nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Life after death?

Kermit.de.frog

Do you believe in life after death? Maybe not the traditional narratives of heaven etc but maybe something else?

As an aside you know the way a doctor will always say so and so died "peacefully"? Do you believe that is likely? Curious. Because I don't believe that myself but I suppose that is separate.

Discuss!:)

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

nozzferrahhtoo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

From who?

Oh do keep up. I was talking about the group of people YOU were referring to when you said "Condescension and dismissal is never far away from my experience of atheists."

In other words perhaps it is how you conduct yourself around this group that results in the response you get from them.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You are right and the rest are wrong.

Speak for yourself. I have no idea who is "right" about an after life for example. I just know at this time that we have ZERO evidence or arguments to suggest there is one and several to suggest there is not.

Does that mean there 100% is not one? Of course not. It is you, not I, couching the discourse in terms of right and wrong.

All I know is that at THIS time there is no reason to think there is one. That is all. No more. No less.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

As for the rest of your post which is nothing more than a sloppy

Ah the old "I can not reply to your post so I will dismiss it with some throw away one liner or instead" cop out trick. We have never seen that one on After Hours before. Oh wait we have. All the time. No one buys it though. You can either reply to the substance of my posts... or you can run away. The choice is yours. Many people have tried the latter tactic however and have just ended up running away from the forum in shame like Philologos and Nagarric for example.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I just think there should be respect for ALL views and less belittling.

I do not think "views" deserve any respect. At all. Even a little. PEOPLE do. I respect people, not ideas. The problem is that the theist cohort tend to contrive to take offence on behalf of their ideas. As if by questioning or falsifiying an idea you are somehow attacking the people who hold them.

But that is absurd. We can very much respect people while not respecting ideas. Ideas should not be respected. They should be unpacked, examined, tested for falsification, error, or fallacy.... and this should be done using all the human faculties we have including, like it or not, our faculty of humor.

And there is one category of views that deserves the LEAST respect of all. And that is ENTIRELY unsubstantiated ones. The idea there is a god and the idea there is an after life are both examples of that sub set.

Zubeneschamali

o1s1n wrote: »

It would have been nice if you'd included the rest of my post in your quote, you know, the bit where it says 'I think it's daft.'

Your wish is my command! [hits edit button]

Kermit.de.frog

o1s1n wrote: »

I'm completely 'live and let live by the way' - I only have an issue with religions when they start impeding on the rights of others.

So do I but let's not pretend that is the preserve of a tiny minority of religious fanatics. Because it is not and never has been.

moneyman

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If everyone is like an animal in a field than why wouldn't you take what you can from everyone? Violently and without consequence, without fear? People don't like to hear it and ignore it but the rise in violent crime in "the west" is proportional to the decline in religion. Fact. Ignore as you wish.

I'm sure this has already been pointed out, but I could only read to page three due to the utter dross being spouted by you, but the countries in the west with the highest % of atheists are actually the most crime-free. This is an actual verifiable fact, unlike the emotional drivel you presented as "fact". Wanting it to be true does not make it so, nor does your insistence of it as such.

I don't know why I'm even bothering to respond, your arguments are mind-numbingly dumb and have been easily refuted for quite a long time. It's empirically false that there has to be a God in order to have morals.

nc19

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

There is no evidence what-so-ever to suggest that we have had past lives or that it is the explanation for deja vu..

Where did I say there was evidence???

I thought this was a light hearted thread on 'OUR OWN OPINIONS'
I wasnt expecting to have to prove my theory

btw, what evidence is there to support any theory about what happens after death????

TwoShedsJackson

moneyman wrote: »

I'm sure this has already been pointed out, but I could only read to page three due to the utter dross being spouted by you, but the countries in the west with the highest % of atheists are actually the most crime-free. This is an actual verifiable fact, unlike the emotional drivel you presented as "fact". Wanting it to be true does not make it so, nor does your insistence of it as such.

I don't know why I'm even bothering to respond, your arguments are mind-numbingly dumb and have been easily refuted for quite a long time. It's empirically false that there has to be a God in order to have morals.

You're wasting your time, Kermit fancies himself the Eamon Dunphy of AH, just take a look at the threads he starts, trying to provoke a reaction.

greenbicycle

I am sure most people have read this story but it fits well into this topic

http://www.galactanet.com/oneoff/theegg_mod.html

Its not that I believe in what it is saying but it makes you think a bit! sorry for the long length but its worth a read!

The Egg

By: Andy Weir

You were on your way home when you died.

It was a car accident. Nothing particularly remarkable, but fatal nonetheless. You left behind a wife and two children. It was a painless death. The EMTs tried their best to save you, but to no avail. Your body was so utterly shattered you were better off, trust me.

And that’s when you met me.

“What… what happened?” You asked. “Where am I?”

“You died,” I said, matter-of-factly. No point in mincing words.

“There was a… a truck and it was skidding…”

“Yup,” I said.

“I… I died?”

“Yup. But don’t feel bad about it. Everyone dies,” I said.

You looked around. There was nothingness. Just you and me. “What is this place?” You asked. “Is this the afterlife?”

“More or less,” I said.

“Are you god?” You asked.

“Yup,” I replied. “I’m God.”

“My kids… my wife,” you said.

“What about them?”

“Will they be all right?”

“That’s what I like to see,” I said. “You just died and your main concern is for your family. That’s good stuff right there.”

You looked at me with fascination. To you, I didn’t look like God. I just looked like some man. Or possibly a woman. Some vague authority figure, maybe. More of a grammar school teacher than the almighty.

“Don’t worry,” I said. “They’ll be fine. Your kids will remember you as perfect in every way. They didn’t have time to grow contempt for you. Your wife will cry on the outside, but will be secretly relieved. To be fair, your marriage was falling apart. If it’s any consolation, she’ll feel very guilty for feeling relieved.”

“Oh,” you said. “So what happens now? Do I go to heaven or hell or something?”

“Neither,” I said. “You’ll be reincarnated.”

“Ah,” you said. “So the Hindus were right,”

“All religions are right in their own way,” I said. “Walk with me.”

You followed along as we strode through the void. “Where are we going?”

“Nowhere in particular,” I said. “It’s just nice to walk while we talk.”

“So what’s the point, then?” You asked. “When I get reborn, I’ll just be a blank slate, right? A baby. So all my experiences and everything I did in this life won’t matter.”

“Not so!” I said. “You have within you all the knowledge and experiences of all your past lives. You just don’t remember them right now.”

I stopped walking and took you by the shoulders. “Your soul is more magnificent, beautiful, and gigantic than you can possibly imagine. A human mind can only contain a tiny fraction of what you are. It’s like sticking your finger in a glass of water to see if it’s hot or cold. You put a tiny part of yourself into the vessel, and when you bring it back out, you’ve gained all the experiences it had.

“You’ve been in a human for the last 48 years, so you haven’t stretched out yet and felt the rest of your immense consciousness. If we hung out here for long enough, you’d start remembering everything. But there’s no point to doing that between each life.”

“How many times have I been reincarnated, then?”

“Oh lots. Lots and lots. An in to lots of different lives.” I said. “This time around, you’ll be a Chinese peasant girl in 540 AD.”

“Wait, what?” You stammered. “You’re sending me back in time?”

“Well, I guess technically. Time, as you know it, only exists in your universe. Things are different where I come from.”

“Where you come from?” You said.

“Oh sure,” I explained “I come from somewhere. Somewhere else. And there are others like me. I know you’ll want to know what it’s like there, but honestly you wouldn’t understand.”

“Oh,” you said, a little let down. “But wait. If I get reincarnated to other places in time, I could have interacted with myself at some point.”

“Sure. Happens all the time. And with both lives only aware of their own lifespan you don’t even know it’s happening.”

“So what’s the point of it all?”

“Seriously?” I asked. “Seriously? You’re asking me for the meaning of life? Isn’t that a little stereotypical?”

“Well it’s a reasonable question,” you persisted.

I looked you in the eye. “The meaning of life, the reason I made this whole universe, is for you to mature.”

“You mean mankind? You want us to mature?”

“No, just you. I made this whole universe for you. With each new life you grow and mature and become a larger and greater intellect.”

“Just me? What about everyone else?”

“There is no one else,” I said. “In this universe, there’s just you and me.”

You stared blankly at me. “But all the people on earth…”

“All you. Different incarnations of you.”

“Wait. I’m everyone!?”

“Now you’re getting it,” I said, with a congratulatory slap on the back.

“I’m every human being who ever lived?”

“Or who will ever live, yes.”

“I’m Abraham Lincoln?”

“And you’re John Wilkes Booth, too,” I added.

“I’m Hitler?” You said, appalled.

“And you’re the millions he killed.”

“I’m Jesus?”

“And you’re everyone who followed him.”

You fell silent.

“Every time you victimized someone,” I said, “you were victimizing yourself. Every act of kindness you’ve done, you’ve done to yourself. Every happy and sad moment ever experienced by any human was, or will be, experienced by you.”

You thought for a long time.

“Why?” You asked me. “Why do all this?”

“Because someday, you will become like me. Because that’s what you are. You’re one of my kind. You’re my child.”

“Whoa,” you said, incredulous. “You mean I’m a god?”

“No. Not yet. You’re a fetus. You’re still growing. Once you’ve lived every human life throughout all time, you will have grown enough to be born.”

“So the whole universe,” you said, “it’s just…”

“An egg.” I answered. “Now it’s time for you to move on to your next life.”

And I sent you on your way.

Kermit.de.frog

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

And there is one category of views that deserves the LEAST respect of all. And that is ENTIRELY unsubstantiated ones. The idea there is a god and the idea there is an after life are both examples of that sub set.

Who are you to be taking apart anyones beliefs? Your taking out the garbage are you? Now you are living up to the stereotypical view of atheism.

Tell us about the entirely substantiated history of the universe and how we came in to being.

Your view, your ideology is also entirely unsubstantiated.

I'm well aware science has progressed our understanding of who we are and how we came about and has provided some answers but I am also aware there are a lot of holes in scientific theory as well. Ergo unsubstantiated.

And now your going to go in to a little hissy fit i'm guessing considering it did not take you too long to revert to type in the last post.

If someone wants to believe in some sky god because it gives them comfort or whatever than leave them be. As long as they are not interfering with you than what is the problem?

Zubeneschamali

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

As long as they are not interfering with you than what is the problem?

I find those bongs on the radio at 6 pm really irritating. After I have eradicated all religion in the world through rational boards.ie posts, RTÉ will have to stop the bongs.

Kermit.de.frog

moneyman wrote: »

It's empirically false that there has to be a God in order to have morals.

Another one incapable of reading. I never said that there has to be a God to have morals.

What I asked was, had you bothered to read, what do atheists base their moral code on if not some religious basis? Nothing to do with God.

It's a fair question and in fairness some have attempted to answer it to their credit.

sblythe

Life after death isn't something I can recall ever thinking deeply about. Actually, it isn't something I can recall thinking about all apart from when I was a kid and I was thinking about heaven for whatever reason. I'd rather not think about it now though, and I don't really care either. I'll enjoy living for the foreseeable future and when the time comes I'll take whats given to me.

nozzferrahhtoo

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I thought people came to After Hours to shoot the breeze and have the chat. Never knew it was such an organised pursuit.

Someone asking for my input on something constitutes an organised pursuit? If thats relatively organized in your world view I would hate to see how you run your life

But nice out on replying to anything I actually said in most of my posts

nc19 wrote: »

I thought this was a light hearted thread on 'OUR OWN OPINIONS'

Exactly. You are expressing yours. I gave you mine. Only one of us appears bothered by the other person having done so though. You might want to dwell on that for a moment.

nc19 wrote: »

I wasnt expecting to have to prove my theory

Good life lesson then. Often when you express an opinion in life.... people sometimes go "Oh really? What makes you think that?".

nc19 wrote: »

btw, what evidence is there to support any theory about what happens after death????

My point exactly. There is none. We simply have no evidence that there is anything after death. None. Nadda. Nichts. Nothing. Feck all. Diddly squat.

We do however have much evidence linking human consciousness to the brain.

So when ALL evidence we do have suggests the two things are inextricably linked and NO evidence we have suggests the possibility of a disconnect.... you can probably imagine if you try hard why I go one way and not the other.

One does not need 100% conclusive proof to notice that if given choices X and Y that all the evidence points towards X so far and no evidence points towards Y so far.

Jerichoholic

You can argue about religion all day but the only fact about this is that nobody knows.

Maximus Alexander

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

What I asked was, had you bothered to read, what do atheists base their moral code on if not some religious basis. Nothing to do with God.

There is no single answer to that since atheists are not one unified group with a rule book, just a whole load of random people who don't believe in God.

But some examples might be: whatever they were taught by their parents or peers. Whatever feels right or wrong to them, what makes them feel guilty or selfish and what does not. What, through thought or analysis they judge to be best thing to do for the benefit of themselves / loved ones / the community / the world at large, depending on their particular persuasion.

nozzferrahhtoo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Who are you to be taking apart anyones beliefs?

A human being. No one owns real estate in Idea Space. We are a social species living in a society and it does us well to take the ideas and beliefs of others and check them, falsify them, support them, rebbutal them and more.

The art of human discourse gives us this ability. People express ideas all the time. Other people discuss and unpack and analyse those ideas all the time.

Who I am to take apart beliefs? Who am I NOT to. We all have that right. If you do not want your beliefs subject to scrutiny.... then why express them in a public.... (wait for the next word it is important here).... DISCUSSION forum.

Perhaps a blog format would be more suited to you if you want to express ideas without rebutal? Or that soap box corner in Hyde Park?

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Tell us about the entirely substantiated history of the universe and how we came in to being.

If you want to start a thread on the subject of astro physics or Biological Evolution I am MORE than happy to tell you what current thinking is on those things and what substantiation is available for it. I am trained and educated in both but the latter is more my field. There is another Boards User called Morbert who is as well versed in the former as I am in the latter. I would be happy to contact him and ask him to join in too.

But THIS thread is not about that so I will not be derailing it here if it can be helped.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Your view, your ideology is also entirely unsubstantiated.

Which one? I have expressed none. I have just been evaluating YOURS. Are you presuming to know what I think and how I think before even asking me? Oh wait.... that is what you have been doing all this thread so far is it not.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If someone wants to believe in some sky god because it gives them comfort or whatever than leave them be.

I do. All the time. But as I said above this is a DISCUSSION forum and you specifically started a thread asking peoples opinions on this matter. I repeat the advice I gave you in one of, if not the, first reply I made on the thread which is if you do not want to hear the answers, then do not ask the questions!

I do not go around lambasting people for their theism or jumping on people who hold unsubstantiated beliefs. But if you come on to a discussion forum actively seeking input on a particular belief..... then do not go into a haughty little tantrum when you actually get answers.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

As long as they are not interfering with you than what is the problem?

Would that it were so. Alas the theist cohort is interfering with us every day in our halls of power, education and science. But as I keep saying, that has nothing to do with this thread. On THIS thread you asked a question then got offended that people actually answered it. Hardly clever kid.

kylith

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

What I asked was, had you bothered to read, what do atheists base their moral code on if not some religious basis? Nothing to do with God.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I base mine on 'not being a dick'.

krudler

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

From who? I see you are using the royal "we" there. Who are those around me?

Don't assume for one moment that everyone here is on your side. Atheists have a habit of being louder than the rest. That is your problem. You are right and the rest are wrong.

You may be right and so might religions, no one knows.

As for the rest of your post which is nothing more than a sloppy attempt at those attributes you were criticising me for attaching to many atheists - condescension and dismissal - it's hard to muster up the will to even respond because of the tone of it. It's the usual stuff. Delusion, what's wrong with these people etc etc.

I do appreciate you saying who you are though. The difference between you and me is that I would not actively go out to form a sect, cult or whatever you want to call it based on any belief I might have. But then i'm neutral and have no great feeling on the issue either way. I just think there should be respect for ALL views and less belittling.

And honestly I don't have the time to be replying in depth to every single post on boards. Maybe the weekend but not now.

Just to clarfiy then we're including marrying children, honour killings, beheading infidels, suicide bombing, denying medical attention for religious views, genital mutilation, murdering homosexuals, burning people alive for adultery?

Those should be respected?

TwoShedsJackson

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

what do atheists base their moral code on if not some religious basis? Nothing to do with God.

Can't they base it on Not Being a Twat??

I've never murdered anyone, and I don't intend to. Why? Because I know murdering someone is wrong. You don't need to have God or anything else to base that on, you just need to have empathy.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

WilyCoyote

Ode on Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood

Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting:
The Soul that rises with us, our life's Star,
Hath had elsewhere its setting,
And cometh from afar:
Not in entire forgetfulness,
And not in utter nakedness,
But trailing clouds of glory do we come

I've always liked this verse.

nozzferrahhtoo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

What I asked was, had you bothered to read, what do atheists base their moral code on if not some religious basis? Nothing to do with God.

It's a fair question and in fairness some have attempted to answer it to their credit.

As you noted many people have answered you, myself included, and some of them have done it quite patiently, articulately and openly. You have simply skipped over the posts and not replied to any of them in favor of going on an anti atheist rant in general, and on an anti nozzferrahhtoo rant in particular.

This is a discussion forum as I keep reminding you and discussion goes two ways. Rather than driveling on in an anti atheist empty rhetoric why not engage in replying to some of the answers you have had so far, ask questions about some of them, understand them better, see where they are coming from.

I for one base my morality on a socio-democratic application of the golden rule concept. I am _more_ than happy to elaborate on what that means to me and how I see it working if you wish to engage in actual conversation rather than soap boxing, throwing toys out of the pram, and wanton straw man generalizations about atheists as a whole.

krudler

The idea of what happens your consciousness is pretty fascinating, "heaven" seems terrifying to me, eternal awareness? no thanks. I'd much rather not exist at all.

[Deleted User]

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Another one incapable of reading. I never said that there has to be a God to have morals.

What I asked was, had you bothered to read, what do atheists base their moral code on if not some religious basis? Nothing to do with God.

It's a fair question and in fairness some have attempted to answer it to their credit.

If the words of religious texts are not the words of a god/gods then what exactly is it that religious people base their morality on?

krudler

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

As you noted many people have answered you, myself included, and some of them have done it quite patiently, articulately and openly. You have simply skipped over the posts and not replied to any of them in favor of going on an anti atheist rant in general, and on an anti nozzferrahhtoo rant in particular.

This is a discussion forum as I keep reminding you and discussion goes two ways. Rather than driveling on in an anti atheist empty rhetoric why not engage in replying to some of the answers you have had so far, ask questions about some of them, understand them better, see where they are coming from.

I for one base my morality on a socio-democratic application of the golden rule concept. I am _more_ than happy to elaborate on what that means to me and how I see it working if you wish to engage in actual conversation rather than soap boxing, throwing toys out of the pram, and wanton straw man generalizations about atheists as a whole.

There seems to be a trend in the OP's type of poster, ask a question, get reasonable well thought out counterpoint, ignore said points and go off on one accusing people of ignoring the questions they just answered in a rational manner. It's a bizarre mentality tbh.

In answer to what I base my morality on? not being a dick basically. How I was raised, my background and where I grew up, being aware of right and wrong. Don't need god for any of this.

Kermit.de.frog

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

On THIS thread you asked a question then got offended that people actually answered it. Hardly clever kid.

Correction - interpretations have been given not answers. As for offence - no. I'm not offended by anything I have seen here.

sbsquarepants

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, it does.

But is any of it true, that is the important question.

Exactly. The easter bunny offers chocolate eggs, atheism doesn't. Some Nigerian bloke keeps offering me 16 million dollars. What something offers has nothing to do with how true it is!

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

What I asked was, had you bothered to read, what do atheists base their moral code on if not some religious basis? Nothing to do with God.
.

What does a puppy base it's morals on? Why don't dogs just go around biting people, or each other? It's not for fear of devine retribution, cos as we all know all dogs go to heaven, Disney said so!
All animals have an inbuilt moral compass - it's no good for the survival of any species to just go around indiscriminately harming others.

Kermit.de.frog

krudler wrote: »

There seems to be a trend in the OP's type of poster, ask a question, get reasonable well thought out counterpoint, ignore said points and go off on one accusing people of ignoring the questions they just answered in a rational manner. It's a bizarre mentality tbh.

What reasonable well thought out counterpoint would that be? There has not been any. I have not ignored anything incidentally. And incidentally a counterpoint to what exactly?

You don't have to read the thread. Plenty going on elsewhere.

kylith

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Can't they base it on Not Being a Twat??

I've never murdered anyone, and I don't intend to. Why? Because I know murdering someone is wrong. You don't need to have God or anything else to base that on, you just need to have empathy.

The thing is, the really scary thing, is that it is perfectly acceptable, nay mandated to murder people under the rules of many religions, provided that they are gay, don't believe in the same god as you, are a woman who has had sex with someone she's not married to, or under several other rules. And then they have the gall to say we have no morality when their own god demands that they kill people just for disagreeing with them!

What the absolute frak?

Corkgirl210

nc19 wrote: »

Where did I say there was evidence???

btw, what evidence is there to support any theory about what happens after death????

PLENTY!!! ********************************

Walk into any spiritualist or spiritist church and you will be given some evidence by mediums..
Go experience past life regression/hypnois and make up your own mind.. Or read books from the likes of Brian Weiss/Dolores Cannon to look at their past life/future life evidence..
Go to a physical seance where you will be given irrefutable proof....

fizzypish

kylith wrote: »

I can't speak for anyone else, but I base mine on 'not being a dick'.

Spot on. Try to knock as much crack out of life while alive without interfering with everyone else crack. No need to worry about death. More than likely your consciousness will cease to exist. There won't be blackness, there will just be nothing and a nothing that you won't even be aware of because you don't exist anymore.