11 Jul 19
@mister-moggy saidAnd yet it is an integral part of almost all the religions subscribed to by the vast, vast majority of theists in the world. So, just to be clear, is your answer to the OP question 'no'?
@FMF
religion does not require a promise of everlasting life.
a religion could promise a half-dozen reincarnations or a limited time in heaven before your entity was dissolved.
the promise of eternity is not a necessary predicate for a religion.
11 Jul 19
@philokalia saidDo you not want to answer the OP question?
I think you could find people who would say that it would make it more believable.
11 Jul 19
@philokalia saidYou didn't answer the question. You don't have to if you don't want to.
How was my answer unclear, friendo?
11 Jul 19
@fmf saidRegardless of the reward, personally I would still subscribe to the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles. These principles are good for daily living. The promise of eternal life for followers and keepers of the commandments is just the icing on the cake.
To the theists here: if the religious doctrines you subscribe to did not promise everlasting life, would you find it to be an unbelievable religion?
11 Jul 19
@mister-moggy saidMy position is that of an agnostic atheist. The OP question isn't intended for me or for people who take my position [i.e. lack of belief in the notion of everlasting life]. The OP question is for theists.
@
your position would have set well with thomas jefferson. his bible
ripped out all of the miracles in the bible and left everything else.
11 Jul 19
@fmf saidYes.
To the theists here: if the religious doctrines you subscribe to did not promise everlasting life, would you find it to be an unbelievable religion?
I think a place called "Heaven" is a requirement. A place where there's no pain, suffering or confusion. A place where everything will make sense.
If you remove that, you've taken away the entire reason for the crucifixion.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 30628
11 Jul 19
@chaney3 saidReligion is humanities desperate attempt to overcome mortality.
Yes.
I think a place called "Heaven" is a requirement. A place where there's no pain, suffering or confusion. A place where everything will make sense.
If you remove that, you've taken away the entire reason for the crucifixion.
11 Jul 19
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI disagree.
Religion is humanities desperate attempt to overcome mortality.
For those who've determined that the universe, along with human life, is NOT a cosmic accident, then you're left with a "creator".
Religion tries to figure out exactly who that creator is.
@chaney3 saidI don't see why theists have to make the leap between 'there is a creator' to 'we can live forever'. I can see that it's an aspiration, and it provides some solace or even a target. But I see no compelling reason why 'there is a creator' should automatically lead to 'we can live forever'. And yet that's what billions of theists do thanks to their religious traditions and scriptures. Why not 'there is a creator' leads to just 'thanks for creating me; life is very interesting; thanks again'?
I disagree.
For those who've determined that the universe, along with human life, is NOT a cosmic accident, then you're left with a "creator".
Religion tries to figure out exactly who that creator is.
11 Jul 19
@fmf saidYou're correct.
I don't see why theists have to make the leap between 'there is a creator' to 'we can live forever'. I can see that it's an aspiration, and it provides some solace or even a target. But I see no compelling reason why 'there is a creator' should automatically lead to 'we can live forever'. And yet that's what billions of theists do thanks to their religious traditions and scriptur ...[text shortened]... 'there is a creator' leads to just 'thanks for creating me; life is very interesting; thanks again'?
If one realizes that a "creator" exists, then the bible and what we've learned at church since childhood is all we really have in trying to figure out what "he" wants, and what comes next.