Afterlife: Is There Life After Death?
Replies
-
Well yes it does. The site tries to manipulate "findings" to their advantage. That's not objective, that's subjective.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.
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, that would be true if that is what he was doing, but I didn't see any evidence that he was doing that--seemed like just a straight report. But I have to admit that I just gave it a cursory examination after being dismayed by the sensationalistic way that the material was presented. There are a lot of better defenses of the veracity of Torah done by Israeli scholars. I have seen a number of them but did not have them at hand.0 -
"0
-
"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...."
You are a bit behind the times. It used to be thought that Neanderthal "died out"---now we know that some of Neanderthal's genes live on in modern humans. And your faith in science is actually stronger than the faith that many scientists have in science.0 -
But of course, otherwise how would spiritualists converse with the dead?
How would the afterlife have been suggested?
Why would anyone suggest ghost and haunting?
Why would we care about and talk to our passed relatives?0 -
"...and we totally have proof that that really happened.laugh And somehow Moses and Noah both lived over 500 years each. Best stories ever...."
Actually, that is incorrect. The Bible records that Moses died at 120 years. What is fascinating is that the death ages of the Patriarchs goes into sharp decline after the Flood. Why would the people have lied about that? Other pagan sources greatly exaggerated the ages of their "heros"---some pagan kings were said to have lived many thousands of years.0 -
Do not misunderstand where I am coming from. I am not among the 'there is no God, and I know this' people. I am among the 'you're gonna have to show me something better than a terribly documented and horribly flawed poetic novel to convince me' people.
I am generally forced to side with the atheists, because they aren't the ones making ludicrous claims and predicting the end of the world based on a book. That doesn't mean that I don't grasp the power that lack of understanding can have on people. Now, before you get butthurt over that, let me explain what I mean. I'll need to find the source, but basically there have been more than a couple of scientists who set out to prove that the beginning of all things started with whatever, yet ended up converting to Christianity or Judaism in the end. They explained this as something along the lines of it being mathematically improbable for the universe to begin without intelligent design, due to the extremely narrow parameters required for this to happen. Basically, random chance couldn't explain it.
However, I take this to mean that THEY couldn't explain it, and because man has no problem resorting to any explanation at all when there appears to be no explanation, they jumped on the Jesus train.0 -
" * 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."
1) The personal belief of atheistic scientists have made "naturalism" the ruling ethos of science. Scientists of the past were quite willing to put their faith in one basket and their pursuit of science in another---why confuse the two? In saying that there is no God, that in itself is a faith statement (as you must know). Has the atheist been everywhere in the universe to be able to make that statement? Saying "But there is no evidence..." is an "argument from silence".
2) No Christian scientist that I ever knew would ever do such a thing as "omitting relevant information" but there are often atheistic scientists who seem quite willing to do that these days it seems.
And just exactly why should Francis Collins apply the "scientific method" to his own personal beliefs? You're being rather judgmental, aren't you?0 -
"...There are of course a lot of different kinds of "intelligence", BUT THAT'S JUST SOME OF MY THOUGHTS/VALUES on the subject..."
But your thoughts and values are not everyone's thoughts and values. Your belief system should also be irrelevant to the pursuit of truth.0 -
I do not believe he should. In fact, I rather respect people who are able to separate the two. Not just scientists, but philosophers as well, most notably Soren Kierkegaard, who even acknowledged that for a thinking man to be a believer requires one leap of faith after another, which are prone to diminishing returns. So far as I know, Kierkegaard didn't quite live long enough for the returns to become so bad that he lost faith, but for many, that isn't the case.
Given my stance, it should come as no real shock that I have no problem with people who rely on faith for their beliefs. I do have a problem however, with people who can't separate faith from substantiated fact, and make it into positions of power. Israel, most Muslim countries, etc. are all good examples of this in action.0 -
Do not misunderstand where I am coming from. I am not among the 'there is no God, and I know this' people. I am among the 'you're gonna have to show me something better than a terribly documented and horribly flawed poetic novel to convince me' people.
I am generally forced to side with the atheists, because they aren't the ones making ludicrous claims and predicting the end of the world based on a book. That doesn't mean that I don't grasp the power that lack of understanding can have on people. Now, before you get butthurt over that, let me explain what I mean. I'll need to find the source, but basically there have been more than a couple of scientists who set out to prove that the beginning of all things started with whatever, yet ended up converting to Christianity or Judaism in the end. They explained this as something along the lines of it being mathematically improbable for the universe to begin without intelligent design, due to the extremely narrow parameters required for this to happen. Basically, random chance couldn't explain it.
However, I take this to mean that THEY couldn't explain it, and because man has no problem resorting to any explanation at all when there appears to be no explanation, they jumped on the Jesus train.
No one comes by faith in that way. Perhaps they could come to agnosticism that way (and there are many scientists who are agnostics--the "don't know and don't care" crowd). Real faith comes from accepting the truth and surrendering to it--wherever it leads. It is by a supernatural act of God. C.S. Lewis said that he was probably the most unhappy man on campus the night that he accepted Christ---so strong was his mind's resistance to the idea of faith.0 -
Right. Apparently I may on the ball more than you think.You are a bit behind the times. It used to be thought that Neanderthal "died out"---now we know that some of Neanderthal's genes live on in modern humans. And your faith in science is actually stronger than the faith that many scientists have in science.
http://www.pnas.org/content/109/35/13956
And it's not "faith" that I put into science as you put it. Faith doesn't need evidence. Science does. Again, if you haven't caught on, science is based on observation and critical thinking methods. It doesn't sound like you understand what science really is and as mentioned earlier, have a tendency to try to "strawman" arguments.
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 nutrition0 -
Lol, of course Pagans stated that...........their belief in mythological gods were.......well mythology. :laugh: Did you know that mythology used to be a religion?Actually, that is incorrect. The Bible records that Moses died at 120 years. What is fascinating is that the death ages of the Patriarchs goes into sharp decline after the Flood. Why would the people have lied about that? Other pagan sources greatly exaggerated the ages of their "heros"---some pagan kings were said to have lived many thousands of years.
And my bad on Moses. I should have said others like Adam, Methuselah, and Mahalalel. As for sharp decline after the flood, maybe people actually didn't buy into the stories of 900 year old people anymore since others were dying within say 40 years?:laugh:
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 nutrition0 -
Afterlife: Is There Life After Death?
Let the debate begin
I'm not sure.0 -
Faith comes from strong doctrines of religion. That's what faith is. Truth relies on accordance of FACT and REALITY. And testimonies aren't evidence. That's like someone saying Rasberry Keytones are why they lost weight.No one comes by faith in that way. Perhaps they could come to agnosticism that way (and there are many scientists who are agnostics--the "don't know and don't care" crowd). Real faith comes from accepting the truth and surrendering to it--wherever it leads. It is by a supernatural act of God. C.S. Lewis said that he was probably the most unhappy man on campus the night that he accepted Christ---so strong was his mind's resistance to the idea of faith.
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 nutrition0 -
" * 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."
1) The personal belief of atheistic scientists have made "naturalism" the ruling ethos of science. Scientists of the past were quite willing to put their faith in one basket and their pursuit of science in another---why confuse the two? In saying that there is no God, that in itself is a faith statement (as you must know). Has the atheist been everywhere in the universe to be able to make that statement? Saying "But there is no evidence..." is an "argument from silence".
2) No Christian scientist that I ever knew would ever do such a thing as "omitting relevant information" but there are often atheistic scientists who seem quite willing to do that these days it seems.
And just exactly why should Francis Collins apply the "scientific method" to his own personal beliefs? You're being rather judgmental, aren't you?
"...There are of course a lot of different kinds of "intelligence", BUT THAT'S JUST SOME OF MY THOUGHTS/VALUES on the subject..."
But your thoughts and values are not everyone's thoughts and values. Your belief system should also be irrelevant to the pursuit of truth.
I don't usually do ad hominem... But you Sir are impressive in a special sort of way. Everything you say is more or less a non sequitur to my arguments, and the context in which I present them.
This quote comes to mind:"Debating creationists on the topic of god is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."
It's 01:22 AM, and I am going to copulate with my beautiful girlfriend. Good night.0 -
no obviously not0
-
Life can be great and all....but i really hope there is more than school, work, and taxes. Fingers crossed.0
-
Do not misunderstand where I am coming from. I am not among the 'there is no God, and I know this' people. I am among the 'you're gonna have to show me something better than a terribly documented and horribly flawed poetic novel to convince me' people.
I am generally forced to side with the atheists, because they aren't the ones making ludicrous claims and predicting the end of the world based on a book. That doesn't mean that I don't grasp the power that lack of understanding can have on people. Now, before you get butthurt over that, let me explain what I mean. I'll need to find the source, but basically there have been more than a couple of scientists who set out to prove that the beginning of all things started with whatever, yet ended up converting to Christianity or Judaism in the end. They explained this as something along the lines of it being mathematically improbable for the universe to begin without intelligent design, due to the extremely narrow parameters required for this to happen. Basically, random chance couldn't explain it.
However, I take this to mean that THEY couldn't explain it, and because man has no problem resorting to any explanation at all when there appears to be no explanation, they jumped on the Jesus train.
I have these suggestions for you:
"The Case For Christ" and "God's Outrageous Claims" by Lee Strobel
He receieved a Master of Studies in Law Degree from Yale Law School and was an atheist.
He can provide you with a much more compelling argument than I ever could.0 -
I have these suggestions for you:
"The Case For Christ" and "God's Outrageous Claims" by Lee Strobel
He receieved a Master of Studies in Law Degree from Yale Law School and was an atheist.
He can provide you with a much more compelling argument than I ever could.
Thanks for these. I've added them to my 'to read' list. Headed to the bookstore tomorrow anyway, so I'll definitely see if I can find them. o/0 -
Right. Apparently I may on the ball more than you think.You are a bit behind the times. It used to be thought that Neanderthal "died out"---now we know that some of Neanderthal's genes live on in modern humans. And your faith in science is actually stronger than the faith that many scientists have in science.
http://www.pnas.org/content/109/35/13956
And it's not "faith" that I put into science as you put it. Faith doesn't need evidence. Science does. Again, if you haven't caught on, science is based on observation and critical thinking methods. It doesn't sound like you understand what science really is and as mentioned earlier, have a tendency to try to "strawman" arguments.
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
I don't think YOU understand the reality of what science is---perhaps it is because of what you have been told by those who idolize it. Science IS based on observation and critical thinking but it is not infallible and is notoriously fickle in its beliefs. There are many scientists (in my opinion, true scientists) who love the overturning of one of their pet theories because it sets them off in another even more exciting direction. No real scientist ever thinks of ANY bit of data as "proof" of anything. They love to be confounded and amazed by the complexity and unpredictability of our world and the heavens that surround us. A quote from Sir Francis Bacon (ca.1625) "A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion." In Bacon's day, science was known as "philosophy" (and actually up to recent times).0 -
Lol, of course Pagans stated that...........their belief in mythological gods were.......well mythology. :laugh: Did you know that mythology used to be a religion?Actually, that is incorrect. The Bible records that Moses died at 120 years. What is fascinating is that the death ages of the Patriarchs goes into sharp decline after the Flood. Why would the people have lied about that? Other pagan sources greatly exaggerated the ages of their "heros"---some pagan kings were said to have lived many thousands of years.
And my bad on Moses. I should have said others like Adam, Methuselah, and Mahalalel. As for sharp decline after the flood, maybe people actually didn't buy into the stories of 900 year old people anymore since others were dying within say 40 years?:laugh:
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
You might want to take a look at a book called, "Genetic Entropy" by John Sanford, Ph.D. (he's a geneticist). He explains that the human genome is deteriorating at a rapid pace these days. He also insists that there is NOTHING that can stop the decline--not gene therapy, not cloning and he explains why. If you extrapolate backward, it is easy to see how humans could have lived disease-free so much longer than we do. If it weren't for modern medicine, many of us would not be here. Think about it---did your great grandparents spend so much time being ill before they died? Now, there are hosts of people who spend 20-30 years in a state of ill health. Some diseases like breast cancer are hitting women at younger and younger ages. There is virtual epidemic of breast cancer among women in their 20s and 30s when it was basically unheard of in a woman under 45 in the past.0 -
"I don't usually do ad hominem... But you Sir are impressive in a special sort of way. Everything you say is more or less a non sequitur to my arguments, and the context in which I present them.
This quote comes to mind:"Debating creationists on the topic of god is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."
It's 01:22 AM, and I am going to copulate with my beautiful girlfriend. Good night.
[/quote]
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
And I don't usually laugh at someone who is attempting to pose serious arguments---but really? You stoop to ad hominem (twice, no less) and then attempt to shock with your somewhat crude comment about your girlfriend? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
p.s. By the way, I am not a "Sir" I am a "Madame". Your gender prejudice is showing.
p.p.s. It is customary to attribute quotes from sources other than those which should be very familiar (such as quotes from the Bible). Never rnind, I just looked it up, it is that swell atheist blogger, Scott Weitzenhoffer (who stole the quote from someone else).0 -
I have these suggestions for you:
"The Case For Christ" and "God's Outrageous Claims" by Lee Strobel
He receieved a Master of Studies in Law Degree from Yale Law School and was an atheist.
He can provide you with a much more compelling argument than I ever could.
Thanks for these. I've added them to my 'to read' list. Headed to the bookstore tomorrow anyway, so I'll definitely see if I can find them. o/ 0 -
"...if you know what life is worth, you will look for yours on earth...."0
-
Not life as we know it. I believe our energy (soul) just returns to the energy of the universe, but not our consciousness.0
-
Where did you get the idea that I believe science is infallible? Never stated it. I have stated that science provides evidence for what it is theorizing or hypothesizing for. And since science discovers new things continual, I'll change my stance along with it. For example stretching for the longest time was thought to prevent injury. Several studies later show that static stretching before and after exercise doesn't prevent injury. A pretty significant change in the business I do. And I now DO NOT let any of my clients warm up with static stretching.I don't think YOU understand the reality of what science is---perhaps it is because of what you have been told by those who idolize it. Science IS based on observation and critical thinking but it is not infallible and is notoriously fickle in its beliefs. There are many scientists (in my opinion, true scientists) who love the overturning of one of their pet theories because it sets them off in another even more exciting direction. No real scientist ever thinks of ANY bit of data as "proof" of anything. They love to be confounded and amazed by the complexity and unpredictability of our world and the heavens that surround us. A quote from Sir Francis Bacon (ca.1625) "A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion." In Bacon's day, science was known as "philosophy" (and actually up to recent times).
Sit a person down with no arms and legs in a room in front of me, have a bunch of people pray for arms and legs to grow, and if it happened in front of me, I would have no reason at that point to believe that a god doesn't exist.
People who truly believe in science will listen to different studies and not just bias themselves on just one or just one person conducting experimentation. I look at scenarios objectively.
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 nutrition0 -
No respawns!
As much as I'd LIKE to believe in an afterlife, I do not.
I find comfort in knowing that even if we do cease to exist in one point in time, you still exist in another (the past). Luckily, time is not linear. It's a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff
0 -
If I were to take my grandparents on both sides, the oldest lived to 84 years old. My mother is 86 now and her oldest sister is 89.(Don't know anything about grandmother on my father's side since she left when he was very young). My grandfathers on both sides died before 83 years old. My father is 86. Parents are in better health than my grandparents were due to better nutrition and exercise.You might want to take a look at a book called, "Genetic Entropy" by John Sanford, Ph.D. (he's a geneticist). He explains that the human genome is deteriorating at a rapid pace these days. He also insists that there is NOTHING that can stop the decline--not gene therapy, not cloning and he explains why. If you extrapolate backward, it is easy to see how humans could have lived disease-free so much longer than we do. If it weren't for modern medicine, many of us would not be here. Think about it---did your great grandparents spend so much time being ill before they died? Now, there are hosts of people who spend 20-30 years in a state of ill health. Some diseases like breast cancer are hitting women at younger and younger ages. There is virtual epidemic of breast cancer among women in their 20s and 30s when it was basically unheard of in a woman under 45 in the past.
And while modern medicine has extended life, you cannot deny that weight has played a pivotal role in the health of individuals. Weight is the number factor related to health issues.
And according to CDC statistics, 1999 breast cancer rate was higher for practically every state compared to 2009. Even Leukemias (the most popular childhood cancer) was higher in 1999 than in 2009.
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 nutrition0 -
So I glanced at Sanford's credentials and noticed he's NOT a human geneticist, but a plant geneticist. I also see from his biography that he's a CREATIONIST. Nice pull.You might want to take a look at a book called, "Genetic Entropy" by John Sanford, Ph.D. (he's a geneticist).
His argument for devolution is a good theory but not withstanding criticism. Carbon dating will refute how long he believes that Earth has been around. Heck even common sense would tell us that based on how the Earth is still shifting and moving, it's break up into continents took millions and million of years. Fresno and San Francisco are creeping closer together (verified) at a rate of about an inch a year. At this rate it's gonna take well over 12 million years for them to be beside each other.
I'd have to see much more evidence proving his theory before believing in it.
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 nutrition0 -
If I were to take my grandparents on both sides, the oldest lived to 84 years old. My mother is 86 now and her oldest sister is 89.(Don't know anything about grandmother on my father's side since she left when he was very young). My grandfathers on both sides died before 83 years old. My father is 86. Parents are in better health than my grandparents were due to better nutrition and exercise.You might want to take a look at a book called, "Genetic Entropy" by John Sanford, Ph.D. (he's a geneticist). He explains that the human genome is deteriorating at a rapid pace these days. He also insists that there is NOTHING that can stop the decline--not gene therapy, not cloning and he explains why. If you extrapolate backward, it is easy to see how humans could have lived disease-free so much longer than we do. If it weren't for modern medicine, many of us would not be here. Think about it---did your great grandparents spend so much time being ill before they died? Now, there are hosts of people who spend 20-30 years in a state of ill health. Some diseases like breast cancer are hitting women at younger and younger ages. There is virtual epidemic of breast cancer among women in their 20s and 30s when it was basically unheard of in a woman under 45 in the past.
And while modern medicine has extended life, you cannot deny that weight has played a pivotal role in the health of individuals. Weight is the number factor related to health issues.
And according to CDC statistics, 1999 breast cancer rate was higher for practically every state compared to 2009. Even Leukemias (the most popular childhood cancer) was higher in 1999 than in 2009.
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
Just because people are now learning to take better care of the health that they have, doesn't mean that the genome is not continuing to deteriorate. You only need to look at the large increase in infertility among young men to know that something is amiss. If male sperm counts continue to decline at the present rate, within a couple of generations (40 years or so) very few men will be able to father children. Whether the cause is environmental or genetic has yet to be studied. If it is environmental the fix will be difficult, if it is genetic, it will be impossible.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions