Can good people go to hell?

[JoStories]

OK, I have to admit that Paul isn't my favorite apostle. He comes across as misogynistic, legalistic, and the first Christian Pharisee...dragging all his previous biases in with him when he converted. If and when I do ever meet him, I'll have a few pointed comments to make. As well, you are right that there is zero evidence that he actually met Jesus (though he probably saw Him, at least, and almost certainly knew about Him during His lifetime). My opinion of his personality aside, however, Paul's position as an apostle is based upon his actually receiving revelation FROM Jesus Christ, as the other apostles did, according to Acts. If he did receive that revelation, then he 'met' Christ, whether or not I want to drop water balloons at him from a great height. The problem is, the bible, when talking about prophets and apostles, goes to some lengths to point out the human flaws in the people God chooses to use, and Paul, irritating as he is, fits right into that particular pattern.

The question you are raising, though, is an important one for me. Are you saying that only those who actually met and followed Jesus during His lifetime are qualified to be apostles/prophets, and to have contributed to scripture?

As well, while I agree with you that the books were compiled into what we know as 'the bible' partly for the reason you state, I don't think that this is why those books and letters were actually written. (large font for JoStories)

First, thank you the large font. That said, interesting post. I am not saying that Paul was not an apostle based on his not having met Christ. I am saying that, as you noted so well, everything that Paul had to say, IMO, is the opposite of what Christ taught. If we go by the Sermon on the Mount, consider the beauty of those lessons and then compare what Christ had to say to what Paul said. Christ never said women were second class. Christ never said they should not speak in church or have their heads covered. Paul said those things. And you will note that none of the gospels, as in Luke, Matthew, John and Mark, say such heinous and disparaging things. There is no evidence that Paul met Christ, whether in a dream state or an hallucination either. Based on that, I see what he allegedly wrote as Paulian dogma and it has nothing to do with what Christ taught. Of course, I don't believe that Christ was divine either. I see him, if he existed, which is debatable, but most scholars, such as me, agree a man like him did exist, I see him as a prophet or teacher, much like The Buddha.

 

[JoStories]

Absolutely right, we only have the Bible as proof. Even proof that Christ existed.
Aren't there corresponding cross-references verses and passages with what Paul wrote?______
Didn't gospel writer Luke write the book of Acts ?__________
So, if you eliminate Paul's writings, then shouldn't you also eliminate what Luke wrote in Luke and Acts ?_______

Yes, but I would also question the veracity of Mark, as in some Bibles, there is a disclaimer at the end of Mark. I don't believe any of the books of the Bible were truly written by the names given to the books. It is possible one or two might have been but most have been proven to have been written at least 100 years or more after the death of Jesus. That means that whatever was written was handed down by word of mouth. And we all know that information handed down is tainted by the person's views. That old game of telling someone in a whisper a couple sentences and then going around a circle repeating the same thing, at the end is vastly different. This is the same premise.

 

[JoStories]

Yes, Hanson's Disease exists today, but it is Not necessarily exactly the same a strain as the time of Moses.
Why would you expect any today to be miraculously cured ?
While on Earth did Jesus heal or cure everyone? According to Scripture he did Not.
Jesus' main focus or work was teaching - Luke 4:43; Matthew 28:18-20
The miraculous works Jesus performed were just a small sample, a preview, a coming attraction, of what Jesus will do on a grand-global scale during his 1,000-year governmental rulership over Earth comes. Then, mankind will see the return of the Genesis ' Tree of Life ' for the healing or curing of Earth's nations - Revelation 22:2; Isaiah 33:24

I mean you no disrespect but IMO, this is nothing more than magical thinking. there is no proof whatsoever that what you are saying about this 'coming attraction' will ever come to fruition. I can appreciate that you believe this because I believe in reincarnation but I would also be the first to tell you that there is absolutely no proof of that either. It, too, is magical thinking but it is what I believe.

 

[JoStories]

Did God start the fire ?________ Since Adam rejected God by breaking God's Law, then Adam chose independence from God.
The passing of time shows that independent mankind can Not successfully direct his step - Jeremiah 10:23
Satan challenges all of us. Didn't Job loose his children ?_______
Satan challenges that ' touch our flesh '( Loose physical health ) and we would Not serve God- Job 2:4-5
Under Adverse conditions both Job and Jesus proved Satan a liar.
False clergy teach God takes children to heaven. Dead children are asleep in the grave until Resurrection Day or Jesus' millennium-long day of governing over Earth.- Revelation 1:18
Just as Jesus resurrected dead children back to healthy life on Earth, dead children will be restored back to perfectly healthy life under Christ' 1,000-year rulership over Earth.
Rejoice because there ' is going to be ' a resurrection.......- Acts of the Apostles 24:15

well, I am very glad you never said this kind of thing to my aunt as it is maybe the most hurtful thing I can imagine anyone saying. Oh, its ok, your children are dead and are food for worms until some magical pie in the sky belief comes to fruition. Sorry but this post just is insulting to her and her children's memories.

 

[JoStories]

I don't think you got the point of the post to which you are replying, my friend.

Amen to that!

 

[JoStories]

Didn't you say that Paul isn't your favorite apostle ? ______ That is what I was addressing as to why Paul should or shouldn't be a favorite.

IMO, Paul should not even be considered when studying the words of Christ. They are the opposite of the beauty that Christ taught. His words are ugly and mean and are only meant to kowtow people into doing as he said. No thank you.

 

[dianaiad]

well, I am very glad you never said this kind of thing to my aunt as it is maybe the most hurtful thing I can imagine anyone saying. Oh, its ok, your children are dead and are food for worms until some magical pie in the sky belief comes to fruition. Sorry but this post just is insulting to her and her children's memories.

Everybody's belief system is different, JoStories. I can even imagine that this poster thinks s/he is being comforting. Or something. After all, those who are 'asleep in the grave' or however it is described, cannot feel pain, and are not conscious of the passage of time, so if they are resurrected when their mother is, they have not spent any time missing her. At least, I think that's part of it.

My own beliefs, however, are that children are heaven-bound, period. They haven't had TIME to 'sin,' and are certainly not punished for something someone else did. Not that your aunt would want to hear that preached at her. My daughter certainly didn't want to hear how her four hour old, only child, went directly to heaven...she wanted that child HERE. She shares my beliefs about where her baby is, and even so....sometimes comfort should be in simple 'I'm sorry' and silence, not preaching. Someday your aunt might want to hear religious musings and comfort, but if that sort of 'comfort' makes her angry, best not go there at all.

All I can say is...life can sometimes really suck. Sometimes it is joyous. All of us, however, who were born will die, and dying is seldom a pleasant experience, and death itself is usually a relief from dying. It's hard when it's a chlid. It's hard when it's a young person who should have had a long life. It's hard when it's someone old who doesn't deserve the suffering that goes along with the process, but it's something we all have to experiences. Those who believe in reincarnation have to experience it often.

I do not believe in reincarnation. I do, however, believe that we did exist as spirits before our births...and I also believe that we were told that life would be like this, and that we 'signed up' for it anyway. (shrug) This belief has made it easier for me to deal with life and loss, even though I have to stop and yell at myself; "What were you THINKING???"

PS...does my replying in large font help, or does it matter?

 

[dianaiad]

Didn't you say that Paul isn't your favorite apostle ? ______ That is what I was addressing as to why Paul should or shouldn't be a favorite.

Paul is not my favorite apostle. He was cantankerous, obstreperous, pharisitical, legalistic, misogynistic and almost stereotypically curmudgeonly. The POINT of my post, however, is that in spite of all that, he was, indeed, an apostle. I believe that he received revelation, and, even though he was cantankerous, obstreperous, pharisitical, legalistic, misogynistic and almost stereotypically curmudgeonly, he was the right person for the job to which he was called.

I think rather similar thoughts about Brigham Young, by the way. Actually, my favorite apostle/prophet was a man named Jonah. Stubborn, cantankerous, rebellious; a man God had to clobber more than once. I rather appreciate the rebellious who end up doing the right thing in spite of themselves.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Paul is not my favorite apostle. He was cantankerous, obstreperous, pharisitical, legalistic, misogynistic and almost stereotypically curmudgeonly. The POINT of my post, however, is that in spite of all that, he was, indeed, an apostle. I believe that he received revelation, and, even though he was cantankerous, obstreperous, pharisitical, legalistic, misogynistic and almost stereotypically curmudgeonly, he was the right person for the job to which he was called.

Wasn't it Paul who wrote the words of Romans 12:10 that in showing honor to one another take the lead ?______

What was cantankerous, obstrepersous, pharisitical, legalistic, misgoynistice and curmudgeonly about Acts chapter 15?
Paul remained humble - 1 Corinthians 15:9-11
Please consider how Paul handled the problem over the issue of circumcision at Acts of the Apostles 14:26-28; Acts of the Apostles 15:1-2
Since Paul had been appointed to take the lead among non-Jews, then Paul could have thought himself quite qualified to resolve the problem - Galatians 2:8-9
When Paul's efforts did Not come up with the desired result, then with ' humility and modesty ' Paul went along with the arrangments of the Elders.
Didn't Paul co-operate fully with the Elders ?______
According to chapter 15 of Acts, wasn't it the Elders who assigned Paul to be on 'their' messengers ?______
- Acts of the Apostles 15:22-24; Acts of the Apostles 15:25-27; Acts of the Apostles 15:28-30; Acts of the Apostles 15:31
Thus, Paul took the lead in showing honor to his fellow servants - Romans 12:10

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I mean you no disrespect but IMO, this is nothing more than magical thinking. there is no proof whatsoever that what you are saying about this 'coming attraction' will ever come to fruition. I can appreciate that you believe this because I believe in reincarnation but I would also be the first to tell you that there is absolutely no proof of that either. It, too, is magical thinking but it is what I believe.

Matthew 24:14; Acts of the Apostles 1:8 'is' scriptural proof.
As Jesus taught that Scripture is: religious truth - John 17:17
Even gospel writer Luke even describes the magnitude of the earthquakes that would be occurring in our day at Luke 21:11 along with the other details
We are nearing the ' final phase ' of Matthew 24:14 that the good news of God's kingdom government would be proclaimed on an international scale as it is being done today.
We are nearing the ' final signal ' of 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 when ' they ' ( powers that be ) will be saying, "Peace and Security " as the precursor to the coming great tribulation of Revelation 7:14, before Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will usher in global Peace on Earth among people of goodwill - Matthew 25:31-33,37

 

[URAVIP2ME]

well, I am very glad you never said this kind of thing to my aunt as it is maybe the most hurtful thing I can imagine anyone saying. Oh, its ok, your children are dead and are food for worms until some magical pie in the sky belief comes to fruition. Sorry but this post just is insulting to her and her children's memories.

How is resurrection insulting?
Were the parents insulted when Jesus resurrected their children ? ______ - Luke 8:52-53; Luke 8:55-56
Surely, I would Not say to anyone that God started the fire.
God forbids the burning up of children - Jeremiah 32:34-35
It is false clergy often teach the dead are either in eternal bliss or eternal blisters.
The Bible teaches the dead are in an unconscious sleeping state (R.I.P.) until Resurrection Day - Acts of the Apostles 24:15
( the dead know nothing -> Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Daniel 12:2; Daniel 12:13; John 11:12-14 )
If Jesus' millennium-long Resurrection Day would have happened a long time ago none of us would have ever had the opportunity to be born.
The passing of time has allowed for us to be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us? Satan or God ?
Jesus will undo all the damage and hurt that father Adam ( Not God ) brought upon the human race.- Revelation 1:18
The dead are in God's memory and He can restore the dead back to life again.
There will be healing for earth's nations including enemy 'death' being brought to nothing - 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8; Revelation 22:2
So, children who had tragic deaths can be restored to happy-and-healthy physical life on Earth during Jesus' 1,000-year governmental rulership over Earth.
Under Christ's governing leadership there will be No more pain or grief - Revelation 21:4-5

 

[URAVIP2ME]

First, thank you the large font. That said, interesting post. I am not saying that Paul was not an apostle based on his not having met Christ. I am saying that, as you noted so well, everything that Paul had to say, IMO, is the opposite of what Christ taught. If we go by the Sermon on the Mount, consider the beauty of those lessons and then compare what Christ had to say to what Paul said. Christ never said women were second class. Christ never said they should not speak in church or have their heads covered. Paul said those things. And you will note that none of the gospels, as in Luke, Matthew, John and Mark, say such heinous and disparaging things. There is no evidence that Paul met Christ, whether in a dream state or an hallucination either. Based on that, I see what he allegedly wrote as Paulian dogma and it has nothing to do with what Christ taught. Of course, I don't believe that Christ was divine either. I see him, if he existed, which is debatable, but most scholars, such as me, agree a man like him did exist, I see him as a prophet or teacher, much like The Buddha.

Women were Not 2nd-class to Paul. Paul was in effect saying," Don't interrupt the meetings " ( speak disruptingly out loud in the congregation )
Head covering was only when a woman was taking the place of a man ( spiritual brother ) because of the headship principle - 1 Corinthians 11:3
According to gospel writer Luke, Paul did have an encounter with Christ - Acts of the Apostles 9:15; and Paul took up where Jesus left off - Acts of the Apostles 26:28

 

[JoStories]

Women were Not 2nd-class to Paul. Paul was in effect saying," Don't interrupt the meetings " ( speak disruptingly out loud in the congregation )
Head covering was only when a woman was taking the place of a man ( spiritual brother ) because of the headship principle - 1 Corinthians 11:3
According to gospel writer Luke, Paul did have an encounter with Christ - Acts of the Apostles 9:15; and Paul took up where Jesus left off - Acts of the Apostles 26:28

I disagree and what's more, I find that these types of posts which border, IMO, on proselytization, are not in keeping with the forum. I understand that, for you, this is how you respond. I prefer someone to speak for themselves and leave the sacred text passages out of it. I am sorry friend but I simply won't waste my time with these types of posts.

 

[Rapture Era]

I mean you no disrespect but IMO, this is nothing more than magical thinking. there is no proof whatsoever that what you are saying about this 'coming attraction' will ever come to fruition. I can appreciate that you believe this because I believe in reincarnation but I would also be the first to tell you that there is absolutely no proof of that either. It, too, is magical thinking but it is what I believe.

I am of the Christian faith, that is to say I believe and trust in Jesus Christ for my eternal salvation, Jesus is equal to God the Father in deity and creator of the universe. I clarify that because there are many who claim the Christian faith but are diametrically opposed in doctrine. Anyway, you said " I believe in reincarnation but I would also be the first to tell you that there is absolutely no proof of that either. It, too, is magical thinking but it is what I believe." I'm really curious why you believe this. What is it about reincarnation that is so attractive to you over any other belief system, or just Christianity for example. Lets just take those two. I dont want to argue about the two, I would like to dialog without getting nasty. I dont know enough about Hinduism to understand why one would choose it over Christianity unless this religion has always been in a persons family and its all they know. So, in one hand Christianity, the other Hinduism. No proof that either is true. I would like to know just from a common sense view because I'm not a scholar or theologian or a philosopher. What makes one so attractive over the other in your opinion? Thanks!