- Apr 13, 2020
- Reaction score
No it is your problem as you are the delusional fool writing novels that no human will ever read.That's their problem.No one is ever going to read all of thatMy perception of God would be like an ant's perception of us. It just isn't possible to fully wrap our minds around. So my answer to your questions are based upon my sincerest effort to answer the question of origin and fully explore the possibility of mind creating the material world. It's probably not something you have ever seriously or honestly tried to do before and is the reason you are biased against the possibility of mind creating the material world.Humans are subjective, but I thought God was objective. Or at least eternal and consistent. There's only one heaven and one hell, right?Why should there be? Humans are subjective.
When you are ready for an honest discussion, let me know
I'm only asking for information, I have no counter to the Christian view of the afterlife. I'm not a believer but I just want to know what people think is coming.
The closest I can come to God is infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite goodness, infinite beauty and infinite love which are eternal and unchanging. We know that things like logic, truth, goodness, beauty and love exist. To complete the spectrum we know the absence of those things exist as well but are not extant. So I start from the extant to describe what I believe mind to be like.
So I don't see how God could be anything but objective and if there is something which argues against this, then it is the argument itself which is in error. For instance, bad acts of men would be an illogical argument against infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite goodness, infinite beauty and infinite love existing. The material world is not perfect. It's full of all kinds of defects. It is the nature of the material world. To argue there is no such thing as infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite goodness, infinite beauty and infinite love because the material world has defects doesn't make sense.
I don't know what heaven and hell is. File that as another thing we can't wrap our minds around. The closest I can can come to perceiving heaven and hell is either being eternally united or separated from infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite goodness, infinite beauty and infinite love. I have a notion that the separation would feel like torture to us as the spirit of infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite goodness, infinite beauty and infinite love is withdrawn from us. Some people don't realize what they have until it is taken away from them. As to the concept of reward and punishment, we can look at our own experiences as a proxy to know that reward and punishment are well founded in human behavior. But another thing is also there.... forgiveness. So it is not necessarily a binary decision. So the question of heaven and hell or reward and punishment is founded in logic but it shouldn't even enter into our calculus of how we behave (be, exist, being, etc.). So I can't understand how anyone would use heaven and hell as an argument against infinite logic, infinite truth, infinite goodness, infinite beauty and infinite love.
You say you are only asking for information, but my perception is that you are looking for confirmation. Confirmation of your beliefs. Why else would you care about reconciling Christian beliefs with the origin question? You are just looking for excuses not to do your own honest investigation into the origin of existence. The origin of logic, truth, goodness, beauty and love.
What does it matter what other people believe is coming? Why is that important? How does it change your thinking or your decisions?
Can you wrap your mind around that?