Afterlife: Is There Life After Death?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.

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

Afterlife: Is There Life After Death?

Let the debate begin

Yes

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.

No. :noway:

Quit monopolizing the conversation chatty cathy.

"...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?

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

"...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.