are Heaven/Hell side effects of humans' inability to comprehend nothingness?

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Well, it's about heaven/hell, so it naturally intersects with religion some.

I am talking about focusing on specific religions. I want to avoid that because that may necessitate the need to move this thread.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
And creating a "why" for the universe is pretty much the same as creating a god or gods (which humans have done throughout their history). Both are subjective and created by the individual, not set forth by an omnipotent deity.

BINGO!

Originally posted by DigiMark007
The universe itself is inherently without meaning, until we bring meaning to it for ourselves.

Strangely, I agree. I really can't find a way to logically argue with a counterpoint. Does that mean that God exists because there is no meaning to the universe without God? Maybe...but it is still a faith based perspective and not concrete science.

Here is a something interesting that I thought about while doing cardio yesterday...

It takes a form of faith to believe in concrete laws in science. There are always slim chances that even our scientific laws are not technically able to be laws. (Look up the definition of "law" as it is used in science to gain a grasp of what I mean...if necessary.)

For instance, when you drop a stone from 10 meters above sea level, it is a scientific law that it will fall at 9.8 meters a second a second. (no, I did not stutter.) However, there are several probabilities that would prevent the stone from falling. A sudden strong gust of wind to cause it to fall slower. A bird could prevent it from falling. A person around you could prevent it from falling all the way. Even the very stability of universe's physics could collapse and everything would cease to exist as we know it. (A very very very slim probability that our universe would become unstable and collapse again, but still a possability right now.)

My point is, even 100% certainty is not 100% certainty. You have faith that the rock will fall at 9.8 meters a second a second by subconsciously believing that nothing could possibly change that fact. In the same vein, I subconsciously know that nothing could change the fact that the Universe was created by a God. It is a fact for me, more true than the laws of physics he created. In religion, they call that a sure knowledge...which something past just plain faith. (Indeed, you could apply the idea of "a sure knowledge" to our physics example to.) Basically, a sure knowledge is just faith in a stronger form.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
I can appreciate your desire to realize a heaven-state at the end of life, I just think that it's still not on solid reasoning other than a vague "what if" scenario. There's as good a chance that you're wrong as there is that you're right, so enjoying family/friends/etc. in the moment is just as important as planning to spend eternity with them.

Part of obtaining my heaven IS enjoying "family/friends/etc." In my religion, to not do that would technically be a sin. (Not showing appreciation to the things you have been blessed with.)

See, nothing I believe (and nothing most skeptics believe) is 100%, because that's a dogma, like religion. Our opinion shifts as our knowledge grows. Certain things, like physcial laws you mentioned, can be treated as facts. But they are provisional facts, not unchanging edicts that no force could ever change.

It honestly seems like a double standard, because you were making the point that you can't prove a negative earlier. Within subjective reality, literally nothing can be proven 100%, making your "sure knowledge" a little silly.

That kind of faith is basicaqlly saying "Well, it's faith, so I don't care how good your argument is, or how little logic I'm basing my opinion on. It's faith, so I know it's true and nothing I ever encounter will change it." Irrational stubbornness, and an attempt to hide from rational debate behind an impenetrable wall of knowledge that is as concrete as it is baseless.

Don't constru this as a personal attack, because it isn't. I like you, and you seem to be much more civil than most who attempt to describe their beliefs here. But I simply can't agree with your reasoning, so that's what I'm critiquing...it's a good discussion at least.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Strangely, I agree. I really can't find a way to logically argue with a counterpoint. Does that mean that God exists because there is no meaning to the universe without God? Maybe...but it is still a faith based perspective and not concrete science.

No, it doesn't mean that God exists because of this. God is a human-made construct. And many peoples' meanings have nothing to do with a creator or a deity. Your meaning, and others', might be God....but that doesn't make him real except as a thought in your mind, nor does it make heaven or hell real. That borders on Aquinas' ridiculous "a priori" argument that posits if you can imagine a perfect creator, he must exist.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
It honestly seems like a double standard, because you were making the point that you can't prove a negative earlier. Within subjective reality, literally nothing can be proven 100%, making your "sure knowledge" a little silly.

That kind of faith is basicaqlly saying "Well, it's faith, so I don't care how good your argument is, or how little logic I'm basing my opinion on. It's faith, so I know it's true and nothing I ever encounter will change it." Irrational stubbornness, and an attempt to hide from rational debate behind an impenetrable wall of knowledge that is as concrete as it is baseless..

Sort of.

Unlike others who believe in God, I believe in evolution. I believe God made everything the way it was made as shown by science...not absurd instantaneous creation. The typical creationist theory sounds crude and insulting to the God that they worship as being all knowing and all mighty.

My sure knowledge comes from personal experiences that I would equate to an empirical knowledge which is a prerequisite in my mind to believe things. I know that religious faith isn't supposed to be that way, but it is with me.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Don't constru this as a personal attack, because it isn't. I like you, and you seem to be much more civil than most who attempt to describe their beliefs here. But I simply can't agree with your reasoning, so that's what I'm critiquing...it's a good discussion at least.

HAHA...far from being a personal attack. These things should ALWAYS be talked about. With a world running around with a bunch of judgemental religious crazies, discussions like this should provide a symbiotic center to the extreme polars on religion.

My workout partner, who professes to not be an atheist because atheism is still a theism, debates these types of things with me all the time.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
No, it doesn't mean that God exists because of this. God is a human-made construct. And many peoples' meanings have nothing to do with a creator or a deity. Your meaning, and others', might be God....but that doesn't make him real except as a thought in your mind, nor does it make heaven or hell real. That borders on Aquinas' ridiculous "a priori" argument that posits if you can imagine a perfect creator, he must exist.

I probably didn't word that right. I am saying that the Universe is hard to make sense of without deity...meaning that one could say that that, in and of itself, is proof of deity and another could say it is evidence of our current scientific ignorance.

Originally posted by dadudemon
...I probably didn't word that right. I am saying that the Universe is hard to make sense of without deity...meaning that one could say that that, in and of itself, is proof of deity and another could say it is evidence of our current scientific ignorance.

So, are you saying that ignorance is proof of a god?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, are you saying that ignorance is proof of a god?

No, I am saying that there are two points of view. One says that the whys of the universe are explained by Deity and another point of view says we are just scientifically ignorant and we just have to grow in our knowledge to eliminate the need for a God. (Some people have already done the latter. I have not, as you can read in my previous posts.)

Originally posted by dadudemon
No, I am saying that there are two points of view. One says that the whys of the universe are explained by Deity and another point of view says we are just scientifically ignorant and we just have to grow in our knowledge to eliminate the need for a God. (Some people have already done the latter. I have not, as you can read in my previous posts.)

But there are more then two point of view...

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But there are more then two point of view...

Obviously. But they are not points of view that I consider.

Originally posted by Captain King
How is it people can't think past the most primitive aspects of thier brain?

"Human beings cannot fathom nothingness!"

But you just did dumbass, so either

A: You're a lieing bastard. Who just likes to be a dick and make everyone else out to be stupider then you when you yourself don't believe half the shit you say.

B: You've fathomed nothingness thus proving human beings can but choose not to believe in it.

Or C: You've fathomed nothingness and are not human but some kindof mutant or alien or something.

Would it be too outrageous for you peons to possibly comprehend that heaven and hell are not dimensions granteed to us by brownie points or lack thereoff, but a place where spirits reside and build themselves?

Immagine it, Heaven is like a place with very strict border policies. Only ceartain people are allowed in, it's very exclusive. So it's a "paradise" in the sense there's no conflict and there's no dickery. (Presumably)

Everyone else goes to hell. Therefore there's going to be lots of conflict, lots of chaos, and much more dickery. (Again, presumably)

wow... ok first of all, that was the most unnecessarily combative and angry statement i have ever heard. That fact alone shows that you probably don't have a very solid point and have to mask your lack of evidence with anger and "in-your-face" tactics.
Secondly, simply mentioning the word "nothingness" isn't even remotely similar to comprehending the concept.

this is a topic for simple discussion, not attacks on people for questions they pose. That's just immature.

learn to play noob...

Originally posted by dadudemon
Obviously. But they are not points of view that I consider.

If you have not considered all points of view, how can you know if you are right?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Even though I am fairly religious...I agree with the above statement. Despite this fact, I chose to believe in a God, just in case there really is some sort of transcendent reality after this life.

I can easily see the absurdities of religion and how they are really immature to hold.

Do you guys understand why I still partake in religion or is my point lost in my inarticulateness?

I can relate 👆

I went from Catholic to Agnostic to Atheist to Buddhist to Buddhist Agnostic to Buddhist Theist....my beleifs are the cumulation of certain studies and findings from research and experience.

As of now I beleive several things:

1) God is the Universe- male and female, all things good and bad

2) Heaven and Hell do exist, but on Earth, not in another unexplainable plane, and they exist as a result of our choices

3) God's Law is the Law of Attraction (a simplified version, but I can explain that later)

4) I also beleive in a cycle of Life and Death

5) Last, but not least, I beleive the Mind determines the state of the body. kind of the whole "mind over matter" thing. I am much more careful what I think and say, because I used to beleive my thoughts and words had less consequences than my actions, but now I beleive that thoughts and words are equal to actions.

Long story as to how I came to those conclusions....but the point is, once where I ridiculed all things religious, I now understand and respect why you came up to your own personal conclusion.

There is nothing wrong with believing in God, and everything right with trying to be a good person 👆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If you have not considered all points of view, how can you know if you are right?

I never said that I have never considered them...just that I don't consider them...meaning I have discarded any other specifics and narrowed it down to two. Deity in any form versus, no deity in any form...that is what I have narrowed it down to.

(When I say deity, I really mean any form of Transcendent Reality i.e. reincarnation, etc...I basically believe that the Universe was intelligently created by something bigger than my puny reality.)

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
I can relate 👆

I went from Catholic to Agnostic to Atheist to Buddhist to Buddhist Agnostic to Buddhist Theist....my beleifs are the cumulation of certain studies and findings from research and experience.

As of now I beleive several things:

1) God is the Universe- male and female, all things good and bad

2) Heaven and Hell do exist, but on Earth, not in another unexplainable plane, and they exist as a result of our choices

3) God's Law is the Law of Attraction (a simplified version, but I can explain that later)

4) I also beleive in a cycle of Life and Death

5) Last, but not least, I beleive the Mind determines the state of the body. kind of the whole "mind over matter" thing. I am much more careful what I think and say, because I used to beleive my thoughts and words had less consequences than my actions, but now I beleive that thoughts and words are equal to actions.

Long story as to how I came to those conclusions....but the point is, once where I ridiculed all things religious, I now understand and respect why you came up to your own personal conclusion.

There is nothing wrong with believing in God, and everything right with trying to be a good person 👆

Unfortunately, the rest of the world isn't like all of us in this thread. If it was, we really wouldn't have problems.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I never said that I have never considered them...just that I don't consider them...meaning I have discarded any other specifics and narrowed it down to two. Deity in any form versus, no deity in any form...that is what I have narrowed it down to.

(When I say deity, I really mean any form of Transcendent Reality i.e. reincarnation, etc...I basically believe that the Universe was intelligently created by something bigger than my puny reality.)

How you considered that the universe was NOT created?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Unfortunately, the rest of the world isn't like all of us in this thread. If it was, we really wouldn't have problems.

The problem is we naturally feel a need to blame someone us for our own suffering/problems.

Once we decide to take responsibility for our own lives, the good and the bad, then we can stop judging and blaming others. When we recognize a belief or practice that another person has, which does not coincide with our own, it becomes hard to respect it. It takes maturity to do so.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
How you considered that the universe was NOT created?

I don't think that matters. He can beleive what he wants, as long as he does not try to use his beleif to hurt or oppress others.

The way we decide to treat each other is far more important than wondoring how the Universe came to be.

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
I don't think that matters. He can beleive what he wants, as long as he does not try to use his beleif to hurt or oppress others.

The way we decide to treat each other is far more important than wondoring how the Universe came to be.

Spoiler. 😛

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Spoiler. 😛

LOL

Somehow, I knew this was what you already know.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
How you considered that the universe was NOT created?

See my previous posts in this thread for the answer for that question.

Originally posted by dadudemon
See my previous posts in this thread for the answer for that question.

If you are going to referee to a previous post, please place a link to it. I'm not going to go and back-read something that may not be identifiable as an answer to my question.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If you are going to referee to a previous post, please place a link to it. I'm not going to go and back-read something that may not be identifiable as an answer to my question.

I figured that if you are going to participate in this dicusion, I shouldn't have to repeat myself.

My bad.