Death.. Then what?

[ARTgames]

No i pointed out what will happen. When or not you answer it is up to you. I never said don't answer it. unless you can point that out.

Why do feel as if you don't need to think out side of Mormonism? Is it because you think that is the truth and there's not need to go feather? If so that must mean non Mormon is false? Explain please.

[Mystery]

ARTgames, I'm kinda curious......you've been active throughout this discussion, so what do you believe in? I don't think you've said yet.

[HamsterPants]

Woops, i replied to someone elses question, wasnt paying attention, i need to get some sleep....

[Delicious]

I think the fact that I do not attend church distorts my belief on afterlife. Perhaps I would actually believe in a christ if I were to be surrounded by people who agree in one which is done by going to church..
Has anyone ever thought of how this all had started? I mean, everything rather then just how human life evolved.

[ARTgames]

@ HP
Ok good. I know how you feel about it. But do you think other people should do the same?

Has anyone ever thought of how this all had started? I mean, everything rather then just how human life evolved.

yeah. I have. but i would like to know what other people think.

@Mystery
its wip and i think it will always be. Also what i posted a little in past posts. I would haft to think about it. Im kind of just flowing my personalty.

[Mystery]

I think the fact that I do not attend church distorts my belief on afterlife. Perhaps I would actually believe in a christ if I were to be surrounded by people who agree in one which is done by going to church..
Has anyone ever thought of how this all had started? I mean, everything rather then just how human life evolved.

People are naturally curious and look for explanations to everything. It's that simple.

[Mr Pwnage]

I think the fact that I do not attend church distorts my belief on afterlife. Perhaps I would actually believe in a christ if I were to be surrounded by people who agree in one which is done by going to church..
Has anyone ever thought of how this all had started? I mean, everything rather then just how human life evolved.

Well I think the whole "what happens to me after I die?" is an instinctive thought for all humans...it is just interpreted and believed many different ways. So I think pretty much every religion started with this same idea...and somebody came up with some sort of story to teach morals and whatnot...I guess to incorperate character values/karma in the whole matter...than that brought upon a great list of rules...and everybody kind of differed on the takes on the matter there.


I have a question though...assuming there is a God of some sort...let me ask you...who Made God? Who made the Maker of god? Who made the maker of maker of god? See where I am going here? Even God might not know everything...The point is the whole subject is wayyy to phenomenon for anybody, maybe even God, to understand just how we came about. The reason I don't go to church is because I don't want to waste hours of my life doing something I am not certain is beneficial to me. I just want to live my life to the fullest...and let death be a surprise, good or bad.

[ARTgames]

I have a question though...assuming there is a God of some sort...let me ask you...who Made God? Who made the Maker of god? Who made the maker of maker of god? See where I am going here? Even God might not know everything...The point is the whole subject is wayyy to phenomenon for anybody, maybe even God, to understand just how we came about. The reason I don't go to church is because I don't want to waste hours of my life doing something I am not certain is beneficial to me. I just want to live my life to the fullest...and let death be a surprise, good or bad.

a lot of people share this mind set today. im not saying its wrong or right. just going to point that out.

Here my question to you Mr Pwnage. In church you do get to have a social experience and they do donate stuff and run community programs ect. Would you like to be part of something like that but without the part with the god and the teaching ect?

[Mystery]

ARTgames, I'm kinda curious......you've been active throughout this discussion, so what do you believe in? I don't think you've said yet.

*ahem*

[Jake]

You didn't offend me, for the record, I dont get offended, ever. I actually thought that was a rather hilarious story, but I will confirm the fact that we do not beleive in poligamy, there is that one church that broke off from us because they do, and I feel sorry for those people.

May I ask why not? Why should societies' limited view of right and wrong influence your religions view on polygamy? It seems that the taboo's of American culture have made a pretty profound impact on your beliefs. According to Mormonism, Jesus was a polygamist, Joseph Smith was a polygamist, etc. So why do so many Mormons not believe in polygamy? Even worse, Mormons caught practicing polygamy today are ex-communicated for it! This to me is completely absurd. If you believe whole-heartedly in a religion, then why pick and choose your beliefs based on what society thinks is proper? Please enlighten me on this, because I feel disappointed that Mormons would conform to something like this so easily.

Taking offense is a stupid thing to do, atleast according to Mormonism, we are tolerant people, but we have our limits, we beleive that it is nescessary to act upon a matter if it is an explicit threat to our freedom to say and beleive in what we want to, and to our families. Those are nescessary motives to go to war or any other form of battle, nothing else. Also, we do not beleive that Jesus was a polygamist, I don't know who made that up, but it's nonsense, we beleive that he had to marry someone, but there's not need for more than one wife, and it's honestly a difficult thing to do these days unless you're a pervert.

So do you believe polygamy is wrong? It seems to me that Mormons didn't just stop practicing polygamy, but they took an unnecessary step to make it seem horrible. Ex-communication of members who practice polygamy? Seems pretty harsh when Joseph Smith himself practiced it. Or do you not believe that he practiced it? I'm reading quotes and readings that tell two different stories on the life of Joseph Smith, so it's hard to find what he truly believed.

As for my comment about Jesus being a polygamist, my source must have been wrong. It seems that the correct answer is that it's open to interpretation.

[LeGuy]

I think the fact that I do not attend church distorts my belief on afterlife. Perhaps I would actually believe in a christ if I were to be surrounded by people who agree in one which is done by going to church..
Has anyone ever thought of how this all had started? I mean, everything rather then just how human life evolved.

Well I think the whole "what happens to me after I die?" is an instinctive thought for all humans...it is just interpreted and believed many different ways. So I think pretty much every religion started with this same idea...and somebody came up with some sort of story to teach morals and whatnot...I guess to incorperate character values/karma in the whole matter...than that brought upon a great list of rules...and everybody kind of differed on the takes on the matter there.


I have a question though...assuming there is a God of some sort...let me ask you...who Made God? Who made the Maker of god? Who made the maker of maker of god? See where I am going here? Even God might not know everything...The point is the whole subject is wayyy to phenomenon for anybody, maybe even God, to understand just how we came about. The reason I don't go to church is because I don't want to waste hours of my life doing something I am not certain is beneficial to me. I just want to live my life to the fullest...and let death be a surprise, good or bad.

The entire point of God is that nobody made Him. Assuming some force would have the ability to create a universe, that thing would have to be infinite - that is, infinite in time and space. So some people ask, "Who made God?" The answer to that is, "No one." God has always existed, God exists now, and God will always exist. If things were any different, then God wouldn't be God, would He?

In any case, that's the best answer I can provide at the moment.

[ARTgames]

ARTgames, I'm kinda curious......you've been active throughout this discussion, so what do you believe in? I don't think you've said yet.

*ahem*

@Mystery
its wip and i think it will always be. Also what i posted a little in past posts. I would haft to think about it. Im kind of just flowing my personalty.

[Lingus]

In response to the "Who made God?" question, I have to point something out. It's funny because it doesn't really prove that God exists, but it looks like it is in favor of it in this context (even though it's a scientific explanation. In any case, the theory is that the Big Bang caused space and time to exist. "Before" that, there was no space or time. Time is where we get the concept of Cause and Effect, or causality. The idea that if something exists, something had to happen to make it exist. Without the flow of time, causality doesn't exist. So, if God really did create the Universe, being that it would be a force outside of space-time, using this model of causality, nothing had to create God.




Just a few thoughts on Jake's comments

I believe the emotions we feel can not ever be expressed in terms of science, because they exist in another realm from it. Explaining the paths of neurons and how they interact with the synapses of my brain will never convince me that that's why I am sad, or happy.

In fact, emotions are caused by chemicals in the brain. How happy or sad you are is determined by how much serotonin is being produced. You can take a pill that causes your brain to produce more artificially causing you to be happy regardless of exterior stimulous. Speaking from first hand experience, taking a pill can make you happy. But, at the same time, I understand your point. This explains HOW we feel emotions, not WHY. That's a much more complex topic relating to psychology.

I hold the belief that consciousness cannot be attained simply through complexity. Computers will never experience the feelings that we feel because there is no substance to the 1's and 0's that comprise their brains.

Really, it's the same thing. 1's and 0's are different voltages of electricity... Our brain uses tiny charges of electricity to send signals between neurons. One is man made, and the other is organic. There's nothing stopping us from creating an artificial brain that works similar to our organic one. Does that mean it will become conscious? Will it have a soul? These are not questions we can answer.

On the other hand, we have no evidence whatsoever of God. Being able to see, touch, feel, smell, etc an object in our Universe is completely different than having a "feeling" that God loves you (or w/e). You can say that that feeling is imagined... you can also say that your senses of the object is imagined as well, but there are much more real ramifications of that. If you are hit over the head with that object, is the pain imagined? If you bleed to death because of it, doesn't that change things?

Do you see how there is a clear difference?

The definition of evidence has a much more broad meaning than that. "Evidence in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion" -Wikipedia. If I simply have a feeling that God exists, that alone can be evidence that God exists, even if it is only self applicable. No one else will probably believe me, but they can not denounce my view point, because they did not have the feeling that I had. They can try to explain it through medical conditions, or simply how the brain works, but this only seems more plausible to them. To the person who has the feeling, the plausibility that the feeling is from a higher source makes much more sense. Are they simply being narrow-minded? One can not say. That is why I get confused when people say there is no evidence for God. There is simply no evidence that you see as applicable.

I like your comparison of senses to the feeling of God. It's crazy fun to think about stuff like that, but it usually leads me to a dead end of "Well there's no point in believing in anything because I don't know what's real and what isn't."

I'll just point out that there are different types of evidence or knowledge. In the same wiki article: "An important distinction in the field of evidence is that between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence, or evidence that suggests truth as opposed to evidence that directly proves truth. Many have seen this line to be less-than-clear and significant arguments have arisen over the difference." This is exactly what we're talking about. This is the difference I'm referring to. One's "feeling" of God is circumstancial evidence, it suggests a truth. Whereas being able to touch, see, or feel (in the literal sense) an object would be direct evidence.

I recognize that there is a fine line there, but it's significant enough. And I would like to point out that even using the direct evidence we all can see, I would still be willing to alter my opinions were that direct evidence proven false later. If I saw an object, I would at first take it for granted that something is there, with the assumption that it is possible my eyes are playing tricks on me. At that point I would go up to the object and try to touch it (if I'm trying to test its existance). If, at this point my hand passes through the object or something similar, I would have to reassess my opinion. Maybe it's an elaborate illusion of some sort. I would then have to test that theory. If, on the other hand, I can touch it, I would have stronger evidence that the object is real. This process can continue on...

The point is, I see how even direct evidence can be misleading, but at the same time it is how we perceive the things around us. It is our physical world that we have to live in and survive in. If we don't follow our perceptions, we can't survive. On the other hand, the topic of God et al is meta-physical. We can choose what we want to believe and it won't make much difference to our survival. It might make a difference to our mental state, but that's up to us to decide. If we can get by believing that the world was created by a giant elephant that sneezed out the stars and planets out of its trunk, then we're good. It makes little difference to our physical world.

[Chaos]

Has anyone ever thought of how this all had started? I mean, everything rather then just how human life evolved.

I'm of the theory that it never 'started'.  It has never 'ended', either.  You know the saying about how history repeats itself?  Think of that on a grand scale.  We reach the end of the universe, some cataclysmic event, we all are destroyed...and then everything starts over.  Life starts all over again.  Makes the face of a clock fairly ironic, too.

[Skeet0]

How the hell do i play the game ??  :-\