Which "afterlife" stories makes the most sense?

[We Never Know]

I'm curious:

Which one(s) do you think makes most sense?
They don't have to be 100% true to ponder the question
Included interesting reads on your own time

Afterlife (Afterlife (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Reincarnation (Study of Reincarnation Archives | Division of Perceptual Studies)
Near death experiences (Near-Death Experiences - Academic Publications | Division of Perceptual Studies)
Spirit and humans in the "same dimension" (Spiritualist belief) I couldn't find anything on this but the gist is the our spirits (some sources call them energies) who exist after death and interact with our living loved ones.

These are missing a couple other views, but the concept is the same in separation between body and soul (or so have you).

Enjoy

None of them. Dead people don't talk.
No one has talked to anyone that has experienced heaven or hell. Its all speculation based on what one believes.

 

[blü 2]

The soul is immaterial, but that does not mean it is imaginary, unless you are a materialist who believes that everything that exists is material.

What else can it be, specifically?

The soul needs a physical body by which to express itself. While we are alive in the physical world, the soul works through the body and brain.

I don't understand the answer. Why does the soul want to express itself physically at all?

Exactly how the soul operates is a mystery so we don't have answers to these questions.

You'll have noticed how "I don't know" can sort of deflate an argument.

The soul perceives its surroundings and expresses itself through a spiritual body after our physical body dies.

That still begs the question why it bothered to become physical in the first place.

I believe that the soul is responsible for consciousness, but there is no evidence that would be satisfactory to you.

Noted.

The soul continues to function during unconsciousness and after the brain dies.

But how do these things shut the soul out?

The soul does not rely upon the brain for consciousness, the brain relies upon the soul, so the soul is nit an intruder.

So it's the soul that gets drunk, knocked unconscious, demented, is affected by encephalitis, then?

The soul comes into being at the moment of conception and it animates the body and gives it life. The soul determines human behavior by working through the brain and mind while we are alive in a physical body.

And yet that's all much more simply explained by the materialist view ─ with much less of a gap between the claim and the evidence.

Those traits are inherited at conception or acquired during life, and the soul animating the brain and allowing it to function that makes that possible. It is the soul that has a personality, the brain is just gray matter with no identity.

Yet I doubt you dispute that the body / brain form a biological entity whose traits are derived genetically. How can the operation of genes affect an immaterial soul?

These are physical things so the brain is responsible for them, but the soul is not fooled.

I would have thought the evidence was very clear that the consciousness is what is deceived by the illusion.

 

[Skywalker]

Once again, a statement that you simply cannot justify. The fact that your imagination is limited, and perhaps your education, too, does not in any way constrain what nature can in fact do.

Nothing in nature has a bad design. Everything has a design and a purpose. Does “Bad Design” In Nature Prove It Wasn’t Designed? | Reasons for Jesus

By James Bishop| Critics of theism arguing from what one might call the “problem of bad design” contend that features in both the universe and human body are badly or incompetently designed and therefore suggest the unlikeness of there being an all-powerful God or Designer who created these features. Critics will point to the processes of evolution and the evolution of organs such as the brain. Atheist writer John Loftus argues as follows,

“We see this best in the human brain. David J. Linden, professor of neuroscience at John Hopkins School of Medicine, tells us that the human brain “is, in many respects, a true design nightmare… built like an ice cream cone with new scoops piled on at each stage of our lineage.” The human brain “is essentially a Rube Goldberg contraption.” Gary Marcus, professor of psychology at New York University, describes our brain as kluge. A kluge “is a clumsy or inelegant—yet surprisingly effective—solution to a problem.” Just picture a house constructed in several stages by different contractors at each age and you can get the picture. Without starting all over with a completely new floor plan, we get kluge” (1).

Loftus maintains that this is how evolution works, which has resulted in humans having “three brains built on top of one another”: the reptilian (hind) brain, the limbic system (midbrain), and the neocortex (forebrain). These three brains affect how humans think and are why our memories are adversely affected, as are our beliefs, choices, language, and pleasure. Loftus believes that if humanity was the product of some intelligent designer, our thoughts would be rational, our logic impeccable, our memory robust, and our recollections reliable.

Yet in light of how the human brain evolved, this is not what one finds. Loftus points to other evidence of bad design, such as the esophagus for swallowing, the relatively short rib cage that does not protect most internal organs, our eyes being wired backward, and the male prostate gland that at some point, in every one of two males, blocks the flow of urine. There are also vestigial organs that are the debris of evolution and that perform no useful function for which they evolved; for example, there are the appendix, coccyx, tiny muscles attached to hair follicles causing our hairs to stand

 

[Quagmire]

Living the life I have now over and over again.

This version of the afterlife has always appealed to me.

It's like you get to be you over and over again until you get it right.

I think this theme shows up almost subliminally in various art forms (or maybe it's just me interpreting it that way):

Movies:
The very end of the movie Armageddon for instance.

Music:

"You can check out anytime you like but you can never leave"
---- The Eagles

"We have all been here before we have all been here before. . ."
--- Crosby, Stills and Nash

In my version of this afterlife we get to keep some residual memory of our previous attempts, although it usually manifests itself as intuition or as just a feeling, like deja vu, or that feeling you sometimes get that you know someone on meeting them for the first time.

 

[King Phenomenon]

This version of the afterlife has always appealed to me.

It's like you get to be you over and over again until you get it right.

I think this theme shows up almost subliminally in various art forms (or maybe it's just me interpreting it that way):

Movies:
The very end of the movie Armageddon for instance.

Music:

"You can check out anytime you like but you can never leave"
---- The Eagles

"We have all been here before we have all been here before. . ."
--- Crosby, Stills and Nash

In my version of this afterlife we get to keep some residual memory of our previous attempts, although it usually manifests itself as intuition or as just a feeling, like deja vu, or that feeling you sometimes get that you know someone on meeting them for the first time.

My version I make same choices

 

[Quagmire]

My version I make same choices

Sounds kind of monotonous.

 

[King Phenomenon]

Sounds kind of monotonous.

New life how could it be

 

[Quagmire]

New life how could it be

I suppose if you completely lost all memory of your previous go-around that would be different.

I'm probably thinking of it in a more linear fashion than you are: for me there has to be some sort of goal --- some sort of progression or improvement --- in order for there to be a point to it all.

Which isn't to say that I'm right, or that my version is somehow better, just that this version appeals to me more.

 

[King Phenomenon]

I suppose if you completely lost all memory of your previous go-around that would be different.

I'm probably thinking of it in a more linear fashion than you are: for me there has to be some sort of goal --- some sort of progression or improvement --- in order for there to be a point to it all.

Which isn't to say that I'm right, for that my version is somehow better, just that this version appeals to me more.

I hear ya
Yeah no memory here
My life is a huge point and the only point I need

 

[firedragon]

The way I often feel about God I am not so confident but thanks anyway.

I know you struggle with theodicy. All of us do. Most of us pretend we dont. If God exists, you think he doesnt know that?

Your good heart will see you sailing through.

 

[Trailblazer]

So, show us the man who has successfully chosen his "higher" spiritual nature and his "lower" material nature. Just to begin with, for example, this "saint" would never have to eat, drink, pee or poop. Or all sorts of other things the rest of us enjoy.

Of course such a man would still have to eat, drink, pee or poop, because all of us have to do those things. It is the optional enjoyable activities that he would not have to do because he'd be too busy helping other people

Do you know one? Can you name one?

Jesus.

 

[Trailblazer]

I know you struggle with theodicy. All of us do. Most of us pretend we dont.

I am not sure all believers struggle with it, not unless they are compassionate like you and @ SeekingAllTruth
Oddly, some believers see no conflict at all between suffering and a benevolent God.

If God exists, you think he doesnt know that?

I know God knows, but I don't know what He thinks of it.

Your good heart will see you sailing through.

Thanks, I can only hope so, hope and pray.

 

[Skywalker]

I am not sure all believers struggle with it, not unless they are compassionate like you and @ SeekingAllTruth
Oddly, some believers see no conflict at all between suffering and a benevolent God.

I know God knows, but I don't know what He thinks of it.

Thanks, I can only hope so, hope and pray.

The Bible says that we live in a fallen creation, one that came about because of the disobedience of Adam. When he sinned against God, he ushered in sin, disease, suffering, and death.

 

[firedragon]

I am not sure all believers struggle with it, not unless they are compassionate like you and @ SeekingAllTruth
Oddly, some believers see no conflict at all between suffering and a benevolent God.

Trust me on this. Because I can't give you syndicated research data. But this was part of a thesis and the hypothesis was that humans see no conflict if they are "religious". I mean religious, not a person who "calls himself/herself religious". The research was a strata method and a snowball method and the data was analysed separately.

Trust me. Most people claim they dont have conflict in theodicy, but they do. The hypothesis was proven false.

Maybe you are honest.

 

[Trailblazer]

The Bible says that we live in a fallen creation, one that came about because of the disobedience of Adam. When he sinned against God, he ushered in sin, disease, suffering, and death.

I do not believe that the Bible says that but rather Christians have interpreted the Bible to mean that.
That one belief has caused so much pain to so many people. I consider it a travesty.

 

[Trailblazer]

Trust me on this. Because I can't give you syndicated research data. But this was part of a thesis and the hypothesis was that humans see no conflict if they are "religious". I mean religious, not a person who "calls himself/herself religious". The research was a strata method and a snowball method and the data was analysed separately.

Trust me. Most people claim they dont have conflict in theodicy, but they do. The hypothesis was proven false.

Maybe you are honest.

I trust you because obviously you know more than I do.

 

[firedragon]

I trust you because obviously you know more than I do.

Of course not. -_-

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm curious:

Which one(s) do you think makes most sense?

The one that says that there is no such thing.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Nothing in nature has a bad design. Everything has a design and a purpose. Does “Bad Design” In Nature Prove It Wasn’t Designed? | Reasons for Jesus

Your link (John Loftus) tries very hard to skirt the issue of evolution -- but things like our wisdom teeth and appendix are NOT evidence of "design for some side reason" but rather are very direct evidence of the workings of evolution.

 

[Colt]

I'm curious:

Which one(s) do you think makes most sense?
They don't have to be 100% true to ponder the question
Included interesting reads on your own time

Afterlife (Afterlife (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Reincarnation (Study of Reincarnation Archives | Division of Perceptual Studies)
Near death experiences (Near-Death Experiences - Academic Publications | Division of Perceptual Studies)
Spirit and humans in the "same dimension" (Spiritualist belief) I couldn't find anything on this but the gist is the our spirits (some sources call them energies) who exist after death and interact with our living loved ones.

These are missing a couple other views, but the concept is the same in separation between body and soul (or so have you).

Enjoy

In his Godless universe it's Life that's not logical.