You haven't proven there is a heaven so you first
Between the two of us, which openly has a belief system of faith?
I'm not standing around trying to claim that I can empirically prove the existence of Heaven, because my belief system is based on faith.
You on the other hand are saying that there is no Heaven, as if it is a provable fact. If it is, then do so.
If you can't, and you are taking it on faith alone that there is no Heaven, which means your view is no more or less valid, than my own view.
There is no empirical proof of heaven.
When there is I'll admit I was wrong
There is no evidence that a supreme being exists
When there is I will admit I was wrong
But you will never say you are wrong because no matter what evidence is given you you will refuse to believe it
That's an easy claim to make when you have not, nor has anyone else, given evidence that proves your claim.
You made a statement: There is no Heaven.
I said prove it.
You said "You go first".
Why should I go first, when I have not made a claim to you.
You said there is no Heaven. I said nothing to you before this.
You made the claim. It's your job to prove the claim. Can you prove the claim or not?
Now you are saying that you are not going to provide proof, because you supposedly have the omniscient ability to read minds, and know I would not accept proof.
That just makes you a bigot. If that is your only argument, and you consider that argument valid.... ok....
Well sir, I have proof of Heaven, but I'm not going to give it to you because I know you will just refuse to believe it.
There we go. If that's a valid argument for you, it is also a valid argument for me.

Cheers mate.