• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Do you believe in an afterlife?"

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
(Revival of another thread not in debate Forum)
#24

Why not, please?
If one has a life today, is anybody in doubt of the tomorrow (after today), please? Right?
Have a hope, we pray one lives after-today and enjoys life! Right?
I give here other posts posted in the Interfaith Discussion/Religion Q&A.
#34
After life is optimistic and positive, why not to believe in it, please?
Right?
#52
Not believing in Afterlife is pessimistic and negative, why not leave it, please?
#76
Why not do the virtuous deeds that are good both for us and the humanity and add to the peace of the world in present (here) living and also in the immediate and distant (after life) future (here-after), please? Right?

Regards
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Right, all that is left is THE STUFF, Brahman. 'Me' lasts till life lasts, after that there is no me. Whether it makes sense or not, that is besides the point. It makes perfect sense to me. "Sarvam khalu idam Brahma" (All this here is Brahman - Mandukya Upanishad)
Giving "stuff" another name doesn't change what it is. I think of myself as being (physically) made up of the stuff of our universe, and (spiritually) as made up in such a fashion as to have achieved consciousness. At some point, the stuff of the universe that permits my conscious self to exist will break down, become, in many ways, incoherent, incapable of supporting that conscious self. And that conscious self will disappear. The stuff will remain, and whether I call it "stuff of the universe," Brahman, or Fred won't change any of that, in way whatsoever.

At least, that is how I see it.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
individual, ego, personality is the problem. otherwise being is permanent. now whether the being is aware of previous/future forms is the real question. there is no after, just as there is no before in being
Word Revealed by G-d Quran answers:

36:78اَوَلَمۡ یَرَ الۡاِنۡسَانُ اَنَّا خَلَقۡنٰہُ مِنۡ نُّطۡفَۃٍ فَاِذَا ہُوَ خَصِیۡمٌ مُّبِیۡنٌ ﴿۷۸﴾
English - Sher Ali
Does not man see that We have created him from a mere spermdrop? Yet lo! he is an open quarreller!
36:79وَضَرَبَ لَنَا مَثَلًا وَّنَسِیَ خَلۡقَہٗ ؕ قَالَ مَنۡ یُّحۡیِ الۡعِظَامَ وَہِیَ رَمِیۡمٌ ﴿۷۹﴾
And he coins similitudes for Us and forgets his own creation. He says, ‘Who can quicken the bones when they are decayed?’
36:80قُلۡ یُحۡیِیۡہَا الَّذِیۡۤ اَنۡشَاَہَاۤ اَوَّلَ مَرَّۃٍ ؕ وَہُوَ بِکُلِّ خَلۡقٍ عَلِیۡمُ ﴿ۙ۸۰﴾
Say, ‘He, Who created them the first time, will quicken them; and He knows every kind of creation full well,
36:81ۣالَّذِیۡ جَعَلَ لَکُمۡ مِّنَ الشَّجَرِ الۡاَخۡضَرِ نَارًا فَاِذَاۤ اَنۡتُمۡ مِّنۡہُ تُوۡقِدُوۡنَ ﴿۸۱﴾
‘He Who produces for you fire out of the green tree, and behold, you kindle from it.
36:83اِنَّمَاۤ اَمۡرُہٗۤ اِذَاۤ اَرَادَ شَیۡئًا اَنۡ یَّقُوۡلَ لَہٗ کُنۡ فَیَکُوۡنُ ﴿۸۳﴾
Verily His command, when He intends a thing, is only that He says to it, ‘Be!,’ and it is.
36:84فَسُبۡحٰنَ الَّذِیۡ بِیَدِہٖ مَلَکُوۡتُ کُلِّ شَیۡءٍ وَّاِلَیۡہِ تُرۡجَعُوۡنَ ﴿٪۸۴﴾
So Holy is He, in Whose hand is the kingdom of all things. And to Him will you all be brought back.
Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search
Right?

Regards
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
No, @paarsurrey . I neither believe, nor want, nor see any upside to the idea of afterlives.

At some deep level I find the popularity of that idea rather weird and more than a bit worrisome.

Perhaps in part because I have seen up close how unhealthy that belief can be, both for Abrahamists and (even more) for animists (Kardecist Spiritism is very popular here in Brazil). There are no boundaries to the levels of self-deception, emotional abuse, unhealthy attitudes and arrogance that are fed by beliefs in afterlives.

But even taking aside those practical reasons to object to the belief in afterlives, I also find it rather unconvincing. It is just too blatantly a form of unhealthy wishful thinking gone astray.

We know with plenty enough certainty what happens after death. It is not a difficult phenomenon to observe and understand, nor a rare one. We no more wonder what will happen after death than we wonder what will happen to wet clothing exposed to the wind and sun.

What does exist and ought to be deal with in a sober way are fears and feelings of loss triggered by the perception and remembrance of mortality. There is no good reason for us to nurture those fears and feelings, but many people do just that anyway.
I am a believer, so I have given my viewpoint. I have not problem if others have a different point of view. All friends belonging to " "Religion: None" , of any shade, please be happy.
Just tell me what methodology one adopted to come to this conclusion reflected in one's post. Scientific Method is useless in such matters, and in fact, Science has never taken up that " There is no afterlife" , and they will never take it up as it is beyond their scope, as I understand, please. Right?
I use the religious method of "claim and reason" from the Word Revealed by G-d (Quran). Right?

Regards
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
As I said in the other thread, I am an afterlife believer based on the Afterlife Evidence.

But I just don't understand the argument you presented.
(Revival of another thread not in debate Forum)

Why not, please?
If one has a life today, is anybody in doubt of the tomorrow (after today), please? Right?
Have a hope, we pray one lives after-today and enjoy life! Right?

.
Why does having a life today cause no doubt you will have a life tomorrow. I mean one can argue that as soon as the brain's biological functions stop there is nothing we could call 'life'.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Why? You could have a cancer today, and with a good surgeon, not have it tomorrow. You could have a car today, and if there was a clever car thief, not have it tomorrow. So why does having life today imply life tomorrow?

At least in one sense, you would have to admit to this, because if (and it is a huge IF) there were an "after-life," it could not be the same as the one you have now. For one thing, you won't be taking any of your body parts with you, and that could play havoc with your ability to truly enjoy your houris.

I don't have the concept that this body will be in the afterlife, with death a new spirit, bestowed to one according to ones good or bad deeds, will emerge from one's present soul, and the present soul will be its 'heavenly' body. Since this heavenly body will be the same as before so it will feel like we feel now, I understand, please.

Regards
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Evangelicalhumanist said:
For one thing, you won't be taking any of your body parts with you, and that could play havoc with your ability to truly enjoy your houris.
Ah, after-life concerns the soul and God. You get a 'divine', 'heavenly' body which is not affected by sorrows, illness or wants.
Yes, this is almost the concept I have.
But where did one get this concept from, I would like to know please. Right?

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Good point!
Most Atheists probably go to bed thinking they will get up the next day. They plan things ahead of time. Book vacations etc. but they are not planning to seek God's immediate kingdom after their "transition". They are not obtaining their passport and their identity. They probably don't believe there is such a thing called "souls". They usually don't have a response regarding the origin of consciousness.
By default, they are planning to fade away into nothingness! IMO
Our Atheism friends, different shades of them, they plan for the coming day, week, month and years, but they don't plan for the after that, isn't it weird and contradictory of them, please? Right?

Regards
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
(...............Why not, please?
If one has a life today, is anybody in doubt of the tomorrow (after today), please? Right?
Have a hope, we pray one lives after-today and enjoy life! Right? Regards............
I find No doubt about tomorrow in the Bible that ' there is going to be ' a resurrection....... - Acts of the Apostles 24:15
So, one will live after-today when 'Resurrection Day' comes (aka Jesus' coming 1,000-year Day governing over Earth ).
Whereas, the difference between 'after life' is 'after life' teaches a person is more alive after death than before death.
When the Bible teaches without a future resurrection the dead remain dead.
Would remain in an unconscious 'sleep-like' state according to Jesus and the OT.
( Psalms 6:5; Psalms 13:3; Psalms 115:17; Isaiah 38:18; Ecclesiastes 9:5; John 11:11-14,17 )
So, yes we have a hope that we are all invited to pray to God for Jesus to come ! - Rev. 22:20
Come so that the ones having a physical earthly resurrection will 'enjoy life forever' on Earth.
Or as Jesus promised that humble meek people will inherit -> the Earth - Matthew 5:5; Psalms 37:9-11
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Right, all that is left is THE STUFF, Brahman. 'Me' lasts till life lasts, after that there is no me. Whether it makes sense or not, that is besides the point. It makes perfect sense to me. "Sarvam khalu idam Brahma" (All this here is Brahman - Mandukya Upanishad)
It is for this that I say Western Atheism is different and Eastern Atheism is altogether different. Right?

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I find No doubt about tomorrow in the Bible that ' there is going to be ' a resurrection....... - Acts of the Apostles 24:15
So, one will live after-today when 'Resurrection Day' comes (aka Jesus' coming 1,000-year Day governing over Earth ).
Whereas, the difference between 'after life' is 'after life' teaches a person is more alive after death than before death.
When the Bible teaches without a future resurrection the dead remain dead.
Would remain in an unconscious 'sleep-like' state according to Jesus and the OT.
( Psalms 6:5; Psalms 13:3; Psalms 115:17; Isaiah 38:18; Ecclesiastes 9:5; John 11:11-14,17 )
So, yes we have a hope that we are all invited to pray to God for Jesus to come ! - Rev. 22:20
Come so that the ones having a physical earthly resurrection will 'enjoy life forever' on Earth.
Or as Jesus promised that humble meek people will inherit -> the Earth - Matthew 5:5; Psalms 37:9-11
" a person is more alive after death than before death."

I agree with one on what I have colored in magenta, please.

Regards
 
Last edited:

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
......After life is optimistic and positive, why not to believe in it, please? Right?
Not believing in Afterlife is pessimistic and negative, why not leave it, please?
Why not do the virtuous deeds that are good both for us and the humanity and add to the peace of the world in present (here) living and also in the immediate and distant (after life) future (here-after), please? Right? Regards
To me there is a difference between being optimistic and positive and being realistic.
What I mean by realistic is by the educated teaching of Jesus from the old Hebrew Scriptures.
Sure, the OT is optimistic and positive but in the future Resurrection Hope - Acts of the Apostles 24:15
'After Life' means being more alive in death than before death.
If Jesus believed in after-life he would Not have resurrected people back to life.
Jesus was giving us a sample preview, a coming attraction on a small-scale resurrection of what he will be doing on a GRAND international scale during his coming thousand-year reign over Earth when the dead will live again.
Live again with the prospect of being able to Enjoy Life Forever on a beautiful paradisical Earth as Eden was.
Beautiful as described in Isaiah 35th chapter for all to read.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
As I said in the other thread, I am an afterlife believer based on the Afterlife Evidence.

But I just don't understand the argument you presented.
Why does having a life today cause no doubt you will have a life tomorrow. I mean one can argue that as soon as the brain's biological functions stop there is nothing we could call 'life'.
Kindly read my post #26 in this connection, please.

Regards
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I am a believer, so I have given my viewpoint. I have not problem if others have a different point of view. All friends belonging to " "Religion: None" , of any shade, please be happy.
Just tell me what methodology one adopted to come to this conclusion reflected in one's post. Scientific Method is useless in such matters, and in fact, Science has never taken up that " There is no afterlife" , and they will never take it up as it is beyond their scope, as I understand, please. Right?

Roughly true.

However, science does not have a particularly firm grip on the concepts involved either. To this day it is not really very clear how we could tell life apart from non-life.

Frankly, I don't think that it is much of a religious matter either. All in all, I just don't find the matter worth of much attention, even for pure speculation.

Instead, I address the idea of afterlife from a mix of aesthetical and logical analysis, somewhat informed by a few core concepts from Buddhism such as interdependent origination and impermanence. You can probably question my understanding of what constitutes life, and that is fair enough.

In any case, I consider life to be in some ways like fire: a transitory situation that can't be expected to be everlasting. It links people and other sensitive beings and acquires certain meanings and purposes as a consequence. But it is not lasting and could not work very well if it were.

I use the religious method of "claim and reason" from the Word Revealed by G-d (Quran). Right?

If you say so.

Same.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
But where did one get this concept from, I would like to know please. Right?
You see, paarsurrey, I understand the theists' ways perfectly. I was a theist for half of my life. However, Hinduism does not have this concept. After our stay in heaven for the good deeds we may have done, and in hell for the evil deeds that we may have done, we are sent to the world again to improve our record and become wiser.
It is for this that I say Western Atheism is different and Eastern Atheism is altogether different. Right?
Like in Hinduism, atheists too have various views. I wrote from my view. But what is common is not accepting the existence of any God or Goddess.
 

Eli G

Well-Known Member
Believing in an afterlife is somewhat complicated.

According to the Bible the dead will live again, so even if they are now unconscious, they will have an afterlife, or afterdeath if you want to see it that way.

Something different is to believe that something of those who die remains conscious. Some believe that this is the case, because of some kind of communication they believe they have with spirits... But, are those spirits with whom they are communicating conscious remains of dead people? It well could be something very different, because if they don't see them, other types of beings different from humans could be pretending to be them... and who could unmask them?

Think about one thing: if something from our ancestors would still be alive, don't you think that human problems would have disappeared by now? Each dead person would have helped his family to have no more problems, all of them would have agreed to solve everything and make the lives of their living relatives something pleasant. And that hasn't happened, so...

The best thing would be to investigate what God himself says, and in reality, the Bible is the only book that is so special about its origin and content, and explicitly asserting that it is inspired by God to give us accurate knowledge about certain things so, why not look for it to learn what it says about the dead and who are those spirits with whom some say to have communication?
 

Clara Tea

Well-Known Member
(Revival of another thread not in debate Forum)
#24

Why not, please?
If one has a life today, is anybody in doubt of the tomorrow (after today), please? Right?
Have a hope, we pray one lives after-today and enjoy life! Right?

Regards
______________
Friend @stvdv has rated the above post as "winner", I am happy to note, thanks to him and love to him, please.

If heaven is the final destination, why be sad?
 

Clara Tea

Well-Known Member
Giving "stuff" another name doesn't change what it is. I think of myself as being (physically) made up of the stuff of our universe, and (spiritually) as made up in such a fashion as to have achieved consciousness. At some point, the stuff of the universe that permits my conscious self to exist will break down, become, in many ways, incoherent, incapable of supporting that conscious self. And that conscious self will disappear. The stuff will remain, and whether I call it "stuff of the universe," Brahman, or Fred won't change any of that, in way whatsoever.

At least, that is how I see it.

ESP grabs info out of the air. Some is knowledge of future events.

Is ESP real? Statistics professor (former head of her department at UC Irvine) Jessica Utts, thinks that she proved ESP. She had been hired to do early studies of it. ESP research, since it doesn't seem to have a scientific basis, is the pariah of science. Scientists shun it because they might get a bad reputation (like Spooky Mulder. . . X-Files).

If info can be stored in such a way that a psychic could use it, then spirits could be stored too (information not scrambled). For that matter, God's mind might be stored in the same medium. All this is highly speculative, yet, if provides an opportunity to believe in God and spirits and time travel of information (from the future to the present or from the past to the present).

There is much that science doesn't know. Why is the universe accelerating its expansion. We shouldn't turn every unknown into a proof of the existence of God. But we should be open to the idea that there is a lot that we have to learn.

Where did the big bang come from? If all matter started out in a tiny dot, why did it expand?

I almost believe that it is possible that the universe will keep accelerating until somehow it goes backwards in time and recombines to a dot. If so, the end of the universe would be the beginning of it. This is not a scientific view, but a wild speculation of what might be.
 
Top