Afterlife places

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

I find it absurd that when people die, they have to go to some specific afterlife place based on their performance on this world. Why can't they go wherever they want to go?? What's the worst can they do, kill more dead people? It just doesn't make sense.

No, there are different places, and often you do get to pick. There is the ground, an urn, or even scattered about some specific place into the wind or the sea.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

No actually, what I mean is the logic of material reductionism does not hold up at all.

Fine by me... I didn't come up with "reductionism" - I couldn't care much less how much it fails or succeeds in any way, shape or form.

I was simply stating that when you damage the brain, you damage what we think of as the pith of the person - the "mind", as it was called earlier. And yes, I agree that if you damage the "mind" you can also "damage" the physical brain - for instance dwelling for too long on a given arena of thought, such as a person who is locked away and not exposed to the outside world for years at a time. The pathways the brain updates and connections it makes can suffer greatly during real-world trauma, sure. But, again, I believe there is that physical explanation.

The funny part about statements like "There's more to it than that! I can just feel it!" is that this assumes some invisible veil of "magic" (after a fashion) that is going on and interacting with us while we haven't a clue. The problem with that being - if magic exists in the first place and has all these grand abilities - then what is the use of the material/physical self in the first place? Why have it? Why not just float around, happy as a lark, just being fed by the invisible milk from the invisible teat of the universe?

 

[Ben Avraham]

that doesn't break the golden rule. double minded people break the golden rule. Hypocrite (Isa 32:6, the Revised Version (British and American) "profaneness"); chaneph, from which it is derived, means properly "to cover," "to hide," or "becloud," hence, to pollute, to be polluted or defiled, to make profane, to seduce; as a substantive it is translated "hypocrite" (Job 8:13; 13:16; 15:34; 17:8; 20:5; 27:8; 34:30; 36:13, in all which instances the Revised Version (British and American) has "godless man," "godless men," "godless"; Prov 11:9, the Revised Version (British and American) "the godless man"; Isa 9:17, the Revised Version (British and American) "profane"; Isa 33:14, the Revised Version (British and American) "the godless ones"); it is rendered "hypocritical," in Ps 35:16; Isa 10:6, the Revised Version (British and American) "profane."

Your explanation above only tells me that the sin of Jesus was twice as bad as the text is described in Mat. 23:13-33.
If you ask me, I don't believe Jesus would ever offend his colleagues that bad but, it is written in your own Bible.

 

[psychoslice]

When we die, that's it, we are dead, no more to be heard or seen, we are as an ex parrot, snuffed of life, its that easy.

 

[Ben Avraham]

When we die, that's it, we are dead, no more to be heard or seen, we are as an ex parrot, snuffed of life, its that easy.

Finally, something I can agree with from you.

 

[paarsurrey]

I find it absurd that when people die, they have to go to some specific afterlife place based on their performance on this world. Why can't they go wherever they want to go?? What's the worst can they do, kill more dead people? It just doesn't make sense.

Even in this world one cannot go everywhere. There are restrictions, economic and otherwise.
The premise needs to be corrected.
Right? Please
Regards

 

[Fool]

Your explanation above only tells me that the sin of Jesus was twice as bad as the text is described in Mat. 23:13-33.
If you ask me, I don't believe Jesus would ever offend his colleagues that bad but, it is written in your own Bible.

if a person is thieving, the person is called a thief.
if a person pretends to be pious and doesn't look after the disenfranchised, poor, and orphaned, they are called a hypocrite. if the shoe fits; as the idiom goes.


Hypocrites

There were four judges in Sodom (ib. 109b), named respectively Shaḳḳarai ("liar"), Shaḳrarai ("habitual liar"), Zayyafa ("deceiver"), and Maẓle Dina ("perverter of the Law"). In Sodom every one who gave bread and water to the poor was condemned to death by fire (Yalḳ., Gen. 83). Two girls, one poor and the other rich, went to a well; and the former gave the latter her jug of water, receiving in return a vessel containing bread. When this became known, both were burned alive (ib.). In the Midrash (ib. 84) the judges are called Ḳaẓ Sheḳer (= "greatest liar"), Rab Sheḳer (= "master of lies"), Rab Nabal (= "master of turpitude "), Rab Masṭeh Din (= "chief perverter of the Law"), and Ḳelapandar (probably = "forger"). Pentapolis existed only fifty-two years; and during the last twenty-two of them God brought earthquakes and other misfortunes upon it that it might repent. It refused to do so, however, and was destroyed (ib. 83).

 

[Ben Avraham]

if a person is thieving, the person is called a thief.
if a person pretends to be pious and doesn't look after the disenfranchised, poor, and orphaned, they are called a hypocrite. if the shoe fits; as the idiom goes.

Hypocrites

There were four judges in Sodom (ib. 109b), named respectively Shaḳḳarai ("liar"), Shaḳrarai ("habitual liar"), Zayyafa ("deceiver"), and Maẓle Dina ("perverter of the Law"). In Sodom every one who gave bread and water to the poor was condemned to death by fire (Yalḳ., Gen. 83). Two girls, one poor and the other rich, went to a well; and the former gave the latter her jug of water, receiving in return a vessel containing bread. When this became known, both were burned alive (ib.). In the Midrash (ib. 84) the judges are called Ḳaẓ Sheḳer (= "greatest liar"), Rab Sheḳer (= "master of lies"), Rab Nabal (= "master of turpitude "), Rab Masṭeh Din (= "chief perverter of the Law"), and Ḳelapandar (probably = "forger"). Pentapolis existed only fifty-two years; and during the last twenty-two of them God brought earthquakes and other misfortunes upon it that it might repent. It refused to do so, however, and was destroyed (ib. 83).

Very interesting Middrash! You are evolving. Time to change your username into "Wise."

 

[Fool]

Very interesting Middrash! You are evolving. Time to change your username into "Wise."

more like boringly obvious. doing something for quid pro quo is not like doing something solely out of compassion. one receives something for something, or material compensation, the other receives intangible happiness in helping to alleviate another's suffering.

20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. 22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. 23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them. 24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.


again its your mind that you sieve experiences through. you want find what you're looking for in the tanakh or the midrash. they are good for only wiping the mucus from you nose, or burning for warmth, or wiping the waste from your bottom.

the Truth is written on the heart.

Proverbs 4:23
Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.

Jeremiah 31:33
But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

 

[Ben Avraham]

more like boringly obvious. doing something for quid pro quo is not like doing something solely out of compassion. one receives something for something, or material compensation, the other receives intangible happiness in helping to alleviate another's suffering.

20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. 22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. 23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them. 24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day; again its your mind that you sieve experiences through. you want find what you're looking for in the tanakh or the midrash. they are good for only wiping the mucus from you nose, or burning for warmth, or wiping the waste from your bottom. the Truth is written on the heart.

Proverbs 4:23 Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.

Jeremiah 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

The Pharisees were Jesus' colleagues. They would not demand any thing from one another but discuss an issue especially from the Torah. Besides, they would never show hostility to one another by using disgusting terms as "wiping the mucus from your nose or wiping the waste from your bottom." Therefore that text of Luke 17:20-24 would not be part of the 20% about Jesus or from him but from the Hellenist who wrote that gospel from a borrowing of the Pauline grudge against the Pharisees and, of course, ornamented by your hostile addition into the text because I can't find those disgusting terms in there.

Regarding Jeremiah 31:33, that was a prophecy that got fulfilled soon after the Jews returned from Babylon with the Bible organized by Ezra, the most famous Scribe in the History of Israel. Since then, the Law has been in our hearts. We have only to observe it. (Deuteronomy 30:14)

 

[Fool]

The Pharisees were Jesus' colleagues. They would not demand any thing from one another but discuss an issue especially from the Torah. Besides, they would never show hostility to one another by using disgusting terms as "wiping the mucus from your nose or wiping the waste from your bottom."

one doesn't have to show direct hostility. depraved indifference appears to be a reoccurring issue.
Ezekiel 16:49

and prophets were not generally warm and fuzzy types. aka your most famous scribe being hostile to intermarriages.

Intermarriage and the Jews: What would the early Israelites say?

Therefore that text of Luke 17:20-24 would not be part of the 20% about Jesus or from him but from the Hellenist who wrote that gospel from a borrowing of the Pauline grudge against the Pharisees and, of course, ornamented by your hostile addition into the text because I can't find those disgusting terms in there.

most ideas can be found in some form in other religions. like judaism borrowed from zoroastrianism. it's bound to happen. unfortunately people get hung up on words at the expense of an idea; which having any truth has always existed. The Truth

Regarding Jeremiah 31:33, that was a prophecy that got fulfilled soon after the Jews returned from Babylon with the Bible organized by Ezra, the most famous Scribe in the History of Israel. Since then, the Law has been in our hearts. We have only to observe it. (Deuteronomy 30:14)

i could care less when the prophecy was fulfilled. actions have results. obviously it's sometimes jews behaving badly; when they aren't behaving lovingly to their neighbor. you reap what you sow, no matter what rags you wear, or emperor you believe you are.

for those who behave as such, the torah is a total waste of time. also, if the instructions are only being followed out of fear of negative repercussions, that isn't a positive influence. if they can't grasp anything of intrinsic worth from it. if it doesn't have a positive influence its basically a paper waste.. better to get some positive use from it; even if using it as a sanitary wipe.

FYI, i borrowed the idea from Lin-Chi, a famous ch'an practitioner.

Lin-chi- Great Teacher Series - Theosophy Trust

guard your thoughts because they come from the heart. the forms change but the actions don't. So acting in Love is not necessarily like acting on tradition. Some things go in and out of style but the Truth remains forever the same. Some folks act the part on stage and some folks live it in private.

 

[Milton Platt]

I find it absurd that when people die, they have to go to some specific afterlife place based on their performance on this world. Why can't they go wherever they want to go?? What's the worst can they do, kill more dead people? It just doesn't make sense.

You are trying to make myths seem logical. that just does not work. sorry. However, I must point out that part of your statement is not universally true. The Christian belief system holds that it is not what you do but what you believe that matters.