2007-12-12 06:32:42 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Valhalla.
2007-12-12 06:36:24 · answer #1 · answered by The Return Of Sexy Thor 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Heaven and Hell are Christian concepts of an afterlife, and are inseparable from their God, who is the final judge of where everyone ends up. Neither could exist without God, and Atheists don't believe in God, so the question is flawed.
It would be a more interesting question if you asked an Agnostic (one that believes that knowledge such as the existence of God is inherently unknowable).
If it was left to an option between Heaven and Hell, it's be a tough question; would they rather be stuck in the eternal pain of Hell, or be forever stuck with a God that could ultimately be summed up as a prankster who created a vacuum of knowledge to conceal his own existence and motives.
Most Agnostics don't believe that many of the major religions hold much water anyway, so it might be even more interesting to ask what general concept of an afterlife they would prefer. Many might say that a godless one would be preferable, such as perpetual reincarnation, an infinite loop of one's own life, or nothing at all.
2007-12-12 07:06:21 · answer #2 · answered by Yer Mom 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither.
Hell is torture through fire, and Heaven is torture through boredom. All the descriptions of heaven listed in the bible, are of mankind praising God for eternity, all other descriptions are made up from external sources.
I would rather just cease to exist all together. Eternal life, really isn't that appealing if you think about it. Eventually, all things would grow to be incredibly tiresome and meaningless.
The reason life is so incredible and valuable is because it ends, if it didn't, there would be no accomplishment of value at all.
I wonder how far into eternity it will take believers to realize that life without death is meaningless? 100, 1000, 1000000 years?
2007-12-12 06:41:25 · answer #3 · answered by ɹɐǝɟsuɐs Blessed Cheese Maker 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think there is an after life but I would like Hell. The people there would be a lot more fun.
If there were an angel that defied god I don't see him being a total **** where he would punish others for doing the same.
Just doesn't make sense.
2007-12-12 06:41:24 · answer #4 · answered by ItsMeTrev 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why is an afterlife limited to heaven and hell?
2007-12-12 06:35:45 · answer #5 · answered by nyx コト 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
I am an atheist, and am more inclined to believe in reincarnation, if I believed anything at all.
I do not believe that the man who spoke the words attributed to him in Matthew Chapter 5 would condemn me and my fellow atheists to burn in hell for all eternity for the heinous crime of being skeptical.
2007-12-12 06:37:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think inherent in the definition of hell is that it is someplace you won't be happy to be and vice versa for heaven. The answer to your question seems a bit obvious to me.
Read Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus, to get his take on the question.
2007-12-12 06:36:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Getting sent to a Heaven full of fundies would be Hell for me.
2007-12-12 06:37:01 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I'd prefer the lake of fire over heaven or hell. I'd want complete destruction rather than being subjected to eternal existence... no matter where that eternity was.
2007-12-12 06:36:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
I'd make up my own and go to the Grand Planet of the Divine Pink Bunny. The trees are made of cotton candy and the rivers flow with apple juice.
2007-12-12 06:37:01 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
it relatively is nicer to think of that once you die you pass someplace for eternal existence. If there have been surely any actual information for the existence of a god or heaven and hell, i could be plenty extra possibly to believe it.
2016-12-10 20:58:39 · answer #11 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋