Heaven cannot be timeless

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bahman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
seagal said:
Our souls go to heaven first, not our bodies. It’s only at the end of time that our bodies are reunited with our souls, and at that time there will be a new heaven on earth. Revelation 21:1-3, 22-23
Click to expand...
So we will have time and space at new Heaven?
 
Bahman said:
I didn’t say that I know more than God or God is wrong. All I said that you cannot go to Heaven when you have a physical body since Heaven is spiritual and there is no space there.

Resurrection! What do you think about it now?
Click to expand...
You never addressed the people we know were assumed bodily into heaven…SO you either have to deny those occurrences OR you then have to admit your entire logic of:
you cannot go to Heaven when you have a physical body
Click to expand...
is completely unsubstantiated thereby proving your overall conclusions are based mostly on fallacy.

So, Jesus, Mary, Elisha (anyone I might be missing)

Do you refute their assumption into heaven? or do you admit it?
 
LethalMouse said:
You never addressed the people we know were assumed bodily into heaven…SO you either have to deny those occurrences OR you then have to admit your entire logic of:
Click to expand...
I think it is clear that you cannot enter spiritual Heaven by a body.
LethalMouse said:
is completely unsubstantiated thereby proving your overall conclusions are based mostly on fallacy.
Click to expand...
We have material and spiritual worlds. Something physical cannot enter spiritual world since it occupy some room which exist not in spiritual world.
LethalMouse said:
So, Jesus, Mary, Elisha (anyone I might be missing)

Do you refute their assumption into heaven? or do you admit it?
Click to expand...
They couldn’t be in Heaven. Could they?
 
Bahman said:
I think it is clear that you cannot enter spiritual Heaven by a body.

We have material and spiritual worlds. Something physical cannot enter spiritual world since it occupy some room which exist not in spiritual world.

They couldn’t be in Heaven. Could they?
Click to expand...
Then if you straight 100% consider your understanding of heaven beyond that of the church and bible etc… I don’t see how anyone can help you in your searching 🤷

If you are trolling in general then cool, but seriously work on your angles better… be more awesome.

Oh that and you often toss out limited scientific understanding of concepts to which it feels like discussing with someone from the 1800s when you talk of physics…perhaps take some courses before attempted trolling o.O
 
Bahman said:
This is simple: The state of Heaven is subjected to change because individuals are going there. The timeless Heaven cannot change. Hence Heaven cannot be timeless.
Click to expand...
The question seems to be: Is heaven a state of reality in time or outside time? I don’t know. It could be either.

I do think that time is a dimension of reality that allows the same object to occupy two or more locations. If time did not exist and someone argued from imagination that if another dimension existed, then static 3D objects could become dynamic occupying more than one location, there would be arguments.

Heaven, I imagine, requires a new dimension in which 3D objects have the property of omnipresence. Such a state could exist in time or outside time. People would not “go” to heaven, as it is not a place but rather enter a new dimension of reality.
 
LethalMouse said:
Then if you straight 100% consider your understanding of heaven beyond that of the church and bible etc… I don’t see how anyone can help you in your searching 🤷
Click to expand...
So what is the position of church in this regards? Is Heaven spiritual?
LethalMouse said:
If you are trolling in general then cool, but seriously work on your angles better… be more awesome.
Click to expand...
I am not trolling.
LethalMouse said:
Oh that and you often toss out limited scientific understanding of concepts to which it feels like discussing with someone from the 1800s when you talk of physics…perhaps take some courses before attempted trolling o.O
Click to expand...
I am a physicist.
 
Bahman said:
I am a physicist.
Click to expand...
Really?

So you are a physicist who doesn’t know how time theories work? Throughout your multiple similar posts you have ignored or denied standing recognized sciences on numerous things. So I can imagine you are eithet not a physicist or a malintent one o.O
 
o_mlly said:
The question seems to be: Is heaven a state of reality in time or outside time? I don’t know. It could be either.
Click to expand...
But Heaven is spiritual. What is the difference between spiritual and material in your opinion?
o_mlly said:
I do think that time is a dimension of reality that allows the same object to occupy two or more locations. If time did not exist and someone argued from imagination that if another dimension existed, then static 3D objects could become dynamic occupying more than one location, there would be arguments.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand what you are saying here.
o_mlly said:
Heaven, I imagine, requires a new dimension in which 3D objects have the property of omnipresence. Such a state could exist in time or outside time. People would not “go” to heaven, as it is not a place but rather enter a new dimension of reality.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand how a 3D object could be omnipresence?
 
Bahman said:
I have problem with time.

None.
Click to expand...
So you are admitting that as a physicist you actively are not good with other physicist’s science of time?

Also, I went through much of your post on the forums during lunch here and noticed something…

You said you find error in our beliefs so you come to point then out

You say you are a non-believer

You say you have literally dealt with satan (making the above illogical)

You claim errors in theology based on your expertise that in this last post you just admitted is lacking in your own field…

So do you see the logical conundrum?

I would suggest you approach only one situation at a time instead of pulling your mind in 300 different directions…
 
LethalMouse said:
So you are admitting that as a physicist you actively are not good with other physicist’s science of time?

Also, I went through much of your post on the forums during lunch here and noticed something…

You said you find error in our beliefs so you come to point then out

You say you are a non-believer

You say you have literally dealt with satan (making the above illogical)

You claim errors in theology based on your expertise that in this last post you just admitted is lacking in your own field…

So do you see the logical conundrum?

I would suggest you approach only one situation at a time instead of pulling your mind in 300 different directions…
Click to expand...
I work on a few topics at a time. As much as I can handle.
 
I would also be curious what “physicist” means. Are we talking in college atm, associates degree? PHD? Actual Job doing/teaching in the field?
 
seagal said:
So you don’t necessarily agree with current scientific notions of time
Click to expand...
Forms and motions are principle things that we observe. We cannot observe time. Time just appears as a variable inside our equation of motion.
seagal said:
and you’re trying to undermine our Catholic understanding of eternity. Why should we come round to your view?
Click to expand...
I have no intention to undermine your belief. I just make argument in regards what I think it is true. Sometimes you provide a correct answer to my question and sometimes not. That is it.
 
Bahman said:
Forms and motions are principle things that we observe. We cannot observe time. Time just appears as a variable inside our equation of motion.
Click to expand...
I agree, we can’t observe time except as it relates to how things change. But as somebody once said (tongue in cheek), time is what keeps everything from happening at once. And Einstein used time as part of his relativity equation, so it must be something.
I have no intention to undermine your belief. I just make argument in regards what I think it is true. Sometimes you provide a correct answer to my question and sometimes not. That is it.
Click to expand...
Correct according to whom? You? Why should I go by your authority?
 
seagal said:
I agree, we can’t observe time except as it relates to how things change. But as somebody once said (tongue in cheek), time is what keeps everything from happening at once. And Einstein used time as part of his relativity equation, so it must be something.

Correct according to whom? You? Why should I go by your authority?
Click to expand...
With authority of Logic.
 
Bahman said:
With authority of Logic.
Click to expand...
It’s been pointed out many times that your own logic is not exactly impeccable. You draw conclusions that don’t follow from your premises, you make assumptions that are unwarranted.
 
Bahman said:
With authority of Logic.
Click to expand...
If 3 people hold 3 different views about what the logical truth is, how do we determine their validity?

In typical sense we default to the majority opinion in general but history shows that can often be quite wrong.

BUT in this sense you are largely in the mega minority among laymen and scientists alike as you deny the sciences of your peers and laymen. But then you hold that you have the correct logic and everyone else is wrong.

There are 2 possibilities in this regard:
  1. You are a super duper genius who has found the total truth of logic and are living before your time.
  2. You are in some cases just wrong and hardheaded
As I mentioned before popular opinion is not always a guaranteed correct way of thinking in any particular avenue, however the issue is less that you are reinventing the wheel as you may at times have a somewhat valid point, but you are having discussions with people based purely on your own sciences and you are largely unyielding to concession.

It has the feel as though you are saying something akin to thing:

Gravity does not exist, therefore someone explain how we stay on the ground.

Everyone says gravity…

therefore you say they are not answering your question because correct logic says gravity does not exist.

Then we get the feeling of :banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top