Hold up man. Grown ass people seriously think they go to heaven? Really now?

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

It's actually not a dumb question... Prove there's no afterlife

You can't prove a grand architect doesn't exist.

Maybe heaven and God as described in the bible... but life after death and a supreme creator? Nah

Its not my job to prove that. the burden of proof isn't on me to do that.

I can't prove a negative.

Thats the point.

I simply don't believe they've supported their claim

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

breh imagine it's the year 500 Bc and you're trying to explain to someone that you are made out of energy. That your physical body isn't really there it's a vibration That all matter is really something vibrating at the same density. Imagine telling them that energy cannot be created or destroyed etc etc. They'd look at you like

I think that's one of the reasons the bible is written the way it is. This Universe is infinitely complex and it needed to be explained in very simplistic terms. The other reasons are because most of the bible is allegorical and also it was never one book it's actually a compilation strung together with pieces added on and also other texts removed.

so god just made some explanation that naturally most people misunderstand out of sheer ignorance?

 

[The Real]

I live a rather content life thank you it must suck to not be able to disprove the existence of heaven reaffirming your fear that hell might be real.

Again shut the fukk up 'til you prove them wrong

Bruh, you don't seem to get how this works. The burden of proof is always on the person making the positive claim about something that isn't empirically apparent. If something can't be proved false, that doesn't mean it's true. Sometimes, as in the case of God, it just means it's not a logical idea to begin with. Religion is faith-based. There's no point trying to establish it with logic.

I can't prove you aren't a transsexual crackhead dwarf. That doesn't mean you are one. I can't prove your home won't get hit by an asteroid tomorrow. That doesn't mean it will. I can't prove that Buddhism isn't the one true religion. That doesn't mean you're going to hell for believing in false deities.

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

If something can't be proved false, that doesn't mean it's true.

Main reason why there is no reason to discuss it in the first place.....If you believe..cool If you don't....cool

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

It must suck to be as stupid as you.

I live a rather content life thank you

 

[Ain't That Something]

Bruh, you don't seem to get how this works. The burden of proof is always on the person making the positive claim about something that isn't empirically apparent. If something can't be proved false, that doesn't mean it's true. Sometimes, as in the case of God, it just means it's not a logical idea to begin with. Religion is faith-based. There's no point trying to establish it with logic.

I can't prove you aren't a transsexual crackhead dwarf. That doesn't mean you are one. I can't prove your home won't get hit by an asteroid tomorrow. That doesn't mean it will. I can't prove that Buddhism isn't the one true religion. That doesn't mean you're going to hell for believing in false deities.

Breh for me to prove the existence of heaven I would have to explain to you spiritual concept that you do not understand nor willing to accept. What atheist want people of faith to do is akin to a astrophysicist explaining his field of study to a one year old.

 

[Cacs R Us]

No one should really care what someone believes if that someone is not trying to force it on others or mess with laws based on their beliefs.

 

[The Real]

Breh for me to prove the existence of heaven I would have to explain to you spiritual concept that you do not understand nor willing to accept. What atheist want people of faith to do is akin to a astrophysicist explaining his field of study to a one year old.

Bruh, religion is faith-based, plain and simple. At heart, it's not about concepts that people can understand or not understand through logic. No amount of explanation can change that.

 

[Ain't That Something]

Bruh, religion is faith-based, plain and simple. At heart, it's not about concepts that people can understand or not understand through logic. No amount of explanation can change that.

Faith without works is useless. People of faith that I know faith is reaffirmed through spiritual experiences they have had. Unless one is willing or able to go through said experience the conversation is mute. Their faith is made evident though their life.

 

[The Real]

Faith without works is useless. People of faith that I know faith is reaffirmed through spiritual experiences they have had. Unless one is willing or able to go through said experience the conversation is mute.

Yes, but those experiences are subjective. You can't prove them to other people using logic. If some homeless dude came up to you tomorrow and told you Jesus appeared to him in a vision and declared him a new teacher of humanity and that you had to kneel to and follow him, would you believe him? What if he showed you a book with words that backed up his claims, and he told you that Jesus revealed the book to him?

 

[Ain't That Something]

Yes, but those experiences are subjective. You can't prove them to other people using logic. If some homeless dude came up to you tomorrow and told you Jesus appeared to him in a vision and declared him a new teacher of humanity and that you had to kneel to and follow him, would you believe him?

Yes, would I follow him no. 'till one have said spiritual experience for themselves they cannot nor should not follow any doctrines. I believe knowledge of a doctrine is not the same as experiencing the concepts that said doctrines expound on. I could go further if you want.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Faith without works is useless. People of faith that I know faith is reaffirmed through spiritual experiences they have had. Unless one is willing or able to go through said experience the conversation is mute. Their faith is made evident though their life.

You're regurgitating Bible paraphrasings that have nothing to do with argument. The point is your belief in Heaven and your Christian religiosity is based on faith, not reason. It's impossible for you to make a logic-based case for Heaven's existence. It will inevitably boil down to "the Bible says so and I believe it on faith."

 

[Ain't That Something]

You're regurgitating Bible paraphrasings that have nothing to do with argument. The point is your belief in Heaven and your Christian religiosity is based on faith, not reason. It's impossible for you to make a logic-based case for Heaven's existence. It will inevitably boil down to "the Bible says so and I believe it on faith."

Breh for me to prove the existence of heaven I would have to explain to you spiritual concept that you do not understand nor willing to accept. What atheist want people of faith to do is akin to an astrophysicist explaining his field of study to a one year old.

 

[The Real]

Yes, would I follow him no. 'till one have said spiritual experience for themselves they cannot nor should not follow any doctrines. I believe knowledge of a doctrine is not the same as experiencing the concepts that said doctrines expound on. I could go further if you want.

Ok, but it seems like you're agreeing with me then, since you're saying that the ultimate source is subjective experience, which by definition is not logical and an individual matter.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Yes, would I follow him no. 'till one have said spiritual experience for themselves they cannot nor should not follow any doctrines. I believe knowledge of a doctrine is not the same as experiencing the concepts that said doctrines expound on. I could go further if you want.

You just responded to a legitimate critique of a flawed assertion by just repeating that flawed assertion. "Spiritual experiences" are completely subjective. People of all different faiths and beliefs have spiritual experiences. The existence of a spiritual experience as deemed by an individual does not validate the specific claims of any particular religion. It just means someone had a subjective experience and attributed to some supernatural force. You, a Buddhist monk, and a schizophrenic heroin addict could all have individual spiritual experiences, but that isn't any objective proof or evidence of any of each of your respective religious claims.