What happens after we die.

[Ryn2075]

Actually, those were good points you made devonin.

1. You're right, we have no way of knowing if religion is really correct, but based on my life experiences, I can say that for me it is.

2. As far as posting it here, I've already expressed to Mr. Rubix that I shouldn't have called him out on what he believes to be true without sufficient research. I've done enough research on my own to make my choice, but to counter someone who believes in evolution, I suppose I'm not well-equipped to do that yet. Also, I already stated why I believe what I do, so everyone got their answer. It confuses me why they can't accept that answer. (And yes, that may sound hypocritical based on the arguments in this thread, but like I said I've already accepted that and apologized.)

3. I would never consider you guys racist, just.....discriminatory, but ONLY if you guys breathe down our necks that we should believe what you believe. I don't care if you state what you believe and ask why I believe what I believe, but physically TELLING us what we should believe is showing a little discrimination instead of the healthy spirit ofdiscussion, no?

~Ryan

[devonin]

The issue is just that even if you deeply and truly believe in your religion, religions are inherantly faith-based, and if you had actual objective facts to support it (Objective meaning 'things which would necessarily be accepted as fact by all people') then you would be able to provide those facts to us and we would have no choice but to accept them. What you have are personal, subjective experiences that, while -you- know they are fact to YOU, we have no way to actually corroborate them.

Where this gets applied in the thread is when someone says something like "For my given subjective reasons, this is a belief that I feel is very strongly correct" but since it's your own subjective and personal reasons educating your belief, those of us who don't accept your reasons can therefore also not accept your conclusion. While a true conclusion can be potentially arrived at from faulty premises, we still need to produce the same conclusion from valid premises before we know it's actually a true conclusion.

I don't think anybody was telling you what you should believe, so much as telling you that they think you have no justifiable reasons to believe what you DO believe. And as long as you are content to not be able to convince others of the correctness of your position, all you need are the reasons that are good enough for you. But if you -do- want to convince others of the correctness of your position, you'll need reasons that are good enough for -them- as well.

[Ryn2075]

And that may be the most non-hostile post I have seen in this entire thread, my own included. Nothing but truth in that post devonin. That's exactly what I was trying to say to them to stop them from getting onto me.

I'm 100% happy with what I believe, and if someone else thinks I don't have a real reason to believe what I believe, then they can think that. Faith has no factual explanation, and in essence it is based purely on subjective, emotional belief. That is good enough for me, and in my mind, what I believe is as real to me as evolution is to you guys. Seriously, I said this like, 50,000 posts ago (albeit probably not as clearly as I did now). How did it get this far into the thread? XD

[Cenright]

If you take a Christian point of view, then you are saying that the Bible is your guide, therefore, where better to look than the Bible to back up your views.

"That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned - " (Romans 5:12)
"The soul that is sinning - It itself will die. (Ezekiel 18:4)
"For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten. Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 9:5,6)

I believe this should suffice when it comes to scriptures. I do not believe that I instantly go to heaven or hell, or even that my soul lives on after death. If I did, then a resurrection would not be needed, and I DO believe in a resurrection. I will leave resurrection scriptures to another time. I just wanted to clear up the 'living on after death' part.

[perfectchaoslemon]

Originally Posted by Mousethecat

Why do cats and dogs fight?

Point is, they're two opposite sides of a spectrum. Dispute is going to happen. Nothing will stop that.

It's also because there are an equal amount of dumbasses on both sides (i.e. Atheism has Bill Maher, idk what the Christian idiot is, but I'm sure there is one), and then those idiots call everyone on the opposite side idiots, so it's kind of a never-ending battle of idiocy.

[fido123]

Religion isn't something that can be proved. Instead of stating your religion as fact, simply state that according to your religion this would happen. I have no issues with religion. These questions are so far outside the spectrum of what we can prove as fact, rather than theorise about. I personally think the idea of a God is pretty preposterous, then I look at the complexity of our universe and understand that the idea of a greater power isn't as dumb as I originally thought. This is why I'm open minded about religion, although remaining an Atheist.

So in short, if you're religious, state your opinion as a religious one however don't present it as if it is a proven fact fact. A lot of religion is based around faith, which you can't expect everybody to have. The Bible isn't a reputable source from a scientific standpoint, and if you're going to state something as a fact, it must be proved. The Bible isn't proved, so if you're going to claim it to be truthful, please refer to it as a fact according to your religion.

[CobaltWire]

Be careful what you ask, questions like this tend to spark up big arguments.

To answer your question, there are only 2 possible outcomes when you die.

ANYTHING could happen when you die or NOTHING could happen when you die. Try not to ask yourself this question alot while your breathing and let death tell you what happens when your heart stop pumping.

[Frozen Beat]

Nobody knows. Heavily religious people will often say they do know.

"What? How could you possibly know? You either think or believe."

Damnn straight.

However, when considering that nobody knows, doesn't that make anything _possible_?

Of course it does

"purpose" and "existence" are real. It's just up to us to decide what it is, really.

[N.T.M.]

Solid post by devonin.

I agree whole-heartedly.

[MrRubix]

devonin:

I've always enjoyed the debates when they're done for the right reasons. That is to say, why someone CHOOSES to belief in a faith rather than in evidence. However, the problem is that, for instance, someone who believes in faith will argue that they are doing so because the evidence-oriented pathway is riddled with holes and flaws -- then they will start quoting misunderstandings and issues where there aren't any.

It's one thing to fully understand all options before choosing, but it's another thing to either 1. Ignore the cons of your perspective, or 2. Assume a non-existent or misunderstood con in the opposite side.

[devonin]

Oh for certain, and believe me, when I described the connotation-neutral stance on religious belief I wasn't granting that everyone in the thread espousing religious belief was doing so in that way. I was more trying to explain -to them- why the non-theists in the thread were "giving them a hard time"

The onus is on EVERYONE in a discussion being willing to actually and genuinely admit that their position could be false, and to thus grant criticisms of their position some basic respect and consideration. That doesn't mean all premises are created equal, or are worthy of equal respect, but if someone has made the admission that they know their position is a subjective one, with evidence that is good enough for them, if not others, the correct reaction is to acknowledge that they are entitled to believe whatever they like, but that you are under no obligation to address or modify your own stance if they aren't able to provide reasons WHY they disagree with you that are legitimate logical reasons, and then that person is responsible to realise that they've made that admission, and stop posting about their position like it is contributing to the discussion anymore.

[0MG]

Arguments upheld in favor of no religion, I think, derive from the very ground they stand on. Everything in their physical view is scientifically proven. Where we come from (conception), the things that make us up (macro/micro structure), and the things we do every day are all supported by science. Arguments upheld in favor of a religious person push further. They usually grow up in an environment where that particular faith could have stemmed back thousands of years. Also, they could have been raised to see the world differently than just how it scientifically is made up. Perspective is key here, because how one person sees something isn't necessarily how the next will.

[AquaTeen]

Being a born again Christian, I say that our body dies but our soul goes to be with the Lord eternally that is if you are a firm believer and follower of Christ but if you die and you aren't then you are stuck with the fate of eternal damnation. Now there's the fact of the rapture. When the Lord comes back to take his people home there is a 7 year tribulation in which those nonbelievers get a chance to turn their lives around and after the 7 years if you are not brought back home to the Lord, your fate is death and sadly eternal damnation so that's my moral belief of after death experiences

[Silver Sky]

Originally Posted by AquaTeen

Being a born again Christian, I say that our body dies but our soul goes to be with the Lord eternally that is if you are a firm believer and follower of Christ but if you die and you aren't then you are stuck with the fate of eternal damnation. Now there's the fact of the rapture. When the Lord comes back to take his people home there is a 7 year tribulation in which those nonbelievers get a chance to turn their lives around and after the 7 years if you are not brought back home to the Lord, your fate is death and sadly eternal damnation so that's my moral belief of after death experiences

Okay for one the bible clearly says at (and I encourage you to look it up) Ecclesiastes 9:5,6 that :For the living are conscious that they will die, but s for the ded, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they have anymore wages, because the rememberance of them has been forgotten. Also, their love and their hate and their jealously have already perished, and they have no portion anymore to time indefinite in anything that has to be done under the sun. It doesn't say the soul will continue to live. And if you think about it the bible brings out that when you die you go to sheol. Which if you look up is the common grave of mankind. And the bible actually talks about a wonderful hope for the dead. As in the resurrection hope. A paradise. Many different things. And sheol is the same as hades also. And the bible talks about Jesus being in sheol itself. Many different things people over look when it comes to the bible. But this is only a few things stated here.

[G.S.M]

I gave up on thinking about this when I turned 15 because you can't know until you die. Any religious person is dead wrong as you would have to be dead to know what happens well... when you die

[Silver Sky]

That's why through God's word we can determine what happens to us. All the prophecies in the bible have came true and at thisd moment is coming true before our eyes. The bible is real and ther evidence is there. But people turn away from the bible and turn to their own beliefs

[~kitty~]

I think this appropriately died out around when devonin posted.

[wargasm1]

I like to look at the problem in one of 2 ways. One is by using scientific knowledge to demonstrate theres nothing beyond, the other is using what all ive seen to make sense of life.

Do u remember what hapenned before u were born? No right? Its because the entropy in the universe was low when it started and it can only get higher, this is what created this illusion of time. Time accelerates because the rate of the expansion of the universe accelerates. If you think that the universe being created out of nothing and by noone makes no sense, try to think about a universe created by a god, who created this god? Was he there forever? This makes even less sense than a universe created out of nothing to me. If the universe was created out of nothing, then its almost impossible that it hapenned just once. We would live in a multiverse, and it would explain why stuff expands faster and faster, cause our stuff is getting closer to stuff in other universes and is being attracted by the huge gravity. Now this tells us nothing about life after death, but its a tight little theory :P.

I refuse to comment wether i believe in god or not, like i said i have 2 ways to look at the problem, depending on the days and how i feel. Why would god make the universe and erase all proof of his existence? We are here because we are here, this is proof of nothing. If we were in a universe that had a chance out of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to happen, we wouldnt be here to think about it if it didnt happen.

I hope someone can make sense of what i just wrote.

[ScylaX]

What makes you think that creating an universe implies having every right on that universe ? It's just the proof that a power created it, but nothing says that same power can destroy or modify it.

If we were in a universe that had a chance out of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to happen, we wouldnt be here to think about it if it didnt happen.

Be clearer, what do you mean exactly ? You can live in an universe where the phenomenon of its birth was nearly impossible without limiting the possibilities of that universe, since it's all about probabilities that happen or not.
What were the probability for you to don't be born, to don't be at all and not feel life ? There is no probability, you just live.

[wargasm1]

What you're saying is that probability is a human concept and has nothing to do with the universe in the big picture is that it? That makes sense. I'm not 100% sure what i meant, if i could get high i would know better.