credible. That's not how debate works.

Yes exactly, thank you. Talk about ad infinitum.

 

[Der Alte]

Your statement of:
Still stands. That's what I mentioned. Anything else you have said is irrelevant to my pointing out that particular statement.

Your objections are nothing more than "You're wrong and I'm right! Am too! Nuh huh!" In other words irrelevant!
According to the sources I quoted when, if ever, did Ge Hinnom become associated with "Hell"? Was it some years after Jesus' ministry or a bunch of years before?
But here's the deal when you stop posting your false assumption/presuppositions about eternal life, hell etc. I might stop posting the documented truth. Your biased opinion about those facts is not relevant. People come and go you want them to know what you believe and I want them to know the facts.

 

[Der Alte]

There's no point continuing to ask the same questions of the same person once they have answered you. No-one's calling you a liar just because they don't find your evidences credible. That's not how debate works.

You keep posting. I keep posting. Simple as that. See above post #856. above.
Nothing anybody has said in this thread or any other thread where my post re: Jewish belief in Hell is posted, conclusively shows that anything I posted is incorrect. Biased opinions notwithstanding.

 

[Hmm]

Nothing anybody has said in this thread or any other thread where my post re: Jewish belief in Hell is posted, conclusively shows that anything I posted is incorrect

You misunderstand the nature of religious truth comrade. It's not maths and beliefs can't be proved conclusively one way or another in the way that Fermat's Last Theorem was in 1994.

Biased opinions notwithstanding.

So anyone who disagrees with you is biased?

 

[ozso]

Your objections are nothing more than "You're wrong and I'm right! Am too! Nuh huh!" In other words irrelevant!
According to the sources I quoted when, if ever, did Ge Hinnom become associated with "Hell"? Was it some years after Jesus' ministry or a bunch of years before?
But here's the deal when you stop posting your false assumption/presuppositions about eternal life, hell etc. I might stop posting the documented truth. Your biased opinion about those facts is not relevant. People come and go you want them to know what you believe and I want them to know the facts.

For the umpteenth time, so far you haven't established that in Israel before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery eternal punishment. The evidence you've provided for that so far has been scant.

 

[ozso]

So anyone who disagrees with you is biased?

Among several other negative things.