Is there an Afterlife?

[cashmcall]

Same ol' story ... instead of searching, you want the answer fed to you like pap. You want God to prove He exists to you ... got any idea just how egotistical and antithetical that sounds?

He needs to stop researching, and start searching.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Yea its very egotistical for someone to not believe in something there is no proof for, and all claimed proof, that is of course not at all proof, is 2000 years old. Its amazing how much "proof" use to happen all the time in the bible, but then as soon as we got a little smarter, technology a little better...no more proof. No talking bush's , no dead rising up, no biblical floods, no Profits ( outside Muhammad of course) ...then again David Koresh did think he was god so maybe...No virgin Birth Humans * use to be common back in the day.

 

[dogtowner]

Yea its very egotistical for someone to not believe in something there is no proof for, and all claimed proof, that is of course not at all proof, is 2000 years old. Its amazing how much "proof" use to happen all the time in the bible, but then as soon as we got a little smarter, technology a little better...no more proof. No talking bush's , no dead rising up, no biblical floods, no Profits ( outside Muhammad of course) ...then again David Koresh did think he was god so maybe...No virgin Birth Humans * use to be common back in the day.

What "proof" is there of these things you claim were disproved ?
There is also a reason they refer to it as faith and not proof.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

What "proof" is there of these things you claim were disproved ?
There is also a reason they refer to it as faith and not proof.

so you want me to prove what can't be proved did not happen...you should be smart enough to know you can't do that. You want me to do what? prove that a burning Bush was not talking to someone 2/3000 years ago?

And my point acactly, its quite the ego to attack someone for not believing what you only can take on faith, as evidence at best does not show it to be true...and at worse shows it to not true at all. There are Billions of People with Faith...and the fact is the vast majority or all of them are wrong. That is proven by the simple fact their faith is not the same as evryone else. But they all belive their faith is the true one, and is proven.

 

[Iolo2]

Is there an Afterlife?

I may be finding out over the next few days, and won't be back for a while anyway. Wish me luck if it in you lies!

 

[dogtowner]

so you want me to prove what can't be proved did not happen...you should be smart enough to know you can't do that. You want me to do what? prove that a burning Bush was not talking to someone 2/3000 years ago?

And my point acactly, its quite the ego to attack someone for not believing what you only can take on faith, as evidence at best does not show it to be true...and at worse shows it to not true at all. There are Billions of People with Faith...and the fact is the vast majority or all of them are wrong. That is proven by the simple fact their faith is not the same as evryone else. But they all belive their faith is the true one, and is proven.

You are the one who said the falicy was proved, not me. So whats it going to be ?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

You are the one who said the falicy was proved, not me. So whats it going to be ?

I have stated many times if you listen , that in science you can not prove a Negitive. But I can say that evidence does not support any of these things. But if you want to prove Noahs arc or that a random burning bush talked, or people rising from the dead...have at it. Maybe you can prove that humans use to live to be 900. Because you know its egotistical not to believe those things right?

 

[dogtowner]

I have stated many times if you listen , that in science you can not prove a Negitive. But I can say that evidence does not support any of these things. But if you want to prove Noahs arc or that a random burning bush talked, or people rising from the dead...have at it. Maybe you can prove that humans use to live to be 900. Because you know its egotistical not to believe those things right?

Yes but in this thread you said they were disproven. Perhaps you erred ?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Yes but in this thread you said they were disproven. Perhaps you erred ?

ok fine, there is zero proof for them....I also can't disprove your not a alien sent from the future to steal the recipe for McD's big mac sauce.....but we can safely rule it out. Though also some are more or less disproved as well due to the fact that we can date events that happened and they don't match the bible. Such as the walls of Jerico could no have fallen the way its said, as hey have done many studies finding that the city was destroyed some 400 years before. zero evidence of a massive flood of the world. Laws of physics and logic stating that he arch would no have been able to do what is said. And no one has yet found any other talking plant life. No Human is near 900, nore has any evidence of one ever been found.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

ok fine, there is zero proof for them....I also can't disprove your not a alien sent from the future to steal the recipe for McD's big mac sauce.....but we can safely rule it out. Though also some are more or less disproved as well due to the fact that we can date events that happened and they don't match the bible. Such as the walls of Jerico could no have fallen the way its said, as hey have done many studies finding that the city was destroyed some 400 years before. zero evidence of a massive flood of the world. Laws of physics and logic stating that he arch would no have been able to do what is said. And no one has yet found any other talking plant life. No Human is near 900, nore has any evidence of one ever been found.

you also can't prove the spaghetti monster did not create life on earth. But your pretty nuts to think it did.

 

[dogtowner]

ok fine, there is zero proof for them....I also can't disprove your not a alien sent from the future to steal the recipe for McD's big mac sauce.....but we can safely rule it out. Though also some are more or less disproved as well due to the fact that we can date events that happened and they don't match the bible. Such as the walls of Jerico could no have fallen the way its said, as hey have done many studies finding that the city was destroyed some 400 years before. zero evidence of a massive flood of the world. Laws of physics and logic stating that he arch would no have been able to do what is said. And no one has yet found any other talking plant life. No Human is near 900, nore has any evidence of one ever been found.

Thats what i thought. You may want ro revisit your assertions.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

yes, it was so wrong of me to think it was funny that someone would call someone egotistical for asking for proof of something that science and logic don't support. Just bow down , don't need proof, just live your life for a larger then life father figure with anger issues....and yet asking for proof of its existence before you bow down to it, its ego.

 

[dogtowner]

yes, it was so wrong of me to think it was funny that someone would call someone egotistical for asking for proof of something that science and logic don't support. Just bow down , don't need proof, just live your life for a larger then life father figure with anger issues....and yet asking for proof of its existence before you bow down to it, its ego.

Its funny that you assume therenis no "proof" of biblican events. If you wish to forego faith then feel free. I wont hold it against you. If only you could return the favor.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Its funny that you assume therenis no "proof" of biblican events. If you wish to forego faith then feel free. I wont hold it against you. If only you could return the favor.

you seem to confuse faith something happened, with proof. You know every Religion has great faith in there story...Does not mean they are all proved. Faith is the absence of fact.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

I have claimed apotheosis and what I found would be called heaven.

It is not the biblical heaven though where we have to do whatever Christians think they do there.

What I found was more of a cosmic consciousness and if you believe or give any veracity to what this scientist thinks he found, then you might give my apotheosis a bit of consideration.

------------------------------

If interested in my experience, I offer this old O.P.

Care to compare the Jesus you know to the one I know?
I have been asked to do an O P showing my beliefs and have written a nutshell view to fill that request.

I was a skeptic till the age of 39. I then had an apotheosis and later branded myself an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian. Gnostic Christian because I exemplify this quote from William Blake and that makes me as hated by Christians today as the ancient Gnostics that Constantine had the Christians kill when he bought the Catholic Church.

“Both read the Bible day and night, But thou read'st black where I read white.”

This refers to how Gnostics tend to reverse, for moral reasons, what Christians see in the Bible. We tend to recognize the evil ways of the O. T. God where literal Christians will see God’s killing as good. Christians are sheep where Gnostic Christians are goats.

This is perhaps why we see the use of a Jesus scapegoat as immoral, while theists like to make Jesus their beast of burden. An immoral position.
During my apotheosis, something that only lasted 5 or 6 seconds, the only things of note to happen was that my paradigm of reality was confirmed and I was chastised to think more demographically. What I found was what I call a cosmic consciousness. Not a new term but one that is a close but not exact fit.

I recognize that I have no proof. That is always the way with apotheosis.

This is also why I prefer to stick to issues of morality because no one has yet been able to prove that God is real and I have no more proof than they for the cosmic consciousness or what I call; the Godhead.

The cosmic consciousness is not a miracle working God. It does not interfere with us save when one of us finds it. Not a common thing from what I can see. It is a part of nature and our next evolutionary step.

I tend to have more in common with atheists who ignore what they see as my delusion because our morals are basically identical. Theist tend not to like me much as I have no respect for literalists and fundamentals and think that most Christians have exaggerated tribal mentalities and poor morals as they have developed a double standard to be able to stomach their God.

I am rather between a rock and a hard place but this I cannot help.

I am happy to be questioned on what I believe but whether or not God exists is basically irrelevant to this world for all that he does not do, and I prefer to thrash out moral issues that can actually find an end point. The search for God is never ending when you are of the Gnostic persuasion. My apotheosis basically says that I am to ignore whatever God I found, God as a set of rules that is, not idol worship it but instead, raise my bar of excellence and seek further.

My apotheosis also showed me that God has no need for love, adoration or obedience. He has no needs. Man has dominion here on earth and is to be and is the supreme being.

Since then, I have tried to collect information that would help any that believe that apotheosis is possible, generally not Christians, --- as they do not believe in the mythical esoteric Jesus that I believe in and churches do not dare teach it.

This first clip gives the theological and philosophical interpretation of what Jesus taught and the second clip show what I think is a close representation of the method that helped me push my apotheosis.

Basically, the usual Christian Jesus is their hero and savior while my version demand that man himself steps up to the plate and save himself.
Which version do you think is more moral and deserving of praise and why?

Regards
DL