Christian Denominations - Heaven and Hell

When it comes to Christian denominations (current or historical) and belief differences, what belief differences make the difference between heaven and hell?Or, in simpler words, what are the bare minimum requirements as to what you can and can not believe to go to heaven in Christianity?edit by commike37: For this topic we're going to assume Biblical inerrancy. Otherwise, this discussion would get nowhere, because every time two Bible verses seemed to contradict itself, we would automatically assume that the Bible contradicts each other and both views are correct, and we couldn't prove anything (let's not go postmodern, shall we, I want to actually accomplish something in this topic). If you want to get into the issue of which Bible we should use (ie: you're Catholic and would like to bring in verses from a book that is only in the Catholic Bible), that's certainly relevant, but this is not a topic to disprove Biblical inerrancy. You could still argue on whether or not a Christian who doesn't believe in Biblical inerrancy would get into heaven, though.{Added blank line between paragraphs. Also added the "Heaven and Hell" part to the title - Adminnemooseus}This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-28-2004 22:58 AMThis message has been edited by commike37, 01-03-2005 18:40 AMThis message has been edited by commike37, 01-04-2005 17:12 AM

Well, let's take this from the beginning. I suggest that we start tabula rosa, or as a blank slate. Just so that you know, I'll be backing up what I say with the NIV version of the Bible (not to say you can't use another version, it's just that I want you to know what version I'm using). Let's start with question one:What must an unbeliever do to receive salvation?John 14:6 "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."We've established that the only way to get salvation is through Jesus. But what exactly must we believe about Jesus?1 Corinthians 15:17 "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins."It is established that someone must believe in Jesus's death on the cross, his resurrection, and forgiveness of sins resulting from his death and resurrection. I hope we can all have this established, so the question is, where do we want to go from here? What's the next question?

FYI, I'm Lutheran, not an Exclusionist Christian sect. Let's see who's truly out of context. First off, the word love means "agapao" in the original Greek (Greek has three versions of love). This originates from the word "agape," which in the New Testament refers to the unconditional love with which God loves us. No human, except Jesus, was capable of "agape" love.Sources:
Bible Search and Study Tools - Blue Letter Bible
Bible Study - You Have Questions. The Bible Has Answers!Furthermore, I have two Bible verses to back up my point.Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God,"Ephesians 2:8-9 "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--not by works, so that no one can boast."
Key Phrases: not from yourselves, not by worksQuite frankly, there's no way anyone can live up to God's standard by works. God's standard of good works is perfection. Anything less falls short and doesn't give you the golden ticket to heaven. The only way you can be perfect is if your sins disappear, which is exactly what Jesus does.

But what you don't get is that this single word established a standard that is impossible to fill, as I established in Romans 3:23. This is agape love, not phileo love. Perhaps if you read Romans 6:15-20, you'll truly understand how futile it is to rely on ourselves for grace. You don't get it. His commands to love each other could not have been carried out by the disciples to the level necessary to receive salvation. Hope does not exist in the law, but in grace. As Romans 6:14 says, "For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace." And remember that grace is it says in Ephesians, is "not from yourselves" (it should be noted that you didn't attack my additional support of my stance with Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 3:23). And let us look at the last verse of Ephesians 2, which reads, "For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." Good works do not lead to salvation. Good works are the result of salvation.

But don't you get it? It's now you who are being exclusionary and out-of-context. The Bible is most certainly consistent with itself (well, at least in this topic it will be, I don't think that assumption could be made in an evolution versus creation topic). If the message in John truly requires good works, then it should be supported with other parts of the Bible. I've established that John requires good works, but the type of good works it requires is loving each other through "agape" love. Since no disciple is capable of that, we must look beyond John 14 to get the true context. This message could certainly be confirmed through other parts of John, but as 2 Timothy 3:16 says, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness." Meaning I can refute your argument with other parts of John, but I can also do it with other books of the Bible.This message has been edited by commike37, 12-30-2004 00:25 AM

Funny thing is here, up until you used Matthew 25 in this post, you only provided one passage to support your view. Talk about out-of-context. Meanwhile, I have directly quoted or made reference to the following scripture:
Romans 3:23
Ephesians 2:8-9
Romans 17:15-20
And although you constantly accuse me of being out-of-context, on how many of these verses have you specifically shown me how I'm out-of context? And how many have you refuted with Biblical support? Zero. It's time you start going beyond your prima facie claims. Here I go I'll look at Matthew 25. And I'll show how each section doesn't say works is necessary for salvation.The Parable of the Ten Virgins
Let's also look to Matthew 26:40-41
Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Could you men not keept watch with me for one hour?" he asked Peter. "Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak."
1. The disciples weren't always ready as you're supposed to be in the Parable of Ten Virgins, but are they now going to hell for that?
2. Notice how Jesus emphasizes the difference between the spirit and body.The Parable of the Talents
The problem with this is that the servant with one talent was a believer (in the parable, he had a master), but his faith was dead. James 2:17 says that In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But he later says in verse 19, You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that-- and shudder. This passage does not say that saving faith is dead, it says that a simple "I believe in Jesus", but not trusting in Him faith is dead. It was aimed at a false faith, just like the parable. This false faith is also shown in verse 18, But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. This passage denotes two types of faith: a false and a true one. It says that deeds is the result of faith (not vice-versa), and was used to warn against people who thought they could just believe in Christ and do nothing about it. This is what the parable truly warns against. It does not establish faith by works.The Sheep and the Goats
All of us have certainly been on both sides by doing or not doing something one of the least of these. What then separates us from the sheep and the goats? John 14:6 says that we come through the father only through Jesus. The answer is simple. None of us have earned the praise God lavishes us. But as 1 Corinthians 6:11 says, And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, and you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. The reason why God lavishes the sheep with praise is not by works, it is because of Jesus. Actually, I looked beyond John 14:6 and saw that you must follow God's commands if you love him. But I've also established that this kind of love is "agape" love. And now what I've done is go one step farther to see how one can achieve agape love. And despite all of your out-of-context, exclusionary attacks, you have not directly touched upon how you achieve agape love.

Let's focus on what you have refused to attack or rebut:After I explicitly demonstrate which Bible verses I have used to support my stance and which you have not refuted (aside from a prima facie claim of me being an out-of-context, exclusionary, quote-based person), you still refuse to refute my arguments or explicity show how I am out of context. I'll post the verses once again.
Romans 3:23
Ephesians 2:8-9
Romans 17:15-20You have also failed to refute my answers to the Parable of Ten Virgins and The Parable of the Talents. I thought all of Matthew 25 would support your point, not just a selected parable. Talk about out-of-context. Here's the Bible verses I have used to support my stances on these parables:
Matthew 26:40-41 (which would be especially in context)
excerpts from James 2:14-26Furthermore, you used no further Biblical support for your stance on The Sheep and the Goats. I used this verse:
1 Corinthians 6:11So here's what you have left. You have John 14 and Matthew 25:31-46 (it was originally all of Matthew 25, but I guess the other two parables weren't important). You have not used any further Biblical support beyond that. And finally, you have not addressed my critical question:
How do you meet the standards of good works described in these two excerpts?
How is it possible to love each other, not with "phileo" love, but "agape" love?
How is it possible to act like the sheep, even though we've also acted like the goats?
Do you meet these standards of good works by your own good works and your own actins, or is it through Christ's death, resurrection, and forgiveness of sins that you appear perfect before God? Could you please demonstrate how I have done that? The fact is that "professing, Bible thumping" is establishing a standard of behavior or good works needed to go to heaven. And I have been arguing against justification by works this entire time. How about you put an end to the smear attacks?This message has been edited by commike37, 12-30-2004 12:37 AMThis message has been edited by commike37, 12-30-2004 13:13 AM

All right, I'll tone it down and redo that subtitle (though I still love the book 1984). But as a high-school debater who is experienced in debate, Jar is really starting to frustate me (comparing me to "Exclusionist Christian sects" as early as Message 7 didn't help, either).This message has been edited by commike37, 12-30-2004 12:43 AMThis message has been edited by commike37, 12-30-2004 12:44 AM

First off, this message was moreso meant to say to jar that I can use any part of the Bible to talk about John 14, not just John 14. edit: It was saying I could use any part of the Bible to talk about heaven or hell.But on the question of whether or not Paul is pre-approving future work, the answer is yes. It says, "All Scripture is God-breathed," which means that whether it is written in the past, present, or future, it's approved as long as it's God-breathed. For more support, let's look to John 14:26
"But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you."
The Holy Spirit would teach the disciples everything (including all of what Jesus would say). And even if a certain book wasn't written yet, the Holy Spirit can still teach the disciples what that book will say.The key thing to remember here is that Scripture is God-breathed and that these people are inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is not Paul's job to worry about pre-approving future works, for God is present in Paul and will handle all of that.Does that help?This message has been edited by commike37, 12-30-2004 14:04 AM

I certainly agree that the Beattitudes establishes a standard that we should follow. However, just like the Ten Commandments, no one has perfectly lived up to the standards of the Beattitudes, so it's not a means to salvation.

Well, you still have to accept this message of grace. I go more in depth about that in the topic about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Jesus was raising the standard for people who wanted to get into heaven by good works. The person who asked Jesus was trying to justify himself by the Law, so Jesus first laid out the commandments, and then he added the "sell all and give to the poor" to show that the person couldn't be justified by works (because he wouldn't do it). Jesus does this a lot also on the Sermon on the Mount (ie: adultery is looking at a woman lustfully, murder is hating your own brother). By raising the standards it shows that only Jesus can obey the Law. It seems that the Greek word here is "theopneustos." I was feeling lucky on Google, and I got this:
"St. Paul, in 2 Tim 3:16, used the technical term Theopneustos, which means inspired by God, to indicate the special act by which God inspired the Scriptures"
It's not exactly God-breathed, but it still fits my point on how an author could pre-date approval because his writing is inspired by God.

Whether it's the Two Great Commandments, The Ten Commandments, or the Beattitudes, it's still a standard that no human can live up to, even after receiving forgiveness. As I said earlier in Romans 7:15-20 (that should be the right chapter, I got the wrong chapter in previous messages), Paul, who was a very great exemplar of fulfilling these two commandments, expresses a hopeless feeling of himself falling into sin. Jesus said in Matthew 18:22 that when it comes to how often you forgive people, In order for someone to be forgiven seventy-seven times, he has to sin seventy-seven times. The problem with faith without works is not based on the works, it's based on the belief (or a false faith) that faith can exist without works. When talking about faith with actions in James 2:14-26, James makes reference to Abraham being willing to sacrifice Isaac in verse 23 Abraham was credited for his belief in God, not his good work by trusting God with his son Isaac. His faith existed before his good work. Works are evidence of genuine faith, but they are in no way a means to salvation.

Actually, that would be a comparision. Obviously it must have been back in the 50's, because you have to relearn a few things. One problem is your selective rebuttal of my arguments (which is quite odd since you were the one makeing the accusations of me being out-of-context and exclusionary).
Examples:
After you bring up Matthew 25, I show how each parable in Matthew 25 ultimately demonstrates what I'm saying. You only respond to one parable. [edit: My mistake, I got you mixed with someone else on the second example]. When I earlier on listed the Bible verses I had used as further support and mentioned that you had not addressed any of them, you still did not address even one.Also, it took you the longest amount of time for your accusations of me being "out-of-context" to go beyond just a prima facie claim.This message has been edited by commike37, 01-01-2005 00:49 AM

The man who asked Jesus how to get into heaven certainly didn't consider giving to the poor, and he still wasn't considering it after his question was answered. So, regardless of whether or not his command was new, it's still showing that the man can't possibly get in by works. But why would they do that? Would they leave everything and follow Jesus? Did their actions earn them salvation, or were there actions a result of their salvation in Jesus? Look to my explanation of James 2:14-26 in Message 60 to find the answer. Checking out the Protestant link, that Old Testament is based on the Hebrew Bible (except for splitting up some of the books, which is incosequential since it's the same content), so I would be willing to accept it because it's based on the Hebrew Bible, and the Old Testament was written in Hebrew. As for the New Testament, I'll take a closer look into that one, but I'm going to assume the four gospels are safe for now.

I don't have all of the answers (and I'll be going to sleep soon), but here's some of what I have.

---

Marcion's canon:
It appears that Marcion was a Gnostic, and here's an interesting fact on him.Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - Christian Cyclopedia

---

Revelation should be in the New Testament because
1: It's God-inspired and the Word of God. 2. The command to not add or subtract from Revelation because it comes from God (22:18-19) is also seen in Dueteronomy (4:2, 12:32). Several canons (including Marcion) exclude Revelation.

---

I also might have stumbled onto something here. I don't quite understand this, but take a look and see if you can pull anything out of this:
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - Christian Cyclopedia
Some abbreviations: c-century, ca-circa, NT-new testament MSS-manuscripts

---

I hope you're not randomly pulling links without understanding them, purpledawn. I certainly don't think you find yourself in the situation of accepting a Gnostic canon.