If There Is No Heaven Will You Still Love God?

[nancy_dalrymple]

I do not see that any of you have provided me sufficient reason to doubt my faithfulness to God. So unless your gonna show me a papal-bull, i see no reason why i should believe that my arguments are as such that they deny the word of God.

One thing i know to be true, is that “Heaven” is the ultimate fulfillment of our humanity and is absolutely necessary for our fulfillment as living persons. All my reasoning is based upon this one premise.

I also know that only God can fulfill humanity and is absolutely necessary for our fulfillment as living persons, and that no idol can achieve what God is by nature. Thats basically my main answer.

I could be wrong about heaven, just as much as i could be wrong about the existence of God; but what is really relevant is whether or not you truly understand why my reasoning leads me to believe that “God is heaven” and that God cannot exist without Heaven. I don’t think you do understand, because i don’t think you really grasp the reason why there is such a thing as heaven in the first place, or even why Jesus came to die on the cross. My study of Gods nature leads me to believe that the non-existence of heaven at some point is impossible, because that would mean that God could cease to exist or begin to exist. That is why i reject the question of this thread as fallacious.

As for everyone else who have been brazen enough to challenge me, I have explained my reasoning plenty of times through out this thread, and i believe they are sufficiently in line with our theological conception of God. My arguments stem from philosophical reflections on Gods nature. So please, instead of quoting scripture that you don’t understand, perhaps you should challenge my arguments point for point with logic.

This is the philosophy forum.

Who gave you the authority to judge us? We understand more than you think,if this thread scares you for some reason then mabe you should go watch tv or crochet. Even a Priest would laught at fallacious. There is a priest here on the forum i can give you his e-mail and mabe you can check it out? Let me know PS READ your Mail Nancy:shrug:

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

Dear Mind over Matter: PHILOSOPHY: is the study of general problems concerning matters such a existance,knowledge,truth,beauty,law, justice,validity,mind,and language. Philosophy is distuingished from other ways of addersing a question(such as mysticism or mythology) by it’s critical,generally systematic approach and it’s reliance on reasoned argument. the word Philosophy is of Ancient Greek origin: “meaning love of wisdom” There is Western philosophy 1 Ancient philosophy (600bc-ad 500) 2 Medevil philosophy (ad 500-1350) 3 Renaissance(1350-1600) 4 Early modern philosophy(1600-1800) 5 Nineteenth centry philosophy(1900-present) Main Theories 1 Realism and nominalism 2 Rationalism and empiricism 3 Skepticism 4 Idealism 5 Pragmatism 6 Phenomenology 7 Existentialism 8 Structuralism and post Structrualism 9 The analytic tradition 10 Moral and political philosophy-human nature and political ligitimacy 10-2 Consequentialism,deontology,and the aretaic turn Eastern Philosophy Babyloian,Chinese,Indian,Persian.
Metaphysics investigates the nature of being and the world.Traditional branches are cosmology and ontology.
Epistemology is concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge,and whether knowledge is possible. Among it’s central concerns has been the challenge posed by skepticism and the relationships between truth,belief,and justification.
Ethics, or moral philosophy, is concerned with questions of how persons ought to act or if such questions are answerable. The main branches of ethnics are meta-ethnics, normative ethnics,and applied ethnics. Meta-ethnics concerns the nature of methical thought,comparison of various ethnical systems, whether there are absolute ethnical truths,and how those truths can be known. Ethnics is alsi associated with the idea of morality. Plato’s early dialogues include a search for difinitions of virtue.
Political philosophy is the study of government,laws, justice,property,rights and obligations. Aesthetics deals with patterns of thinking that lead from true premises to true conclusions, originally developed in Ancient Greece.
Philosophy of mind deals with the nature of the mind and it’s relationship to the body, and is tipified by disputes between dualism and materialism.(Philosophy and cognitive science) And the list goes on.I think the question fits the site. Keep your stick on the ice! Nancy

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

Dear Nom The Wise can you show me the grave error this thread is making? It is a question,it is not the end of the world,for that’s happening outside of the question. The question makes you think,makes you use your God given talents (the brain) It is in no manner offensive to God if anything it helps Glorify our Father,it give us peace to know all he has done for us,and how he planned it all just so perfectly.

I don’t know how I can better explain it than I already have. If there is no heaven, then there was no need of a crucifixion and resurrection, acts that had the sole purpose of allowing us to enter Heaven. In an earlier post I addressed this. Heaven is both a “place” and a “quality.” We begin our “time” in Heaven right now if we are faithful. We are currently in Purgatory; neither perfect enough for Heaven or damned enough for Hell. This is where we are working through our imperfections by the grace of God. Heaven is our reward for our suffering here, our persevering until the end when we are united with God. Without the promise of Heaven, why suffer for the Gospels? The “Good News” is that Jesus is raised from the dead, and thus we will be raised if we follow him faithfully. Yes, God is Heaven as well. Have we not heard of the “Beautific Vision”? That Heaven is beholding God unveiled for all of eternity?

If There Is No Heaven Will You Still Love God? No. Of course not (at least not Jesus; I’ll concede that). Jesus of Nazareth **PROVED **that He was the Messiah by rising from the dead. If He did not rise from the dead (and thus went to Heaven and opened Heaven for all of us) then He was NOT GOD and we’d all better head for the nearest Jewish Synagogue, because the Messiah is yet to come.

The Old Testament did not include going to Heaven. Only very special people went to Heaven (like Elijah). So those of you pointing to the Old Testament to support loving God without going to Heaven are missing a very crucial point, that back then Heaven was not in their calculations (per se). They were waiting for the Messiah. So if we are not going to Heaven, then Jesus was a fraud because God does not break His Promises (see 1 Corinthians 15 which has been reproduced here several times).

If you say that you’d still love God without the promise of Heaven, then you are perhaps a Jew. They love God very much, only they don’t believe that Jesus is God’s Messiah–God Incarnate. So you certainly are not a Christian to love God without the promise of Heaven which Jesus promised us. Sure you can still love God, but not Jesus who lied to you (if there is no Heaven).

As I said before, this “What if” scenario is meant to make us think about the reward/punishment aspect of our faith, and yes there are many people with imperfect faith that without the threat of Hell/Promise of Heaven they wouldn’t see a point to doing anything. But there is no real reward in this life for serving God but persecution. And we have the Beatitudes to console us when we are persecuted, and the promise of Heaven.

Trying to make this “What if” scenario purely philosophical is a red herring and I’ll tell you why: because the issue of Heaven is purely theological. The Christian concept of Heaven is unique. Plato believed in the “Forms.” Greco/Roman mythology didn’t have a Heaven like the Christian Heaven. And theology is a function of philosophy, as is psychology which is now a “science.” So being that the topic of Heaven is theological, how can anyone claim this thread is purely philosophical?

How about this?: If There Is No Heaven Will You Still Love God?

Yes, but not Jesus. I’d immediately go yarmulke shopping. (There, I’ve compromised…)

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

I don’t know how I can better explain it than I already have. If there is no heaven, then there was no need of a crucifixion and resurrection, acts that had the sole purpose of allowing us to enter Heaven. In an earlier post I addressed this. Heaven is both a “place” and a “quality.” We begin our “time” in Heaven right now if we are faithful. We are currently in Purgatory; neither perfect enough for Heaven or damned enough for Hell. This is where we are working through our imperfections by the grace of God. Heaven is our reward for our suffering here, our persevering until the end when we are united with God. Without the promise of Heaven, why suffer for the Gospels? The “Good News” is that Jesus is raised from the dead, and thus we will be raised if we follow him faithfully. Yes, God is Heaven as well. Have we not heard of the “Beautific Vision”? That Heaven is beholding God unveiled for all of eternity?

If There Is No Heaven Will You Still Love God? No. Of course not (at least not Jesus; I’ll concede that). Jesus of Nazareth **PROVED **that He was the Messiah by rising from the dead. If He did not rise from the dead (and thus went to Heaven and opened Heaven for all of us) then He was NOT GOD and we’d all better head for the nearest Jewish Synagogue, because the Messiah is yet to come.

The Old Testament did not include going to Heaven. Only very special people went to Heaven (like Elijah). So those of you pointing to the Old Testament to support loving God without going to Heaven are missing a very crucial point, that back then Heaven was not in their calculations (per se). They were waiting for the Messiah. So if we are not going to Heaven, then Jesus was a fraud because God does not break His Promises (see 1 Corinthians 15 which has been reproduced here several times).

If you say that you’d still love God without the promise of Heaven, then you are perhaps a Jew. They love God very much, only they don’t believe that Jesus is God’s Messiah–God Incarnate. So you certainly are not a Christian to love God without the promise of Heaven which Jesus promised us. Sure you can still love God, but not Jesus who lied to you (if there is no Heaven).

As I said before, this “What if” scenario is meant to make us think about the reward/punishment aspect of our faith, and yes there are many people with imperfect faith that without the threat of Hell/Promise of Heaven they wouldn’t see a point to doing anything. But there is no real reward in this life for serving God but persecution. And we have the Beatitudes to console us when we are persecuted, and the promise of Heaven.

Trying to make this “What if” scenario purely philosophical is a red herring and I’ll tell you why: because the issue of Heaven is purely theological. The Christian concept of Heaven is unique. Plato believed in the “Forms.” Greco/Roman mythology didn’t have a Heaven like the Christian Heaven. And theology is a function of philosophy, as is psychology which is now a “science.” So being that the topic of Heaven is theological, how can anyone claim this thread is purely philosophical?

How about this?: If There Is No Heaven Will You Still Love God?

Yes, but not Jesus. I’d immediately go yarmulke shopping. (There, I’ve compromised…)

Shopping sounds good why not go to(Info.com-if there is no heaven) But i’m glad there is a heaven Psalms 91 is one of my favorite Psalms. And the thread is very philosophical. Love to you Nancy

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

Shopping sounds good why not go to(Info.com-if there is no heaven) But i’m glad there is a heaven Psalms 91 is one of my favorite Psalms. And the thread is very philosophical. Love to you Nancy

I wouldn’t need info.com to find a yarmulke. Your response, again, shows that you cannot refute me, philosophically and logically.

Good philosophy attempts to define the truth. This thread attempts to ignore truth for the sake of a self-serving fantasy.

benedictus2 used an example “what if” question earlier. “What if I were born a black woman in the '20’s?” Well, I wouldn’t be able to vote, I would have breasts and a vagina (things that I as a man do not have), I would be subject to violence born of racism, I’d be able to get pregnant, etc. So? What’s the point of asking the “What if?”

No one has refuted me with any credibility. If your only refutation of me is “It’s a philosophical What If scenario” that is a non-sequitur.

twb 1621 asked me earlier “I hope you are not taking this as in anyway suggesting there is no heaven, are you?” **No, but you’re asking me to *consider *that there is no heaven. Aren’t you? And I have. **
**No heaven = no need of crucifixion/resurrection = Jesus is not the Son of God. **

A discussion of Christian Heaven must necessarily involve the question of whether or not Jesus was the Son of God. It is logical because Heaven would not be accessible without the risen Christ opening the door for us. The only being who ever offered us Heaven was Jesus of Nazareth.

This what-if question is heretical *specifically *because the OP suggests (or rather implies in successive posts) that in this scenario Jesus is still the Son of God, and we are asked to love Jesus without the promise of Heaven. Furthermore, that we KNOW there is Heaven but God is not going to let us in it anymore. Heaven was offered but has been taken from us. We will only have this life and then we will just die. That totally annihilates the need for Jesus to be crucified. So the direct logical implication is that God (as Jesus) suffered for nothing and now has broken his promise. That’s just pure heresy. Refute me. I’ve considered this question far deeper than perhaps the OP intended (or that poor deluded priest who was probably just being lazy when he gave this question as a homily and went back to the celebrant’s chair patting himself on the back for being so clever).

I’m not wrong. I’m really not. I’m trying, with love, to correct you all. Refute me. Please.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

When we truly see God then we realize that we are creatures and He is Master and Lord. But He is Lord who loves us enough to die for us.

Although I do realize that that is something that an atheist will not understand.

He loves us enough to die for us. Why die for us if only to revoke the promise of Heaven which was the only reason for the crucifixion? (This is one example of where benedictus2 is implicitly stating that we’re talking about Jesus in this thread, and not just the Old Testament).

I’m not an atheist and I understand this perfectly.

 

[twb1621]

I don’t know how I can better explain it than I already have. If there is no heaven, then there was no need of a crucifixion and resurrection, acts that had the sole purpose of allowing us to enter Heaven. In an earlier post I addressed this. Heaven is both a “place” and a “quality.” We begin our “time” in Heaven right now if we are faithful. We are currently in Purgatory; neither perfect enough for Heaven or damned enough for Hell. This is where we are working through our imperfections by the grace of God. Heaven is our reward for our suffering here, our persevering until the end when we are united with God. Without the promise of Heaven, why suffer for the Gospels? The “Good News” is that Jesus is raised from the dead, and thus we will be raised if we follow him faithfully. Yes, God is Heaven as well. Have we not heard of the “Beautific Vision”? That Heaven is beholding God unveiled for all of eternity?

If There Is No Heaven Will You Still Love God? No. Of course not (at least not Jesus; I’ll concede that). Jesus of Nazareth **PROVED **that He was the Messiah by rising from the dead. If He did not rise from the dead (and thus went to Heaven and opened Heaven for all of us) then He was NOT GOD and we’d all better head for the nearest Jewish Synagogue, because the Messiah is yet to come.

The Old Testament did not include going to Heaven. Only very special people went to Heaven (like Elijah). So those of you pointing to the Old Testament to support loving God without going to Heaven are missing a very crucial point, that back then Heaven was not in their calculations (per se). They were waiting for the Messiah. So if we are not going to Heaven, then Jesus was a fraud because God does not break His Promises (see 1 Corinthians 15 which has been reproduced here several times).

If you say that you’d still love God without the promise of Heaven, then you are perhaps a Jew. They love God very much, only they don’t believe that Jesus is God’s Messiah–God Incarnate. So you certainly are not a Christian to love God without the promise of Heaven which Jesus promised us. Sure you can still love God, but not Jesus who lied to you (if there is no Heaven).

As I said before, this “What if” scenario is meant to make us think about the reward/punishment aspect of our faith, and yes there are many people with imperfect faith that without the threat of Hell/Promise of Heaven they wouldn’t see a point to doing anything. But there is no real reward in this life for serving God but persecution. And we have the Beatitudes to console us when we are persecuted, and the promise of Heaven.

Trying to make this “What if” scenario purely philosophical is a red herring and I’ll tell you why: because the issue of Heaven is purely theological. The Christian concept of Heaven is unique. Plato believed in the “Forms.” Greco/Roman mythology didn’t have a Heaven like the Christian Heaven. And theology is a function of philosophy, as is psychology which is now a “science.” So being that the topic of Heaven is theological, how can anyone claim this thread is purely philosophical?

How about this?: If There Is No Heaven Will You Still Love God?

Yes, but not Jesus. I’d immediately go yarmulke shopping. (There, I’ve compromised…)

Short response; I love God not because of what He offers me, but because He has never abandoned me as I did Him. I love Him because He accepted me when I returned to Him. I love Him for the relationship He has with me and the guidence He provides me in going through this life. Not because of what He offers me if I remain obedient. Because I know I can always fail I do not take anything in regard to God’s salvation for granted. That in my opinion would be disrespect to say the least. I do not base it on what He offers me any more than He based suffering His passion on my prior commitment to accept Him. This makes me a Jew? You know better than that, your speaking out of frustration.

 

[benedictus2]

He loves us enough to die for us. Why die for us if only to revoke the promise of Heaven which was the only reason for the crucifixion? (This is one example of where benedictus2 is implicitly stating that we’re talking about Jesus in this thread, and not just the Old Testament).

I’m not an atheist and I understand this perfectly.

If you bother to read the post by TheAtheist that I responded to, you will realize that the point you are trying to make above has no bearing on my response. My reply to atheist is an aside.

As I have explained time and again which some people still do not get, some aspects of the revelation is suspended by the what if. It seems to me you still do not understand what the nature of a what if is.

Also, the salvific effect of Christ’s life,death and ressurection is not felt or made available only when we get to heaven. The graces are being poured out on us now. The question is whether the graces we are receiving NOW (which we are only receiving because of His life, death and ressurection), is this enough for us to love Him back.

 

[benedictus2]

You didn’t read my posts, otherwise you would not persist in this heresy posing as a “what if” scenario. Did you read my demonstration of St. Paul’s “what if” scenario? You wrote here:

If we cannot love God now, just for the gift of life here on earth and for everything that He has done for us here on earth, then that is really sad.

No, it’s not. Our covenant is heaven. You think that by continuing to call this a “What If” scenario" that it somehow excuses the grave error this question presents. Don’t lecture me on logic. My refutation of you is logical. Calling this a “what if” scenario is a red herring.

I read the other posts. Please read mine. All the way through.

You are a **heretic **if you believe this. Do you not understand the grave error this thread commits? You continue to defend this position. Please stop. Please.

You surely cannot be that dense. I am not saying there is no heaven. There is a heaven otherwise the what if becomes totally stupid. Do you not get that at all?
So first of all the question is valid for the very reason that there is a heaven.

Now, a question does not make one a heretic, however, I cannot understand your fear in addressing this question. What’s with that?

The quesiton is simple, should life here on earth be all there is to life, can you still love God?

The question is valid so really answerable by yes or no. Okay, so your answer is no. That is fine. But don’t go around saying the question is a heresy because it is not. You obviously do not understand what constitutes a heresy.

As I have explained before, one of the questions in St Thomas’s Summa was: If Adam and Eve had not fallen, would Christ still have come? Now do you think St Thomas is a heretic for asking such a thing?

And your refutation is not logical. It is illogical because what make the OP logical is the fact that there is a heaven or it will not be a what if.:banghead::banghead::banghead:

The only ones who have any grounds in claiming it illogical are those who equate heaven with God, becuase if Heaven IS God then the question becomes something like “Will still love God if there is no God?” which as you can see is completely stupid.

But even Bruno who thinks the question is invalid does not agree that Heaven and God are one and the same, so his and your objections are the ones that are invalid.

 

[benedictus2]

Short response; I love God not because of what He offers me, but because He has never abandoned me as I did Him. I love Him because He accepted me when I returned to Him. I love Him for the relationship He has with me and the guidence He provides me in going through this life. Not because of what He offers me if I remain obedient. Because I know I can always fail I do not take anything in regard to God’s salvation for granted. That in my opinion would be disrespect to say the least. I do not base it on what He offers me any more than He based suffering His passion on my prior commitment to accept Him. This makes me a Jew? You know better than that, your speaking out of frustration.

Why aren’t there more clear thinking people like you?

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**

But even Bruno who thinks the question is invalid does not agree that Heaven and God are one and the same, so his and your objections are the ones that are invalid

Oh Benedict the second, your horse is running away with you.
You call others and what they say dense – they do not understand, are not logical, our objections are invalid - and more.

Stop it and get back to reason! It’s not christian-like to use this language.

Let me be straight then so you understand:
No, If there would be no heaven I would not still love God!

Just as if there would be no ground to stand on, I would not walk on earth.
You got it now?! Let’s all hope so!
**

 

[benedictus2]

Oh Benedict the second, your horse is running away with you.
**You call others and what they say dense – they do not understand, are not logical, our objections are invalid - and more. **

Okay hold your horses.

I have explained the nature of what ifs so many times and still people do not get it.

Here it is again.

The reason the OP is valid, is PRECISELY BECAUSE THERE IS HEAVEN.

As I said in a reply to you before, if you were to ask “What if I was born a man” would be totally stupid since YOU ARE A MAN (or at least going by your name I am presuming that you are male). The logical “what if” is to ask “What if I was born a woman?”. Is that clear enough?

**Stop it and get back to reason! **

But it is precisely reason I have been using all this time and I have demonstrated over and over again and people just do not get it.

The only time the question becomes invalid is if HEAVEN is indeed GOD. You yourself have told MindOverMatter that he is way off the track with this kind of thinking.

It’s not christian-like to use this language.

It is not un-christian to say that something is illogical when it is illogical or that something is invalid when it is invalid.
Perhaps I should not call someone dense but how many times do I have to explain the nature of a what if before some peopel get it.

Let me be straight then so you understand:
No, If there would be no heaven I would not still love God!

Just as if there would be no ground to stand on, I would not walk on earth.
**You got it now?! Let’s all hope so! **

Nope because your last phrase " Just as if there would be no ground to stand on, I would not walk on earth." implies that you are equating God with Heaven and you already said that God is not heaven.

Ground and earth in your sentence are one and the same. Does that mean that for you heaven and God are one and the same too?

 

[benedictus2]

Well hear goes,Ive been reading alot of the posts and it made me think that if there was no heaven then there would not have been the death of Christ and if there were no need for his death then that must mean(the way i take it) that there must not be any sin (no devil) no need for heaven and we would love God proberly even more because our lives would be a heaven on earth and there woldn’t be any sickness because that was bought on by sin and no death because that would have been bought on by sin, and their would be no fighting and dispair,we’d be in heaven period wouldn’t we?

My! Nancy! That is quite some thinking you’ve put into that statement. It’s slightly askew from the topic but very well done.:tiphat:

I look at lt like this,even if we had to die,but lived a beautiful life without sin and problems it would be a wonderful thing Yes i’d still praise God and love him. But if i suffered alot and there was sin and horror and nothing to look forward to and i knew we were going to just die after all that i’d be confused as to why i was here in the first place,heaven is worth suffering for that’s why the decipals were willing to die like they did because they knew to be absent from the body would to be present with the Lord,then and only then to die would be gain. Love of Christ Nancy

Exactly the point that TheAtheist nailed on the head. The answer will depend on each person’s situation. If their life is okay, then even if there is nothing after this, it was good to have lived. But if your life is an utter misery then probably the only thing that makes you go on living is the hope of heaven, the hope of a better life in the hereafter.

So yes, very well put.

But interestingly enough, there are more suicide in affluent societies than among the poor.

 

[benedictus2]

Who gave you the authority to judge us? We understand more than you think,if this thread scares you for some reason then mabe you should go watch tv or crochet. Even a Priest would laught at fallacious. There is a priest here on the forum i can give you his e-mail and mabe you can check it out? Let me know PS READ your Mail Nancy:shrug:

 

[benedictus2]

I don’t know how I can better explain it than I already have. If there is no heaven, then there was no need of a crucifixion and resurrection, acts that had the sole purpose of allowing us to enter Heaven.

If the sole purpose of the crucifixion is so that we may get to heaven then how come we, the baptized, are still not in heaven?

The life, death and resurrection of Christ has an effect on our life here on earth. The Peace and Joy of Christ is to be felt and experience here on earth as well or the Mass does not make sense.

St Augustine says that in the Eucharist, we are transformed into that which we recieve. That transformation happens on this earth as well, although it’s completion does take effect in heaven.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

If the sole purpose of the crucifixion is so that we may get to heaven then how come we, the baptized, are still not in heaven?

Because we haven’t **died **yet. You have to **die **to get to Heaven. Jesus was resurrected after he died just as we will be resurrected after we die. The “quality” of Heaven (which I discussed in an earlier post when I analyzed the Beatitudes in the *Greek *scripture) begins here on earth, but we do not enter the “place” of Heaven until we die.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

Does that mean that for you heaven and God are one and the same too?

**NO!
God is God
God created heaven and therefore can’t be heaven.
But there is a heaven we get into if we where good.
But only after we died - not now Dear.
No, you can’t walk into heaven now - and you can’t marry Greta Garbo when you grow up! Now stop being a baby about it!

Isn’t that a silly roundabout

But I give up
Yes, you are absolutely right whatever you say
phoo - content now

let’s talk about the weather - ain’t is lovely (or whatever you say - I say rain and hailstorm if you wish).

**

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

Short response; I love God not because of what He offers me, but because He has never abandoned me as I did Him. I love Him because He accepted me when I returned to Him. I love Him for the relationship He has with me and the guidence He provides me in going through this life. Not because of what He offers me if I remain obedient. Because I know I can always fail I do not take anything in regard to God’s salvation for granted. That in my opinion would be disrespect to say the least. I do not base it on what He offers me any more than He based suffering His passion on my prior commitment to accept Him. This makes me a Jew? You know better than that, your speaking out of frustration.

You have created quite a strawman here. This is not my position. I’m not frustrated at all except by the poor catechesis I’ve seen demonstrated on this thread.

“I do not base it on what He offers me any more than He based suffering His passion on my prior commitment to accept Him.” Your “prior” commitment? Were you alive before the crucifixion? You have accepted the crucified and risen Christ, not the God of the Old Testament alone. We do not know any other Christ than the one that died on the cross for our salvation so that we might enter Heaven. That is the Covenent. Christians are not Jews because we love God through the death and resurrection of Christ, which “bought” us the *literal *Heaven. But, if Heaven was taken from us as this thread has suggested, then that would mean that Christ was not the Son of God and his crucifixion a waste of time and pain. So without the New Testament, without the promise of Heaven through Christ’s death and resurrection, that would take us back to the Old Covenant and we would still be waiting for the Messiah, thus making us “Jews” by the terms of the Old Testament.

But if, as this scenario has suggested, Christ died and was resurrected and then said “You cannot go to Heaven anymore…when you die, you die” then Christ has broken his promise. That’s the heresy.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

Also, the salvific effect of Christ’s life,death and ressurection is not felt or made available only when we get to heaven. The graces are being poured out on us now. The question is whether the graces we are receiving NOW (which we are only receiving because of His life, death and ressurection), is this enough for us to love Him back.

The graces that we are receiving NOW are only the barest foretaste of the promise of Heaven, “bought” for us by Christ’s life, death and resurrection. The OP may be valid, but it is ILLICIT. I’d go back and read my logic books if I were you.

Christian “Heaven” is unique: the only one that ever offered Heaven to the world was Christ. As I pointed out earlier, the Greek scriptures of the Beatitudes could be interpreted as “the kingship” of Heaven as well as “kingdom of Heaven.” It is both. The “kingship” shines through us as a quality we receive by Grace, by following Christ, and the Kingdom we receive by Christ opening the door to Heaven by his passion and resurrection.

We are only receiving graces now, as you have admitted above, “because of His life, death and ressurection” (your spelling). So without our eventual entering of Heaven there would be no graces now. If the source of the river dries up, people living downstream will only have a dried up river bed. They would say “Where has the river gone?” God damned it up, hypothetically.

And really, I don’t know what kind of charmed life you all are living that the promise of Heaven doesn’t get you through the day. And really, what you suggest would equate to cruelty on God’s behalf. To give us the taste of Heaven but then take it away? You could love that God? I think you are all being dishonest with yourselves.

I am merely following the logical pathways that stem from the OP question. I’m not wrong.

 

[Nom_the_Wise]

You surely cannot be that dense. I am not saying there is no heaven. There is a heaven otherwise the what if becomes totally stupid. Do you not get that at all?

You have asked me to consider that there is no heaven. I’m not dense. It was *your *question. Have the courage to accept the ramifications for your irresponsibility.

So first of all the question is valid for the very reason that there is a heaven.

Now, a question does not make one a heretic, however, I cannot understand *your fear *in addressing this question. What’s with that?

You just love ad hominen refutation, don’t you. I have demonstrated no fear in addressing your question. I have answered your question “no” several times and demonstrated WHY in no uncertain terms. I cannot understand your fear in refuting me point by point. What of 1 Corinthians 15? St. Paul’s “what if” scenario is what I stand by fearlessly.

The question is valid so really answerable by yes or no. Okay, so your answer is no. That is fine. But don’t go around saying the question is a heresy because it is not. You obviously do not understand what constitutes a heresy.

In an ealier post you called someone “sad” for answering no to this question, but for me it’s “fine”? I’m not “sad”?

Yes I understand what constitutes a heresy. As I stated earlier, this what if question attacks the very foundation of Christianity and has caused believers to consider that God will not keep his promises. Totally valid and licit reasoning stemming from the OP question. It is you that refused to see the grave error that your question suggests.

As I have explained before, one of the questions in St Thomas’s Summa was: If Adam and Eve had not fallen, would Christ still have come? Now do you think St Thomas is a heretic for asking such a thing?

Of course not, because the answer to that question is NO, if Adam and Eve had not fallen, Christ would not have had to come. Aquinas’ “what-if” points to the “serendipity” of the Fall. We have **a better deal **because of it, a New Testament. Christ came, died and was resurrected so that we could attain a “new paradise,” a “better paradise” than found in the Garden of Eden. Your “what-if” actually flies in the face of Thomas Aquinas’ “what-if” question. St. Thomas was demonstrating the dire need we had for Christ to come to save us, because of the original Fall from Grace. Your “what-if” question asks us to consider that Christ came, suffered and died all for nothing. No Heaven = No Need for the Crucifixion = No Salvation. I cannot say this for sure, but I believe that St. Thomas would be on my side.

And your refutation is not logical. It is illogical because what make the OP logical is the fact that there is a heaven or it will not be a what if.:banghead::banghead::banghead:

The OP question is valid. It’s implications point to a valid heresy. I have never challenged the logical nature of the question, but I have indeed reasoned out the FULL logical implications of the question. You are banging your head because I’m not playing in your sandbox the way you would like me to play.

If there is no Heaven: First I have to define what Heaven is in order to engage this “what if” question (which has been done in many posts already). “Why, if Heaven didn’t exist, would I have to ponder whether or not I still love God? What is Heaven in relation to my love of God? What does the lack of Heaven take away from my love of God? Thus, what is the basis for my love of God?”

No matter what you think Heaven “really” is, Heaven is **the real estate deal **Christ offered us. If you follow me, you will go to Heaven. You are sinners, but I will die in your place thus paying the price for your sins and then you can enter Heaven. Sound like a good deal? Here, let’s have a New Covenant: I will die for you to enter Heaven.

Then, along comes this hypothetical “what-if”: If there is no Heaven, will you still love God? Hmmm…the removal of the very thing that Christ died to give us (whatever it is–none of us have ever been there; we only have Christ’s promise that it exists at all).

Is the logic coming through loud and clear?