Afterlife?

Discuss literature (e.g. books, newspapers), educational studies (getting help or opinions on homework or an essay), and philosophy.

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Wed Apr 02, 2008 12:30 am

ZenZach wrote:Your interpretation on everything I said was the obvious.

Nobody can explain life before birth, because there IS no life to be considered for before a human is born.


It seems we're both stating the obvious.

Say I was born in 1993, does that mean I had to wait allllll those years before 93, my birth? No, it just simply happened I was born in that year, and things occurred before my birth.


You didn't have to wait, nor could you wait, as there was no entity such as you.

Also it was no cosmic mistake or happenstance you were born in 1993. An action occured and you were the eventual consequence.

But how was there little reason to believe my theory? Are you saying something I thought of is stupid? And what if I was right, because I'm not alone to think maybe so, but if I was right, there is full reason to believe.


There is little reason to believe it because there is no evidence to support it. I could create a multitude of scenarios on the possibilities of how and why we are here. But all of them are little more than fancy hypotheticals, most of which we have imposed our human rationalization upon. What we can be certain of is what we know.

Also, if you're arguement for believeing what you believe is simply 'what if im right?' then thats quite hardly supportable. Should I believe we were spawned from the depths of a angry bunny god's bowels and justify it to you by saying 'what if im right?'

The bit with Lu Bu and Cao Cao, again you interpreted it wrong. They did not choose to even be born (yes I know two had intercourse to bring them about) but my question is what were they born in their time? And why were we born in our time?


Did you actually read what I wrote? Word for word I explained they did not choose to be created much the same as anyone of us did not choose to be created either. That is, as we've noted, stating the obvious. You're trying to extrapolate a far-reaching reason (i assume dealing with fate or something) for why they were created at the time they were created. The truth is, you have no knowledge of why they were born into their times except for 1 thing: their parents had sex. There is no grand scheme you can get from those basic facts except for their parents concieved them. This applies to us as well.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4307
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Unread postby ZenZach » Wed Apr 02, 2008 1:46 am

Shikanosuke wrote:
ZenZach wrote:Your interpretation on everything I said was the obvious.

Nobody can explain life before birth, because there IS no life to be considered for before a human is born.


It seems we're both stating the obvious.

Say I was born in 1993, does that mean I had to wait allllll those years before 93, my birth? No, it just simply happened I was born in that year, and things occurred before my birth.


You didn't have to wait, nor could you wait, as there was no entity such as you.

Also it was no cosmic mistake or happenstance you were born in 1993. An action occured and you were the eventual consequence.

But how was there little reason to believe my theory? Are you saying something I thought of is stupid? And what if I was right, because I'm not alone to think maybe so, but if I was right, there is full reason to believe.


There is little reason to believe it because there is no evidence to support it. I could create a multitude of scenarios on the possibilities of how and why we are here. But all of them are little more than fancy hypotheticals, most of which we have imposed our human rationalization upon. What we can be certain of is what we know.

Also, if you're arguement for believeing what you believe is simply 'what if im right?' then thats quite hardly supportable. Should I believe we were spawned from the depths of a angry bunny god's bowels and justify it to you by saying 'what if im right?'

The bit with Lu Bu and Cao Cao, again you interpreted it wrong. They did not choose to even be born (yes I know two had intercourse to bring them about) but my question is what were they born in their time? And why were we born in our time?


Did you actually read what I wrote? Word for word I explained they did not choose to be created much the same as anyone of us did not choose to be created either. That is, as we've noted, stating the obvious. You're trying to extrapolate a far-reaching reason (i assume dealing with fate or something) for why they were created at the time they were created. The truth is, you have no knowledge of why they were born into their times except for 1 thing: their parents had sex. There is no grand scheme you can get from those basic facts except for their parents concieved them. This applies to us as well.


Yeah I read what you wrote, it's respect for the debate why wouldn't I?

Well, there is no evidence to support there is in fact a god, so why would we believe? Ohhh because there are writings of him....Well, there are also writings and such that say things about Buddha and what he did, and also the coming back in different lives. But, there is evidence to support there is evolution. Scientists don't lie about things they study and prove, I believe in evolution.

Also, again on the Cao Cao and Lu Bu situation, I'm not trying to find a grand scheme, but simply resolve an idea. I'm saying that the mind cannot think of anything before birth. so in other words I'm trying to prove the idea of coming back in other lives is somewhat true. It is just a matter of being able to reach the state of mind to see in the past like Buddha did.
\"Do not turn your back on the various ways of this world.\"

-Miyamoto Musashi
User avatar
ZenZach
Academic
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:32 am
Location: In the void.

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:50 pm

ZenZach wrote:
Well, there is no evidence to support there is in fact a god, so why would we believe? Ohhh because there are writings of him....Well, there are also writings and such that say things about Buddha and what he did, and also the coming back in different lives. But, there is evidence to support there is evolution. Scientists don't lie about things they study and prove, I believe in evolution.


So basically we've thus both resolved there is no evidence to support either God or afterlife? ya?

Also, again on the Cao Cao and Lu Bu situation, I'm not trying to find a grand scheme, but simply resolve an idea.


Still seems like a fishing expedition to me. You're ignorning the obvious answers while in pursuit of grand "ideas/questions".

I'm saying that the mind cannot think of anything before birth.


the mind cannot think of anything before birth not for some cosmic or metaphysical reason, but because before birth its existence is rather unformed. Before conception, you as an entity do not exist...therefore you dont wait/choose to be born. my mind couldn't think of things before my birth because my brain did not exist (or was not formed completely).

so in other words I'm trying to prove the idea of coming back in other lives is somewhat true. It is just a matter of being able to reach the state of mind to see in the past like Buddha did.


i.e. you're trying to prove something you have and will obtain little evidence for. i think you're better off trying to offer up the crackpot theories (which actually directly contradict what you say). most people who believe in multiple lifetimes support the idea they do remember other lifetimes or life before "rebirth". either way, its really a nonsense idea. granted its not too much more nonsense than any other 'afterlife'.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4307
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Unread postby ZenZach » Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:18 pm

Shikanosuke wrote:
ZenZach wrote:
Well, there is no evidence to support there is in fact a god, so why would we believe? Ohhh because there are writings of him....Well, there are also writings and such that say things about Buddha and what he did, and also the coming back in different lives. But, there is evidence to support there is evolution. Scientists don't lie about things they study and prove, I believe in evolution.


So basically we've thus both resolved there is no evidence to support either God or afterlife? ya?

Also, again on the Cao Cao and Lu Bu situation, I'm not trying to find a grand scheme, but simply resolve an idea.


Still seems like a fishing expedition to me. You're ignorning the obvious answers while in pursuit of grand "ideas/questions".

I'm saying that the mind cannot think of anything before birth.


the mind cannot think of anything before birth not for some cosmic or metaphysical reason, but because before birth its existence is rather unformed. Before conception, you as an entity do not exist...therefore you dont wait/choose to be born. my mind couldn't think of things before my birth because my brain did not exist (or was not formed completely).

so in other words I'm trying to prove the idea of coming back in other lives is somewhat true. It is just a matter of being able to reach the state of mind to see in the past like Buddha did.


i.e. you're trying to prove something you have and will obtain little evidence for. i think you're better off trying to offer up the crackpot theories (which actually directly contradict what you say). most people who believe in multiple lifetimes support the idea they do remember other lifetimes or life before "rebirth". either way, its really a nonsense idea. granted its not too much more nonsense than any other 'afterlife'.


You seem to thrive on the idea that "evidence" is everything. It's not, but has meaning. And you say the idea of coming back to life is nonsense? Well then the Christian way in your sense in nonsense as well. When you die according to Christian, you are guided to heaven or banished to hell, therefore reviving you as either a reward or punishment.

I'm sure several religions have the idea of another life after death. Christianity and Buddhism, two of the most practice religions out there (Not saying they are the most practiced) believe in the idea.

I still don't like the way you interpret most of the things I say, but I should accept and move on.
\"Do not turn your back on the various ways of this world.\"

-Miyamoto Musashi
User avatar
ZenZach
Academic
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:32 am
Location: In the void.

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:33 pm

ZenZach wrote:You seem to thrive on the idea that "evidence" is everything. It's not, but has meaning.



Yea, evidence is usually how most people thrive. In fact, the reason we create elaborate fantasies of what happens in the afterlife is because we lack evidence about the actuality of it and thus seek an answer. However, none of these answers really amount to much. Evidence is the only way to intelligently assume something.


And you say the idea of coming back to life is nonsense? Well then the Christian way in your sense in nonsense as well. When you die according to Christian, you are guided to heaven or banished to hell, therefore reviving you as either a reward or punishment.


Yep, as I word for word said your theory is reincarnation is about as much nonsense as any other afterlife theory.

I'm sure several religions have the idea of another life after death. Christianity and Buddhism, two of the most practice religions out there (Not saying they are the most practiced) believe in the idea. [/qoute]

i think the way in which you are grouping the two togther is incorrect here. both believe in a 'life' after death but both mean it in a completely different way. in the christian sense, you continue to 'live' on but you lack what is actually human 'life'. in your reincarnation theory, you actually are reborn into another human life.

I still don't like the way you interpret most of the things I say, but I should accept and move on.


i only interpret it this way because its the only rational way I can. i look at what i know versus what i don't. i would love to think there is an afterlife (in the christian sense) where i can live blissfully in some way or another. but i also recognize this as more hope than actual belief.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4307
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Re: Afterlife?

Unread postby FoxWithWings » Thu Dec 18, 2014 2:32 am

Well, I do believe in God, so shouldn't it be indicative that I believe in the Afterlife as well?

I have no idea what it will look like, but I do know it's where I (might) spend an eternity in eternal bliss with God.
"There's no one I'd rather be, than me" -Ralph
FoxWithWings
Master
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 2:42 pm
Location: Either in a forest, or flying above it.

Previous

Return to Literature, Academics, and Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved