Moderator: Community Team
Except that for all you know the whole thing might be a twisted piece of Satire, heaven might be a bore and hell a 24 hour party zone...nobody knows so its folly to think you have chosen the safe option.116Soldier wrote:No I think you misunderstood. It seems the most reasonable to me. Heaven is a better place then hell. Here's a point. If a Christian is wrong, and they just become extinct, they will never know. But if an Atheist is wrong and there is a God then they will go to hell.Skittles! wrote:So, with that reasoning, you're going to gone because of your fear of hell? Sounds like Dark Age Catholicism to me.
Uh, humans are mammals. I was talking about reptiles and birds and non-Mammalia animals. Trees decompose too, which aren't animals.116Solider wrote:haha I know. but to some humans are considered mammals, therefore I put it. lol
I was simply relating to mammals because they are considered by some the closest to us. And I agree that reptiles and birds and non-Mammalia animals decompose the same. Trees decompose and they are considered living but wouldn't be good for the sake of an analogy and are unrelated to humans. lol
Were you originally attracted to Christianity for the not-going-to-hell part, or did you genuinely believe?116Soldier wrote:No I think you misunderstood. It seems the most reasonable to me. Heaven is a better place then hell. Here's a point. If a Christian is wrong, and they just become extinct, they will never know. But if an Atheist is wrong and there is a God then they will go to hell.Skittles! wrote:So, with that reasoning, you're going to gone because of your fear of hell? Sounds like Dark Age Catholicism to me.
Uh, humans are mammals. I was talking about reptiles and birds and non-Mammalia animals. Trees decompose too, which aren't animals.116Solider wrote:haha I know. but to some humans are considered mammals, therefore I put it. lol
I was simply relating to mammals because they are considered by some the closest to us. And I agree that reptiles and birds and non-Mammalia animals decompose the same. Trees decompose and they are considered living but wouldn't be good for the sake of an analogy and are unrelated to humans. lol
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Which God? Did you randomly pick one and are hoping that your choice is the "real" God?But its all personal choice. I'd rather devote to God then to risk life in hell.
Obviously you'd have to pick the god with the best heaven and the worst hell. That way you're getting the best payback for the odds.Haggis_McMutton wrote:Which God? Did you randomly pick one and are hoping that your choice is the "real" God?But its all personal choice. I'd rather devote to God then to risk life in hell.

I certainly did not expect this thread to come to this.116Soldier wrote:So then for the sake of conversation, lets say that the teachings of the Bible are true and there is a God. Would you like to know how you can be sure you would go to heaven?InkL0sed wrote:That is a valid point. I am an agnostic (borderline atheist, really), and I have to say, sometimes I tell myself maybe I should believe in God just to be on the safe side. But then I reason, if everyone used that logic, and there was no God, that would just be a waste of life, wouldn't it? All that time going to Church, worrying about burning in Hell and whatnot, and at the end of it all you just gave the head of whatever church it is power. So I'll take my chances with what I actually believe.116Soldier wrote:So your saying that you choose to be an Atheist because you dismiss religious texts and "figure heads." Therefore nothing happens when you die, you just cease to exist. I have a question to follow that though, what if you are wrong?hecter wrote:116Soldier, you seem to be asking us to back up out beliefs with facts... The fact of the matter is: Xians and other religions have their religious texts and figure heads that they believe in and trust (as well as a few other things they consider to be facts, but we're not getting into that...) and atheists dismiss all these texts and figureheads as myths and so they go with the only logical conclusion that when we die, we rot in the ground.
There's a very interesting, relatively new theory on the physical basis of our consciousness that basically argues that the brain is a quantum computer and that consciousness, or the mind, if you prefer, are rooted in quantum coherences in our brains. This theory has been put forth primarily by Stuart Hammeroff and Roger Penrose. See http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/ if you're interested. If this theory is correct (and it will be very difficult to test), it could eventually lead to detection of transfer of the quantum coherences that make up the mind to some other medium after the death of the individual... i.e. detection of physical evidence supporting the idea of some kind of afterlife, if such a thing really happens. Long way off and probably a long shot, but a very real possibility, so someday you might get that evidence, Frigidus....well probably your children's children will get it but whatever. Or we might just be worm food.Frigidus wrote:Well, my opinion is pretty much tied with why I'm an athiest. When it comes to death, specifically, I don't see any evidence that suggests any sort of split between mind and body. Our brain, the center of our "soul", if you want to call it that, is physical. If it is not sustained it will cease to work, and so we will cease to be.
bolded for probably the most reasonable way to view the possiblity to anything after life.Colossus wrote:There's a very interesting, relatively new theory on the physical basis of our consciousness that basically argues that the brain is a quantum computer and that consciousness, or the mind, if you prefer, are rooted in quantum coherences in our brains. This theory has been put forth primarily by Stuart Hammeroff and Roger Penrose. See http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/ if you're interested. If this theory is correct (and it will be very difficult to test), it could eventually lead to detection of transfer of the quantum coherences that make up the mind to some other medium after the death of the individual... i.e. detection of physical evidence supporting the idea of some kind of afterlife, if such a thing really happens. Long way off and probably a long shot, but a very real possibility, so someday you might get that evidence, Frigidus....well probably your children's children will get it but whatever. Or we might just be worm food.Frigidus wrote:Well, my opinion is pretty much tied with why I'm an athiest. When it comes to death, specifically, I don't see any evidence that suggests any sort of split between mind and body. Our brain, the center of our "soul", if you want to call it that, is physical. If it is not sustained it will cease to work, and so we will cease to be.
Personally, I expect there probably is something after death (after all, Gandalf says there's a big field), and believing enriches my life now, so it's worth it even if I do end up worm food.
kalishnikov wrote: Damn you Koesen. (I know you're reading this)
Interesting. I'm honestly intrigued by the idea of a possible scientific basis for an afterlife. I think it's worth looking into. I suppose that we'll all find out once we're dead, but a little forewarning would be nice.Colossus wrote:There's a very interesting, relatively new theory on the physical basis of our consciousness that basically argues that the brain is a quantum computer and that consciousness, or the mind, if you prefer, are rooted in quantum coherences in our brains. This theory has been put forth primarily by Stuart Hammeroff and Roger Penrose. See http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/ if you're interested. If this theory is correct (and it will be very difficult to test), it could eventually lead to detection of transfer of the quantum coherences that make up the mind to some other medium after the death of the individual... i.e. detection of physical evidence supporting the idea of some kind of afterlife, if such a thing really happens. Long way off and probably a long shot, but a very real possibility, so someday you might get that evidence, Frigidus....well probably your children's children will get it but whatever. Or we might just be worm food.Frigidus wrote:Well, my opinion is pretty much tied with why I'm an athiest. When it comes to death, specifically, I don't see any evidence that suggests any sort of split between mind and body. Our brain, the center of our "soul", if you want to call it that, is physical. If it is not sustained it will cease to work, and so we will cease to be.
Personally, I expect there probably is something after death (after all, Gandalf says there's a big field), and believing enriches my life now, so it's worth it even if I do end up worm food.
This raises an interesting question. If Islam is the One Truth, and a Christian suicides, will he be rewarded with virgins in the afterlife?ignotus wrote:When I blow myself up I will go to Heaven where I will get 77 virgins and...
Ups... Wrong forum?![]()
![]()
![]()
kalishnikov wrote: Damn you Koesen. (I know you're reading this)
Matthew 7:7Koesen wrote:This raises an interesting question. If Islam is the One Truth, and a Christian suicides, will he be rewarded with virgins in the afterlife?ignotus wrote:When I blow myself up I will go to Heaven where I will get 77 virgins and...
Ups... Wrong forum?![]()
![]()
![]()
heavycola wrote:I actually converted around page 198. Unfortunately, I converted to satanism.Snorri1234 wrote:Man, this thread was great. A whopping 230 pages with noone changing their viewpoint.
I fully agree.Koesen wrote:I am an agnostic because I've never experienced anything that requires me to believe in a supernatural creator of everything. None of the arguments advanced by believers convince me. I am not an atheist, though, since I can't be 100% sure that I'm right.
As for the "better safe than sorry" logic, I think that's just too petty. If there is an omniscient and omnipotent creator and ruler of everything, then I have to assume that
(A) it's apparently his wish that I don't believe,
(B) that the petty little differences between things like christianity, islam and other religions are insignificant to him and that
(C) if there is such a thing as heaven and hell, the creator will take a look at how you lived your life (i.e. do you try not to hurt other people etc.) and judge you on that basis, rather than on whether or not you have been scared into believing to avoid the possibility that you might be wrong.
Believing for no other reason than to avoid the consequences in case there is a creator, is spiritual fraud, and I have no illusion that if there is an omnipotent creator, he'll be fooled by my safe politics.
That reminds me of that great Rowan Atkinson stand up where he is Satan welcoming people to hell.Neoteny wrote:Someone pointed out to me that if a particular religionist is right that there is a hell, but wrong in the god they choose to worship, they get to spend eternity with the atheists...
Colossus have you read The Emperor's New Mind? Also you mentioned GEB somewhere else... but that's by the by. Both brilliant books. Anyway - i thought rog penrose was kind of arguing for a 'quantum theory' of consciousness in TENM (then again, that book left me quite dizzy)Colossus wrote:There's a very interesting, relatively new theory on the physical basis of our consciousness that basically argues that the brain is a quantum computer and that consciousness, or the mind, if you prefer, are rooted in quantum coherences in our brains. This theory has been put forth primarily by Stuart Hammeroff and Roger Penrose. See http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/ if you're interested. If this theory is correct (and it will be very difficult to test), it could eventually lead to detection of transfer of the quantum coherences that make up the mind to some other medium after the death of the individual... i.e. detection of physical evidence supporting the idea of some kind of afterlife, if such a thing really happens. Long way off and probably a long shot, but a very real possibility, so someday you might get that evidence, Frigidus....well probably your children's children will get it but whatever. Or we might just be worm food.Frigidus wrote:Well, my opinion is pretty much tied with why I'm an athiest. When it comes to death, specifically, I don't see any evidence that suggests any sort of split between mind and body. Our brain, the center of our "soul", if you want to call it that, is physical. If it is not sustained it will cease to work, and so we will cease to be.
Personally, I expect there probably is something after death (after all, Gandalf says there's a big field), and believing enriches my life now, so it's worth it even if I do end up worm food.
