Death.. Then what?

[Jake]

Please explain. I would be interested to hear how. From my understanding the core concepts are mutually exclusive. Of course, I'll be the first to admit I don't know everything.

First things first, we define Creationism.

"Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe were created in some form by a supernatural being or beings." - Wikipedia

Evolution is fact and theory. The proven part of evolution is what we have observed through biological processes. It's proven because we can test it, view it, etc. The modern evolutionary synthesis theory on the other hand deals with how life has evolved over time. This is the part that many claim to contradict Creationism.

But why do they contradict? Just because God created life, the earth, etc, doesn't mean he didn't use forces of nature to do it. Not every Creationist believes God snapped his fingers and created our earth. In fact, Creationism can often times goes hand in hand with deism, which supports God through science alone.

Young Earth Creationism contradicts evolution, and that's what many Christian fundamentalists believe. Because of this, many people fail to acknowledge the many beliefs that Creationism encompasses, and in turn, things like this happen, which wrongly generalize a large group of people.

[Trogdor]

In response to Jake's post (and I suppose the rest of this thread) I think a problem with any certain belief system (or lack thereof, which ironically is a belief system in itself) is that some become slightly obsessive over it. They get so caught up in the every day minutiae of attempting to follow their belief, or attempting to convert others who don't share the same religion/belief/faith, that they end up missing out on living. Please keep in mind that I'm talking about the zealots, not lay practitioners of a certain belief.

An example of this are my father's side of the family, whom are deeply Catholic. They worry over my sister and I because we don't share the same beliefs as them, and desperately try to show us the light each time they visit. They cause themselves extensive amounts of pain and sorrow knowing their nephew and niece are going to suffer for an eternity in Hell, or any other person whom they dearly love or care about for that matter. Sometimes it becomes unendurable to watch them struggle, and no amount of reassurance will quell their fears. I understand and respect their views on life, but I don't understand why they cannot do the same for me. It's this obstruction that I feel impedes a person's ability to just enjoy life and simply live.

On a less personal note, my "belief" is keeping an open mind on others belief systems. I've been to a Christian church numerous times with a close friend, thoroughly enjoying the community of accepting people, singing hymns, and praying. I've put myself in the shoes of an atheist and found the lack of belief liberating as well as frightening. I've gone on a week long retreat at a Buddhist monastery, practicing mindfulness and waking up at 4 o'clock in the morning for an hour of meditation. The great irony of religion is that the vast majority of them have the basic set of moral principles, and the major difference between them is what happens after death.

Having a belief you can fall back on is a wonderful thing in times of doubt, such as the contemplation of death and what might occur thereafter. However, I had to sacrifice complete faith in a specific belief in order to maintain an open mind regarding others. With this sacrifice comes the uncertainty of death (which is another great irony). I take solace in the fact that I am guaranteed an explanation in my life, and I will have to exercise patience before that truth is revealed to me.

The set of principles expressed by the many religions that I've been involved with in my life are roughly summarized in a list of "rules" for being human (in addition to being aptly titled so). The following was found on the door of a refrigerator in a home in Toronto. It has been slightly altered from various people, but it still maintains the essential concept expressed in such a list. The author is anonymous.

Rules for Being Human

1. You will receive a body.
You may like it or hate it, but it will be yours for the entire period you are on this planet.

2. You will learn lessons.
You are enrolled in a full-time informal school called life. Each day in this school you will have the opportunity to learn lessons. You may like the lessons or think them irrelevant and stupid.

3. There are no mistakes, only lessons.
Growth is a process of trial and error, i.e. experimentation. The "failed" experiments are as much a part of the process as the experiment that eventually "works".

4. A lesson is repeated until it is learned.
A lesson will be presented to you in various forms until you have learned it. When you learned it, you can go on to the next lesson.

5. Learning lessons does not end.
There is no part of life that does not contain its lessons. If you are alive there are lessons to be learned.

6. "There" is no better place than "here and now".
When your "there" has become a "here and now", you will simply obtain another "there" that will again, look better than "here and now".

7. Others are merely mirrors of you.
You cannot love or hate something about another unless it reflects to you something you love or hate about yourself.

8. What you make of life is up to you.
You have all the tools and resources you need. What you do with them is up to you. The choice is yours.

9. Life is exactly what you think it is.
You create a life that matches your beliefs and expectations.

10. Your answers lie inside you.
The answers to life's questions lie inside you. All you need to do is look, listen and trust.

11. You will forget all this.

[ARTgames]

edit: i messed up on editing this post and posted twice.

[ARTgames]

Please explain. I would be interested to hear how. From my understanding the core concepts are mutually exclusive. Of course, I'll be the first to admit I don't know everything.

First things first, we define Creationism.

"Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe were created in some form by a supernatural being or beings." - Wikipedia

Evolution is fact and theory. The proven part of evolution is what we have observed through biological processes. It's proven because we can test it, view it, etc. The modern evolutionary synthesis theory on the other hand deals with how life has evolved over time. This is the part that many claim to contradict Creationism.

But why do they contradict? Just because God created life, the earth, etc, doesn't mean he didn't use forces of nature to do it. Not every Creationist believes God snapped his fingers and created our earth. In fact, Creationism can often times goes hand in hand with deism, which supports God through science alone.

Young Earth Creationism contradicts evolution, and that's what many Christian fundamentalists believe. Because of this, many people fail to acknowledge the many beliefs that Creationism encompasses, and in turn, things like this happen, which wrongly generalize a large group of people.

That is a good point Jake. Who tould you that? I never really looked into it because i never really took sides. I just posted a video wondering what evolution and religion have to say to each other. And it looks like we got your post. not saying your post is the end of the subject but just something good to point out. something i did not know.

Also then what do you want us to call it to separate the people who do from the people who don't?

[Lingus]

Please explain. I would be interested to hear how. From my understanding the core concepts are mutually exclusive. Of course, I'll be the first to admit I don't know everything.

...Not every Creationist believes God snapped his fingers and created our earth...

Young Earth Creationism contradicts evolution, and that's what many Christian fundamentalists believe. Because of this, many people fail to acknowledge the many beliefs that Creationism encompasses, and in turn, things like this happen, which wrongly generalize a large group of people.

That's where my understanding broke down. I did not think about Creationism as a more broad scope theory. I assumed the Young Earth Creationism theory was what was being referred to.

[ARTgames]

Please explain. I would be interested to hear how. From my understanding the core concepts are mutually exclusive. Of course, I'll be the first to admit I don't know everything.

...Not every Creationist believes God snapped his fingers and created our earth...

Young Earth Creationism contradicts evolution, and that's what many Christian fundamentalists believe. Because of this, many people fail to acknowledge the many beliefs that Creationism encompasses, and in turn, things like this happen, which wrongly generalize a large group of people.

That's where my understanding broke down. I did not think about Creationism as a more broad scope theory. I assumed the Young Earth Creationism theory was what was being referred to.

same here

[Lingus]

Was going to respond to Trogdor earlier but ran out of time.

The great irony of religion is that the vast majority of them have the basic set of moral principles, and the major difference between them is what happens after death.

I'm not sure I agree here. I think most of the major religions have very similar views on the afterlife with minor differences such as the specific details of just how you will burn in hell, or just how much pleasure you will receive in heaven. There are of course exceptions such as Buddhism, but even here there is a sort of similarity. Do good in life you are rewarded (ie Nirvana or reincarnating at a higher stage), do bad and you will be punished (ie reincarnating to a lower stage).

My opinion is that the major differences between religions are the sum of all of the minor differences. Take all of the traditions and rituals of one religion and compare to another and they will look entirely different. Strip those away and the core concepts will be very similar. The irony (or rather tragedy) is that the differences are surface level and if everyone just realized that and accepted those differences while embracing the similarities then there probably would be nothing to argue over.

However, I had to sacrifice complete faith in a specific belief in order to maintain an open mind regarding others. With this sacrifice comes the uncertainty of death (which is another great irony). I take solace in the fact that I am guaranteed an explanation in my life, and I will have to exercise patience before that truth is revealed to me.

I'm very similar in this respect. I don't have a very strong conviction for any belief system. There is a kind of general logic that I adhere to, but even this is maleable. In any case because of this, I feel I am better able to accept other's beliefs.

Where I think we differ is that I don't feel a guarantee that I will receive an explanation of anything in life (or after life). Everything is uncertain, and may likely always be. Even after I die I don't expect some entity to swoop in and give some grand narrative exposition. Nor do I feel I will suddenly become aware of "the truth". I feel death is likely just another stage. We will probably be just as clueless in that stage as we are now. But, that's just a guess. We may never know.

[Trogdor]

Take all of the traditions and rituals of one religion and compare to another and they will look entirely different. Strip those away and the core concepts will be very similar. The irony (or rather tragedy) is that the differences are surface level and if everyone just realized that and accepted those differences while embracing the similarities then there probably would be nothing to argue over.

This is exactly how I feel. Though death is just another one of these dissenting opinions religions have, I attributed a prevailing characteristic to it in order keep with the theme of the topic.

Even after I die I don't expect some entity to swoop in and give some grand narrative exposition. Nor do I feel I will suddenly become aware of "the truth". I feel death is likely just another stage. We will probably be just as clueless in that stage as we are now. But, that's just a guess. We may never know.

I didn't mean to come off like that. What I meant to say was that when we die, we'll finally know what death itself is. Even if nothing happens and our biological battery simply runs out, the absence of swooping entities or enlightenment to the truth will be the answer, though our conscious self will not realize it. However, if death is another journey that many religions claim, then some part of the self must linger long enough to comprehend what death is.

This is not to say the self lingers for an eternity. Bringing back a controversial subject introduced by Delicious, there have been countless cases of NDE's (Near-Death Experiences) where a person's self remains intact after being pronounced clinically dead, and they project their belief system into the experience of death. Of course, human error plays a part from malfunctioning machinery to mistakes made by doctors. Whether it's the random firing of synapses in the brain as the body realizes its life is coming to a close, struggling to make sense of its current situation/deities exist and welcome their followers with open arms/the body is able to project its local self into the environment temporarily, NDE's are becoming increasingly prevalent in the medical community as newer and more refined life saving/prolonging techniques are invented.

I feel that the overwhelming documented cases of NDE's shouldn't be ignored, as they contribute in their own way to the various belief systems. Depending on what belief system the person had when going into the NDE, it's almost a "confirmation" that said person's belief is true, and further reinforces that specific belief system from this "proof". Of course if this were the case, then each religion who had a member with an NDE would be the "correct" one. Until scientists fully understand what the brain (assuming the mind and self manifest from it) goes through in response to the trauma of near-death, one should not immediately judge and label a situation. The subject to me is fascinating, though I always take it with a grain of salt.

[Lingus]

However, if death is another journey that many religions claim, then some part of the self must linger long enough to comprehend what death is.

In as much as we comprehend life. That's really what I'm getting at I think. We may understand things to a certain extent (which may be not at all) but I don't think we will ever know the full truth. Just as there may be an underlying reality to the "living" world, there may be the same for the "after-life". I guess I'm just saying even if we remain aware on some level after we die, I don't think the "layers" of illusion will instantly drop away as some people believe. I know this isn't what you're saying. I guess I'm going on a tangent a bit.

And yes, I agree on the NDE's there. It's interesting true, but only on a scientific level. I don't feel there is any reason why it can't be explained by biology and psychology. The brain does some crazy stuff near and after death. Your mind is going to interpret that craziness in some very interesting ways.

[Scotty]

What comes after death?  I know what it is! the answer is a lot of this
and a lot of this!

And how could I forget this!

[Jake]

And yes, I agree on the NDE's there. It's interesting true, but only on a scientific level. I don't feel there is any reason why it can't be explained by biology and psychology. The brain does some crazy stuff near and after death. Your mind is going to interpret that craziness in some very interesting ways.

There are also NDE recordings of things that can't happen from the brain simply going crazy. For example, if you're completely unconscious and being operated on, how would you know the name of the doctor working on you or what they were wearing and what they were saying at the time if you had never seen or heard of that person before? There's literally hundreds of crazy incidents just like that if you read about them.

[Lingus]

I can't answer that other than to say there is a lot about the brain that is not understood. There is every possibility that those external signals are still somehow filtering through. I mean, just because you're unconcious it doesn't mean your ears turn off. Your brain is supposed to shut those signals out, but from what I understand there are incidences of people having heard what people are saying as they lay unconcious. So it is very possible the same thing is occuring.

Though, I guess in that respect there's as much evidence to support either side of the argument. I'm not saying I'm necessarily right. Just offering a counter.

[Red October]

this!

Does your skin feel burnt? Because I think you must have just fallen down from heaven, and re-entry would have caused some problems for you.

[Scotty]

this!

Does your skin feel burnt? Because I think you must have just fallen down from heaven, and re-entry would have caused some problems for you.

Do me a favor, and say that to a woman, the humiliation of watching the girl laugh at you would be priceless to witness.  Make sure to video tape it as well.

[Red October]

Do me a favor, and say that to a woman, the humiliation of watching the girl laugh at you would be priceless to witness.  Make sure to video tape it as well.

No one is that stupid to do it for you. You will have to do it yourself. :)