Some theists think that they will exist forever in Heaven while others burn (exist) forever in Hell. What does that even mean? My 42 year old physical self does not look much like my 10 year old self. And I certainly don't have many of the same interests as I did when I was 3 years old. Can it even be said that those previous versions of me still exist? I think an argument could even be made that since my molecules and thoughts are constantly changing, that even the version of myself that existed 5 seconds ago doesn't exist anymore and will never exist again. How is it possible for a person who doesn't exist to experience Heaven or Hell?
Of course, theists will say that souls are immortal and never change. But it they never change, then how can they ever experience pain or pleasure in the future? If I have a soul, whatever that is, I'm fairly confident that it isn't currently experiencing pain or pleasure. Something would have to change for my soul to suddenly feel eternal pain or pleasure. Such a change would mean that the previous version of that soul no longer exists and is no longer "my" soul. Why in the hell should I worry about a soul that I don't even self-identify with? Sure, I may feel sorry for a soul that happens to be burning in Hell for all eternity but I'm certainly not going to stop living my life because of it.
I do understand that "previous versions" of myself determine everything about the "current version" of myself and that I have memories of the previous versions that no one else has. But that doesn't mean that those previous versions still exist.
Any thoughts on this so that I can clarify my views on this subject are most welcome.
Quote from: "mikecool70"Some theists think that they will exist forever in Heaven while others burn (exist) forever in Hell. What does that even mean? My 42 year old physical self does not look much like my 10 year old self. And I certainly don't have many of the same interests as I did when I was 3 years old. Can it even be said that those previous versions of me still exist? I think an argument could even be made that since my molecules and thoughts are constantly changing, that even the version of myself that existed 5 seconds ago doesn't exist anymore and will never exist again. How is it possible for a person who doesn't exist to experience Heaven or Hell?
Your getting into annoyingly complex philosophical questions of what identity is, so I'm no help there. Though, I'd like to point out that even though the molecules that make you up now are mostly different, the brain cells that do the information storage and such are essentially still there.
Considering I don't take those concepts (heaven/hell) seriously, I'll skip. :P
QuoteOf course, theists will say that souls are immortal and never change. But it they never change, then how can they ever experience pain or pleasure in the future? If I have a soul, whatever that is, I'm fairly confident that it isn't currently experiencing pain or pleasure. Something would have to change for my soul to suddenly feel eternal pain or pleasure. Such a change would mean that the previous version of that soul no longer exists and is no longer "my" soul. Why in the hell should I worry about a soul that I don't even self-identify with? Sure, I may feel sorry for a soul that happens to be burning in Hell for all eternity but I'm certainly not going to stop living my life because of it.
I would assume a slightly more savvy theist would argue that the soul contains the totality of everything you ever were, so there's no question of identity loss, so much as there is of "who the fuck am right now I then?!"
QuoteI do understand that "previous versions" of myself determine everything about the "current version" of myself and that I have memories of the previous versions that no one else has. But that doesn't mean that those previous versions still exist.
Of course not, and there are some good arguments against that (Daniel Dennett gave a good thought experiment against it I believe, but I can't remember it). Try Googling something like "Daniel Dennett identity problem thought experiment".
For an idea of what it would be like to live forever, look up Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged.
I always thought the believers see the eternity in heaven thing as kind of a selling point. But I kind of think eternal existence is the last thing any rational thinking person would ever want.
Matlock episodes are 22 minutes long and I'm bored out of my skull 4 minutes in. Even if heaven is the greatest thing that ever existed, I have to think by the time you're 10 or 15 billion years in, you'll kind of run out of new shit to do. And then its just billions and billions of years of absolute boredom. No thanks. I'll take my 50-100 years of pleasure and pain and toil and then I'll happily get out of the business. Good luck with the eternity at the country club thing there champ. I hope you still like the taste of the kool aide 100 billion years from now.
Quote from: "Johan"I always thought the believers see the eternity in heaven thing as kind of a selling point. But I kind of think eternal existence is the last thing any rational thinking person would ever want.
Matlock episodes are 22 minutes long and I'm bored out of my skull 4 minutes in. Even if heaven is the greatest thing that ever existed, I have to think by the time you're 10 or 15 billion years in, you'll kind of run out of new shit to do. And then its just billions and billions of years of absolute boredom. No thanks. I'll take my 50-100 years of pleasure and pain and toil and then I'll happily get out of the business. Good luck with the eternity at the country club thing there champ. I hope you still like the taste of the kool aide 100 billion years from now.
Well, I suppose God could make it so that they never got bored. But imagine how much a person could learn in a billion years. Seems to me that after a billion years of learning the person would have undergone so much change that it's no longer the same person. Even in my 42 years I'm not the same person as I was when I was 1. Seems to me that the only way a spiritual person could exist forever is to never change, not even a little bit. And that does indeed seem boring to me; although, admittedly, an all-powerful God could cause the person to be eternally happy. But Christians clearly think that they will be able to do things in Heaven; not aware of any of them saying they will never change once in Heaven, just that souls are immortal. Seems contradictory to me.
QuoteWell, I suppose God could make it so that they never got bored.
But then they would no longer be themselves, would they? :P It goes into the whole identity problem again. The problem with humans is that they'll quickly get used to their status and desire something new and/or better.
Quote from: "mikecool70"My 42 year old physical self does not look much like my 10 year old self. And I certainly don't have many of the same interests as I did when I was 3 years old. Can it even be said that those previous versions of me still exist? I think an argument could even be made that since my molecules and thoughts are constantly changing, that even the version of myself that existed 5 seconds ago doesn't exist anymore and will never exist again.
What you're dealing with here are the questions of what it means to be human; what is consciousness; what is the self. These questions really have nothing to do with the theological or philosophical implications of eternal life, since all one need do is say "whatever life is, it will continue forever."
I myself have come to the conclusion that consciousness/being/self/whatever is not a thing at all. It is a process. I suppose theists would say that this process will continue forever, although I cannot imagine how this could possibly be, since the process appears to be an electrochemical process which takes place in a living human brain. Once the brain is dead, the process will cease.
However, if we wanted to imagine for the sake of argument that the process will magically continue forever in some disembodied state or alternate universe or whatever, I don't see this as a problem. Just because the process has changed significantly since I was 10, that doesn't mean it's not the same process. It's merely a later phase of the same process. That earlier phase is over now, and cannot be duplicated, but the process itself still continues.
Those who claim that God, Souls, Angels, or any other hypothetical beings are both alive and unchanging at the same time are short-sighted morons. Life is a process. Life cannot exist without change. Action cannot exist without change. Ergo, you may safely ignore those people and go on being what you are, until you stop.
Quote from: "Johan"I always thought the believers see the eternity in heaven thing as kind of a selling point. But I kind of think eternal existence is the last thing any rational thinking person would ever want.
Which is precisely why believers
would want eternal existence.
A wave that see its self as a separated wave is looking for the ocean.
It is missing its true identity, water.
Jesus called it Christ and Siddharta called it Buddha.
That what does not come and go, that what we already are.
In the context of religion is God everything but being awake is not in a context.
That is why Jesus said in the end of the story, my god my god why have you forsaken me, he could not follow concepts.
The point is that you must wake up to understand your eternal being, you can not understand it with your mind.
As soon as you touch your mind do you see your self as a separated wave in the ocean.
Oeh, poetic bull. My favorite.
If you have something of value to share, share it in clear, precise and well understood terms.
If you cannot, you have nothing of value to share.
Also, welcome :)
Endlessness sounds like a nightmare. A trillion, trillion, trillion years after all matter in the universe has dissipated into a cloud of photons; and it's not even a moment compared to the deep time coming your way. If there were a God, maybe we should expect it to be kind of random...expecting an eternal being to be sane might be a little unreasonable.
A life that never ends is never complete, a beginning with no middle or end. It sounds ghastly.
Quote from: "Plu"Oeh, poetic bull. My favorite.
If you have something of value to share, share it in clear, precise and well understood terms.
If you cannot, you have nothing of value to share.
Also, welcome :)
It is clear, precise and well understood.
Haha. Cute. It doesn't even use proper grammar or punctuation, let alone precise language. It's one big ball of metaphores.
QuoteWhich is precisely why believers would want eternal existence.
:rollin: Exactly! One lifetime is enough for me. Has anyone known of a soul without a conscious brain? If a person is utterly destroyed while unconscious, how do they then become conscious without a brain? It's true that what makes up our bodies and the brain are never destroyed when we are, it sure doesn't mean our consciousness, memories, or personality still exists no matter how much we wish it is so, or not, when we are scattered atoms or sub atomic particles of energy. :roll: Solitary
Quote from: "Plu"Haha. Cute. It doesn't even use proper grammar or punctuation, let alone precise language. It's one big ball of metaphores.
English is not my main language.
Listen to Radiohead //http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_qMagfZtv8
You do it to yourself, you do
And that's what really hurts
Is that you do it to yourself
Just you, you and no one else.
Quote from: "Alias"English is not my main language.
It is not a good idea to discuss complex topics in a language that you lack proficiency in.
This atheist belief of ceasing to exist should not be preached like theists preach about God.
Quote from: "Alias"This atheist belief of ceasing to exist should not be preached like theists preach about God though one can not know.
Why not? We can make a good case for cessation of existence. There is no case to be made for the afterlife.
Quote from: "Alias"This atheist belief of ceasing to exist should not be preached like theists preach about God though one can not know.
Not true at all! When you are unconscious you don't exist as a personality, and if you died then it is logical to assume you would not become conscious again and exist without brain function. If God did indeed exist after 6,000 years of recorded history and thousands of gods that are now considered myths because there is no reliable evidence they did accept as stories, it is also logical to assume God doesn't exist either for the same reasons and is a myth. If one cannot not know if God exist, then why is it assumed He does without any reliable evidence? :roll: Solitary
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "Alias"This atheist belief of ceasing to exist should not be preached like theists preach about God though one can not know.
Why not? We can make a good case for cessation of existence. There is no case to be made for the afterlife.
If you believe that you are body and mind then you are right.
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Quote from: "Alias"This atheist belief of ceasing to exist should not be preached like theists preach about God though one can not know.
Why not? We can make a good case for cessation of existence. There is no case to be made for the afterlife.
If you believe that you are body and mind then you are right.
Well, I'm glad we can agree on that at least.
Quote from: "Solitary"Quote from: "Alias"This atheist belief of ceasing to exist should not be preached like theists preach about God though one can not know.
Not true at all! When you are unconscious you don't exist as a personality, and if you died then it is logical to assume you would not become conscious again and exist without brain function. If God did indeed exist after 6,000 years of recorded history and thousands of gods that are now considered myths because there is no reliable evidence they did accept as stories, it is also logical to assume God doesn't exist either for the same reasons and is a myth. If one cannot not know if God exist, then why is it assumed He does without any reliable evidence? :roll: Solitary
Do you see a God now, if no then there is no god, if yes let us know.
Do you see your self as body and mind, if no then stay as you are, if yes then you will die.
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Plu"Haha. Cute. It doesn't even use proper grammar or punctuation, let alone precise language. It's one big ball of metaphores.
English is not my main language.
Listen to Radiohead //http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_qMagfZtv8
You do it to yourself, you do
And that's what really hurts
Is that you do it to yourself
Just you, you and no one else.
If English isn't your main language you should be aiming to cut out the verbose irrelevancies to the highest degree possible. I admire people who go onto foreign language forums and attempt to contribute, but passing off your own inadequacies in the proficiency of the language as others simply 'refusing to see' your point is ludicrous and quite pathetic. It is nothing but a tactic to obscure and sleight of hand the respondent. Bad form, sir.
Otherwise speak language across comes garbled confused points lost through translation yes!
Quote from: "Alias"This atheist belief of ceasing to exist should not be preached like theists preach about God though one can not know.
There is no "atheist belief". Atheism is LACK of one specific belief - that of gods. An atheist can believe in life after death as long as no god is involved.
QuoteIf you believe that you are body and mind then you are right.
And if you don't, you're not too securely attached to reality. (Or don't you understand the difference between "believe" and "accept the fact"?)
1) Living forever means surviving the heat death of the universe - which is not possible, by definition. If you exist as disembodied atoms, incapable of anything, it's not "existence" as we understand the word. (And if it's anything more than that, the universe hasn't reached maximum entropy yet.)
2) Burning in hell, after you have no body, is meaningless. "Burning" means rapid oxidation. If you have no corporeal existence, exactly what is it that's oxidizing? An incorporeal "soul" (the word is a misunderstanding of Latin, it has no actual meaning) can't combine chemically with oxygen, so it can't "burn". And if you have no corporeal nerves, you can't experience pain. The whole concept is the imaginings of scientifically illiterate goat herders, and the scientifically illiterate people who believe those imaginings.
Stop acting as if you're far superior to the rest of us - you're not.
Quote from: "Fidel_Castronaut"Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Plu"Haha. Cute. It doesn't even use proper grammar or punctuation, let alone precise language. It's one big ball of metaphores.
English is not my main language.
Listen to Radiohead //http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_qMagfZtv8
You do it to yourself, you do
And that's what really hurts
Is that you do it to yourself
Just you, you and no one else.
If English isn't your main language you should be aiming to cut out the verbose irrelevancies to the highest degree possible. I admire people who go onto foreign language forums and attempt to contribute, but passing off your own inadequacies in the proficiency of the language as others simply 'refusing to see' your point is ludicrous and quite pathetic. It is nothing but a tactic to obscure and sleight of hand the respondent. Bad form, sir.
Otherwise speak language across comes garbled confused points lost through translation yes!
Your point is ludicrous and quite pathetic.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"This atheist belief of ceasing to exist should not be preached like theists preach about God though one can not know.
There is no "atheist belief". Atheism is LACK of one specific belief - that of gods. An atheist can believe in life after death as long as no god is involved..
True.
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Fidel_Castronaut"Quote from: "Alias"English is not my main language.
Listen to Radiohead //http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_qMagfZtv8
You do it to yourself, you do
And that's what really hurts
Is that you do it to yourself
Just you, you and no one else.
If English isn't your main language you should be aiming to cut out the verbose irrelevancies to the highest degree possible. I admire people who go onto foreign language forums and attempt to contribute, but passing off your own inadequacies in the proficiency of the language as others simply 'refusing to see' your point is ludicrous and quite pathetic. It is nothing but a tactic to obscure and sleight of hand the respondent. Bad form, sir.
Otherwise speak language across comes garbled confused points lost through translation yes!
Your point is ludicrous and quite pathetic.
But understand least yes did you?
You learn-ding!
If you think speaking clearly and precisely is pathetic, then I suggest you go back to school son. It's the basis of communicating clearly ones thoughts to others who otherwise would remain ignorant to ones opinion.
Of course, unless you're like a drug addict who just refuses to understand. You know, like Plu? He's fucking off his head on coke, I'd stay away.
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Fidel_Castronaut"If English isn't your main language you should be aiming to cut out the verbose irrelevancies to the highest degree possible. I admire people who go onto foreign language forums and attempt to contribute, but passing off your own inadequacies in the proficiency of the language as others simply 'refusing to see' your point is ludicrous and quite pathetic. It is nothing but a tactic to obscure and sleight of hand the respondent. Bad form, sir.
Otherwise speak language across comes garbled confused points lost through translation yes!
Your point is ludicrous and quite pathetic.
People whose first language is English get his point, and think he's quite correct, so your comment must merely be due to your lack of ability to understand English.
The concept of forever is lost on the average mind. Humans can barely grasp one hundred years. To them forever is probably 234 years.
I am sure if we asked Old Seer what the babble meant by forever it would be an interesting response like, "the distance between a monkey and a frog in other parts of the world but only in eons instead of meters".
:rollin: Aitm
The concept of Forever isn't difficult. In order to exist forever you must make a serious mark on the world - a piece of art, writing that becomes epic, curing a disease, etc. Heaven or hell has nothing to do with it. Only the living can truly appreciate someone who's dead and gone in whatever fashion the dead left their mark.
:rollin: Aitm
The concept of Forever isn't difficult. In order to exist forever you must make a serious mark on the world - a piece of art, writing that becomes epic, curing a disease, etc. Heaven or hell has nothing to do with it. Only the living can truly appreciate someone who's dead and gone in whatever fashion the dead left their mark.
Quote from: "mikecool70"although, admittedly, an all-powerful God could cause the person to be eternally happy.
So can a never ending supply of Prozac in heavy doses. But that doesn't mean I'd want to live my life that way.
Quote from: "WitchSabrina":rollin: Aitm
The concept of Forever isn't difficult. In order to exist forever you must make a serious mark on the world - a piece of art, writing that becomes epic, curing a disease, etc. Heaven or hell has nothing to do with it. Only the living can truly appreciate someone who's dead and gone in whatever fashion the dead left their mark.
I get your point, but even that is not existing "forever". Those works will only exist as long as recorded human history exists. So many people have had their "works" (whatever those may be) lost to the passage of time because they were not considered important by society. If they are not perceived as important by whoever is still living they will simply be discarded.
See: Law of conservation of matter, and law of conservation of energy.
See: entropy.
Quote from: "Colanth"See: entropy.
Ah, but when the universe experiences heat death, all the matter and energy will still be. It can't not be. It will just be evenly distributed throughout the universe. Finally, some quiet.
Quote from: "Jmpty"Quote from: "Colanth"See: entropy.
Ah, but when the universe experiences heat death, all the matter and energy will still be. It can't not be. It will just be evenly distributed throughout the universe. Finally, some quiet.
And that's when it all comes full circle, and the religious new agers will say "that's it!!! The matter and energy is God, the be all end all of everything!!!!111". The Alpha and Omega, the first and the last!!
Perhaps I beat them to the punch. But you get the point.
Has anyone contemplated that the eternal we are looking for with our mind, is veiled by mind?
Whatever you see your self as, is a label and comes from mind, is it not?
A theist should say, god is everything and the burden of proof is on the atheist to prove a individual self.
One expressing as many vs individuals.
Quote from: "frosty"Quote from: "WitchSabrina":rollin: Aitm
The concept of Forever isn't difficult. In order to exist forever you must make a serious mark on the world - a piece of art, writing that becomes epic, curing a disease, etc. Heaven or hell has nothing to do with it. Only the living can truly appreciate someone who's dead and gone in whatever fashion the dead left their mark.
I get your point, but even that is not existing "forever". Those works will only exist as long as recorded human history exists. So many people have had their "works" (whatever those may be) lost to the passage of time because they were not considered important by society. If they are not perceived as important by whoever is still living they will simply be discarded.
True enough. I get your point. I was referring to creating something special enough as to always be recognized by people -for as long as people exist. For without people to appreciate certain works (like Shakespeare for example) - then time ceases to have meaning. Of course *time* could continue without mankind - but we certainly won't care if we're not here anymore. Unless you're proposing aliens - which I am not. :rollin:
Quote from: "WitchSabrina"Quote from: "frosty"Quote from: "WitchSabrina":rollin: Aitm
The concept of Forever isn't difficult. In order to exist forever you must make a serious mark on the world - a piece of art, writing that becomes epic, curing a disease, etc. Heaven or hell has nothing to do with it. Only the living can truly appreciate someone who's dead and gone in whatever fashion the dead left their mark.
I get your point, but even that is not existing "forever". Those works will only exist as long as recorded human history exists. So many people have had their "works" (whatever those may be) lost to the passage of time because they were not considered important by society. If they are not perceived as important by whoever is still living they will simply be discarded.
True enough. I get your point. I was referring to creating something special enough as to always be recognized by people -for as long as people exist. For without people to appreciate certain works (like Shakespeare for example) - then time ceases to have meaning. Of course *time* could continue without mankind - but we certainly won't care if we're not here anymore. Unless you're proposing aliens - which I am not. :rollin:
May I be so bold as to suggest that Bach is also timeless and would appeal to more people than Shakespeare, as music is the universal language. Then again, what today passes for music...
And I am pretty sure that time will continue long after mankind has turned into stardust. I had better not start on parallel universes, but that is a wonderful subject for another "time".
Quote from: "WitchSabrina"Quote from: "frosty"Quote from: "WitchSabrina":rollin: Aitm
The concept of Forever isn't difficult. In order to exist forever you must make a serious mark on the world - a piece of art, writing that becomes epic, curing a disease, etc. Heaven or hell has nothing to do with it. Only the living can truly appreciate someone who's dead and gone in whatever fashion the dead left their mark.
I get your point, but even that is not existing "forever". Those works will only exist as long as recorded human history exists. So many people have had their "works" (whatever those may be) lost to the passage of time because they were not considered important by society. If they are not perceived as important by whoever is still living they will simply be discarded.
True enough. I get your point. I was referring to creating something special enough as to always be recognized by people -for as long as people exist. For without people to appreciate certain works (like Shakespeare for example) - then time ceases to have meaning. Of course *time* could continue without mankind - but we certainly won't care if we're not here anymore. Unless you're proposing aliens - which I am not. :rollin:
I have a feeling the alien subject may create some strong opinions, but I will say this. Out of the ever expanding universe, with the trillions (and more) of stars, the plethora of planets around, and the varying planetary conditions we see regarding the few planets we can observe, the mathematical probability of us being the only "intelligent" lifeform out there seems very slim. Perhaps the biological organisms that any hypothetical alien would be based from can survive in different planetary environments than us humans. To simply rule out any other life because A) we cannot see it, therefore it does not exist and B) certain planets do not match our own specific living conditions, I think is a little shortsighted.
We have made great strides as a species but we simply do not know everything there is to know about what's out there. Keep in mind I am referring to scientific paradigms here, not religious or spiritual. Any scientists, even the biggest of the hotheads, will admit that we do not know everything there is to know about everything.
And to anybody that replies, keep in mind that aliens at this point are still a hypothetical maybe and I am not in any way insisting that they in fact exist, because I have no proof to show you.
Quote from: "Jmpty"Quote from: "Colanth"See: entropy.
Ah, but when the universe experiences heat death, all the matter and energy will still be. It can't not be. It will just be evenly distributed throughout the universe.
As individual sub-atomic particles, but not as "you".
Quote from: "Alias"Has anyone contemplated that the eternal we are looking for with our mind, is veiled by mind?
Whatever you see your self as, is a label and comes from mind, is it not?
A theist should say, god
Oops - burden of proof right there, and no one has ever met it.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Has anyone contemplated that the eternal we are looking for with our mind, is veiled by mind?
Whatever you see your self as, is a label and comes from mind, is it not?
A theist should say, god
Oops - burden of proof right there, and no one has ever met it.
I can prove it, I just don't feel like it right now.
Quote from: "Jmpty"I can prove it, I just don't feel like it right now.
Thank you, M. Fermat.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Has anyone contemplated that the eternal we are looking for with our mind, is veiled by mind?
Whatever you see your self as, is a label and comes from mind, is it not?
A theist should say, god
Oops - burden of proof right there, and no one has ever met it.
God/one expressing as many is everything, end your search and you will know.
Siddharta and Jesus is two of many.
Adyashanti and Eckhart Tolle is two of many that lives today.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Jmpty"I can prove it, I just don't feel like it right now.
Thank you, M. Fermat.
You are welcome. Exponentially so. :wink:
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Has anyone contemplated that the eternal we are looking for with our mind, is veiled by mind?
Whatever you see your self as, is a label and comes from mind, is it not?
A theist should say, god
Oops - burden of proof right there, and no one has ever met it.
God/one expressing as many is everything, end your search and you will know.
I'll search for whatever you can produce evidence of. So far, no one has produced any evidence of any god. So the burden is still yours.
Quote from: "Jmpty"Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Jmpty"I can prove it, I just don't feel like it right now.
Thank you, M. Fermat.
You are welcome. Exponentially so. :wink:
Oh, I thought marginally so.
Look, I'm working on it. OKAY?!!
(//http://www.michw.com/blogwp/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/mathEQsheet.jpg)
Quote from: "Colanth"I'll search for whatever you can produce evidence of. So far, no one has produced any evidence of any god. So the burden is still yours.
God = One expressing as many
It is your burden to prove where the separation is.
What does "One expressing as many" even mean?
Quote from: "Plu"What does "One expressing as many" even mean?
That what you can not understand, life, is one.
It express as form.
Your try to understand this, is also an expression.
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Plu"What does "One expressing as many" even mean?
That what you can not understand, life, is one.
It express as form.
Your try to understand this, is also an expression.
[youtube:2qp3qhit]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_mDTLphIVY[/youtube:2qp3qhit]
I can forgive some bad grammar, but you aren't even
trying. :evil:
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Plu"What does "One expressing as many" even mean?
That what you can not understand, life, is one.
It express as form.
Your try to understand this, is also an expression.
Bring on the vegamatic...
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Colanth"I'll search for whatever you can produce evidence of. So far, no one has produced any evidence of any god. So the burden is still yours.
God = One expressing as many
It is your burden to prove where the separation is.
I'll grant your "one expressing as many". Now explain how thew many created the universe (before they existed, since there was nothing - including the many - when it was created). And explain how "the one expressing as many" died for the sins of the many. (Not that you can, since that's semantic claptrap.)
I'm gonna side with Hijiri Byakuren. This guy apparently doesn't speak English and is talking through some kind of translator, I'm guessing.
Unsurprisingly, when you put gibberish into a translator, it spouts amplified gibberish on the other end.
I actually understand what he's saying, Plu. (I've encountered the assertion before.) That doesn't make it any less nonsense.
Quote from: "mikecool70"Some theists think that they will exist forever in Heaven while others burn (exist) forever in Hell. What does that even mean? My 42 year old physical self does not look much like my 10 year old self. And I certainly don't have many of the same interests as I did when I was 3 years old. Can it even be said that those previous versions of me still exist? I think an argument could even be made that since my molecules and thoughts are constantly changing, that even the version of myself that existed 5 seconds ago doesn't exist anymore and will never exist again. How is it possible for a person who doesn't exist to experience Heaven or Hell?
Of course, theists will say that souls are immortal and never change. But it they never change, then how can they ever experience pain or pleasure in the future? If I have a soul, whatever that is, I'm fairly confident that it isn't currently experiencing pain or pleasure. Something would have to change for my soul to suddenly feel eternal pain or pleasure. Such a change would mean that the previous version of that soul no longer exists and is no longer "my" soul. Why in the hell should I worry about a soul that I don't even self-identify with? Sure, I may feel sorry for a soul that happens to be burning in Hell for all eternity but I'm certainly not going to stop living my life because of it.
I do understand that "previous versions" of myself determine everything about the "current version" of myself and that I have memories of the previous versions that no one else has. But that doesn't mean that those previous versions still exist.
Any thoughts on this so that I can clarify my views on this subject are most welcome.
This is what freaks me out about Star Trek transporters. How do I know the guy that comes out the other end is really "me"?
QuoteThis is what freaks me out about Star Trek transporters. How do I know the guy that comes out the other end is really "me"?
How do you know the guy that wakes up when you go to sleep is really you? :P
Quote from: "Plu"QuoteThis is what freaks me out about Star Trek transporters. How do I know the guy that comes out the other end is really "me"?
How do you know the guy that wakes up when you go to sleep is really you? :P
According to certain Native American belief, it's not. You're a new "you" every day.
I think the problem is that there's no competent definition of "really me".
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Colanth"I'll search for whatever you can produce evidence of. So far, no one has produced any evidence of any god. So the burden is still yours.
God = One expressing as many
It is your burden to prove where the separation is.
I'll grant your "one expressing as many". Now explain how thew many created the universe (before they existed, since there was nothing - including the many - when it was created). And explain how "the one expressing as many" died for the sins of the many. (Not that you can, since that's semantic claptrap.)
"The one expressing as many" is a pointer that that there is no separated self.
A wave that no longer see its self as a separated wave can see the ocean and its true self, water.
I am not talking about creation, i dont know about that.
I am talking about the title, "What does it even mean to exist forever".
Quote from: "Alias""The one expressing as many" is a pointer that that there is no separated self.
Oh, sorry. I thought this was going to be a rational discussion, not me viewing your drug-induced nightmares.
QuoteI am talking about the title, "What does it even mean to exist forever".
It means to survive the heat-death of the universe - IOW, it's words with no meaning.
Quote from: "Alias""The one expressing as many" is a pointer that that there is no separated self.
A wave that no longer see its self as a separated wave can see the ocean and its true self, water.
I am not talking about creation, i dont know about that.
I am talking about the title, "What does it even mean to exist forever".
I know what the nature of water is - it's melting point, boiling point, density, etc. - and how a wave can appear as a spatial-temporal manifestation consistent with physical laws yet not be separate from the whole body of water. I don't know what the nature of "the one" is and how there can appear to be different spatial-temporal manifestations - "expressing as many" - of a whole that you refer to as "the one". Could you explain the nature of "the one" in a way like we can explain the nature of water (what are its properties) and could you explain how "the one" can exhibit spatial-temporal manifestations like we can explain, using physical laws, how a big body of water can exhibit the spatial-temporal manifestation of a wave?
In an eternal state, the only thing I can think of that might help you stay sane is if eventually, you manage to forget everything you've ever experienced after a certain amount of time.
But that's just really a strange and impractical situation to speculate on anyways. In truth I guess no one knows what it might be like to be immortal. Anyone seen the Highlander? Those guys seemed well adjusted enough.
Quote from: "Cocoa Beware"In an eternal state, the only thing I can think of that might help you stay sane is if eventually, you manage to forget everything you've ever experienced after a certain amount of time.
You don't need to live forever to forget things. Based on what I can remember now, if I lived to be even 1,000 I'd have very little memory of the 21st century. (No worries about the 20th - I have enough trouble remembering it now.)
Quote from: "entropy"Quote from: "Alias""The one expressing as many" is a pointer that that there is no separated self.
A wave that no longer see its self as a separated wave can see the ocean and its true self, water.
I am not talking about creation, i dont know about that.
I am talking about the title, "What does it even mean to exist forever".
I know what the nature of water is - it's melting point, boiling point, density, etc. - and how a wave can appear as a spatial-temporal manifestation consistent with physical laws yet not be separate from the whole body of water. I don't know what the nature of "the one" is and how there can appear to be different spatial-temporal manifestations - "expressing as many" - of a whole that you refer to as "the one". Could you explain the nature of "the one" in a way like we can explain the nature of water (what are its properties) and could you explain how "the one" can exhibit spatial-temporal manifestations like we can explain, using physical laws, how a big body of water can exhibit the spatial-temporal manifestation of a wave?
Let everything be as it is, i call it the ocean, the one.
Waves comes and goes in the ocean, i am so and so, mind.
You see your self as a separated wave when you identify your self with mind.
You are not the ocean or the wave.
You are water, i am.
Jesus said, deny your self.
Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.
Everyone seems to know who they are as they express i am so and so but it is mind and mind comes and goes.
It is nice with identity but it is also demanding resources, it makes us fight about it.
Cute poetry, but still meaningless drivel.
Quote from: "Plu"Cute poetry, but still meaningless drivel.
It is nothing to understand for the mind so the mind see it as meaningless drivel.
That seems about right, yeah. Nobody in their right mind would make anything of that.
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Plu"Cute poetry, but still meaningless drivel.
It is nothing to understand for the mind so the mind see it as meaningless drivel.
More nonsense.
Verbose irrelevencies designed to obscure the idea being proposed is a waste of everyone's time.
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Plu"Cute poetry, but still meaningless drivel.
It is nothing to understand for the mind
And since the mind is the only place life on Earth can understand anything, it's nothing to understand at all. Not even cute poetry, just nonsense. At least most religious nonsense sounds as if it means something - yours doesn't have even that.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Plu"Cute poetry, but still meaningless drivel.
It is nothing to understand for the mind
And since the mind is the only place life on Earth can understand anything, it's nothing to understand at all. Not even cute poetry, just nonsense. At least most religious nonsense sounds as if it means something - yours doesn't have even that.
Thank you, it is about nothing and mind can not accept it, therefor it talks about nonsense as soon as it can not accept that there is nothing to understand.
Put it in context of why we dont have peace, because we identify our self with body and mind.
It drives us to understand what does not need to be understood, that what we are as we are.
The wave/body comes from ocean/nature, i prefer the parable though we understand water in the parable better then the many names that has been given to what we are.
Quote from: "Alias"Thank you, it is about nothing and mind can not accept it, therefor it talks about nonsense as soon as it can not accept that there is nothing to understand.
Evidently you're not intelligent enough to understand.
If the mind can't understand it, there IS NOTHING to understand.
Making up sentences that have no meaning doesn't make you look superior, it makes you look infantile.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Thank you, it is about nothing and mind can not accept it, therefor it talks about nonsense as soon as it can not accept that there is nothing to understand.
Evidently you're not intelligent enough to understand.
If the mind can't understand it, there IS NOTHING to understand.
Making up sentences that have no meaning doesn't make you look superior, it makes you look infantile.
We are no thing, there is nothing behind body and mind and believing that we are body and mind is a symptom of an idea of our self that claims it, we call it person and some cant maintain being a person so they reach out for something that can free them selves.
It is the change of ones idea about ones self that gives rise to some peace for awhile.
I understand Jesus when he said, deny your self, take up your cross and follow me.
For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.
He even expressed how it felt to give up the most close self that wants to be free.
My god my god, why have you forsaken me, no self, no god.
This i my view on "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?".
That what is left does not come and go.
You dont have to waste more of your time on saying that you dont care about how i see it.
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Thank you, it is about nothing and mind can not accept it, therefor it talks about nonsense as soon as it can not accept that there is nothing to understand.
Evidently you're not intelligent enough to understand.
If the mind can't understand it, there IS NOTHING to understand.
Making up sentences that have no meaning doesn't make you look superior, it makes you look infantile.
We are no thing, there is nothing behind body and mind and believing that we are body and mind is a symptom of an idea of our self that claims it, we call it person and some cant maintain being a person so they reach out for something that can free them selves.
It is the change of ones idea about ones self that gives rise to some peace for awhile.
I understand Jesus when he said, deny your self, take up your cross and follow me.
For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.
He even expressed how it felt to give up the most close self that wants to be free.
My god my god, why have you forsaken me, no self, no god.
This i my view on "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?".
That what is left does not come and go.
You dont have to waste more of your time on saying that you dont care about how i see it.
As I said, making things up makes you look infantile. Now how about posting some actual EVIDENCE? Not things other people claimed, actual evidence. Like objective evidence (if you aren't sure exactly what that means, look it up before you make yourself look foolish) that a god, any god, objectively exists? Or that "Jesus" was more than a Jewish sky-godlet myth (like Mithra was a Persion sky-godlet myth and Osiris was an Egyptian sky-godlet myth)? (Remember, Paul never wrote about a MAN named YEshua, he wrote about someone who lived in the "seventh heaven" and came down to the "first heaven" to be killed. The human Jesus was a later invention of those who invented modern, non-sky-godlet, Christianity.)
So ... evidence, or more nonsense? Your choice.
Quote from: "Colanth"As I said, making things up makes you look infantile. Now how about posting some actual EVIDENCE? Not things other people claimed, actual evidence. Like objective evidence (if you aren't sure exactly what that means, look it up before you make yourself look foolish) that a god, any god, objectively exists? Or that "Jesus" was more than a Jewish sky-godlet myth (like Mithra was a Persion sky-godlet myth and Osiris was an Egyptian sky-godlet myth)? (Remember, Paul never wrote about a MAN named YEshua, he wrote about someone who lived in the "seventh heaven" and came down to the "first heaven" to be killed. The human Jesus was a later invention of those who invented modern, non-sky-godlet, Christianity.)
So ... evidence, or more nonsense? Your choice.
The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you want evidence?
QuoteThe subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you want evidence?
We always want evidence. It's kinda our schtick, and it's sad that most of the world doesn't seem to care for evidence.
never mind
Quote from: "entropy"never mind
Does it matter?
:-D
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Colanth"As I said, making things up makes you look infantile. Now how about posting some actual EVIDENCE? Not things other people claimed, actual evidence. Like objective evidence (if you aren't sure exactly what that means, look it up before you make yourself look foolish) that a god, any god, objectively exists? Or that "Jesus" was more than a Jewish sky-godlet myth (like Mithra was a Persion sky-godlet myth and Osiris was an Egyptian sky-godlet myth)? (Remember, Paul never wrote about a MAN named YEshua, he wrote about someone who lived in the "seventh heaven" and came down to the "first heaven" to be killed. The human Jesus was a later invention of those who invented modern, non-sky-godlet, Christianity.)
So ... evidence, or more nonsense? Your choice.
The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you want evidence?
The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you bring up a make-believe godlet? That's what I want evidence for - the godlet you're talking about.
It was hard, but I eventually accepted mentally that I indeed will not exist forever. Our cavemen ancestors instilled the sense of survival into our genes.... a sense that is so strong that we wish to exist after we are dead. People want to live on and live forever, just as much as I'm assuming almost 100 percent of the users on this forum want to get out of bed in the morning and live their lives. It seems to be in our nature to want to live on forever and it seems like people struggle with eventually accepting that they will not.
Quote from: "Alias"The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you want evidence?
Quote from: "Colanth"The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you bring up a make-believe godlet? That's what I want evidence for - the godlet you're talking about.
Either we lean to "many expressing as the one", affecting each other with morale and laws, striving towards oneness
or we lean to "the one expressing as many", to notice that we are already one as we are.
We have a longing to feel complete and that longing comes from identification in body and mind though out of that comes person that is an idea.
You will have your evidence as you let go of maintaining person, half of a half second is enough.
Sounds like the typical theist reasoning. "Accept that I am right and the fact that I am right will immediately become clear."
Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Alias"The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you want evidence?
Quote from: "Colanth"The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you bring up a make-believe godlet? That's what I want evidence for - the godlet you're talking about.
Either we lean to "many expressing as the one", affecting each other with morale and laws, striving towards oneness
or we lean to "the one expressing as many", to notice that we are already one as we are.
We have a longing to feel complete and that longing comes from identification in body and mind though out of that comes person that is an idea.
You will have your evidence as you let go of maintaining person, half of a half second is enough.
I'll have Bleu Cheese dressing on that salad, please.
I comes and goes.
What is left is what does not come and go, that what we are.
The idea of our self, whatever idea it is, veils the being, that what we are looking for with our idea of our self.
Maybe this can help you to know what it means to exist forever.
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Alias"The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you want evidence?
Quote from: "Colanth"The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you bring up a make-believe godlet? That's what I want evidence for - the godlet you're talking about.
Either we lean to "many expressing as the one", affecting each other with morale and laws, striving towards oneness
or we lean to "the one expressing as many", to notice that we are already one as we are.
We have a longing to feel complete and that longing comes from identification in body and mind though out of that comes person that is an idea.
You will have your evidence as you let go of maintaining person, half of a half second is enough.
I'll have Bleu Cheese dressing on that salad, please.
HA-HA dat was funny...
Quote from: "Colanth"Quote from: "Alias"Quote from: "Alias"The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you want evidence?
Quote from: "Colanth"The subject is "What Does It Even Mean to Exist Forever?" and you bring up a make-believe godlet? That's what I want evidence for - the godlet you're talking about.
Either we lean to "many expressing as the one", affecting each other with morale and laws, striving towards oneness
or we lean to "the one expressing as many", to notice that we are already one as we are.
We have a longing to feel complete and that longing comes from identification in body and mind though out of that comes person that is an idea.
You will have your evidence as you let go of maintaining person, half of a half second is enough.
I'll have Bleu Cheese dressing on that salad, please.
What did he say? It sounded like it was important, and I would like to respond, but I can't because I don't understand. So obviously he must be smarter than me. Dagummit! Foiled by an incomprehensible statement... again!
I'm going to take a wild stab in the dark here and say that English is not Alias' first language.
Step by step.
I sees its self as so and so.
I comes and goes.
I is mind.
When you look, you dont find mind, its a bundle of thoughts.
Mind needs your authority to exist and struggle to survive, it needs feelings.
Mind sees its self as consciousness or spirit, god or soul, nothing or person.
Mind needs the shift, its how body and mind works else body and mind becomes depressed, feelings becomes old.
Self, spirit or person is individuality, mind cant stay to long as that, mind becomes to intense.
We like whatever what can take the attention to be at something else than mind, that is what we think is good.
That is why a being can be a racist or why a being can listen to Justin Bieber, strong feelings takes the attention away from mind.
You know your own world you have a life in.
The source of it is mind.
The world is illusion./Siddharta
I am with you until the end of the world./Jesus
You can whenever notice that here is no individuality, its practically but not real.
You need individuality for there to be birth and death.
You need mind for there to be an inside and outside of you.
You remind me of myself when I was 12. I wrote some pretty terrible poetry as well.
Mind is a bundle of thoughts, it becomes an idea of our self as we have a relationship to it.
I am not saying as if there is a line to be on the right side of or to get rid of mind.
Its about the relationship to mind though a deep relationship means to take ones self as mind.
A mind with authority is based on thoughts/feelings and a mind based on thoughts/feelings is all about wanting to be free from its self.
Sin means to miss the mark.
Its a kind of mind that understands but cant let go of its self that talks about sin as something with a consequence.
It comes from the hate based on thoughts/feelings that is questioned, afraid of meeting ones own nothingness/self.
A nothingness/self that feels like hell to mind, a nothingness/self that feels heavenly to us if i may use some religious storytelling words to describe.
Its that nothingness/self that we are, it does not come and go.
I looked for my self, i gave up the search, i found my self.
We are unaware while we do it and because we are unaware do we take a step into mind again.
In the dark days of mind do we want to be free, trying to find our self, around and around it goes.
You know your self, it is what you are as you are.
Let it be and you will notice the absence of individuality and separation.
We dont need to do anything to see through the eyes of oneness or like the religious storytelling describes it, to be with god.