Can an Atheist get into heaven

[AnimatedDirt]

Take the knowledge of man on the moon.  Given this knowledge 2000 or more years ago, what advantage does that knowledge give them?  One can relay the knowledge, but without "proof", they would simply say these are the ramblings of a crazy person.

In that case, why does the Bible offer any prophecy at all?

If genuine prophecy exists, then who but an omniscient diety would know?

Which takes me back to another point brought up to another person here.  If God were to appear to you, how would you document the fact/truth so that 2000 years from now, your experience of truth remains truth and not heresay...leading back to the belief again that God doesn't exist or better, that no GOOD evidence exists that proves God exists?

Were I an omniscient god dictating my holy book, it'd be very easy: I'd include a bit of knowledge that would be incomprehensible in the science of the day, but understood later.

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,
    and its people are like grasshoppers.
  He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
    and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

Food rain - Exodus 16.  Notice Moses and Aaron attempted to keep the manna as proof...

Now, were I the scribe, I'd request this very machination so as to aid the propagation of my god's message.

...and if the "maschination" disappears or someone that disagrees with you takes it/destroys it?

(Of course, the veneration of blind faith is exactly designed to answer this stunning paucity of evidence; it's purpose is to make the Christian god unfalsifiable by asserting that he values faith and disparages those who require evidence).

Not true at all.

Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came.  So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!"  But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.  But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

[Davin]

I have no idea who's arguing against evolution, is there a reason that you're asking this question? It seems to me that there are two appropriate kinds of actions that you could have taken in order to avoid going off tangent: provide the evidence that supports your positive claims or admit to not having any evidence.

Which claim?  Too many topics here.

The claim that all it requires to get into heaven is belief in the god you just so happen to believe in. The claim that atheists require absolute knowledge. The claim that heaven even exists. The claim that a god exists and only wants people to believe in it. If you need more help recognizing the claims you've made, I can help.

This thread is about Atheists in heaven.

And like every positive claim, it requires evidence to support it.

You're right...there is evidence of many topics, however to stick with the topic heading...

You claimed without anything other than stating it that in order to get into heaven, one must believe in a specific god (which luckily for you, happens to be the one you believe in), because I and several other atheists do not believe in god because there is no evidence of any god, then the evidence for what you're saying and the evidence for a god is directly related to the topic of the post.

This thread is about Atheists in heaven.

And like every positive claim, it requires evidence to support it.

I figured you knew the forum well since you've been here for 500+ posts.  If you want a link, here is one possible place.

This doesn't cover the evidence that supports you stating that one must believe in the specific god that you just so happen to believe in, to be allowed into heaven.

(Of course, the veneration of blind faith is exactly designed to answer this stunning paucity of evidence; it's purpose is to make the Christian god unfalsifiable by asserting that he values faith and disparages those who require evidence).

Not true at all.

Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came.  So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!"  But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.  But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

So not blessed are those who have not seen and yet believed? He didn't say anything close to "blessed are those that sought to make sure what they believed in was true." He said "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed," meaning the same thing that Thumpalumpacus had stated: that your religion blesses those with blind faith over those seeking the truth. How can you say "Not true at all" then provide a biblical quote as evidence that it is true after all?

[Gawen]

Have you seen love lately?  Love is something not seen, yet I'm sure you have faith that love exists.

Wonderful argument...*slappin me forehead*....Love exists, therefore god exists.

*slappin u forehead too* Not an argument for God.  Simply an argument for things that exist that cannot be seen.  Wind...  If you insist its an argument for God, then it simply shows your inability to discuss and acknowledge things you cannot see, yet "believe" in.

I can stick my hand out the window to see if it's windy. I can stick my hand out of a moving car to see what wind the car generates. I can also detect air. And I can give very good evidence of both. You, however, can give no good evidence of heaven, hell or your god.

Short-sighted?  What exactly do you believe in?  Enlighten me.

Another thread, perhaps.

Oh, now you want another thread...I get it.

I don't wish to skew the thread any more than it already is.

Let's say God appears to you.  How do you document the proof so that  2000 years from now, the proof still stands valid and trustworthy?

I don't document the proof. That would be for the psychoanalysts.

All of a sudden you're not an expert in truth nor how to store it, yet you're quite sure of what IS truth.  I suppose then the evidence you "believe" to not exist is really the ramblings of others and not really your own thoughts or findings.  Great way of deflecting to answer a question you have no idea how to answer/do so you pawn the task off...further you pawn off the "seeing" to the psychoanalysts and you simply believe them.  Very interesting indeed.[/quote]I've seen more sidestepping with your posts than mine. Just trot out your god, whisk me to heaven and let's have a good cup of tea with Jesus and the saints. The only stipulation is that everyone on this board is invited and it will take place in my house. O ye with a mustard grain's weight of truth and faith should be able to make this happen.

Rape is wrong.  Is that an absolute truth?

Your god exists. Is that an absolute truth? Stop sidestepping the issues.

[AnimatedDirt]

I have no idea who's arguing against evolution, is there a reason that you're asking this question? It seems to me that there are two appropriate kinds of actions that you could have taken in order to avoid going off tangent: provide the evidence that supports your positive claims or admit to not having any evidence.

Which claim?  Too many topics here.

The claim that all it requires to get into heaven is belief in the god you just so happen to believe in. The claim that atheists require absolute knowledge. The claim that heaven even exists. The claim that a god exists and only wants people to believe in it. If you need more help recognizing the claims you've made, I can help.

Atheists don't require absolute truth?  Oh that's right...just evidence.  Heaven can't be proven this side of life.  God doesn't want anyone to believe in heaven.  Where did you get that idea?  If you need help in what is being discussed here, I can help.

And like every positive claim, it requires evidence to support it.

Again, this is not the subject of THIS thread.  THIS thread is whether Atheists can get into heaven.  The question then assumes the existence of it for the sake of discussion.  If you can't understand the nature of the discussion, I can help.

You claimed without anything other than stating it that in order to get into heaven, one must believe in a specific god (which luckily for you, happens to be the one you believe in), because I and several other atheists do not believe in god because there is no evidence of any god, then the evidence for what you're saying and the evidence for a god is directly related to the topic of the post.

See reply above.

This doesn't cover the evidence that supports you stating that one must believe in the specific god that you just so happen to believe in, to be allowed into heaven.

This answer was in regard to you bringing up evolution...if you can't see that, I can help.

So not blessed are those who have not seen and yet believed? He didn't say anything close to "blessed are those that sought to make sure what they believed in was true." He said "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed," meaning the same thing that Thumpalumpacus had stated: that your religion blesses those with blind faith over those seeking the truth. How can you say "Not true at all" then provide a biblical quote as evidence that it is true after all?

If you can't see that Thomas was given proof, touched Christ...then I can't help your ignorance.  I can't help that.

[AnimatedDirt]

I can stick my hand out the window to see if it's windy. I can stick my hand out of a moving car to see what wind the car generates. I can also detect air. And I can give very good evidence of both. You, however, can give no good evidence of heaven, hell or your god.

So is what you're saying is that you trust your senses even though your senses can be imperfect?  Let's be honest here.  One argument the Atheist brings to debunk ID, for example, is the apparent flaws in the human body.  If this is true, what can you trust to be true even if you "feel" it, "see" it, or experience it?  With this in mind you're going to now tell me you can prove wind/air without actually seeing it?  How convenient it is for you to use a flawed system(s) for proof, yet a Christian cannot.

I don't wish to skew the thread any more than it already is.

Yet who's the one that initiated a skew?

I've seen more sidestepping with your posts than mine.

Glad you admit your own part.

Just trot out your god, whisk me to heaven and let's have a good cup of tea with Jesus and the saints. The only stipulation is that everyone on this board is invited and it will take place in my house. O ye with a mustard grain's weight of truth and faith should be able to make this happen.

Maybe if you earnestly seek, He may oblige you.  However, I doubt you can earnestly seek anything you have no belief in...unless it's something of scientific value.  Even then, if you don't believe something, why seek to find yourself wrong?

Rape is wrong.  Is that an absolute truth?

Your god exists. Is that an absolute truth? Stop sidestepping the issues.

Is absolute truth only absolute truth the moment it can be proven?

[Davin]

Which claim?  Too many topics here.

The claim that all it requires to get into heaven is belief in the god you just so happen to believe in. The claim that atheists require absolute knowledge. The claim that heaven even exists. The claim that a god exists and only wants people to believe in it. If you need more help recognizing the claims you've made, I can help.

Atheists don't require absolute truth?  Oh that's right...just evidence.  Heaven can't be proven this side of life.  God doesn't want anyone to believe in heaven.  Where did you get that idea?  If you need help in what is being discussed here, I can help.

Where did you get the idea that I said anything about god wanting people to believe in heaven? I wrote nothing even close to that. You asked what you claimed, I provided some of the things you claimed.

And like every positive claim, it requires evidence to support it.

Again, this is not the subject of THIS thread.  THIS thread is whether Atheists can get into heaven.  The question then assumes the existence of it for the sake of discussion.  If you can't understand the nature of the discussion, I can help.

So anyone can just make anything up and every one is good with that? Ok, atheists and everyone else who doesn't believe in things without evidence are allowed into heaven, while those who do believe in things without any reasonable evidence go to hell.

This doesn't cover the evidence that supports you stating that one must believe in the specific god that you just so happen to believe in, to be allowed into heaven.

This answer was in regard to you bringing up evolution...if you can't see that, I can help.

Yes, this statement:

Rocks crying only points to crying rocks. The enormous complexity of life is evidence... evidence for evolution. Talking about evidence for god, then bringing up gravity, cells or the diversity of life... is a bit like saying that you can bend a spoon with your psychic powers, then using your hands

Which was a response to you bringing up evolution by saying "The enormous complexity of life is not evidence...evidence?" It seems that you're having difficulty following this conversation and the order in which the conversation is occurring.

So not blessed are those who have not seen and yet believed? He didn't say anything close to "blessed are those that sought to make sure what they believed in was true." He said "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed," meaning the same thing that Thumpalumpacus had stated: that your religion blesses those with blind faith over those seeking the truth. How can you say "Not true at all" then provide a biblical quote as evidence that it is true after all?

If you can't see that Thomas was given proof, touched Christ...then I can't help your ignorance.  I can't help that.

Yes Thomas was given proof, if you can't see that he was not blessed for asking for proof while those who believed without the proof were blessed, then I think any conversation with you is very useless.

[Thumpalumpacus]

If genuine prophecy exists, then who but an omniscient diety would know?

Perhaps the people who lived in the time and space prophesied, and the following generations.  You know, people who look for actuall prophecy in the Bible, only to be disappointed.

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,
    and its people are like grasshoppers.
  He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
    and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

Food rain - Exodus 16.  Notice Moses and Aaron attempted to keep the manna as proof...

Note how this doesn't address my point -- that deep truths buried in a bible would be very convincing.  Those writing them down need not understand what they're writing at all:

"What's that, God? Atoms are surrounded by -- hold on, I'm trying to keep up -- an electron cloud?  What does that mean?"

"Don't worry about what it means, Moses.  I, the Lord God they Father, am telling you to write this down.  Could you please just write it down?"

"But -- but --"

"Moses, do you argue with Zipporah like this?!" [Cue ominous thunder]

Now, kindly address this point.

...and if the "maschination" disappears or someone that disagrees with you takes it/destroys it?

Any god who is claimed both omnipotent and filled with a desire to save his creations could make arrangements to forestall this.  Certainly your god cannot be outwitted by a small-time burglar.  Or can he?

(Of course, the veneration of blind faith is exactly designed to answer this stunning paucity of evidence; it's purpose is to make the Christian god unfalsifiable by asserting that he values faith and disparages those who require evidence).

Not true at all.

Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came.  So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!"  But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

I have emphasized a passage you seem to be ignoring.  This is exactly a "veneration of blind faith."

Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.  But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

I am faithless.  Your omnipotent god knows this.  Now, if he refuses me evidence, the only logical conclusion is that he doesn't care for me to believe.  Given that, the claim that he desires the salvation of all men is ipso facto false.

[AnimatedDirt]

Where did you get the idea that I said anything about god wanting people to believe in heaven? I wrote nothing even close to that.

The claim that heaven even exists. The claim that a god exists and only wants people to believe in it.

If you need some OJT on basic grammar and/or clear writing skills, I can help.

So anyone can just make anything up and every one is good with that? Ok, atheists and everyone else who doesn't believe in things without evidence are allowed into heaven, while those who do believe in things without any reasonable evidence go to hell.

Since you cannot see an assumption or two is made in the question asked, (not that the question affirms the assumption) then I suppose I can't help you...no one can.

It seems that you're having difficulty following this conversation and the order in which the conversation is occurring.

...which was a response to you and your gravity evidence of which you can't see.  Already at this point we had sidetracked.  If you can't see that, I can help.

Yes Thomas was given proof, if you can't see that he was not blessed for asking for proof while those who believed without the proof were blessed, then I think any conversation with you is very useless.

What you can't see is that he WAS blessed with physical proof.  His belief was based simply in touching hands.  Could yours?  Blessed are they that receive no proof, yet believe.  Blessed if their faith is proven true later.

I couldn't help but notice you avoided; Is absolute proof only absolute proof once proven?  Or more simply put, is truth only truth once proven?
Is the earth only a sphere-shape once proven to be?

[Tank]

[AnimatedDirt]

Perhaps the people who lived in the time and space prophesied, and the following generations.  You know, people who look for actuall prophecy in the Bible, only to be disappointed.

A simple google search will find you many prophecies fulfilled.  Some not yet fulfilled and some apparently not fulfilled.

Note how this doesn't address my point -- that deep truths buried in a bible would be very convincing.  Those writing them down need not understand what they're writing at all:

When exactly was it known for sure the earth is sphere-shaped?  When was it known that the atmosphere is a protective covering for the earth?
Notice that the idea is the same while using examples of understood then.  Did they understand the earth was round or the atmosphere protected them?  I'm not sure if it was.  I don't know of anyone expounding on the idea in that day.  If someone did, it still wasn't fully understood.

Now, kindly address this point.

Were I an omniscient god dictating my holy book, it'd be very easy: I'd include a bit of knowledge that would be incomprehensible in the science of the day, but understood later.

"The circle of the earth, like a canopy, spreads like a tent to live in"  Are you telling me they understood exactly what this meant?  It's exactly the "bit" you asked for "incomprehensible" to the science of the day AND later understood.  Which part didn't I address?  Being a Christian, my IQ is lower than yours.  I may need your help.

Any god who is claimed both omnipotent and filled with a desire to save his creations could make arrangements to forestall this.  Certainly your god cannot be outwitted by a small-time burglar.  Or can he?

According to the "tale", Satan thought he outwitted God when Christ was nailed to the cross.  Little did he know the cross was the bridge for man to cross over to God while yet a sinner.  In the same way, men may "outwit" God, but like I asked before, is truth only truth the moment it is proven?

He did make arrangements.  Unfortunately the only way "around" His own law  and remain Just, Righteous, and Holy is for God Himself to die.  

...that he values faith and disparages those who require evidence).
This is exactly a "veneration of blind faith."

This text proves God doesn't disparage seekers of truth.  He came, appeared before Thomas and let him touch his hands.  I suppose the point is Thomas was seeking God.  Atheism, when "looking" for God, is only looking for proof of his/her own understanding to further substanciate his/her belief/disbelief and thus find no "evidence."

Evidence was left and many believed after the fact...the problem now is that you don't want to believe 2000 yr old evidence, hence the question posed earlier; How would you keep the evidence so that in 2000 years there doesn't arise Atheists again?

I am faithless.  Your omnipotent god knows this.  Now, if he refuses me evidence, the only logical conclusion is that he doesn't care for me to believe.  Given that, the claim that he desires the salvation of all men is ipso facto false.

If God says "the rocks cry out..." and you don't believe nature and it's grand complexity and order, men who through direct interaction, wrote their experience down to share, historical evidence...then I suppose what you're doing is remaining in what YOU want to remain in.  Evidence is not refused you.  You are surrounded by it.  Is it God's fault you decide the vast, almost unimaginable and incomprehensible, improbability of the opposite is more probable to you?

Do you go to Vegas?

[AnimatedDirt]

:pop:

My fingers are killing me, Tank!  

[DropLogic]

Davin wrote:
The claim that heaven even exists. The claim that a god exists and only wants people to believe in it.

If you need some OJT on basic grammar and/or clear writing skills, I can help.

Actually, you need the lesson.  Plus pointing out grammar mistakes on a forum is just another lame deflection tactic.

[Tank]

You can always stop! It's not compulsory to come here and defend your position or that of other Christians. You're on a hiding to nothing you know. Go have a look at jac3510's posts. He just sort of left...

Good luck. I'll hold your coat  

[AnimatedDirt]

Davin wrote:
The claim that heaven even exists. The claim that a god exists and only wants people to believe in it.

If you need some OJT on basic grammar and/or clear writing skills, I can help.

Actually, you need the lesson.  Plus pointing out grammar mistakes on a forum is just another lame deflection tactic.

If you're giving the lesson, are you pointing out a mistake in grammar to me?

If pointing out the "mistake" conveys how I interpreted his words, then it's not lame nor a tactic of deflection.

[DropLogic]

Davin wrote:
The claim that heaven even exists. The claim that a god exists and only wants people to believe in it.

If you need some OJT on basic grammar and/or clear writing skills, I can help.

Actually, you need the lesson.  Plus pointing out grammar mistakes on a forum is just another lame deflection tactic.

If you're giving the lesson, are you pointing out a mistake in grammar to me?

If pointing out the "mistake" conveys how I interpreted his words, then it's not lame nor a tactic of deflection.

Because God is a "He" to you?  If God transcends the physical, how could one possibly know the sex of such a being?