@bu1ckgnx You believe in logic, but you cannot explain where it came from. And I never said anything about places outside the universe, but rather ideas, like logic. Naturalism has no basis for logic. If naturalism were true, logic wouldn't exist, because it is abstract. God created logic, where did you get the idea that he didn't? That would make God, well, not God.
@jsalverdachss If we only believed in things for which we knew the natural origin, we would all believe in nothing since even the Big Bang isn't the end of the story. Logic is only abstract because we need abstract ideas to represent its laws. The laws exist regardless. Example: A=A. The symbols are abstract, the concept is absolute. A cannot equal not A.
@jsalverdachss ...so you say god created logic. That means you think logic is subjective. That means you think god could make A=~A. No wonder you have everything in your head backwards and upside-down.
You are asking if we'd rather be theists or atheists if either were true, while tacking on infinity life for atheists, and taking away infinite life for theists. Theism in your question wouldn't be logical, because there is no being saved. And atheism isn't logical, in either your question or reality, because it assumes nothing is outside the universe, and so has no reason for logic to exist to begin with. All in all, the question isn't logical from any stance, so you can't get a logical answer.
@jsalverdachss Buddhism proposes eternal life without a god (Buddha was just the first person to achieve Nirvana, and returned as the Dali Lama to show the way). Ergo, there can be a belief in eternal life without a "god" to "save" you. The reverse is clearly true where a god can exist but there are no eternal souls, even though it may not be emotionally appealing. Nothing's illogical about these hypotheses except that it doesn't fit YOUR view of theism. More Dodge! Just answer the question.
@bu1ckgnx That is why I'm not a Buddhist, because it's illogical. And if there were a God, why would there be no souls? No morals? No saving? Clearly any God would create people with souls, to be like him. Also, any God should hold his people to morals, and therefore, when the people sin, he should offer them saving. And not fitting my view of theism is what makes them illogical. Why is there logic if there is no God? Answer me that, and I will answer your question.
@jsalverdachss Your premise that a god must care about making everyone eternal is not valid. As the Greeks believed, gods can be malevolent, emotional, petty, just or any combination. There's nothing about a creator that says the nature of this creator must be purely good. That's just what you hope for. You point out the bias in your argument by dismissing other theistic views simply because they're not yours. Explain why Buddhism is illogical without saying god must exist...
@jsalverdachss...and as for a god creating people with no eternal souls, he would be punishing and rewarding in this life. Is that not good enough for you? You demand eternal life also? Then choose the other option, but forgo a god to dish out a punishment or reward. Maybe the souls do that themselves, to themselves. The point is, these scenarios are not illogical because they are internally consistent. BTW, logic must precede any god for it to be objectively true.Otherwise 2+2=4 is subjective
@bu1ckgnx First, your logic thing at the bottom. Math isn't logic. It's math. And God made the laws of logic. In your worldview, you believe that nothing is outside this universe. And you believe that God is an illogical idea. But then where does logic come from? The fact that there is logic means your worldview is illogical.
And proving Buddhism wrong without saying there has to be a God is like answering 1+3 without using 4. You can't, because the rules are biased.
@jsalverdachss I can't help you if you can't acknowledge the validity of internally consistent worldviews that don't fit yours. If you think logic MUST come from god, you are beyond repair. BTW, math is a subset of logic, so math is a form of logic. Look it up. But my point about logic preceding any god is to point out the paradox in any god who creates logic. For if this is the case, then logic is subjective to the whims of the creator, and thus not truly logical because it is not objective.
@bu1ckgnx Beyond repair? You believe that nothing is outside the universe yet you rely on the laws of logic and nature, which you have completely no basis for. And math is not logic, merely follows its rules. And logic isn't subjective to the whims, but to the very nature, of God. And why are you talking to me about logic? Logic, in your worldview, does not exist. The fact that it does proves you wrong.
@jsalverdachss Where do you come up with this? Stop using a Straw Man argument! I absolutely believe logic exists! What makes you think my worldview excludes logic? That's a leap and a half with no basis for stating such. Also, there could be places outside our "universe". There's nothing about naturalism that says a multiverse is impossible. Based on QM and leading physics theories, a multiverse is likely. But it would still be logical and part of nature. God needs evidence, not logic...
@jsalverdachss...Also, what does "logic isn't subjective to the whims, but to the very nature, of God" mean? Are you saying that logic is part of god's nature? Can god change his nature? If so, wouldn't that make the logic in his nature a subjective whim? You see how you are stuck in a paradox? In a world with god, he either created logic (making logic subjective) or logic existed first (making god subordinate). You can't have god both create and not create logic. But if no god, logic simply is.
Honestly, why would a God help if this was the only life you got and no heaven? So, the question is non-sensical (favorite saying of Atheists I've seen). It makes no sense for a God to create us and then not care what His enemy does to us in this life or the next. I mean if we are in the image of God then I think we are more than just physical. I honestly don't think we would care about death or God if all we are is flesh and blood.
@vbirdieb DODGE! The point of the exercise is to determine what is more important TO YOU: living forever, or being protected. Just cause you would NOT live forever doesn't mean a god couldn't protect you while you were alive. And just because you WOULD live forever doesn't mean a god exists to make it so. Lumping the 2 together as dependent on each other is a logical fallacy.
I really want to believe in reincarnation. It would be awesome if it's true. I'd much rather have the afterlife. Geez after all my research and everything, I don't know what to believe anymore. I guess we'll have to wait and see (or not see).
I like it the way God designed it, that is, just like it is. Is this life on earth perfect, no. Is that the way it was designed to be, yeah. Works for me.
God gave free will! You make an assumption that all Christian beliefs are based on religious views. I'm Christian and don't follow Dogma or man's religious views, so how about that? You say there's no God, I say prove it!!! I see atheist as walking dead people...
I don't love God because of heaven, that would be love for heaven not God....I love God because He's always there for me and my life is awesome and very peaceful, so what more could I ask for?
you say ~ So you would choose god over eternal life?
Yes I sure would! you say ~ Name calling is unattractive. And you've been so sweet right? Give me a break! More exclamation points are because of how slow you are and needed a picture to understand my answer! You don't ask questions because you want to know, you question because you have a need to feel alive, and by hating Christians is how you deal with it.
You don't know anything about me. You assume I hate Christians when what I actually hate is the religious oppression some try to impose on everyone else. Don't deny it, it's been going on for centuries.
Name calling is unattractive you UglyBoringOldBitch. See?
The only reason you're mad is because the question forces you to consider what's more important to you. I wonder how honest you're being.
Name calling is unattractive you UglyBoringOldBitch hahahaha your face is unattractive but I didn't tell you that till now..ROFL plus if I'm so boring why won't you stop writing me? lol hate is the religious oppression some try to impose on everyone else...I know, you atheists need to knock it off! And you know anything about me? I'm not mad I think you're funny, I'm being honest, you're just to simple minded to understand.
Your fear of hell makes you irrational. Look at the first line you wrote: "God gave free will". No proof provided. No logic or reason. Just an empty statement made to assert authority. Unfortunately, you fail at this attempt and just came off pompous. Than you claim I'm "assuming Christian beliefs are based on religious views". What else can they be based on? What is a Christian belief that ISN'T a religious view. You don't even know what you're talking about, and that's why I keep responding.
Prove it's wrong! And I see no logic or reason in what you think. What the heck you talking about boy? I keep responding cause you won't piss off! You don't even know the difference between Christians, but you know it all..Duh! Stupid kid go away now you bore me!
some food for thought, immortal means never dying - this is not the same as "self-existing", one of the attributes of God, which means having no beginning. The immortal soul had a moment when it was created.
And being "created" implies a creator, right? This argument fails because of the multitudes of examples in nature of order arising from chaos by simple laws of nature. Less complex can lead to more complex w/o a higher power (in your example, one of INFINITELY higher complexity). I'm not even talking about life. Look at galaxy formation, or crystal growth. No god needed for those, so why should a soul be any different?
In my humble unbiased opinion: There is a God, and we have an immortal soul too. God created our souls so there can be a God without our immortal souls, but there can't be our immortal souls without God, Seems like you like to philosophize.
It does not follow that a soul MUST be created by a god. You make that assumption based on nothing but your religious views. Logically, the 2 concepts are not dependent on each other. This can be shown by the example of Buddhism (have immortal souls but no god or gods). And even if you're right, this is beside the point. The point is for you to think about which you consider more important. That's why it's a "hypothetical" question.
An eagle who can't fly. At least I'd have those bad ass talons.
As for the point of my question, I think you missed it. I don't care what you (general sense) believe. I asked what you want more. I'm clearing the air and establishing the priorities people have. Do they want to live forever or be looked after.
those talons are no good if u cant fly down on ur prey
have u entertained the idea that u might live forever and never have the wrath of a vengeful god?
theists cant answer ur question who are the ppl u are aiming the question at. they are too fixed into their belief structure to logically step out of it and asses the options u propose lol they just think they are off to heaven end of conversation, they dont think they might live for ever without s god or live one mortal life protected
lol yeah ok, but you cant then be a theist can you? picking ur option B where u dont have help from god and then u can live for ever in some place, how can a theist pick that option when they believe in god? u say she is a theist but she cant pick that option because that option doesnt have god in it, u get what i mean? makes no sense, so my 'theory' does still stand, u become an atheist picking the option B? so therefore a theist cant answer ur question and remain a theist 'hypothetically'
Buddhists are considered theists. They don't believe in a god, yet they do believe in an afterlife. Your definition is flawed because you assume a theist must believe in a deity. But picking option B wouldn't make them an atheist. It only shows what's more important to them. Stop simply claiming otherwise. In fact, why don't you answer the question. Which would you prefer, god w/ no afterlife or afterlife w/ no god.
my definition is not flawed because the very definition of a theist is someone who believes in at leats one god, i never said buddists were theists so i dont even know why u would use this is some evidence of my statement being flawed.
ok ok i will answer ur question
oh dear there seems to be a problem, ur aiming this at theists and im not one im a buddist
I don't think admitting which option is MOST important to "you" excludes you from believing in BOTH options. It merely highlights where a person's priorities lie. My now fiance still believes in God, even though it is immortality she most desires.
It seams the fear of death is stronger than the fear of god.
Shoot hard question. As ProfMTH said it really makes little sense to me, since God and afterlife goes together. I think i tend towards the afterlife thingie though.
The afterlife is wishful thinking. Then again, what do Christians think they are going to do for billions of years on end in a heaven? That, in and of itself could turn out to be never ending torment.
lol i agree, they think/beliveve that they will worship 'God' for eternity, sounds pointless eh? why would god make us for that alone as the best possible outcome for us knowing full well the majority are off to hell for ever, and the ones in heaven will have to think about their loved ones burning away, pretty scary if u go up or down :S
I hear ya man. I just can't imagine what it would be like living in heaven for zillions of years on end with a mother fucker like Yahwah or whatever other alias's he comes under. That would be more like a hell if anything right? of course it would. That's why anybody with a working brain can conclude that Xtianity and the bible is one big pile of bullshit !
hang on nogogma, it is obvious that the biblical teachings were changed in order to suit the rewriters and use as a weapon to control the masses and start wars and do evil, i see this much, but maybe there was some truth somewhere b4 it got raped, i am not in favor or either potentialty as i dont have a time machine.
but yeah lol this vision of heaven is enough to make one rebel maybe and do exactly what Satan did? lol i dont trust the organised religions or the scientific explanations
Even if your hypothesis is correct, if God is so powerful, he would not only not need for fallible humans to write a book about him but if it was altered, he would have set the record straight by now, don't you think? Of course he would. Or she would. Let's face it. God is a myth. All of them were invented out of ignorance and fear. The only life we have is here and now and it's very precious. That's why I say, drink all the beer while your alive! LOL just kidding! I don't drink anyway
That's the point of the exercise. There's no reason why an afterlife is necessary if a god exists, and likewise there's no reason a god needs to exist if there is an afterlife. The video's point is to highlight how all these mutually exclusive beliefs have been glued together by religion. The religion is more appealing if the metaphysical benefits are overwhelming. Separating these beliefs exposes PR side of religion. But why did you choose God? I find immortality more appealing.
Well, I was trying to leave what it would be up to the imagination of the theist. And maybe I should take answers from both theists and atheists. It'd make it more interesting to compare and contrast. So far, you're the only one who even answered, sort of.
I suspect theists may find it a tough choice to make and hard question to answer. As I was watching the video, I was thinking about how prior to the development of notions of an afterlife in Judaism, Jews did their thing with Yahweh without any expectation of something beyond the grave. My guess would be the the overwhelming majority of theists would say that just wouldn't make sense to them because religion has, in the main, become a (purported) way to solve the death problem. That is...
...certainly what Christianity is ultimately all about.
When I was a believer, I liked the idea of living forever, but in more thoughtful moments I wondered what *would* I do. There's a line in the hymn "Amazing Grace" that goes something like "When we've been there [i.e., with God in the afterlife] 10,000 years, bright shining as the sun, we've no less days to sing God's praise than when we first begun." 10,000 years singing "God's praise"?! I wondered whether there would be vacation time.
The afterlife is definitely the main appeal of Christianity (though they usually use the negative enforcement as motivation, ie: Hell). Even my g/f, who is a strong Catholic believer said she'd rather have the immortal soul. So much for God!!!
I know this vid is from years back....
but to answer your Q as a Theist, I'd pick God even with no afterlife.
Boulberhane 1 week ago
@bu1ckgnx You believe in logic, but you cannot explain where it came from. And I never said anything about places outside the universe, but rather ideas, like logic. Naturalism has no basis for logic. If naturalism were true, logic wouldn't exist, because it is abstract. God created logic, where did you get the idea that he didn't? That would make God, well, not God.
jsalverdachss 6 months ago
@jsalverdachss If we only believed in things for which we knew the natural origin, we would all believe in nothing since even the Big Bang isn't the end of the story. Logic is only abstract because we need abstract ideas to represent its laws. The laws exist regardless. Example: A=A. The symbols are abstract, the concept is absolute. A cannot equal not A.
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
@jsalverdachss ...so you say god created logic. That means you think logic is subjective. That means you think god could make A=~A. No wonder you have everything in your head backwards and upside-down.
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
You are asking if we'd rather be theists or atheists if either were true, while tacking on infinity life for atheists, and taking away infinite life for theists. Theism in your question wouldn't be logical, because there is no being saved. And atheism isn't logical, in either your question or reality, because it assumes nothing is outside the universe, and so has no reason for logic to exist to begin with. All in all, the question isn't logical from any stance, so you can't get a logical answer.
jsalverdachss 6 months ago
@jsalverdachss Buddhism proposes eternal life without a god (Buddha was just the first person to achieve Nirvana, and returned as the Dali Lama to show the way). Ergo, there can be a belief in eternal life without a "god" to "save" you. The reverse is clearly true where a god can exist but there are no eternal souls, even though it may not be emotionally appealing. Nothing's illogical about these hypotheses except that it doesn't fit YOUR view of theism. More Dodge! Just answer the question.
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
@bu1ckgnx That is why I'm not a Buddhist, because it's illogical. And if there were a God, why would there be no souls? No morals? No saving? Clearly any God would create people with souls, to be like him. Also, any God should hold his people to morals, and therefore, when the people sin, he should offer them saving. And not fitting my view of theism is what makes them illogical. Why is there logic if there is no God? Answer me that, and I will answer your question.
jsalverdachss 6 months ago
@jsalverdachss Your premise that a god must care about making everyone eternal is not valid. As the Greeks believed, gods can be malevolent, emotional, petty, just or any combination. There's nothing about a creator that says the nature of this creator must be purely good. That's just what you hope for. You point out the bias in your argument by dismissing other theistic views simply because they're not yours. Explain why Buddhism is illogical without saying god must exist...
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
@jsalverdachss...and as for a god creating people with no eternal souls, he would be punishing and rewarding in this life. Is that not good enough for you? You demand eternal life also? Then choose the other option, but forgo a god to dish out a punishment or reward. Maybe the souls do that themselves, to themselves. The point is, these scenarios are not illogical because they are internally consistent. BTW, logic must precede any god for it to be objectively true.Otherwise 2+2=4 is subjective
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
@bu1ckgnx First, your logic thing at the bottom. Math isn't logic. It's math. And God made the laws of logic. In your worldview, you believe that nothing is outside this universe. And you believe that God is an illogical idea. But then where does logic come from? The fact that there is logic means your worldview is illogical.
And proving Buddhism wrong without saying there has to be a God is like answering 1+3 without using 4. You can't, because the rules are biased.
jsalverdachss 6 months ago
@jsalverdachss I can't help you if you can't acknowledge the validity of internally consistent worldviews that don't fit yours. If you think logic MUST come from god, you are beyond repair. BTW, math is a subset of logic, so math is a form of logic. Look it up. But my point about logic preceding any god is to point out the paradox in any god who creates logic. For if this is the case, then logic is subjective to the whims of the creator, and thus not truly logical because it is not objective.
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
@bu1ckgnx Beyond repair? You believe that nothing is outside the universe yet you rely on the laws of logic and nature, which you have completely no basis for. And math is not logic, merely follows its rules. And logic isn't subjective to the whims, but to the very nature, of God. And why are you talking to me about logic? Logic, in your worldview, does not exist. The fact that it does proves you wrong.
jsalverdachss 6 months ago
@jsalverdachss Where do you come up with this? Stop using a Straw Man argument! I absolutely believe logic exists! What makes you think my worldview excludes logic? That's a leap and a half with no basis for stating such. Also, there could be places outside our "universe". There's nothing about naturalism that says a multiverse is impossible. Based on QM and leading physics theories, a multiverse is likely. But it would still be logical and part of nature. God needs evidence, not logic...
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
@jsalverdachss...Also, what does "logic isn't subjective to the whims, but to the very nature, of God" mean? Are you saying that logic is part of god's nature? Can god change his nature? If so, wouldn't that make the logic in his nature a subjective whim? You see how you are stuck in a paradox? In a world with god, he either created logic (making logic subjective) or logic existed first (making god subordinate). You can't have god both create and not create logic. But if no god, logic simply is.
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
Honestly, why would a God help if this was the only life you got and no heaven? So, the question is non-sensical (favorite saying of Atheists I've seen). It makes no sense for a God to create us and then not care what His enemy does to us in this life or the next. I mean if we are in the image of God then I think we are more than just physical. I honestly don't think we would care about death or God if all we are is flesh and blood.
vbirdieb 6 months ago
@vbirdieb DODGE! The point of the exercise is to determine what is more important TO YOU: living forever, or being protected. Just cause you would NOT live forever doesn't mean a god couldn't protect you while you were alive. And just because you WOULD live forever doesn't mean a god exists to make it so. Lumping the 2 together as dependent on each other is a logical fallacy.
bu1ckgnx 6 months ago
Certainly an eternity is more important than a 70 year mortal existence. You have a pretty good imagination
stevestewart7777 1 year ago
I really want to believe in reincarnation. It would be awesome if it's true. I'd much rather have the afterlife. Geez after all my research and everything, I don't know what to believe anymore. I guess we'll have to wait and see (or not see).
JenEpona 1 year ago
I like it the way God designed it, that is, just like it is. Is this life on earth perfect, no. Is that the way it was designed to be, yeah. Works for me.
nighthawk7878 1 year ago
you are so ugly, I bet your mom was impregnated by that hairy dog.
TheSunmanho 2 years ago
I saw your stupid rap video. Have you ever gotten laid? I doubt it. Fucking kill yourself, looser.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
@bu1ckgnx
I know how to handle women!
TheSunmanho 2 years ago
If you try to serenate them with that rap, you will fail.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
God gave free will! You make an assumption that all Christian beliefs are based on religious views. I'm Christian and don't follow Dogma or man's religious views, so how about that? You say there's no God, I say prove it!!! I see atheist as walking dead people...
I don't love God because of heaven, that would be love for heaven not God....I love God because He's always there for me and my life is awesome and very peaceful, so what more could I ask for?
sexywildchildbaby 2 years ago
Not one point in that defensive rambling did you answer the question.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
You say ~ They like god to be there, controlling everything, I say ~ God gave free will!!!
You say ~ Christians make assumption based on nothing but our religious views.
I say, religious views do not make you a Christian!!!!
You say~ Christians love God because of heaven!!!!
I say you're wrong, that would be love for heaven not God. Didn't know you needed a picture to understand, thought zombies like you know everything!!!
sexywildchildbaby 2 years ago
So you would choose god over eternal life (not necessarily heaven). Is that your round-about way of answering the question?
btw: Name calling is unattractive. You should refrain.
Also, more exclamation points don't make you right about anything. It only shows how you are defensive.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
you say ~ So you would choose god over eternal life?
Yes I sure would! you say ~ Name calling is unattractive. And you've been so sweet right? Give me a break! More exclamation points are because of how slow you are and needed a picture to understand my answer! You don't ask questions because you want to know, you question because you have a need to feel alive, and by hating Christians is how you deal with it.
sexywildchildbaby 2 years ago
You don't know anything about me. You assume I hate Christians when what I actually hate is the religious oppression some try to impose on everyone else. Don't deny it, it's been going on for centuries.
Name calling is unattractive you UglyBoringOldBitch. See?
The only reason you're mad is because the question forces you to consider what's more important to you. I wonder how honest you're being.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
Name calling is unattractive you UglyBoringOldBitch hahahaha your face is unattractive but I didn't tell you that till now..ROFL plus if I'm so boring why won't you stop writing me? lol hate is the religious oppression some try to impose on everyone else...I know, you atheists need to knock it off! And you know anything about me? I'm not mad I think you're funny, I'm being honest, you're just to simple minded to understand.
sexywildchildbaby 2 years ago
Your fear of hell makes you irrational. Look at the first line you wrote: "God gave free will". No proof provided. No logic or reason. Just an empty statement made to assert authority. Unfortunately, you fail at this attempt and just came off pompous. Than you claim I'm "assuming Christian beliefs are based on religious views". What else can they be based on? What is a Christian belief that ISN'T a religious view. You don't even know what you're talking about, and that's why I keep responding.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
Prove it's wrong! And I see no logic or reason in what you think. What the heck you talking about boy? I keep responding cause you won't piss off! You don't even know the difference between Christians, but you know it all..Duh! Stupid kid go away now you bore me!
sexywildchildbaby 2 years ago
LOL why would anyone answer this. His situation is not the case. Pointless...
lbszg350 2 years ago
some food for thought, immortal means never dying - this is not the same as "self-existing", one of the attributes of God, which means having no beginning. The immortal soul had a moment when it was created.
bigboyvernon 2 years ago
And being "created" implies a creator, right? This argument fails because of the multitudes of examples in nature of order arising from chaos by simple laws of nature. Less complex can lead to more complex w/o a higher power (in your example, one of INFINITELY higher complexity). I'm not even talking about life. Look at galaxy formation, or crystal growth. No god needed for those, so why should a soul be any different?
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
In my humble unbiased opinion: There is a God, and we have an immortal soul too. God created our souls so there can be a God without our immortal souls, but there can't be our immortal souls without God, Seems like you like to philosophize.
bigboyvernon 2 years ago
It does not follow that a soul MUST be created by a god. You make that assumption based on nothing but your religious views. Logically, the 2 concepts are not dependent on each other. This can be shown by the example of Buddhism (have immortal souls but no god or gods). And even if you're right, this is beside the point. The point is for you to think about which you consider more important. That's why it's a "hypothetical" question.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
Metaphysical ideas are debatable, and I appreciate hearing your ideas because it gets me to think.
bigboyvernon 2 years ago
thinking is never a bad move.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
i dont believe in any organised or unorganized religion but i dont believe in a prime creator which would qualify me as a theist
pointless question u are asking
so heres one for u
would u rather b a penguin who cant swim or an Eagle who cant fly
u cant make crazy rules up in ur question and expect some kind of intelligent response
mavidbabae 2 years ago
An eagle who can't fly. At least I'd have those bad ass talons.
As for the point of my question, I think you missed it. I don't care what you (general sense) believe. I asked what you want more. I'm clearing the air and establishing the priorities people have. Do they want to live forever or be looked after.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
those talons are no good if u cant fly down on ur prey
have u entertained the idea that u might live forever and never have the wrath of a vengeful god?
theists cant answer ur question who are the ppl u are aiming the question at. they are too fixed into their belief structure to logically step out of it and asses the options u propose lol they just think they are off to heaven end of conversation, they dont think they might live for ever without s god or live one mortal life protected
mavidbabae 2 years ago
Actually, my theist girlfriend said she'd rather have an immortal soul. There goes your theory that theists can't separate the 2 concepts.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
lol yeah ok, but you cant then be a theist can you? picking ur option B where u dont have help from god and then u can live for ever in some place, how can a theist pick that option when they believe in god? u say she is a theist but she cant pick that option because that option doesnt have god in it, u get what i mean? makes no sense, so my 'theory' does still stand, u become an atheist picking the option B? so therefore a theist cant answer ur question and remain a theist 'hypothetically'
mavidbabae 2 years ago
Buddhists are considered theists. They don't believe in a god, yet they do believe in an afterlife. Your definition is flawed because you assume a theist must believe in a deity. But picking option B wouldn't make them an atheist. It only shows what's more important to them. Stop simply claiming otherwise. In fact, why don't you answer the question. Which would you prefer, god w/ no afterlife or afterlife w/ no god.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
my definition is not flawed because the very definition of a theist is someone who believes in at leats one god, i never said buddists were theists so i dont even know why u would use this is some evidence of my statement being flawed.
ok ok i will answer ur question
oh dear there seems to be a problem, ur aiming this at theists and im not one im a buddist
j/k
i would choose afterlife with no god
mavidbabae 2 years ago
I don't think admitting which option is MOST important to "you" excludes you from believing in BOTH options. It merely highlights where a person's priorities lie. My now fiance still believes in God, even though it is immortality she most desires.
It seams the fear of death is stronger than the fear of god.
Sorry it took so long to respond. Kinda busy.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
oops, read the comments upside-down.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
this is not establishing what theists priorities either
mavidbabae 2 years ago
Shoot hard question. As ProfMTH said it really makes little sense to me, since God and afterlife goes together. I think i tend towards the afterlife thingie though.
kissvenom 2 years ago
The afterlife is wishful thinking. Then again, what do Christians think they are going to do for billions of years on end in a heaven? That, in and of itself could turn out to be never ending torment.
nogogma 2 years ago
lol i agree, they think/beliveve that they will worship 'God' for eternity, sounds pointless eh? why would god make us for that alone as the best possible outcome for us knowing full well the majority are off to hell for ever, and the ones in heaven will have to think about their loved ones burning away, pretty scary if u go up or down :S
mavidbabae 2 years ago
mavidabae;
I hear ya man. I just can't imagine what it would be like living in heaven for zillions of years on end with a mother fucker like Yahwah or whatever other alias's he comes under. That would be more like a hell if anything right? of course it would. That's why anybody with a working brain can conclude that Xtianity and the bible is one big pile of bullshit !
nogogma 2 years ago
hang on nogogma, it is obvious that the biblical teachings were changed in order to suit the rewriters and use as a weapon to control the masses and start wars and do evil, i see this much, but maybe there was some truth somewhere b4 it got raped, i am not in favor or either potentialty as i dont have a time machine.
but yeah lol this vision of heaven is enough to make one rebel maybe and do exactly what Satan did? lol i dont trust the organised religions or the scientific explanations
mavidbabae 2 years ago
Even if your hypothesis is correct, if God is so powerful, he would not only not need for fallible humans to write a book about him but if it was altered, he would have set the record straight by now, don't you think? Of course he would. Or she would. Let's face it. God is a myth. All of them were invented out of ignorance and fear. The only life we have is here and now and it's very precious. That's why I say, drink all the beer while your alive! LOL just kidding! I don't drink anyway
nogogma 2 years ago
If I had to choose I guess I would pick God existing, but when you die that is it. However both choices sound like no win situations.
WordPlanter 2 years ago
That's the point of the exercise. There's no reason why an afterlife is necessary if a god exists, and likewise there's no reason a god needs to exist if there is an afterlife. The video's point is to highlight how all these mutually exclusive beliefs have been glued together by religion. The religion is more appealing if the metaphysical benefits are overwhelming. Separating these beliefs exposes PR side of religion. But why did you choose God? I find immortality more appealing.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
"A sort of float-around existence"
I think I'd like that for at least a few hundred years, but then I'd probably be looking for something to do.
Oops, I shouldn't be answering. I'm not a theist. Sorry. :: quietly steps away ::
ProfMTH 2 years ago
Well, I was trying to leave what it would be up to the imagination of the theist. And maybe I should take answers from both theists and atheists. It'd make it more interesting to compare and contrast. So far, you're the only one who even answered, sort of.
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
I suspect theists may find it a tough choice to make and hard question to answer. As I was watching the video, I was thinking about how prior to the development of notions of an afterlife in Judaism, Jews did their thing with Yahweh without any expectation of something beyond the grave. My guess would be the the overwhelming majority of theists would say that just wouldn't make sense to them because religion has, in the main, become a (purported) way to solve the death problem. That is...
ProfMTH 2 years ago
...certainly what Christianity is ultimately all about.
When I was a believer, I liked the idea of living forever, but in more thoughtful moments I wondered what *would* I do. There's a line in the hymn "Amazing Grace" that goes something like "When we've been there [i.e., with God in the afterlife] 10,000 years, bright shining as the sun, we've no less days to sing God's praise than when we first begun." 10,000 years singing "God's praise"?! I wondered whether there would be vacation time.
ProfMTH 2 years ago
The afterlife is definitely the main appeal of Christianity (though they usually use the negative enforcement as motivation, ie: Hell). Even my g/f, who is a strong Catholic believer said she'd rather have the immortal soul. So much for God!!!
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago
You look exactly like an old friend of mine, except you have a great personality! heh, It's so weird. :)
Great vid.
DblOSmith 2 years ago
Thanks!
bu1ckgnx 2 years ago