Afterlife: Is There Life After Death?

stormtruck2

Touch one of my Moto Guzzi's and you'll find out. :devil: :laugh:

Gallowmere1984

You think Jesus is megalomaniacal?

No, I said that many of the rules put forth in the Qu'ran are megalomaniacal. Have you read the Qu'ran, or just the Bible?

Keep in mind, I am coming from the position of someone who has studied most faiths in a very in depth manner. I don't just see one in particular as nutty. I see all of them as imbalanced.

Mr_Bad_Example

I think the real question is, "How do you log calories burned when crossing over into the afterlife?" Everything else is just details.

scs143

I think the real question is, "How do you log calories burned when crossing over into the afterlife?" Everything else is just details.

If we still have to log calories after crossing over- then that's not much of an afterlife and I am going to be pissed.

Mustang_Susie

You think Jesus is megalomaniacal?

No, I said that many of the rules put forth in the Qu'ran are megalomaniacal. Have you read the Qu'ran, or just the Bible?

Keep in mind, I am coming from the position of someone who has studied most faiths in a very in depth manner. I don't just see one in particular as nutty. I see all of them as imbalanced.

Well, based on your opinions, I will tell you why I disagree with your religious teaching/state worship hypothesis

If, and only if, we are teaching children strictly from the Bible without any man made religion tossed in then I believe this is the difference:

The God of the Holy Bible is loving, omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. His ultimate purpose for having a relationship with us is for our good. It's about love, not rules.

The "Kim's" are fallible human beings, with limited knowledge and power. Their quest is for more power, not to love the Korean people.

Simply put: to worship God is life to worship a "Kim" or any other man or religion that denies the power of God and the death and resurrection of His Son Jesus on the cross is death.

Gallowmere1984

The problem with that logic is that man penned the Bible. Even if the methods are to be believed, the earliest of the stories took place over thousands of years, during which time much of what happened was passed down orally before being put to paper. Please tell me how that isn't a recipe for human error to jump all into the mix. You tell one person something, and by the time it goes through five people, the story is totally different. Can you imagine how much it could change over the course of generations?

Do I believe that there is some historical accuracy to the Bible? Yes, but nowhere near enough for it to have the legions of followers that it does. In the end, just as you say, man is flawed, and these laws and stories have been passed down, translated, and re-translated by man.

Mustang_Susie

The problem with that logic is that man penned the Bible. Even if the methods are to be believed, the earliest of the stories took place over thousands of years, during which time much of what happened was passed down orally before being put to paper. Please tell me how that isn't a recipe for human error to jump all into the mix. You tell one person something, and by the time it goes through five people, the story is totally different. Can you imagine how much it could change over the course of generations?

Do I believe that there is some historical accuracy to the Bible? Yes, but nowhere near enough for it to have the legions of followers that it does. In the end, just as you say, man is flawed, and these laws and stories have been passed down, translated, and re-translated by man.

I believe the Word of God is inspired by the power of the Holy Spirit-the third person of the Trinity
I believe Jesus, second person of the Trinity, is the son of God and was born of the Virgin Mary from the line of David as was prophesied.
Genealogy can be proven
I believe his birth was foretold by Daniel and the prophet Isaiah, among other, hundreds of years before Jesus was born

Gallowmere1984

Now you're just dodging my questions and statements, not refuting them. As is the norm, this is a debate that can't have much of a winner because neither side can show proof or disproof of such claims...kinda like the whole Flying Spaghetti Monster joke.

peterdt

MFP monitors must be watching the super bowl. Sadly, my Niners lost.

tlrcwr

Aside from my personal faith, as a hospice nurse, I have been with people through their finals days, hours and minutes and have seen time and again people who appear to be met by someone/something familiar and comforting and guided into their next life.

I've witnessed this myself as well. Very comforting. I believe there's "afterlife" in a spiritual sense; not coming back as a bird, cat or a dog.

I really hope so. I've lost both my parents in the last year. I'd like to think that Dad got his wish in their souls reuniting after death. I keep waiting for a sign....but so far, nothing.

I don't believe in a god. I've always believed in living life fully here and now, helping others. So, no comfort in the thought of a "heaven".

Mustang_Susie

Now you're just dodging my questions and statements, not refuting them. As is the norm, this is a debate that can't have much of a winner because neither side can show proof or disproof of such claims...kinda like the whole Flying Spaghetti Monster joke.

Ah, but this discuss has caused me to evaluate my skill as an apologist and what I believe.
With that, I bid you adieu

Gallowmere1984

Now you're just dodging my questions and statements, not refuting them. As is the norm, this is a debate that can't have much of a winner because neither side can show proof or disproof of such claims...kinda like the whole Flying Spaghetti Monster joke.

Ah, but this discuss has caused me to evaluate my skill as an apologist and what I believe.
With that, I bid you adieu

Good evening.

JennyLisT

Also- if you need the threat of hell and some deity's judgment to not be an *kitten*, you're still an *kitten*.

SanteMulberry

It would help if you would define your idea of "religious teaching" and "'state worship'"

Religious teaching is pretty self-explanatory. Basically, teaching children to believe in something for which there is no verifiable proof, before they are of an age where their 'that doesn't make any sense' sensors have turned on in life. In all of my time, I have only ever seen ONE young child say something along the lines of 'you really believe that?' to a parent who explains God to them. Most children will just take whatever their parents say as being true, no matter how preposterous it is.

Since you are asking what state worship is, I assume you know very little, if anything about North Korea. The children there are essentially brought up viewing whichever Kim happens to be in charge as their 'Lord and savior', provider of all things, great protector, he who strikes fear into the American heathens, blah blah, etc. The humanitarian aid we send over to try to keep those people from starving? Yeah, the Kims play it off to the people as 'tribute from the white devil to avoid invoking the wrath of the Dear Leader'. This is something that has been going on for so long that there are very few North Koreans left who remember a time before this was the case. As such, it's not quite as old as Christianity, but other than that, it's pretty much the same thing.

In both cases, children are having something hammered into their head before they are old enough to understand that it just might not be based in any sort of fact at all.

What about all the people who have come to faith as adults?-- (as I did, by the way). I can assure you that I was not indoctrinated in any way.

SanteMulberry

The problem with that logic is that man penned the Bible. Even if the methods are to be believed, the earliest of the stories took place over thousands of years, during which time much of what happened was passed down orally before being put to paper. Please tell me how that isn't a recipe for human error to jump all into the mix. You tell one person something, and by the time it goes through five people, the story is totally different. Can you imagine how much it could change over the course of generations?

Do I believe that there is some historical accuracy to the Bible? Yes, but nowhere near enough for it to have the legions of followers that it does. In the end, just as you say, man is flawed, and these laws and stories have been passed down, translated, and re-translated by man.

You do not understand how the Bible was formulated, if you could say that. The events were written down as they occurred in the "history" section of the Old Testament. We have already dealt with the first five books of the Law. The writings of the Prophets were just that. The Torah was seen as sacred writings from the very beginning and as such, elaborate methods were used by the scribes, to assure that there would be no alteration of the text. Even Jesus testified to the veracity of Torah in John 10:35. It all comes down to whether you believe Him and His closest followers or not.

SanteMulberry

It's not just American children. It's children in many nations. What they are having pushed into their minds from a young age is a collection of stories that is little more than a poorly structured novel, in the case of the Holy Bible, a really strange and sometimes megalomaniacal set of rules in the case of the Qu'ran, etc.

In order to make it even easier to get it slipped in from a young age, we now have stuff like 'Baby's First Bible'. Really? They had to go there? Story wasn't inviting enough, so we needed to dress it up with cartoon likenesses of Noah, Moses, Jesus, and Mark?

Because this is presented as fact, and not story by their parents, they believe it. It is further solidified by family and church community over time. Again, no different than North Korea...well, except I haven't seen a 'Baby's Guide to the Dear Leader' yet.

If you had ever tried to teach young children, you would know that they don't accept faith concepts readily. Oh, they may say that they do, but real faith is a conviction of the heart and is not some mental assent to religious dogma. Jesus Himself said that few ever find real faith. It is by the drawing power of the Father toward the Son and confirmed by the Holy Spirit. The prophet, Jeremiah noted that it comes to those who "patiently wait" not to those who are carefully indoctrinated. You are quite wrong.

ninerbuff

Have you never heard of "Mitochondrial Eve"? You really shouldn't laugh at things you do not understand.

Lol, so using "science" you're going to claim that ancestry and evolution (which is mentioned as to how mitochondrial eve dna evolutionized from early ancestry and went through stages) is what the bible was talking about? But apparently evolution isn't what happened and that humans were "born" first? Laughable. You do understand that mtEve speaks of "a female" yet that other female peers were more than likely alive as well? It's a misconception blathered by christians who are reaching to try to counter scientific method.

It was Moses who penned the first five books of the Bible and he likely related it as it was told to him.

Exactly. "Told to him" doesn't mean truth. How do we know moses was sane? If any man today stated that a "burning firehydrant" spoke to them and told him to write laws that man needed to follow, he'd be thrown into a hospital for insanity.

By the way, Biblical archeology is uncovering fascinating evidence that the Exodus actually took place. Here is a link to an article that tells of the more recent discoveries (just one is the discovery of a large number of coral encrusted chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea). http://www.triumphpro.com/exodus.pdf

Lol when you site a source that also states headings like "Barack Obama's pact with the Devil" or "Will the Antichrist be born of a Harlot?" and refers to Obama's father as a seed of Satan, you gotta think that information here is totally biased. Nice try. What a dogmatic site.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

ninerbuff

Being "good" doesn't guarantee you'll make it into the gates of Heaven, rather it will still secure you a place in Hell.

Yep, helping unfortunate people, feeding the hungry, volunteering to help others who have gone through travesty (like Hurricane Katria) or providing for a child in the 3rd world country, means people like myself are going to hell because sky daddy (love this term) is too narcissistic. This god needs people to worship him or they all go to hell. Lol, sounds like Hitler.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

SanteMulberry

Lol when you site a source that also states headings like "Barack Obama's pact with the Devil" or "Will the Antichrist be born of a Harlot?" and refers to Obama's father as a seed of Satan, you gotta think that information here is totally biased. Nice try. What a dogmatic site.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Yes--it is a somewhat unfortunate site--just grabbed the first one I saw that looked at some of the archeological discoveries. I should have examined it more carefully--sorry. But that doesn't take away from the discoveries that the site reports on.

WendyTerry420

Afterlife: Is There Life After Death?

Let the debate begin

Yes

Timshel_

Yes

You talk too much.

SanteMulberry

But apparently evolution isn't what happened and that humans were "born" first? Laughable. You do understand that mtEve speaks of "a female" yet that other female peers were more than likely alive as well?

Then where are their offspring? How do you KNOW that it wasn't exactly how the Bible relates it? The answer is that you can't know. It is by faith that you accept the blatherings of scientists (who are notoriously fickle in their beliefs). Otherwise some in the physics establishment wouldn't be referring to others in the physics establishment as "Einsteinian Relativity Gangsters".


Exactly. "Told to him" doesn't mean truth. How do we know Moses was sane?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

If the man who spoke to a "burning fire hydrant" then parted the Red Sea, we likely would listen to him.

_the_feniks_

No. :noway:

Timshel_

No. :noway:

Quit monopolizing the conversation chatty cathy.

JOYOUS62

no one knows. no one living has been dead for more than a few minutes and the brain does things just before the body dies to make the mind hallucinate, so no one living knows whether there is life after death.

not strictly true, I work in the hospital and on 2 occasions have had patients who had out of hospital arrests brought back, one after 48 mins and the other 20 mins, mind you they have been left with serious brain damage and will never be able to tell us if they encountered an afterlife in the time they were "dead"

I myself believe that once we are dead, thats it, end of

thecpommander

"...You are not going to tell me that Albert Einstein was a theist now are you? Because I can assure you, he was not..."


Even though Einstein was officially "atheist" he would make frequent references to "God" (as many physicists do). Physicist, Roger Penrose, while also "officially" atheist, has said, "I think I would say that the universe has a purpose, it's not somehow just there by chance ... some people, I think, take the view that the universe is just there and it runs along – it's a bit like it just sort of computes, and we happen somehow by accident to find ourselves in this thing. But I don't think that's a very fruitful or helpful way of looking at the universe, I think that there is something much deeper about it." Geophysicist, John Baumgardner (of Los Alamos National Laboratory) is a Christian.

The brilliant geneticist, Francis Collins (past head of the Human Genome Project) outright says he is a Christian, as does the eminent geneticist, J.C. Sanford.

Emeritus Law Professor, (and past law clerk of Chief Justice Earl Warren of the U.S. Supreme Court) Phillip Johnson is a Christian.

And there are many, many more brilliant individuals too numerous to mention.

Einstein was indeed quite fond of quoting "God", but he did it only as a poetic metaphor.

Here is an English translation of the letter sent by Einstein to Eric B. Gutkind, on January 3, 1954, a year before Einstein passed away, sent as response to Gutkind's book “Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt”.

"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

---

And the ancient Greek Sophists were able to prove the most absurd propositions using formal logic. I am not "appealing to authority"---I am refuting your contention that only "dumb" people believe in an afterlife. You might want to be careful about who you are calling "dumb". I have often observed that those who throw that insult around loosely, frequently display their own ignorance.

You are making quite arbitrary assumptions (spicing it up with a Strawman).

Never did I state that ALL people who believe in an afterlife are stupid/dumb. I stated certain premises before I added any remarks (non of which included the "belief in an afterlife" btw).

Just because a person is a scientist does not make him/her intelligent nor does it make you any less intelligent if you are not a scientist. It is just a job.

Example: Francis Collins advocates the perspective that belief in Christianity can be reconciled with acceptance of evolution and science. Which more or less makes him an advocater of intelligent design. Which would make him intellectually dishonest and quite childish in his beliefs at that. Being a renown researcher/scientist does not change this.

To be successful does not automatically make you intelligent.

But maybe I should whip up a list of impressive anti-theists, just for the heck of it?

SanteMulberry

"...Just because a person is a scientist does not make him/her intelligent nor does it make you any less intelligent if you are not a scientist. It is just a job..."


Perhaps you would care to outline what, in your opinion, makes someone intelligent? If it is just that they agree with you, I think you have just defined intelligence as something only you possess--since everyone would be likely to disagree with you, at some point.


"...Example: Francis Collins advocates the perspective that belief in Christianity can be reconciled with acceptance of evolution and science. Which more or less makes him an advocater of intelligent design. Which would make him intellectually dishonest and quite childish in his beliefs at that. Being a renown researcher/scientist does not change this. To be successful does not automatically make you intelligent..."

So, let me see...you would then be suggesting that Francis Collins is, in your words, "dumb". Just because he disagrees with you on the matter of God? My, my...words fail.

"...But maybe I should whip up a list of impressive anti-theists, just for the heck of it?..."


Why would you do that? I can guarantee that I will not be impressed. In any case, it would be a waste of time as I have seen those types of lists before. God isn't impressed either--He said, through the Apostle Paul, "Claiming to be wise, they became utter fools instead."

ninerbuff

Yes--it is a somewhat unfortunate site--just grabbed the first one I saw that looked at some of the archeological discoveries. I should have examined it more carefully--sorry. But that doesn't take away from the discoveries that the site reports on.

Well yes it does. The site tries to manipulate "findings" to their advantage. That's not objective, that's subjective.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

ninerbuff

Then where are their offspring? How do you KNOW that it wasn't exactly how the Bible relates it? The answer is that you can't know. It is by faith that you accept the blatherings of scientists (who are notoriously fickle in their beliefs). Otherwise some in the physics establishment wouldn't be referring to others in the physics establishment as "Einsteinian Relativity Gangster."

Neanderthal and other human sub species died off for unknown reasons. We DO have evidence that these sub species lived (skulls, skeletons that aren't fully human). And it's not by "faith" that I believe in science. Science is based on fact and theories. You do know that gravity is a theory right?

If the man who spoke to a "burning fire hydrant" then parted the Red Sea, we likely would listen to him.

Lol, and we totally have proof that that really happened.:laugh: And somehow Moses and Noah both lived over 500 years each. Best stories ever.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

thecpommander

"...Just because a person is a scientist does not make him/her intelligent nor does it make you any less intelligent if you are not a scientist. It is just a job..."


Perhaps you would care to outline what, in your opinion, makes someone intelligent? If it is just that they agree with you, I think you have just defined intelligence as something only you possess--since everyone would be likely to disagree with you, at some point.


"...Example: Francis Collins advocates the perspective that belief in Christianity can be reconciled with acceptance of evolution and science. Which more or less makes him an advocater of intelligent design. Which would make him intellectually dishonest and quite childish in his beliefs at that. Being a renown researcher/scientist does not change this. To be successful does not automatically make you intelligent..."

So, let me see...you would then be suggesting that Francis Collins is, in your words, "dumb". Just because he disagrees with you on the matter of God? My, my...words fail.

Where are you getting all these strawmans from? Please read my post more carefully before you post a response.

I never called Francis Collins "Dumb". He is very unscientific in at least one of his conclusions about reality, this makes him intellectually dishonest. Which (as you should know) is the opposite of intellectual honesty:

"Intellectual honesty is characterized by an unbiased, honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways, including but not limited to:

* One's personal beliefs do not interfere with the pursuit of truth;
* Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such things may contradict one's hypothesis;
* Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another,"

or "a virtuous disposition to eschew deception when given an incentive for deception."

The reason why Intelligent design is viewed as a pseudoscience by the scientific community, because it lacks empirical support, offers no tenable hypotheses, and aims to describe natural history in terms of scientifically untestable supernatural causes.

Collins applies a Scientific method in his work, but chooses not to when it comes to his religious beliefs.

Perhaps you would care to outline what, in your opinion, makes someone intelligent? If it is just that they agree with you,

To be an intellectual, or to be intelligent is not something that easily defined (even if that would a pretty decent definition, lol)

But I would definitely say that my definition is characterized by:
* Applying scientific methods of thinking to reality (possessing a scientific mind-set)
* Intellectual honesty
* To be knowledgeable about and value epistemology (i.e. questioning what knowledge is, how it is acquired, and the possible extent a given subject or entity can be known).
* To value logic....

That's about it... I guess... There are of course a lot of different kinds of "intelligence", but that's just some of my thoughts/values on the subject.

"...But maybe I should whip up a list of impressive anti-theists, just for the heck of it?..."


Why would you do that? I can guarantee that I will not be impressed. In any case, it would be a waste of time as I have seen those types of lists before. God isn't impressed either--He said, through the Apostle Paul, "Claiming to be wise, they became utter fools instead."

I know very well that a person who would quote the bible in a discussion (trying to make a point?) would not be impressed by.... anything actually, anything remotely intelligent or relevant to the topic at hand. So I refer from doing so, because it would indeed be a waste of my time.