No Tears in Heaven?

What do you imagine heaven will be like? If you take Revelations 21:4 literally…

Revelations 21:4 – “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.”

…then one thing you believe is that there will be no crying or sorrow or pain in heaven. That sounds very nice, especially if you are saved and you will be there enjoy it for all eternity. And especially if all of your loved ones are saved and will be there to enjoy it with you. And if your parents are saved. And all of your brothers and sisters. And all of your children. And your dearest friends. They are all saved, aren’t they?

If they aren’t, then according to Mark 9:43 (and many similar verses) they will suffer the torment of the “fire that never shall be quenched” – forever. And you will be aware that they aren’t saved because they won’t be in heaven with you. And according to Luke 16:19-31, people in heaven can see (and even talk to!) people in hell.

What would you think of a person who doesn’t cry or feel sorrow or pain while they are enjoying eternal bliss, all the while knowing full well that their loved one is suffering unimaginable torment for all eternity? Can you imagine not feeling sorrow or pain or not crying for your loved ones in hell because Revelations 21:4 says that you won’t? Do you believe that Revelations 21:4 is true?

16 Responses to No Tears in Heaven?

  1. The Reverend says:

    An eternity of joy and happiness devoid of the obverse emotions of pain and sorrow sounds like a rather perverse and hollow existence. Happiness would become dulled and meaningless without sorrow. Bring on the Soma.
    Couple that with blithely wandering about singing praises to a megalomaniac and that incessant trumpet blaring, I’d question the veracity of the scribblings of an eremitic madman.

    If you have no tears for the hellish situations of your kith and kin you are ethically corrupt, morally bankrupt and psychologically screwdupt. Also, to describe heaven as being bedecked with gems and streets of gold seems an attempt to appeal to the human greed factor and not the transcendental or ethereal aspects of an afterlife. With only joy and happiness, wouldn’t you be just as joyous in a little outhouse on the prairie as you would in the Trump Tower, with jacuzzi of course?

    For more on heaven, have a look here: nobeliefs.com/heaven.htm

  2. Daughter of a King says:

    sorry it was not letting post this blog on the other section so i placed it here:

    a bout the “God repenting” well God does not contradict himself this is why I say it was incorrectly interpreted. And it was King James who revised the “king James” Version… and well the bible has been revised so many times and the words made simpler and simpler each time. For exaple, If i were to write “Your irrelevant comment about the spheric apple was unnecessary in the argument between Luis and Ana”…and somebody trying to translate it into a different language or the same one but with simpler words with a more understandable vocabulary…….and it looked something like this:……”When you talked you said the wrong thing about the round apple in Luis and Ana’s fight”……… Same kinda thing but little words such as fight… and round…and “saying the wrong thing”….. can give the reader other conclusions about the phrase… they get the same idea but you know what I mean? cuz i have a teen bible and the words are made so much simpler for me to understand that I feel a lot of important details are missing. So when the bible was interpreted from the original language they used that word… to interpret it but it really doesn’t go there. You know what i mean?

  3. lisa Bee says:

    Ecc 9:5-6 5For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

    There will be no more memory of those in the flesh on earth. This is the meaning behind no more tears. We will not be able to look down or talk to those in Hell.
    Jesus, the one who rose from the dead, was the one talking to the rich man in Luke 16.
    That is Jesus/incarnate of God.

    If you need more information by my book: to Babel or Not Lisa (Bee) Ransdell

  4. The Atheist says:

    lisa,

    There will be no more memory of those in the flesh on earth.

    If that’s the case, then none of our relationships, like those with our parents, or those with our children really matter, since after we die, we will spend eternity without remembering that they were our beloved parents or children. How do you feel about that?

    Jesus, the one who rose from the dead, was the one talking to the rich man in Luke 16.
    That is Jesus/incarnate of God.

    Are you saying that “Father Abraham” is just another name for Jesus? Why would you conclude that?

  5. Lisa Bee says:

    the story in Luke 16 of heaven and hell (I do not believe in purgatory or limbo–that would be another new thread) is called a parable. A parable is nothing more than something that is made up for the understanding of those around, yet it contains an element of truth.
    Therefore, in Luke 16:19-21 we get the following truths: Father Abraham represents Jesus (God/Incarnate) who is the one “who rose from the dead” that the pharisee would not believe in (Jesus was actually putting two truths in that one sentence). He was also telling them that once in hell there is no way out and it is a place of torment. Those in Hell have all the memories of their earthly life.
    Notice also that the rich man was not contending any of these facts or even the reason for his being there. Which I can only guess was his selfishness of not attending to the poor when he had the opportunity.
    The poor man who is now in heaven has no recollection of his life on earth, he is just happy that he is in the bosom of his beloved father.
    Christians are to believe that everyone on earth is their family. I truly pray for those like yourself who do not believe in a God, much more than the agnostic, because you know scripture, yet chose for what ever reason, not to believe. The agnostic is nothing more than a sissy who chooses not to make up their mind.
    If I know that a loved one is headed down the wrong path (and my first child has) I suffer greatly. God never promised us a rose garden here on earth, Satan comes at us from all directions, especially those that are God’s elect–yet another thread.
    Everyone in heaven are just as much loved by each other, as a child, parent or husband here on earth. We will have new memories of love, and the memories of those in hell are passed away. This was a difficult fact for me to accept, but when I let go of my child and spiritually gave her to God to take care of, He has led brought her back home where she belongs.

  6. The Atheist says:

    Lisa,

    the story in Luke 16 of heaven and hell … is called a parable.

    And this is called a “clarifying question”: even if we agree that the story is a parable, how do you know that Father Abraham represents Jesus in this parable, and not Abraham the Patriarch?

    The poor man who is now in heaven has no recollection of his life on earth…

    Sounds tragic.

    The agnostic is nothing more than a sissy who chooses not to make up their mind.

    You are incorrect. An agnostic is someone who believes that there is not enough evidence to accept or deny the existence of a particular God.

    If I know that a loved one is headed down the wrong path (and my first child has) I suffer greatly.

    How greatly would do you think you would suffer if this same child were kidnapped by terrorists and tortured indecently? (btw – I would NEVER wish this on you or your child or anyone else, so please don’t take this question the wrong way!) Would you react the same way you would react thinking that this child is destined for hell? I would expect your reaction in the first scenario would be much different than the 2nd. In the 2nd scenario, you might be heat-broken; in the first scenario, you would most likely sob incessantly, plead incessantly for the terrorist to let her go, and your physical health and mental state would completely deteriorate – you would be traumatized. And this difference in how you would react would make me wonder to what extent you actually believe your child would suffer torture for all eternity.

    Everyone in heaven are just as much loved by each other, as a child, parent or husband here on earth.

    I presume you believe that Satan and his evil minions were once in heaven. It would seem that being in heaven is no guarantee that everyone will love everyone.

    memories of those in hell are passed away. This was a difficult fact for me to accept…

    This is difficult for me to accept too since that would mean that our life on earth would not be a part of our eternal life… which seems counter to Christian doctrine. If one becomes a “new creature”, he is a new creature at the time conversion (rebirth). And as I understand it, that new creature never dies. The loss of all memory, tantamount to the loss of self, is the same as the loss of life. It would also make receiving reward in heaven for actions on earth seem senseless – it would be as if you received rewards for something you never did.

  7. lisa bee says:

    Obviously I’m not a good story teller/writer, I seem to be more confusing than being understood. When a person tells a parable, he has to put the story in words that everyone understands at that time. For instance: if I wanted to describe the loss of memory of something bad I would probably use the description of child birth. Any woman can tell you that child birth pains may be really horrible, yet there is something about holding that infant in your arms that makes that pain go away, and then allows you to continue on down the road to get pregnant again. When I say that the memories of those in hell are passed away, i mean that bad memories are gone, it will be as though that person never existed. There will be plenty of good memories of happiness to fill whatever void that the evil person left.

    Jesus in this parable was using people that the Pharisee’s/sadducees of the day would not dispute with or deny. the whole point to this parable though, is not about Abraham verses God, or heaven vs hell (even though these are some elements of truth contained within the parable) but that he was proclaiming his future resurrection–“neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead (verse31); People would not believe in him.

    Do I believe the Bible is inerrant (It is too difficult and confusing to go back and forth on the different posts). I believe the Holy scriptures in their original form were inspired and therefore inerrant. Problem is those manuscripts for the most part are gone, and we have bits and pieces or copied versions left–to the best of my knowledge. I have found a William Tyndale version online (5 first books of old testament, and then all of New Testament) and it differs from the King James Version which has added passages to some verses; however, I fell that the KJV is probably the least tainted of all Bibles on the Market today. There are some versions that are just plain counterfeit bibles.

    Now let us add to the confusion of added passages in the bibles and then mix in different denominations and their one verse of scripture to justify their beliefs and we come up with a really big mess. It is no wonder people do not know what exactly to believe. So, when I say that I cannot find the doctrines of original sin, purgatory, limbo, infant baptism, or Jesus descent into Hell in the Bible, then I am saying that these are man’s doctrines and traditions, and yes that is about 1500 years that the ‘church’ has lied to us. This does not mean everything in the Bible is a lie, it means my work on what is believe now is more difficult, I want to know the truth–not what man has said is the truth.

    Ecclesiastes 1:5 is a prime example Men lost their lives over this verse during the inquisition, Galileo would have, had the telescope not been invented. And for the life of me, when I read that verse it says to me: The sooner you go to bed, the sooner it is time to wake up and go to work.

    Was Satan and his minions in heaven–yes at one point, but again I can only back this up Biblically. Genesis 1:31 and everything was very good. I believe that at this time frame, Satan had not ‘fallen”, but by Genesis 3 he had said in his heart “I will”–I will be God–and the temptation of man began what he thought would be the overthrow of the Almighty.

    How would I feel if my child had been held by a terrorist. She was held at gunpoint, and dyes it terrified me to think of all the ramifications that could have happened; I suppose that this was about the time I felt it necessary to get my own life in order and began an in depth study of the scriptures. My studies are still on going. Peace for now.

  8. The Atheist says:

    Lisa,

    bad memories are gone, it will be as though that person never existed.

    I have to say, I’m very glad that I don’t subscribe to your theology. I would find that idea quite disturbing!

    I believe the Holy scriptures in their original form were inspired and therefore inerrant.

    If you don’t know what the original scriptures say, on what basis do you hold this opinion?

    the KJV is probably the least tainted of all Bibles on the Market today.

    The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus and contains various passages (like the “long” ending of Mark, Jesus sweating blood, the story in John of the woman taken in adultery, the Pericope Adulterae, an explicit reference to the Trinity in 1 John, the Comma Johanneum.
    ) that are not found in earlier Greek manuscripts (like Codex Vaticanus for example). My advice would be to prefer the NIV over KJV – that’s probably the most accurate English translation based on some of the oldest extant Greek manuscripts.

    his does not mean everything in the Bible is a lie, it means my work on what is believe now is more difficult, I want to know the truth–not what man has said is the truth.

    Lisa, I am sincerely happy to hear you say this. First, let me say that I don’t believe everything in the Bible is a lie either. And like you, I also want to know the truth and not what has been passed down as truth and accepted without question. If this is how you really feel, then I had a wrong impression of you and I apologize.

    …I believe that at this time frame, Satan had not ‘fallen”…

    I dont’ think the time frame is important. The point is that even if there is absolute peace in heaven as you believe there will be, there is still the potential that hate and heavenly war could break out (if we believe all the Bible has to say about heaven – maybe we don’t?). So if there was peace before Satan’s fall, and out of that peace came hostility, then there is no reason to believe that hostility could not appear in heaven in the future as well (that is, if we agree that all creatures retain free will). If this is the case, then it would seem that your vision of everlasting love (and therefor the absence of strife) in heaven is unfounded. Your thoughts?

  9. Lisa Bee says:

    A says: I am very glad I don’t subscribe to your theology, I would find that very disturbing…
    When any one dies, whether or not they believe in God, their memories are dead. Most Christians base their ideas on Heaven and Hell as to what they perceive to them own selves to be true, as well as what they have been taught. This does not mean their beliefs to be Biblical.
    When you die (and since you don’t believe in an afterlife) then your memories-good or bad-will die with you. I believe in an afterlife–heaven or hell- and I believe that those memories that I cherish will be retained with me in heaven.
    I am not sure what verses on the trinity you refer to in John 1 unless of course it was the very beginning John 1-13 , I only referenced 1-4 (just to start off with–I will keep on with the study) . The main difference that I found was between William Tyndale’s version and all other versions. William Tyndale states “it” in verses 3-4 while all other (I used BibleGateway.com) said “him”
    Wm. Tyndale’s vs 4:”In it was lyfe” other versions of vs. 4: “In him was life.” verse 10 they all agree though …and the world(e) was made by him. So I will keep looking for a discrepancy I feel would justify a discredit to the doctrine of the Trinity. I am currently trying to discredit other doctrines such as original sin, purgatory, limbo , etc. I do believe that the Roman Catholic Church has done much damage to the true church from the c 4th century to the current date with their doctrines (I refer to as evil, for they are found nowhere in scripture),
    I tried to find the Codex Vaticanus in English and the same problem would still exist with it as far as accountability for accuracy in translation. Do you have any links to full versions of any ancient manuscripts in English? This is the only language I know (unfortunately) and as you can tell, I quite often butcher it especially when writing. It is odd though I don.t have any problem reading William Tyndale’s version which mainly consists of first 5 books of OT and then all of NT.

  10. The Atheist says:

    Lisa,

    I said this on another thread but let me repeat it here to you: Sorry to abandon our conversation for a while – I got very busy again with a combination of a tough work schedule and some personal commitments I had to fulfill.

    I believe in an afterlife–heaven or hell- and I believe that those memories that I cherish will be retained with me in heaven.

    That’s a curious position. You seem to be saying that you will suffer memory lapses! If you remember only “good things” and not “bad things”, what about things that are neither good or bad? What about things that are mostly good but have some bad elements in them too, or things that are good from a certain point of view, but bad from another? It sounds from your description like you will feel distressed in the same way an amnesiac feels when he firsts loses his memory. That in itself seems like a “bad” experience.

    I am not sure what verses on the trinity you refer to in John 1…

    Not John 1. 1 John! :)) Look at 1 John 5:7, an important verse for justifying the notion of trinity. The KJV, translated from the Textus Receptus says: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” However, the NIV, translated from the much earlier Alexandrian Family of manuscripts says: “For there are three that testify:” Big difference, huh?

    The next verse, 1 John 5:8 is different too. KVJ translates Textus Receptus: “And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” NIV translates the Alexandrian manuscripts: “the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”

    I will keep looking for a discrepancy I feel would justify a discredit to the doctrine of the Trinity.

    I can give you a number of verses to discredit the trinity, but that’s quite a different topic.

    I tried to find the Codex Vaticanus in English and the same problem would still exist with it as far as accountability for accuracy in translation.

    There may well be problems with a particular translation, but that is very different from the much larger problem of corruption that I am pointing out.

    Do you have any links to full versions of any ancient manuscripts in English?

    Here is a link to an English translation of the codex Sinaiticus: http://www.sinaiticus.com/

    I would also recommend “The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament” by Bart Ehrman:

    http://www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Corruption-Scripture-Christological-Controversies/dp/0195102797

    In this book, Ehrman explains just how profound and wide-spread the problem of corruption actually is for those who try to reconstruct the original text of the New Testament. He gives several excellent examples and he describes the techniques for determining which fragments are the closest to the originals. If you’re a serious student of the New Testament, this book is a “must read”.

  11. Boo says:

    First off for Lisa Bee,
    The bible is very clear in teaching that we will have memory in heaven. You need to study up a little bit before answering questions. And No, Luke 16 is not a parable

    Second to Atheist,
    Luke 16 the rich man is not in Hell yet, he is in Hades. There is a huge difference

    http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2244

    Go to http://www.apologeticspress.org and search any issue and they look at both sides of the arguments.

  12. Lisa Bee says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable—Luke 16 on the rich man and Lazarus, since Jesus was talking to the Pharisee’s (not in hell, hades at that time) this would then make it a parable by most definitions. As far as the rich man not in hell yet, he is in hades please back that up. Hades is a term of Greek mythology for the underworld and is named after its ruler. Hades was never considered a place of fire, as Luke 16 indicates. Since you refer to the rich man was not in hell, then you must agree with the RC version of Jesus’ descent into hell upon death, which i do no agree with and find it unbiblical–unable to justify this doctrine through scripture.
    Please also find scripture to back up your statement that we will have memory in heaven, I personally said we will not have a bad-memory hence no more tears.

  13. The Atheist says:

    Boo,

    Welcome to the blog!

    the rich man is not in Hell yet, he is in Hades. There is a huge difference

    I’ll say there is! Hades has a Greek origin (Haides) and is a part of Greek mythology whereas Hell has a Norse origin (Hel) and is a part of Norse mythology, and Gehenna is Hebrew and is part of Hebrew mythology. I see no good basis for concluding that the Greek Haides and the Greek transliteration of Gehenna mean different things to the New Testament writers. Do you?

  14. Lisa Bee says:

    I believe we may have scarred Boo off!

  15. The Atheist says:

    Lisa,

    I believe we may have scarred Boo off!

    What do you mean, “we”?

    (
    just kidding :))
    )

  16. lisa bee says:

    Bee Says:

    October 24, 2008 at 10:48 am
    the story

    Testing this blockquote that you gave me, But this is not the problem I am having, I am unable to highlight anything past a certain point in order to copy (cut and paste).
    What do you mean we? I did give him/her a pretty rough time maybe they are looking up the scripture to ‘back up’ his statement on the richman in hades–in which case he won’t be back, as I have yet to find that answer myself.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: