The Purpose of Life

[syo]

Say one does so, then what? What if you had never been born to live your life to the fullest, what difference would it make to the world?

.

we are here in the world to give whatever we can. we make a difference in life and it must be a good difference. so we will live happier, and that's what counts. being happy is the key.

 

[Willamena]

There is no purpose to life
or

There is, and it's ________________________________________________ .

.​

There is, and it's what we make it.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

So, the purpose of life is so you never die? That's enlightening. You might wish to try to be all those things before you die. You'd be a lot happier, and probably live a lot longer too. (time to give up McDonald's and sitting on the couch all day, if we wish for these things. No need to wait till we're dead).

We don't need to wait til we are dead because as Jesus promised the humble meek people will inherit the Earth.
Humble people don't try to do all things, but try to do all ' righteous ' and ' upright ' things in God's eyes.
I agree that people who follow Jesus would give up fast food as usual sustenance and Not be a couch potato.
Since 'the dead do Not praise God.....' according to Psalms 115:17 then we need to do what we can now which
Includes following Jesus' instruction at Matthew 24:14 to tell others about the good news of God's kingdom government of Daniel 2:44 before the soon coming ' time of separation ' comes as mentioned at Matthew 25:31-33.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

no assumptions
Someone HAD to be first

Nope -- you are failing to understand how nature works.

Evolution says that wherever you decide to draw the line of "first person" (that is to say first human being), it would be completely arbitrary, for that first "human" would have had parents so much like him that he and they would not see that they were any different at all.

And if you are implying that there cannot be any "thing" without there being some "person" to create it, then you immediately deny that a "person" can be any kind of "thing."

 

[Thief]

Nope -- you are failing to understand how nature works.

Evolution says that wherever you decide to draw the line of "first person" (that is to say first human being), it would be completely arbitrary, for that first "human" would have had parents so much like him that he and they would not see that they were any different at all.

And if you are implying that there cannot be any "thing" without there being some "person" to create it, then you immediately deny that a "person" can be any kind of "thing."

and you can't follow a simple line of thought

Someone had to be First

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

and you can't follow a simple line of thought

Someone had to be First

Well forgive me for saying so, but I rather think that while you are busy with "simple lines of thought," you are unable to process subtlety of thought. You will always, of course, arrive at simplistic answers that have little bearing on reality, if that is the case. The truth is, almost nothing in the universe -- from one perspective or another -- is "simple."

 

[Windwalker]

Someone had to be First

Why? What if that first was a single celled creature that became two, that become another two, that over ages and ages became the species that became what became what became and what became into what we look on today as "us"? Where exactly is the "first human" in that?

That was his point, and I agree with it.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

and you can't follow a simple line of thought

Someone had to be First

Let me ask you a very simple question, which "following a simple line of thought," you ought to be able to answer: who was the first person to speak "Modern English?" And did anybody else understand him or her? And therefore, why would they bother speaking it?

 

[Thief]

Let me ask you a very simple question, which "following a simple line of thought," you ought to be able to answer: who was the first person to speak "Modern English?" And did anybody else understand him or her? And therefore, why would they bother speaking it?

answered with a question.....
Who was first to say?......I AM!

and they with understanding will know......Who was First

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

answered with a question.....
Who was first to say?......I AM!

and they with understanding will know......Who was First

Sorry, I'm doing rational inquiry, and you're doing dogma. You can't understand my inquiry because you have no access to the evidence that supports it, and I can't accept your dogma because nobody's ever produced any evidence to support it. Speaking only

The gulf is too wide to bridge.

And by the way, "I AM!" is a phrase in English. Nobody spoke that at the time in question. So, it is a translation. And how good is the translation? Well, according to Wikipedia, not so hot, really, since there are many possible ways to render it. I Am that I Am - Wikipedia

And for the record, even that -- in whatever language it was written in, is not something that you can attest "Who was the first to say..." The only thing you can know for certain is that it was written in a human language in a book written by humans making claims to what they could not know -- and so of course asserted was necessarily "absolute truth." From my point of view, and certainly not yours, this is a patently silly claim.

 

[Thief]

Sorry, I'm doing rational inquiry, and you're doing dogma. You can't understand my inquiry because you have no access to the evidence that supports it, and I can't accept your dogma because nobody's ever produced any evidence to support it. Speaking only

The gulf is too wide to bridge.

And by the way, "I AM!" is a phrase in English. Nobody spoke that at the time in question. So, it is a translation. And how good is the translation? Well, according to Wikipedia, not so hot, really, since there are many possible ways to render it. I Am that I Am - Wikipedia

And for the record, even that -- in whatever language it was written in, is not something that you can attest "Who was the first to say..." The only thing you can know for certain is that it was written in a human language in a book written by humans making claims to what they could not know -- and so of course asserted was necessarily "absolute truth." From my point of view, and certainly not yours, this is a patently silly claim.

and they with understanding would know

Someone had to be .....First

 

[BilliardsBall]

I find Jesus taught ' resurrection ' whereas the afterlife teaching indicates a person is more alive after death then before death. Jesus taught the dead are in a sleep-like state until resurrected at John 11:11-14.
What Jesus taught I find in harmony with Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5 that the dead know nothing.
If the ' afterlife ' teaching was scriptural there would be No need for a coming future resurrection as mentioned at Acts of the Apostles 24:15 that there "IS GOING TO BE ' a resurrection......
That ' going to be ' resurrection will begin with Jesus' coming 1,000-year reign over Earth.

You may have misunderstood me, I was speaking of Heaven and Hell, not Heaven or annihilation--which annihilation undercuts the "wicked dead are more alive after death" since they would be dead again and less than dead or existing!

 

[URAVIP2ME]

You may have misunderstood me, I was speaking of Heaven and Hell, not Heaven or annihilation--which annihilation undercuts the "wicked dead are more alive after death" since they would be dead again and less than dead or existing!

I find since Jesus promised that it's humble meek people will inherit the Earth as found at Psalms 37:9-11, then to me the focus is more about Earth than Heaven, although Scripture does teach about some resurrected to heaven with Christ. They are the ones having a first or earlier resurrection as mentioned at Revelation 20:6; 5:9-10.
I find the Bible's hell is the hell place Jesus went the day he died according to Acts of the Apostles 2:27.
Since Jesus and the old Hebrew Scriptures teach ' sleep ' in death ( as per John 11:11-14; Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5 ) then while dead Jesus was in biblical hell ( a grave for the sleeping dead ) then Jesus was in a sleep-like state until his God resurrected Jesus out of temporary hell, back to living his former spirit life, but the majority of mankind ( John 3:13) can have a healthy physical resurrection back to life on Earth when Christ's millennial reign over Earth begins.

With the wicked destroyed (Psalms 92:7; Proverbs 2:21-22) I find it interesting that according to Revelation 20:13-14 that 'everyone' in the Bible's hell will be ' delivered up ' (resurrected) out of biblical hell before the Bible's temporary hell is then cast vacant into that symbolic ' second death ' for emptied-out biblical hell. Hurray! 'Enemy death will be No more' on Earth as per 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

answered with a question.....
Who was first to say?......I AM!
and they with understanding will know......Who was First

I can't find any verse using all upper-case letters for I am.
The Hebrew/English Interlinear reads at Exodus 3:14-15 says that "I Shall Be As I Shall Be" .
The Tetragrammaton (YHWH) for " I Shall Be As I shall Be " is found at Exodus 6:3 (old KJV)

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

and they with understanding would know

Someone had to be .....First

You know, I learned in early childhood that repeating the same thing over and over again until everybody got sick of it and gave in still didn't make it correct.

But then again, for a lot of the little kids I knew who did that, well, really it was all they had.

 

[Thief]

You know, I learned in early childhood that repeating the same thing over and over again until everybody got sick of it and gave in still didn't make it correct.

But then again, for a lot of the little kids I knew who did that, well, really it was all they had.

and I learned ...when people repeat what they say....
you're not getting the point

Someone had to be First

 

[SalixIncendium]

and I learned ...when people repeat what they say....
you're not getting the point

Someone had to be First

And that tactic works until you enter elementary school.

 

[Thief]

I can't find any verse using all upper-case letters for I am.
The Hebrew/English Interlinear reads at Exodus 3:14-15 says that "I Shall Be As I Shall Be" .
The Tetragrammaton (YHWH) for " I Shall Be As I shall Be " is found at Exodus 6:3 (old KJV)

different text for different believers

I have kj 1960

it's there......speaking to Moses
Thus thou shalt say unto the children of Israel ...I AM hath sent me unto you


just like that

 

[Thief]

And that tactic works until you enter elementary school.

and it would work if I were you

 

[URAVIP2ME]

different text for different believers
I have kj 1960
it's there......speaking to Moses
Thus thou shalt say unto the children of Israel ...I AM hath sent me unto you
just like that

And just like that the Bible was Not written in KJ English but Exodus was written in Hebrew.
I can't find in the Hebrew Interlinear I AM in all upper-case letters.
Also ' I am ' I find is Not the Tetragrammaton letters.