Heaven

[JBlack]

God has chosen those whom he will save through his divine election for his purposes. There is nothing any man can do to become saved but beg God for mercy unto salvation. Asking for mercy does not guarantee our salvation...
For example, the bible says if seek him and you shall find him but it also makes it clear that NO ONE seeks him, the bible says repent, but it is God who grants repentance, the bible says come to me all you who are weary, but it also teaches that NO ONE can come unless drawn by the Father, And again the bible says he who recieves me receives the one who sent me, but it also teaches that no one can receive anything unless it be given him from heaven. So while one one hand some commands may seem clear we get further clarification when we compare all of the scriptures together.

So, there's nothing anybody can do to be saved. I can become Christian, accept Jesus, repent, do as the bible says, and after I die... still go to hell?
But yet, God is just, merciful and all-loving?!?

Yes, you can do all those things above and still go to hell.

But what about verses like these?:

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Questions for debate:

1. What must one do, according to the Bible, in order to go to heaven?
2. If AIEC is right, that you can become Christian and do as the Bible says, and still go to hell when you die, then what is the point of Christianity?

[SpiritQuickens]

Are you asking:


* What must OT readers do to be saved?

* What must Gospel readers do to be saved? Or,

* What must readers of Paul's epistles do to be saved?



Please clarify?

Well, what must someone who believes the Bible to be 100% the Word of God do?

Indeed, what is the point of any faith and belief supported only by conjecture and rhetoric?

Well, with Christians, my understanding has always been that they believe we need Jesus to save us from our sins. By repenting and believing in him, we'll go to heaven. I've always understood this to be the point... But then I encounter Christians who say things like, there's nothing we can do to be saved. Now with these Christians, the whole point is lost.

I can read what AIEC claims, but where's the support for that/those claims? Where's the evidence? "Where's the beef?"

Here's more of AIEC's argument

Salvation is accomplished by God and God alone. Our task as believers is to preach the gospel, the whole bible, in all the world. God has chosen those whom he will save through his divine election for his purposes. There is nothing any man can do to become saved but beg God for mercy unto salvation. Asking for mercy does not guarantee our salvation but this example was given to us by the prayer of the tax collector and the pharisee. God uses two babies as an example of his election process, Jacob and Esau.
Romans 9
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I HATED.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then[/b] it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. 19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

Here many statements are being made about God and man kind. Notice that before the twins were born, they were elected, one unto salvation the other unto damnation. Also notice that this election took place not because they had done or were going to eventually do any good or evil, but so that God's purpose in election might stand.

Now notice the question being asked and the reply, so why then does God still find fault with us, because who can resist HIS will? The reply, who are we to talk back to God, God has the right to form his creations as he wishes, some for glory and some for destruction, such as Pharaoh.

The problem is not in the soverignty of God, but in some of the statements the bible makes about ways to become saved. But we have to compare everything the bible says about any given topic to arrive at an accurate conclusion. The question is, can God make demands from his creation without his creation being able to obey? Most people logically say, no. But the bible teaches otherwise, For example, the bible says if seek him and you shall find him but it also makes it clear that NO ONE seeks him, the bible says repent, but it is God who grants repentance, the bible says come to me all you who are weary, but it also teaches that NO ONE can come unless drawn by the Father, And again the bible says he who recieves me receives the one who sent me, but it also teaches that no one can receive anything unless it be given him from heaven. So while one one hand some commands may seem clear we get further clarification when we compare all of the scriptures together. The raising of Lazarus is a picture of how we become saved, remember how I posted those verses that stated we all died spiritually because of what Adam did? Well Lazarus is an earthly picture of how we become saved. Before Jesus raises him he says, I am the resurrection and the life. Jesus calls out, Lazarus come forth and Lazarus rose from the dead. this is the same way we are raised from the dead spiritually.

Practically speaking, it's not that there's "nothing we can do to be saved." This is a form of fatalism totally foreign to the Bible. Rather, the moment at which you accept Christ, you say "I chose Him, that must mean He chose me!"

[myth-one.com]

Please ignore what myth-one.com says. He's an annihilationist, and practically everything he says is ridiculous heresy.

For the wages of sin is death . . . (Romans 6:23)

Is He an annihilationist also?

Do you reccommend ignoring God?

[Jonah]

j black et al,

There is a problem with your illustration of Lazarus. You just point blank mix physical resurrection with spiritual. In the NT, Lazarus was neither raised spiritually, nor did he go to heaven (in the NT text). In short, Lazarus was resurrected according to Pharisaic teaching...a physical resurrection to life on THIS earth...albeit a bit early...chalk that up to why one should pay attention to the ressurector. Then. There is also a theological problem. In the Lazarus story, it cannot be said that his resurrection was a totally passive event upon him. Jesus commanded him to come forth. Lazarus had to respond in agreement. Rather covenantal. And Jewish....as opposed to "spirits" that resurrect and fly off to some netherworld.

I would also point out: that Jesus did not ascend to "heaven" as a spirit. The post resurrection body that made several appearances including chowing down with the peeps ascended...in the text. That's different than a Jesus-Caspar The Friendly Ghost Ascension.

Finally, why do Christians assume that everyone agrees that "heaven" is the optimal resurrection destination? This is not the mainstream Jewish assumption. As a Jew, I prefer earth. God made it, and told us to keep it up good.

[JBlack]

Please ignore what myth-one.com says. He's an annihilationist, and practically everything he says is ridiculous heresy.

He backs up everything he says.

Practically speaking, it's not that there's "nothing we can do to be saved." This is a form of fatalism totally foreign to the Bible. Rather, the moment at which you accept Christ, you say "I chose Him, that must mean He chose me!"

But according to my understanding of what you said before, you can't choose him unless he has already chosen you. So how can you have free will to choose God, if this is something you can't do unless you were already chosen?

j black et al,

There is a problem with your illustration of Lazarus. You just point blank mix physical resurrection with spiritual. In the NT, Lazarus was neither raised spiritually, nor did he go to heaven (in the NT text). In short, Lazarus was resurrected according to Pharisaic teaching...a physical resurrection to life on THIS earth...albeit a bit early...chalk that up to why one should pay attention to the ressurector. Then. There is also a theological problem. In the Lazarus story, it cannot be said that his resurrection was a totally passive event upon him. Jesus commanded him to come forth. Lazarus had to respond in agreement. Rather covenantal. And Jewish....as opposed to "spirits" that resurrect and fly off to some netherworld.

The stuff about Lazarus wasn't from me. I was quoting AIEC. I don't think he was saying that Lazarus rose spiritually though. He was using it as a comparison.

Finally, why do Christians assume that everyone agrees that "heaven" is the optimal resurrection destination?

I often wonder the same thing.

[Jonah]

oh okay...the box maze got me.\

Yeah. I suppose it may also be a personality thing. If I had the choice between resurrected life in a spiritual heaven and just a plain ol' vanilla resurrection here on earth, I'd go with plain ol' vanilla. I really don't need much to entertain me, and I think the Lord had a pretty good idea with this earth gig. As an example, I really don't like holidays. I like just the plain open field of an uneventful January or August.

[SpiritQuickens]

Please ignore what myth-one.com says. He's an annihilationist, and practically everything he says is ridiculous heresy.

But I quote scriptures which support what I believe. Should those ridiculous heretical scriptures also be ignored?

Note to moderator: Can he call me that big word "annihilationist" without proof? I have never annihilated anyone!

"Annihilationism" is the name for the heresy in which one misinterprets Scriptures which clearly teach punishment for the unsaved by eternal torment, and argues instead that these texts teach the obliteration of consciousness for the unsaved, and that "death" in Pauline literature refers to this annihilation of consciousness.

[SpiritQuickens]

Please ignore what myth-one.com says. He's an annihilationist, and practically everything he says is ridiculous heresy.

For the wages of sin is death . . . (Romans 6:23)

Is He an annihilationist also?

Do you reccommend ignoring God?

I don't recommend ignoring God. That's why I recommend ignoring annihilationists.

"And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name."-Rev. 14:10.

This text clearly teaches eternal torment for the unsaved. It is not saying that the smoke that torments them briefly rises forever because the flames of hell rise forever even if its torment does not endure forever. John is using a literary device whose name I'm unsure of, but I will get back to you with it. It's a poetic way of saying that their torment persists forever. Your hyper-literalism is utterly ridiculous, as I hope the author of this thread will see.

[SpiritQuickens]

Please ignore what myth-one.com says. He's an annihilationist, and practically everything he says is ridiculous heresy.

He backs up everything he says.

Practically speaking, it's not that there's "nothing we can do to be saved." This is a form of fatalism totally foreign to the Bible. Rather, the moment at which you accept Christ, you say "I chose Him, that must mean He chose me!"

But according to my understanding of what you said before, you can't choose him unless he has already chosen you. So how can you have free will to choose God, if this is something you can't do unless you were already chosen?

j black et al,

There is a problem with your illustration of Lazarus. You just point blank mix physical resurrection with spiritual. In the NT, Lazarus was neither raised spiritually, nor did he go to heaven (in the NT text). In short, Lazarus was resurrected according to Pharisaic teaching...a physical resurrection to life on THIS earth...albeit a bit early...chalk that up to why one should pay attention to the ressurector. Then. There is also a theological problem. In the Lazarus story, it cannot be said that his resurrection was a totally passive event upon him. Jesus commanded him to come forth. Lazarus had to respond in agreement. Rather covenantal. And Jewish....as opposed to "spirits" that resurrect and fly off to some netherworld.

The stuff about Lazarus wasn't from me. I was quoting AIEC. I don't think he was saying that Lazarus rose spiritually though. He was using it as a comparison.

Finally, why do Christians assume that everyone agrees that "heaven" is the optimal resurrection destination?

I often wonder the same thing.

Unless God has chosen you, it's true, there's nothing you can do to be saved. The verses you quoted are not sufficient to disprove "Calvinism", as AIEC pointed out. We must seek God, but no one seeks Him. We must repent, but God grants repentance, etc.

[SpiritQuickens]

The verses you quoted under "But what about verses like these?" are sufficient to prove anyone can be saved.

No they're not. As AIEC points out:

"The question is, can God make demands from his creation without his creation being able to obey? Most people logically say, no. But the bible teaches otherwise, For example, the bible says if seek him and you shall find him but it also makes it clear that NO ONE seeks him, the bible says repent, but it is God who grants repentance, the bible says come to me all you who are weary, but it also teaches that NO ONE can come unless drawn by the Father, And again the bible says he who recieves me receives the one who sent me, but it also teaches that no one can receive anything unless it be given him from heaven."

[JBlack]

Unless God has chosen you, it's true, there's nothing you can do to be saved. The verses you quoted are not sufficient to disprove "Calvinism", as AIEC pointed out. We must seek God, but no one seeks Him. We must repent, but God grants repentance, etc.

The verses you quoted under "But what about verses like these?" are sufficient to prove anyone can be saved.

No they're not. As AIEC points out:

"The question is, can God make demands from his creation without his creation being able to obey? Most people logically say, no. But the bible teaches otherwise, For example, the bible says if seek him and you shall find him but it also makes it clear that NO ONE seeks him, the bible says repent, but it is God who grants repentance, the bible says come to me all you who are weary, but it also teaches that NO ONE can come unless drawn by the Father, And again the bible says he who recieves me receives the one who sent me, but it also teaches that no one can receive anything unless it be given him from heaven."

So you don't believe in free will?