Talk:Heaven/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 26 July 2023. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

"nothng was repeated"

"nothng was repeated" - well, technically, there should be a lot more repetition. It's from an old talking heads song, and goes something like:

"heaven - heaven is a place - a place where nothing - nothing ever happens"

But it's fine without the repeat. human^{be in} 16:03, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

mia culpa. you're welcome to insert the whole phrase. Thunderkatz 16:07, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Apathy

Heaven must induce a state of complete apathy in it's denizens, so that their perfect bliss isn't even slightly marred by knowledge of all the pain and suffering still going on in the material world. And Heaven forbid (Heh. Pun.) that any Good Christian has a loved one burning in Hell. Unless of course the people derive pleasure from watching the suffering of all their loved ones who weren't worthy, then it would be, well, Heaven. Daecon 01:03, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Don't be silly! The shining force of God's presence sandblasts out any worries about silly things like the "material world" and "loved ones". Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:07, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

In Soviet Heaven, YOU love GOD. Daecon 01:51, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Christians already love God! They don't need help from Soviet Heaven! : D Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:53, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

I thought they feared him because if they were bad then they'd get sent to the Naughty Step... of DOOM. Daecon 03:05, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Sinning is not asseptabull. --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 03:05, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Soviet society does not need God, comrade. It already is Heaven, and the People is God! --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 03:07, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Nichte (It's GERMAN. Ironic). The russian society worships it's greatest citizen!!!!! The mighty, Russian Soldier #3 from Indy 4!!!!--*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 03:11, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

If only. Heaven sandblasts your conscience and compassion so you actively take joy in the suffering of the damned. At least according to the Summa Theologica. Neonchameleon (talk) 00:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Cap war ;)

Some of these words are definitely not proper nouns. Heaven and hell aren't. God can be either - if we are referring to that Yahweh character, it's "God". If we are talking about dieties in general, or from a non-religious snarky point of view, they are gods. Christianity, of course, is a proper noun. ħuman 15:32, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

I'll admit that Heaven and Hell are up for debate. Personally, I'd capitalize because they're specific places, just as I'd capitalize Valinor. On the other hand, I see that my usual Bible in these matters, the Chicago Manual of Style, disagrees with me. God should be capped, because we are obviously talking about Yahwe: "...mindlessly worship the Christian god...". And Christ also refers to a specific person and should be capped as well. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:39, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Oh, yes, sorry I agree on Christ. Did I uncap one? Part of what comes into play here is the nature of this article - it's not exactly about Christian theology (where Heaven and Hell are specific places). Outside of the theological or believer realm they aren't. Hmmmm. Although, there is a difference between saying "this job is hell on my nerves" and "you're going to Hell for that!" that I can see makes sense. However, the "Christian god" usage is more like "Greek gods" in this article. ħuman 15:43, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Summa theologica

While it is one text, from the 1400's, asserting that what it says represents "traditional christianity" on matters of Heaven and Hell, overlooks the last 600 years of theology. --GodotCalibrated! let the voting begin! 00:06, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

The nature of Heaven

How does it accommodate all the people going there?

The key word appears to be #Boring#.

The heaven outlined in CS Lewis' The Last Battle seems to be somewhat better (exploring what is there etc)

A joke:

Angel takes newly deceased round heaven - here are the (whatever), there are the (another group); if you are interested in golf go this way ... and then they come to a high wall and the angel indicates they should be quiet. One of the newly deceased asks why.

'They are the (group) and they think only they go to heaven.' 82.44.143.26 (talk) 16:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Somewhen in the afterlife

Some Vikings from Valhalla decide to go a-roving (as they did in life) and find themselves in Christian heaven.

What happens next?

Summerland [1] seems better than conventional heaven. 82.44.143.26 (talk) 17:08, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

A full re-edit

What is this dreadful piece of crap you call an article? It reads more like something from Uncyclopedia, or Encyclopaedia Dramatica. Do you really think so little of religion that you slough it off rather than giving it a proper look?

My rework of this pathetic article was an attempt to help meet what this Wiki actually is supposed to be: rational. Lord knows you wouldn't want to be hypocrites, like I am. Snark's one thing; stupidity is another. And this article is all snark and absolutely lacking information.

Now, if you want to be "Snark Wiki", that's your prerogative. But if you want to be heard from all logical sides - including reasonable, logical Christians such as myself - you are either going to have to listen to my arguments and refute them, or explain statements such as:

"one can do nothing but constantly and mindlessly worship the Christian god."

What does this mean? What does "constantly and mindlessly" worshiping look like? And if Heaven doesn't really exist, would you care to provide good reason for why it does not? I gave many good reasons in the last edit. Indeed, I have tried to write from your perspective. But, unlike the previous editor, I have tried to do so while considering heaven a logical possibility, as any open-minded agnostic ought to - unless, of course, he knows God doesn't exist.

174.19.71.25 (talk) 19:37, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

The article was pretty bad. I've looked over your edit again, and realized that much of it was better than the original. I've incorporated (some of) your ideas here. What are your thoughts? FuzzyCatPotato of the Shimmery Okras (talk/stalk) 20:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, a thousand times over. The article is MUCH improved. I give you a great deal of credit for improving it. I hope you won't mind if I tweak it a bit here and there - nothing serious. You did a good job with the material you have. 174.19.71.25 (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Seems fine. If you wish to continue adding quality edits, please consider registering. FuzzyCatPotato of the Shimmery Okras (talk/stalk) 02:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, FCP. But, if it's all the same to you, I think I prefer to remain anonymous. 174.19.85.208 (talk) 07:10, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

An IP address is less anonymous than a name, unless you prefer pointlessly visiting all websites with a dynamic fake IP--Miekal 07:22, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, you already know all you need to know about me, then. 174.19.93.252 (talk) 23:27, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I have heated things up with an additional 666 characters! Bongolian (talk) 21:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Honestly this article shouldn't even exist! It's just for neckbeard atheist circlejerk at this point ^{— Unsigned, by: 74.218.222.70 / talk / contribs} on 24 April 2023, eight years after the last comment.

And instead of creating a new topic, you thought it was a better idea to respond to a very old post. You fundies have any proof that heaven exists, besides the usual "EBIL Ath31sts11!1!1!" bullshit? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 14:04, 24 April 2023 (UTC)