Originally posted by JS357You sure?
I would never hijack a thread before it is moribund, and then only to perform a cup of grass.
But that should be "Does" any of you. "Any" is singular.
I can't stand it when people use improper grammar like "Do any of you."
What does any of the other hijackers here think about this?
1 edit
Originally posted by googlefudgeBut I trust that God knows how everything works, even if we don't.
Yes.
Unlike some supernatural/religious claims the existence of souls/afterlives is testable.
Which is something scientists and rationalists love and purveyors of woo hate.
IF an afterlife exists that some part of us goes to, and that part is the "REAL" you.
(Ie it IS your mind and memories and everything that makes you more than just a fu
Interesting bit starts at 2:50 in.
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/27780085
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWhen people talk about the afterlife, I think they mean an afterlife for the mind. I've talked with Christians, though, who say the soul has an afterlife but the mind doesn't. In that case, why should I care what happens to my soul, anymore than I should care what happens to my toenail clippings?
[b]Let's say there is no Christ...
If so, then in whom or what would you (and your family) place your confidence and trust?[/b]
We awake in the morning and see sunshine through the windows, smell the coffee brewing. I assume you believe that after we die we will 'wake up' in the afterlife and experience the joys of heaven or the horrors of hell.
In that case, to answer your op, I have no confidence that there is any sort of afterlife. I am not confident that there is no afterlife, either.
The Vikings believed that the only way to get to heaven was to die in battle. Any other death sends them to hell. The way they lived showed that belief! They so loved to fight and were so fearless and ferocious.
The Christians believe the only way to get to heaven is to believe that Christ is Savior. Good people with doubts go the hell; bad people with Jesus-belief go to heaven. The way they live shows that belief! They commit crimes as readily as anyone else, the prisons are full of Christians, some sects are known for their priests' love of homosexual pedophile behavior, and so on.
I mentioned Pascal's Wager in another thread and you basically dismissed it. Of all the many religions, which should I wager on? Your answer, I'm sure, is that I should wager on your religion because it is the only True path to heaven. You've made clear that you are completely confident in that Truth.
Bobby, I see only three possible reasons that explain such confidence.
1) Indoctrination. Ever noticed that a Christian person usually comes from a Christian family and is part of a Christian culture? A Muslim person comes from a Muslim family and is part of a Muslim culture? Same with every religion. They were indoctrinated.
The Christian God currently sends about 68% of all people to hell merely because they don't believe in Jesus!?!
(For RJHinds: is that the act of a good God?)
2) Insanity. I assume that's not the case with you.
3) Personal experience. I respect a confidence based on personal revelation, a divine experience of some sort. I doubt that such experience is correctly interpreted, but let's say it is - the believer with utmost confidence and zero doubt may be correct in his beliefs.
Well, God hasn't given me such experience, and I have searched.
I cannot have complete confidence in any belief which is based on indoctrination; I assume I am not insane; and threats of eternity in hell have no power over me because God hasn't talked to me!
2 edits
Originally posted by apathist"When people talk about the afterlife, I think they mean an afterlife for the mind. I've talked with Christians, though, who say the soul has an afterlife but the mind doesn't. In that case, why should I care what happens to my soul, anymore than I should care what happens to my toenail clippings?"
When people talk about the afterlife, I think they mean an afterlife for the mind. I've talked with Christians, though, who say the soul has an afterlife but the mind doesn't. In that case, why should I care what happens to my soul, anymore than I should care what happens to my toenail clippings?
We awake in the morning and see sunshine through the windo ]threats of eternity in hell[/i] have no power over me because God hasn't talked to me!
* Temporal body dies when the brain waves flatline, not at all unlike a power outage or computer crash. The tent is reduced to decomposing flesh and deteriorating bone, inert and lifeless. Immortal souls are imputed at the momement of birth to a viable fetus which moments later becomes physically alive but spiritually dead. A soul uniquely houses vocabulary storage; academic information; 'wisdom' or useful academic and technical information applied; norms and standards or conscience; incredibly vast banks of short and long term memory (far greater than any computer memory ever devised); and rational capacity for inductive and deductive thought as well as creative endeavors. Surely disingenuos for any person with an intelligence quotient above a genetic moron to think or say this entire package equates to "... my toenail clippings".
-
2 edits
[quote]When people talk about the afterlife, I think they mean an afterlife for the mind. I've talked with Christians, though, who say the soul has an afterlife but the mind doesn't. In that case, why should I care what happens to my soul, anymore than I should care what happens to my toenail clippings?
* Temporal body dies when the brain waves flatline, not at all unlike a power outage or computer crash. The tent is reduced to decomposing flesh and deteriorating bone, inert and lifeless. Immortal souls are imputed at the momement of birth to a viable fetus which moments later becomes physically alive but spiritually dead. A soul uniquely houses vocabulary storage; academic information; 'wisdom' or useful academic and technical information applied; norms and standards or conscience; incredibly vast banks of short and long term memory (far greater than any computer memory ever devised); and rational capacity for inductive and deductive thought as well as creative endeavors. Surely disingenuos for any person with an intelligence quotient above a genetic moron to think or say this entire package equates to "... my toenail clippings". [/quote]
So you agree with my first paragraph while calling some of your fellow Christians 'morons'. You clearly equate soul with mind, as I do. Now, about the rest of my post?
Originally posted by apathist"We awake in the morning and see sunshine through the windows, smell the coffee brewing. I assume you believe that after we die we will 'wake up' in the afterlife and experience the joys of heaven or the horrors of hell." > Close. Possible outcomes, yes. Interruption of soul life, no. You and I will be as aware of ourselves and our chosen eternal addresses one miniscule fraction of a nano following cessation of the brain waves within our physical bodies this moment as I'm typing... and some while later as you're reading this post.[quote]When people talk about the afterlife, I think they mean an afterlife for the mind. I've talked with Christians, though, who say the soul has an afterlife but the mind doesn't. In that case, why should I care what happens to my soul, anymore than I should care what happens to my toenail clippings?
* Temporal body dies when the brain wav ...[text shortened]... stians 'morons'. You clearly equate soul with mind, as I do. Now, about the rest of my post?
-
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYou have repeatedly stated that you are only hear for fun and casual conversation.
"We awake in the morning and see sunshine through the windows, smell the coffee brewing. I assume you believe that after we die we will 'wake up' in the afterlife and experience the joys of heaven or the horrors of hell." > Close. Possible outcomes, yes. Interruption of soul life, no. You and I will be as aware of ourselves and our chosen eternal addres ...[text shortened]... l bodies this moment as I'm typing... and some while later as you're reading this post.
-
Which is fine (I don't entirely believe you but I'll run with that).
However that doesn't in any way change the fact that in a conversation, casual or
otherwise, the objective is to communicate ideas between two people.
To that end, if you write something it should be intelligible TO THE OTHER PERSON.
Otherwise there is no point.
What you just wrote is total gibberish.
It's not prose, it's not using flowery language, it's just gibberish.
It's badly laid out and formatted, and doesn't actually convey any meaningful information.
I have no more idea what you are trying to convey after reading it than before.
There is no point in having a conversation of any kind, if one of the parties is not prepared
to present their ideas in some kind of coherent and understandable fashion.
Your continuing insistence of posting either mindless trivialities that could come (and probably do)
from a fortune cookie, or totally incomprehensible gibberish, is actually insulting.
As it implies that our posts to you (or that you respond to) are not worth your time to formulate and
format a decent thought out comprehensible reply to.
Particularly when others evidently do take the time and trouble to produce thought out and well
formatted replies to your posts.
I would appreciate it if you tried rewriting your post so that it is clear and actually makes sense.
Originally posted by googlefudgeGooglefudge, please note that this sidebar conversation is between apathist and gb. Thanks.
You have repeatedly stated that you are only hear for fun and casual conversation.
Which is fine (I don't entirely believe you but I'll run with that).
However that doesn't in any way change the fact that in a conversation, casual or
otherwise, the objective is to communicate ideas between two people.
To that end, if you write something it shou ...[text shortened]... appreciate it if you tried rewriting your post so that it is clear and actually makes sense.
-
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyDoesn't matter, don't care.
Googlefudge, please note that this sidebar conversation is between apathist and gb. Thanks.
-
Conversations on an open forum are open.
Like talking amongst a group of people.
If you make a point that someone wants to take up they are free to do so.
Turning round to them and saying "I wasn't talking to you" is rude.
If you want private one on one discussions then hold them in private.
There are no 'sidebars' here, just conversations/debates/arguments between multiple players.
1 edit
Originally posted by googlefudgePlease reach within for something you might contribute to the topic.
Doesn't matter, don't care.
Conversations on an open forum are open.
Like talking amongst a group of people.
If you make a point that someone wants to take up they are free to do so.
Turning round to them and saying "I wasn't talking to you" is rude.
If you want private one on one discussions then hold them in private.
There are no 'sidebars' here, just conversations/debates/arguments between multiple players.
Nitpicky, petulant yik yakitation becomes burdensome for other people...
even though it may in some manner or other make your own day.
-
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyThe burden on this forum is quite clearly you.
... becomes burdensome for other people...
...
-
As GF said its an open forum, open to all, and I am sure many read it without
commenting. You cannot monopolise it and say who and who not may contribute.
But if it came down to who contributes least then quite clearly you should shut up.
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59Thanks for weighing in with your long held opinion. Fact is the interruptive reply in question contributed nothing. Some posters are naturally assertive; others aren't. Personality and style are false strawmen issues. Irrational minded weakness based posts may please some of the perp's attack dogs, puppets or sheep. The dead weight burden created becomes an unnecessary nuisance for polite readers.
The burden on this forum is quite clearly you.
As GF said its an open forum, open to all, and I am sure many read it without
commenting. You cannot monopolise it and say who and who not may contribute.
But if it came down to who contributes least then quite clearly you should shut up.
-