Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 101 (8822 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-23-2018 1:50 AM
330 online now:
DrJones*, PaulK, xongsmith (3 members, 327 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: danlovy
Happy Birthday: CosmicChimp
Post Volume:
Total: 827,467 Year: 2,290/29,783 Month: 956/1,334 Week: 281/318 Day: 2/79 Hour: 0/2

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   What do believers believe heaven or hell are like?
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 50 of 148 (184176)
02-09-2005 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by robinrohan
02-09-2005 5:07 PM

My thoughts on heaven/hell
I think when your physical body dies your soul continues to exist in some 'spirit world'. One assumption for my thoughts on the afterlife is that your existence in this world affects the next one (this isn't hard for me to believe because Jesus' teachings suggest this). When people's bodies die they all go to the same place, where there's no thinking or 'feeling' (in the physical sence). What determines if the afterlife is heavenly or hellish is how you get satisfaction for this life. If all your happiness comes from physical means (ie sex and drugs) then when you die you'll no longer have a body and you're in the sprit world and you'll be in a 'hell'. If you gain satisfaction from the things that can transend death, you will be satisfied in the afterlife and be in a heaven.

I think the things that transend are Faith Hope and Love (maybe some others too). This doesn't meant that the physical pleasures are bad, and I don't think you get punished for sinning, but if thats what you're relying on, when you die your gonna be screwed. I also don't think that heaven is some reward for good behavior. You just gotta know how to get spiritual happiness.

My thoughts on this subject come from feeling my soul. I think there's something inside me that isn't physical and I can feel it. It doesn't seem like my mind is playing tricks on me. I think you body is required for your soul to develop and interact with others. I think as your body grows your soul grows, and your mind (not brain) is the connection between them. Other ideas come from the teachings of Jesus. I think if you weren't very intellegent or didn't think deeply about afterlives and such, but you followed the teachings of Jesus, then your afterlife would be heavenly.

Please respond with your thoughts or questions.

This message has been edited by Catholic Scientist, 02-09-2005 16:46 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by robinrohan, posted 02-09-2005 5:07 PM robinrohan has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by robinrohan, posted 02-09-2005 6:04 PM New Cat's Eye has responded
 Message 53 by nator, posted 02-09-2005 9:15 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 52 of 148 (184202)
02-09-2005 7:07 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by robinrohan
02-09-2005 6:04 PM

Re: My thoughts on heaven/hell
What if I have engaged in such sensual adventures and yet never got much "happiness" out of them? Would a certain degree of hard-won misery help mitigate the wicked sensuality of which admittedly I have often partaken in the past?

If you never got much happiness from the sensual adventures then that blandness would have little affect on your afterlife. You wouldn't miss it, but you might miss spiritual happiness if your sensual adventures weren't coupled with the transendencese I spoke of.

Would a certain degree of hard-won misery help mitigate the wicked sensuality of which admittedly I have often partaken in the past?

I wouldn't call them wicked, do all the drugs and sex that you want just realize that they will be gone and you should suplement those feelings with ones that can be worth something in the afterlife. And also realize that the more sex and drugs you do the more you'll rely on them for happiness and take time away from the better things.

Now, this question of mitigating the sensuality...

I don't really understand what you mean or how you can cancel something you previously enjoyed by disliking it now...but then your question says that you never enjoyed them inthe first place so whats the point of canceling it?
This does make me think of something I hadn't thought of before. Instead of mitigating the things you liked, what if your life was filled with physical pain and suffering and contained no transedent happiness, when you died and were freed from the pain, perhaps the afterlife would be heavenly-ly numb...but still without the transendent happinesses I think your afterlife would be vauge and bland, like the concept of pergatory.

Speaking of purgatory...I think if your physical body and your mind don't develop, then your soul doesn't develop either. So when babies die they experience the afterlife much like they experienced the physical world, unaware, or in purgatory. Likewise, if someone is physically developed but not mentally developed, their sould will only know what their mind has been able to communicate to it. A severly mentally undeveloped person would experience the afterlife like a severly physically undeveloped person would.

It takes the growth of your body and the encouters it faces, to develop your soul through communication with your mind. The mind is the physical/spiritual link between the soul and the body.

I'm tired of typing and am leaving work so maybe I can respond later tonight.

Please resond with questions/comments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by robinrohan, posted 02-09-2005 6:04 PM robinrohan has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by nator, posted 02-09-2005 9:22 PM New Cat's Eye has responded
 Message 55 by robinrohan, posted 02-09-2005 10:23 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 57 of 148 (184333)
02-10-2005 2:33 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by nator
02-09-2005 9:15 PM

Re: My thoughts on heaven/hell
Just a few quick thoughts before I hit the sack, I'll give a better reply tomarrow....

How do you feel something that isn't physical with a body which is equipped to feeling only physical sensation, as far as we have ever been able to detect and demonstrate?

Do you not believe that things exist which are not detect/demonstrate-able?
Also, I think the soul IS the equipment that allows the body to feel non-physical sensations.

If your mind were playing tricks on you, you wouldn't know, by definition.

When I'm afraid of the dark and then I realize that nothing is there, I feel like my mind played a trick on me. Also, when I use conscious expanding drugs, some mind tricks become apparent.

The thing is, what kind of evidence would you accept which would convince you that your mind actually IS playing tricks on you?

As far as the my soul is concerned...any, do you have some of that evidence?

Where does the mind come from, if not the brain?

It comes from the brain AND the soul, its a connection between the two.

Huh, Jesus likes superficial thinking, dumb people best.

I'd like to point out to everyone that I did NOT bring this up.

Catholic Scientist said it first.

superficial ( P ) Pronunciation Key (spr-fshl)
Of, affecting, or being on or near the surface: a superficial wound.
Concerned with or comprehending only what is apparent or obvious; shallow.
Apparent rather than actual or substantial: a superficial resemblance.
Trivial; insignificant: made only a few superficial changes in the manuscript.
Being or affecting or concerned with a surface; not deep or penetrating emotionally or intellectually

I think you're wrong about Jesus. His teachings were about deep emotional and intellectual morals that were far from the 'surface' of this physical existance. Could you please reiterate you the point you were making with these statements?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by nator, posted 02-09-2005 9:15 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by robinrohan, posted 02-10-2005 1:42 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded
 Message 60 by nator, posted 02-11-2005 9:18 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 58 of 148 (184334)
02-10-2005 2:35 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by nator
02-09-2005 9:22 PM

Re: My thoughts on heaven/hell
It's really too bad that the old religions of the fertility Goddesses got crushed by the anti-pleasure, anti-female, persecutorial, guilt- and shame-promoting Patriarchal God religions.

Those lost religions celebrated the Goddess given pleasures of life instead of devaluing and degrading them.

Physical pleasures are useless in the long run. Post-death, i mean.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by nator, posted 02-09-2005 9:22 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by nator, posted 02-11-2005 9:25 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 83 of 148 (218494)
06-21-2005 6:24 PM

Brain <-- Mind --> Soul
The brain is purely physical and the soul is purely spiritual. The mind is the part of our brain that is not physical. It is a result of the brain and I believe that it has to do with the soul. Like a connection between the two.

Schraf writes:

Did you know that intense religious feelings in humans can be induced by stimulating certain parts of the brain, just like smells, visions, body movements and other emotions?

Now, if we were to do an experiment in which we put an electrode in that part of the brain of a person without their knowing it, and we stimulated it, would they realize that the "soul feelings" they were experiencing were induuced? Or, would they simply have a strong religious experience and be convinced that they are connected to the divine?

How can a person tell the difference between a real religious experience in which they connect with the divine and a fake one that they self-induce?

Now, if you go tampering with the brain and try to induce a religious experience I think it would seem very real. I dont think the person would be able to tell the difference. Smells, visions, body movements and other emotions could stimulate intense religious feelings as well. I still dont think that this rules out that other, lets say true, religious experiences are cause by the soul. It makes sense to me that because the soul is connected to the brain, via the mind, that effects on the brain could seem like effects coming from the soul. But because this is possible, does not rule out the soul, IMHO, as the cause for true religious experiences.

You would say that what I call true religious experiences are a result of self-delusion, to which I would say that I am convinced that they are not delusions. And then you would say that being deluded means that you dont think you really are deluded, and then I say yeah, I could be all wrong and actually be deluded, but I still think I know that Im not, so I guess there is no way for me to find out, and Im gonna go with my gut on this one.

Schraf writes:

If I stick a icepick into the same part of your brain that was damaged in Phineas Gage, I predict that we would see similar behavioral and temperament changes as he and other people experienced.

This seems to go with the whole brain/computer analogy. When you damage the brain, you damage the mind. And behavior and temperament changes would be expected.

Schraf writes:

Well, this might be the case but the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is the one which does not invoke an undetectable "spirit" or what have you that you are suggesting.

Well, Im not satisfied with the most simple explanation with the fewest assumptions because of the religious experiences Ive had and the feeling of a soul that I have. That explanation seems incorrect to me, and Ive realized that science cannot touch the subject because of its inability to detect/demonstrate the subject.

Schraf writes:

We could also say that aliens, or the spirits of our ancestors, or our chakras are influencing and guiding our minds seperately from our bodies.

These are also possibilities and I wouldnt be able to tell if it were one of these or if it was my soul. But I do think that something is influencing and guiding our minds seperately from our bodies. I dont just pick soul randomly, a lot of my beliefs come from Jesus.

A lot of this seems off topic, but IIRC I did say what I believe heaven or hell would be like and I believe that they exist because I believe I have a soul. This post shows why I believe in the soul which is why I believe what heaven and hell are like, so, I guess that it is on topic.

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by nator, posted 06-21-2005 11:40 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 85 of 148 (218732)
06-22-2005 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by nator
06-21-2005 11:40 PM

Re: Brain <-- Mind --> Soul
The problem is, though, how does anyone ever tell the difference between a "true" religious experience and a self-induced one?

I think that it is up to the individual. Some people think they are having religious experiences all the time ('God brought us here today'...:rolleyes:...). Some think their religous experience is a delusion. Some feel nothing, some feel a little, some feel a lot.

I would say that there is no way of knowing if they are real or delusion.

You just gotta decide for yourself if it is real or not. And if someone claims to have had a religous experience and you don't believe them, so what?

A baseball was flying towards my head and at the last second I saw it and ducked. God tapped me on the shoulder and saved me, see he's really really real. Yeah right. Just as lame is, I used the force and saw it comming before I saw it comming. How about my reflexes kicked in that have naturally evolved and nothing extraordinary happened.

If we damaged that "religious experience" part of the brain, the person would no longer be able to experience religious feelings.

Does that mean he has lost his religion? Does that mean his religion doesn't exist?

While we're speculating..., If we damaged that "religious experience" part of the brain and the person can still experience religious feelings, then that would suggest that the feelings can come from somewhere else as well, perhaps the soul.

The brain, especially WRT determining fantasy from reality, is typically really, really easily fooled.

I must not be typical. I can easily determine fantasy from reality.

What kind of fantasies are you talking about, besides religious experiences, that easily fool the brain?

It is most easily fooled when certain factors are in place

Definately. Alot of people believe way too much without even thinking about it. I'd recommend the same remedy that Bill Hicks did: a psychedelic experience. "It makes you realize that everything you've learned is in fact learned and not neccessarily true."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by nator, posted 06-21-2005 11:40 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by nator, posted 06-22-2005 7:20 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 87 of 148 (218791)
06-22-2005 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by nator
06-22-2005 7:20 PM

Re: Brain <-- Mind --> Soul
But if one is deluded, then by definition, one doesn't know one is being deluded, right?

Otherwise, it wouldn't be a delusion.

So, depending on the individual to tell reality from delusion is not at all useful.

In the same way, you cannot tell if you are not being deluded.

But, if the delusions produce consistent outcomes then they could be considered useful, or if outside confirmation of the delusion is consistent, then it doesn't matter if it is a delusion.

WRT the soul, it is only an internal/personal delusion and not useful outside of the body. But, the 'outcomes' of my soul are consistent and, though outside confirmation is impossible, inside confirmations are consistent with what I feel and believe. I fell no more deluded about my soul than I do about my existance. I am as sure of my soul as much as I am sure of my existance.

The 9/11 bombers believed that they were also doing God's will.

So did Mother Teresa.

Or, I made a touchdown, now I'm going to bend down and thank God

Or how about when a baseball player steps up to the plate and makes the sign of the cross/says a little prayer, man that pisses me off.

would you ever consider that religious experience is physical?

of course, and I have. But it is inconsistant with what I feel, think, and believe.

Do you see an optical illusion and never see the illusion?

Were you convinced by all of the forced perspective shots in Lord of the Rings or were you able to tell that John Reis Davies who played Gimli is actually taller than most of the other actors?

Oh, I didn't know you were including optical illusions and special effects in fantasy. I was thinking more 'internal'. So an optical illusion is a delusion?

What about this one:


Now, it looks like the image is moving when I look at it, but I know that it isn't. Am I deluded? I know they are not moving and I don't believe that they are moving, but it looks like they are moving. I've determined the reality from the fantasy.

I think if I were deluded then I would think/believe that they are actually moving.

Have you ever construced a false memory?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by nator, posted 06-22-2005 7:20 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by nator, posted 06-23-2005 12:37 AM New Cat's Eye has responded
 Message 91 by nator, posted 06-23-2005 9:12 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 89 of 148 (218871)
06-23-2005 1:54 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by nator
06-23-2005 12:37 AM

Re: Brain <-- Mind --> Soul
I'm not really sure. Nothing specific comes to mind. But for argument's sake lets just say that I have and move on.

ABE: In addition to moving on I hope you also address mesage 87

This message has been edited by Catholic Scientist, 06-23-2005 12:55 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by nator, posted 06-23-2005 12:37 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by nator, posted 06-23-2005 9:00 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 92 of 148 (218943)
06-23-2005 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by nator
06-23-2005 9:12 AM

Re: Brain <-- Mind --> Soul
You seemed to be implying that people's personal religious experiences have little no no effect upon others.

No, I wasn't going that far with that statement. I was thinking more in the context of a conversation, with emphasis on the claim. I don't think claiming to have a personal religious experience(PRE) has much affect, it is what you do about that experience, what actions you take. But, I wouldn't blame a PRE for the actions that sometakes outside of that experience. I doubt the 9/11 terrorist were having a PRE while they were hijacking the airplane.

I'm out of time. Will continue later.

What about optical illusions and false memories?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by nator, posted 06-23-2005 9:12 AM nator has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018