When does one go to heaven?

[Byzantine Mercenary]

There is no logic in religion. I'm sorry but the very premise of deriving reason from faith is just plain preposterous. Believe in your God if you will, I shall not bother your faith; but such a claim puts me off.

On another note, logicians have come to the interesting "conclusion" that logic is, to use an old British India answer, "turtles all the way down." You cannot pinpoint its beginning.

Therefore, if I am an arrogant bastard, I will immediately claim that from such conclusion we can draw another conclusion (thus turning it in to premise ) that there is no beginning.

But I won't.

Now, pardon the interruption and please continue.

there is logic in religion, if a higher being was to compile a list of rules for society then i would argue that the teaching to love your neighbour would be the simplest and most logical teaching to send.

We can each have a different logic from our different perspectives and come to different conclusions but i can assure you that from my position the existance of god is entirely logical, although i can except that you do not see it as logical from your position.

I cannot see chaos somehow creating complex laws of science, i can't see a universe starting for no reason or self concious beings just happening to pop along after a while instead of the universe being a cloud of gas or a giant black hole

[Divinus Arma]

I just kind of browsed this thread, and I want to answer the original question.

I will answer the questions regarding eclectic logic in the other thread. I'll just say this: There is no faith. Faith is believing in something you know cannot possible be true. Faith will not feed us, clothe us, or fulfill us, no matter how it is sold. Logical worship is the only answer and it does answer all questions. I'll respond to these legitmate arguments in the religion thread.


Re: Heaven. Before one can ascertain "how" to get to heaven, we must first ask "if".

I will assume first that my conclusions on logical evidence of a self-aware will has been accepted. If it is not accpeted, than they points are irrelevent. I will be happy to debate the matter in the other thread. For now, I hope you can simply understand the following logic until I have made my other points clear enough.

All world religions share a similar vision of the Lord. Our God is a living God. We have no evidence of any other existence than this one, but it is arrogant to assume that our feeble human minds know all. We do know for certain of this existence. And if the Lord is a living God, than he dwells with us here and now, not in a place of our imagination.

This, I think, is a critical foundation for a discussion on the nature of the relationship between mortality and relevance. After all, our search for heaven is nothing less than a search for relevance. If we conclude that our existence ceases beyond our mortality, than in existence our lives are futile and without purpose. Our existence, then, is without purpose, the universe is without purpose, and thus ultimately, there exists no self-aware will.

The two are interlinked and provide the key to our exisetnce, the realtionship between the Lord, and our innate sense of being and purpose.

Through logical interpretation of the nature of chaos, we have discovered the truth of a living will. Through logical interpretation of the purpose of the living will, we have discovered that this living will is self-aware.

And now us. We exist. But toward what end? What purpose? We complete the cirlce of purpose through choice, choosing to serve the will with our own will. This, therein is heaven. This, you have found in life, should you manage to achieve it. We remember our impermanence in state to release our struggle with desire. Through the acceptance of things as they are rather than as we would wish them, we achieve harmony with our surroundings.

We come now to death. And as our will is alligned with the will of the lord, so to shall that continue in death. Our alligned will and harmony with the continual change of state will allow us to join the will. As we have been the will through our lives, choosing to allow God to work through us, choosing to sacrifice ourselves in order to truly be His will in life, so to should there be no reason for this ceasing upon death. We simply continue in being his will, and in so doing, become the will.

Because we have sacrificed ourselves and chosen to be his will, there is no self, only His will. And so the differences between us in life dissapear as we become the will. You do not cease to exist. You always were. And you always will be. You were never "born", as you have been alive since life was formed. You are aged. Older than yourself. Older than your parents, and they too, as old as you. And so on back through the ages, you have been alive, until the day that you were on this earth, in order to have choice. Shall you follow the will of the Lord?

[Divinus Arma]

This is one thread I did not wish to kill.

[Rodion Romanovich]

@Divinus Arma: if you commit the sin of bumping you won't go to heaven!

[KafirChobee]

At first I (was hoping) thought the question was at what point does one go to heaven - as in the old "and the dead shall rise and be judged" ... or the "you will be with me at my father's side this day" (Jesus to the petty criminal being crucified with him - that asked to be saved). Then I read the posts, many not so original ideas ... but, all well presented (mostly).

The idea that one's sins can be forgiven - for a price - is a Catholic one. But, the idea that if you "change your ways" and accept Jesus as your saviour .... wellllllll, that's an evangelican one (Baptisits and such). The idea that if you live your life correctly, harm no one with with intent (except to protect your family), seek a true meaning in life, find your center in the universe, help the less fortunate, judge lest you be judged, and honor yourself - then your a Buddhist.

On old TV (1950s) there was Bishop Sheen, my parents (Lutheran) watched him (and made us - I mean my bro's and me were 6, 4 and 3 - eldest here) religiously. He was great, because he explained things simply (on his blackboard) and never proclaimed his interpretations as being absolutes ... he basically said as long as one believed in something and didn't intentionally break the laws of god, they could (might) get an audience with the lord. Me, I remember his interpretations on angels as though it were yesterday (somethings just stick in your head ... ya' know?). Thing is, getting to heaven has a great deal in acknowledging God, but accepting Jesus has nothing to do with it - except by the interpretation of evangelicals (etc). IMO, that is how it has been presented.

Now, when does one actually attain heaven? Upon death - after X amount of time in purgatory (or do we each find our level on the 9 plat's of H'eck) ..... or do we simply go into a limbo until "judgement day"? When all the dead shall rise and be judged? Or, are we reincarnated 'til judgement day?

Nothing 'bout that thing Bush believes in ... you know where the true believers will be rushed up to heaven on an escallator to watch the end times? Gah! But, when do the true believers actually reach their goal? upon death, or the end of times? Don't mean to hi-jack the thread, am just curious.

[Byzantine Mercenary]

[QUOTE=KafirChobee]
Now, when does one actually attain heaven? Upon death - after X amount of time in purgatory (or do we each find our level on the 9 plat's of H'eck) ..... or do we simply go into a limbo until "judgement day"? When all the dead shall rise and be judged? Or, are we reincarnated 'til judgement day?
QUOTE]

my problem with the idea of purgatory is that i have never seen jesus mention it in the bible, and if it exists, surely he would have mentioned it?

time is just another dimention and can be manipulated, so when we all die we could go straight to a judgement day surely?

[KafirChobee]

OH, OH!!!! I know this one's origin - about purgatory .... it's that phrase about Jesus descending into Hell and then rising from the dead and then ascending into heaven. No?

[Byzantine Mercenary]

a phrase in the bible? where? does it make specific reference to purgatory?

[Don Corleone]

It's because of the logic, derived from the position that Christians take about their god. Atheists and agnostics try to understand using the thought process they are used to - which excludes faith based assumptions.

God created everything. Since evil exists, therefore he created evil. As creator, he cannot claim credit just for good. Thus he can be apportioned responsibility for evil, even if his creation of Man is the one choosing to inflict evil.

Or:

God created everything except evil. Since evil exists, there must be another creator, at least as powerful as God. Either this is Man, creating evil from his own free will, or another supernatural creator such as Satan. Evil is demonstrably as powerful as good to affect men's lives, which means either Man or Satan is as powerful as god. Therefore there is not one god, but at least two.

See?

Whereas the atheist can argue that since there is no God, Man takes full responsibility for both good and evil.

Okay, let's change metaphors and lets look at a family situation?

A set of parents create a house and in the fullness of time, they get pregnant and have a child. As the child grows, the parents try to do everything they can to see to it that the child grows up healthy, happy and wise.

When the child is 19, he discoveres his parents' liqour cabinet. He asks his parents for a key so that he can indulge too. Now, mind you, I said 19. He's old enough to know good and bad, right from wrong. His Dad says well, I think you're old enough. But before you touch anything, you must understand, things in this cabinet must be enjoyed in moderation. Too much of anything in here and you'll be very sick, possibly die. So, be careful.

One saturday night, a friend that the parents don't approve of comes over to hang out. Unfortunately, the parents aren't home. The 'friend' encourages the son to drink bourbon... a LOT of it. Too much. After he vomits it up, the friend holds the bottle to his mouth and encourages him to drink more. Eventually, the son succumbs to alcohol poisoning and dies.

Now, let me ask you...

Were the parents to blame?

Was the alcohol itself?

No, it was the son, who made the choice to continue drinking when he should have stopped, to hang out with a bad influence that he knew he should avoid, and to reject what his father had told him in his warnings.

Now, could the parents have seen to it that there was no alcohol? Does the fact that they didn't make the son's overindulgance their fault instead of his? Let's say the son didn't die. Let's say he pukes all over the floor, kicks his younger sister and breaks some valuable family heirlooms. His father comes home to find him staggering drunk, attempting to beat up his younger sister. The father backhands the son to try to bring him back to reality. Is the father solely responsible?

This is the problem with modern times. Everyone demands their rights, and nobody takes responsiblity for anything. We're all a bunch of children complaining that our piggy bank is empty after we've bought too much candy.

[Don Corleone]

As for the original question, Duke John,... forget what any dogma or 'true vision' of Christianity says (Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist, or any other worldwide cult, and I AM a devout Christian).

How did Christ treat the establishment of the established religion of his day. He railed against the Sadducees and the Pharisees. He said they didn't have the first clue about what the Father wanted.

More importantly, He warned all of us against passing judgement on each other and condemning each other "Remove the plank from your own eye, then you can see clearly to help your brother with the speck in his".

But He also said "I am the way, the truth and the life. Noone may come to the Father except through me".

If you're asking if anybody else has the right to say you're bound for heaven or hell, no, nobody else on Earth can tell YOU where you're headed. If you're asking do you need to know Christ at some point in your life, I think so. I know that I do. If you want to talk about Christ, let me know. I'll tell you what I've learned of Him. If you want to talk about why we suffer from evil in the world, I can offer you my guesses. If you want answers, well, I'm sorry, you're going to have find those for yourself. No shortcuts.

[Kanamori]

Eh, meh, not really belonging in this thread.

[Don Corleone]

To be a bit combative, I wonder why I should accept Jesus' explanation over anyone else. Even better, why should I accept the Bible's account, I've read it, and it was not God talking to me. The only authority above myself is God, and God hasn't been talking to me lately. Of course, not taking the Bible as an authority over myself, because it is not God, could be a sin, but I think there are very few that will be pleased w/ this conclusion.

You ever wonder if it's that God quit talking to you, or you already have all the answers and quit listening?

[Kanamori]

If I cannot identify that God is God, I'm in a whole lot of trouble, no matter what.

[Don Corleone]

If I cannot identify that God is God, I'm in a whole lot of trouble, no matter what.

Yahweh is who is. Whether you choose to know Him, seek Him and listen to Him is entirely up to you. He doesn't change, you do.

[Xiahou]

This is the problem with modern times. Everyone demands their rights, and nobody takes responsiblity for anything. We're all a bunch of children complaining that your piggy bank is empty after we've bought too much candy.

I second that.

[KafirChobee]

Yahweh is who is. Whether you choose to know Him, seek Him and listen to Him is entirely up to you. He doesn't change, you do.

Know what, you almost seem to know what you are talking about - but, then you get definative that you are right and no one else should have an opinion. It is a matter that you, and you alone know the truth - what ever that truth might be.

Now, I like your allegory about the kid and booze (think I heard that one by my pastor back in 1962), but to use such things to attempt to make a point? I must ask, what is your point? That you and only you know right from wrong? That we change as does the direction of the wind? [when, how, and why - when will people accept the law that abortion is legal? - or is mans' law lesser than the gods'] Do men have free will, or are we governed by the will of god - as, Bush confesses to be ("God, made me president").

Perceptions, ideals, ideas, concepts, philosophys, theorys, axioms, or unbiased (or biased) opininions - all are relevant. The idea that one idea of god is superior to another? Well, that's from those convinced that only they and they alone know the truth ..... like say the jihadist and the christian right. The rest of us are open to ideas - I mean, I like the idea of wood nyphms. Why not?

So, when does one go to heaven? At death? Or, at the end of times?

[Don Corleone]

When did I say I was right and nobody else was entitled to an opinion? Read my post to Duke John's question directly. I said what I thought and offered to discuss it with him further.

Some people started saying that they didn't think there could be a God, because evil happens and He allows it. I tried to offer an alternative explanation for what happens, and you come along and declare me to be intolerant and self-righteous.

You know, Khafir, I don't think in the two years I've been on here, you've ever had anything even remotely nice to say about me. You've called me a host of names I cannot repeat without getting warned, which is funny, because you didn't get warned when you called me them. I thought this might actually be the first time you weren't going to be downright insulting, and then I re-read your post above and recognized that this was one of your more nefarious attacks to date.

If the best you can do is to just continue to mispresent what I've said and then insult me on the basis of what you've construed, perhaps you should simply add me to your ignore list. I can assure you, I'm not worth the agitation and heartburn I apaprently cause you.

[KafirChobee]

Insult? Challange, yes. Insult, no. Sorry, you took it that way Don.
Must be my aggressive style of writing - will try to be more cautious in the future (though at my age don't count on much).