#151 Posted by Flawed_System (388 posts) -

@HKZ said:

@Flawed_System: Maybe not every single one, Buddhism being the first one that pops into my head, but the very popular ones yes. They are historically terrible to those that didn't have money, used for more political gain than righteous deeds, and are rife with ridiculous stories based on fairytales. There are good things they teach, but their basis of existence is in complete denial of scientific fact.

I'll give you Islam on those points. The other major religions...not so much.

#152 Edited by HKZ (70 posts) -

@Flawed_System: I see you don't have any knowledge of the history of Christianity or Catholicism. Guess this has come to its inevitable conclusion. You've offered nothing but saying my opinion is nothing more than logical fallacy, and you don't know anything about history. Enjoy your night time fairy tales, you obviously listen to nothing else.

#153 Posted by crusader8463 (14415 posts) -

I believe that now so no.

#154 Posted by mrmanga (219 posts) -

Im not sure if i want to answer this queation honestly. My views on this stuff is pretty weird.

#155 Edited by EarlessShrimp (1632 posts) -

@Questionable: Being a humanist is what it's all about, son. Do good deeds because, well, you should fuckin' do them. You don't need a chuck e. cheese at the end of a tunnel of light where you get to meet your pets having sex with 72 virgins when you'll just come back as a gnat because you were a douche in your previous life.... or whatever you believe to entice you.

#156 Posted by HKZ (70 posts) -

@Flawed_System: Also, I find it absolutely hilarious, really, that the leader of the Catholic Church (the Pope) believes in his God so much that he rides around in a bulletproof car. If his faith was so great, he'd be sure that God would protect him from the Devil and those that do his work, would he not? Really shows how much faith the highest person in Catholicism has in "God" doesn't it? Religious stories and beliefs in deities are completely false, even if some of its teachings are sound (morals and how to treat your fellow man and all).

#157 Posted by LD50 (416 posts) -

Pffft, easy. Like I don't think about this everyday. I would sell Crystal Meth to pay for skin regeneration research until we found out how to stall aging. Then I would take over the sex lubricate market. Obviously, from there, I would own the world.

#158 Posted by freakin9 (1104 posts) -

There's no afterlife, it's certain. At least to a lot of people it is. And we are some lovely people.

#159 Posted by zyn (2591 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

Well, yea. Why would that change me?

#160 Edited by JustKamToo (664 posts) -

A religion thread I see this ending well.

#161 Posted by Mirado (992 posts) -

@EarlessShrimp said:

@Questionable: Being a humanist is what it's all about, son. Do good deeds because, well, you should fuckin' do them. You don't need a chuck e. cheese at the end of a tunnel of light where you get to meet your pets having sex with 72 virgins when you'll just come back as a gnat because you were a douche in your previous life.... or whatever you believe to entice you.

This is it, right here. If there's no afterlife to work towards, then the only impact you will ever have is on other people. If you do good by them, you're called a humanitarian. If you do evil, then a sociopath.

Which would you rather be?

#162 Edited by TruthTellah (8578 posts) -

A lot of this thread really creeps me out.

The scariest thing is how common these ways of thinking are even amongst people you can have pleasant conversations with. That guy you're chatting with about the Wii U or Vinny's sunglasses may have no personal issues with torturing or killing people if only they could get away with it. Their fantasies and self-fulfillment are all that ultimately matter, and we're simply lucky that so many deem acting friendly to be most advantageous. In the absence of solid values and real feeling, we are lost. This way of thinking. These careless mindsets left to fester in ourselves and our children. They are why so many awful things in this world can bring out the worst monsters within ourselves.

Just disturbing to see here.

Online
#163 Posted by ShaggE (6351 posts) -

I'm going to hazard a guess that the last 8 pages consist of a lot of "I don't even OWN a dogma" dick-waving, so I'll commit the cardinal sin (Ha! Topical!) of not reading the thread and risking redundancy.

I think that the complete removal of consequence (both earthly and supernaturally) would bring out a surprising number of closet psychopaths, to use a broad term. It's easy and self-assuring to say "I'd still do good, I'm good by nature", but "What's stopping me?" is a much more persuasive thought.

#164 Posted by forkboy (1118 posts) -

@Questionable said:

If from tomorrow on you had absolute certainty there is no afterlife would you continue to behave exactly as you do now?

  • No reincarnation
  • No afterlife
  • No lingering spirits or any form of awareness
  • Absolutely zero repercussion or consequence

This is already what I assume happens when I die. Well, aside from the "zero consequences" part, because I tend to believe that there's more than me on this world so try not to be a dick to everyone.

#165 Posted by envane (1159 posts) -

@Questionable: your question is not just about the afterlife , it hinges on so many preconceptions such as divine retribution , karma , going to hell , being stuck in limbo ...

IMAGINE if none of these thigns affected how you live now , thats how the world actually is

#166 Posted by Cheesebob (1233 posts) -

It is what you do in this life which is important, not the after life. So I wouldn't change at all.

#167 Edited by egg (1450 posts) -

@Questionable said:

@DJJoeJoe said:

Jail and morals exist during life, so unless you include those as also being none existent then I don't see why anyone should change how they act.

I can consider (hypotheticly) that killing my wife and running off with the insurance money is worth the risk of 15 years jail, Now if the risk is 15 years prison and "eternal damnation" that really tips the scale even when you take the jail time entirely out of the equation.

You're giving me a headache.

People in the other thread were telling me there is no afterlife, here you're saying you're not killing people just to be on the safe side.

#168 Posted by Rawrnosaurous (768 posts) -

I'm concerned that for some reason you wouldn't really be that cross about killing your wife for money, the only down side to it is that you might suffer eternal god wrath.

How can you on one hand put so much stock in material things (money) so much so that you are only shied away from it by fear of eternal damnation. If you knew, YOU KNEW, that there was no after life and that you only have this one life why would you completely snuff out the one life someone else had for a slightly bigger TV and apartment?

Sometimes I just don't quite understand the human psyche.

#169 Posted by Flawed_System (388 posts) -

@HKZ said:

@Flawed_System: 1). Also, I find it absolutely hilarious, really, that the leader of the Catholic Church (the Pope) believes in his God so much that he rides around in a bulletproof car. If his faith was so great, he'd be sure that God would protect him from the Devil and those that do his work, would he not? Really shows how much faith the highest person in Catholicism has in "God" doesn't it? Religious stories and beliefs in deities are completely false, even if some of its teachings are sound (morals and how to treat your fellow man and all).

1). That's some terribly faulty logic. You're arguing that God should make his followers impervious to death?

Your other posts use Argumentum ad Ignorantiam and Argument from Incredulity as a base. Therefore, I chose to focus on the structure of the argument, rather than material such as, "Beliefs in deities are completely false" and "religion is bullshit" etc.

Tacitus, Josephus, and the Talmud (non-Christians) all established that such a man (Jesus) existed and he was, in fact, crucified by the Romans.

#170 Edited by Penelope (225 posts) -

@Questionable said:

@DJJoeJoe said:

Jail and morals exist during life, so unless you include those as also being none existent then I don't see why anyone should change how they act.

I can consider (hypotheticly) that killing my wife and running off with the insurance money is worth the risk of 15 years jail, Now if the risk is 15 years prison and "eternal damnation" that really tips the scale even when you take the jail time entirely out of the equation.

Personally i would feel allot more inclined to take risks that would cross morals. perhaps invest some money in a sound isolated basement in a remote location and see where it goes from there. afteraal, if the only thing that matters is your life now. why not fulfill every curiosity and fantasy you might have or whatever you consider living life to its fullest.

If there is no afterlife than all that morals are are just rules imposed onto you by your fellow man.

Uh.

I'm an atheist. A devout (ha!) one. But just because God doesn't exist doesn't mean I would ever kill or harm someone for money or personal gain even in a hypothetical situation which guaranteed no negative repercussions for myself. If the afterlife is the only thing stopping you from being a dick, I think you probably need to take a look at yourself and you're motives.

I guess I had always naively assumed that if people had a choice, it would be TO NOT GODDAMN MURDER EACH OTHER.

As for the sound-proof basement, weird curiosity, and living life to the fullest?

Uh yeah. Go nuts. That about matches my lifestyle.

#171 Posted by Jrinswand (1696 posts) -

I already have an absolute certainty about all those things, so yes.

#172 Posted by Kieran_Smith5 (140 posts) -

Make the best out of life while we are here.

#173 Posted by TehFlan (1944 posts) -

So, one thing I'd like to clear up. I'm a Christian, and that doesn't mean I act the way I do out of fear of punishment or a hope of reward. I've been shown more love by God than I can ever imagine. My being given the gift of eternal life has nothing to do with how good a person I am or what I've done, it's a gift from God, who sent his son to die on the cross as a stand-in for my sin. My ability to good comes from God's grace, not from sense of fear. It has always confused me how misunderstood the gospel seems to be, even by most Christians.

That said, if there were no afterlife, that more or less disproves the Bible, making most of what I've based my life around a lie. I'm not sure exactly what kind of effect that would have on how I live, but it would be depressing as all hell.

#174 Posted by iTWAN (45 posts) -

I don't believe in any afterlife so I would be the same, lol!!!

#175 Posted by Somnus (81 posts) -

Yes.

#176 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

well i would do more bad things as there would be no hell

#177 Edited by HKZ (70 posts) -

@Flawed_System: Ah, you've graduated from trolling to the strawman. Congrats.

#178 Posted by avidwriter (667 posts) -

The same as I do now. I know 100% there is no afterlife already.

#179 Posted by phantomzxro (1565 posts) -

I would say yes i would live my life the same because whatever the afterlife may be nothing is curtain and you still would have to live your life to the best of your ability. I already believe in helping others and doing the right thing even if you don't count religion. So i would not just be evil to be evil to people so i don't see me personally changing if that was the case.

#180 Posted by MonkeyKing1969 (2597 posts) -

@Questionable said:

If from tomorrow on you had absolute certainty there is no afterlife would you continue to behave exactly as you do now?

  • No reincarnation
  • No afterlife
  • No lingering spirits or any form of awareness
  • Absolutely zero repercussion or consequence

You're assuming any mechanism of afterlife has a "judged" phase to make it occur. Since I believe there could never/would never be judgement the question is moot. How do you judge a life. How do you judge tigers? How do you judge and Protozoa? How do you judge a man? I've never see or heard about a way to judge life that seems to make sense...so I say there isn't one - except for anything goes.

#181 Posted by Grillbar (1800 posts) -

after that nothing changes for me since i dont belive in any of that anyway. im not saying it does not exist, i just dont belive it does when your dead your dead thats the end nothing more nothing less.

#182 Posted by Orange_Pork (583 posts) -

It kind of weirds me out that most people behave the way they do not because it's how they truly feel, but because they want to score cosmic brownie points for later.

#183 Edited by Flawed_System (388 posts) -

@HKZ said:

@Flawed_System: Ah, you've graduated from trolling to the strawman. Congrats.

You stated that God should protect the Pope from bullets, correct? Does that not make him 'immortal' in a sense?

By definition, you are in fact the troll:

"a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages."

Let's take a few examples, "religion is bullshit" (inflammatory remark) and "God should protect the Pope from bullets" (extraneous).

Your original post: "1). Do you have absolute proof that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified on the cross, and then was resurrected by "God" three days later to be his spokesperson? Unless you have, you can shut the fuck up with your ignorance and fallacy talk because you've done nothing but troll."

That last sentence in particular certainly constitutes an inflammatory remark.

1). You're still relying on Argumentum ad Ignorantiam.

#184 Edited by HKZ (70 posts) -

@Flawed_System said:

Let's take a few examples, "religion is bullshit" (inflammatory remark) and "God should protect the Pope from bullets" (extraneous).

The first (inflammatory remark) accusation would be true only if you never had been educated in science past about 6th grade, and the second is not what I said at all. I said it's hilarious that the leader of the Catholic Church expresses his steadfast faith in his God by riding around in a bulletproof car. Seems to me that a person as high up in the very influential Catholic Church would have more faith in his God. That's all. I'm not saying that his God should make him immortal, impervious to harm, or get special treatment. He should have more faith in his God because he has devoted his entire life to nothing but worshipping Him. You can go on and on about logical fallacy this and that, but you have yet to answer any one of my question about the stories that are told in religion with facts to support your fallacy talk. Simple truth is the things that are taught in the Bible, i.e. the Earth being created a few thousand years ago by God, is patently false. The teaching that Jesus was brutally murdered by being nailed to a cross and then resurrected three days later is patently false as well. I'd love to see absolute proof that you can brutally murder a man by nailing him to a cross, let him die from it in agonizing pain, then have him come back to life after three days. That simply isn't poosible, and isn't true. I'm sorry if you aren't intelligent enough to understand that death is permanent in that situation. If you had paid attention in elementary school you'd know this. I have offered up an opinion, religion is bullshit, and you've only countered with "logical fallacy" drivel. I'm the troll because I stated and opinion only for you to offer nothing in rebuttal but "you're not thinking logically"? Okay. I didn't realize that cold hard fact backed up by science is a logical fallacy. For whatever it is worth I'm a very avid reader of the Christian Science Monitor. At least they seem to have some shred of intelligence when it comes to science, you appear to not share that trait.

@Flawed_System said:

1). You're still relying on Argumentum ad Ignorantiam.

Exactly where does my ignorance come in? You keep saying this over and over to try and make it seem like a point of contention, but have yet to make it clear why you believe I know nothing of religion. I was raised in a very strict Baptist household, I know what's in the Bible, and I know what it taught from it. Do I need a degree in Theology to have an opinion on the subject of religion? Would that satisfy your accusations that I'm just some ignorant fool spouting an opinion? You can call me ignorant all you want, that doesn't make you have a valid point because you never actually make one. I think that alone qualifies you to be trolling this topic, and my opinions on its own. When you can tell me exactly, with proof of course, why thinking a man being resurrected from death without scientific proof to back it up is fallacious, then I'll be more than happy to concede that I'm an idiot for thinking that coming back from being dead for three days is wrong. In the mean time I will continue to side with scientific fact and leave the fairy tales to schoolchildren.

#185 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

I'm not religious at all but I still just can't explain what an eternity of nothing would be after death. From birth our brains are always doing something. I guess no one can explain what nothing is like so we will have to wait and see...

#186 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

As someone who use to be very Christian and believed in heaven and hell, but now is an atheist and does not believe in any afterlife, I can say that my morals did not really change. The only difference now is that I realize more that I am responsible for all of my actions rather than being able to fall back on the absurdity that no matter what I do, Jesus will forgive me.

But this idea that once the fear of hell is removed that people will turn into thieving, murdering, rapists is a little ridiculous, especially when you consider that there is a correlation between populations of atheists being more intelligent and less likely to commit crimes than their religious counterparts.

#187 Posted by Turambar (6677 posts) -

Socialization is not dependent on the afterlife. 

#188 Edited by Flawed_System (388 posts) -

@HKZ said:

@Flawed_System said:

Let's take a few examples, "religion is bullshit" (inflammatory remark) and "God should protect the Pope from bullets" (extraneous).

1). The first (inflammatory remark) accusation would be true only if you never had been educated in science past about 6th grade, and the second is not what I said at all. I said 2). it's hilarious that the leader of the Catholic Church expresses his steadfast faith in his God by riding around in a bulletproof car. Seems to me that a person as high up in the very influential Catholic Church would have more faith in his God. That's all. I'm not saying that his God should make him immortal, impervious to harm, or get special treatment. 2). He should have more faith in his God because he has devoted his entire life to nothing but worshipping Him. You can go on and on about logical fallacy this and that, but you have yet to answer any one of my question about the stories that are told in religion with facts to support your fallacy talk. 3). Simple truth is the things that are taught in the Bible, i.e. the Earth being created a few thousand years ago by God, is patently false. 4). The teaching that Jesus was brutally murdered by being nailed to a cross and then resurrected three days later is patently false as well. I'd love to see absolute proof that you can brutally murder a man by nailing him to a cross, let him die from it in agonizing pain, then have him come back to life after three days. That simply isn't poosible, and isn't true. 1). I'm sorry if you aren't intelligent enough to understand that death is permanent in that situation. 1). If you had paid attention in elementary school you'd know this. I have offered up an opinion, religion is bullshit, 5). and you've only countered with "logical fallacy" drivel. I'm the troll because I stated and opinion only for 6). you to offer nothing in rebuttal but "you're not thinking logically"? Okay. I didn't realize that cold hard fact backed up by science is a logical fallacy. For whatever it is worth I'm a very avid reader of the Christian Science Monitor. 1). At least they seem to have some shred of intelligence when it comes to science, you appear to not share that trait.

@Flawed_System said:

1). You're still relying on Argumentum ad Ignorantiam.

7). Exactly where does my ignorance come in? You keep saying this over and over to try and make it seem like a point of contention, but have yet to make it clear why you believe I know nothing of religion. I was raised in a very strict Baptist household, I know what's in the Bible, and I know what it taught from it. Do I need a degree in Theology to have an opinion on the subject of religion? 7). Would that satisfy your accusations that I'm just some ignorant fool spouting an opinion? You can call me ignorant all you want, that doesn't make you have a valid point because you never actually make one. I think that alone qualifies you to be trolling this topic, and my opinions on its own. When you can tell me exactly, with proof of course, why thinking a man being resurrected from death without scientific proof to back it up is fallacious, then I'll be more than happy to concede that I'm an idiot for thinking that coming back from being dead for three days is wrong. 1). In the mean time I will continue to side with scientific fact and leave the fairy tales to schoolchildren.

All items marked with a 1). constitute Ad Hominem abusive. These are all inflammatory remarks as well.

2). So you're arguing that you should take no precautions and allow yourself to be harmed because you believe in God?

3). Can you point to me where exactly in the Bible it states the Earth was created a 'few thousand years ago'.

4). Argument from Incredulity.

5). Stating your argument is steeped in logical fallacies is not "drivel". A logically fallacious argument is one that stems from incorrect reasoning, resulting in misconceptions. Thus, the argument is false.

6). What "cold hard facts" have you pointed out? That humans die?

7). Argumentum ad Ignorantiam does not mean you're an inherently 'ignorant' person. It means you are arguing from ignorance. In other words, you're stating that 'since I don't believe there's any evidence to the contrary, then it mustn't be true'. I never stated you knew nothing of religion.

Let me remind you that the burden of proof is on the one making a positive claim. Prove to me that Jesus was never nailed to a cross or resurrected. Since his body was never found, how can we prove that he wasn't resurrected?

Also, drop the patronization.

#189 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4331 posts) -

I already don't believe in that nonsense so I don't see any reason to change what I'm doing now.

#190 Posted by Shotaro (820 posts) -

I don't believe that there is an afterlife, I believe that when you die life just, well, ends...

It's not had a profound impact on the way I live my life other than a desire to make sure I do what I want to do and what makes ME happy since well when it's gone it's gone. All I want from life is to know that people will remember me when I'm gone. Ideally through family and children but friends and people whose life I have affected also.

That's it - biological and psychological imperative of my life.

#191 Posted by Arker101 (1474 posts) -

These threads always turn out great.

I honestly don't know if I'd change, I think it would heavily effect the world though.

#192 Posted by Sweep (8830 posts) -

I already have absolute certainty. Feels pretty great.

Moderator
#193 Posted by LikeaSsur (1497 posts) -

I probably would be more inclined to do some less-than-good things, I'll admit that.

#194 Posted by Sargus (723 posts) -

I personally DO believe there's an afterlife, but that's not why I act the way I do.

#195 Posted by Apparatus_Unearth (3112 posts) -

I would get rid of my books relating to religion. That's about it.

#196 Posted by Deusx (1903 posts) -

I don't believe in an after life and I live my life with that in mind.

@OtakuGamer said:

@Questionable said:

@DJJoeJoe said:

Jail and morals exist during life, so unless you include those as also being none existent then I don't see why anyone should change how they act.

I can consider (hypotheticly) that killing my wife and running off with the insurance money is worth the risk of 15 years jail, Now if the risk is 15 years prison and "eternal damnation" that really tips the scale even when you take the jail time entirely out of the equation.

Personally i would feel allot more inclined to take risks that would cross morals. perhaps invest some money in a sound isolated basement in a remote location and see where it goes from there. afteraal, if the only thing that matters is your life now. why not fulfill every curiosity and fantasy you might have or whatever you consider living life to its fullest.

If there is no afterlife than all that morals are are just rules imposed onto you by your fellow man.

If there wasn't an afterlife, wouldn't you be more inclined to not take risks? Wouldn’t you make sure that your life was fulfilling and not wasted by imprisonment or death? I never really understood the phrase “you only live once” because if you only live once, why waste it?

If someone doesn't take risks because they believed in an after life then they are really dumb. That is like saying atheists don't have morals because they never read the bible.

#197 Posted by Silvergun (297 posts) -

I've got a good feeling about this thread! I think this time we'll solve the science vs. religion debate once and for all!

#198 Posted by Atwa (616 posts) -

I already have that..

#199 Posted by Harkat (1100 posts) -

@Viking_Funeral said:

I prefer to put my faith in people who choose not to be assholes out of a sense of benevolence towards their fellow man, than people who only pretend to be nice to each other because they fear burning in a lake of lava for all eternity, for ever and ever and ever!

#200 Posted by ninjalegend (416 posts) -

@Questionable said:

@DJJoeJoe said:

Jail and morals exist during life, so unless you include those as also being none existent then I don't see why anyone should change how they act.

I can consider (hypotheticly) that killing my wife and running off with the insurance money is worth the risk of 15 years jail, Now if the risk is 15 years prison and "eternal damnation" that really tips the scale even when you take the jail time entirely out of the equation.

Personally i would feel allot more inclined to take risks that would cross morals. perhaps invest some money in a sound isolated basement in a remote location and see where it goes from there. afteraal, if the only thing that matters is your life now. why not fulfill every curiosity and fantasy you might have or whatever you consider living life to its fullest.

If there is no afterlife than all that morals are are just rules imposed onto you by your fellow man.

WTF! I would risk my life if need be for someone I care about. The thought of killing a loved one or family member for insurance purposes hypothetical or not is sick. If the promise of glittering prizes after you die is all that is holding you back from premeditated murder, you don't need to be locked up, but buried underneath a jail. Sometimes religious people scare the crap out of me, and this is one of those times.