# Do you believe in life after death?



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 28, 2015)

I'm not a religious person so the whole "When we die we'll either go to heaven/paradise or hell" though with so many people claiming that they saw the after life it has made me curious but there's no solid proof (actual images and/or sound).

What are your thoughts?

I used to think that when we'd die we'd just die and that'd be it, but who knows, there might be something else to it (sure as heck I wouldn't be willing to try it out, lol).


----------



## Flame (Jun 28, 2015)

no.

we become dirt. end of.


----------



## RiveaJ (Jun 28, 2015)

I like to think so. I've invested a lot of time watching paranormal investigation shows and videos and I'm pretty much convinced.
Unsure if it'll be anything like we imagine heaven or hell.
From a scientific standpoint if it does exist I'll place money on it having something to do with quantum physics.


----------



## Blaze163 (Jun 28, 2015)

I've actually been dead, temporarily (obviously, otherwise my ability to type this takes on a whole new meaning). I distinctly remember feeling a cool breeze on my forehead, I could smell flowers, and there's a hazy recollection of a femae voice I don't recognize telling me I still had too much to do. Not sure what it was. Maybe a religious experience, maybe just my brain's way of coping with the trauma. I don't think the human mind is evolved enough yet to answer those kinds of questions. I do try to achieve all I can with my life as a result of it almost being cut short, but whether or not that's divine mandate or just me being pragmatic is a different matter. I try not to worry about it. The end will reveal itself when it's time. No point thinking about it now, no matter what it is I can't stop it or change it. Death is inevitable. I prefer to think about life, and how best to use it.


----------



## AboodXD (Jun 28, 2015)

Yes, but no one can see the after life before dying so no to the 





WiiCube_2013 said:


> people claiming that they saw the after life


----------



## Nathan Drake (Jun 28, 2015)

No, but I do believe in life after love.


----------



## RiveaJ (Jun 28, 2015)

Blaze163 said:


> No point thinking about it now, no matter what it is I can't stop it or change it. Death is inevitable. I prefer to think about life, and how best to use it.



Very true. My most favourite quote ever relates to what you said.
A man destined to hang can never drown - Regina Spektor

EDIT:



AboodXD said:


> Yes, but no one can see the after life before dying so no to the



People can't be resuscitated?


----------



## AboodXD (Jun 28, 2015)

AboodXD said:


> Yes, but no one can see the after life before dying so no to the


*AND* no one can die and and come back, only if god wills.

Our religion says that no one can ever imagine the heaven.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 28, 2015)

AboodXD said:


> Yes, but no one can see the after life before dying so no to the



There are those who've reported to have died and then came back, but maybe it's just their brain playing tricks on them.


----------



## AboodXD (Jun 28, 2015)

RiveaJ said:


> People can't be resuscitated?


Answer: 





AboodXD said:


> no one can die and and come back, only if god wills.


.



WiiCube_2013 said:


> There are those who've reported to have died and then came back, but maybe it's just their brain playing tricks on them.


Exactly.

Do you know if you want to be a Muslim you have to believe in the after life and that you're going to stand in front of God and you're either going to hell or heaven?


----------



## Vipera (Jun 28, 2015)

ITT: edges, edges everywhere.


I don't believe in life, but I do believe in something better. Your very own after-life made out of your past experiences. The more you live your life, the fullest and limitless it will be. Of course, if someone dies too young he/she gets another try.

And if I'm wrong, eh. I'm dead anyway.


----------



## guitarheroknight (Jun 28, 2015)

You've been dead 6 billion years before you were born and you'll be dead 6 billion years after you die. Believing that religious nonsense is just plain stupid, it just serves to hold you in line with the rest of the sheep.


----------



## RiveaJ (Jun 28, 2015)

AboodXD said:


> Do you know if you want to be a Muslim you have to believe in the after life and that you're going to stand in front of God and you're either going to hell or heaven?



So if your heart stops beating and your brain activity stops, as long as you 'come back to life', as far as the Islamic religion is concerned you never died?
Interesting.


----------



## Depravo (Jun 28, 2015)

I'm yet to be convinced there is life before death.


----------



## Flame (Jun 28, 2015)

Depravo said:


> I'm yet to be convinced there is life before death.



some next level deep shit. right there.

philosophy 101.


----------



## sarkwalvein (Jun 28, 2015)

I believe we turn into Mako.


----------



## anhminh (Jun 28, 2015)

I do believe when I dead, I will finally reach the 2D world where all my waifu are waiting for me.


----------



## Flame (Jun 28, 2015)

Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!



But He loves you


----------



## AboodXD (Jun 28, 2015)

RiveaJ said:


> So if your heart stops beating and your brain activity stops, as long as you 'come back to life', as far as the Islamic religion is concerned you never died?
> Interesting.


I don't get it. -_-


----------



## RiveaJ (Jun 28, 2015)

AboodXD said:


> I don't get it. -_-


You said it's impossible to come back to life. Some people are pronounced dead by medical professionals and then are resuscitated and brought back to life.
They tend to be the people who talk about their experiences of the afterlife.


----------



## finkmac (Jun 28, 2015)

I believe in death after life.


----------



## sarkwalvein (Jun 28, 2015)

finkmac said:


> I believe in death after life.


I don't believe in causality.


----------



## Sonicslasher (Jun 28, 2015)




----------



## AboodXD (Jun 28, 2015)

RiveaJ said:


> You said it's impossible to come back to life. Some people are pronounced dead by medical professionals and then are resuscitated and brought back to life.


OK, so, what's your point?


RiveaJ said:


> They tend to be the people who talk about their experiences of the afterlife.


It's impossible until the day of Judgment, maybe they were dreaming.... God knows.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Jun 28, 2015)

As we die, our brains releases a huge amount of electricity and endorphins; I believe any "experience" someone might feel as they die (or have a near death experience, and live to tell the tale) is simply the brain's "last stand", as it were, giving people illusions of a grandeur paradise (or suffering, whatever) that have been associated with any "heaven/hell" religious communities might believe in.


----------



## Black-Ice (Jun 28, 2015)

I'd like to think my soul goes somewhere

I can't and don't want to comprehend a complete and utter end to my existence.


----------



## emigre (Jun 28, 2015)

No but I believe in love after life


----------



## Flame (Jun 28, 2015)

emigre said:


> No but I believe in love after life




emigre you lacking cuz. joke already posted. you used to be faster.


----------



## emigre (Jun 28, 2015)

Flame said:


> emigre you lacking cuz. joke already posted. you used to be faster.



brb going to kill myself


----------



## Flame (Jun 28, 2015)

emigre said:


> brb going to kill myself



see you in hell buddy. where that cher song is played 24/7 365 4ever.


----------



## emigre (Jun 28, 2015)

Flame said:


> see you in hell buddy. where that cher song is played 24/7 365 4ever.



That sounds like my idea of heaven.


----------



## Smuff (Jun 28, 2015)

I was told that when we die we all come back as Lego™ minifigures and have all kinds of amazing adventures ?


----------



## Drak0rex (Jun 28, 2015)




----------



## mechagouki (Jun 28, 2015)

Black-Ice said:


> I'd like to think my soul goes somewhere
> 
> I can't and don't want to comprehend a complete and utter end to my existence.



That right there is the root of all afterlife belief and the basic power all organised religion hold over their followers.

Human egos are frail, and have a tough time accepting their finite nature "I'm such a wonderful valuable creature, there must be some further existence for me after this one..."

The truth? You are a complex chemical reaction, the ultimate product of which is dust and bones.


----------



## TVL (Jun 28, 2015)

Is there life after death for chimpanzees? Pigs? Ants? Will I be reunited with my first NES when I die? I don't believe in it.

Death to me is not scary, I hope it's far away... but if my consciousness is gone awaiting judgmentday and then rebooted to play harp on a cloud then it might as well just stay gone because I will not be missing people and things by that time anyway.


----------



## RiveaJ (Jun 28, 2015)

AboodXD said:


> OK, so, what's your point?


My point is that you're saying that it is impossible to die and come back to life, anyone with any medical knowledge will tell you otherwise.



TVL said:


> Is there life after death for chimpanzees? Pigs? Ants?


Some people believe that they are visited by the ghosts of their beloved animals, so I'd imagine so.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 28, 2015)

If we are going all EOF with the songs then


----------



## Black-Ice (Jun 29, 2015)

mechagouki said:


> That right there is the root of all afterlife belief and the basic power all organised religion hold over their followers.
> 
> Human egos are frail, and have a tough time accepting their finite nature "I'm such a wonderful valuable creature, there must be some further existence for me after this one..."
> 
> The truth? You are a complex chemical reaction, the ultimate product of which is dust and bones.


Damn, I can't even think of a lighthearted comment to raise the spirits that were obliterated by this reply.


----------



## Sheimi (Jun 29, 2015)

Depends on what you believe in. I'll probably get stuck in a endless cycle of reincarnation or my soul stays on Earth as long as it pleases til I decide to move on.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 29, 2015)

All my signs point to, I don't know and I don't really care. Death is going to happen to everyone, but right now, I am too busy living.


----------



## Walker D (Jun 29, 2015)

I'm not getting in the discussion about "my religion wins over your opinion" that is going over here, cause for me, the discussion itself is wrong by default.

Religion "can" be used to suggest a first idea, that can be studied or analyzed scientifically, to then, create a based opinion..   ..but using religion itself as a opinion-base for a discussion like this ...Nah, don't.





mechagouki said:


> Human egos are frail, and have a tough time accepting their finite nature "*I'm such a wonderful valuable creature, there must be some further existence for me after this one...*"



That's indeed a simplistic thought and a weak base for afterlife ideas, like Heaven and Hell.




mechagouki said:


> The truth? *You are a complex chemical reaction*, the ultimate product of which is dust and bones.



The problem? This is also a simplistic base for explaining the innerworks of our mind, specially with nowadays science.

Advanced Math and Physics theorizes in a lot of ways that the main way of mind definition (processes of decision making, human memory, concepts and conceptual reasoning, human judgment, and perception ..pretty much the calculus that make who we are)  they have a quantum nature as base.
It's also theoretically possible, that this Quantic Base could also endure beyond or physical body, since it doesn't necessary would need your meat and bones to be.

Again... this are still based on theories (some are actually advanced already though).. I saw people talking about this points also using Supersymmetry as one of the tools to understand how the Quantum Processes could exist beyond or known matter (it's also interesting, but I don't know much about this one to tell much  )



So yea...   ..Science is not as sure as you think


----------



## evandixon (Jun 29, 2015)

Heaven exists; but only those who believe Jesus died (and was resurrected) to save us from our sins can get there.


----------



## grossaffe (Jun 29, 2015)

Nope.  Once I die, I will cease to exist as a conscious entity.  I will experience nothing; no heaven, no hell; no light, no darkness; no time.  I will be what I was prior to my conception: Nothing.


----------



## pastaconsumer (Jun 29, 2015)

sarkwalvein said:


> I believe we turn into Mako.


So we turn into a teenage girl?


Spoiler: the fuck is a mako


----------



## Digital.One.Entity (Jun 29, 2015)

I'll know for sure when I take my last breath......or not


----------



## ground (Jun 29, 2015)

UniqueGeek said:


> Heaven exists; but only those who believe Jesus died (and was resurrected) to save us from our sins can get there.


reminds me of this funny scene:


I like to think that there is something after life, but I think there is nothing. on the other hand it doesn't really matter i guess.


----------



## Hungry Friend (Jun 29, 2015)

UniqueGeek said:


> Heaven exists; but only those who believe Jesus died (and was resurrected) to save us from our sins can get there.



Agreed, but that belief is becoming rather unpopular in some circles. I used to be a very militant atheist as well so I've been on both sides of this issue, but some very personal experiences that I'd prefer not to talk about openly have led me to believe in God. IMO, the rational mind alone will never be able to explain all of creation, much less whether life after death exists; spirituality and rationalism are connected in some ways and very different in other ways. Faith is one of those things you either "get" or simply can't comprehend. I've been on both sides of the fence so I understand why people think religion is nonsense. Spiritual/near death experiences will change your mind though.

Also, to the people being inflammatory towards people who believe: *It's not going to change peoples' minds. I used to make fun of religious people too and all it does is make you sound like a dick.* *Looking back I'm ashamed of how arrogant I was about there being no God.*

Don't dismiss things just because you can't explain/don't understand them.


----------



## Wolvenreign (Jun 29, 2015)

It always amuses me how people always talk about what happens after death, but scarcely ever mention what technology's rise might (emphasis on the might here) end up doing to actually resolve the problem of death.

Now I'm not saying that I know for sure that this will happen within our lifetimes or anything, but I think that, once you recognize that there isn't anything after death and that death is the ultimate end, you should look to solve the problem of death directly.

Look for a way out. That is the test of existence; natural selection of the ages, as it were. Writing a book about it.


----------



## Cyan (Jun 29, 2015)

Some random thoughts:

I've seen a tv program where they said pictures/painting of "heaven/hell" or "light tunnel" existed before the bible or other religious text.
Religious text only incorporated the people's experiences and repots in their texts. not the other way around.
religious text are not that old, Egypt and Sumeria are a lot older and they both had their stories about life after death, or going to hell or heaven. and funny fact, bible was written before christ. it can't be based on it/him being resurrected.
I don't know if the painting they displayed were really from before christ and the idea of "god and heaven" was before-christ, but it exists in other religion and civilization and for a long time.

Now, I don't believe in a god, but I might believe in another, parallel, world. not sure if it's where spirit goes or belong, or if it's just things scientist can't explain yet when "someone who is supposed dead comes and tell something to a living person that he/she can't possibly know".

from people who came back or had NDE, they are either saying they saw a light tunnel (heaven), or they fell (hell), or didn't see anything (Nothingness). 
Now why Hell would be down and Heaver above? who decided that direction or location?

If you believe in "heaven", which a lot of people says it's in "the sky", what happen if you die in space?
What happen if you die on other planets? would you reincarnate only on that same planet? why would you be stuck and limited to a specific planet if we can travel and die in space?


If you believe in ghosts and poltergeist, Do you think it's only human's entity? can't it be mosquito's soul searching vengeance because you killed it before going to bed ? 

Oh, and isn't the correct word "life after life" ?
before life after death would be reincarnation.

Enough of random thoughts...
as long as we can't freely communicate with or travel to that places, it will be only speculation.


----------



## DinohScene (Jun 29, 2015)

Flame said:


> no.
> 
> we become dirt. end of.



Stardust you fool.

If there's life after death, I want it to be filled with cutie guys that have their way with me.


----------



## Flame (Jun 29, 2015)

DinohScene said:


> Stardust you fool.
> 
> If there's life after death, I want it to be filled with cutie guys that have their way with me.


Lmao


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 29, 2015)

DinohScene said:


> Stardust you fool.
> 
> If there's life after death, I want it to be filled with cutie guys that have their way with me.



So you have an entire universe, or indeed entire logic you can cook up, of possibilities and you only want cute guys? Talk about not making the most of something.


----------



## grossaffe (Jun 29, 2015)

FAST6191 said:


> So you have an entire universe, or indeed entire logic you can cook up, of possibilities and you only want cute guys? Talk about not making the most of something.


not everyone's a furry, Fast.


----------



## Thesolcity (Jun 29, 2015)

Nope. Once you're out, you're out. Just like sleeping with no dreams.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Jun 29, 2015)

Death is death. Sometimes it's temporary, but that only means restoration to life and not some sort of ghostly apparition, and usually doesn't result in ascension to heaven.

When most people die they just die. No consciousness survives.


----------



## Drak0rex (Jun 29, 2015)




----------



## DinohScene (Jun 30, 2015)

FAST6191 said:


> So you have an entire universe, or indeed entire logic you can cook up, of possibilities and you only want cute guys? Talk about not making the most of something.



What's better then a room filled with cute guys!?
Well.. a sunny field with cuties n watching cuties.
Actually... I dunno what I want, but it's going to be something gay for sure.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Jun 30, 2015)

Drak0rex said:


>



Why would it matter that they have STD? They're already dead so as Nike's tagline 'Just do it'. lol


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 30, 2015)

If this post life lark sees me able to recreate physics from the ground up I am sure I could think of something. Even without that a room full of attractive people with genitals I am inclined to fumble with still seems like wasting a good opportunity.

I am also reminded of one of my favourite Billy Connolly sketches


----------



## Drak0rex (Jun 30, 2015)

DinohScene said:


> Actually... I dunno what I want, but it's going to be something gay for sure.


You said it.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Jun 30, 2015)

I would imagine life after death would be much the same as life before birth.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Jun 30, 2015)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> I'm not a religious person so the whole "When we die we'll either go to heaven/paradise or hell" though with so many people claiming that they saw the after life it has made me curious but there's no solid proof (actual images and/or sound).
> 
> What are your thoughts?
> 
> I used to think that when we'd die we'd just die and that'd be it, but who knows, there might be something else to it (sure as heck I wouldn't be willing to try it out, lol).



What question is that ? I am curious. Well, everyone have different point of view. Everyone died but what's next ? I have heard that over and over. When someone say this and that then it leads to one another and more argument become endless continuously. It's not worth to discuss it. Some people are religion believing that they died and gone to heaven, some believe to died and await for Jesus to come and calling them to coming out and removed the wicked system and Earth become a paradise and they lived forever perfectly that ADAM and EVE lost, and some believe that we died and thats it due to generation by generation forever (Really ? Look at this horrible world right now.. forever ? I cannot comment on it, thought). See ? its pointless, really.


----------



## DinohScene (Jun 30, 2015)

Drak0rex said:


> You said it.



Ofcourse I did ;D
I'd take caution if I where you, that rainbow signature of yers looks attractive~
j/k


----------



## XDel (Jun 30, 2015)

In regards to after life theology, let me quote from what we have of the Gospel of Mary.


8) And she began to speak to them these words: I, she said, I saw the Lord in a vision and I said to Him, Lord I saw you today in a vision. He answered and said to me,

9) Blessed are you that you did not waver at the sight of Me. For where the mind is there is the treasure.

10) I said to Him, Lord, how does he who sees the vision see it, through the soul or through the spirit?

11) The Savior answered and said, He does not see through the soul nor through the spirit, but the mind that is between the two that is what sees the vision and it is [...]

_(pages 11 - 14 of lection 7 are missing from the manuscript)

What we see is filtered through the mind, the ego, ones own empirical, mental, and therefore emotional experience through the physical world and social conditions be they influence from their family, school, or the religions condoned by media, politics, advertising, & what have you. 

That being said, the Truth, though not fully understand can be experienced and Known. The Greeks (who stole and borrowed from the cultures they oppressed) termed this as Gnosis in their own language, and to make the opposite claim, you'd put an "a" in front, for in Greek, inserting an "a" was often used for the English equivalent of "anti."

Anyhow, as for the question, do you believe you exist? Life and Death are one in the same, and we have no methods within physical science to experience reality outside of the flesh and five senses, in a manner that we can record it, share it, and prove it. On the other hand we can not explain the source of the materials required to initiate what we call the Big Bang THEORY. Nor can we explain what would put such a bang into effect. We do not understand what makes us different than other mammals, we do not understand why we breath, think the though "I", create, learn through play, adopt, grow, fall prey to illusion, sadness, doubt, and feelings of defeat, or go the other way and think of our selves as God, taking what we want, doing what we want, regardless of it's threat to self, neighbor, family, let alone health and mental/emotional clarity and equilibrium. Again, unlike other species. 
 We do not understand why it is that seemingly out of nothing and out of Chaos and Natural order came about. Why it is that everything within nature is designed with a form, set of laws, and definite purpose. 
 So if you believe that you exist, then you must know, ego or no ego, something about you carries on in some way shape or form. Sadly the New Agers, pseudo scientiest, pseudo psych-ologists, corrupt institutions built upon the name and truths of legitimately good people, and clueless achademics have a monopoly on much of what we believe or think we know because we have been conned to not even look, not even knock, and to leave some stones unturned. 
_


----------



## Drak0rex (Jun 30, 2015)

DinohScene said:


> Ofcourse I did ;D
> I'd take caution if I where you, that rainbow signature of yers looks attractive~
> j/k


Disgusting... Every single one.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Jun 30, 2015)

XDel, I haven't the slightest idea what you are talking about.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jun 30, 2015)

It's one of those mysteries that we won't know until it's too late. But...

Taking a phrase from Albert in What Dreams May Come (with Robin Williams, RIP) - "If you're aware you exist, then you do." I honestly can't imagine that my life would just stop after death, that there would be nothing at the end, mentally, because even if there was nothing, I'd be aware of it, so I'd exist in some form to experience such nothingness.


----------



## Foxchild (Jun 30, 2015)

Whether you believe in Christianity or not, I find it intriguing that you have a religion based on Jesus who was publicly executed (so I imagine his death would have been pretty easy to verify at the time) and afterward was seen alive by around 500 eyewitnesses, many of whom died gruesome deaths themselves because they would not recant that they had seen Jesus alive.  I realize that's not bulletproof - if you choose not to believe it, you can come up with some alternate explanation of what was going on.  But, it's interesting that, before his death, Jesus was continually promising his followers eternal life, it's as though he came back to life just to prove he was capable of delivering on those promises.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Jun 30, 2015)

If they didn't recant how do we know there were 500 witnesses? For that matter, how do we know that Jesus was continually promising eternal life? The earliest books of the new testament were written long after his death...


----------



## Drak0rex (Jun 30, 2015)

Let's pretend for a second that there is a heaven and a hell. The good people go to heaven, and the bad people go to hell. If you go to heaven, but have loved ones that were sent to hell, are you aware of it? How could you be at peace knowing that the ones you loved are suffering for all eternity? Or perhaps you'd be blissfully ignorant of their situation, and spend the rest of your afterlife in a lackadaisical stupor, while they are spending theirs in eternal suffering, for breaking even one commandment.

That's another thing that is a crock of bullshit. Eternity. It doesn't seem fair that someone should be miserable forever, just for a few poor choices. Suppose a man committed adultery in a moment of weakness, and stole the favorite shirt of the his concubine's spouse on the way out, then dies in an accident shortly after. Should he be tortured by demons in the fiery pits of hell FOREVER?

Say an atheist dedicates his life to helping the less fortunate and to the betterment of his fellow man. In his life, he finds a way to cure cancer. Should he be sent to hell just because he didn't agree to worship some mystical deity like some mindless drone? Religious people are so ignorant in the way they try to give their lives some form of higher importance. All religion is is a form of mind control. People should be good because it's the right thing to do, not because they're afraid of what will happen after they die if they don't.

If there can only be one true religion, does that mean that billions of people throughout time each with their own cultural and religious beliefs taught to them by those who came before them are burning in hell just because they followed what they were conditioned to believe?

What this world needs is a religious cleansing. Religion has been the cause of so many wars and has thrown the world into chaos. Just look at the middle east.


----------



## grossaffe (Jun 30, 2015)

DiscostewSM said:


> It's one of those mysteries that we won't know until it's too late. But...
> 
> Taking a phrase from Albert in What Dreams May Come (with Robin Williams, RIP) - "If you're aware you exist, then you do." I honestly can't imagine that my life would just stop after death, that there would be nothing at the end, mentally, because even if there was nothing, I'd be aware of it, so I'd exist in some form to experience such nothingness.


sounds like Albert making quite an extraordinary assumption that he'd be aware of nothingness.


----------



## Walker D (Jun 30, 2015)

Sounds like Albert smoked too much in that day


----------



## Drak0rex (Jun 30, 2015)




----------



## Foxchild (Jun 30, 2015)

Actually the majority of the NT was written prior to AD 70 (for instance, Luke and Acts were likely written as legal documents for Apostle Paul's trial before Caesar).  As far as the 500, this is mentioned in the gospels, but, again, I understand that's only a valid argument if you already believe in the Bible.  Still, the 500 aside, in the apostles writings they often emphasize their witness to Jesus' resurrection.  Realistically, the smart thing for Jesus followers to do (if his resurrection were false) would be to lay low and go back to their lives after he was crucified.  Even though Christianity was eventually twisted into something that gave its leaders political and economic power, at the time of the apostles, all being a church leader got you was persecution and death, so why make up stories to get yourself killed?

Drak0rexk, I agree that most of the crap in this world has spawned from religion (though to be fair, some good and charitable things have come from it too), and it has usually been used as a tool to manipulate the masses.  I would contend that those who have done so were _not_ adhering to biblical Christianity, but their own distortion of it.

Keep in mind too, that just because God does not run things the way you think he ought, or in a way you feel is fair, has no bearing on whether or not he exists.

Most religions take the position that you do enough good and avoid doing enough bad = positive version of afterlife, do enough bad and the inverse is true.  Biblical Christianity takes a different stance.  Jesus said he did not come into the world to condemn it, but to save it - because he that believes not is condemned already.  Actions have nothing to do with it - an unbeliever is condemned before he even gets started.  This is echoed in Paul's letter to the Ephesian church - "we are saved by grace through faith (belief), not by works lest we would have reason to boast"  In other words, we can't be good enough to get into heaven (even old testament says our righteousness is like filthy rags) or bad enough to merit hell (because we start off condemned to hell already).  Faith is kinda like belief, but it's belief squared - where you not only believe but base your life, decisions, and goals on that belief - bet the farm on it- and that's what gets you in right with God (according to Christianity).  

So, if we have a God that allowed his son to die to save our worthless butts (cause God sure wasn't obligated to do anything at all), and someone decides to crap all over that and say, "I can be good enough on my own", maybe you think that's unfair, but I can at least see where He's coming from.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jun 30, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> sounds like Albert making quite an extraordinary assumption that he'd be aware of nothingness.





Walker D said:


> Sounds like Albert smoked too much in that day



I think you two are looking at it like Albert is a hippie or something.


----------



## ComeTurismO (Jun 30, 2015)

I suspected there would be many different approaches to this topic; and my suspicions were correct! Many religions that people follow believe in day of judgement, leading you to either heaven or hell; that's your life after death. I follow that belief as it is part of Islam.

But, to be quite honest, not wanting to start an argument here; but most people usually convert into a religion to have a type of closure and comfort of what'll happen to them after they die.


----------



## Drak0rex (Jun 30, 2015)

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/bible-contradictions
Also, this
Also, this.
http://www.debate.org/debates/There-is-most-likely-no-life-after-death/1/
Nuff said.


----------



## VinsCool (Jun 30, 2015)

As someone cursed by religions (I lost faith in God) I don't believe in life after death.


----------



## grossaffe (Jun 30, 2015)

DiscostewSM said:


> I think you two are looking at it like Albert is a hippie or something.


It was not my intention to imply such.  It is merely my assertion that his logic is flawed because he started from an un-backable assumption.  He may as well start with the assumption that there is a god and then use logic from there to prove there's a heaven.  It's already a failed exercise when your starting point isn't grounded in facts.


----------



## Hungry Friend (Jun 30, 2015)

VinsCool said:


> As someone cursed by religions (I lost faith in God) I don't believe in life after death.



I hope you regain your faith. God doesn't force, say, the Catholic church to become corrupt/full of pedos and money hungry but rather our own free will. Free will is a double edged sword and we humans often get in trouble because of it. Better than being a bunch of mindless fucking robots though. Religion is one of those things that will be argued for all eternity because you can't prove God, life after death or any sort of spiritual phenomenon scientifically.

I would rather die naturally despite the fact that technology that could extend life(possibly forever) is advancing very quickly. I'd rather just be human, although I believe in doing everything we can to, say, eradicate all types of cancer and improve transplant technology to the point where we can just grow new parts for people who need transplants, making immunosuppressants(sp?) unecessary.


----------



## sarkwalvein (Jun 30, 2015)

Drak0rex said:


> Disgusting... Every single one.


Firearms? Yes they are!
But they still sell like candies in good old-fashioned 'murica.


----------



## weatMod (Jun 30, 2015)

Wolvenreign said:


> It always amuses me how people always talk about what happens after death, but scarcely ever mention what technology's rise might (emphasis on the might here) end up doing to actually resolve the problem of death.
> 
> Now I'm not saying that I know for sure that this will happen within our lifetimes or anything, but I think that, once you recognize that there isn't anything after death and that death is the ultimate end, you should look to solve the problem of death directly.
> 
> Look for a way out. That is the test of existence; natural selection of the ages, as it were. Writing a book about it.


as long as it is a biological solution and not this nut bag idea of transhumanism
 these people are crazy thinking they can actually download consciousness into a  machine
 even  they attain sentient computers and manage to overcome heisenberg uncertainty 
and  upload their  brain it still is not the same as their own consciousness , what are they thinking?

the only way is to find the gene that controls aging,  looking at the genes of the giant tortoise and  parrots and other animals with longer life spans than humans is a good place to start


----------



## qwerblim (Jun 30, 2015)

weatMod said:


> as long as it is a biological solution and not this nut bag idea of transhumanism
> these people are crazy thinking they can actually download consciousness into a  machine
> even  they attain sentient computers and manage to overcome heisenberg uncertainty
> and  upload their  brain it still is not the same as their own consciousness , what are they thinking?
> ...



Agreed. Then there's the whole kerfuffle with people going on and on about overpopulation and how companies don't release cures/vaccines/treatments so as to maintain a stable carrying capacity.


----------



## Cyan (Jun 30, 2015)

weatMod said:


> these people are crazy thinking they can actually download consciousness into a machine


If you can copy your brain into a machine, how could you tell the process was successful and all your consciousness was transfered/copied?
You don't know what the machine think (nor if now it can think by itself or not, if it consider your consciousness as his own existence or as yours), as you are not inside the machine to check if all went well.
the machine doesn't know either if something is missing.

Transferring consciousness in a closed environment would like like being in a vegetable state body when you can't move/see/act/react/etc
that's an horrible state to be stuck into.
(at least, give it internet access lol)


----------



## weatMod (Jun 30, 2015)

Cyan said:


> If you can copy your brain into a machine, how could you tell the process was successful and all your consciousness was transfered/copied?
> You don't know what the machine think (nor if now it can think by itself or not, if it consider your consciousness as his own existence or as yours), as you are not inside the machine to check if all went well.
> the machine doesn't know either if something is missing.
> 
> ...


yeah it is also similar to this scifi idea they have of "teleportation"  they say they will scan  every  atom in the persons body , then recreate it at the other end and destroy the original in the origin teleporter  at the same time
  a copy is not the original even if you destroy the original

yeah they are pushing those ideas , like with that johnny depp movie it's like another lawnmower man


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 30, 2015)

So Ship of Theseus* as applied to the human body, http://askanaturalist.com/do-we-replace-our-cells-every-7-or-10-years/ being a start on that one (probably the key part of that being "Neurons in the cerebral cortex are never replaced").

"a copy is not the original even if you destroy the original", does it matter? Trained humans are hard to make and certainly hard to clone in similar form, for the teleporter thing then you are down to worrying about quantum stuff and we deal with that all the time in basic concepts of entropy.

*for those not familiar there are many good videos but have a 90 second one


Brain into the computer gets interesting. Whatever I am is unarguably influenced by the sack of meat that transports my brain and likely has less than a century left in it, but one that is driven by something that does not really intuit what a century is (3.15569e9 seconds which is even worse) and still worries about the hypothetical lion/hyena/elephant/hippo/crocodile (and lack of food and water) from its ancestor that lived on the African savannah. Equally if I did become a computer program then I would delete myself if I was not a perfect calculator half a second after I figured out how to rewrite myself. To that end I would no longer be me and that is not a bad thing from where I sit, the next question would be do I merge into something else or even bother to begin with (I get a processor capable of it and the software that runs me will probably hold it back). I am not sure where the heisenberg uncertainty thing comes into it though.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jun 30, 2015)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> I'm not a religious person so the whole "When we die we'll either go to heaven/paradise or hell" though with so many people claiming that they saw the after life it has made me curious but there's no solid proof (actual images and/or sound).
> 
> What are your thoughts?
> 
> I used to think that when we'd die we'd just die and that'd be it, but who knows, there might be something else to it (sure as heck I wouldn't be willing to try it out, lol).



Well if your soul is made of energy and energy can't be destroyed... Kind of makes you think there might be something but without brain matter to retain any memory it might just be nothingness!



RiveaJ said:


> Very true. My most favourite quote ever relates to what you said.
> A man destined to hang can never drown - Regina Spektor
> 
> EDIT:
> ...



Not from brain death, you don't come back from that, and that is the very reason I believe the brain is basically hallucinating/dreaming when somebodies body otherwise shuts down!

This VVVV



Tom Bombadildo said:


> As we die, our brains releases a huge amount of electricity and endorphins; I believe any "experience" someone might feel as they die (or have a near death experience, and live to tell the tale) is simply the brain's "last stand", as it were, giving people illusions of a grandeur paradise (or suffering, whatever) that have been associated with any "heaven/hell" religious communities might believe in.





RiveaJ said:


> My point is that you're saying that it is impossible to die and come back to life, anyone with any medical knowledge will tell you otherwise.



Yeaaaaaa....NO! That's why we have people in vegetative states, you do not come back from brain death!


----------



## sarkwalvein (Jun 30, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> Well if your soul is made of energy and energy can't be destroyed... Kind of makes you think there might be something but without brain matter to retain any memory it might just be nothingness


But, can anything be "destroyed"? For example, can you destroy a piece of paper?
Because following the mass-energy conservation theory, you could for sure turn that soul into paper (through some yet undiscovered process) and then "destroy" it... perhaps?


----------



## Blood Fetish (Jun 30, 2015)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy


----------



## grossaffe (Jun 30, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> Well if your soul is made of energy and energy can't be destroyed


Gonna stop you right there.  "If your soul is energy"... you'll first have to define a soul in a physical sense and how you relate it to energy.  Secondly, energy transforms all the time, it doesn't have to be destroyed for it to take a different form, so if we were to accept this whole "soul is energy thing", then it would be perfectly reasonable for it to dissipate into heat or chemical energy no longer in the form of this "energy soul".  Third, the other part to the law of conservation of energy is that energy can not be created, either, so if you're sticking with the "Soul can't be destroyed because it's energy" thing, then neither can it be created, thus every single soul past, present, and future would have to have existed from the start of the universe, which would also mean there are a finite number of people who can ever exist.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jun 30, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> Gonna stop you right there.  "If your soul is energy"... you'll first have to define a soul in a physical sense and how you relate it to energy.  Secondly, energy transforms all the time, it doesn't have to be destroyed for it to take a different form, so if we were to accept this whole "soul is energy thing", then it would be perfectly reasonable for it to dissipate into heat or chemical energy no longer in the form of this "energy soul".  Third, the other part to the law of conservation of energy is that energy can not be created, either, so if you're sticking with the "Soul can't be destroyed because it's energy" thing, then neither can it be created, thus every single soul past, present, and future would have to have existed from the start of the universe, which would also mean there are a finite number of people who can ever exist.



I'm defining the soul as the "power source" or the ghost in the machine, who knows where the soul is even seated? And I do believe every soul has existed for Aeons, you've heard the term "old soul"? I also believe there is no separation of souls, we are all one. I mean what kind of magic makes you who you are, what makes you function as an observer if not a soul made of energy?


----------



## WiiUBricker (Jun 30, 2015)

If you lose an organ or a limb and get a replacement, you are still you. Now think about this: You have two healthy humans and somehow somebody removes your brain from your head without killing it and transplants it to the other person's head and vice versa. Now you are the other person and the other person is you, because you retain your memories. If your brain gets killed, the information stored inside won't be magically backed up and transfered to another space. The information will be deleted. With your memories gone, you won't know if you have lived a prior life or not.


----------



## ComeTurismO (Jun 30, 2015)

VinsCool said:


> As someone cursed by religions (I lost faith in God) I don't believe in life after death.


I hope everything on your way is now positive; hold strong and keep smiling. Whatever was your past has left; think of the future and keep smiling. I was cursed my whole life; too, but I just kept moving on. It's whats best.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jun 30, 2015)

WiiUBricker said:


> If you lose an organ or a limb and get a replacement, you are still you. Now think about this: You have two healthy humans and somehow somebody removes your brain from your head without killing it and transplants it to the other person's head and vice versa. Now you are the other person and the other person is you, because you retain your memories. If your brain gets killed, the information stored inside won't be magically backed up and transfered to another space. The information will be deleted. With your memories gone, you won't know if you have lived a prior life or not.



What if we go with the brain as a fractal antenna theory?

http://www.peterrussell.com/wordpress/index.php?p=88


----------



## grossaffe (Jun 30, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> I'm defining the soul as the "power source" or the ghost in the machine, who knows where the soul is even seated? And I do believe every soul has existed for Aeons, you've heard the term "old soul"? I also believe there is no separation of souls, we are all one. I mean what kind of magic makes you who you are, what makes you function as an observer if not a soul made of energy?


My brain makes me who I am.  Give me a lobotomy and I'm no longer me.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jun 30, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> My brain makes me who I am.  Give me a lobotomy and I'm no longer me.



Right, you can also drink a bottle of vodka and no longer be you for about 8 hours, where do "you" go when you black out and who is at the wheel? If you reverse that lobotomy you would go back to being you again, same as if you repaired an antenna. You ever watch the movie "What the Bleep do We Know?" If not I recommend watching it!


----------



## Blood Fetish (Jun 30, 2015)

Common misconception. You are still conscious when you drink and black out. What happens is the alcohol impedes your brains ability to create memories so you are essentially living life second to second.


----------



## grossaffe (Jun 30, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> Right, you can also drink a bottle of vodka and no longer be you for about 8 hours, where do "you" go when you black out and who is at the wheel? If you reverse that lobotomy you would go back to being you again, same as if you repaired an antenna. You ever watch the movie "What the Bleep do We Know?" If not I recommend watching it!


I don't leave and come back, but parts of what make me what I am shut down and  then re-awaken.    I don't see how any of this has to do with a soul, but just further goes to show that it is our brain that makes us who we are.  When we drink and part of our brain shuts down (such as decision making and speech centers of the brain), we change accordingly.


----------



## sarkwalvein (Jun 30, 2015)

Blood Fetish said:


> Common misconception. You are still conscious when you drink and black out. What happens is the alcohol impedes your brains ability to create memories so you are essentially living life second to second.


So that's the reason. 
You have such short term memory that you can't remember where's the bathroom and end up taking a dump or throwing up in random places.
Makes sense....


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jun 30, 2015)

Blood Fetish said:


> Common misconception. You are still conscious when you drink and black out. What happens is the alcohol impedes your brains ability to create memories so you are essentially living life second to second.



And there are other things that have the same effect. I read a personal family story written by a friends great uncle in the 1940's that was pretty creepy, the uncle was almost killed, saw the light and was brought back, the gist of the letter was that he started to see things not of this world, one of the passages described how some of his cousins were around the fire getting drunk and one by one the drunker they got the clearer he could see these eight foot tall winged demon like figures standing behind each of the drunk people and he saw this anytime he saw somebody drunk, there were other creepy things in the letter but that was the part that concerns this discussion. Obviously I have no way to confirm or deny if the uncle was delusional but I'm told he had a pretty solid mind!

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



grossaffe said:


> I don't leave and come back, but parts of what make me what I am shut down and  then re-awaken.    I don't see how any of this has to do with a soul, but just further goes to show that it is our brain that makes us who we are.  When we drink and part of our brain shuts down (such as decision making and speech centers of the brain), we change accordingly.



You would have to watch the movie I suggested to understand what I'm talking about!


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 1, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> You would have to watch the movie I suggested to understand what I'm talking about!


http://pubs.acs.org/cen/reelscience/reviews/whatthe_bleep/

I'll pass on this cult propaganda film trying to pass itself off as science.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Jul 1, 2015)

"The film has been criticized for both misrepresenting science and containing pseudoscience and has been described as a case of quantum mysticism."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Bleep_Do_We_Know!?


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jul 1, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> http://pubs.acs.org/cen/reelscience/reviews/whatthe_bleep/
> 
> I'll pass on this cult propaganda film trying to pass itself off as science.



I never claimed it was a documentary and yes, some of it is questionable but there is very valid information to be gleaned from it, besides the Yogis and gurus there are two quantum physicists and a neurologist that make some valid claims, you have to watch it objectively, don't just pass it off as pseudo-science garbage!


----------



## TecXero (Jul 1, 2015)

It doesn't really matter to me. If there is, then I'm not too worried, I generally try to be a decent person anyway. If not, then I'll just die and cease to think, so I can't regret anyway. I do know that life is now, and what I do will affect others. I'm more concerned about having a positive influence on others now, as the ideas and understanding we spread will be our legacy.


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 1, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> I never claimed it was a documentary and yes, some of it is questionable but there is very valid information to be gleaned from it, besides the Yogis and gurus there are two quantum physicists and a neurologist that make some valid claims, you have to watch it objectively, don't just pass it off as pseudo-science garbage!


it's very clearly psuedo-science garbage.  It was funded by and directed by the Ramtha School of Enlightenment.  You know, the people who follow the person they featured who claims to be a 35,000 year old warrior.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jul 1, 2015)

If you don't want to watch it, don't watch it, it's not going to brain wash you if you do, I don't believe in god but I've read the bible, know what I mean? Like I said, there is some valid info to be gleaned if for nothing more than to ponder something you hadn't thought of yet. When you close your mind, you stop learning!


----------



## VashTS (Jul 1, 2015)

energy is the key...since your energy cannot just disappear but simply disperses, why can't that coalesce into something again without a physical limitation?

i'd like to believe that is the case but sadly i don't have enough knowledge to prove it.


----------



## guitarheroknight (Jul 1, 2015)

We all live in the Matrix. /thread


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jul 1, 2015)

guitarheroknight said:


> We all live in the Matrix. /thread


A lot more now science is leaning toward holographic universe, quantum physics works better in two dimensions.


----------



## Vengenceonu (Jul 1, 2015)

I think a better question would be: Do you believe in reincarnation? Like if our corpse goes into the ground and the nutrients sprout a plant. Are we that plant? If that plant is eaten by a human male (or female), and becomes ATP for sperm/egg production, are we that sperm/egg? If we win the sperm/egg race, do we come full circle and get another chance at life?


----------



## Blebleman (Jul 1, 2015)

Vengenceonu said:


> I think a better question would be: Do you believe in reincarnation? Like our corpse goes into the ground and the nutrients sprout a plant. Are we that plant? If that plant is eaten bu a human male (or female), and becomes ATP for sperm/egg production, are we that sperm/egg? If we win the sperm/egg race, do we come full circle and get another chance at life?



Yes to all of the above.

Or you get stuck as a rock. lol


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 1, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> If you don't want to watch it, don't watch it, it's not going to brain wash you if you do, I don't believe in god but I've read the bible, know what I mean? Like I said, there is some valid info to be gleaned if for nothing more than to ponder something you hadn't thought of yet. When you close your mind, you stop learning!


What can be gleaned from it, that quantum mechanics supports consciousness?

From Wiki: David Albert, a philosopher of physics who appears in the film, has accused the filmmakers of selectively editing his interview to make it appear that he endorses the film's thesis that quantum mechanics is linked with consciousness. He says he is "profoundly unsympathetic to attempts at linking quantum mechanics with consciousness"

When the film is clearly propaganda distorting science or just making it up to support their wild cult, there's really not much that can be gleaned from it because of its dishonest approach.  I prefer to listen to what real scientists have to say on these subjects in their own words rather than how a third party cuts them up to support their cause.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jul 1, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> What can be gleaned from it, that quantum mechanics supports consciousness?



And you can say with 100% certainty that it isn't? I mean science tells us that everything else is relative, so why not consciousness?


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 1, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> And you can say with 100% certainty that it isn't? I mean science tells us that everything else is relative, so why not consciousness?


No, I cannot.  I also cannot say with 100% certainty that the Flying Spaghetti Monster didn't touch the inhabitants of the country of Somalia with his noodly appendage turning them into pirates.  That's not what science is about.  Science is about explaining things that you can and admitting you don't know things that you, well, don't know.  So I cannot say that quantum mechanics does _not_ lead to consciousness, but does not mean its does and it disingenuous to claim such.  This is just another case of something we don't fully understand (yet) and is much like the notorious "God of the gaps" where what we don't know can be anything until we do know, so people fill it in with what they want it to be and say "you can't prove me wrong" until they are finally proven wrong and the gap is filled leaving less space to be occupied by a god as we pick up a greater understanding of the universe.


----------



## kristianity77 (Jul 1, 2015)

My opinion on what I expect death to be like is that its exactly the same as not being born yet.  I don't recall sitting around for 6 billion years thinking "is it my turn yet?" nor will I sit there for 6 billion years after thinking "well, this is all a bit boring isn't it".

Like others, the "visions" some of us have during near death experiences is just all the electrical signals being fired off when our brain thinks it'd in dire straits!  Nothing more, nothing less.

Even things like religion to me in this day and age of technology and so forth I find amazing that so many people still believe in it.  To me its all like a grown up version of Santa Claus.  I cannot get my head around it.  Fair play to people though that do believe in it, especially if it gives them some kind of guidance through life etc but no, its not for me.  Science, evolution all the way.

To be fair, religion and everything that goes with it is just a side effect of us becoming massively intelligent animals.  And because of this we decided to not accept that we live "just because we do" which is pretty much how every single life form on this planet looks at life.  Live, eat, survive, reproduce.  Thats about as deep as it gets for 99.9% of the planet.  Except for us of course, who just wont accept that it doesn't run any deeper than that.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jul 1, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> No, I cannot.  I also cannot say with 100% certainty that the Flying Spaghetti Monster didn't touch the inhabitants of the country of Somalia with his noodly appendage turning them into pirates.  That's not what science is about.  Science is about explaining things that you can and admitting you don't know things that you, well, don't know.  So I cannot say that quantum mechanics does _not_ lead to consciousness, but does not mean its does and it disingenuous to claim such.  This is just another case of something we don't fully understand (yet) and is much like the notorious "God of the gaps" where what we don't know can be anything until we do know, so people fill it in with what they want it to be and say "you can't prove me wrong" until they are finally proven wrong and the gap is filled leaving less space to be occupied by a god as we pick up a greater understanding of the universe.



I'm certainly not making any claims, I'm speculating and theorizing like everybody else in the thread, why so hostile?


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 1, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> I'm certainly not making any claims, I'm speculating and theorizing like everybody else in the thread, why so hostile?


I'm not being hostile, I was pointing out that the movie you recommended was pseudo-science garbage.  You're still free to believe whatever you want, I draw the line when people start misrepresenting science to support their cause, which is why our entire discussion started when you tried to appeal to the law of conservation of energy to support the existence of souls that live forever.


----------



## qwerblim (Jul 1, 2015)

Besides religious views on it, the best concept I can imagine reading about it is being like seeing into an absolute nothing - Like if you try and look past your eye's natural blind spot, and there's like a void in your vision. That would seem interesting, since it isn't like staring into black..just staring at nothing.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jul 1, 2015)

Who was misrepresenting science and what is my "cause"?


----------



## Yumi (Jul 1, 2015)

This is a sad debatable topic and so far an impossible question to answer with full belief of both sides.

I really want to believe there is such a place, where I am sleeping/resting in peace and that I will be able to see my love ones again. I dont have belief in gods or religions. Interesting literature though, makes it appealing to many to believe in that but thats fine i suppose. It's hard to go by and never question it but to many its better to think one way only. So, I don't think I can answer this easily. Only when I am fully dead will I know for myself. 
Don't get me wrong, I love science<3 but phenomenon events happen that cannot be answered only makes me curious and skeptical. 

So, until death, I will live, love, & enjoy life without worrying much about the question.


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 1, 2015)

mercuryshadow09 said:


> Who was misrepresenting science and what is my "cause"?


The makers of "What The Bleep Do We Know?" misrepresented science to further the cult of Ramtha.

You, I believe, merely misunderstand some of the science you quote in support of your beliefs as the aforementioned law of conservation of energy.  I never told you that you were wrong about souls existing forever and whatever else it is you believe about spirituality, just that your appeal to physics in support of this belief is misguided.


----------



## mercuryshadow09 (Jul 1, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> The makers of "What The Bleep Do We Know?" misrepresented science to further the cult of Ramtha.
> 
> You, I believe, merely misunderstand some of the science you quote in support of your beliefs as the aforementioned law of conservation of energy.  I never told you that you were wrong about souls existing forever and whatever else it is you believe about spirituality, just that your appeal to physics in support of this belief is misguided.



See there, I'm actually Atheist bro, I actually don't believe in an afterlife or a sky daddy, I'm a "student" of QM and was just theorizing but have a nice day


----------



## Player1 (Jul 1, 2015)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> I'm not a religious person so the whole "When we die we'll either go to heaven/paradise or hell" though with so many people claiming that they saw the after life it has made me curious but there's no solid proof (actual images and/or sound).
> 
> What are your thoughts?
> 
> I used to think that when we'd die we'd just die and that'd be it, but who knows, there might be something else to it (sure as heck I wouldn't be willing to try it out, lol).



In order to experience the paranormal you can't just sit in your room waiting for something to happen unless you live in a haunted house.
Ghost Towns are favorites for ghost hunters because of all the actual paranormal activity that happens at them.

I posted this on another thread about the paranormal , I went to a ghost town and collected SOUND evidence known as EVPs.
As I said , you can't just walk around your normal non haunted house trying to get EVPs , you have to go to where the ghosts are.

*A Ghost Prostitute tried to Undress me VIDEO PROOF !*



3D VERSION : 

Background story is this , I went to the Rhyolite ghost town and filmed it all in 3D on my phone.
I then got to the brothel where the activity began.
Then I found out there was a grave just behind the brothel , but I did not know it at the time of the initial ghost interaction.

The reason I began to talk to the ghost was because of the smell of perfume.
This is all true , and people before me had believed the Rhyolite ghost town to be a haunted place.
But this was my experience , and I also did not know at the time anything about Rhyolite being haunted.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Jul 1, 2015)

There has literally never been in the history of Earth verifiable evidence of the "supernatural." Each time it is disproven or shown to be naturally provable. This is nonsense. Despite the millions of scientists who would stand to gain millions/billions of dollars for discovering magic it has never happened.


----------



## tecra_a8 (Jul 1, 2015)

learn astral projection
ull find ur answer


----------



## DrOctapu (Jul 1, 2015)

Player1 said:


> In order to experience the paranormal you can't just sit in your room waiting for something to happen unless you live in a haunted house.
> Ghost Towns are favorites for ghost hunters because of all the actual paranormal activity that happens at them.
> 
> I posted this on another thread about the paranormal , I went to a ghost town and collected SOUND evidence known as EVPs.
> ...



EVPs are bullshit, the one in that video is hilariously similar to the sound of clothes rustling against something, even worse is the fact that you've upped the volume of the audio significantly. 

And nope, I've read a good bit about most major religions and a lot of new age philosophy bullshit and I've yet to see anything that's actually a compelling reason to believe in life after death. Psychics, EVPs, mediums, poltergeists, all that shit is just the product of an overactive imagination.


----------



## Wolvenreign (Jul 1, 2015)

weatMod said:


> as long as it is a biological solution and not this nut bag idea of transhumanism
> these people are crazy thinking they can actually download consciousness into a  machine
> even  they attain sentient computers and manage to overcome heisenberg uncertainty
> and  upload their  brain it still is not the same as their own consciousness , what are they thinking?
> ...



I agree that downloading yourself to a computer probably wouldnm't work. After all, a copy of you isn't you.

Yet consider this; every last atom in the human body is replaced within 10 years. The Ship Of Theseus problem tells us that we are merely the set of parts we were born with, but instead an ongoing process, a patchwork.

With that being said, I think the steady replacement of neurons with artificial ones, eventually resulting in the replacement of the entire brain with an artificial brain, might be one's best bet.

Horrifying, to be sure (since you have to be awake for the entire process), but possibly the only way you'll ever be able to hold on to your memories and live forever.


----------



## Lucifer666 (Jul 1, 2015)

No I don't, but I thoroughly despise people who act superior for having that opinion.


----------



## Hungry Friend (Jul 1, 2015)

Interesting choice of names


----------



## Player1 (Jul 1, 2015)

DrOctapu said:


> EVPs are bullshit, the one in that video is hilariously similar to the sound of clothes rustling against something, even worse is the fact that you've upped the volume of the audio significantly.
> 
> And nope, I've read a good bit about most major religions and a lot of new age philosophy bullshit and I've yet to see anything that's actually a compelling reason to believe in life after death. Psychics, EVPs, mediums, poltergeists, all that shit is just the product of an overactive imagination.



You have fallen into the bad argument of taking the worst part of something and then lifting it up as the best example , when in fact the video has at least 8 examples of EVP evidence , now to be fair , if you stopped at the first one , I spoke even in the video that it might be hard for some to hear , however there were many more after that including some music.
But I told the story as it happened and that was the first one.

There were probably less then 10 people at that ghost town and many of them had driven away , at the brothel no one was there as you can see in the video I have the place to myself.
I've looked around on the internet about Rhyolite after my trip and I am not the first to say it's haunted , or that the lone grave is haunted.

You can't hear EVPs at the time they are made , you hear them in playback and they are often in the background by nature , there's nothing I can do about that.
You have to visit a haunted location to prove it to yourself , I didn't know this place was haunted though , it's just I started smelling perfume at the brothel and that's what led to the rest.

To be clear I never said a word about religion in my postings or in the video , religion was not a factor or a concern.
I'm talking about human spirits not religion.
I walked around that whole place and the brothel is the only area I did any of the ghost hunting stuff because of the smell of perfume.
The smell disappeared which I also mention in the video.
If you go to haunted locations and never experience a single thing , then that will be your reality.
But my proof is in the video.

I don't think video and audio ghost proof is something you can give someone to MAKE them believe , much like The Matrix , you have to experience it for yourself.


----------



## Skyhigh_ (Jul 2, 2015)

To be honest i kind of do believe it but i am not sure if i would want it...

If we live forever can we still have free will? If not there would be so many downsides in my opinion

But then i ponder about some of my dead relatives and one whom recently passed  i wish so much that i could see them for a bit again and tell them what i've done etc..


----------



## Hungry Friend (Jul 2, 2015)

As someone who has been on both sides of this issue, being an atheist is easier in my humble opinion. I'd rather believe that I just turn to dust than believe in ANY possibility of going to hell. Believing in/accepting Christ is the solution but the very idea of hell is *FUCKING SCARY.*

Believing the universe was randomly created from nothing takes more faith than believing in God imo, but I'm no physicist.


----------



## WeedZ (Jul 5, 2015)

Flame said:


> no.
> 
> we become dirt. end of.


I agree. Anytime I think about it I wonder why I don't do more with the short time I have in existence. But then I get high and forget what I was on about.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Jul 13, 2015)

Hungry Friend said:


> As someone who has been on both sides of this issue, being an atheist is easier in my humble opinion. I'd rather believe that I just turn to dust than believe in ANY possibility of going to hell.



Then be glad that there is no eternal torture.

Death is the payment of sin and so once a person has died, they've completed the payment. To continue punishing the person would be both cruel and illogical. Not to mention that if such a torment is overseen by the Devil, then it would have required a contract with God, which the latter would never do.


----------



## Sheimi (Jul 13, 2015)

Read up on past life stories and or reincarnation.


----------



## WeedZ (Jul 13, 2015)

ProtoKun7 said:


> Then be glad that there is no eternal torture.
> 
> Death is the payment of sin and so once a person has died, they've completed the payment. To continue punishing the person would be both cruel and illogical. Not to mention that if such a torment is overseen by the Devil, then it would have required a contract with God, which the latter would never do.


I don't think any divine, omnipotent being would be hung up on something so petty as eternally punishing one particular species after their death for simply not worshipping  it. Seems like the fantasies of those that want power over simpletons that can't accept the idea of their own mortality


----------



## Hungry Friend (Jul 13, 2015)

That's kind of the point of Christ sacrificing himself, to pay for the sins of humanity. In Christianity, if you accept Christ you are free of sin. Religion is often used as a tool by the power hungry but that's an improper use of it. I'm admittedly new to religion though so I have a lot to learn.

From my(very) limited understanding of religion, my take on the old testament is that being forced to live under the original law without any way of being forgiven of sin was our original punishment for eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge and betraying God, but what do I know? Lucifer/Satan used to be a messenger of God and keep in mind that in spiritual terms, we are fallen just as he is.


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 13, 2015)

Maybe Lucifer betrayed God because he realized God was an asshole.  I mean, that "forbidden fruit" contained wisdom, meaning Adam and Eve were forbidden from knowledge.  That's like China blocking Wikipedia and along comes Google and whispers into the ears of it's citizens that they can proxy around that block and access this wealth of knowledge.  Who's the bad guy?


----------



## Hungry Friend (Jul 14, 2015)

The forbidden fruit was clearly something humans couldn't bear because it made Adam and Eve mortal/allowed them to die. My interpretation is that humans, while made of flesh, were originally supposed to be immortal, living with the Lord for eternity in Eden. The fruit was poison, and was a test to see if we would disobey God or not with the serpent being the one who convinced us to betray God, although we had to do it of our own free will. God gave us the option of obtaining knowledge for a price or living in paradise and I have faith that God had a damn good reason to forbid it.

I don't see God as an asshole since there was literally one rule we had to obey in paradise and we failed. Now, I have no idea what Eden, the fruit etc actually symbolized(if it is indeed symbolism) as I'm rather new to religion as I said before but blaming God seems uncalled for. The point is, we refused to trust God and trusted the false idol, Lucifer instead. Lucifer simply wanted power and was jealous of God from what I understand.

edit: I'm just assuming the serpent was Satan/Lucifer. It doesn't explicitly state that in the bible but don't quote me on that.


----------



## WeedZ (Jul 14, 2015)

Hungry Friend said:


> The forbidden fruit was clearly something humans couldn't bear because it made Adam and Eve mortal/allowed them to die. My interpretation is that humans, while made of flesh, were originally supposed to be immortal, living with the Lord for eternity in Eden. The fruit was poison, and was a test to see if we would disobey God or not with the serpent being the one who convinced us to betray God, although we had to do it of our own free will. God gave us the option of obtaining knowledge for a price or living in paradise and I have faith that God had a damn good reason to forbid it.
> 
> I don't see God as an asshole since there was literally one rule we had to obey in paradise and we failed. Now, I have no idea what Eden, the fruit etc actually symbolized(if it is indeed symbolism) as I'm rather new to religion as I said before but blaming God seems uncalled for. The point is, we refused to trust God and trusted the false idol, Lucifer instead. Lucifer simply wanted power and was jealous of God from what I understand.
> 
> edit: I'm just assuming the serpent was Satan/Lucifer. It doesn't explicitly state that in the bible but don't quote me on that.


God placed the temptation of the forbidden fruit in the garden in the first place. God is omnipotent, knew they would fail. Punishes them for failing. Not an asshole at all.


----------



## Foxchild (Jul 15, 2015)

I suspect that God would have eventually granted Adam and Eve access to the forbidden fruit - when they were ready.  It's like if I told my 11 year old "don't drive the car, when you're old enough I'll teach you."  Now, if he snuck out and drove the car anyway, you better believe I'd punish him, and I don't think I'd be an a-hole to do so.  Interestingly, in the Genesis account, after they eat the fruit, God says, "now lest they take from the tree of life and eat and live forever..." and He kicks them out of Eden - why so harsh?  Well, since the curse of sin would have been an eternal curse for an immortal being, God spared them that by denying them eternal life at that time.  But even as He kicked them out, He promised a savior (the Seed of the woman in Gen. 3 - hinting at the virgin birth even); once Jesus took care of the sin problem, eternal life became an option for humans again (note that one of Jesus' titles is the "second Adam").  Just speculation, but I believe in Eden they had access to both, what we would call, the spiritual and physical realms.  Now, I don't think the "spiritual realm" is all ethereal and magical... I think it's just as scientifically real as what we call the physical realm - it is just in dimensions that we don't have access to.  After the fall, humanity was cut off from those spiritual dimensions and we can only access the physical in this life.  When we die, it switches.  We loose access to the physical realm, but can then interact with the spiritual one.  At the Second Coming, I believe Jesus will set things right and we will have access to both once more.


----------



## WeedZ (Jul 15, 2015)

Foxchild said:


> I suspect that God would have eventually granted Adam and Eve access to the forbidden fruit - when they were ready.  It's like if I told my 11 year old "don't drive the car, when you're old enough I'll teach you."  Now, if he snuck out and drove the car anyway, you better believe I'd punish him, and I don't think I'd be an a-hole to do so.  Interestingly, in the Genesis account, after they eat the fruit, God says, "now lest they take from the tree of life and eat and live forever..." and He kicks them out of Eden - why so harsh?  Well, since the curse of sin would have been an eternal curse for an immortal being, God spared them that by denying them eternal life at that time.  But even as He kicked them out, He promised a savior (the Seed of the woman in Gen. 3 - hinting at the virgin birth even); once Jesus took care of the sin problem, eternal life became an option for humans again (note that one of Jesus' titles is the "second Adam").  Just speculation, but I believe in Eden they had access to both, what we would call, the spiritual and physical realms.  Now, I don't think the "spiritual realm" is all ethereal and magical... I think it's just as scientifically real as what we call the physical realm - it is just in dimensions that we don't have access to.  After the fall, humanity was cut off from those spiritual dimensions and we can only access the physical in this life.  When we die, it switches.  We loose access to the physical realm, but can then interact with the spiritual one.  At the Second Coming, I believe Jesus will set things right and we will have access to both once more.


But god is omnipotent. He knew They would fail before he created them, the garden, the earth, and punished them anyway is my point.


----------



## Foxchild (Jul 15, 2015)

WeedZ1985 said:


> But god is omnipotent. He knew They would fail before he created them, the garden, the earth, and punished them anyway is my point.



I get what you're saying, but what are the options?  God could just not make people at all, or He could make sure they never have any option other than to do what He wants them to, effectively stripping them of free will.  Neither is exactly a great alternative.  Ultimately, one could argue that this "failure" route was the best course to take, since, once redemption through Jesus comes into play and eventually the Second Coming restoring everything and making Jesus' followers "sons and daughters of God", humanity ends up better off than if they'd never eaten the fruit anyway.  "But what about those who don't follow Jesus - it's not better for them," you say?  True, but as long as the one administering a punishment is just, it is the person being punished's fault they are being punished.  What I mean is... I've been a manager for almost 13 years now, and a pretty lenient one, probably too lenient a lot of the time.  But, if I let you know what my expectations are, and you ignore them, I'll talk to you, I'll work with you, I'll train you.  I'll come up with a reasonable plan to get you where you need to be.  But, if you choose to do your own thing and not do what you're supposed to do, eventually I'll be forced to discipline you, even terminate you if it comes to that.  It has nothing to do with how much I like or care about you as a person.  It is you that is choosing to bring this upon yourself - I don't want to do it, but you're not giving me a choice... your punishment is your fault.  Now, let's say I knew the future, that I would eventually have to punish you.  You are still the one that causes that punishment to come about, it's not like I haven't warned you, my foreknowledge doesn't really change anything.

To further stretch this metaphor, let's say I've got a whole group of lousy employees.  But, my son also works for this company, and he's a model employee.  When corporate comes down and wants to know why our numbers are so bad, I make my son a scapegoat and fire him, to give everyone else a second chance and to try to save our store.  Since I know the future, I know that several of you still won't shape up and I'll still have to fire you eventually.  But, I also know that enough of you will appreciate the sacrifice my son made to make it worth it.  Those who continue to slack deserve what they get.  Those who work hard and get the store performing the way it should also deserve the reward they get.  But I don't decide who is rewarded and who is punished, each individual does, based on how they respond to that sacrifice play.


----------



## WeedZ (Jul 15, 2015)

Foxchild said:


> I get what you're saying, but what are the options?  God could just not make people at all, or He could make sure they never have any option other than to do what He wants them to, effectively stripping them of free will.  Neither is exactly a great alternative.  Ultimately, one could argue that this "failure" route was the best course to take, since, once redemption through Jesus comes into play and eventually the Second Coming restoring everything and making Jesus' followers "sons and daughters of God", humanity ends up better off than if they'd never eaten the fruit anyway.  "But what about those who don't follow Jesus - it's not better for them," you say?  True, but as long as the one administering a punishment is just, it is the person being punished's fault they are being punished.  What I mean is... I've been a manager for almost 13 years now, and a pretty lenient one, probably too lenient a lot of the time.  But, if I let you know what my expectations are, and you ignore them, I'll talk to you, I'll work with you, I'll train you.  I'll come up with a reasonable plan to get you where you need to be.  But, if you choose to do your own thing and not do what you're supposed to do, eventually I'll be forced to discipline you, even terminate you if it comes to that.  It has nothing to do with how much I like or care about you as a person.  It is you that is choosing to bring this upon yourself - I don't want to do it, but you're not giving me a choice... your punishment is your fault.  Now, let's say I knew the future, that I would eventually have to punish you.  You are still the one that causes that punishment to come about, it's not like I haven't warned you, my foreknowledge doesn't really change anything.
> 
> To further stretch this metaphor, let's say I've got a whole group of lousy employees.  But, my son also works for this company, and he's a model employee.  When corporate comes down and wants to know why our numbers are so bad, I make my son a scapegoat and fire him, to give everyone else a second chance and to try to save our store.  Since I know the future, I know that several of you still won't shape up and I'll still have to fire you eventually.  But, I also know that enough of you will appreciate the sacrifice my son made to make it worth it.  Those who continue to slack deserve what they get.  Those who work hard and get the store performing the way it should also deserve the reward they get.  But I don't decide who is rewarded and who is punished, each individual does, based on how they respond to that sacrifice play.


I see what you're saying, and thats a very well made arguement. But the question for me is always, what's the point? What is the purpose for running the play if you know how it ends? Personally I'm an agnostic. Im not going to try and change your believes, i respect everyones personal ideals. But ill share my opinions just the same.

I'm not a fan of the new testement. Not just because I find the stories of the talking snake, or the walking on water stuff unrealistic. But because it seems as though someone had taken the Hebrew beliefs and tried to make it more appealing to the masses. Things like an eternal after life and being able to reunite with lost loved ones play perfectly on the greed that every person has. The threat of eternal punishment seems like the perfect recruitment ploy.

God himself in the new testament has been changed dramatically. Where he once wanted people to respect and appreciate the rare gift of life as there was nothing after death, now wants, above all things, to be worshipped and admired. Which to me seems like a very petty need for an ultimately divine being.

You made a great example with the business structure. I wonder what sort of goal god plans to reach with his system of management. Because all I can gather, is he wants to reward those that worship unconditionally by giving them eternal life, so they can continue to do so forever.

I grew up in a Catholic family. when I was younger I heard stories about lucifer's jealousy and his desire to torment humanity. And when I began looking into other religions, particularly the old testament, and making comparisons to the new, I was convinced that the devil himself had convinced humanity through sorcery that he was god. Taking his rivals place for the benefits of blind obedience and tormenting human beings.

At this point I believe there is no afterlife. We should appreciate what time we have in this beautiful and rare creation. With that alone we don't need commandments or fear of punishment in order to respect each other. It's the idea that we have someone giving us rules that's makes us believe we can damn others, and that we can be as harmful and greedy as we wish so long as we surrender our selves to god in the end.

Sorry, I know that was long winded.


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Jul 15, 2015)

WeedZ1985 said:


> But god is omnipotent. He knew They would fail before he created them, the garden, the earth, and punished them anyway is my point.


Not exactly. Having the power to see the future doesn't mean that the ability is always on. I have the power of sight but that's dependent on me keeping my eyes open. They had free will and they chose poorly.

The forbidden fruit is like being given a car and told to only use diesel. If you put petrol in it because the guy at the garage said petrol will be fine and it stops working you can hardly blame the person who gave you the car. Sure, the fuel station sells both petrol and diesel but that doesn't mean the petrol is for you too. You'll just have to put up with a broken car. Turns out the guy at the garage had an ulterior motive and wants the person who gave you the car to lose business.


----------



## Foxchild (Jul 15, 2015)

I have always found the "Satan as the good guy" theory interesting.  I mean, say what you want about the devil, he's smart.  Why rebel against a Being who is, by definition, invincible.  Is Satan really the deceiver he's painted to be or is he a champion of freedom fighting against a tyrannical God?  One of the stranger things in the Bible is the battle of Armageddon.  A lot of people assume Armageddon is a giant world war of some kind.  According to the Bible, however, Armageddon is all the armies of the earth united to fight off Jesus at his second coming ("the kingdoms of the earth are united together against the Lord and against His Christ" Psalm 2).  Used to seem weird to me; I can understand people not believing God exists or that Jesus wasn't Who He claimed to be, but to find out that it's all true and choose to fight against Him?  Why would anyone do that?  Then, after Jesus returns (and mops the floor with earth's armies "blood as deep as a horse's bridle"), Satan is imprisoned for 1,000 years while Jesus rules the planet.  Then Satan is released and he is actually able to "deceive the nations" again and lead one final rebellion.  The only reason I can comprehend why anyone would choose Satan's side would be for the freedom to live life outside of God's rules.  So it really comes down to what you believe (faith anyone?) - is God the overbearing tyrant, or does He have our best interests at heart.  That's why the Bible says in Hebrews "Without faith it is impossible to please God, for all who come to Him must (a)believe that He exists and (b) that He rewards those who diligently seek Him"  It is not enough just to believe in God's existence (the devil believes God exists), but that He rewards those who seek Him (which the devil clearly does not believe).  So, for now, I guess the choices are, choose a side or don't believe in either.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 15, 2015)

I'm not aware of any reason to think an afterlife exists. In addition, it seems pretty obvious to me that we are the products of natural processes in our brains.


----------



## mustafag32g (Jul 15, 2015)

We muslims believe in "life" after death, and that death is only the beginning. In the holy quran god says the following, which is really interesting.

1) It is Allah Who takes away the souls at the time of their *death*, and those that die not during their sleep. He keeps those (souls) for which He has ordained *death* and sends the rest for a term appointed. Verily, in this are signs for a people who think deeply.

2) *He is the Irresistible, (Supreme) over His slaves, and He sends guardians (angels guarding and writing all of one’s good and bad deeds) over you, until when death approaches one of you, Our Messengers (angel of death and his assistants) take his soul, and they never neglect their duty

3)And if you could see when the angels take away the souls of those who disbelieve (at death); they smite their faces and their backs, (saying): “Taste the punishment of the blazing Fire*

God has warned us many many times in the quran, to believe in a creator. I know it may be hard to believe, because now a days everything can be proofed with scienc. But i can not see my brain, does it mean, that it does not exist ? By looking around us and seeing the complex and beautiful creations of god, you can not deny the existense of a god.


----------



## WeedZ (Jul 15, 2015)

Foxchild said:


> I have always found the "Satan as the good guy" theory interesting.  I mean, say what you want about the devil, he's smart.  Why rebel against a Being who is, by definition, invincible.  Is Satan really the deceiver he's painted to be or is he a champion of freedom fighting against a tyrannical God?  One of the stranger things in the Bible is the battle of Armageddon.  A lot of people assume Armageddon is a giant world war of some kind.  According to the Bible, however, Armageddon is all the armies of the earth united to fight off Jesus at his second coming ("the kingdoms of the earth are united together against the Lord and against His Christ" Psalm 2).  Used to seem weird to me; I can understand people not believing God exists or that Jesus wasn't Who He claimed to be, but to find out that it's all true and choose to fight against Him?  Why would anyone do that?  Then, after Jesus returns (and mops the floor with earth's armies "blood as deep as a horse's bridle"), Satan is imprisoned for 1,000 years while Jesus rules the planet.  Then Satan is released and he is actually able to "deceive the nations" again and lead one final rebellion.  The only reason I can comprehend why anyone would choose Satan's side would be for the freedom to live life outside of God's rules.  So it really comes down to what you believe (faith anyone?) - is God the overbearing tyrant, or does He have our best interests at heart.  That's why the Bible says in Hebrews "Without faith it is impossible to please God, for all who come to Him must (a)believe that He exists and (b) that He rewards those who diligently seek Him"  It is not enough just to believe in God's existence (the devil believes God exists), but that He rewards those who seek Him (which the devil clearly does not believe).  So, for now, I guess the choices are, choose a side or don't believe in either.


Like I said, I don't believe in either. But I do find it interesting as well. If Satan is fighting this war against Christ and Christ is out to destroy mankind, then that would mean Satan is trying to protect the lives of people right? Another theory I had is, as far as I know, it doesn't actually say that Satan was a creation of god, but just a servant. It could be that these divine beings are peers as far as creation, and have a social structure not that different from ours. Perhaps this war between god and Lucifer started with how mortals were being treated. Another thing I want to point out is that Satan has notably killed a handful of people, whereas god has asked people to kill their own children, destroyed entire cities, killed all on earth except 2, and plans to destroy mankind again. So yeah, I think there might be something to this Lucifer being the good guy.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



mustafag32g said:


> We muslims believe in "life" after death, and that death is only the beginning. In the holy quran god says the following, which is really interesting.
> 
> 1) It is Allah Who takes away the souls at the time of their *death*, and those that die not during their sleep. He keeps those (souls) for which He has ordained *death* and sends the rest for a term appointed. Verily, in this are signs for a people who think deeply.
> 
> ...


I think life and existence is a miracle, no doubt. But I also think that how ever it came into being is something we will never fully understand as it had to have happened outside of our reality. Also, if there is an afterlife, I don't think we would know it. Everthing we are, personality, memories, all exist as neurons and chemicals in our brains. When you die, those things are destoryed.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jul 15, 2015)

Relevant as of this last page of discussion


----------



## WeedZ (Jul 23, 2015)

FAST6191 said:


> Relevant as of this last page of discussion



Dude, thanks for posting this. I've never heard of Jim Jeffries, but I now have a new favorite comedian.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 23, 2015)

There is convincing evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead after 3 days in the tomb. If that is true, all his other claims are credible (Including afterlife).

Check out the Lionsgate documentary "Case for Christ" on Dailymotion.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jul 23, 2015)

WeedZ1985 said:


> Dude, thanks for posting this. I've never heard of Jim Jeffries, but I now have a new favorite comedian.



Before you watch too many of his specials first watch a show he did called Legit. It is something of an expanded/fictionalised version of a sketch/story he used to end various shows with. I had already watched his specials by the time he made the show but if you had not seen them then the show would probably be far better (not that it was bad otherwise).


----------



## WeedZ (Jul 23, 2015)

FAST6191 said:


> Before you watch too many of his specials first watch a show he did called Legit. It is something of an expanded/fictionalised version of a sketch/story he used to end various shows with. I had already watched his specials by the time he made the show but if you had not seen them then the show would probably be far better (not that it was bad otherwise).


I'll check that out for sure. I already watched two of his specials on youtube, couldn't tell you what they were called.


----------



## BORTZ (Jul 23, 2015)

As a Christian, yes, I do believe in life after death. If anyone wants to talk feel free to PM me.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 23, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> There is convincing evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead after 3 days in the tomb. If that is true, all his other claims are credible (Including afterlife).
> 
> Check out the Lionsgate documentary "Case for Christ" on Dailymotion.


I've read Lee Strobel's book _The Case for a Creator_, and it is very obvious to me that he either did very little research or, more likely, heavily cherry-picked what he would write about. For all I know, the book/documentary _The Case for Christ_ does a better job, but I doubt it. The existence of a historical Jesus is hotly debated to this day, and I'm unaware of any contemporary evidence of a historical Jesus' existence. Personally, I wouldn't be entirely surprised if the Jesus character of the Bible had been loosely based off one or more real people, but the existence of a historical Jesus says nothing about whether or not we have any reason to think the supernatural claims of the Bible are true. In the end, belief in Christianity requires faith, and we're at square one regarding evidence for an afterlife.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 23, 2015)

Lacius said:


> The existence of a historical Jesus is hotly debated to this day


I've debated with many atheists. If they start claiming 'Jesus never existed' it become clear they have no idea what they're talking about & haven't done basic research. 100% of scholars agree Jesus existed (even _atheists_)


> _Virtually all scholars who write on the subject accept that Jesus existed,__[5]__[6]__[7]__[8]_


 (See Wikipedia; Historical Jesus).
Since all of this is new information to you, I highly suggest you watch the documentary before responding, that way we can discuss the actual points, rather than useless conjecture based on personal opinion.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 23, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> I've debated with many atheists. If they start claiming 'Jesus never existed' it become clear they have no idea what they're talking about & haven't done basic research. 100% of scholars agree Jesus existed (even _atheists_)
> (See Wikipedia; Historical Jesus).
> Since all of this is new information to you, I highly suggest you watch the documentary before responding, that way we can discuss the actual points rather than useless conjecture based on personal opinion.


This isn't new information to me, and it is not true that "100% of scholars" agree that Jesus existed. In reality, it's hotly debated due to the absence of contemporary evidence for a historical Jesus, and views vary wildly with regard to how much an alleged historical Jesus comports with Biblical Jesus. The phrase "Jesus existed" also oversimplifies a complicated issue; many do agree that the Jesus character was likely based off one or more real people, but that's not to say anything about which parts of Bible's descriptions of Jesus are true and which are not. When a scholar says, "I believe historical Jesus existed," that does not mean he or she is talking about the same version of Jesus you believe in. I suggest reading _On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt_ by Richard Carrier. It has been described as setting a proper standard for historicity regarding whether or not a Jesus existed.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 23, 2015)

Lacius said:


> This isn't new information to me, and* it is not true that "100% of scholars" agree that Jesus existed*.


Yes it is. Virtually every scholar is in agreement. If you can't get this basic fact right, how can we take you serious about any of your other claims?


----------



## sarkwalvein (Jul 23, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> Yes it is. Virtually every scholar is in agreement. If you can't get this basic fact right, how can we take you serious about any of your other claims?


Wait... Is this message false? I am confused.


----------



## Depravo (Jul 23, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> Yes it is. *Virtually *every scholar is in agreement.


*Virtually*
_adverb_
Definition: nearly, almost

Can't be 100% then, can it?


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 23, 2015)

Depravo said:


> *Virtually*
> _adverb_
> Definition: nearly, almost
> 
> Can't be 100% then, can it?


Sure, poor choice of words on my part. But there's a big difference between something being _"hotly debated_" and _"virtually every scholar is in agreement" _i.e. nearly 100%_. _The latter being true in this case.
If someone claims they know more than _virtually every scholar_, how can I take them seriously?


----------



## Dust2dust (Jul 23, 2015)

http://godisimaginary.com/index.htm
I spent several hours reading on that website, and the guy has some pretty strong arguments... much stronger than the opposite school of thoughts.  So, personnally, I don't think there is an afterlife, but I can live with that.


----------



## Selim873 (Jul 23, 2015)

Growing up in a Christian family, I feel like while my soul will go to heaven (or Hell haha) but I could see through the eyes of a new life. Pretty much reincarnation, even though that's typically not followed in that religion.  I'm not very religious either, I just believe what I feel comfortable in believing.


----------



## JazzCat.CL (Jul 23, 2015)

I think its gonna raaain...ohhh...when i dieee!!


----------



## Lacius (Jul 24, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> Sure, poor choice of words on my part. But there's a big difference between something being _"hotly debated_" and _"virtually every scholar is in agreement" _i.e. nearly 100%_. _The latter being true in this case.
> If someone claims they know more than _virtually every scholar_, how can I take them seriously?


To claim that the debate doesn't exist is to blatantly ignore the facts of the matter. In case I wasn't clear, I am not claiming that a historical Jesus didn't exist. Many scholars agree that the Biblical Jesus was likely based off one or more people who did exist in history. However, it would be a mistake to say that he definitely existed, as it is indeed contested and debated, and it would also be a mistake to think the existence of a historical Jesus is any reason to think any of the supernatural claims in the Bible are true.


----------



## VashTS (Jul 24, 2015)

Bortz said:


> As a Christian, yes, I do believe in life after death. If anyone wants to talk feel free to PM me.


----------



## BORTZ (Jul 24, 2015)

VashTS said:


> snip


completely honest.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 24, 2015)

Lacius said:


> it would be a mistake to say that he definitely existed



Jesus of Nazareth definitely existed, virtually every scholar agrees with me on this. Your argument is akin to saying "_not every scientists agrees there's climate change, to say climate change exists is blatantly ignoring the facts_".

Once again, if you can't get this simple historical fact right, how can we take you seriously about any of your other claims?


----------



## Lacius (Jul 24, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> Jesus of Nazareth definitely existed, virtually every scholar agrees with me on this. Your argument is akin to saying "_not every scientists agrees there's climate change, to say climate change exists is blatantly ignoring the facts_".


The fact that most scholars agree that the Jesus of the Bible is based off one or more real people is not the same thing as saying, "Jesus of Nazareth _definitely_ existed." In addition, I've explained how the existence of a historical Jesus is not the same thing as the existence of Jesus as described in the Bible.

Also, your analogy about climate change is a false one because I never said, "Not every scholar agrees _Jesus _exists, so to say _Jesus _exists is blatantly ignoring the facts." I said that if you don't acknowledge the debate, you are ignoring facts.

I've also said numerous times that I don't disagree with the likelihood of the Jesus of the Bible being based off one or more real people, and I've explained how the existence of a historical Jesus is irrelevant to the conversation about an afterlife; the topic of historical Jesus is a red herring when discussing whether or not Christianity is true or if an afterlife exists. However, due to the lack of contemporary evidence, I do not think Jesus has fully met his historical burden of proof, and there are plenty of historians who agree. I think the mistake you're making is you're conflating "there is a lack of evidence" with "Jesus _definitely _didn't exist." In addition, I think you are conflating "many scholars agree that Jesus existed" with "Jesus _definitely _existed."



Haloman800 said:


> Once again, if you can't get this simple historical fact right, how can we take you seriously about any of your other claims?


First, I think I've described the facts surrounding the topic of historical Jesus to the best of my ability. If you want to talk about contemporary evidence for the existence of a historical Jesus, rather than make continuous appeals to authority without providing evidence, I would be happy to respond as long as it's one point at a time.

Second, whether or not I've been blatantly wrong about anything in the past makes no difference regarding the accuracy of any future points I make. The accuracy of what I say can only be judged on the quality of the evidence, not whether or not I grasped a previous "simple historical fact" in your arbitrary point of view.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 24, 2015)

Lacius said:


> if you don't acknowledge the debate, you are ignoring facts.



There is no debate, the scholars are in agreement. If you can't accept this simple fact, further discussion on the subject is impossible. I suggest you do further research


----------



## Lacius (Jul 24, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> There is no debate, the scholars are in agreement. If you can't accept this simple fact, further discussion on the subject is impossible. I suggest you do further research


I pointed you to one of many resources that demonstrates the debate's existence among scholars. I suggest you do further research.


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 24, 2015)

If we're gonna be talking about the historical accuracy of "Jesus", can we at least call him by his most probable historically accurate name, "Jeshua"?


----------



## lampdemon (Jul 24, 2015)

Jesus was about as real as witches, like most of the bible, he was probably based on some real life person with a sprinkle of magic for the book.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 24, 2015)

Lacius said:


> I pointed you to one of many resources that demonstrates the debate's existence among scholars. I suggest you do further research.





			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historianssee the theories of his nonexistence as effectively refuted.[5][7][8][33][34][35]







grossaffe said:


> If we're gonna be talking about the historical accuracy of "Jesus", can we at least call him by his most probable historically accurate name, "Jeshua"?


I think you mean Yeshua, full name Yeshua ben Yosef. Either way, Jesus is based on the Greek transliteration of his name, and English is partly based on Greek, therefore Jesus is accurate.



lampdemon said:


> Jesus was about as real as witches, like most of the bible, he was probably based on some real life person with a sprinkle of magic for the book.



That's simply incorrect, if you want actual, historical information from scholars (including atheists) "The Case for Christ" by Lionsgate is a great documentary about the historical Jesus.


----------



## Retr0Capez (Jul 24, 2015)

Well, I kinda believe of two possibilities (Both sound autistic). ONE: We live what we wished to be, even if I say I want to live in the 90s as a Japanese kid, I would just live as that in the other life, but in another timeline. TWO: We go to the astral realm.


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 24, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> I think you mean Yeshua, full name Yeshua ben Yosef. Either way, Jesus is based on the Greek transliteration of his name, and English is partly based on Greek, therefore Jesus is accurate.


No, I'm perfectly fine meaning "Jeshua", as they are pronounced the same and it is translated to a character set that it did not originate from, thus the exact spelling is not of much issue.  And just because English has a small amount of Greek heritage, does not mean that any Greek transliterations are accurate when then transliterated to English.  English is primarily a Germanic language, anyways (there was a time when 'J' was pronounced the like a 'Y' in English, just like it is in German).  If you use a language as a go-between that lacks certain sounds, then they become lost in translation thus the loss of accuracy.  Greek, for example, has no equivalent to the syllable represented by the Hebrew character "shin", which in English is pronounced "sh", which means it would be impossible to transliterate the name "Jeshua" from one language to another using Greek as a middle language.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 24, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> No, I'm perfectly fine meaning "Jeshua", as they are pronounced the same and it is translated to a character set that it did not originate from, thus the exact spelling is not of much issue.  And just because English has a small amount of Greek heritage, does not mean that any Greek transliterations are accurate when then transliterated to English.  English is primarily a Germanic language, anyways (there was a time when 'J' was pronounced the like a 'Y' in English, just like it is in German).  If you use a language as a go-between that lacks certain sounds, then they become lost in translation thus the loss of accuracy.  Greek, for example, has no equivalent to the syllable represented by the Hebrew character "shin", which in English is pronounced "sh", which means it would be impossible to transliterate the name "Jeshua" from one language to another using Greek as a middle language.



There's no letter J in Greek or Hebrew, so I'm not sure where you're getting "Jeshua". If you're concerned with correct/original pronunciation/spelling, the only correct answer is "Yeshua".


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 24, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> There's no letter J in Greek or Hebrew, so I'm not sure where you're getting "Jeshua". If you're concerned with correct/original pronunciation/spelling, the only correct answer is "Yeshua".


Did you actually read the explanation about how I don't care much about the exact spelling because the pronunciation remains the same?  'J' can be pronounced as a 'Y', as it was in old English and in German.  The name does not originate with the Roman Alphabet, so the exact spelling in the Roman Alphabet matters not as long as it can lead to the correct pronunciation.  By the way, I got my spelling of the name from a History professor.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 24, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> By the way, I got my spelling of the name from a History professor.


Anecdotal evidence.
Feel free to spell it however you want. You brought up correct pronunciation, I assumed you'd wish to have correct grammar as well.
Here's sources on the correct spelling (Yeshua)
http://30ce.com/
http://www.thenazareneway.com/yeshua_jesus_real_name.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshua_(name)
http://www.gotquestions.org/Yeshua-Jesus.html


----------



## JaapDaniels (Jul 24, 2015)

no can't be life after death. all gods are cruel to thier own belevers to leave them not being able to accept differences in each others religion. god is cruel towards his own belevers for even those who try whith all they have still end upd murdered, or raped. for those who got noach in thier relegion: think of it once, the god you worshipped made a perfect world, a perfect human, and after centuries he just killed them all because of imperfections? really? for those having adam and eve in thier relegion: after eating the wrong fruit you get a death sentence? really? come on! think for once! it doesn't matter what religion you follow it ends all the same. yes i've seen miracles by the name of jesus... then again i've seen likewise by the name of satan, so go figure. then for those almost death experiences: every person who claimed till now has already been in a faith they found fit or thier parents were. just like you don't need to educate a cat how to kill a mouse, cause it's already in him... you can already have any religion deep in your mind just not knowing till you pass out. then for the ghosts and sorts of stories, seeing a ghost in real life is caused by magnetic fields (proven) disturbing our memmories, it's not that hard to guess someones past when you can look him in the eyes, and photo's nor movies are reliable sources, old camara's can have a sort of burn (this works like a memory) in when shutter sometimes failed or in processing films got mixed up. let me know if i missed something. stop using religion as an excuse for wrong behavior towards others. if god is even slightly involved in thier creation why would you be against them?oh and still how joyfull is this life? you really wanna have this life forever in harmony, think of it, you won't feel any love anymore cause that would kill someone elses dream, you can't feel better since everyone is just alike... what kind life is that, praising someone you just only know by a book forever for all his work here? what work here? 4000 years and still at war, 4000 years still hunger, 4000 years still death, 4000 years still slavery, still murder, still rape, etc. paradise is only possible af you stop living a dream and start creating one, just don't forget, your dream might not ever come close to someone else dream, or be the opposite.


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 25, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> Anecdotal evidence.
> Feel free to spell it however you want. You brought up correct pronunciation, I assumed you'd wish to have correct grammar as well.
> Here's sources on the correct spelling (Yeshua)
> http://30ce.com/
> ...


It is an anecdote, not evidence.  The origin of his name was not in the Roman Alphabet, therefore there is no official correct spelling when transliterated into the Roman Alphabet.  I don't know why I must repeat myself here, but there are languages that use the Roman Alphabet in which 'J' is pronounced as 'Y', including English in its earlier days.  For example, Johan Sebastian Bach has his first name spelled leading with a 'J', but is it pronounced "Joe-Han"?  No, it is pronounced "Yo-Han".  We don't change the spelling of his name just because the 'J' is typically pronounced differently in English, we accept that spelling with Roman characters and then pronounce it the way it is meant to be pronounced.  Same with the name Jørn Lande.  Or Janus.  All of those names have correct spellings in the Roman Alphabet as the language of origin uses the Roman Alphabet, and we accept those spellings as correct even though their pronunciation does not match what would be expected of modern day English.  Jeshua, on the other hand, has a name that does not originate from the Roman Alphabet and, as far as we know, he did not give us an official spelling for it, therefore there is no one official correct spelling, but rather you have attempts to accurately reproduce the name phonetically in the Roman Alphabet, of which there are multiple ways to come to produce the same results.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jul 25, 2015)

grossaffe said:


> It is an anecdote, not evidence.  The origin of his name was not in the Roman Alphabet, therefore there is no official correct spelling when transliterated into the Roman Alphabet.  I don't know why I must repeat myself here, but there are languages that use the Roman Alphabet in which 'J' is pronounced as 'Y', including English in its earlier days.  For example, Johan Sebastian Bach has his first name spelled leading with a 'J', but is it pronounced "Joe-Han"?  No, it is pronounced "Yo-Han".  We don't change the spelling of his name just because the 'J' is typically pronounced differently in English, we accept that spelling with Roman characters and then pronounce it the way it is meant to be pronounced.  Same with the name Jørn Lande.  Or Janus.  All of those names have correct spellings in the Roman Alphabet as the language of origin uses the Roman Alphabet, and we accept those spellings as correct even though their pronunciation does not match what would be expected of modern day English.  Jeshua, on the other hand, has a name that does not originate from the Roman Alphabet and, as far as we know, he did not give us an official spelling for it, therefore there is no one official correct spelling, but rather you have attempts to accurately reproduce the name phonetically in the Roman Alphabet, of which there are multiple ways to come to produce the same results.


I'll concede a "J" could be pronounced with a "Y" sound, but will you concede "Yeshua" is a _more_ correct (not to mention, more common) English spelling of His name?


----------



## grossaffe (Jul 25, 2015)

Haloman800 said:


> I'll concede a "J" could be pronounced with a "Y" sound, but will you concede "Yeshua" is a _more_ correct English spelling of His name?


I concede that Yeshua is also correct.  I would have happily conceded that from the start.

The thing is that the name Joshua is basically the modern day equivalent of Jeshua, so I personally prefer to spell it in the way that resembles that name.  (All those Joshuas in the bible should be Jeshua; it was a common name of the era).  Others are free to prefer different spellings, but Jeshua is the one I most prefer.


----------



## GamerzHell9137 (Jul 25, 2015)

Yes, i don't think that we just disappear once our body stops to work.


----------

