John's Heaven or God's Heaven?

What does it matter? How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?



IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER!!!!

It matters, because if you spend your life unhappy with how things are, saying " There's got to be something better... " then it had better damned well be better.

I've made many miserable choices in this life. Pushed friends away, regretted alot of things, lost jobs, and suffered a bit. It isn't just an academic idea, like the angels on a pin, it's an actual concern of mine. And yes I know, the atheists will tell me that nothing exists, which is 1000 times more horrifying. Being snuffed like a candle, with nobody caring.

Don't mean nothing, not a thing.

Heaven has nothing to do with anyone's yearning for something better. It has to do with coming into line with the fact we are made in G*d's image and how we individually realize that image.

If we accept that G*d' has created Heaven, what does it matter right now how it is configured? We know where we're going, it doesn't matter what's there because it is the creation of our G*d.

We've all made terrible mistakes. It doesn't matter where we came from, it only matters where we are and where we're going.

Christ said the last to work in the vineyard shares equally in the harvest. He brought the thief into the vineyard as they both were hung from crosses and dying.

I'm not not interested in the vineyard, I'm interested in the grapes. Being saved is goal.

Let me put it this way.

We are all offered the coin or whatever as payment for the work in the vineyard. Same goal, same thing we work for, regardless of how early or late we accept God.

Eternal life, being saved, stuff like that.
Okay, that's all fine. But answer me a question, then.

Would it make a difference if someone like Hitler was in charge of Heaven as opposed to Jesus?

Of course it would!

If the image of Heaven is, "None of the Jews, blacks, gays, and gypsies get into heaven. I'm gonna toss them all into a fiery furnace, and then given the ashes to farmers," then you're pretty much gonna have a sort of grimace look at this depiction. Likewise, if the image is some euthanasia type into abortions, "Okay, there are no new children in heaven, and I'm gonna murder any new souls because it's too crowded in here," not that either.

Yes, it clearly does matter that we don't just say, "Welp, Heaven is way better than we can imagine. So don't focus on what it looks like, focus on how you can get there!" Neither you nor I would want to enter a Heaven that is a trick or scam. We need to have faith that what God offers is the real deal, is what we've been hoping for all along. Even if Heaven is only the state of unity with God, this only is worthy if God isn't a douchebag.

Which is why, I want to know. Is this John's limited imagination of Heaven? (Cuz it sucks) Or does God know what is right for us, not what is right for John, who apparently hates the ocean and hanging out with women.

Part of what is wrong with human utopias, why they always fail, and instead become dystopias, is that the person either is lying to us (and wants power over our lives), or because it's someone else's dream of perfection. Listen, I can't even stomach my own idea of perfection, to the point where I've left behind and repented of a number of previous ideals. Just because someone if immortal and omnipotent doesn't mean they automatically know what is right for us, and taking away our will is an unacceptable solution to the problem of happiness. In other words, God must necessarily know what's best for us, not merely demand he does, as the tyrants of this world do. This is a "you'll eat soylent green and you'll like it, slave" problem. We have an issue with not accepting authority, and either we take away free will (a lobotomy of sorts) to MAKE people obedient, or they have to obey because they actually want to. In order for the latter, there has to be a means where one can be truly fulfilled, that from the bottom of their hearts they obey because they've chosen God and they love Him. But this can't be a raw deal, and God cannot be an abusive boyfriend who takes away all one's friends and positions because of jealousy.

You ask a question that means nothing.



But even if Hitler made it into the vineyard at the last spark went out, G*D still rules Heaven.

[img]
If the image of Heaven is, "None of the Jews, blacks, gays, and gypsies get into heaven. I'm gonna toss them all into a fiery furnace, and then given the ashes to farmers," then you're pretty much gonna have a sort of grimace look at this depiction. Likewise, if the image is some euthanasia type into abortions, "Okay, there are no new children in heaven, and I'm gonna murder any new souls because it's too crowded in here," not that either.

Yes, it clearly does matter that we don't just say, "Welp, Heaven is way better than we can imagine. So don't focus on what it looks like, focus on how you can get there!" Neither you nor I would want to enter a Heaven that is a trick or scam. We need to have faith that what God offers is the real deal, is what we've been hoping for all along. Even if Heaven is only the state of unity with God, this only is worthy if God isn't a douchebag.

Which is why, I want to know. Is this John's limited imagination of Heaven? (Cuz it sucks) Or does God know what is right for us, not what is right for John, who apparently hates the ocean and hanging out with women. [/img]

None of this speaks to anything in the Father's promise or Christ's gift of Grace. This speaks to your own doubts about salvation.

Get right with G*D, and your doubts will melt.

I added stuff above.





Actually, it speaks to my doubts not about salvation, but about Christians who talk about God's authority as an absolute ruler.
1. We are being tested under various trials, as the letters say, these are essential for the growth of character.
2. But what are they all for? Supposedly, we are to mold ourselves in the image of Christ. If this is conformity, why then do people made in the image of God resemble themselves as unique creations? We are to be like Jesus, but just as it is enough to be like the master as a servant, we are not called to be identical.
3. I have seen the lockstep nature of the states of man in rebellion to God. They impose harsh laws on others. It is as Jesus says, "You have seen the rulers of the world, how they lord over others. It is not to be so with you." Okay, so how then can it be claimed that God will take away our earthly desires without something major getting taken away? Even if we are to be like Christ, we are supposed to be different. This is not a flaw in my understanding of salvation, it is a problem in acceptance of God as some kind of benevolent dictator.

Because of this, I can only conclude that John is wrong (or rather has a restrictive or limited idea of Heaven, where we don't do anything but obey God). Jesus himself says "My yoke is easy, and my burden is light." And it is said of service to him being "perfect freedom." He also, as I mentioned earlier, talked of rulers who lorded over others. This is not the disobedience of the world, which ironically leads to harsh rule. But neither can it replace this disobedience with lockstep obedience.

Either that, or God is a tyrant. And I would not accept this. God as Jesus came to free us, and free us truly. Being right with God means seeing him as my dearest friend. I cannot imagine my dearest friend betraying me and telling me to, oh I dunno, take some kind of drug so that I don't question too much and fit in with everyone else. That's how the world operates, they take what you have, then your freedom, then your life. I've seen how cruel this world can be. This cannot be how God operates.

While I agree with almost all you’ve said in the OP, I think you may be mixing some of John’s visions of Heaven with those of the Millennium.

My reading of 'Revelations' tells of a 1000 year period on 'a new earth' where God’s Son would be the ‘government'. This is PRIOR to entering heaven where a very significant process takes place.

Bob has kind of a point about those visions not mattering and 'being saved' does. But during the Millennium, there is a lot more that matters. It looks like the last stage of the process of those who managed to be saved.

I think that’s necessary, Because without that process there are a lot of sincerely 'saved' people who would wish me harm as things stand now.

And YES, the limitations of John expressing what he saw is a big factor. You would probably need the Holy Spirit in order to see them through John’s tortured text of the visions.

Stop confusing the world with Heaven: Christ said, "My kingdom is not of this world."

G*D is no racist.

Right. God's kingdom is not of this world.

So why does John depict the world to come in such a way? It's clearly influenced by his Jewish mindset.

As for racism, I believe this is exactly the problem. The people who accuse me of racism are often annoying leftists that decide big state (e.g. exactly the sort of mark of the Beast lockstep mentality that I'd struggle against) is what God is for. They are precisely the people who accuse others of racism while the clearly not racist hordes who preach diversity are clearly not trying to bust into our house under the banner of justice to make sure we all got the vaxx. Or that all of us are pro-black or voted the same way. That's the way kingdoms of this world operate. The diversity they have is false.

Jesus spoke not of peace but a sword (division). That is, at the core of things, we don't have a God who demands we are identical. Not to a morality. Not to a race. Not even to a creed. What we mean by "Nobody comes to the father but through me" is not Christian fanclubism, but an acceptance of personal relationship with God (Jesus, even if we do not know his name, was definitely felt, even by the early Jews; that is my answer to the insipid "what about all the doomed people before Jesus?" They weren't saved by following the law as Jews think. They were saved by being like Jacob, and wrestling in person with God) .

Honestly, as strange as my belief system is, I'm a bit of a universalist. I believe that that whole burning bit at the end is not an end for the sinner, but a reset before that time. What I basing this on? It's clearly not in the Bible.
1. Buddhism. The Buddhist mindset is that we have rebirth. This is very detailed, and appears to describe a soul that didn't get things right. They compare rebirth to a flame, and talk about a sort of wiping of memory and experience.
2. God's statement that he desires all to be saved. He would not devise a trap that would catch all the righteous off guard. That's troll-like behavior. Instead, he would design ths millennium as a threshold event, where all who ever live work towards. From my study of religion and history, I've noticed a number of trial periods. For instance, we had similar crap going on as now, 100 years ago.
3. What I know of fire. Smelting doesn't destroy matter, it separates it off into dross, and material that can be recast. Likewise, bonfires make ash, which can be mixed with other materials to make soil. Which in turn growsnew plants.

But there's another option we haven't considered. The millennium is a period of 1000 year peace. But human beings aren't designed for peace. We see this throughout the Creation. Dividing Void into Void and Light (space). Dividing Light into light and darkness, day and night, water and sky, water and earth, earth and grassy flowering stuff, different animals, and finally man. And further dividing good and evil to form free will. God isn't trying to make everyone agree, so much as bring his plan to light.

Satan is an accuser. But during this time, Satan will be locked away, and presumably the power of government with it. This isn't an evil period though, even though people will have none to judge their actions. But it's not a good period either. It sorta is a break time where people will have a time to work around the idea of whether all of us have to agree in order to have peace. I believe in the millennium and the 7-year period but I'm fuzzy as to whether the tribulation comes before all that (in which case, we've had relative peace) or after. Much of Revelation seemed to confuse the hell out of me. In any case, what happens is the return of evil after that. Holdon....

Now, having read this...
https://www.amazingfacts.org/media-library/study-guide/e/4989/t/1-000-years-of-peace
This thousand years of peace is because everyone is dead. They are either in heaven or in the ground. It says that the good are taken into heaven, while the wicked are slain when Jesus comes, and remain dead until after the 1000 years. So basically, those who ascend get to trial Heaven for 1000 years. Then we all get sent back. And it appears that seven years is after, which makes now sense to me, as it seems like there should be seven years of leadup to complete destruction and the return of Jesus, and then a millennium. But anyway, then John has a "zero-tolerance God" who basically condemns everyone who rebels. I'm not suee he's seeing things right.

What I see happening here is a sort of upheaval where those who have no memories before this are suddenly forced into the same room to deal with people who have enjoyed peace all this time. This clash itself is against God's hope. But there's a rebellion, and things are settled. And there's alot of destruction, and John sees them burning in a lake of fire, and doesn't associate this with any karmic looping. But it's one big temporally scrambled mess, where people get reborn or whatever. Some of those at the end of this hate what 1000 years of peace was like, some have a sort of inkling that they just woke up from being dead and want to do better. Some are burned to ashes, and used for new souls, either in the New Earth or sent back to do over. I dunno.

Why is there a new Earth, as well as a new Heaven? Well, if we've been paying attention, God eventually destroys the old one, burning up the wicked (see my thoughts on universalism above). New souls are created from the ashes of those damned wicked, and because those wouldn't really fit on New Heaven, they live in this New Earth. But even Heaven is reformed, thanks in part to a bunch of people living there. Heaven and Earth are basically the same, and not the same. New Earth is for those who live with God, but cannot who need a sense of separateness (not the same as separation, or Hell, but rather people who see their relationship with God in earthly terms, where each of us is an independent creation yet also able to know God). The New Heaven is a better version of Heaven than whatever was before. But while the New Heaven and New Earth are different they are also much the same. Immortality, the absence of things that cause us pain (we probably have the ability to alter personal reality as part of God wiping away every tear from our eyes), and the only difference I can think of is that in the New Heaven there is a merging with God (hive mind?) and I see this happening on the New Earth, more of a "dating Jesus" phenomenon. But we don't have physical bodies anymore but a sort of spiritual body... or something.
John, on the other hand seems to be a staunch moralist, and sees this whole prophecy as a separation of wicked and damned. But if that were so, why doesn't this prophecy just mention a New Heaven? If John is right, even those who made it to the 1000 years of peace won't necessarily be saved. This is an arbitrary and capricious "God" who I'd have to ask "What does God need with a starship?"

You sent them to a happy peaceful place, naturally they're bored. Humans aren't suited for peace, or they would have made it last long before this. Then you cram them with people they won't get along with, and judge them for rebelling.

No, I can't buy this. I don't see God as someone who tolerates evil either, but if conformity was such a good thing, why did God make us different? More likely, by rebellion against God, we're seeing this:
1. Those who died are still selfish and human. They make stupid mistakes, and attack people who seem to have things better.
2. Those who lived through the millennium will try to impose their view of perfection on others (this is also against God's will)
3. Lastly, there are those who think life should have conflict, anf try to live as normal humans.

This includes basically everyone, meaning God will have enough, and destroy the world. If we believe John, there isn't an elect that will be saved, nobody gets saved under these circumstances. But if God desires all to be saved, there is something that John is blind to. I have to believe in God's grace, even when it seems to run out. And based on these three, nobody will bw worthy. We're all falling short, so there is something he's got wrong or is not telling us.

And so, God will settle this by making a world where different types of people live separately. Those who want to live in a sort of unity get their wish (Heaven) as do those who want to know God, but fish or skateboard or whatever with Him (New Earth).

G*D doesn't condemn, he convicts. Through the Grace of Christ we are saved from condemnation. If we are condemned, that condemnation is on us.

You're making it too difficult, like counting 100,000 angels dancing on the head of a pin.

Believe, be baptized, accept Christ's Grace, admit to a sinful nature and seek forgiveness. That's all we need to know.

What color Christ's sandals were means nothing. Whether he had 4 or 30 disciples mean nothing. Whether the music in Heaven is Montovani or AC/DC means nothing. Wings or feet, dressed in Lands End, nude or mu-mus means nothing.

Nonetheless, all of us stand convicted. There is not one of us worthy (but for the grace of God).

I could see myself among those who try to cling to normalcy rather than embracing whatever God plans. I love God with all my heart, but I have such trust issues that I'd immediately suspect 1000 years of peace as a scam, and forcing me back with scoundrels and losers afterwards as a betrayal.

If I can't make it, and my friends can't, and even those I look up to as being a much better person than I, what is the point?

John is a douchebag, and so I only trust the general points of his Revelation. Everything that the Bible teaches is at odds with the sort of God depicted here. It's like a Lovecraft story, where there is no hope, only madness.

But it's not something that only matters as much as Jesus's sandals. This is something you have to think about. One day, all of us will be judged? Is the judge a fair one? Is he devious?

The Muslims think the latter. John seems to think the latter, as this prophecy apoears to damn everyone (righteous and sinner alike, will both rebel in some way or other).

I reject the "God" of Islam who leads astray as he wills. There must then be a way to pass this test. But John's depiction, as I read it, forces people who have never enjoyed peace together with those who enjoyed it too long. That's a rigged scenario.

Don't fall into the trap that Revelations can or needs to be understood. Or explained or condemned. It's one book out how many?

If we ignore it though, what good is it?

"I don't understand what the Mark of the Beast is, so I guess I'll implant this barcode/chip/whatever on my arm that they tell me I really need in order to buy or sell."

If we don't question or interpret at all, we might as well be driving a car into a pit. "Well, we don't know what's ahead, but it seems really dark, so I guess I'll keep driving."

I believe in a God who warns us of pitfalls. I also believe in a God who desires to rescue us from snares. Forcing people tired of peace in the same world as those who have never known it is a definite snare.

God rescues us from snares too, not just warns. Including those he made himself. That is the God I believe in. No, I cannot just blindly accept. Before I named myself Samantha, my name was Thomas. I must see those scars.

Again, "my kingdom is not of this world". Trying to be the one who "gets" Revelations is a worldly conceit. Getting lost in the woods that is Revelation is not a productive endeavor.

The mark of the beast just does not mean anything if you hold onto the iron rod: believe, be baptized in the Spirit, accept Christ's Grace, seek forgiveness, treat others as you would have yourself treated.

And Jesus's warning about stuff coming like a thief in the night? And having to be watchful? Well, I guess that doesn't matter. We shouldn't bother interpreting scripture.

I don't care if I'm the only one who gets it. But we shouldn't be like the blind leading the blind, and fall into a pit.

Have you brought the oil, or will you need to go back?

You misunderstand what Christ meant by "coming as a thief in the night", He was speaking directly about looking for secrets hidden in scripture about the coming of the End Times. He said "No one knows my time but the Father". That it "will come as a thief in the night", that anyone who claims otherwise is "looking through a glass darkly."

Trying to now when the end is coming is counting angels. Live each day as if it's the one you're judged on.