“So?” answers everything. Either when used by religionists or secularists.
Of course, it also doesn’t answer anything.
The link does.
Religious Jews do. And I agree with them.
Btw, you’re wrong about the rape.
No, it doesn’t. I agree with both Aquinas & Rousseau here. My head & heart both affirm trust in a Creator Who is ultimately kind & fair, Who manifested as Yahweh to Israel & then in flesh as Jesus.
Aquinas and Rousseau are not in agreement.
They aren’t but my point is- I see Thomistic thinking on God & Rousseauing feeling on God as both having valid places in one’s belief-system, with the intellectual path as having the edge.
Why must you be a divider & not a uniter? 
That’s Elijah, since I know you’re a guy who likes to get his facts straight.
That is not what the Word says, take your apocrophia cite:
“For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they any more have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten.”
No** Blake **you are simply wrong. People do not become angels, or in limbo - both are unscripturally. God is the God of the living:
The dead in that contects in OT times equates to those in Hell in NT times, those who worshiped other then the God of the living, themselves or one of Satan’s forms. They are effectively removed from eternal life.
Thank you, that’s correct, I have no interest in changing peoples’ minds.
I do find this very interesting, though. We’ve only gotten one real response, and that was logic (Auntbeast’s answer). In the corresponding atheist thread we did a bit better, I think. The atheists, for the most part, are at least willing to consider the alternative, even if the standard of proof is high. That doesn’t seem to be the case with religious people.
Nothing apocryphal about Ecclesiastes, kb. Did you think Blake meant Ecclesiasticus?
Well, but to be fair, Auntbeast is not a theist.
You left out the significant adverb - “absurdly”. I might as well say that I will consider atheism when you are able to show me God’s dead body. 
Thank you Malacandra, that was a running out to work post, I realized by mistake on the way, glad someone corrected it.
The book of Ecclesiastes shows how everything in the flesh is meaningless without the eternal (spiritual) side.
Well, to be fair, the standard of proof is absurdly high, because it is trying to prove something that is even more absurdly improbable.
As for god’s dead body, I don’t think you’re playing the game very well. Try and do better, or admit that you’re not willing to openly examine the alternatives.
This is truly scary. Why this isn’t considered a mental disorder is beyond me.
For the same reason that homosexuality WAS considered mental illness for such a long time. Political power.
Well, only half the Balkans will believe, then, depending on what script God writes it in.
There is nothing in this world that could change my mind. War, pestilance, the rape of children, the death of loved ones, all of these do serve some purpose when they are looked into and not just judged on the surface.
When we judge things on the surface we are being lazy, selfish and pridefull. We are too lazy to look for all of the facts, too selfish to try and empathize with someone elses point of view, and too pridefull not to admit that we might not already know all of the answers.
Do I feign to understand the purpose and plan behind all evil and unspeakable acts? Certainly not, there are a lot of sick and twisted people out there. God does not stop them for a reason, faith in His plan tells me that. I don’t need to understand it, I just need the faith to accept that 1. This too shall pass and 2. All things will work themselves out in the end.
Finally, a poem I found that kind of sums it up for me:
Of course YMMV - N8
Highlighting mine
Well, no, no you don’t have it.
While the text Blake cited is germane to the JW belief in the question of life (or death) after death, it is but one text among many other texts and contexts that speak to it.
The rest of this post----especially the stuff about limbo, souls in hell etc----are not part of JW teaching.
Thank you FriarTed.
I’ll join the discussion later this evening.
I’m playing the game at least as well as those who want the stars in the sky rearranged to spell out Goldbach’s Conjecture and its proof in Serbo-Croat, dude. Why does their side get to mock, and not mine?
Plenty of mockery to go around! Here:
Q: What would it take to change a theist’s mind?
A: A bone saw, a melon baller, and a roll of duct tape.
Thanks, you’ve been a great congregation. I’m here every Sunday.