Les Sleeth said:Fine so far. I didn’t say both thieves went to paradise; I said there is nothing Jesus is recorded as saying that clearly indicates because one doesn’t end up in paradise means one ends up burning in hell for eternity. I am not arguing the truth of falsity of hell or heaven, only what we can safely assume from Jesus’ words.
Well know you got me all mixed up. How can you believe in heaven and hell and assume from what Jesus said that he does not, where did you get your notion that a heaven and a hell exists from then, even if you consider hell as something many do not?
It doesn’t matter “what he did not speak.” You can’t assume anything from what he didn’t say, you can only be sure of what he did speak (or what biblical authors say he spoke). He didn’t say the non-repentant thief was going to Los Angeles, so should we assume he might have been sent there?
You can assume not for two reasons Los Angelus did not exist at that time. How can you contend that the words spoken to the good thief have no implications on what is meant to the other? Do you really believe this? You said that you had undergrad degree in religious studies, is this conclusion of what they teach? My education is based on San Tomas Aquinas and it is quite the opposite of there conclusion. Notwithstanding I understand quite well why this happens because no one really understands there own interpretation of the words that someone else spoke either insinuated or not because you can not know there thoughts. Only sometimes do we get it real close and sometimes we are way off the mark.
But that isn’t true. We can and do think in plenty of ways other than opposites. Only blockheads think only black or white. The discriminating thinker forms his concepts from the way reality is, and reality is more than one extreme or the other.
You know what I mean but if you insist I am a blockhead that’s OK. If you’re interested in how I think read this thread you missed. Moving Finger did not get it maybe you can. https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=121360
Now you’re talking. Logically, if paradise is to be in the presence of, or one with God, then the absence of God might be interpreted as hell (at least for lovers of God – those who don’t love God might not consider not being unified with God a problem). All I said (or meant to say) was that the mainstream conception of hell as burning in agony for eternity is not supported by Jesus’ references to Gehenna.
I think I have understood you on that point and you have understood mine.
There is a big problem here though, (at least for me) if God is not separable from the universe, how would it keep part of it, to not know itself? An easy solution would be that it is.