Originally posted by FMFThen maybe you should slow down, and ask coherent questions (as bbar did) and stop identifying every little slight you suffer after you've spammed and slammed the people who apparently offend you.
My questions were triggered by the incoherent nature of your take on morality and psychology and sought an explanation as to how you think such a change could occur. How you can somehow think this was not about 'mechanics' of "heaven" is unclear. They were not in any shape or form rhetorical questions and it's odd that you'd suggest as much.
You come across like a hive of bees waiting for the opportunity to be offended. Even bees don't behave like this, they just mind their own business until they perceive a real threat... you act more like an internet bully just spoiling for a fight. In light of your own behavior your objections make very little sense... you could just as well be describing yourself for all anyone knows.
Originally posted by lemon limeThis is nothing but deflection.
Then maybe you should slow down, and ask coherent questions (as bbar did) and stop identifying every little slight you suffer after you've spammed and slammed the people who apparently offend you.
You come across like a hive of bees waiting for the opportunity to be offended. Even bees don't behave like this, they just mind their own business un ...[text shortened]... ns make very little sense... you could just as well be describing yourself for all anyone knows.
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFWhat exactly is left of "you"?
The issue is whether or not what you profess to believe has any coherence in terms of morality and psychology. If your life-defining love, compassion, devotion are somehow extinguished, are you still ~ for all intents and purposes ~ "you" when you arrive in "heaven"? If so, how so? What exactly is left of "you"?
You. Who you are, the part of you that can be called "you".
Not your body, not your fingernails, not your hair or what you see in a mirror... what is left of you is you.
If you believe you are only your body, then you would have to believe nothing of you exists after that body is dead. You would be like a mobile home with an entertainment center, a place to prepare food, a place to defecate, a place to sleep, etc etc. The problem is the only thing missing from your mobile is "you", so when your mobile home no longer functions that's it... no more mobile home, no more you.
Originally posted by lemon limeI think I clearly have been asking coherent questions.
Then maybe you should slow down, and ask coherent questions (as bbar did) ....
If all your love and compassion for your wife and your children, in the event that their fate is not the same as yours, is turned into "all that crap" [your description, not mine] by your going to "heaven", in what way is being in "heaven" desirable?
What other wonderful goodness, achievements and qualities of your life are turned into "crap" by your being in "heaven"?
Originally posted by lemon limeWhat would be left of you after the central loves of your life had been extinguished and the anguish and spiritual loss this would naturally cause had somehow been eradicated through fear?
[b]What exactly is left of "you"?
You. Who you are, the part of you that can be called "you".
Not your body, not your fingernails, not your hair or what you see in mirror... what is left of you is you.[/b]
Originally posted by lemon limeI should have used the word opposite, antithesis was not the right word to use, trying to be too clever. The waking up from a dream part and being "more conscious" yes, but somewhere insubstantial somehow. Food would be unsatisfying, drink wouldn't taste of anything, that kind of thing.
[b]As an aside, if heaven is realer than real and Hell is in a sense its antithesis, would Hell therefore be less real than real?
I'm not sure what you mean by 'antithesis', but no. Both would seem equally real. As in I really enjoy being here, or I really don't want to be here. I believe the sense of realness would be same, only much ...[text shortened]... we can experience now. It's how you would feel about being in either place that would different.[/b]
Originally posted by lemon limeWell we all die. On that we can agree. It is the concept of the supposed afterlife that you propagate ~ and I do not share ~ that is being examined.
If you believe you are only your body, then you would have to believe nothing of you exists after that body is dead.
Originally posted by lemon limeYour post was nothing but ad hominem. Me drawing attention to this is not a "counter argument". My arguments and counter arguments are contained in my statements and questions that you side-step when you start deflecting.
The "deflection" counter argument is meaningless... it come across as a default response for whenever you're at a loss for words.
Here was an earlier unanswered question that drew only deflection from you: "So how is it that "distress" about tortured loved ones does not exist in "heaven"? Would you still be essentially you if this "distress" over the fate of loved ones were extinguished by fear whilst in "heaven"?"
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFIf the central love of your life is you then I don't think it will be an issue...
What would be left of you after the central loves of your life had been extinguished and the anguish and spiritual loss this would naturally cause had somehow been eradicated through fear?
... you'll have other concerns to worry over.
Originally posted by lemon limeBy "central loves of your life", I am clearly referring to one's spouse and children and not oneself.
If the central love of your life is you then I don't think you will need to worry about that...
... you'll have other concerns to worry over.
So, what would be left of the essential you if this lifelong love and compassion had been extinguished and the anguish this would cause had somehow been eradicated through fear?
Originally posted by lemon limeHere's hoping the questions below are coherent!
Then maybe you should slow down, and ask coherent questions (as bbar did) and stop identifying every little slight you suffer after you've spammed and slammed the people who apparently offend you.
You come across like a hive of bees waiting for the opportunity to be offended. Even bees don't behave like this, they just mind their own business un ...[text shortened]... ns make very little sense... you could just as well be describing yourself for all anyone knows.
As I mentioned before, I like the dream analogy. It tracks some important Scriptural passages (i.e. in Timothy, where is it claimed that with salvation comes knowledge of the truth). From what you've said elsewhere in this thread, you're positing that the damned will similarly be 'awakened'.
I worry, though, about how much salvation/damnation can change us psychologically without our becoming essentially different people. There are really tough questions about personal identity lurking right underneath this account of yours, and I'm curious what you think.
I believe that part of what makes me this person that I am is that I have a a particular set of deeply held beliefs, character traits, values, memories and relationships. These psychological properties of me both distinguish me from others and are the basis of the claim that, for instance, I'm the same person now I was last week, last year, etc.
But if, upon my awakening in Heaven or Hell, much of this just fades away like a dream, then I wonder if it makes sense to say that's it's actually me who ends up in Heaven in Hell. Think of how much you're different in your waking life than in your dream life...
The thing is, your belief system absolutely requires that personal identity be maintained in the afterlife. If it wasn't; if the person who wakes up in Heaven or Hell is not the substantially the same person they were on Earth, then both Heaven and Hell would be a form of death. The original person wouldn't really be around anymore. Further, Hell in particular would seem perversely unjust, since some person would end up eternally tormented for the misdeeds or lack of faith of, essentially, some different, previous person.
Do these questions make sense?
Originally posted by bbarrIs there a belief system that you like that makes more sense than Christianity? If there is then you would be dishonest to choose Chistianity. I choose Christianity because I honestly think it makes the most sense to me even though I must accept the possibility of miracles, angels, demons, and hell.
Here's hoping the questions below are coherent!
As I mentioned before, I like the dream analogy. It tracks some important Scriptural passages (i.e. in Timothy, where is it claimed that with salvation comes knowledge of the truth). From what you've said elsewhere in this thread, you're positing that the damned will similarly be 'awakened'.
I worry, thou ...[text shortened]... k of faith of, essentially, some different, previous person.
Do these questions make sense?
Originally posted by RJHindsAre you willing to have a crack at answering bbar's questions?
Is there a belief system that you like that makes more sense than Christianity? If there is then you would be dishonest to choose Chistianity. I choose Christianity because I honestly think it makes the most sense to me even though I must accept the possibility of miracles, angels, demons, and hell.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtFood would be unsatisfying, drink wouldn't taste of anything, that kind of thing.
I should have used the word opposite, antithesis was not the right word to use, trying to be too clever. The waking up from a dream part and being "more conscious" yes, but somewhere insubstantial somehow. Food would be unsatisfying, drink wouldn't taste of anything, that kind of thing.
Not according to what I've read. But here again, we're supposedly weighing what the Bible says against what our imaginations are telling us. There's no reason we shouldn't imagine food or drink being more satisfying or tasty. To my way of thinking, more real seems to imply the opposite of less tasty and satisfying. The account of Jesus showing up (after he had been killed) and sharing a meal with his disciples seems to indicate the afterlife is (at the very least) minimally as real as anything we might experience here. And other scripture unequivocally states that heaven is unimaginably better than anything here.
We can speculate the pros and cons of scripture weighed against our own reasoning and imagination. Science can't help us in this endeavor, seeing as how there is no way to prove any of this until we die and see for ourselves...