Is there an afterlife? [Archive] - The Apricity Forum: A European Cultural Community

Cato

08-11-2009, 03:31 AM

Jung might say that your fear of death results from your disassociation with your ancestral past. An artificial construct, Roman Catholicism and the Abrahamic belief system, was superimposed over holistic and natural beliefs that your pre-Christian ancestors once held, for thousands of years, to be very sacred- the body perished, but the spirit was reborn into its own family or went to the realm of the Gods. Now, death is seen as the worst of all evils; modern westerners have been raised in a belief system (Christianity) that teaches that life and the natural world exists in a fallen state. So, you view death from this perspective and you, now, are at war with deeply-rooted ancestral yearnings (such as a desire for stability in an instable world, which were provided by the legends, myths and rituals in old times).

If your life is lived well and nobly, what matters if you die prematurely? Don't kowtow to empty saviors, merely brush up on the lore of your European forebearers. Even if you don't buy into it, it'll present a much different, richer and satisfactory, worldview than that of the crucified sissy.

The existence of an afterlife is a moot point since, quite honestly, it's the world here and now that matters. What comes after is, well, an afterthought. Yes I believe in an afterlife, but no, I don't know what it'll be like.

Ulf

08-11-2009, 03:31 AM

MOY-jJeOeBk

Short answer: No
Long answer: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

Sorry to disappoint. :(

But this is just my trollish ignorant opinion, please disregard.

Jägerstaffel

08-11-2009, 03:31 AM

No.

sturmwalkure

08-11-2009, 03:33 AM

I meant is there such thing as heaven? Will my soul live on? :( I am just so scared right now. I can't think about falling asleep.

Jägerstaffel

08-11-2009, 03:36 AM

Jägerstaffel

08-11-2009, 03:37 AM

And that is why we have to enjoy what we have now. It's our only option. Do with life as you will.

My motto is "the meaning of life is to give life meaning."

Cato

08-11-2009, 03:37 AM

I meant is there such thing as heaven? Will my soul live on? :( I am just so scared right now. I can't think about falling asleep.

Only God and the Gods know, so to speak what the afterlife is like. I can, however, console you with this bit of wisdom borrowed from the Stoics: if an afterlife exists and you are a good person, then your eternal reward is assured; if no afterlife exists, then you'll descend into eternal, dreamless sleep- happy oblivion.

Goidelic

08-11-2009, 04:38 AM

If you're Agnostic or something, you might want to consider full body vitrification, :) in order to be reawoken and revived in the future.

Frigga

08-11-2009, 04:49 AM

I think that the afterlife depends on you. If you believe something with enough conviction, than it becomes true for you. Do you believe in an afterlife yourself? Then that's what you will have. Do you believe that there is nothing after you die? Then you go off into oblivion. It's all in the energy that is put into something. Lies that are said to be truths enough times that are believed to be true truths evolve into a form of truth. Now, here is the question: What do you want? Find that, and work at it a little every day. That is what will greet you when our mortal coil passes away from us. Surround yourself with those who support you in this way of thinking. They will encourage you, and be a witness to what you are striving for.

anonymaus

08-11-2009, 05:39 AM

Almost certainly not.

"I will not die, it's the world that will end." --Rand, channeling Lucretius

HawkR

08-11-2009, 06:41 AM

All depends on your religion, in blood. Me, I mean there's an afterlife, a Valhalla or the nine underworlds, depends on how and when I'm dying.

Say, if you're of Heathen heritage, only heathenisme will bring you an afterlife, and if you are not a heathen at the time of your death, your soul will wander restlessly in all eternity.

Loki

08-11-2009, 06:46 AM

I meant is there such thing as heaven? Will my soul live on? :( I am just so scared right now. I can't think about falling asleep.

Guys, take it easy on Elfichka. She's experiencing another panic attack. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=79258&postcount=2129) :(

Dear Elfichka

I'll give my honest thoughts when you're feeling better. :bearhug:

All I'm going to tell you right now, is that you are going to outlive me by far! :thumbs up I'll be eaten by the maggots when you will still be having fun. :D So ... don't worry about a thing. You're not about to die! You're going to live long and prosper. :)

Laudanum

08-11-2009, 07:23 AM

Nobody really knows what will happen when we die. But to me that doesn't mean we have to be afraid to die. Death is natural, everything dies. It's just as natural as living. I believe in Germanic mythology, but you can never be sure what happens when your dead. I guess you'll just have to wait and see..

Lulletje Rozewater

08-11-2009, 08:21 AM

An atheist is driving along the motorway on his way home. On the opposite carriageway a large truck swerves but fails to avoid something in the road and blows a tyre. The truck veers across the road and ploughs through the central barrier. The atheist has no chance to avoid the truck and his last thought is "times up!"

The atheist opens his eyes with the memory of the impending crash vivid in his mind. But to his surprise he is not in a smashed car, nor a hospital bed. He feels no pain as he looks around a featureless white room. His mind is reeling. Having been taught about Christianity as a child his first though is that he is in heaven, then, being an atheist, that this is the anteroom to hell. But having no basis for either idea he waits to see what happens.

A short while later a door opens in one featureless wall and two strange looking creatures enter. They approach him and consult a board they are each carrying before speaking. They use a language that is not English, nor any language he recognises, yet he understands it perfectly. They say "Do you know your status?" Uncertainly he replies "Dead?". He speaks in the same strange tongue. They nod and ask "Heaven or hell?" This seems very strange, does he have a choice? "Neither." he says. "What god do you worship?" "None." he says. They tap at their panels and turn toward to door saying "follow us".

He emerges through the door into an unearthly room with a view over a very alien looking city. The two creatures lead him to a third figure who greets him "Welcome. I will debrief you. Take a seat." As he sits he catches a glimpse of himself in a reflective wall panel and realises that he is the same type of strange creature. Part of him is repelled and sickened. Another part is comforted.

The debriefing begins. "Who are you?" He gives his name, in English. "Where are you from?" He names the town of his birth. His companion nods. "In fact you have been in the training room for the entire duration of your Earth life. You have now completed the programme and made a successful transition back to reality. You are not a human from planet Earth, you are a native of this planet and you have just completed a course on primitive culture and superstition at this university." He looks around the increasingly familiar surroundings and knows this is the truth. Already his memories of his 36 years on Earth have taken on the sense of a remembered dream. "So, how did I do?" he asks. His companion answers "Very well. You saw through the many superstitious world views that are prevalent in the simulation and worked out a coherent philosophy based on the limited factual evidence available to you. You have passed the course with distinction. Take a few days here to readjust and one of our careers advisers will visit you to discuss your options." It is coming back to him and he recalls friends that enrolled in the course with him. He asks about them. "Mixed news I'm afraid. One became an evangelical Christian and not only did he fail the course for that, he is still convinced he is in hell and we are all demons. We are having problems deprogramming him. He keeps calling out to Jesus. Very sad. Another friend is finding the course tough and has been retaking modules. He has been seduced by various faiths for a while. When he realizes each is false he just moves onto another. I have hopes that he may still graduate though, eventually. Another friend worked out that she was in a simulation and exited the course early. We don't get many of those, she is an exceptional student. She reminds me of a particular star student who invented his own religion on the course without reference to the pre-programmed religious traditions at all. It was very successful as well. So successful that we have written it into the simulation now. Most students have no problem seeing through it though."

They rise and he goes over to the window to gaze over his home city and reflect on his experiences and ponder his future back in the real world.

Disclaimer: this has nothing to do with anything. Just a story about the meaning life that is as worthless as most others since it lacks any basis in fact. If you see a Truth in it and think it might be an idea you could believe in you may need professional help. ;)

Brännvin

08-11-2009, 08:43 AM

Nobody really knows what will happen when we die.

This is true. :)

Even atheism is a sick religion. People should live their lives without thinking about death, what happens after death no one really knows.

Loki

08-11-2009, 08:56 AM

... what happens after death no one really knows.

The overwhelming evidence and logic says that nothing happens at all. We decompose and become nothing. Like we were before we were born. We didn't exist then, and we won't after the maggots have chewed our last pieces of flesh.

Brännvin

08-11-2009, 09:03 AM

The overwhelming evidence and logic says that nothing happens at all. We decompose and become nothing. Like we were before we were born. We didn't exist then, and we won't after the maggots have chewed our last pieces of flesh.

If you're buried in a garden, part of your organic matter indirectly will be useful for an another form of life, but then something happens. :)

Äike

08-11-2009, 09:24 AM

I want to be assured there is some sort of life after death.

There probably isn't any life after death.

Loki

08-11-2009, 09:35 AM

Individual life in itself is so insignificant (and fleeting), it is hardly worth speculating about. Let's face it, our consciousness is the unfortunate product of billions of years of organic evolution. Our self-awareness is our curse of existence. Life was never meant to become so "advanced", if you may. A mere accident in time.

SweTrash

08-11-2009, 09:52 AM

Awh, gash.. im getting mindshuffled again Dx

Phlegethon

08-11-2009, 10:14 AM

Amarantine

08-11-2009, 10:57 AM

Of course, there is definitely an after-life, but...

...you're going straight to Hell anyway. :p

PS. Sorry if I am being an ass.

make a damage and after so sorry...:rolleyes2:

Amarantine

08-11-2009, 11:11 AM

Of course there is an afterlife.

What is questionable is if there is a life before the afterlife. Judging from my own experience I'd say no.

But I have a long list of people to haunt after my death. ;)

This sarcastic (as usuall:P) post has it's own point-are our lives on the Earth, are some kind of "afterlife" or even purgatorium?

Our lives here are mostly established on materialistic base, but Humans are dual in their essence, so we have our spiritual side, as well.

I do believe in reincarnation and I do believe in spirits and I do believe in Nirvana or whatever some could call the final stage of our being, which will be pure energy. Why? Becouse , the energy is the only thing in Universe which couldn't dissapeared.

I don't believe in Darvin theory,well in certain aspects of that theory...some as natural selection is quite approved.

P.S. I really think, to write this post or not, becouse this is something very personal for me, but if this could open new view and help Elfichka to find out or rich some greater knowledge, I'll be happy. Of course this is just my thinking which could be one day modified:)

sturmwalkure

08-11-2009, 12:31 PM

I just want to be assured my soul will live on. Thanks for the support from those who have been supportive of me in this thread. :( I'll type out more replies later on but I just want to be assured of at least spiritual life after death.

Loki

08-11-2009, 12:42 PM

I just want to be assured my soul will live on.

"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life."

John 5:24 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%205:24&version=31)

Lady L

08-11-2009, 12:45 PM

I'm sending my thoughts in a PM :)

Phlegethon

08-11-2009, 12:57 PM

I just want to be assured my soul will live on.

But females have no soul to live on. ;)

Phlegethon

08-11-2009, 01:00 PM

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 6:23)

Vulpix

08-11-2009, 01:03 PM

Is this going to turn into another psalm thread?

Phlegethon

08-11-2009, 01:06 PM

It is not a psalm, it's a letter. Psalms can be sung. Give it a try. ;)

Vulpix

08-11-2009, 01:07 PM

It is not a psalm, it's a letter. Psalms can be sung. Give it a try. ;)

Thanks not my kind of music ;)

Loki

08-11-2009, 01:08 PM

Thanks not my kind of music ;)

You lack culture ;) :p

Vulpix

08-11-2009, 01:09 PM

Define culture :p

Phlegethon

08-11-2009, 01:10 PM

Thanks not my kind of music ;)

Just tune down the guitars, grow your hair and give it a try!

q7E2j-Ut6iE

Goidelic

08-11-2009, 02:18 PM

The best is to not think about death in my opinion, so when it happens it won't be as shocking. In other words, it shouldn't be a constant thing on someone's mind. :) The problem is when we get to the day when we really can vitrify people for hundreds of years and then wake them up to live another hundred years. People getting cremated and buried will get screwed over, whereas the vitrified will be living. :coffee::mad:

Gooding

08-11-2009, 02:45 PM

An afterlife?Maybe so, maybe no..it might be determined by what you do here on earth, though..:D

Octothorpe

08-11-2009, 03:20 PM

Elfichka, I'm sorry that you feel the way you describe. It's actually a fairly common set of thoughts, and I've encountered them before (I'm wearing my psychologist hat right now). Even more pertinent, I had the same feelings when I was a lad.

I couldn't go to sleep without contemplating death and wondering about the afterlife (if any). What made it worse was the fact that even at a young age I had read the Bible many times and had rejected Christianity as a belief system. As a young man, too smart for his own good, I assumed that science meant atheism, and that the only end is the cool hum of slowly decaying hydrogen in interstellar space. The probelm with this view, is that it is as arrogant as any proclamation by any Pope.

What modern atheists miss is that the question of survival after death of the personality is absolutely unknowable by any rationalistic means. It can't be scientifically disproved OR proved--therefore, using the old Falsifiable Principle, you can't use science/logic/rationalism to answer the question. This does not mean that the question is unanswerable at all--it means you must use one of the many nonlinear methods of thought to find an answer that lets you sleep at night (and if you think that these methods aren't rigorous in and of themselves, you full-on rationalists have a huge conceptional hole in your Bauplan! "Logic is a method of going wrong with confidence").

So, what do you do? Learn as much as you can about nonlinear systems of thought and discovery. Read about as many different thinkers as you can get your hands on--and make sure they disagree with one another or you'll be lead down a dead-end path! Eventually, you'll be able to discard the cold comfort of 'experts' (they've ruined everything, anyway) and make your own, original compromise with entropy.

I found mine in Heathenism/Northern Traditions Paganism, with a heaping dose of Libertarian politics and Transhumanist philosophy. It fits me, but probably won't fit you or anyone else. Just as the human brain/mind/'soul(s)' (if you think it's all electro-chemical, you've not even scratched the surface!) is the most complex phenomenon in the observable universe, no one solution or answer will be complex enough for more than one person at one time.

So, what to do? Elfichka, face your fears! You are a human being, and there is nothing that you cannot do if you choose to do it! Learn, love, create, move, act, play--all these will help you craft what you need. Best of luck!

Baron Samedi

08-11-2009, 04:11 PM

Yes, there is an afterlife.....

You have to construct it yourself from the boughs of Chaos.

Magic will set you free.

Lars

08-11-2009, 04:50 PM

When you die you become worm food.

If it makes you happy you can pretend you live on through your children. You can also think of your dead body gives nutrition to the animals and plant life, and that is a good thing.

Hrolf Kraki

08-11-2009, 04:53 PM

I am so worried lately, that if I die prematurely that that would be that. I want to be assured there is some sort of life after death. If not I wish to be immortal. Even after my body is no longer alive I want to be assured there is some sort of afterlife. My fear of death is only going to increase if there is no such thing as an afterlife. I know there is a variety of religious beliefs here. I used to consider myself Catholic and went to church regularly. But due to anxiety related issues I stopped going. I am at rock-bottom now, with my anxiety and with panic-attacks being regular, my hypochondria and all. I just want to find solace in knowing there is an afterlife. :(

I fret about this exact same thing all the time. I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but there is no solace to be found. There is no evidence for an after-life nor can any ever be found. However, what we can do is use logic and apply it to what we know about the universe in an attempt to come up with a somewhat educated guess. If one can even call it that. Here´s what I´ve found.

Look at the earth and all it´s processes: the water cycle, the life cycle, etc. Now look at the universe. It also exhibits cycles. Stars aren´t eternal. They form from raw materials, live for a while, then die returning it´s atomic constituents to space for yet another star to be formed. (This is what occurred with our own Sun.) It´s no coincidence that not one single atom has been either created nor destroyed since the Big Bang. Atoms are merely recycled. See a pattern yet? These cyclic events rule the universe. In fact, I believe that the universe itself is cyclic. With all these cycles going on, would it make sense for a soul to go elsewhere and simply reside for all eternity? No, it doesn´t. Not only does time and space NOT exist outside the universe, but eventually this "afterlife" location would eventually become infinitely populated.

So what does make sense? Cycles. This is how the universe operates. Why should it not also apply to us? Perhaps a person´s being or essence is preserved by the fabric of space-time only to be used again and again in different living bodies.

But this idea of an afterlife is utterly ridiculous. It just doesn´t mesh with logic and deep intuition.

Inese

08-11-2009, 07:08 PM

I have fear that there is no afterlife also! :( I dont beliefe anything and i have no trust what comes after dead but maybe it will be a surprise and there is something after dead you know?? Maybe maybe maybe!!

Hm i think to myself that when i have children someday then i have done something to the world and i am not total dead because some parts of me live on in my children , and if i can give some other people joy they do not forget about me and i live on in thoughts and in the hearts of people who loved me and who loved i okay?? That are my words of comfort to myself!! And maybe they help you too a little bit! I want to hug you we have simliar fears but there are bad and good times! :hug_002:

Loki

08-11-2009, 07:22 PM

I have fear that there is no afterlife also! :(

I think about this a lot as well. I guess it's human nature to not want to die, and live on forever.

Animals don't really have that fear, because they are not so much self-aware as we are. They don't really think about the future, but only follow their instincts.

Our problem is that we as a species have become self-aware. Thus, we have become conscious of our own shortcomings, and ultimate fate. And, the human brain does not want to accept this. THIS is the primary reason why cultures have created religions ... fear of death, and a desire to make sense of it all.

I still cannot really come to terms with that, in about 5 or 6 decades, I will be very old and probably dead. I won't know anything anymore, won't think at all. Won't even be aware of myself, because I won't be alive anymore. Is this all there is to life? 100 years if you're lucky? It seems so unfair.

How to rationalise all this, and find inner peace? That is the billion dollar question. Normally, religion can fill that void. One can believe in eternal life with God, and therefore be confident and silently happy all your life, until you die. Ignorance really is bliss. Such a scenario is perhaps the most comforting. It won't work for everyone, though. For me, it won't ever work again. My mind has rationalised and come to the conclusion that God, the angels and heaven are not real. Therefore I am left with the conclusion that my fate is sealed -- I WILL DIE. I have accepted it, even though the idea is not pleasant. It is part of what we are ... ALL human beings must die. That is the only thing you can be 100% sure of in your life -- one day you will die.

For me, the best way of coping with this, is to realise that I am very insignificant. And it is true. I am nothing. And so are the rest of you. We are just a breath in time, designed to procreate and pass on our genes to the next generation, then die. So that is what I will attempt to do, eventually.

Óttar

08-11-2009, 08:17 PM

MOY-jJeOeBk
I really liked that movie. I really cracked up at "You won't be around to think 'Gee, I'm dead.'" :rotfl:

It reminds me of the saying displayed in an old catacomb with skulls all about in Italy which reads, "What you are now, we once were, what we are now, YOU WILL BE." :scared:

In Hinduism's most highly developed school Advaita Vedanta, Brahman the Absolute, Prime Mover and totality of creation is one with the atman or Self, so although the body dies, Brahman is eternal. IMO organisms replicate because they are driven to manifest; the same in essence though they differ in form and quality, their Source is the same.

So to restate, Hinduism believes everything but Brahman is an illusion, as only that which is eternal is real. Buddhism on the other hand, disputes the notion of atman or Self with the notion of anatman or not-self, maintaining that even Atman is an illusion. I believe ultimately that these are two sides of the same coin as Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita "I am the Manifest and the Unmanifest." Indeed, I once explained to a Buddhist friend of mine "The essential difference between Hinduism and Buddhism is that Hinduism maintains that All is essentially One, whereas Buddhism maintains All is essentially...None."

The film brings up an interesting point about identity. It says that there will be no "you", but I believe that is not to say that it isn't possible that you may awake to consciousness again as another being. Would it be you as in your exact personality? No. Will it maintain parts of "you" ? Perhaps. But because "you" are really "It" and I believe, "It" never dies, I can sleep better.

As a Shakta, I choose to approach the personal deity as Feminine. The Feminine is the Prototype, the Root, the Foundation. We start out as feminine daughter cells. The Feminine manifests potentialities. She is the source of the gods' power, She is Brahman, She is all that exists, and I will go back to Her because on a metaphysical level, I am Her.

I will leave you with perhaps my favorite verse from the Bhagavad-Gita:

"There never was a time when I nor you, nor the kings were not, and never shall there be a time when we shall cease to be."

Bhagavad Gita (II.15)

Cato

08-11-2009, 08:24 PM

All of you who say there is no afterlife should be ashamed. What threshold of death have you crossed over, like Baldr returned from the grave, to bring us this news? The great malaise of modern man, modern western man in particular, has been the denial of traditional thought forms and traditional legends. This upswell of atheistic and nihilistic nonsense is directly responsible for the mental and emotional mess that so many modern people are in- yet they proponents of such say that they are liberating their fellow humans from the very things that they need to keep them from falling into an existential black hole. For all of its power, science hasn't answered life's eternal questions, try as the technophiles might to use science as a snake oil cure-all for modern man.

Atheism and nihilism weren't a part of mainstream European culture until fairly recently, so how can you want to preserve the very things that you're basically denying have any importance?

Loki

08-11-2009, 08:27 PM

Atheism and nihilism weren't a part of mainstream European culture until fairly recently

Neither were electricity and cars.

Cato

08-11-2009, 08:34 PM

Óttar

08-11-2009, 08:41 PM

by the materialists to offer "proof" as to why the divine doesn't exist, why the afterlife is a fantasy, ad infinitum.

How is materialism wrong? We are matter and we can see and verify it, all else is speculation. I think however that perhaps if we had Shamans and the proper initiation into the use of meditation techniques, or better yet entheogens, we might actually be able to see and understand beyond matter. I am a Libertarian and I believe that anyone should be able to ingest whatever substance they like in accordance with their own judgment.

Cato

08-11-2009, 08:44 PM

How is materialism wrong? We are matter and we can see and verify it, all else is speculation. I think however that perhaps if we had Shamans and the proper initiation into the use of meditation techniques, or better yet entheogens, we might actually be able to see and understand beyond matter. I am a Libertarian and I believe that anyone should be able to ingest whatever substance they like in accordance with their own judgment.

By materialism, I always mean materialism in its strictist sense, the sort of materialistic nonsense that puts forth that the triple existence of body, mind and soul is nonsense and that only the body (i.e. the physical world) exists. This position is as ridiculous as the idea that true bliss only exists in heaven (the spiritual realm).

Barreldriver

08-11-2009, 08:52 PM

I honestly have no evidence to support the existence of an after life (rather in the sense of a place of life after death that is separate from Earth), however I do believe in life after death on Earth at least, reasons being some of the things that I have seen and experienced that have convinced me that the dead "linger".

Also, you can take this p.o.v., when you die you are not completely destroyed, or erased, you decay yes, but the end result of that decay gives nutrients to the soil, and things that live in that soil, so in a sense you are continuing life by providing a source of nutrient for currently non-deceased organisms, and those remains of you will constantly be recycled in the cycles of our planet.

I also believe that the most true form of immortality is achieved through legend and folk lore, if your actions and self are above par, you will be remembered for generations, and your reputation will not die out as long as it was so worthy that it sticks in the minds of men.

"Cattle die, kinsman die, the self must also die, one thing that never dies is the reputation of each man".

Then my arrogant goal: if there is not an afterlife, then I am determined to create one. :D

Cato

08-11-2009, 08:58 PM

I respect the intellectual integrity of people who have no belief in the afterlife, but they're wrong. ;) I'm not going to debate, or try to convince, I'm just going to go on the offense, so to speak, with all guns blazing.

I see such a position as dangerous because it implies that there is no moral order at work in the world (i.e. the Gods or ancestral spirits or the Tao or whatever you believe in), morality is relative (a horrifying thought, since "gay marriage" is now considered normal by some), that human existence is meaningless (although I'll allow for human existence being meaningful because we make it meaningful), that our ancestors were wrong (which they weren't), that our folk culture is worthless (which is not true, because we want to preserve and uphold it), and so on.

I'm not in-between on this issue; I don't think I can be.

Cato

08-11-2009, 09:13 PM

I'll step back from this thread, Odin is driving my mind mad, so I can't risk any further mental instability by batting the ball of theology back and forth with my fellow forum posters. :P

sturmwalkure

08-11-2009, 09:51 PM

Phlegethon

08-11-2009, 09:54 PM

What's there to fear about? I know I am dying prematurely and it does not really bother me at all.

anonymaus

08-11-2009, 09:54 PM

If you fear death to the exclusion of living your life, you've already died.

Electronic God-Man

08-11-2009, 10:00 PM

I am really at rock-bottom at this time in my life. I appreciate those who have been supportive of me but the last thing I need is to hear is there is no afterlife. That's just going to increase my worries by 1000%. It's your opinions sure, but that doesn't mean it's the truth. It's just not what I need to hear. I fear dying prematurely more than anything. I want to live to have kids, grand-kids, and possibly great-grand-kids. Who knows maybe when I am so old I'll be wishing for the release of death but I am young and I fear dying young more than death it's self. :(

A horrible thought, but maybe it will get you to stop stressing out...but you are digging yourself an early grave by worrying so much. You will not die before your time to die. There's nothing you can do about it. Worrying like this only makes an early death more likely. So if you can reason this out this means you should simply stop worrying. That's one simple thing you can do to hopefully boost your longevity.

Now you just have to make sure you don't start fearing the fear of death. :)

sturmwalkure

08-11-2009, 10:07 PM

A horrible thought, but maybe it will get you to stop stressing out...but you are digging yourself an early grave by worrying so much. You will not die before your time to die. There's nothing you can do about it. Worrying like this only makes an early death more likely. So if you can reason this out this means you should simply stop worrying. That's one simple thing you can do to hopefully boost your longevity.

Now you just have to make sure you don't start fearing the fear of death. :)

Thanks, this is not the first time I've been obsessed with premature passing but the best I can do is live each of my remaining (hopefully plentiful) days to their fullest and to do something with my life, something meaningful. At least having a few children so at least my genetic legacy will live on through them. I just need to snap out of this. I know I will. *takes deep breath*

Loki

08-11-2009, 10:24 PM

Eternal Life needn't be boring ... ;)

MK0l2XBMjFA

Goidelic

08-11-2009, 11:05 PM

Speaking of an afterlife Elfichka, this song should cheer you up. :D

hUhVGIecbK8[/QUOTE]

Jägerstaffel

08-12-2009, 12:14 AM

Loki, with all respect to you (since I love your form :D), it's a position that's not even worth responding to at any length. The same tired, old arguments are carted out again and again and again and again and again and again, with the same rhetoric, by the materialists to offer "proof" as to why the divine doesn't exist, why the afterlife is a fantasy, ad infinitum.

It's the same way the Bible-thumpers constantly cart out their own ammunition to "disprove" other religions and "prove" the truth of Christianity. In both cases it's this: we're right and the rest of you are wrong- because we said so and our proof trumps everything else!

All it does is confuse people and sow discord and turn their minds into mush.

It's not to confuse anyone. It's the most reasonable assertion on the whole subject, so therefore it is the one I subscribe to. I don't offer any proof or have any rhetoric regarding it; as the burden of proof lies solely with the people making the claim (in other words; the religionists). I don't spout off long-winded arguments about religion, gods and afterlife - I just say what I believe and also explain what I don't believe.

Just because someone is an atheist doesn't mean they're trying to recruit anyone to atheism or destroy belief in gods or ridicule religionists. I grow tired of hearing that atheists are the these vile, negative, argumentative, myths that people make them out to be.

Atheism means 'without belief in god". That's exactly what it is. It doesn't mean that I have proof there are no gods, or I have proof that religion is wrong or religionists are stupid. All it means is that I lack a belief in gods.

Ulf

08-12-2009, 12:16 AM

I believe in gods but no afterlife. Even the gods are mortal.

Psychonaut

08-12-2009, 01:22 AM

I believe in gods but no afterlife. Even the gods are mortal.

Yep.

As far as I can tell, the only possible logical defense of the eternal existence of the "soul" (which is an entirely separate can of worms that always boils down to the thoroughly ridiculous Cartesian mind/body split) is to deny to ultimate reality of time. This is the case with Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and late Hinduism (i.e. Advaita Vedānta). All of these faiths purport that the temporality we experience is either an illusion (Hinduism and Buddhism) or a temporary construct with a definite beginning and end point that is set in the midst of an otherwise atemporal universe (the Abrahamic faiths). Personally, I find these views of temporality to be entirely indefensible (a view agreed upon by most physicists, phenomenologists, and process thinkers), but if you insist on believing in the eternal existence of your soul, please think the idea through to its logical conclusions and be prepared to defend the idea of a universe in which time does not exist.

Nodens

08-12-2009, 01:31 AM

as the burden of proof lies solely with the people making the claim

The only rational conclusion to this is a suspension of judgment. The assertion that their is no afterlife is no more justified than a belief in one.

"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence." - Carl Sagan

Psychonaut

08-12-2009, 01:44 AM

The only rational conclusion to this is a suspension of judgment. The assertion that their is no afterlife is no more justified than a belief in one.

"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence." - Carl Sagan

But, since no one can ever be absolutely sure of anything, we are constantly forced to pass judgment. Evidence that might invalidate an idea can always be theorized to exist, but in all matters we can only judge with the evidence that is available. While it's true that our understanding of cognition and self-identity as it relates to neurobiology is lacking, it certainly does look more like consciousness is an electro-chemical affair than it does to be something having to do with some kind of non-material "soul" that is exempt from the laws of physics.

Barreldriver

08-12-2009, 02:16 AM

I'm pretty convinced of one possibility, I stumbled upon it during my Junior year in high school, and toyed with it up until this point, then boom, the same things I was studying showed up on my teletoob (the show on the History Channel "The Universe") , and provided further insight to the concepts I have been forming in my head for the past 2 years.

I will give a brief summary (made in a series of points, followed by a closing statement or two), and it may offer some ease of mind in regards to the afterlife debate:

Point one - We individually are faced with multiple choices and possibilities of outcomes.

Point two - When we chose these outcomes our current self goes in the direction that was chosen.

Point three - If you believe in the multiple dimension theories, when we make these choices that catapult ourselves in our current direction in life, there is another copy of ourselves in an alternate universe taking the other direction.

Basically, on Earth right now, we have an infinite number of copies of ourselves, we cannot see these copies due to the barriers between these alternate universes by the rules of dimensional theories, each time we make a split decision one of these copies goes down one path, the other down another.

In other words, I could be debating whether or not I should purchase a new sword, I in this universe, and in this scenario in which I am present, decide to purchase this sword and lets say I end up injuring myself severely due to a lack of safety precaution, and I end up dying from an infection. Well, in a separate universe, at the exact same instant that I purchased the sword in this one I will decide not to purchase it, thus preventing my death. This concept repeats infinitely each and every day since the beginning of existence.

Simply put we are in all places, all possible outcomes at once.

Here is a model to help grasp this concept:

When you shine a laser light through a prism this laser light seems to split, it is still one laser light, but through the prism it is able to reach multiple points at once, say you shine this laser through the prism, one point is shining on a table, the other on a wall, the other on your body, the laser light is still one item, or thing, but in multiple places at once.

Point four - Since there are infinite copies of us in an infinitely growing and multiplying cluster of universes, we truly never cease to exist, in one universe we may die, in another we may discover eternal youth and life and never die, just keep on going.

Point five - Sometimes the barriers between these alternate universes are breached, things come in, things leave, traveling in between these universes. This may explain the paranormal occurrences, for example ghost sightings, seeing gods, angles, mythical creatures whatever you fancy.

Lets say someone dies in this universe and then in the next universe over a breach is made, the same person that died here ends up passing from that alternate universe through the breach and comes into our world, a family member of the deceased in our world sees this alternate persona and thinks "ghost".

Point six: This point here is from my own though process rather than regurgitating heard and read info.

If breaches are able to be made between universes, copies of ourselves from another universe able to come into our universe, then perhaps when we die and disappear from this universe we go to another, a whole new universe that was previously empty of lives that is now being filled with the lives that had previously been lived in other universes. In other words an "after life".

According to the theories of these alternate universes there are new universes constantly being made, either spawning from currently existing universes, much like the manner I have described via the other points, each choice we make spawns a new universe that contains an alternate outcome.

It has been mentioned in these theories that there are other possible ways for universes to be created, some via the energy released from the collision of two universes, some of these universes generated have yet to contain life.

Perhaps when we die, and leave this universe we are able to pass through all dimensional barriers and continue on to a new universe, perhaps one that is empty, thus our "dead" selves are colonizing new worlds, living new lives, literally life after death, an after life.

Figure this now:

The Christian god claims to be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. All powerful, all knowing, all present (present everywhere at once).

Well, we ourselves are just that in a sense, we are omnipresent, we are present in an infinite number of outcomes in an infinite number of events. We are omnipotent, all powerful, for in these alternate universes we can achieve the unheard of, in an alternate universe the same self that is here in this current universe, you and the only you, will be achieving godly achievements of strength and power, a literal if it could be thought, if it could be dreamed, it can and will be. We are omniscient, all knowing, in the sense that since we create all these realities, we think all these possibilities, we literally know all that is or did happen because we made it happen, some of this indirectly or directly known, indirectly known being a hunch, a guess, a random thought that seems preposterous, and perhaps what has been "forgotten", we know it without knowing we know it. Then directly known being what we planned, what we remember, the results of which we can concretely observe and relate to.

So in fact, we are gods, we create our lives, we create our afterlives.

Nodens

08-12-2009, 02:22 AM

But, since no one can ever be absolutely sure of anything, we are constantly forced to pass judgment.

Certainly, but one need not argue with the conviction of the True Believer.

Evidence that might invalidate an idea can always be theorized to exist, but in all matters we can only judge with the evidence that is available. While it's true that our understanding of cognition and self-identity as it relates to neurobiology is lacking, it certainly does look more like consciousness is an electro-chemical affair than it does to be something having to do with some kind of non-material "soul" that is exempt from the laws of physics.

One must also remain aware of the limitations of the available evidence. Until (if ever) Psychology is subsumed into Neuroscience, questions will remain. Furthermore, since when must this 'soul' be exempt for the laws of physics? We could just as easily conceive of the 'soul' as a non-conscious form of energy created by (or interacting with) human biology, existing after one's biological death, but still subject to the laws of entropy. The problem we are faced with is one of presumption. While the eternal soul that remains conscious after biological death may be somewhat dubious, continuation of some type of individual life-force is not in direct opposition to our current understanding of the universe. This does, however, leave us with the problem of identity. Even if one maintains some form of existence, it is questionable whether what remains can justly be said to be an extension of oneself or merely a component of oneself. At the very least, any 'life after death' is likely to be radically different from what one expects. In conclusion, I feel the need to state that while scientific inquiry remains one of the best tool at our disposal, it is also true that the more we learn the less we know.

And some food for thought: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Beyond_the_Wall_of_Sleep

Karaten

08-12-2009, 02:23 AM

Why do things that have no evidence need to be dis-proven? If we accept that all things are true unless dis-proven, then all religions would therefore have equal merit, and due to contradiction makes the ideology of dis-proof being necessary moronic.

Rather, we should follow the ideology of false unless proven. This is why when you state something outlandish, that answers a question that could be answered a million other ways, the excuse of "prove me wrong" is not valid, while "prove it" is quite valid indeed.

And so, I will stand by my position that there is no afterlife until I have acceptable proof that there is one.

Nodens

08-12-2009, 02:26 AM

Psychonaut

08-12-2009, 02:32 AM

One must also remain aware of the limitations of the available evidence.

Agreed, but one cannot function in the world while constantly suspending judgment about everything.

Furthermore, since when must this 'soul' be exempt for the laws of physics? We could just as easily conceive of the 'soul' as a non-conscious form of energy created by (or interacting with) human biology, existing after one's biological death, but still subject to the laws of entropy. The problem we are faced with is one of presumption. While the eternal soul that remains conscious after biological death may be somewhat dubious, continuation of some type of individual life-force is not in direct opposition to our current understanding of the universe.

OK, if you're talking about some kind of temporary continuance of neural patterns, then I'll admit that it might be plausible. Although, as you say, in that case we'd be dealing with something that is decidedly not eternal, but would still be subject to the eventual entropic decay forecast by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. That's certainly a much more believable scenario than the one told to us by Christians et al.

And some food for thought: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Beyond_the_Wall_of_Sleep

One of my favorite of the Master's tales. :thumb001:

In a similar vein, I'm very keen on the type of research conducted by Dr. Stephen LaBerge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_LaBerge).

Guapo

08-12-2009, 02:45 AM

Karaten

08-12-2009, 03:09 AM

I challenge you to solve the Cartesian dilemma
and escape Solipsism.

I don't believe that at all. I have an epistemological ideology, in which I identify the difference between perception and reality. I see perception being constructed of a combination of facts (truth) and beliefs (bias), which are shaped the way we see the world. Reality, (truth, fact) is defined by it's universality, it's absolution, and it's impact on belief.

For example, someone being stabbed. I do not deny the existence of that stabbing, as it can be shown by the universal impact of the stabbing, the absolution of the stabbing, and the impact of the stabbing on belief. Perception would then come in at "the stabbing was justified." or "this was a sick act!" As these opinions are firmly believed, but not universal, and are shaped by bias, such as an opinion of the person, the relevant impact hurting people, and a personal sense or morality.

I look at death like this. Death is proven, people die, it is universal, absolute, and impacts belief. What I cannot accept as truth are the explanations of afterlife, as they do not apply to any of these.

I could go on forever about my ideology to get more in depth, but that's the basis. My point is, my ideology is nowhere as simple as you let it out to be.

Barreldriver

08-12-2009, 03:09 AM

Nodens

08-12-2009, 03:22 AM

I don't believe that at all. I have an epistemological ideology, in which I identify the difference between perception and reality. I see perception being constructed of a combination of facts (truth) and beliefs (bias), which are shaped the way we see the world. Reality, (truth, fact) is defined by it's universality, it's absolution, and it's impact on belief.

For example, someone being stabbed. I do not deny the existence of that stabbing, as it can be shown by the universal impact of the stabbing, the absolution of the stabbing, and the impact of the stabbing on belief. Perception would then come in at "the stabbing was justified." or "this was a sick act!" As these opinions are firmly believed, but not universal, and are shaped by bias, such as an opinion of the person, the relevant impact hurting people, and a personal sense or morality.

I look at death like this. Death is proven, people die, it is universal, absolute, and impacts belief. What I cannot accept as truth are the explanations of afterlife, as they do not apply to any of these.

I could go on forever about my ideology to get more in depth, but that's the basis. My point is, my ideology is nowhere as simple as you let it out to be.

Then you, by default, accept the existence of and meaningful interaction with, an external world. The only evidence you have of this world is your own sensory experience, known to be of dubious reliability. This conflicts with your 'false until proven otherwise' position. My point is principally that as all essential worldviews rely on basic, unprovable (and often unfalsifiable) presumptions, hard skepticism must, if consistently applied, lead to intellectual paralysis. Any rejection of Solipsism must be on pragmatic, rather than evidentiary, grounds.

Karaten

08-12-2009, 03:32 AM

Then you, by default, accept the existence of and meaningful interaction with, an external world. The only evidence you have of this world is your own sensory experience, known to be of dubious reliability. This conflicts with your 'false until proven otherwise' position. My point is principally that as all essential worldviews rely on basic, unprovable (and often unfalsifiable) presumptions, hard skepticism must, if consistently applied, lead to intellectual paralysis. Any rejection of Solipsism must be on pragmatic, rather than evidentiary, grounds.

I explained how I tell the difference between my perception and reality, which you seem to ignore.

Nodens

08-12-2009, 03:33 AM

I explained how I tell the difference between my perception and reality, which you seem to ignore.

You assume a connection between them. Where is the proof of this?

Lyfing

08-12-2009, 03:56 AM

I don't think there is life after death..

Cattle die and kinsmen die,
thyself eke soon wilt die;
but fair fame will fade never,
I ween, for him who wins it.

Cattle die and kinsmen die,
thyself eke soon wilt die;
one thing, I wot, will wither never:
the doom over each one dead.

Havamal 76-77, Hollander trans.

Maybe wyrd won in the world goes around though..

To have a son is good, late-got though he be,
and born when buried his father;
stones see'st thou seldom set by the roadside
but by kith raised over kinsmen.

Havamal 72, Hollander trans.

In my wanderings, I have found that a dualistic notion of there being a mortal body and an immortal soul to be alien from what was held by the ancient Germanic peoples who seemed to hold that the soul was inseparable from the body.

The former notion is necessary for something along the lines of “spiritual evolution” to take place as with say reincarnation, also for any kind of “just rewards” from a Happy ( or Not-So-Happy ) Father who art in Heaven. Both of those are pretty self-serving. And, the focus in on the individual some place and time other than here and now. Other-Worldly rather than Wyrldly.

The latter notion's emphasis is more centered with the community. Because we held, it seems, that the “body is the soul” as opposed to “the soul is in the body” we wanted to get our dead in the ground and keep them there. If they were lucky in life they would bring us luck. We could even make deals with them. They might also walk around as draugar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draugr) and “raise Hel” like something out of Pet Sematary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pet_Sematary).

We buried all of our folk together in our Odal-lands and they brought luck to our Soil in our Blood..

So Frey took the rule after Niord; he was called Drott (or Sovereign) of the Swedes and took scot from them; he had many friends and brought good seasons like his father… In his days began the peace of Frode; then there was also a good season over all the land. The Swedes gave Frey credit for it, and he therefore was much more worshipped than the other gods, as the land folk in his days became richer on account of peace and good seasons than ever before… Frey then fell sick, and as he neared death, his men took counsel, and let few men come to him; and they built a great howe with a door and three holes in it. And when Frey was dead they bore him in loneliness to the howe, and told the Swedes that he was still alive; they watched him then for three years, and all scot they hid down in the howe, in one hole the gold, in another the silver, and in the third copper pennies. The good seasons and peace continued… When all the Swedes marked that Frey was dead, but that good seasons and peace still continued, they believed that it would be so, so long as Frey was in Sweden; therefore, they would not burn him, but called him god of the earth, and ever after sacrificed to him, most of all for good seasons and peace.

Heimskringla, pp. 7-8

Later,
-Lyfing

Karaten

08-12-2009, 04:33 AM

You assume a connection between them. Where is the proof of this?

The universality and absolutism.

To the people who question the existence of reality, I hold two arguments, a one of semantics and one of apathy.

That being, in a semantic sense, I speak of the existence we all share and live, and, in apathy, if there is a higher existence that we cannot affect, it does not matter.

Then consider a law of absolution within nature, that being, there is no need for divine explanation, nor worship, as if it is, then it is, and as such, if it will be punished, then it shall, and if this is absolute and true, then it matters not whether we believe it will.

This is me being open minded in my explanation, mind you.

Amarantine

08-12-2009, 07:40 AM

How many of you have seen or heard a ghost? Well I have and it scared the shit out of me :D There must be some sort of afterlife but what kind is another question. If anyone is wondering, I was staying at my grandmother's house 12 years ago.I was sleeping upstairs while my grandmother slept downstairs since my grandfather past away.I was staying across the room from where he died in his sleep, his heart just stopped.Suddenly, I heard a voice which sounded like a person grasping for air. It sounded like it was getting closer to the door and then in the room but nobody was in there! Somehow I managed to fall asleep, and I've slept there many times after, but I'll never forget that night.Believe it or not.

May be you were just dreaming, and may be not...So this is something what huh well, scare me too. One day when our bodies pass, how our souls will accepted dividing with this materialistic world? Is that a reason for Ghost phenomena? On this world our souls left all these beautiful things, green grass, beautifull sea, blue sky, all kind of smells, touches, worries for our dearest, our wishes...what happened with all those when human dissapeared? Nikola Tesla had a theory that all our thoughts are collected in some level of stratosphera ( I forgot the right name),...

So, sometimes Church is not just an empty bla bla, for example when we ignited a candles for living souls and for pass over souls (to show them a path). I think that is not just a fairytale. I believe in words and symbols, when we pray to our Gods (no matter is that Paganism, or Christianity, the point is absolutly the same).

Guapo

08-12-2009, 10:08 PM

May be you were just dreaming, and may be not...So this is something what huh well, scare me too. One day when our bodies pass, how our souls will accepted dividing with this materialistic world? Is that a reason for Ghost phenomena? On this world our souls left all these beautiful things, green grass, beautifull sea, blue sky, all kind of smells, touches, worries for our dearest, our wishes...what happened with all those when human dissapeared? Nikola Tesla had a theory that all our thoughts are collected in some level of stratosphera ( I forgot the right name),...

So, sometimes Church is not just an empty bla bla, for example when we ignited a candles for living souls and for pass over souls (to show them a path). I think that is not just a fairytale. I believe in words and symbols, when we pray to our Gods (no matter is that Paganism, or Christianity, the point is absolutly the same).

It wasn't a dream.It happened a month after his passing away and as you know in our religion supposedly for forty days after death the soul of the deceased remains in a kind of limbo.

Jägerstaffel

08-13-2009, 12:23 AM

The only rational conclusion to this is a suspension of judgment. The assertion that their is no afterlife is no more justified than a belief in one.

"Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence." - Carl Sagan

This is where the difference between weak atheism and strong atheism comes into play.

Perhaps the most rational conclusion is weak atheism, the LACKING of a god-belief.

I tend to lean more towards strong atheism, the BELIEF that there is no god.
The reason being; after years of weak atheism I came to realize that all the convoluted (differing and disassociated) claims this way and that regarding the question of spirituality lead me to conclude that they're all wrong.

So maybe I am slightly 'irrational' about it, but I've only taken that leap from the rational starting point, if you take my meaning. :)

Thorum

08-13-2009, 12:38 AM

I am so worried lately, that if I die prematurely that that would be that. I want to be assured there is some sort of life after death. (

Wow, Elfee, I think a bit as you except in one big way. I was dead before. Weren't you? It was dark, warm safe...nice. Then I was born. Don't put your faith in faith...Religion is only for those that fear death...

Octothorpe

08-13-2009, 01:46 AM

May be you were just dreaming, and may be not...So this is something what huh well, scare me too. One day when our bodies pass, how our souls will accepted dividing with this materialistic world? Is that a reason for Ghost phenomena? On this world our souls left all these beautiful things, green grass, beautifull sea, blue sky, all kind of smells, touches, worries for our dearest, our wishes...what happened with all those when human dissapeared? Nikola Tesla had a theory that all our thoughts are collected in some level of stratosphera ( I forgot the right name),...

So, sometimes Church is not just an empty bla bla, for example when we ignited a candles for living souls and for pass over souls (to show them a path). I think that is not just a fairytale. I believe in words and symbols, when we pray to our Gods (no matter is that Paganism, or Christianity, the point is absolutly the same).

Teilhard de Chardin, a Jesuit and an anthropologist, wrote of a "Noosphere," where the collective consciousness of the human race becomes an emergent property of the universe. Also, if you look up morphogenesis, which is a spiffy little concept, one can see where the impressions of non-local phenomena (which consciousness falls under, according to Tipler and others) might survive after the linkage to physicality breaks ('death"). Again, not yet 'provable' (but not impossibly so, given the current rate of discovery), but certainly an area for more thought.

Lulletje Rozewater

08-13-2009, 08:28 AM

Teilhard de Chardin, a Jesuit and an anthropologist, wrote of a "Noosphere," where the collective consciousness of the human race becomes an emergent property of the universe. Also, if you look up morphogenesis, which is a spiffy little concept, one can see where the impressions of non-local phenomena (which consciousness falls under, according to Tipler and others) might survive after the linkage to physicality breaks ('death"). Again, not yet 'provable' (but not impossibly so, given the current rate of discovery), but certainly an area for more thought.

Teilhard was also a charlatan.(Piltdown man),but he had some interesting ideas
All energy emitted from your Body and Brain(thought) can not be destroyed and is absorbed by the universe,as electrical impulses.
One day it would be possible to travel so fast that some one could read your words and thoughts of 40 years ago

Cato

08-18-2009, 05:33 AM

I said I'd withdraw from the thread, but I had to take a peek.

Yes, Teilhard de Chardin was an interesting man, very deep and with complex ideas that seem to be the logical outgrowth of theistic evolution- that mankind, by progressive stages, is evolving into a deity of sorts, that is identical to, yet also distinct from, the Christ.

Paleo

08-18-2009, 05:52 AM

yes, of course there's something after life, its called fucking death.

when i die, i would far rather, just disappearing to nothingness and too non-existence. Any kind, of eternal life, is hell to me.

Lulletje Rozewater

08-18-2009, 06:38 AM

Liffrea

08-18-2009, 08:21 PM

I don’t tend to give it much thought, more concerned with what I do in this life than what happens after, I’ll die soon enough and I doubt that I’ll get a reprieve.

I have some beliefs of what happens, that the universe itself is an organism in it’s own right, that we are cells within it and aspects of it, that it is alive through us. That we perhaps are reabsorbed into it, and/or parts of us are reborn into a cycle.

I don’t accept that death is the end.

Lady L

08-18-2009, 10:36 PM

Maybe this goes here maybe it doesn't but yesterday Lyfing and I were on the town square taking care of some buisness and we were approached after just getting in the car,( unfortunately the windows were down :D ) by 2 young Mormon guys offering us a " free gift " and their little talk. We let them talk a bit, and I could tell Lyfing almost wanted to laugh. I kept busy digging in my purse and fasting my seat belt. :p After a minute Lyfing says " well, ya know we're Heathen " ...there was silence ...the guy says " Oh ...OK ..." :confused:

Lyfing gives him a little bit of info on the subject cause they were then lost by what Heathen was. Lyfing says " do some reading on Asatru " :p " Google it " ...

...The guy: " Well, do you believe in Jesus ...? " Lyfing: " Well, he was a dude " " I don't know about all that other stuff though " ....

They wish us a good day and Lyfing said " Hail Odin " we drove off still tickled at the :confused: on their face! :D

:D

Murphy

08-18-2009, 10:38 PM

I believe in the afterlife yes. Don't think I need to say it any simpler than that.

Regards,
Eóin.

Germanicus

08-18-2009, 10:54 PM

I believe in the afterlife yes. Don't think I need to say it any simpler than that.

Regards,
Eóin.

Well i on the other half do not, i believe quite simply that when the heart stops beating life to the brain the body dies, there is no soul that floats off to a higher plane, in a nut shell the electricity switch has been turned off.
Death is inevitable, it is stalking us everyday, the answer to death is simply, enjoy life now whilst you are young enough to enjoy it, do not worry about anything..............except put money away for when you do get old.. you will need it under the Tories..:(

Murphy

08-18-2009, 11:01 PM

Well i on the other half do not, i believe quite simply that when the heart stops beating life to the brain the body dies, there is no soul that floats off to a higher plane, in a nut shell the electricity switch has been turned off.

That's rather sad :(..

Death is inevitable, it is stalking us everyday, the answer to death is simply, enjoy life now whilst you are young enough to enjoy it, do not worry about anything

I wont lie to you and say that I don't fear death. But I am very comfortable in the knowledge of God and His love for me. So I shall enjoy my life - a life dedicated to God and Country.

except put money away for when you do get old.. you will need it under the Tories..:(

Hopefully I wont be here for that :cool:!

Regards,
Eóin.

Germanicus

08-18-2009, 11:05 PM

That's rather sad :(..

I wont lie to you and say that I don't fear death. But I am very comfortable in the knowledge of God and His love for me. So I shall enjoy my life - a life dedicated to God and Country.

Hopefully I wont be here for that :cool:!

Regards,
Eóin.

I completely respect your faith, my views are my own and are not decided lightly.

sturmwalkure

08-23-2009, 01:06 PM

I should have titled this 'Do you believe there is an Afterlife?'. I believe in an afterlife while some members here don't. I also should have made this a poll. Can a Mod or Admin fix that? I respect that others don't hold the same beliefs that I do on this matter, but I've seen felt, read, and experienced more than enough to reaffirm my beliefs on this matter. I believe we are more than just flesh. Even during my time of questioning of my faith I've always held the belief (at least to some degree) that we do have souls.

Loki

08-23-2009, 01:10 PM

sturmwalkure

08-23-2009, 01:12 PM

Done, poll added. :)

Thanks. :)

Cato

08-23-2009, 01:23 PM

I voted yes on the poll.

Barreldriver

08-23-2009, 07:16 PM

I voted yes as well, after all, the concept I outlined is a sort of afterlife. :D

Atlas

08-23-2009, 11:12 PM

I don't know, no ones know. I hope our spirits doesnt passes away so we can keep dreaming forever.

Piparskeggr

08-23-2009, 11:20 PM

Believe, yes.

Know, no.

I think I recall seeing something during my near death experiences in the first third of last year, but..

Cato

08-24-2009, 04:12 AM

I repeat: yes.

Lutiferre

08-24-2009, 03:12 PM

sturmwalkure

08-24-2009, 04:04 PM

When I was younger, I used to speculate about life and death all the time, and had a period where I was extremely paranoid. I couldn't escape the thought, "what if I die in a second, and everything just stops?".

But I got over that. In the end, this is only normal for anyone who thinks and reflects a lot on existence and the meaning and nature of everything.

You should try to get used to the idea of death. I think the question is not so much whether there is an afterlife, but whether we are prepared to die; something we should always aspire to be, even if we don't want to - because we don't have control over death, and we will die eventually. And, after all, no one can really convince you that there is an afterlife if your doubts are deep enough, and we will only be absolutely certain when we die.

But, to the question: yes, there is an afterlife.

You are right. I need to stop obsessing over it. The best I can do for my longevity is keep a healthy diet and exercise. I actually do believe in the afterlife. I just had a moment of doubt when I made this thread. I don't know if I'll ultimately come back to the Roman Catholic church in which I was raised, or if I may find it elsewhere- but I really do believe we as humans are more than just flesh. As I've mentioned before I believe my grandfather who died thirteen years ago is still watching over me, from where I believe he is in heaven.

No one needs to worry about me converting to Islam though, ;)

Liffrea

08-24-2009, 06:50 PM

Fear of death is natural, although for me I don’t fear being dead, if there is life after death great (as long as it ain’t the same bloody life!) if not, so what, I’m dead I won’t know anything about it. As long as I die with dignity and not in some long drawn out painful death I don’t really care all that much. It’s something you have to come to terms with, you will die no doubt about it and nobody can tell you for sure that there is anything beyond death, I believe that there is something, I posted what I believe a few pages back, but who am I to say?

Just try to live a good life whilst you’re here, the next stage will take care of itself.

Beorn

08-24-2009, 07:01 PM

I am so worried lately, that if I die prematurely that that would be that. I want to be assured there is some sort of life after death.

How can you die prematurely? :) When your time is up it is up, irrespective of age or length of stay on Earth.

As to your fear of there being no afterlife, that is a journey you must undertake by yourself for yourself. I remember sitting on my fathers lap bawling my eyes out at the age of about 7 scared witless of the time when I would die. I asked him whether there was a life after death, would I see him and my family there. (Funnily enough, looking back on it now, I never asked if I was going to Heaven or Hell.) His response was the saem as mine today: Discover your own afterlife and overcome your fear of the inevitable.

Lutiferre

08-24-2009, 07:06 PM

the next stage will take care of itself.
I'd have to disagree there ;)

sturmwalkure

08-24-2009, 09:40 PM

How can you die prematurely? :) When your time is up it is up, irrespective of age or length of stay on Earth.

As to your fear of there being no afterlife, that is a journey you must undertake by yourself for yourself. I remember sitting on my fathers lap bawling my eyes out at the age of about 7 scared witless of the time when I would die. I asked him whether there was a life after death, would I see him and my family there. (Funnily enough, looking back on it now, I never asked if I was going to Heaven or Hell.) His response was the saem as mine today: Discover your own afterlife and overcome your fear of the inevitable.

I just don't want to die before I have the chance to have children, to travel the world and to live my dreams. :( There is so much I want to see, so much I want to do... it would be a terrible shame if that was cut short. :(

Loki

08-24-2009, 09:59 PM

I just don't want to die before I have the chance to have children, to travel the world and to live my dreams. :( There is so much I want to see, so much I want to do... it would be a terrible shame if that was cut short. :(

Some people fail to achieve all that, even with a long life.

sturmwalkure

08-24-2009, 10:03 PM

Some people fail to achieve all that, even with a long life.

I hope to have my first child in the next eight years ideally but I'd need to find a husband first. Even in my hours of doubt I've always held the same standard for myself, that I be married before I have children.

Beorn

08-24-2009, 11:14 PM

I just don't want to die before I have the chance to have children, to travel the world and to live my dreams. :(

It would have to be noted that having children usually puts an end to attaining ones dreams, but if you can do both and be successful in your life then just go for it. Don't dilly-dally and don't maudle all over it.
Life isn't short. Ones aspirations make ones life short.

I have achieved all I wanted to do in life. I'm only 29. Well, I tell a lie as there is one more thing I want to achieve, but that can wait.

There is so much I want to see, so much I want to do... it would be a terrible shame if that was cut short.

:confused: I can't see why. If you haven't seen it then you certainly will in the next life.
Life doesn't end at the grave you know.

What have you got to tie you to the life you currently lead and which prevents you from travelling and the such?

Cato

08-24-2009, 11:30 PM

Loddfafner

08-24-2009, 11:36 PM

I hope there is no afterlife. Reversion to dust sounds much better than the alternatives:

Hell: At first, Hell sounds like it would be the most fun. Getting there is entertaining enough but then if Mark Twain is right, the company alone can make even an eternity endurable. You get to hang out with all those cool demons you see in medieval paintings. But, think about it. SM sex clubs get pretty monotonous and after a few centuries, or even months, or just hours, it will be just like, well, hell.

Heaven: Maybe the climate is more bearable but sitting around playing harp music and praising some insecure old man is even more hellish than hell itself.

Muslim Heaven: Once I have run out of my allotment of 72 virgins, then what?

Valhalla: Yes I am a heathen and that is where I should aspire, Valykries willing, and all that RAC and heavy metal would keep me going much longer than those fucking harps, but how much drinking and brawling can one take before even that gets old?

If there has to be an afterlife, and I have any choice in the matter, I would like to be able to explore everywhere and swim through history. I would haunt old California and the Temple at Upsalla before taking a long hike through the Eocene.

Cato

08-24-2009, 11:38 PM

If you have religious beliefs why do you hope that there's no afterlife?

Goidelic

08-24-2009, 11:54 PM

Lately, I've been thinking of how to prepare to say final farewells to the loved ones you know who are older than you, specifically family that will eventually pass away soon. Our family loved ones live on in our genetics, genealogy, memories, thoughts, photographs, and for the religious - prayers and soul. You can say some are never forgotten and become legends in time. My grandfather died a couple months ago, and my other grandfather two years ago. Both of whom I was close too. It's not so much the afterlife I've been thinking about or concerned or if there is one, but our loved ones and how to learn as much as you can about them, their presence on this earth and the terrestrial time we have left. It must be hard losing both parents at a young age, not knowing anything about your parents and being orphaned (raised by his sister) like my grandfather was. This changes ones whole perspective on life.

Piparskeggr

08-25-2009, 12:24 AM

Hail all;

The idea that a life can be cut too short has never occurred to me, even when I was having my heart trouble last year. I had concerns of undone things and who would care for my wife if I had died, but no thoughts railing against dying itself.

I only, actually, have this fleeting moment in which I am right now. What I do right now adds to the size of my past, and has weight to guide where I go as time unfolds.

Knowing that, I try and make the best of each breath; most often, uh uh, I'm merely mundane, not bright and shiny. I do have sterling, even golden, moments, though.

I believe that in any afterlife, I will have earned whatever it is that I get.

Most often, in my drams and poetic musings, I see a street upon which sit houses; the house of my father's mother and the house of my mother's mother are two of them. Their back doors look upon the house of their mothers, and those of their husbands, and so on...

This is a post I sent to one of the lists upon which I write at times:

My idea of what happens after this life is fairly simple, I believe that we go to the Hall of our Forebears.

Being a bit of a poet and spending more time than I should alone [ ,-) ] I spend a lot of it within myself; thinking, day-dreaming, meditating, Utsita, having one-sided conversations with Uller or others of the Holy Powers...being a firm believer in the Mystical side of our Faith, Bond with the Holy Powers and Weave of one's Kin-line: Orlay, Might, Maegn, Wyrd...

On the one year anniversary of my last conversation with my uncle Michael, in early May, before he died of pancreatic cancer last year I had a very vivid dream of him and me. We were walking down a cobblestone street lined with large, half-timbered houses that seemed to go back from the street forever. We were talking over our lives and what led up to his passing.

We came to a brown house, that was different from the others, clapboard siding, a regular size, dark oak door.

Uncle Michael told me that it was time for supper and he needed to go inside. My maternal grandmother opened the door and stood there smiling at me. I started to follow, but she shook her head and said that it was not yet my time. Uncle Michael told me that it was alright, he was home now. Nonnie opened the door wider and I could see a long table; closest to me were great aunts and great uncles, my great grandparents, cousins I recognized, also. She hugged Michael and told me to go back to my own life.

As I turned to go, the front door on another house just across the street opened, my paternal grandmother and her mother looked out and waved. Gram told me to go home to Anita, I wasn't supposed to be walking that street for some time to come. A similar scene was there, behind them.

I believe that this is where I will go, a neighborhood of the Houses of my Forebears.

I also believe that I will go to the Yewdales from time to time, for I have been gifted with visits there during my deepest thoughtful times...and my forebears will accept that, as family are the folks who accept because you are part of them, as they are part of you.

Ulf

08-25-2009, 12:25 AM

Eternity is a bitch, just let me drift off into sweet oblivion, free from literally everything.

Lutiferre

08-25-2009, 01:06 AM

Your current, physical existence is just the lower self. Your true self is a divine being, a spark of the eternal fire of God. This is the mystery behind the ancient mystery cults, something that bothered the orthodox Christians so much that they waged a pogrom of obliteration against paganism and its offshoots like Gnostic Christianity. This is the true afterlife, not a blissful realm in the ether with the saints and angels and whatnot.
What is the true afterlife? You said nothing about the afterlife, as far as I could read?

Those who hear the daimon plainly are a rare gift because the vast majority of people cannot hear the daimon. This is the Christ in you that Paul speaks of, not a historical personage called Jesus the Christ, but your divine essence.
Riiiight. Any other fringe revisionisms to offer? Read any of St. Pauls writings. This is a crackpot theory. Paul was clearly a follower of Jesus the Christ, and all his references to the Christ in us were in conjunction with speaking about Jesus, the Christ, and the communion between his followers with him.

It makes no sense to hijack Paul for whatever purposes you have; it's not like it gives any legitimacy to the idea. If anything, it makes it worthless, since if Paul meant nothing of what everyone agrees he actually says, then his teachings are almost completely bullshit and you would have me believe only a fragment of them are intelligible for the "select few", who "know the great esoterical secrets hidden to everyone else". Sounds like Gnosticism a la the 21st century. Plagiarise some Christian writings and ideas, and pretend you have understood some implicit "secret teachings" unavailable to the ignorant masses who "just misunderstood what he REALLY meant", completely ignoring all the evidence to the contrary.

Cato

08-25-2009, 02:47 AM

What is the true afterlife? You said nothing about the afterlife, as far as I could read?

Riiiight. Any other fringe revisionisms to offer? Read any of St. Pauls writings. This is a crackpot theory. Paul was clearly a follower of Jesus the Christ, and all his references to the Christ in us were in conjunction with speaking about Jesus, the Christ, and the communion between his followers with him.

It makes no sense to hijack Paul for whatever purposes you have; it's not like it gives any legitimacy to the idea. If anything, it makes it worthless, since if Paul meant nothing of what everyone agrees he actually says, then his teachings are almost completely bullshit and you would have me believe only a fragment of them are intelligible for the "select few", who "know the great esoterical secrets hidden to everyone else". Sounds like Gnosticism a la the 21st century. Plagiarise some Christian writings and ideas, and pretend you have understood some implicit "secret teachings" unavailable to the ignorant masses who "just misunderstood what he REALLY meant", completely ignoring all the evidence to the contrary.

Paul is the founder of Christianity, and not all of his supposed writings are actually his. The phantom figure of Jesus "the Christ" only appears in the collections of Christian mythology- orthodox and what survives of Gnosticism, which was wiped out by the orthodox by the way- along with paganism, the true "Christianity before Christ."

You need to do some studying of comparative religion and see just how very similar Christianity is to older salvation cults.

sturmwalkure

08-25-2009, 04:23 PM

It would have to be noted that having children usually puts an end to attaining ones dreams, but if you can do both and be successful in your life then just go for it. Don't dilly-dally and don't maudle all over it.
Life isn't short. Ones aspirations make ones life short.

I have achieved all I wanted to do in life. I'm only 29. Well, I tell a lie as there is one more thing I want to achieve, but that can wait.

I'm not going to waste any more time. I plan a trip to Austria next Summer/Fall. Also, my dreams include in fact are centered around my desire to have children. :)

:confused: I can't see why. If you haven't seen it then you certainly will in the next life.
Life doesn't end at the grave you know.

I know. But I shouldn't be thinking about death right now anyway. :(

What have you got to tie you to the life you currently lead and which prevents you from travelling and the such?

It's money constraints that prevent me from traveling as much as I'd like. But I am looking into getting a job soon so I can save up. :thumb001:

Lutiferre

08-25-2009, 04:51 PM

Paul is the founder of Christianity, and not all of his supposed writings are actually his.
The writings where Paul addresses the followers of Jesus the Christ in discussing the spiritual life of Christians, he speaks of the Christ that dwells in us and that we become one in Him by communion with Him. They are all writings addressed from a Church perspective, addressed to the Church, and instructive to the spiritual life of Jesus Christs followers. I have read enough Paul to know that. It's all well and fine that you take one sentence out of Paul and apply it to some meta-cultic idea reminiscent of pantheism or egotheism or whatever it is - but you can do that with almost any religious writing. It doesn't gain you any insight into what Paul really meant.

The phantom figure of Jesus "the Christ" only appears in the collections of Christian mythology- orthodox and what survives of Gnosticism, which was wiped out by the orthodox by the way- along with paganism, the true "Christianity before Christ."
Gnosticism is a much later and very fringe movement, than the earliest Christianity in the Early Church in the first century.

You need to do some studying of comparative religion and see just how very similar Christianity is to older salvation cults.
Christianity is not wholly similar to many religions that predate it, nor is it wholly dissimilar, like Christianity isn't wholly similar to religions after it, like Islam, nor wholly dissimilar to it. There's nothing new in this, and certainly nothing that compromises the truth and validity of Christianity. If anything, it proves that Christianity is the truth, because whatever truth offered by other religions is present in the most high and Divine sense in Christianity.

sturmwalkure

08-30-2009, 01:43 PM

Like Ulf said; that's the short answer.

The long answer is still - NO. The reasoning behind that is simple.

Occam's razor. The most likely explanation of the whole religion/spirituality debate is the one to put stock in. It's all wishful thinking, no matter how beautiful it is. There is no reason to assume there is a soul or an afterlife, because all evidence points to the contrary.

Death is extinction. Non-existence. Lights out.

Almost certainly not.

"I will not die, it's the world that will end." --Rand, channeling Lucretius

The overwhelming evidence and logic says that nothing happens at all. We decompose and become nothing. Like we were before we were born. We didn't exist then, and we won't after the maggots have chewed our last pieces of flesh.

When you die you become worm food.

If it makes you happy you can pretend you live on through your children. You can also think of your dead body gives nutrition to the animals and plant life, and that is a good thing.

I fret about this exact same thing all the time. I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but there is no solace to be found. There is no evidence for an after-life nor can any ever be found. However, what we can do is use logic and apply it to what we know about the universe in an attempt to come up with a somewhat educated guess. If one can even call it that. Here´s what I´ve found.

Look at the earth and all it´s processes: the water cycle, the life cycle, etc. Now look at the universe. It also exhibits cycles. Stars aren´t eternal. They form from raw materials, live for a while, then die returning it´s atomic constituents to space for yet another star to be formed. (This is what occurred with our own Sun.) It´s no coincidence that not one single atom has been either created nor destroyed since the Big Bang. Atoms are merely recycled. See a pattern yet? These cyclic events rule the universe. In fact, I believe that the universe itself is cyclic. With all these cycles going on, would it make sense for a soul to go elsewhere and simply reside for all eternity? No, it doesn´t. Not only does time and space NOT exist outside the universe, but eventually this "afterlife" location would eventually become infinitely populated.

So what does make sense? Cycles. This is how the universe operates. Why should it not also apply to us? Perhaps a person´s being or essence is preserved by the fabric of space-time only to be used again and again in different living bodies.

But this idea of an afterlife is utterly ridiculous. It just doesn´t mesh with logic and deep intuition.

Why do things that have no evidence need to be dis-proven? If we accept that all things are true unless dis-proven, then all religions would therefore have equal merit, and due to contradiction makes the ideology of dis-proof being necessary moronic.

Rather, we should follow the ideology of false unless proven. This is why when you state something outlandish, that answers a question that could be answered a million other ways, the excuse of "prove me wrong" is not valid, while "prove it" is quite valid indeed.

And so, I will stand by my position that there is no afterlife until I have acceptable proof that there is one.

yes, of course there's something after life, its called fucking death.

when i die, i would far rather, just disappearing to nothingness and too non-existence. Any kind, of eternal life, is hell to me.

I am sorry but I am not sure if I can remain here much longer if I have to see depressing garbage like this. I KNOW I have a soul! I am not just fucking flesh! I appreciate that there are people here who acknowledge the existence of the soul and the afterlife but unfortunately they're outnumbered. :mad:

Loki

08-30-2009, 02:05 PM

Poltergeist

08-30-2009, 02:08 PM

Only 22% voted "No" in this poll.

Which looks pretty strange, kind of intriguing to me.

sturmwalkure

08-30-2009, 02:10 PM

Only 22% voted "No" in this poll.

But the general sentiment here seems to not acknowledge it.

Beorn

08-30-2009, 02:10 PM

I appreciate that there are people here who acknowledge the existence of the soul and the afterlife but unfortunately they're outnumbered. :mad:

The creation of the mass man I'm afraid. One of many examples of a declining civilisation.

Loki

08-30-2009, 02:12 PM

But the general sentiment here seems to not acknowledge it.

Perhaps the No-voters are just more vocal. :) You shouldn't get disheartened ... there will always be different opinions flying around, it doesn't mean they're the truth. For you, you will discover your own truth and live your life according to that. :) For many people, this means a belief in an afterlife to come, and they take great comfort in that for their entire lives ... and remain happy people until old age.

Bari

08-30-2009, 02:20 PM

I hope there is an afterlife, but i don't know for sure. So i voted uncertain.

Liffrea

08-30-2009, 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by Elfichka
But the general sentiment here seems to not acknowledge it.

Personally I don’t allow other people’s views or opinions alter my own, I have the ability to think critically about issues and assess evidence, from that I will come to my own opinion. I like people to challenge my beliefs; I don’t mind being in a minority of one, or one amongst a million, all the same to me.

I believe in life after death, of a form, nothing anyone has written on this thread has remotely persuaded me otherwise, I guess that holds true the other way as well.

No need to be uptight about it. Only by the free exchange of ideas can you grow.

Fortis in Arduis

08-30-2009, 02:21 PM

We are souls, not bodies, so when the body dies, we continue to live.

We are immortal non-physical spiritual beings, and what we do in this life creates our future.

Frigga

08-31-2009, 03:01 AM

Elfichka, I understand how you feel though. I myself put too much stock sometimes into what other people think of my opinions or ideas. Different people have different life experinces that color and shade their life views. Unfortunately some are more nihilistic than we would think is healthy if you are of the ilk that tries to look at the glass half full. I posted a couple of poems by Mary Oliver in another thread, I'd like you to read them. I suggest that you read more of her work besides these ones, as she is highly inspiring in developing your character.

The Journey (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=83438&postcount=14)

Wild Geese (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=83449&postcount=15)

When Death Comes (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=88822&postcount=22)

Grow and develop yourself, as in the end you're the only one whom you can truly change, and your opinion of yourself is, and should be, the only one that truly matters as regards yourself in the great scheme of things.

Kind regards,
Frigga's Spindle :)

Goidelic

08-31-2009, 07:48 AM

I think it boils down to the question of dying the best most peaceful way for preparation, rather than an afterlife. Although in my opinion, you can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a god or afterlife. The bigger question is preparing for death, and the rest will be a mystery after that. Whether the afterlife is a certain amount of time, short, long or eternal, or whether there is one is and has always been unknown imo. How many people have come back from the dead talking about the afterlife?

Occasionally, you hear people who died for a short amount of time and then were "brought back to life" claiming they were out of their body and in an afterlife. There have been patients under surgery that "supposably died" for a couple minutes then brought back to life claiming there was an afterlife, whereas others under such circumstances didn't notice anything "just lights out." Others claim they truly experienced the afterlife, and weren't on drugs or still under the medicinal effects during and after the surgery they experienced "death." This can be argued for religious people whether the afterlife was kicking in or takes much longer after death 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 1 year, many years etc.. and how long this lasts sort of like decomposing in a different sense of existence that could be roughly called an "afterlife"?

Death perhaps can be one of the most complex processes at hand or simply the easiest lights out "without being born" version we will never truly know. We will all eventually find out under death or "be lights out" with death sooner or later. Some people I've talked to would rather "be lights out" than burning in eternal hell being severely punished for all the crimes they've committed or being in an afterlife with all the people they've despised who will be there with them, or if the afterlife is your own personal design. I was talking with another person who mentioned to me if there was an afterlife and if he were actually burning in hell being punished, he would say "take me back to nothingness and be lights out for eternity."

I've had people tell me your beliefs will come true when you die, in other words if you believe in zeus you'll go to zeus, you believe in reincarnation as a bug etc. There are just so many beliefs that some seem rather unfathomable to fulfill in any extra-life/spiritual way. I didn't believe that person though. From what I've observed and given the extent and amount of beliefs/religions that have existed on this planet that have been common in human evolution, including Neanderthal & Cro-Magnon spirituality, I think they're all preparatives to prepare inevitably for the never returning to life called, death. Some Atheists argue that we were a flawed result of evolution turning out to be the only organisms to have higher thought to realize "we will die." Frankly, I don't dwell on the concept of death knowing I won't win or arrive at answers that everyone wants to hear and agree on.

Cato

08-31-2009, 01:41 PM

"There is no death, there is only the Force."

Lutiferre

08-31-2009, 02:03 PM

I've had people tell me your beliefs will come true when you die, in other words if you believe in zeus you'll go to zeus, you believe in reincarnation as a bug etc. There are just so many beliefs that some seem rather unfathomable to fulfill in any extra-life/spiritual way. I didn't believe that person though. From what I've observed and given the extent and amount of beliefs/religions that have existed on this planet that have been common in human evolution, including Neanderthal & Cro-Magnon spirituality, I think they're all preparatives to prepare inevitably for the never returning to life called, death. Some Atheists argue that we were a flawed result of evolution turning out to be the only organisms to have higher thought to realize "we will die." Frankly, I don't dwell on the concept of death knowing I won't win or arrive at answers that everyone wants to hear and agree on.

Our intellectual awareness of life and death (unlike any other creature) is exactly what tells me that our destiny as noetic agents is beyond the mere material world ... in eternity and immortality.

Even for an atheist, there might be such a thing as an afterlife, since many non-Christian philosophers of mind believe that the link between the brain and consciousness is necessary (e.g. we have to have a brain to exercise and experience consciousness in this world); but not sufficient (that is, consciousness is not reducible merely to neurology; an "immaterial" quality emerges, which is not like a stone or a piece of meat, is an immaterial substance). This emergent consciousness may never cease to exist even when we die, because it is immaterial and only matter is subject to corruptibility, and furthermore, if it's causal relationship to the brain is only one of of necessity but not of sufficiency, the substance is also to a degree independent as soon as it has emerged.

Lutiferre

08-31-2009, 02:10 PM

Our intellectual awareness of life and death (unlike any other creature) is exactly what tells me that our destiny as noetic agents is beyond the mere material world ... in eternity and immortality.

Even for an atheist, there might be such a thing as an afterlife, since many non-Christian philosophers of mind believe that the link between the brain and consciousness is necessary (e.g. we have to have a brain to exercise and experience consciousness in this world); but not sufficient (that is, consciousness is not reducible merely to neurology; an "immaterial" quality emerges, which is not like a stone or a piece of meat, is an immaterial substance). This emergent consciousness may never cease to exist even when we die, because it is immaterial and only matter is subject to corruptibility, and furthermore, if it's causal relationship to the brain is only one of of necessity but not of sufficiency, the substance is also to a degree independent as soon as it has emerged.

The interesting thing is that since only matter is subject to corruptibility and change, and the emergent consciousness is not material, the emergent consciousness can only change as long as it depends on the brain. If the emergent consciousness subsists even when the brain dies, which it must do since it is immaterial and therefore incorruptible, it would be unable to change because it would be independent from matter, which is the foundation of all change, or as Aristotle called it, matter is potentiality, as opposed to substantial form/actuality. The soul here, is then the substantial form/actuality, which when we die, cannot change without having a brain; and for that reason, as a Christian, it makes perfect sense that if we don't repent in this life, it's too late when we die, and we will have to face Gods judgement.

Liffrea

08-31-2009, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by Lutiferre
Our intellectual awareness of life and death (unlike any other creature) is exactly what tells me that our destiny as noetic agents is beyond the mere material world ... in eternity and immortality.

I agree with that sentiment, evolution is a process that, by it’s nature, doesn’t waste energy unduly, to see man simply as just a product of biological evolution only takes one so far and leaves many questions unanswered.

The capacity of the human mind goes far beyond the needs of mere survival, our very ability to reason, our ability to contemplate have no relevance that I can see in human survival, and evolution is, ultimately, the adaptation of an organism for survival.

No, the very reason that my mind wants to understand the ultimate origin of and purpose of the universe is enough to convince me that whilst my biological brain may well be that of a slightly advanced ape creature of African origin, it has become something far more since that epoch some 200,000 years ago, and has become something more for a purpose.

Finsterer Streiter

08-31-2009, 04:23 PM

We are souls, not bodies, so when the body dies, we continue to live.
Absorbing viewpoint, now how do you think we continue to live? See, I don´t want to end up as an animal or a plant. Either I´m reborn as a human being or I´m not interested in any rebirth or reincarnation. Do you think the process is controlable?

We are immortal non-physical spiritual beings, and what we do in this life creates our future.
So evil deeds lead to a negative future. Now what´s the definition of negativity for a immortal non-physical spiritual being? Human definitions of pleasure and pain, of reward and punishment, play no role in other dimensions. If life creates future it must be possible to make any future impossible. And if the souls have an own will our whole life is already determinated. Then the adoption of a bodily form is a complete waste of time for our souls. What´s the intension then? Fun? Wasting time?

Cato

08-31-2009, 05:21 PM

Yoda said it best:

"We are luminous beings, not this crude matter."

:D

Assume such a worldview, that all that is in the world is matter, either solidified matter or atomized matter, and you'll view the afterlife accordingly- that death terminates human existence. Crude matter, to use the little green sage's words, is what you are, not really any different from a pile of dung or a block of cement or an Arab blockhead.

Luminous beings, or divine beings, wound up in a body that's prone to spatio-temporal decay, that's what human beings are. Taken at face value, the Bible's view of mankind being the image of God refers not to any anthropomorphic likeness, but to a luminous likeness. Man is God's moral and intellectual twin, as above and so below and all of that jazz.

Liffrea

08-31-2009, 06:56 PM

I don’t consider matter crude or illusionary (if by that is meant non-existent) I believe it is just one level of being in the same way that consciousness, conscience and mind are different levels of mental existence. If we take our mental awareness to be multi-layered, which it is, then I think our being as a whole could be so.

Cato

09-01-2009, 01:33 AM

I was merely addressing the commonly-held belief that matter is all that exists, or the materialist view of the world held by many people like Dawkins (who, firstly, need to convince themselves that they really aren't all that smart before they convince anyone else of anything at all). I don't rely on my intellectual powers to come to this conclusion, but it's a matter of intuition and empathy- the very things Dawkins et al. are out of touch with.

When you're out-of-touch with the spirit, yet try to answer spiritual questions, you're setting yourself up for a loss.

Hrolf Kraki

09-08-2009, 04:42 AM

I fret about this exact same thing all the time. I hate to be the bringer of bad news, but there is no solace to be found. There is no evidence for an after-life nor can any ever be found. However, what we can do is use logic and apply it to what we know about the universe in an attempt to come up with a somewhat educated guess. If one can even call it that. Here´s what I´ve found.

Look at the earth and all it´s processes: the water cycle, the life cycle, etc. Now look at the universe. It also exhibits cycles. Stars aren´t eternal. They form from raw materials, live for a while, then die returning it´s atomic constituents to space for yet another star to be formed. (This is what occurred with our own Sun.) It´s no coincidence that not one single atom has been either created nor destroyed since the Big Bang. Atoms are merely recycled. See a pattern yet? These cyclic events rule the universe. In fact, I believe that the universe itself is cyclic. With all these cycles going on, would it make sense for a soul to go elsewhere and simply reside for all eternity? No, it doesn´t. Not only does time and space NOT exist outside the universe, but eventually this "afterlife" location would eventually become infinitely populated.

So what does make sense? Cycles. This is how the universe operates. Why should it not also apply to us? Perhaps a person´s being or essence is preserved by the fabric of space-time only to be used again and again in different living bodies.

But this idea of an afterlife is utterly ridiculous. It just doesn´t mesh with logic and deep intuition.

A full month after writing this I receive a neg. rep. from the thread-starter. Instead of countering my philosophical thought with some rational insight, I get this comment along with the bad rep: "------------".

You´re a coward, Elfichka.

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 04:53 AM

A full month after writing this I receive a neg. rep. from the thread-starter. Instead of countering my philosophical thought with some rational insight, I get this comment along with the bad rep: "------------".

You´re a coward, Elfichka.
It can be debated how philosophical it is. The issue is really that you are assuming a soul -a person or a consciousness- is an essence composed of matter. But I only see us as tied to matter; I see our essence as being itself beyond matter, immaterial; I as a person, am not a rock, a stone, a banana, a piece of meat or a neuron; those are only material things that I may subsist on and am tied to, like my brain, which is the "center of operation" in this material realm; but they are not my essence.

Brynhild

09-08-2009, 05:33 AM

I'm sorry, Elfickha, but frankly I'm going to be blunt. Why did you ask this particular question if you criticise the opinions of others who don't agree with you? I believe in the afterlife but not everyone shares my views. As far as I'm concerned this life I'm living has been hell at times and there's got to be somewhere better to go afterwards, but that is still just my view.

Grow a bloody spine, and live your own truth, before you do drive yourself to the grave! And above all, don't be a hypocrite who passes judgement on others because you don't like what they say. And don't play victim when we call your bluff! Harsh, I know, but I really get fed up when people carry on with their self-righteous twaddle and dish it out, yet when it comes back on them, they can't handle it!

Vulpix

09-08-2009, 07:34 AM

Make the most of this life Elfickha, it is the only one you know you've got. Anything else is hot air.

Phlegethon

09-08-2009, 07:57 AM

Make the most of this life Elfickha, it is the only one you know you've got.

Is it really? Could be an illusion as well.

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 08:28 AM

Make the most of this life Elfickha, it is the only one you know you've got. Anything else is hot air.
And then the question is what you mean with "make the most of it". By some kind of superficial pleasure-seeking and chase after the next high, the next momentary chemical reaction in the brain? Indulging in meaningless carnal pleasure, presumably? By being spiritually lethargic?

I don't think any of that fulfills anything in my existence except a short moment which is, in itself, nothing. Being a Christian is making the most of life, in my opinion, because I believe Christianity allows us to reach a new consciousness of existence; of joy, and of pain, of heaven and of hell, of truth and of beauty, of the temporary and the eternal, of God and of creature. It fills the eye of our soul with God; and in this, salvation lies. Christianity gives everything that is good a new life, so that it is so much more, because it has meaning. Meaning is truth, and I find no true joy without meaning in existence.

Vulpix

09-08-2009, 09:15 AM

Is it really? Could be an illusion as well.

I could come up with plenty of suggestions for improving that illusion then ;).

And then the question is what you mean with "make the most of it". By some kind of superficial pleasure-seeking and chase after the next high, the next momentary chemical reaction in the brain? Indulging in meaningless carnal pleasure, presumably? By being spiritually lethargic?

I don't think any of that fulfills anything in my existence except a short moment which is, in itself, nothing. Being a Christian is making the most of life, in my opinion, because I believe Christianity allows us to reach a new consciousness of existence; of joy, and of pain, of heaven and of hell, of truth and of beauty, of the temporary and the eternal, of God and of creature. It fills the eye of our soul with God; and in this, salvation lies. Christianity gives everything that is good a new life, so that it is so much more, because it has meaning. Meaning is truth, and I find no true joy without meaning in existence.

Whatever floats your boat.

Johnny Bravo

09-08-2009, 11:36 AM

And then the question is what you mean with "make the most of it". By some kind of superficial pleasure-seeking and chase after the next high, the next momentary chemical reaction in the brain?

Your unmitigated arrogance and superficial comments betray your complete and utter ignorance of the way some of us lead our lives. But that's what you'd expect from someone who is being raised on a diet of reductionistic Christian dualism: it's either my way or the highway. :rolleyes:

Indulging in meaningless carnal pleasure, presumably? By being spiritually lethargic?

I'm sure you're in a position to dish out advice on both of those matters. :coffee:

I don't think any of that fulfills anything in my existence except a short moment which is, in itself, nothing. Being a Christian is making the most of life, in my opinion, because I believe Christianity allows us to reach a new consciousness of existence; of joy, and of pain, of heaven and of hell, of truth and of beauty, of the temporary and the eternal, of God and of creature. It fills the eye of our soul with God; and in this, salvation lies. Christianity gives everything that is good a new life, so that it is so much more, because it has meaning. Meaning is truth, and I find no true joy without meaning in existence.

Being judgmental and exclusivistic again, as usual. Some of us consider Christianity to be hardly more than second-rate philosophy and spirituality, a watered-down version of both. It's also a drug that makes people high on Jesus juice (or being in communion with god in your parlance). Hardly something I would call noble or worth pursuing. All in all, this sums it up quite nicely:

His aversion to religion, in the sense usually attached to the term, was of the same kind with that of Lucretius: he regarded it with the feelings due not to a mere mental delusion, but to a great moral evil. He looked upon it as the greatest enemy of morality: first, by setting up factitious excellencies—belief in creeds, devotional feelings, and ceremonies, not connected with the good of human kind— and causing these to be accepted as substitutes for genuine virtue: but above all, by radically vitiating the standard of morals; making it consist in doing the will of a being, on whom it lavishes indeed all the phrases of adulation, but whom in sober truth it depicts as eminently hateful. I have a hundred times heard him say, that all ages and nations have represented their gods as wicked, in a constantly increasing progression, that mankind have gone on adding trait after trait till they reached the most perfect conception of wickedness which the human mind can devise, and have called this God, and prostrated themselves before it. This ne plus ultra of wickedness he considered to be embodied in what is commonly presented to mankind as the creed of Christianity - John Stuart Mill

So thanks, but no thanks.

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 02:47 PM

Your unmitigated arrogance and superficial comments betray your complete and utter ignorance of the way some of us lead our lives. But that's what you'd expect from someone who is being raised on a diet of reductionistic Christian dualism: it's either my way or the highway. :rolleyes:
I am not ignorant of it at all. But of course, it will be better for you and your case to pretend that I am some kind of ignorant Christian who was raised as such and enclosed into ignorance; while the truth is I was not raised as a Christian, nor are most people I know Christians.

Being judgmental and exclusivistic again, as usual. Some of us consider Christianity to be hardly more than second-rate philosophy and spirituality, a watered-down version of both. It's also a drug that makes people high on Jesus juice (or being in communion with god in your parlance). Hardly something I would call noble or worth pursuing. All in all, this sums it up quite nicely:
Well, I don't really care what "some of us" (that is, most people on this site) consider it to be. What matters is what it is, which I credit myself at least superficially with knowing, even if I don't know it to any great depth, then you are moving a thousand miles away from the surface.

All in all, a meaningless post which wasn't mandated by the relevant subject which I was replying to.

Whatever floats your boat.
Exactly, right? Even if happiness is the only measure for truth, then I am happy to say I immerse myself with truth.

Loki

09-08-2009, 02:52 PM

Well, I don't really care what "some of us" (that is, most people on this site) consider it to be. What matters is what it is, which I credit myself at least superficially with knowing, even if I don't know it to any great depth, then you are moving a thousand miles away from the surface.

I think this is the crux of the matter. You are certain that your way is the "right" way, and the only right way. It's not really your fault, this method of reasoning is inherent in Christian (and Muslim) teaching -- that of philosophical and spiritual arrogance, deliberate narrowmindedness and self-righteousness ... leading to judgement on others and their ways of thinking.

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 02:57 PM

I think this is the crux of the matter. You are certain that your way is the "right" way, and the only right way.
Then you, of course, bold a text in which I credit myself with superficially knowing something. Yes, and that is not a prideful "I am more right than all others"-statement; I credit myself with superficial knowledge, because I know others whose knowledge is much deeper; if I had nothing to measure it against, I couldn't even call it superficial or even deep.

It's not really your fault, this method of reasoning is inherent in Christian (and Muslim) teaching -- that of philosophical and spiritual arrogance, deliberate narrowmindedness and self-righteousness ... leading to judgement on others and their ways of thinking.
Right. Because you don't at all judge me or my ways of thinking. No, no, no, my meek and humble lamb, you refrain from any such judgement, which is strictly the business of the evil Christians and Moslems :rolleyes:

Treffie

09-08-2009, 03:12 PM

But the general sentiment here seems to not acknowledge it.

It's what you believe in, Elfichka.;)

Vulpix

09-08-2009, 03:18 PM

I am sorry but I am not sure if I can remain here much longer if I have to see depressing garbage like this. I KNOW I have a soul! I am not just fucking flesh! I appreciate that there are people here who acknowledge the existence of the soul and the afterlife but unfortunately they're outnumbered. :mad:

Just why do you bother to open a thread asking for our views on this topic if you are only willing to hear one type of opinion :confused:?

Frigga

09-08-2009, 03:21 PM

Precisely Arawn. :)

It doesn't matter what other people believe, it should only matter in your own heart. Trying to base your opinions and ideas on the basis of what other people think or feel is setting yourself for failure, anger, and hurt feelings, because not everyone is going to paint the pretty picture you're hoping for, and pat you on the head and tell you what you want to hear. Truth in this world needs to be found on your own, and you can bouce ideas off of other people's ideas, but still form your own conclusions. No one is this world is going to always hold your hand.

Johnny Bravo

09-08-2009, 03:21 PM

I am not ignorant of it at all. But of course, it will be better for you and your case to pretend that I am some kind of ignorant Christian who was raised as such and enclosed into ignorance; while the truth is I was not raised as a Christian, nor are most people I know Christians.

I said "you are being raised" not "you have been raised." You're still 17 last time I checked.

Well, I don't really care what "some of us" (that is, most people on this site) consider it to be.

You gave us your (rather uninformed) opinion and I gave you my reply. What exactly is your problem now?

What matters is what it is, which I credit myself at least superficially with knowing, even if I don't know it to any great depth, then you are moving a thousand miles away from the surface.

All in all, a meaningless post which wasn't mandated by the relevant subject which I was replying to.

I bet you've come to this conclusion yourself... You accused those of us who don't follow the ways of your favourite sect of leading superficial lives (you at least assumed it). In reality, you have no idea how I and our other interlocutors in this thread conduct their lives, what impact they have on their families, relatives, communities, etc. Funny you'd mention "chasing after the next high" and "momentary chemical reactions" because that's exactly what the majority of moralistic Christian ramblings amount to - a momentary high in which you get to lecture all those who reject the Creator on how much better your sect is and how sinful our views are.

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 03:22 PM

Just why do you bother to open a thread asking for our views on this topic if you are only willing to hear one type of opinion :confused:?
"Just why" do you think? Have you actually read the opening post?

I am so worried lately, that if I die prematurely that that would be that. I want to be assured there is some sort of life after death. If not I wish to be immortal. Even after my body is no longer alive I want to be assured there is some sort of afterlife. My fear of death is only going to increase if there is no such thing as an afterlife. I know there is a variety of religious beliefs here. I used to consider myself Catholic and went to church regularly. But due to anxiety related issues I stopped going. I am at rock-bottom now, with my anxiety and with panic-attacks being regular, my hypochondria and all. I just want to find solace in knowing there is an afterlife. :(

sturmwalkure

09-08-2009, 03:22 PM

Just why do you bother to open a thread asking for our views on this topic if you are only willing to hear one type of opinion :confused:?

I was having a moment of doubt when I made the thread, I do believe in the afterlife.

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 03:26 PM

You accused those of us who don't follow the ways of your favourite sect of leading superficial lives (you at least assumed it). In reality, you have no idea how I and our other interlocutors in this thread conduct their lives, what impact they have on their families, relatives, communities, etc.
I never accused you or any plurality.

I was addressing what I felt to be the implied attitude behind the post of a single poster.

It wasn't addressed to you, and it wasn't addressed to anyone but the one I actually obviously and visibly addresed it to.

Funny you'd mention "chasing after the next high" and "momentary chemical reactions" because that's exactly what the majority of moralistic Christian ramblings amount to - a momentary high in which you get to lecture all those who reject the Creator on how much better your sect is and how sinful our views are.
And then I guess you pointing this out must be your high, since that is not what I have been doing amounts to. I for one, never accused you of being "sinful".

Vulpix

09-08-2009, 03:35 PM

"Just why" do you think? Have you actually read the opening post?

I advise you to mind your manners. Patronisation does not go down well with me.

Johnny Bravo

09-08-2009, 03:40 PM

I am sorry but I am not sure if I can remain here much longer if I have to see depressing garbage like this. I KNOW I have a soul! I am not just fucking flesh! I appreciate that there are people here who acknowledge the existence of the soul and the afterlife but unfortunately they're outnumbered. :mad:

Now, don't get your panties in a bunch...

Yeah, you do have a soul. It's mostly made of neurons. What about those people who have had an accident and whose soul seems to be "dormant?"

Johnny Bravo

09-08-2009, 03:48 PM

I never accused you or any plurality.

I was addressing what I felt to be the implied attitude behind the post of a single poster.

Yeah, what you felt:

And then the question is what you mean with "make the most of it".

It wasn't addressed to you, and it wasn't addressed to anyone but the one I actually obviously and visibly addresed it to.

And then I guess you pointing this out must be your high, since that is not what I have been doing amounts to. I for one, never accused you of being "sinful".

It was very obviously a generalisation. I happen to follow the same motto.

sturmwalkure

09-08-2009, 03:51 PM

Now, don't get your panties in a bunch...

Yeah, you do have a soul. It's mostly made of neurons. What about those people who have had an accident and whose soul seems to be "dormant?"

No my soul isn't composed of neurons. :) It's something that can't be proven by science, but it is very real and is very much a part of me and of all humans. When my body dies, my soul will either go to heaven to hell or to purgatory.

When I will die, I do not know, only God knows. :)

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 03:53 PM

It was very obviously a generalisation. I happen to follow the same motto.
You may "happen" to do so. But I am not telepathic. It wasn't addressed to you, even if it's unfair that I didn't telepathically know you agreed with him or the attitude to life behind the statement.

Yeah, you do have a soul. It's mostly made of neurons. What about those people who have had an accident and whose soul seems to be "dormant?"
Well, no, the soul is not a bunch of neurons. The soul is tied to the brain, is tied to the neurons, for it's proper operation in this carnal flesh. Whenever the neurons get damaged, so does that operation.

The brain is necessary for, but not sufficient for, the soul's immanence.

SuuT

09-08-2009, 04:20 PM

[...]...Religion is only for those that fear death...

While this is often true, I don't think it is necessarily so. I'm ready to die right now; but, then again, I'm not entirely certain that I am 'religious'.

I am not ignorant of it at all. But of course, it will be better for you and your case to pretend that I am some kind of ignorant Christian who was raised as such and enclosed into ignorance; while the truth is I was not raised as a Christian, nor are most people I know Christians.

I might be one of few at this point as you are in intense danger of over-exposure; but I don't think that you are ignorant at all.

I think you are a fine rhetor and a superior Apologist.

Exactly, right? Even if happiness is the only measure for truth, then I am happy to say I immerse myself with truth.

And I hope we all aspire to such an immersion.

I have a different take on the long and short answer.

Short answer: I have no idea.

Long(er) answer: There is a gravity to death that, itself, cannot be killed. There is a curious Anamnesis to death and the after-life, as well. Just as Science cannot answer, "what is the length of awesome?" it cannot - in virtue of itself - grasp, let alone answer to, meta-temporal considerations. For this, we have Metaphysics and, ultimately, some manner of spiritual practise.

So whilst I do not, and cannot know, I am humbled before the possibility; and, am intent on contemplating the matter until I draw my last breath.

Johnny Bravo

09-08-2009, 04:55 PM

You may "happen" to do so. But I am not telepathic. It wasn't addressed to you, even if it's unfair that I didn't telepathically know you agreed with him or the attitude to life behind the statement.

I'm glad we sorted those bits out. Now, why exactly do you assume that "focusing on this world" is tantamount to hedonism?

Well, no, the soul is not a bunch of neurons. The soul is tied to the brain, is tied to the neurons, for it's proper operation in this carnal flesh. Whenever the neurons get damaged, so does that operation.

The brain is necessary for, but not sufficient for, the soul's immanence.

I'll give it the benefit of the doubt, since there is no evidence for it nor to the contrary. Assuming the validity of one position (as you an Elfichka seem to do) would be equally fallacious. Wishful thinking in other words...

Say, what is your sect's position on who exactly possesses a soul? People only, all living beings including or excluding bacteria or viruses?

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 05:05 PM

I'll give it the benefit of the doubt, since there is no evidence for it nor to the contrary. Assuming the validity of one position (as you an Elfichka seem to do) would be equally fallacious. Wishful thinking in other words...
The issue is that your statement that our "soul is just a bunch of neurons" is not true, in any case. As I've pointed out elsewhere, many philosophers of mind and neurologists (including atheists like Daniel Dennett) support the emergentist view of the relationship between the brain and the mind or soul, which says that the result that emerges (the mind) is greater than the sum of it's parts (the brain). And that is really a tautology; because take any of the parts in isolation, and they are not capable of a fraction of what results in unity. This view is highly espoused of in light of what we know about primitive versus complex neurology. It's therefore unjustified to say that the soul is "just a bunch of neurons". It's not.

Johnny Bravo

09-08-2009, 05:10 PM

The issue is that your statement that our "soul is just a bunch of neurons" is not true, in any case. As I've pointed out elsewhere, many philosophers of mind and neurologists (including atheists like Daniel Dennett) support the emergentist view of the relationship between the brain and the mind or soul, which says that the result that emerges (the mind) is greater than the sum of it's parts (the brain). And that is really a tautology; because take any of the parts in isolation, and they are not capable of a fraction of what results in unity. This view is highly espoused of in light of what we know about primitive versus complex neurology. It's therefore unjustified to say that the soul is "just a bunch of neurons". It's not.

And that's not what I said at all. Take a look at my reply again.

Care to answer my other question:

"Say, what is your sect's position on who exactly possesses a soul? People only, all living beings including or excluding bacteria or viruses?"

asulf

09-08-2009, 05:15 PM

I am so worried lately, that if I die prematurely that that would be that. I want to be assured there is some sort of life after death. If not I wish to be immortal. Even after my body is no longer alive I want to be assured there is some sort of afterlife. My fear of death is only going to increase if there is no such thing as an afterlife. I know there is a variety of religious beliefs here. I used to consider myself Catholic and went to church regularly. But due to anxiety related issues I stopped going. I am at rock-bottom now, with my anxiety and with panic-attacks being regular, my hypochondria and all. I just want to find solace in knowing there is an afterlife. :(

there is something tangible even if c is difficult to put into words, I will provide evidence for what I've lived and I'll tell you.
death is a door, the one that crossed over another reality.
You are free to the defrinir at your convenience here is what happened
24 years had I slept with my girlfriend and always when I wake at night I watch the time on my watch ....
So that night in my sleep I feel that I am the one hand that the right is shot as if to get up twice, I feel the tensile stresses and wakes me up so nothing special about the piece everything is calm, calm as I looked at my watch it was 3 hours 12 am ok and I fell asleep.
to 6 hours of Sunday morning knock on the door, I opened and saw my brother told me that suit you, we leave Mom died that night in a car accident.
we go to the place of the accident I'll take care of formalities with police, discuss with the authorities and relief
see the application report and the time of death found by rescue me say we tried everything between 3 10 and 3H 12-night .......... not bother to find out who has been able to wake up, by the urgency of the situation
subsequently in the days that followed , got twice the manifestation of the presence of my mother by my side .
then do not panic, we will all see in due time the other side of the mirror.:D

Lutiferre

09-08-2009, 05:18 PM

"Say, what is your sect's position on who exactly possesses a soul? People only, all living beings including or excluding bacteria or viruses?"
I believe that other organisms possess a primitive soul. Quoting a Thomistic exposition:

There is a hierarchy of vital functions, and thus of different kinds of souls. First of all, there is the vegetative soul which accounts for the functions of nutrition and reproduction. Plants have only this kind of soul. Next, there is the sensitive soul, by which higher animals perceive and respond to their environment.This kind of soul, for some animals, also includes the power of local motion. Finally, there is the rational soul, by which humans are able to use speech and have abstract thoughts. In all of the higher kinds of organisms, the functions that were performed by lower kinds of souls are performed by the higher. Thus, there is only one soul in any particular animal even though it is has the same vegetative capacities as plants. The vegetative functions, which are performed by a plant's soul without sensitive functions, are also performed by the sensitive soul. Likewise, the rational soul is the principle also of sensitive and vegetative functions of human beings. Thus there is a hierarchy of souls and of vital functions, such that the higher souls subsume the lower, but the lower vital functions are necessary for there to be higher ones. The higher are never found without the lower, but the lower are found without the higher. Moreover, there is an interaction between the capacities that characterize higher and lower souls: a lion uses sight to find food, and moves toward the lamb it spies, which it then eats and digests so that it may chase other prey.

Karaten

09-08-2009, 06:50 PM

The soul is the intelligent interpatation of instinctive emotions. We feel, we identify we feel, and we intellectually interpret that feeling, Thus, we think we feel the soul, when really, it's nothing more than an illusion, a trick with smoke and mirrors.

Go ahead and neg rep me again, though if you knew how you felt, I wonder why you made this thread at all.

Karaten

09-08-2009, 06:52 PM

there is something tangible even if c is difficult to put into words, I will provide evidence for what I've lived and I'll tell you.
death is a door, the one that crossed over another reality.
You are free to the defrinir at your convenience here is what happened
24 years had I slept with my girlfriend and always when I wake at night I watch the time on my watch ....
So that night in my sleep I feel that I am the one hand that the right is shot as if to get up twice, I feel the tensile stresses and wakes me up so nothing special about the piece everything is calm, calm as I looked at my watch it was 3 hours 12 am ok and I fell asleep.
to 6 hours of Sunday morning knock on the door, I opened and saw my brother told me that suit you, we leave Mom died that night in a car accident.
we go to the place of the accident I'll take care of formalities with police, discuss with the authorities and relief
see the application report and the time of death found by rescue me say we tried everything between 3 10 and 3H 12-night .......... not bother to find out who has been able to wake up, by the urgency of the situation
subsequently in the days that followed , got twice the manifestation of the presence of my mother by my side .
then do not panic, we will all see in due time the other side of the mirror.:D

I don't see how that's proof at all. That, too, could simply be a psychology illusion.

sturmwalkure

09-08-2009, 07:27 PM

Poltergeist

09-10-2009, 04:34 PM

Yes, there is.

Cato

09-10-2009, 04:46 PM

Perhaps this thread was doomed from the start. If I was in a better state of mind (remember; I was having a nervous breakdown when I'd made this thread) I would have titled this thread 'Do you believe there is an afterlife?'. Thanks to Loki, there's a poll with that same question in this thread. Maybe this is a lesson I need to learn, when it comes to defending my views and how I regard other's views. I firmly believe in the afterlife, and no one can change my mind about that. On that same hand, I shouldn't let other's views bother me so much. Sure, as much as I find their views depressing I won't let them affect mine anymore. And I won't hand out negative rep like I did again. It was just something I needed to get off my chest, it helped I admit. :D

There's no need to defend what you believe, so don't seek to justify yourself to someone that can, possibly, disagree negatively. State what you believe, clarify if you need to or explain further if you're asked, but don't assume a defensive posture or try to vindicate yourself to others. This is done entirely too much, as if many people are so uncertain about what they believe- to the point that they constantly need to buttress their belief system with a neverending litany of apology.

For example, in my case, I might say:

I believe in the lordship of Zeus Almighty, best and greatest of all Gods, and the guardianship and companionship of Pallas Athena, who is the Father's eternal wisdom personified and my own personal daimon; I believe in the the divinity and immortality of my soul, the innate goodness of the world, and that it's better to seek for my own good beliefs than to have them given to me by someone else.

Let someone take issue with this, it's no concern to me. Or, if they ask me what I mean, I'll clarify certain points.

Lutiferre

09-10-2009, 05:06 PM

There's no need to defend what you believe,
Sometimes there is, to retain the integrity of your belief, whether it be to others or yourself.

Cato

09-11-2009, 01:11 AM

I'll clarify and explain, never defend what I believe. By implication, to defend what one believes suggests, to me, means that I must feel the need to justify what I believe and why I believe it. At most I'll say that I'm no neopagan or "Hellenic reconstructionist" type. My forum name means something like counseled [or advised] by Pallas. I don't really know, but I'm not pretending to be a Greek.

Baron Samedi

09-11-2009, 02:48 PM

Satan is the answer.

It is in him you will gain eternal life.

I know this to be real, now.

Gooding

09-11-2009, 03:00 PM

There is an afterlife.Who can define it?"Energy is neither created nor destroyed, only changed.Presumably, this applies to neural energy as well.

Hrolf Kraki

09-11-2009, 03:03 PM

There is an afterlife.Who can define it?"Energy is neither created nor destroyed, only changed.Presumably, this applies to neural energy as well.

One exception. Energy was created at the event known as the Big Bang.

Quantum fluctuations can occur in which two particles are spontaneously created, but there are special circumstances and restrictions.

What do you mean by "neutral energy"?

Sometimes there is, to retain the integrity of your belief, whether it be to others or yourself.

The only reason you would need to justify your beliefs to others is if you yourself didn't have full confidence in your own beliefs. However, the man who has full confidence in beliefs that he can't possibly prove is a man who certainly needs to rethink his position.

Explaining your beliefs to others can benefit you by helping you to find any flaws in your belief system by bouncing ideas off others. However, this would imply that your beliefs are open to change and that you aren't 100% certain of them.

Anyone who is absolutely certain as to what will happen when we die is either a liar or a fool.

Lutiferre

09-11-2009, 03:25 PM

The only reason you would need to justify your beliefs to others is if you yourself didn't have full confidence in your own beliefs.This is really a cliche which everyone seems to repeat.

There is no boundary of confidence in your beliefs, no point at which you cannot build up more experience and confidence in your worldview and your beliefs. And so, defending and discussing your beliefs and others beliefs is always interesting. You can always learn more.

Explaining your beliefs to others can benefit you by helping you to find any flaws in your belief system by bouncing ideas off others. However, this would imply that your beliefs are open to change and that you aren't 100% certain of them.

Anyone who is absolutely certain as to what will happen when we die is either a liar or a fool.
Not necessarily, no. But I will agree that most people are never 100% certain of anything. We aren't certain that things will still fall to the ground and the law of gravity will apply in a minute. But we can come close to certainty of many things, and only be absolutely certain about few things.

Psychonaut

09-11-2009, 04:20 PM

There is an afterlife.Who can define it?"Energy is neither created nor destroyed, only changed.Presumably, this applies to neural energy as well.

There's only one problem with applying thermodynamic theories to neural immortality. You've started with the first law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics), which does state that energy/matter can be manipulated, transformed, transfigured, etc., but can not be destroyed. However, the second law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics) is just as applicable. It states that in any ordered system (like a neural network), entropy will increase over time. Although the electrical pulses would (in some form) persist, the overall pattern would necessarily break down as time increases. :shrug:

Hrolf Kraki

09-11-2009, 05:39 PM

This is really a cliche which everyone seems to repeat.

Name one other reason in which to defend your belief system. The only alternative that I can come up with is if you had evidence that yours was correct. However since no evidence exists, we can throw that one out.

SuuT

09-11-2009, 05:48 PM

Name one other reason in which to defend your belief system.

It is being forceably extinguished from without?

Lutiferre

09-11-2009, 06:03 PM

Name one other reason in which to defend your belief system. The only alternative that I can come up with is if you had evidence that yours was correct. However since no evidence exists, we can throw that one out.
My post was not about evidence, but about why someone would want to debate his beliefs with another. You are absurd.

Nodens

09-11-2009, 08:57 PM

There's only one problem with applying thermodynamic theories to neural immortality. You've started with the first law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics), which does state that energy/matter can be manipulated, transformed, transfigured, etc., but can not be destroyed. However, the second law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics) is just as applicable. It states that in any ordered system (like a neural network), entropy will increase over time. Although the electrical pulses would (in some form) persist, the overall pattern would necessarily break down as time increases. :shrug:

/Speculative Fiction On

Assuming of course, that the Neural Energy, or 'Soul', is a closed system onto itself and that there is no external source of energy/order. It could be the case that the 'Soul' is in fact, capable of action that would extend it's existence indefinably if exercised with regularity. Furthermore it may be possible for external influences to aid this process. If the gods do have a measure of existence outside of our psyches, then the 'Afterlives' they oversee may be (in a limited sense) warded against some degree of entropy. Additionally, offerings for the dead may allow a limited degree of energy replenishment.

/Speculative Fiction Off

Just elaborating a possible system. Even here though, the concept of an 'Eternal' or 'Immortal' 'Soul' cannot be sustained, and a final end to the self can only be delayed.

Lutiferre

09-11-2009, 09:06 PM

There is an afterlife.Who can define it?"Energy is neither created nor destroyed, only changed.Presumably, this applies to neural energy as well.
I don't believe the soul is a material essence, and hence, the laws that apply to matter and energy, such as inevitable corruptibility of form, don't apply to the soul.

Psychonaut

09-12-2009, 12:40 AM

Assuming of course, that the Neural Energy, or 'Soul', is a closed system onto itself and that there is no external source of energy/order.

Like Leibniz's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Leibniz) monads? :D

It could be the case that the 'Soul' is in fact, capable of action that would extend it's existence indefinably if exercised with regularity. Furthermore it may be possible for external influences to aid this process.

If we're dealing with something physical, then it seems like conservation of energy would still come into play, since any activity necessarily expends some sort of energy.

If the gods do have a measure of existence outside of our psyches, then the 'Afterlives' they oversee may be (in a limited sense) warded against some degree of entropy. Additionally, offerings for the dead may allow a limited degree of energy replenishment.

Now that is an interesting thought! That's a good fiction right there, quite similar to Gaiman's American Gods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Gods). :thumb001:

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 01:42 AM

You are absurd.

Sayeth the boy believing in fairy tales....

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 01:45 AM

I have a question for those believing in a soul/afterlife.

Do animals have souls and are they able to enter into an afterlife? Honest question.

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 01:49 AM

Sayeth the boy believing in fairy tales....

"Who is he that overcomes the world, but he that believes Jesus is the Christ?" All the fairy tales are true. They are the stories that will be remembered long after the stories of this forlorn day are discarded on the dust heap of history.

There is the chivalrous lesson of 'Jack the Giant Killer'; that giants should be killed because they are gigantic. It is a manly mutiny against pride as such... There is the lesson of 'Cinderella,' which is the same as the Magnificat-exaltavit humiles.

There is the great lesson of 'Beauty and the Beast'; that a thing must be loved before it is loveable. There is the terrible allegory of the 'Sleeping Beauty,' which tells how the human creature was blessed with all birthday gifts, yet cursed with death; and how death also may perhaps be softened to a sleep...In the fairy tale an incomprehensible happiness rests upon an incomprehensible condition. A box is opened, and all evils fly out. A word is forgotten, and cities perish. A lamp is lit, and love flies away. A flower is plucked, and human lives are forfeited. An apple is eaten, and the hope of God is gone.

--G. K. Chesterton

Fairy tales are true, not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that they can be defeated.

--G.K. Chesterton

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 01:52 AM

I have a question for those believing in a soul/afterlife.

Do animals have souls and are they able to enter into an afterlife? Honest question.
Something that was already asked and which I already answered.

I believe that other organisms possess a primitive soul. Quoting a Thomistic exposition:

There is a hierarchy of vital functions, and thus of different kinds of souls. First of all, there is the vegetative soul which accounts for the functions of nutrition and reproduction. Plants have only this kind of soul. Next, there is the sensitive soul, by which higher animals perceive and respond to their environment.This kind of soul, for some animals, also includes the power of local motion. Finally, there is the rational soul, by which humans are able to use speech and have abstract thoughts. In all of the higher kinds of organisms, the functions that were performed by lower kinds of souls are performed by the higher. Thus, there is only one soul in any particular animal even though it is has the same vegetative capacities as plants. The vegetative functions, which are performed by a plant's soul without sensitive functions, are also performed by the sensitive soul. Likewise, the rational soul is the principle also of sensitive and vegetative functions of human beings. Thus there is a hierarchy of souls and of vital functions, such that the higher souls subsume the lower, but the lower vital functions are necessary for there to be higher ones. The higher are never found without the lower, but the lower are found without the higher. Moreover, there is an interaction between the capacities that characterize higher and lower souls: a lion uses sight to find food, and moves toward the lamb it spies, which it then eats and digests so that it may chase other prey.

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 01:55 AM

Cato

09-12-2009, 02:00 AM

How does a lower lifeform obtain a higher soul? What I mean to say is, we as humans came from apes. Which generation was it that the one prior had a lower soul and the next had a higher one? Do organisms with lower souls ascend to heaven?

You have to take it for granted that the human race is the result of a divinely-created plan. For myself, I literally believe that the human form is ideal and utilitarian and, in its own physical way, divine. But, it's also the carrier for that part of the Godhead that is commonly called soul. The origin of the physical human form isn't much of an issue to me, since this body isn't what I rightly regard as the true human existence. We share a physical existence and sense and sensation with animals, but animals do not share in the soul of God.

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 02:00 AM

How does a lower lifeform obtain a higher soul? What I mean to say is, we as humans came from apes. Which generation was it that the one prior had a lower soul and the next had a higher one?
Apes are already higher in the hierarchy to begin with. Primitive hominids even higher than the apes, and humans even higher than the primitive hominids. As to which generation, that is a matter we can only speculate about, and ultimately one of divine providence.

Do organisms with lower souls ascend to heaven?
They are not rational, and hence, not capable of free exercise of choice, and accepting divine grace is a choice, and hence, not capable of divinisation. Only by divinisation does man enter into the gates of heaven; because divinity is immortality. Man was created with this likeliness of divinity, which we call immortality.

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 02:08 AM

You have to take it for granted that the human race is the result of a divinely-created plan.

Divinely-created plan, eh? What of Darwin? Seems like we evolved by pure chance.

What of creatures inhabiting other star systems? You don't mean to suppose that our planet is the only one out of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 others that can support life, do you?

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 02:15 AM

Divinely-created plan, eh? What of Darwin? Seems like we evolved by pure chance.
Evolution was not an idea that originates in Darwin, but is evident in the Greek thinkers, including Anaximander, Anaximenes, Diogenes of Appolonia, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, but most notably and most fully of all, Aristotle, and from Aristotle, further into the Christian Fathers and Doctors like Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine and Aquinas.

Darwins achievements were much rather in the specific, in expositing on the workings of evolution and natural selection in the specifities of different animals in nature. He was not an inventor of the idea, and nor was his specific exposition fully sufficient, as some of the later Lamarkian discoveries suggest.

What of creatures inhabiting other star systems? You don't mean to suppose that our planet is the only one out of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 others that can support life, do you?
We don't know, since the likelihood of rational animals in the form of humanity is extremely low and hence, it is a miracle that it has even occured on one planet.

Cato

09-12-2009, 02:18 AM

Divinely-created plan, eh? What of Darwin? Seems like we evolved by pure chance.

What of Sir Charles Darwin? Neither he nor his theory represents the eternal questions of the human soul; he merely explains the origin of the animal lifeforms.

What of creatures inhabiting other star systems? You don't mean to suppose that our planet is the only one out of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 others that can support life, do you?

Whose destiny is it to bring life to these lifeless worlds?

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 02:21 AM

Charles Darwin is the father of the modern theory of Evolution no matter how many hairs you wanna split.

Whose destiny is it to bring life to these lifeless worlds?

How do you know they're lifeless?

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 02:25 AM

How do you know they're lifeless?We don't know they are lifeless. But we don't know that they have life either. And even if they have life, which we don't know, it is extremely unreasonable to think they have intelligent life, much less intelligent life anything like humans.

Cato

09-12-2009, 02:26 AM

Charles Darwin is the father of the modern theory of Evolution no matter how many hairs you wanna split.

No, I'm not splitting hairs, I merely gave him proper credit for being the father of a current theory of science.

How do you know they're lifeless?

Belief-based speculation, simply because it's within my realm of belief to believe that mankind is to be a figure of Promethean proportions for the universe at large. I have high hopes for mankind, not a belief that sees him as merely a byproduct of cosmic chance or an advanced form of animal.

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 02:32 AM

it is extremely unreasonable to think they have intelligent life

Oh? We know of around 125-150 billion galaxies in the observable universe. Each has around a half trillion stars. I think it's extremely likely that there is intelligent life elsewhere. However the likelihood that we find it before it dies out (or we die out) is incredibly slim.

Why should earth be unique? The origins of life on earth aren't exactly known, but we've got a pretty good idea about what went on. Rare, but rare doesn't mean never.

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 02:32 AM

Belief-based speculation, simply because it's within my realm of belief to believe that mankind is to be a figure of Promethean proportions for the universe at large. I have high hopes for mankind, not a belief that sees him as merely a byproduct of cosmic chance or an advanced form of animal.
And neither do I, though we are animals in the sense of being animate beings, just not in the sense of being at the level of the non-rational creatures.

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 02:33 AM

Cato

09-12-2009, 02:37 AM

Oh? We know of around 125-150 billion galaxies in the observable universe. Each has around a half trillion stars. I think it's extremely likely that there is intelligent life elsewhere. However the likelihood that we find it before it dies out (or we die out) is incredibly slim.

Why should earth be unique? The origins of life on earth aren't exactly known, but we've got a pretty good idea about what went on. Rare, but rare doesn't mean never.

I won't dispute the physical facts, but I'm not referring to facts and statistics of astronomy and astrophysics. I'm bewildered why people so earnestly believe in Sagan's nonsense about the "pale blue dot" when mankind's, and the Earth's momentous potential is so utterly obvious. Such people are short-sighed and have no sense of the destiny of mankind.

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 02:37 AM

The earth is unique, and if it wasn't, life, much less human life, would have never blossomed forth here.

The earth is unique insofar as we've not yet found another planet like it. But that means nothing.

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 02:39 AM

The earth is unique insofar as we've not yet found another planet like it. But that means nothing.
No. It's unique not only insofar as it was the planet on which humanity arose, but insofar as it's the planet which enabled us to say that it's unique.

I find it absurd how some people think that astrophysical facts should rationally have any impact on the existential and spiritual centrality, primacy and supremacy of humanity, in indeed, humanitys own worldview and existential priority of the cosmos.

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 03:04 AM

No. It's unique not only insofar as it was the planet on which humanity arose, but insofar as it's the planet which enabled us to say that it's unique.

I find it absurd how some people think that astrophysical facts should rationally have any impact on the existential and spiritual centrality, primacy and supremacy of humanity, in indeed, humanitys own worldview and existential priority of the cosmos.

I never said it had any such impact, but it allows one to see how the universe operates on a deeper level. This deeper understanding helps fuel logical thought concerning creators. You apparently don't know enough astrophysics. Read some cosmology. It'll do you good.

Gooding

09-12-2009, 03:24 AM

One exception. Energy was created at the event known as the Big Bang.

Quantum fluctuations can occur in which two particles are spontaneously created, but there are special circumstances and restrictions.

What do you mean by "neutral energy"?

The only reason you would need to justify your beliefs to others is if you yourself didn't have full confidence in your own beliefs. However, the man who has full confidence in beliefs that he can't possibly prove is a man who certainly needs to rethink his position.

Explaining your beliefs to others can benefit you by helping you to find any flaws in your belief system by bouncing ideas off others. However, this would imply that your beliefs are open to change and that you aren't 100% certain of them.

Anyone who is absolutely certain as to what will happen when we die is either a liar or a fool.

I'm not too certain about the reality of this life, how can I know what'll happen later?:P I do believe that we are a part of a larger reality that was created by an Absolute Principle of Love.I think that we will be called to account for our actions when we are brought before this Being (not Spirit. A spirit is something that is part of a larger community, a "species", if you will. I think this Being is completely unlike anything in our temporal experience.Eternally Unique, a Singularity, maybe?). We either exist in fellowship with the blessed company in company with this Being, or we get cast off,eternally isolated. I can't prove any of it, but I can believe it and draw comfort from the believing, such as the Asatru find comfort in the Eddas, or the Zoroastrians find comfort in the Gathas. The Big Bang, by the way, might've occurred as a result of a previous " Big Crunch", hence pointing to a sustained recyclability of this universe.

Cato

09-12-2009, 03:38 AM

Someone who knows of his work might consider me to have been influenced by Teilhard de Chardin, but I was formulating my beliefs about the afterlife, God and human destiny well before I ever read any of his books. When I finally did read some of his works, I was struck by how similar, and also how much more well-developed, he was to what I've been mulling over in my mind for some time.

For those who keep bringing up other worlds, distant stars and distant galaxies (not Hrolf, but just in general), they're getting ahead of themselves. I just see that as, for lack of a better term, inert matter or entropic stuff that needs the guiding hand of a divine creature to be made alive and meaningful. People without the benefit of having read Teilhard will think I sound self-absorbed and foolish, but they know what I mean (but not exactly in the Christocentric way that Teilhard did). It's the purpose and the duty of man to make the physical plane a perfected, well-ordered place- like what we call heaven. This is what I can only call the doctrine of the man-god, who is to emulate the works of God on a cosmic scale.

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 08:49 PM

The Big Bang, by the way, might've occurred as a result of a previous " Big Crunch", hence pointing to a sustained recyclability of this universe.

Yes. I believe this makes most sense. Universes are closed.

Hrolf Kraki

09-12-2009, 08:51 PM

For those who keep bringing up other worlds, distant stars and distant galaxies (not Hrolf, but just in general), they're getting ahead of themselves. I just see that as, for lack of a better term, inert matter or entropic stuff that needs the guiding hand of a divine creature to be made alive and meaningful.

I'm not getting ahead of myself. I just find all this divine hand mumbo-jumbo quite laughable. The universe has progressed according to science since the beginning WITHOUT any help of some divine source.

Lutiferre

09-12-2009, 08:54 PM

The universe has progressed according to science since the beginning WITHOUT any help of some divine source.
Possibly the most stupid statement I've ever heard.

Cato

09-13-2009, 12:46 AM

Scientific laws would've been a better thing to say.

Lutiferre

09-13-2009, 11:17 AM

Scientific laws would've been a better thing to say.
Not even that. It is always our scientific laws which to an extent (but not fully; we may have flawed understanding) progress according to the universe, not the universe that progresses according to our scientific laws.

Hrolf Kraki

09-13-2009, 05:57 PM

Possibly the most stupid statement I've ever heard.

The universe operates according to its own set of laws that were prescribed at the origin of the universe. We just try to figure out what those laws are. Stop with the semantics. It's ridiculous.

Psychonaut

09-13-2009, 06:12 PM

Not even that. It is always our scientific laws which to an extent (but not fully; we may have flawed understanding) progress according to the universe, not the universe that progresses according to our scientific laws.

I can't believe you guys are arguing about this. Do natural phenomena occur in ways that can generally be predicted? Yes, of course they do. Do we call the formalized methods of prediction scientific laws? Ditto. Is anyone here really claiming anything otherwise? No. Is semantic nitpicking about this pointless? You betcha.

Poltergeist

09-13-2009, 06:22 PM

Psychonaut

09-13-2009, 06:38 PM

The mechanical view of the universe has been disproved long ago, by discoveries in quantum physics.

Does the discovery of QM invalidate Newtonian mechanics? No. It only invalidates NM as a universal predictor; the pre-QM formulas still work just fine for phenomena that are outside of the scope of QM and Relativity. Furthermore, since QM and Relativity still don't mesh, you can't really say that something has been disproved by QM; we're quite sure that QM will be superseded by a TOE (at some point). Perhaps David Bohm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bohm) and his camp will end up being correct and hidden variables will be discovered that account for the appearance of unpredictability at the quantum level. We'll have no way of knowing for sure until we can overcome the limitations of our current particle accelerators.

Do "laws of nature" exist per se? I don't think so. There is only some inexplicable chaos which we (try to) rationalize away by applying the abstract notion of "laws of nature".

So, when I, in a vacuum, drop a lead sphere, it's resultant motion doesn't occur in an entirely regular and repeatable manner?

Poltergeist

09-13-2009, 07:03 PM

Does the discovery of QM invalidate Newtonian mechanics? No. It only invalidates NM as a universal predictor; the pre-QM formulas still work just fine for phenomena that are outside of the scope of QM and Relativity. Furthermore, since QM and Relativity still don't mesh, you can't really say that something has been disproved by QM; we're quite sure that QM will be superseded by a TOE (at some point). Perhaps David Bohm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bohm) and his camp will end up being correct and hidden variables will be discovered that account for the appearance of unpredictability at the quantum level. We'll have no way of knowing for sure until we can overcome the limitations of our current particle accelerators.

It's not universal, you say it yourself. The "only" adverb is superfluous here. Furthermore, it is difficult to dismiss subatomic level by saying "only" since it is basis of all material world, thus a very important fact (not just a detail). What will be discovered in future, we don't know. Once there was no Newtonian mechanics either.

So, when I, in a vacuum, drop a lead sphere, it's resultant motion doesn't occur in an entirely regular and repeatable manner?

If something happens one thousand times (or how many one wishes), nothing guarantees the same will happen for one thousand and first time. We just, with a high probability, expect that it would repeat itself every time.

These abstractions called "laws of nature" do have a very useful practical value because they enable us to predict things with high probability. I am not denying that. It's only that I don't see them as existing in and of themselves, transcendentally, so to speak, as eternal and self-understood. They are our approximations and projections.

Hrolf Kraki

09-13-2009, 07:27 PM

The mechanical view of the universe has been disproved long ago, by discoveries in quantum physics.

I'm familiar with quantum physics. Explain what you mean.

Psychonaut

09-13-2009, 07:28 PM

It's not universal, you say it yourself. The "only" adverb is superfluous here. Furthermore, it is difficult to dismiss subatomic level by saying "only" since it is basis of all material world, thus a very important fact (not just a detail). What will be discovered in future, we don't know. Once there was no Newtonian mechanics either.

I guess the salient difference here is that while NM was believed for a long time to a finished core to a system that would expand to cover all phenomena, QM was know very soon after it's discovery to be something that would be replaced and would have to be replaced in the near future thanks to it's fundamental incompatibilities with our large scale formulas. Since it's never really been seen as a stopping point, I don't really see any point in basing assumptions about the ultimate nature of the universe on it. It's not like other theories that might be falsified in the future; we're certain this will be. We just don't know how yet.

If something happens one thousand times (or how many one wishes), nothing guarantees the same will happen for one thousand and first time. We just, with a high probability, expect that it would repeat itself every time.

I'm not a physicist, merely an interested layman with some background in the field, so I'm not quite sure about this: has there ever been a documented instance of a large-scale formula, in a situation in which all the necessary variables were known, not predicting the outcome? I ask because the only tests I can think of where this occurs deal with either photons or sub-atomic particles.

Loki

09-13-2009, 08:43 PM

It would seem that Christians have a different definition of quantum physics (http://www.agapelifeministriesinc.com/files/Quantum_Physics_Part_1_and_2.pdf).

Poltergeist

09-13-2009, 09:17 PM

It would seem that Christians have a different definition of quantum physics (http://www.agapelifeministriesinc.com/files/Quantum_Physics_Part_1_and_2.pdf).

Actually, I have heard (and read) plenty of Christians denouncing "quantum physics" as modern, "devilish" invention and preferring old, newtonian mechanics.

I'm familiar with quantum physics. Explain what you mean.

I mean the fact that Newton's laws are inadequate to apply in certain cases, most remarkably at very small scales, very high speeds or very strong gravitational fields. These laws cannot be used to explain phenomena such as conduction of electricity in a semiconductor, optical properties of substances and superconductivity. Explanation of these phenomena is impossible without more sophisticated physical theories, including General Relativity and Relativistic Quantum Mechanics.

Hrolf Kraki

09-13-2009, 09:53 PM

I mean the fact that Newton's laws are inadequate to apply in certain cases, most remarkably at very small scales, very high speeds or very strong gravitational fields. These laws cannot be used to explain phenomena such as conduction of electricity in a semiconductor, optical properties of substances and superconductivity. Explanation of these phenomena is impossible without more sophisticated physical theories, including General Relativity and Relativistic Quantum Mechanics.

Yes, much of the physical world can be described using Newtonian physics, but in the realm of the very large, one needs to use Relativity and in the realm of the very small one needs to use Quantum Mechanics. But alas the problem still exists: the two DON'T mesh.

So what exactly is your point?

One shouldn't base judgements on what science doesn't yet know.

Hrolf Kraki

09-13-2009, 09:54 PM

It would seem that Christians have a different definition of quantum physics (http://www.agapelifeministriesinc.com/files/Quantum_Physics_Part_1_and_2.pdf).

Hahahahaha!!!! Oh man I'm gonna have to print that one. Christians are great for a laugh, but their utter ineptness of logical thought does begin to grind on one after a while.

Poltergeist

09-13-2009, 09:57 PM

I guess the salient difference here is that while NM was believed for a long time to a finished core to a system that would expand to cover all phenomena, QM was know very soon after it's discovery to be something that would be replaced and would have to be replaced in the near future thanks to it's fundamental incompatibilities with our large scale formulas. Since it's never really been seen as a stopping point, I don't really see any point in basing assumptions about the ultimate nature of the universe on it. It's not like other theories that might be falsified in the future; we're certain this will be. We just don't know how yet.

Anything could be replaced, so could Newtonian physics. Being neither myself a physicist, but having read something about it, and heard from some physicists, I'd just say there are two competing theories/views which will in future maybe be reconciled, or maybe both of them dismissed for some third theory, which would perhaps incorporate elements of the both, or some fourth variety, who knows. I just said that for the time being the very fact of inapplicability of some Newtonian concepts to the subatomic level discredits the Newtonian determinism from its pretenses to universality (being the subatomic level a very basic one indeed).

I'm not a physicist, merely an interested layman with some background in the field, so I'm not quite sure about this: has there ever been a documented instance of a large-scale formula, in a situation in which all the necessary variables were known, not predicting the outcome? I ask because the only tests I can think of where this occurs deal with either photons or sub-atomic particles.

Not that I know of, on the macroscopic level.

But that was not my point. I wasn't trying to "disprove" Newton's laws (and who am I to do that anyway, since I am not a physicist, but just reading and collecting what physicists wrote about that?), ie. their level od predictability, but just speaking about the general notion of "laws of nature", that nothing proves that they are absolute in and of themselves, that they are necessarily true and unchanging, that speaking hypothetically no-one can say that some supposed law of nature may not be applicable in some situation similar to situations it was already tested in and found always (so far) as corresponding. Even the extremely high level of predictability does not equal absolute truthfulness (which no scientific theory claims for itself anyway).

007

09-13-2009, 10:08 PM

Those who die in battle and impress the Valkyrie with their bravery and prowess are taken to Valhalla to drink mead and feast with Woden and prepare for Ragnarokr

Psychonaut

09-13-2009, 10:21 PM

Anything could be replaced, so could Newtonian physics. Being neither myself a physicist, but having read something about it, and heard from some physicists, I'd just say there are two competing theories/views which will in future will maybe be reconciled, or maybe both of them dismissed for some third theory, which would perhaps incorporate elements of the both, or some fourth variety, who knows. I just said that for the time being the very fact of inapplicability of some Newtonian concepts to the subatomic level discredits the Newtonian determinism from its pretenses to universality (being the subatomic level a very basic one indeed).

Fair enough. :)

...just speaking about the general notion of "laws of nature", that nothing proves that they are absolute in and of themselves, that they are necessarily true and unchanging, that speaking hypothetically no-one can say that some supposed law of nature may not be applicable in some situation similar to situations it was already tested in and found always (so far) as corresponding. Even the extremely high level of predictability does not equal absolute truthfulness (which no scientific theory claims for otself anyway).

I guess what I was getting at is that while it would of course be foolish to proclaim that our current set of formulas are the laws that matter operates in accordance with, why would we not believe that the formulas we've discovered are simulacrums of true universal laws that have yet to be formulated? Certain types of phenomena may not be predictable at any point, but the fact that the overwhelming number of occurrences are seems to imply that the principle of order is implicit in the universe itself and is not merely an appearance that masks some ultimate chaos. After all, quantum occurrences aren't even that chaotic to begin with. Their behaviors can be somewhat described by the probability functions that we're currently using, since it's only "chaos" within a specific limit of the function.

Poltergeist

09-13-2009, 10:27 PM

Hahahahaha!!!! Oh man I'm gonna have to print that one. Christians are great for a laugh, but their utter ineptness of logical thought does begin to grind on one after a while.

"Logical thinking" means nothing without premises, because logic is just a tool to explain some things and not an end to itself.

(just generally speaking, not referring to that weird tract linked to by Loki)

Humanophage

09-14-2009, 12:04 AM

I probably have a rather boring and uneducated opinion on all this.

The difference between life and its absence for me is largely the difference between the presence of perception and thought of some sort and a lack thereof. If I do not perceive anything, then nothing exists. The most likely possibility is that what follows death will be akin to an eternal dreamless sleep, equivalent to lacking perception - nothing.

A more optimistic scenario is that 'death' is a step into one of many stages of some sort of a 'greater life', which would be utterly alien and indiscribable, and which the rather finite concepts of afterworlds don't seem to accomodate very well. Then again, such a life may be finite and end in the same loss of perception and thought, i.e. in the true death. It appears futile to speculate about anything like that.

Oh, and I would not entirely denounce the possibility of scientists learning to revive individuals in the future, most probably by using data gathered from their remains, but perhaps through some other means. It is therefore a sound idea for a body to be preserved for as long as possible. That combined with a temporary dreamless slumber seem to be the most prosaic and believable scenarios of afterlife, so to say. Not really depressing, except it would mean being eternally imprisoned in this existence.

P.S. I am quite assured that the afterlife, if there is any, will not be dependant on human morals. The sheer variety of the latter strips them of credibility in this regard. That doesn't mean morals aren't an efficient tool to organise well-functioning communities, naturally.

Lutiferre

09-14-2009, 09:39 AM

I can't believe you guys are arguing about this. Do natural phenomena occur in ways that can generally be predicted? Yes, of course they do. Do we call the formalized methods of prediction scientific laws? Ditto. Is anyone here really claiming anything otherwise? No. Is semantic nitpicking about this pointless? You betcha.
It's more than nitpicking, as you say:

Does the discovery of QM invalidate Newtonian mechanics? No. It only invalidates NM as a universal predictor; the pre-QM formulas still work just fine for phenomena that are outside of the scope of QM and Relativity. Furthermore, since QM and Relativity still don't mesh, you can't really say that something has been disproved by QM; we're quite sure that QM will be superseded by a TOE (at some point). Perhaps David Bohm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bohm) and his camp will end up being correct and hidden variables will be discovered that account for the appearance of unpredictability at the quantum level. We'll have no way of knowing for sure until we can overcome the limitations of our current particle accelerators.

Exactly, new theories and new knowledge will come, and hence, what seems to be inevitable laws of nature might not be, after all. The consensus is not the Bohmian interpretation though, but the Copenhagen interpretation (however hard that is to deal with).

That said, I am not denying there are laws of nature, I am just denying that they are the same as the "laws of science" at any given moment.

Barreldriver

09-16-2009, 09:11 PM

Ragnarokr

R's after consonants are lame. R's after vowels pwn, reallyr. :P

I wonder where you got that version of the word? I've never seen it in any translation dictionary that I've observed.

Note the original version:

Old Norse: rɑɡnɑrøk

pronounced ræɡnərɒk

fusion of ragna (plural form of regin)/Gods/Ruling Powers and rök, various meanings include development, end, origin, cause, relation, fate.

So God development, Gods end, Gods origin, Gods cause, Gods relation, Gods fate.

Or Rulers end, Rulers origin, Rulers cause, Rulers relation, Rulers fate.

Ragnarokr is not present among any version of the word Ragnarok that I have seen.

:D

Regardless, your OP was applicable and a fate to be desired. :D

Psychonaut

09-16-2009, 10:50 PM

R's after consonants are lame. R's after vowels pwn, reallyr. :P

I wonder where you got that version of the word? I've never seen it in any translation dictionary that I've observed.

Note the original version:

Old Norse: rɑɡnɑrøk

pronounced ræɡnərɒk

fusion of ragna (plural form of regin)/Gods/Ruling Powers and rök, various meanings include development, end, origin, cause, relation, fate.

So God development, Gods end, Gods origin, Gods cause, Gods relation, Gods fate.

Or Rulers end, Rulers origin, Rulers cause, Rulers relation, Rulers fate.

Ragnarokr is not present among any version of the word Ragnarok that I have seen.

:D

Regardless, your OP was applicable and a fate to be desired. :D

The terminal "-r" is the nominative declension for a lot of words in Old Norse, if I remember correctly. In Proto-Norse (and Proto-Germanic) it was the terminal "-z" which the Algiz rune signified. Ragnarökr is not at all an uncommon spelling.

Hrolf Kraki

09-18-2009, 02:44 AM

R's after consonants are lame.

R's after consonants are the best. That's what real vikings do; not all this sissy 'ur' nonsense they got going on now.

007

09-18-2009, 04:28 AM

R's after consonants are lame.

Don't tell the Old Norse.

I wonder where you got that version of the word?

Wikipedia; "In the Prose Edda, and a single poem in the Poetic Edda, the event is referred to as Ragnarökr or Ragnarökkr (Old Norse "Twilight of the Gods"[4]),"

Ragnarokr is not present among any version of the word Ragnarok that I have seen.

:D

Regardless, your OP was applicable and a fate to be desired. :D

I agree that Valhalla is a fate to be desired

safinator

02-20-2012, 12:47 AM

We can't know until we try it.

Mercury

02-20-2012, 12:58 AM

Based on the information cardiologist Pim van Lommel collected (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=39600)concerning near death experiences, I would say it's very likely an afterlife exists. There is simply too much evidence for it that cannot be ignored and should be investigated scientifically. I highly doubt we will experience the Christian form of afterlife, something along the lines of the Greco-Romance belief on the Realms beyond here make more sense to me.

heyaitsme

02-20-2012, 01:00 AM

Why is there so many threads on religion? I saw like 3 just now..

Electronic God-Man

02-20-2012, 01:35 AM

Why is there so many threads on religion? I saw like 3 just now..

Surely that's better than 500 threads on racial taxonomy every day?

FrenchSeeker

02-24-2012, 05:43 PM

My personnal opinion is that there's no afterlife at all, you're a body and when you die it is the end.
That's why life's so precious.

Teyrn

03-02-2012, 01:02 AM

The answer to this perplexing question remains to be seen in my mind. I used to have a specific answer ("yes") but after some recent experiences and alot of thinking I can honestly say that at this point I simply don't know.

YeshAtid

11-09-2013, 02:18 AM

Depends

Gorštak

11-09-2013, 02:25 AM

Islam is all about afterlife, this world is basically just an

illusion, test, for a real life(afterlife).

Stanley

11-09-2013, 02:27 AM

Depends

Yeah, it totally depends on whether there's an afterlife or not.

Krampus

11-09-2013, 03:02 AM

I meant is there such thing as heaven? Will my soul live on? :( I am just so scared right now. I can't think about falling asleep.

Yes. Don't be scared about it, I've had the same problem when I was younger. I was always scared about no afterlife because once I die there is nothing left. As long as you have faith, its no problem. This is kinda weird, but if exorcisms are real and possessions by the devil than I'm pretty sure that Jesus and Christianity is real.

CordedWhelp

11-09-2013, 03:21 AM

There is.

There's this "meme" in the intellectual world....not an internet meme...but this annoying train of thought that's rather a thorn in my ass.

I see a lot of pseudo-intellectual arm-chair philosophers fancy that they know everything that there is to know...often agnostics and atheists,...and new agers...etc... and they have some emotional desire to believe that life is a random explosion of a random mutation...etc...etc...

I was raised in the Lutheran faith. I saw some spirits..some shit...but then I had some thinking I had something wrong with me. I fell away...I embraced some new-age spiritualist shit...I dug deep into the rabbit hole...I was after a point in some kind of training to benefit the Luciferian system.

One time I was face to face with a fallen angel. This fallen angel was actually repentent... freshly so. I had actually been talking to this individual for a ..couple of weeks. Well...during this Particular conversation, I suddenly learned love, and fear, and hate...and a voice. The Voice of He who made me. I felt fuzzy, I shed some tears...then a lesson in Reason.

This is not some cheap troll post. The reason I joined this forum was to confess Truth to a venue I thought...call me crazy...might get me. It's strange...some folks just find eachother...

Yes, there is a spiritual life... It's frankly silly to think there is no spiritual realm. I think most people have experienced it in some form or another...many choose to deny it.

I choose Messiah. Take that as you will.