Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell

[Sum Dum Gai]

Do your views include how you interact with your wife?

Obviously. They color how I interact with everyone. Just like anybody else. If you believe something you can't help but have it color your relationships.

[dom]

when you die, you're dead...

That is all we do know. To say anything different would be a total lie. Think of it as a long sleep. A sleep that you never wake up from.
Your atoms however, could go on to form part of a tree, flower or rubber tyre etc

[mrsdutt]

Sept 15, 2012 16:46:54 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Do your views include how you interact with your wife?

Obviously. They color how I interact with everyone. Just like anybody else. If you believe something you can't help but have it color your relationships.

No, it's not obvious to me. Sorry buddy. Your words don't match your actions.

Just trying to get you to think.

[Sum Dum Gai]

No, it's not obvious to me. Sorry buddy. Your words don't match your actions.

Well, not always. Nobody is perfect. People who believe in eternal damnation and hell still sin occasionally. On the whole I try to help people when I can, and avoid hurting them, because I think this life is all we get.

[Deleted]

ISA wrote:"An interesting line of thought. A lack of wrong and right doesn't necessarily mean that moral relativism is in effect. It might just mean that there is no wrong or right at all, relative or otherwise. This is the view I ultimately subscribe to myself, Lone, though I too have difficulty reconciling such a lofty idea with the down-to-Earth, day-2-day occurrences of life."

If there is no right or wrong, then you cannot tell another not to maim, butcher, abuse, kill, rape, steal or destroy. Or, to give, help, heal, feed, mend, etc. You would necessarily have to say one value set is "good" based on some Absolute. Otherwise, you cannot. Yes, you can try to make relative case, but if feel i want to engage in evil then you cannot then say your way is better, higher or good because it really isn't anything. No?

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2012 17:39:40 GMT -5 @shooby said:

If there is no right or wrong, then you cannot tell another not to maim, butcher, abuse, kill, rape, steal or destroy. Or, to give, help, heal, feed, mend, etc.

Yes, I think that's a correct analysis of it, Shoobz, indeed.

Yes, you can try to make relative case, but if feel i want to engage in evil then you cannot then say your way is better, higher or good because it really isn't anything. No?

Well, 'evil' doesn't exist in that particular way I noted, so you wouldn't be able to engage in it.

[femmefatale]

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2012 18:54:15 GMT -5 @femmefatale said:

;D

[femmefatale]

Sept 15, 2012 18:55:29 GMT -5 @devianity said:

Sept 15, 2012 18:54:15 GMT -5 @femmefatale said:

;D

[mrsdutt]

LONE said: I believe as generous as this is, we may be interfering in someones path when we give too much.


This is a given. A person would never learn what they are meant to if we rescue them all of the time. On the other hand there is a time to give through compassion. One needs the wisdom to know the difference. Please note I said wisdom, not knowledge. There's quite a difference between the 2.

[mrsdutt]

Sept 15, 2012 19:17:40 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

Sept 15, 2012 19:07:28 GMT -5 mrsdutt said:

LONE said: I believe as generous as this is, we may be interfering in someones path when we give too much.


This is a given. A person would never learn what they are meant to if we rescue them all of the time. On the other hand there is a time to give through compassion. One needs the wisdom to know the difference. Please note I said wisdom, not knowledge. There's quite a difference between the 2.

Yes!!!! This is something I struggle with all the time. When to give and when to allow someone to learn to do for themselves.
Maybe this is my beef about welfare. A helping hand, yes, enabling, no.

''

I have developed parameters with this one. I don't offer help if someone could afford something they should be paying for, but uses their resources irrationally. I do help when there is extenuating circumstances.

Example: I wouldn't give gas money to someone because there should be a place for that in their budget. I will buy a stroller for a new baby because that would be a hardship of sorts for someone on a tight budget

It's not my job to rescue others. To help when it's appropriate works well for me.

[mrsdutt]

Sept 15, 2012 17:27:57 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

No, it's not obvious to me. Sorry buddy. Your words don't match your actions.

Well, not always. Nobody is perfect. People who believe in eternal damnation and hell still sin occasionally. On the whole I try to help people when I can, and avoid hurting them, because I think this life is all we get.

Everyone sins. The end. I find it interesting that you chose the word 'sin'.

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2012 18:37:01 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

If there is no right or wrong, then you cannot tell another not to maim, butcher, abuse, kill, rape, steal or destroy.

Actually, no. You would be interfering with their path and the path of the person being abused. The mission here of the victim may have been to learn empathy for a rape victim and the rapist is only here to assist in that mission. I know....this is really far out and something our society would never accept. Thus the conflict.

Those here who are generous in their giving are doing so because somewhere alone the line they have experienced being without and they have learned empathy for the needy. We see this as good. However, I believe as generous as this is, we may be interfering in someone's path when we give too much.

Otherwise, you cannot. Yes, you can try to make relative case, but if feel i want to engage in evil then you cannot then say your way is better, higher or good because it really isn't anything. No?

Confusing, huh? I don't know. I don't have the answers, I'm sure. Just what I feel.

But, in a world of moral relatism and no higher power, there can be no good nor evil. What you describe is assinging a property of value in that good is somehow better than evil. In order for it to be better, there has to be somemeasuring stick by which to measure, aka an Absolute Truth andin fact an absolute Higher Power. If you are just describing us a chemical rxns that simply go round and round, it wouldn't matter a whit whether you choose to be Jeffrey Dahmer or Mother Theresa. In the end, it is simply all just nothing.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Sept 15, 2012 4:58:15 GMT -5 mrsdutt said:

AHAM said: It's the recycling of energy that seems to exists that interests me.

You may be on to something with this. Unfortunately I think there is so much to know, no one will ever know it all. So let us know if you come up with any answers on this one.

Will do. However, I think this is beyond my realm of understanding, I only know what I am supposed to know...

I know a maintenance manager that is 84 yrs old, and my Grandpa basically died in the field at 82. So I know one thing for sure; it's not the older you get, the less energy in your "battery".

[Deleted]

So, then there is something beyond ourselves? But, if it merely just a valueless energy, then what would be the reason you would strive to live a "good" life?

If in the end, there is no point, then murdering someone is equivalent to scrathing your ear which is also nothing as well. So, going round and round as meaningless energy to what end?

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Sept 15, 2012 22:24:25 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

I only know what I am supposed to know...

I believe we only remember and know what we choose to remember and know.

Life is about understanding.

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2012 22:22:10 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

If you are just describing us a chemical rxns that simply go round and round, it wouldn't matter a whit whether you choose to be Jeffrey Dahmer or Mother Theresa. In the end, it is simply all just nothing.

You're right. It doesn't matter who we choose to be. The goal of each of us, should be to join with the whole, the God energy. I don't believe our journeys are for nothing.

We have similar end opinions it seems, Lone, but perhaps they are reached through quite different thinking.

Take as a premise that everything is part of the same one thing. Human intelligence has been on a quest to split that one thing up into evermore numerous components for the purpose of studying and trying to acquire a greater understanding.

However this has led to a false perception of it; instead of viewing it as one thing we have come to view it as a collection of components. From this, a whole range of dichotomies arise - hot & cold, light & dark, right & wrong - these are illusory by-products of perception. Really they are all part of the same one thing and aren't actually separate in the way our perception suggests.

One initial difficulty is in reconciling the fact of their illusory nature with the fact of their seeming real to us. This is hampered by the fact that it is only through human perception that one is able to realise human perception is responsible for said illusions.

This difficulty is overcome by the simple realisation that they are in fact part of the same one thing; Jeffrey Dahmer and Mother Theresa are part of the same thing, and it is the thing of which we, and everything else we can possibly think of, are also a part.

We can call this 'God' if we like, or 'the Universe', or 'energy'… doesn't really matter, it's just a label.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Interesting points Astro..

We can call this 'God' if we like, or 'the Universe', or 'energy'… doesn't really matter, it's just a label.

Two things we know, when humans continued to label themselves the son of God, one was created. Also, when we seem to "go away" from God(togetherness) things seem to start really going bad.

[Sum Dum Gai]

I find it interesting that you chose the word 'sin'.

Why?

I was specifically talking about people who have a Christian worldview where doing bad things in this life, which they refer to as sinning, can lead to an afterlife that consists of eternal suffering. Even with that belief they still sin. What other word would I use?

[Sum Dum Gai]

I can't wrap my mind around this because it seems so illogical. When we look around we see that there is a reason for everything.
The bug feeds the bird, the bird drops the seeds...Why would our existence be the only thing on this earth that means nothing, here for no reason at all?

Who says any of that means anything either? This planet is full of organisms that have evolved to coexist with each other. It almost seems like there's a plan. Except that species that have evolved to fill a particular niche in the food chain still go extinct. We go through an ice age, or a period of lots of volcanic activity and some species die off. No real rhyme or reason. Life overall struggles on of course. Until one day the sun goes supernova and destroys every living organism on the planet.

Our existence isn't the only one that means nothing and is here for no reason at all. All life on this planet is here for the same reason. The conditions were right for it to exist, and so it does. When those condition change, like the sun explodes, it will cease. There's your reason. Because it can... for a while.

[Reckless Roselia]

Sept 15, 2012 23:50:24 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Interesting points..

We can call this 'God' if we like, or 'the Universe', or 'energy'… doesn't really matter, it's just a label.

Two things we know, when humans continued to label themselves the son of God, one was created. Also, when we seem to "go away" from God(togetherness) things seem to start really going bad.

Once we start labelling God as something we have various forms and divisions of believers. Naming God or a Higher Being as the Universe can make one a Pantheist.

[mrsdutt]

Sept 16, 2012 2:41:04 GMT -5 Reckless Roselia said:

Sept 15, 2012 23:50:24 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Interesting points..



Two things we know, when humans continued to label themselves the son of God, one was created. Also, when we seem to "go away" from God(togetherness) things seem to start really going bad.

Once we start labeling God as something we have various forms and divisions of believers. Naming God or a Higher Being as the Universe can make one a Pantheist.

I believe God is who He says He is, 'The beginning and the end'. Jesus has a name, just like the rest of us. God does too. (Yaway, English spelling) The universe is part of His creation. It's not Him. It is amazing to me how far people will go to separate themselves from their creator. I know as a parent I would be broken hearted if my children separated themselves from me, denying that I was 1/2 responsible for their creation.

[Reckless Roselia]

Sept 16, 2012 6:19:04 GMT -5 mrsdutt said:

Sept 16, 2012 2:41:04 GMT -5 Reckless Roselia said:

Once we start labeling God as something we have various forms and divisions of believers. Naming God or a Higher Being as the Universe can make one a Pantheist.

[glow=teal,2,300]I believe God is who He says He is, 'The beginning and the end'.[/glow] Jesus has a name, just like the rest of us. God does too. (Yaway, English spelling) [glow=purple,2,300]The universe is part of His creation. It's not Him. It is amazing to me how far people will go to separate themselves from their creator.[/glow] [glow=navy,2,300]I know as a parent I would be broken hearted if my children separated themselves from me, denying that I was 1/2 responsible for their creation[/glow].

Idin, if you're implying God shares many qualities that of Infinity then yes, I agree with you because this is what I believe in too.

But God can be anything right? Do we know how He looks like or how he feels or talk? He may just be light energy.

I can understand your sentiments but believers from all walks of life have been calling things that they can 'see' to be God.

God cannot be a parent figure in my humble opinion.

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2012 23:50:24 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Two things we know, when humans continued to label themselves the son of God, one was created.

Hmm, Hamburger, it is a stretch to say 'we know' this. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that some of us like to believe it.

Also, when we seem to "go away" from God(togetherness) things seem to start really going bad.

Yes. Unfortunately, differing ideas over 'God' is one of the obstacles to togetherness.

[Deleted]

If Jeffery Dahmer and Mother Theresa are all the same then you have no moral imperatives to live by. Nor, can you call on others to live any other way. You can no more condemn violence than you can praise goodness. If it is all for naught, we are just floating blobs, then there is absolutely no reason why i should not go next door and take everything by neighbor has, by force, if necessary. The funny thing about man is that we seem to have the ability to make moral or immoral choices unlike animals, plants or other life. We alone seem to have this "image of God" implanted in us.
To just say we exist "just because" is pretty odd. From WHERE did the material building blocks come from to create the "right conditions" for our existence. You have to start from somewhere and all roads can only lead back to a predeceding God. There has to a beginning point where 2 atoms came into existence. From whence did they come? There has to be something outside of creation to have created creation. The chemist is 'outside" the lab directing the chemicals. And, if that is the case, to just assume the master Chemist or Creator rendered our existence but then just walked away like a derelict and has no interest in the end result is another notion that simply does not make sense to me.

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2012 8:09:05 GMT -5 @devianity said:

Sept 15, 2012 23:50:24 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Yes. Unfortunately, differing ideas over 'God' is one of the obstacles to togetherness.

Not so ISA. Assuming randomness and no God is a very easy leap into absolute and total self centered living where there is nothing to aspired to other than your own personal pleasure and self gratification. So, if no God, i have no fear of punishment other than what man can do to me and also no hope of reward either. I can then just simply take a calculated risk for my highest reward. If i can knock you to the ground and take what you own and get away with it, there is no reason at all why i should simply NOT do so.

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2012 8:13:14 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

God cannot be a parent figure in my humble opinion.

I agree. It would be like depending upon the energy coming from a light bulb to tell us how to live our lives. If we choose to share in the energy and the warmth it produces, we must go to it.
Again...this is just my belief and realize it's not everyone's.

The bulb did not create itself. It is kind of like saying the light bulb created your home. To believe that God created everything and doesn't care and is a walk away parent seems an ever less logical belief in my opinion. It seems strange that a creator would make such an intricate and beautiful creation and then just toss it aside. And, if God is capable of that, then he is capable of "paying attention" to whether we drink a caramel macchioto or a vanillla latte.

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2012 8:14:56 GMT -5 @lonewolf said:

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that some of us like to believe it.

How can we not believe when our souls remember and cry for it.

Do plants have a soul? Does water have a soul? Do the sun moon and stars have a soul? What is a soul?

[femmefatale]

Also, when we seem to "go away" from God(togetherness) things seem to start really going bad.

So true, for me, Aham. I just wouldn't feel complete without Him.

[Deleted]

So, there is a reason or there is NOT a reason? Is the universe just a random occurrence of chance? If so, then there is no reason. If there is a reason, apart from God, what could possibly be the reason?