Eternity...?

[Tough Grits]

Don't get me wrong, I would be pleasantly surprised if there was some type of afterlife, but I'm not counting on it :)

Do you feel that those who do not believe in any afterlife are spending their time better than those who do believe in an afterlife?

Or do you feel both are spending their time the same?

Or do you feel religion does have benefits and does bring good into the world?

Or something altogether different?

Again, just curious.

[talisyn]

SIGH

Yes, I am well aware that I did not configure in the MANY different religious beliefs that exist or have existed upon the earth, as I was speaking to Godless.

Again, I was just trying to be light. Apparently my humor was not received well. My apologies for all those who are offended.

Eternity is very serious business!!

[Moksha]

I'm also referencing having to live with... the people on this Earth... for eternity. :\

Perhaps you could get a transfer to the Enish-go-on-Dosh region.

[hordak]

I guess I deserve that for trying to be light and add some humor. Maybe you missed all my smiley faces???

~TG

Trying to add humor. Tsk Tsk.

Beating will continue til moral improves.

[JohnnyRudick]

Or

Godless people , who live good lives because it is the right thing to do are rewarded for their integrity , while those who use Pascals wager are recognized as frauds and punished accordingly.

Not saying you personally or most religious people only do what is right for reward (though i have met many) but as a father I am more impressed when my son cleans his room (even if it isn't the best job) because it needs to be done, then by the pristine job my daughter does so she can play outside.

Just saying.

Well, I have had several children and I had one who would do it because "It is the rules".

One who would like to go out to play.

and another who will do it only if he thought I might do something very drastic to his person.

We are all different.

I think that the universe is a huge place and it will be very difficult to get board even in an Eternity.

Bro. Rudick

[JohnnyRudick]

I think you're missing a few scenarios there, like maybe one of the thousands of other religions that have existed throughout time are correct and you will be judged based on the criteria of that religion. Given that many religions have conflicting requirements, there really is no way to "err on the side of caution."

Unless you are coming from the perspective like the one I am coming from.

You see, I and a few others of us around here are born again people

of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

We are children of the Ones who built this place;)

We will be around a long time and well, you know how us kids are:p

Bro. Rudick

[Aesa]

Maybe what you need are some eternal goals, like learning how to surf or grow exotic minnows?

Well, while that's a nice idea personally I'd hope that my goals can be focused in the same way I see them as being at present. To seek things that will lead to the greater good and growth of the species, and to not be over indulgent (e.g., growing exotic minnows) - what good does that ever achieve?

I think you are working with a very limited understanding of what life in the Kingdoms of Heaven will be like.

Well, perhaps. I'm actually more coming from the point of view of any conscious eternity, so not Christianity specifically (however I do understand that, the question being raised on a Christian forum that it will be the focus).

The way I see it, eternity is a concept that was invented by mankind thousands of years ago as a way of making death easier to cope with.

Kind of like... a guy working out in the fields, who has to do it every day and says "I don't seem to be getting anywhere... what's in it for me?" and someone responds "If you don't get it in this life, you'll get it in the next if you remain 'good' to God". ?

In my experience that's because there bodies are broken down.

Personally, I think it's because most of them have been forced into servitude (i.e., you need to earn money to survive) rather than being able to pursue their own interests and so forth ... there are many 90+ year olds who are fit in body and mind because they've had the courage to pursue what is of interest to them rather than the interests of the wallet as so many of us are raised to consider first and foremost.

[hordak]

Here is a hypothetical

6 Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment.

7 Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory.

8 Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery, for it is meet unto you to know even as mine apostles.

9 I speak unto you that are chosen in this thing, even as one, that you may enter into my rest.

10 For, behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore—

11 Eternal punishment is God’s punishment.

12 Endless punishment is God’s punishment.

I'm no scripturion but this seems to indicate (and i recall being taught) that "Eternal" and "endless" punishment isn't a matter of time meaning forever but simply that it comes from God.

If that is the case perhaps "eternal" life isn't what most assume it to be either?

[Tough Grits]

Well, I have had several children and I had one who would do it because "It is the rules". One who would like to go out to play and another who will do it only if he thought I might do something very drastic to his person.

We are all different.

Thank you for posting this. Part of not judging others, is to not belittle or judge their motives for "being good" or being active in the gospel. Our motives may change over time as our testimony changes and grows.

Think of these levels in motivation: have to do it, need to do it, want to do it, like to do it, love to do it.

Person A may only pay tithing because they have to, but they read their scriptures every night because they love to.

Person B may pay tithing because they like to, but they read their scriptures because they need to.

Person A and B may seem different on the surface---and they are different because they are unique spirits dwelling within unique bodies---but just because their motive levels are different does not mean that they are not striving for the same goal.

We are all on a journey. Some of us have different goals or different "ends" that we are working towards. As long as we are moving forward and not harming one another, then maybe we should focus less on WHY the person next to us is moving forward, and simply focus on the fact that they are still moving forward at all.

This includes whether a person is moving forward towards nothingness, moving forward towards God's Kingdom, moving forward because of Pascal's Wager, or moving forward just because those around them are.

Personally, I trust Heavenly Father and His omniscience in discovering our motives out for Himself and judging us accordingly.

[Hemidakota]

After reading the posts in "TheyCallMeMom"s thread I decided I wouldn't make this post in her thread but rather separate.

What on earth is appealing about eternity with family members and so forth? Most old people I meet cannot wait until they die, because they've experienced this consciousness for long enough.

Just think about it for a minute. Eternity has no ends and bounds. There is no getting away, there is no indulgent behaviour (because you're in God's kingdom remember, so it's what He says go's), there is no free-will anymore. It's either obey or you're out (Lucifer being cast out of heaven is a relevant example here).

I don't know... to me the idea that my conscious awareness will cease entirely in about another 70 or so years is very appealing. I don't want to spend an eternity in this mind, in this body, consciously aware of this universe, bound to any other part of this existence, ...

Seriously. Stuff that.

I'd rather be dead.

What's so appealing about an eternity of static consciousness?

There is no 'static' about eternal progression. Progression will not end in celestial kingdom but another stepping stone what is beyond that sphere. Now, those who have witnessed 'five minutes' of celestial vision are the ones who want to be with there Creator.

[DigitalShadow]

Do you feel that those who do not believe in any afterlife are spending their time better than those who do believe in an afterlife?

Or do you feel both are spending their time the same?

It really depends on the person, but for me not knowing if there is anything after this makes this lifetime more meaningful and worth trying to get the most of. I'm sure it could have the opposite effect on some people, like they would think that if there is no afterlife there is no point to anything in this life because it doesn't matter after you die. It just depends on how you look at things, no matter what you believe someone could find the optimistic or the pessimistic side of it.

Or do you feel religion does have benefits and does bring good into the world?

I definitely believe religion has the potential for great personal improvement, but it also has the potential to be used as a tool for hate under a mask of righteousness. Again, I think it really depends on the underlying person more than the particular religion or lack there of.

Edited June 2, 2009 by DigitalShadow

[Guest Godless]

DigitalShadow pretty much hit the nail on the head with his responses, but I do have a few things to add. I apologize in advance for the length.

Godless, do you truly believe that all the varied religions of the world---that believe something happens after death---are all wrong and are all basing their beliefs on "making death easier to cope with"? Can so many religions really have it wrong in believing in some kind of afterlife?

Religion got its start thousands of years ago when, in the absence of today's scientific knowledge, early man found a need to explain the way the world works. So they started worshiping various gods and giving them credit for everything from the changing of the seasons to the fermentation of grapes to make wine.

As human knowledge evolved, so did religion. It lost its explanatory role and took on a comfort/justification role. Doctrines on the afterlife developed as a way of giving people hope for a better life than this one. The lonely and depressed were given the comfort of an all-loving deity who would always be there for them. The ambitious and proud were given a vengeful deity in whose name they could justify their bloodlust. Hope is the most common denominator though. Let's face it, this life really sucks sometimes. It sucked even more for people who lived in the time of Christ. Who wouldn't want to believe that there's something better awaiting us? This is why religion and its doctrines on the afterlife are so deeply rooted in the collective mindset of our species. It doesn't make it true though.

Do you feel that those who do not believe in any afterlife are spending their time better than those who do believe in an afterlife?

Or do you feel both are spending their time the same?

It depends. There are theists who dedicate nearly every aspect of their lives to pleasing and serving God/Allah/Yahweh/Jesus. In my opinion, these people are living for an intangible afterlife, and it doesn't make sense to me. Most people, though, are able to balance their religious beliefs with making the most of this life. They do what they're supposed to do to get into Heaven, but they don't let that eternal reward consume them and control their lives. They know that they should be enjoying this life rather than just waiting to die so they can be exalted. I see nothing wrong with that.

Atheists have varying stances on this as well. There are quite a few atheists (and agnostics like your father) who believe in an afterlife. A lot of them follow the Eastern religions and therefore are able to reconcile belief in an eternal spirit with their lack of belief in a deity. Then there are non-spiritual atheists like myself who flat-out don't believe in the existence of a soul or spirit that lives on after us. We believe that this life is all we get, so we should make the most of it. For this reason, most atheists are existentialists, which means that we believe that the only purpose and meaning that we have in this life is self-made, as opposed to the universal meaning that many theists believe in. My life can be just as meaningful and purposeful as yours, but in a different way. You believe that your purpose extends beyond the grave, and I don't. But we can both agree that this current life carries a lot of potential for great accomplishments.

Here's my view on death, courtesy of The Shawshank Redemption. You can either accept death as a fact of life and "get busy living", or you can fear it and "get busy dying". Whether there's life after death or not, everyone is going to die. There's no escaping it. As an atheist, I accept this as a fact of life along with the fact that there is no continuation of life after I die. I think it's a pretty unique perspective in a world where most people believe that death isn't the end. I think it makes you appreciate this life a lot more. That's just my opinion though.

Or do you feel religion does have benefits and does bring good into the world?

In today's day and age, I think religion has become redundant. And in centuries past, I think the world would have been much better off without it. Many of the moral codes that we embrace consist of basic laws that are geared towards maintaining order in our societies. Things like murder, rape, and thievery are antithetical to the progress and survival of a society. Humans have known this for centuries and have modeled their secular laws around these ideas. Ancient theologians included many of these laws into their dogmatic law and threw in some purely religious laws as well. It's for this reason that some people believe that secular law is rooted in religion. I believe that the opposite is true, that dogmatic principles are rooted in ancient social mores and codes of conduct. And as societies have evolved, so have some of the laws, which is why the Law of Moses was excluded from Christianity. It was obsolete.

The point I'm trying to make is that religious morality is a redundant add-on to the basic secular laws and codes that humanity has embraced for centuries. This doesn't mean that it doesn't have potential for good though. Many people who embrace religion, especially in modern times, let their faith influence the way they treat other people. They have that "Christ-like" love, and they are genuinely better people because of it.

Historically speaking though, there have been some horrifying things done in the name of religion. The Crusades and the Inquisitions come to mind. The Old Testament is filled with stories of genocide and slavery at the hands of both the Israelites and their "idol-worshiping" foes. The Israelites wiped out entire civilizations because they believed that the lands of the Fertile Crescent were meant for them, not the original inhabitants. And they had the God of Abraham on their side, so that made it okay. These biblical tales are difficult to verify, but it's been shown more than once that many of the stories in the Bible (and the OT in particular) that are written strictly from a historical perspective rather than a religious one are pretty accurate. It's a textbook example of mingling history with legend and myth, just like the British did with King Arthur, whom many historians believe was a real historical figure.

So basically, yes, I believe that religion can be very beneficial to our society. However, I also believe that it's one of the most dangerous and destructive institutions ever created by man. I may not believe that your God (or anyone else's, for that matter) exists, but I can't deny the monumental impact, both good and bad, that he has had on humanity over the centuries.

Edited June 2, 2009 by Godless

[Tough Grits]

Godless and DigitalShadow: Thanks for answering my curiosity with intelligence and compassion. Though---obviously---I do not agree, I do enjoy conversation that is free from bashing and free from ridicule.

Religion got its start thousands of years ago [...]

Indeed. However, you know where most of us on this site will say where/when it began. Obviously, we believe in one eternal round, and that our spirits existed before coming to earth to inhabit earthly bodies.

BTW I believed this when I was agnostic. I just felt that there were certain people I had known before and felt deeply connected to. My father---being agnostic---explained this by believing in reincarnation. As much as I adored and loved my father, that never rang true for me. It was not until many years later and after much investigation of other faiths, that I found the answer to that question.

Who wouldn't want to believe that there's something better awaiting us? This is why religion and its doctrines on the afterlife are so deeply rooted in the collective mindset of our species. It doesn't make it true though.

I understand your point of view (believed it myself at one time and listened to my father state as much), but obviously just because a person disbelieves religion does not make that disbelief true either. I say that with sincerity, not as a slam.

Again, I believe in this gospel because it rings true for me, not because of fear or the need to belong to a "collective mindset of our species". I was too opposed to the thought of religion for most of my life to jump into a religion for any such reasons. I became a member because what I found in the gospel moved me and spoke to me so profoundly that I could not ignore it.

Most people, though, are able to balance their religious beliefs with making the most of this life. They do what they're supposed to do to get into Heaven, but they don't let that eternal reward consume them and control their lives.

I don't quite know what you consider being consumed or controlled by religion. For me, there is no way to separate my happiness on earth from what I am looking forward to in the eternities. For me, they are not mutually exclusive. I love earth. I love my life. I am happy. If this were the game SimEarth, I would be one of the people walking around with a satisfied bubble over my head. LOL

Then there are non-spiritual atheists like myself who flat-out don't believe in the existence of a soul or spirit that lives on after us.

But do you believe that you have a soul/spirit right now? Out of curiosity, what do you feel sparked that soul/spirit into existence within your body, and what do you feel snuffs it out when your body expires?

But we can both agree that this current life carries a lot of potential for great accomplishments.

Indeed.

As an atheist, I accept this as a fact of life along with the fact that there is no continuation of life after I die. I think it's a pretty unique perspective in a world where most people believe that death isn't the end. I think it makes you appreciate this life a lot more. That's just my opinion though.

Yes, I can appreciate where you would find a greater appreciation for every minute on earth. However, just because I believe in eternity does not mean that I do not appreciate every minute. Both my grandmothers and my grandfather passed away last year. Although I believe that they are in the Spirit World, I miss them terribly and their deaths remind me of how very precious every moment life on earth is. Giving birth to three precious children also allows me to have a deeper, profound gratitude for life and my time on earth.

Many people who embrace religion, especially in modern times, let their faith influence the way they treat other people. They have that "Christ-like" love, and they are genuinely better people because of it.

I agree. However, I also know that agnostics or atheists can be loving and kind people who would never do harm or commit evil, my father included.

I have enjoyed our conversation. I hope this thread does not shred to pieces in ugliness and contention as other threads have.

Peace.

~TG

[Hemidakota]

Here is a hypothetical

I'm no scripturion but this seems to indicate (and i recall being taught) that "Eternal" and "endless" punishment isn't a matter of time meaning forever but simply that it comes from God.

If that is the case perhaps "eternal" life isn't what most assume it to be either?

If you seen 'Hell' in its entirety, then you will realize something is missing from that quote, which I can attest, knowing Joseph Smith, this revelation was given to the end fate of those who are consigned to endless punishment. But was not added to the Doctrine and Convents for a wiser purpose thats not our call. Even President Joseph Fielding Smith held back a revelation for purpose that perhaps, through the church leadership, can now be added if Savior deemed so.

[Hemidakota]

DigitalShadow pretty much hit the nail on the head with his responses, but I do have a few things to add. I apologize in advance for the length.

Religion got its start thousands of years ago when, in the absence of today's scientific knowledge, early man found a need to explain the way the world works. So they started worshiping various gods and giving them credit for everything from the changing of the seasons to the fermentation of grapes to make wine.

.

If you are referring too "man made religion" than yes. But remember, Adam was taught by ministering spirits, if not, the Godhead first hand. Having the absolute truth holds father weight than theories of science or fabrication of evolutionary history.

[hordak]

If you seen 'Hell' in its entirety, then you will realize something is missing from that quote, which I can attest, knowing Joseph Smith, this revelation was given to the end fate of those who are consigned to endless punishment. But was not added to the Doctrine and Convents for a wiser purpose thats not our call. Even President Joseph Fielding Smith held back a revelation for purpose that perhaps, through the church leadership, can now be added if Savior deemed so.

Guess it depends on what hell you/it is referring to. I recall the scripture being associated with spirit prison but the question still stands. If "eternal punishment" means Gods punishment and not a length of time, why the assumption "eternal life" means length of time?

[Guest Godless]

I understand your point of view (believed it myself at one time and listened to my father state as much), but obviously just because a person disbelieves religion does not make that disbelief true either. I say that with sincerity, not as a slam.

Very true. I accept that there's a chance I may be wrong, though I believe that it's a ridiculously small chance. Basically, I look at all of the different religions out there and how they came to be, not to mention the characteristics that I mentioned in my previous post, and I see very little of real value. I see them as agents of control, false hope, and comfort. I don't see anything that makes one religion (the LDS church for example) more legitimate and believable than all the others.

I don't quite know what you consider being consumed or controlled by religion. For me, there is no way to separate my happiness on earth from what I am looking forward to in the eternities. For me, they are not mutually exclusive. I love earth. I love my life. I am happy. If this were the game SimEarth, I would be one of the people walking around with a satisfied bubble over my head. LOL

The average theist has a plethora of worldly things that contribute to his/her happiness. Family, friends, and a successful career are just a few things that improve the quality of life for people of all faiths, as well as those with no faith. However, there are those few who find no pleasure in anything other than serving their God. Those are the ones I was referring to when I talked about being consumed and controlled by religion.

But do you believe that you have a soul/spirit right now? Out of curiosity, what do you feel sparked that soul/spirit into existence within your body, and what do you feel snuffs it out when your body expires?

No. My consciousness is caused by brain function. When my brain dies, so will my consciousness. What religious people call the soul, I call the mind. It's a very complex thing, and it's the product of hundreds of thousands of years of human evolution.

Yes, I can appreciate where you would find a greater appreciation for every minute on earth. However, just because I believe in eternity does not mean that I do not appreciate every minute. Both my grandmothers and my grandfather passed away last year. Although I believe that they are in the Spirit World, I miss them terribly and their deaths remind me of how very precious every moment life on earth is. Giving birth to three precious children also allows me to have a deeper, profound gratitude for life and my time on earth.

It's all about perspective. I realize that many theists hold a deep appreciation for the current life. I also realize that there are plenty of atheists who waste their time here despite the fact that they don't believe in an afterlife. Mindset and perspective are everything. My lack of belief in an afterlife is a crucial factor in how I view and try to live this life. For you, your belief in a Celestial reward could have the same affect.

I agree. However, I also know that agnostics or atheists can be loving and kind people who would never do harm or commit evil, my father included.

Very true. There are good people from all religious backgrounds. Some people are good by nature, and others use their religious beliefs to guide their actions towards others, which is perfectly fine. The people who scare me are the ones who claim that they would cease to be good people if they stopped believing in God (and believe me, they're out there). Fortunately, I think they're a minority among theists.

[ztodd]

Very true. I accept that there's a chance I may be wrong, though I believe that it's a ridiculously small chance. Basically, I look at all of the different religions out there and how they came to be, not to mention the characteristics that I mentioned in my previous post, and I see very little of real value. I see them as agents of control, false hope, and comfort. I don't see anything that makes one religion (the LDS church for example) more legitimate and believable than all the others.

Then you haven't studied the LDS faith enough yet! :)

The average theist has a plethora of worldly things that contribute to his/her happiness. Family, friends, and a successful career are just a few things that improve the quality of life for people of all faiths, as well as those with no faith. However, there are those few who find no pleasure in anything other than serving their God. Those are the ones I was referring to when I talked about being consumed and controlled by religion.

Serving God equates to serving others- family, friends, career, etc. I don't know how they can be separated, unless a person does not understand what it means to serve God.

No. My consciousness is caused by brain function. When my brain dies, so will my consciousness. What religious people call the soul, I call the mind. It's a very complex thing, and it's the product of hundreds of thousands of years of human evolution.

Don't ya ever feel like there's something more to it?

It's all about perspective. I realize that many theists hold a deep appreciation for the current life. I also realize that there are plenty of atheists who waste their time here despite the fact that they don't believe in an afterlife. Mindset and perspective are everything. My lack of belief in an afterlife is a crucial factor in how I view and try to live this life. For you, your belief in a Celestial reward could have the same affect.

But what's the point in living a good life if there is no after life?

Very true. There are good people from all religious backgrounds. Some people are good by nature, and others use their religious beliefs to guide their actions towards others, which is perfectly fine. The people who scare me are the ones who claim that they would cease to be good people if they stopped believing in God (and believe me, they're out there). Fortunately, I think they're a minority among theists.

I'd like to think I would still live a good life even if I didn't have any hope of God or of an after life- but it's kind of hard for me to imagine. What would be the point?

I guess one would still live a good life if that was what would bring him / her happiness in life. And it does do that.

But if someone finds that in trying to live by the rules, life just doesn't work out for them, and they just keep running into misery, and they find life to be much easier and happier by becoming an outlaw for example, then why wouldn't they follow that path?

Now I don't think a person can be happier following a path of wickedness like that, but that's all based on my belief in God and His laws. Our consciences, The moral lights within us, come from God. But where does someone who doesn't believe in God think that happiness comes from? Why do certain things make us happy, and other things miserable?

Do you have even a tiny hope that there is a God and a life after this one? Perhaps hope in God would depend on whether you would fear or look forward to meeting Him... :) Suppose He would be nothing but merciful and loving to you, and forgive all your sins; would you then hope for God to be real?

[Aesa]

Basically, I look at all of the different religions out there and how they came to be...

So do I, and the fact that they can be seen as all inter-connected and virtually every aspect of Christianity can be referenced somewhere in the Mediterranean/Egyptian/International Pagan world continuously leads me to conclude that Christianity has a ... common ancestor.

Don't ya ever feel like there's something more to it?

Feelings aren't really an appropriate measure of what is reality.

But what's the point in living a good life if there is no after life?

One might be: the well-being of the human species and all the inhabitants of the Earth?

But where does someone who doesn't believe in God think that happiness comes from? Why do certain things make us happy, and other things miserable?

Well I hold that it's entirely subjective. Happiness is not something that everyone will find in the same place, and that's why certain people have certain preferences. Why do they have certain preferences? Because we're all conditioned slightly differently in our environment, and this plays a major role in determining our likes and dislikes (which are, subjective).

People like Iris Murdoch, for example, espoused that happiness comes from overcoming our 'selfish ego' and 'joining the world as it is' rather than fighting in our own interests, etc,.

Suppose He would be nothing but merciful and loving to you, and forgive all your sins;

You'd have to have faith in God to believe in sin in the first place, wouldn't you?

If you are referring too "man made religion" than yes. But remember, Adam was taught by ministering spirits, if not, the Godhead first hand. Having the absolute truth holds father weight than theories of science or fabrication of evolutionary history.

[Guest Godless]

Then you haven't studied the LDS faith enough yet! :)

18 years of indoctrination didn't do much for me, so I'm pretty confident with my position.

Serving God equates to serving others- family, friends, career, etc. I don't know how they can be separated, unless a person does not understand what it means to serve God.

They don't have to be separated, but they can certainly compliment each other, as you said. The extreme cases that I'm referring to are the people who would disown their children for straying from the family faith, and the ones who only befriend people outside of their faith for the sole purpose of trying to convert them. Monks and nuns would also fall into this category. They basically isolate themselves from everything and everyone in the secular world in order to dedicate themselves 100% to God. While I admire their dedication, I find it difficult to see how their God could condone such a lifestyle, especially given the fact that Christ himself is said to have spent most of his time in the company of sinners.

Don't ya ever feel like there's something more to it?

No. I neither need nor want more from life than what this current state of mortality gives me. My worldview makes perfect sense to me without the concepts of God, the soul, and an afterlife interwoven into it.

But what's the point in living a good life if there is no after life?

It's all about making this life count, even though it may be meaningless in the grand scheme of things. When I die, I don't want any sort of eternal reward or celestial glory. I just want people to be able to look back on my life and say that I was a good person. I want to be able to sit on my deathbed and be proud of the things I've done and the man I was. That alone is enough to give my life plenty of meaning and purpose.

I'd like to think I would still live a good life even if I didn't have any hope of God or of an after life- but it's kind of hard for me to imagine. What would be the point?

Your faith in God is what gives your life meaning. I respect that completely. I would never try to convince my religious friends to give up their faith in God and live solely for this life alone because I know how hard it would be for them to do that. If your faith in God brings you happiness, then that's all that really matters.

I guess one would still live a good life if that was what would bring him / her happiness in life. And it does do that.

Exactly right. Some people find happiness in their faith, others find just as much happiness without it. Either way though, the promise of happiness is what drives us as a species.

Now I don't think a person can be happier following a path of wickedness like that, but that's all based on my belief in God and His laws. Our consciences, The moral lights within us, come from God. But where does someone who doesn't believe in God think that happiness comes from? Why do certain things make us happy, and other things miserable?

My work, my hobbies, my friends, and my family all bring happiness into my life. As you mentioned, these things to you equate to serving God. You define your happiness by serving God through the things you do and the people you associate with here on this earth. The main difference between you and I is that I take God out of the equation. But those things of the world are still there.

Also, Aesa hit the nail on the head when he said that happiness is subjective. We all find different ways of pursuing and obtaining it. There may be some common denominators like friends and family, but we still have different ways of determining how these things should define our happiness. I could find happiness in spending as much time as I can with friends and family and having lots of interpersonal interaction. Another person may find happiness through living alone as a hermit in the middle of the Appalachians. Which one of us is right? Both of us are, because we are defining happiness on our own subjective terms. Your idea of happiness includes serving God and living by his commandments. Who am I to tell you that you're wrong? Just because your model of happiness would never work for me doesn't mean that it doesn't work perfectly for you.

Do you have even a tiny hope that there is a God and a life after this one? Perhaps hope in God would depend on whether you would fear or look forward to meeting Him... :) Suppose He would be nothing but merciful and loving to you, and forgive all your sins; would you then hope for God to be real?

No. I accept, not hope, that there's a small chance that God may exist. Neither of our worldviews can be proven beyond all shadow of a doubt, though I am just as confident of the validity of mine as you are with the validity of yours. If by some chance I'm wrong, and God does exist, then I suppose I'll have some explaining to do after I die. But I find that to be highly improbable, so I don't make a point of worrying over it.

Edited June 3, 2009 by Godless

[Dravin]

No. I accept, not hope, that there's a small chance that God may exist.

I'm curious (and this is a general question to anyone), is there a hard line somewhere between atheist and agnostic? My understand was an agnostic was somebody who didn't know if there is a God or not. An atheist is somebody who doesn't believe there is a God. So is the difference just a matter of shades? An atheist is just more sure there isn't a God even if they accept the possibility that there could be one (however slim and unlikely)? To put it in different terms (though not without flaws):

Agnostic: I might win the lottery, I might not.

Atheist: Its practically impossible that I'm going to win the lottery, I'm not even gonna play or worry about it, or even entertain thoughts of, "What if I won?"

It's just I've generally associated statements of, "there is a chance." to a more agnostic line of thinking. Or is it just a concession that if pushed in a corner that science/observation can't prove a negative and if there was something one my call God that is impossible to observe (not everyones views of just who/what God is is the same) you can't be 100% sure (just 99.9 repeating :))? If so I've always felt that's a very intellectually honest position to take.

[Guest Godless]

I'm curious (and this is a general question to anyone), is there a hard line somewhere between atheist and agnostic? My understand was an agnostic was somebody who didn't know if there is a God or not. An atheist is somebody who doesn't believe there is a God. So is the difference just a matter of shades? An atheist is just more sure there isn't a God even if they accept the possibility that there could be one (however slim and unlikely)? To put it in different terms (though not without flaws):

Agnostic: I might win the lottery, I might not.

Atheist: Its practically impossible that I'm going to win the lottery, I'm not even gonna play or worry about it, or even entertain thoughts of, "What if I won?"

It's just I've generally associated statements of, "there is a chance." to a more agnostic line of thinking. Or is it just a concession that if pushed in a corner that science/observation can't prove a negative and if there was something one my call God that is impossible to observe (not everyones views of just who/what God is is the same) you can't be 100% sure (just 99.9 repeating :))? If so I've always felt that's a very intellectually honest position to take.

The lottery analogy is an excellent one. When it comes to belief in God, a position of 100% certainty in either direction is pretty irrational. Theists cannot prove beyond all shadow of a doubt that God exists, and atheists can't prove beyond all shadow of a doubt that he doesn't. You base your worldview on the assumption (as opposed to perfect knowledge) that he exists, and I base mine on the assumption that he doesn't.

So without complete certainty, we are all agnostic to some degree. The actual definition of agnosticism is the belief that the answer is unknowable. Not only can God's existence not be proven, it cannot be speculated upon because we lack the knowledge to do so. Dawkins gave an excellent explanation of the ranges of agnosticism in his book The God Delusion. I normally don't like quoting him, but I really liked his take on this particular issue. Basically, he contends that a person's stance on the existence of God is based more on probability than absolute certainty. Theists believe that God's existence is highly probable, while atheists believe that it's highly improbable. And agnostics believe that the probability is equal in both directions. Dawkins organized the range into a Spectrum of Probability.

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, 'I do not believe, I know.'

2. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. 'I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.'

3. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. 'I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.'

4. Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. 'God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.'

5. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. 'I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical.'

6. Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'

7. Strong atheist. 'I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung "knows" there is one.'

In his book, Dawkins himself admits that he is just shy of being a 7. He says, "I am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden". I pretty much feel the same way.

[Dravin]

This seems to have turned into the, "Ask an Atheist' thread. I hope the OP doesn't mind the hijack, its quite refreshing. To many rabid people (of any stripe) getting in the way of understanding particularly online where rabidity seems the 'national' sport.

[Guest Godless]

This seems to have turned into the, "Ask an Atheist' thread. I hope the OP doesn't mind the hijack, its quite refreshing. To many rabid people (of any stripe) getting in the way of understanding particularly online where rabidity seems the 'national' sport.

Yeah, I get carried away sometimes. Sorry Aesa!

[Tough Grits]

This seems to have turned into the, "Ask an Atheist' thread. I hope the OP doesn't mind the hijack, its quite refreshing. To many rabid people (of any stripe) getting in the way of understanding particularly online where rabidity seems the 'national' sport.

True, but I have thoroughly enjoyed the thought provoking posts and how nobody has resorted to being mean or ugly.

Godless: interesting post on Dawkins Spectrum of Probability. I would say that my Dad is---or was---in the range of a 5 or 6 based on our many conversations when I was a child. I was probably in the same range before investigating the Church.

In your post you state, "I normally don't like quoting [Dawkins]"...why? I'm just asking out of curiosity.

Gosh, I hope I am not contributing to the hijack. I am just enjoying the conversation!!!! ~TG