# Thanksgiving.



## VisionCasting (Nov 25, 2011)

Serious question... Curious of the apathetics or atheists on here celebrate Thanksgiving.  If so, to what or whom do you give thanks?  Or is it more just an opportunity to get off work for a couple of days?


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 25, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Serious question... Curious of the apathetics or atheists on here celebrate Thanksgiving.  If so, to what or whom do you give thanks?  Or is it more just an opportunity to get off work for a couple of days?



I'm grateful and thankful everyday for being alive and living with comfort and abundance but I realize that I could have just as easily been born into much a worse situation.   

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=648094

In the same way, I am thankful that there was beautiful weather today so that I could fish and play tennis.

To attribute either my pleasure or that little girls suffering to a being, God or Devil seems like nonsense and it would make me feel worse about either situation to think that there was some design(er) behind it.


----------



## VisionCasting (Nov 25, 2011)

To clarify, my question isn't if you are thankful, but what is the object of your thanks.  For instance, of I do something for you, you might be thankful to me. But if there is no source of the good things in your life, to whom do you give thanks?  Yourself?  Or just sort of throw thanks "out there" and hope it sticks?  




ambush80 said:


> I'm grateful and thankful everyday for being alive and living with comfort and abundance but I realize that I could have just as easily been born into much a worse situation.
> 
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=648094
> 
> ...


----------



## bullethead (Nov 25, 2011)

Give thanks to the friends and family for being friends and family.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 25, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> To clarify, my question isn't if you are thankful, but what is the object of your thanks.  For instance, of I do something for you, you might be thankful to me. But if there is no source of the good things in your life, to whom do you give thanks?  Yourself?  Or just sort of throw thanks "out there" and hope it sticks?




It's not a thing or being to be given credit, it's just chance.  Impartial, random chance.  That's what I've seen operating.  I'm just grateful that my dice land on 7's sometimes.


----------



## VisionCasting (Nov 25, 2011)

bullethead said:


> Give thanks to the friends and family for being friends and family.



That seems odd to me. Help me understand why you'd be grateful to your family.  Isn't it just chance they became your family?   Or are you saying you are grateful to them for their actions to you?


----------



## VisionCasting (Nov 25, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> It's not a thing or being to be given credit, it's just chance.  Impartial, random chance.  That's what I've seen operating.  I'm just grateful that my dice land on 7's sometimes.



So there is no object o your gratitude?  You are grateful but not to anyone, anything or any 'system' (ie the cosmic dice that periodically give you 7s)?  That's interesting.  Is that kind of like the proverbial tree falling in the woods?


----------



## bullethead (Nov 25, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> That seems odd to me. Help me understand why you'd be grateful to your family.  Isn't it just chance they became your family?   Or are you saying you are grateful to them for their actions to you?



Thanking friends and family for being part of my life seems odd to you, yet thanking an imaginary invisible being that only exists inside an individuals mind is "normal"?

Did someone/something PLAN who would be my friends and family?

Random chance, Yes.
Appreciating who I got stuck with, yes.
Odd, No.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 26, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> So there is no object o your gratitude?  You are grateful but not to anyone, anything or any 'system' (ie the cosmic dice that periodically give you 7s)?  That's interesting.  Is that kind of like the proverbial tree falling in the woods?



Well, I've seen a tree fall.  I know it makes a sound.  I know how sound waves work.  The only "evidence" I have of a super being is the testimony of people that believe in one.  I have no reference for that.  I'm not grateful to "anyone".  Just pleased when things turn out beneficially. By the same token, I'm not angry or accusatory towards "anyone" (the Devil, demons) when things go wrong.


----------



## stringmusic (Nov 28, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Well, I've seen a tree fall.  I know it makes a sound.  I know how sound waves work.  The only "evidence" I have of a super being is the testimony of people that believe in one.  I have no reference for that.  *I'm not grateful to "anyone".  *Just pleased when things turn out beneficially. By the same token, I'm not angry or accusatory towards "anyone" (the Devil, demons) when things go wrong.



Except the dice, right? You do thank the dice, don't you?


----------



## gtparts (Nov 28, 2011)

For the record, I thank God for the dice, too. Yet, nothing is truly random. I am thankful for all the blessings in my life.... and all the trials, pains, and disappointments. God is bigger than all my experiences and His word tells me that He works all things for good to those that love Him. What a great promise to those that love Him!


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 28, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Except the dice, right? You do thank the dice, don't you?



Dice don't have a consciousness.  

I'm just glad that I was born "here" instead of "there".


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 2, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> I'm just glad that I was born "here" instead of "there".



Why?  So you can have more stuff?  Is that your greatest goal in life?  The accumulation of stuff?  If so, take some time to think about why Gates, Buffet and Turner are giving so much away.  Even they have realized stuff is not a reasonable end game. 

Just curious...  Have you ever been 'there', to a place with so many people, so destitute that the situation seemed to lack all hope?  Then heard them praise God for what seemingly little they have?


----------



## Tvveedie (Dec 2, 2011)

CRIKEY!  

This thread gives me the impression that the action of giving thanks is somehow based on meeting a criteria.  And methinks that the manner in which it was brought up was a facade to engage someone for a "I believe and you don't debate".  That said, I'll throw in something to gnaw on.  There are plenty of unspiritual people that live their life in a way that would eclipse some religious folks in regards to virtue and purpose.


----------



## JB0704 (Dec 2, 2011)

Tvveedie said:


> That said, I'll throw in something to gnaw on.  There are plenty of unspiritual people that live their life in a way that would eclipse some religious folks in regards to virtue and purpose.



....and?

How does that fit into a conversation as to what folks give thanks for?  I can imagine if I was atheist I would still be grateful for the good things, but, my gratitude would be geared towards "good fortune" and not God.

And, as a Christian I am certain some of the most "moral" folks I know are atheist, and some of the biggest scoundrels I know are Christian.  Belief, in my experience at least, seems to have little effect on integrity. But, I am not certain that is where the OP was going.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 2, 2011)

Tvveedie said:


> This thread gives me the impression that the action of giving thanks is somehow based on meeting a criteria.



Yes, isn't it obvious there are criteria?  You must have something for which you are thankful in order to give thanks.  



Tvveedie said:


> And methinks that the manner in which it was brought up was a facade to engage someone for a "I believe and you don't debate".



Negative.  That wasn't the intent of the OP.   In fact I can't imagine why any Christian would attempt to "convince"  an atheist of anything when according to John 6:44 it's not possible to lead someone to faith who isn't already being drawn there.  It's an exercise in futility.  Why so suspicious?


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 2, 2011)

JB0704 said:


> And, as a Christian I am certain some of the most "moral" folks I know are atheist, and some of the biggest scoundrels I know are Christian.  Belief, in my experience at least, seems to have little effect on integrity. But, I am not certain that is where the OP was going.



Ditto.  That was most certainly NOT the reason for the OP.  People seem to read a lot into posts that just isn't there.


----------



## Six million dollar ham (Dec 4, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Serious question... Curious of the apathetics or atheists on here celebrate Thanksgiving.  If so, to what or whom do you give thanks?  Or is it more just an opportunity to get off work for a couple of days?



I thanked my mother-in-law for the awesome meal and my brother and his family for hosting us later.  I tend to give credit where it's due.

For freedom, I'm thankful for our founding fathers and our armed forces.

For my health, I'm just fortunate (with regards to cancer, Down's syndrome, spina bifida, etc).  That and I'm proactive in making wise health choices.  So I'm thankful for myself, my physician, exercise physiologists, and drug companies.

I also tend to be thankful for weird things like how I was born in this modern age and location and not medieval Spain, 1940's Stalingrad,  modern Ethiopia, a woman in Afghanistan, etc.  I don't think there's any reason to thank a deity for that because if he spared me, he didn't spare somebody else those tortured existences.


----------



## ted_BSR (Dec 4, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> To clarify, my question isn't if you are thankful, but what is the object of your thanks.  For instance, of I do something for you, you might be thankful to me. But if there is no source of the good things in your life, to whom do you give thanks?  Yourself?  Or just sort of throw thanks "out there" and hope it sticks?



The mummified llamma buried under the corner of his house.


----------



## Dixie Dawg (Dec 4, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Yes, isn't it obvious there are criteria?  You must have something for which you are thankful in order to give thanks.



True.
But you don't have to have someONE to attribute your thanks to.

I have many things in my life I am thankful for.  I can be thankful without having to attribute my blessings to anyone or anything.  

Why is it that believers are so insistent that we 'thank God' for our blessings, but then totally opposite when it comes to stuff that doesn't go our way?  If you have good things happen in your life, you're supposed to be thankful to God, but if you have bad stuff happen in your life you just take the blame for yourself?

What a load of manure.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 5, 2011)

Dixie Dawg said:


> True.
> But you don't have to have someONE to attribute your thanks to.
> 
> I have many things in my life I am thankful for.  I can be thankful without having to attribute my blessings to anyone or anything.
> ...



Your right, that is a load of manure, 'cause thats not how it's supposed to work.


----------



## Huntinfool (Dec 5, 2011)

Dixie, glad to see you back around!

I get where things are coming from though.  You actually cannot be thankful without having and object to be thankful to in reality.  Just going, I suppose, by the technical definition of "being thankful".  

It's not possible to be thankful without being thankful to someone or something.

I think what the non-believers are really saying is that they participate in "Thanksgiving" as a time to celebrate with their families.  They are possibly thankful to other people for their love and their participation in their lives.  But they are not just generally thankful in the sense of being thankful to God for the many blessings in our lives.  Just different angles on the holiday.

Pretty sure most of them have Christmas trees and give presents as well, even though they don't celebrate the season or the day for the same reason we do.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 5, 2011)

I didn't realize Thanksgiving was a religious day...


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 5, 2011)

I thank the aliens that seeded this, the third rock from the big star, and guided us towards this day.


----------



## willholl79 (Dec 5, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Serious question... Curious of the apathetics or atheists on here celebrate Thanksgiving.  If so, to what or whom do you give thanks?  Or is it more just an opportunity to get off work for a couple of days?



God's ticked at you for making this worthless thread.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 5, 2011)

willholl79 said:


> God's ticked at you for making this worthless thread.



Why is it a worthless thread?


----------



## willholl79 (Dec 5, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Why is it a worthless thread?



Same ole arguement.  

Those who believe and those who don't.  In my opinion both sides have good reasons for what they do/don't believe.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 5, 2011)

willholl79 said:


> Same ole arguement.
> 
> Those who believe and those who don't.  In my opinion both sides have good reasons for what they do/don't believe.



So we're just supposed to quit having discussions?


----------



## willholl79 (Dec 5, 2011)

No, by all means, discuss all you want.  I was just pokin' at the OP.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 5, 2011)

willholl79 said:


> No, by all means, discuss all you want.  I was just pokin' at the OP.


----------



## Huntinfool (Dec 5, 2011)

> Same ole arguement.
> 
> Those who believe and those who don't. In my opinion both sides have good reasons for what they do/don't believe.




Know what I do when people are arguing about something that I don't care about???

I stay out of the Duck Forum (and the PF for that matter).  

Might try it.  I have pretty good luck avoiding threads I think are worthless that way.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 5, 2011)

willholl79 said:


> No, by all means, discuss all you want.  I was just pokin' at the OP.



Poking at an honest question?  OK.  Whatever floats your boat.


----------



## willholl79 (Dec 5, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Know what I do when people are arguing about something that I don't care about???
> 
> I stay out of the Duck Forum (and the PF for that matter).
> 
> Might try it.  I have pretty good luck avoiding threads I think are worthless that way.



When did I say i didn't care about it?

Besides, how will I know if it's worthless or not unless I read it?


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 5, 2011)

Dixie Dawg said:


> But you don't have to have someONE to attribute your thanks to.
> 
> I have many things in my life I am thankful for.  I can be thankful without having to attribute my blessings to anyone or anything.



It is curious that you used the word "blessings".  Can you go into that a little more?  My understanding is that a blessing, like thankfulness, has an object.  Blessings come from someone, thanks go back.

Can you give a concrete example of a 'blessing' for which you thankful but not to anyONE?


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 5, 2011)

I thank our founding fathers for the wisdom that guaranteed every American citizen his or her freedom to worship or not to worship, and that the government would not show prejudice to either group.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 5, 2011)

"I love Thanksgiving turkey... it's the only time in Los Angeles that you see natural breast". 

Arnold Schwarzenegger


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 5, 2011)

ted_BSR said:


> The mummified llamma buried under the corner of his house.



Are you mocking my sacred ritual?


----------



## JFS (Dec 5, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> It is curious that you used the word "blessings".  Can you go into that a little more?  My understanding is that a blessing, like thankfulness, has an object.  Blessings come from someone, thanks go back.



I think you are being too restrictive.

From Webster's

Definition of BLESSING
1a : the act or words of one that blesses b : approval, encouragement 
*2: a thing conducive to happiness or welfare* 
3: grace said at a meal 

But I agree the whole thing is ridiculous- "god blessed me when the tornado missed my house"...  when it went down the other street and killed the those other guys.  Really?  Were they gay or disobey their parents or something?  We've been down that road before, and honestly you'd be better off just admitting a sense of gratitude to random chance is sufficient for a "blessing"- it makes more sense then anthropomorphizing randomness.


----------



## justhuntinSC (Dec 5, 2011)

1 COR.15 v 57 But Thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. 

God does not guarantee riches or blessings on earth. What he does guarantee is Eternal life through Jesus. That folks is something to be thankful for.


----------



## bullethead (Dec 5, 2011)

Thanks for a bible verse. It's gotta be true if it is written there!


----------



## ted_BSR (Dec 5, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Are you mocking my sacred ritual?



Nope, just pointing out where you are coming from.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 6, 2011)

JFS said:


> I think you are being too restrictive.
> 
> From Webster's
> 
> ...



I guess that's exactly my question.  1a - "act or words of one".  Which one?  The person bestowing the blessing, obviously.  There is always a source of the blessing.  Look then at Webster's examples of the word's usage:

"Examples of BLESSING

1. Presumably he was acting with the government's blessing.
2. They got married without their parents' blessing.
3. We asked the Lord's blessing on us and on our project.
4. He said a blessing before the meal."

Each has an object bestowing the blessing.

I fear that A&A are being untrue to their position by unknowingly using words like "blessing" and "thanksgiving".  

In the words of Pnome (where ya been man?), "Words mean things".

I'm just trying to help you stay true to your position.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 6, 2011)

Who is being thanked when someone says "Thank goodness!"?

At any rate, in my household we have started a new November holiday which we call "Thanks, Injuns".


----------



## JFS (Dec 6, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> I'm just trying to help you stay true to your position.




Thanks, you are such a blessing yourself.  But don't misconstrue things in your rush to be helpful.   Certainly words have meanings, but you are being disingenuous in your selections.  The word "blessing" is broad enough to cover good things that come your way by luck or good fortune with no other known progenitor other than nature or naturalistic explanations.  So if you think us heathens need to thank something, OK, we can still thank the natural powers that be, the universe, the Tao, or whatever- no anthropomorphizing required.   



> 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean â€” neither more nor less.'
> 
> 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
> 
> 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master â€” that's all.'



_Definition of Blessing
Bless´ing
 3. A means of happiness; that which promotes prosperity and welfare; a beneficent gift.
Nature's full blessings would be well dispensed.
- Milton. 

bless·ing (blsng)
n.
3. Something promoting or contributing to happiness, well-being, or prosperity; a boon.

Noun 
 2. blessing - good fortune, good luck, luckiness - an auspicious state resulting from favorable outcomes_


----------



## Tvveedie (Dec 6, 2011)

I'm getting confused now.  Am I allowed to celebrate Thanksgiving or not?  and if I am allowed, disregarding my belief or lackthereof, am I entitled to be sincerely thankful for things I determine are significant enough to be remember on that day?


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 6, 2011)

JFS said:


> _Definition of Blessing
> Bless´ing
> 3. A means of happiness; that which promotes prosperity and welfare; a beneficent gift.
> Nature's full blessings would be well dispensed.
> ...



I'm not at all surprised you left off:
4. the invoking of God's favor upon a person

:nono:  Again, I don't concern myself with what you believe or why.  To think I could change your belief is to diminish the power of the Gospel.  After all, no offense, but what's in it for me?  I'm not sure I want to share my eternal tree-stand with you anyways.  

But this thread has helped me gain a clearer understanding of A&As:  You can be thankful to yourself, to other people or to 'systems' (for lack of a better word) but refuse to entertain an ultimate author of 'blessings'.

That's all I was interested in.  Carry on.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 6, 2011)

Tvveedie said:


> I'm getting confused now.  Am I allowed to celebrate Thanksgiving or not?  and if I am allowed, disregarding my belief or lackthereof, am I entitled to be sincerely thankful for things I determine are significant enough to be remember on that day?



You are a free man.  Celebrate what you wish.  And answer the question if you'd like... what is the object of your 'thanks'?  Only people?


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 6, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> I thank our founding fathers for the wisdom...



No offense, but that makes absolutely NO sense.  Aren't the founding fathers all dead?  How do you thank them?


----------



## JFS (Dec 6, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> I'm not at all surprised you left off:
> 4. the invoking of God's favor upon a person



Of course, the issue was never whether one could use the word in a religious context.  It was merely over:


> Blessings come from someone, thanks go back.
> 
> Can you give a concrete example of a 'blessing' for which you thankful but not to anyONE?



So yes, you can 



> be thankful to yourself, to other people or to 'systems' (for lack of a better word) but refuse to entertain an ultimate author of 'blessings'.



For the same reasons you aren't thanking Zeus....


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 6, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> No offense, but that makes absolutely NO sense.  Aren't the founding fathers all dead?  How do you thank them?



And you thank who?  Big J?  Hmmm..."Dead" 
 kinda fits his description.  Plus I just get in my time machine (provided by the Aliens I mentioned in a earlier post) and go back and thank them personally every Thanksgiving.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 6, 2011)

*"Totem"  RUSH*

I've got twelve disciples and a Buddha smile
Garden of Allah, Viking Valhalla
A miracle once in a while

I've got a pantheon of animals in a pagan soul
Vishnu and Gaia, Aztec and Maya
Dance around my totem pole
Totem pole...

I believe in what I see
I believe in what I hear
I believe that what I'm feeling
Changes how the world appears

Angels and demons dancing in my head
Lunatics and monsters underneath my bed
Media messiahs preying on my fears
Pop culture prophets playing in my ears

I've got celestial mechanics
To synchronize my stars
Seasonal migrations, daily variations
World of the unlikely and bizarre

I've got idols and icons, unspoken holy vows
Thoughts to keep well-hidden
Sacred and forbidden
Free to browse among the holy cows :cow:

That's why I believe

Angels and demons inside of me
Saviors and Satans all around me

Sweet chariot, swing low, coming for me


----------



## Four (Dec 7, 2011)

I'm not big into holidays in general. . . I doubt i "give thanks" any more during thanksgiving than i do any other day . . maybe marginally more.

I enjoyed the company of those who were around me, and the situation i am in. If i was to give thanks for those things it would be thanks to my parents for giving me the means and motivation to educate myself, and myself for getting a degree and a job, and busting my rear to get work done. Also my wife and family for helping me cook


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 7, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> And you thank who?  Big J?  Hmmm..."Dead"
> kinda fits his description.



JC dead?  You obviously missed the rest of the story.  The whole point of Christianity is not that He died on the cross, but that He's alive.  Resurrected and seated at the right had of the Father, interceding on our behalf daily.  If He were dead it would invalidate the core belief of Christianity.  It's about Easter, not Christmas!

You don't need to believe that, but at least understand what you are disputing.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 7, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> JC dead?  You obviously missed the rest of the story.  The whole point of Christianity is not that He died on the cross, but that He's alive.  Resurrected and seated at the right had of the Father, interceding on our behalf daily.  If He were dead it would invalidate the core belief of Christianity.  It's about Easter, not Christmas!
> 
> You don't need to believe that, but at least understand what you are disputing.




Lil' help here...He died, was placed int he tomb then 3 days later he was resurrected and walked among his peeps until ascending into heaven.  So , is he alive like you and me but in heaven?  how does that work?  or is his spirit in heaven not unlike the founding fathers?


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 7, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> Lil' help here...He died, was placed int he tomb then 3 days later he was resurrected and walked among his peeps until ascending into heaven.  So , is he alive like you and me but in heaven?  how does that work?  or is his spirit in heaven not unlike the founding fathers?



While I can't attest to the presence of the FF in Heaven, I will be happy to let you know when I get there.  Hopefully I don't have to pass the message to the 'hot place' though.  

As for you other question, if it's genuine I'd be happy to give you a synopsis of what the Bible says over the Sriritual Discussions and Study SF.  Do you really care, or is yours an "I want to find something to :swords: about" question?


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 7, 2011)

just curious as to how you can thank JC in heaven but I cant thank the founding fathers who may also be in heaven....


----------



## Tvveedie (Dec 7, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> You are a free man.  Celebrate what you wish.  And answer the question if you'd like... what is the object of your 'thanks'?  Only people?



What is the object of my thanks?  

I'm thanking rhetorically I guess.  I am grateful to my mother for creating me, although she passed last year, she was spiritual.  Would this be categorized as passive spirituality?  

The choices and actions I make and take are in line with what most would consider pure-of-heart, but I'm hopeful that someone will put me on the guest list in Heaven cause I'm not quite sure I'll make it on my own.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 7, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> just curious as to how you can thank JC in heaven but I cant thank the founding fathers who may also be in heaven....



So then, you believe in life after death?  Tell me about that.  What's it like?


----------



## Tvveedie (Dec 7, 2011)

Life is a circle, it's a circle, it's a circle, it's a circle.....


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 7, 2011)

Tvveedie said:


> ...but I'm hopeful that someone will put me on the guest list in Heaven cause I'm not quite sure I'll make it on my own.



  That my friend is the ENTIRE message of the Gospel.  None of us are qualified on our own.  We all need someone to 'put us on the guest list'.  That's been done.  All we need to do is accept the invitation.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 7, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> So then, you believe in life after death?  Tell me about that.  What's it like?



? Where did I say that?


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 7, 2011)

"You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose freewill."

Neil Peart


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 8, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> ? Where did I say that?



Post #56  - to quote - " but I cant thank the founding fathers who may also be in heaven"

So do you believe they are?  How'd they get there?


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 8, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> "You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
> If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
> You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
> I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose freewill."
> ...



So you would rest a decision that may have catastrophic eternal consequence on RUSH lyrics?    Have you been 'smoking' a little too much?

But based on your Bills avitar you are on the wrong side of the equation a lot.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 8, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> So you would rest a decision that may have catastrophic eternal consequence on RUSH lyrics?    Have you been 'smoking' a little too much?
> 
> *But based on your Bills avitar you are on the wrong side of the equation a lot.*





At least they had Fred Jackson for most of the season..... he was fun to watch.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 8, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Post #56  - to quote - " but I cant thank the founding fathers who may also be in heaven"
> 
> So do you believe they are?  How'd they get there?



May implies that I don't know if they are or if they are not in this place.  I don't understand the implication of life after death..and being in heaven...we die then come back alive in this magical mystical place?  or is heaven really a planet several light years from earth where our founding aliens take us after we stop living here?


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 8, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> So you would rest a decision that may have catastrophic eternal consequence on RUSH lyrics?    Have you been 'smoking' a little too much?
> 
> But based on your Bills avitar you are on the wrong side of the equation a lot.



Rush lyrics or a book written by men about a divine holy person/spirit/god?  
And the Bills have been my "home" team from the time i was old enough to go to Rich Stadium and watch "The Juice".  They did a whole lot better in the 90's than the majority of the teams in the league.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 8, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> And the Bills have been my "home" team from the time i was old enough to go to Rich Stadium and watch "The Juice".  They did a whole lot better in the 90's than the majority of the teams in the league.



Been to many a game at Rich as well.  Oh the memories.  But they lost me after the 3rd Superbowl loss.  

Ralph should have sold the team to someone that knows how to win over a decade ago.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 8, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> I don't understand the implication of life after death..and being in heaven...we die then come back alive in this magical mystical place?  or is heaven really a planet several light years from earth where our founding aliens take us after we stop living here?



Again, if you are serious about your question there are a lot of well intentioned guys, myself included, who would be willing to you find the answer as best they could.  But if you are just :swords:  it's not really worth the effort.


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 8, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> Lil' help here...He died, was placed int he tomb then 3 days later he was resurrected and walked among his peeps until ascending into heaven.  So , is he alive like you and me but in heaven?  how does that work?  or is his spirit in heaven not unlike the founding fathers?



Let's not forget that "up" there where he ascended to is just space. That part was just for show apparently.


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 8, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> Rush lyrics or a book written by men about a divine holy person/spirit/god?



Both have equal merit, and credibility.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 8, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> Both have equal merit, and credibility.





As far as what?


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 8, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Let's not forget that "up" there where he ascended to is just space.



He did?  Man, your Bible translation is WAY different from mine.  Mine doesn't say anything about 'space'.  @string, how about you?  Any space talk in yours?


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 8, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> He did?  Man, your Bible translation is WAY different from mine.  Mine doesn't say anything about 'space'.  @string, how about you?  Any space talk in yours?



Does it say anything about ascending?


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 8, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Does it say anything about ascending?



Yes, but nothing about astronaut gear.


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 8, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Yes, but nothing about astronaut gear.



Maybe if you can fly up into the clouds like superman you don't need any astronaut gear just like superman?

Acts 1:9
After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. 

He was physically going somewhere. Where did he go?


----------



## Tvveedie (Dec 8, 2011)

This is ground control to Major Tom.  Come in Major


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 8, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Maybe if you can fly up into the clouds like superman you don't need any astronaut gear just like superman?
> 
> Acts 1:9
> After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.
> ...



Heaven. How he got there after the cloud hid Him I don't know.


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 8, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> As far as what?



As far as the truth and divinity of their origin.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 8, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> As far as the truth and divinity of their origin.



The Bible and the band Rush, two peas in a pod.

riiiiiiiiiiiigghhtt 

Even for someone that doesn't believe the bible to be truth, you can do better than that....... right?


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 8, 2011)

If you could use unemotional, unbiased, and unfiltered logic, string, you would see they are both equal .  The only reason we have these threads is becuase the divine nature of your literature is highly questionable, as are Rush lyrics.  If they weren't we would not need faith, and we would all be devout followers.


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 8, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Heaven. How he got there after the cloud hid Him I don't know.



Just part of the show then?


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 8, 2011)

Of course it makes perfect sense for people who think heaven is a physical place beyond the clouds. Now that we know what is beyond the clouds it just sounds silly. One of many indicators that these stories are fabrications.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 8, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Maybe if you can fly up into the clouds like superman you don't need any astronaut gear just like superman?
> 
> Acts 1:9
> After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.
> ...



Where do you get fly into space from 'taken up'?  Don't mistake your lack of knowledge and holding to misconstrued childhood stories for sound doctrine.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 8, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Of course it makes perfect sense for people who think heaven is a physical place beyond the clouds. Now that we know what is beyond the clouds it just sounds silly. One of many indicators that these stories are fabrications.



Rather than banter baseless opinion, can you back up your ascertation the Bible claims heaven is in outer space?


----------



## Tvveedie (Dec 8, 2011)

Although jez a little bit vague, I'm convinced that we all continue to exist after death.  Whether or not there is a differentiation within that state ala Heaven and Hades, I'm a fringe believer at best.  

I am thankful for that conclusion and the eternal enigma.  And who shouldn't be.  It's pretty boss on the third rock.  I count up the good times and they far exceed the bad.  I don't consider extending things beyond this so when they hollar last call, you sip it slow.


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 8, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Rather than banter baseless opinion, can you back up your ascertation the Bible claims heaven is in outer space?



Jesus ascension isn't the first biblical description of a man traveling to heaven by being carried up into the sky. The tower of Babel and God's reaction also shows that heaven was understood to be "up there". People back then didn't understand that there really is no up, that beyond the sky and clouds they can see is just more space.

Perhaps you would like to take a stab at the question. Where exactly did Jesus bodily ascend to?


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Just part of the show then?



There was no "show", Jesus didn't come to this earth for His entertainment value. He went to heaven, I don't know what else to say.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Of course it makes perfect sense for people who think heaven is a physical place beyond the clouds. Now that we know what is beyond the clouds it just sounds silly. One of many indicators that these stories are fabrications.



Does the bible indicate how far "beyond the clouds" heaven is? Does Paul or Peter or Luke indicate that they thought heaven was 3.2 miles beyond the clouds? Do you not think night time ever came and they could see "beyond the clouds"?

We only know whats beyond the clouds by what the huble can tell us.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 9, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Where exactly did Jesus bodily ascend to?



I think you need to start with a different question.  Perhaps "why", instead of where.  Then move on to "how".

If you had any genuine interest in those questions I would be happy to talk to you about it.

Remember, just because you do not understand a subject does not mean it is not true.  Most people who travel by airplane do not understand Bernoulli's Principle, yet they have the necessary faith to believe that an airplane made of metal (heavier than air) can stay aloft.  The alternative is to say "it is illogical to assume a metal tube full of people can stay up in the air!"


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> I think you need to start with a different question.  Perhaps "why", instead of where.  Then move on to "how".
> 
> If you had any genuine interest in those questions I would be happy to talk to you about it.
> 
> Remember, just because you do not understand a subject does not mean it is not true.  Most people who travel by airplane do not understand Bernoulli's Principle, yet they have the necessary faith to believe that an airplane made of metal (heavier than air) can stay aloft.  The alternative is to say "it is illogical to assume a metal tube full of people can stay up in the air!"


Good stuff VC.

He will say he understands it very well though, and while I will agree with him that he _knows_ the bible well, he is yet to_ understand _it.


----------



## JFS (Dec 9, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Where did he go?



He had a seat reserved next to this guy


----------



## JFS (Dec 9, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Remember, just because you do not understand a subject does not mean it is not true.  Most people who travel by airplane do not understand Bernoulli's Principle, yet they have the necessary faith to believe that an airplane made of metal (heavier than air) can stay aloft.  The alternative is to say "it is illogical to assume a metal tube full of people can stay up in the air!"



Ah, I guess this passes for intellectual rigor in religious circles.   

Don't believe the religious superstitions?  Well who cares that it doesn't make a lick of sense, you don't understand quantum physics either so that just means you have to take the bible on faith.  Give me a freakin break. 

PS- Here's some help with how airplanes fly:  http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airflylvl3.htm  Happy to meet you at Hartsfield-Jackson to demonstrate this for you.  Let me know when you have a divine ascension you can demonstrate so we can call it even.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

JFS said:


> Ah, I guess this passes for intellectual rigor in religious circles.
> 
> Don't believe the religious superstitions?  Well who cares that it doesn't make a lick of sense, you don't understand quantum physics either so that just means you have to take the bible on faith.  Give me a freakin break.


The point was that one must first understand, before making claims on what they _think_. The logic in this post is pitiful at best.



> PS- Here's some help with how airplanes fly:  http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airflylvl3.htm  Happy to meet you at Hartsfield-Jackson to demonstrate this for you.  Let me know when you have a divine ascension you can demonstrate so we can call it even.


Nobody asked how airplanes fly.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

JFS said:


> He had a seat reserved next to this guy



Doushe bag point awarded!


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 9, 2011)

JFS said:


> Don't believe the religious superstitions?  Well who cares that it doesn't make a lick of sense, you don't understand quantum physics either so that just means you have to take the bible on faith.  Give me a freakin break.



And you do?  HA! Right, your real name is Sheldon?


----------



## JFS (Dec 9, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> The point was that one must first understand, before making claims on what they _think_.



Interjecting false equivalence doesn't advance the conversation. 



> Nobody asked how airplanes fly.



But they should have, because they obviously didn't understand how when they made their analogy.


----------



## JFS (Dec 9, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Doushe bag point awarded!



:nono: Double points awarded to people who claim Jesus physically ascended but can't say were he went.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 9, 2011)

"Nothing is real unless it is observed." 

Niels Bohr


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

JFS said:


> Interjecting false equivalence doesn't advance the conversation.


Thats the thing JFS, you claim the bible to be false, in which you have no idea if it really is, that doesn't mean anything. 





> But they should have, because they obviously didn't understand how when they made their analogy.


How to fly an aircraft wasn't the point of the analogy.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

JFS said:


> :nono: Double points awarded to people who claim Jesus physically ascended but can't say were he went.



He went to Heaven. I answered this question in post #78 and you answered it yourself in post #92 with your stupid picture that received deserved doushe bag points.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 9, 2011)

JFS said:


> ... you don't understand quantum physics either so that just means you have to take the bible on faith.  Give me a freakin break.
> 
> PS- Here's some help with how airplanes fly:  http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/airflylvl3.htm  Happy to meet you at Hartsfield-Jackson to demonstrate this for you.



Who said I don't understand quantum physics?

Oh, and jets... I know a little about those too.  This photo was me in an L-39; we were flying section setting up for a 3-ship dogfight.  Invitation to Hartsfield unnecessary.  I prefer to fly out of PDK.  Didn't expect that, did ya friend?  

Do you really believe Christians have to check intellect and rich life experience at the door?  Faith is simply the bridge from the certain to the unseen.  The more knowledge and wisdom you have, the less faith is actually required.  It's paradoxical.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 9, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> "Nothing is real unless it is observed."
> 
> Niels Bohr



I've been to South Beach, therefore...

"Not everything observed is real"  - VisionCasting


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> "Nothing is real unless it is observed."
> 
> Niels Bohr



The word observed is very subjective in that quote. You may take that quote and use it to say that God is not real, I on the other hand observe God everyday just by looking outside.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> "Not everything observed is real"  - VisionCasting


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 9, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> He went to Heaven. I answered this question in post #78 and you answered it yourself in post #92 with your stupid picture that received deserved doushe bag points.



Which was understood by jews to be some where up there beyond the clouds. Nobody knew back then what was really out beyond the clouds so the pearly gates was as good a guess as any other. Now we do know and the story of the ascension makes no sense in light of our current understanding. We've actually gone out where the people who wrote the bible expected heaven to be and it isn't there.

You guys will probably retort that heaven is in a different dimension that is spiritual and not physical. Fine if that is what you want to believe. But if that was the understanding of the biblical authors then the tower of Babel wouldn't have made any sense when God was dismayed that man was building a tower to heaven and said nothing they set out to do will be impossible for them before he intervened to stop them. And it would also mean that the ascension was pointless because Jesus wasn't going to a physical place.

At some point you have to ask why so many twists of the story and excuses are needed if it is all true.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 9, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> You guys will probably retort that heaven is in a different dimension that is spiritual and not physical. Fine if that is what you want to believe. But if that was the understanding of the biblical authors then the tower of Babel wouldn't have made any sense when God was dismayed that man was building a tower to heaven and said nothing they set out to do will be impossible for them before he intervened to stop them. And it would also mean that the ascension was pointless because Jesus wasn't going to a physical place.
> 
> At some point you have to ask why so many twists of the story and excuses are needed if it is all true.



Not me.  I won't retort as such.  Rather I will tell you that Revelation attempts to describe that which is indescribable.  Imagine jumping in a time machine, going back 2000 years, and asking someone to describe an aircraft carrier.  Can you imagine the description?  "It was a mighty floating city of lights.  Fiery beasts, with deafening roars, launching into the sky".  I imagine that was pretty much John's predicament.   Explaining something some magnificent mortal words fall short.

There are no twists to the whole of the Bible.  

OT:  God created everything.  We sinned and all fall short of His righteous standard.  There was a way to gain our right standing back in God's eyes (sacrificial system).  

NT:  Jesus came as a proxy (substitute).  All we need to do is exercise our God-given free will and accept Him and we are once again made 'whole' (righteous) in God's eyes.

Simple story.  No twists. 

Merry Christmas!  :decorate:


----------



## JFS (Dec 9, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Thats the thing JFS, you claim the bible to be false, in which you have no idea if it really is, that doesn't mean anything.



But that's the point, it's not falsifiable.  X happened because god did it, Y happens after you die.  Not at all the same as physics.   We can work with aerodynamics.  Everyone may not understand it themselves, but it is not an equivalent issue of faith in the same way belief in nontestable supernatural claims made in ancient stories is.




> How to fly an aircraft wasn't the point of the analogy



That's why my comment was only a PS.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Dec 9, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Does the bible indicate how far "beyond the clouds" heaven is? Does Paul or Peter or Luke indicate that they thought heaven was 3.2 miles beyond the clouds? Do you not think night time ever came and they could see "beyond the clouds"?
> 
> We only know whats beyond the clouds by what the huble can tell us.



WHAT? I've been above the clouds myself, actually... Plenty of people have been... People have also been outside of our atmosphere completely to see for themselves what's behind the clouds.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 9, 2011)

I have a headache and it's Friday!!! I got ducks to kill this weekend.

 Ya'll have a good weekend fellas


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 10, 2011)

I don't have faith in faith,I don't believe in belief. You can call me faithless but I still cling to hope and I believe in love, and that's faith enough for me.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 11, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> ...but I still cling to hope and I believe in love, and that's faith enough for me.



Cling to hope in what?


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 12, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Cling to hope in what?



hope and change ...?!?   

I was referring to the Merriam-Webster version not the biblical...You seem to think that every word used in the bible has maintained its biblical definition and many haven't, so you can't take everything us "pagan/infidels" say/type and apply your biblical dictionary to it and expect us to defend our words accordingly.


----------



## Four (Dec 12, 2011)

Time to lock / abandon this thread yet? When was the last post that was on topic?


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 12, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Which was understood by jews to be* some where up there beyond the clouds*. Nobody knew back then what was really out beyond the clouds so the pearly gates was as good a guess as any other. Now we do know and the story of the ascension makes no sense in light of our current understanding.


Again, it never says how far they thought heaven was beyond the clouds.




> We've actually gone out where the *people who wrote the bible expected heaven to be* and it isn't there.


Please quote where you got this information from.



> You guys will probably retort that heaven is in a different dimension that is spiritual and not physical. Fine if that is what you want to believe. But if that was the understanding of the biblical authors then the tower of Babel wouldn't have made any sense when God was dismayed that man was building a tower to heaven and said nothing they set out to do will be impossible for them before he intervened to stop them. And it would also mean that the ascension was pointless because Jesus wasn't going to a physical place.


How did the tower of Babel come into play in this, where some of the workers also authors?



> At some point you have to ask why so many twists of the story and excuses are needed if it is all true.


Nobody is twisting anything but you.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 12, 2011)

TripleXBullies said:


> WHAT? I've been above the clouds myself, actually... Plenty of people have been... People have also been outside of our atmosphere completely to see for themselves what's behind the clouds.



How far beyond the clouds was the point. Just saying "beyond the clouds" gives no indication how far or where that actually was.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 12, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> hope and change ...?!?
> 
> I was referring to the Merriam-Webster version not the biblical...You seem to think that every word used in the bible has maintained its biblical definition and many haven't, so you can't take everything us "pagan/infidels" say/type and apply your biblical dictionary to it and expect us to defend our words accordingly.



I don't really have any idea what exactly you are trying to say here?

We can use Websters then....

Definition of HOPE
1archaic : trust, reliance 
2a :* desire accompanied by expectation of or belief in fulfillment *<came in hopes of seeing you>; also : expectation of fulfillment or success <no hope of a cure> b : someone or something on which hopes are centered <our only hope for victory> c : *something hoped for *

So, in light of Websters dictionary, what do you "cling to hope for" or "in"?


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 12, 2011)

Four said:


> Time to lock / abandon this thread yet? When was the last post that was on topic?



This is the way most of the threads turn out.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 12, 2011)

Four said:


> Time to lock / abandon this thread yet? When was the last post that was on topic?



Come on!  I'm up to 119 replies already.  Let's let it go for at least 200. I'll be like those sill "driveler" threads.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 12, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Again, it never says how far they thought heaven was beyond the clouds.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





stringmusic said:


> How far beyond the clouds was the point. Just saying "beyond the clouds" gives no indication how far or where that actually was.



I promise I'm not being condescending when I say this but, are you listening to yourself?   I read this and I sit slack jawed to think that a full grown man would believe that a person got lifted up off the ground and pulled into space.  

Does it seem weird maybe even ridiculous to you when Muslims tell you about Mohammed flying into the clouds on a fiery chariot?


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 12, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> I promise I'm not being condescending when I say this but, are you listening to yourself?


I try not to, I get confused and usually smell smoke.



> I read this and I sit slack jawed to think that a full grown man would believe that a person got lifted up off the ground and pulled into* space*.


Heaven, Heaven, Jesus ascended into Heaven, _not_ space, Heaven. Why do you and Atlas want to put Him in space so bad?




> Does it seem weird maybe even ridiculous to you when Muslims tell you about Mohammed flying into the clouds on a fiery chariot?


I know right, Mohammed flying into the clouds on a fiery chariot, those crazy Muslims......


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 12, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Does it seem weird maybe even ridiculous to you when Muslims tell you about Mohammed flying into the clouds on a fiery chariot?



The stories_ have to be _taken by the whole, individualy yes, Jesus' ascension sounds crazy, but so does feeding thousands of people and healing the lame, blind and sick, walking on water, turning water into wine. I believe the bible to be true, I have faith in Jesus Christ. There is a lot more to the stories than "once upon a time a guy flew into heaven. The end".

From what I know about Islam, not so much...


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 12, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> I promise I'm not being condescending when I say this but, are you listening to yourself?   I read this and I sit slack jawed to think that a full grown man would believe that a person got lifted up off the ground and pulled into space.
> 
> Does it seem weird maybe even ridiculous to you when Muslims tell you about Mohammed flying into the clouds on a fiery chariot?



Ascension can also refer to raising to a higher level. Like "climbing the corporate ladder".  Your problem with that word may stem from being unintentionally influenced by romance era art.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 12, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> I try not to, I get confused and usually smell smoke.
> 
> 
> Heaven, Heaven, Jesus ascended into Heaven, _not_ space, Heaven. Why do you and Atlas want to put Him in space so bad?
> ...



You mean that after he flew through the cloud he might have de-materialized and proceeded on to some other dimension?



stringmusic said:


> The stories_ have to be _taken by the whole, individualy yes, Jesus' ascension sounds crazy, but so does feeding thousands of people and healing the lame, blind and sick, walking on water, turning water into wine. I believe the bible to be true, I have faith in Jesus Christ. There is a lot more to the stories than "once upon a time a guy flew into heaven. The end".
> 
> From what I know about Islam, not so much...



You're absolutely right.  The Bible is chock FULL of fantastic and unbelievable stories. All the more reason that it should be considered true?



VisionCasting said:


> Ascension can also refer to raising to a higher level. Like "climbing the corporate ladder".  Your problem with that word may stem from being unintentionally influenced by romance era art.



So it was a metaphor?  No one actually flew through the air up into the clouds?  Maybe you and String should get your stories straight as to what happened and then we can all discuss the credibility of the account.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 12, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Maybe you and String should get your stories straight as to what happened and then we can all discuss the credibility of the account.



Are you really interested in a theological debate on the geographic location on Heaven?  It'd be more prudent for you inquire about how to get there.  Just like that party for the popular kids in highschool, it doesn't matter where it is... if you weren't on the guest list.

That my friend is something String and I are completely aligned on; we know for certain how to get there!


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 12, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Are you really interested in a theological debate on the geographic location on Heaven?



I really, really am.



VisionCasting said:


> It'd be more prudent for you inquire about how to get there.  Just like that party for the popular kids in highschool, it doesn't matter where it is... if you weren't on the guest list.



I was invited to those parties (I played football) but often didn't go because they were dumb.  I was and am more interested in hanging out with independent thinkers.



VisionCasting said:


> That my friend is something String and I are completely aligned on; we know for certain how to get there!



I bet you ain't.  I am certain that there is some point of contention about being saved that in the end you both will say "Well, I just don't see it that way" and you will agree to disagree.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 12, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> I really, really am.



OK, then let's start at the beginning.  I assert that Heaven is real.   Do you agree?  It's not reasonable to talk location if you don't agree on its existence.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> OK, then let's start at the beginning.  I assert that Heaven is real.   Do you agree?  It's not reasonable to talk location if you don't agree on its existence.



Typical...you must believe what I believe or we cannot have a discussion on who, what or where...

I'm out...


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> OK, then let's start at the beginning.  I assert that Heaven is real.   Do you agree?  It's not reasonable to talk location if you don't agree on its existence.



I cannot agree.  I have no frame of reference for Heaven nor have I any evidence to point to its existence.

I can discuss it as a hypothetical place.  Can you do that?


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 13, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> Typical...you must believe what I believe or we cannot have a discussion on who, what or where...



So you don't see the irrelevance of debating nuances when core issues are left unsettled?

I don't see how you could possibly wonder the location of something you don't think exists.  It's simply illogical.

And for the bizillionth time, I don't care what you believe.  I can't change it, and there is nothing in it for me by trying.  It's an exercise in futility.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 13, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> I can discuss it as a hypothetical place.  Can you do that?



No.  We would have no common basis.  It'd be an apples & snow tires conversation.  You have to have a common foundation for any conversation.


----------



## bullethead (Dec 13, 2011)

If someone wants to step up and prove heaven exists and where it is located then maybe some minds will be changed. Now if your going to quote Bible verses to "prove" anything then you must know beforehand that those verses didn't convince quite a few of us the first 300 times we've read them and saying them again now isn't going to sway anyone. Somehow prove it is real and then we can talk about this real place.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 13, 2011)

bullethead said:


> If someone wants to step up and prove heaven exists and where it is located then maybe some minds will be changed. Now if your going to quote Bible verses to "prove" anything then you must know beforehand that those verses didn't convince quite a few of us the first 300 times we've read them and saying them again now isn't going to sway anyone. Somehow prove it is real and then we can talk about this real place.



Nothing can be proved.  You can only show evidence to support a conclusion.

Prove to me that you drove to work this morning.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> No.  We would have no common basis.  It'd be an apples & snow tires conversation.  You have to have a common foundation for any conversation.



We can discuss lots of things that are hypothetical like mathematical theories.  Fort the sake of discussion I will assume that Heaven is real.  So where is it, what's it like and how do you know?



VisionCasting said:


> Nothing can be proved.  You can only show evidence to support a conclusion.
> 
> Prove to me that you drove to work this morning.



Nothing can be proved.........


----------



## TheBishop (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Nothing can be proved.  You can only show evidence to support a conclusion.
> 
> Prove to me that you drove to work this morning.



I can prove that if you shoot your computer with 00 buck that you no longer be able to post comments like that with that computer.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> So you don't see the irrelevance of debating nuances when core issues are left unsettled?
> 
> I don't see how you could possibly wonder the location of something you don't think exists.  It's simply illogical.
> 
> And for the bizillionth time, I don't care what you believe.  I can't change it, and there is nothing in it for me by trying.  It's an exercise in futility.



No, illogical is believing in an invisible being who controls everything that happens made everything that is and knows everything that will be and lives in a place that you can not prove exists.

And for the quadzilionth time, you must care what I believe or you wouldn't spend so much time trying to show that what i believe  is not what you believe therefore it is wrong.

Now, im off to meet the wizard...


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 13, 2011)

TheBishop said:


> I can prove that if you shoot your computer with 00 buck that you no longer be able to post comments like that with that computer.



Challenge accepted.  Prove it.  Just use your computer.


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 13, 2011)

hunter rich said:


> No, illogical is believing in an invisible being who controls everything that happens made everything that is and knows everything that will be and lives in a place that you can not prove exists.
> 
> And for the quadzilionth time, you must care what I believe or you wouldn't spend so much time trying to show that what i believe  is not what you believe therefore it is wrong.



Why do you seem so irritated in your post? VC simply stated it is illogical to have a conversation about where heaven is when one of the people in the conversation doesn't believe heaven is even a place.

Then, for some reason, you go on a rant about why it is illogical to believe in God? That wasn't even part of that particular conversation. If you're mad a christians so be it, we are in this forum to have discussions about theology, join in when you would like.



> Now, im off to meet the wizard...


wooooo, so close to a doushe bag point, but you can slide cause you haven't posted in here much. For future reference, those stupid comments are not needed to have a discussion.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 13, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Why do you seem so irritated in your post? VC simply stated it is illogical to have a conversation about where heaven is when one of the people in the conversation doesn't believe heaven is even a place.
> 
> Then, for some reason, you go on a rant about why it is illogical to believe in God? That wasn't even part of that particular conversation. If you're mad a christians so be it, we are in this forum to have discussions about theology, join in when you would like.



He despises the messenger because he hates the message.  It's OK.  That doesn't make the message wrong.  His visceral reaction is a 'tell'...  I wonder what the root hurt tracks back to?


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> He despises the messenger because he hates the message.  It's OK.  That doesn't make the message wrong.  His visceral reaction is a 'tell'... * I wonder what the root hurt tracks back to?*



There's no telling, my brother is an atheist because his best friend lost his mom from a brain tumor when they were young and they went to church "every time the doors were open".

Maybe he will tell us.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 13, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Maybe he will tell us.



He probably used to pray for Scott Norwood.  "Wide right!  Wide right!"


----------



## stringmusic (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> He probably used to pray for Scott Norwood.  "Wide right!  Wide right!"





Hopefully he can laugh at that, cause that's just funny.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> He probably used to pray for Scott Norwood.  "Wide right!  Wide right!"





stringmusic said:


> Hopefully he can laugh at that, cause that's just funny.



i used to pray to God and I used to rub a rabbit's foot, then I realized that neither of them held any real power.


----------



## hunter rich (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> He despises the messenger because he hates the message.  It's OK.  That doesn't make the message wrong.  His visceral reaction is a 'tell'...  I wonder what the root hurt tracks back to?



I don't _despise_ anyone on this forum. I dont _hate _the message, just dont believe it as you do.  My "visceral" reaction?  Really?  My root hurt? Now we are ventureing into psychology?

But losing that many superbowls can have an effect on an individuals psyche...(latin from the Greek psyche  soul but dont read to much into that)


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 13, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Again, it never says how far they thought heaven was beyond the clouds.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Genesis 11

4 They said, “Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.” 5 The LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6 The LORD said, “Behold, they are one people, and they all have [d]the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be [e]impossible for them.

This would indicate that God had reason to be concerned that people were going to build a tower to heaven.

How far up does that indicate to you heaven would have been? Farther than any modern man has gone?

It's clear that the bible indicates Jesus and Elijah were physically carried to heaven. So where is this physical place? Are we to believe they ascended up past the clouds and then suddenly zipped out through space beyond the known universe at some impossible speed?


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 13, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> Ascension can also refer to raising to a higher level. Like "climbing the corporate ladder".  Your problem with that word may stem from being unintentionally influenced by romance era art.



You know it's funny how christians love to tell others with certainty what the bible says and what it means until you start pinning them down on the details and then it suddenly becomes ambiguous.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 15, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> Genesis 11
> 
> 4 They said, “Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.” 5 The LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6 The LORD said, “Behold, they are one people, and they all have [d]the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be [e]impossible for them.
> 
> This would indicate that God had reason to be concerned that people were going to build a tower to heaven.



Well, there it is.  You are just plain wrong.  First, the concept being expressed in their desire to build a tower wasn't actually to reach heaven, but to rech 'unto' or 'toward' heaven.  (get a good concordance and do a little research in Hebrew)  Kind of like how contemporaries still build places of worship, set crosses, etc... on hills.  IMHO, God's omnipresence invalidates the need for altitude. But people still do it.  I can't explain why.  You'd have to ask them.

Now if you'd like to understand why God would have been concerned with the unified language of man, well my friend, that is WAY above my pay grade.  You'll have to ask Him yourself.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 15, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> You know it's funny how christians love to tell others with certainty what the bible says and what it means until you start pinning them down on the details and then it suddenly becomes ambiguous.



Vague unproductive generalization and poke at all Christians.  Well done.


----------



## JFS (Dec 15, 2011)

VisionCasting said:


> First, the concept being expressed in their desire to build a tower wasn't actually to reach heaven, but to rech 'unto' or 'toward' heaven.




I can't speak authoritatively about their intent, but you do know that "unto" means the same as "to"?

And don't plenty of translations say "to heaven" or that effect?


New International Version (©1984)
Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth."

English Standard Version (©2001)
Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.”

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
They said, "Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth."

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
And they said, Come, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

American King James Version
And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach to heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad on the face of the whole earth.

American Standard Version
And they said, Come, let us build us a city, and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And they said: Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven: and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands. 

English Revised Version
And they said, Go to, let us build us a city, and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

Webster's Bible Translation
And they said, come, let us build us a city, and a tower, whose top may reach to heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we should be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 15, 2011)

JFS said:


> I can't speak authoritatively about their intent, but you do know that "unto" means the same as "to"?
> 
> And don't plenty of translations say "to heaven" or that effect?



In the Bible the words “reached unto” are italicized because there was no exact literal translation.  Ask any linguist, languages and words themselves change over time (eg: look up the word "jerk", it's current meaning didn't come into place until the 20th C).  Thus "to" or "into" or "unto" was an interpretive assumption by the translators.

An equally acceptable in this context is the fact that instead of " reaching unto" it could be "likened unto."  This was forbidden in Ex 20:4 (The Law).

Is your issue with translations?  There are plenty of resources available about the translation process, which are the most literally accurate translations, etc...

This is off base from the OP.  

My original question still stands.  What is the object of your thanks?


----------



## Blueridge (Dec 15, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> i used to pray to God and I used to rub a rabbit's foot, then I realized that neither of them held any real power.



maybe your prayers were just   all about YOU


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 15, 2011)

Blueridge said:


> maybe your prayers were just   all about YOU




Yes.  I suppose when I prayed for a loved one to get better it's really all about me.


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 15, 2011)

It wasn't just that they were unified in language, it was what they were doing through their unification. Of course you are welcome to your self serving interpretation but that would be one heck of a coincidence that heaven was believed to be up there in the sky and yet God's concern with men building a tower to the heavens had nothing to do with that belief.

The original question remains, if heaven is a place that Jesus and Elijah physically went up into the sky to get to, then where is it?


----------



## Blueridge (Dec 15, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Yes.  I suppose when I prayed for a loved one to get better it's really all about me.




Did not mean that in a hateful way.  Sorry


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 15, 2011)

Blueridge said:


> Did not mean that in a hateful way.  Sorry



Peace.  I didn't take it that way.


----------



## VisionCasting (Dec 15, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Yes.  I suppose when I prayed for a loved one to get better it's really all about me.



The purpose of prayer is a whole other can of worms. Maybe I will start a Christmas thread to address that.  Kiddin.


----------



## ted_BSR (Dec 18, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> I promise I'm not being condescending when I say this but, are you listening to yourself?   I read this and I sit slack jawed to think that a full grown man would believe that a person got lifted up off the ground and pulled into space.
> 
> Does it seem weird maybe even ridiculous to you when Muslims tell you about Mohammed flying into the clouds on a fiery chariot?



When someone starts a sentence with the words above in red, prepare to recieve a condescending statement.

People usually warn you of their bad intentions beforehand.

Well done Ambush.


----------

