1
   

Who gets to go to heaven?

 
 
Treya
 
Reply Sat 16 Sep, 2006 10:33 pm
Here's an interesting video that I came across. I'd be interested to discuss this with anyone who is willing. I think it has some valid points...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzzORZhnCao&mode=related&search=

Any takers?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,916 • Replies: 48
No top replies

 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 03:36 am
Very entertaining !

As an atheist with an interest in "spirituality", it is clear to me that this is aimed at those with limited intellect. Concepts of "spirituality" which may or may not involve "heaven" (or nirvana) are ineffable....they are beyond "logic"...indeed they can be evoked by "illogic" (Zen koan).

It is little wonder that number 8 (being born again) carries the most weight for the spiritually inclined because this is a clear metaphor for "transcendence of self" common to many meditational practices.

I think I have mentioned before that writers such as Krishnamurti give a much more satisfying insight into the pitfalls of dogma than the "high school stuff" in the video .
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 04:18 am
Honestly, despite the fact that it seems like the person doing all the talking appears to think he's pretty darn smart and comes across as rather condescending, I thought some of the stuff he pointed out was rather interesting. Perhaps it is at too low a grade level for someone of your caliber... So I guess you should go find another sand box to play in fresco....













Hehe...
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 04:25 am
Hum...

Always the same scheme: "don't agree with me?" : go away.

Disappointing for the readers..
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 06:32 am
bm
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 07:02 am
Hephzibah,

My suggestions for alternative reading are made in an attempt to indicate something you might find of value, rather than an intellectual put down.
The "I" that places itself in the sand-pit is not the "I" to whom those references might make sense.
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 07:40 am
all dogs go to heaven




or so a movie once told me
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 07:50 am
I couldn't see the video, but if someone summarizes it I would appreciate it.

I have a related question... if somehow I qualify for heaven, can I choose to not go?

Not having seen the video (but having read the Book) I think the whole system is unfair. You have arbitrary rules that aren't fully understood by anyone that have to be gleaned from religious writings that don't make sense in places and aren't even recognized by much of the world.

If God offers to let me into heaven... he will have to explain a couple of things. I don't want to be a part of a system that determines the eternal fate of my neighbors unless I am absolutely sure it is fair.

I assume that when I get there, I will understand the rules (or God can explain them to me) and I will also know who is coming with me.

If I find that the system is unfair-- I will choose not to participate.

I have a good sin prepared for the last minute just in case.
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 08:07 am
Francis and Fresco I was SOOO attempting to make a joke there...

I guess I won't quit my day job!

Sorry! LOL



ebrown... I'll be getting back to you on your post.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 08:54 am
Francis wrote:
Hum...

Always the same scheme: "don't agree with me?" : go away.

Disappointing for the readers..


Not precisely - the invitation to "play elsewhere" only came because of the derogatory tone of the reply, not becasue of any opposite opinion.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 09:50 am
snood,

I am always surprised by those who set any score by the wording of "holy texts". All the evidence points to their multifarious authorship in particular linguistic and historical contexts. Their applicability in today's world is wish fulfilment on the part of those with a vested interest in "the eternaL" If what seems self-evident to me appears to be "a derogatory tone" for others, they seriously need to consider why their "holy texts" should be given any more credibility than that of any other religion. The universality of the principle is the key to intellectual respect.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 10:31 am
Oh c'mon fresco- just be honest. You started your reply with this:

Quote:
Very entertaining !


condescending and patronizing - surely not just a statement of what is "self-evident" or not...

you also said this:

Quote:
it is clear to me that this is aimed at those with limited intellect


...and how can this be perceived as anything but pejorative?

Whatever. As annoyed as you claim to be by those with beliefs which seem sophomoric to you, I am annoyed by those who can't even claim their own garbage.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 11:12 am
snood,

Perhaps you should consider why an atheist should denigrate an attempt at justification of an atheistic position. Work on that and you might find you have missed the point. Smile
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 11:19 am
I think that it is hilarious that Miss Eppie opened up the can of worms implicit in the concept of "going to heaven," nevermind that silly video.

Can anyone say, 144,000 Saints?

What stretches credulity is the concept of exclusivity of salvation. The idea of an omnipotent deity "creating" sentient individuals, giving them the will to ask as they list, and then saying: "Ooops, you were bad, no heaven for you!" is pretty damned absurd, as is the concept of all the good boys and girls getting to spend eternity singing songs of praise to the celestial ego-maniac.

After all, after the first few million years, that's got to get rather boring.
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 01:12 pm
I can't finish what I've started here. I'm sorry.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2267172#2267172
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 09:46 pm
Setanta wrote:
I think that it is hilarious that Miss Eppie opened up the can of worms implicit in the concept of "going to heaven," nevermind that silly video.

Can anyone say, 144,000 Saints?

What stretches credulity is the concept of exclusivity of salvation. The idea of an omnipotent deity "creating" sentient individuals, giving them the will to ask as they list, and then saying: "Ooops, you were bad, no heaven for you!" is pretty damned absurd, as is the concept of all the good boys and girls getting to spend eternity singing songs of praise to the celestial ego-maniac.

After all, after the first few million years, that's got to get rather boring.


Setanta it is interesting that you should bring up that number. I know that is the number the JW believe will be saved. But if you look to then next verse it talks about a whole lot more than just 144,000. First of all vs 4 says:

4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed. One hundred and forty-four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel were sealed

That is the direct descendents of the tribes of israel is it not? That's what it sounds like to me. Furthermore after stating how many from each tribe it goes on to say:

9After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands, 10 and crying out with a loud voice, saying, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!"

I don't think this particular scripture is at all exclusive, though that may be how some choose to interpret it. The way you talk about it, the concept does sound absurd. That God would create people just to turn around and send them to hell. However, I don't remember seeing that ideal specifically in the bible anywhere. Do you have somewhere to point me to?
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 10:12 pm
hephzibah wrote:
. . .
Setanta it is interesting that you should bring up that number. I know that is the number the JW believe will be saved. But if you look to then next verse it talks about a whole lot more than just 144,000. . .
That there may be only 144000 who will enter heaven to rule as king and priests beneath Christ does not include the vast majority of mankind who will live on earth. That was and is God's purpose stated in Genesis, if you will remember.
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Sep, 2006 10:38 pm
Hmmm... interesting point neo. So what's the point of the "rapture" then? Do you believe in the rapture?
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 08:08 am
hephzibah wrote:
Hmmm... interesting point neo. So what's the point of the "rapture" then? Do you believe in the rapture?
The fact that the word does not appear in the bible should give us one clue. . .

Or how about Solomon's words at Proverbs 2:21, 22: . . . "For the upright are the ones that will reside in the earth, and the blameless are the ones that will be left over in it. 22 As regards the wicked, they will be cut off from the very earth; and as for the treacherous, they will be torn away from it."
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 08:11 am
So, basically, you're saying, yes, only the 144,000 get to go to heaven. Count me out.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Who gets to go to heaven?
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/29/2022 at 06:57:42