Off-Topic When you die . . .

[Salt]

For those of you that just envision bleakness and darkness as where we are going I would like to ask you where did you even begin?

And for you smart alecks out there I don't mean your mother's womb (that's in another thread).

To think it all ends in nothing doesn't explain how it all started.

Obviously oblivion or the vacuum is nothing. And nothing comes from nothing. Maybe we end up there but we certainly didn't start there.

 

[Bender]

Possible, but this cyclical model has been discarded by cosmologists because the energy for the universe to rebound will eventually run it's course. Kind of like a ball bouncing. Each time it bounces it loses energy. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

So from that one may surmise the process of rebounding is not past eternal. The universe did likely start in a remote time in the past. "Something" started it. Beyond that you are just getting into metaphysics and one's faith will determine your belief whether you are a naturalist or supernaturalist.

There are so many things in the universe not following the laws of thermodynamics and science, I wouldnt be surprised if death and birth of the universe are included in that.

 

[Salt]

There are so many things in the universe not following the laws of thermodynamics and science, I wouldnt be surprised if death and birth of the universe are included in that.

Death and birth are very much part of our understanding of the laws of physics. Things begin and end. The question is if this process can continue ad infinitum as suggested by your expanding and crunching universe.

And if I understand correctly it is dark matter that will lead to the crunch because as of now there is not enough observable matter to exert enough gravity for the universe to eventually pull itself back. Hypothetically more matter would be needed. The other option sans dark matter is just endless expansion until everything just fizzles out.

I don't subscribe to a closed universe (meaning the universe is all there is). I do think something generated it and sustains it that is also not part of it. That would be outside our realm of physics.

 

[Bender]

Death and birth are very much part of our understanding of the laws of physics. Things begin and end. The question is if this process can continue ad infinitum as suggested by your expanding and crunching universe.

And if I understand correctly it is dark matter that will lead to the crunch because as of now there is not enough observable matter to exert enough gravity for the universe to eventually pull itself back. Hypothetically more matter would be needed. The other option sans dark matter is just endless expansion until everything just fizzles out.

I don't subscribe to a closed universe (meaning the universe is all there is). I do think something generated it and sustains it that is also not part of it. That would be outside our realm of physics.

Again, its just my head spinning with possibilities. However, as you stated, I do believe the beginning and the end of the universe are things that cannot be understood with the current knowledge of physics that we have.

 

[Salt]

Again, its just my head spinning with possibilities. However, as you stated, I do believe the beginning and the end of the universe are things that cannot be understood with the current knowledge of physics that we have.

Yes, of course, endless possibilities. But all we have is what is the actual that can be measured and observed so it's a good a place to start as any.

The universe likely began to exist about 14 billion years ago. It hasn't been around forever as far as we know and will eventually cease as we currently understand it.

If you believe in a closed system the universe is all you have and if it isn't eternal it begs the question how it began. And if it will eventually end in essentially nothingness it begs the question what is really the point of it?

 

[MainLineCane]

Whether you're religious or nonreligious the simple irrefutable FACT is that NOBODY knows what happens after you die, beyond the knowledge that we cease to exist in our current state.

IMO someone's "goodness" is not determined by whether they are religious or not. Goodness transcends religion, same goes for evil. Good and evil can easily and readily be found on both sides of the religious divide. Neither side has exclusivity on goodness, evilness and especially knowledge. Anyone claiming otherwise is full of because good ,evil and knowledge can be found on both sides of the religious divide.

Since NOBODY knows, that's what makes this an interesting discussion. Everyone is entitled to their own individual beliefs and no one can prove that their version of what happens after death is correct.

I really couldn't care less what someone else believes beyond the fact that I find it all interesting. IMO nor should anyone else. I believe that everyone should believe as they choose to, as long as it doesn't impact others.

My limit on this is , just don't try to impose your beliefs on me. I love that about our Constitution

 

[hotshot]

For those of you that just envision bleakness and darkness as where we are going I would like to ask you where did you even begin?

And for you smart alecks out there I don't mean your mother's womb (that's in another thread).

To think it all ends in nothing doesn't explain how it all started.

Obviously oblivion or the vacuum is nothing. And nothing comes from nothing. Maybe we end up there but we certainly didn't start there.

Interesting point. I have no idea what happens, or doesn't happen, after death but I'm pretty **** sure it has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, et al.

 

[JD08]

Reincarnated as yoga pants

You're definitely going to want to live as good a life as possible lest you end up on a fat chick at Walmart straining at the seams.

 

[Salt]

Interesting point. I have no idea what happens, or doesn't happen, after death but I'm pretty **** sure it has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, et al.

You have no idea what happens or doesn't happen after death but you are **** SURE it's ABSOLUTELY not any of the above

That is quite a leap from humility to hubris there, friend.

 

[hotshot]

You have no idea what happens or doesn't happen after death but you are **** SURE it's ABSOLUTELY not any of the above

That is quite a leap from humility to hubris there, friend.

Though a former Altar Boy, just can't believe the organized religion pap. If you care to know why, let me recommend the movie "Religulous" to you as an introductory primer.

 

[Salt]

Whether you're religious or nonreligious the simple irrefutable FACT is that NOBODY knows what happens after you die, beyond the knowledge that we cease to exist in our current state.

IMO someone's "goodness" is not determined by whether they are religious or not. Goodness transcends religion, same goes for evil. Good and evil can easily and readily be found on both sides of the religious divide. Neither side has exclusivity on goodness, evilness and especially knowledge. Anyone claiming otherwise is full of because good ,evil and knowledge can be found on both sides of the religious divide.

Since NOBODY knows, that's what makes this an interesting discussion. Everyone is entitled to their own individual beliefs and no one can prove that their version of what happens after death is correct.

I really couldn't care less what someone else believes beyond the fact that I find it all interesting. IMO nor should anyone else. I believe that everyone should believe as they choose to, as long as it doesn't impact others.

My limit on this is , just don't try to impose your beliefs on me. I love that about our Constitution

So based on the above you seem to imply there is some transcendent standard of good and evil. Interesting. I agree. And that should tell you something.

Let's just say if there is no transcendent basis for morality where would it come from?

From a strict atheistic evolutionary framework , let's say, if morality is just a genetic spin off in some combination with prevailing societal pressures to conform then there is nothing really transcendent about that.

And that would give us no basis for us to judge that the mullahs in some Muslim country that behead you because you go against their beliefs are no more wrong or right than the Christian who pickets to overturn Roe.

Everyone does their thing so leave us the **** alone. But if there is good and evil that transcends us doesn't that leave us with some moral duties and obligations?

How exactly are you going to stop evil if not by imposing your beliefs on what you think is evil to stop it?

 

[Salt]

Though a former Altar Boy, just can't believe the organized religion pap. If you care to know why, let me recommend the movie "Religulous" to you as an introductory primer.

Bill Maher is a satirist by trade. Therefore I would not take anything he says seriously. He's entitled to make a living doing what he does. I would not typically go to him for sage advice on the purpose and meaning of life unless I wanted a laugh.

 

[hotshot]

Bill Maher is a satirist by trade. Therefore I would not take anything he says seriously. He's entitled to make a living doing what he does. I would not typically go to him for sage advice on the purpose and meaning of life unless I wanted a laugh.

He's pretty darn serious on the particular subject we're discussing. Not a question of going to anyone for advice. More about facts presented (now I'm sounding like the posters touting 2000 Mules).

 

[Salt]

He's pretty darn serious on the particular subject we're discussing. Not a question of going to anyone for advice. More about facts presented (now I'm sounding like the posters touting 2000 Mules).

I know where Maher is coming from and I don’t agree with his position on this. But he seems pretty tight with Ben Shapiro (they have been on each other’s show) who is an Orthodox J e w. That’s pretty funny in its own right.

 

[ddann]

Since NOBODY knows, that's what makes this an interesting discussion. Everyone is entitled to their own individual beliefs and no one can prove that their version of what happens after death is correct.

Question:
If someone died and was dead for, say, three days, and then came back to life, would his version of what happens after death be correct?

 

[MainLineCane]

So based on the above you seem to imply there is some transcendent standard of good and evil. Interesting. I agree. And that should tell you something.

Let's just say if there is no transcendent basis for morality where would it come from?

From a strict atheistic evolutionary framework , let's say, if morality is just a genetic spin off in some combination with prevailing societal pressures to conform then there is nothing really transcendent about that.

And that would give us no basis for us to judge that the mullahs in some Muslim country that behead you because you go against their beliefs are no more wrong or right than the Christian who pickets to overturn Roe.

Everyone does their thing so leave us the **** alone. But if there is good and evil that transcends us doesn't that leave us with some moral duties and obligations?

How exactly are you going to stop evil if not by imposing your beliefs on what you think is evil to stop it?

Operative phrase in what I said was "as long as it doesn't impact others"

Therefore, the act of beheading people is a no-no.

Society determines what is moral. There are innumerable consistencies that transcends all different religious beliefs and the beliefs of nonbelievers as to what kinds of behaviors are acceptable in a society.

So communities should have little difficulty determining what is goodness. One religion or one book is not necessary for humanity to determine what is goodness.

Determining punishment for what is considered evil is a societal decision. Not something individuals should take up on their own unless there's no other option immediately available to prevent immediate harm to others.

Guides are great IF you want to use them.

Question:
If someone died and was dead for, say, three days, and then came back to life, would his version of what happens after death be correct?

Hmmmmm

An acquaintance of mine in my distant past, Marlon McXxxx claimed that the very same thing happened to him. He may be out and about again now.

I'm sure, Marlon has not been the only one in human history to have made that or similar claims.

As I've said before ddann, believe whatever or whoever you choose to believe. And I will do the same.

Speaking from direct experience of the claim made by Marlon, I found his version very very hard to swallow. You and I are free to believe Marlon's or anyone else's version.

 

[ddann]

Speaking from direct experience of the claim made by Marlon, I found his version very very hard to swallow. You and I are free to believe Marlon's or anyone else's version.

Your friend Marlon sound like an interesting guy, but I can definitely see why his story was hard for you to swallow.

We’re there any eyewitnesses who went on record stating that they:

1) Saw Marlon definitively DEAD?

2) Saw Marlon buried where he remained entombed for 3 days?

3) Saw Marlon alive again and walking around after having also seen him dead?

 

[MainLineCane]

Your friend Marlon sound like an interesting guy, but I can definitely see why his story was hard for you to swallow.

We’re there any eyewitnesses who went on record stating that they:

1) Saw Marlon definitively DEAD?

2) Saw Marlon buried where he remained entombed for 3 days?

3) Saw Marlon alive again and walking around after having also seen him dead?

I don't really know. My acquaintance, Marlon didn't have many friends or associates.

But who knows. Maybe in the future, some people will step up and claim that they witnessed everything Marlon claimed. They might even write a book about it. Who knows?

 

[Salt]

Operative phrase in what I said was "as long as it doesn't impact others"

Therefore, the act of beheading people is a no-no.

Society determines what is moral. There are innumerable consistencies that transcends all different religious beliefs and the beliefs of nonbelievers as to what kinds of behaviors are acceptable in a society.

So communities should have little difficulty determining what is goodness. One religion or one book is not necessary for humanity to determine what is goodness.

Determining punishment for what is considered evil is a societal decision. Not something individuals should take up on their own unless there's no other option immediately available to prevent immediate harm to others.

Guides are great IF you want to use them.

So if society determines good and evil how does that work with my hypothetical mullahs? They live under Sharia law which determines what is good and bad and their society accepts it as divine law.

Our society obviously has a different tradition and beliefs.

Would we have a right to judge their society as being good or bad for beheading or stoning homosexuals, for example?

 

[MainLineCane]

So if society determines good and evil how does that work with my hypothetical mullahs? They live under Sharia law which determines what is good and bad and their society accepts it as divine law.

Our society obviously has a different tradition and beliefs.

Would we have a right to judge their society as being good or bad for beheading or stoning homosexuals, for example?

Salt,
Every society chooses to follow their own laws.

I'm sure there are plenty of traditions and actions they find repulsive about ours.

Serious question Salt,

Why are you so **** bent on determining how everyone else should live? I really want to understand