Afterlife stuff

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Have to agree with Zebu on this one.

And there is something interesting about this, which is called the Pascal's wager.

More can be read here: http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/pasc-wag.htm

It basically means that if you do believe in god, you are better off than not believing at all through simple thinking like this:

You believe in god. If you are right, you can get past the pearly gates, but if you are not then well, you dont lose anything really.
You dont believe in god. If you are right, you dont get anything lol and if you are wrong, well satan's gonna poke you with his stick for all eternity you unsaved infidel!



Unless there is an atheist's heaven of course where we can socialize and high-five each other for being right.

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Didn't Monty Python say something like 'I've always said that there's nothing than an agnostic cannot achieve if he really doesn't know if he believes in anything or not'.

 

Then, by definition, you can't BE an atheist.

An atheist doesn't believe in the existence of God. End of. Its not a matter of you being 99.999999% certain that there isn't a God. If you are willing to accept that you COULD be proved wrong, no matter how remote the possibility, then by definition you cannot call yourself an Atheist.

There isn't a 'personal preference' for what you consider yourself to be. These are hard and fast definitions. Look them up - you're an agnostic mate, like it or not!

 

How is He torturing us? Because he won't heal every single bodily affliction we have?? How is a lost arm His fault?

How have we earned the right to command God to do something for us??

Missing an arm will be absolutely nothing compared to being sent to hell for eternity: "It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. --Matthew 18:8"

Scoff if you want - I have nothing to lose if you reject Him, regardless of who is right. But if I'm right, you have everything to lose.

In any case, anyone would be better off to have the attitude of this guy: link

Like I said, afflictions can bring us closer to God.

I didn't ignore them at all. I've watched them before, and they've been debated ad nauseum on a billion different forums.

Miracles cannot be proven... nor can they be disproven.

If prophecy were written about David Copperfield that becomes fulfilled by what he does, then I'm quite sure people would be worshipping him.

Not sure where you get "heavily edited"... the Bible has been quite consistent over the course of time.

Perhaps advances in science simply make us more aware about something in religion that we didn't understand before. Science just hasn't caught up yet.

Who's to say that there aren't angels living in the "heavens above the clouds" (though I think the actual location is quite irrelevant)?

Never said it was.

That doesn't answer my question, which didn't have anything to do with whether people are monogamous or adulterous. My question was, "Either there IS a right and wrong, or everything is relative. Which is it?".

Again, you fail to answer my question. When you think something is good, and I think the opposite is good, which good wins, if everything is relative?

 

Come on, Modey... cut out the name calling.

 

Actually... all of that completely misses the point of religion.

 

Essentially, this is true. But if the only reason you say you "believe" is because it's the only option where you have nothing to lose and everything to gain, then you really HAVEN'T put your faith and trust in God.

It's not enough to just believe in God. James 2:19 says, "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder."

 

I think this is gonna get locked soon.

People believe what they believe wether they've been fed it from birth or came to their own conclusion to believe what they do and many people will change their minds regardless of what an opposing poster will put.

I am agnostic I will believe in god, super aliens or whatever but until I have definitive proof then I won't believe and can't believe. The only thing I find strange about any religions is most seemed to be based on some book which is a collection of writings and because there is only a book to go from and not eye witness acounts then these writings are said to be true. I was always told don't believe everything you read can't this be the same for religious texts?

I mean it's like the question if a tree falls in the wood does it make a sound, you would like to think it does but if no one is around to hear it then who knows and who has the right to say it does or doesn't.

 

What if you left a tape recorder in the woods and then went back and listened to is afterwards?

Woa - Schroedinger's cat - it both does and doesn't make a sound until someone listens to the tape...

 

An all powerful being who choses to let his best creations suffer for his entertainment seems a little werid no ?

Hey if I'm gonna invent a giant fantasy being, I at least want him to make me feel good about myself !

Inventing one thats either to busy, doesn't listen, or plain doesn't care seems pointless...

But thats your belief, since I don't believe in hell the threats of your religion are meaningless to me. Even if hell were to exisit who's to say I'd find it less preferable than heaven ?

Pretty big if, anyway I can just repent at the last minute right and alls forgiven ? If he wants us to follow him so much why doesn't he turn up a bit more often ? He doesn't call, he doesn't ring...

Kind of like your parents beating you to love them, a little twisted isn't it ? Why would you want such a god, its like worshipping Marilyn Manson !

No but I go by the odds. Chances of a woman having a baby by natural childbirth, its been recorded billions of times all round the world, chances of being impregnated by a supernatural being, not one properly recorded account.

What difference does prophecy make ? How do you know there was a prophecy ? Hindsight is 20-20.

It was compiled of only the texts of the early churchs chosing. They knew the kind of church they wanted, male dominated, monotheastic etc. It's also been translated many times. Religious people themselves often can't seem agree on the exact meaning of most phrases.

Caught up with what ? It is the people that beleived in your book that turned out to be wrong, what use is the book if they can't reliably interpret it ?

Well yes if they are invisible perhaps, but thats not how most people seemed to interpret it, my point is if your book cannot reliably describe or predict the world, what use is it ? If its open to totally different interpretations how can it act as a guide ?

Some things might be right or wrong, other things might be relative. 1+1=2 Its a mathematical proof, its always true, I will not win the lottery 99.99999999% of the time, its not an absolute, it might just happen. Both statements can exist in the world with no contradiction as long as they don't intersect. If you beleive in humanism you might believe that all humans are somehow biologically programmed to know that murder is wrong, but you might think that picking your nose is bad is not a universal human belief or rule and that you learnt it socially. You'd have to define all the rules and beliefs individually. Sociology studies such stuff, for example young children can't lie, they learn to lie, is lying bad ? Does it depend on context ? Is it a useful social skill ?

Well maybe I don't really understand your question. Fuzzy logic systems normally assign weights to different values, the weights can even vary by complex formula. It would really depend on context, thats why we have morality and laws and judges and lawyers. There are certain general principles like having certain freedoms as long as they don't impinge on the freedom of others. Ultimately its up to society to decide, and society includes all religions and non religions, so no your religious ideas should not in general always win.

A beneign dictator is still a dictator, and what happens if his heir is not beneign ? Thats why we have democracy and non secular societies. Thats why we have critical thinking and science.

 

But there WERE eyewitness accounts of what happened in the Bible. That's one of the reasons the majority of the New Testament books were written fairly soon after Jesus was resurrected... so there would still be people alive who could vouch for - or vehemently deny - their authenticity.

Certainly there aren't any of those people around anymore... but archaeology is validating many of the other things that the Bible says.

Josephus ben Matthias was a Jewish historian who, although he didn't believe Jesus was the Messiah, wrote about the existence of Jesus. A Jewish professor, Shlomo Pines, discovered a non-controversial, 10th-century Arabic version of Josephus' testimony:

At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon their loyalty to him. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive. Accordingly they believed that he was the Messiah, concerning whom the Prophets have recounted wonders.

Does this prove that the Bible is real or that Jesus is the Son of God? No. But it is a second-hand account that Jesus was a real figure who people believed was the Christ and who was reported by eyewitnesses to have risen from the dead after three days.

Certainly it's the same. Do your research, and make an informed decision... in this case, an informed choice.

 

I don't discount the exsistance of Jesus as I know he did exsist this has been proven from what I have researched but wether he was the son of a god or creator is something that still needs to be proved.

It's the mystical bits I don't believe like, Jesus cured the lepors. Maybe this so called lepor just had bad acne and Jesus gave hime some spot cream or Jona and whale. Some guy gets eaten by a whale, it swims 200 miles to Jerusalem then he gets out of it's mouth and walks away I could go on but this would be seen as mocking and I don't want to offend as I have said before I have nothing against people believing what they believe as long as they don't force it upon me.

I tend to agree with Dmarsh on this and he can put it better than me. So lets take the bible for instance. It is a collection of writing/scriptures from along time ago and they started well before Jesus was around these writings will have changed over the years as people in all religions come up with so many meanings for the same piece of text.

There used to be a game called chinese whispers where there's a group of people and one person tells another person a message, this person would have to pass it onto the next person then the next person and you could guarantee that the original message would have been altered quite vastly by the time it got to the end.

So who is to say that the original scriptures of the Bible haven't been altered even slightly?

If I did believe in God I would like to think of him as a God that would punish the evil and reward the good whilst they were alive not after they died. This makes no sense to me, so if I am nice and virtuous I will be rewarded with something in heaven when I die and will have life eternal although I don't understand that phrase, how can I have life eternal if I am dead?

or I will burn in the firey pits of hell for eternity, why will I care if I am dead and unable to feel pain and brain doesn't function to comprehend what is happening?

or am I missing something?

 

You presume it is for God's entertainment. How do you make that logical leap that God enjoys suffering? Because God CAN heal an amputation but doesn't, He enjoys our suffering??

Because I don't buy my son a Wii, does that mean I enjoy that he doesn't have a console? Makes no sense.

That's the point; He's not an invention. If He were an invention, why WOULDN'T we make a God that lets us do anything we wanted? Why wouldn't we create a God that was "all love", but would let us do whatever our hearts desire, without any fear of judgement? Because... that's not how God has revealed himself to us. He's a loving God... but he's also a just God.

In short, we don't get to say who God is.

True, I may be wrong - the true God may not be the one who I worship. Or He may not exist at all. But I believe He does.

Again, you presume to know God. Why do you think he's too busy, doesn't listen, or doesn't care? I've experienced exactly the opposite. He may not do things when I want them done... but He's done what's best for me - whether I realized it at the time or not.

If hell were to exist as my religion believes it to be, you would find it less preferable than heaven. Hell's a place of eternal suffering... not of partying it up.

If it doesn't exist, then you have nothing to fear. But just because you don't believe doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I guess that's the risk you take.

But... that's not how true repentance works, my friend. God knows your heart and your motives for repentance.

How hard is it to believe in a God who performs miracles on command? If that were the case, wouldn't everyone believe? I don't presume to speak for God, but based on my studies, I don't believe He wants everyone to follow Him because they've seen proof... I think He wants us to have faith enough to follow Him in the absence of absolute proof. John 20:24 says,

One of the twelve disciples, Thomas (nicknamed the Twin),* was not with the others when Jesus came. They told him, “We have seen the Lord!”

But he replied, “I won’t believe it unless I see the nail wounds in his hands, put my fingers into them, and place my hand into the wound in his side.”

Eight days later the disciples were together again, and this time Thomas was with them. The doors were locked; but suddenly, as before, Jesus was standing among them. “Peace be with you,” he said. Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and look at my hands. Put your hand into the wound in my side. Don’t be faithless any longer. Believe!”

“My Lord and my God!” Thomas exclaimed.

Then Jesus told him, “You believe because you have seen me. Blessed are those who believe without seeing me.”

And, in my experience, that's when He reveals himself to us. In my experience, he DOES "call" or "ring"... you just need to listen. That said, He's probably not gonna reveal himself if you shut Him out.

But God doesn't CAUSE the suffering! He doesn't cause the amputations, he doesn't cause the sickness, and he doesn't cause the sin in the world to happen.

Again, how do you make that logical leap?

So should there have been millions of women impregnated by a supernatural being to increase the chances that you would believe? If that were the case, what would be miraculous about that?

The prophecies concerning Jesus were written long before Jesus existed. Thus, there's no hindsight.

Well, the early church wasn't the only group to decide which books would be included in the Bible; several groups after that did as well. If you are interested, I would recommend that you study from a non-pessimistic point of view about how they came about selecting those books for inclusion or exclusion.

Yes, it has been translated many times, but usually from the original Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic. There are certainly some phrases that we don't know the true meaning of. However, the majority of them don't affect something that is all that controversial. Still, that's why there are many denominations of Christianity. Doesn't mean they're all wrong...

It was a tongue-in-cheek joke, dude. See the little thumbleft guy?

Still, the essence of truth is there. What I mean is that it is possible that science MIGHT eventually be able to prove the existence of certain things that are discussed in the Bible. For example, the Bible suggested that the Earth was round about 400 years before Aristotle mentioned the possibility, and long before it was proven by science. Of course, that's just one example... there are plenty of others in there.

Eh? Not how who interprets it? I didn't know there was a huge controversy brewing as to whether angels are invisible or extra-dimensional...

Just because we fallible humans don't know how to interpret something doesn't mean the words aren't written down and available for translation or interpretation. If you want, you too can learn Hebrew or Greek or Aramaic and translate the original writings and interpret it for yourself... particularly if you find any major discrepancies. In truth, many Bible scholars do exactly that... it's not that difficult.

Children learn to lie? Nay, my friend... my son CAN lie, even though neither I nor anyone my son came in contact with lied to him or taught him how to lie before he first did it.

Sure, it is logical to believe that humans are programmed to know that things are wrong. I don't challenge that; I merely stated my belief. Howver, none of that addresses my point about relativism. If someone TRULY believes that relativism exists, then they believe that there's no such thing as right and wrong. I'm not talking about your lottery analogy, I'm not talking about "the odds", I'm not talking about "shades of gray"... I'm saying that if someone thinks they truly believe in relativism where there is no right or wrong, they're lying to themselves, because I can quickly find something they think is wrong.

Obviously, you don't truly believe in relativism, because you do believe there is a right and a wrong for many things. I'm not discussing you. Look back at who my original comment was addressed to.

I never said they should. I was addressing why relativism fails as a logical viewpoint... not in any of the things you mention above.

Not sure where you're going with this one...

 

Again, "The Case for Christ" will connect the logic-dots for you, if you truly want to know.

Still, I don't think it - or anything else - will give you 100%, absolute, in-your-face, undeniable proof, if that's what you seek. At some point, you have to have an ounce of faith. That said, his book does present a compelling, logical argument for Jesus being who Christians say He is... proof enough for some people.

No, I don't think you're mocking at all. Those things ARE hard to comprehend and believe. If they weren't... then what would be supernatural about what happened?

 

Well correct me if I'm wrong, but you are not an all powerful being. To an all powerful being that can be everywhere and do anything, not to help out would be wrong no ? Like crossing the other side in the good samaritan.

So basically we have to be better than god, while he can be as lazy as he wants chosing to help out in the afterlife if at all?

I think the people who wrote the books did, and the people that interpret the books do.

Do you presume to know god ? A little circular isn't it ?

If there is a superbeing whos already made his mind up then what does it matter ? Is repenting to be saved bad ? Why bother repenting otherwise ? What if you've nothing to repent other than non belief ? Is a god that sends you to enternal torture on that basis just ?

Who says it should be hard ? Why should god want to test me ? If he knows everything about me theres really no need surely ?

I beleive in a person called jesus, I don't beleive in any holy trinity. So Jesus does not equate to god to me.

If I told you I had been to heaven or hell would you beleive me ? After all, its gotta be hard to beleive right ? So the more preposterous my story is, the more true ?

Maybe you can explain it to me so I don't miss his call next time.

Doesn't matter if he causes it or not, hes an all powerful being remember ? It would be like me watching a murder and not lifting a finger.

Where there you go again, you see, isn't it strange that everything that makes you believe has to be some totally unprovable or circular statement ? How do you know that there have ever been any supernatural pregnancies ? How do you know there was only one ? If you think it could happen once then why not again ? Hey even I could be the son of god ?

How can you prove they were written long before ? How can you prove they referred to Jesus ? Its like people quoting nostradamus.

If I didn't have to spend 60+ hours a week working in IT and reading IT books I just might. All my reading is non fiction, basically only IT books.

There is evidence of people navigating the globe going back millenia. Its quite possible that some people knew a lot well before Jesus.

Languages are not my strongpoint, I work in IT remember ? I work with logic and systems.

We as humans create systems to handle stuff, thats why we have laws, science, etc in a sense its all IT.

 

"
- Hello, IT ?
- (indistinct voice)
- Have you tried to turn it off and on again ?
"

Haha, sorry couldn't resist! This just made me remember the good laughs from IT Crowd.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpmLrz_lSuE

 

No, but I'm powerful enough to buy that Wii. Because I don't, do I enjoy his crying that he wants one? According to your logic, not buying him one just because he wants one is wrong, no?

We might not understand why God doesn't "fix" everything we want Him to fix. But I can no more demand it and expect Him to do everything I want no more than my son can demand and expect that I give him everything he wants. There is a reason, even if I don't understand it. Perhaps I'll understand when I'm in heaven. I dunno.

No, we can't be better than God. Dude, we didn't create everything out of nothing.

He's not lazy; we just don't understand His reasonings behind His decisions. He does act, whether you believe He does or not. I've experienced it.

You are entitled to your belief. Don't belittle me for mine.

Not circular at all. I presume to know what God is based on what is in that Bible that you don't believe in. You are discussing a god that is nowhere to be found in the Bible - a lazy god who delights in suffering. That's not the God I worship.

On the other hand, I don't presume to know the reasons for what He does or does not do.

I never said God had already made his mind up about anything. The Bible says that God HAS changed His mind before based on the prayers of his believers.

Is repenting bad? No, not at all. God gives us the free will to choose sin or to repent of sin, to choose Him or to deny Him. If you repent on your deathbed, and you truly mean it, God will know what is in your heart. If you decide now that you are going to "live it up" now and repent later, then I'm not too sure that'll fly. God will have to make that judgement call, however.

Is there a God that will send you to eternal torture for denying Him and what He wants you to do? Yes, there is. He doesn't want that; after all, he is a loving God. However, he is also a just God who does not tolerate sin, and if you continue to deny Him, then yes, he will send you to eternal torture. It's your choice as to what you want to do.

Similarly, it's my son's choice whether he wants to do what I tell him to do or not. I don't want to punish him... but I will if he continues to do what I've asked him not to do. Does that make me a bad dad?

Nobody says it has to be hard. In fact, it's not hard for me to believe.

So it's not OK for God to test you... but it's OK for you to test God?

In truth, he's not testing you at all. You can choose to accept Him or deny Him. That's no test.

Similarly, I don't test Hayden to see if he loves me; he either does or he does not. I'm not testing Hayden when I tell him he can't do something; I have a reason for telling him what to do and what not to do. He might not understand, but he chooses whether he wants to do it or not.

I use the father-son analogy because it's an appropriate one - we are God's children, His creations.

Yes, that would be hard to believe. I don't know whether to believe any of the stories about those who go to hell or heaven, spend some time, and then come back. Ultimately, though, it doesn't matter, because I don't need that information to know whether to believe in God or not to believe in God.

I already have - I have suggested that you believe in Him and attempt to build a relationship with Him and ask for him to guide your life.

Even if you don't, who knows, maybe he'll give you a sign even without you believing in Him. I can't tell you how to discern God's activity in your life. If you don't believe in Him, and you don't read His word, you're not likely to believe in what He does in your life or understand His purpose for your life.

So God should stop all murders, right?

Not the same at all.

There's this little thing called sin... death and pain and suffering was caused when WE sinned against God. And we continue to do so. All of us. Me, you, everyone.

Because, dude, God is unprovable!

I don't know that there have been any supernatural pregnancies but one. But this isn't about MY belief... this is about your unbelief. First you say that it's hard to believe that there is one. When I ask you if it would be easier to believe if there were more than one, you change the argument!?!

It can happen again. It might have happened a hundred times. I have no idea. But there has only been one person to fulfill the prophecies of the Messiah discussed in the Old Testament... and you are not Him.

Dude, now you're just being petulant. Even people who don't believe in the Bible believe that the Old Testament was written before Jesus.

I can't PROVE (there's that word again) that they referred to Jesus. But there are dozens of prophecies (the exact number is in question, but many believe it's at least 60) in the Old Testament that were written hundreds of years before Jesus' birth that all point to Jesus being the Messiah. I can list some, if you're truly curious... but I think you're just taking the piss.

It doesn't take long to read a quick summary of it. Eh, your choice.

Could be. But the prevailing theory at the time was that the world was flat.

Being in IT doesn't prevent you from learning languages - after all, I did. Still, you don't have to be a language scholar... if you see a theological debate about conflicting interpretations, there are plenty of online resources where you can see what the original word is and the multiple definitions for that word. Easy! Then you can interpret the scripture using whichever definition you believe makes the most sense.

 

Maybe im making a really poor effort of making my point (not for the first time) here

My point im trying to make is that if there were to be some piece of scientific evidence that was presented to the human race to conclusively prove the existance of a god then obviously everyones conclusion would have to be that there is a god, I for a long time have had no belief in the existance of a God or any hope (if that is the right word here) that this evidence will be presented.

At the moment this evidence doesnt exist, and none of the Apologists, Bill O'Reilly or Vatican are willing to point to this evidence if they are in possesion of it, and with a dwindling flock I am sure if it did exist and they had it, well it would have been front page news.

 

Link?

 

Perhaps he's referring to the UK, church attendence here has been on the decline for some time. I have certainly heard public figures (Arch Bishops etc..) saying the like on the news now and again.