If there was heaven and hell?

Huh?


If there were heaven and hell . . . were . . . it's the subjunctive.

I don't see how an infinitesimal number of alternate realities derives of a certainty from there being heaven and hell . . . after that, you lost me altogether.

Well if there is two, then why not more?

'K . . . i got no problem with that, i simply understood you to be positing that the existence of two such places naturally inferred the existence of an infinite amount . . . i take it you are equating heaven and hell with alternate realities . . . is that because of the obvious knotty problem of placing such endroits within the space/time continuum as currently envisioned?

Yes, I dont see how something can exist and be completly out of grasp of comprehension.

But there could be other ways to explain as well. It just seems that heaven and hell would be some sort of an alternate axis on this space/time continuum shift. It is symbolized all over religions in the referance to the upper and lower worlds, or paths? But never on a scientific levil. I am by far not a scientist, for I am just a young student. But why does everyone try to prove these types of things without trying to prove how they could exist?

Oh ye of little faith . . .

Questions are not appreciated from the peanut gallery while viewing the Holy of Holies . . .

What so ever do you mean, you dont know?

I am not faithful, in religion at least, and I do ask questions. Thats the only way.

That was sarcasm, aided by irony . . . don't take it personally . . .

So explain it to me. Cause I dont think that I see this sarcastic irony that you speak of.


Are you speaking from the apparent perspective of religion or what?

The irony is that it is apparent, tough not real, and the sarcasm is in the sneer implied about the attitude taken toward believers by the high and mighty of religion . . . and if you need that explained to you, i doubt that you and i will make much progress in a conversation . . .

Well then, I did get you correctly. But what say you? Havent you got any reasoning or do you just say its there, or its not there? Me I say I dont know if its there.

I say that i've never given a tinker's damn for the provenance of fairy tales . . .

What I think Setanta is saying -- quite rightly -- is that the existence (or non-existence) of two or three loci does not, in itself, imply the existence (or non-existence) of any other locus, infinite or finite.

There is plenty of room for heaven and hell in this universe without invoking alternate dimensions.

But your question brings up a good point: If the many-worlds hypothesis is correct and the universe splits every time a choice is made, then there must be an almost-infinite number of alternate universes in which a given soul earns eternity in paradise, and an equally great number of universes in which it is destined for hell.

Do God, heaven, hell and our eternal souls split every time the universe does? If not and God is independent of any universe, perhaps he simply counts alternate realities in which the soul is saved and compares it to the number in which the soul is condemned. Whichever number is greater determines your ultimate fate.

Bubble Theory Metaphysic? Outstanding!

splitting hairs here...

infinitesimal = 1/infinite

I know, Seal. But I thought I'd let that slide.

It seems to me that if there were an omnipotent creator of the universe, then he would have created both the physical laws of the universe and the rules of basic logic, and could violate them or play with them anyway he chose. I think that the idea most consistent with the existence of a God would be that heaven and hell are completely beyond the physical realm. If they were not, then it would probably be possible to travel to them, at least in principle, with a sufficiently developed technology, and I doubt that God would permit that. The point relating the afterlife to the Many Worlds Hypothesis is very interesting. The Christian idea of an afterlife, is that an individual chooses to do good or evil, and the idea that every individual makes every choice in some universe seems to contradict this idea.

Yet it is a quantum possibility. It's also an alternate explaination of the doctrine of "free will".

The problem I have with the bubble theory is with all the infinite universes coming out of nowhere. Each one would contain an entire universe with the same matter/energy as its parent... equivalent to free energy!

It seems more likely that clusters of realities would form from alternate possibilities, very similar to our own reality, and many of them would collapse back into our reality. In other words, not all choices would create wholly independent timelines/dimensions. Most decisions, I imagine, would be so meaningless (to reality as a whole) that the resultant "alternate reality" would soon (if not immediately) collapse back into the parent reality.

The problem is... without an "outside" viewpoint, we never really know what the "important" decisions are. Personally, I don't think they're too related to the concept of "sin", tho...

And, to get back to the initial question (!), my personal beliefs are that heaven and hell are HERE and NOW. In other words, they depend on your perspective.

Why would alternate dimensions/universes exist for subjective concepts like pleasure and suffering? (Excepting the will of God, of course) Why would they exclude other sensations? There could be a guilt universe, an orgasm universe, a numb-tingly universe, a sleep universe, an ennui universe (bo-RING), an excited universe... a bunch of stuff that god never told us about!