Assumptions about the after-life

[Derek]

disclaimer: The following post is random nonsense I've been thinking about, no attempt to be logical is made here:


It seems that most people always assume one of the following about the after life:

1.) Eternal, sleep-like oblivion. No pain, no suffering, but also no more existence, forever.

2.) Eternal existence in the presence of God OR eternal existence in the absence of God, eternal pain & suffering

3.) Some kind of heaven like afterlife that everyone goes to

4.) reincarnation.

I've noticed that there seem to be very few people who ASSUME that the afterlife will be horrible painful suffering in hell and that there are no other choices. Are we all just wishful thinkers or is it actually reasonable to assume there's something "better" in the afterlife?  This is definitely a sillier question to ask than my previous post. I'm making no attempt to be logical in this one.

[jlh]

Why don't you add a poll to this topic?

Like, give several options of common assumptions about the afterlife or absence of such.  It'll be fun! 

[debussy symbolism]

Greetings

This thread makes no real sense, as none of these things can yet be adequately tested. The reason for why this subject matter is difficult to foresee is because medicine does not really understand consciousness, or "soul" for that matter, yet those facets of life exist. For this reason it is hard to gather scientific evidence. Empirical evidence as in the "near-death experience" is highly subjective and in my opinion isn't definitive. Subjects in those states may have a brain condition that would possibly present hallucinations as after death experiences.

[G.W.K]

Why don't you add a poll to this topic?

Like, give several options of common assumptions about the afterlife or absence of such.  It'll be fun! 

I agree!

I think you have a choice what happens to your "soul". You can either remain as a ghost or you can be reincarnated. But look at the Dia Llama (I think that's how its spelt), he dies and reincarnated but still remembers things in his past life.

I don't know if its true or not and I apologise if I made a different point.

G.W.K

[thalbergmad]

But look at the Dia Llama (I think that's how its spelt), he dies and reincarnated but still remembers things in his past life.

I think it is possible that we all can under certain circumstances.

Out of curiosity, i have visited a retrogressional hypnotist on several occasions. It is a fascinating experience.

Thal

[G.W.K]

What is a retrogressional hynotist?

G.W.K

[thalbergmad]

A specialist who supposedly can take you back through your previous lives.

Thal

[pianistimo]

you missed one category.  eternal life in the presence of God and/or eternally dead (nonexistant).  you know - the judgement.  dies irae. 

God cannot be loving and torture people.  i think that it's supposed to be called 'the second death.'  dead.  gone.  as the bible puts it - never to see God's face.  i am assuming that the only way to see his face is to 'seek Him dilligently while He may be found and to call upon Him while He is near.'

[thalbergmad]

you missed one category.  eternal life in the presence of God and/or eternally dead (nonexistant).  you know - the judgement.  dies irae. 

Hmm, why was that category left out?

Seems obvious really.

Thal

[debussy symbolism]

A specialist who supposedly can take you back through your previous lives.

Thal

There are specialists in that area? Would they be in the similar vein of God specialists and Bigfoot specialists? If she indeed is capable of such abilities, she must either be using a scientific method, or a subconscious, non-scientific method. Given the current development and knowledge of science and medicine, I doubt she is using a scientific method. If one would place oneself in the hands of someone who follows esoteric trends, one would have to acknowledge the fact that any results from that person can be ambigious and inexact, if not flat our wrong. I am not questioning her methods I am just questioning the precision of them.

[thalbergmad]

There are specialists in that area? Would they be in the similar vein of God specialists and Bigfoot specialists? If she indeed is capable of such abilities, she must either be using a scientific method, or a subconscious, non-scientific method.

1. Yes
2. No
3. He
4. Non
5. Find one and come to your own conclusions

[debussy symbolism]

1. Yes
2. No
3. He
4. Non
5. Find one and come to your own conclusions

Well as this thread's name suggests, I can only assume. My conjecture is that she relies more on intuition than logic, due to the fact that the "supernatural" matter is very elusive to reason, and medicine hasn't yet really permeated its nature.

Here is how you can gather evidence though. Visit mutliple psychics, and compare the results. If the results are similar of carry within them sings of repetition, then you can formulate some conclusions. However, and this is again a hypothesis, due to the fact that these persons rely on intuition, the results are more likely to be arbitrary.

[prometheus]

Same state as before conception.


Pretty obvious. But you didn't include it.


You will stop existing altogether.

[pianistimo]

but, perhaps humans exist in the consciousness of God's mind before He creates them.  that would mean that He is creating as 'sons' or 'daughters' in His own image.  and, if He considers His own image important -than he certainly wouldn't create them to disown them.  I think (and this is in the bible) that He created us to be 'like' Him.  to have creative powers.  and, much like in video games (excepting for good purposes) if we learn the rules in this life - we'll have more power in the next.  not that power is what we're after - but the rewards of following God's rules will be that you can go on to the 'next life' unhindered by death.

the opposite of life is death.  and death is final - and life could be eternal.

[debussy symbolism]

Same state as before conception.


Pretty obvious. But you didn't include it.


You will stop existing altogether.

I am sorry for misunderstanding, but could you clarify on what you mean by "same state before conception and stop existing altogether"?

[pianistimo]

good point!  each one of us must have been planned since adam and eve's time - because we are a product of a sperm and egg that had to hit at exactly the right time of ovulation to create the dna that produces the internal and external information about ourselves - minusing the spiritual element that God might zip inside us at the moment we take our first breath.  the breath of life - which he first gave adam and is transferred to us vicariously.  (God breathed into him 'the breath of life - and he became a LIVING soul.')

so we have one the one hand - the elements that make us (not yet combined - but planned out) - and then go back to dust (the elements again) - but if christian - our Spirit can go to God.  otherwise, Jesus wouldn't have said anything about committing His spirit to the Father at death.  and, on the other hand our physical lifespan of existing and being a  person.

[debussy symbolism]

but, perhaps humans exist in the consciousness of God's mind before He creates them.  that would mean that He is creating as 'sons' or 'daughters' in His own image.  and, if He considers His own image important -than he certainly wouldn't create them to disown them.  I think (and this is in the bible) that He created us to be 'like' Him.  to have creative powers.  and, much like in video games (excepting for good purposes) if we learn the rules in this life - we'll have more power in the next.  not that power is what we're after - but the rewards of following God's rules will be that you can go on to the 'next life' unhindered by death.

the opposite of life is death.  and death is final - and life could be eternal.

If God is a conscious entity then he will have the power to make conscious beings. That would make sense, but we have to yet locate a conscious entity that is also a supernatural entity. Many cultures have included information that relates to angels coming down to Earth and intermingling with humans or altering their state of being. It is much less likely that these entities were unconscious angelic beings rather than conscious biological entities.

The opposite of life is non-existence. The opposite of birth is death. It is beyond our current knowing if death is eternal, but we do all know that life isn't. If we assume that death isn't eternal and that there are hints of life after it, then we can also assume that life is eternal, with life of course signifying existence, whether in a physical state or mental state or whatever. We can only speculate on these matters and can't come to a conclusion. The more we speculate however the closer we can come to a more reasonable conclusion.

[pianistimo]

if God decides who will live and who will die by conscious choice - just as humans sometimes feel they have that power - then by our actions we imitate in some small way the deciding factors of God.  it is my opinion that this is why murder is so heinous to God.  He does not consider us capable, at this point, of deciding that a person should or shouldn't live because we cannot 'know' their minds and intents as He does.  perhaps judgement and justices are the closest representations of what we know as 'interpreters of the law' - and God-like.  but, if we come to know God personally - we see that He is very much interested in our personal beings and in mercy.  therefore - it would be easier to entreat God when He is easily found - than a judge who sees many cases and every human being is somewhat stuck in a similar mold until proven differently.  in other words, these judges cannot read our minds and therefore are only partly sure of their judgements.

perhaps we are not used to and don't know 'perfection.'

[debussy symbolism]

good point!  each one of us must have been planned since adam and eve's time - because we are a product of a sperm and egg that had to hit at exactly the right time of ovulation to create the dna that produces the internal and external information about ourselves - minusing the spiritual element that God might zip inside us at the moment we take our first breath.  the breath of life - which he first gave adam and is transferred to us vicariously.  (God breathed into him 'the breath of life - and he became a LIVING soul.')

so we have one the one hand - the elements that make us (not yet combined - but planned out) - and then go back to dust (the elements again) - but if christian - our Spirit can go to God.  otherwise, Jesus wouldn't have said anything about committing His spirit to the Father at death.  and, on the other hand our physical lifespan of existing and being a  person.

If any species follows natural reproduction, then in no way can their fate be planned, assuming that their genetic material isn't altered artificially. By a process of natural selection, the best genes will survive and be passed on. Many natural and arbitrary mutations will take place and alter the beings in either a positive or negative manne, or perhaps not alter at all. If Adam and Eve were created by a pure entity, then the Adam and Eve were themselves pure and their osspring pure as well. That is all good, however, due to the fact that some mutations occur, the pure genetic makeup will be altered eventually. If we are to assume that Adam and Eve were pure beings that were not capable of selfishness and violence, then we surely cannot qualify ourselves as pure. This would make sense as our genetic makeup has been changed by random mutations. Whether God brough into them the soul is a more speculative matter. We can deduce from this that the soul is either a spiritual matter, or a natural matter. Since we don't have knowledge of this supernatural entity matter, we are more likely to conclude that the soul and consciousness are natural to humans.

[pianistimo]

i think the soul is what combines with the Holy Spirit to create this 'purity' that you speak of.  Adam and Eve were created good - but with the capability of bad reasoning.  thus, eve taking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  if one believes the biblical story true - then her genetic makeup was not discussed at the point where she chose to go against God.  He did not say - I made you good - and you have somehow become bad without My creating the capabilities of that in you.  in fact, He actually warned adam and eve NOT to take and eat from one tree and that the other tree they were free to eat from.  this implies that he was teaching them from the start about self-control.  if God thinks that humans are capable of self-control -then this is spiritual and not genetic.  our natural tendencies are to be warm, to be fed, to be taken care of.  when this does not happen - we do have a fight and flight and also sometimes fear or anger - many feelings.  but, if we only live by our feelings - is this going to be taken into account at the judgement?  'God - i felt tired.  therefore - i didn't really want to ...  do whatever.  God - i was angry at this person - so I killed them.'  etc.  I don't think God will care about the genetic makeup - because he doesnt' direct us to it in our decision making process.

to me - this is the highest level of consciousness - to consciously choose good and not evil.

[debussy symbolism]

if God decides who will live and who will die by conscious choice - just as humans sometimes feel they have that power - then by our actions we imitate in some small way the deciding factors of God.  it is my opinion that this is why murder is so heinous to God.  He does not consider us capable, at this point, of deciding that a person should or shouldn't live because we cannot 'know' their minds and intents as He does.  perhaps judgement and justices are the closest representations of what we know as 'interpreters of the law' - and God-like.  but, if we come to know God personally - we see that He is very much interested in our personal beings and in mercy.  therefore - it would be easier to entreat God when He is easily found - than a judge who sees many cases and every human being is somewhat stuck in a similar mold until proven differently.  in other words, these judges cannot read our minds and therefore are only partly sure of their judgements.

perhaps we are not used to and don't know 'perfection.'

If we imitate God's actions that include killing others, then we have an entirely wrong perception of God. How could the all benevolent God allow so much man-slaughter and events such as the Holocaust and WW2?

The God doesn't consider us capable of deciding whether to let one live or die, but he himself heavily indulges in those matters.

I do not at the moment recall which philosopher said these words, but they are pronounced as such, or close to: "If God is capable of preventing evil, but doesn't choose to, then he is malevolent; if God isn't capable of preventing evil, then he isn't omnipotent; if God is capable and willing to, then whence evil; if God is neither capable or willing to prevent evil, then whence God"?

[pianistimo]

God did not create us as robots.  even though we might wish it so.  He created people who can choose their character - but cannot make themselves eternal as He is without imitating Him (as Jesus did).  if He decides that evil should not exist - is this wrong?  that perhaps evil will not exist eternally - but only in this small moment of the vastness of eternity?  who are we?  basically smaller than specks to God's view.  as i see it - to get God's attention and love - we must strive to be 'like Him' in every way.  that includes in righteous behavior.

as i read the bible - it seems that He only has our benefit in mind.  otherwise - why would His first and only begotten Son be crucified so that we might live?  but, paul tells us not to live our lives to sin - but to holiness.  so that means we have to put aside the 'old man' - what we naturally like to do - and consider the 'new man' - what is more difficult to chose for us.  to be 'like God' as much as possible.  this, to me, means finding out as much about God as one can.

[debussy symbolism]

i think the soul is what combines with the Holy Spirit to create this 'purity' that you speak of.  Adam and Eve were created good - but with the capability of bad reasoning.  thus, eve taking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  if one believes the biblical story true - then her genetic makeup was not discussed at the point where she chose to go against God.  He did not say - I made you good - and you have somehow become bad without My creating the capabilities of that in you.  in fact, He actually warned adam and eve NOT to take and eat from one tree and that the other tree they were free to eat from.  this implies that he was teaching them from the start about self-control.  if God thinks that humans are capable of self-control -then this is spiritual and not genetic.  our natural tendencies are to be warm, to be fed, to be taken care of.  when this does not happen - we do have a fight and flight and also sometimes fear or anger - many feelings.  but, if we only live by our feelings - is this going to be taken into account at the judgement?  'God - i felt tired.  therefore - i didn't really want to ...  do whatever.  God - i was angry at this person - so I killed them.'  etc.  I don't think God will care about the genetic makeup - because he doesnt' direct us to it in our decision making process.

to me - this is the highest level of consciousness - to consciously choose good and not evil.

If soul isn't the "holy spirit" then we enter another level of ambiguity. If Adam and Eve were created by a God who was pure spititually, then Adam and Eve wouldn't be capable of bad deeds either.

If God failed to supervise Adam and Eve's behaviour then either of two things were happening. Either God's message to them wasn't clear, hence denoting his lack of omnipotence, or a second factor intervened with Adam and Eve's makeup. That would naturally denote that something changed them. If we are to follow the Bible, it states that they were induced to change by a serpent like being, or the Devil. However, on a more logical basis, we could view those changed as being simply genetic, with mutations allowing Adam and Eve to suprass God's disire.

Self-control is genetic. Humans are curious, and that is genetic. If God intended Adam and Eve to not be curious, he failed, because the genetic mutations altered them in such a way that they became curious.

[debussy symbolism]

God did not create us as robots.  even though we might wish it so.  He created people who can choose their character - but cannot make themselves eternal as He is without imitating Him (as Jesus did).  if He decides that evil should not exist - is this wrong?  that perhaps evil will not exist eternally - but only in this small moment of the vastness of eternity?  who are we?  basically smaller than specks to God's view.  as i see it - to get God's attention and love - we must strive to be 'like Him' in every way.  that includes in righteous behavior.

as i read the bible - it seems that He only has our benefit in mind.  otherwise - why would His first and only begotten Son be crucified so that we might live?  but, paul tells us not to live our lives to sin - but to holiness.  so that means we have to put aside the 'old man' - what we naturally like to do - and consider the 'new man' - what is more difficult to chose for us.  to be 'like God' as much as possible.  this, to me, means finding out as much about God as one can.

Tell me Pianistimo, you strive to immitate God in everyway possible. Are you eternal, or are you going to eventually have the capacity to become that? If however God defies you that privilage, what does that make of your faith to Him? If God decides that evil shouldn't exist, but it does, then we have a problem.

If we indeed are smaller than specks to him, what possible hope can we have of ever coming close to him?

[prometheus]

I am sorry for misunderstanding, but could you clarify on what you mean by "same state before conception and stop existing altogether"?

I mean the same state as before you were born, but of course you already exist before birth. So thus conception. After you have died you are in the same state as before your egg was fertilized.


So you stop existing. You aren't dead, you die and you stop with everything. Being dead, sleeping, whatever.


You don't sleep before your egg gets fertilized. Saying that would be silly.

[pianistimo]

but, a very fundamental thing about mutations is important.  we have never had more than 48 chromosomes a piece.  there are no more ( and the only mutations that occur are on a very very very small level).  also, they cannot add to the genetic string.  only become weaker and die out.  we have nothing better than adam and eve  -genetically.  in fact, adam and eve were most likely quite a bit superior to us - if we take the biblical account of their respective ages alone. 

that is an entirely different matter - but apparently not genetically predetermined.  HOW LONG WE LIVE.  this was a matter that God decided also.  He simply said - man will now only live thus and thus years of age.  so, if anyone finds a supposed 'ageing gene' - it is really hokey pokey stuff - because our lives are totally dependent on God's Holy life giving Spirit - without which we could not live another minute.

that fact that God keeps us alive - proves we are way more important than specks to Him.  but, what i mean is that He wants us to have the best - so He admonishes us to listen to His Words.  that is what i mean by good and evil.  not our choice of good and evil - but His choices.  who are we to argue with good and evil's definition.  that is what adam and eve effectively did.

as i see it - it does not matter so much what I think or feel - as much as what God wants me to think and feel.  therefore - some of the time i may be uncomfortable.  but, in the long run - the blessings of not living life by feelings alone are interminably better.  you cannot join an army and then have 20,000 people walking 20,000 different directions.

[debussy symbolism]

but, a very fundamental thing about mutations is important.  we have never had more than 48 chromosomes a piece.  there are no more ( and the only mutations that occur are on a very very very small level).  also, they cannot add to the genetic string.  only become weaker and die out.  we have nothing better than adam and eve  -genetically.  in fact, adam and eve were most likely quite a bit superior to us - if we take the biblical account of their respective ages alone. 

that is an entirely different matter - but apparently not genetically predetermined.  HOW LONG WE LIVE.  this was a matter that God decided also.  He simply said - man will now only live thus and thus years of age.  so, if anyone finds a supposed 'ageing gene' - it is really hokey pokey stuff - because our lives are totally dependent on God's Holy life giving Spirit - without which we could not live another minute.

Mutations may occur at a miniature scale, but they add up. Eventually, a gene is altered in enough ways that its original functions start to fade, and new constructs arise. Concerning whether the outcome is positive or negative, it is random, unless directed by a conscious hand. There is a process called natural selection, which determines which genes get passed on. The more benefitial genes remain. So the though that man since Adam and Eve has aged considerably also includes in it the though that man has mutated considerably.

Our lifespans are also determined by our genetic makeup. I has to do with certain segments of chromosomes which wear off as we age.

[pianistimo]

natural selection has been disproven by mtdna.  even as small a thing as 'hormones' have been around in the same state for many years.  the 23 male and 23 female chromosomes meet up and match - unless one of the genes in this set is defective and causes less (not more) to happen to the original dna.  basically, we are living proof today - of deficiencies.  why all the autism suddenly?  perhaps the environment (pollution) causes death of certain intricate pieces of the puzzle?  finding more and more strange deformities in humans and animals - and certainly not considered progressive in terms of 'selection.'

i would like to see proof of any race becoming superior in any sort of way.  i think each generation becomes just a bit weaker - myself.  for one thing, the very technology which is supposed to help us - can actually weaken us.  i recently heard that women who have gotten too many x-rays from breast cancer detection screenings - got cancer from the x-rays.  perhaps i am paranoid - but i really don't see environmental things (pollution in air and water) helping us genetically  mutate very successfully.  take third world countries such as places in africa (nigeria) where there are large oil refineries right next to mud huts. 

and food that supposedly is grown better by genetically altering it - tastes like *.  as i see it- if God wanted it that way - he'd have made it that way.  but, of course, this all sounds terribly unadvanced - and true - there are always pests that attack crops and we would all be starving if we suddenly went back to 'all organic.'  but, over time - i think the correlation to our health would be seen.  there is a show on the radio that explains many natural pest control methods and ways of encouraging crops to grow better.   for one, land rests.  nobody really thinks about the importance of them.  rotating crops and then every few years letting the land grow wild and rehydrate and nourish itself - or whatever it does.

i suppose i have gotten terribly off-track. but, i did attempt to respond to some ideas.

[debussy symbolism]

natural selection has been disproven by mtdna.  even as small a thing as 'hormones' have been around in the same state for many years.  the 23 male and 23 female chromosomes meet up and match - unless one of the genes in this set is defective and causes less (not more) to happen to the original dna.  basically, we are living proof today - of deficiencies.  why all the autism suddenly?  perhaps the environment (pollution) causes death of certain intricate pieces of the puzzle?  finding more and more strange deformities in humans and animals - and certainly not considered progressive in terms of 'selection.'

i would like to see proof of any race becoming superior in any sort of way.  i think each generation becomes just a bit weaker - myself.  for one thing, the very technology which is supposed to help us - can actually weaken us.  i recently heard that women who have gotten too many x-rays from breast cancer detection screenings - got cancer from the x-rays.  perhaps i am paranoid - but i really don't see environmental things (pollution in air and water) helping us genetically  mutate very successfully.  take third world countries such as places in africa (nigeria) where there are large oil refineries right next to mud huts. 

and food that supposedly is grown better by genetically altering it - tastes like *.  as i see it- if God wanted it that way - he'd have made it that way.  but, of course, this all sounds terribly unadvanced - and true - there are always pests that attack crops and we would all be starving if we suddenly went back to 'all organic.'  but, over time - i think the correlation to our health would be seen.  there is a show on the radio that explains many natural pest control methods and ways of encouraging crops to grow better.   for one, land rests.  nobody really thinks about the importance of them.

Um, natural selection has not been disproven. If you would like to provide argument or papers concerning that information, please provide it here. What do the hormones have to do with anything. Hormones do not determine genetic makeup and certainly do not change it. The chromosomes that are present within each human can carry in them a certain amount of deficiencies. For example trisomy-21 is an extra chromosome that is the culprit for down syndrome. Strange deformities are a result of many causes. It is obvious that pollution, smoking, drinking are a cause for the majority of newer defects. The natural selection isn't altered here. Those with the damaged genes will die out. Only those will remain who do not indulge in activities that would artificially damage their offspring's genes, such as smoking during pregnancy.

A race becomes more superior as it advances. The civilization cannot obviously be getting weaker as our level of technological and artistic achievement is rising. Yes, misuse in technology can cause damage, such as too much x-ray exposure as you mentioned. However, if used properly, these x-rays offer help in detecting cancer in deformities, which in turn will prolong human life and reduce the number of potential deformities passed on to offspring.

If genetically enhanced food products are in any way harmful, it is not because genetics is at fault, it is because our lack of the science is at fault. If the altered product is damaging, it has been altered in a bad way, and newer knowledge will prevent that from occuring and we can eventually get more safer food results.

[prometheus]

Pianistimo, do you realise that what you posted there is against the terms of agreement?


You agreed not to distribute false information when you joined this forum. Yet you are consciously doing so. By the letter of this agreement your use of this forum should be terminated.

[johnny-boy]

Speaking of chromosomes: how do you tell a male chromosome from a female chromosome?

Ans.:  Pull down genes, take a look.

John

[debussy symbolism]

Pianistimo, do you realise that what you posted there is against the terms of agreement?


You agreed not to distribute false information when you joined this forum. Yet you are consciously doing so. By the letter of this agreement your use of this forum should be terminated.

Yes, she should be terminated, but only if she spread the false information on purpose. I personally don't think it was on purpose, do you? I don't think anyone should be banned because their sources are flawed.

[johnny-boy]

Pianistimo, do you realise that what you posted there is against the terms of agreement?


You agreed not to distribute false information when you joined this forum. Yet you are consciously doing so. By the letter of this agreement your use of this forum should be terminated.

Oh come on Promey; lighten-up.

John

[jlh]

God did not create us as robots.  even though we might wish it so.  He created people who can choose their character - but cannot make themselves eternal as He is without imitating Him (as Jesus did).  if He decides that evil should not exist - is this wrong?  that perhaps evil will not exist eternally - but only in this small moment of the vastness of eternity?  who are we?  basically smaller than specks to God's view.  as i see it - to get God's attention and love - we must strive to be 'like Him' in every way.  that includes in righteous behavior.

Careful, susan... don't put words into the Bible.  We don't have to rely on our works to get the attention and love of God.  Paul spoke specifically against that doctrine. 

Smaller than specks in one sense maybe, but remember that God wants to relate to us, not just govern us.  Remember about the sparrow, who is so much smaller than us, and Jesus said that not one would fall to the ground without God knowing about it... and how much more important are we, who are made in His image?  We don't have to work to get God's attention.

[debussy symbolism]

Smaller than specks in one sense maybe, but remember that God wants to relate to us, not just govern us.  Remember about the sparrow, who is so much smaller than us, and Jesus said that not one would fall to the ground without God knowing about it... and how much more important are we, who are made in His image?  We don't have to work to get God's attention.

Actually, God doesn't want to relate to us, we want to relate to God. We may not have to work to get God's attention, but God sure has to work in order to get ours. Come to think of it, the only real way most people would acknowlege God's existence if He would show through the sky as a beam of light with "God" written on it.

[jlh]

Actually, God doesn't want to relate to us, we want to relate to God. We may not have to work to get God's attention, but God sure has to work in order to get ours. Come to think of it, the only real way most people would acknowlege God's existence if He would show through the sky as a beam of light with "God" written on it.

I could quote the Bible to you if you want. 

Perhaps you're talking about a different god?

[debussy symbolism]

I could quote the Bible to you if you want. 

Perhaps you're talking about a different god?

I am talking about all Gods. As far as what is generally known about Gods, it wasn't that Gods created humans, but the other way around.

[rimv2]

I am talking about all Gods. As far as what is generally known about Gods, it wasn't that Gods created humans, but the other way around.

Can you prove that statement. I've got a link here that says otherwise.

Click it. If you're brave enough

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,26310.msg300197.html#msg300197

[debussy symbolism]

Can you prove that statement. I've got a link here that says otherwise.

Click it. If you're brave enough

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php/topic,26310.msg300197.html#msg300197

I will try as best I can. Many religions, including Christianity, speak of heavenly beings that descended upon Earth from stars and interbred with humans. Whilst, I am not going to go into as to who those beings might be, I will point out that as of now, there is no concrete evidence of those beings, even though many could argue otherwise; yet the evidence isn't apparent to mainstream public and believers. Keeping that in mind, many people still choose to believe in God despite having no physical evidence at hand. If you believe in something that you have no physical information on, then even if that entity exists, it doesn't really exist to the believe, in physical form that is. That leads to the God entity as being construed by the believers.

Many tribes and ancient cultures make Gods of animals. They speak of the world as being founded by those animals. Obviously, with the help of technology, we see no giant animals supporting our planet and the stars around us, so we have to refute their reasoning. However, to them, those animals are holy. Following that reason, they invented Gods and not the other way around.

I haven't yet read the link you posted.

[thalbergmad]

Who started her off again?

[prometheus]

Well, I guess her religion has the forum of a major mental illness and that gets her the way out.


I don't think she is stupid or mentally disabled. So then either she must do it knowingly since I have done this debate with her before many times. Or there is something else harming her mental capacity.

[thalbergmad]

Or there is something else harming her mental capacity.

Yeh, her Bible.

Thal