What happens after death?

[Aschy]

So he DID mention the dinosaurs?

Who mentioned what? Open up genesis man, unless you don't care about what it says then just brush this off.

 

[Elenai]

With a wonderful thing called "This is a parable that describes a literal event" Creation, and Evolution can indeed co-exist.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

In that single verse at the beginning of the Bible, you could have literally billions upon billions of years, which span all the way from the very second of the big bang, straight to the point where Earth was ready to start bearing life.

Which is where the use of a literary device with symbols and such to describe to the people of the world the act of creation begins. This device being: A list, with a 'week day' symbol.

I doubt after all, that the people at the time would have grasped the concept of evolution, since evolution requires prior-knowledge of certain concepts before you can get to it...like the knowledge of bacteria, which was definitely not known to most ancient people.

This does not however, mean that Genesis is out dated, it merely means that the symbolic way of describing the act of creation is just that...still symbolic.

We now know a little bit of the 'how', what the Bible shows is 'why'.

I don't think God would have gotten through to his people, (without blatantly forcing himself, which God does not do) if he was to tell one of his prophets to write down/preach the entire act of evolution, with formulas, and biological references, and foot notes....It would have hindered his primary purpose, giving humanity that fundamental choice.

"Me, or yourselves. Choose me, and I'll take you up, choose yourself, and I'll shut the gate on that which is my property (the entire mortal universe, and Heaven), and let you live your own life away from me, until the time to judge everyone for what they did with their lives is at hand."

That is the way I see it at least.

 

[PurplePoot]

Maybe god is a parable too.

 

[bounty hunter2]

Suppose he is? What then?

 

[PurplePoot]

Then it would be incredibly ironic.

 

[bounty hunter2]

I find a point in that. Ironic it would be however it has the most sense to me.

 

[CMarket]

I believe that we just root away. Simple as that. We are just walking piles of organic matter and nothing more. Sad, I know, but c'est la vie. I would like to believe in something more than just organic decomposition of your body once you die, but it is far too illogical for me to believe in something such as an almighty entity.

If god is almighty there are several qualities he must have. They are as follows:

- He must know everything. Everything that is, everything that has been and everything that will be. To be able to know everything that will be he must know every position and every momentum of every particle in cosmos.
- He must be worth our worship. A being that is not worth worshiping is no god.
- He must be able to do anything. If there are things that god can't do, he certainly is not omnipotent.
- He must be above time. But not only that, god must stand above all possible dimensions.
- He cannot be 'good' or 'evil' or, indeed, have any subjective characteristic. If god is all good, he cannot do evil things and cannot be almighty. Most people would object and say that good can do evil but chooses not to do it. Well, if god is all good he can't choose to do evil things, can he?

If the evil in the world is intended by god he is not good. If it violates his intentions he is not almighty. God can't be both almighty and good. There are many objections to this, but none that holds since god is ultimately responsible for the existence of evil. Besides, if only god can create he must have created evil. If somebody else (the devil) created evil, how can one know that god, and not Satan created the universe?

Another thing is that there is a test, based on the ontological evidence against god, that you can do to try the existence of god. Pray, and ask god to provide you with a clear proof for his existence within a week. If he doesn't, there are only three reasons I can think of that are plausible: (1) God does not exist, (2) God does not want to or (3) God can't give you this evidence. Because of the ontological evidence, alternative (2) and (3) are not worth your worship and thus they equal alternative (1). So if you get no response there is no god.

Also, there are things that are impossible to do. For example nobody can cover a two-dimensional surface with two-dimensional circles, without making them overlap. It is impossible to add the numbers two and two and get 300. The number of things that are impossible to do are almost infinite. If god were to be almighty he would be able to do them, but it's impossible to do so. Some people say that he can only do things that are logically possible to do, but what is? Is it logically possible to walk on water? Is it logically possible to rise from the dead? Is it logically possible to stand above time, space and all other dimensions - and still exist?

If everything must have been created, then god must have been created as well. If god is not created, then everything mustn't have a creator, so why should life or cosmos have one?

 

[CaptainTesticles]

We rot away, and we lose consciousness.

 

[Hakeem]

We are just walking piles of organic matter and nothing more.

Normally I wouldn't bother bringing it up, but seeing the thought you put into the rest of your post, I don't think that it'll go right over your head when I say, "Cogito ergo sum."

You cannot explain color to a blind man, and you can't actually explain it to anyone else. You can just hope they already know what you are talking about when you say, "red." Indeed, this is true for every sense and emotion. The electromagnetic waves and chemical reactions that compose the world we "sense," or, as I like to say, "experience," is tangible and constant. That can be described. Thought happens by physical processes in the brain, though we may not understand how they give rise to the functions it can execute. That is not what I speak of. That can be described. The thing I would like to know if you know about, is the thing that experiences your senses, emotions, and thought.

Do you know this concept of which I speak?

I would like to believe in something more than just organic decomposition of your body once you die, but it is far too illogical for me to believe in something such as an almighty entity.

Some part of the human that persists after death is not synonymous with existence of God. In fact, they can be mutually exclusive.

If the evil in the world is intended by god he is not good.

In a literal sense, you might say that. I would not, because neutrality would mean he would have no reason to do anything. In order to have created everything, he must have had a reason, and were he neither any part good, nor any part evil, why should he create reality? What you may say, is that God is not pure good.

Pray, and ask god to provide you with a clear proof for his existence within a week. If he doesn't, there are only three reasons I can think of that are plausible: (1) God does not exist, (2) God does not want to or (3) God can't give you this evidence. Because of the ontological evidence, alternative (2) and (3) are not worth your worship

In particular:

not worth your worship

As he creates evil, so does he create people who deem him unworthy of worship. I am of the belief that God did not create physics to merely break it when someone asks.

nobody can cover a two-dimensional surface with two-dimensional circles, without making them overlap.

I'd point out that you can do this quite easily. Suffice to say, all the circles will have the same origin.

It is impossible to add the numbers two and two and get 300.

Addition does not take place.

Some people say that he can only do things that are logically possible to do, but what is?

The above are logic puzzles, and the below, physics puzzles.

Is it logically possible to walk on water?

Uh... Things do it all the time?

Is it logically possible to rise from the dead?

Let me tell you the story of the frog that hibernates by freezing solid...

Is it logically possible to stand above time, space and all other dimensions - and still exist?

Why don't you go there and find out?

It does no good to provide a question for which the answer cannot be known when confined to human limits. Additionally, one might note that you used the phrase "logically possible," and in doing so, prevent the current model of physics from being an absolute truth.

If everything must have been created, then god must have been created as well.

But as you say, God must be above time. The word "been" implies a past to compare to the present, and hence, time.

If god is not created, then everything mustn't have a creator, so why should life or cosmos have one?

But in such a case that no thing was created but still yet exists, one would be inclined to think it probable that anything and everything, including God, exist.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

Ugh, back in the thread... Those arguments are against A) Judeo-Christian God, B) (A) god/s that cares if we care about him/her/it/them

I also have seen definitive proof of a god anyways. A friend and I carpool to campus and back. We're getting into his Jeep, and stop dead in our tracks. A granola bar wrapper was stuck on the side of the front passenger-side chair. It was like a seventy degree angle. I challenge you to look me straight in the eyes and tell me some sort of divine being was not totally jerking our chains.

 

[CMarket]

Some part of the human that persists after death is not synonymous with existence of God. In fact, they can be mutually exclusive.

I sure hope you're right. Otherwise, everything we do is useless and pointless, at least in the long run.

As he creates evil, so does he create people who deem him unworthy of worship. I am of the belief that God did not create physics to merely break it when someone asks.

He can still prove that he exists by not breaking physics. There are plenty of ways various coincidences can happen so much to the point that even an atheist would see that that's too much coincidence for it not to be something more.

Addition does not take place.

I don't understand what you mean here.

Uh... Things do it all the time?

Things, yes. Water spiders too. But man?

Let me tell you the story of the frog that hibernates by freezing solid...

I was referring to resurrection in a Jesus Christ kind of way.

I'd also like to add something about religion in general. If god is so mysterious, how can we know anything about him? Through the Bible? How do we know that the Bible and not the Koran or the Vedha books, for example, are the words of god? (or the bible if you believe in any of the other two books). Considering the cruelties that have been made in the name of god, how do we know that not all religions are made by Satan?

If there is no way to know this but to trust people who claim they have had "divine experiences" there is no way to tell true from false prophets.

Also, I believe that people who claim to believe in god do not really do so, at least half of them anyway. They just wish to believe in god. They somehow feel that their lives are meaningless without god. My personal experience has taught me that some even believe in god because "it's better to believe than not believe. If you believe and you're wrong nothing happens. If you don't believe and you're wrong you burn in hell". These people, in my opinion, aren't real believers either.

Many people justify their faith with god as an explanation. What is the meaning of life? Where does time and space come from? Who created the physical constants? et cetera. Because we lack knowledge of these things - and maybe never will, since they are questions like "what is the color of a second?" or "how does sound taste?" - god is there as an explanation.

Let's say that god is the meaning of life, what then is the meaning of god? If god has a nature, who created that nature? If god created time and space, how can god exist without it? Since creation is an event in time, how could god create time? and who created god? To answer these questions god must be almighty, or else you can't explain them.

One more thing. A paradox, but still. If god is indeed all might he can create everything, no matter how silly or stupid. Now, if god can create everything he can create a rock that is too hard for him to carry. But if god is almighty he can carry everything and therefore he can't create a rock that is too heavy. But if he can't create a rock that's too heavy that means that he isn't almighty.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

Omnipotence includes defying logic.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

The thing I would like to know if you know about, is the thing that experiences your senses, emotions, and thought.

Do you know this concept of which I speak?

Why can our conscience not be encompassed by the brain?

I sure hope you're right. Otherwise, everything we do is useless and pointless, at least in the long run.

Was there ever a point? Does there need to be? I live my life so I can enjoy it. Is that not enough? Tell me, what would you consider a recognizable achievement, or a valid point to something?

IHe can still prove that he exists by not breaking physics. There are plenty of ways various coincidences can happen so much to the point that even an atheist would see that that's too much coincidence for it not to be something more.

How can one prove its existence beyond a reasonable doubt when he is the one who created reason? If our logic and our life is his signature, how can doing what he wouldn't normally do be considered an act on his part?

Also, I believe that people who claim to believe in god do not really do so, at least half of them anyway. They just wish to believe in god. They somehow feel that their lives are meaningless without god. My personal experience has taught me that some even believe in god because "it's better to believe than not believe. If you believe and you're wrong nothing happens. If you don't believe and you're wrong you burn in hell". These people, in my opinion, aren't real believers either.

When you want to believe something, all arguments against it have a tendency to disappear.

"what is the color of a second?"
"how does sound taste?"

Green and salty.

One more thing. A paradox, but still. If god is indeed all might he can create everything, no matter how silly or stupid. Now, if god can create everything he can create a rock that is too hard for him to carry. But if god is almighty he can carry everything and therefore he can't create a rock that is too heavy. But if he can't create a rock that's too heavy that means that he isn't almighty.

Should an omnipotent deity exist, it would not be restricted to our logic.

 

[Hakeem]

Omnipotence includes the ability to remove your omnipotence.


No matter what way you slice it, the question of the origin of the cosmos is always there. I have never heard anyone give a reason why it exists. If you go far enough backwards in time, you get to a point of absolute cosmic nothingness. How, then, does the cosmos exist? Maybe by telling you I have an explanation you'll actually try to think of an explanation instead of shrugging it off as impossible to know, when you do not know if it is impossible to know.

Until you can give me an alternate explanation, the only conceivable way I can think of to rationalize the existence of the cosmos, is though a process in which God exists.


Also, maybe, juuuuuuust maybe, there are differences between all the holy texts, and one of them, says something so profound, that the only conclusion is that something, whether it be God or aliens, is setting up events in such a way that they want us to believe in that religion.

Why can our conscience not be encompassed by the brain?

Because no component of physics has these properties. We cannot explain these properties even if we did find anything. We just know and experience them.

 

[CMarket]

Was there ever a point? Does there need to be? I live my life so I can enjoy it. Is that not enough? Tell me, what would you consider a recognizable achievement, or a valid point to something?

What I meant to say was, if this is all there is than the only point of life is to life it to the fullest. To always do what you want to do and not what you should do(well, don't take it literally). The thing is that if this is all there is than it won't matter how much you've achieved, how many kittens you've saved, how many dollars you gave to charity. I mean, it will mean something to the people you've helped and their children but eventually they'll die as well so, as I said, in the long run it would be pointless.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

What I meant to say was, if this is all there is than the only point of life is to life it to the fullest. To always do what you want to do and not what you should do(well, don't take it literally). The thing is that if this is all there is than it won't matter how much you've achieved, how many kittens you've saved, how many dollars you gave to charity. I mean, it will mean something to the people you've helped and their children but eventually they'll die as well so, as I said, in the long run it would be pointless.

I help people because doing so makes me feel like a better person. Religious or not, we all have a sense of morality, and satisfying it is like eating good food.

 

[Elenai]

Religion for me wasn't a choice of : "do good and get to heaven." it was "Alright Elenai, you've done things you can't make up for with community service, so...here is a pardon, and now that you are clean, go out, and do good things and while you are doing them, remember that you aren't doing them now to get into Heaven, but instead because you are now clean, and are now able to do these things not out of guilt, but out of the sheer pleasure of doing them because it is the right thing to do." In essence, much like Myspacebarbroke said, I do not do good for the sake of Heaven, but for the sake of doing it. However, I do so now with a clean and 'the bill is covered' heart. That is what my faith is for atleast. Took down the barrier or fear, so that I could focus on good for goodness sake, after receiving the freedom of Salvation. To use MSBB's food analogy: "God gave me a sink to wash my dirty hands in, before I began to eat for the satisfaction of eating. After having my hands washed...I don't taste the dirt."

If god is almighty there are several qualities he must have. They are as follows: - He must know everything. Everything that is, everything that has been and everything that will be. To be able to know everything that will be he must know every position and every momentum of every particle in cosmos. - He must be worth our worship. A being that is not worth worshiping is no god. - He must be able to do anything. If there are things that god can't do, he certainly is not omnipotent. - He must be above time. But not only that, god must stand above all possible dimensions. - He cannot be 'good' or 'evil' or, indeed, have any subjective characteristic. If god is all good, he cannot do evil things and cannot be almighty. Most people would object and say that good can do evil but chooses not to do it. Well, if god is all good he can't choose to do evil things, can he? Good = the intended balance of the universe. Evil = perversion of that balance. "Good is a clean sheet, evil is spreading mustard on it" Good and Evil are not 'two bowls on an old pair of scales', you are either perfect, or you are perverted. God has not been deformed, and neither can he be since this is his universe, and his rules thusly. Keep that in mind when using 'good/evil' arguments. If the evil in the world is intended by god he is not good. If it violates his intentions he is not almighty. God can't be both almighty and good. There are many objections to this, but none that holds since god is ultimately responsible for the existence of evil. Besides, if only god can create he must have created evil. If somebody else (the devil) created evil, how can one know that god, and not Satan created the universe? God created everything in a perfectly intended balance "And he saw that it was good", he did not create evil, evil 'became' when members of said creation, deformed themselves, and became 'imperfect', and evil, by disrupting the intended order. They fell, and everything they perverted fell with them. Another thing is that there is a test, based on the ontological evidence against god, that you can do to try the existence of god. Pray, and ask god to provide you with a clear proof for his existence within a week. If he doesn't, there are only three reasons I can think of that are plausible: (1) God does not exist, (2) God does not want to or (3) God can't give you this evidence. Because of the ontological evidence, alternative (2) and (3) are not worth your worship and thus they equal alternative (1). So if you get no response there is no god. Testing God, is like a gnat saying to another gnat, "Test this Human, and see if he really is a living thing that invented the strange boxes of deadly light (bug zappers), or is just a giant moving object that we feed upon". We are infact, less than gnats, in that regard. Also, there are things that are impossible to do. For example nobody can cover a two-dimensional surface with two-dimensional circles, without making them overlap. It is impossible to add the numbers two and two and get 300. The number of things that are impossible to do are almost infinite. If god were to be almighty he would be able to do them, but it's impossible to do so. Some people say that he can only do things that are logically possible to do, but what is? Two loves of bread, and two little fishes...God's universe, God's rules. Is it logically possible to walk on water? ...localized temporary defiance of gravity. Or even the case of the Jesus Christ lizard...sure..he has to run on the water...but it is 'possible'. Is it logically possible to rise from the dead? We do it all the time, how else are aneurysm's taken care of... Is it logically possible to stand above time, space and all other dimensions - and still exist? Yes. Is it impossible for me to stand over a bowl of cereal that I made, and still be 'outside' that bowl? Does a worm realize that there are stars in the night sky? If everything must have been created, then god must have been created as well. If god is not created, then everything mustn't have a creator, so why should life or cosmos have one? Where did matter come from? I was referring to resurrection in a Jesus Christ kind of way. What is the body but a machine made of organic material...fix the machine, put the pilot back in (soul) and there you go...I LIVE AGAINZORZ!! I'd also like to add something about religion in general. If god is so mysterious, how can we know anything about him? Through the Bible? How do we know that the Bible and not the Koran or the Vedha books, for example, are the words of god? (or the bible if you believe in any of the other two books). Considering the cruelties that have been made in the name of god, how do we know that not all religions are made by Satan? God is mysterious because we are like that worm that looks up at the night sky and sees the stars. And then you are given a book about stars, but being a worm (or even a human), you still find the night sky to be very mysterious. If there is no way to know this but to trust people who claim they have had "divine experiences" there is no way to tell true from false prophets. Of course there is. If you know what to look for. Also, I believe that people who claim to believe in god do not really do so, at least half of them anyway. They just wish to believe in god. They somehow feel that their lives are meaningless without god. My personal experience has taught me that some even believe in god because "it's better to believe than not believe. If you believe and you're wrong nothing happens. If you don't believe and you're wrong you burn in hell". These people, in my opinion, aren't real believers either. If you believe in God, you can choose him. If you do not, you do not choose him, and thus you don't get to live in the universe that God has set aside for those who do. You are instead by your own choice sent to a place 'away from him', this is called 'Hell'. Hell however was not made as a prison of fire, and darkness. It was made merely as a place to put people who don't want to be with God, like fallen angels. The only reason it is "Hell" now is because people like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc dwell there, and are free to fulfill all of their guilty pleasures without fear of 'guilt'. In Hell, God is a distant memory, and infact, you are blind to his presence, since you have already chosen that you don't want to feel it. Thus...you are left to your own devices...which are inevitably evil. Put all the evil people in one room, and it will be a horrible place to be. Many people justify their faith with god as an explanation. What is the meaning of life? Where does time and space come from? Who created the physical constants? et cetera. Because we lack knowledge of these things - and maybe never will, since they are questions like "what is the color of a second?" or "how does sound taste?" - god is there as an explanation. Attributes to things, that have not said attributes. God is the (creator/designer/evolver/molder/your choice) of everything, and is present everywhere...that does not mean he is a rock...or that he is made of hydrogen, or is a sound wave. He can wrap portions of himself in said things of course. Like a hand in a sock puppet of matter, and energy. Let's say that god is the meaning of life, what then is the meaning of god? If god has a nature, who created that nature? If god created time and space, how can god exist without it? Since creation is an event in time, how could god create time? and who created god? To answer these questions god must be almighty, or else you can't explain them. God is separate from time and space, in a dimension of his own. What is a dimension, but a word that we created to define "the area, where an area, where things exist". Likewise, a nature need not be created, a nature need only be gained. God is in many ways essentially the consciousness of existence itself. He may have at one point been a mere spark of conciousness, that over trillions of eons before anything was even first formed, became the God we know of today. Being omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent and fully God when the universe was first conceived in his mind, and the path it would take already written down in his imagination. Whether or not the hypothesis I mentioned above is true, does not take anything away from the divinity of God. Even if he was at one point a mere spark, the fact that he is an eternal flame roaring across the eons of eternity...well...it is simply that, he is a blaze at this point, a blaze that is "A God" and which may thus be "The God". One more thing. A paradox, but still. If god is indeed all might he can create everything, no matter how silly or stupid. Now, if god can create everything he can create a rock that is too hard for him to carry. But if god is almighty he can carry everything and therefore he can't create a rock that is too heavy. But if he can't create a rock that's too heavy that means that he isn't almighty. It is easy for God to create a rock too heavy for him to lift. All he has to do is manifest a portion of himself in a form that finds the rock too heavy to lift. Use a mortal's body as a sock puppet, and try to lift it with the natural strength of the mortal. God does not give up his omnipotence, or his omni-self. But he still finds the rock too heavy to lift, until he decides to do it another way, and lifts it thus. He is almighty, he simply limited himself for that moment, to prove a point.

 

[brad.dude03]

Ugh, back in the thread... Those arguments are against A) Judeo-Christian God, B) (A) god/s that cares if we care about him/her/it/them

I also have seen definitive proof of a god anyways. A friend and I carpool to campus and back. We're getting into his Jeep, and stop dead in our tracks. A granola bar wrapper was stuck on the side of the front passenger-side chair. It was like a seventy degree angle. I challenge you to look me straight in the eyes and tell me some sort of divine being was not totally jerking our chains.

That's all the proof I'll ever need.

Where do I sign up for this Granolaism?

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

"God gave me a sink to wash my dirty hands in, before I began to eat for the satisfaction of eating. After having my hands washed...I don't taste the dirt."

It's more like God gave you dessert. He gave you further incentive to do good things for people. But at that point, can you still consider yourself finishing your meal for the sake of eating good food, and not just so you can have dessert? The intentions of one who calls himself Christian are no less ambiguous as that of one who calls himself atheist.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

That's all the proof I'll ever need.

Where do I sign up for this Granolaism?

http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/groups/500-granolaism.html

Behold, 500 GET! Surely, more proof of our divine prankers!
... Seriously though, this granola bar thing is getting weird as hell.

 

[Elenai]

It's more like God gave you dessert. He gave you further incentive to do good things for people. But at that point, can you still consider yourself finishing your meal for the sake of eating good food, and not just so you can have dessert? The intentions of one who calls himself Christian are no less ambiguous as that of one who calls himself atheist.

..I meant quite truly "He gave me a sink". Dessert is just a bonus.

I need not dessert to eat my dinner...I would eat my dinner otherwise, dessert is something of a surprise at my house, not expected. I do however need to wash my hands before I eat...I can't stand the thought of eating with dirty hands.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Okay, now this metaphor is really eating out of its own ass. You can't stand the thought of helping people with...what, now?

 

[Elenai]

I think I may have misworded something somewhere along the line...

"Religion does not equal morality"

On this we agree.

Morality = Doing good deeds, and such. (in general)

Religion to me = Washing my hands before I eat.

Morality to me = Like you said: Eating a satisfying meal.

Heaven = a dessert, which at my house we don't expect dessert, it is a bonus that we are surprised with.

I would eat my meal, even without dessert. I would do good deeds, even without the incentive of Heaven.

However, I would not eat my meal (do good deeds) without first washing my hands. Because then I would taste the dirt, with my meal. (I would have a corrupted reason to do good deeds, and my reasoning would not be pure).

I need not dessert to eat my dinner...I would eat my dinner otherwise, dessert is something of a surprise at my house, not expected. I do however need to wash my hands before I eat...I can't stand the thought of eating with dirty hands.

This was a literal statement, to show where I was coming from, IE: connecting what occurs in my real life, to what I was saying prior to that.

I can't stand eating with dirty hands: I therefore, would not want to enjoy a good deed, with corrupt motives.

Did I explain it better this time?

 

[CMarket]

God created everything in a perfectly intended balance "And he saw that it was good", he did not create evil, evil 'became' when members of said creation, deformed themselves, and became 'imperfect', and evil, by disrupting the intended order. They fell, and everything they perverted fell with them.

If god is all mighty than he knew they would fall, as he knows everything that will be, and thusly having not changed that he didn't stop the creating of this deformities even though he knew they would happen. Testing God, is like a gnat saying to another gnat, "Test this Human, and see if he really is a living thing that invented the strange boxes of deadly light (bug zappers), or is just a giant moving object that we feed upon". We are infact, less than gnats, in that regard. Do gnats worship us? Do you have a small church in your backyard that gnats built to worship you and light candles for the dead gnats? No. We have a mind, we have free will, "given by god". ...localized temporary defiance of gravity. Oh, come on. At least try to give a plausible explanation. I'm not here to beat down religion, I am here to find somebody that can prove me wrong because I want to believe. Things like this only make me see more and more that that won't happen We do it all the time, how else are aneurysm's taken care of... Same as above. The resurrection was definitely not anything medical. And if it was that would just prove more to the point that Jesus might have been a fake. Yes. Is it impossible for me to stand over a bowl of cereal that I made, and still be 'outside' that bowl? This is another example that's lacking in many aspects. Of course it's possible to be outside of a building and exist, but is it possible to be above time and exist? Where did matter come from? From aliens? From Allah? From god? From Lucifer? From Zeus? From Buda? From Joseph Smith? From a highly complex series of chemical reactions that can only occur in the void? What is the body but a machine made of organic material...fix the machine, put the pilot back in (soul) and there you go...I LIVE AGAINZORZ!! God is mysterious because we are like that worm that looks up at the night sky and sees the stars. And then you are given a book about stars, but being a worm (or even a human), you still find the night sky to be very mysterious. Yeah, except worms don't have a mind. You can't compare a being that acts like a robot on instinct to a human. You can't compare because other creatures on this planet primarily act on instinct while the human acts as he wishes. Of course there is. If you know what to look for. Yeah, I'm sure you would say god and Jesus Christ, a Muslim would say Mohamed and Allah while some African tribesmen will think that the crocodile is the all might prophet. Once again I'm not trying to beat down religion, but if there are so many of them and if only one of them is true it's pretty much based on where you're born and what the people in your surroundings believe. You are instead by your own choice sent to a place 'away from him', this is called 'Hell'. Hell however was not made as a prison of fire, and darkness. It was made merely as a place to put people who don't want to be with God, like fallen angels. The only reason it is "Hell" now is because people like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc dwell there, and are free to fulfill all of their guilty pleasures without fear of 'guilt'. In Hell, God is a distant memory, and infact, you are blind to his presence, since you have already chosen that you don't want to feel it. Thus...you are left to your own devices...which are inevitably evil. You speak of it as if you've been there. For all you know hell might be a green swamp, a boiling pot of yellow water or nothing at all. Your rationalization of hell is somewhat logical, but it might be completely wrong, especially if it's Lucifer's domain. It is easy for God to create a rock too heavy for him to lift. All he has to do is manifest a portion of himself in a form that finds the rock too heavy to lift. Use a mortal's body as a sock puppet, and try to lift it with the natural strength of the mortal. God does not give up his omnipotence, or his omni-self. But he still finds the rock too heavy to lift, until he decides to do it another way, and lifts it thus. He is almighty, he simply limited himself for that moment, to prove a point. Just think for a minute about this statement. If he can lift it in another way that means that he can't create a rock that is too heavy for him which means he isn't all mighty. Once again, please don't let my comments offend you. I don't want to bash religion, I just want to see an explanation that's at least remotely plausible. Oh, and a note to the "doing good deeds" comments. You do them for selfish reasons, because it makes you feel good at the very least. You do something completely self-sacrificing and then you can look yourself in the mirror and say "I helped someone today". It makes you feel good. I'm not saying I don't do good deeds. I do them a lot, but that's because I like helping people.

 

[Hakeem]

From a highly complex series of chemical reactions that can only occur in the void?

There are no chemicals in the void, and where did this void come from anyway?

Yeah, except worms don't have a mind.

An apt analogy to an omniscient mind. The point of the analogy was that there are things beyond mortal comprehension.

a Muslim would say Mohamed and Allah

That would be the conclusion, not the evidence.

if there are so many of them and if only one of them is true it's pretty much based on where you're born and what the people in your surroundings believe.

If truth is relative, it isn't truth.

If he can lift it in another way that means that he can't create a rock that is too heavy for him which means he isn't all mighty.

Omnipotence includes the ability to remove your omnipotence.

Oh, and a note to the "doing good deeds" comments. You do them for selfish reasons

As opposed to being self-destructive?

You do something completely self-sacrificing and then you can look yourself in the mirror and say "I helped someone today".

And if I don't look myself in the mirror?

 

[Aschy]

I'm curious if it is possible to believe in Life after Death if you do not believe in some kind of God's or w/e, I'm just saying things always happen for a reason and this is a good example you can't save things to a computer with no hard drive.

Who the fuck remembers what your soul is or what your memories are or any of that shit your personality, your physical features, your sins, your charity, etc? Like is it even possible to pull information of someone from absolutely nothing say if we had a machine that could resurrect people? Wouldn't that mean that even people that didn't exist would have the possibility of being risen to life? Because who the shit would makes sure that a Life after Death system goes down, mother nature?

 

[CMarket]

If truth is relative, it isn't truth.

That's exactly what I said. I said that most people believe in stuff their parents, friends, surrounding people believe, be it Islam, Christianity, Mormonism and so on. The point is, if there is only one truth, one god, one correct religion, that means that most of the world's population will be wrong in their beliefs simply by being born in the wrong part of the world.

Now please don't try to make a comment based on semantics as you usually do as it is going nowhere fast and I am being far more skeptic about finding an answer here. I said if there is only one god and one right religion, not if there are more.

 

[Killer_Mushroom]

After death you get reincarnated as an earthworm or galaxy or something or else you go to some place made of marshmallows.

 

[Elenai]

If god is all mighty than he knew they would fall, as he knows everything that will be, and thusly having not changed that he didn't stop the creating of this deformities even though he knew they would happen.

Of course he did, and he gave them the choice to do so, and already had a plan to make things ten times better than before.

He made lemon meringue pie out of the lemons.

Do gnats worship us? Do you have a small church in your backyard that gnats built to worship you and light candles for the dead gnats? No. We have a mind, we have free will, "given by god".

We are still gnats compared to God, and the hypothetical personification of gnats comparison that I made still stands.

Oh, come on. At least try to give a plausible explanation. I'm not here to beat down religion, I am here to find somebody that can prove me wrong because I want to believe. Things like this only make me see more and more that that won't happen

I did...It shouldn't be too difficult for God to perhaps defy gravity, or make himself weightless, or make a body weightless.

However, it is not a matter of proving someone wrong to make them believe, you believe because you want to.

If you want to believe...then believe, it is as simple as that. There is nothing wrong with believing in something like God, and if we are wrong, so what? We had a good run and did good things along the way.

Believe, it is your choice to make, not mine.

"To be, or not to be...Why should that be a question? Just 'be'."

Yeah, except worms don't have a mind. You can't compare a being that acts like a robot on instinct to a human. You can't compare because other creatures on this planet primarily act on instinct while the human acts as he wishes.

I was again using a personification comparison. A worm looking up at the night sky, is like us looking up at God.

Yeah, I'm sure you would say god and Jesus Christ, a Muslim would say Mohamed and Allah while some African tribesmen will think that the crocodile is the all might prophet. Once again I'm not trying to beat down religion, but if there are so many of them and if only one of them is true it's pretty much based on where you're born and what the people in your surroundings believe.

I was thinking more along the lines of L Ron Hubbard, or Jose Miranda De Jesus, or that random druggy that says "I am Christ reincarnated!".

For belief, it is a simple matter of looking at things and making a choice.

I chose Christianity because it made the most sense. Sure, I had help from my environment, but when I was old enough (15) and looked at things around me I chose it in full, and without environmental pressure. I was prior to that, researching the other faiths, and other cultures. Christianity offered full redemption without any haggling with God. It was clean, simple, and free, with no strings attached, and no fear of failure in its promise. So..I chose it.

My suggestions, 'give what you are seeking, an honest effort', that's all it takes usually.

You speak of it as if you've been there. For all you know hell might be a green swamp, a boiling pot of yellow water or nothing at all. Your rationalization of hell is somewhat logical, but it might be completely wrong, especially if it's Lucifer's domain.

Hell is Lucifer's prison, not his domain. He is currently not 'in' Hell either, he is wandering about as a spirit of malice, offering the choice to be away from God, where as Christ offers the choice to be with him. Lucifer is however, fallen, and will use treacherous means to offer his choice, even attempt to force it. Thankfully he is not omnipotent, and therefore, limited.

As for what Hell is like: I have not described 'what it looks like', only 'what it is'.

Just think for a minute about this statement. If he can lift it in another way that means that he can't create a rock that is too heavy for him which means he isn't all mighty.

But he can put himself in a form that cannot lift it. And then exit said form, and lift it.

He is almighty, because he can do both.

"I am in the form of a rabbit, I cannot lift this rock. But behold, I have exited this rabbit's body, and I am now a spirit, watch as I manipulate gravity to lift this rock."

Once again, please don't let my comments offend you. I don't want to bash religion, I just want to see an explanation that's at least remotely plausible.

No offense taken. Sometimes the best plausible answer is the one you come up with yourself.

Oh, and a note to the "doing good deeds" comments. You do them for selfish reasons, because it makes you feel good at the very least. You do something completely self-sacrificing and then you can look yourself in the mirror and say "I helped someone today". It makes you feel good.
I'm not saying I don't do good deeds. I do them a lot, but that's because I like helping people.

Everyone likes doing good deeds, it is supposed to feel good.

That however, is not the purpose of religion, or belief. Morality is built into everyone, whether or not it is buried or turned off. But the problem is, that we get dirty and grimy while we are doing said good deeds, or especially evil deeds.

Religion is where you take a bath, get the grime off, and look presentable while you are doing good deeds.

"Helping grandma pick up sticks in the yard is a good deed...but it wont shampoo your greasy hair."

 

[Japut3h]

"I am in the form of a rabbit, I cannot lift this rock. But behold, I have exited this rabbit's body, and I am now a spirit, watch as I manipulate gravity to lift this rock."

But what if it was up to him to make a rock that he himself cannot lift, without changing forms?

 

[Elenai]

But what if it was up to him to make a rock that he himself cannot lift, without changing forms?

I'm sure he could figure out how to 'not' do it somehow...that is what "omnipotence" is for.

"I can't lift it...because I don't want to."

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

I would eat my meal, even without dessert. I would do good deeds, even without the incentive of Heaven.

However, I would not eat my meal (do good deeds) without first washing my hands. Because then I would taste the dirt, with my meal. (I would have a corrupted reason to do good deeds, and my reasoning would not be pure).



This was a literal statement, to show where I was coming from, IE: connecting what occurs in my real life, to what I was saying prior to that.

I can't stand eating with dirty hands: I therefore, would not want to enjoy a good deed, with corrupt motives.

Did I explain it better this time?

Yes. Now answer this: Where is the corruption in my motives? Considering this is the very thing I've been arguing since I started using that metaphor, I'd really like to know. In fact, that was the very first thing I've stated. I do good things because they make me feel like a better person the same way eating good food makes me feel good. And you state I should wash my hands. Is there some kind of incentive more pure than doing good things for the sake of doing good things? Is there some little ninja lying in the back of my head that's the source of my feeling good for doing good things, and this ninja is actually having me do good things for another reason?

EDIT:

Everyone likes doing good deeds, it is supposed to feel good.

That however, is not the purpose of religion, or belief. Morality is built into everyone, whether or not it is buried or turned off. But the problem is, that we get dirty and grimy while we are doing said good deeds, or especially evil deeds.

Religion is where you take a bath, get the grime off, and look presentable while you are doing good deeds.

"Helping grandma pick up sticks in the yard is a good deed...but it wont shampoo your greasy hair."

...So that's all religion is to you? Giving a good first impression? Whew, I thought I was missing something big here.

 

[Elenai]

...So that's all religion is to you? Giving a good first impression? Whew, I thought I was missing something big here.

As a way to keep my self not only presentable to God, and others...but also as a way to be clean, pure, and healthy....seems good to me...what seems to be the problem?

Should it be anything else?

Or

Should I use it for what it is intended...

On your part, I think you may have read a little bit too much into the general metaphor that I presented.

Yes. Now answer this: Where is the corruption in my motives? Considering this is the very thing I've been arguing since I started using that metaphor, I'd really like to know. In fact, that was the very first thing I've stated. I do good things because they make me feel like a better person the same way eating good food makes me feel good. And you state I should wash my hands. Is there some kind of incentive more pure than doing good things for the sake of doing good things? Is there some little ninja lying in the back of my head that's the source of my feeling good for doing good things, and this ninja is actually having me do good things for another reason?

I wasn't directing my statement at you personally. However:

Would you rather eat a sandwich with clean hands...or dirty? If you are hungry you'll eat anyway...But...

Shall I pass the soap?

As for the incentive:

Yes...there is a reason God wants 'purity' above simply 'being good'.

He expects you to do good things. He wants you to be pure. He will only allow those who are pure into his presence. If I were covered in mud would your mom let me into your home? Why should God then allow someone caked with dirt into his house?...We who are all covered in muck.

God will of course be happy with you doing good deeds. But you still need to be clean to walk in the front door.

 

[Hakeem]

I'm curious if it is possible to believe in Life after Death if you do not believe in some kind of God

It most certainly is. A soul could be a natural occurrence just like the rest of the universe.

The point is, if there is only one truth, one god, one correct religion, that means that most of the world's population will be wrong in their beliefs simply by being born in the wrong part of the world.

Then maybe they ought to have open minds and research these things, eh? (Or have internet access. )

The way you had phrased it before could have been interpreted as, "If A, B, C, exist, Then A, B, C, are false."

 

[Aschy]

The point is, if there is only one truth, one god, one correct religion, that means that most of the world's population will be wrong in their beliefs simply by being born in the wrong part of the world.

Well this is true because I hope there isn't 2 causes for the earth ><. Aside from that if it is like you said in the quote I think he would make sure everyone is treated equally. I'm sure we would not have to show the "Almighty One" the Declaration of Independence.

 

[CMarket]

He expects you to do good things. He wants you to be pure. He will only allow those who are pure into his presence. If I were covered in mud would your mom let me into your home? Why should God then allow someone caked with dirt into his house?...We who are all covered in muck.

You can't know what he expects. For all you know the correct religion is satanism

P.S. The metaphors are getting annoying and confusing in some parts...

 

[Elenai]

You can't know what he expects. For all you know the correct religion is satanism

I do know what he expects, common sense dictates it.

If we are humans, flawed, and etc, and we still expect good, but want purity, and were designed as such, then God being perfect should by reasonable conclusion 'expect good, and want purity' even more.

P.S. The metaphors are getting annoying and confusing in some parts...

If you prefer I could use the strict Latin terms that not even I would understand, and proceed to go the pharisee route...

 

[PurplePoot]

You're assuming:

A) All humans share your definition of purity.
B) A god would be perfect.

Both of which are not certain (in fact, the first is entirely wrong).

 

[Elenai]

A) All humans share your definition of purity.

Purity is, and always will be: Without blemish, or flaw, or pollutant.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/purity

Any form of sin is a corruption, a blemish, a flaw. Humans are rife with it.

B) A god would be perfect.

If I created a universe, and was god over it, I would be perfect in said universe, by the sheer force of 'I am, what I say I am'.

He is perfect, by his own definition of perfect, a definition he can make, if we assume correctly that he made that which is to be defined.

Luckily God also enacts such qualities as mercy, and etc, while also being just.

 

[Aschy]

You're assuming:

A) All humans share your definition of purity.
B) A god would be perfect.

Both of which are not certain (in fact, the first is entirely wrong).

I'm not sure if you wanted the definition of purity but Elenai gave it to you. But when your a infant your in a sense extremely "pure" and you do things to taint it yourself, your conscience will dictate this.

Unless you break your conscience from a young age, which is entirely possible to.

 

[PurplePoot]

Yes, but what is pure is what varies person to person.

--

Elenai, you assume a god's definition of perfect is in line with your own. Also, you assume that there is only one god.

 

[Elenai]

Elenai, you assume a god's definition of perfect is in line with your own.

Well...I assume that if I created a world, and made up the rules, that I would be perfect in that world, since I am the one who would have defined perfection. If that makes sense.

Also, you assume that there is only one god.

I believe, but I don't merely assume, there was afterall, quite a bit of thought put into it on my part.

There is afterall, only one consciousness inside every person (multiple personalities/manifestations of said conciousness do not count as multiple consciousness')

And what is God, but the conscious force of creation/existence, and ruler of said creation. He is not merely 'a god' one must remember, but if he is indeed 'the almighty' then he is indeed alone, being 'the'.

That is how I've broken it down at least. Others believe in multiple weak gods, vying amongst one another in cycles, and with human natures...I found such an answer to be insufficient, since then the universe would be inconsistent, where as it usually is, in the most general sense of consistency.

Yes, but what is pure is what varies person to person.

I don't believe anyone would look at a person who has been a well known prostitute for 30 years, and say "she's a pure and innocent virgin".

Purity may be interpreted differently by different people, people may use synonyms, or make excuses, or even twist the idea. But purity remains at its core "without blemish", or else if it did not mean "without blemish" it would be a completely different word.

"A fish is a fish. A cat is not a fish. A shark is a different sort of fish...but it is still a fish. A whale looks like a fish...but it isn't. A fish is a fish."

What is 'purity' is not defined by what mankind thinks it is, but 'purity' is defined by what 'it is' already by its nature. We just gave it a name.

 

[PurplePoot]

I don't believe anyone would look at a person who has been a well known prostitute for 30 years, and say "she's a pure and innocent virgin".

Obviously not, since two out of the three words you used means she never had sex.

Purity may be interpreted differently by different people, people may use synonyms, or make excuses, or even twist the idea. But purity remains at its core "without blemish", or else if it did not mean "without blemish" it would be a completely different word.

But the definition of "without blemish" varies.

What is 'purity' is not defined by what mankind thinks it is, but 'purity' is defined by what 'it is' already by its nature. We just gave it a name.

Its nature is an interpretation by humankind.

Well...I assume that if I created a world, and made up the rules, that I would be perfect in that world, since I am the one who would have defined perfection. If that makes sense.

But seeing as you as a human cannot know what this definition of "perfect" is, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[CMarket]

/snip

I agree. You don't make really solid points and you only see one side of the argument, your side.

 

[Elenai]

But the definition of "without blemish" varies.

Elaborate?

Its nature is an interpretation by humankind.

An interpretation, is but a liquid idea, based on something solid.

But seeing as you as a human cannot know what this definition of "perfect" is, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

But a being like God would, if he created the idea in the first place.

 

[PurplePoot]

Elaborate?

Maybe someone considers "without blemish" to be "incredibly successful" while someone else considers it to be "incredibly kind."

An interpretation, is but a liquid idea, based on something solid.

No, to base X on Y you need knowledge of Y. As we have no knowledge of what "absolute purity" would be, we cannot base anything on it.

But a being like God would, if he created the idea in the first place.

But you can't relate it to reality.

 

[Elenai]

Maybe someone considers "without blemish" to be "incredibly successful" while someone else considers it to be "incredibly kind."

The kind rapist, the successful billionaire who cheated for his millions, the merciful murderer, the generous thief, the honest liar.

Without Blemish, is an odd thing is it not?

No, to base X on Y you need knowledge of Y. As we have no knowledge of what "absolute purity" would be, we cannot base anything on it.

Then...How could anyone hope to achieve it?

But you can't relate it to reality.

Why not?

 

[PurplePoot]

The kind rapist, the successful billionaire who cheated for his millions, the merciful murderer, the generous thief, the honest liar.

Without Blemish, is an odd thing is it not?

Notice how you, in those descriptions, are making assumptions of "without blemish" means - your definition is circular.

Then...How could anyone hope to achieve it?

You can't. That's what I've been getting at for a while.

Why not?

Because you can't know what a god would think.

 

[Elenai]

Notice how you, in those descriptions, are making assumptions of "without blemish" means - your definition is circular.

Alas, I was but musing on the failures of every human being, of whom does not meet the definition of 'blameless, and pure'.

Purity is to be without pollutant, and sinful natures are pollutant.

You can't. That's what I've been getting at for a while.

And the leading point has thus been made

Doing good deeds is all fine and dandy, that is what God expects, but what we lack, and what he wants, is purity.

That is the point of 'Religion', over morality. You can't get close to God, if you smell like garbage.

Because you can't know what a god would think.

But what God thinks, is if God is indeed 'the god' of the universe, already made apparent in how he has manifested his purpose to mankind.

---

There is more of a point I am trying to make, and my vocabulary and etc is a little shaky, but I am a bit weary, and will try to explain it a little better tomorrow. And I may need to write something like a summary to fully compile what I've been trying to say.

 

[PurplePoot]

Alas, I was but musing on the failures of every human being, of whom does not meet the definition of 'blameless, and pure'.

Purity is to be without pollutant, and sinful natures are pollutant.

But sin is the Judeo-Christian interpretation of purity.

But what God thinks, is if God is indeed 'the god' of the universe, already made apparent in how he has manifested his purpose to mankind.

---

There is more of a point I am trying to make, and my vocabulary and etc is a little shaky, but I am a bit weary, and will try to explain it a little better tomorrow. And I may need to write something like a summary to fully compile what I've been trying to say.

Keep in mind that you often muse as to humankind's shortcomings. If god created them as such, perhaps murderers, liars, cheats, etc, are pure?