God and heaven and hell in the After Life: if it turns to be true of false?

[Blastcat]

I think the really big winners are the ones who do unto other s as they would have it done unto them.

People do say that.. but then just because YOU might like to be treated in a certain way is NO guarantee that I want to be treated in the same way. I may HATE to be treated the way you like the best. It looks like even the golden rule needs to be nuanced.

I do one clever thing for someone else.
Upon my arrival (hope I make it) in heaven......
everyone returns the gesture in the same proportions....times however many participants there may be!

You can picture anything you like.. it doesn't mean it's real. But you do have nice dreams. Do you always just go with what feels the nicest? Is that how you evaluate reality?

If our thoughts and feelings are tied to our brains......dust....in a box.....in the ground.
Eternal darkness is physically real.
No form of light follows anyone into the grave.

That's another one of your dreams? You can't possibly know that.. but.. hey.. why not say things that sound nice to you.. it's fun, after all. Right? Is that how you evaluate reality?

As for sharing dreams.....
Isn't heaven the place where your dreams come true?
and you want to do that by yourself?

Heaven is a place where your wildest dreams come true.. What a lovely end to this fairy tale, good night, and sleep tight. Is that what you think reality is.. some kind of a dream you make up as you go?

 

[Blastcat]

Demeaning, unproductive.....

Not in my opinion. You don't LIKE his point of view. Ok.. you don't have to.

 

[Blastcat]

If the islamo-christian heaven is true, you would be happy there. You don't have to believe it's real, but I don't see how anyone could imagine that an all powerful God promising eternal bliss to His followers wasn't one step ahead of you.



Who said anything about Pascal's wager? Given the op it's better to be an incorrect believer than an incorrect disbeliever. They were the 2 options.

You still have to be a genuine believer though rather than a pragmatist.

That's called Pascal's Wager.. look it up , it's very famous.

 

[Blastcat]

I think believing is not bound to possible or impossible.

But it should be. IS it a good idea to base one's belief on something that is IMPOSSIBLE? .. if so, please explain.
It's obvious to me that someone who believes something that is impossible is .. what's the technical word I'm looking for?

Oh yes., wrong.

 

[Blastcat]

If there is no god, then theists will lose nothing since there will be no judgment day or anything. But if there is god whom atheists deny his existence, then they will be in extreme loss when they are faced with his judgment in the hereafter

Sounds like shallow thinking to me. IF there is no god, the theist will have wasted his life on a false belief system. He could have spent it better by not believing. The theist only has this one life, if there is no god.

Now, the atheist also has only one life, but doesn't waste his life on a false belief. He spent his time and money on other, truer things.

Now, if there IS a god, and the atheist will be burned in hell for all eternity because of not having a belief without evidence, then the god in question is perfectly monstrous. This god would never deserve being worshiped in any way.

If there is a god , and the theist did the right thing by believing all along then fine, worship this perfectly monstrous god for eternity.

Oh yes, and as someone said in here. some Christian. Hell isn't such a bad place after all.. then I sure PICK HELL.. no hesitation. I don't to spend eternity with some codependent weirdo deity who demands to be worshiped. You never know what's he's going to do NEXT..

I think the wager only works with a really horrible Hell.. and that negates the idea of a loving and kind god. Period.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Oh, you missed the sarcasm. The white-bearded one was medically examined for potency and found capable.

 

[Blastcat]

Hi Blastcat,

Thanks for your reply. I agree with you that if something is totally impossible, then its foolish to hope in it.

Ok, good so far.. I like when people can agree.

But people who put such hope in the bibles message do so because the people who penned the bible did have such proof of the things that would normally be impossibe for us to know. The proof offered to them may seem like heresay to us because we were not there to witness any said proofs ourselves, so i understand why its easy for some to hold the view you do. This is why its a matter of faith really.

Can you explain how using faith to judge if what the Bible says is true or not works?

If you believe in something enough, it becomes true? How does that work?
Sorry, but just because you have faith that something is true doesn't MAKE it true. You may have a HUGE conviction but you can be HUGELY wrong, as well.

But yes, I agree.. we can't possibly verify that the Bible stories are true. That's a huge problem

The kind of hope we are holding is the one testified to by people of the past. I can understand why that is not sufficient for many reasoning minds today.

I agree. It doesn't sound reasonable at all. To me, believing in something that isn't reasonable is a very weird concept. You are almost GUARANTEEING that you will be most likely wrong by not using the best reasoning possible. But then again, I think that a lot of theists really don't CARE if what they believe is true or not. They "have" their beliefs, and that's pretty much that. But for me, I would NEVER ever want to believe in something that I deemed UNREASONABLE.. wow.. I'd just drop the unreasonable belief like a hot potato. But the truth actually matters to me. I don't think that's necessarily the case for everyone.

What happened 2,000 years ago should not concern us at all. However, when i studied the bible, i found that what is recorded in the bible has a direct bearing on our day today and the very things foretold have seen fulfillment and continuing to be fulfilled today.

Right. I hear that a lot. Prophecy is fulfilled and so on. But.. when I go through the prophecies in the Bible, one by one.. they are either too trivial to prove anything miraculous, too vague to make sense of..or completely wrong. So, we don't agree on the accuracy of the Bible prophecies.

Thats why I believe the bibles message and have put my hope in it. There is no way that people 2,000 years ago could have predicted the things we are seeing today.

That's true. It is impossible, and they don't. I think you are referring to the extremely vague and trivially true kinds of prophecies any good con man can make up on the spur of the moment. A lot of people believe in psychics, and for the same kinds of bad reasoning.

But then again, you don't really care about good reasoning, do you? What you care about is the belief that you already have.. and keeping that belief, in spite of poor to nonexistent evidence.

Yes, I'm very familiar with how this all works.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Rotation!

Newton says that if no force is applied a rotating body will keep on rotating till eternity. Then there is Heisenberg's probability. Then there are virtual particles. One cannot put one's finger on anything. Nothing is at rest. Such is the unknown world of Brahman.

Heaven is a place where your wildest dreams come true..

Don't have wild dreams. Do you?

 

[shawn001]

"I believe in one less god

Richard Carrier, in Sense and Goodness Without God, writes on page 255:But if the idea of a god is inherently illogical (if the very idea is self-contradictory or meaningless), or if it is contradicted by the evidence, then there are strong positive reasons to take a harder stance as an atheist – with respect to that particular god. For in this sense, even believers are strong atheists – they deny the existence of hundreds of gods. Atheists like me merely deny one more god than everyone else already does – in fact, I deny the existence of the same god already denied by believers in other gods, so I am not doing anything that billions of people don’t do already.


In other words, if you are a Christian, you probably don't believe in the existence of Allah, Vishnu or any of the myriad of other gods that people have followed throughout history. I don't believe in those gods either, so in this sense I'm not all that different to you. The only small difference is that I believe in one less God.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It's obvious to me that someone who believes something that is impossible is ..

What can be impossible if you believe in God? Virgin birth, flying to heaven on a white beast, turning water into wine (my, my), rising from death, moving Himalayas to South America?

If you know .. with what are we burned in hell with? Wood, oil, gas?

I don't to spend eternity with some codependent weirdo deity who demands to be worshiped.

Do you think the Gods who demand worship are weird?

 

[Blastcat]

Thank you again.

Yes, and I respect how atheists feel. I wish we all respect each other's feelings, even if we disagree with each other's beliefs.

I respect your humanity, as to your feelings?.. we all have feelings.. I'm not too sure why I should "respect" your feelings..
But when it comes to your ideas? I need never respect those at all. Your ideas might deserve to NOT be respected. It's a case by case scenario with me.. Say something evil and vile, and I won't respect that at all. I can guarantee you that.

I respect YOU as a person. That is enough. I won't needlessly put you down. You aren't a dog, you're a human. I don't know why you felt the need to plead for respect. Did I show a lack of respect for you?

If so, I heartily apologize. I'm actually a newbie at forums like this.. and might conceivably make newbie errors. Forgive me, if you can.

 

[Blastcat]

What can be impossible if you believe in God? Virgin birth, flying to heaven on a white beast, turning water into wine (my, my), rising from death, moving Himalayas to South America?

Right.. everything is possible.. even self-contradictory beliefs are possible.. why not?

Now, everything is possible.. A=A and A=nonA

yes.. and you think this is meaningful, well, not in my world. But maybe you are being ironic. It's really hard to tell with you. One thing I will tell you is that if you think that absolutely EVERYTHING is possible, I can't really expect you to discern reality from fiction. I can't possibly have a rational discussion with someone who is so quick to abandon rationality.

So, thanks for the info, but if you truly believe what I quoted above, that everything is possible.. I can't talk to you. Oh, and that icon is offensive to me.

 

[Blastcat]

Newton says that if no force is applied a rotating body will keep on rotating till eternity. Then there is Heisenberg's probability. Then there are virtual particles. One cannot put one's finger on anything. Nothing is at rest. Such is the unknown world of Brahman.Don't have wild dreams. Do you?

I can't make heads or tails of that.

 

[Blastcat]

Do you think the Gods who demand worship are weird?

Yes. I said as much. I haven't changed my mind between then and now.

Why would an all powerful god need worship? Does he need some kind of validation? It's codependency at it's finest. Some sick weirdo version of an immature, insecure child god. I would fear such a god if it were possible.

 

[shawn001]

This didn't actually happen, but pretty good on hell.


Dr. Schambaugh, of the University of Oklahoma School of Chemical Engineering, Final Exam question for May of 1997. Dr. Schambaugh is known for asking questions such as, "why do airplanes fly?" on his final exams. His one and only final exam question in May 1997 for his Momentum, Heat and Mass Transfer II class was: "Is hell exothermic or endothermic? Support your answer with proof."

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's Law or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following:

"First, We postulate that if souls exist, then they must have some mass. If they do, then a mole of souls can also have a mass. So, at what rate are souls moving into hell and at what rate are souls leaving? I think we can safely assume that once a soul gets to hell, it will not leave.

Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for souls entering hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, then you will go to hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and souls go to hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in hell to increase exponentially.

Now, we look at the rate of change in volume in hell. Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in hell to stay the same, the ratio of the mass of souls and volume needs to stay constant. Two options exist:

If hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter hell, then the temperature and pressure in hell will increase until all hell breaks loose.
If hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until hell freezes over.
So which is it? If we accept the quote given to me by Theresa Manyan during Freshman year, "that it will be a cold night in hell before I sleep with you" and take into account the fact that I still have NOT succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then Option 2 cannot be true...Thus, hell is exothermic."

 

[Aupmanyav]

So, thanks for the info, but if you truly believe what I quoted above, that everything is possible.. I can't talk to you. Oh, and that icon is offensive to me.

Why should it be offensive? It is used in East to denote welfare for all for thousands of years. It was used by Greeks, Romans, Jews and Christians in history. How are we responsible for what a mad man did in Germany?

Swastikas have been found in ancient Jewish synagogues alongside the Star of David. Excavations of a group of 3 synagogues, the Mooz Haim Synagogue, ..

For Hindus, both Swastika and Star of David are equally important. See my albums Swasti and Swasti1.

One thing I will tell you is that if you think that absolutely EVERYTHING is possible, I can't really expect you to discern reality from fiction. I can't possibly have a rational discussion with someone who is so quick to abandon rationality.

That is the problem, knowing what is reality and what is fiction. Smart Guy said "I think believing is not bound to possible or impossible."

 

[Aupmanyav]

Why would an all powerful god need worship? Does he need some kind of validation?

1 Chronicles 16:23-31
23 Sing to the LORD, all the earth; proclaim his salvation day after day.
24 Declare his gloryamong the nations, his marvelous deeds among all peoples.
25 For great is the LORD and most worthy of praise; he is to be feared above all gods.
26 For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the LORD made the heavens.
27 Splendor and majesty are before him; strength and joy in his dwelling place.
28 Ascribe to the LORD, O families of nations, ascribe to the LORD glory and strength,
29 ascribe to the LORD the glory due his name. Bring an offering and come before him; worship the LORD in the splendor of his holiness.
30 Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved.
31 Let the heavens rejoice, let the earth be glad; let them say among the nations, "The LORD reigns!"

44 Bible verses about worship:
44 Bible Verses about Worship - DailyVerses.net

 

[Aupmanyav]

Newton says that if no force is applied a rotating body will keep on rotating till eternity.

That was in reply to a post by Thief which said:

For movement to be noted.....you need point A and motion toward point B.

In case of sub-atomic particles, there is motion, but there is no change (of motion).

 

[Smart_Guy]

But it should be. IS it a good idea to base one's belief on something that is IMPOSSIBLE? .. if so, please explain.
It's obvious to me that someone who believes something that is impossible is .. what's the technical word I'm looking for?
Oh yes., wrong.

Oh, I didn't mean believing in the impossible itself. I meant believing in what might not seem to be be proven to others, like God's existence.

I respect your humanity, as to your feelings?.. we all have feelings.. I'm not too sure why I should 'respect' your feelings..
But when it comes to your ideas? I need never respect those at all. Your ideas might deserve to NOT be respected. It's a case by case scenario with me.. Say something evil and vile, and I won't respect that at all. I can guarantee you that.

I respect YOU as a person. That is enough. I won't needlessly put you down. You aren't a dog, you're a human. I don't know why you felt the need to plead for respect. Did I show a lack of respect for you?

If so, I heartily apologize. I'm actually a newbie at forums like this.. and might conceivably make newbie errors. Forgive me, if you can.

Please don't get me wrong, I wasn't talking about you when I wished people should respect each other. I only stated that I respect your feelings in believing that God does not exist and heaven and hell are fictions, even tho they are against my beliefs, and hoped that everyone would do the same. If atheists can't believe in the first place, how can they be blamed for anything? It hurts me when I see believers bash atheists for stuff like where they get their morals from. That bashing is wrong.

Also, you said "I'm not too sure why I should 'respect' your feelings." Did you perhaps mean to say "disrespect" instead of "respect"? We all have feelings and it is only humane to respects each others feelings. How can one respect another as a person without respecting their feelings? And, I didn't say you should respect ideas, which is different than respecting the freedom of having ideas.

You're not in the wrong at all. There was no need apologize.

When I first came here I felt something different too. People here are mostly nice people that co-exist regardless. Religious talk can be very delicate, but once we feel for each other, it becomes pleasant to even debate things.

Welcome aboard, my friend

 

[Curious George]

Sounds like shallow thinking to me. IF there is no god, the theist will have wasted his life on a false belief system. He could have spent it better by not believing. The theist only has this one life, if there is no god.

Now, the atheist also has only one life, but doesn't waste his life on a false belief. He spent his time and money on other, truer things.

Now, if there IS a god, and the atheist will be burned in hell for all eternity because of not having a belief without evidence, then the god in question is perfectly monstrous. This god would never deserve being worshiped in any way.

If there is a god , and the theist did the right thing by believing all along then fine, worship this perfectly monstrous god for eternity.

Oh yes, and as someone said in here. some Christian. Hell isn't such a bad place after all.. then I sure PICK HELL.. no hesitation. I don't to spend eternity with some codependent weirdo deity who demands to be worshiped. You never know what's he's going to do NEXT..

I think the wager only works with a really horrible Hell.. and that negates the idea of a loving and kind god. Period.

Your assenent is inaccurate because it leaves out too many possibilities.
With this many pages on such popular argument (Pascal's wager) I assume this has been presented. This is a problem with infinity. In order to properly make a decision we must consider all possibilities. Thus every conceivable notion of after death must be considered. While we are dealing with infinite possibilities our chances of being right becomes infinitely small. That said we have in our mix notions of gods who can forgive non-belief but punish belief in a wrong god, further we can have constructions of gods who reward disbelief and punish any belief., still further we can have gods which reward everyone regardless of belief. Despite all of these favorable deities to nontheists If we add all of these up we still get an infinitely small chance of being correct. Thus the risk of an afterlife being true or false cancels out, and we are left with only the first question "which is better believing in God or not." This is completely subjective.