Viewing Thread:
"Life after Death"

Do you believe in life after death?. Following being diagnosed with cancer my life was put on stop, my world changed instantly. I and my family were in shock but I was not mad or asked why me?. I was however mad at the system that allowed me to get in this situation because there was history in my case that appeared not to mean a thing. I then had experiences that only convinced me that there are stranger things in heaven than on earth. Not a stranger to mystical events in the past I started a mission to work with cancer

If religion has the right answer, why would it need to change?

I think it would be very difficult to argue that religion hasnt changed anyway.

Indeed Garin, it certainly has changed in many ways. What I meant was in its essential 'core', Christianity remains exactly the same as it was. Same with other religions. As far as I'm aware. It's more a comment on the process rather than the facts. ish.

Geffdof; because it doesn't have the right answer, it has an answer. And that's the whole argument all over again, so let's not go there ;) Leave it at that i finks.

Science is seen by many as the only way forward nothing else exists, religion has no place, Richard Dawkins is a good example but what happens in nature he describes as a wonder.
Religion and science have been poles apart for millennia; one deals morals and faith the other with mathematics and models. It is the path between and the undiscovered dimensions that await us is challenging. Dean Hamer a guy who is a leading geneticists working on personality traits for the National Cancer Institute in the USA, has found spirituality is an innate part of human beings and can be measure. Religion is results of spiritual experience the two are different. Hamer also studies Bible stories through genetics. The exodus of the Jews from Egypt is correct, as far as he can tell from their genetics. Jews diverged from that part of the world around the time of Jesus. By blood testing for twelve Y-chromosome markers that Cohanium Jews (a special priesthood) around the world had a distinctive genetic signature. Even black South Africans who were Jews, way down at the end of Africa, isolated still kept that injunction.

Cycloon wrote:
> Indeed Garin, it certainly has changed in many ways. What I meant
> was in its essential 'core', Christianity remains exactly the
> same as it was. Same with other religions. As far as I'm aware.
> It's more a comment on the process rather than the facts. ish.
>
> Geffdof; because it doesn't have the right answer, it has an
> answer. And that's the whole argument all over again, so let's
> not go there ;) Leave it at that i finks.

I was meaning if anything had the right answer why would it need to change? Religion thinks it has the right answer and doesn't need to change. Science assumes it has the best answer with the current evidence and will alter in the future. Its probably foolish to get into this again though, as you say.

It is worth thinking about the richness of human life and how we conceive beauty, emotions, love, moral values all that kind of stuff within our brains, are we taught all this or are there physical entities within our brain. Philosophical naturalists believe there is nothing beyond the physical world, no supernatural creative intelligence in the universe, no soul that outlasts the body but miracles occur in natural phenomena that are not yet understood. A bit of a cop out!!!!
Then we have the Deists, Theists and Pantheists all with their version of God or the Creator. The physicists and scientists trying to explain “why” then the followers of any religion believing that their God is the soul way, truth and light. Religious Gods are interventionists, miracle wreaking, thought reading, sin punishing, prayer- answering all through faith, priests, mullahs and rabbis. So do we talk to our friends and ask “Do you believe in an afterlife” I doubt it but it's a great talking point.

How is it a cop out to be a naturalistic philosopher because there are some unexplainable occurences? They're unexplainable - hence they're not inside nature (perhaps) but EQUALLY if not more so, not necessarily OUTSIDE nature.

Ignoring something just because you cant explain it is a cop out. I'm assuming that's what you mean but I may have missed the point.

Yeah sure, ignoring it is. I don't think he said that though, maybe he implied it. Otherwise, it's silly.

"Geffdof" you assumed right. It is now emerging from the scientific establishment challenging new evidence.
Complexity of life forms is providing empirical evidence for Intelligent Design, as well as further indications that evolution is impossible. This has come about with the revolution in microbiology. We now know things that Darwin could never have imagined in his wildest dreams. The significance of this is found in Darwin's own words: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down" (Behe ).
With the work that uncovers of the DNA code, genetics has become another area that will challenge establish principles. Evolution can explain the genes, but not the genetic code. That is, they can explain the matter, but not the information. There is not a mechanism demonstrated by any evolutionist that can explain how information gets into the DNA. So if science has excluded the idea of a God or a creator but they could be wrong, maybe we are moving closer to understanding religion and faith.