If you were shown irrefutable evidence that heaven or hell did not exist, would that interest you?

Dave Watchman said:

I say it still is.

It's the most published.

It's the most printed.

It's the most sold book on the planet.

Entire Christian Book stores are dedicated to it's sale.

The country where I'm from even has a Bible Belt.

There's never been, or going to be, another phenomena like that again.

The #1 best seller can be found in that lower range from 2.5 to 6 Billion Books.

Even the 2.5 billion beats the next runner up, the Chairman Mao Book.

And i seriously doubt that the Chairman Mao book legitimately earned it's place on the list.

I'm sure there was some "political" motivation in there somewhere in getting that little red book out into the hands of every citizen.

Click to expand...

Nope, it is the most given away, the difference is money

dybmh said:

No. My statement was refuting @fools argument. That's all. it wasn't intended to be stated as fact.

( @Fool please correct me if I'm wrong )

Here's the refutation:

@Fool is among other things a Hermetic Qabahlist ( Hermetic Qabalah - Wikipedia ).

This belief system implies panentheism. technically it describes Creation as ongoing; similar to a movie being played on a screen. If at any point God decides to stop the process of creating, all of existence ceases to be. That's part of the Hermetic Qabalah beleif system. That's why i can say definitively that @Fool cannot claim the laws of thermodynamics in a debate. Doing so contradicts an important concept in @fools belief system. it would be like an atheist claiming the "God did it" in a debate.

Click to expand...

Much as i loath to admit it @Fool is correct, the first law of thermodynamics shows that energy (and by default mass) cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system, only changed from one form to another.

Of course whether the universe is open or closed is unknown which is why i queried your post

dybmh said:

No. My statement was refuting @fools argument. That's all. it wasn't intended to be stated as fact.

( @Fool please correct me if I'm wrong )

Here's the refutation:

@Fool is, among other things, a Hermetic Qabahlist ( Hermetic Qabalah - Wikipedia ).

This belief system implies panentheism. technically it describes Creation as ongoing; similar to a movie being played on a screen. If at any point God decides to stop the process of creating, all of existence ceases to be. That's part of the Hermetic Qabalah belief system. That's why i can say definitively that @Fool cannot claim the laws of thermodynamics in a debate. In Hermetic Qabalah, Creation is not a closed system. Energy is literally pouring into it at every moment continuously.

The contradiction was probably just an oversight, on fool's part. I doubt it was an intentional blunder. But, doing so contradicts an important concept in @fools belief system. And so I thought it was important to point it out.

a similar example would be if an atheist claims that "God did it" as evidence in a debate. That also would need an explanation if the argument was to remain valid.

Click to expand...

i don't believe in a system separate from the Absolute. there is no Absolute and some otherness; so no, i'm a pantheist. creation involves the destruction of one form into some other form; which many call creation. you can't have one without the other. to rise means something falls away.

one is both coming and going when leaving or arriving. it is again a state of mind

the cup is always full


pssst the mysticism arises from love and manifests as understanding. it's a secret. giggles

i'm loathed/loved

ChristineM said:

Btw, you may find this educational rather than ignorantly calling names
Your avatar.

Click to expand...

Jesus said,
“Follow Me,
and let the dead bury their own dead.” - Matthew 8:22

Fool said:

i don't believe in a system separate from the Absolute. there is no Absolute and some otherness; so no, i'm a pantheist. creation involves the destruction of one form into some other form; which many call creation. you can't have one without the other. to rise means something fall away.

one is both coming and going when leaving or arriving.

the cup is always full

Click to expand...

OK.

ChristineM said:

Much as i loath to admit it @Fool is correct, the first law of thermodynamics shows that energy (and by default mass) cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system, only changed from one form to another.

Of course whether the universe is open or closed is unknown which is why i queried your post

Click to expand...

kisses my beloved. you keep me on the straight narrow and hold my nose to the grindstone.

touche

ChristineM said:

Much as i loath to admit it @Fool is correct, the first law of thermodynamics shows that energy (and by default mass) cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system, only changed from one form to another.

Of course whether the universe is open or closed is unknown which is why i queried your post

Click to expand...

Yes. You're right. Pantheism is a closed system. I'll scratch Hermetic Qabalah off the list when discussing matters with @Fool...

dybmh said:

Yes. You're right. Pantheism is a closed system. I'll scratch Hermetic Qabalah off the list when discussing matters with @Fool...

Click to expand...

the name doesn't distinguish between the father and its beloved, its offspring, the Father and I are ONE.

ChristineM said:

Your faith and knowledge of the bible does you proud, your interpretation and opinion have little to do with the spirit of the thread.

Click to expand...

Well... there was an "other: please explain" option.

As you said... you really can't provide such, anyway -but I would certainly have to modify my beliefs, etc., if shown proof of anything.

Now, see, that's just boring. I liked my other post better.

Other, please explain.

I would immediately attempt to refute it.

Such a thing as "irrefutable" is not real. This is a way of telling people "I proclaim that you cannot refute my argument (because actually it is so flimsy that I can knock it apart with a touch and I want you give up with out a fight)."

Heaven and Hell do exist, Christine, regardless of what some hack has told you. But they are not what you understand them to be.

1. An Afterlife exists. But this is a matter of faith. This is experience that happens after death.
2. Heaven and Hell exist. This is not a matter of faith. This is because Heaven and Hell are emotional/spiritual states not places. The Afterlife can become like Heaven or Hell, but Heaven and Hell are also found in Earth. For example:
2a. You have just met the love of your life, found your dream job, and everything is going well (Heaven)
2b. You are alone, imprisoned, or on the streets and hungry (Hell)
3. These things are places too (you could conceivably dig into the Earth and find a volcanic portion that would nicely suit anyone's idea of Hell) but it's important not to see them as some sort of pie-in-the-sky ideal.

Dave Watchman said:

Education?

“The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed,
nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.” - Luke 17:20​

And if the scientific method were to fail, as you apparently believe, you would still do better defaulting to a belief in God.

If it is true that we are incapable of determining whether or not God exists, we will still be placing our bets one way or the other.

One wager leads to life eternal, the latter leads to eternal destruction.

And being shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.

Google knows it:

"Wagering for God superdominates wagering against God: the worst outcome associated with wagering for God (status quo) is at least as good as the best outcome associated with wagering against God (status quo); and if God exists, the result of wagering for God is strictly better than the result of wagering against God. (The fact that the result is much better does not matter yet.)

Pascal draws the conclusion at this point that you should wager for God.​

Pascal’s Wager (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

The Demons know it too, and they shudder.

I think you believe.

Otherwise you wouldn't be here with a curiosity, or a concern about it.

Click to expand...

Sorry? Pascal's Wager was something of a joke on the Gullible.

Homer Simpson (who isn't the brightest) quickly points to the Fatal Flaw: what if you picked the wrong god?

But even worse: What sort of foolish god would be appeased by a shallow "Just in case" sort?

Only with the most extreme narcissistic god would Pascal's Wager actually work...

Dave Watchman said:

The planet's number one best selling Book.

The Word of God.
.

Click to expand...

Nope. Not the #1 "best seller". As the vast majority of bibles "sold" were VANITY PRESS: printed as pure propaganda, and forced upon people, often against their will.

Worse: The majority of bibles? NEVER READ BY ANYONE-- they sit there, languishing in a pew, or in a motel room drawer, or on a coffee table -- gathering dust, unopened, unread, unlamented, useless as a freezer at the north pole.

Even worse for you: Harry Potter books? Have long since outsold the bible! And? People purchased Harry Potter books... to actually read.

Dave Watchman said:

Wiki is your friend:

"According to Guinness World Records as of 1995, the Bible is the best-selling book of all time, with an estimated 5 billion copies sold and distributed.

List of best-selling books - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

1995? LMAO! Nope-- Harry Potter has now outsold these.

Worse-- the estimation? Includes NON-SOLD copies, so right away that is a flat lie.

Printed? Mabye-- but Wal Mart's weekly sales sheets? Out printed the bible decades ago...

oooops! You just keep getting it wrong.

Baroodi said:

But we have irrefutable pleas that, the last day is coming. People will be resurrected and judged.

Click to expand...

And? We have irrefutable pleas that The Force Is With You.

Big deal.

ChristineM said:

I did say "if"

Click to expand...

I know of course. I can understand your english very well. When you write you are very clear. I like that.

And as I liked your OP, I gave it a few thoughts and

I just added my opinion IF another person (I was not talking about you in the OP), comes to me making such a claim.

So the word "fool" I wrote had nothing to do with you (just to be very clear, as to avoid any misunderstanding, as you twice explained what you meant + added the word 'But', I got the feeling you read something in my words that was not in my mind; so my reply was not clear it seems). In my mind I have a picture of "smart" when thinking of you. I hope this clarifies how I feel about you

ChristineM said:

And i also said that i cannot provide such evidence

Click to expand...

Same as above. I liked it, that you added that line. I cannot provide such evidence either.

ChristineM said:

But i am happy to see you would at least question the evidence

Click to expand...

Because of the word 'But' I feel you have a different idea about stvdv then I have, as regard to this. So..

I only accept evidence of this kind, when I have experienced it myself.

In a way I was excluded to reply to the question asked in your OP, as I do not believe in an afterlife, nor do I ever think or contemplate about afterlife ever. So I did not answer the question, but just added an idea I got reading the OP.

When I experience afterlife then it's soon enough to start thinking and believing in afterlife for me.

Evangelicalhumanist said:

Actually, I had a boyfriend from NZ long ago, who to me was irrefutable proof that NZ not only exists, but has heavenly beings in it, to boot!

Click to expand...

Nope. Axiomatic, like I said. He was most likely a Weta Workshop generated bot.

ChristineM said:

A question to all those with belief in the afterlife. If you were shown irrefutable evidence that heaven or hell did not exist would that,
evidence cause you to modify your faith? Would your faith in heaven/hell remain firm? Or would you dismiss the evidence?

Click to expand...

Interesting question you asked.

Normally I do not think nor contemplate about Heaven or Hell. I see them as places, hence capitalized, in the mind of some people (not to belittle of course, just to indicate that it has not yet materialized into something to be experienced for all, as far as I am aware of).

So, as for the question asked, my faith would change. It would become more strong, as it now confirmed what I already believe; all even well within the scope of my faith. 1 more puzzle piece in it's place.

The other question "being shown Heaven and Hell are for real", would shake things up quite a bit more. But as Heaven and Hell (as places) are so unreal to me, I normally do not even think about them. Only when people ask questions about it.

I did have some 'Near Death Experiences', but did not make it to the "Afterlife". So I still have no experience of this so called "Afterlife". Hence I feel no need to believe or disbelieve in it.

Note 1: Ages ago I did see a movie called "Afterlife" if I remember correctly. Probably at that time I gave it some thoughts. But could not believe in it.

Note 2: To me Hell and Heaven are meant figuratively and stands for how 'one' feels here and now. I don't see them as places. Unless you count "going somewhere in your mind" also as a place.

Heyo said:

Bielefeld didn't exist far longer than New Zealand.

Click to expand...

And then James Bond dropped him down a factory chimney, thus proving my point.

Dave Watchman said:

Jesus said,
“Follow Me,
and let the dead bury their own dead.” - Matthew 8:22

Click to expand...

And you will notice the difference between your mock skull (is it dribbling over a bible there?) And my 22,000 year old cro magnon skull. Now can i ask have you done trolling there thread

dybmh said:

Yes. You're right. Pantheism is a closed system. I'll scratch Hermetic Qabalah off the list when discussing matters with @Fool...

Click to expand...

I didn't know whether to vote winner or funny for that, i went with winner, here is the funny ;-)