Explain the heaven concept

robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Explain the heaven concept

The bible leaves heaven, pretty open ended. I have been to church many times long ago, and I don't recall the preachers hitting on exactly what heaven is like either. This is another miniscule ratiocination in why I do not believe in the whole sham. It is obviously left open ended so that one could conjure whatever fantasy in the mind one likes and it would be heaven.

From what I recall it is guarded by some pearly gates and St. Peter, and inside there are people playing harps (an instrument seldom used today). So, what do you do when in heaven. Obviously you would leave behind all your worldly cares like sex, video games, and football. So, what exactly are you going to do in heaven. Is it just a perpetual state of bliss? Like being extremely high or something?

 

 

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Blake
atheistScience Freak
Posts: 991
Joined: 2010-02-19
User is offlineOffline
David Henderson can probably

David Henderson can probably do a better job than I, but I'll try (take all of this with a grain of salt- this is NOT my area of expertise):

 

Basically, the original conception of an afterlife was very limited, and physical, on Earth.  There wasn't a heaven- YHWH was going to make his kingdom on Earth and resurrect all of his faithful followers to live in it- it would be something like the new Eden.

The idea of a spiritual location and a magical ghost-like soul came much later, and that's why older scripture is weak on it- the new ideas came from the other religions of the day, including Roman paganism and probably some more Eastern concepts that had been mingling/migrating West with trade.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Well, I suppose that heaven,

Well, I suppose that heaven, as expressed, has to go on forever. So there must be an infinite amount of stuff to do. Absent that, I fail to see how one would not get bored after some finite amount of time. The whole “been there, done that, ate the sandwich, took a crap in the collectible lunch box” thing.

 

Seriously, given an infinite amount of time, you have to be able to do an infinite amount of things.

 

Heck but I would assume that at some point, it becomes reasonable to spend a trillion years in hell. I could see dropping by Joe Stalin for a good long time and saying “Gee, in 102,464,004 years, I am going back. Too bad that you got fucked on the deal”.

 

The only downside that I see is that sooner or later, you would have to meet someone who you cared about. Here I what I see on that: “Gee mom! I guess that my older brother was not really born a month premature. Sucks for you but I am going home next eon! I guess that you regret that 20 minutes out of your life”.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4198
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
there's no evidence for a

there's no evidence for a spiritual afterlife in the hebrew bible.  the only book that comes close to mentioning "heaven," apart from intricate prophetic visions that may or may not have been meant to be taken metaphorically, is job, in which the tempter visits god in his celestial court.  there is no evidence of once-dead humans being there, though.

as the new testament itself documents, the jewish world has always been divided on the question of a general resurrection.  once again, the hebrew bible doesn't really give any evidence that its few resurrection stories are meant to be anything more than special occurences.

as for harps and "pearly gates," etc., most of these details come from the description of the new jerusalem in revelation.  the new jerusalem has 12 gates, each of which is a single massive pearl, as opposed to the popular representation of ornate gates fashioned from some sort of "pearly" material.  it's ironic that this is represented as the current "heaven," since according to the plain meaning of revelation, the appearance of the new jerusalem is an eschatological event that hasn't happened yet (if one takes it for granted, along with most mainstream christians, that revelation describes mostly future events).  as for harps, the 24 elders around the throne of god are represented as holding harps.  once again, there is no evidence at all that these were once living people, nor does it say we will all play harps in heaven anywhere in the bible.

as for st. peter guarding the gates of heaven, this is a later tradition.  it's based on matthew 16.18-20, where jesus tells peter he will give him "the keys to the kingdom of heaven."  there is no explanation in the text as to what this means, and most scholars today agree that jesus used "kingdom of heaven" (or, alternately, "kingdom of god" ) to denote an imminent eschatological kingdom, either spiritual or terrestrial, not an already existing spiritual realm.  it's also part of the reason why there are two keys in the vatican crest.

 

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


B166ER
atheist
B166ER's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2010-03-01
User is offlineOffline
A great book on the subject

Robj101, a really great book about the whole heaven thing is Mark Twain's "Letters from the Earth". It's a great book that wasn't published until decades after his death since his daughter thought it would hurt his reputation. Always the sign of a great book! It is the story of Satan getting grounded out of heaven for a 1000 years and coming to earth during his vacation and being completely confused by the religious people of the world. One of my favorite parts is where he is thinking about how people talk about not being able to wait to get to heaven, when they describe it like an eternity of Church and most of the people he sees can't stand sitting in Church for more then an hour or so. I think "Letters from the Earth" should be on everyone's bookshelf. It's hilarious, poignant, and scathing social satire in a way only Mark Twain could have accomplished. A MUST READ!

"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
All I know is what I was

All I know is what I was told as a child.  Heaven is sitting on clouds, playing harps, and singing praises to god for eternity.  It sounded boring when I was a kid and it sounds even worse now.  I remember telling the pastor that it sounded boring and got told it won't seem so when in the presence of god.  I still didn't believe that it would be interesting for more than a minute or two.

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2929
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
B166ER wrote:Robj101, a

B166ER wrote:

Robj101, a really great book about the whole heaven thing is Mark Twain's "Letters from the Earth". It's a great book that wasn't published until decades after his death since his daughter thought it would hurt his reputation. Always the sign of a great book! It is the story of Satan getting grounded out of heaven for a 1000 years and coming to earth during his vacation and being completely confused by the religious people of the world. One of my favorite parts is where he is thinking about how people talk about not being able to wait to get to heaven, when they describe it like an eternity of Church and most of the people he sees can't stand sitting in Church for more then an hour or so. I think "Letters from the Earth" should be on everyone's bookshelf. It's hilarious, poignant, and scathing social satire in a way only Mark Twain could have accomplished. A MUST READ!

Reading it now.  Neat!  I like Twain, he was such a smart ass.

Here are the letters: http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/twain/letearth.htm

 

I agree with cj, heaven never sounded very interesting when I was a kid.  Honestly, if there were a heaven for me I would expect it to be 1/3 giant university, 1/3 giant holodeck and 1/3 giant orgy.  Learn, play, party.

Who wants to spend an eternity in church?  Yuck.  Most theists just gloss over it though, "But God will be there, he'll make it totally awesome!".

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


B166ER
atheist
B166ER's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2010-03-01
User is offlineOffline
IT'S ONLINE!!! XD

mellestad wrote:

Reading it now.  Neat!  I like Twain, he was such a smart ass.

Here are the letters: http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/twain/letearth.htm

That's great that I'm not the only one who has read one of Twain's finest. And to hear that its online is great news indeed! I would advise it to all, Creanderthals especially, since he totally demolishes so many religious arguments so well, with an intelligence and wit only he was capable of. His take on Noah's Ark is just priceless!

"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
cj wrote:All I know is what

cj wrote:

All I know is what I was told as a child.  Heaven is sitting on clouds, playing harps, and singing praises to god for eternity.  It sounded boring when I was a kid and it sounds even worse now.  I remember telling the pastor that it sounded boring and got told it won't seem so when in the presence of god.  I still didn't believe that it would be interesting for more than a minute or two.

This pretty much sums up my feeling towards it. An eternity of ...existing, sounds boring as hell /cough.

 

edit: but I wanted a theist to explain it too us =)

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2929
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
I wouldn't mind the living

I wouldn't mind the living forever part though, as long as I could end it when I wanted to.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:I wouldn't

mellestad wrote:

I wouldn't mind the living forever part though, as long as I could end it when I wanted to.

Then by proxy of stipulation that would rule out "forever".

I doubt God has the humility to get board. Lucky for humanity such a being is fictitious.

If a god existed the only pragmatic reason I could fall for such tripe is that we are lab rats.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
If our existence is

If our existence is constantly governed by learning, then the leader who knows everything has nothing to learn which makes him/it/whatever mute, merely a figurehead which like all reality, bites us in the ass. No one likes a know it all, which should make God the biggest prick in the universe.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


GodlessGabriel
atheist
GodlessGabriel's picture
Posts: 24
Joined: 2010-03-10
User is offlineOffline
The bible and the theist

The bible and the theist don't expand on the concept of heaven because none of them know what/where/how it is.

It's just an idea implanted in peoples minds by ancient theists to keep people from doing bad stuff.

For example: In some versions of the bible there is no mention of hell(only heaven).and because there was no hell al lot of people comited suicide as a means to ending their suffering. After a very high suicide rate, scribes told people that suicide was a sin and that it was punishable by hell(which was created for the soul purpose of making people obey the commandments).

 

 

"I don't believe in afterlife, although I am bringing a change of underwear."


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:The bible

robj101 wrote:

The bible leaves heaven, pretty open ended. I have been to church many times long ago, and I don't recall the preachers hitting on exactly what heaven is like either. This is another miniscule ratiocination in why I do not believe in the whole sham. It is obviously left open ended so that one could conjure whatever fantasy in the mind one likes and it would be heaven.

From what I recall it is guarded by some pearly gates and St. Peter, and inside there are people playing harps (an instrument seldom used today). So, what do you do when in heaven. Obviously you would leave behind all your worldly cares like sex, video games, and football. So, what exactly are you going to do in heaven. Is it just a perpetual state of bliss? Like being extremely high or something?

 

 

 

The Hebrew word shamayim is always in plural form and is rendered heaven(s). It has the basic sense of that which is high or lofty. The etymology of the Greek word for heaven, ouranos, is uncertain. It could mean Earth's atmosphere, where the dew forms, wind blows, and birds fly, outer space, where the stellar bodies are, all of this involving the physical heavens. What you are talking about, though, is the spiritual heavens. The words to express the spiritual are the same as those to express the physical, the context is different. The spiritual heavens was created for God and his spirit creatures whereas the Earth was created for the physical, man animal, etc. so the religious notion of heaven being whatever makes a good dead  person happy is what it is, is, not surprisingly, just nonsense. I think that was pointed out here by others.

Other Hebrew words that have a similar meaning or can be translated as heavens are shachaq, which is the sky or clouds. Shachaq has a root meaning of something that is beaten out to be pulverized; a film of dust. In fact it is literally translated as such at Isaiah 40:15 - "Look! The nations are as a drop from a bucket; and as the film of dust on the scales they have been accounted. Look! He lifts the islands themselves as mere fine dust." Clouds form when rising warm air is cooled. This is the dew point. Water vapor condenses into minute particles that are called water dust. So in a sense that the ancient Hebrew could understand, God has beaten out the skies. Unfortunately, during the dark ages it was commonly believed that there was a solid dome around the Earth, so in Bible illustrations and dictionaries Job 37:18 was taken as being a literal beating out of a solid structure.  

Of course, atheist love to interpret this as being Biblical error. They are not likely to look any deeper than their interpretation requires and so, the atheist are left in the dark ages.

 

 

 

 


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Interesting, Mr Henson....If

Interesting, Mr Henson....

If  "The spiritual heavens was created for God  and his spirit creatures", who created them?

Of course the word has at least two usages, one referring to what we now call the sky, and the other to the realm of God, and possibly the 'saved' souls.

That quote about islands really does not describe clouds. To be more technically accurate, the 'dew point' depends on the partial pressure of water vapour in the atmosphere - water vapour will condense onto any surface below the dew point, including suspended particles of ice or dust. Without any such particles, cloud/mist will not form until much lower than the 'dew point' temperature. Dew normally forms at ground level. What forms above, but close to, the ground, is mist or fog. High up it is cloud, formed of either fine droplets of water, or particles of ice. 

Water vapour condenses into minute droplets of water, forming a mist. Who calls fine mist "water dust"? I can find no reference to that usage.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1

BobSpence1 wrote:

Interesting, Mr Henson....

If  "The spiritual heavens was created for God  and his spirit creatures", who created them?

The spirit creatures and the heavens were created by God, God himself was not created. He has no beginning or ending.

Bob Spence wrote:
Of course the word has at least two usages, one referring to what we now call the sky, and the other to the realm of God, and possibly the 'saved' souls.

The 'saved' souls? No. I understand that you have had family who are JW? My beliefs on souls and heaven are more in line with those.

Bob Spence wrote:
That quote about islands really does not describe clouds.

The quote is a case of the Hebrew word which is typically translated as the skies as a more literal reflection of the word's root meaning.

Bob Spence wrote:
Water vapour condenses into minute droplets of water, forming a mist. Who calls fine mist "water dust"? I can find no reference to that usage.

I have heard it called that but I can't recall where.

 


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
David Henson

David Henson wrote:

BobSpence1 wrote:

Interesting, Mr Henson....

If  "The spiritual heavens was created for God  and his spirit creatures", who created them?

The spirit creatures and the heavens were created by God, God himself was not created. He has no beginning or ending.

But what you actually typed there, the words I underlined, explicitly means that some other party created them for God, not that they were created by God, surely you understand the difference? I assumed it was a mistake of some kind. It doesn't say or imply anything about anything creating God, just that the heavens were created by something else.

Your reading comprehension and writing ability seem rather poor.

Quote:

Bob Spence wrote:
Of course the word has at least two usages, one referring to what we now call the sky, and the other to the realm of God, and possibly the 'saved' souls.

The 'saved' souls? No. I understand that you have had family who are JW? My beliefs on souls and heaven are more in line with those.

I was referring to the more common, mainstream understanding of 'heaven', but really I was just making the distinction between 'heaven' as a poetic way to refer to the sky above us, and the idea of the abode of God, of any variety.

Quote:

Bob Spence wrote:
That quote about islands really does not describe clouds.

The quote is a case of the Hebrew word which is typically translated as the skies as a more literal reflection of the word's root meaning.

"Skies", "clouds", whatever - where do "islands" come in??? 

Quote:

Bob Spence wrote:
Water vapour condenses into minute droplets of water, forming a mist. Who calls fine mist "water dust"? I can find no reference to that usage.

I have heard it called that but I can't recall where.

 

OK , I was really just pointing out where I found your arguments particularly hard to follow, and your responses here support my impression that you are a very confused dude - the confusing arguments reflect confused 'thinking', which has come across in virtually everything you write.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
Bob,The Bible says that

Bob,

The Bible says that God's son, the arch angel Michael, was the firstborn of creation, the only begotten son. What this means is that Michael, who later came to earth in physical form as the man, Jesus Christ, was the first act of creation for Jehovah God. Everything else was created by Jehovah God through Christ Jesus. First spiritual heaven, then the spirit creatures, then the physical heavens - the earth and its inhabitants. So, Psalm 115:15-16 says  "You are the ones blessed by Jehovah, The Maker of heaven and earth. As regards the heavens, to Jehovah the heavens belong, But the earth he has given to the sons of men." and Colossians 1:15-17 says "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and  he things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist"

 

What this means is that Jehovah God created the heavens and earth and all of the inhabitants therin through and for Christ Jesus for or out of his love for his creation. Proverbs 8:30-31, then, says of Jesus "then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men."

 

 

The Islands quote, like I have said twice, is an example of the Hebrew word shachaq, which is translated as sky and clouds, being used in a different sense of its actual root meaning of being beaten out or pulverized into fine dust or film. "Look! The nations are as a drop from a bucket; and as the film of dust [Hebrew shachaq] on the scales they have been accounted. Look! He lifts the islands themselves as mere fine dust."

 


GodlessGabriel
atheist
GodlessGabriel's picture
Posts: 24
Joined: 2010-03-10
User is offlineOffline
David Henson wrote:Bob,The

David Henson wrote:

Bob,

The Bible says that God's son, the arch angel Michael, was the firstborn of creation, the only begotten son. What this means is that Michael, who later came to earth in physical form as the man, Jesus Christ, was the first act of creation for Jehovah God. Everything else was created by Jehovah God through Christ Jesus. First spiritual heaven, then the spirit creatures, then the physical heavens - the earth and its inhabitants. So, Psalm 115:15-16 says  "You are the ones blessed by Jehovah, The Maker of heaven and earth. As regards the heavens, to Jehovah the heavens belong, But the earth he has given to the sons of men." and Colossians 1:15-17 says "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and  he things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist"

 

What this means is that Jehovah God created the heavens and earth and all of the inhabitants therin through and for Christ Jesus for or out of his love for his creation. Proverbs 8:30-31, then, says of Jesus "then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men."

 

 

 

 

The Islands quote, like I have said twice, is an example of the Hebrew word shachaq, which is translated as sky and clouds, being used in a different sense of its actual root meaning of being beaten out or pulverized into fine dust or film. "Look! The nations are as a drop from a bucket; and as the film of dust [Hebrew shachaq] on the scales they have been accounted. Look! He lifts the islands themselves as mere fine dust."

 

 

This is a typical theist response. when you run out of rational arguments, you start quoting the bible.

 

I'm actually wondering when are you going to realize that you can not prove the credibility of a book by presenting arguments from the same book. 

"I don't believe in afterlife, although I am bringing a change of underwear."


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3929
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Proofs.

Heaven can not exist because in order for Christians to experience complete perpetual extacy, they would need atheists around to enjoy the pleasures of feeling moral superior to us.

Hell can not exist because in order for Atheists to experience complete perpetual torture, we would need Christians around to suffer the anguish of their moralizing, irrational ways.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:The bible

robj101 wrote:

The bible leaves heaven, pretty open ended. I have been to church many times long ago, and I don't recall the preachers hitting on exactly what heaven is like either. This is another miniscule ratiocination in why I do not believe in the whole sham. It is obviously left open ended so that one could conjure whatever fantasy in the mind one likes and it would be heaven.

From what I recall it is guarded by some pearly gates and St. Peter, and inside there are people playing harps (an instrument seldom used today). So, what do you do when in heaven. Obviously you would leave behind all your worldly cares like sex, video games, and football. So, what exactly are you going to do in heaven. Is it just a perpetual state of bliss? Like being extremely high or something?

 

 

As an ex-Catholic I remembered that John Paul II explicitly said that there is no physical place as heaven or hell.

See this link for the details: http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2HEAVN.HTM

He uses the same line of reasoning as Thomas Aquinas that being in Hell is rejecting God and Heaven is fullness or communion with God. This is a state of being rather than a place according to John Paul. All of it is metaphorical and of course beyond proof and verification until after you die, kind of convenient. It of course keeps the shell game going and the contributions to the Church flowing into its coffers.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
If you haven't already heard

If you haven't already heard about "Kissing Hank's Ass", a great satire on the whole promise of heaven thing, here is the link:

http://www.jhuger.com/kisshank.php

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5133
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Hi Dave

David Henson wrote:

 

The Hebrew word shamayim is always in plural form and is rendered heaven(s). It has the basic sense of that which is high or lofty. The etymology of the Greek word for heaven, ouranos, is uncertain. It could mean Earth's atmosphere, where the dew forms, wind blows, and birds fly, outer space, where the stellar bodies are, all of this involving the physical heavens. What you are talking about, though, is the spiritual heavens. The words to express the spiritual are the same as those to express the physical, the context is different. The spiritual heavens was created for God and his spirit creatures whereas the Earth was created for the physical, man animal, etc. so the religious notion of heaven being whatever makes a good dead  person happy is what it is, is, not surprisingly, just nonsense. I think that was pointed out here by others.

Other Hebrew words that have a similar meaning or can be translated as heavens are shachaq, which is the sky or clouds. Shachaq has a root meaning of something that is beaten out to be pulverized; a film of dust. In fact it is literally translated as such at Isaiah 40:15 - "Look! The nations are as a drop from a bucket; and as the film of dust on the scales they have been accounted. Look! He lifts the islands themselves as mere fine dust." Clouds form when rising warm air is cooled. This is the dew point. Water vapor condenses into minute particles that are called water dust. So in a sense that the ancient Hebrew could understand, God has beaten out the skies. Unfortunately, during the dark ages it was commonly believed that there was a solid dome around the Earth, so in Bible illustrations and dictionaries Job 37:18 was taken as being a literal beating out of a solid structure.  

Of course, atheist love to interpret this as being Biblical error. They are not likely to look any deeper than their interpretation requires and so, the atheist are left in the dark ages.

 

 

But what do you think heaven will be like? Do you have an expectation of something or would you say there's little direct evidence, or teaching, and you'll just see when you get there?

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:David

Atheistextremist wrote:

David Henson wrote:

 

The Hebrew word shamayim is always in plural form and is rendered heaven(s). It has the basic sense of that which is high or lofty. The etymology of the Greek word for heaven, ouranos, is uncertain. It could mean Earth's atmosphere, where the dew forms, wind blows, and birds fly, outer space, where the stellar bodies are, all of this involving the physical heavens. What you are talking about, though, is the spiritual heavens. The words to express the spiritual are the same as those to express the physical, the context is different. The spiritual heavens was created for God and his spirit creatures whereas the Earth was created for the physical, man animal, etc. so the religious notion of heaven being whatever makes a good dead  person happy is what it is, is, not surprisingly, just nonsense. I think that was pointed out here by others.

Other Hebrew words that have a similar meaning or can be translated as heavens are shachaq, which is the sky or clouds. Shachaq has a root meaning of something that is beaten out to be pulverized; a film of dust. In fact it is literally translated as such at Isaiah 40:15 - "Look! The nations are as a drop from a bucket; and as the film of dust on the scales they have been accounted. Look! He lifts the islands themselves as mere fine dust." Clouds form when rising warm air is cooled. This is the dew point. Water vapor condenses into minute particles that are called water dust. So in a sense that the ancient Hebrew could understand, God has beaten out the skies. Unfortunately, during the dark ages it was commonly believed that there was a solid dome around the Earth, so in Bible illustrations and dictionaries Job 37:18 was taken as being a literal beating out of a solid structure.  

Of course, atheist love to interpret this as being Biblical error. They are not likely to look any deeper than their interpretation requires and so, the atheist are left in the dark ages.

 

 

But what do you think heaven will be like? Do you have an expectation of something or would you say there's little direct evidence, or teaching, and you'll just see when you get there?

 

 

 

This is what I was getting at, it is so open ended. It's like offering a cookie, and um, yea it can be any kind of cookie you want..you just have to imagine it..in the same way you have to imagine "god" except there is less to go on other than your own desires.

In a way, heaven sounds as if it is oblivion. The way I picture death is ultimate bliss because well, your dead, you have not a care at all...for eternity.

You can't really imagine oblivion either. You can understand what it is but you just can't quite visualize ...absolute nothing.

Anyway, I cite the heaven concept as another obvious farce untill proven otherwise.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:But

Atheistextremist wrote:

But what do you think heaven will be like? Do you have an expectation of something or would you say there's little direct evidence, or teaching, and you'll just see when you get there?

 

I don't think that I am going to heaven, at least I hope not, it wouldn't suit me. I enjoy the creation of Earth far too much. Earth was created with everything in mind for humans to enjoy. Nature, the senses etc. Heaven wasn't created with man in mind. To man it would appear, I would imagine, as a void. Of course flesh and blood can't go there, and perhaps it would be different to the few who will go there in spirit form.


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
Ignorance Is

robj101 wrote:

Anyway, I cite the heaven concept as another obvious farce untill proven otherwise.

I think its so funny when atheists say stuff like that. "Nothing in the world could possibly exist without first being proven to me, and once something is 'proven' it can't possibly be complete bullshit!" Nice and snug there in the fragile reality you create for yourselves. Its boring as hell but there are plenty of drugs and alcohol to substitute for the religious crutch the quasi-intellect seemingly replaced. Still. No thoughts to think - only that false sense of security that somewhere, someone, if not today then soon, will have figured it out and it all makes absolute sense and isn't at all obligatory other than the assumptions that created the faithful illussion in the first place . . . ah . . . bliss . . . which is exactly why atheists are always criticizing anyone's reading comprehension that don't agree with their paradigm. It is actually a reflection on not only their own comprehension but their xenophobia as well. "This does not compute! This does not compute!"


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4198
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
David Henson wrote:robj101

David Henson wrote:

robj101 wrote:

Anyway, I cite the heaven concept as another obvious farce untill proven otherwise.

only that false sense of security that somewhere, someone, if not today then soon, will have figured it out

 

that "false sense of security" comes from the fact that history shows us repeatedly that somewhere, someone always does figure it out, whereas on the contrary history shows us repeatedly that the conceptions and predictions of the religious come to nothing.  some of christ's disciples will live to see his return, the earth is flat, the universe is geocentric, the world is going to end in year XXXX (countless predictions here, including more than a few from your people), etc., etc.

the atheist's "false sense of security" is actually not a sense of security at all.  we know nothing is "secure."  we know the world as we know it can end at anytime through human stupidity, with no point or redeeming quality at all, while the typical monotheist believes that we'll all be ok until god chooses to play his hand, and then they'll be perfectly ok because god will rapture them or some other such nonsense (i believe the JWs cite the verse about being led to hidden fountains during the tribulation).  we know that nothing at all happens when we die.  we know we will never see those who have passed on again.  we know there is no final guarantee of rewards for the just or punishment for the wicked.  we know there is no forgiveness or grace for the mistakes we've made, large or small, except perhas from those we've wronged.  the dungeons of cordoba, the trenches of ypres, the ovens of auschwitz, the killing fields of cambodia--they had no point.  we know the earth itself is living on borrowed time, and is destined for a fiery end, though our race will probably be long gone by that time, and no one will ever remember us.  we have no faith in science.  we know it's nothing but an expedient to try to understand what our senses apprehend in order to make our meaningless lives as comfortable as possible.  we know the whole edifice is a house of cards that could come tumbling down at any time.  we know all this because we have seen nothing--nothing--to guarantee us otherwise, only empty words from those who are either too afraid to accept this knowledge, or wish to control those who are afraid of this knowledge by cynically manipulating that fear. 

the odd thing for most theists, however, is that most of us are perfectly comfortable in this knowledge.  i know i am.

 

 

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
David Henson wrote:robj101

David Henson wrote:

robj101 wrote:

Anyway, I cite the heaven concept as another obvious farce untill proven otherwise.

I think its so funny when atheists say stuff like that. "Nothing in the world could possibly exist without first being proven to me, and once something is 'proven' it can't possibly be complete bullshit!" Nice and snug there in the fragile reality you create for yourselves. Its boring as hell but there are plenty of drugs and alcohol to substitute for the religious crutch the quasi-intellect seemingly replaced. Still. No thoughts to think - only that false sense of security that somewhere, someone, if not today then soon, will have figured it out and it all makes absolute sense and isn't at all obligatory other than the assumptions that created the faithful illussion in the first place . . . ah . . . bliss . . . which is exactly why atheists are always criticizing anyone's reading comprehension that don't agree with their paradigm. It is actually a reflection on not only their own comprehension but their xenophobia as well. "This does not compute! This does not compute!"

uhh, did you say MY fragile reality? lol, yea that IS funny.

It is much to egregious that heaven was made by men and the promise of a life after death is another bit of evidence.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3929
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
David Henson wrote:robj101

David Henson wrote:

robj101 wrote:

Anyway, I cite the heaven concept as another obvious farce untill proven otherwise.

I think its so funny when atheists say stuff like that. "Nothing in the world could possibly exist without first being proven to me, and once something is 'proven' it can't possibly be complete bullshit!" Nice and snug there in the fragile reality you create for yourselves. Its boring as hell but there are plenty of drugs and alcohol to substitute for the religious crutch the quasi-intellect seemingly replaced. Still. No thoughts to think - only that false sense of security that somewhere, someone, if not today then soon, will have figured it out and it all makes absolute sense and isn't at all obligatory other than the assumptions that created the faithful illussion in the first place . . . ah . . . bliss . . . which is exactly why atheists are always criticizing anyone's reading comprehension that don't agree with their paradigm. It is actually a reflection on not only their own comprehension but their xenophobia as well. "This does not compute! This does not compute!"

But yet when you're sick, you want the doctor to give you treatments proven to be correct by scientific methods and rules for evidence. Same for flying on an airplane. You want the plane to be proven to be reliable by the rules for evidence and not the 'faith' of the designers.

So explain to us why you have one set of rules for your survival and safety in this world. But a different set of rules about so called life after death? Why not just take some snake oil next time you're sick?

 

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
GodlessGabriel wrote:This is

GodlessGabriel wrote:
This is a typical theist response. when you run out of rational arguments, you start quoting the bible.

 

I'm actually wondering when are you going to realize that you can not prove the credibility of a book by presenting arguments from the same book. 

First of all, I never run out of rational arguments. For example, since we were talking about what the Bible says I use the Bible. Imagine if I told you that I expect you to tell me what a book is about without your being able to reference the book. This makes perfect sense to most atheists because they assume that their preconcieved notions of the Bible are well founded, which isn't rational.


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
You Miss The Point

EXC wrote:

But yet when you're sick, you want the doctor to give you treatments proven to be correct by scientific methods and rules for evidence. Same for flying on an airplane. You want the plane to be proven to be reliable by the rules for evidence and not the 'faith' of the designers.

So explain to us why you have one set of rules for your survival and safety in this world. But a different set of rules about so called life after death? Why not just take some snake oil next time you're sick? 

At one time people may have thought snake oil would do the trick, but not anymore. You should do some research on how the Jehovah's Witnesses refusal to accept blood transfusions has changed the medical profession and bloodless surgery. At first the medical profession refused to accept it. They had such great faith in the way things were done they couldn't face the possibility of there being any other way, and now they are beginning to see that bloodless surgery is better, safer, more efficient and promotes healthy healing. That is religion, you see. Not just the spiritual, but blind faith in something which leads to stagnancy, refusal to change or gladly accept the possibility of being wrong. Its human nature. You see it in politics, entertainment, religion [looks around cautiously, and whispers] maybe even science! 

Not me. Now - if there is one word that I hear over and over again from skeptics, as if by rote, it is the word "proven." Spell checker doesn't like the word proven and I am always cautious of it myself. When you are done researching the Jehovah's Witnesses bloodless surgery thing, in other words, never, question the pharmaceutical patent system and money making machine.

 

 

 

 


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:uhh, did you

robj101 wrote:

uhh, did you say MY fragile reality? lol, yea that IS funny.

It is much to egregious that heaven was made by men and the promise of a life after death is another bit of evidence.

 

I am going to do something which if you are as wise as you pretend to be you will completely ignore and if you are as daft as I would imagine you will simply mock and dismiss as if it were an insult for me to dare even suggest discourse with on the subject. I am going to ask you to explain the logic underlying your conclusion, please.  


David Henson
Theist
David Henson's picture
Posts: 491
Joined: 2010-02-15
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:that "false

iwbiek wrote:

that "false sense of security" comes from the fact that history shows us repeatedly that somewhere, someone always does figure it out, whereas on the contrary history shows us repeatedly that the conceptions and predictions of the religious come to nothing.  some of christ's disciples will live to see his return, the earth is flat, the universe is geocentric, the world is going to end in year XXXX (countless predictions here, including more than a few from your people), etc., etc.

My people? I have no people. You are going to demonstrate the "false sense of security" with history? Good choice. The conceptions and predictions of the religious come to nothing? Sir Isaac Newton was religious, you know. And anyway, do you see how ass achingly stupid it is to try and make your point on the historical nothingness of a man who died two thousand years ago whos teachings we are currently discussing, for the most part?

iwbiek wrote:
the atheist's "false sense of security" is actually not a sense of security at all.  we know nothing is "secure."  we know the world as we know it can end at anytime through human stupidity, with no point or redeeming quality at all, while the typical monotheist believes that we'll all be ok until god chooses to play his hand, and then they'll be perfectly ok because god will rapture them or some other such nonsense (i believe the JWs cite the verse about being led to hidden fountains during the tribulation).  we know that nothing at all happens when we die.  we know we will never see those who have passed on again.  we know there is no final guarantee of rewards for the just or punishment for the wicked.  we know there is no forgiveness or grace for the mistakes we've made, large or small, except perhas from those we've wronged.

You KNOW all of this? Tell me, how is it that you know what happens after death?

iwbiek wrote:
the dungeons of cordoba, the trenches of ypres, the ovens of auschwitz, the killing fields of cambodia--they had no point.  we know the earth itself is living on borrowed time, and is destined for a fiery end, though our race will probably be long gone by that time, and no one will ever remember us.  we have no faith in science.  we know it's nothing but an expedient to try to understand what our senses apprehend in order to make our meaningless lives as comfortable as possible.  we know the whole edifice is a house of cards that could come tumbling down at any time.  we know all this because we have seen nothing--nothing--to guarantee us otherwise, only empty words from those who are either too afraid to accept this knowledge, or wish to control those who are afraid of this knowledge by cynically manipulating that fear. 

the odd thing for most theists, however, is that most of us are perfectly comfortable in this knowledge.  i know i am.

Then why defend it so zealously as if it were divine? Why cling to it so dogedly? Why wrap yourself in it like a blanket and why waste presious time argueing with me about a 6,000 year old dead book?

 

 


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
bloodless surgery

David Henson wrote:

EXC wrote:

But yet when you're sick, you want the doctor to give you treatments proven to be correct by scientific methods and rules for evidence. Same for flying on an airplane. You want the plane to be proven to be reliable by the rules for evidence and not the 'faith' of the designers.

So explain to us why you have one set of rules for your survival and safety in this world. But a different set of rules about so called life after death? Why not just take some snake oil next time you're sick? 

At one time people may have thought snake oil would do the trick, but not anymore. You should do some research on how the Jehovah's Witnesses refusal to accept blood transfusions has changed the medical profession and bloodless surgery. At first the medical profession refused to accept it. They had such great faith in the way things were done they couldn't face the possibility of there being any other way, and now they are beginning to see that bloodless surgery is better, safer, more efficient and promotes healthy healing. That is religion, you see. Not just the spiritual, but blind faith in something which leads to stagnancy, refusal to change or gladly accept the possibility of being wrong. Its human nature. You see it in politics, entertainment, religion [looks around cautiously, and whispers] maybe even science! 

Not me. Now - if there is one word that I hear over and over again from skeptics, as if by rote, it is the word "proven." Spell checker doesn't like the word proven and I am always cautious of it myself. When you are done researching the Jehovah's Witnesses bloodless surgery thing, in other words, never, question the pharmaceutical patent system and money making machine.

My sister is a JW and she had a triple by pass about 8 years ago.  Yes, they had a special ward for people who wouldn't do blood transfusions.  What they do is pump you up with fluids before the surgery and then watch like a hawk after wards.

Now, I don't know the details, because I haven't bothered to research it.  But notice, there was a special ward for people who didn't want transfusions.  If it is so great, why isn't everyone lined up for transfusion-less surgery?

And I was shown the verses that supposedly support refusing transfusions.  It was my first introduction to selective bible editing.  Take a verse in the middle of a description of how to do an animal sacrifice.  (Don't drink the blood of the sacrifice.)  Take a verse that says "the soul is in the blood" - I don't know many people who think their soul is in their blood and if you ask my sister, she will say the soul is in the blood, heart, brain, your whole body.  Oooookkkkkkaaaaayyyyy......  And that is it.  The entire justification for not doing transfusions. 

Being a person to focus on details, I asked her if you aren't supposed to drink the blood of sacrifices, is it okay to eat meat?  This is also the reason for kosher kills, you know.  You need to drain the blood of the animal because god doesn't want you to drink the blood of sacrifices.  And she said, what blood?  I said, the blood floating around on the bottom of the meat package.  She said, I'll ask my elders.  Later, she said the elders told her, that isn't blood, it's nutrients.  After all, if they were vegetarians, they would be just like the 7th Day Adventists.

All of which is my take on the amount of screw around most christians will go through to justify the damnest dumbest beliefs.

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4198
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
David Henson wrote:My

David Henson wrote:

My people? I have no people.

the jehovah's witnesses.  even if you're not in good standing with the watchtower society (i have no idea if you are or not), you're clearly influenced by their teachings: jesus identified with michael, the dichotomy of eternity in an earthly paradise or an eternity in heaven--these are doctrines you've referenced in the past which, as far as i know, only the JWs hold.  i know because my grandmother was one and she taught me their beliefs pretty thoroughly.  i should say for everyone's clarification, she didn't indoctrinate me, nor insist on them, she just offered them for what they were.

David Henson wrote:

The conceptions and predictions of the religious come to nothing? Sir Isaac Newton was religious, you know.

you know damn well i was talking about religious predictions, especially considering the examples i gave.  in the words of eric idle, "if you're gonna split hairs, i'm gonna piss off."

David Henson wrote:

And anyway, do you see how ass achingly stupid it is to try and make your point on the historical nothingness of a man who died two thousand years ago whos teachings we are currently discussing, for the most part?

i'm not currently discussing it.  i'm addressing a remark you made that had no reference to jesus at all.  to be quite honest, unlike most atheists here, i believe that a historical jesus was likely, in the sense of a first century apocalyptic teacher named jesus, who came from nazareth, was probably an essene at one time or another, and at least some of whose sayings are preserved, most likely in Q and the gospel of thomas.  and no, i'm not interested in arguing those points here and now.  i'm just saying i'm not pursuing an agenda of jesus's "historical nothingness."

DavidHenson wrote:

You KNOW all of this? Tell me, how is it that you know what happens after death?

we "know" this in the sense that we have no evidence to the contrary outside the words of scripture.  i made that quite clear in my post.  science is easily able to explain "near death experiences," and most of the people i've read about or talked to who were clinically dead (including my uncle, who was a JW incidentally) said it was just like "being asleep."  the whole point is, the words of various books throughout the world which clearly contradict each other with no corroborating evidence is just not enough to convince the rational person of an afterlife, especially when we take into account the enormous psychological factor that human beings in general are terrified of death and abhor the thought of the annihilation of their egos. 

DavidHenson wrote:

Then why defend it so zealously as if it were divine? Why cling to it so dogedly? Why wrap yourself in it like a blanket and why waste presious time argueing with me about a 6,000 year old dead book?

i'm not arguing with you about a book.  nor am i defending anything zealously.  in fact, i'm not sure what you mean by "it," but i'm assuming modern science?  what i am doing is pointing out that a theist calling an atheist delusional is patently ridiculous.  if you hadn't made this asinine remark, david, i wouldn't be talking to you at all.

btw, 6,000 years is pretty damn generous.  around 2,700 years is more like it, if we're talking strictly about the "book" more or less as we know it. 

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
David Henson wrote:robj101

David Henson wrote:

robj101 wrote:

uhh, did you say MY fragile reality? lol, yea that IS funny.

It is much to egregious that heaven was made by men and the promise of a life after death is another bit of evidence.

 

I am going to do something which if you are as wise as you pretend to be you will completely ignore and if you are as daft as I would imagine you will simply mock and dismiss as if it were an insult for me to dare even suggest discourse with on the subject. I am going to ask you to explain the logic underlying your conclusion, please.  

 I have already explained it enough, it is simply a fairy tale, what more would man want than the promise of life after death? Heaven is the carrot on the end of the religious stick. One must have "faith" for it to exist and things based wholly on faith will fail. We don't need to go into the faith rant, everyone is well aware of "faith" and it's awesome power.

There is more evidence that the bible is total carp, unless your god enjoys keeping women in the kitchen, slavery and eternities of torture and damnation, not to mention contradictions. The bible is a major part of the stick.

No it can't be completely invalidated, but you can't disprove anything that cannot be proven in the first place.
 

Now I would like to reflect on a moment of daftness...you are a crackpot who thinks he did not have a solid belief in "god" that made him an atheist. If you believe in god now, you were never really an atheist in the first place. I doubt that you were even a skeptic, you probably just didn't care and suddenly found a cause. A cause to point your misguided stick of irrationality towards.You also fancy yourself to be somewhat intellectual. I don't pretend that I'm terribly smart, if I had been so smart I would have gone to college and gotten an education and I would be using lots of Big Words. A relatively high IQ means nothing if you don't use it, and I am guilty of that. However, I'm smart enough to know the bible and you, are full of carp.

 

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin