Description of Afterlife?

m4rk84 said:
The thing is that it isn't even baseless opinion though, there's far more evidence to suggest there not being an afterlife then there is supporting one.
Click to expand...

Hence I meant it is baseless to believe that there is an afterlife, not that it was to understand there isnt.
 
bhavv said:
Nope, its just baseless opinion, like the whole idea of an afterlife in the first place.



Hmmm, if there is such a higher power as described by religion that watches over and controls everything we do, then under this belief, isnt that higher power directly responsible for all such events on Earth, and therefore this god being is the cause of all evil?
Click to expand...

Not sure, but my point is, if this world was created by a compassionate person, would they be happy to a:terminate it (e.g kill all those lives) or b: sit by and watch them destroy each other? Otherwise it's just an experiment, like we experiment on mice.
 
oldbag said:
Not sure, but my point is, if this world was created by a compassionate person, would they be happy to a:terminate it (e.g kill all those lives) or b: sit by and watch them destroy each other? Otherwise it's just an experiment, like we experiment on mice.
Click to expand...
Or your premise that the creator is compassionate is false. You can still have a sadistic creator.
 
ethan said:
You go on believing what you believe and I'll just stick to this:

Click to expand...

I dont think that anything in that video supports the idea of the afterlife, just the idea that the brain and consciousness are two separate things.

It is impossible to test whether or not consciousness survives after brain death. Brain death is absolutely not the same thing as a loss of consciousness, during which the brain is still alive and able to function.

Even if the brain and mind are separate entities, the mind much more evidently still seems to require a living brain to maintain functioning. There is no evidence to suggest that the mind can survive after brain death. If a person is comatose or near death, yet they come back to life with a still healthy brain, they have come nowhere near close to experiencing brain death. Its far more likely that their brain simply entered a state of self protective delirium to nullify the severe damage and / or pain that that the patient's body was under.

oldbag said:
Not sure, but my point is, if this world was created by a compassionate person, would they be happy to a:terminate it (e.g kill all those lives) or b: sit by and watch them destroy each other? Otherwise it's just an experiment, like we experiment on mice.
Click to expand...

As Morbius said, the idea of a creator is not mutually exclusive with the idea of a compassionate creator. I think that everything in our world proves that if there is a creator in the religious sense that controlls everything on Earth, then it is definitely not compassionate. It is only false human beliefs, again with no evidence that suggest this potential creator is compassionate, regardless of all the terrible things that happen in the world. If the state of our world is a direct result of a creator, then our creator is pure evil.
 
Last edited:
I don't really see the point in threads like these, it just ends up being people bashing others for their beliefs or ideas.

There's always going to be those who don't believe in life after death/conciousness existing outside the body. Then there are those who definitely believe in it. Then finally there are those on the fence, open to either argument and willing to entertain any idea no matter how un-scientific or illogical, without claiming the bold statement that they 'know' for sure.

Sadly most people fall into the first two categories, and for some reason see it as a quest to verbally batter anyone else into their way of thinking. But being stubborn as humans are we rarely change our minds at the click of a finger, nor at hearing someone else's opinion on the internet, so I don't quite get what these threads seek to ultimately achieve.
 
bhavv said:
It is impossible to test whether or not consciousness survives after brain death.
Click to expand...

Then even scientifically speaking, how is anything but pure agnostic open-minded fence-sitting the correct position for you? If you have no means to test you have nothing upon which to base any real tenable position - including precluding survival of consciousness. In your own words from earlier in the thread, if you can't test your idea that there is no afterlife then you don't have a hypothesis, you have a belief...
 
What is there after death? well as Ricky Gervais says "Remember those billions of years before you were born?..well its pretty much like that!"

Thats how I see it.
 
In your own words from earlier in the thread, if you can't test your idea that there is no afterlife then you don't have a hypothesis, you have a belief...
Click to expand...
The irony being he is forever harking on about evidence and ignoring it from veridical near death experiences :D
 
oldbag said:
True. So maybe life is actually hell, and heaven is death....

Or neither exists and its pure science.
Click to expand...

I possibly cannot imagine any kind of hell or eternal suffering that is worse than life on Earth. IF there is an afterlife, any afterlife must be better than life. Otherwise why even bother believing in an afterlife if you think its only going to be worse?
 
Morbius said:
If the goal is to get to the afterlife, wouldn't the easiest way be to end your life prematurely? That would make life even more pointless than the no-afterlife alternative.
Click to expand...

Well, this was going to be a new potential signature of mine, but I thought it would be seen as too offensive, but it fits this thread perfectly:

LU5u4.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom