Life after death

[otters]

I understand what you're getting at. And I half-way agree. But I think you're missing the point - if you do want that thing long enough, and it eventually turns into belief, that can still only happen if you essentially think that it's true. Beliefs aim at truth. That is the nature of them.

Hm, what about people who seek evidence to support things they want to believe in, and ignore evidence that conflicts with their desired belief?

They build multimillion dollar museums in Kentucky.

It's the stupidest money-wasting defense of YEC I've yet seen. The Creation Museum. Ugh. It reeks of "unprofessional."

People have to start realizing that religion and that kind of stuff doesn't exist, it's just some invention by someone.

Oh dear.

Donfuy, this is the Debate forum, and as such you don't state your own beliefs as fact. If you do, people can just say, "You're wrong because blah blah blah"...you don't learn anything. Instead they can say, "That doesn't make sense...I think blah blah blah, because blah blah blah."

You don't say, "Dude, that's the stupidest thing ever." You say, "I think that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard."

Kapiche?

[Atilla]

Religion clearly exists, in the same way that atheism, communism, and anarchism exist. This isn't to say that religious people, atheists, communists, or anarchists are right... but just for future reference, be aware that "religion" refers to the concept of religion itself, not to the objects of religious belief (gods, afterlife, etc. etc.). Otherwise it could get confusing - "religion is cruel" is quite a different statement from "the gods are cruel".


Also, incluye, I think "That's the stupidest thing ever, because blah blah blah" is acceptable. I believe that saying "That's the stupidest thing ever, full stop" without explanation is what is problematic, because I believe without giving any reason or explanation there is little to discuss and I think it would just degenerate into shouting what I think is essentially "IS SO!" "IS NOT!" "IS SO!" ad nauseum. I also think it's perfectly fine to state your beliefs without prefacing every clause with "I think" or "I believe". I think doing so just clutters up the text and inhibits communication. I believe that most people posses sufficient social awareness to know that stuff someone else says is often their opinion rather than fact (at least, I think it is). I think that if people object to the truth or factual accuracy of a statement they are free to contest it regardless of whether or not it is prefixed with "I think".

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

I also think it's perfectly fine to state your beliefs without prefacing every clause with "I think" or "I believe". I think doing so just clutters up the text and inhibits communication. I believe that most people posses sufficient social awareness to know that stuff someone else says is often their opinion rather than fact (at least, I think it is). I think that if people object to the truth or factual accuracy of a statement they are free to contest it regardless of whether or not it is prefixed with "I think".

I only ever speak objective truth.

[Atilla]

I think I only ever speak objective truth.

I think I contest the accuracy of that statement. But how can I be sure that there is a statement, let alone that I am contesting it? It seems to me that it is a statement and that I am questioning its accuracy, but what do I know? Perhaps it is actually a question, and all this time I have been thinking it is a statement when it is not. Or perhaps what I think of as the statement is contesting me.

[Donfuy]

Gosh, I had this same exact discussion with my friends a week ago. I lost the discussion (they were two, and they always act like I've no reason 'bout nothing), but, as always, certain that I was right.

[Deathconciousness]

But i also find it quite frustrating when people create arbitrary deities with arbitrary means of getting into their "afterlife" for the sake of explaining their point of view.

...the birth of every religion, ever?

your opinion that religion is petty doesnt really make the argument any more valid

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

But i also find it quite frustrating when people create arbitrary deities with arbitrary means of getting into their "afterlife" for the sake of explaining their point of view.

...the birth of every religion, ever?

your opinion that religion is petty doesnt really make the argument any more valid

Could that be because it wasn't an argument, but a statement of opinion?
Religion is petty.

[Deathconciousness]

Religion is extremely petty on a large scale.

[Rikaninja]

There is no need to believe in an after-life. There is no proof and there wll never be. The world will never now of such a thing, and if there is a heaven. Well... I guess I'm wrong. But I strongly believe that there is no aftr-death and I understand that Earth will never know!

[blue_tetris]

Religion is extremely petty on a large scale.

And religion is nonexistent on a small scale.

Does someone ever come to the conclusion that their universe is governed by invisible people without the aid of others? If people internalize a sense of spirituality and practice their faith alone, something tells me that they've still borrowed some of their material from large scale sources.

[NicNac14]

If you where standing right next to me Why me, then i would have punched you.. questioning there if there is after life is fine but using the example heaven is not in my based vicinity.. just say after-life you could offend someone.. not me of course i just wanted to punch you for your stupidity.. hehe.. I'm not religous in any way.. although i do respect other cultures religion..
its your choice not mine so why do i care?

[乳头的早餐谷物]

If you where standing right next to me Why me, then i would have punched you.. questioning there if there is after life is fine but using the example heaven is not in my based vicinity.. just say after-life you could offend someone.. not me of course i just wanted to punch you for your stupidity.. hehe.. I'm not religous in any way.. although i do respect other cultures religion..
its your choice not mine so why do i care?

I'm not sure why anyone would be offended because he used the word heaven when clarifying his question. It could be taken as being specifically directed at Christianity (although it just as easily could have a more general meaning), but what's the problem with that? Certainly anyone who is personally offended when their beliefs are questioned should stay away from debates.

[NicNac14]

true... sorry.. but I live in a mixed community so i'm used to these remarks causing so much bullshit..

[otters]

Why don't the big names here respect religion?

I mean, I can tell you're a smart guy, Tsukatu, and you probably have good reasons for your beliefs. Why do you refuse to reciprocate?

[blue_tetris]

Am I a big name?

I respect people with faith. I can even respect religion, when it does the right things.

[jean-luc]

I doubt I qualify as a big name, but I can at least be 3/5ths of one or something.

I am very hard on religion when it causes harm. That said, I think in the majority of cases it does good. I have full respect for the majority of religions, even the many that I disagree with.

[otters]

Am I a big name?

I respect people with faith. I can even respect religion, when it does the right things.

Sorry about the generalization. I meant Suki.

[乳头的早餐谷物]

Would it be acceptable to respect the people involved in them but not the religions themselves?

[jean-luc]

Would it be acceptable to respect the people involved in them but not the religions themselves?

I think so. That's the case for the religions I don't respect.

[blue_tetris]

Also, incluye said "Why do you refuse to reciprocate (the respect)?"

I'm pretty sure religion doesn't respect a lot of people, based on who they are or what they do. These people should feel free to reciprocate whatever malice is being hurled at them from organized religion.

[beethoveN]

without reading the other posts; I am going to state my opinion.

I do believe in the afterlife* because; yes; the bible** says so. but I will go a little deeper than that.
through many historical discoverys the bible is the most trustworthy historical document. the most.
we have even found the 'ark', as it is called. through finding the ark, we practically proved the flood. through proving the flood; we prove a God.
if their is a God***, which I believe in, then why not have afterlife.
also, if the bible is the most trustworthy historical document, which it is through all three tests, then also the afterlife part is also correct.
sorry I couldn't go in depth, but I'm only 11 years old.

*reffering to heaven
**reffering to the christian bible
***reffering to the holy Trinity, God the father, God the son and God the holy spirit

[blackson]

through many historical discoverys the bible is the most trustworthy historical document. the most.
we have even found the 'ark', as it is called. through finding the ark, we practically proved the flood. through proving the flood; we prove a God.

Kid, you don't know anything your talking about. You think there would be any atheists or non-believers if that statement was true?

I would flag Tsukatu, but he's probably tired of this same argument.

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

Why don't the big names here respect religion?

I mean, I can tell you're a smart guy, Tsukatu, and you probably have good reasons for your beliefs. Why do you refuse to reciprocate?

Because I think you're doing something dumb. Respecting people unconditionally is not one of the tenets I hold to, nor is respecting people for doing things I think are dumb.
This is especially aggravated by the fact that you somehow have the impression that your faith wants you to respect everyone, and then you wonder aloud why I don't share the same faith-derived tenet.
In other words, you (mistakenly) believe that respecting everyone is a Christian thing to do, and right now you're asking me why I'm so bad at doing something a Christian would do?

[yungerkid]

atheists have respect too, tsukatu. they're not all abusive and choleric. and Christianity as a religion did not invent love. we are not the only ones who practice it. i don't know where you got that "only Christians can feel respect" (paraphrased) idea.

i believe that humans are machines and objects, and i still maintain a certain level of respect for them. he's asking you to do something that is *in your nature*. is it really that hard or that contrary to your core beliefs?

[blackson]

atheists have respect too, tsukatu. they're not all abusive and choleric. and Christianity as a religion did not invent love. we are not the only ones who practice it. i don't know where you got that "only Christians can feel respect" (paraphrased) idea.

Christians find it their duty to show it, and tell everyone that they are, just in case.