Our New Home

We have a new home, come join us at WeAreSMRT (We Are Skeptical Minds & Rational Thinkers)

The Forum

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Questions For Christians: Heaven

First, the usual disclaimer: the purpose of these posts is to pose questions to Christians who come here (or go anywhere, for that matter) with the intent of converting us to Christianity, but also with an open mind about their own faith. My ultimate goal in asking these questions is to have you deconvert from Christianity. If you are not open to at least the possibility of that happening, then I suggest you not respond to these questions, as that will be a waste of your time and our bandwidth. At the same time, I am open to the possibility of learning a thing or two about Christianity along the way -- but if you plan to post a comment with the intention of deliberately being a teacher, instead of a learner, then please don't bother. These questions are for your benefit.

Today's questions concern Heaven, the place where the "saved" will purportedly go after death to live with God and Jesus in eternal bliss for all eternity. There are a number of different conceptualizations of heaven, depending on the Christian sect you adhere to, so one or more of the questions below will not apply to you. But most of the questions will apply to most Christians.


1. How is Heaven ultimately any different from Hell?

The Buddhists believe that the time between incarnations of fully enlightened Buddhas is incredibly vast -- so vast that they have invented picturesque metaphors to describe them. One of the more popular ones is this: Imagine a mountain, greater than Everest. Imagine that, once every thousand years, a bird comes along and sharpens its beak on that mountain, then flies away, leaving the mountain alone for another thousand years. Try to imagine the amount of time it would take for that bird to wear away the rock of the entire mountain.

The Buddhist epoch is an absurdly long time -- but it is not forever. Heaven, according to the Christians, is forever. That means, no matter how arbitrarily long you make the metaphor -- say, the amount of time it takes for the bird to wear away all the rock of all the planets in the entire universe by sharpening its beak every thousand years -- you will still be spending your days and nights doing nothing but praising God!

Perhaps there will be things to do other than praise God -- commune with fellow "saved," perhaps play board games, write and perform plays, perhaps other activities we presently cannot even conceive of. But remember, we're talking about forever. Whatever form you'd take after death, you'd still be a finite being given an infinite period of time. Eventually you'd run out of things to do. Eventually you'd tire of the bliss. How could you stand it? Wouldn't you start to long for the tortures of Hell, just to get away from the monotony?


2. Is there free will in Heaven?

If people in Heaven do have free will, then they would have the freedom to sin. Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga wrote that people with the freedom to sin will necessarily choose to actually do so on occasion -- I do not agree with Plantinga on this issue, but let's say that he's right. That would mean that, eventually, there would be sin in Heaven. What happens to people in Heaven who sin? Are they kicked out? That would mean that someday Heaven would completely empty out, with the entire human race ending up in Hell, leaving God all alone with whatever celestial beings he created -- which would defeat the purpose of creating humanity in the first place, wouldn't it? On the other hand, are they allowed to stay? What, then, would be the point of earthly existence and salvation and all that?

If people in Heaven do not have free will, however, then they would be, in the words of some Christian apologists, "mindless robots." Would God desire communion with such beings for eternity? If so, why not have created mindless robots to begin with?

Let's say that Plantinga is wrong, however, that people can somehow be caused to never sin and still have free will in a significant sense. But why, then, did God not cause people on Earth to be in that state? Can you find any non-arbitrary answer to this problem?


3. How is heaven fair?

Many if not most evangelists believe that attainment of Heaven is awarded by grace, that it is a gift of God, and that he alone decides who receives it and who doesn't. Most evangelists also believe that some people receive Heaven and some receive Hell. How is that fair? If Heaven truly is a gift, and not earned entirely on merit, wouldn't a loving father gift the gift to all his children?


4. Could you really be happy in Heaven with loved ones in Hell?

Suppose you arrive in Heaven only to discover that your parents, your siblings, your spouse, your children, your friends, all the people that you ever loved, having failed to "make the grade" as you did, are now in Hell, where they will be tortured forever, by decree of the God with whom you now get to live with for all eternity. Would you be sad? Angry?

If so, how is that compatible with the eternal bliss that Heaven entails? If not, if God arranged matters so that you would not feel sadness or anger or the state of affairs, how would you still be you? How could you cease to care when your caring for these people is a core aspect of the person you are on Earth, and still be you? Wouldn't you be an entirely different person? Wouldn't the you that existed on Earth have, for all purposes, ceased to exist? What, then, is the point of promising salvation, when the promised reward will not be given to you, but to someone else?

Moreover, if you are aware that if in spite of your best efforts your loved ones wind up unsaved, and that you will then cease to care about them as you do today, and you don't have a problem with that . . . wouldn't that make you ultimately uncaring about your loved ones? As an atheist, I would have a huge problem with that -- doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?


5. Can you prove that a single person is in Heaven right now?

The central message of Christian evangelism is God's promise that he will award Heaven to those who . . . whatever. Repent, or accept Jesus, or stand on a soapbox, or whatever is necessary for this to happen. (The concept of salvation will be addressed in a future "Questions" post.)

Yet no Christian I have ever spoken with has been able to point to a single person and say, "See? God has kept the promise he made to that person!" Can you do so? If not, how do you know that such a promise, even if made in the first place, will be kept?

80 comments:

  1. Your disclaimer makes it almost impossible to answer your questions and keep my free will.

    How am I learning if I'm answering your questions?

    How can I, as a Christian, answer these questions and it be beneficial to me?

    Since no one has been to heaven and come back to tell about it, and you obviously already know the answers Christians would give, what is the point of answering these questions?

    I would hate to waste your time and bandwidth.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Cynthia,

    Your disclaimer makes it almost impossible to answer your questions and keep my free will.

    How would answering my questions curtail your free will?

    How am I learning if I'm answering your questions?

    Through the process of answering them, and deciding for yourself whether your answers ultimately make sense, that's how.

    How can I, as a Christian, answer these questions and it be beneficial to me?

    By learning, through your answers, that Christianity doesn't make sense and probably isn't true, that's how.

    Since no one has been to heaven and come back to tell about it, and you obviously already know the answers Christians would give, what is the point of answering these questions?

    The point is not to educate me -- I probably do know the answers you would give, although I may yet be surprised -- rather, the point is to educate yourself.

    I would hate to waste your time and bandwidth.

    Okay. Buh-bye.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree Cynthia... God bless you sister.
    In Christ
    Jean

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jean, you said,

    I agree Cynthia

    Care to elaborate on that?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Silent Dave

    you obviously already know the answers Christians would give

    I would hate to waste your time and bandwidth.

    thats what I agree with

    ReplyDelete
  6. Cynthia & Jean,

    Why is it that you are willing to 'waste time and bandwidth' by replying at all if you aren't willing to answer the questions set forth?

    ReplyDelete
  7. NT, I don't have time or bandwidth to comment on what you just wrote.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Lance,

    I don't have time or bandwidth to comment on your comment about what I just wrote.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'd write a response to that, but I really don't have the time.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'd write a response to your response but I don't want to waste our bandwidth.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Cynthia and Jean,

    If you gave some actual thought to the questions you would likely see(being intelligent women) that your answers are irrational or contradictory. In doing so, you would be educating yourself about a hole in your religious, dogmatic thinking.

    If on some off chance you managed to answer all the questions coherently, you'd be that much closer to proving a god to us atheists.

    Copping out doesn't help either of us.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It is obvious, and I an sure that Lance will agree wih me on this; is there beer in heaven, or is there not?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hi Silent Dave,

    I came here from a link someone (one of your contributors, I think) left in the comments section at Pharyngula.

    Perhpas I could get the ball rolling. Re: the question, Could you really be happy in Heaven with loved ones in Hell?, I've been listening to Christians trying to defend that one for years, and it's one of my particular favorites. The general, all-purpose answer is that in heaven, the veil will be lifted, they will see pretty much as God sees, and will understand why eternal damnation is fair, just, necessary, etc. Tell them that you can't conceptualize any scenario in which it would be necessary, that you can't imagine anything God could tell you that would make it seem fair or reasonable or just, and you'll be told, "You think you can understand the creator of the universe with your feeble human mind? What arrogance!" You'll also very likely hear something involving the potter and clay metaphor. When they want to hold us accountable, we're free moral agents. When we want to protest the overwhelming odds - shut up, you have no more rights than does an inanimate object!

    If you ask why God doesn't lift the veil so that we can see reality as it is and make better decisions, you'll get a nebulous response about free will. Christians like to say we can't understand these things because, as Paul said, "We see as through a glass, darkly." I've tried to argue that it's precisely because we don't see reality as it is that we aren't really free, and that hell isn't even remotely a reasonable consequence of our "state of sin". Of course, I don't get anywhere.

    Christians go to great lengths to defend the concept of hell; they're tremendously invested in it. I think it was Tertullian who first stated that part of the enjoyment of heaven will be the ability to witness, for all eternity, the tortures of the damned. Jonathan Edwards reiterated this centuries later, saying that a father would see his child roasting in the flames, and would enjoy the spectacle, as it would stand as a testimony to God's justice.

    I was reminded of something today. About ten years ago, Bruce Bawer said in Stealing Jesus, "To a lot of fundamentalists, God's love just isn't any fun unless you can find somebody else to deny it to."

    ReplyDelete
  14. Oh, I forgot the alternative popular answer - in heaven, God will erase their memories so they won't be conscious of their former loved ones in hell. However, we'll remember, and part of our torment will be the knowledge that we've forgotten and abandoned for all of eternity.

    Lovely, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  15. that we've *been* forgotten and abandoned.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It is obvious, and I an sure that Lance will agree wih me on this; is there beer in heaven, or is there not?

    Beer's not enough. I demand a beer volcano.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Ok, here were my thoughts.
    You complain of the restrictions Ray has on his blog, yet you say in your disclaimer:
    "My ultimate goal in asking these questions is to have you deconvert from Christianity. If you are not open to at least the possibility of that happening, then I suggest you not respond to these questions, as that will be a waste of your time and our bandwidth."

    and

    "if you plan to post a comment with the intention of deliberately being a teacher, instead of a learner, then please don't bother"

    So, with that I assume you don't want to hear what I have to say.

    And again I say, If I'm answering YOUR questions, how am I learning?
    I would want you to hear what I have to say, not say only what you want to hear.

    I can only answer your questions with what I know, or tell you that I don't know the answer.

    Anyway, I was just trying to make a point (without actually saying it) that in my opinion, it seems there's a double standard in posting here and at Ray's.

    If I answer your questions using my answers, then I'm not learning something because I'm stating what I believe.

    You said"
    "Through the process of answering them, and deciding for yourself whether your answers ultimately make sense, that's how"

    Sorry, but that just doesn't make sense to me. If I believe something, writing it down doesn't make me change my mind.

    NMT, I was just not interested in telling him something he already knows. No way would answering the heaven questions change my mind about anything. Also, I believe he said not to bother answering unless I was willing to deconvert.

    Ok, there goes another bit of bandwith.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Cynthia--

    Before you go, let me ask a question, if I may. Answer as The Lord leads you:

    In heaven--Are there girls?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Maragon, in all honesty, I can't prove a thing to you or anyone else.

    I can only testify to my personal experiences, beliefs, and hopes.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  20. captain howdy...

    Why do you ask? Are you planning on being there?

    ReplyDelete
  21. @Church lady--

    Why do you ask? Are you planning on being there?

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Depends. Are there girls?

    ReplyDelete
  22. @captain howdy

    I'll be there, so yes there will be girls.

    Or did you mean women?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Why, you saucy imp, you.

    I might convert to Christianity just so I can chase you around like some post-Rapture Pepe Le Pew.

    ReplyDelete
  24. But..but...Cynthia...you're already here....you could just ..answer...you are saucy aren't you Cynth?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Oh, --

    While you're here, notice something.



    You can actually have a conversation on our blog. Just try that on Ray's.



    Ourblog's better.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ok anything for you nmt. As I've already said I can't prove anything to you, so don't ask me to.

    #1. I don't know what life will be like in heaven. Yes, we will worship God because that's what we were created for but I don't believe that's the only thing we will do. I believe we'll eat, so maybe we'll grow our own food. That will keep one busy. Perhaps we'll use our God given talents, the things we love to do, in a more God honoring way when we worship Him. Honestly, I can't fully comprehend heaven, but I know I want to go there.

    #2. I don't believe we will have free will as we know it here and now. We wont be making choices as in good vs bad because there will be no sin or evil influences there.
    We will be in heaven then because of the choices we made now.

    #3. I don't believe you understand the concept of God's grace and his gifts. We only receive them based on the choices WE make. He doesn't just hand them out or retain them all willy nilly. It's your decision that sends you to heaven or hell, not God's.

    #4. I can't fully understand not being sad that my family is not with me, but I trust God that it wont be an eternal awareness.

    #5. I personally cannot prove anything. I've already stated that. There were people who saw Jesus after His crucifixion and they have given an account of what they saw. Even without these accounts, I believe He is God's Son, I believe he died, for me, and I believe that He went to heaven, and I believe He's prepared a place for me.

    More than this, I don't know what to say.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Yes, Captain, that is a nice feature, being able to have a conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Awwww !!! Thank you Cynthia!

    Cynthia I could disagree with you all day and night and still have a soft spot for you. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  29. Dave -
    I think you should compile this series into a pamphlet entitled "The Christian Test!" Perhaps you could throw a coconut analogy in there as well. I could then pass them out while shouting "THERE IS NO GOD" and "DON'T WORRY ABOUT HELL" at people on the sidewalk. Cause, ya know, that's the best way to pass a message along.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Wait a second-
    You need to take the questions and just print them directly on coconuts.
    That way I could just whip coconuts at people. Checkmate Mr. Comfort.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Cynthia said,

    And again I say, If I'm answering YOUR questions, how am I learning?
    I would want you to hear what I have to say, not say only what you want to hear.


    You're learning by answering the questions and considering the answers. Or you aren't. It depends on how open-minded you are.

    Sharing your answers with me is entirely optional. Looking at the disclaimer, I can see how the remark about bandwidth might be construed as a request to post your answers here -- I'll have to change that in my next post. I don't particularly care if you post your answers or not.

    If you do choose to post your answers, so that I can tell you give you a perspective of one who's already an atheist, then that's icing on the cake. But if you've read my post, and given it thought, I've accomplished my goal: I've planted seeds of doubt in your mind. Those seeds might take months to sprout, or years, or they may never. But they're there now, and they'll stay there.


    Anyway, I was just trying to make a point (without actually saying it) that in my opinion, it seems there's a double standard in posting here and at Ray's.


    Could it be that you want there to be a double standard because you know we're right about Ray's censorship practices, and that's the only way you can justify it in your mind? Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Cynthia said,

    I can't fully understand not being sad that my family is not with me, but I trust God that it wont be an eternal awareness.

    So you believe that you wouldn't be sad that your family would be, not just absent from your life, but in actual physical torture for all eternity?

    And you don't have a problem with that?

    ReplyDelete
  33. cipher,
    welcome here. It was probably my link you took. (black wolf)
    I'm glad someone used it.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Hi, Felix. Thanks. Yes, I believe it was.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I said "I can't fully understand not being sad that my family is not with me, but I trust God that it wont be an eternal awareness."

    you said:
    So you believe that you wouldn't be sad that your family would be, not just absent from your life, but in actual physical torture for all eternity?

    And you don't have a problem with that?"


    Reply:
    Actually, I believe all my family will be in heaven. But yes, I believe that I will not have an eternal awareness.

    What I have a problem with is thinking about it in the here and now. So, I do something about it now while I can, because the thought of anyone in my family ending up in hell is unbearable.

    The fact that it's unbearable to think about doesn't alter what I believe.


    You said:
    But if you've read my post, and given it thought, I've accomplished my goal: I've planted seeds of doubt in your mind. Those seeds might take months to sprout, or years, or they may never. But they're there now, and they'll stay there.

    Reply:
    You've not planted any fruit bearing seeds. I don't doubt anything that I believe. I'm aware that some things in the Bible are beyond our full understanding but I still believe.

    Actually I read your post thinking to myself, "he knows all the answers and he's asking normal, understandable questions" so what is there to say.

    It was the double standard thing that stuck out.
    You said:
    "Could it be that you want there to be a double standard because you know we're right about Ray's censorship practices, and that's the only way you can justify it in your mind? Just a thought."

    Want there to be a double standard?? Ha! You're funny. I actually like this format better.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Cynthia said,

    Actually, I believe all my family will be in heaven. But yes, I believe that I will not have an eternal awareness.

    What I have a problem with is thinking about it in the here and now. So, I do something about it now while I can, because the thought of anyone in my family ending up in hell is unbearable.


    But should that happen, then you believe they will end up in hell, and that you won't have an "eternal awareness" of it -- meaning, I presume, you'll forget all about them, and that they're being tortured forever.

    And you don't have a problem with that?

    You've not planted any fruit bearing seeds.

    Write down the exact time and date you wrote that. :)

    Want there to be a double standard?? Ha! You're funny. I actually like this format better.

    Okay . . . any substantive response to what I said?

    ReplyDelete
  37. silent dave said:
    Okay . . . any substantive response to what I said?


    Sure. I like this format better than Ray's because of the fast response/reply time. Also it's a little more personal here, meaning you people reveal more of yourselves here.

    Some of you are very funny, some very kind, some not, but all of you seem very inteligent.

    I listen to what you people say. I've heard that you don't want to be preached at, you don't want to be called names, etc. I've heard all this and decided that you aren't really interested in what I have to say. Therefore, I mostly ask questions.

    ==============
    "You've not planted any fruit bearing seeds.

    Write down the exact time and date you wrote that. :)"


    No need.

    ReplyDelete
  38. @cynthia--

    Some of you are very funny, some very kind, some not, but all of you seem very inteligent.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    But I seem to remember you giving a mighty 'Amen!' when one of the Christians called us fools over on Ray's.

    How can we be both very intelligent and fools at the same time?

    ReplyDelete
  39. captain said:

    "I seem to remember you giving a mighty 'Amen!' when one of the Christians called us fools over on Ray's.

    How can we be both very intelligent and fools at the same time?"

    Reply:

    I'm not sure how you manage it. You tell me.

    I just wrote that you don't like to be called names, but in reply, the Bible calls unbelievers fools and I agree.

    So you are intelligent but lack good judgement. How hard was that to answer? As if you didn't know what I would say!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Cynthia,

    If you ever have any questions to ask we could do an 'Ask an Atheist' post and you could get some of your questions answered. You could email them to me if you want and I could post them.

    ReplyDelete
  41. @ nonmagical thinking:

    That would be great, but my questions would not be anything about theories, evolution, science, biology, or anything like that. They would be more of the personal type questions about your beliefs or lack of.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Cynthia,

    I don't think any of us would have a problem answering questions like that. I know I wouldn't.

    Heck, Cynth, you could become a full fledged Raytractor yourself!!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Cynthia, to repeat the most critical point I made above -- the only one, I note, you neglected to respond to . . .


    Actually, I believe all my family will be in heaven. But yes, I believe that I will not have an eternal awareness.

    What I have a problem with is thinking about it in the here and now. So, I do something about it now while I can, because the thought of anyone in my family ending up in hell is unbearable.


    But should that happen, then you believe they will end up in hell, and that you won't have an "eternal awareness" of it -- meaning, I presume, you'll forget all about them, and that they're being tortured forever.

    And you don't have a problem with that?

    ReplyDelete
  44. Cynthia said,

    How can we be both very intelligent and fools at the same time?"

    Reply:

    I'm not sure how you manage it. You tell me.


    No, you tell us. You're the one who's name-calling.



    I just wrote that you don't like to be called names, but in reply, the Bible calls unbelievers fools and I agree.


    Name-calling by proxy is still name-calling.

    By the way, has it occurred to you that the Bible might be (gasp!) wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  45. @ not so silent dave

    I said...

    "What I have a problem with is thinking about it in the here and now. So, I do something about it now while I can, because the thought of anyone in my family ending up in hell is unbearable"

    Excuse me for thinking that was my answer.

    Everyone, my family included, makes their choices about heaven and hell. I've done my best to turn my kids in the right direction, but ultimately the choice is theirs. I do not believe I will be aware of anyone's absence in heaven. I also do not believe that I will be aware of hell at that time either.

    I hope you are clear now about what I believe on this particular subject.


    and

    As for the name calling, I was more or less just messing with captain because I think he's funny, but at the same time I was saying I do agree with the Bible. I notice he didn't get upset with what I said....not yet anyway. So, I don't know why your panties are in such a wad.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Cynthia said,

    Everyone, my family included, makes their choices about heaven and hell. I've done my best to turn my kids in the right direction, but ultimately the choice is theirs. I do not believe I will be aware of anyone's absence in heaven. I also do not believe that I will be aware of hell at that time either.

    I hope you are clear now about what I believe on this particular subject.


    I was made clear on what you believe on that particular subject the first time you expressed that opinion, and if by doing so you had actually answered my question, I would not now have to ask it a third time: Do you, or do you not, have a problem with that?


    As for the name calling, I was more or less just messing with captain because I think he's funny, but at the same time I was saying I do agree with the Bible. I notice he didn't get upset with what I said....not yet anyway.

    You called atheists a name. I am an atheist. Hence, you called me a name. This is not negated by the fact that your comments were addressed to captain.


    So, I don't know why your panties are in such a wad.

    I'll take the high road and disregard that comment.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Oh that question. Well, why didn't you say so.

    No, I have no problem with it.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Cynthia sez:

    Oh that question. Well, why didn't you say so.

    He did say so. Three times.

    No, I have no problem with it.

    You know, Cynthia, your concept of Heaven isn't substantively different from the effects of a frontal lobotomy and the proper application of medications. Is that really your Great Reward? To be lobotomized?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Cynthia said,

    No, I have no problem with it.


    In that case, I direct you to the last part of my original question:

    Moreover, if you are aware that if in spite of your best efforts your loved ones wind up unsaved, and that you will then cease to care about them as you do today, and you don't have a problem with that . . . wouldn't that make you ultimately uncaring about your loved ones? As an atheist, I would have a huge problem with that -- doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?

    ReplyDelete
  50. "doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?"

    One thing I said was:
    #4. I can't fully understand not being sad that my family is not with me, but I trust God that it wont be an eternal awareness

    Another thing I said was you do not understand the concept of God's grace. It's by His grace I believe I will be unaware of what's going on in hell with you or anyone else.

    I believe I am the more caring of the two of us because I care about their eternal state and you don't even believe they have one past being dead.

    You and your monkey buddy are all anal because you had to ask me a question 3 times before I understood specifically what you were asking. This is important to you? I sincerely doubt that anything I say is important to anyone here.

    Anyway, your disclaimer still reeks of double standard, which was my original reason for even commenting here.

    ReplyDelete
  51. You have a new Questions post that you'd like to draw my attention to?

    You're kidding, right?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Cynthia said,

    I believe I am the more caring of the two of us because I care about their eternal state and you don't even believe they have one past being dead.


    Cynthia also said (farther up),

    I personally cannot prove anything. I've already stated that. There were people who saw Jesus after His crucifixion and they have given an account of what they saw. Even without these accounts, I believe He is God's Son, I believe he died, for me, and I believe that He went to heaven, and I believe He's prepared a place for me.


    So you don't even know that that eternal state exists. You just have a hope, and a feeling in your tummy, that it does. By contrast, your loved ones' earthly existence is indisputable -- and it is that which, if I were in your shoes, I would be concerned with.

    So I ask again, doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?


    You also said,

    You and your monkey buddy are all anal (...)

    I don't have a response to that -- the high road, and all that -- I just wanted to highlight the fact that you said it.

    ReplyDelete
  53. you said "your loved ones' earthly existence is indisputable -- and it is that which, if I were in your shoes, I would be concerned with.

    So I ask again, doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?"


    Don't be dense. I answered your question when I said "I believe I am the more caring of the two of us because I care about their eternal state and you don't even believe they have one past being dead"

    you said "So you don't even know that that eternal state exists"

    Again, don't be dense. You and I both know that an eternal state exists. I believe in eternal life after death. You believe in eternal nothingness after death.

    So as far as I'm concerned I've answered your question(s) at least twice now.

    How many more times do you need to hear me say this?

    ReplyDelete
  54. you said:

    "You and your monkey buddy are all anal (...)

    I don't have a response to that -- the high road, and all that -- I just wanted to highlight the fact that you said it."

    ==============
    Highlight it all day long. He named himself, I didn't.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Cynthia said,

    Don't be dense. I answered your question when I said "I believe I am the more caring of the two of us because I care about their eternal state and you don't even believe they have one past being dead"

    you said "So you don't even know that that eternal state exists"

    Again, don't be dense. You and I both know that an eternal state exists. I believe in eternal life after death. You believe in eternal nothingness after death.

    So as far as I'm concerned I've answered your question(s) at least twice now.



    I'm afraid you misunderstood me. When I said "eternal state," I meant "eternal awareness." You don't know that an eternal awareness exists in the sense that you "know" that this earthly existence exists, you only have a hope and a feeling in your tummy. You seem relatively unconcerned with the well-being of your loved ones in this earthly life. Me, on the other hand, that's all I am concerned about. That's what I devote myself to, heart and soul.

    So I ask a third time: doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?


    How many more times do you need to hear me say this?

    Once is enough, provided you're fully aware of the implications of what you're saying. The reason I repeat the questions is because I'm not convinced you are.

    Incidentally, I've posted yet another Questions for Christians post on this blog, this one dealing with the ethics of Jesus. You may also be interested in what people have to say about your position -- see my post "The Price of Christianity."

    ReplyDelete
  56. Cynthia said,

    Highlight it all day long.

    Thank you, I will. I'll also highlight

    Don't be dense.

    and

    Again, don't be dense.

    Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Christian behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  57. It's not un-Christian to point out that you are being dense.

    ReplyDelete
  58. "I'm afraid you misunderstood me. When I said "eternal state," I meant "eternal awareness."

    How did I misunderstand "what you meant"?? How is it possible for me to misunderstand what you didn't say?
    ================

    "You don't know that an eternal awareness exists in the sense that you "know" that this earthly existence exists, you only have a hope and a feeling in your tummy."

    I never said I "know". I said and I meant I "believe". I also never said I had a feeling in my tummy (a word I would never use).

    ===================

    "You seem relatively unconcerned with the well-being of your loved ones in this earthly life. Me, on the other hand, that's all I am concerned about. That's what I devote myself to, heart and soul."


    What I said, for what I'm sure is the 21st time here, is -- 'What I have a problem with is thinking about it in the here and now. So, I do something about it now while I can, because the thought of anyone in my family ending up in hell is unbearable.' - that was in reply to caring about my family..in the here and now.

    I care here and now. Ask my kids how loved they are.

    If you are going to quote me, please don't make up your own words or assume you know anything.

    ReplyDelete
  59. So I ask a third time: doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?



    Write this down 16 times:

    no.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Cynthia,

    It's not un-Christian to point out that you are being dense.

    Indeed -- name-calling does seem to be one of the defining behaviors of Christians.


    How did I misunderstand "what you meant"?? How is it possible for me to misunderstand what you didn't say?

    By reading something that can be interpreted at least two different ways, and interpreting it in a way I didn't mean, where my interpretation can be stated using different wording, that's how.

    I'm not saying it's your fault, by any means -- I'll simply have to be more precise with my wording in the future.


    I never said I "know". I said and I meant I "believe".

    My point exactly.


    I also never said I had a feeling in my tummy (a word I would never use).

    Stomach, then.


    I care here and now. Ask my kids how loved they are.

    If your kids were my kids, and I believed there was a chance that they could be tortured for all eternity and that I would not be aware of that or that they ever existed, I would have a huge problem with that.

    So I ask for the fourth time: doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?


    Write this down 16 times:

    no.


    Sure: no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no. no.

    That was surprisingly fun. Okay, now, let's give you a turn -- write this down 16 times:


    I will ask you whatever questions I deem necessary, as many times as I deem necessary, for the purpose of making you fully understand the moral and intellectual implications of your position. You can continue to respond to them or not, as you choose. You can continue to incorporate insults and name-calling into your responses or not, as you choose.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Hmm. Suddenly Cynthia's the silent sort.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I'm not silent. It's just that this conversation was going nowhere.

    When you said "I will ask you whatever questions I deem necessary, as many times as I deem necessary, for the purpose of making you fully understand the moral and intellectual implications of your position. You can continue to respond to them or not, as you choose"----I chose to end it because we were going in circles.

    There was nothing else to say. Talking to you was pointless, as far as I was concerned...and I just can't wait to read what you twist this into.

    ReplyDelete
  63. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  64. (reposted to correct rather large typo)

    Well, I wasn't intending to share my interpretation of your withdrawl -- or, to use your less charitable phrasing, my "twisting" of it -- but far be it from me to keep you in suspense.

    My interpretation is that I was hitting a little bit close to home. But of course, that can't be the full explanation, because I've been hitting in the same direction this entire time. The other part, then, must be that for a brief moment you were actually listening to my words and taking them to heart -- and you were simply too uncomfortable with really facing up to the truth.

    Your interpretation is, of course, that we were going around in circles -- I repeat it because I suspect that otherwise you would, for the sake of reinforcing that belief to yourself (a practice which Christians have learned instinctively, through a sort of evolution, over the centuries to keep from dying out). Consider it a public service.

    So now, since I know that you're still alive and paying attention to this thread, I'll ask for a fifth time:

    If your kids were my kids, and I believed there was a chance that they could be tortured for all eternity and that I would not be aware of that or that they ever existed, I would have a huge problem with that.

    Doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?

    ReplyDelete
  65. "Well, I wasn't intending to share my interpretation of your withdrawl -- or, to use your less charitable phrasing, my "twisting" of it -- but far be it from me to keep you in suspense."

    Reply:
    Thank you for sharing and yes, you have twisted what I said to mean what you want it to mean. No surprise there.

    ===============================
    "My interpretation is that I was hitting a little bit close to home. But of course, that can't be the full explanation, because I've been hitting in the same direction this entire time."


    Reply:
    No, you have not hit anywhere close to home. You are really being full of yourself to think that in a few short posts you have "hit home" with me.

    ==========================
    The other part, then, must be that for a brief moment you were actually listening to my words and taking them to heart -- and you were simply too uncomfortable with really facing up to the truth.

    Reply:
    I hate to be rude, but you make me laugh. Seriously. I don't take to heart anything you say because I believe the opposite of whatever you believe...or don't believe.

    ==============================
    "Your interpretation is, of course, that we were going around in circles -- I repeat it because I suspect that otherwise you would, for the sake of reinforcing that belief to yourself (a practice which Christians have learned instinctively, through a sort of evolution, over the centuries to keep from dying out). Consider it a public service."

    Reply:
    Wrong. I said we are going in circles because you keep asking the same question that I keep answering. There was nothing more to it than that. Very simple.
    =======================
    "So now, since I know that you're still alive and paying attention to this thread, I'll ask for a fifth time:"

    Reply:
    Wow. You really care about me being alive? Thanks for the care.

    But, sadly, you are wrong. I'm not paying attention to it. I am just subscribed to it. It comes to my email inbox and naturally, since you missed me, I thought I would respond.
    ==========================

    "If your kids were my kids,"

    Reply:
    mmmmm....not gonna happen, but thanks anyway.

    =======================
    ..."and I believed there was a chance that they could be tortured for all eternity and that I would not be aware of that or that they ever existed, I would have a huge problem with that."

    Reply:
    I have a huge problem with it also. That's why, if you will remember, I said that's why I do something about it in the here and now. My children have all professed Christ as their savior.

    ===================
    "Doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?"

    Reply:

    No.

    If my kids were your kids, then I know they would be going straight to hell.

    If you really care about your children, make sure they don't spend eternity in hell.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Cynthia said,

    I have a huge problem with it also. That's why, if you will remember, I said that's why I do something about it in the here and now. My children have all professed Christ as their savior.

    "Professed" being the operative word. They have to mean it in their hearts too, or so goes my understanding of Christian theology. If they don't, then they go to hell, and be tortured forever, and you will live in blissful unawareness of that fact forever. Are you okay with the possibility of that happening? I'm not talking about your childrens' fates, I'm talking about your forgetting them and being blissfully unaware that the people you purportedly care about in this life are being tortured. Is that something you'd happily accept? If so, then for the sixth time, doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?

    I'll respond to the rest of your points above if you feel that I am mistaken in thinking that none of them are substantive enough to warrant a response. Just let me know.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Incidentally, there are several more posts that have been published in this series since this one. You can find them all under the "questions for christians" label. Check them out, or not, as you will.

    ReplyDelete
  68. "Professed" being the operative word. They have to mean it in their hearts too, or so goes my understanding of Christian theology.


    Reply:
    You are correct in your understanding. The word professed is "christian speak".

    =====================

    If they don't, then they go to hell, and be tortured forever, and you will live in blissful unawareness of that fact forever.

    Reply:

    Actually, no one is 100% sure of the degree of awareness we will have concerning our loved ones after we die, but I told you my thoughts about this already. Eternal awareness was the term I used. The Bible does tell us there will not be sadness in heaven.

    ============================

    Are you okay with the possibility of that happening? I'm not talking about your childrens' fates, I'm talking about your forgetting them and being blissfully unaware that the people you purportedly care about in this life are being tortured.

    Reply:
    Thank you for finally making it a little more clear what you are trying to say. Return the favor and call me dense if you wish.

    This side of death I can't stand the thought of what anyone in hell is going through. I'm not ok
    with it so as I said, I do something about it in the here and now, while I can.

    ===============================
    Is that something you'd happily accept? If so, then for the sixth time, doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?

    Reply:

    Happily accept?

    No, I don't "happily accept it.
    I just accept it.

    For the umpteenth time, no, I do not see where you are the more caring person.

    In what way are you more caring?

    Are you more caring because you have a problem with it?

    So if you ARE the more caring of the two of us, what is your solution to this problem you have?

    In your world, when you die and when your children die, YOU and THEY will be unaware of the other's fate. You are dead and unaware, in your world.

    Am I correct in thinking that you do not believe in hell, and therefore, you don't have to care one way or the other about the fate of your children at death, and that you cannot be accused of being being part of the blame for them being tortured.

    This is supposed to make you more caring than me?

    If not, please, tell me in what way you are more caring than me? Because you have a problem and I don't?

    What does your caring change?

    Please tell me what your caring is a solution to?

    ================================

    I'll respond to the rest of your points above if you feel that I am mistaken in thinking that none of them are substantive enough to warrant a response. Just let me know.

    Reply:

    No, you do not have to respond to anything I say. You have the same option you've given me.

    If you continue to ask me this same question again and again, without giving your solution, we will be here until eternity comes, just repeating ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  69. You said

    "Check them out, or not, as you will."


    Again, Mr. Dave, you make me laugh.
    You know you want to spar with me ;)

    But.....just in case you are actually a woman...forget the wink.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Cynthia said,


    Thank you for finally making it a little more clear what you are trying to say. Return the favor and call me dense if you wish.

    This side of death I can't stand the thought of what anyone in hell is going through. I'm not ok
    with it so as I said, I do something about it in the here and now, while I can.


    Happily accept?

    No, I don't "happily accept it.
    I just accept it.

    For the umpteenth time, no, I do not see where you are the more caring person.


    I believe I am the more caring person because I would not accept it.

    Perhaps more clarification is in order: I do not mean "accept" in the sense of factual acknowledgement, or "that's the way it is." I mean "accept" in the sense of being complicit in it.

    If that's not clear, then let me propose a thought experiment. Let's say that you wind up in heaven, and your children in hell, and God gives you a choice: you can forget that your children are being tortured and that they ever existed, or you can remember that they existed and be aware of their torment. You might respond that that won't be the case, and I happen to agree that it won't (although for entirely different reasons), but let's say, just as a hypothetical, that it will.

    In that hypothetical situation, what would you choose? Would you choose to remember your children and to be aware of their predicament for all eternity? Or would you choose to forget that they ever existed, to wipe them out of your awareness forever?

    If the former, then it sounds like, given the choice, you would not accept the heaven that you believe in. Wouldn't that make you, virtually by definition, a bad Christian?

    If the latter, then you should know something: I would never, or so I'd like to think, deliberately choose to forget my loved ones and be ignorant about the state of their well-being forever, no matter how much pain it caused me. I believe that that's part of what it means to truly love and care for someone. So, for the seventh time I would ask: Doesn't that make me a more caring person than you?



    Are you more caring because you have a problem with it?

    So if you ARE the more caring of the two of us, what is your solution to this problem you have?

    In your world, when you die and when your children die, YOU and THEY will be unaware of the other's fate. You are dead and unaware, in your world.


    I accept that that will be the case in the sense of factual acknowledgement, but if someone deliberately arranged for that to be the case, I would not voluntarily take part in that scheme.



    Am I correct in thinking that you do not believe in hell, and therefore, you don't have to care one way or the other about the fate of your children at death, and that you cannot be accused of being being part of the blame for them being tortured.

    This is supposed to make you more caring than me?


    In order for the reverse to be true, in order for you to be more caring than me (or even as caring as me) based on your own actions and my lack of taking those actions, two conditions would have to obtain:

    (1) There would have to exist empirical evidence sufficient to prove, beyond any reasonable doubt, that such places as Heaven and Hell exist. To act as you have in the absence of such evidence would be to fail to perform intellectual due diligence in determining the conditions needed for your children’s' happiness, and thereby to fail to care for them as much as you could.

    (2) There would have to not exist a morally compelling reason to refrain from being complicit in whatever scheme determines whether a given person goes to heaven or hell. To knowingly act as you have in the presence of such a reason would be to be complicit in a moral atrocity, thus making you morally atrocious yourself, and thereby to render your love worthless.

    You have admitted that (1) does not obtain. I believe that there can be made, and in part have argued for, a good case that (2) does not obtain either. Therefore, at least one condition above fails to obtain.

    Therefore, the answer to your question is yes, that does make me a more caring person than you. Do you disagree? If so, why?

    ReplyDelete
  71. Well Dave,

    you might as well have spoken to me in chinese.

    Give this ignorant, high school graduate only a break and speak to me where I can understand you.

    I really, really hate to have to use a dictionary to understand you.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Nevermind, I basically understood what you said and you didn't answer my question.

    What is your solution to your problem.

    You will also need to prove there is no heaven and hell.

    P. S. I care more than you do.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Cynthia said,

    Nevermind, I basically understood what you said and you didn't answer my question.

    What is your solution to your problem.


    See above.


    You will also need to prove there is no heaven and hell.

    It is a well-established principle of methodology that the burden of proof resides with the person making an existence claim (you), and not with the person who withholds assent from that claim (me). Moreover, in the case of an extraordinary claim like "Hell exists," the fact that it is unproven is sufficient to call it disproven -- as is the fact that the universe is demonstrably Godless.


    P. S. I care more than you do.

    If that were true, you wouldn't morally accept the whole Heaven/Hell thing.

    ReplyDelete
  74. It is a well-established principle of methodology that the burden of proof resides with the person making an existence claim (you), and not with the person who withholds assent from that claim (me).

    Reply:

    How convenient for you.

    I've already stated that I cannot "prove" what I believe.
    Other than the proof God has given, there is none.

    ============

    P. S. I care more than you do.

    If that were true, you wouldn't morally accept the whole Heaven/Hell thing.


    Reply:

    Heaven and Hell are not moral issues. They are eternal dwelling places.

    Nothing you could ever say can sway me from the Lord I love. Just because you don't believe, accept, or understand this love that is beyond you, does not mean that it isn't real.

    You have no idea what you are missing out on. I wish you did.

    It's not my intention to convince you of anything because of your disclaimer so please excuse me for saying more than you want me to.

    At some point God gives up on people like you. Since I don't feel any inclination to say more, then I can assume He's given up on you...and so do I.

    Finished.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Cynthia said,

    I've already stated that I cannot "prove" what I believe.
    Other than the proof God has given, there is none.


    When you say the proof God has given, do you mean anything other then that warm fuzzy feeling in your tummy -- excuse me, your stomach?

    If not, then that hardly counts as meeting condition 1 above. That makes me a more caring person than you.


    Heaven and Hell are not moral issues. They are eternal dwelling places.

    They represent moral issues. If you accept a place in Heaven, then you are complicit in a moral atrocity.


    Nothing you could ever say can sway me from the Lord I love. Just because you don't believe, accept, or understand this love that is beyond you, does not mean that it isn't real.

    That's true. Reality itself means that it isn't real. It's also true that nothing I say will sway you from your beliefs -- there are some steps you have to take yourself.


    You have no idea what you are missing out on. I wish you did.

    Your wish is (retroactively) granted. I was a Christian for many years.


    It's not my intention to convince you of anything because of your disclaimer so please excuse me for saying more than you want me to.

    No worries. It's not for my benefit anyway.


    At some point God gives up on people like you. Since I don't feel any inclination to say more, then I can assume He's given up on you...and so do I.

    Finished.


    Well, I've already made clear my interpretation of your wishing to withdraw from this discussion. There's just one thing I'll add, just on the off chance that you actually mean it this time:

    I think -- and I'll say up front that I have no good evidence for this, just a strong gut feeling -- I think you know in the deepest part of your being that God does not exist. I just want you to know that, when the rest of you comes around, no apologies are necessary. (You'll understand why I say that when it happens.)

    ReplyDelete
  76. Ok Mr. Dave, you just had to go and say some things you KNEW I would respond to. Thanks. Usually it's the woman that wont let a subject drop. I bet your wife .... nevermind.

    Anyway, you said:

    "Well, I've already made clear my interpretation of your wishing to withdraw from this discussion.

    Reply:

    I don't remember telling you I wish to withdraw...I just didn't say any more to you because I thought we were going in circles.
    Getting nowhere fast and I told you that.

    ==========================

    There's just one thing I'll add, just on the off chance that you actually mean it this time:

    Reply:

    Please. If you want to continue with me, quote only what I say, not your interpretation of what you think I might have meant to say had I said what you wanted to hear.

    =========================

    I think -- and I'll say up front that I have no good evidence for this, just a strong gut feeling --

    Reply:

    Please Mr. Dave...you couldn't possibly have a gut feeling where I'm concerned. It's odd, but I had the same gut feeling about you..but decided I was wrong.

    Anyway, I've not said anything to make you have a gut feeling where I'm concerned.
    =========================

    I think you know in the deepest part of your being that God does not exist.

    Reply:

    I believe I made myself very clear that you can't draw me away from the love I have for the Lord.

    Please don't misquote me and for certain don't tell me what I think.

    Your voodoo wont work on me.

    ===========================

    You are the very person that I would like to ask a ton of questions of. No preaching or teaching from my side.

    I'm not interested in learning to deconvert. I'm interested in asking some questions of a professed atheist who was once a Christian.

    If that's not you then fine. I only bring it up to you because we've made such a long page of comments and you feel you know me so well that I was hoping you would be so kind as to do this one thing.

    You've made the comment several times that it makes no difference to you whether I reply to you or not, but you keep drawing me back, so I figure you would be the one I could ask...and I now feel comfortable enough with you to do this.

    You know why I feel comfortable with you? You've been nice.

    Yes or no...it's up to you.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Cynthia said,

    Ok Mr. Dave, you just had to go and say some things you KNEW I would respond to.

    That wasn't quite my intention, but okay.



    I bet your wife .... nevermind.

    Given the existence of the "Backspace" button, you CAN, in fact, be held morally responsible for unfinished sentences in blog posts.



    Please Mr. Dave...you couldn't possibly have a gut feeling where I'm concerned. It's odd, but I had the same gut feeling about you..but decided I was wrong.

    Anyway, I've not said anything to make you have a gut feeling where I'm concerned.


    You're quite mistaken -- it is, in fact, the totality of our conversation thus far that has led me to have this gut feeling. Your overall shift in demeanor over this time is consistent with one who is not quite certain about the things she is saying.



    I believe I made myself very clear that you can't draw me away from the love I have for the Lord.

    Please don't misquote me and for certain don't tell me what I think.


    You have, indeed, stated your surface feelings quite clearly. But you cannot tell me not to not have gut feelings, nor do you have the right to tell me not to express my opinions.



    You are the very person that I would like to ask a ton of questions of. No preaching or teaching from my side.

    I'm not interested in learning to deconvert. I'm interested in asking some questions of a professed atheist who was once a Christian.


    That would be fine, but not in this thread. This thread, and the other "Questions..." posts are for you, not me, to answer questions. I'll set up a thread a little later for that purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Cynthia, I have set up a thread for you to ask me questions here.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Guess I shouldn't have said you were nice.

    Your demeanor in your last post changed also, but not for the better. Afraid of being exposed?

    My shift in demeanor was because you were nice.

    My convictions have never budged. In fact, the truth is, when I sent that last reply I wish I had not added the part about asking you questions.

    Light and darkness don't mix. So we can forget you making another thread and you can think what you will of me.

    I honestly don't care.

    ReplyDelete

Unlike Ray we don't censor our comments, so as long as it's on topic and not spam, fire away.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.