What Happens When we die?

[Shaggai]

I simply don't see that as viable given the culture that the Christian faith originated in. Given Christ literally died founding this faith there was little motive for control if he didn't truly believe in what he was doing. To say that one would die for a religion they created intending to control the population and never be able to execute that control.. is not logical.

And yet we have little proof that Christ even existed. He could be an amalgamation of several people, or didn't exist at all. We don't know and we most likely will never know. Yet due to the scarcity of the reports of Christ actual existence, I really doubt he is real.

Actually, he probably did exist. Some Jewish historian, I forget the name, did actually record the fact that Jesus was alive around his time, and noted that there were a lot of stories around him. Personally, I think Jesus was just a wandering preacher sort of thing with a message people liked, and a lot of stuff got blown out of proportion. But that's just me.

[The Land of Truth]

Where's your proof that they actually died (or even lived)?

If you're saying they did not, then what is your explanation for the near global manifestation of Christian and Jewish faiths. Who originated this world wide-religion? If it had to originate after the era of writing, what is your explanation for it being adopted over other faiths based on written works?

I never said they didn't--I swear to god, if people keep putting words in mouth, I'm going to punch a fucking wall.

It could have just been created by a few Jews who made it all up because they were sick of the Temple-politics and wanted to cause some changes without revealing who they were.

[Dragonisia]

See my previous post. It just isn't logical when so many of them knew they'd end up dead and not able to actually exert any actual influence. Additionally if one actually reads the letters written by the apostles and the disciples, you can see they were very committed to what they believed and that there were no apparent intended deceptions. These letters which were included in the new testament were private letters and I doubt many of the apostles or disciples were ever aware they'd actually be integrated into a book, since books were exceptionally uncommon around their time. Your thoughts on this matter.. is full of logical holes regarding the nature of the time of origin.. at least when it pertains to Jewish and Christian faiths. Later faiths which came after the more common dissemination and understanding of the written word this would be a more logical theory for.

I have logical holes? The entire Christian religion is one big logical hole. The bible is notorious for its fabrications, and I take any evidence based off of it with one massive grain of salt. The bible is a book written many years after the death of "Christ".It is possible that the "Apostles" were truly devoted to a Christian faith, but it is assured that in the end, religion is a tool of the powerful to cow a superstitious populace, it has happened throughout history. Nothing unites people like faith, which by definition is belief without factual basis.

I love your assertions which, themselves, are unspecific and without direct reference. What parts are fabrications? You are not entirely correct. It was translated and put into a book years after the death of Christ, but there are original manuscripts around for the original texts of some of the books and letters. I am glad you are willing to acknowledge the Apostles may in fact have been true to their faith, which means there might in fact be something real and tangible behind Christianity, if the original texts (or as close to them as you can get) are explored, researched, and cross referenced. Your assurance that in the end religion is just a tool is nonsense. There are plenty of people of Faith who are merely searching for the God that reigns over this universe on their own. And you are correct, the devil has used religion and extremely well. Why do you believe I feel the vast majority of the global population is likely damned? They've all been either been misled, given up, or have taken to very acidic cynicism the notion of any sort of divinity.

[The Truth and Light]

If we were reincarnated, would we be continuing where we left off, like being born in one life at the same time that we died in another, or would there be a delay between dying and being reborn, like a vacation from life? Or would we be born in a different time altogether, so that we could be born into the role of different historical figures, like an endless stage play with the actors switching roles each act?

Personally, I don't believe in reincarnation, i'm just hypothesizing.

I think if reincarnation were to be a valid explanation, it would have to fit basic rules of logic.

Firstly, we have to operationalize the concept of reincarnation precisely. What is being reborn? The whole human, including their identity and past identities? The soul of the human? What is a soul? Is it just the consciousness being reborn, with all previous identities being washed away?

There have to be ground rules, and there has to be evidence to match it.

If you were to be reborn as another person after your death, how would that scientifically happen? What are the odds that you would end up human and not be a tree?

I think the idea of reincarnation stems from a human inability to imagine a lack of consciousness after death. If you were to be born again as a conscious being, then by what we know about consciousness, you could not remember anything about your past lives. All of that information is stored in your previous brain, which would be rotting after death. Basically, there's no way to prove that there is any such thing as reincarnation.

Hey, we can dream can't we?

Maybe a soul exists, probably not.

One idea I find intriguing that could make reincarnation viable - but lacks current evidence and scientific support - is the idea that humans simultaneous exist on several planes of reality, including the physical world, and "higher" and "lower" planes like the Astral plane, just for a random example. If this is true, then that means a death on this plane is not necessarily a death on the other planes, which means we would live on in one or more of the other planes. But this is deep metaphysics and like I said, there's a distinct lack of verifiable evidence.

[The Land of Truth]

And yet we have little proof that Christ even existed. He could be an amalgamation of several people, or didn't exist at all. We don't know and we most likely will never know. Yet due to the scarcity of the reports of Christ actual existence, I really doubt he is real.

Actually, he probably did exist. Some Jewish historian, I forget the name, did actually record the fact that Jesus was alive around his time, and noted that there were a lot of stories around him. Personally, I think Jesus was just a wandering preacher sort of thing with a message people liked, and a lot of stuff got blown out of proportion. But that's just me.

If you're referring to Josephus, don't, 'cause that's a big pile shit.

[Dragonisia]

If you're saying they did not, then what is your explanation for the near global manifestation of Christian and Jewish faiths. Who originated this world wide-religion? If it had to originate after the era of writing, what is your explanation for it being adopted over other faiths based on written works?

I never said they didn't--I swear to god, if people keep putting words in mouth, I'm going to punch a fucking wall.

It could have just been created by a few Jews who made it all up because they were sick of the Temple-politics and wanted to cause some changes without revealing who they were.

You think if that is all that it was it wouldn't have simply ended after a brief stint? Movements like that in any population rarely go anywhere. If they didn't want anyone knowing who they were.. how int he world would such a religion have taken flight, lacking a pr department in a very conservative society that would have likely dashed the mention of any alternate faith at a moment's notice. I doubt anonymity would have been an option if you really wanted such a movement to take root in any fashion in such a society. Again, this just doesn't sound viable.

[Shaggai]

Actually, he probably did exist. Some Jewish historian, I forget the name, did actually record the fact that Jesus was alive around his time, and noted that there were a lot of stories around him. Personally, I think Jesus was just a wandering preacher sort of thing with a message people liked, and a lot of stuff got blown out of proportion. But that's just me.

If you're referring to Josephus, don't, 'cause that's a big pile shit.

Really? I thought it was valid. Why is it not? I'm actually being curious, not sarcastic.

[Blasveck]

If we were reincarnated, would we be continuing where we left off, like being born in one life at the same time that we died in another, or would there be a delay between dying and being reborn, like a vacation from life? Or would we be born in a different time altogether, so that we could be born into the role of different historical figures, like an endless stage play with the actors switching roles each act?

Personally, I don't believe in reincarnation, i'm just hypothesizing.

I think if reincarnation were to be a valid explanation, it would have to fit basic rules of logic.

Firstly, we have to operationalize the concept of reincarnation precisely. What is being reborn? The whole human, including their identity and past identities? The soul of the human? What is a soul? Is it just the consciousness being reborn, with all previous identities being washed away?

There have to be ground rules, and there has to be evidence to match it.

Hey, we can dream can't we?

Maybe a soul exists, probably not.

One idea I find intriguing that could make reincarnation viable - but lacks current evidence and scientific support - is the idea that humans simultaneous exist on several planes of reality, including the physical world, and "higher" and "lower" planes like the Astral plane, just for a random example. If this is true, then that means a death on this plane is not necessarily a death on the other planes, which means we would live on in one or more of the other planes. But this is deep metaphysics and like I said, there's a distinct lack of verifiable evidence.

So, M-Theory?

Because M-Theory is becoming more viable as a legitimate explanation.

[The Land of Truth]

I have logical holes? The entire Christian religion is one big logical hole. The bible is notorious for its fabrications, and I take any evidence based off of it with one massive grain of salt. The bible is a book written many years after the death of "Christ".It is possible that the "Apostles" were truly devoted to a Christian faith, but it is assured that in the end, religion is a tool of the powerful to cow a superstitious populace, it has happened throughout history. Nothing unites people like faith, which by definition is belief without factual basis.

I love your assertions which, themselves, are unspecific and without direct reference. (1)What parts are fabrications? You are not entirely correct. It was translated and put into a book years after the death of Christ,(2) but there are original manuscripts around for the original texts of some of the books and letters. (3)I am glad you are willing to acknowledge the Apostles may in fact have been true to their faith, which means there might in fact be something real and tangible behind Christianity, if the original texts (or as close to them as you can get) are explored, researched, and cross referenced. Your assurance that in the end religion is just a tool is nonsense. (4)There are plenty of people of Faith who are merely searching for the God that reigns over this universe on their own. And you are correct, (5)the devil has used religion and extremely well. Why do you believe I feel the vast majority of the global population is likely damned? (6)They've all been either been misled, given up, or have taken to very acidic cynicism the notion of any sort of divinity.

1) Honestly? All of them.
2) Source?
3) No. The fact that people believe in something has no effect on whether or not it's true.
4) And there are just as many willing to use that belief for personal and/or monetary gain.
5) The Devil's not real.
6) Source?

[Edward Richtofen]

IDK, but when I die I hope there is no afterlife, I feel that even in heaven an eternity would destroy my sanity and just bore me. I would prefer to not exist afterwards that my mind just dies as well.

[The Land of Truth]

I never said they didn't--I swear to god, if people keep putting words in mouth, I'm going to punch a fucking wall.

It could have just been created by a few Jews who made it all up because they were sick of the Temple-politics and wanted to cause some changes without revealing who they were.

You think if that is all that it was it wouldn't have simply ended after a brief stint? Movements like that in any population rarely go anywhere. If they didn't want anyone knowing who they were.. how int he world would such a religion have taken flight, lacking a pr department in a very conservative society that would have likely dashed the mention of any alternate faith at a moment's notice. I doubt anonymity would have been an option if you really wanted such a movement to take root in any fashion in such a society. Again, this just doesn't sound viable.

How is what I said any different from the actual religion's mythos?

[The Truth and Light]

So, M-Theory?

Because M-Theory is becoming more viable as a legitimate explanation.

Yes, that's the one!

Personally, I think it'd be amazing if there's something to it. I'm not getting my hopes up, though.

[The Land of Truth]

If you're referring to Josephus, don't, 'cause that's a big pile shit.

Really? I thought it was valid. Why is it not? I'm actually being curious, not sarcastic.

It depends which line you're talking about.

Read this.

[Dragonisia]

1.) Ambiguity doesn't allow me to address specific accusations.
2.) http://www.truthnet.org/Bible-Origins/8 ... croll2.jpg
3.) I didn't say it proved it was true. I stated they believed it was true. Meaning they weren't attempting intentionally to defraud or mislead which gives more credibility to their letters. Intent of authors is sometimes more important than what they write.
4.) You are correct.
5.) You are entitled to that opinion, but I run into him daily.
6.) You seem to be.. and others I have met directly. First hand experience.

[Blasveck]

So, M-Theory?

Because M-Theory is becoming more viable as a legitimate explanation.

Yes, that's the one!

Personally, I think it'd be amazing if there's something to it. I'm not getting my hopes up, though.

Concerning M-Theory and splitting realities, a number of possibilities exist, if the Theory is real an there are infinite universes.

If its true, in one universe, Christianity never happened.
In another, you're having sex with the man/woman of your dreams right now.

The problem Therein is that the "You" in this universe may die when you're 50, and a new reality might be created, where another "You" exists, but "You" are not the "other You".

Both exciting and depressing at the same time.

[Great Franconia and Verana]

I have logical holes? The entire Christian religion is one big logical hole. The bible is notorious for its fabrications, and I take any evidence based off of it with one massive grain of salt. The bible is a book written many years after the death of "Christ".It is possible that the "Apostles" were truly devoted to a Christian faith, but it is assured that in the end, religion is a tool of the powerful to cow a superstitious populace, it has happened throughout history. Nothing unites people like faith, which by definition is belief without factual basis.

I love your assertions which, themselves, are unspecific and without direct reference. What parts are fabrications? You are not entirely correct. It was translated and put into a book years after the death of Christ, but there are original manuscripts around for the original texts of some of the books and letters. I am glad you are willing to acknowledge the Apostles may in fact have been true to their faith, which means there might in fact be something real and tangible behind Christianity, if the original texts (or as close to them as you can get) are explored, researched, and cross referenced. Your assurance that in the end religion is just a tool is nonsense. There are plenty of people of Faith who are merely searching for the God that reigns over this universe on their own. And you are correct, the devil has used religion and extremely well. Why do you believe I feel the vast majority of the global population is likely damned? They've all been either been misled, given up, or have taken to very acidic cynicism the notion of any sort of divinity.

Please, you are putting words in my mouth, something that always ruins a debate. Seeing as though you are very thoroughly indoctrinated into the "Faith", I will not be getting my message to you. I hope someday you find a thing called logic. Watch some debates between Atheists and Christians online, and you might realize the entire thing is a sham. I recommend the Atheist Experience.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I believe that physical death is simply a transmutation of atomic energy. I'm pleased that there is no Guy In The Sky deciding if I am worthy or unworthy. I am the same energy released the moment of the Big Bang....just transmuted a billion times.
Be kind, I have no education, but I try to fake it.

[Shaggai]

Really? I thought it was valid. Why is it not? I'm actually being curious, not sarcastic.

It depends which line you're talking about.

Read this.

I was only talking about the bits that referred to some guy named Jesus existing. I had looked him up in a previous argument, so I knew about the bits that had been inserted. But I was pretty sure at least the bits about a preacher named Jesus existing were valid.

[Dragonisia]

I love your assertions which, themselves, are unspecific and without direct reference. What parts are fabrications? You are not entirely correct. It was translated and put into a book years after the death of Christ, but there are original manuscripts around for the original texts of some of the books and letters. I am glad you are willing to acknowledge the Apostles may in fact have been true to their faith, which means there might in fact be something real and tangible behind Christianity, if the original texts (or as close to them as you can get) are explored, researched, and cross referenced. Your assurance that in the end religion is just a tool is nonsense. There are plenty of people of Faith who are merely searching for the God that reigns over this universe on their own. And you are correct, the devil has used religion and extremely well. Why do you believe I feel the vast majority of the global population is likely damned? They've all been either been misled, given up, or have taken to very acidic cynicism the notion of any sort of divinity.

Please, you are putting words in my mouth, something that always ruins a debate. Seeing as though you are very thoroughly indoctrinated into the "Faith", I will not be getting my message to you. I hope someday you find a thing called logic. Watch some debates between Atheists and Christians online, and you might realize the entire thing is a sham. I recommend the Atheist Experience.

Really? To which Faith is it I belong and who leads me? I'd love to see you prove the assertions you know about a person you just casually met on the internet. You know very little about me to make these statements. I understand logic very well. It's the second sword I wield.

[The Land of Truth]

1.) Ambiguity doesn't allow me to address specific accusations.
2.) http://www.truthnet.org/Bible-Origins/8 ... croll2.jpg
3.) I didn't say it proved it was true. I stated they believed it was true. Meaning they weren't attempting intentionally to defraud or mislead which gives more credibility to their letters. Intent of authors is sometimes more important than what they write.
4.) You are correct.
5.) You are entitled to that opinion, but I run into him daily.
6.) You.

1) How is that ambiguous? The Bible's fiction. Period.
2) And?
5) It's not an opinion.
6) You said "the vast majority of the global population." Proof please.

[Shaggai]

Yes, that's the one!

Personally, I think it'd be amazing if there's something to it. I'm not getting my hopes up, though.

Concerning M-Theory and splitting realities, a number of possibilities exist, if the Theory is real an there are infinite universes.

If its true, in one universe, Christianity never happened.
In another, you're having sex with the man/woman of your dreams right now.

The problem Therein is that the "You" in this universe may die when you're 50, and a new reality might be created, where another "You" exists, but "You" are not the "other You".

Both exciting and depressing at the same time.

I think you're actually talking about the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum whatever. M-Theory does involve other universes or "branes", but you seem to be talking about MWI, which is what states that every quantum "choice" goes both ways, just in a different universe.

[Farnhamia]

So, M-Theory?

Because M-Theory is becoming more viable as a legitimate explanation.

Yes, that's the one!

Personally, I think it'd be amazing if there's something to it. I'm not getting my hopes up, though.

Branes! *slobber*

[The Land of Truth]

It depends which line you're talking about.

Read this.

I was only talking about the bits that referred to some guy named Jesus existing. I had looked him up in a previous argument, so I knew about the bits that had been inserted. But I was pretty sure at least the bits about a preacher named Jesus existing were valid.

There's nothing referring to an actual "Jesus". There's a line that says, "James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ", which many interpret to mean that Jesus' brother existed, so he probably did, too.

[The Truth and Light]

Yes, that's the one!

Personally, I think it'd be amazing if there's something to it. I'm not getting my hopes up, though.

Concerning M-Theory and splitting realities, a number of possibilities exist, if the Theory is real an there are infinite universes.

If its true, in one universe, Christianity never happened.
In another, you're having sex with the man/woman of your dreams right now.

The problem Therein is that the "You" in this universe may die when you're 50, and a new reality might be created, where another "You" exists, but "You" are not the "other You".

Both exciting and depressing at the same time.

It is - we're not talking about the same theory, though. I was referring to the concept of multiple realities layered in synchronicity, one on top of the other.

The idea that one could simultaneously exist on multiple dimensions and not know it, is... hard to swallow almost. There are many esoteric and mystic practices that center around working to to release the consciousness from the boundaries of our physical realm and see other dimensions, and even walk around in them. But those are the fringe of the fringe.

[Blasveck]

Concerning M-Theory and splitting realities, a number of possibilities exist, if the Theory is real an there are infinite universes.

If its true, in one universe, Christianity never happened.
In another, you're having sex with the man/woman of your dreams right now.

The problem Therein is that the "You" in this universe may die when you're 50, and a new reality might be created, where another "You" exists, but "You" are not the "other You".

Both exciting and depressing at the same time.

I think you're actually talking about the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum whatever. M-Theory does involve other universes or "branes", but you seem to be talking about MWI, which is what states that every quantum "choice" goes both ways, just in a different universe.

Meh. Both seem to intertwine.

Although, if the splitting realities portion is invalid, it still opens up essentially infinite possibilities with M-Theory.

Literally everything that can happen in a universe, has happened in some universe.