ot. real estate in heaven

User Forum Topic
Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 14, 2018 - 11:54am

thinking about moving to heaven. interested in info on best religions for their heaven types and locations, housing, etc. would like to be close to G- d, the beach.

ideally would like to be with other good families. no riff raff.

own planet preferred, per Mormon heaven, possibly. anyone know an agent on Kolob?

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainmen...

can someone recommend a broker for a good fixed rate eternal mortgage?

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 14, 2018 - 1:09pm.

Can I be your neighbor? I’m good family. No riff raff.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 14, 2018 - 1:37pm.

sure.

but maybe we should gentrify an up and coming heaven, maybe a growing cult? go in on a duplex together? might be better longterm. everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die. heaven real Estate investing is not for sissies

Submitted by harvey on March 14, 2018 - 1:37pm.

Give Leo a hug for me.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 14, 2018 - 5:06pm.

So this might sound a little odd but although I am a hardcore atheist, I listen to A LOT of Christian radio, always in my car, always when im riding to or from work. I LOVE CHRISTIAN RADIO. I love hearing preachers. not crappy local guys. bbig league heavy hitters.

It gets me fired up. I have listened to Christian radio for over ten years, and I recommend Christian radio to all young attorneys, and really anyone who does public speaking. I have my own style, but its based off many years of listening to these guys. I believe that the way they speak is the way to address groups of people in large groups when trying to persuade them. Intensity, absolute belief in your message, great pacing, soft, loud, stop go, building, letting go, ham it up, scream, cry, fall deathly silent, howl, it’s like a beautiful sexual episode.

Coincidentally (although with G-d there are no “coincidences” I was listening to jack Hibbs of calvarry chapel on the way home today. He’s far from my favorite, but, not terrible. Just not strong enough for me. He seems like he’s not 100% in, at least to me (he appears to be suffering from medical problems, per the internet).

Anyway, his program today on 88.1 was WHO TOLD YOU YOU’RE GOING TO HEAVEN? Man he had his people going. They loved him. Apparently, you need to know that lots of Christians who believe in G-d and do all the right things and pray constantly and read their bible and love Jesus ARE GOING TO HELL. The only way to get to heaven is to be BORN AGAIN. Huh. There you have it/ heaven has an HOA I guess, or at least some restrictive covenants. No one’s getting any real estate there unless BORN AGAIN. Not sure if shell companies can buy up lots thereon spec for others, or what the deal is re investment properties.

If you need to speak to a group, ALWAYS S put on Christian radio to get psyched up. Those guys KNOW how to SELL IT. I owe them a debt of gratitude, attitude and beatitude. [powerful groupings of 3 words repeated can work nice].

Submitted by zk on March 14, 2018 - 5:37pm.

I think a good name for a christian rock band would be "The Stepford Zombie Squirrels"

outtamojo wrote:
Stripped of its past programming is it even the same squirrel? It's probably some kind of stepford zombie squirrel too dumb to even wonder how it got there.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 14, 2018 - 11:02pm.

we can do better, publicity wise. maybe something antigay behavior. that's popular in Calvary chapel I think....what about

Homo Hellfire.
The Sodomites
jesus hates Sodomy.
HOMOSICK [I like this one)
the antihomos.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 15, 2018 - 2:17pm.

Scaredy, I really want to be your neighbor in heaven. Please introduce your estate broker to me. I think I’m intellectually in love with you.

When driving to and fro Vegas, I listen to Christian radio as well and I have thought about all the points you made. Of course, you put it more beautifully than I would because you are my intellectual superior.

Now, if the Christian messages were ads, the marketers would wonder why you haven’t bought their products or services. The messages are clearly reaching you but you have not been sold in 10 years of listening. They need to send periodic special coupons, money back warranty vouchers or something.

Also, clearly Christian media are effective and do get people fired up. But what would it take for you to buy it?

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 15, 2018 - 3:52pm.

Maybe heaven is just swamp land.

All the great cities in the world were swamps. Once enough people move in, the land becomes desirable.

Submitted by gzz on March 15, 2018 - 11:32pm.

You tell young lawyers to sound like radio preachers? Few problems with this advice:
1 Most young lawyers don't get to speak in court 2. Median age of a judge is about 70. You have to speak Loudly and Clearly. 3. If you start speaking quickly cause the Holy Spirit has got into you, the court reporter will tell you to slow down. 4. Majority of judges interrupt you before you get out two sentences.

Submitted by harvey on March 16, 2018 - 6:46am.

If you are still looking for a property, here are some Realtors® that can help:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y1xJAVZxXg

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 16, 2018 - 7:52am.

gzz wrote:
You tell young lawyers to sound like radio preachers? Few problems with this advice:
1 Most young lawyers don't get to speak in court 2. Median age of a judge is about 70. You have to speak Loudly and Clearly. 3. If you start speaking quickly cause the Holy Spirit has got into you, the court reporter will tell you to slow down. 4. Majority of judges interrupt you before you get out two sentences.

listen to Christian radio. absorb. adapt.
it's a perspective.

facts don't persuade.

feelings persuade.

"i've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel."
Maya Angelou

people look to how strongly you believe what you are saying. if you don't believe in it, no one will believe in you.

"the good lawyer is not the man who has an eye to every side and angle of contingency, and qualifies all his qualifications, but who throws himself on your part so heartily, that he can get you out of a scrape."

ralph Waldo emerson.

imagine this. Christian radio transcribed and read by your dullest college professor, the one that made your eyes Cross within 2 minutes, even when you really truly wanted to listen. .

same exact message.

no one believes. or even actually hears it, except the proverbial choir. it seems to invite more questions than it answers.

be more like jack hibbs in WHATEVER message you sell...not boring. what makes someone not boring in their persuasive pitch?

the style IMO needs to be this: the message feels urgent, of extreme importance and you believe this message with the core of your being.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 16, 2018 - 11:41am.

Scaredy, I think God can make you a very wealthy attorney. Listen to the prosperity gospel so you can buy your slice of heaven.

Are you following Michael Avenatti, Stormie Daniels’ attorney on TV? Avenatti is so much better than the other lawyers.

Submitted by njtosd on March 17, 2018 - 11:28am.

Nature has taken millions of years of experience and distilled it into our emotions/instincts. Any genes that made people stay around to pet the cute saber tooth tiger? Gone. Any genes that led you to hang around and ask an aggressor about the weight and/or density of his club (logically speaking, it could be styrofoam . . . )? Gone. Any genes that allowed you to leave your baby alone on the ground while you went to see your friend 3 caves down? Gone.

Has anyone ever used logic to decide who to be friends with? Logic is good for figuring out when our emotions are being used to trick us (i.e. in court when you show a video of the poor injured worker playing volleyball the previous weekend) but it is secondary. So, yes, appeal to the emotions first and then use logic as a secondary reinforcer.

I have always found this story of Elliott (a man who lost the ability to call on emotion when making decisions) to be fascinating: https://www.thecut.com/2016/06/how-only-...

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 18, 2018 - 2:23pm.

Too many emotions. Evolution has not kept up the technology.

Emotions don’t results in good outcomes. The Greek knew it and that’s why they values reason. You clearly see it in architecture. Houses that are well designed using reason actually result in better wellbeing and emotional contentment.

Isn’t the law about reason and intellect?

Submitted by flyer on March 18, 2018 - 6:04pm.

As has been discussed, the prosperity gospel is definitely big business but, according to the terms of most organized religions, you don't receive the benefits without complying with the terms, so, per that premise, taking advantage of the benefits may or may not work out work out for those who don't comply with the terms.

Personally, I find no reason or need to argue about it one way or the other--as none of us will really know until after we take that last breath--and, perhaps, not even then. In the meantime--enjoy!

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 19, 2018 - 7:06am.

flyer wrote:
As has been discussed, the prosperity gospel is definitely big business but, according to the terms of most organized religions, you don't receive the benefits without complying with the terms, so, per that premise, taking advantage of the benefits may or may not work out work out for those who don't comply with the terms.

Personally, I find no reason or need to argue about it one way or the other--as none of us will really know until after we take that last breath--and, perhaps, not even then. In the meantime--enjoy!

I don't know. it's pretty risky to not believe...

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]

Pascal's Wager was based on the idea of the Christian God, though similar arguments have occurred in other religious traditions. The original wager was set out in section 233 of Pascal's posthumously published Pensées ("Thoughts"). These previously unpublished notes were assembled to form an incomplete treatise on Christian apologetics.

Historically, Pascal's Wager was groundbreaking because it charted new territory in probability theory,[3] marked the first formal use of decision theory, and anticipated future philosophies such as existentialism, pragmatism

The Wager uses the following logic (excerpts from Pensées, part III, §233):

God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives.
A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
You must wager (it is not optional).
Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.
But some cannot believe. They should then 'at least learn your inability to believe...' and 'Endeavour then to convince' themselves."

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 19, 2018 - 7:08am.

the cosmic equivalent of BUY NOW OR BE SHUT OUT FOREVER

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 19, 2018 - 8:57am.

FlyerInHi wrote:
Too many emotions. Evolution has not kept up the technology.

Emotions don’t results in good outcomes. The Greek knew it and that’s why they values reason. You clearly see it in architecture. Houses that are well designed using reason actually result in better wellbeing and emotional contentment.

Isn’t the law about reason and intellect?


The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience... The law embodies the story of a nation's development through many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics.

Oliver Wendell holmes, 1880s.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 19, 2018 - 9:58am.

scaredyclassic wrote:

The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience... The law embodies the story of a nation's development through many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics.

Oliver Wendell holmes, 1880s.

I know you will win every argument but I will try.

The development of the law over time is emotions. But should the application of the law not be rational?

An HOA has a problem with a guitar player who plays amplified "American" music for all to hear for hours. Many residents love it. What if someone else played the Muslim call to prayers everyday? Are those not noises all the same which should be punished all the same? I don't think any intelligent person would advocate for capricious and arbitrary application of the rules.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 19, 2018 - 11:18am.

when they can program a computer to logically analyze whether a given set of facts contains "reasonable doubt", let me know.

the boundaries are constrained by laws, but within the boundaries, emotions rule.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 19, 2018 - 12:32pm.

scaredyclassic wrote:

the boundaries are constrained by laws, but within the boundaries, emotions rule.

That’s why Brock Turner, the Stanford rapist got no jail time.

There is some application of AI to the law.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.technol...

BTW, I think artificial intelligence has a great future. Good investment opportunities.

Submitted by flyer on March 20, 2018 - 12:43am.

scaredyclassic wrote:
flyer wrote:
As has been discussed, the prosperity gospel is definitely big business but, according to the terms of most organized religions, you don't receive the benefits without complying with the terms, so, per that premise, taking advantage of the benefits may or may not work out work out for those who don't comply with the terms.

Personally, I find no reason or need to argue about it one way or the other--as none of us will really know until after we take that last breath--and, perhaps, not even then. In the meantime--enjoy!

I don't know. it's pretty risky to not believe...

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]

Pascal's Wager was based on the idea of the Christian God, though similar arguments have occurred in other religious traditions. The original wager was set out in section 233 of Pascal's posthumously published Pensées ("Thoughts"). These previously unpublished notes were assembled to form an incomplete treatise on Christian apologetics.

Historically, Pascal's Wager was groundbreaking because it charted new territory in probability theory,[3] marked the first formal use of decision theory, and anticipated future philosophies such as existentialism, pragmatism

The Wager uses the following logic (excerpts from Pensées, part III, §233):

God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives.
A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
You must wager (it is not optional).
Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.
But some cannot believe. They should then 'at least learn your inability to believe...' and 'Endeavour then to convince' themselves."

Great quote, and no worries, scaredy. We're believers, but we just don't find the need to debate our beliefs publicly. Interestingly, from this discussion--it's clear there are many viewpoints on this topic--even some that appear to be argued from conflicting perspectives.
(Not really clear as to how one can be an atheist and a believer.)

Conflicting perspectives seem quite common though, since, from my experience, it appears most Christians don't believe Catholics have the answer to eternal life and vice versa etc., etc.--but my previous point was that the big business of the prosperity gospel that has been discussed, may present a false sense of entitlement to the benefits of a belief--without having to comply with the terms of that belief. That's a nice selling point--but, as you mentioned would be considered "risky" from the viewpoint of those who believe the terms precede the benefits.
In the meantime, we're loving this life, and wish the same to everyone.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 20, 2018 - 11:18am.

flyer wrote:
scaredyclassic wrote:
flyer wrote:
As has been discussed, the prosperity gospel is definitely big business but, according to the terms of most organized religions, you don't receive the benefits without complying with the terms, so, per that premise, taking advantage of the benefits may or may not work out work out for those who don't comply with the terms.

Personally, I find no reason or need to argue about it one way or the other--as none of us will really know until after we take that last breath--and, perhaps, not even then. In the meantime--enjoy!

I don't know. it's pretty risky to not believe...

"Pascal's Wager is an argument in philosophy presented by the seventeenth-century French philosopher, mathematician and physicist Blaise Pascal (1623–62).[1] It posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or does not.

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas they stand to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).[2]

Pascal's Wager was based on the idea of the Christian God, though similar arguments have occurred in other religious traditions. The original wager was set out in section 233 of Pascal's posthumously published Pensées ("Thoughts"). These previously unpublished notes were assembled to form an incomplete treatise on Christian apologetics.

Historically, Pascal's Wager was groundbreaking because it charted new territory in probability theory,[3] marked the first formal use of decision theory, and anticipated future philosophies such as existentialism, pragmatism

The Wager uses the following logic (excerpts from Pensées, part III, §233):

God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives.
A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
You must wager (it is not optional).
Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.
But some cannot believe. They should then 'at least learn your inability to believe...' and 'Endeavour then to convince' themselves."

Great quote, and no worries, scaredy. We're believers, but we just don't find the need to debate our beliefs publicly. Interestingly, from this discussion--it's clear there are many viewpoints on this topic--even some that appear to be argued from conflicting perspectives.
(Not really clear as to how one can be an atheist and a believer.)

Conflicting perspectives seem quite common though, since, from my experience, it appears most Christians don't believe Catholics have the answer to eternal life and vice versa etc., etc.--but my previous point was that the big business of the prosperity gospel that has been discussed, may present a false sense of entitlement to the benefits of a belief--without having to comply with the terms of that belief. That's a nice selling point--but, as you mentioned would be considered "risky" from the viewpoint of those who believe the terms precede the benefits.
In the meantime, we're loving this life, and wish the same to everyone.

.

re: conflicting opinions...

"we all nod our heads in agreement when we hear the phrase, “Two Jews, three opinions.” We similarly chuckle when we hear the anecdote about the Jew who was discovered after years of living alone on a desert island. His rescuers noticed that he had built two huts aside from the one he lived in. He told the puzzled people who saved him that they were shuls, or synagogues. When asked why he needed two shuls, he retorted, “One is the one in which I pray, and the other is the one into which I would never set foot.”

We have no trouble believing that Jews tend to be contentious and have to express their disagreements with others, even when stranded alone on a desert island. "

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 20, 2018 - 5:51pm.

flyer wrote:
As has been discussed, the prosperity gospel is definitely big business but, according to the terms of most organized religions, you don't receive the benefits without complying with the terms, so, per that premise, taking advantage of the benefits may or may not work out work out for those who don't comply with the terms.

If God bestows earthly benefits/prosperity before full compliance then she's a pretty gullible dealmaker.

There should be reincarnation for the prosperity gospel to make sense. But reincarnation is not part of Christianity.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 20, 2018 - 8:55pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:
flyer wrote:
As has been discussed, the prosperity gospel is definitely big business but, according to the terms of most organized religions, you don't receive the benefits without complying with the terms, so, per that premise, taking advantage of the benefits may or may not work out work out for those who don't comply with the terms.

If God bestows earthly benefits/prosperity before full compliance then she's a pretty gullible dealmaker.

There should be reincarnation for the prosperity gospel to make sense. But reincarnation is not part of Christianity.

i think you misunderstand prosperity gospel. the wealth you have is a sign in itself that G-d loves you and is pleased with you. the more money you have, the more G-d thinks of you. Wealth is a tangible marker that you are on the right path, not a reward.

So, for instance Donald trump goes to his pastor, a prosperity Gospel huckster, and Donald is assured that G-d is pleased with him because the proof is clearly in the evidence; he's rich.

G-d wouldnt give trump all this money if he weren't an awesome individual. And it's not that far from mainstream Christianity; prayers get answered, blessings on the faithful, etc. Donld of course enjoys this cynical take on Christiantiy because it affirms him and because, of course, he believes in absolutely nothing but money, and prosperity gospel's extreme take on Christianity allows him to snicker to himself that of course everyone is as full of crap as he isand that at the end of the day, this blessed are the poor and help the downtrodden crap is just a bunch of malarkey, and that rich people in fact are the preferred of G-d.

of course, the notion that G-d intentionaly gives specific blessings to specific people based on merit in the form of cash prizes is just a concrete example of the Power of Prayer, a nice sentiment, taken to an extreme view, and it sounds crazy, but then again, all religious doctrine, from the outside, sound like the ramblings of an insane person.

as the old atheist says:

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
...Stephen F Roberts

or, as ricky gervais out it:

"I don't understand how you don't believe in God" < Well, you know how you don't believe in Zeus? Like that.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 20, 2018 - 8:57pm.

christian money talks, bullshit atheists walk...

Slideshow
That the prosperity gospel has a hold on a segment of American culture is not disputable. Time quotes its own poll numbers:

17 percent of Christians surveyed said they considered themselves part of such a movement, while a full 61 percent believed that God wants people to be prosperous. And 31 percent—a far higher percentage than there are Pentecostals in America—agreed that if you give your money to God, God will bless you with more money. … Of the four biggest megachurches in the country, three—Joel Osteen's Lakewood in Houston; T.D. Jakes' Potter's House in south Dallas; and Creflo Dollar's World Changers near Atlanta—are Prosperity or Prosperity Lite pulpits.
For Osteen, Prosperity Gospel isn't a pejorative term:

"Does God want us to be rich?" he asks. "When I hear that word rich, I think people say, 'Well, he's preaching that everybody's going to be a millionaire.' I don't think that's it." Rather, he explains, "I preach that anybody can improve their lives. I think God wants us to be prosperous. I think he wants us to be happy. To me, you need to have money to pay your bills. I think God wants us to send our kids to college. I think he wants us to be a blessing to other people. But I don't think I'd say God wants us to be rich. It's all relative, isn't it?"

Submitted by njtosd on March 21, 2018 - 9:27am.

scaredyclassic wrote:

i think you misunderstand prosperity gospel. the wealth you have is a sign in itself that G-d loves you and is pleased with you. the more money you have, the more G-d thinks of you. Wealth is a tangible marker that you are on the right path, not a reward.

So, for instance Donald trump goes to his pastor, a prosperity Gospel huckster, and Donald is assured that G-d is pleased with him because the proof is clearly in the evidence; he's rich.

.

I think that is the draw. People want to know if they are saved. They want to know how many points they got on the test and whether the grade in this class is going to be curved and whether there is any opportunity for extra credit. They want to know whether they are getting into medical school. They want to know if they are working hard enough or whether there is still more to do. Its a way to assuage anxiety without making you drunk or fat or high.

So what about Barron Trump? That's where predestination comes in I think. I find predestination to be a fascinating concept (due in part to what I believe is its somewhat primitive attempt to account for some getting better genes than others). I thought predestination was basically a creation of the Puritans (now Presbyterians) because it appealed to the proto prosperity gospel types. They always have the nicest churches (like the one in Chicago with Tiffany stained glass). But after just doing a bit of reading I found that it appears to have also been an issue raised in rabbinic literature (according to Wikipedia). This quote from Wikipedia made me chuckle: "However, many Chabad (Lubavitch) Jews attempt to hold both views." i.e. that there is both free will and predestination. I guess your story about "2 Jews, 3 opinions" holds water.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on March 21, 2018 - 7:39pm.

right. plus, usually, when we love people, like they say He loves us, one sign of affection is GIFTIES!!!

Submitted by FlyerInHi on March 22, 2018 - 11:40am.

What about poor Christians? God must be mad at them. They should bitch at God if they have grievances.

Submitted by svelte on March 23, 2018 - 11:24am.

If I were to try and manipulate people, what would be the most efficient way to do it?

Tell them that there is an all-powerful being that will reward them for worshipping him and doing as he states. Tell them that if they didn't believe and do as he states, they will be forever punished. And tell them there is no way to prove the existence of the all-powerful being until after they die, a time when they obviously can't report back to the living.

That's the ticket. The perfect manipulation machine.

Now all I have to do is have them interpret the all-powerful being's "words" to fit my view of the world and I'm all set.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.