How Come People Think When They Die They Go To Heaven?

Discussion in 'Christianity' started by thefutureawaits, Jun 26, 2017.

  1. NoxiousGas

    NoxiousGas Old Fart

    Messages:
    8,382
    Likes Received:
    2,385
    LOL
    GB trolling you....LOL

    go ahead and get into a battle of wits with GB, I know who my money will be on. [​IMG]
     
  2. psymon*

    psymon* shadilay

    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    114
    Re String theory, the theory of everything. In my opinion It is stolen material from the Greek philosopher Anaximander and his philosophy on the boundless (apeiron, in Greek) he called it, also known as the the principal of things that which is so small you can not see or detect it but it is what makes everything. The unknown elements are so small they can not be detected.
     
  3. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    There are scientific theories that have strong evidentiary support and those that don't. The theory of evolution is a scientific theory, which means not just some hypothetical guess but and explanation that best fits the available facts. It is supported by evidence from the fossil record, genetics, comparative anatomy, biogeography, embryology, and microbiology. In other words, it is one of the better supported theories in science. But like all scientific theories, it is tentative. If a rabbit fossil were discovered in the Cambrian, evolutionists would have to take up another line of work. So far, no rabbits! The reason most scientists accept evolution is that there really isn’t an alternative scientific theory. Creationism and Intelligent Design are not scientific theories because they are not empirically refutable, and they test no new theories or hypotheses but simply concentrate on developing critiques of Darwinism. Other theories have a following but less empirical support. Many scientists believe in abiogenesis because it is a naturalistic explanation of the origin of life, but there is little or no evidence for it. I remains a reasonable hypothesis. M-theory and a universe from nothing have no empirical foundation, and not much confidence that any will be obtainable in the forseeable future. There are, however, some elegant equations on the blackboard.

    Re the land bridge, I guess I'm not following the argument. The Beringia land bridge between Siberia and Alaska was once above water and seems to have been 600 miles wide, and there is strong genetic evidence that humans lived on it until the last Ice Age.
    https://www.thoughtco.com/bering-strait-and-the-land-bridge-170084
    http://www.pbs.org/beringlandbridge/guide/history.html
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/first-americans-lived-on-bering-land-bridge-for-thousands-of-years/
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/claimbonn.html

    When the ice melted some 13 thousand years ago, there went the bridge! Why there are no ape bones in North America and no Neanderthals in Africa has to do with the geographical locus of evolution. The prevailing theory is that hominoid evolution began in the savannah of Africa (some recent discoveries to the contrary), but that there was migration out of Africa in response to changing climate. Neanderthals evolved mainly from those early immigrants (some fossils have been found in Israel and were well-adapted to the Ice Age in Europe. Modern homo sapiens came out of Africa later. Apes simply had no reason to leave Africa, since they were doing fine there. They were not hunters and gatherers. Just yesterday, a friend asked at a Fourth of July picnic why, if humans had evolved from apes, none of them have done so lately. I guess the short answer is they didn't need to.
    [SIZE=10pt]. [/SIZE]
    The question reminds me of one raised by fundamentalist preacher Kent Rieske: why don't Eskimos have fur and do have dark skins, even though they live in the cold environment of the Arctic? The explanation evolutionists give is that they migrated to the Arctic region from Asia, along with the Indians, they were dark when they arrived, and of course furless because they came originally from a warmer climate and in any event used technology to develop fur clothes to keep them warm.
     
    3 people like this.
  4. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    There are no written docurments by Jesus himself, nor people around Jesus who wrote anything when he was still alive. *Why is that? Probably because he and they were preoccupied with spreading the Word before the coming of the Kingdom of God, which they believed was imminent. Or possibly because they were illiterate. Most of them were poor Galilean fishermen. Jesus was a day laborer trained as an artisan. But there is evidence from other sources that I (and most scholars) think is enough to support a reasonable belief that Jesus existed.

    This would include statements by Paul, in letters that most scholars accept as authentic, that he had interactions with James, whom he calls "the brother of the Lord" and with the Twelve, especially Cephas (Peter) and John, whom he calls the "pillars". At minimum, this would suggest that his audience was familiar with those figures. The fact that he also expresses differences and rivalry with them is also some indication that they existed, since it would stretch the bounds of schizophrenia to make up imaginary rivals. The fact that the Jewish historian Josephus corroborates the existence of "James the brother of Jesus who is called the Christ" in a passage that most scholars think is authentic (not the Testamonium Flavium, which is disputed) is corroboration. Ordinarily, if a person's brother exists, that's good evidence that the person in question also existed. There is also the tale found in all four gospels that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist. The existence of John the Baptist is again confirmed by Josephus. This presents a problem for the Gospel writers, since it suggests :(a) that Jesus needed to be baptized and (b) that John was Jesus' spiritual superior. The Gospel writers spend some time trying to explain these problems when, if either Jesus or John were fictional, they would not need to be explained. We also have at least twenty-seven first century documents and some fifty Gnostic treatises from the second century, admittedly by believers but not nothing. Not everyone would consider this evidence compelling, but I think that's far from saying there is no evidence.

    As for the claims made about Jesus' miracles, that's another story, since extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But the various accounts do mostly agree on core basics of his life: h was a Galilean of humble circumstances, baptized by John the Baptist; he recruited disciples, had an encounter with authorities at the Temple, was crucified by the Romans; his disciples claimed he rose from the dead, and his disciples continued his mission. As for his message, there also seems to be general agreement that he preached peace, love, and understanding for all, including society's rejects, and that he preached the coming of God's Kingdom. While this evidence doesn't seem as strong as that for, say, evolution, it is enough to meet the substantial evidence test that is widely used to support administrative decisions.
     
    2 people like this.
  5. NoxiousGas

    NoxiousGas Old Fart

    Messages:
    8,382
    Likes Received:
    2,385
    It is nice to see someone who understands the intrinsic evidence and can also explain it clearly.
     
  6. psymon*

    psymon* shadilay

    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    114
    Okie, in the science community today there are scientists and evidence denied simply because it does not fit into the land bridge hypothesis, and it is a hypothesis. Harvard professors even refer to it as hypothesis. It does not explain evidence of humans in North America dating back
    100 000 years. This evidence was and is denied simply because It blew the land bridge and migration of humans to North America from Europe out of the water. To say there were humans in North America prior to people coming over here from elsewhere is not the senecio being pushed forward today by the scientific community, by the United Nations, as well as people who are for globalization.

    https://tworowtimes.com/news/local/early-man-finds-predate-land-bridge/

    Atheist latch on to science simply because they believe it will disprove the existence of a god or disprove the existence of religious figures who have influenced our society today. They use it to denounce people faith as being a lie, when none of it makes it a lie or untrue. They follow a science they do not understand and it gives them faith in something,

    I have had dreams of people who have passed on as well and people I never knew but turned out to be family. I know people who have experienced unexplainable things by science standards, as well as experiencing them myself. My grandmother, who is passed - prior to going saw her parents at the foot of their bed prior to passing, every morning for 6 months straight, she said her parents are standing there silent and smiling. When it started she was perfectly healthy. Ther are many medical doctors, physicians who believe in god or a higher power.

    Now people can say this is just an old womans mind going and playing tricks or at the end of our life on earth does a part of our mind open up allowing us to see things that were not visible before? Is this possible? In our sleep does this part of the brain also open up? Is this possible? I believe it Is.
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. The Imaginary Being

    The Imaginary Being PAIN IN ASS Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    11,772
    Likes Received:
    134
    why not? better than dying and going to costco
     
    1 person likes this.
  8. Okiefreak

    Okiefreak Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,079
    Likes Received:
    4,937
    It's a hypothesis with some supporting evidence. The alternative theory is that humans drifted over on rafts at an earlier time. I don't think the dispute is over the land bridge per se but on when it existed and whether or not humans were here before or after that time, and whether or not it was the only route to North America. . I gave you some links on the subject. Here are some others. Science is always tentative. That's the beauty of it.
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/10/061017-bering.html
    http://www.newsweek.com/perfectly-preserved-12000-year-old-skeleton-proves-bering-strait-theory-251234
    http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2007/11/28/evidence-for-the-bering-strait/
    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/americans-earliest-humans-spread-north-america-asia-research/story?id=16655753
    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/prehistoric-hunt-suggests-humans-arrived-north-america-earlier-previously-thought/

    Whatever the case, I seriously doubt it's a conspiracy by the U.N. and people who are for globalization. That seems a bit farfetched.


     
  9. Scratched

    Scratched Members

    Messages:
    866
    Likes Received:
    254
    Quote: There are no written docurments by Jesus himself, nor people around Jesus who wrote anything when he was still alive.


    Hmmm...There are some Bibles in which the words of the Lord are printed in red. Quite a bit in the first three books of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark and Luke.)

    Pretty straightforward statements too as I remember, not much "beatin' around the bush".
     
  10. Asmodean

    Asmodean Slo motion rider

    Messages:
    50,556
    Likes Received:
    10,126
    Uhm Scratched, that doesn't mean it was written down in Jesus's lifetime.
     
  11. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    its a comforting thing to tell the bereaved, it actually comes from a guy named dante who was trying to write a satire.
     
  12. Scratched

    Scratched Members

    Messages:
    866
    Likes Received:
    254
    I found it interesting to learn that Darwin himself took the Lord as his savior before his death, yet Darwinism is still taught in schools. LOL

    Hey I like to believe that anything that holds me back from having a good time and sinning will never be given a damn about too.

    Eternity is a long time to gamble against, just to be stubborn. But it's our lives so go as y'all must.

    Just hope Wile E. Coyote never again runs into his own painted wall that the Road Runner ran through. W.E. should just go buy a can of Spam.
     
  13. thefutureawaits

    thefutureawaits Members

    Messages:
    1,528
    Likes Received:
    204
    Jesus didn't write words because he didn't have time to be wtiting. He was to busy in his ministry, teaching the apostles and teaching the people with beautiful illustrations and showing them the way, also quoting scriptures healing people raising people from the dead.
     
  14. What if Jesus was illiterate and just pretended not to have time to write. Like, he was so insecure about being illiterate that he started doing all this crazy shit to make it seem like there was no time for writing.
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. Meliai

    Meliai Banned

    Messages:
    25,868
    Likes Received:
    18,279
    Evolution and God arent mutually exclusive though. Perhaps all the evidence supporting evolution is also evidence of God's handiwork

    Also there is no evidence Darwin found God on his deathbed
     
  16. unfocusedanakin

    unfocusedanakin The Archaic Revival Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    11,308
    Likes Received:
    3,598
    Did not happen.

    I refer you to a thread I already made calling this nonsense out. But if makes you feel any beater Darwin never claimed God did not exist in the sense Christian claim nor does atheism as a whole say this they simply require proff a Christian can not give.

    https://www.hipforums.com/forum/topic/482488-why-do-christians-always-claim-famous-people-repent-on-their-death-bed/
     
  17. tumbling.dice

    tumbling.dice Visitor

    That's a myth begun by Elizabeth Reid Cotton, aka "Lady Hope", a British evangelist active in the Temperance movement. On 4 August 1915, 33 years after Darwin's death and shortly after she was diagnosed with breast cancer, Hope led a devotional service at a Bible conference in Northfield, Massachusetts, where she apparently first told her story about meeting Darwin.

    Darwin's family has denounced her claims as falsehoods.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deathbed_conversion#Charles_Darwin

    What could be so compelling about a religion that fundamentalists feel the need to lie about great people, or anyone for that matter? I'm sure they are aware that most people will just believe their claims on the spot and never bother checking their veracity . I heard similar claims concerning Carl Sagan, one of my earliest childhood heroes and a man I credit with my 'awakening'. It's infuriating. Fundamentalists really need to keep to themselves and leave the rest of the world alone.
     
  18. Scratched

    Scratched Members

    Messages:
    866
    Likes Received:
    254
    Fair enough.
     
  19. NoxiousGas

    NoxiousGas Old Fart

    Messages:
    8,382
    Likes Received:
    2,385
    but it is confirmed fact that Sagan smoked weed daily for the majority of his life..:)
     
  20. Amethyst87F

    Amethyst87F JesF35

    Messages:
    262
    Likes Received:
    58
    I've heard people say it's because of their faith. I've also heard that believing in a nice afterlife makes people not so afraid of dying.
     
    Piobaire likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice