The Afterlife

[Chad]

One thing to me sticks out in many religions: A supposed afterlife. However, how exactly is this afterlife supposed to work? Are people thinking that they will be judged by a supreme being that will have final say over if they were good or bad? Upon judgment is your “soul” thrown in an infinitely large room or something, free to roam and do what you wish for all eternity? I guess all of this is rather dependent on your chosen religion. Doesn't this seem rather needlessly complicated, selfish (In a certain respect) and very wishful?

It would seem much more logical for me to think that when we die we just plain cease to exist. Why do many feel that other animals just die while we ascend to some afterlife? When I read about other animals, I'm often amazed at some of their abilities. Granted, humans do have some unique features, but does this really make us so much more deserving of an eternal life? Why is there a need for an eternal life? Is there a reason why we should have a “soul” that lives on?

[Random Thought]

The more I read and think about it, the more I think this is a great trick that the religion memeplex pulls. Nearly every religion proposes an afterlife. This afterlife guarantees a great existence after death. The afterlife is not able to be proven, so it remains in question, untestable for the most part. The positive side effect to believing in this afterlife I guess would be people obeying set rules and guidelines, according to the religion in question. While it may not seem like an obvious positive side effect, many religions seem to promote some common good ideas. Such as not lying, stealing and murdering. There's much more, but I don't feel like digging around for more specific examples at the moment Of course, those who follow these practices will be at a slightly better advantage for survival, which in turn will pass on their religious ideas to their children or others who think highly of them. Not to mention the fear of an bad afterlife to keep people in line and make them strive to follow the rules and guidelines that much closer. Ok, I trailed off a little...there's much more I would like to relate, but I'll try to get to my point! I just felt like I would share where I stand on the issue.

[/Random Thought]

I guess my main questions would be this: How do you suppose an afterlife to actually work (Supposing you believe in an afterlife to begin with)? Do you feel at all like the idea of an afterlife is wishful thinking from a fear of one day your existence might come to a complete end? Or does the belief in an afterlife come solely from the teachings of the religion that you learned?

For those that don't believe in an afterlife: What do you think drives the need for people to suppose an afterlife, along with what do you think continues to propagate it?

These are all genuine questions, I don't mean to sound rude if any of my post came off that way...I have a bad tendency make that happen...lol.

(Btw - I was unsure what sub-forum to put this under...so feel free to move it if you think it's better off in a different sub-forum )

[Chad]

Is there a reason why we should have a “soul” that lives on?

If what I have previously mentioned is true (near death experience) then obviously there is some purpose to our soul and it's continuance after the body expires. Exactly why that should be seems very mysterious.

Going back to the premise that there is an afterlife, and souls continue on-there could be several reasons or purposes for a soul after death.

I have heard many reports of the belief of "guardian angels" or the spirits of familiar or non familiar souls who seemingly look over, guide, or protect a living person. Perhaps certain souls return to watch over a specifiic person who is currently living.

There are far too many unfortunate people in the world for me to think that Guardian Angels exist. My sister's must have been asleep at its post! It's also untestable, which presents a bit of a problem. As much as I would like to think that someone was watching over us (Wait a second, that seems a little creepy now that I think of it ), it doesn't seem to be the case. It contains many other questions to, such as who/what decides what you watch over or who you protect, and how do you protect it if you dont actually exist?

I've heard many reports of reincarnation, where a soul will return to earth in a different body to experience life all over again. This pattern continues over and over again, lifetime to lifetime, until a specific goal, or enlightenment is achieved.

Ah yes, reincarnation. This is an interesting idea as well. At one time I thought this was a reasonable explanation. However, there are some problems with it. What if the earth were suddenly struck by an Asteroid (Ala the KT Extinction Event) and all life became extinct (Yeah, it's far fetched because something would most likely adapt and fill the niche rather "quick")? Would the souls end up waiting a few billion years for life to evolve and come around again? And even then, I think it would be hard pressed to believe that all the same life would evolve on a second time around. Thus, do the souls adapt to other body forms with entirely different functions? It just seems to become overly complicated to me. A few of my friends do believe in reincarnation though.

I've also heard several reports of ghosts; those souls who somehow get lost or held to a particular destination. Houses that are haunted by a prior owner (or someone murdered in that house or location) are common themes. If ghosts do exist-then this is further evidence that there is at least some aspect of truth to the afterlife for apparently their soul has continued to exist after the body no longer functions.

I realize, Chad, that I haven't given definite answers to the segments of your post that I chose to focus on. But I wanted to mention these different possibilities that souls may continue on, and the possibility of an afterlife.

Evidence for ghosts seems rather sketchy. Under true scientific testing, ghosts dont seem to exist. Many things should be considered before jumping to a wild explanation; the motive and sincerity of those reporting the sighting should be evaluated, the possibility of it being a hoax or con, physiology reasons and psychological reasons. I'd be willing to bet that any ghost sighting could be adequetly explained using those guidelines. Though it is often a story being told, it's near impossible to test.

I think memetics does a good job of explaining a lot of these different ideas. I fully reccommend Susan Blackmore's The Meme Machine. It really makes you think, and I was able to relate a lot of the concepts to things that I see going on day by day. Things that I never really thought of too much started to actually make sense in terms of memes.

(This response was a bit delayed - I've been rather busy lately!)

[Nick Hallandale]

The whole idea of an afterlife is a dangerous idea. Too many people are willing to risk there life in war because they think they will go to heaven if they die.
Hallandale

[QED]

Ah yes, reincarnation. This is an interesting idea as well. At one time I thought this was a reasonable explanation. However, there are some problems with it. What if the earth were suddenly struck by an Asteroid (Ala the KT Extinction Event) and all life became extinct (Yeah, it's far fetched because something would most likely adapt and fill the niche rather "quick")? Would the souls end up waiting a few billion years for life to evolve and come around again? And even then, I think it would be hard pressed to believe that all the same life would evolve on a second time around. Thus, do the souls adapt to other body forms with entirely different functions? It just seems to become overly complicated to me. A few of my friends do believe in reincarnation though.

Very good analysis. Once people have 'invented' these nonsense ideas (usually a very, very long time ago) they stick around forever. They only persist because there's no test of their validity. There are other reasons as well:

The ideas are appealing to people and belief in them is seen as harmless.
The ideas often support other inventions in a way that resembles a properly reasoned-out whole i.e. before being allowed to enter heaven in the afterlife we must pass a judgment.

It seems that this interconnectedness is mistaken by otherwise rational people as an indication of the veracity of such ideas. But a little bit of logic -- such as that which you applied to reincarnation -- demonstrates that the principle of these ideas is quite simply a nonsense. I think people have become too used to the 'politically correct' tolerance of the basic tenets of religion. If the normal amount of critical thinking that humans employ when military, commercial or scientific objectives are involved was applied such concepts would be dismissed in very short measure. I don't know why humanity has given special leave of its senses when it comes to our 'spiritual side'. Perhaps it's us taking a holiday from reason and reality?

[Arya]

[quote="Chad]

There are far too many unfortunate people in the world for me to think that Guardian Angels exist. My sister's must have been asleep at its post! It's also untestable, which presents a bit of a problem. As much as I would like to think that someone was watching over us (Wait a second, that seems a little creepy now that I think of it ), it doesn't seem to be the case. It contains many other questions to, such as who/what decides what you watch over or who you protect, and how do you protect it if you dont actually exist?

Hi Chad, sorry for my delay-I've been busy also but want to respond to your observations/questions.

It does seem that some people may have "someone looking over them" whereas others out there have so much misfortune in their lives that it appears as though there are no guardian angels. I do not know your sister's situation (if you have mentioned it I missed that post and I apologize-just point me in the right direction of the post # and I'll read it so that you don't have to repeat yourself), but perhaps it may only seem that she doesn't have one. For reasons unknown, the angel or guardian may be staying in the background for there is some difficulty or obstacle that she must overcome on her own without assistance from an outside source. This sounds silly in light of those who are paraplegics from a car accident (not their fault) or a parent who loses their child to unforseen circumstances. Those circumstances sound very extreme, but then again there may be a reason why bad things happen to good people that are not "avoided" or interfered/intervened by a guardian angel.

Then again too, what if reincarnation exists and a person is sent back to Earth to "fend for themselves" without an angel to watch over them for the evils that they may have done to a person/persons from another lifetime-depending of course upon the severity of this evil. Hitler would be a good example-what if he was sent back to Earth for many successive lifetimes to suffer horribly all the evils that he infliced on a specific race of people?

Ah yes, reincarnation. This is an interesting idea as well. At one time I thought this was a reasonable explanation. However, there are some problems with it. What if the earth were suddenly struck by an Asteroid (Ala the KT Extinction Event) and all life became extinct (Yeah, it's far fetched because something would most likely adapt and fill the niche rather "quick")? Would the souls end up waiting a few billion years for life to evolve and come around again? And even then, I think it would be hard pressed to believe that all the same life would evolve on a second time around. Thus, do the souls adapt to other body forms with entirely different functions? It just seems to become overly complicated to me. A few of my friends do believe in reincarnation though.

Let's just say that reincarnation is a reality, and the Earth is completely destroyed by that asteroid. The souls have to go somewhere, and I would tend to think that any responsible creator would have a place for them to reside. The universe is too vast for me not to consider that a possibility, especially when another planet could very well sustain life as does the Earth. For the record, I believe in reincarnation and feel that I have lived other lives and met others that I knew from other lifetimes in this one. I'm not "weird" or "kooky" for thinking this, it is just something I have believed since I was a child.

Evidence for ghosts seems rather sketchy. Under true scientific testing, ghosts dont seem to exist. Many things should be considered before jumping to a wild explanation; the motive and sincerity of those reporting the sighting should be evaluated, the possibility of it being a hoax or con, physiology reasons and psychological reasons. I'd be willing to bet that any ghost sighting could be adequetly explained using those guidelines. Though it is often a story being told, it's near impossible to test.

I think memetics does a good job of explaining a lot of these different ideas. I fully reccommend Susan Blackmore's The Meme Machine. It really makes you think, and I was able to relate a lot of the concepts to things that I see going on day by day. Things that I never really thought of too much started to actually make sense in terms of memes.

Scientific study and research will very quickly debunk the existence of spirits I have found. Scientific research measures things that are physical or attainable to be measured, recorded, or otherwise explainable through mathematical means (for example). The existence or possible existence of spiritual entities is beyond scientific explanation by traditional means. But that doesn't mean that they don't exist, it's just that there is not enough scientific proof to say "yea" or "nay" currently.

And the possibility for hoaxes and frauds is very possible, since there are many different ways to explain a "cold spot" or a piece of furniture or inatimate object apparently moving on it's own. And certain people are simply not honest souls and will lie/fabricate a "ghost" story for numerous reasons. Most of those reasons are for monetary gain or instant fame.

But thank you for the suggestion of the book-I am an avid reader and will most definitely check that out.

[QED]

Arya> I'll leave Chad to reply to your points above but you evidently believe in the whole shebang of angels, reincarnation, spooks and so on. You yourself described one problem -- how it is that some unfortunate peoples guardians desert them when an accident occurs. I would like to focus on this... you have made a rationalization that seems to fit, that the person deserved the accident/loss of guardian... but can this always be the case? Can't you picture the suffering of true innocents? Or do you get around this by subscribing to auxiliary concepts such as "we are all sinners from birth". But why then do some small children suffer when others don't?

It seems like an extraordinary exercise in mental gymnastics to navigate a course through this fantastic landscape. Infinitely more so considering the complete absence of all the supposed influences to the measuring equipment that speaks the language of the universe.

I want to understand where the certainty in all this comes from. Why the conviction in the absence of logic or tangible evidence? Sure I can sympathize a little knowing the separation that exists (as a consequence of our physical construction) between 'reality' and our perception of reality.

I think that the problem is that we become too used to thinking that we have a direct-line to reality in our waking hours. As a consequence of this we have too great an expectation for that reality to stay real. Thus when we experience a processing glitch we tend to view it as something corporeal when infact it is not. If we take mind-altering drugs we know that our experiences are 'unreal' -- but the mind is just as capable of the odd 'hiccup' now and then. In the case of an afterlife the reports coming back from near-death experiences are consistent with brain function subject to oxygen starvation for example.

But even in everyday situations we can become overloaded, inspired or confused and at such times impressions can be gained which are incorrectly interpreted as having something to do with the external world when in fact they are all happening right here in our heads.

[Being1]

A question that I would be delighted to receive some intelligent response to is this;

Would knowing beyond all doubt, that there was or was not an afterlife, effect the way you choose to live your life right now? If so, in what ways?

[keltzkroz]

Would knowing beyond all doubt, that there was or was not an afterlife, effect the way you choose to live your life right now? If so, in what ways?

It would not affect the way I live my life, whether or not an afterlife exists. I always get the impression that some people think that since I'm a Christian, and I believe in an afterlife, I'm missing out on something in this life, like I'm wasting my life or not living life to the fullest. This has always puzzled me, and no one has yet elaborated or explained to me sufficiently (an explanation that applies to me) what I'm missing.

[palmera]

It seems that this interconnectedness is mistaken by otherwise rational people as an indication of the veracity of such ideas. But a little bit of logic -- such as that which you applied to reincarnation -- demonstrates that the principle of these ideas is quite simply a nonsense.

I disagree. Rationally speaking, reincarnation is all around us in nature. Things die, decay, and after returning to the earth spring forth again. The water cycle is another good example. The changing of the seasons is a reincarnation cycle. Logically, reincarnation is a conclusion that may naturally be drawn by viewing the world around us closely. It's not nonsense, and to say so is to belittle billions of people's beliefs.

I think people have become too used to the 'politically correct' tolerance of the basic tenets of religion. If the normal amount of critical thinking that humans employ when military, commercial or scientific objectives are involved was applied such concepts would be dismissed in very short measure. I don't know why humanity has given special leave of its senses when it comes to our 'spiritual side'. Perhaps it's us taking a holiday from reason and reality?

Too tolerant of religious views? People have an inherent freedom to seek truth for themselves, to freely express their chosen path in life. Thinking about religion as one does military tactics or the market would suck the life out of religion, destroy the very essence of belief. Humanity has not "given special leave of it's senses" in regards to spirituality; rather, humanity has, from it's earliest cultural roots understood that there is something beyond which our senses can understand and observe, that there is something about this universe we live in, a reality, which cannot be defined or parsed out using human logic. Since when is the human mind the end-all and be-all of understanding reality?

It is arrogant to think that logic and reason somehow have a monopoly on truth or that they alone can define accurately our reality(s). They are apt to describe, but give no meaning to the individual learning process. The universe is far too complex to dismiss ideas of religion, views of the after-life etc. regardless of whether they hold true scientifically.

[McCulloch]

It would not affect the way I live my life, whether or not an afterlife exists. I always get the impression that some people think that since I'm a Christian, and I believe in an afterlife, I'm missing out on something in this life, like I'm wasting my life or not living life to the fullest. This has always puzzled me, and no one has yet elaborated or explained to me sufficiently (an explanation that applies to me) what I'm missing.

“Don’t lay up treasures for yourselves on the earth, where moth and rust consume, and where thieves break through and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consume, and where thieves don’t break through and steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

I would think that there is an implied trade off here. You have a choice: lay up treasures here or in heaven. Choosing to focus on a heavenly reward would invariably mean to not focus on the rewards of this life.

Then Jesus said to his disciples, “If anyone desires to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, and forfeits his life? Or what will a man give in exchange for his life?

If your understanding of following Jesus does not involve self-denial then you have been taught a different Jesus than the one in the bible. Anyone who seriously reads the Christian New Testament will get the idea that Christians are supposed to be "missing out on something in this life".

[keltzkroz]

It would not affect the way I live my life, whether or not an afterlife exists. I always get the impression that some people think that since I'm a Christian, and I believe in an afterlife, I'm missing out on something in this life, like I'm wasting my life or not living life to the fullest. This has always puzzled me, and no one has yet elaborated or explained to me sufficiently (an explanation that applies to me) what I'm missing.

“Don’t lay up treasures for yourselves on the earth, where moth and rust consume, and where thieves break through and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consume, and where thieves don’t break through and steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

I would think that there is an implied trade off here. You have a choice: lay up treasures here or in heaven. Choosing to focus on a heavenly reward would invariably mean to not focus on the rewards of this life.

Then Jesus said to his disciples, “If anyone desires to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, and whoever will lose his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, and forfeits his life? Or what will a man give in exchange for his life?

If your understanding of following Jesus does not involve self-denial then you have been taught a different Jesus than the one in the bible. Anyone who seriously reads the Christian New Testament will get the idea that Christians are supposed to be "missing out on something in this life".

Those passages you quoted are often misunderstood (at least from my point of view) as saying that if I am to follow Jesus Christ, I should deny all that is worldly, not work towards a successful career, earn money and buy cars, etc. In fact, as implied by "... seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you...", a person is also "provided for" here on Earth (not only in the afterlife). And what about the story of Job? He was well "provided for" here on Earth. So in my case, what am I missing out on?