GZ, your approach most certainly is different.

>>Heaven & hell is not even remotely a logical starting point for consideration. Not unless heaven & hell can be proven<<

As I said before, I'm supremely unconcerned whether they can be proven or not. I haven't the slightest interest in discussing or analyzing proofs, simply in the concepts. I am asking, what is in your mind when you use the words.

goodthief understands the question, and had the courtesy to respond with his impressions - I certainly don't intend to ask him to "prove" that they exist in this form.

If you don't have any idea, then just say so. However, it would be good manners, if you don't have a clue what they represent, to avoid using them to threaten or cajole.

The reason I asked the question in the first place is that so many religious people bandy the terms around as if it is self-evident what they are, but when questioned about them, back off at a million miles an hour.

Much as you do.

>>Question is, have you exhausted your own answers on how life had come about, for instance?<<

Since when was this the issue? What relevance are my answers to the question of your impressions of heaven and hell?

And even if I were able to reach the end, and had gained a full understanding of life, the universe and everything, how exactly would this change your answer?

>>If so, shouldn't you allow your answers be challenged rather than jumping to cast doubts on heaven & hell?<<

I am not, watch my lips, "casting doubts" on heaven and hell.

I personally don't believe in either, but I can certainly accept that they exist as images in people's minds.

And I am interested in understanding those images, in order to have a better understanding of the forces that create them, and the uses to which they are put.

What are you afraid of?

Pericles, Some oddments arising from your last post to me.

Yes, a Southern Baptist might imagine heaven to be heavily populated: is this what you mean?

However, the fact that there are different ways of describing heaven (eg some will say Jesus brought heaven here, when he said “Behold, the kingdom of God is at hand”) doesn’t mean there isn’t one. It just means all the different descriptions can’t be equally true. It means –
1 one of the versions is true (but it’s hard to tell which one)
2 some other unstated version is true
3 or, of course, there’s no heaven at all and I have beguiled myself into a stupor.

Anyhow, the buffet of descriptions will not excuse you from eliminating the tangible option. Sorry not be more obliging.

It’s the same, of course, with God. Either God exists (bearing some description or other), or not. And with Jesus. Either he is the Son of God, or he is not.

These are REAL alternatives. There is personal taste (or belief) involved, but the beliefs are either true or not, so it is not MERELY personal taste. Is this clear, or unclear or uninteresting?

Incidentally, I don’t read Genesis literally. I think the world is extremely old, not a reproduction antique, and that evolution is almost certainly true. But I do read Genesis for maximum value. Simply put, I believe that the world is, and people are, AS THOUGH the Genesis account were literally true. For example, I believe God made the world/universe, but I don't know how he went about it.

Similarly I believe we humans are made in God’s image (via evolution), and that this fact along with God’s love for us is what makes humans worth loving. If I were an atheist humanist, limited to evolution, I would struggle to find a basis for saying we should love, or respect, or act justly towards humans. I would see humans as essentially just the latest chimp-upgrade, and I would be so conscious of differences that I would have no reason to be an egalitarian. Any comment?

We have it proposed that perhaps people in “heaven” will have bodies back. Well, I hate to think about people who were cripple to be back in “heaven” with the same problems they had on earth. Likewise, the blind, etc.

Then we have that somehow a person who commits murder but seek his GOD for forgiveness can end up in Heaven, and a non-believer (for better wording missing) who never committed any crime and spent his/her whole life dedicated to help those in need somehow then ends up in “Hell”

Then we have the issue that somehow “GOD” having created Adam and Eve found they did not fulfill his desire by eating the apple and so banned out of the Garden of Eve. Well, that would place GOD as an almighty bools-up GOD, who could not even manage to have his first creations to do the right thing, and as a vindictive GOD in that he now pursues mankind to suffer for his first creations.

Perhaps the real truth is that as in a dream, you can make up anything you belief and you have every right to do so, regardless if it is related to reality or not. However, do not try to dictate others to accept this notion of a perception as being a REALITY.

Let see, if any of my children were to do a bad thing to me then am I then forever in the day hold it against his/her children and further descendant? At least, that seems the logic used in the view that GOD seek to punish mankind for the purported wrongs by Adam and Eve.

The fact that biblical text is based upon what towns may have existed does not mean that therefore the bible text further is correct.
When I wrote my first book it was a crime/comedy book;
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® and the Secret of the Empire
Personalized crime/comedy novel on CD edition

Later the same book was republished with a board game.

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® and the Secret of the Empire, GAME EDITION
Crime/comedy novel on CD edition

part 2

Both however having extensive maps as to what the story relies upon.
Only, I created the map afterwards and then inserted the names into the story line.
Others could likewise have done so in creating the different text of the bible, as after all some parts were written hundreds of years later, and without then having sound recording, etc, a lot was how a story teller was passing it on to others. And, we all know that exaggeration takes place as a story is told and retold many times over.

Dead Sea scrolls have appeared that question the version of text in the current Bible, and as such a lot is there left to be desired as to what is true or not.

GOD exist in the mind of those who desire to “belief’ in GOD and does not exist in those who do not “belief” in this GOD. However, those who do not belief in this “GOD” may or may not “belief” in the existence of another SUPERNATURAL being. Now we might come down to UFO’s and whatever perhaps?

Everyone has the right to “belief” whatever they desire and again, as long as they keep it for themselves and do not try, so to say, shove it down the throat of others then they have my “blessing”.

FH,

Gosh...when did I deny my true belief??
I mentioned you may regard me a "logical Christian" (whatever this means to you)
If you think I'm religious, spiritual church-goer, pray and talk to priests then perhaps I ought to laugh. You can't read me, can you?
I don't expect a religious guy like you to understand.

I do conclude that Christianity is (much) more logical than Islam.

And who suggested to prove Virgin Birth and Resurrection? I've hinted to CJ not to waste his breath. Whilst I believe Muhammad's claims are definitely hoax, I do not conclude this way about Virgin Birth & Resurrection.

After listing some reasons against Muhammand's claims, I'm still waiting for CJ's reasons for suggesting Virgin Birth & Resurrection are hoax, EQUALLY IMAGINARY as Muhammand's angel claims.

Now CJ tells me it's quite okay to admit it's a matter of belief. This is not the point. What good if they are equally hoax?

Pericles,

I don't understand the approach of asking about heaven & hell when it is religions that mention them. If one has a reason to believe in a religion, then I assume one tends to believe in that religion's version of heaven & hell. Therefore shouldn't you question religions rather than heaven & hell?
But does one believe in a religion because one has a preconceived ideas about heaven & hell? I wonder...
What about science? Don't people question science (and exhausted their scientific answers) before coming to a religion?

The above underlines why I wrote my previous posts the way I did.

Sure, Goodthief courteously, sincerely respond with his impressions. But does it matter? You don't believe him, do you?

I think you are insistent that heaven & hell exist only in people's minds, and are used as a threat. All that you do is nothing more than gathering answers from others to reinforce this preconceived idea.

I think your position could be one of prejudice. That's why I suggest you state your own reasonings for others to comment/challenge.

I should be the one asking: What are you afraid of ?

Mr Schorel-Hlavka, Can I call you Gerrit, please?

Perhaps I have not been clear:-

1) I do not read the Genesis story literally. I don’t believe Adam and Eve ever existed. I believe that each human has, at the deepest level, betrayed God in the way Adam and Eve do in the story.

2) If we have bodies in heaven, they will be perfect. I omitted to say this above. Heaven (if it exists) is perfect.

3) I don’t believe non-Christians automatically go to hell. I don’t expect there are many people in hell. This is because, as I said, God is at pains to gather people to him, to live in a perfectly loving situation forever. He doesn’t want anyone left out, but he relies on the individual’s consent.

4) I’m not dictating about the existence of heaven, or God. My point was that these are issues of fact, not merely “internal” matters. If God and heaven exist, then I was right and the atheist was wrong. If not, then the atheist was right and I was wrong. The problem for me is that God does not make his existence obvious (eg to a scientist). Of course the atheist would say, “Well, I think there is a very good reason for that”! Anyway, I was not intending to impoe my belief on anyone.

God’s incompetence at managing Eden is simply explained in terms of the freedom he designed into people. They chose (ie we choose) to disobey.

Regarding God’s apparent vindictiveness at banishing us here, these few points might help (please excuse the list format):

a) There was actually no banishment, because Eden is just a story.
b) For the same reason, we are not being punished for the wrong of Adam and Eve.
c) We don’t deserve a world that is any better than this one.
d) Most that is wrong with the world is man-made.
e) We’re not here very long.
f) God feels as bad about our situation as we do.

Pax,