Is there an afterlife? / The ultimate goal for man

[Me Myself]

Thinking about it... I agree, If I were to be eternally tortured I would say it would of been better if I had never been born.

I believe Hell has an end and that there is a happily ever after available to all.

nice

 

[Looncall]

I believe there is a life after death awaiting every living creature.
When I die and find out for certain I have an immortal spirit I will ethir look back on my life with regret, or feel confident about my life insomuch that I will be able to look forward with confidence.
I find it facinating just how concerned people can be concerning what happens when you die.
I know that it concerned Emperor Qin the first emperor of China enough to build the 8000 life sized individual Terracotta Warriors. If all these strong and powerful leaders who had everything throughout history have been so concerned, should we not be also?

if some ignorant savage was so concerned, so what? Remember, people knew far less in antiquity. If some notion is old, it's old, that's all. The older it is, the more it is likely to be in error.

Personally, I think all this guff about an afterlife is just a scam intended to keep pews and collection plates full - a cruel deception and a delusion.

 

[gnostic]

I know that it concerned Emperor Qin the first emperor of China enough to build the 8000 life sized individual Terracotta Warriors. If all these strong and powerful leaders who had everything throughout history have been so concerned, should we not be also?

And you think I am going to believe in a tyrant who hundreds of thousands of slaves or pressed his own people into forced labor, to work on his walls, with who know how many die in the process, as the way to afterlife, then I don't want this afterlife.

 

[Nadia Faiazova]

Hi! According to Bible, humans were created to live forever on the paradise earth. And God's purpose for them hasn't changed. We still have a great chance to enjoy everlasting life on the paradise earth, if we are obedient to God's commandements and work in harmony with his purpose.

 

[gnostic]

In my studies I have learned that Hindus believe that the ultimate goal for man to achieve is to break the cycle of reincarnation and cease to exist, while for a great many others it is the ultimate goal to live forever. What do you think the ultimate goal is for man?

I prefer to "cease to exist" when I die, but I wouldn't want to go through reincarnation after reincarnation.

And I don't want to "live forever". I don't find "living forever" at all appealing. The Islamic and Christian concepts of the afterlife are as appealing as going to the dentist and having my wisdom tooth removed.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

if some ignorant savage was so concerned, so what? Remember, people knew far less in antiquity. If some notion is old, it's old, that's all. The older it is, the more it is likely to be in error.

Personally, I think all this guff about an afterlife is just a scam intended to keep pews and collection plates full - a cruel deception and a delusion.

I don't think Emperor Qin nor any of the Pharoahs of Egypt were concerned about some collection plate, there seems to be more evidence showing that they were more concerned about their own welfare after they died than donating money to some church.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

I prefer to "cease to exist" when I die, but I wouldn't want to go through reincarnation after reincarnation.

And I don't want to "live forever". I don't find "living forever" at all appealing. The Islamic and Christian concepts of the afterlife are as appealing as going to the dentist and having my wisdom tooth removed.

I think a lot of people would prefer that, just because they hate the feeling of having to face the unknown. Life would be easier that way, you can do whatever you want including killing people and doing all manner of atrocities and never once have to worry about the consequences. People in general don't like the feeling of having to be accountable for anything.

 

[waitasec]

What do you think the ultimate goal is for man?

it depends on who you ask...

 

[gnostic]

I think a lot of people would prefer that, just because they hate the feeling of having to face the unknown. Life would be easier that way, you can do whatever you want including killing people and doing all manner of atrocities and never once have to worry about the consequences. People in general don't like the feeling of having to be accountable for anything.

Now that the most stupidest thing I have seen you have written.

I have seen atheists and agnostics exhibited more morals and responsibilities than some Christians, including LDS.

Carrying a "holy" book, doesn't make you more accountable for your action. Being able to pray doesn't make you a good person. It is instinct to do the right thing that make a person responsible morally. A Christian could cheat and lie with the best of them.

Do you want me to give you some examples about your 1st prophet, yaddoe?

Don't try to teach me about responsibility and accountability.

And if you want to know. It is not fear that reject the unknown. It is these books filled with superstitions, myths and unsubstantiated belief that I reject. And it is not fear that I reject afterlife, it is skepticism on the part of belief and desire for non-existence when my time is up because I don't find afterlife or reincarnation to be at all appealing.

 

[Evandr]

Now that the most stupidest thing I have seen you have written.

I have seen atheists and agnostics exhibited more morals and responsibilities than some Christians, including LDS.

Carrying a "holy" book, doesn't make you more accountable for your action. Being able to pray doesn't make you a good person. It is instinct to do the right thing that make a person responsible morally. A Christian could cheat and lie with the best of them.

Do you want me to give you some examples about your 1st prophet, yaddoe?

Don't try to teach me about responsibility and accountability.

And if you want to know. It is not fear that reject the unknown. It is these books filled with superstitions, myths and unsubstantiated belief that I reject. And it is not fear that I reject afterlife, it is skepticism on the part of belief and desire for non-existence when my time is up because I don't find afterlife or reincarnation to be at all appealing.

Knowledge has a way of changing people's minds as I believe it will yours in some distant future after your mortal sojourn is over and changing it will do you little good. I would agree with you if what we understand about the eternities was all that there is to learn. If that were true than by all means, live for your own moral definition of happiness and then end it all at death because there is no point to going on.

I refuse to be so foolish as to accept only what I see and understand only what knowledge is available to me on a temporal level and then proceed to fashion my beliefs and action after that; that is just plain stupid not to mention embodying the very definition of self glorification and haughty indifference to the realities of creation we simply choose not to recognize.

Mortality is a time of trial so the condition of the soul can be revealed to the bearer of that soul so that final judgment cannot be argued against, it is not done to prove anything to God but to remove from us the ability argue against what we ourselves fashioned which is the foundation of the judgments of God.

Go ahead, dance around and make light of this very serious time called mortal probation, wasting it with foolishness and self centered aggradations will be the fuel for mental torment so great it has been equated with the pains of fire and brimstone. I once heard a member of this forum call it Hell within Heaven – I had to smile because in a very real sort of way that idea has merit. We are so ignorant of the heights of joy and the depths of sorrow that mankind can achieve that we believe that what we have is all there is. We can go to far greater places, even places of glory, and still find ourselves so short of the mark (being in the presence of God) that hellish mental torment in a place of some degree of glory is possible.

 

[Majikthise]

Keep your glory. I'll take a nice bacon sandwich and a cold brew over kissing some imaginary deity's behind all my life.
And I'm not kidding.

 

[gnostic]

To Evandr:

Do you think that I would commit "crimes" or "atrocities" without consequences and accountability, simply because I don't believe in the afterlife?

Because that's basically what yaddoe is saying. It is rubbish, and it is stereotyping.

Do you think I am immoral and amoral person? How can you judge a person who you don't know, with or without religious background?

Such self-righteousness attitude never go well with me. If either my LDS brother-in-law or my sister spoke that way, I'd blast them too.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

Keep your glory. I'll take a nice bacon sandwich and a cold brew over kissing some imaginary deity's behind all my life.
And I'm not kidding.

We are not talking about deity right now, we are just focusing on whether there is an after life or not.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

To Evandr:

Do you think that I would commit "crimes" or "atrocities" without consequences and accountability, simply because I don't believe in the afterlife?

Because that's basically what yaddoe is saying. It is rubbish, and it is stereotyping.

Do you think I am immoral and amoral person? How can you judge a person who you don't know, with or without religious background?

Such self-righteousness attitude never go well with me. If either my LDS brother-in-law or my sister spoke that way, I'd blast them too.

OOooo getting a little violent in your speaking now eh? I gotta watch out around this one j/k

I'm stating that not believing in an afterlife completely justifies everything Hitler did during WWII.

If there is no afterlife I can go do whatever I want to do and what is the worst you can do? kill me? I'll just disappear one day anyway, what is the difference between now or 60 years from now? anything finite in an infinite universe is completely meaningless. What significance does one speck of sand really make in our galaxy? Wait I can't say sand because you can still have a couple 1,000 year old spec of sand, something more temporary, a snowflake, what significance does one snow flake really have in our galaxy?
Will it really matter if this one snow flake was some how able to and some how decided to melt all these other snow flakes away long before they naturally would of melted away. I don't think so. So if there is no afterlife what Hitler did really was no big deal, it was no different from the snowflake.
(note ignore whatever you might think about the water cycle, for arguments sake there is no water cycle for the snow flake, after it melts it literally becomes nothingness.)

If there is no afterlife what is the difference between melting snowflakes and killing people? Or if it is a life thing then the difference between killing ants, spiders, flies, or even mosquitoes and killing people.

 

[blackout]

That...

I believe in an afterlife of sorts but don't actually spend much time dwelling on it. My view is this: Afterlife or not, we only have this life once so make the most of it.

and that...

I think my ultimate goal is to recognize my divinity and experience my divinity to the fullest.

 

[gnostic]

OOooo getting a little violent in your speaking now eh? I gotta watch out around this one j/k

I'm stating that not believing in an afterlife completely justifies everything Hitler did during WWII.

If there is no afterlife I can go do whatever I want to do and what is the worst you can do? kill me? I'll just disappear one day anyway, what is the difference between now or 60 years from now? anything finite in an infinite universe is completely meaningless. What significance does one speck of sand really make in our galaxy? Wait I can't say sand because you can still have a couple 1,000 year old spec of sand, something more temporary, a snowflake, what significance does one snow flake really have in our galaxy?
Will it really matter if this one snow flake was some how able to and some how decided to melt all these other snow flakes away long before they naturally would of melted away. I don't think so. So if there is no afterlife what Hitler did really was no big deal, it was no different from the snowflake.
(note ignore whatever you might think about the water cycle, for arguments sake there is no water cycle for the snow flake, after it melts it literally becomes nothingness.)

If there is no afterlife what is the difference between melting snowflakes and killing people? Or if it is a life thing then the difference between killing ants, spiders, flies, or even mosquitoes and killing people.

Again, you writing nonsense.

Right now with people who do believe in the afterlife, this doesn't deterrent people from committing murder.

Charlemagne was very devout Christian. He had slaughtered thousands of pagan Saxons at the point of the sword, and only those who converted were spared. The promise of the afterlife wasn't deterrent to stop massacre. If anything it was license to kill, because Pope Leo, who would later crowned as the Holy Roman Emperor (800 CE), praised Charlemagne for being a model Christian and a champion of Christianity.

And it doesn't stop there. In Jesus' name, Christians even kill other Christians.

How many were killed in the name of Christ or in the name of God?

I certainly couldn't hazard a guess.

Even with the afterlife, what is the difference between melting snowflakes and killing people.

Just because you pray or read whatever scriptures you may, Christians (including LDS) are no different from everyone else. Neither the promise of everlasting rewards in heaven or the threat of eternal punishment will a Christian or any other religious people for that matter, from committing a crime, especially where he or she may something from it.

So spare me your horrible logic.

Do you think I go around committing crimes simply because I don't believe in the afterlife?

I know the Mormons, well at least the good ones, don't drink, smoke, do drug, or even drink coffee. So big fricking deal. I don't drink, smoke, drug or drink coffee too. You may not do these because whatever your prophet JS may have taught or what your church teach you. But I do all of these things because I don't like the taste of cigarette, alcohol or coffee. It does make me a better person than you, but it also doesn't make you better person than me.

I also don't steal or murder, simply I don't like hurting other people. I don't need a fricking holy book, church, prophet, Jesus or God to tell me what's right or wrong. I don't need the religious crutches to do what's right.

 

[Hari Krishna]

Right now with people who do believe in the afterlife, this doesn't deterrent people from committing murder.

Do you think I go around committing crimes simply because I don't believe in the afterlife?

I also don't steal or murder, simply I don't like hurting other people. I don't need a fricking holy book, church, prophet, Jesus or God to tell me what's right or wrong. I don't need the religious crutches to do what's right.

It's true that morality or a sense of right and wrong doesn't arise from a belief in an afterlife. It's also true that the threat of punishment may not prevent crime from occurring. Even if the the threat of punishment does deter people from committing crimes, can it really be considered a moral action if that is the motivation? As you say, religious people can justify their insane behaviour as easily as non-religious people.

But the question is still interesting, because if there is no afterlife, no god, no meaning or reason for the existence of the universe, how has this idea of morality arisen? Why are some things considered good and why is killing considered bad? If everything arises from chance, then everything is merely the random actions of atoms.

If everything is the random action of atoms, how can we find a basis for making a judgement of good or bad? We would then have to consider morality to be something like the golden rule - if we wouldn't like it then its bad and if we would its good.

So although I agree that morality is not produced merely by a 'belief' in god, I do think it arises from genuine spiritual knowledge. Some atheists may be more enlightened in this regard than some theists. But it is only humans who have this morality which seems to go against the laws of nature - dog eat dog. Animals don't think like this.

 

[9Westy9]

I personally believe there is and that this life has a point and isn't just about growing and growing and growing only one day to be toppled into non existence.

In my studies I have learned that Hindus believe that the ultimate goal for man to achieve is to break the cycle of reincarnation and cease to exist, while for a great many others it is the ultimate goal to live forever. What do you think the ultimate goal is for man?

To grow and grow and grow to avoid being toppled into non-existence.

 

[Looncall]

It's true that morality or a sense of right and wrong doesn't arise from a belief in an afterlife. It's also true that the threat of punishment may not prevent crime from occurring. Even if the the threat of punishment does deter people from committing crimes, can it really be considered a moral action if that is the motivation? As you say, religious people can justify their insane behaviour as easily as non-religious people.

But the question is still interesting, because if there is no afterlife, no god, no meaning or reason for the existence of the universe, how has this idea of morality arisen? Why are some things considered good and why is killing considered bad? If everything arises from chance, then everything is merely the random actions of atoms.

If everything is the random action of atoms, how can we find a basis for making a judgement of good or bad? We would then have to consider morality to be something like the golden rule - if we wouldn't like it then its bad and if we would its good.

So although I agree that morality is not produced merely by a 'belief' in god, I do think it arises from genuine spiritual knowledge. Some atheists may be more enlightened in this regard than some theists. But it is only humans who have this morality which seems to go against the laws of nature - dog eat dog. Animals don't think like this.

All social animals require morality. Otherwise they could not survive as social animals. A simple consideration of what people need from each other to survive, plus a dash of empathy, produces the morality we need. Vicious sky daddies and threats of eternal damnation are not needed. In fact, they are counterproductive.

Morality is indeed observed in animals. Please put aside your speciesist arrogance.

 

[Jainarayan]

In my studies I have learned that Hindus believe that the ultimate goal for man to achieve is to break the cycle of reincarnation and cease to exist, while for a great many others it is the ultimate goal to live forever.

I would suggest you continue studying. This is a very narrow interpretation of what mokṣa actually is, and it is definitely not the way I understand it to be.

Indeed... there are a number of views of the Hindu afterlife, once liberation is achieved. Advaitins believe in "union" with Brahman. My understanding of that is like pouring a glass of water into the ocean. The water in the glass, once released becomes one with the ocean. So the individual soul once released from samsara, becomes one with Brahman. i.e moksha.

Vaishnavas who are overwhelmingly not Advaita believe in an eternity in the presence of Lord Vishnu/Lord Krishna in Vaikunthaloka or Goloka, respectively, enjoying eternal bliss in God's company and presence. Oddly enough, and I would get my tongue ripped out by some Hindus, the Vaishnava view is not altogether unlike the Abrahamic view of Heaven.