Printable View
It doesn't necessarily equate to that, I was just posing a theoretical question. If you dicovered there was NOTHING after this life,no God, heaven, hell or any other religious or personal beliefs about any after-life. If you could remove yourself from your beliefs for a second....you die...you cease to exsist, and there is NO MORE after that. Would you change the way you live your life if this was true?Quote:
Originally Posted by one_raven
I try do be a nice person and do good things for other people because it makes me feel good inside, and I get rewards for my actions in this life. It wouldn't matter if there was a god or heaven after this because it wouldn't change how I treat other people and choose to live my life. I do good and help because it makes me happy. But hey If I'm doing this life thing wrong and there really is a god and you have to be in a religion to go to heaven...then I guess I'll see you in hell. I'll bring the hot dogs and smores.
the comfort then derived is limited to the group which subscribe to it. the question is is that the best man can do? that is choose one group over another and remain loyal to that group to the end of his days for better or worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Auriga
If I were able to remove myself from my beliefs, perhaps then I could start believing in the Judeo-Christian concept of what afterlife is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metanoia
I already think there is no God so that wouldn't change anything for me.I'd keep going exactly the same with the exeption that there wouldn't be any theological debates with my friends.Anyway,the debate of Heaven and Hell and afterlife it is an ethical issue that is not neccesarily connected to God.
Third eye in Hinduism is the eye of wisdom or divine. Lord Shiva has it.Quote:
Originally Posted by thirdeye
Third eyes your ideas are really moving!
An actual infinity is infinite; because the future does not exist until it becomes the present, time cannot be an actual infinity, but rather a potential infinity - in that the second hand can continually add just one more second.Quote:
Originally Posted by one_raven
Why not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Redzeppelin
Reading some of the responsed gives me the dreadful impression that people haven't really read anything about philosophy and theological arguments about this subject.
News flash: the world is a dark and terrible place. Human beings have believed in a supernatural being to try and make sense of this place, but it doesn't make it real. Nietzche begins his argument with the famous qoute: God is dead.
I suggest you guys read what Russell, Sartre and Heideggar had to say on the subject. You might also want to check out the recent books by Hitchens, Dawkins and my favorite: "God: the failed hypothesis" by Victor Stenger.
Not to be argumentative, but why does Nietzsche, who gets a lot of bad press, or any one else saying "God is dead." make that true? We are already given to believe that by these philosophers' writings, that they feel man has grown beyond the need for God, that we understand enough of how the world works to make excellent deductions at that which we do not know, and nothing exists that does not have a reasonable explanation. I.E., they see no reason to believe in God, so God doesn't exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by liberal viewer
Human beings are notorious for being wrong, even the brightest of minds. I say you cannot prove something doesn't exist. Infinity is a long time to deal with. So I see no reason to take the statement "God is dead." as fact. And read Nietzsche a bit more carefully and see if he wasn't more against the apparent hypocrisy in the churches than the Christians themselves. If they were going to call themselves Christians, he found their actions deplorably beneath any high calling.
God Bless
Pendragon
God Bless
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care what Nietzsche, Russell, Sartre and Heideggar have to say about God. I just don't need their opinions. Either believe or don't believe. No one's opinion will change what I believe in my heart. But, I do believe that there are other things to be learned by reading them.
Also, I can't see where humans have evolved to the point where they don't need a god any longer. In this world, I think we probably need God even more. But, that is just my opinion.
:Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny5
:
On the other hand, I am betting you got your own concept of God taught to you by your family and your society. So actually what you believe in your heart comes from the opinions of others about there being a God. As for needing a God now even more, I'd say we need more solidarity and human understanding.
I think you are making my argument. Religion is taught to us. We have this need for a higher being simply because we can't explain our universe and ourselves. As for reading Nietzche more carefully, I have. He thought that the notion of a higher being was an insult to human intelligence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
"What if you found out with absolute certainty, that there was no god? No god, and no heaven or hell. (really think about this!) Would the knowledge that there was nothing after this life awaiting us, change the way you lived your life?"
I'd drink to that.
But honestly I don't think any proof of any kind could convince those who really want to believe.
After the life i don't know about it.But in life i believe in god.About hell or heaven i think hell and heaven is in the life itself.
No, I am not making your argument for you. As I said, I still think Nietzsche gets plenty of bad press and quotations taken out of context. But it is certain that he said "God is dead."Quote:
Originally Posted by liberal viewer
Well, consider this: If you do not believe something even exists, to you it never lived anyway. To those of us who believe in God in all His Power, He cannot die.
However, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche was born on October 15, 1844 and on August 25, 1900, God said "Nietzsche is dead." And so it has been. His statement of God being dead failed to destroy God. And I am well aware that with Nietzsche, whom by the way you have failed to spell right even once (I corrected your spelling here), people pick and choose what they put forward as his statements, and claim his illness (which finally claimed him) was against him if they disagree.
Let someone else suggest anything about that illness, and they have insulted a brilliant thinker. Know your opponent to play the game.
God Bless
Pen