What happens after death?

[Elenai]

Purplepoot: To be rather blunt...

___

Forget not, that if we indoctrinate, and force our beliefs on our children by taking them to church, so too does the other side of the fence indoctrinate their children.

If we brainwash, then all sides of the argument do.

I believe this is the point that Gilles, and I are trying to make, that and the very term brainwashing, and indoctrination implies that Christians raise their children in a sinister, or malicious manner, or deny them a wholesome existence, or enact some form of evil against their young...which is very far from the truth. Of which, to our perspective, (though it may not be intentional on your part) you seem to be raising secular parenting, above spiritual ones, as 'the good, true, and proper way'.

If you are not...then feel free to correct us, and we may continue.

To be honest however...you may wish to rephrase your terminology, and take into account that we are not enacting in malicious ways, by offering a spiritual view.

 

[Gausslander]

Purplepoot: To be rather blunt...

___

Forget not, that if we indoctrinate, and force our beliefs on our children by taking them to church, so too does the other side of the fence indoctrinate their children.

If we brainwash, then all sides of the argument do.

I believe this is the point that Gilles, and I are trying to make, that and the very term brainwashing, and indoctrination implies that Christians raise their children in a sinister, or malicious manner, or deny them a wholesome existence, or enact some form of evil against their young...which is very far from the truth. Of which, to our perspective, (though it may not be intentional on your part) you seem to be raising secular parenting, above spiritual ones, as 'the good, true, and proper way'.

If you are not...then feel free to correct us, and we may continue.

To be honest however...you may wish to rephrase your terminology, and take into account that we are not enacting in malicious ways, by offering a spiritual view.

ah. so agnostics are the only ones free of guilt huh?

 

[PurplePoot]

Purplepoot: To be rather blunt...

___

Forget not, that if we indoctrinate, and force our beliefs on our children by taking them to church, so too does the other side of the fence indoctrinate their children.

If we brainwash, then all sides of the argument do.

I believe this is the point that Gilles, and I are trying to make, that and the very term brainwashing, and indoctrination implies that Christians raise their children in a sinister, or malicious manner, or deny them a wholesome existence, or enact some form of evil against their young...which is very far from the truth. Of which, to our perspective, (though it may not be intentional on your part) you seem to be raising secular parenting, above spiritual ones, as 'the good, true, and proper way'.

If you are not...then feel free to correct us, and we may continue.

To be honest however...you may wish to rephrase your terminology, and take into account that we are not enacting in malicious ways, by offering a spiritual view.

There's a difference between not influencing your child's decision and telling them there is no god. If you think that not influencing their decision is brainwashing, then ...

As for terms with negative connotations, the terms get the negative connotations, not vice-versa. They are considered negative words for a reason.

 

[Elenai]

There's a difference between not influencing your child's decision and telling them there is no god. If you think that not influencing their decision is brainwashing, then ...

My point is, that both sides then influence their children's decisions. Influence is a passive act, where as brainwashing is a direct act involving force, and subjugation of the will to your own.

Non-influence, does not exist in a parent/child relationship. Even if the father or mother is completely absent the influence of their absence manifests itself.

As for brainwashing by 'telling them/showing them/taking them to a place that says' whether or not 'this or that is true', you can make a person go to chuch, or school, or a scientific inquiry, but you cannot make the child listen, or believe whatever is said there.

(school, is a special case of this, as students are prime examples of 'non-listeners' "why should I study history, I'll never need it")

As for terms with negative connotations, the terms get the negative connotations, not vice-versa. They are considered negative words for a reason.

Which...is why I asked that you not use them, unless you are indeed implying that Christian families are enacting with malicious intent towards their children.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

I saw the day this page had like 2 or 3 pages, and I knew it was a good idea to leave it alone. This is the second time I have seen this thread topic, and it's the second time it has turned into religious persons v areligious persons.

 

[Elenai]

I saw the day this page had like 2 or 3 pages, and I knew it was a good idea to leave it alone. This is the second time I have seen this thread topic, and it's the second time it has turned into religious persons v areligious persons.

Unfortunately :/

Alas, when the spear is pointed at your head, or at the head of a friend...raising the shield is usually a better course of action.

 

[PurplePoot]

My point is, that both sides then influence their children's decisions. Influence is a passive act, where as brainwashing is a direct act involving force, and subjugation of the will to your own.

Non-influence, does not exist in a parent/child relationship. Even if the father or mother is completely absent the influence of their absence manifests itself.

As for brainwashing by 'telling them/showing them/taking them to a place that says' whether or not 'this or that is true', you can make a person go to chuch, or school, or a scientific inquiry, but you cannot make the child listen, or believe whatever is said there.

(school, is a special case of this, as students are prime examples of 'non-listeners' "why should I study history, I'll never need it")

Elenai, when they're three years old they will listen. Children at young ages assume what is being told to them.

And yes, I agree, passive influence is unavoidable. That doesn't mean you should stop trying to prevent yourself from actively influencing them.

Which...is why I asked that you not use them, unless you are indeed implying that Christian families are enacting with malicious intent towards their children.

I am implying that forcing your belief down their throats is to some extent a malicious act.

 

[DoOs_101]

I have a different opinion.

When I die, I will still live eternal, only my name though. Why? Cuz I Am Legend!

Huurahh baby!

 

[Aschy]

I am implying that forcing your belief down their throats is to some extent a malicious act.

If you truly have faith in what you believe, you are more "saving them" more than you are brain washing them because you teach them about (1) morals (2) why humans exist (3) What happens when we die (Those 3 are more if you don't believe in God (1) because most people think the bible was made for guide lines and not to be taken literally).

You must understand that people that believe in God and atheists are completely different and will never agree to things that involve "faith". I believe that passive influences are a very great contributor to how a child turns out, BUT I think that even though they may or may not know they are being influenced they only take influences that they are comfortable with or they seem to "enjoy"(For lack of a better word). In no way is "teaching" your children a malicious act unless you somehow include a malicious act in it. But I have no arguments about people who do brainwash their children because we all know that there are crazy people out there, and that is not what this thread is called its called "What happens after Death?". If you must discuss that religion is a malicious act to teach to your children then make a new thread but in my opinion its totally up to the people that do the acts and not the religion to decide if its brainwashing or not.

 

[Gilles]

Well, I have evidence that you plan to do it based on your past statements. I also have evidence your parents did the same to you.

That's what I was referring to.

My parents wouldn't have ever kicked me out. Grounded me, perhaps, but it never came to that.

 

[PurplePoot]

My parents wouldn't have ever kicked me out. Grounded me, perhaps, but it never came to that.

Grounding someone for thinking for themself is forcing your beliefs down their throats.

If you truly have faith in what you believe, you are more "saving them" more than you are brain washing them because you teach them about (1) morals (2) why humans exist (3) What happens when we die (Those 3 are more if you don't believe in God (1) because most people think the bible was made for guide lines and not to be taken literally).

You must understand that people that believe in God and atheists are completely different and will never agree to things that involve "faith". I believe that passive influences are a very great contributor to how a child turns out, BUT I think that even though they may or may not know they are being influenced they only take influences that they are comfortable with or they seem to "enjoy"(For lack of a better word). In no way is "teaching" your children a malicious act unless you somehow include a malicious act in it. But I have no arguments about people who do brainwash their children because we all know that there are crazy people out there, and that is not what this thread is called its called "What happens after Death?". If you must discuss that religion is a malicious act to teach to your children then make a new thread but in my opinion its totally up to the people that do the acts and not the religion to decide if its brainwashing or not.

There's a difference between your intention and reality. Even if you intend to send someone by heaven by killing them, reality is you killed them (For example).

 

[Teh_Ephy]

There's a difference between your intention and reality. Even if you intend to send someone by heaven by killing them, reality is you killed them (For example).

What a can of worms you just cracked the lid on.

 

[Elenai]

Why is it always 'we' who are doing the force feeding? :/

 

[PurplePoot]

Why is it always 'we' who are doing the force feeding? :/

It isn't, but it's you who are the ones who are complaining about being labeled as such. Fervent atheists do the same thing the other way.

 

[Elenai]

We only complain when the label is thrust upon us :/

Alas: I figure we should probably get back to the original topic...

Life after death...

bleh..why was this topic even started...believers are mocked, and non-believers are scorned..all it is, is one big bloody mess.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

What happens after death is FSM and IPU have an epic fight lasting many millenia, yet lasting only an instant, across seventeen planes of alternate existence for control of your soul. Upon the conclusion of said epic fight, you are returned to Its/Her saucy/HAWT goodness, for purposes unknown. This is true because I say so, and I probably have Shados or someone else of comparable awesomeness to vouch for me.

/\
||
This

 

[Gausslander]

Just for the record; I don't think any of you Medivh's tower jockeys are awesome. No matter how you may portray yourselves to be.

As for Elenai's little dark green text at the bottom of his post; it's somewhat true. Though atheists due love to pick a fight with religious people, enough is enough.
Count me out.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

You seem to be forgetting that there are also religious persons that love to shove their religions down other peoples' throats.

Back to this
||
\/

What happens after death is FSM and IPU have an epic fight lasting many millenia, yet lasting only an instant, across seventeen planes of alternate existence for control of your soul. Upon the conclusion of said epic fight, you are returned to Its/Her saucy/HAWT goodness, for purposes unknown. This is true because I say so, and I probably have Shados or someone else of comparable awesomeness to vouch for me.

 

[Gilles]

I could definitely deal with that. What religion is it, I want in.?

 

[PurplePoot]

FSM: Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
IPU: home

 

[Elenai]

I'm more into studying the ways of Lon...he talks to me in dreams...or is that IM's...I can't really tell when I'm dozing off.

 

[shadow3]

As whatever I am, I don't believe in God.
I only believe what is proven, and since God has not been proved, I'd rather not believe in something that may be false, then believe that I simply don't know.

On topic, what I'd guess happens after life is you decay and die, every atom in your body being spread out to a very long and boring to read number of places. Your memories are lost, as they are a chemical process like stated earlier, and the atoms of whatever your memories are made of, are divided.

In addition I'd like to add that this is a pointless discussion since one side refuses to see it from the other sides view, which leads to effortless discussion. However, I also believe there is no absolute point in life, so if we enjoy it, why shouldn't we do it.

Our lives are full of options, and we may live for whatever we want to, and die for whatever we want to, and because we die, that gives our lives meaning, as we spend our time, or sacrificing our time if you prefer, doing something.

Think of it as someone sacrificing their life for you, just in smaller dozes.

But believe what you wish to believe, because doing what you enjoy doing is a great way to live your life.

 

[Falconeye]

Just for the record; I don't think any of you Medivh's tower jockeys are awesome. No matter how you may portray yourselves to be.

As for Elenai's little dark green text at the bottom of his post; it's somewhat true. Though atheists due love to pick a fight with religious people, enough is enough.
Count me out.

Religious people can be the same way though. I think all the criticism should just stop with all of these topics. After all if you believe in heaven and hell good for you, if you don't, good for you. No offense to not wanting to participate in this debate but I think topics like these can seriously ruin friendships.

Anyone wondering though, I am Roman Catholic.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

The actual name of FSM's religion is Pastafarianism, not sure about IPU.

 

[Gilles]

As whatever I am, I don't believe in God.
I only believe what is proven, and since God has not been proved, I'd rather not believe in something that may be false, then believe that I simply don't know.

You don't believe in much, do you?

But believe what you wish to believe, because doing what you enjoy doing is a great way to live your life.

It also leads to crime.

Religious people can be the same way though. I think all the criticism should just stop with all of these topics. After all if you believe in heaven and hell good for you, if you don't, good for you. No offense to not wanting to participate in this debate but I think topics like these can seriously ruin friendships.

Anyone wondering though, I am Roman Catholic.

Then don't take part. Some of us enjoy it, and I don't think anyones "friendship" has been hurt. I still think Poots a great guy, I just disagree with him on a lot of stuff.

It's good to see a fellow Catholic though. : )

 

[brad.dude03]

As whatever I am, I don't believe in God.
I only believe what is proven, and since God has not been proved, I'd rather not believe in something that may be false, then believe that I simply don't know.

Only believing in what we can see? That's what people used to do. There's no such thing as molecules because we can't see them!

Sometimes you have to trust that there are things both beyond our senses and beyond our knowledge. Nobody knew about molecules until they were proven, but they existed all along.

I mean I can see where you're coming from, but sometimes you have to be open to new possibilities. I'm no longer a Catholic, but I certainly believe in the possibility of God, and I think it very likely that some higher being did indeed create us.

The problem with debating things of this nature is that people hold these beliefs so dear to themselves that naturally any attack on said beliefs is assumed to be an attack on the person themselves. That is why people can't discourse rationally about religion. Well, most people can't anyway.

Thus, I suggest we return this discussion to the possibility of life after death, rather than fruitlessly debating the nature of religion.

 

[PurplePoot]

You don't believe in much, do you?

True that.

It also leads to crime.

You can look it up, the correlation is either nonexistent or, according to many people, more religious people per capita are criminals. However, I won't say this as a fact since several google searches didn't yield any statistics pages at all.

Then don't take part. Some of us enjoy it, and I don't think anyones "friendship" has been hurt. I still think Poots a great guy, I just disagree with him on a lot of stuff.

It's good to see a fellow Catholic though. : )

Indeed - what is in a debate thread stays in that debate thread.

--

Brad, there's a distinct difference between a higher being and a god. For example, we're nearing the point of being able to create life ourseles.

 

[Arvedui]

You can look it up, the correlation is either nonexistent or, according to many people, more religious people per capita are criminals. However, I won't say this as a fact since several google searches didn't yield any statistics pages at all.

Actually, I think what Gilles was referring to was the fact that Shadow3 (I believe) said:

But believe what you wish to believe, because doing what you enjoy doing is a great way to live your life.

He (Gilles) wasn't speculating (from what I can tell) that "doing what you enjoy doing" is religious but that it can lead to crime. It really doesn't fit in this thread to be honest, but whatever.

Anyway, on the actual topic:

What happens after Death? Well, not saying my faith, I do believe there is a Heaven, but I don't really believe in Hell in the "classical" sense that we usually think of it as (or a Purgatory for that matter).

And just pointing this out, more than just Christians believe in "Heaven."

 

[TheToastedChicken]

Brad, there's a distinct difference between a higher being and a god. For example, we're nearing the point of being able to create life ourseles.

We already can right? The whole God all so mighty, kinda fails now...

 

[Elenai]

We may be able to create simple life, but we cannot yet create/mold/design/evolve/mess with the fabric of/or the universe.



And from this idea, why would it not be possible to take our consciences, and give them temporal form in a higher universe? Heaven is afterall, the 'storage', a temporary place for the souls of mankind according to Christian belief.

The body when it is broken or defiled by disease is like a computer with messed up wires, and the soul is like the hard drive.

Though the computer may not be able to access our data, our data still exists within the soul, and if that data is put in a new computer, we can access it again.

That is just my thought.

 

[shadow3]

You don't believe in much, do you?

More like knowing instead of believing.

It also leads to crime.

Depends what you enjoy doing. I enjoy playing Wc3 and WoW, not poking people in the eye with a screwdriver, but in a perfect world, that would be how you would live. Not saying it's a perfect world, but pretending that it is sometimes helps, and as long as I don't get turned on by random violence, I can do a lot of things I just feel like.

Only believing in what we can see?

No, read it again.

 

[Ziggen]

About the religion, look up the theodicy problem. I think it is what that is called.

 

[Elenai]

More like knowing instead of believing.

What is 'knowing' but believing with a good amount of evidence to back it up? :/

I know that I have brown hair, because I can see that I do...but...there is always that 'teenie weencie' possibility, that I am infact, blue headed.

 

[TheToastedChicken]

We may be able to create simple life, but we cannot yet create/mold/design/evolve/mess with the fabric of/or the universe.



And from this idea, why would it not be possible to take our consciences, and give them temporal form in a higher universe? Heaven is afterall, the 'storage', a temporary place for the souls of mankind according to Christian belief.

The body when it is broken or defiled by disease is like a computer with messed up wires, and the soul is like the hard drive.

Though the computer may not be able to access our data, our data still exists within the soul, and if that data is put in a new computer, we can access it again.

That is just my thought.

So you're one of those "Adam and Eve" guys out there? Seriously, do you really think that some people just suddenly happened to exist without any evolvement? Just like these "simple life" creations, everything starts from square one and not square 2 million.

 

[shadow3]

I know that I have brown hair, because I can see that I do...but...there is always that 'teenie weencie' possibility, that I am infact, blue headed.

Well I have brown hair because I saw it in the mirror and I've been taught that it's the color brown. Even if someone else sees another color that's the color I'll see, and it's always going to be brown in my eyes.

Oh and I do believe what I've been taught in school, from books etc. unless it seems a bit too far over the top. Like the bible stuff and Jesus feeding a thousand people with half a bread and a fish. Don't go arguing about what the example was, I just cba to think that much as it's kinda late

 

[Aschy]

It also leads to crime.

Muhahahahaha, true say

Also a question to Catholics its you guys that believe in Heaven & Hell correct? And are you the only ones that believe in this method?

Originally Posted by PurplePoot
Brad, there's a distinct difference between a higher being and a god. For example, we're nearing the point of being able to create life ourseles.

Off Topic: Also is it possible that we can actually can create matter (Or life if that's what you meant) from nothing? Or are all these scientists fucking with it too much and its not genuinely being created, I mean by this are they adding things to a formula to create matter or is there too much machinery involved in the process. Also if your all going to continue to bash yourselves back it up with factual based evidence so can really show others who's boss but be prepared to back up your facts with more facts. I also think by higher being I think he means the same type of lifeforce as "God" would be (eg: not flesh and bone).

 

[Elenai]

So you're one of those "Adam and Eve" guys out there? Seriously, do you really think that some people just suddenly happened to exist without any evolvement? Just like these "simple life" creations, everything starts from square one and not square 2 million.

How did you manage to get that out of what I said?

Well I have brown hair because I saw it in the mirror and I've been taught that it's the color brown. Even if someone else sees another color that's the color I'll see, and it's always going to be brown in my eyes.

kay.

Oh and I do believe what I've been taught in school, from books etc. unless it seems a bit too far over the top. Like the bible stuff and Jesus feeding a thousand people with half a bread and a fish. Don't go arguing about what the example was, I just cba to think that much as it's kinda late

A miracle is miraculous for a reason

___

Anyone have any comments on the life after death, computer/conciousness thing? Or is this going to continue on as the same ol' same ol' debate?

Seriously...

 

[brad.dude03]

Well I have brown hair because I saw it in the mirror and I've been taught that it's the color brown. Even if someone else sees another color that's the color I'll see, and it's always going to be brown in my eyes.

Oh and I do believe what I've been taught in school, from books etc. unless it seems a bit too far over the top. Like the bible stuff and Jesus feeding a thousand people with half a bread and a fish. Don't go arguing about what the example was, I just cba to think that much as it's kinda late

Ah, now you opened up a can of worms. You see that you have brown hair, but what is brown? What if brown doesn't even exist, if what we know as 'brown' is just a sensory illusion?

Don't dismiss it. Colours in general are just waves of light hitting the retina. The colour itself is determined by the different wavelengths. Colours don't exist really, it's just a collective illusion brought about by our brains.

And regardless of your example, you should know first and formost that the Bible should never be taken literally, ever, because it's incredibly foolish. The Bible was never meant to be taken literally. We must assume that there is greater truth beneath the words.

 

[Elenai]

And regardless of your example, you should know first and formost that the Bible should never be taken literally, ever, because it's incredibly foolish. The Bible was never meant to be taken literally. We must assume that there is greater truth beneath the words.

And there is the can of millipedes xD

Some parts are literal, some are not, some parts are parables, some are meant to be historical accounts as according to the Jews.

It is full of literary devices, and devices not so literary. It is a work of words after all.

 

[PurplePoot]

We may be able to create simple life, but we cannot yet create/mold/design/evolve/mess with the fabric of/or the universe.



And from this idea, why would it not be possible to take our consciences, and give them temporal form in a higher universe? Heaven is afterall, the 'storage', a temporary place for the souls of mankind according to Christian belief.

The body when it is broken or defiled by disease is like a computer with messed up wires, and the soul is like the hard drive.

Though the computer may not be able to access our data, our data still exists within the soul, and if that data is put in a new computer, we can access it again.

That is just my thought.

We can create matter, see: particle accelerator.

As for your computer analogy, it's bad because we are not designed as computers in that regard (especially since our brains handle most of the stuff, though they have segmented areas for doing it).

Off Topic: Also is it possible that we can actually can create matter (Or life if that's what you meant) from nothing? Or are all these scientists fucking with it too much and its not genuinely being created, I mean by this are they adding things to a formula to create matter or is there too much machinery involved in the process. Also if your all going to continue to bash yourselves back it up with factual based evidence so can really show others who's boss but be prepared to back up your facts with more facts. I also think by higher being I think he means the same type of lifeforce as "God" would be (eg: not flesh and bone).

Who cares if there is machinery involved? It doesn't make it any less authentic.

Ah, now you opened up a can of worms. You see that you have brown hair, but what is brown? What if brown doesn't even exist, if what we know as 'brown' is just a sensory illusion?

Don't dismiss it. Colours in general are just waves of light hitting the retina. The colour itself is determined by the different wavelengths. Colours don't exist really, it's just a collective illusion brought about by our brains.

They do exist, since they are exactly that; a range of wavelengths of light.

 

[Elenai]

As for your computer analogy, it's bad because we are not designed as computers in that regard (especially since our brains handle most of the stuff, though they have segmented areas for doing it).

It isn't bad if you read into the simple mechanics of it..

"info goes in, info is stored, info is accessed later"

It isn't like I'm saying my brain has an awesome graphics card, and that my kidney's are full of spyware :/

We can create matter, see: particle accelerator.

But we can't create a planet now can we?

 

[PurplePoot]

But we can't create a planet now can we?

No, but we know how random matter can create a planet - we know the theory. We just don't have the technology to do it yet.

Baby steps.

It isn't bad if you read into the simple mechanics of it..

"info goes in, info is stored, info is accessed later"

Nah, info isn't really stored in the same sense. It's based on emotions and vague concepts to do with the event, which is why it's so easy to misremember things - they are easily changed as your perception is.

 

[Elenai]

Nah, info isn't really stored in the same sense. It's based on emotions and vague concepts to do with the event, which is why it's so easy to misremember things - they are easily changed as your perception is.

The basic, skeletal, barebones, down the the quick, simple, principle remains the same.

"the idea of transferable, stored, information"

 

[Aschy]

Who cares if there is machinery involved? It doesn't make it any less authentic.

The event of "creating something from nothing with something" is crazy, but the event of something "creating something from nothing with nothing" is indeed insane.

 

[Elenai]

On the issue of creating things...

"God made us in his image, why should we therefore, not create in our turn?"

 

[PurplePoot]

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[shadow3]

You see that you have brown hair, but what is brown? What if brown doesn't even exist, if what we know as 'brown' is just a sensory illusion?

I fail to see how this has anything to do with the arguement.
I said I do not believe in things that aren't proven, or have been tested and are generally seen as true because no-one has been able to falsify(that's the word?) it.
Even if brown does not exist, then why is there a word for it? If it's an abstract thing like time, does it matter? As long as you can count the seconds that we've made up, why can't I see the colors we made up.
You can't touch brown, but you know what it is.
Colors are colors, that's just how it is. They're words, meant to describe how we see something.

 

[PurplePoot]

Yes, the pragmatic theory of truth is win. Truth, for all practical purposes, lies in what works.

 

[Just_Spectating]

this whole page has bent into off-topic.

reading this page w/o the background information makes it all look like off-topic to me.

 

[PurplePoot]

Conversations shift foci as they develop.