What is it about the gays?..

[Larry Gude]

No, I don't believe the afterlife is like sitting in front of a broken television, or an equally vapid experience. I also don't believe it's clouds and harps and wings..... If it were, I'd find the nearest cloud and jump off of it.

Whatever it is, when I try to imagine it... I picture the concept of eternity as a physical dimension rather than a temporal one. Then I picture the most vast thing I can think of, as huge and expansive as my mind can fathom..... Then I compress it to a mote and imagine a size relative in vastness to that mote. And then again... and again... and again... and again...

Then I apply that to time and then I imagine that I have to pass that time.







And then I consider the human lifespan compared to that unending vast eternity and it makes this life completely and thoroughly pointless.

Excuse me. I'm going to go curl up in a fetal position for a while.

Interesting. If I thought of it in human terms of 'passing' time, I'd probably be freaking out, too. In my minds eye, that vastness, that eternity, will play out in a decidedly non human consciousness and, therefore, be no more of a concern to me in ANY afterlife than real life is to, say, a bug or an animal or blade of grass; the point being existence, what may be. Not some sort of 'passage' of time. In my mind, ONLY humans think in those terms and that is because we are innately aware of our mortality.

Hope that helps.

 

[Toxick]

In my minds eye, that vastness, that eternity, will play out in a decidedly non human consciousness and, therefore, be no more of a concern to me in ANY afterlife than real life is to, say, a bug or an animal or blade of grass; the point being existence, what may be. Not some sort of 'passage' of time. In my mind, ONLY humans think in those terms and that is because we are innately aware of our mortality.

Hope that helps.

Well, like I said a few post back, the I'm sure the transformation that occurs during death will probably make the concept more palatable, but that's little comfort to me now, since I am incapable of imagining what that transformation entails.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

That view leaves out an enormous 'what if'.

While it is certainly fair and reasonable to say that teaching one set of principles is equivalent to teaching another, that is, by no means, the same as saying they are of equal value. Given the choice between the teachings of Christ or Mohamed, I'll take the former. You may argue you'd choose neither and, as a free autonomous individual, you can, in this Christian nation, choose that course. But, you're simply choosing, whether you acknowledge it or not, whatever faith you happen to think is better. You can prove this to yourself by simply considering your views of right and wrong and what those views are based on. The point is that Christianity has allowed for that over time. If it dies, something else will replace it and I am not in favor of that being Islam. I do not consider the two equivalent. I think Christianity has, demonstrably, to have made us much better.

If you disagree, you and I could be having this conversation in public anywhere in the US and all of the Western world. Is there one place we could be having it in Muslim lands?

Recognize that you believe Christianity to be the more 'moral' of the two religions because you have been indoctrinated in a Christian culture and belief system from a young age.

Consider that a serial killer, who has specialized in the rape and killing of young children, need only to 'accept Christ' before his execution, and he spends an eternity in paradise. While a homosexual (homosexuality is genetic/epigenetic determined and common not only in humans but throughout the animal kingdom) who lives an exemplary moral life assisting the poor, but lives his life as a homosexual, ends up in hell and suffers unspeakable torment and anguish for all eternity.

One thing should be perfectly clear to you from this example. Christianity has absolutely nothing to do with moral accountability.

The Biblical God is quite fond of slavery (note the new testament does not refute slavery), mass genocide, selling one's daughter into sexual slavery, on and on. If there is a more immoral religion, claiming to be moral, I can't think of one.

We have free speech in this country thanks to the founding fathers, not Christianity. Jefferson and Adams were deists, not theists, and despised organized religion. Thomas Payne and Ben Franklin were atheists.

 

[Larry Gude]

Recognize that you believe Christianity to be the more 'moral' of the two religions because you have been indoctrinated in a Christian culture and belief system from a young age. .

My views may be easier to understand thusly; Moral or otherwise, I recognize Christianity to be the more tolerant of my morals, such as they are, and less likely, among the two, to chop my ####ing head off for my sins.

Even if they won't bake a cake for my brothers wedding.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

Literature is not a necessary characteristic of a religion. While some religions have these, not all of them do.

I've already addressed this, my point appears to have been ignored or disregarded.

While these may be valid points while arguing in favor of atheism, none of them makes your belief system any more or less of a religion.

BTW: Theists also realize that the existence of a deity is not disprovable. Many rely on this as proof of a deity in and of itself, or to stymie discussion. I usually avoid this particular crutch, and it makes me cringe when they use it. Believe it or not I am a scientist...

Hmmm, suppose intelligent beings elsewhere in the universe, where for reasons of their evolution of consciousness and rational thinking, never developed myths involving Gods, or any worship of any kind of entity, or beliefs relating to mysticism. No beliefs in heaven above, hell below, or an afterlife. Only their lives to live in service to one another and with an unquenchable desire to learn more about the universe and their own planet, and only engaged in activities to further enhance the survival of their species, and the species of any other sentient life on their planet. Would you call them religious? Would you claim somehow that their belief system fit the definition of a religion?
If you wish to believe that abscense

 

[ProximaCentauri]

Well, like I said a few post back, the I'm sure the transformation that occurs during death will probably make the concept more palatable, but that's little comfort to me now, since I am incapable of imagining what that transformation entails.

So you're "sure the transformation that occurs during death will probably make the concept more palatable"...

Are you sure you're sure? You're convinced of a 'transformation' upon death? And further, you're convinced this 'transformation' will make the concept of eternal life more palatable to you? Not to mention, your extraordinary claim of an 'eternal afterlife'. As a scientist, what evidence do you have for these claims?

 

[ProximaCentauri]

My views may be easier to understand thusly; Moral or otherwise, I recognize Christianity to be the more tolerant of my morals, such as they are, and less likely, among the two, to chop my ####ing head off for my sins.

Even if they won't bake a cake for my brothers wedding.

Fair enough, I would probably need to go back and read your posts, but I think we're in some semblance of agreement on the cake thing.

 

[Toxick]

As a scientist, what evidence do you have for these claims?

As I said earlier, I have spent years coming to the conclusions I've come to. I have absolutely no inclination to discuss or debate them here.

I'm not trying to convert anyone, and I never pretended to.

And even if I did choose to discuss my conclusions and evidence I've collected, I sincerely doubt you would consider them with the depth I think they deserve - and even if you did, I don't believe you'd accept any of it, so I'm not going to waste my time. If you want to debate the existence of God and/or the afterlife, feel free to do so with someone else. That's not what I entered this conversation for, I'm not interested drifting in that direction now.

 

[Toxick]

If you wish to believe that abscense

You're not much into reading comprehension and retention.

I already made the distinction between an "absence of belief" and a "belief in absence".





As for your hypothetical alien society, I'd have to analyze way more than the information you've blithely provided.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

No, I don't believe the afterlife is like sitting in front of a broken television, or an equally vapid experience. I also don't believe it's clouds and harps and wings..... If it were, I'd find the nearest cloud and jump off of it.

Whatever it is, when I try to imagine it... I picture the concept of eternity as a physical dimension rather than a temporal one. Then I picture the most vast thing I can think of, as huge and expansive as my mind can fathom..... Then I compress it to a mote and imagine a size relative in vastness to that mote. And then again... and again... and again... and again...

Then I apply that to time and then I imagine that I have to pass that time.

And then I consider the human lifespan compared to that unending vast eternity and it makes this life completely and thoroughly pointless.

Excuse me. I'm going to go curl up in a fetal position for a while.

Quite a bit of mental masturbation and self-inflicted mental anguish over something unknowable and for which not the slightest of evidence exists for. Rational and critical thought - as a scientist - should tell you to just cut this sh*t out. Besides, it's non-productive and self-absorbed.

 

[Toxick]

Quite a bit of mental masturbation and self-inflicted mental anguish over something unknowable and for which not the slightest of evidence exists for. Rational and critical thought - as a scientist - should tell you to just cut this sh*t out. Besides, it's non-productive and self-absorbed.

Wow - I never thought of that before. When you put it like that, it makes so much sense! I'm wasting my whole life!

 

[Zguy28]

Wow - I never thought of that before. When you put it like that, it makes so much sense! I'm wasting my whole life!

http://www.desiringgod.org/books/dont-waste-your-life

 

[ProximaCentauri]

As I said earlier, I have spent years coming to the conclusions I've come to. I have absolutely no inclination to discuss or debate them here.

I'm not trying to convert anyone, and I never pretended to.

And even if I did choose to discuss my conclusions and evidence I've collected, I sincerely doubt you would consider them with the depth I think they deserve - and even if you did, I don't believe you'd accept any of it, so I'm not going to waste my time. If you want to debate the existence of God and/or the afterlife, feel free to do so with someone else. That's not what I entered this conversation for, I'm not interested drifting in that direction now.

Frankly, I though that would be your reply. Just recognize - as a scientist, if you indeed are one - that 'faith' hijacks reason.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

You're not much into reading comprehension and retention.

I already made the distinction between an "absence of belief" and a "belief in absence".

As for your hypothetical alien society, I'd have to analyze way more than the information you've blithely provided.

Resorting to ad hominem arguments so soon? Sort of unexpected, and unbecoming of a 'scientist', wouldn't you say?

 

[Toxick]

Resorting to ad hominem arguments so soon? Sort of unexpected, and unbecoming of a 'scientist', wouldn't you say?

Ad hominem?




In what way have I attacked you personally?

In this conversation the only one who has been insulting is you.

 

[Larry Gude]

Well, like I said a few post back, the I'm sure the transformation that occurs during death will probably make the concept more palatable, but that's little comfort to me now, since I am incapable of imagining what that transformation entails.

Kewl. I get that. I've either moved past that or haven't come to that hurdle yet!!!

 

[hotcoffee]

Look at the interest this thread has garnered.

I wonder sometimes.... if there had be internet back in the days of Sodom... would the comments to the tread have been the same?

 

[Larry Gude]

Look at the interest this thread has garnered.

I wonder sometimes.... if there had be internet back in the days of Sodom... would the comments to the tread have been the same?

That's a GREAT question!

At core, the internet is a way to easily share thoughts and ideas. If you go back that far in history, for sure, the sharing of thoughts and ideas was not only very hard to do but, very risky. People then, I suspect, act the way people do today when they think the authorities are listening or are in public or in church; they say what they think they need to say. So, if we had the web and it was private, relatively so, I would suspect people would question authority and orthodoxy in the same fashion.

It is inconceivable to me that any religion could have gotten off the ground with free flow and exchange of thoughts and ideas.

Great question!

 

[Amused_despair]

Look at the interest this thread has garnered.

I wonder sometimes.... if there had be internet back in the days of Sodom... would the comments to the tread have been the same?

Sodom brings up an interesting thought. Sodom, Gomorrah, the Great Flood: I wonder how many pregnant mothers were there. How many children under the age of 13? How many little babies, now many unborn babies, how many toddlers? How many innocent lives snuffed out through no choice of their own?

 

[Zguy28]

Sodom brings up an interesting thought. Sodom, Gomorrah, the Great Flood: I wonder how many pregnant mothers were there. How many children under the age of 13? How many little babies, now many unborn babies, how many toddlers? How many innocent lives snuffed out through no choice of their own?

God alone is the only one who has the right to create life and to take life as He pleases. Please consider that before sitting in judgment on Him and weigh it carefully my friend, because someday He will sit in judgement on all of us.