What does one Do in Heaven - a few answers

[bilby]

The details of a fictional world are of interest only to its fans.
If you are disinterested by Harry Potter, why do you care what colour his dorm room at Hogwarts is painted? If you ask a Potter fan, and they don't know, had never really given it much thought, or tell you that they have their own guess (but no scriptural/textual backing for it), then what have you achieved? We all know that it's fiction. And any hypothetical extreme Potter fan who has lost sight of the fact that it is fiction, is not going to come back to their senses because someone points out that they don't know what colour the walls of Harry's Hogwarts dorm room are.
Your entire approach here is deeply flawed.

Is it a fictional world to Theists? Of course not - to them it is the next world after this - even after all the evidence provided by Darwin we still have kooks looking for the Ark - crazy. I actually saw a TV show where this guy goes all the way to Ireland(i guess he had a generous budget) to interview a Priest who thinks - get this - that God is the missing piece of our knowledge! Sheesh! Any fool could have told him that - Yes sir God of the Gaps - we don't know what happened before the Big Bang & yep there He is

We are not talking about people who are willing to admit that religion is fictional. As far as Atheists go all they say is that there is no evidence for God or the Heavens - and it is easily countered by religious people saying Science does not have all the answers, which it doesn't

So how do we prove that religion and its promises are fictional? By asking lots of questions - same way you spot a liar - if someone is lying about living in France - how do you prove he is lying? Easy, ask him about landmarks or the language - sooner or later he will slip up

And to me religion is much, much easier - far too easy - every question that i ask they don't know - they don't have a clue

What Does one DO In heaven? If babies or children are killed, do they grow up in heaven without parents? Do they eat in heaven? Where do they stay? Does everyone gets the same house since there can't be divisions in heaven - does this mean living in heaven would be like living in a Communist country? If the bread-winner dies and his family is fighting for their lives in the hospital does he stop caring? Is he having fun in heaven while his wife is going crazy trying to hold the family together? if a grandson is lost in the forest, slowly starving to death crying for his mommy, is Grandpa in Heaven having a grand old time?

Lots and lots of questions that they can't answer because they have no clue and even if they dare not try because that exposes their lies

You should try reading all of what I wrote. Then you wouldn't look like a fool for complaining that I didn't address a point that I specifically considered - "... And any hypothetical extreme Potter fan who has lost sight of the fact that it is fiction, is not going to come back to their senses because ..."



I stand by my assessment; Your entire approach here is deeply flawed.

 

[abaddon]

So how do we prove that religion and its promises are fictional? By asking lots of questions - same way you spot a liar - if someone is lying about living in France - how do you prove he is lying? Easy, ask him about landmarks or the language - sooner or later he will slip up

Bad analogy. Questioning someone who's moving to France when he retires and finding that he doesn't know the lay of the land yet would be the more apt analogy. So you're in effect disproving France by interrogating people who don't live there yet.

And to me religion is much, much easier - far too easy - every question that i ask they don't know - they don't have a clue

Any Christian should readily admit he doesn't have all the details. Because, why not admit it? It doesn't matter if no living human knows all the details about heaven.

if a grandson is lost in the forest, slowly starving to death crying for his mommy, is Grandpa in Heaven having a grand old time?

If his grandson's "redeemed" and expected in heaven, then maybe so. It's hell that is the thing you could be ranting about if you want to try arguing a moral case for the nonexistence of something.

 

[Sarpedon]

Yeah. Especially because finding out someone has never actually lived in France by comparing their account vs the account of proven sources is not at all analogous to heaven. As there are no proven sources of a place that does not exist. Inconsistencies in accounts are therefore of no significance. You COULD conclude that is evidence that everyone is describing something they are only imagining. But it is equally as logical for each person to conclude that their account is correct and differing accounts are erroneous.

 

[ideologyhunter]

BTW, if West Virginia is "almost Heaven", as per St. John of Denver, I'm redeeming my bus ticket now. I've been to Looneyville, and it aint a pretty sight.

 

[Ramaraksha]

You should try reading all of what I wrote. Then you wouldn't look like a fool for complaining that I didn't address a point that I specifically considered - "... And any hypothetical extreme Potter fan who has lost sight of the fact that it is fiction, is not going to come back to their senses because ..."

I stand by my assessment; Your entire approach here is deeply flawed.

Are we discussing the future of the world here? Of course not - there is room here for more than one idea - Atheists must stick to just saying there is no evidence and that's it? No other ideas allowed?
Sounds like you are biased. Are you a theist?

And it would be nice if you stop thinking you have all the answers - I do get that theists are delusional but we also talking about loved ones, about highly intelligent people and there are different ways to get thru to them.

 

[Ramaraksha]

Bad analogy. Questioning someone who's moving to France when he retires and finding that he doesn't know the lay of the land yet would be the more apt analogy. So you're in effect disproving France by interrogating people who don't live there yet.

Any Christian should readily admit he doesn't have all the details. Because, why not admit it? It doesn't matter if no living human knows all the details about heaven.

They seem to have all the other nice details - live for ever, no more worries - the easy happy life - how come they know that stuff but can't tell us what they do on a day-to-day basis?

If his grandson's "redeemed" and expected in heaven, then maybe so. It's hell that is the thing you could be ranting about if you want to try arguing a moral case for the nonexistence of something.

Basically they say that in Heaven one is happy, no more grieving or unhappiness - so does that mean they stop caring in heaven? So, theists hope that their dead loved ones are in heaven but does that mean they don't grieve when they are alive and are slowly dying and even after? What is Grandfather doing in heaven? If he is grieving for his starving grandchild then heaven being a place where there is no sorrow is untrue.

 

[Ramaraksha]

Yeah. Especially because finding out someone has never actually lived in France by comparing their account vs the account of proven sources is not at all analogous to heaven. As there are no proven sources of a place that does not exist. Inconsistencies in accounts are therefore of no significance. You COULD conclude that is evidence that everyone is describing something they are only imagining. But it is equally as logical for each person to conclude that their account is correct and differing accounts are erroneous.

Simple really - if someone is making a claim that person must prove it, right? Theists always say Atheists have not proven there is no God but that is not correct, theists are making the claim, they must prove God exists

Similarly, they claim Heaven exists and all i am asking for are details - they make cheap easy promises of the easy good life to be had - all i am doing is asking for details - ok the easy good life - but why would God have billions of people just sitting around doing nothing? Ok, they are working - so then, on what?

Their claims start falling apart pretty quickly

 

[Learner]

Simple really - if someone is making a claim that person must prove it, right? Theists always say Atheists have not proven there is no God but that is not correct, theists are making the claim, they must prove God exists

I could make the claim that atheists can't prove of a "no such thing" as God ... but obviously this is an unanwserable question because to suggest otherwise would then be a "claim" in which atheist scientists will not do. Of course this is not evidence for theists because of "no claim".

Similarly, they claim Heaven exists and all i am asking for are details - they make cheap easy promises of the easy good life to be had - all i am doing is asking for details - ok the easy good life - but why would God have billions of people just sitting around doing nothing? Ok, they are working - so then, on what?

Their claims start falling apart pretty quickly

You're repeating yourself again as the members of the forum have pointed out your flawed argument about details. What are the details you can tell us about the next life you will be? You have to highlight details here, if this is the argument you are using.

It is also unclear where you stand really. You are an atheist-Hindu but insist reincarnation is the better *edit: (more realistic) idea.

Do you actually believe in reincarnation or is it merely the philosophical ideas you prefer ?...its hard to tell by atheist-hindu. If you believe in reincarnation then you are religious! If you are not religious then you are arguing the philosophical ideas between heaven and reincarnation which means; both ideologies should be unreal to you regarding your physical perspective of reality.

I'd say you are a little mixed up. But taking note of what the other members have been pointed out. You can improve your "approach".

 

[Potoooooooo]

I asked this question a while ago on forums like these, message boards etc and have received answers well that are disappointing but expected

1. We will find out when we get there - (in other words, I have no clue)
2. We Pray, We Sing - (yep 24 hours a day, 7 days a week 52 weeks a year? I guess they go around in shifts)
3. We will be working hard, don't worry - (again, in other words, have no clue)
4. There is no heaven - we will be down on the ground until the blessed man comes down to earth - (like zombies coming out of the ground - that would be real scary)
5. We will be sent down here, like ghosts, we will be advising people (not sure i want advice from a Joe schmo who spent his life drinking and gambling, but when asked if the speaker has one and what is his adviser's name and life details, they clam up)

What is disappointing and frankly scary is that these words are coming out of the mouths of quite intelligent and educated people who are holding high-level jobs, running companies, making important decisions that involve a lot of thought and high education and intelligence & yet when it comes to the concept of Heaven something crazy happens

The amazing ability of religion to brainwash the best of minds is frankly amazing to see and behold. If this wasn't so scary, i would be laughing out loud but i fear that if climate change is real, we will be looking at a lot more mass killings in the name of religion and we know from past experience that such killings would be justified

reminds me of this

 

[Ramaraksha]

You're repeating yourself again as the members of the forum have pointed out your flawed argument about details. What are the details you can tell us about the next life you will be? You have to highlight details here, if this is the argument you are using.
It is also unclear where you stand really. You are an atheist-Hindu but insist reincarnation is the better *edit: (more realistic) idea.
Do you actually believe in reincarnation or is it merely the philosophical ideas you prefer ?...its hard to tell by atheist-hindu. If you believe in reincarnation then you are religious! If you are not religious then you are arguing the philosophical ideas between heaven and reincarnation which means; both ideologies should be unreal to you regarding your physical perspective of reality.
I'd say you are a little mixed up. But taking note of what the other members have been pointed out. You can improve your "approach".

Again, when it comes to religion why be against new ideas? To me religions like Christianity and Islam are Communist religions - 'Our way or the highway' - new ideas were discouraged esp if they ran counter to established religious ideas - in the 21st century - i feel like i am back in those days, probably because i am facing Christians?

If your young girl says to you Daddy this nice rich old guy says he will pay me 10k a month just to take notes but i will have to live with him, what would your reaction be? How many young women have been trafficked into prostitution with promises of the a wonderful high-paying job? Not just women, there are plenty of men from India stuck in the middle-east their high hopes of a nice job dashed

Why would any guy pay a young girl 10k just to take notes? Does one not ask such questions? Are jobs in the middle east all pay well? What are the working conditions like? How much do they pay exactly? How much can we send home? These are legitimate questions.

Heaven is a scam and the only way to expose it as i see it is to ask questions - ask for details - why is that a problem?

Plenty of questions have been asked about other religious claims as well - the ark for example - how many animals did he take? How big was this boat? How did Kangaroos, native to Australia get into the boat? How did the lion stop itself from eating the deer?

And of course I am sure in Darwin's time the question of how the Universe was built in 7 days was also asked

As for Reincarnation - i believe all religious ideas are but what they are - Heaven is the idea that we can run away from life and religions took advantage by promising Sugar Daddy Lands in the sky and Reincarnation is the idea that This is ALL there is - there are no other worlds, this is it!

 

[Ramaraksha]

reminds me of this

That was funny - glad to see such videos - thank you for posting that

It is insensitive but there is this question of mass murderers - we seem to have more of them lately - did they not just free a lot of people from the drudgery of life? All those people killed are now enjoying God's hospitality and the good life in heaven? They got a 30-40 year head-start? So are mass murderers heroes in heaven? Lauded for what they did?

 

[Sarpedon]

And you reincarnation people have to answer why souls would reincarnate. Most religious people are very good at figuring out the problems with other people's religion. They lack the honesty to apply that scrutiny to their own.

 

[abaddon]

So are mass murderers heroes in heaven? Lauded for what they did?

Answer those questions yourself. (And, really, do it. If you reply to this post, then include if you really think Christians would think mass murderers are heroes).

I have my reasons to criticize the belief in heaven, but I can't in the thread of an atheist who uses your tactic.

Again, you have to know their story and present it back to them as it is, but highlight the inconsistencies that are actually there. If they lack details then you adding the details is not a demonstration of the inconsistencies within their beliefs, it's a demonstration that you make shit up about their beliefs.

Making a display of how clueless you are can't convince heaven-believers that their belief is silly.

You keep asking who's theist, wondering what the bias is in people who point at the flaws of your approach. That's what fundies always do with skeptics -- accuse them of bias and not being openminded to "new" ideas. So don't resort to that either. FYI, there's nothing in my criticism of your approach that is intended to protect a religion, nor any "ism" other than skepticism.

 

[Ramaraksha]

So are mass murderers heroes in heaven? Lauded for what they did?

Answer those questions yourself. (And, really, do it. If you reply to this post, then include if you really think Christians would think mass murderers are heroes).
I have my reasons to criticize the belief in heaven, but I can't in the thread of an atheist who makes shit up.

Again, you have to know their story and present it back to them as it is, but highlight the inconsistencies that are actually there. If they lack details then you adding the details is not a demonstration of the inconsistencies within their beliefs, it's a demonstration that you're a person who makes shit up.

Making a display of how clueless you are is bad strategy.

You keep asking who's theist, wondering what the bias is in people who point at the flaws of your approach. That's what fundies always do with skeptics -- accuse them of bias and not being openminded to "new" ideas.


FYI, there's nothing in my criticism of your approach that is intended to protect a religion or any "ism" other than skepticism.

Just asking questions - and once people start getting personal instead of answering the question you know they have lost - and that is why they get personal. Instead of answering the question now it's a religious war, i have an agenda
Answer the question - if life is a sin, how is getting away from life a sin? They say suicide is a sin, because you are doing it yourself but when someone else is doing it for you, you are dead, so it's not your fault. Now you are in a happy place - is the guy who put you there evil or good?

The whole idea is about getting away from this life - that is wrong. We are given this life, this life is a Gift - the real world - this Universe is more beautiful than any heaven.

The religions that dominate today were born when times were very, very harsh, violent times when little was understood - i can understand building castles in the sky with the hope that we can run away to them

At some point we need to stop running away, stop living in dreams

 

[Ramaraksha]

And you reincarnation people have to answer why souls would reincarnate. Most religious people are very good at figuring out the problems with other people's religion. They lack the honesty to apply that scrutiny to their own.

Yep, not a problem - i will answer - nothing wrong with asking questions - yes i would be more "enlightened" when it comes to other religions and vice versa

Science and Atheism and Hinduism are all saying the same thing - THIS IS IT! This is ALL there is - Souls incarnate because they want to taste life. There is no magic land in the sky, no sitting around doing nothing - that is just a fantasy

Let's go back and take your France example for a second - you want to go to France for a visit - someone tells you it is a wonderful place - you will enjoy it there and he also tells you that he knows a rich guy over there who has a vacation home where you can stay! for Free! A cook will come and cook your meals. The fridge is fully stocked - all the food and drinks are on him. You can use his car also! And his boat as well! How wonderful!

At what point do you say why would any rich guy do that? Give you the keys to his house and let you eat and drink on his dime? and secondly, even if you could do that somehow would you do that? How would you feel taking advantage of someone else's generosity? Don't you think that is wrong?

 

[Sarpedon]

Your cartoons are bad. And you should feel bad.

And your reasoning is worse.

 

[bilby]

Science says only one thing about souls - that they are fictional.

Dualism is only possible if the Standard Model is incorrect or incomplete at the kinds of energies humans can survive (It's not - we tested it).

Discarding our best tested scientific theory in favour of a completely unevidenced phenomenon would be the exact opposite of science.

 

[Ramaraksha]

Science says only one thing about souls - that they are fictional.
Dualism is only possible if the Standard Model is incorrect or incomplete at the kinds of energies humans can survive (It's not - we tested it).
Discarding our best tested scientific theory in favour of a completely unevidenced phenomenon would be the exact opposite of science.

Just that part - the - THIS IS IT - part. We need to stop hating something just because a religion is saying it. Back in the day when ideas could easily be lost, if you want an idea to be kept alive the best way to do it is to package it via Religion. Just say God endorses this view or God did this or that and such an idea would be kept alive by its followers. The problem people have is to separate the idea from religion - The Buddha said be compassionate - doesn't matter if the Buddha said it or if it is a religious idea - it is a good idea.

Hindus talked about Brahma creating this universe, their calculations said that it was 9 billion years old, they also said there were millions of Brahmas - you can see the idea of the multiverse here. They used religion to pass down their ideas

 

[Ramaraksha]

Your cartoons are bad. And you should feel bad.
And your reasoning is worse.

Getting personal - that's not right. Make a case why the cartoon is wrong. Why would anyone just let you sit and do nothing for eternity? You know that in real life no one will help you for free, maybe close family but that's about it.

A long time ago i came to the US with little on me, quickly found myself in money trouble almost homeless - needed a bit of money and asked a well-to-do relative of mine for some money and she refused. That's what happens - no one is going to give you anything for free and maybe not even if you are good for it

The case is two-fold - 1. Why would God have billions of people sitting around heaven doing nothing? What is there for them to do?
2. Even if such a situation exists, how can anyone with any bit of self-respect take advantage? How are they any different from "friends and family" living off their rich sports and movie stars? We see that happening today - does anyone respect such people?

 

[bilby]

Science says only one thing about souls - that they are fictional.
Dualism is only possible if the Standard Model is incorrect or incomplete at the kinds of energies humans can survive (It's not - we tested it).
Discarding our best tested scientific theory in favour of a completely unevidenced phenomenon would be the exact opposite of science.

Just that part - the - THIS IS IT - part. We need to stop hating something just because a religion is saying it. Back in the day when ideas could easily be lost, if you want an idea to be kept alive the best way to do it is to package it via Religion. Just say God endorses this view or God did this or that and such an idea would be kept alive by its followers. The problem people have is to separate the idea from religion - The Buddha said be compassionate - doesn't matter if the Buddha said it or if it is a religious idea - it is a good idea.

Hindus talked about Brahma creating this universe, their calculations said that it was 9 billion years old, they also said there were millions of Brahmas - you can see the idea of the multiverse here. They used religion to pass down their ideas

Science doesn't 'hate' ideas, it tests them and discards those that are proven to be wrong.

The source of an idea is completely irrelevant. Souls are fictional regardless of who discusses them.