Life after death

[eanassir]

Can the purpose of this existence be seen in hope of a better life?
If this life is all there is, why do any good at all?
Why not be mean, mad murderous, selfish individuals with hope that this is all there is?

look3467, there is a very simple answer to that. We do good because we want to do good, because it feels good to do good.

Contrary to what you may think, most human beings are not mad murderers. We are all selfish to some extent, sure. But which of us wouldn’t try to help a drowning man, or a drowning child? Which of us wouldn’t give a piece of bread to a starving man?

And why do we do this? Because it feels good, not because some vengeful, wrath filled God is looking down on us and makes us. And why does it feel good? Why, because of the instinct of preservation of species, of course, which is hard wired into all the species.

We do selfish acts out of the instinct of self preservation. We do charitable acts out of the instinct of preservation of species. Both the instincts are hard wired into all the species. It is not more complicated than that.

It is excellent indeed that man loves every good and likes to do every good; but let all this be for the sake of God alone ––– and here man will have the reward of his doing.

Example: Man does every good work to benefit his family members: he brings them food, fruit, clothes and toys for his children ...etc; then let such act be for God's sake and seeking His good pleasure and here he will gain much profit both during this World by the blessing and in the next world he will prosper.

This is in the Quran

4: 134​

مَّن كَانَ يُرِيدُ ثَوَابَ الدُّنْيَا فَعِندَ اللّهِ ثَوَابُ الدُّنْيَا وَالآخِرَةِ وَكَانَ اللّهُ سَمِيعًا بَصِيرًا​

The explanation:
(Whoso desires a reward in this World; with God is the reward of this World and of the Hereafter; God is All-hearing, All-Seeing.)

It means: let his purpose be the good pleasure of God alone; and He will reward him in this World and in the next world or the Hereafter.​

Therefore, let man fear God and ward off His disobedience, and such man will gain the two rewards.​

 

[eanassir]

darkbeaver, good morning. :smile:

 

[Dexter Sinister]

A trade that will not lose​

This call is to all our friends and others in the Canadian Content forums.​

No thanks, that looks like just another version of Pascal's Wager. I've never doubted your sincerity eanassir, you're obviously deeply committed to your faith and I've no doubt you're a good and loving and well-meaning person in your real life. But everything I've learned about how things work in this world, how to figure out what's likely to be true and not true, tells me that on the subjects of religion and belief and faith and related matters, you cannot possibly be right. Your claims, and every other believer's claims, are entirely and completely inconsistent with everything I understand about how to assess the truth content of ideas. I've been thinking and studying hard on these matters for almost 40 years, because I thought it was important, and for the last 35 of them, starting long before any of the currently popular books on the subject appeared (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, et al), atheism has been the only position that makes any sense to me. I have no faith at all in the religious sense. I don't really want it anymore either, something I've realized only recently as I was composing and examining my responses to some of the discussion threads I've been involved in here lately. Things make better sense to me without it, and none at all with it, it explains nothing to me, and frankly seems to me to be a deliberate abandonment of any attempt to make sense of things. I think that trade is a dead loss. No deal.

 

[moha66]

on the subjects of religion and belief and faith and related matters, you cannot possibly be right. Your claims, and every other believer's claims, are entirely and completely inconsistent with everything I understand about how to assess the truth content of ideas. Things make better sense to me without it, and none at all with it, it explains nothing to me, and frankly seems to me to be a deliberate abandonment of any attempt to make sense of things. I think that trade is a dead loss. No deal.

Dear Dex,

Would you please explain to me why should the children of the same father and mother look different from one another, why should even so-called identical twins be differenciated by their finger-prints, why should all plants be watered by the same water, why should a salty sea mingle with a sweet-water river and yet each keeps its own taste? These are very innocent questions, if you wouldn't mind.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

These are very innocent questions, ...

No they're not, you have a poorly hidden agenda. They're a lead in to some citation from Islamic writings that you'll claim demonstrates Islam knew the answers before science figured them out, or they'll lead into some form of the Argument from Design, or something like that.

Children of the same parents all look different for the same reason all members of any species look different from each other. It's just normal genetic variation among individuals.

Fingerprints are not entirely genetically determined, they're subject to environmental influences during fetal development.

Everything that needs water, not just plants, is watered by the same water, there's only one kind of water, made from two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen.

Salt water and fresh water do not mingle and keep their own taste. Try it. Take a glass of sea water, mix it half and half with fresh water, then taste it. It'll taste salty.

 

[eanassir]

No thanks, that looks like just another version of Pascal's Wager. I've never doubted your sincerity eanassir, you're obviously deeply committed to your faith and I've no doubt you're a good and loving and well-meaning person in your real life. But everything I've learned about how things work in this world, how to figure out what's likely to be true and not true, tells me that on the subjects of religion and belief and faith and related matters, you cannot possibly be right. Your claims, and every other believer's claims, are entirely and completely inconsistent with everything I understand about how to assess the truth content of ideas. I've been thinking and studying hard on these matters for almost 40 years, because I thought it was important, and for the last 35 of them, starting long before any of the currently popular books on the subject appeared (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, et al), atheism has been the only position that makes any sense to me. I have no faith at all in the religious sense. I don't really want it anymore either, something I've realized only recently as I was composing and examining my responses to some of the discussion threads I've been involved in here lately. Things make better sense to me without it, and none at all with it, it explains nothing to me, and frankly seems to me to be a deliberate abandonment of any attempt to make sense of things. I think that trade is a dead loss. No deal.

Dexter, thank you.​

Prophet Mohammed said: "All people will go to Paradise, except those who refuse."​

Will you consider some men such as (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, et al) like the apostles of God: Moses, Jesus and Mohammed and others, who taught every virtue and brought the light of guidance from God?​

This is in the Quran 47: 14​

أَفَمَن كَانَ عَلَى بَيِّنَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّهِ كَمَن زُيِّنَ لَهُ سُوءُ عَمَلِهِ وَاتَّبَعُوا أَهْوَاءهُمْ​

The explanation:
([Do you think that] one [: Mohammed] who rests on a clear evidence [: the Quran] from his Lord,
as one [: Abu-Jahl] whose bad work is made fair-seeming to him [by Satan],
and they follow their vain desires [in addition to following Abu-Jahl.] )​

These atheists like Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris criticized the confusion of religions present nowadays: the traditions + myths + distortions; to which they have some truth; but the word of God included in the Quran and the other haevenly books is something else.​

To make this clear: When prophet Mohammed called people in the past, he called them by the Quran then anyone responded it is ok and anyone refused then that's it; but how do most religious men call people now? They call them with their traditions and complicated distorted ways, not by the Quran: the word of God.​

Moreover, as much as I live and experience life in this World, I discover how deceptive it is, and how trivial it is, and how meaningless it is;
other than seeking the good pleasure of God my True Master, Whom I hope to meet to forgive me my sins and I hope He may be pleased with me and you and all other good-hearted men; which even Paradise has no taste unless with His good pleasure.​

 

[moha66]

No they're not, you have a poorly hidden agenda. They're a lead in to some citation from Islamic writings that you'll claim demonstrates Islam knew the answers before science figured them out, or they'll lead into some form of the Argument from Design, or something like that.

I wasn't going to cite anything, friend, but now I will.

Children of the same parents all look different for the same reason all members of any species look different from each other. It's just normal genetic variation among individuals.

What governs this "normal genetic variation among individuals"? Chance? Nature? What?

Fingerprints are not entirely genetically determined, they're subject to environmental influences during fetal development.

Why couldn't these "environmental influences" produce the same fingerprints, I wonder?

Everything that needs water, not just plants, is watered by the same water, there's only one kind of water, made from two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen.

This only states what we all know already. It doesn't explain why the same water does not affect different plants/species,etc. in different ways. Why is there only one kind of water for watering everything, man included?

Salt water and fresh water do not mingle and keep their own taste. Try it. Take a glass of sea water, mix it half and half with fresh water, then taste it. It'll taste salty.

The question is, who had worked out this design that made such things differ in such a way? Who had decided that the seas should be salty and the rivers sweet? Is it Chance? Nature? Or what?

Now, I quote the Koran, if I may:

"And they said : Whatever portent thou bringest wherewith to bewitch us , we shall not put faith in thee ." (Al-A'raf : 132)

 

[Vanni Fucci]

There is no life after death, because we have no proof that there is...
There is no god because there is no proof that there is...
There are no prophets because there is no proof that there are...
There is no heaven or hell, because there is no proof that there is...

The torah/quran/bible is not authoritative for the above reasons...


Prove any one of those things, and you might possibly have a case...until then it's just hearsay, conjecture and wishful thinking...

 

[Ron in Regina]

I'll tell you what....if there's no life after death, then I won't come back and let anyone know
now, would I?....but if there is some kind of life after death, I probably still wouldn't come back
to let anyone know that it exists as that would be contrary to my sense of humor. Why deprive
anyone of this perpetually unproven argument? People like to argue (I'm one of them). If that
wasn't the case, then none of us would be on this forum as, it would have no reason to exist...

 

[darkbeaver]

No, certainly not, preposterous, can't possibly happen, we have proof that this ship will not sink.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

No, certainly not, preposterous, can't possibly happen, we have proof that this ship will not sink.

The Titanic should not have sunk...if it were built to the architects specifications it would not have...but to build the ship to specifications would have cost considerably more...

So to be fair, the Titanic as originally envisioned by Thomas Andrews was more likely to be unsinkable...the finished product considerably less so...

So it was not an iceberg, but capitalism that sank the Titanic...

 

[darkbeaver]

Yeah the chisling basturds used cheap plate I think or was it short cheap rivits or a combination there of. My point was I can't prove life after death does not exist for the same reason that I can't prove that it does. We need a volunteer to come forward for a dangerous mission in which he/she will be killed right away but carry a device into the void for us and come back or send back good video. I would consider it an honour to volunteer for the mission. I believe I can do it for just under three million.

 

[darkbeaver]

Yeah the chisling basturds used cheap plate I think or was it short cheap rivits or a combination there of. My point was I can't prove life after death does not exist for the same reason that I can't prove that it does. We need a volunteer to come forward for a dangerous mission in which he/she will be killed right away but carry a device into the void for us and come back or send back good video. I would consider it an honour to volunteer for the mission. I believe I can do it for just under three million.

PS; I also volunteer to look after the donations

 

[Vanni Fucci]

My point was I can't prove life after death does not exist for the same reason that I can't prove that it does.

You are correct that we can't prove one way or the other...

Any system of beliefs that claims to give you a reward AFTER you die should immediately be suspect...one should then look at other claims made by that same system of belief and see how well they hold up to scrutiny...

Once it has been determined, based on all available evidence, that 90% is complete fabrication, and 1% could be true, and 9% is unverifiable...what conclusion would you come to?

When we have no way of proving 100% that something is true or false, then we must rely on probability to decide what is likely and what is not...

 

[Dexter Sinister]

quoting moha66 in bold:
What governs this "normal genetic variation among individuals"? Chance? Nature? What?
Gregor Mendel figured out most of it a long time ago. You can research that just as well as I can, if you really want to know. Try here to start with.
Why couldn't these "environmental influences" produce the same fingerprints, I wonder?
Elementary probability theory explains it. When there are so many possible distinct patterns, many times the number of people who've ever lived or ever will live, it's unreasonable to expect to find two people with the same fingerprints.
This only states what we all know already. It doesn't explain why the same water does not affect different plants/species,etc. in different ways. Why is there only one kind of water for watering everything, man included?
What else would you expect? All life evolved in the presence of water, it's a very useful substance for metabolic processes, and it does affect different living things in different ways. Have you not noticed that vegetation differs quite a lot depending on how much and what kind of water is available? Plant a poplar tree in a cypress swamp and it'll die, plant a cypress tree on the prairie and it'll die...
The question is, who had worked out this design that made such things differ in such a way? Who had decided that the seas should be salty and the rivers sweet? Is it Chance? Nature? Or what?
And you had no hidden agenda involving the Argument from Design? That's not what your original question was, not even close to it. There's no reason to think anyone or anything decided those things, they're readily explicable as the consequences of undirected natural forces.

 

[MHz]

Yeah the chisling basturds used cheap plate I think or was it short cheap rivits or a combination there of. My point was I can't prove life after death does not exist for the same reason that I can't prove that it does. We need a volunteer to come forward for a dangerous mission in which he/she will be killed right away but carry a device into the void for us and come back or send back good video. I would consider it an honour to volunteer for the mission. I believe I can do it for just under three million.

Look at all the tears from the ones that have been left behind, what does that tell you about them wanting to have gone along also?

BTW, isn't 3 million a bit much for one bullet?

 

[eanassir]

Yeah the chisling basturds used cheap plate I think or was it short cheap rivits or a combination there of. My point was I can't prove life after death does not exist for the same reason that I can't prove that it does. We need a volunteer to come forward for a dangerous mission in which he/she will be killed right away but carry a device into the void for us and come back or send back good video. I would consider it an honour to volunteer for the mission. I believe I can do it for just under three million.

DB, good morning :smile:
There have been many experiences related to such idea; some of such event are mentioned in the book Man after Death which I have translated and it is at this link:

http://man-after-death.t35.com​

Abu abd-Allah was a truthful man who did not lie; I knew him for many years before his death at 1991; he experienced such a spiritual experience when he was child and lost conciousness following a fall from a high bench, then his soul separated from his body and he stayed for one hour among the spirits, then he regained conciousness and told us his observations there: it is a nice tour as did he express it. Read it here:
Was it death or fainting?

And here is another story A story of fainting (1)​

 

[Vanni Fucci]

DB, good morning :smile:
There have been many experiences related to such idea; some of such event are mentioned in the book Man after Death which I have translated and it is at this link:

http://man-after-death.t35.com​

Abu abd-Allah was a truthful man who did not lie; I knew him for many years before his death at 1991; he experienced such a spiritual experience when he was child and lost conciousness following a fall from a high bench, then his soul separated from his body and he stayed for one hour among the spirits, then he regained conciousness and told us his observations there: it is a nice tour as did he express it. Read it here:
Was it death or fainting?

And here is another story A story of fainting (1)​

So hallucinations caused by cerebral hypoxia is not a good enough explanation for you nutters?

 

[eanassir]

So hallucinations caused by cerebral hypoxia is not a good enough explanation for you nutters?

Not hallucinations; not everything you read as such you say it is some halluciantions; read it before saying that.
It happened to him only once; it is not recurrent; read it here: Was it death or fainting?
Moreover, most people have experienced many such observations, but may be to some less extent; but many conceal this lest they should ascribe to them madness.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Not hallucinations; not everything you read as such you say it is some halluciantions; read it before saying that.
It happened to him only once; it is not recurrent; read it here: Was it death or fainting?
Moreover, most people have experienced many such observations, but may be to some less extent; but many conceal this lest they should ascribe to them madness.

Why not read something other than Quran and Quran-related studies?

Near death experience - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many NDE reports, however, originate from events that are not life threatening. With recent developments in cardiac resuscitation techniques, the number of NDEs reported has increased. Most of the scientific community regards such experiences as hallucinatory,[2][3][4]....

Correct!

...while paranormal specialists and some mainstream scientists claim them to be evidence of an afterlife.

Incorrect!