If you really really believe Heaven is real but you die and it's not then what difference does it make? You never have your belief disproven. You win nothing by being an atheist.
Because if you believe Heaven is real that gives you the impression that our current life doesn't really matter, that death and suffering don't really matter because Heaven will redeem everything in the endIf you don't believe that then you need to have a fundamentally different perspective of life. That this is the only one we get, and we have to make the most of it, that it is precious, and that injustices will not be redeemed by an eternal afterlife, and those who commit wrong will not face damnation after death. In short, if Heaven isn't real and you believed and acted your whole life as if it is real, it invites a kind of complacency. "Oh yeah the world is awful, but who cares, we're all going to die and go to Heaven anyways and our lifespan is nothing compared to the eternal afterlife".
>>18511802I win not being a fucking retard whose life revolves around yiddish fairytales for silly goyim
>>18511802Heaven is real. Look up.>>18511808No one knows what happens if you die. People all say different things.
>>18511802Unironically this >>18511808, I think it's called "true world theory".The idea that there is a separate world that is "more real" than this one has been part of our mental imagery since the axial revolution since like 800 BC, and it allowed us to develop reason, geometry, logic etc. all of which are de facto part of a separate conceptual world behind this world. If you overdo this conceptualization, you get something like gnosticism where a god behind the world is proposed and then a god beyond the god is proposed and it all becomes a cosmic soap opera... And now comes the question - is believing in God (and heaven) already too far into true-world-theory territory? There are good arguments either way but luckily Christianity doesn't necessarily have to grapple with it as much as other religions do, because it insist that this world is important and matters and that the Kingdom will be right here, if it's not partially here already. Nobody's outsmarting the axial heritage that is true-world-theory, but there's a way to do it correctly.
It's not about winning. I can't convince myself that fairy tales are real. Both science and religion obviously can't be true and science explains reality much better than any religion. There are too many contradictions and afterlife makes zero sense in our biological world.
>>18511802a potentially infinite number of religions and beliefs = infinite potential for eternal torment if said religion you follow turns out to be wrongatheism is the safest choice because you're basically just sitting it out. If God still wants to punish me for this and send me to hell then the standards for heaven are far too high for most people anyways and being religious likely wouldn't have helped me.
>>18511830ThisIt’s like trying to say “look, just sincerely believe 2 + 2 equals 5, and you’ll get a thousand dollars, it’s easy!”I could say 2 + 2 equals 5 but I can’t sincerely believe it, even if some reward is offered.
>>18511830>Both science and religion obviously can't be trueThat's what some atheists like to insist upon, but when you actually look into it, it's mostly bogus. I have yet to find a single scientific study that I, as a Christian, would have to deny to maintain my faith. And the beef between religion and science in history is mostly recent revisionism, even Galileo's literal inquisitor wrote that he'd change his mind about the space if he were presented with evidence because interpreting scripture needs to be reconciled with empirical observation. >science explains reality much better than any religionAbsolutely! Because religions are not explanatory frameworks, they are participative ones. You could just as well say that religion guides spiritual transformation better than science. If you judge one thing by the purpose of another, it will always come out worse.>afterlife makes zero sense in our biological worldWhat that mean?
>>18511802>You win nothing by being an atheist.Your Pascal Wager means nothing to me.If religion is simply about game theory and metaphysical economics then it's lame and I don't care about it
>>18511836Evolution debunks evey religion.
>>18511822The problem is those are like dreams. They are derived from life experience. If something like them exists anyway is unknown. It's like things we can't comprehend. You have to be careful of being rused trying to go strange places other than mundane reality.
>>18511843It debunks some fundamentalists. Most religious people I've met are completely fine with evolution.>>18511844That something can be 'known' is an episode in those dreams. Truth theories are a result of the axial revolution. I agree you should be careful, but the care is that of a man already swimming, not of one potentially falling into water.
>>18511846Evolution, both chemical and biological makes the existence of god pointless. There's no direction, no goal, life was never beautiful and without death, but always the result of constant competition, death and reproduction going back to the very first abiotically formed RNA strands. In such a world there's no place for a good deity that cares about us. Science explains all of this very well, religion doesn't provide any answers because the people who wrote ancient books knew absolutely nothing about evolution or molecular biology.
If God is actually real, you wouldn't need all these elaborate rituals, ceremonies, relics, affirmations, and whatnot desu; God's existence should be regarded with the same reverence as the most mundane things in the world, such as air or light.
>>18511857>Evolution, both chemical and biological makes the existence of god pointlessEvolution produced and sustains the fabric of the universe?>There's no direction, no goalThat's not what the theory of evolution says. That's the way it is designed. Because we currently have no methodologies to investigate teleology, all claims of teleology are avoided. It does not mean we know that there's none. > life was never beautiful Now you're just getting sentimental>Science explains all of this very well, religion doesn't provide any answers because...... because it's not there to provide answers about molecular biology. You're comparing apples to oranges and then making conclusions about all food.I would say you actually more science in your life. Perhaps some brief introduction to philosophy of science. Because it's one thing to appreciate the hell out of the patterns we found out, but it is another to see our methodological limitations as limitations of the universe around you. Science is not asking you to do the latter. And religion never aimed to do it either.
>>18511859My exact thoughts. Things would be so simpler if their God gave a few signs of his existence every now and then
>>18511860>Now you're just getting sentimentalNo, I was thinking about Eden or any other ancient golden age that supposedly existed in deep past. Let's be serious here, most theists are Abrahamists who essentially invents new excuses why their ancient religion shouldn't be considered completely obsolete. >it's not there to provide answers about molecular biologyIt provides no answers that explain the world we live in. Eden wasn't real, snakes weren't punished by god. If you disregard those clearly mythical stories then religion can't even explain why a good god created predatory animals. Why heterotrophy is the dominant way organisms acquire energy on our planet.
>>18511802If you an atheist and Heaven is real, you just say "huh, funny" and proceed to Heaven. You win nothing by being a jew worshipper
>>18511867>ancient golden ageEveryone has an ancient golden age when they are one with everything. Then we develop higher consciousness and this one-ness becomes increasingly difficult. Religion is here to help you with that, not with molecular biology.>most theists ... invents new excuses why their ancient religion shouldn't be considered completely obsoleteI haven't seen a new one in a while. It's been more or less consistent across the past 2000 years and it's usually the critics that come up with novel accusations.>religion can't even explain why a good god created predatory animals> Why heterotrophy is the dominant way organisms acquire energy on our planet.Correct. It doesn't teach you how to make espresso either. Or how to rizz up a girl. Molecular biology, ecology, culinary, those are all pretty random standards to hold religion against. You could just as well dismiss Deuteronomy for not telling you the proper temperature of brewing white tea. Technically correct but a completely uninsightful judgement. Religion is there to guide transformation.
>>18511802>You win nothing by being an atheist.It depends on the rules you think need to be followed to get to heaven, if it requires cutting your dick off because it might tempt you to fornicate, then you have won having a dick and getting to use it at your leisure for your whole life by being an atheist.
>>18511802If you really really believe Heaven is real, but you don't die, what difference does it make? The afterlife (or oblivion) has no relevance.
>>18511860>Evolution produced and sustains the fabric of the universe?Yes, cosmological evolution.>That's not what the theory of evolution says. Then what is the ultimate goal that the theory of evolution "says"?> all claims of teleology are avoidedWhich means they aren't part of the theory which means the theory says that all of that can be done without any ultimate goal besides reproducing new mutants.>because it's not there to provide answers about molecular biology.it is there to provide answers about existence yet it can't even justify the existence of molecular biology when some magician can just magically miracle its will into existence.
>>18511890>It's been more or less consistent across the past 2000 yearsYes that consistency in religion totally explains why there are over 9000 different religious sects constantly warring with each other over minor points.>It doesn't teach you how to make espresso either.Jesus could magically make wine, it supposedly teaches how to make magical wine and how to make manna fall from the sky if you are starving.
>>18511904>>Evolution produced and sustains the fabric of the universe?>Yes, cosmological evolution.You're reaching.>> all claims of teleology are avoided>Which means they aren't part of the theory Yes.>which means the theory says that all of that can be done without any ultimate goalNo. It just doesn't know how to assert anything at all about the goal. The theory of evolution doesn't assert anything about quantum fields either, that doesn't mean it states evolution can proceed without quantum excitations. It just avoids making a statement. Limits of your theory are not limits of the world.>it is there to provide answers about existence yet it can't even justify the existence of molecular biology And it doesn't even elaborate on existence of espressos. Completely pointless insight.>>18511906>over 9000 different religious sectsThe absolute majority are Catholic or Orthodox, which means in agreement about 90% of all theology. And that's after 2000 years. Are you aware of any secular institution that has majority agreement after even 200 years?> it supposedly teaches how to make magical wineIt doesn't. It reports that it was done.
>>18511843Circular reasoning
