You can have a partner in Heaven-and Have Sex there!! !

Page 4 of 6 [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

03 May 2010, 5:46 am

Aimless wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Dilbert wrote:
Existence of something can and must be proven. If it can't be, it doesn't exist by default.


would beg to differ. the mere fact that something has not yet been proven doesn't mean that it will remain unproven for all time. what the smartset thinks it "knows" is but a tiny fraction of what remains which is unknown.


Yes, for example,did microbes exist before the invention of the microscope?


They did. Think of all the plagues that vexed mankind before lenses were invented. And the sun had more than six planets before lenses were invented.

ruveyn



Aimless
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Apr 2009
Age: 66
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,187

03 May 2010, 11:04 am

ruveyn wrote:
Aimless wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Dilbert wrote:
Existence of something can and must be proven. If it can't be, it doesn't exist by default.


would beg to differ. the mere fact that something has not yet been proven doesn't mean that it will remain unproven for all time. what the smartset thinks it "knows" is but a tiny fraction of what remains which is unknown.


Yes, for example,did microbes exist before the invention of the microscope?


They did. Think of all the plagues that vexed mankind before lenses were invented. And the sun had more than six planets before lenses were invented.

ruveyn


I know, :) that was rhetorical.



sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 69
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

03 May 2010, 11:20 am

Heaven can wait topic

Always the skeptic, I will wait until more evidence, please.


_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo


Asmodeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520

03 May 2010, 11:44 am

Even if there is this heaven with sex in it, we can already create (horribly unhealthy) states of bliss that are as good as a continuous orgasm using neurostimulation or drugs down here, wouldn't actual eternal bliss kind of render sex obsolete?



boosterjones
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 269
Location: Liverpool

04 May 2010, 5:18 am

8O Thanks for all of your inteserting replys, however let me settle a few things for you all.

Firstly as for the story about Jesus and the Woman who married 7 times, that is something that I knew was going to come up sooner or later as I've come across this passage myself.

If you look at the passage carefully you'll find that it's really all about getting married rather than the state of being married. As I have said before for all of those that'll enter Heaven (and God has known this from the beinging of time, as He can look into the future so do not think that He just picks us willy nilly as some have been known to believe!) God will have picked out a soulmate for us all before we die then we will meet up with him/her in Heaven (that is if we have not met them on Earth.)

So really everyone who has lived or is living a good life is already married in the eyes of God!! ! It's just that not everyone has met there partners yet.

You see (and I don't mean to seem like a Bible basher) many marriages happen (but don't don't work) because we do not marry in Gods eyes but only in the eyes of Human law, and therefore not ment to be as they are not God made. Those kind of marriages aren't always wrong but are made in error as we can't know about everything.

Also as you are going to be living up there forever how can you be expected to be happy if you can't do something that you want to do but was not able to do for reasons beyond your control?

Also you must not forget the fact the Jesus rarely gave answers that were to the point so that is why he gave the answer that he did!

I hope this will settle your minds and hearts.

Goodbye Till next time.

P.S. I'm sorry but I can't coment much on other faths but often they do have similer beileves as this one. :D



phil777
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 May 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,825
Location: Montreal, Québec

04 May 2010, 6:14 pm

-insert incredulous comment here regarding sex in heaven-



greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

06 May 2010, 6:07 pm

Everyone in heaven will be asexual, yes, that is truely paradise as unbelievable that may sound.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


makuranososhi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,805
Location: Banned by Alex

06 May 2010, 6:21 pm

Dilbert wrote:
Existence of something can and must be proven. If it can't be, it doesn't exist by default.


Fallacious statement; absence of evidence does not correspond to evidence to absence. By that argument, much of modern science is left as a heap of assumptions as many accepted laws are based on inferred models and accepted equations and not direct proof.


M.


_________________
My thanks to all the wonderful members here; I will miss the opportunity to continue to learn and work with you.

For those who seek an alternative, it is coming.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!


Asmodeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520

07 May 2010, 5:59 am

makuranososhi wrote:
Dilbert wrote:
Existence of something can and must be proven. If it can't be, it doesn't exist by default.


Fallacious statement; absence of evidence does not correspond to evidence to absence. By that argument, much of modern science is left as a heap of assumptions as many accepted laws are based on inferred models and accepted equations and not direct proof.


M.


(That is science, the best choices made by the best evidence available)
Therefore heaven does not exist purely by unfalsifiability.
Like so (link)



makuranososhi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,805
Location: Banned by Alex

07 May 2010, 3:04 pm

Spoken as faith; science says that only based on available evidence, there is no basis for a belief in Heaven. It cannot exclude the possibility, one of those open sores that exists between the two. While I believe in science, I do not discount that things may exist that current science cannot account for, measure, or understand.


M.


_________________
My thanks to all the wonderful members here; I will miss the opportunity to continue to learn and work with you.

For those who seek an alternative, it is coming.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!


greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

07 May 2010, 3:13 pm

Asmodeus wrote:
(That is science, the best choices made by the best evidence available)
Therefore heaven does not exist purely by unfalsifiability.
Like so (link)

The Russel Teapot is NOT science.


Regarding the assertion: "Existence of something can and must be proven. If it can't be, it doesn't exist by default."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance#Overview wrote:
Argument from ignorance

Irving Copi writes that:

The argumentum ad ignorantiam [fallacy] is committed whenever it is argued that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proven false, or that it is false because it has not been proven true.[...] A qualification should be made at this point. In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence despite searching, as positive evidence towards its non-occurrence. (Copi 1953)

The two most common forms of the argument from ignorance, both fallacious, can be reduced to the following form:

* Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen (often opposite) hypothesis is therefore considered likely or proven.
* Something is currently unexplained, or insufficiently understood or explained, so it is not (or must not be) considered true, and the opposite position is considered likely.

To avoid this fallacy, the onus is on thorough investigation for information about the subject(s) being considered or hypothesized about.
[edit] Argument from personal incredulity

The common version of the argument from personal incredulity are:

* "I can't believe this is possible, so it can't be true." (The person is asserting that a proposition must be wrong because he or she is incapable of accepting that it may be true.)

This terminology was introduced by Richard Dawkins[3][4], who used it to describe the Argument from Design. He summarizes this argument thus:

I personally cannot imagine a natural sequence of events whereby X could have come about. Therefore, it must have come about by supernatural means.[5]


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 May 2010, 3:14 pm

makuranososhi wrote:

Fallacious statement; absence of evidence does not correspond to evidence to absence. By that argument, much of modern science is left as a heap of assumptions as many accepted laws are based on inferred models and accepted equations and not direct proof.


The underlying laws and hypotheses are testable to the extent that the consequence of these laws and hypotheses can be tested empirical. A scientific theory (to be scientific at all) must make predictions or offer explanations. Predictions can be tested by experiment and are potentially falsifiable. Explanations can be tested in so far as they lead to further observations which either are consistent with the underlying laws and hypotheses or they are not. Also scientific explanations lead to applications and technology.

In the strict sense of logic an experiment which corroberates a hypothesis does not prove the hypothesis. But a set of hypotheses which consistently lead to corroberated results can lead us to be comfortable with using these hypotheses to make further predictions and using them to produce applications.

So scientific theories cannot be proven true in the same way that mathematical theorems are proven. But they do lead us to some understanding of the world and give us tools with which to make further investigations.

All of the above is far more than philosophy and religion has provided for Mankind. Philosophy is mostly verbal muddle and the problems that philosophers have struggled with for thousands of years are generally not solved. Religion has provided little but ignorance, strife, division, war and death. If I were really religious I would say religion is the work of the Devil, the Enemy of Mankind.

ruveyn



makuranososhi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,805
Location: Banned by Alex

07 May 2010, 5:13 pm

makuranososhi wrote:
Spoken as faith; science says that only based on available evidence, there is no basis for a belief in Heaven. It cannot exclude the possibility, one of those open sores that exists between the two. While I believe in science, I do not discount that things may exist that current science cannot account for, measure, or understand.


Since it appears to have been missed the first time, although since you appear to have no value for the thinking which provides the framework under which you survive, then I doubt that the difference and nuance of such an approach will matter much either.


M.


_________________
My thanks to all the wonderful members here; I will miss the opportunity to continue to learn and work with you.

For those who seek an alternative, it is coming.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!


Asmodeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520

15 May 2010, 8:10 pm

greenblue wrote:
Asmodeus wrote:
(That is science, the best choices made by the best evidence available)
Therefore heaven does not exist purely by unfalsifiability.
Like so (link)

The Russel Teapot is NOT science.


Regarding the assertion: "Existence of something can and must be proven. If it can't be, it doesn't exist by default."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance#Overview wrote:
Argument from ignorance

Irving Copi writes that:

The argumentum ad ignorantiam [fallacy] is committed whenever it is argued that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proven false, or that it is false because it has not been proven true.[...] A qualification should be made at this point. In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence despite searching, as positive evidence towards its non-occurrence. (Copi 1953)

The two most common forms of the argument from ignorance, both fallacious, can be reduced to the following form:

* Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen (often opposite) hypothesis is therefore considered likely or proven.
* Something is currently unexplained, or insufficiently understood or explained, so it is not (or must not be) considered true, and the opposite position is considered likely.

To avoid this fallacy, the onus is on thorough investigation for information about the subject(s) being considered or hypothesized about.
[edit] Argument from personal incredulity

The common version of the argument from personal incredulity are:

* "I can't believe this is possible, so it can't be true." (The person is asserting that a proposition must be wrong because he or she is incapable of accepting that it may be true.)

This terminology was introduced by Richard Dawkins[3][4], who used it to describe the Argument from Design. He summarizes this argument thus:

I personally cannot imagine a natural sequence of events whereby X could have come about. Therefore, it must have come about by supernatural means.[5]


Agreed, Russell's teapot isn't science, I think if we remove "therefore" from my post it makes more sense.



just-me
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,178

21 May 2010, 10:19 pm

boosterjones wrote:
:D I have some great news for you all! (Provided you believe in it)

WE WILL ALL HAVE PARTNERS IN HEAVEN!! !

Yes I know that some of you gays and gals aren't fellow believers (but don't worry I have no issue with that) and that some of you may find that a little hard to take in. But it's true as it only makes sence?

Yes, Jesus did say that you can not get married in Heaven, but He did not say that you can't be married before you get there and be in a state of perfect marrage when you are up there!

You see I believe that as everyone has a soulmate and that as God can see all and know all, then don't you think that the following may be possible...

1, Two babies are born on Earth, at ruthly the same time.

2. They are perfectly suited to each other.

3. They never meet and get together while on Earth, but as lead good lives God knows this and desides to have them marry in his eyes (even though they don't know this yet)

4. They both die and go to Heaven. Then they meet and fall in Love!

Yes this may sound like an arranged marriage (because that's what it is) but the only reason why when Human Beings do this with there kids they are...

1. Unawhere of whether or not that there children are soulmates.

2. Most arranged marriages done with the perents best intersts (i.e. money wise) at heart anyway and so don't count in the eyes of God.

So for all of those who are lonely then don't fret you will meet him/her someday.

After all doesn't the Bible say that ''They will be no crying or suffering or pain'' in the next life? If this (or any other desre that you or I or anyone else may have) does not happen then I'll be dissaponited, and that would be a form of pain! Also in't God love? And if Heaven is a better place then one thing that'll happen is that we'll all get what we want!

Thank you for reading this and If anyone wish's to coment on this then feel free to do so.

Goodbye Till Next Time!


I believe it is possible. In my case i met my soul mate on earth. i was very young when i started talking to him in my mind (sort of a telepathic remote viewing communication). now i know you will all think i am crazy but i will tell you anyways because it is relivent to this topic. I never toled anyone the full story but it is so magical i just have too.

I had what my parents called an "imaginary friend". i went under a small tree and talked to him in my mind. i knew he was real ,he was just somewhere else and i was talking to him from a distance. i did not fully understand it but it did not seem strange to me. he was my best friend at the time.

i knew then i would meet someone when i was older. he would be everything i ever wanted. he would be romantic, kind ,daring, seductive , talkative , smart , sweet , quiet, solitary, obsessive, always put me first. i just knew him somehow. it was the boy i talked to telipathicly under the tree.

as the years when past i went though some very bad stuff. i probably would have killed myself at age 6 or 8 if i didn't know for curtain i would meet him one day.

and at age 18 i gave up hope i thought it must be in my head. but i said a prayer to bring him into my life. and then a few months later he appeared.

turns out he knew me too . we were and truly are soul mates. he was just like i pictured. and the events in our lives matched up perfectly. he remembers talking to me too. and the time line matches up.


God matched us up on earth. and i believe it is possible to be matched up after death as well.

(please no negative comments about this post. i dont want people asking for proof or anything like that. i just wanted to share the beautiful love story of just-you and just-me )



boosterjones
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 269
Location: Liverpool

24 May 2010, 4:29 am

The above post my just me, was in one word-lovely!

Yes it is true that God can match two people up in life and if this does not happen (for whatever reason) in death. (well it only makes scense doesn't it?)

Anyway as it stands I'm sure that a few weeks ago at long last I met my soulmate, ON EARTH!! !!

Her name will for reasons that I'm sure you'll all understand will have to reamain under wraps, but I can assure you that we get along very well. If you want to know more then feel free to check out my new post which I've entitled 'Esteban discovers Zia! Or How I met her'

Thank you all for taking part in this as it has meant a lot to me to be able to share my veiws and be of help to any of you who may feel that they will not meet anyone in this life.

Goodbye Till Next Time