The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
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
Page:
If things pretty much suck in this life, then why should I expect them to be better in the next ? I mean, if I put everything thing to it, and do my best to make this life work , and then it doesn't, and then I die, and then God comes and says: ok.. you can go to heaven now... then why should I ? That's just like saying: f*** all your beleifs and all the things you truely wanted, and eventually we're just going to put you where we want, and it's supposed to be good because we say so.If that's the case, then I don't want to go to their heaven.
"We may all find peace in accepting the innevitable."
I've no idea who said that, but someone did! And I'd like to think it true, as I think I'd go insane before I die otherwise.
I've no idea who said that, but someone did! And I'd like to think it true, as I think I'd go insane before I die otherwise.
Well again, do you? At that age, personally I'd guess people have an acceptance of their life which perhaps seems like satisfaction or contentment. Anyway, what you're describing seems somewhat ideallic to me and perhaps not entirely realistic.
Not that it matters I suppose, as I have absolutely no clue what you wanted to say in your original post anyway. :)
Not that it matters I suppose, as I have absolutely no clue what you wanted to say in your original post anyway. :)
No =D
But I take it from that I know most are content at that age
But I take it from that I know most are content at that age
Chaos wrote:
> Most people who
> live to 80 for example, generally feel that they have
> accomplished enough to satisfy them for their life. Hence how
> most people who die of "old age" feel they have lived
> full lives.
Most people? Are you sure about that? :P
> Most people who
> live to 80 for example, generally feel that they have
> accomplished enough to satisfy them for their life. Hence how
> most people who die of "old age" feel they have lived
> full lives.
Most people? Are you sure about that? :P
Tiramisu wrote:>
> I think the certainty of death works both ways. It inspires
> people to make their mark as quickly as possible, which
> can lead to good and great things but just as easily to terrible
> things, as we've seen throughout history.
>
> I often wonder how the world would be different if people lived
> longer - say for 400 years on average...
Interesting viewpoint, however I take the view that we are given the time needed for us to benefit most from life. Most people who live to 80 for example, generally feel that they have accomplished enough to satisfy them for their life. Hence how most people who die of "old age" feel they have lived full lives.
Of course this will completely depend on your perspective, and I feel how much you are aware of, so your general IQ comparative to your ideals in life.
For example, taking my awareness of life at 17, and with the ideals I have of what my life should be, I am satisfied. I feel I have accomplished everything and more of what there is to do in life.
I'm not really sure how this theory works with other people, but seeing as this is the Intelligent Discussion forum, it feels the proper placing for a philosophical debate =D
> I think the certainty of death works both ways. It inspires
> people to make their mark as quickly as possible, which
> can lead to good and great things but just as easily to terrible
> things, as we've seen throughout history.
>
> I often wonder how the world would be different if people lived
> longer - say for 400 years on average...
Interesting viewpoint, however I take the view that we are given the time needed for us to benefit most from life. Most people who live to 80 for example, generally feel that they have accomplished enough to satisfy them for their life. Hence how most people who die of "old age" feel they have lived full lives.
Of course this will completely depend on your perspective, and I feel how much you are aware of, so your general IQ comparative to your ideals in life.
For example, taking my awareness of life at 17, and with the ideals I have of what my life should be, I am satisfied. I feel I have accomplished everything and more of what there is to do in life.
I'm not really sure how this theory works with other people, but seeing as this is the Intelligent Discussion forum, it feels the proper placing for a philosophical debate =D
Garin wrote:
> Obviously not everyone believes in Jesus, but most scholars do.
> There are a few who dont, but you said yourself, there are a
> few
> odd scientists who dont believe in global warming so you cant
> expect everyone to believe in everything.
>
> Belief in Jesus does not automatically mean everything ever
> written about him is true. By the same token its almost certain
> that King Arthur existed, but it doesnt mean he was given a sword
> by a lady in a lake and kept company with Merlin the magician.
Been reading through this (mostly) interesting topic.
I hold a viewpoint that Jesus existed, but the books of the Bible (and other holy texts) are open to a lot of mis-translation over time.
The Old Testament and other books of their time were never really ordered as such and since many people at the time were illiterate, the information within them were orally handed down in some cases. Many translations later (usually by monks who were influenced by the politics and religious thinking of the time) and we have a shadow of the former material.
Even the new testament isn't an intact version of teachings and events at the time, again with some oral translation, written translations (sometimes badly) and with the slimming down of the texts to keep the ones which 'fit the ideal' of the Christian Church.
As for the soul, I personally believe it exists because I feel it, though if I was speaking scientifically, I'd say I had no proof and so it didn't. But a couple of experiences I've had lead me to belief that there is something out there after death.
> Obviously not everyone believes in Jesus, but most scholars do.
> There are a few who dont, but you said yourself, there are a
> few
> odd scientists who dont believe in global warming so you cant
> expect everyone to believe in everything.
>
> Belief in Jesus does not automatically mean everything ever
> written about him is true. By the same token its almost certain
> that King Arthur existed, but it doesnt mean he was given a sword
> by a lady in a lake and kept company with Merlin the magician.
Been reading through this (mostly) interesting topic.
I hold a viewpoint that Jesus existed, but the books of the Bible (and other holy texts) are open to a lot of mis-translation over time.
The Old Testament and other books of their time were never really ordered as such and since many people at the time were illiterate, the information within them were orally handed down in some cases. Many translations later (usually by monks who were influenced by the politics and religious thinking of the time) and we have a shadow of the former material.
Even the new testament isn't an intact version of teachings and events at the time, again with some oral translation, written translations (sometimes badly) and with the slimming down of the texts to keep the ones which 'fit the ideal' of the Christian Church.
As for the soul, I personally believe it exists because I feel it, though if I was speaking scientifically, I'd say I had no proof and so it didn't. But a couple of experiences I've had lead me to belief that there is something out there after death.
Chaos wrote:
> Maybe on a direct viewpoint it's boring, but look at what it
> inspires, and causes people to do. If we all lived forever, it
> seems almost silly to say, what is the point of living?
I think the certainty of death works both ways. It inspires people to make their mark as quickly as possible, which can lead to good and great things but just as easily to terrible things, as we've seen throughout history.
I often wonder how the world would be different if people lived longer - say for 400 years on average...
> Maybe on a direct viewpoint it's boring, but look at what it
> inspires, and causes people to do. If we all lived forever, it
> seems almost silly to say, what is the point of living?
I think the certainty of death works both ways. It inspires people to make their mark as quickly as possible, which can lead to good and great things but just as easily to terrible things, as we've seen throughout history.
I often wonder how the world would be different if people lived longer - say for 400 years on average...
Maybe on a direct viewpoint it's boring, but look at what it inspires, and causes people to do. If we all lived forever, it seems almost silly to say, what is the point of living?
Puniksem™ wrote:
> Logic dictates that when I finally die, ALL electrical activity
> within my body's cells will simply stop, thus rendering
> my corpse a slowly decaying mass of something that was
> once alive.
>
> When a battery is dead it is irreversably dead!
> When a circuit is switched off it's completely dead!
> When a life-form dies all electro-chemical activity ceases!
>
> My conclusion: When ya dead, ya dead! everything else remains
> inconclusive unsubstanciated hearsay.
Can't argue with that, I suppose. Though I sometimes think that death is the most boring thing in the universe, so I don't blame the human mind for trying to spice it up a bit.
> Logic dictates that when I finally die, ALL electrical activity
> within my body's cells will simply stop, thus rendering
> my corpse a slowly decaying mass of something that was
> once alive.
>
> When a battery is dead it is irreversably dead!
> When a circuit is switched off it's completely dead!
> When a life-form dies all electro-chemical activity ceases!
>
> My conclusion: When ya dead, ya dead! everything else remains
> inconclusive unsubstanciated hearsay.
Can't argue with that, I suppose. Though I sometimes think that death is the most boring thing in the universe, so I don't blame the human mind for trying to spice it up a bit.
Page: