Also, assuming you believe in Heaven, what if your parent(s) died

[raccoon]

young and you live to a ripe old age? Won't that seem weird, at the very least?

As you can probably tell, I don't believe in Heaven.

[xchrom]

1. i believe in heaven.

[raccoon]

2. That's your prerogative, but what do you think about the question? nt

[pnwmom]

3. What does that have to do with belief in heaven?

Some people die young, some people live a long time. That has nothing to do with anyone's belief in heaven that I've ever heard of.

[raccoon]

7. If you meet your loved ones in heaven, wouldn't that seem weird if

you're a lot older than your parent?

[Sweet Freedom]

8. I think if you believe in heaven

than nothing there would be weird, it would be heavenly. :)

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. Everybody's 29 in heaven.

I have it on the highest authority.

[liberal renegade]

10. And all this

time I thought it was 33.

[RebelOne]

14. The Rapture Ready nuts believe it is 33

because that's how old Jesus was when he died.

[pnwmom]

13. Many people who believe in heaven believe in the concept of souls.

Souls don't come in "ages," as physical bodies do.

[Evoman]

4. Heaven's a dumb concept.

As you can probably tell, I don't believe in Heaven.

[liberal renegade]

11. Whats so dumb about it?

I do believe in heaven and hope like hell I get there. What I don't believe in is that my creator would torment me nite and day, forever and ever should I commit a few sins. Heaven, imo, isn't a place, it's everlasting life and hell is everlasting death. If your truly an evil bastard and deliberately kill or harm another human being, many times over, your sorry ass gets to be dead forever. Most of us know when we have shit on our neighbors or loved ones, we feel remorse, so much so that we learn from it and try our hardest not to repeat it. You don't have to be a bible thumper to understand whats right or wrong. One piece of advice I took from my Mom, "let your conscience be your guide" Listen to your heart because it's the creators built in mechanism to help keep us from harming one another... I am not a religious man, not even close, but being witness to the birth of my 5 children, it's made me a spiritual man. The birth of a baby will do that to you.

Life is so very cruel for some of us and heaven will forever erase that..imho..

[Evoman]

12. Here is why I think its dumb:

1)When you die your body, and brain, rots.

2)You are your brain. When you brain dies, you are no longer you. You cease to exist. Your morality, your moms advice, your conscience...all from your brain.

3)There is no such thing as everlasting life. If there was you wouldn't die. But you do die.

4)I could literally cut your brain up so that you no longer feel remorse or anything like it. Does that make you evil and incapable of everlasating life, if I did this?

Heaven is dumb.

[pnwmom]

15. The existence of a soul separate from the body cannot be proven

by believers or disproven by science.

By definition, it exists outside the realm of the material world and outside the purview of science.

[Evoman]

17. The only reason it can't be disproven or proven by science is because it doesn't exist.

What I learned from Religion: When I want to believe in something that isn't true, I'll just arbitrarily say that its outside the purview of science.

After all, how do you KNOW that either god or souls are outside of sciences scope? God never said that science couldn't prove, did he?

[Chorophyll]

19. Hi again Evoman.

It's not necessary to believe in anything supernatural if you just don't. In fact, you're probably right not to. If God, heaven and all that other stuff is real, what's the big damn mystery? Like evolution, it ought to be able to be proven scientifically. And it isn't.

Some people (and I'm one of them) just can't help but feel that there is something beyond this physical realm. Call it "faith" for lack of a better word. We know it can't be proven, and sometimes it even makes us feel dumb. But grant us our right to muse on it without handing us our asses every time, huh? Thanks. :)

[Evoman]

22. Your not dumb...and I'm sorry if I made you feel that way.

I am just sharing my opinion.

[Chorophyll]

30. It's cool. n/t

[pnwmom]

20. Scientists themselves do not claim to be able to disprove

the existence of God.

But how do I know? Because science deals with the material world; the immaterial world, by definition, is outside its scope.

[Evoman]

21. I am a scientist, and I too claim that I cannot disprove the existence of god.

But there are a lot of things, like god, that don't exist and which I can't disprove. The problem is not that we cannot disprove god....the problem is that we can't prove god. And according to you, we never will be able to. Your mind is closed, it cannot change because it is not based on anything substantial.

My mind can change easily. One piece of good evidence is all I need. You are stuck forever, believing in something that doesn't exist.

[pnwmom]

23. It's not a "problem" that God can't be proved. It's just logic.

The existence of God is an issue of faith, NOT proof.

And my mind isn't "closed." Like many non-atheists, I'm constantly walking a tightrope -- belief on one side, unbelief on the other.

My mind is open to the idea that there may be more to reality than the material world that we can see and measure scientifically. It sounds to me as if you are the one with the closed mind.

[Evoman]

24. Faith wavers, because faith is built on nothing.

Its all made up, this god stuff. It is insubstantial. I could as easily say there is a pig inside of me...a pig that you can't see, but lives in all of us. When a person is cut open, the invisible pig climbs out the back, through an undetectable hatch. Oh yeah, and the pigs can't be measured scientifically.

See..its all made up. Having faith in the pig does not make it any more true.

My mind is open, but I also have this little thing called a bullshit detector. God, and souls, sets every one of them off. And when someone tells me...oh, science can't detect something that, really, should be easy for science to detect (like a soul, or a diety that affects the world in any way), I just think to myself...."isn't that special...how convenient".

I change my mind all the time....you may not believe it, but I am not rigid at all. I accept and absorb ideas all the time....and if I am ever wrong on some point, I admit it (search my name...its happened here). But an idea that is no more substantial than, "Yes...we have a soul...and ....and...well, you can't say it doesn't exist...and ...uh...science can never detect it because...um..well...because I say so...so yeah...but it does exist"...well, that just doesn't convince me. Why ANYONE is convince by it is literally beyond me.

[pnwmom]

25. The concept is "literally beyond" you. That doesn't make it dumb.

Why did you have to enter into this discussion by insulting the intelligence of any believer with any amount of faith?

[Evoman]

26. I said the concept of heaven is dumb...not those who believe in it.

I stated why it was dumb...because, not only are you positing a soul, which does not exist, but your saying that this "soul" goes to a immaterial world, based on the whim of a non-sensical god, who arbitrarily decided who was going in or not. He lets people in if they are "good"....despite the fact that most "bad" people suffered on the planet he created and it has shaped them who they are, despite the fact that many "non-believers" won't go because this god has given no evidence of his existence, despite the fact that its completely insane to base an organisms place in existence for eternity on 60 years of life.

Why do you believe any of it? Can you even tell me without using the word "faith"? What is faith but a fervent hope with no basis.

No, the concept of heaven is dumb. It is "literally beyond" me why anybody would like Battlefield Earth. Just because I don't understand it, it doesn't mean that the movie isn't dumb.

Which is not to say that you are dumb. The experiences and training you receieved growing up has shaped you into who you are, including being somebody who believes in heaven. I'm sure it makes plenty of sense to you, believing in heaven.

[pnwmom]

28. That's not my concept of heaven or of God.

You don't believe in a certain concept of soul and god, and I don't believe in your concepts either. To my mind, heaven isn't a particular place, and God is . . . well, not what you described. More of a force for good . . . The simplest way to say it, though it is a cliche, is God is Love. And heaven, to me, is joining that spirit.

[Evoman]

33. If god is love, stop saying god, and just say love.

This god = love stuff is even less sensical. Love is a brain based emotion. So that means that god is a brain based emotion?

"Joining of spirits"....what is that? What does it mean? How do you join spirits? What are spirits made of...are they even concious? What do you base these beliefs on?

Are you christian?

[pnwmom]

38. Christian is the closest approximation to what I am.

And "God is Love" is a metaphor, not a scientific reduction. I'm talking about something bigger than human love.

[Evoman]

41. What leads you to believe there is something bigger than human love?

[pnwmom]

52. My experiences in life.

[Evoman]

56. Can you elaborate? I'm interested in what kind of experience may lead

somebody to the conclusion that there is something bigger than human love or, indeed, that there is some reason to call love God.

[Chorophyll]

32. Once more into the breech.

I take exception to your last paragraph. Everyone who professes faith wasn't raised ("trained") the same way. I was raised in an extremely secular, culturally Jewish family. My father didn't believe in god at all. I was an atheist for a long time. (And no, I'm not particularly old and nowhere near death, as far as I know.) My faith, which doesn't belong to any particular religious tradition, developed slowly over time, and is based on personal experience. I'm not saying it's rational, and I sure as hell don't expect anyone to go along with me. I don't impose my beliefs on my husband or my son.

FYI, you're coming across way more dogmatic than most of the "believers" here. Chill.

[Evoman]

35. Fair enough.

"Which is not to say that you are dumb. The experiences and training you receieved growing up has shaped you into who you are, including being somebody who believes in heaven. I'm sure it makes plenty of sense to you, believing in heaven"

This is what I posted. And obviously its not true for everybody...its definitely not true for you. If I could edit if, I would ammend it to this,

"Which is not to say that you are dumb. The experiences and/or training you receieved growing up has shaped you into who you are, including being somebody who believes in heaven. I'm sure it makes plenty of sense to you, believing in heaven"

Because it is well understood that most people accept the religion of their parents...do you deny that? Therefore, for most people that line holds true.

And I don't doubt I'm coming off as dogmatic. Everyone thinks they are right, and everyone else is wrong. When someone argues with me, and insists that there is a heaven or god, they don't sound dogmatic, simply because we are so used to that point of view. A scientist or atheist, on the other hand, is expected to say...."yes, science can't study god". Why? What do we base it on? I sound dogmatic, because I am challenging religion, and thats not something thats done fairly often.

I have simply held my opinion. I did not force anyone to respond to my posts....if you do, I expect that you want to hear my opinions. I am not dogmatic, nor do I particularly care what you believe. In fact, given evidence about god or souls, I would change my mind IN AN INSTANT.

What about me do you find dogmatic?

[Chorophyll]

37. See, I DON'T necessarily think I'm right.

Or that you're wrong.

It seems to me from reading the posts here that the people who believe in an afterlife have different ways of looking at it. No one has quoted chapter-and-verse, or mentioned being judged "good" or "evil" by god. But you seem want to tar everyone everyone with the same brush. And you have used the word "dumb" numerous times. Not directed at any one person, but the implication is there.

ETA: To all: I'm DEFINITELY not trying to prove I'm right about god or heaven or anything. I have no idea.

[pnwmom]

39. Who HERE is "insisting" that there is a heaven or God?

I've been saying that people who are open to the possibility -- or their ideas -- shouldn't be characterized as dumb.

[Evoman]

40. Fine, then. I will stick to the word nonsenical.

My intention is not to offend you. If I have, I apologize.

[spoony]

43. You lack honest curiosity

You make broad assumptions about people and their beliefs, and posit yourself on top of it all. You keep insisting that you change your mind, "all the time." Why? Well, you obviously make poor choices of belief a lot. Regardless, you've shown no hint of being open to any concept you've already ruled upon.

I, and I'm sure many believers, am not a rube. I'm not an idiot. I do not go out with a net looking for leprechauns. I've studied world religions, philosophy, science, cosmology, and made my conclusions. It is not the open and shut case you make it out to be, but I imagine that gets lost on you as a whisper is often missed by a loud scoffer.

[Evoman]

45. Your right in one respect....I lack curiosity in the particulars of your religion.

I have decided that I do not not, and will not, believe in religion without some shred of evidence. The particulars...whether god is love, an old man in the sky, or a woman, or an energy...it is all irrelevant, and is of no importance to me. Why should I be open to it? What makes any detail about religion relevant to me?

By changing my mind, I was talking about evidence based proof. For example, I thought that the dinosaurs were killed by a huge meteor. Right now, I am reading a book that disputes it, and does it by making a fair case. Although I haven't quite changed my mind, the new theory interests me and I may very well do so. And no, I do not make poor choices of belief...but I am convinced by good evidence.

The irony about your post, my friend, is that you accuse people of making broad assumptions about people and their beliefs, and yet you have no problem holding assumptions about me. You do not know me...you have no idea what I am like, or "the poor choice of belief" I hold. You base your entire opinion of me on, of the way I understand the world, on a couple of posts. Yes, I may have used to word dumb to describe an idea, the idea of heaven, but I have not attacket anybody here. In fact, I have contacted my main opponent in this thread, pnwmom, and assured her that I respect her and that my intention was not to insult. You, on the other hand, call me a bad scientist (which I am not, let me assure you), and call me uneducated. You tell me I lack honest curiosity, yet you don't know me. I have studied religion, politics, philosophy, and science as well...I am curious about why others believe what they believe, that is why I ask so many questions.

What am I to make of a person that insults me, and then tells me that I should not insult others?

[Chorophyll]

48. If you aren't curious about other people's religions

what are you doing here? DU has an atheists/agnostics group.

[Evoman]

50. Because I like talking to people like you. People who are not like me.

I find you interesting, though the particulars of your religion are not. I like asking questions, and getting debated. I was quite enjoying myself, actually, until I was called uneducated.

In truth, I probably shouldn't have entered into this conversation...I more or less made a snippy comment, which is my opinion on the matter. It ended up with a hijacked thread, and I should apologize to the OP for that. I had no intention of elaborating, which is why I did not until I was asked my opinion.

I suppose I could ask you the same thing you ask me...why did you engage me in debate/argument?

[Chorophyll]

53. ...

My religion has no particulars, anyway. Religion's an organized thing. I'm disorganized.

I engaged you in debate because I've talked to you here, before, and it was fun. But I object(ed) to the word "dumb" in your first couple of posts. If you call what someone believes dumb, they might logically infer that you're calling them "dumb." I think that ruffled some feathers.

Peace already.

[Evoman]

54. Dumb was probably the wrong word to use.

Unless you like Battlefield Earth...then, I'm sorry, but you are dumb ;)

[Chorophyll]

55. I said "Good day," sir! :)

I don't even know what Battlefield Earth is.

But I can imagine.

[cyborg_jim]

71. L Ron Hubbard

One of his dreadful sci-fi works made into an equally dreadful film by John Travolta.

[Chorophyll]

76. Aaah! Thanks. Glad I didn't know. n/t

[cosmik debris]

47. If I might contribute here,

Scientists observe phenomena and posit explanations using the scientific method. Scientists do not posit explanations where there are no phenomena.

That is what religionists do.

Since it seems apparent that god has no impact on this universe and creates no phenomena, making up an explanation for non-existent phenomena is not a role for a scientist.

[Evoman]

51. You get New Mexico AND Mexico proper. Enjoy your fajitas, my friend ;)

On edit: I like the fact that when I say heaven is dumb, people jump on me (and maybe rightly so). But someone calls me uneducated, or indeed a liar, and nobody jumps to my defense :(

[spoony]

27. You're a scientist and my eyes shoot fire

You do not write like, nor even write like you think like, a scientist, or even a terribly educated individual.

[aquaman]

29. I agree....

nt

[Evoman]

31. Oh? And what is it that I have written that makes me appear uneducated?

On edit: How do you think a scientist is supposed to write? Less typos? More big words? No colloquialisms on a website, even when said scientist has other things to do and writes in a hurry?

How do you think a scientist is supposed to think? Do good scientists accept statements and beliefs based on faith? Should a scientist automatically accept when other people, especially those who are not scientists, put arbitrary limits on what science can study?

[spoony]

44. see my other reply to you n/t

[cyborg_jim]

34. The definition of dumb:

Dumb, noun:

Ape-like creature prone to believe that the universe was created for it despite having only existed for 200,000 or so odd years out of its 15 billion year existence.

The universe neither cares to nor owes us any favours. There is no heaven.

[Evoman]

36. Ha...you know cyborg jim, you don't post nearly enough.

[Chorophyll]

42. Again, who here is insisting that

the universe owes anyone a favor? Have I or anyone else here mentioned a "young-earth" theory or tried to deny evolution? No.

You are tarring anyone who claims faith with the same fundamentalist brush.

This forum is for discussion, not epithets.

[Evoman]

46. Why are you taking this personally>?

Fine, he "defined" dumb. But you do not believe what he said was dumb. That makes you not-dumb. It makes only those who believe what he wrote dumb. He, at no time, claimed that EVERYBODY with faith was dumb.

[Chorophyll]

49. I'm not taking it personally

Unless "personally" means on behalf of everyone in this discussion who was open to the idea of an afterlife.

Let's not be disingenuous here, shall we?

[cyborg_jim]

57. You miss the point spectacularly

Why should anyone assume we are special enough for an afterlife?

[Chorophyll]

58. I do everything spectacularly, cyborg_jim.

But I didn't miss your point. To answer your question, I don't assume we're special enough for an afterlife. I just don't assume we aren't. I'm not trying to win you over to my side, since I don't really have one. I only objected to the snarky way (defining "dumb") that you made your point.

[cyborg_jim]

60. You call it snarky, I call it humour

[no_hypocrisy]

5. If you want heaven and hell, it's here on Earth. You don't have to leave. n/t

[YOY]

6. Assuming there is a heaven, who says it's a place?

Why not a feeling?

[pnwmom]

16. Or that it exists in linear time.

[TRYPHO]

18. Is there any basis for the Christian assumption?

Is there a scripture that states it expressly, how you get there and what happens if you dont?

Just wonderring.

My belief is my own*, but assumes age is not pertinent outside of this reality. Otherwise the plan to spend eternity as youthful a figure as possible would act against the desire for a long life.

TRYPHO
* - because Jewish thoughts are very deep and kabbalistic** and not exactly Torah based, so I take what I can from the concepts I vaguely understand (trust me, its VERY heavy) and assume the rest must be nice and cuddly :-)
** - I'm not quite 40, and insufficiently knowledgable of the Talmud to warrant a genuine education in Kabbalah.

[JerseygirlCT]

59. I don't think I believe in a heaven where we inhabit our current

bodies, and where age is an issue. I think our spirits move on. So, my parents' spirits, should they no longer be with us here, would be the same there.

I don't think time exists there, or bodies.

[TRYPHO]

61. I'm goig to have to think about this for a second...

I don't think time exists there, or bodies.

Bodies, ok. Though you would need a perimeter to your "self" and the term "body" could still be the descriptor. If you said I dont think we'll be Homo Sapien shaped I'd agree (since you left your corporeal form behind), but the logic part of your psyche might (prob would) still picture yourself as a human, since it must take a period to overcome that memory.

And thus on to time. If there is no time then there is no movement. It cannot have no time. I think you can be immune to the effects of time and/or not care about time, but I demand time be a linear descriptor in the afterlife! Furthermore, in Judaism, the soul can take up to 12 months to cleanse, so atleast on Earth the transition ...TO...heaven, is (in religious circles) still close enough to have a time association.

Sorry to go on, I happen to like this kind of impossible nonsense.

TRYPHO

[muriel_volestrangler]

62. Without 'time', I can't picture a 'self' for 'me' to exist as

All of us experience time. It's fundamental to our consciousness. I can't see that any existence without time can be said to include something identifiable as the minds that we are in the real world. I think you're right to "demand time be a linear descriptor in the afterlife".

[JerseygirlCT]

63. Not impossible -- it's kind of fun to tease out, isn't it?

I do get to the point though, where I have to say: perhaps I won't understand this today or ever in this place.

I'm not sure in my current thinking that maintaining an individual presence, spirit, whatever, is important there. I'm wondering whether it's just being united with God -- and does that involve being subsumed into the God-head? Is giving up your sense of "me" part of that union?

I don't know. Just thoughts, random right now.

I hope someday to find out though!

[TRYPHO]

64. Whats that law about velocity and position...

You can't know what exact speed you are going AND exactly where you are at the same time. Keep that in mind. If you died and your spirit is outside of this Universe, then you are no longer anyWHERE so time is not necessarily a function with respect to THIS universe, BUT there would be a time-continuum in that sphere.

As for re-amalgamation with God,I can't think! My understanding of my cultures position is that you die and go through a period of "painful" cleansing to repair the damage "life" has done to your soul. Then once cleaned you are elevated to a position close to God which brings tremendous "pleasure" to your soul. I can't remember if you gradually get further elevated or whether elevation is a reflection of the deeds in your life, or indeed if it is possible to be reborn for another round; but I don't think anyone actually becomes (a part of) God, because I don't think God is "other" but "in all" already.

If there are any dead people* reading this, would they please be so kind as to PM me, and let me know either way :-)

TRYPHO
* - in this instance thats literal and not a metaphor for Republicans.

[JerseygirlCT]

66. LOL! That would certainly clear things up, wouldn't it?

I'm sure there are a few people, who for the chance to run up amazing bills on your credit card over the phone, would be more than willing to tell you exactly what happens in the next life!

[MistressOverdone]

65. Oddly, I dreamed about heaven last night

and I'm not a big believer in a tangible heaven.

I was in my childhood house and my parents were there and I asked them, "hey, what's going on, you're dead!" My father said, "so are you." I was astonished and asked my sister (also there) what happened. She said "you were trying to make Kay (granddaughter) laugh and you just keeled over dead." So I was upset that I had left my family, and she told me that they would be along presently. I guess we were all going to live in that house together. I do have a memory that my husband lived across town in HIS childhood home, which is the situation of our "courtship" many years ago.

Now, listening to folks' dreams is boring in the extreme, but I think it is interesting that my conception of heaven was my childhood home, which was a big old Victorian house in NJ.

[JerseygirlCT]

67. Ah, well depending on where in NJ, that could very well suit

as heaven, I'd say.

There are any number of beautiful Victorians in say, Cape May, that would do the job nicely for me!

[MistressOverdone]

68. Somerville

Dead center of the state, just north of Princeton. A very pretty town.

[JerseygirlCT]

69. I grew up east of there --

heaven must definitely include a beach for me!

[MistressOverdone]

72. You grew up down the shore?

I had a lot of family that lived in Sea Girt, Mannesquan (sp?), etc. I spend most of my summers there.

[JerseygirlCT]

74. We went to Manasquan often as teens... that was the place to

go then.

I grew up closer to Sandy Hook, though -- not right on the beach, unfortunately. But a quick drive.

I remember when Long Branch was really junky and had a great cheesy boardwalk. And the boardwalk at Asbury was open, too. Love that stuff!

[MistressOverdone]

75. I had my first kiss

on the boardwalk at Asbury. And first few other things, too! Is it still there?

[JerseygirlCT]

77. I haven't been back in a long time now

To Asbury, that is.

I keep reading about a renaissance, but it seems to be eternally imminent and never happening, you know? It was getting pretty seedy when I still lived in NJ 20 years ago.

But I hear Long Branch is on the ups. I have a friend who lives there, and remember his family being upset that he wouldn't move out. Now he's probably sitting pretty on some pretty valuable real estate. Funny how that works!

[kwassa]

70. my sister and family live near there

very pretty semi-rural area, close to Washington's Crossing.

[MistressOverdone]

73. Right on the Delaware, right?

That is a very nice area.