Dear Pogi,

As for my post dated Monday, 10 May 2021 2:04:52 AM, it was not addressed for you, only for some other readers who pass by. Why so? because nothing I say could help saving your soul anyway.

While my quoting the wisdom of the Mahabharata can be relevant and helpful for some (obviously not yourself), my statement there stands on its own merit and does not really require any further substantiation, I repeat:

To create heaven on earth¹ is a materialistic fantasy, for one thing is for sure - there will come a time when this earth and universe, in which fools place their hopes, will be no more.

Can you disagree?

---
¹ In response and rejection of the article's statement: "Time is understood as being linear and directed towards the establishment of the kingdom of heaven/God on earth"

My Dear Yuyutsu,
Re your post Monday 10 March 2021: This post is published on a public forum and is addressed to no one in particular. You want to pick and choose your readers and your responders?

" Why so? because nothing I say could help saving your soul anyway."

This is your one successful attempt at the unvarnished truth and goes back to my brick wall observation.
But YOU cannot know this for a fact. That reduces your assertion to a fondly held opinion which tickles the "faith spot" in your brain. Your interlocutor, poor deprived wretch, lacked such a spot from birth, his deprivation stretched to a soul as well.

"While my quoting the wisdom of the Mahabharata can be relevant and helpful for some (obviously not yourself), my statement there stands on its own merit and does not really require any further substantiation,"

The application of logic and reason inescapably demands that as a claim of this stripe falls without evidence, ergo such claims can be dismissed without evidence and, having no substance (not held together by logic and reason), ipso facto,they perish without substantiation. How would you convince me you are correct unless we both hold to the same credibility standards? Convince me your standards are better than mine. Both of us cannot be correct, but both of us can be wrong. Kindly avoid responding with a question as I will not be dragooned into making your case for you. Straightforward answers will gain respect. Straightforward but unsubstantiated opinions/assertions, less so.

Of course it is possible that everything as we know it will be no more. Prof Paul Davies in GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS describes the heat death of the Universe with science, logic and reason in ch.15. His Templeton Prize (2002, I think) is no taint to his scholarship. Asserting that you know the why , the how and the when requires the same scholarship based in science, logic and reason. Anything less will fail.

Taking pride in one's achievements is a sin only when someone else wants the credit. (248)

Dear Pogi,

I am not here to convince you of anything.
The author wrote his view in the article, I disagreed, regrettably he did not respond, then you intervened.

It seems that you anyway tend to agree with me (in this matter of the non-linearity of time) rather than with the author, Peter Sellick,
but you still seem to be uncertain and would like a further proof. However, the only kind of evidence that you may accept would be from modern material science, something neither the author nor myself have great interest in.

I am pretty convinced that modern scientific evidence can be found on this matter if sought, but I am not your slave to do your research work for free, so if you like to find it then roll up your own sleeves. I make it none of my business whether or not you accept my words or believe Sellick's Christian viewpoint instead - as far as I am concerned it is quite OK if you choose to follow him and become a Christian, even become a Jesuit monk or the pope if you like, I will not be offended.