Christians: If God Loves Us and Wants Us to Join Him in Heaven, Why Didn't He Put Us There?

[cardero]

Are you suggesting that in Heaven we are robots programmed to do exactly as we must?

Beat me by three minutes.

 

[Zadok]

I've never understood how god supposedly loves us and wants us to join him in his family in heaven, yet he put us on earth first with the capacity to fail, for which we could potentially loose the priviledge of joining him.

I doesn't make sense. Why didn't he just put us right in heaven from the beginning?

MSizer: I read through most of the posts on this thread. I do not think you have gotten any answers. Part of the problem is the Bible. We could talk about textual criticisms but in essence there are two problems. First: there is little evidence that the “Bible” is understood in our modern time and less throughout history – beyond the lives of those so inspired to create what is now recognized as Biblical text. Second: there continues to be a great deal of discussion (argument) about what the Bible really says. Who is the authority for what the Bible teaches? Clerical scholars? If we think this is the answer – Jesus tells us in the Bible that the clerical scholars of his time, the Scribes and Pharisees, did not understand the ancient scriptures and to follow them would be worse than not having the scriptures in the first place and following “Satan” directly.

I submit there is a great deal missing in your understanding. Let my demonstrate by simple rhetorical logic. If G-d made anyone they way they are – how is it that G-d is not responsible and can damn anyone to hell? The Bible in Genesis starts out by saying, “In the beginning”. I am told that a variant reading could be used to translate those ancient Hebrew words to “When G-d first established his covenant with man.” In other words man also existed before what the Bible states as the beginning. Now some would argue that man was “created” later – but it is obvious from the account that the forming of man was a physical embodiment which was given life – but if that which is spirit existed then life is to be understood as the combination of spirit and body and death is the separation of spirit and body.

My point is that your question is genuine – but that you will not find your answers in traditional Trinitarian Christianity – that does not mean that your answer does not exist within the extent of Christian thought .

Zadok

 

[Nothing]

God DID put us in heaven and in fact we are still in heaven. We are simply too ignorant, blind an foolish to see this.

 

[blackout]

That Heaven is Now, In our Midst....
Coming without perception...
Rising as Yeast...
Branching up and out like a Tree...
from Within...

This is/was my own personal take on the Kingdom teachings attributed to the figure Jesus.
(The Christ/Kingdom teachings are really the only "biblical" things that speak to/intreigue me.)

Of course my own interpretations of these teachings
(as clear as they seem to me)
made me "not a christian"
to almost every christian I spoke with.
(before I gave the title up as much unnecessary clutter and baggage)

For me... the Christ message is... we are all One with gOd
needing only to realize/REALize our own personal Christhood within.

The rest is so much clutter.

I still wonder. If Jesus was the "Master".
Why aren't his own words enough?
(that they need to be filtered and understood through the likes of Paul for example,
and "church leaders")

 

[Cobblestones]

Part of the problem is the Bible. First: there is little evidence that the “Bible” is understood in our modern time and less throughout history...

One has to ask, then, why this is so. if this is the "inspired words of god" then one must presume that the god who inspired it is completely incapable of comprehensible communication. If it is not "inspired by god" then it is what it appears to be; one absurdity after another that is beyond comprehension because there is nothing to comprehend.

 

[Cobblestones]

that does not mean that your answer does not exist within the extent of Christian thought.

There is no such thing as "Christian thought." There are only opinions based whatever absurdities each individual within the religion is willing to accept.

 

[emiliano]

You've got a point. If God is omnipotent, as Christians believe Him to be, He could have done pretty much anything He wanted. But to continue on with my perspective...

We don't believe in an ex nihilo creation. We believe instead that God created our spirits from highly refined matter that was co-existent with Him. (Yes, I know that sounds it sounds like a contradition, to say that our spirits are created out of matter, but that's the topic for another discussion.) Some spirits were more like His than others. Lucifer's spirit was the epitome of evil while Jesus' spirit was perfect; it was in every way like His Father's. The rest of us fell somewhere in between. To us, it would have been pointless for God to have simply turned us into what He wanted us to become. He wanted us to have the opportunity to become what it was our potential to become. Just as steel is made strong by a refiner's fire, we could gain something beyond the ultimate goal by experiencing and overcoming challenges. In other words, the process itself was important and not even an omnipotent Higher Power could allow us to experience something while simultaneously denying us the opportunity to do so. Sure, He knew that some would succeed and some would fail, but all would have the opportunity to make their own choices. I don't know if that makes sense or not, but I thought I'd throw it out there as a point of view you probably hadn't heard of in the past. It's definitely a far cry from the Catholic perspective.

If a person believe that he/she is a and had no doubts of His existence they what the say the are, that they don’t have the gift yet also it mean that God is sovereign in the choice of the inhabitant of His Kingdom, it all about He has mercy in whom He want (I am not an universal Salvation Christian) not all Tom, Dick and Harry will be finally allow in His Kingdom, an Saran and his follower has his final destiny sealed and it not in God kingdom.

 

[Demonic Kitten]

I've always had a problem with the whole heaven and hell thing..even when I was Christian. I can understand why Msizer started this thread because I have wondered the very same thing. I've read through all of the responses and I can appreciate the point of view of the faith based religions, but I don't have faith in that God or his religion(s). If this God loves his children so much then why be selective about who gets to join him in heaven? I'll continue to lurk in this thread and see what other responses people can come up with.

 

[MSizer]

...If this God loves his children so much then why be selective about who gets to join him in heaven?..

Exactly! Why predispose some to fail? Why stack the cards against anybody?

Do you make your children go hungry for a week so that they can properly appreciate their dinner when you finally allow them to eat?

Why make us fallible and hope we make it back? Why not just put us there in the first place.

Why isn't my question sinking in for some people?

 

[MSizer]

...“He has compassion in who He wants, we also know of His omniscience, it appear to me that that the reason is that not all are destined to that Kingdome, that because of our free will we can ignore his call and reject his offer due to unbelief...

So let me get this straight. Basically god said I'm kicking all of you out of the house, and erasing your memory of me. I'm going to leave some unconvincing texts and rituals that point to my potential existence, but some of you I will equip with minds which are forced to dismiss me as non-existent. For those of you who are forced to disbelieve in me, you aren't allowed back in my beautiful home.

That makes god a big @SS IMO.

 

[MSizer]

Are you suggesting that in Heaven we are robots programmed to do exactly as we must?

Well, do you think that there will be crime in heaven? (I know you don't accept the traditional view of heaven, and nor do i, but from the traditional christian view)

If you don't think there can be crime in heaven, then either everyone there will be bots or god has the power to make us infallible. In which case I'm brought back to the OP. Why didn't he just do that from the start?

 

[Demonic Kitten]

Exactly! Why predispose some to fail? Why stack the cards against anybody?

Do you make your children go hungry for a week so that they can properly appreciate their dinner when you finally allow them to eat?

Why make us fallible and hope we make it back? Why not just put us there in the first place.

Why isn't my question sinking in for some people?

I think it goes back to faith and free will. To me it seems as if these two are fall back answers. Even if you use free will the answers still don't make sense to me.

 

[Mr Cheese]

since we know, now, that this thread is aimed at the very narrow minded christians, that essentially refuse to think for themselves largely, in any shape or form....

doesn't this make this thread an act in stupidity...
like expecting a dog to meow like a cat?

 

[Mr Cheese]

Why isn't my question sinking in for some people?

because its overly simple and bordering on puerile?

threads like this are akin to stating all atheists have no morals
are going to hell, are unamerican and hate jesus

:sarcastic which,,,simply isn't the whole story

 

[MSizer]

since we know, now, that this thread is aimed at the very narrow minded christians, that essentially refuse to think for themselves largely, in any shape or form....?

I'm choosing to challenge the dogma of my Roman Catholic upbringing. The roman catholic church is the largest sect of christianity in the world. These "narrow minded" christians as you call them include the pope and any other catholic who espouses the official dogma as interpreted by the vatican, which is the holy see overlooking the largest group of christians at any point in history.

doesn't this make this thread an act in stupidity...

I'm not going to bother with that one.

like expecting a dog to meow like a cat?

hmm, that's so deep, I can't help but be drawn into the nonexistential realm of human cognition when contemplating the highly insightful concept of a dog meowing like a cat. Thank you wise one, I am less like a tadpole now and more like a frog after digesting such a thoughtful statement.

 

[Willamena]

Well, do you think that there will be crime in heaven? (I know you don't accept the traditional view of heaven, and nor do i, but from the traditional christian view)

If you don't think there can be crime in heaven, then either everyone there will be bots or god has the power to make us infallible. In which case I'm brought back to the OP. Why didn't he just do that from the start?

Sorry: I know of no "traditional Christian view".

Why must they be bots, though? Why can't they be one with "God" (and hence no need for crime)?

 

[Mr Cheese]

I'm choosing to challenge the dogma of my Roman Catholic upbringing. The roman catholic church is the largest sect of christianity in the world. These "narrow minded" christians as you call them include the pope and any other catholic who espouses the official dogma as interpreted by the vatican, which is the holy see overlooking the largest group of christians at any point in history.

You're not though....

you're dealing with generalisations...

if you actually bothered to dig a bit within catholicism, you'd see the allusions you are spreading are rather simplistic and puerile....

Its like saying all maths is made up of addition, subtraction, division and multiplication..... and simply forgetting anythign else....

would it be better if I started a thread about how I think atheists are all immoral, are headed for hell and secretly may be related to orangutangs...?

:sarcastic I guess its easier to criticise something, when we don't fully examine it; enabling us to make generalisations.....

for example, like I said.....
Paul discusses the fact that we wont have physical bodies in heaven...
last time I checked, paul was pretty much an official mouth piece forthe RCC....

or maybe tis the water today?

 

[MSizer]

Sorry: I know of no "traditional Christian view".

Why must they be bots, though? Why can't they be one with "God" (and hence no need for crime)?

They can be, which means god has the capacity to transform us to beings with no need for crime. Therefore, we're back to square one - why not just make us that way in the first place?

 

[Mr Cheese]

They can be, which means god has the capacity to transform us to beings with no need for crime. Therefore, we're back to square one - why not just make us that way in the first place?

maybe God has PMS?

 

[MSizer]

You're not though....

you're dealing with generalisations...

if you actually bothered to dig a bit within catholicism, you'd see the allusions you are spreading are rather simplistic and puerile...:sarcastic I guess its easier to criticise something, when we don't fully examine it; enabling us to make generalisations.....

for example, like I said.....
Paul discusses the fact that we wont have physical bodies in heaven...
last time I checked, paul was pretty much an official mouth piece forthe RCC....

Holy Catholic Bible, American Translation, 1985 Edition, Encyclopedic Dictionary Section:

Resurrection of the Body: "The Christian belief that the resurrection of the entire person is basic to the faith and is attested by many passages in the New Testatment."

Luke 23:39: "Look at my hands and my feet; it is really I. Touch me, and see that a ghost does not have flesh and bones as I do."

Do you call those citings generalizations?

Furthermore, I am specifically stating the doctrine which I'm criticizing. I would be generalizing if I didn't specifiy, but I have. So your analogy about atheism and immorality is fallacious.

I don't owe any heretics any attention. Now either participate or stop cluttering the thread.