The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Here is an example
A mother lives a Godly life. She goes straight to "heaven".
Her son, commits many sins on earth and never asks for forgiveness, doesn't even believe in God for that matter. He goes straight to "hell".
Heaven is supposed to be a perfect place where good souls live amongst God. Right?
That mother LOVES her son. Even though he was a "sinner."
How can Heaven be HEAVEN( a place of hapiness) for that mother/soul without her son that she loves?
Make sence :S ?
A mother lives a Godly life. She goes straight to "heaven".
Her son, commits many sins on earth and never asks for forgiveness, doesn't even believe in God for that matter. He goes straight to "hell".
Heaven is supposed to be a perfect place where good souls live amongst God. Right?
That mother LOVES her son. Even though he was a "sinner."
How can Heaven be HEAVEN( a place of hapiness) for that mother/soul without her son that she loves?
Make sence :S ?
Page:
Everpain wrote:
> You missed the point entirely, but I won't go ito detail about
> that.
So, despite the fact that the main chunk of your post was about Who cares what the point is, we're all on this earth too short a time to worry about why and how we are here? You're saying that this is not the point you were making?
>
> It's nice to have discussions about where we came from a day
> after a documentary which all but proved the possibility
> of panspermia being the origin of all earth-bound life.
>
> So there you have it.
So the circumstantial evidence that some life forms on earth may have come from an extraterrestrial source means what exactly? That Occam's Razor is a flawed method for looking for an answer to the origins of life on earth or something to do with religion perhaps? Or are you being deliberately vague in order to avoid showing an opinion on something based on what you have written?
> You missed the point entirely, but I won't go ito detail about
> that.
So, despite the fact that the main chunk of your post was about Who cares what the point is, we're all on this earth too short a time to worry about why and how we are here? You're saying that this is not the point you were making?
>
> It's nice to have discussions about where we came from a day
> after a documentary which all but proved the possibility
> of panspermia being the origin of all earth-bound life.
>
> So there you have it.
So the circumstantial evidence that some life forms on earth may have come from an extraterrestrial source means what exactly? That Occam's Razor is a flawed method for looking for an answer to the origins of life on earth or something to do with religion perhaps? Or are you being deliberately vague in order to avoid showing an opinion on something based on what you have written?
You missed the point entirely, but I won't go ito detail about that.
It's nice to have discussions about where we came from a day after a documentary which all but proved the possibility of panspermia being the origin of all earth-bound life.
So there you have it.
It's nice to have discussions about where we came from a day after a documentary which all but proved the possibility of panspermia being the origin of all earth-bound life.
So there you have it.
Everpain wrote:
> Who cares what the point is? Do we really need to know why the
> primordial soup heaved out a need for cells to actively seek
> their own survival? The limitations of our existence are
> significant enough to warrant putting such curiosities on the
> backburner. There is only so much time you can spend
> pontificating the spiritual ramifications of the otherwise
> seemingly pointless circle of life before life itself passes you
> by.
Of course. That's the answer. We shouldn't have questioned anything and should have just given up while we could, back when we were cavemen.
Shame, then, that we are human and prone to actually using our brains for something other than basic necessity. Have you wondered why? There is no evidence that our brains have evolved and developed to take in abstract thought just because of a fluke, as there is no evidence that there is anything other than biological reactions for us being here, and yet it doesn't satisfy our needs. Why? Because we are human, and part of being human is to constantly question and respond to our environment, including asking the questions most key to our being, such as 'why are we here?', 'is there a reason?' or 'are there other explanations to our being here that we cannot comprehend?'
To dismiss any possibility of our existence being brought about by external means of any kind is as narrow minded as to accept a belief in one specific reason for our being here and to say that it doesn't matter defeats the whole notion of our being human.
> Who cares what the point is? Do we really need to know why the
> primordial soup heaved out a need for cells to actively seek
> their own survival? The limitations of our existence are
> significant enough to warrant putting such curiosities on the
> backburner. There is only so much time you can spend
> pontificating the spiritual ramifications of the otherwise
> seemingly pointless circle of life before life itself passes you
> by.
Of course. That's the answer. We shouldn't have questioned anything and should have just given up while we could, back when we were cavemen.
Shame, then, that we are human and prone to actually using our brains for something other than basic necessity. Have you wondered why? There is no evidence that our brains have evolved and developed to take in abstract thought just because of a fluke, as there is no evidence that there is anything other than biological reactions for us being here, and yet it doesn't satisfy our needs. Why? Because we are human, and part of being human is to constantly question and respond to our environment, including asking the questions most key to our being, such as 'why are we here?', 'is there a reason?' or 'are there other explanations to our being here that we cannot comprehend?'
To dismiss any possibility of our existence being brought about by external means of any kind is as narrow minded as to accept a belief in one specific reason for our being here and to say that it doesn't matter defeats the whole notion of our being human.
Further thoughts of mine already posted elsewhere:
The meaninglessness of life is not something that has escaped me in its entirety. Despite the illusion of diversity we enforce upon ourselves during life, the simple fact is that we all share a common fate - death. The sheer inevitability of this fate forces me to question why we fear it so vociferously. It seems a waste of effort to fear that which cannot be changed. If something is truly inevitable, if there is factually no possible way of avoiding it, then it should simply be accepted, even embraced.
The fear of death gives birth to a myriad of other fears, many irrational, all riding the wave of denial that ultimately, death must come for you.
Given that life must expire, and given that it is continued only by the life which is begotten by that which has ended, the question that is as old as human thought draws itself unwelcomely to the front of my thoughts. What is the purpose of such a cycle? I've never been comfortable with that question. Not because of the lack of a concrete answer outside of religion, but rather the attitude of self-defeat inherent in having to ask it.
Who cares what the point is? Do we really need to know why the primordial soup heaved out a need for cells to actively seek their own survival? The limitations of our existence are significant enough to warrant putting such curiosities on the backburner. There is only so much time you can spend pontificating the spiritual ramifications of the otherwise seemingly pointless circle of life before life itself passes you by.
The irony of such an event is quite potent.
The meaninglessness of life is not something that has escaped me in its entirety. Despite the illusion of diversity we enforce upon ourselves during life, the simple fact is that we all share a common fate - death. The sheer inevitability of this fate forces me to question why we fear it so vociferously. It seems a waste of effort to fear that which cannot be changed. If something is truly inevitable, if there is factually no possible way of avoiding it, then it should simply be accepted, even embraced.
The fear of death gives birth to a myriad of other fears, many irrational, all riding the wave of denial that ultimately, death must come for you.
Given that life must expire, and given that it is continued only by the life which is begotten by that which has ended, the question that is as old as human thought draws itself unwelcomely to the front of my thoughts. What is the purpose of such a cycle? I've never been comfortable with that question. Not because of the lack of a concrete answer outside of religion, but rather the attitude of self-defeat inherent in having to ask it.
Who cares what the point is? Do we really need to know why the primordial soup heaved out a need for cells to actively seek their own survival? The limitations of our existence are significant enough to warrant putting such curiosities on the backburner. There is only so much time you can spend pontificating the spiritual ramifications of the otherwise seemingly pointless circle of life before life itself passes you by.
The irony of such an event is quite potent.
It wasn't always that simple, as with everything else in the Bible and other holy books, it gets simplified. Milton also defined Hell further with Paradise Lost, which has become the definitive version of Hell we think of today.
Of course, if you're basing any idea of heaven or hell on something earthly and explainable, then you're hampered from the start.
Of course, if you're basing any idea of heaven or hell on something earthly and explainable, then you're hampered from the start.
I'm all for the possibility of other dimensions and metaphysical realms, it's the belief that "knows" they exist that annoys me. How can we know? Also, I don't care for the black-and-whiteness of most of these afterworld beliefs: it's either paradise or punishment. Seems pretty obvious that the heavens and hells of religion are symptoms of wishful thinking.
Yep, it's not something we can get our heads around, therefore we make all these assumptions such as bonds and things that we make on earth will be the same in the next world, but I don't believe that it's like that.
So, for instance, if someone marries twice, in the idea of heaven that some people have they'd have a problem - I mean which husband/wife would they go with? But it doesn't work like that, spirits detached from a body in a metaphysical world wouldn't have worldly attachments, perhaps being all spirits are attached to each other or something...
So, for instance, if someone marries twice, in the idea of heaven that some people have they'd have a problem - I mean which husband/wife would they go with? But it doesn't work like that, spirits detached from a body in a metaphysical world wouldn't have worldly attachments, perhaps being all spirits are attached to each other or something...
Hm, I think I understand your point. So for me to imagine heaven would be like a 2d person trying to imagine a 3d world?
I, for one, believe in the existence of some sort of Heaven and Hell. Not believing is just as strange as believing, to be honest. Why shouldn't we ask the questions such as 'why are we here?' and 'is there a reason for it?' who is to say that just because we ask these question to make sense of the world, that there are no metaphysical answers?
It's an old arguement that hasn't made any grounds and it's a little convienient to say that we're looking for an answer because it's in our nature so therefore there isn't one. How does that arguement work?
As for what they are: I think that the problem is that we simply can't envisage these places as they are beyond our imagining. The soul that goes to heaven or hell is apart from the body and human ties that bind it on earth. Add to this that it's not a simple choice of whether you've been good or not, life isn't that black and white.
It's an old arguement that hasn't made any grounds and it's a little convienient to say that we're looking for an answer because it's in our nature so therefore there isn't one. How does that arguement work?
As for what they are: I think that the problem is that we simply can't envisage these places as they are beyond our imagining. The soul that goes to heaven or hell is apart from the body and human ties that bind it on earth. Add to this that it's not a simple choice of whether you've been good or not, life isn't that black and white.
Everytime someone cries for help, a God is born. :o
Page: