So what’s so great about a Christian heaven?

[Mr Spinkles]

But as for the "particulars" of heaven... good luck. Our vocabulary cannot describe it and our physical focus impairs our spiritual vision.

That is one possibility. Another possibility is that "heaven" is a cognitively meaningless term that appears in the midst of lines of superstitious (though perhaps emotionally uplifting) nonsense. Both possibilities could explain why it is so difficult to describe the "particulars" of heaven. The same reasoning could explain why it is so difficult to describe the particulars of quigglyploofs.

 

[michel]

That is one possibility. Another possibility is that "heaven" is a cognitively meaningless term that appears in the midst of lines of superstitious (though perhaps emotionally uplifting) nonsense. Both possibilities could explain why it is so difficult to describe the "particulars" of heaven. The same reasoning could explain why it is so difficult to describe the particulars of quigglyploofs.

And you forget that there is the possibility that I am solipsist, that you don't exist, and that what you say everytime you post is a figment of my overactive brain - but I discount that, because I know it is wrong - THAT is nonsense.

To term Heaven as meaningless superstitious nonsense to a Christian, is, I think just on the verge of being 'rude' or 'insulting opinion of another's faith' - just as your constant reference to quigglypoofs could well be taken as being patronizing.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

And you forget that there is the possibility that I am solipsist, that you don't exist, and that what you say everytime you post is a figment of my overactive brain - but I discount that, because I know it is wrong - THAT is nonsense.

I'm sorry, I read this a couple of times and I'm still having trouble understanding what you're saying here. Could you please clarify?

To term Heaven as meaningless superstitious nonsense to a Christian, is, I think just on the verge of being 'rude' or 'insulting opinion of another's faith' - just as your constant reference to quigglypoofs could well be taken as being patronizing.

If I were to term Heaven as a meaningful scientifically-supported reality to a Christian, THAT would be patronizing.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Hmnnnn... so you contend that the beliefs of Christianity are cognitively meaningless? Do I detect some latent hostilities here? Maybe not so latent? I thought we were not supposed to malign the beliefs of others on this forum... or so I have been told. I can't speak for others, but I feel pretty maligned.

 

[greatcalgarian]

Hmnnnn... so you contend that the beliefs of Christianity are cognitively meaningless? Do I detect some latent hostilities here? Maybe not so latent? I thought we were not supposed to malign the beliefs of others on this forum... or so I have been told. I can't speak for others, but I feel pretty maligned.

I think Mr. Spinkle is putting the view of atheist regarding interpretation of Heaven in a different way as I envisaged it. It might be very rude, if I say Christians view of heaven is just a figment of their imagination. Instead, I respect Christian faith, and put it this way:
Any one who does not have enough spiritual aspiration will not be able to recognize the present or existence of heaven, and this include many atheist, agnostic, or even some uu etc. This put the burden of not believing in heaven in the hand of atheist.:jiggy:

 

[DreamQuickBook]

Hmnnnn... so you contend that the beliefs of Christianity are cognitively meaningless? Do I detect some latent hostilities here? Maybe not so latent? I thought we were not supposed to malign the beliefs of others on this forum... or so I have been told. I can't speak for others, but I feel pretty maligned.

Well, the idea of heaven is offensive to those who, given the paradigm, are told they are spending an eternity in hell because they are different. So, to say that this kind of thinking is... *insert many negative terms here*... seems justified to me.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Hmnnnn... so you contend that the beliefs of Christianity are cognitively meaningless?

No. That's not what I wrote.

Do I detect some latent hostilities here? Maybe not so latent? I thought we were not supposed to malign the beliefs of others on this forum... or so I have been told. I can't speak for others, but I feel pretty maligned.

s2a has asked about the Christian concept of heaven. You responded that the "particulars" of heaven cannot be described, because we all lack the "spiritual vision" and the vocabulary for such a task.

Similarly, a believer in quigglyploofs might say that the "particulars" of quigglyploofs cannot be described because we all lack the spiritual vision and the vocabulary. Sure, that's one possibility. Another possibility is that we cannot describe the particulars of quigglyploofs because it is a meaningless word that does not correspond to an external reality.

That's all I'm saying. I'm sorry you feel maligned, but I neither feel nor intend to convey any hostility towards anyone.

Well, the idea of heaven is offensive to those who, given the paradigm, are told they are spending an eternity in hell because they are different.

Please Jocose, speak for yourself. For the record, I am not offended at all that some people believe I am going to hell. If that's what someone believes, give it to me straight, don't be shy.

 

[Scuba Pete]

No. That's not what I wrote.

that "heaven" is a cognitively meaningless term that appears in the midst of lines of superstitious (though perhaps emotionally uplifting) nonsense.

So WHAT are you saying here Spinks? That heaven is NOT a Christian belief, or that your post was one big typo? I hasten to point out that were I to say anything CLOSE to this inflmammatory about any other religion's beliefs (including atheism) that I would have been censured. But so we have a double standard... at least it doesn't affect you.

s2a has asked about the Christian concept of heaven.

Then why answer? You don't CLAIM to be Christian. If you are going to answer at least TRY to answer from the Christian's perspective. Oh I forgot... double standard. You are immune to the laws that I must uphold.

Now can the CHRISTIANS be allowed to answer this question?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

So WHAT are you saying here Spinks? That heaven is NOT a Christian belief, or that your post was one big typo?

*sigh*...I am saying that... *rewinds handheld recorder, presses Play button*... the "particulars" of Heaven may be impossible to describe because the word is simply nonsensical. I am not contending, as you suggested, that "the beliefs of Christianity are cognitively meaningless". (For the record, some Christian beliefs are cognitively meaningless, in my opinion--but not all.)

I hasten to point out that were I to say anything CLOSE to this inflmammatory about any other religion's beliefs (including atheism) that I would have been censured.

I find nothing inflammatory about what I am saying: I think the word 'Heaven' does not describe an external reality and is therefore meaningless. I'm not trying to upset you or anyone, I'm just stating my opinion. I'm sorry that it offends you.

This attempt to steer us back on topic is probably futile, but.....do you agree or disagree that the "particulars" of a nonsense word are difficult to describe? If you agree, upon what grounds (other than personal faith/revelation) do you embrace 'Heaven' as a word which corresponds to an incomprehensible reality, and reject the possibility that it is simply nonsensical superstition?

But so we have a double standard... at least it doesn't affect you.

Poorly concealed ad hominem. I think this new tangent discussion is unfortunate (and off topic). I made a perfectly legitimate point; rather than posting about how much it hurt your feelings and what a big meanie I am, perhaps you should address it.

I encourage you to take your complaints to me or the appropriate SuperMods and/or Admins via PM, making sure to include any and all instances in which I censured a Christian for expressing their opinion (in the appropriate forum) regarding atheism.

Then why answer? You don't CLAIM to be Christian. If you are going to answer at least TRY to answer from the Christian's perspective. Oh I forgot... double standard. You are immune to the laws that I must uphold.

I have no obligation to answer from anyone's perspective but my own, as the thread is located in *gasp!* the Debate Forum . Please address further off topic comments about me or the site in general to the appropriate parties via Private Message.

Now can the CHRISTIANS be allowed to answer this question?

I am not aware of anything that has or is preventing them (or non-Christians) from doing so. I'm curious to see if you'll be "allowed" to answer my questions.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Since I am not allowed to respond publically, my PM has been sent.

 

[michel]

Since I am not allowed to respond publically, my PM has been sent.

NetDoc, I have tried to send you a message - but your post box is full; I am off to lunch now, but perhaps after, you could explain this post, and the PM that you have sent me - neither of which I can understand........

 

[Green Gaia]

Since I am not allowed to respond publically, my PM has been sent.

***MOD POST***

Of course you are allowed to respond, but since this thread is in the General Debates (which I'm about to move to Religious Debates), everyone else is allowed to respond as well. I'm not sure what went wrong here (I'm having trouble following all the quotes, and quotes within quotes). Let's all take a deep breath and calm down. ND and Spinks please PM me if I've missed something here.

Maize

 

[s2a]

Maize said (and subsequently acted):

"***MOD POST***

Of course you are allowed to respond, but since this thread is in the General Debates (which I'm about to move to Religious Debates), everyone else is allowed to respond as well. I'm not sure what went wrong here (I'm having trouble following all the quotes, and quotes within quotes). Let's all take a deep breath and calm down. ND and Spinks please PM me if I've missed something here.

Maybe I'm missing something here."

Maybe I am too.

I thought it appropriate to initiate this thread under General Debates in order to accommodate the established (sitewide) rules of REF, notably:

"4.) Each individual religion forum is there for that religion's education and people who abide by that religion to discuss in their religious conversations. We will not tolerate any outside debate about that specific religion in that specific forum. If you wish to have some inner debate about the context in that post within that religion that is fine, BUT NO OUTSIDE DEBATE OR VIEW POINTS ALLOWED. We have other forums for that specific reason."

By moving this thread to Religious Debates, it now violates the above rule. After all, the established foundational points and premised question is one that is lent from an atheist's perspective - not a Christian one. Does not such a viewpoint represent an "outside" perspective? Does not the transferral of this thread to Religious Debates now preclude my own participation within (if yet espousing an atheist's view in rebuttal or debate)? Unless I'm missing something (or misunderstanding something), this move strikes me as, well...capricious at best, and prejudicial (intentional or not) on face value alone.

If this thread had originated within the Religious Debates forum, and had been subsequently moved to the General Debates forum (to facilitate open and unrestricted viewpoints and debate - within established forum rules and parameters), that would have made sense to me.

Note: While I consider the semantical sparring that has pervaded this thread of late to be off-topic, such occurrences are hardly rare or unprecedented in open debates/discussions, and typically burn themselves out after a time.

The best "moderation" of this thread imo, would have been adherence to the "special rules" as posted within the General Debates forum, itself:

"Being this is a debate forum it will be very loosely moderated. The only things that will be deleted or edited are complete hatred posts and non-etiquette posts. We want everyone to have a good friendly time debating but remember everybody has a different view and try not to take it personal."

So be warned, if you participate in this forum be prepared for the worst."

As I understand this, moderators should limit themselves to addressing "hatred posts and non-etiquette posts" alone, as suggested above. Gentle moderator nudging of participants to remain (relatively) on-topic is certainly helpful, but unnecessary for areas specifically designated as open to any and all viewpoints, especially with the appropriate caveat as provided.

So, am I missing something?

I invite clarification and explanation from suitable parties, either by PM, email, or within this thread.

Thanks,

s2a

 

[Pah]

:banghead3 I lost the first reposne I typed and I have to tell you it WAS terrific.

Normally we do not respond to a public questioning of what a moderator does but I'm making an exception. All queries as to why we do something are, by the rules, done in PM or email (PM prefered). I'm hoping, by responding, that others will also understand a bit more about RF.

Rule 4 applies to Discuss Individuals Religions - that family of forums with particular faiths in the title. There, we hope that posting is made for education - education of the individual religion. Originally it was a place for authoritative facts about a religion but has evolved into a discussion and question area that teaches. Questions are allowed from those without the particular faith but only if they serve a non-confrontational learning experience.

Our discussion forums are designed to provide a place where all opinion is welcome and to be a place where the "RF family" meets and talks about most anything.

Debate is where opinion is expressed and other members may challange it. There are three catagories of debate - Religious, General and Political. General is intended to hold those "debates" when they do not fit the other two. Religious Debates is further subdivided into specific areas with General Religious Debates designed to be the "catch-all".

This thread is religious in topic and, although not wrong per se in General Debates, is more appropriate in General Religious Debates.

I hope this helps. But if you have further questions, please PM me.

Bob

I thought it appropriate to initiate this thread under General Debates in order to accommodate the established (sitewide) rules of REF, notably:

"4.) Each individual religion forum is there for that religion's education and people who abide by that religion to discuss in their religious conversations. We will not tolerate any outside debate about that specific religion in that specific forum. If you wish to have some inner debate about the context in that post within that religion that is fine, BUT NO OUTSIDE DEBATE OR VIEW POINTS ALLOWED. We have other forums for that specific reason."

By moving this thread to Religious Debates, it now violates the above rule. After all, the established foundational points and premised question is one that is lent from an atheist's perspective - not a Christian one. Does not such a viewpoint represent an "outside" perspective? Does not the transferral of this thread to Religious Debates now preclude my own participation within (if yet espousing an atheist's view in rebuttal or debate)? Unless I'm missing something (or misunderstanding something), this move strikes me as, well...capricious at best, and prejudicial (intentional or not) on face value alone.

If this thread had originated within the Religious Debates forum, and had been subsequently moved to the General Debates forum (to facilitate open and unrestricted viewpoints and debate - within established forum rules and parameters), that would have made sense to me.

Note: While I consider the semantical sparring that has pervaded this thread of late to be off-topic, such occurrences are hardly rare or unprecedented in open debates/discussions, and typically burn themselves out after a time.

The best "moderation" of this thread imo, would have been adherence to the "special rules" as posted within the General Debates forum, itself:

"Being this is a debate forum it will be very loosely moderated. The only things that will be deleted or edited are complete hatred posts and non-etiquette posts. We want everyone to have a good friendly time debating but remember everybody has a different view and try not to take it personal."

So be warned, if you participate in this forum be prepared for the worst."

As I understand this, moderators should limit themselves to addressing "hatred posts and non-etiquette posts" alone, as suggested above. Gentle moderator nudging of participants to remain (relatively) on-topic is certainly helpful, but unnecessary for areas specifically designated as open to any and all viewpoints, especially with the appropriate caveat as provided.

So, am I missing something?

I invite clarification and explanation from suitable parties, either by PM, email, or within this thread.

Thanks,

s2a

 

[s2a]

:banghead3 I lost the first reposne I typed and I have to tell you it WAS terrific.

Normally we do not respond to a public questioning of what a moderator does but I'm making an exception. All queries as to why we do something are, by the rules, done in PM or email (PM prefered). I'm hoping, by responding, that others will also understand a bit more about RF.

Rule 4 applies to Discuss Individuals Religions - that family of forums with particular faiths in the title. There, we hope that posting is made for education - education of the individual religion. Originally it was a place for authoritative facts about a religion but has evolved into a discussion and question area that teaches. Questions are allowed from those without the particular faith but only if they serve a non-confrontational learning experience.

Our discussion forums are designed to provide a place where all opinion is welcome and to be a place where the "RF family" meets and talks about most anything.

Debate is where opinion is expressed and other members may challange it. There are three catagories of debate - Religious, General and Political. General is intended to hold those "debates" when they do not fit the other two. Religious Debates is further subdivided into specific areas with General Religious Debates designed to be the "catch-all".

This thread is religious in topic and, although not wrong per se in General Debates, is more appropriate in General Religious Debates.

I hope this helps. But if you have further questions, please PM me.

Bob

Okie dokie. My bad. My misunderstanding.

I shall don my hairshirt for my next five visits to REF, and I promise to be miserable and contrite in the self-flagellation that will follow each session.

(I swear if I could find a 4x8 plank lying around here, I'd smack my forehead with it a few hundred times with appropriate chanting and repentant blood-letting).

Submissively yours,

s2a

;-)

 

[michel]

I'm sorry, I read this a couple of times and I'm still having trouble understanding what you're saying here. Could you please clarify?

Part Quote=Michel ..........."And you forget that there is the possibility that I am solipsist, that you don't exist, and that what you say everytime you post is a figment of my overactive brain - but I discount that, because I know it is wrong - THAT is nonsense. ".....

I am merely proposing an absurd argument, which has as much validity, as far as I am concerned, in that the entire world as I know it (including you) is merely a projection of my imagination - that you do not even exist, and that therefore, your ideas have no validity whatsoever, because they are emanating from my 'construction' of you in my own mind...........:biglaugh: But, of course, I don't believe that, as you well know - I was trying to give you an example that there is a great deal of doubt that can be spread around, as you do' - this time, for fun, I gave you a hypothetical example of how I could dismiss you completely. But I would never do that, Spinks, because I like you, and respect you. You have a fine mind...sometimes I question your insistance of the need for proof of everything, but that is your perogative.

 

[FFH]

No takers yet? Nary one advocate/adherent of a Christian Heaven to offer their own Scripturaly supported and detailed travel brochure of what Heaven offers the eternally after-living?

Oh well...

One detailed account of heaven keeps coming to mind and am searching for it. It's amazing what he says and he did not have an NDE, he was "caught away in the spirit," as they say and had a vision. His spirit entered into heaven while yet awake and very much alive.

He was amazed to see that his mansion prepared for him had the exact furniture style, color, shape, etc., in it, already prepared for him. His house/mansion was just as he would have liked to have had it built on earth if he had a gazillion dollars..

He was shown things that he loved on earth, but more of an enhanced experience in the heavens. This life is so one dimmensional compared to heaven...

We are so extremely limited here, compared to the heavens/paradise in which our full potential is realized...

According to NDE accounts I've read, volumes of knowledge are aquired in seconds not years...

There will be a movie coming out in a year or two, which will document a well known NDE account of heaven. She is LDS and had an NDE over 30 years ago. She is half Navajo indian and her name is Bettie Eddie. Go to Embraced By The Light: The Official Betty J. Eadie Web Site and get her book "Embraced by the Light" It is a great and wonderful book, it gives many details of heaven, and the roles we all play here on earth, which seem to weave through so many other lives and connects us all, in one way or another......

s2a you are part of an important link/role on earth...

You have brought up so many great points here on this thread, that Christians fail to address...

Please, I urge you to get any of Betty Eddie's books or tapes, they are well worth it, they have blessed my life more than any other book other than the scriptures...

There are other NDE accounts, but hers is the most complete and touches on great important aspects of heaven and earth life.

Heaven is a busy place, but just as we have a day set aside on earth for rest, so is there time for rest and relaxation in heaven of course.. God takes time off and so will we, even in heaven there is much to do, but time is taken off for rest, relaxation and recreation......

Okay here's another detailed travel brochure of heaven, just google it and found it, the one I was thinking of earlier besides Betty Eddie's book...

I've not read this book, but have seen the DVD version of Jesse Duplantis' description of heaven, as much as he could get into two hours. I'm sure the book goes into more detail, in fact I think I'll order it and read it myself and post some things from the book here as well as some things from Betty Eddie's book ..

These two books stand out the most...

"Embraced by the Light" by Betty Eddie
"Heaven Close Encounters of the God Kind" by Jesse Duplantis

I'm sure you can find a better deal than this link, but here's your travel brochure to heaven, it keeps coming to mind strongly, no need to look any further. I need to get a copy as well, like I said I've only seen the two hour DVD that goes along with this book, in which he recounts his travels to heaven, when his spirit is caught up into heaven, while awake in prayer, conscious and very much alive..

Heaven Close Encounters Of The God Kind - by Duplantis Jesse (this is the travel brochure to heaven you've been asking for as are Betty Eddie's materials equally or more preferred, myself being LDS as she is, but Jesse's account of heaven is nice too)

Jesse Duplantis is a great guy and a kidder so ya gotta forgive the title, that's just his nature, he's a kidder/jokester, very funny guy and the most in tune and down to earth preacher I have ever listened to. Everyone loves listening to him, he's a great story teller, but this is not a story it's the truth, I know that deep within my being/spirit. His church is in New Orleans and was hit directly by hurricane Katrina but was not damaged at all while other houses and buildings all around his church were destroyed. This is a documented miracle.....

Her book "Embraced by the Light" is comforting and inspiring, a good account of heaven, but many things were withheld from her memory, upon returning to her lifeless body, which came back to life, after bleeding to death, after a routine hystorectomy, while unattended in the hospital...

Betty Eddie (LDS half Navajo indian)

His account of heaven gives details of the mansions, the scenery, etc., no NDE here, his spirit was rather caught up into heaven while fully conscious, awake and alive, while in prayer...

Jesse Duplantis (Kajun from New Orleans )

 

[blackout]

s2a, LOL!

Great passionate post!
I liked it.

Consider this.
Y'shua/Jesus told us the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand...
in the Midst of Us... Now.... Within....
The Kingdom of God comes without perception.
Rises like three measures of yeast...
Branches out like a tree...
Is FOUND, as some lost, or misplaced treasure.

Jesus REVEALED the Kingdom of God on earth,
and gave CLUE AFTER CLUE,
that we are to do the same.

He said we could do "greater things than these",
with just a mustard seed of HIS KIND of ACTIVE living faith.

Heaven IS right here,
while you watch your flat screen....
NO, WIDE-screen .... In the Spirit,
"channeling" LIFE, in the "state" of un-"programmable" mind.
God is speaking to you there in your beer.... no, cognac.
Turn down the tv "volume" and HEAR "Him" there.
or Turn up the tv volume and hear "Him" there too!

I entreat that ETERNITY is NOW.
The eternal Now.
Not past, not future,
but only and ever found,
by LIVING LIFE NOW,
ALIVE, WIDE AWAKE,
in the ever unfolding NOW.

It may sound more Buddist in nature...
but if the christian churches
(no offense please)
would stop "screwing up" the entire meaning of Jesus,
who He was, his message and life...
and what He was trying to reveal to us...

we would find that this concept is entirely Jesus.
It's right in front of our noses.
Hidden right in plain view,
like so many many other things.

Thanks for the late night chuckle.

 

[Muffled]

I haven't read much of this thread. I did read most of the OP which was like reading a book. Would that I had eternity to read it all, lol.

I thought I had posted to this thread but evidently not, so it must have been a different thread with the same subject.

I don't pray "on earth as it is in Heaven" for no reason. I believe we were created to inhabit human bodies and are most happy in the physical world. Notice that Jesus doesn't have us pray to be taken to Heaven as soon as possible. Maybe He knew something, eh?

Interestingly enough with not much memory of previous lives, this life seems like a new discovery to me. How can I get bored with my millions of old lives if I can't remember them. Each life gives me a fresh start unless God wants to reveal more.

 

[logician]

Heaven is just a made up place for those who are afraid of death. As to what it is, take your pick of myths.