Inspired by a recent viewing of “The Skeleton Key,” in which a theme was that religion can’t work on you if you don’t believe it… (but don’t let that turn you off)
Suppose that what happens to you in the afterlife is determined by what you believe will happen to you in the afterlife, as described by your choice of either one of the major world religions, or by a more atheistic belief that “nothing” happens to you in the afterlife. Which system would you choose to believe, and why? Would you pick the certainty of nothingness, or a risk/reward belief system where you have a chance of eternal happiness in heaven, but also the possibility of burning in hell for all eternity?
(For the sake of argument, please stick to those options, rather than personal philosophies of what will happen to us when we die.)
I do not believe there is such a thing as Heaven, Hell or Nothingness, we go back into being what we were before we were born, just a small part of existence in the form of atoms etc. It is impossibel for nothing to exist,because then nothingness becomes something.
If you choose heaven/hell, are you judged by someone to go one way or the other or is that determination made by your belief as well?
For example, if you were to get hit by a bus and you believed that you were a horrible sinner, even though overall you’ve been good, would you go to hell?
Why do we have to choose from only one of the major world religions? If that’s the case, I choose nothingness. (This is presuming I choose at all, as I really think it will be automatically nothingness).
If I could choose, for real…
A small floating island. A house. Full of books. With horses in the barn. A waterfall, with a pool & a river that forever flows over the edge and yet never runs out. A meadow, with friendly animals that would snuggle you. Visitors who could visit from other small floating islands, but don’t stay. Pen & inkstand and plenty of time to write all I can. A garden, that with work I can grow anything in. A music room, and tutors.
The traditional Heavens don’t appeal to me. My wants are very simple, and it annoys me that if this God person is all-powerful, he can’t fulfill each good person’s wishes and instead we all have to go into one communal Heaven that He thinks is a good idea. God is inherently selfish, I suppose.
No, you get judged according to however the major world religion you choose says you will be judged. ie, if you chose Christianity, you would be judged more or less on how well you followed the 10 Commandments, and on your belief in Jesus, regardless of how well you personaly thought you scored on that test. (I know there’s an awful lot of divergence among the Christian denominations on what exactly you will be judged on, but those seem to be the basic criterion shared by most denominations.)
Because then everyone (myself included) would choose a belief system in which they (and pretty much whoever else they wanted) would get into heaven and there wouldn’t be much debate. I think all the major world religions have some kind of risk involved in belief – a heaven/hell scenario.
I guess I could make the question a bit broader and say that suppose whichever religion you choose to believe in (both regarding the afterlife and life on earth) became literally, absolutely true, which one would you choose? The question is somewhat moot because theoretically religious people already believe that their religion is literally absolutely true, but a) even believers have doubt, and b) there are non-believers who would like to be religious but aren’t, because their sense of logic keeps them from it, or for some other reason.
I’d say it is determined by one’s own inner state. This is why religions consider it quite important to become master of yourself. If you die with a deepseated unconscious guilt, your consciousness will continue to torment you with what you oppressed your whole life.
I’d of course choose Heaven, because heaven is where one’s dreams come true. People who describe Heaven as boring because all one does is genuflect for their entire lives, are describing hell to me.
I don’t believe in the eternal hell concept, I think that everyone gets to keep going until they finally make it and there is a sense of balance and order for them that gets them into heaven. Hell is a state of extreme fear/hate/rage, but once that is burned down enough, one goes back to other realms to keep trying to find his/her path to heaven.
There is no such thing as a dominant world religion. Christians can’t even agree what Christianity is about necessarily. There are some core tenets, but they are all pretty heavenly. The concept of hell is widely disagreed upon.
It says “major word religions” in the OP. The God of those religions is an egomaniac and a monster; under that creature, I think heaven and hell would be much the same.
I disagree with your assessment that the God of the major world religions is an egomaniacal monster. Certainly God is an egomaniacal monster, God is a tender loving mother as well. Within God the full range of human emotion is represented.
Try to comprehend the infinite. I know it’s hard. But you’ll have to if you want to try to form a picture of God. Whining like a rotten child who gets spanked isn’t really cutting it. I wonder where you get such faith that A> God is unilaterally wrong and B> heaven and hell are indistinguishable.
Me, frankly, I don’t believe in a heaven/hell afterlife. But you seem to, though you skew it somewhat and I wonder why.
Who is this mainstream and why do they get to decide what the nature of God is? I think that belief in the “Earth Mother” is pretty mainstream. I’d argue that God as being an amorphous entity of all things is probably more mainstream than a belief in God as strictly male.
Why do you focus so much on what you see as the “mainstream” view, even posting it in threads where people specifically say that their view does not fit that paradigm?
How do you reconcile your hate for God with your disbelief in God?