Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The afterlife is one of those concepts that we all have an accepted understanding of. And a lot of people and most religions believe in some form of afterlife. But what if we simply cease to exist? How would it affect your behaviour, your everyday life, and your decisions? People sharing this view, how would your world be different if you didn' t believe there was some form of afterlife, if different at all?

I must admit that my view of afterlife varies greatly to the mainstream.

Technically we do seas to exist, but the life energy moves on. Life energy is not created when we are born and its not destroyed when we die. It simply moves on.

The energy thus, cannot be destroyed, and it continues to exist through other living things, and universe itself.
Everything is part of everything else.

I apologize if this sounds too hippie.

However, assuming we just seas to exist, not a lot would change in my attitude. Perhaps the appreciation for the 'now' would grow even bigger.

It'd be like deep sleep then. And who doesn't like that?

I wouldn't change much, really. My sense of morality hasn't been based on much except my own desire to be a good person and the inherent joys of that....rather than, say, karma or belief in another life. So a lot of people would probably be driven to conventional conceptions of "sin" if they knew we would cease to exist, but I'd like to think I'd be able to shy away from that.

Though I'm kinda in lil's boat, ideologically speaking....so I don't really worry about death too much.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I must admit that my view of afterlife varies greatly to the mainstream.

Technically we do seas to exist, but the life energy moves on. Life energy is not created when we are born and its not destroyed when we die. It simply moves on.

The energy thus, cannot be destroyed, and it continues to exist through other living things, and universe itself.
Everything is part of everything else.

I apologize if this sounds too hippie.

However, assuming we just seas to exist, not a lot would change in my attitude. Perhaps the appreciation for the 'now' would grow even bigger. I pretty much see it the same why, though I believe there might be an inbetween stop off since we are part of the creation we can create that aspect also..

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
If there was no afterlife then I would live a self-centered, hedonistic lifestyle. I would have no motivation for living a good moral/ethical life. If there is no afterlife, then that presupposes that there is no God. If there is no God then there is no right and wrong (God is the Creator of right and wrong not humankind. Our laws are based on God's standard of morality).

Then that shows what kind of person you are. IT seems as though you choose to be a good person out of the fear of the results of the afterlife. Unlike yourself, many of us choose to be "good" people based on respect for the lives and happiness of others, not based on some little mythological story, or out of fear of going to Hell.

Secondly, there is no true right or wrong...what is right or wrong is subjective, and everyone has a different concept of what is right or wrong. If there was only one true morality, then everyone would have it...but everyone doesn't have the same morality, now do they ?



Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But...God does exist; therefore, there is an afterlife and thus a Heaven to gain and a Hell to shun.


How do you know God exists ?

So let me get this straight....if there was no Heaven and Hell, you would just go and be selfish ? Why wouldn't you be more mature like some of us, and be good to other people REGARDLESS of whether or not there is a Heaven or Hell ?


Originally posted by JesusIsAlive


Umm...if Salvation is only possible through loyalty to the Bible, then Salvation is the most difficult thing to acheive...with all the contradictions, uncertainties, and misinterpretations the Bible contains, it seems almost impossible.

Originally posted by Robtard
Why not just be as moral as you are for the sake of humanity and not just for an afterlife reward? Sounds kinda selfish to me, only being a decent person because of an impending reward.

Hence, JesusisAlive's sin is GREED

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
If there was no afterlife then I would live a self-centered, hedonistic lifestyle. I would have no motivation for living a good moral/ethical life. If there is no afterlife, then that presupposes that there is no God. If there is no God then there is no right and wrong (God is the Creator of right and wrong not humankind. Our laws are based on God's standard of morality).

Just in case you don't understand hedonism, it is the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain, pursuit of intrinsic good while avoiding evil. By definition most religions are hedonistic. You yourself have stated that you believe in a heaven/hell paradigm. No matter what you do, if you are trying to get to heaven while avoiding hell, you are a hedonist.

JIA, you are a hedonist... unless of course going to heaven is not your pursuit.

Originally posted by Regret
Just in case you don't understand hedonism, it is the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain, pursuit of intrinsic good while avoiding evil. By definition most religions are hedonistic. You yourself have stated that you believe in a heaven/hell paradigm. No matter what you do, if you are trying to get to heaven while avoiding hell, you are a hedonist.

JIA, you are a hedonist... unless of course going to heaven is not your pursuit.

Don't be mean.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Don't be mean.

IMO there is no afterlife, this is it. I'm cool with that, it is what it is...
The problem is people put their faith in this afterlife, and fail to acknowledge the value of this world. I just can't bring myself to beleive in a supernatural realm that is unverifiable.
Then again, I don't know, and probably never will know. It's absurd, but fudge it.
I just try to be a decent person, and repay what debts I owe to the people who love me (,which is a pretty small list.)

Originally posted by Jim Reaper
The problem is people put their faith in this afterlife, and fail to acknowledge the value of this world.

There is a reason for that....

In Christinaity: Reference serfdom.

yeah way back when many people didn't have anything BUT the afterlife to look forward to or acknowledge...

yup. Hence the wonderful opportunity to exploit the masters.

Keep the serfs blinded, looking to the afterlife.
The lords are happy, and they shovel money into the church.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Don't be mean.

I'm not trying to be mean, I'm a hedonist too. I'm a hedonist, you're a hedonist, we're all hedonists. The term only takes on negative connotation when one is referring to someone that has a different definition for pleasure/pain from ours, and we find it unacceptable

as soon as a coin in the coffer rings, a soul from purgatory springs...

Originally posted by Alliance
Don't be mean.

Originally posted by Alliance
yup. Hence the wonderful opportunity to exploit the masters.

Keep the serfs blinded, looking to the afterlife.
The lords are happy, and they shovel money into the church.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So you have no morales of your own? I live in a would with no god out side of me, and I have morales. I am glad there is something controlling you, because you cannot do it yourself.

Sniffle...sniffle. Some of the most beautiful words I have ever read. You say that I cannot do it myself. Well, the Bible does say that I can do all things through Christ Who strengthens me.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Sniffle...sniffle. Some of the most beautiful words I have ever read. You say that I cannot do it myself. Well, the Bible does say that I can do all things through Christ Who strengthens me. So you just strengthened what was just said that you can not do anything on your own but must need God/Christ help to do it.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Sniffle...sniffle. Some of the most beautiful words I have ever read. You say that I cannot do it myself. Well, the Bible does say that I can do all things through Christ Who strengthens me.

You did not understand what I wrote.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Sniffle...sniffle. Some of the most beautiful words I have ever read. You say that I cannot do it myself. Well, the Bible does say that I can do all things through Christ Who strengthens me.

But without Christ, do you beleive you would be a bad person ? If so, why ? I think that's what we are all trying to figure out...

Does your morality completely rely on the Bible, or have you ever had a morality of your own ?

Originally posted by Storm
The afterlife is one of those concepts that we all have an accepted understanding of. And a lot of people and most religions believe in some form of afterlife. But what if we simply cease to exist? How would it affect your behaviour, your everyday life, and your decisions? People sharing this view, how would your world be different if you didn' t believe there was some form of afterlife, if different at all?

My father is a complete Atheist - in fact one of the most Athiestic people I know. He believes when he dies that will be it. He will cease to exist mentally, nothing more then a body to be cremated.

And he is no different then any other father really. He doesn't have strange views, he isn't without purpose or love or anything. In fact, in thinking on it I dare say he is far more alive because of it. At some point he realises the vitality of this life - the only life he has. Thus he endeavours to get everything out of it he can, realising in the big scheme of things he wont have a second chance, and what will remain of him is what he has created and done.

However in saying that he, and people like him, are not somehow decadent, dedicated only to experience. Rather he had a balanced life. He is still a "moral" person, still has a strong sense of right and wrong - without any religion whats so ever to guide him. He "believes" in humanity, essentially. He has raised good children (if I do say so myself) has been a good husband, well respected by his piers and so forth. He has enjoyed life, but never, as JesusIsAlive seems to imply for people without "God" by becoming a amoral, direction-less figure.

COULD IT BE THAT RELIGION IS NOT THE ONLY QUALITY THAT DEFINES A PERSON?

PERHAPS ITS EVEN ONE OF THE LESSER QUALITIES?

Originally posted by Alliance
COULD IT BE THAT RELIGION IS NOT THE ONLY QUALITY THAT DEFINES A PERSON?

PERHAPS ITS EVEN ONE OF THE LESSER QUALITIES?

YOU MIGHT VERY WELL BE ON TO SOMETHING THERE! I SUSPECT IT IS WORTH INVESTIGATING FURTHER detective

Because really it is something that is outdated, in terms of religious advocates, who imply to be an Atheist essentially makes one an amoral Nihilist. I mean really. Morality as a base is something that is far more linked to society then God.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Morality as a base is something that is far more linked to society then God.

Ever since the enlightenment.

Originally posted by Alliance
COULD IT BE THAT RELIGION IS NOT THE ONLY QUALITY THAT DEFINES A PERSON?

PERHAPS ITS EVEN ONE OF THE LESSER QUALITIES?

You could be on too something...

Originally posted by Storm
But what if we simply cease to exist? How would it affect your behaviour, your everyday life, and your decisions?

I'll do a bunch of drugs and cheat on my wife all the time.

I mean if there's no one I have to answer to when I pass then why the **** not?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I'll do a bunch of drugs and cheat on my wife all the time.

I mean if there's no one I have to answer to when I pass then why the **** not?

I wont do drugs for health reason. And i wont cheat on my wife because i dont want him to cheat on me. Of course if there is mutual consent between the two of us . . . . nah, we'll probably just join a wife/husband sharing group .

Originally posted by Templares
And i wont cheat on my wife because i dont want him to cheat on me.

"Him" ?

Originally posted by Templares
we'll probably just join a wife/husband sharing group .

Those actually exist. shock

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
"Him" ?



Those actually exist. shock

Oops. Its Her . And yes, they exist. You could start looking in greek societies with a sorority counterpart.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Besides who needs salvation from an imaginary place.??........That IS the trick of the church.........duh.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So you have no morales of your own? I live in a would with no god out side of me, and I have morales. I am glad there is something controlling you, because you cannot do it yourself.

Everyone has morals of their own because God (the Great Law-giver) gave every person a conscience to know right from wrong. In addition, many of us are taught ethics from our parents/guardians from the time we are young. This truth warrants repeating.

Everyone has morals of their own because God (the Great Law-giver) gave every person a conscience to know right from wrong. In addition, many of us are taught ethics from our parents/guardians from the time we are young.

Get this Shak, get this: God is the reason why there is a knowledge of right and wrong. You don't know this innately or intrinsically apart from God's design (whether you choose to accept this or not). I know you deny the existence of God and what not but that doesn't change anything. God still exists and is responsible for the basic knowledge of right and wrong that you have within you via conscience. Now, you have missed my point completely. Read slowly this time so that you don't miss anything. Shak, I have said this before and I will say it again: you are usually the first to respond to my posts but I don't think that you read what I say carefully. I think that you are impetuous and so eager to respond to what I say (in an effort to oppose what I say) that you overextend yourself mentally. This causes you to miss and overlook the import, gist, and crux of what I say. If this offends you then I apologize. Now, the issue is not whether I "have" morals of my own, but rather whether it matters in a universe devoid of God. As I said at the outset of this post God is the reason there is a right from wrong. These realities, truths, principles, or concepts do not exist in a vacuum on their own. But, as I have reiterated they exist "because of" God. I said all that to say this: if...God...does...not...exist...then...neither...do (or does)...right...from...wrong. That is why I said that I would basically "do my own thing." I would live it up from sun up to sun down. I would do whatever I felt like doing because of the preceding fact. No right from wrong presupposes that there is no God. If there is no God then there is no (true) accountability beyond this present reality we call life. From that vantage point I said that I would live basically any way that I want without regard for others feelings per se. There is no independent, universal law of morality and ethics (apart from God) that is ordained to govern the lives of humanity. In short, there is no justice or standard of right and wrong that we are held accountable to (again, apart from God). How can I say these things? It is simple: the Bible (God's revealed will for humanity) states that the laws that do exist or rather the governing authorities that exist are appointed by God and that there is no (true) authority except from God. God is the source of all authority and right from wrong. Our government exists by God's design (I am not talking about the various political factions and the corruption that goes on in governments worldwide). I am just saying that the concept of "government" (no matter how primordial) orignally came from God, the Great, Sovereign of the universe. All laws in essence are ensconced in divine law or have a common source in terms of our knowledge of law and why they should exist. Without laws to govern society there would be utter chaos and anarchy. That is why God ordained government no matter how primitive or sophisticated it may be among the myriads of cultures and societies ecumenically.

In conclusion, the knowledge of right and wrong is derived from the true Law-giver and Judge of all the earth: God Almighty. Apart from God there is no independent knowledge or thought of right and wrong. The knowledge that exists does not exist out here in a vacuum, but has been implanted, and indelibly etched in/on our minds through the instrumentality of what the Bible calls "the conscience."

Furthermore, I completely understood what you wrote regarding someone controlling me and that I cannot do it myself, yada, yada, yada. I simply responded in a way that deflected what you wrote. Yes I admitted that I need God's help to live right. Is there a problem with that? Are you indicating that you don't need help doing anything? Stop and think about this before you respond Shak. I think I know you by now, don't just reply impulsively and rashly without considering everything (the totality and gist of all that I have written).

Morals are a learned thing from society.........

Morals are based on or derived from a premise: right and wrong. Right and wrong (the concept of the two) come from God. We have this knowledge by way of conscience (which was implanted in us by God).

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Everyone has morals of their own because God (the Great Law-giver) gave every person a conscience to know right from wrong. In addition, many of us are taught ethics from our parents/guardians from the time we are young. This truth warrants repeating.

Everyone has morals of their own because God (the Great Law-giver) gave every person a conscience to know right from wrong. In addition, many of us are taught ethics from our parents/guardians from the time we are young.

Get this Shak, get this: God is the reason why there is a knowledge of right and wrong. You don't know this innately or intrinsically apart from God's design (whether you choose to accept this or not). I know you deny the existence of God and what not but that doesn't change anything. God still exists and is responsible for the basic knowledge of right and wrong that you have within you via conscience. Now, you have missed my point completely. Read slowly this time so that you don't miss anything. Shak, I have said this before and I will say it again: you are usually the first to respond to my posts but I don't think that you read what I say carefully. I think that you are impetuous and so eager to respond to what I say (in an effort to oppose what I say) that you overextend yourself mentally. This causes you to miss and overlook the import, gist, and crux of what I say. If this offends you then I apologize. Now, the issue is not whether I "have" morals of my own, but rather whether it matters in a universe devoid of God. As I said at the outset of this post God is the reason there is a right from wrong. These realities, truths, principles, or concepts do not exist in a vacuum on their own. But, as I have reiterated they exist "because of" God. I said all that to say this: if...God...does...not...exist...then...neither...do (or does)...right...from...wrong. That is why I said that I would basically "do my own thing." I would live it up from sun up to sun down. I would do whatever I felt like doing because of the preceding fact. No right from wrong presupposes that there is no God. If there is no God then there is no (true) accountability beyond this present reality we call life. From that vantage point I said that I would live basically any way that I want without regard for others feelings per se. There is no independent, universal law of morality and ethics (apart from God) that is ordained to govern the lives of humanity. In short, there is no justice or standard of right and wrong that we are held accountable to (again, apart from God). How can I say these things? It is simple: the Bible (God's revealed will for humanity) states that the laws that do exist or rather the governing authorities that exist are appointed by God and that there is no (true) authority except from God. God is the source of all authority and right from wrong. Our government exists by God's design (I am not talking about the various political factions and the corruption that goes on in governments worldwide). I am just saying that the concept of "government" (no matter how primordial) orignally came from God, the Great, Sovereign of the universe. All laws in essence are ensconced in divine law or have a common source in terms of our knowledge of law and why they should exist. Without laws to govern society there would be utter chaos and anarchy. That is why God ordained government no matter how primitive or sophisticated it may be among the myriads of cultures and societies ecumenically.

In conclusion, the knowledge of right and wrong is derived from the true Law-giver and Judge of all the earth: God Almighty. Apart from God there is no independent knowledge or thought of right and wrong. The knowledge that exists does not exist out here in a vacuum, but has been implanted, and indelibly etched in/on our minds through the instrumentality of what the Bible calls "the conscience."

Furthermore, I completely understood what you wrote regarding someone controlling me and that I cannot do it myself, yada, yada, yada. I simply responded in a way that deflected what you wrote. Yes I admitted that I need God's help to live right. Is there a problem with that? Are you indicating that you don't need help doing anything? Stop and think about this before you respond Shak. I think I know you by now, don't just reply impulsively and rashly without considering everything (the totality and gist of all that I have written).

Please stop insulting me. It only shows that you are in position to know anything about a loving god. You anger shows and I think you should stop posting and find something that makes you happy, because I can tell the debating only upsets you.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Please stop insulting me. It only shows that you are in position to know anything about a loving god. You anger shows and I think you should stop posting and find something that makes you happy, because I can tell the debating only upsets you.

Did I offend you or did I just give you a comprehensive, detailed response explaining myself in response to what you wrote about me? I have no problem accepting blame for my actions. I told you at the beginning that I don't mean to offend you but if I did then I apologize Shak. I am not here to offend you that would be counterproductive. I just hope that my reply sufficiently explained the whole, "...you don't have morals of your own...." question that you asked me (again, you quoted my words and then commented on them, it was not the other way around).

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Did I offend you or did I just give you a comprehensive, detailed response explaining myself in response to what you wrote about me? I have no problem accepting blame for my actions. I told you at the beginning that I don't mean to offend you but if I did then I apologize Shak. I am not here to offend you that would be counterproductive. I just hope that my reply sufficiently explained the whole, "...you don't have morals of your own...." question that you asked me (again, you quoted my words and then commented on them, it was not the other way around).





Your apology is not accepted.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Morals are based on or derived from a premise: right and wrong. Right and wrong (the concept of the two) come from God. We have this knowledge by way of conscience (which was implanted in us by God).

I don't see it. Cultures prior to Jesus coming had laws and morals and ethics. Cultures prior to the Jews and Moses had laws and morals and ethics. Cultures that existed isolated from the Middle Eastern rise of the monotheistic faith had laws and morals and ethics.

Today we have Atheists that are good people - most of them in fact. The whole "If there was no God I would be a terrible person" just doesn't ring true as there is no statistical evidence to support the idea that an Atheist or the follower of something other then Christianity are prone to being bad people, or that they are amoral, or whatever.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
I don't see it. Cultures prior to Jesus coming had laws and morals and ethics. Cultures prior to the Jews and Moses had laws and morals and ethics. Cultures that existed isolated from the Middle Eastern rise of the monotheistic faith had laws and morals and ethics.

Today we have Atheists that are good people - most of them in fact. The whole "If there was no God I would be a terrible person" just doesn't ring true as there is no statistical evidence to support the idea that an Atheist or the follower of something other then Christianity are prone to being bad people, or that they are amoral, or whatever.

I am glad that you are not in denial. You admitted that you don't see it. However, did you read my post in response to Shak's post? I expounded this subject more fully and I already addressed the statement that you made,

"...Cultures prior to Jesus coming had laws and morals and ethics...."



Here is an excerpt from my post:

"...I am just saying that the concept of "government" (no matter how primordial) originally came from God, the Great, Sovereign of the universe. All laws in essence are ensconced in divine law or have a common source in terms of our knowledge of law and why they should exist. Without laws to govern society there would be utter chaos and anarchy. That is why God ordained government no matter how primitive or sophisticated it may be among the myriads of cultures and societies ecumenically.

In conclusion, the knowledge of right and wrong is derived from the true Law-giver and Judge of all the earth: God Almighty. Apart from God there is no independent knowledge or thought of right and wrong. The knowledge that exists does not exist out here in a vacuum, but has been implanted, and indelibly etched in/on our minds through the instrumentality of what the Bible calls "the conscience...."

As you can see I already addressed your statement Samura. Just because a person is not conscious that he/she has a conscience (which is next to impossible all things being equal) or does not know God through Jesus Christ, the knowledge of right and wrong still has its beginning with God. A person does not need to know where something came from for the thing to have a source. A person does not need to be cognizant that they have something for the thing to be present. Can you see this?

Notice I said, "...no matter how primordial...." I already took into consideration all of this world's cultures and societies since the beginning of time. Even the first man and woman received their knowledge of right and wrong from God. This knowledge was passed down to us through the agency of conscience.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I am glad that you are not in denial. You admitted that you don't see it. However, did you read my post in response to Shak's post? I expounded this subject more fully and I already addressed the statement that you made,

"...Cultures prior to Jesus coming had laws and morals and ethics...."

Well you seem to have construed a meaning from my words that wasn't there - that isn't what I meant. But eh.





So God gets credit for the morals, laws and the like born from other religions and philosophies?



But you have essentially just said that a person does not in fact need to believe in God, or that there is a God, to be a good moral person. Since the majority of ancient cultures were not Christian yet still had law and the like seems to suggest that the ability to socially formulate laws is not tied in with adherence to the Bible or the belief in God.

People and society will, in fact, be able to legislate and moralise in a complete absence of belief in God, Jesus and all that hoo haa.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I am glad that you are not in denial. You admitted that you don't see it. However, did you read my post in response to Shak's post? I expounded this subject more fully and I already addressed the statement that you made,

"...Cultures prior to Jesus coming had laws and morals and ethics...."



Here is an excerpt from my post:

"...I am just saying that the concept of "government" (no matter how primordial) originally came from God, the Great, Sovereign of the universe. All laws in essence are ensconced in divine law or have a common source in terms of our knowledge of law and why they should exist. Without laws to govern society there would be utter chaos and anarchy. That is why God ordained government no matter how primitive or sophisticated it may be among the myriads of cultures and societies ecumenically.

In conclusion, the knowledge of right and wrong is derived from the true Law-giver and Judge of all the earth: God Almighty. Apart from God there is no independent knowledge or thought of right and wrong. The knowledge that exists does not exist out here in a vacuum, but has been implanted, and indelibly etched in/on our minds through the instrumentality of what the Bible calls "the conscience...."

As you can see I already addressed your statement Samura. Just because a person is not conscious that he/she has a conscience (which is next to impossible all things being equal) or does not know God through Jesus Christ, the knowledge of right and wrong still has its beginning with God. A person does not need to know where something came from for the thing to have a source. A person does not need to be cognizant that they have something for the thing to be present. Can you see this?

Notice I said, "...no matter how primordial...." I already took into consideration all of this world's cultures and societies since the beginning of time. Even the first man and woman received their knowledge of right and wrong from God. This knowledge was passed down to us through the agency of conscience.

So Native American societies had their laws dictated to them by God? Buddha did too? So did Mohhamed?

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Well you seem to have construed a meaning from my words that wasn't there - that isn't what I meant. But eh.





So God gets credit for the morals, laws and the like born from other religions and philosophies?



But you have essentially just said that a person does not in fact need to believe in God, or that there is a God, to be a good moral person. Since the majority of ancient cultures were not Christian yet still had law and the like seems to suggest that the ability to socially formulate laws is not tied in with adherence to the Bible or the belief in God.

People and society will, in fact, be able to legislate and moralise in a complete absence of belief in God, Jesus and all that hoo haa.

I am talking about the fundamental "need" or "desire" that people have to formulate morals and ethics--this is a derivative of conscience. And the conscience is God-given. Kapeesh? All people have a God-given desire to live moral lives and do things ethically (most ignore this impulse because of sin). But this innate desire or instinct as it were (not animal instinct we are humans) stems from the implanted conscience. I know you try to explain this away but it is true. People just don't want to do right for the betterment of others and for sake of other's welfare and wellbeing "just because." God's inborn conscience is at the very root of it.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
So Native American societies had their laws dictated to them by God? Buddha did too? So did Mohhamed?

No! Sorry but there is no way that I could emphasize that. I guess this is what punctuation marks are for. Anyhoo, have you not read what I have written? I have labored to show you and others that what I am referring to is the (say it with me) "conscience." Not divine dictation.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I am talking about the fundamental "need" or "desire" that people have to formulate morals and ethics--this is a derivative of conscience. And the conscience is God-given. Kapeesh? All people have a God-given desire to live moral lives and do things ethically (most ignore this impulse because of sin). But this innate desire or instinct as it were (not animal instinct we are humans) stems from the implanted conscience. I know you try to explain this away but it is true. People just don't want to do right for the betterment of others and for sake of other's welfare and wellbeing "just because." God's inborn conscience is at the very root of it.

I am not trying to explain away anything. I am merely taking your words at face value. The fact is, from what you have said, is that people have an inbuilt law making component - the conscience. We don't need to believe in God, we can be Atheists of Hindu or Aboriginal dream timers and still have laws and morals and Ethics.

Because apparently God built it into us so we would have it. Unfairly it doesn't matter who made the laws thousands of years before Jesus or the Jews, even though man did in the name of Ma'at or whoever. We don't need to believe in God or the Bible to be good people. We don't need to believe in God to make laws.

In the end, seriously, what I see is that laws and morals are the product of society. The product of the sentient mind. It is the only logical way I see so many varied societies, so many people, making laws, having there own moral code. There is no archaeological proof, no anthropological proof, no philosophical proof God was with any of them. Yet they legislated. And they had moral codes. Man made laws. Man made morals. Even today morals are different from what they were in Christian nations 200 years ago. 1000 years ago.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Morals are based on or derived from a premise: right and wrong. Right and wrong (the concept of the two) come from God. We have this knowledge by way of conscience (which was implanted in us by God).

So let me clarify something....

Are you straight out saying that deep inside of us we all know what is right and wrong ?

I believe so but not with a holy spirit............

Originally posted by debbiejo
I believe so but not with a holy spirit............

Which in my mind would be un-needed. If mankind posesses in itself the ability to be lawful and good in terms of current moral norms then it is irrelevant where that origianlly came from - mankind doesn't need God to be good.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
- mankind doesn't need God to be good.


Quite the contrary in fact...mankind seems to NEED GOD as an excuse to do evil....

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Quite the contrary in fact...mankind seems to NEED GOD as an excuse to do evil....

Hmmm. Well that is certainly a way of looking at it.

In my mind the "Holy Spirit" is just our inclusion with all that is and not judgemental,......but can be interactive...............Just part of a communication source, yet I really do not know.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
I am not trying to explain away anything. I am merely taking your words at face value. The fact is, from what you have said, is that people have an inbuilt law making component - the conscience. We don't need to believe in God, we can be Atheists of Hindu or Aboriginal dream timers and still have laws and morals and Ethics.

Because apparently God built it into us so we would have it. Unfairly it doesn't matter who made the laws thousands of years before Jesus or the Jews, even though man did in the name of Ma'at or whoever. We don't need to believe in God or the Bible to be good people. We don't need to believe in God to make laws.

In the end, seriously, what I see is that laws and morals are the product of society. The product of the sentient mind. It is the only logical way I see so many varied societies, so many people, making laws, having there own moral code. There is no archaeological proof, no anthropological proof, no philosophical proof God was with any of them. Yet they legislated. And they had moral codes. Man made laws. Man made morals. Even today morals are different from what they were in Christian nations 200 years ago. 1000 years ago.

But you still have not accounted for the "why (why laws and morals exist)" behind the "what (laws and morals)." I have thoroughly explained both. It cannot be refuted: the conscience and its divine origin (because it had to come from Someone intelligent enough to construct it) is the "underlying reason" why laws are instituted and implemented. The intent of the lawmaker is to create or maintain law, order, and peace among society. This "desire" starts "inwardly" but manifests itself "externally" in customs, laws, ordinances, statutes an so on. But God is the true Originator of laws; He ordained government, it is His idea, not humanity's. But laws are devised with other people's (welfare and wellbeing) in mind. Irrespective of the background or social custom of the lawmaker, the process of lawmaking involves conscience (whether it is a pure and good conscience or weak and evil conscience at the helm governing the process).

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But you still have not accounted for the "why (why laws and morals exist)" behind the "what (laws and morals)." I have thoroughly explained both. It cannot be refuted: the conscience and its divine origin (because it had to come from Someone intelligent enough to construct it) is the "underlying reason" why laws are instituted and implemented. The intent of the lawmaker is to create or maintain law, order, and peace among society. This "desire" starts "inwardly" but manifests itself "externally" in customs, laws, ordinances, statutes an so on. But God is the true Originator of laws; He ordained government, it is His idea, not humanity's. But laws are devised with other people's (welfare and wellbeing) in mind. Irrespective of the background or social custom of the lawmaker, the process of lawmaking involves conscience (whether it is a pure and good conscience or weak and evil conscience at the helm governing the process).

Personally I don't see the importance of the why. I don't think that there is in any way a God responsible for laws, morals etc. In all reality at best I see religion having been used to legitimise social coherency on the front of laws and morals. I find the idea of sweeping away mans achievements as kind of repugnant. I find it equally so to say that the Egyptians and Romans and Greeks and any number of others weren't responsible for there laws and morality, but rather God was, even when God was neither known, acknowledged or believed in.

Even if I accept that God has somehow planted the idea of law and morality in us - it is still up to humans to implement them, obey them and modernise them. God is irrelevant to the whole process - just the intellectual one "Ah, so thats were law came from" - so what? We are were it is going, we are why it is as it is.

Originally posted by debbiejo
In my mind the "Holy Spirit" is just our inclusion with all that is and not judgemental,......but can be interactive...............Just part of a communication source, yet I really do not know.

Because you don't trust the Bible's description as it were of Who He is. You try to understand Who He is (and other things that relate to God as revealed in the Bible) outside of what the Bible reveals. That would be akin to me trying to explain or describe you to someone else without using the autobiographical information that you gave me for this purpose. Can you see this? God has given us all the information that we need in this life to know all that He wants us to know about Him. The rest of it will be revealed in the age to come.

I trusted the "holy Spirit " before................Or as was said it was...........and it was totally off as the pastors word would interpret it.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But you still have not accounted for the "why (why laws and morals exist)" behind the "what (laws and morals)." I have thoroughly explained both. It cannot be refuted: the conscience and its divine origin (because it had to come from Someone intelligent enough to construct it) is the "underlying reason" why laws are instituted and implemented. The intent of the lawmaker is to create or maintain law, order, and peace among society. This "desire" starts "inwardly" but manifests itself "externally" in customs, laws, ordinances, statutes an so on. But God is the true Originator of laws; He ordained government, it is His idea, not humanity's. But laws are devised with other people's (welfare and wellbeing) in mind. Irrespective of the background or social custom of the lawmaker, the process of lawmaking involves conscience (whether it is a pure and good conscience or weak and evil conscience at the helm governing the process). Laws and morals exist because of normal human nature not because of God in the slightest, and this will change as a whole based on the society as a whole. Each country or nations has had its own laws and morals that have changed as they do.

If everyone in the nation cherishes a certain thing then it would be immoral to destroy said item why another nation could care less, does that make them less moral?

Originally posted by Storm
The afterlife is one of those concepts that we all have an accepted understanding of. And a lot of people and most religions believe in some form of afterlife. But what if we simply cease to exist? How would it affect your behaviour, your everyday life, and your decisions? People sharing this view, how would your world be different if you didn' t believe there was some form of afterlife, if different at all?

Proverbs 23:18
For surely there is a hereafter , And your hope will not be cut off.

God damnit, go along with the thread's "What If" scenario or burn in hell.

You swore!! OH my god..................repent repent repent!!!