Reasons to get to heaven

[nobspeople]

I was told by some, the main reason one should want to get to heaven is so they can praise god for eternity.
Is this correct? God seems to be needy and wants all attention focused on (You shall not make for yourselves an idol, nor any image of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: you shall not bow yourself down to them, nor serve them, for I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous God...)
So it seems that this thinking of praising god forever is apt.
But is it?
Many will say 'I will see [insert dead loved one's name here] soon/on the other side/etc'
It seems these people want to socialize with those they've lost, making heaven an elite social club. Add if the city is, indeed, gold-like (or of gold: “The great street of the city was of gold, as pure as transparent glass”) that seems apt (guess even god loves gold - you'd have thunk it?!?).

So who's correct: those that say heaven is a place to kiss god's... feet... or a place to see dead loved ones?

For discussion: What's the literal, physical characteristics of heaven and what will happen to those that make it there?

[Diagoras]

I do think atheism has to take some blame for the fact that the political system is so corrupt because these politicians are real people really hurting other people

Can I pick you up on a few errors in over-generalising here? Not all politicians are atheists. In fact, in America, I'm fairly sure all national-level politicians are self-avowed religious to a degree.

Some political systems are certainly corrupt more than others - and none are entirely free of corruption.

Some political leaders hurt others (either deliberately or inadvertently), but to what degree differs hugely across the world. Sweden vs. North Korea?

Drawing a conclusion such as 'atheism is partly to blame for political corruption' doesn't really follow from the above premises, otherwise we'd see evidence for atheist-predominant governments hurting more people than in theocracies.

Just an aside - happy to take this to another thread if you wanted to debate it further.

[JehovahsWitness]

Does that good track record, overall include eliminating war, hunger, corruption, injustice and suffering?

Is there a serious (and relevant to the thread) point to be made by forcing me to 'admit' that human society has not yet eliminated these problems?

Yes, there is. Humans clearly have not been able to eliminating war, hunger, corruption, injustice and suffering despite thousands of years in the trying AND despite the fact that they presently have the technological knowhow to do so. Looking at humanities "track record" it is realistic to suppose the problem isn't with the soup but the cook! We just cant get it right and the evidence indicates de never will!

Let's be realistic about what humans have achieved and what they are likely to in the future. Here we are with mindboggling technology, we can transport thousands of tons of food, medicines, building material around the earth in a matter of hours, we can operate on a child to cure her of an illness that would have surely meant her end not even a century ago, we can chat online in real time with someone on the other side of the planet, yet thousands of children die of hunger very single day. While quatrillionaires book their next space trip to Mars!



Who' s kidding who here!? Anyone whose vision hasn't been anesthetized by Netflix can see the level of human suffering of this past century is obscene, our planet is teetering on the brink, our politicians are for the most part self serving and there is nothing to indicate these problems will ever be eliminated save for wishful thinking served on a fresh bed of delusion.



JW



RELATED POSTS

Is it not lazy and defeatist to look to God to solve all our problems?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 13#p848013

Will human governments be able to eliminate all suffering one day?
viewtopic.php?p=1062765#p1062765

What is God's Kingdom?
viewtopic.php?p=956867#p956867

What is the issue of universal Sovereignty? [Defined]
viewtopic.php?p=1031210#p1031210

Should not a loving God have ignored the issues in order to avoid suffering? [this post]
viewtopic.php?p=908722#p908722

Why did God allow Job to be tested?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 26#p908726

Does God ignore the prayers of those that suffer?
viewtopic.php?p=1024256#p1024256

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

THE KINGDOM, THE MILLENIUM and ...THE EARTHLY PARADISE

NOTE All posts I write represent my personal faith based beliefs as one of Jehovah's Witnesses

[Purple Knight]

Not all politicians are atheists. In fact, in America, I'm fairly sure all national-level politicians are self-avowed religious to a degree.

They have, but I have every reason to believe that if they really, truly thought they were going to Hell for hurting people, they wouldn't do it.

It's something I often point out in other threads: Politics successfully keeps out honest atheists because if they say they're atheist, nobody will vote for them. It successfully keeps out honest Christians to some degree (though there may be some of the deluded or pawns of others who think they are doing good) because the tenets of a religion that requires one to love thy neighbour aren't compatible with the tactics of success in a political system, especially one that is very corrupt.

However, there may also be honest Christians who think that they can do whatever they want and simply ask for forgiveness later. This may be a misinterpretation of Christianity's teachings but nonetheless, it's something a lot of people, Christian and otherwise, seem to think is correct about the canon, regardless of whether it is.

Some political systems are certainly corrupt more than others - and none are entirely free of corruption.

Some political leaders hurt others (either deliberately or inadvertently), but to what degree differs hugely across the world. Sweden vs. North Korea?

Drawing a conclusion such as 'atheism is partly to blame for political corruption' doesn't really follow from the above premises, otherwise we'd see evidence for atheist-predominant governments hurting more people than in theocracies.

We will certainly see the opposite since nobody would claim to be an atheist unless they were being honest. You don't gain votes for being an atheist; you lose them. A dishonest politician will claim to be whatever gains them votes. I just think it's reasonable that they're not really the religion they claim to be, or at very least, that they don't believe in Hell.

[Diagoras]

Humans clearly have not been able to eliminating war, hunger, corruption, injustice and suffering despite thousands of years in the trying AND despite the fact that they presently have the technological knowhow to do so. Looking at humanities "track record" it is realistic to suppose the problem isn't with the soup but the cook! We just cant get it right and the evidence indicates we never will!

<snip>

... we can transport thousands of tons of food, medicines, building material around the earth in a matter of hours, we can operate on a child to cure her of an illness that would have surely meant her end not even a century ago,...

<snip>

Anyone whose vision hasn't been anesthetized by Netflix can see the level of human suffering of this past century is obscene,...

<bolding mine>

You contradict your own position here, by acknowledging the level of hunger, war and suffering were demonstrably much worse in the past than they are now. It's natural (and human) to look around at the world and be appalled by some of the levels of hardship that still exist, but the evidence - really, go and look again at that graph at the 'gap minder' site that I linked to - shows unambiguously that every country on earth is in a better state than it was a hundred years ago.

I haven't seen any refutation of the evidence that I've put up for either human societal improvement, or for the claim that God's 'track record' (as stated by the Bible) is worse for cruelty, war and injustice. An appeal to emotion by posting a picture of a starving child isn't particularly helpful, either.

[JehovahsWitness]

You appear to be claiming that because human government isn't 'perfect', the world should be run by God...

Well if one can have perfect why settle for less?

[Diagoras]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #45]

Assuming God exists and is perfect, neither of which are proven. After all, you posted:

But hypothetically speaking, if a loving God did exist, logically speaking a government in the hands of a loving and all powerful God would [be] better than government in the power of limited (albeit well meaning) imperfect humans

Contrast that with a hypothetical, equally plausible non-loving God - that would be an absolutely terrible government to suffer under. I imagine it'd feel a bit like being a Samarian (Hosea 13:16) or an Amalekite (1 Samuel 15:3), to consider just a couple of examples.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #45]

Assuming God exists and is perfect ...

I take that you mean: Yes, a perfect government in the hands of God is preferable to imperfect government in the hands of humans. And that is my point.

Is there a serious (and relevant to the thread) point to be made by forcing me to 'admit' that human society has not yet eliminated these problems?

The bible* presents a government by a loving God, vastly superior and preferable for many, to the governments we have today.

(Since the OP is focused on Christian theology, which is based on the existence of a loving God, I'll leave you to go away and start another thread to examine the hypothesis of government the hands of an unloving god)

* I am ONLY mentioning the bible to show what Christianity says in line with subforum guidelines, not to prove that a statement or story therein is true. ​I am not presenting the bible as authorative or proof of truth and have no intention to add an argument to that end in this subforum See LINKS for details: viewtopic.php?p=213491#p213491

If you believe humans will eliminate all these problems forever, well and good (we all need to believe in something no matter how irrational) I simply look at the facts of human history - with its countless attempts to achieve world peace and eliminate suffering - and choose not to share your beliefs in this regard.



JW

[JehovahsWitness]

I'm ... simply pointing out evidence to the contrary as to why 'heavenly rulers' wouldn't in fact be much good for the people left on Earth.

I must have missed that, can you recap why you come to this conclusion ? Was it because you think these powerful spirit creatures with divine powers, and indeed an omnipotent God Himself who created the universe (who is the authority behind the government) won't be able to operate a fax machine?

They don’t have access to physical things like paper, phones or congregational databases.

JW

[Diagoras]

If you believe humans will eliminate all these problems forever,

That's not what I believe. Stop putting up straw man arguments.

On 'heavenly rulers not being much good for those on Earth':

I must have missed that, can you recap why you come to this conclusion ?

Because you've already stated that heaven isn't a physical place - it's a spirit realm. There's no physical objects there. While God can presumably work a fax machine on Earth, there couldn't ever be one in heaven, and if there was, how would it be connected to anything? Who would be able to receive God's faxes?

Separate spiritual and physical realms would be just about as far removed from each other as it's possible to be. Unless the angels, rulers, Jesus and God regularly pop down and manifest themselves in physical form on a fairly regular basis, no-one's going to interact with their leaders at all. In the real world, of course, you can do this. Heavenly leaders, on the other hand, are unapproachable. Therefore 'not much good' for earth.

[JehovahsWitness]

... you've already stated that heaven isn't a physical place - it's a spirit realm. There's no physical objects there. While God can presumably work a fax machine on Earth, there couldn't ever be one in heaven, and if there was, how would it be connected to anything? Who would be able to receive God's faxes?

So you don't think an omnipotent God would be capable of communicating with lower lifeforms? Is that your point? That the inventor of matter cannot manipulate it? Rather like Bill Gates not being capable of turning on his computer?

Or are you saying an omnipotent God couldn't make your computer start typing a message right now if he wanted to because he wouldnt have a long enough extention cord? I really cannot tell if you are joking or not, in any case, this line of reasoning is pretty funny.


JW