God and heaven and hell in the After Life: if it turns to be true of false?

[viole]

So if religion says don't commit adultery then it's the Satan and his demons asking us not to commit adultery.

Who knows?

Can you tell?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Thief]

"I have the stars overhead....the earth beneath my feet.....
and I am not my own handiwork."
That is OK. Everyone is like that. Perhaps you might mention the reason which makes you believe in God. I can't think of any.

At some 'point' there is a beginning.

I say Spirit, first.
Substance as creation.

Someone had to be First.
Substance does not beget the living God.

 

[Shad]

Such an arbitrary God that treats a single belief as a judgement parameter is appalling. Option 1 invests time into the concept of such an arbitrary God which I already find objectionable thus is wasted in my opinion. Option two saves wasted time devoted to such a God but does not resolve the arbitrary judgement. There is also an issue with the implication that some of most horrible people on the planet that commit crimes against humanity are in Heaven. There will be good people in Hell for an arbitrary reason and evil people in Heaven for the same arbitrary reason. Member of IS will be in heaven. The question itself is a form of a trap argument thus is only an option of two evils as a primitive form of Pascal's Wager which has a number of refutation already. Given the hidden premises in such a black and white set of question I can reject the question on the basis of these hidden premises soundness and validity. It is also an appeal to the consequences and appeal to emotions, fallacies thus is illogical and incoherent.

Simple put the options are invalid and unsound thus no answer is required as the question is flawed. It is no better than "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" Both views on based on unsound premises as forgone conclusion which have no evidence in support, thus are unsound just as my comparison shows. It is make a conclusion that you beat your wife as a foregone conclusion regardless of if in fact you beat your wife or not.

I think my vote was removed when I clicked the change vote button. I hope this in fact removed my vote from the results. I have not made a new vote nor will I for the reasons above.

 

[Smart_Guy]

What is "Afterlife?" If you are experiencing anything after the death process then you are still living. So, No "Afterlife" can exist.

A life after this one that comes with the resurrection of the dead. This means we will be alive then.

 

[Awoon]

A life after this one that comes with the resurrection of the dead. This means we will be alive then.

Death is a transition not a stop then start. The writer of the Jesus story has Jesus alive throughout his transition. So if yer gonna use the later thought in the Bible about a resurrection of the dead it must also apply to Jesus as part of a future resurrection. AKA He is still Dead.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Death is a transition not a stop then start. The writer of the Jesus story has Jesus alive throughout his transition. So if yer gonna use the later thought in the Bible about a resurrection of the dead it must also apply to Jesus as part of a future resurrection. AKA He is still Dead.

That's what you believe in and it means you don't believe in a resurrection and a life after it; AKA afterlife. Case closed

 

[Unification]

How could I truly be eternally happy in an afterlife if, say, my children were not there with me?

You could be.

Why do we often put the survival and well being of our descendants ahead of our own?

It is because subconsciously we know that we will be our own descendents. If you have children, you will most likely come back as your own grand children or great grand children. You may even inherit some of your own money.

 

[Aupmanyav]

At some 'point' there is a beginning.

I say Spirit, first. Substance as creation.

Someone had to be First. Substance does not beget the living God.

The beginning or a cycle? Why do you say spirit? Why without any reason? Some ones came much later, the Eukaryotes. Substance does not need a God.

 

[Awoon]

That's what you believe in and it means you don't believe in a resurrection and a life after it; AKA afterlife. Case closed

Nope, that's how it is written in the Bible. An apple is just as much in the apple seed as the apple seed is in the apple. No afterlife, just transition.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Nope, that's how it is written in the Bible. An apple is just as much in the apple seed as the apple seed is in the apple. No afterlife, just transition.

I see. Thank you for clarifying.

 

[Unification]

The beginning or a cycle? Why do you say spirit? Why without any reason? Some ones came much later, the Eukaryotes. Substance does not need a God.

Spirit is not limited in any way. It is not created nor can it be destroyed. It is certainly not an entity, person, or individual. These things by their very definitions are limitations. If God were an individual then God would have to have a cause. And that defeats the traditional idea of God, doesn’t it?

Explaining God as an individual or a someone is an old religious concept. Most people think of God as a cosmic individual because most of everyone else seems to say so. But these same people have not thought about it deeply enough. Common sense should tell us that to relay information about something beyond both time and space (God) to something both limited by time and space (us) is impossible. The only way to truly even attempt it is to use concrete examples and literal stories. Our brains operate in physical reality, so we must have concrete examples to grasp. But in all honesty the most accurate description given of God is in the Bible…I AM THAT I AM.”

Spirit is the first cause of all that is. It gives rise to all experiences. It is primordial consciousness itself. By this consciousness, not as awareness where an entity has the realization of itself in relation to situations and others. Speaking of a oneness where nothing is lacking and infinite potential is constant. This oneness is truly whole. This oneness is also truly nothing (no-“thing”), and yet it is everything at the same time.

 

[Unification]

So if religion says don't commit adultery then it's the Satan and his demons asking us not to commit adultery.

Adultery in scripture is not what one thinks it means. It means to miss the truth, and teach lies about "God" which all religion does, because they play follower the leader into a ditch, and fail to see the truth, the truth of life, the truth of themselves and everyone and anything else. It's an affair with lies. Truth and life is your husband or wife. Cheating on truth and life with lies and myths is adultery.

 

[Nakosis]

I'm ok with either one.
I believe what I believe because it makes the most sense to me. If I face a God, I face this God as who I am, not pretending belief in this which did not make sense.

I assume this God would know me anyway so no point in faking belief. If who I am doesn't deserve to go to heaven according to this God, no point in my being there.

I don't think any God should be expecting me to be believing in something that is not believable to me. It's not like I have a bias. I'm just trying to work out what is apparently true the best I know how.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So we humans don't self govern, very well.

If we do not have our human bodies, then how could we be human?

I don't assume heaven is less.
I suspect greater disciplines are waiting.

But, you are making assumptions, based on how most people are. If there is an after life, one thing I am willing to assume is that there will not be a single human in it, as humans are material beings.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The only way to truly even attempt it is to use concrete examples and literal stories. Our brains operate in physical reality, so we must have concrete examples to grasp. But in all honesty the most accurate description given of God is in the Bible…I AM THAT I AM.”

Spirit is the first cause of all that is. It gives rise to all experiences. It is primordial consciousness itself.

I AM THAT I AM is a hell of a CONCRETE example, I see that everyone is impressed by it.

All sensory inputs are conveyed to the brain before they become experiences through substances. Even the inputs, are forms of 'physical energy', light heat, sound or substance.

 

[Thief]

If we do not have our human bodies, then how could we be human?

But, you are making assumptions, based on how most people are. If there is an after life, one thing I am willing to assume is that there will not be a single human in it, as humans are material beings.

There is no glory in being human.
God is spirit...so too heaven.

My beliefs are called assumption for lack of proof.
My beliefs are not without reason.

 

[Thief]

The beginning or a cycle? Why do you say spirit? Why without any reason? Some ones came much later, the Eukaryotes. Substance does not need a God.

Your last sentence can lead to more.
God created substance.
I say He did so for need.

Kinda hard to say....I AM!....with nothing to show for it.

 

[Thief]

A life after this one that comes with the resurrection of the dead. This means we will be alive then.

In spirit?....or in flesh?


I think to rise from the grave.... is done in spirit.

 

[Unification]

I AM THAT I AM is a hell of a CONCRETE example, I see that everyone is impressed by it.

All sensory inputs are conveyed to the brain before they become experiences through substances. Even the inputs, are forms of 'physical energy', light heat, sound or substance.

Such is true, friend. Then the problem arises in which those are all "physical" and of "substance" and something cannot arise from nothing. First law of thermodynamics. The brain would be incapable of creating delusions then, unless those delusions exist in the physical universe somewhere. The "physical energy," light heat, sound or substance are all something in the material world. The thought for instance, would have to arise from only substance, from "physical energy" in the brain and the brain would only be able to duplicate and think of what already exists in the universe somewhere. Santa Claus, every other delusion of mind, and anything of this physical energy of thought that arises in the brain must exist in the universe somewhere. Our physical bodies, including brains... Are governed by the same physical laws of science.

 

[Thief]

Such is true, friend. Then the problem arises in which those are all "physical" and of "substance" and something cannot arise from nothing. First law of thermodynamics. The brain would be incapable of creating delusions then, unless those delusions exist in the physical universe somewhere. The "physical energy," light heat, sound or substance are all something in the material world. The thought for instance, would have to arise from only substance, from "physical energy" in the brain and the brain would only be able to duplicate and think of what already exists in the universe somewhere. Santa Claus, every other delusion of mind, and anything of this physical energy of thought that arises in the brain must exist in the universe somewhere. Our physical bodies, including brains... Are governed by the same physical laws of science.

and spirit must operate within the rules of chemistry?

then God has a body....somewhere....
He is then subject to a law of existence.

I don't think so, as it is said of Him.....was, is and shall always be.