There is life after death

August 31, 2015, 9:14 pm

Agree253 Disagree109

70%
30%

The debate "There is life after death" was started by Moo1 on August 31, 2015, 9:14 pm. 253 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 109 people are on the disagree side. That might be enough to see the common perception. It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.

PsychDave posted 5 arguments, Maharshi posted 2 arguments, Muskan posted 1 argument, Marvelgirl2002 posted 1 argument, AstroSpace posted 2 arguments, Alex posted 30 arguments, lolly1706 posted 1 argument, deca808 posted 1 argument, bigB posted 1 argument, thecries posted 7 arguments, Dysfunctional posted 1 argument, action007man posted 1 argument, pajrc1234 posted 1 argument, scooter6381 posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
sloanstar1000 posted 5 arguments, historybuff posted 5 arguments, rajarshimaiti posted 1 argument, reganrefia posted 1 argument, Moo1 posted 1 argument, Alex posted 2 arguments, Preploukus posted 1 argument, Sosocratese posted 2 arguments, xbulletwithbutterflywingsx posted 1 argument, shobhit posted 1 argument, pajrc1234 posted 33 arguments, omactivate posted 2 arguments, ADrunkenRobot posted 2 arguments, ganeshbhat posted 1 argument, erikD9921 posted 2 arguments, thecries posted 3 arguments, ajuna posted 1 argument, truth_vs_true posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.

Moo1, djuanstewart, sneha, gouthamabi, DavidStuff777, mvaris, carrot, Muskan, jadesenia, invincible_01, danielfello, AstroSpace, TruthSeekerCivilSpeaker, Bodaciouslady16, Marvelgirl2002, AnselAmory, ReedSchneider, Bestforevr, ktoure, sidhant, dotdotdot, Cross, wayneSPEC, steven_kh, Hellrazor, Alex, Neaa, Zeno, lolly1706, Skeetc15, Bobo, fabby, carltonlasy, ariel22, steady_current, Tiger1738, J_Blue, asaru, stevenchen, ailasorecarg, luvtolaugh, deca808, AmericanScholar, mrsdebate3, TheProduct62, bigB, juliette_os, Sumerian, SpringStudent, WilliamLewis, KicknRush, sdiop, srishti_pinkleaves, TheChosenProphecy, Tristanzee, mylogod, khmlight3, calebtanner, ISI, mafiajo, roshni, wmd, Nury, Dysfunctional, action007man, Kaleighltay, stewasky, theQueenofdebate, Ryan, ThePraxeologist, mace10514, mtemple74, andrewkorman, Tiredandred, DannyknowsItAll, obaidnb, fredtyu, Chandru, Kaifala76, omgflyingbannas, sabrina, universfan, scooter6381, nylia32, brandilyn, AttackedByToast, MrShine, david365, confident, linares34, jjrocks1738, swp16, Rebelis12, The_lamp, Harshgupta, angordon3, multishooterftw and 156 visitors agree.
Maharshi, historybuff, rebecca14, fritz, rajarshimaiti, reganrefia, amtvj, countrybumpkin, ganeshbhat, ResIpsaLoquitor, keshav_garg, nehagoyal, xbulletwithbutterflywingsx, Preploukus, shobhit, gabriel, pajrc1234, WaspToxin, Robert16, Caesar, Eechyobooty, leprechaundances, Aletin, Gman119, fester, Sosocratese, ADrunkenRobot, AndRea, erikD9921, thecries, Nethersquid, sloanstar1000, ajuna, DuPouvoir, zoeclare7, wmgreen00, omactivate, Rokai, andy91, Sli, thatguy, FluffiestDrop45, SocialCrusader, truth_vs_true, srbanano, Monster, rob5998, SueAnnMohr and 61 visitors disagree.

aaahhhh..... everything is gray.

3 years, 4 months ago
Sosocratese
replied to...

But we know that's not how things work. Life needs a constant feed of energy to sustain itself. We must transform calories into ATP in order to do work. Your consciousness is not independent of that transfer, thus, when life ends, consciousness ends with it as you can't keep feeding it energy in order to maintain. This is a pseudoscience application of the first law of thermodynamics. You ignore the fact that life is not a closed system, but rather an open one and thus the first law doesn't apply.

3 years, 4 months ago

death is a opposing force of life, so it wouldn't be death after life, it would be a part of death we don't know about

3 years, 4 months ago

its just something we all choose to believe because we are afraid of losing existence even if we arent religious or if there few experimentx

3 years, 4 months ago
PsychDave
replied to...

The claim that there is no evidence, by definition, does not require evidence. All it would take to disprove a claim that evidence does not exist would be to show some proof. If you have any, feel free to contribute it.

3 years, 4 months ago
bintang
replied to...

you said nothing evidence to prove it. how did you know? there is no proof that assumption.

3 years, 6 months ago
bintang
replied to...

you wanna a evidance at that assumption, you wanna know or see the evidence that assumption. we cant to prove it, cause why? because there is difference between that worlds. lets think, world of life we prove it by thinking rasionally. but the world of death is believing. difference dimension. our knowledge or science cant receive it.

3 years, 6 months ago

miss clicked

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

That's what I was saying.

3 years, 6 months ago
PsychDave
replied to...

The argument that spirit can't die because energy can neither be created nor destroyed has never made sense to me. It seems like saying that a battery can never die because the energy it contains cannot be destroyed. While it is true that the energy cannot be destroyed, it can be converted to other forms and/or dissipated.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

others as in other forms of energy (or matter in that case)

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

We aren't the spirit. If there is a spirit energy within us, we still don't have consciousness after life. We ARE the brain. Once the brain stops reacting, THAT is death. We don't see out of the spirit, just the brain. So if there is a spirit within us, that doesn't account for anything.

Also, though energy can't be created nor destroyed, energy can change into others. If we have a spirit, then dead bodies would be a lot warmer. Maybe they would move! They could also probably be a conductor of electricity or - if we're lucky - a power source.
Though we probably don't have a spirit inside us now, if we could get a constant energy inside us that stops becoming constant at the loss of brain activity, we could generate energy and heat.

Now, you still need to list that source. Until then, I am asking for you to prove it.

3 years, 6 months ago

well honestly death doesn't truely exist,its just an illusion....spirit cant die because spirit is energy and energy cant be created nor destroyed,

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

for the human body thing

3 years, 6 months ago

what source?

3 years, 6 months ago
PsychDave
replied to...

I have yet to see anyone build a human body, but we have clones that move and live. We made them in a lab rather than assembled them from pieces of other things, but the concept is the same.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

I would need you to list the source.

3 years, 6 months ago

I didn't say you were storming off because you didn't respond immediately, I said it because you said "I'm not going to repeat myself, I'm done here." in response to your argument being rebutted thoroughly, point by point.

3 years, 6 months ago

hi people, sorry I can't be on this debate every second. I was busy this weekend, and I'm tired now. be busy tomorrow too.
so I did not go storming out as you accused if doing. XD

3 years, 6 months ago

scientists can build a full human body with living cells .. the remade body still doesn't move it doesn't own a spirit .. I agree that bodies die but spirits don't .. thus there is a life after this life but none knows how will it look like as none have spoken about it except religions.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

Also, we are only cells. We don't have anything else in it. Life is when the cells react. When the cells stop reacting, we die. There's nothing else I can really say. Our brains stop working, so it's impossible for even consciousness. There are no souls inside us.

3 years, 6 months ago

There is no life after death because life is the time after birth and before death. There could be a conciousness after death but not life, it doesn't fit the definition.

3 years, 6 months ago

I'd love to argue the affirmative but I feel like this entire thread has been going in circles...if anyone has any real contentions, I'm more than willing to debate this.

3 years, 6 months ago

I'd say storming off like a child when you can't think if anything logical to say is a pretty good sign you lose the debate.

3 years, 6 months ago

Alex,
Pajrc1234 went through your argument point by point refuting things. He did not take them out of context or change them, he took direct quotes. You are continuing to insist that no one but you is debating logically while ignoring a fairly thorough rebuttal of your arguments. The point of debate is not to state your beliefs and then, of someone dares argue, storm off. If you have responses to both my and parjc1234's rebuttals, by all means make them, but to claim that since we do not agree with your position you are leaving doesn't mean you win the debate.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

"I'm not going to repeat myself, I'm done here."
If you did repeat yourself, you would not have refuted my argument in any sense. My entire argument was refuting yours.

3 years, 6 months ago

and I didn't change your argument at all. I took parts out that were your evidence and I gave my rebuttal. That isn't changing what it means at all.

3 years, 6 months ago

I just made my argument. I did not ignore your evidence, I refuted it. That's how debates work. If you see a piece of refutable evidence, you can refute it and prove why it doesn't actually support your claim. That is what I did. If you are failing to refute it by giving the same refuted evidence, then you have very well ignored what I just said. You are ignoring my rebuttal.

Science is changing the beliefs to fit new observations.
Faith, as you have proved, is the denial of the observation so that the belief can be preserved.

3 years, 6 months ago

you chose #3. you changed my argument to go against me because you can't make up your own argument. I'm not going to repeat myself, I'm done here. if you want me to a sweet your argument scroll down.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

I really don't care if I'm blessed because I don't see. If you are making an extraordinary claim, you need extraordinary evidence to prove it.

"also is God came to each and everyone of us and said 'I'm God' and proved it."
Why can't he do it now? There's nothing stopping Jesus from appearing in my kitchen as I type this. He's freaking omnipotent.

"Now that I have proved you wrong several different ways, you are going to
1. ignore what I just said, and repeat the argument a different way and force me to repeat mine.
or
2. know you have lost and stop arguing. that does not have to mean you believe in God, you only are saying by admitting you lost that there are no big problems with jesus, the bible, and God, that you can think of. and that I've proven wrong the issues you brought up.

I'm guessing you will make up a number 3. this number 3 will be just like the number 1 above."

Now I have proved YOU wrong in several different ways, now you are going to
1. ignore what I just said and repeat the argument
2. back out of evidence
3. Leave the argument. That doesn't mean you have to let go of your faith. Some people have a "point of rationality" moment, while others may not have this, just converting to atheist slowly, or not even change at all.
4. Give more evidence, which I'll refute, and either this or one of the others happens again.

I'm guessing you may make up 5, which is similar to the others in that you're going to be irrational by making claims that you have not given evidence for (ex: you still haven't proven that he healed people or predicted the destruction of Jerusalem, nor have you proven his resurrection, all of which require extraordinary evidence).

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

"I guess healing people, rising from the dead and predicting the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is not enough."
-You

There are actually those who don't even think Jesus existed at all. While one of the only sources that linked back to the first few centuries is the Bible, which has been rendered unverifiable and written by authors eager to promote Christianity, there were a few Roman sources that never mention Jesus at all. The Gospels were also the only ones who wrote about Jesus, and they came long after he was said to be born. (I really love the part of the Bible where Jesus is talking to God (himself) and a person who wasn't there was writing it down!)

Also, he healed people? If they didn't have the proper medical stuff, that's faith healing. You seem to have a lot of faith. I want you to just lightly tap someone who is in crutches, has a cast, etc. and if they run a mile with no struggle (crutches or wheelchair), or lift a 30 pound weight through a ceiling without struggle, then I will believe you. Except it must have physical evidence and/or an eyewitness, and it's on the news within a week. That is how to prove the faith healing. If we had that, we wouldn't need doctors, nurses, medicines, vitamins, etc. If you really think it's true.

There, I have refuted all of your evidence in that quote. Though Jesus of Nazareth (historical) could have existed, a divine Jesus was never written down by any of the Roman texts of the time he was said to have been born.

1. "predicting the destruction of Jerusalem"
There are two problems with your #1.
One of them is the quote above, directly from you. You say he doesn't want to predict the future, just save and teach us.
He apparently predicted the future.
The other problem is the fact that none of my ideas of what the Bible could have put down are in the future. The ENTIRE TIME stars were far away. The ENTIRE TIME the Earth was round. The ENTIRE TIME the body works in different ways. All of them would have been teaching those at his time.
2. "saying things like 'eat my body' lost him followers"
You've had your communion, right? You eat bread, which is supposed to be his body. That's how he GETS followers.
And I never said that the Bible should tell people to eat his body.
3. Well, since he's freaking God, why can't he give them the understanding of what he's saying?

"Blessed are those who believe and not seen"
You're backing out of evidence once again. I have the character limithere

3 years, 6 months ago

Alex,
Why did Jesus want to reveal himself as God, but not too much? He performed miracles to prove he was God, but now miracles don't happen because God wants us to take his existence on faith.

I agree that people would be better if God revealed himself to everyone, but what I don't understand is why that is a bad thing. He did it in the Bible repeatedly, so why not anymore? Is saving the souls of everyone not a good thing? Why would God need to make salvation more difficult?

I do agree that mathematics and science would be poor choices for Jesus to prove his divinity since no one would appreciate it at the time and since they didn't understand it the information would likely get corrupted over the thousands of years to the present.

3 years, 6 months ago

I guess healing people, rising from the dead and predicting the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is not enough. Jesus also said many times "tell no one of this" he wanted his creation to be able to believe on their own. also his mission was to save us from our sins, not prove God is real 24/7.

why didn't jesus tell us these things about science?

1. not his mission to tell us the future. He had more important things to do like saving us, and teaching us.
2. Saying things like "eat my body" lost him followers saying random numbers and talking about complex organ systems would not have helped.
3. most people were uneducated and would have no idea what he was talking about. That would have made him seem more delusional then people thought.


"Blessed are those who believe and not seen"
the book of job also has saten saying to God something like "job only believes in you because you give him good things and talk to him." God does not "prove" his existence to everyone seperatly because what is more fun then proving saten wrong? XD
also is God came to each and everyone of us and said "I'm God" and proved it. then told us there is heaven and we need to be good to go there. how many of us would be good? like everyone. that would really make earth, or trail for heaven very, very easy.

Now that I have proved you wrong several different ways, you are going to
1. ignore what I just said, and repeat the argument a different way and force me to repeat mine.
or
2. know you have lost and stop arguing. that does not have to mean you believe in God, you only are saying by admitting you lost that there are no big problems with jesus, the bible, and God, that you can think of. and that I've proven wrong the issues you brought up.

I'm guessing you will make up a number 3. this number 3 will be just like the number 1 above.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

Also, why doesn't it tell us scientific things that go today?
For example:
-- How stars are light years away rather than in the sky.
-- How each system of the body works and how it works that way.
-- That the Earth isn't flat.
-- That the Earth revolves around the Sun, and the Moon revolves around the Earth, not the Sun revolving around the Earth.
-- Why blood moons happen and how they happen.
-- This list goes on and on...

3 years, 6 months ago

Well, we do know that animals didn't come from dirt, it's more the other way around.

Also, if the Bible is truly God-inspired, why doesn't it amaze us on every page? Why doesn't it give proof like this in a section that Jesus could write about:


"Hello, I am Jesus. I claim to be God. I know that you may need more proof, so here it is:

Take a look at Mount Sinai. Everyone knows that, until today, Mount Sinai stood near here. It is the mountain where God, my father, gave Moses the ten commandments.

Mount Sinai vanished this morning, and what was left in its place was a perfectly smooth, polished stone base measuring four miles square. In centuries, people will find that Mount Sinai landed near a place called Newark, New Jersey. When they dig into it, they will find that the bottom is also perfectly smooth, and they will be able to align it with the plain. I have said many times that, if you have faith, you can move mountains. I have proved that I am God by moving the mountain.

That may not be enough, so here's another:
Draw a circle. You know there is a distance across that circle. Let's call it the diameter. There is also a distance around the circle: we could call it the circumference.

When you divide the circumference by the diameter, you get this irrational number called Pi. As an irrational number, the decimals go on forever and it never repeats.

There will be a day when machines called computers will find out billions of digits of Pi, and near the millionth trillionth digit, it says this:

1836263826727266466253863617527627364661663761564736271673746273747627

Now that I have proven twice that I am God, here is what I want to say as the creator of the universe...."



Wouldn't that be amazing? If that page existed, no one would ever question God at all. Everyone would believe that God existed.


Why would he not do that? If he really wanted us to all believe in him, then he would give us the absolute evidence that he is god.

The reason is obvious: He can't do that. He's not God. If God really wanted many people to believe in him, he would give us evidence. Since he does want us to believe, and he hasn't given any evidence, that leaves one last option: He didn't exist.

3 years, 6 months ago

Did Adam, Eve, and Moses know about chemical reactions? no they did not. so why would they write "and God made chemical reactions out of the clay, and humans were made" God could made chemical reactions out of this clay, most likely when he breathed on them.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

also, this statement is in no way true. In science, there are genes that must be taken into consideration for life. There needs to be chemical reactions, not some guy impossibly making humans out of dirt.

3 years, 6 months ago
Ishita
replied to...

whaT!
life after death as if. How can you prove it?

3 years, 6 months ago

....And that's checkmate!

3 years, 6 months ago

So you can't repeat the same argument because 1 my claims do not fit this specific discussion and 2 you haven't refuted the evidence or given evidence that contradicts the theories.

Your claim to know that God exists, though you haven't provided any evidence. You really just make rationalizations. All you wanted to do was try to justify my argument, and are being like "why aren't you satisfied?" That's delusion.

3 years, 6 months ago

What do you mean? The burden of proof is in you.

3 years, 6 months ago

I explain things to you and you turn around and repeat the same argument.

3 years, 6 months ago

Don't stay away from the proof then say that the proofs are invisible to me.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

the proofs of God aren't existent, because you keep rationalizing without evidence.

3 years, 6 months ago

what, the proofs of God invisible to you?

3 years, 6 months ago

*applies the logic to God*
You should see why I don't believe in God.

3 years, 6 months ago

No proof

3 years, 6 months ago

Why do you think he's not real?

3 years, 6 months ago

no.

3 years, 6 months ago

I've never been trying to use the Big Bang as a way to disprove God. You were the one saying that the Big Bang was illogical, though there is evidence supporting it. It does not prove nor disprove God's existence.


Let me ask you a question:
Do you believe in Bigfoot?

3 years, 6 months ago

maybe God created the particle to blow up and expand the universe. the particle does not disprove God.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

BOTH of these are rationalizations. Though we don't know exactly how the particle came into existence, the particle is still evident by the information listed in the sources.

3 years, 6 months ago

God created the universe and the laws in it. he could have made different laws cause he's God. but he made these laws that work great.

3 years, 6 months ago

my statement this particle did come from nothing is not answered in you argument. God did not come from nothing he is eternal, always was and always will be.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

Clarification: the "this" in "how this came to be" has the antecedent of the Big Bang, not God.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

Also, cosmic background radiation has been found - the afterglow of the bang - in all directions.
Here's my source: http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/BigBang/

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

An entire deity coming from nothing is more broken, because nothing is able to break the laws of physics, and there are definitely some verifiable sources that explain how this came from (what could even not be) nothing.

First, astronomers have found the universe to be expanding (with quasars and distant galaxies), which if we were to take a step backwards, it would be back to a dense particle (smaller than that pore on your skin) that is extremely dense, probably more dense than lead.

3 years, 6 months ago

God, in creation does not go against science more then the big bang does.

3 years, 6 months ago

something coming from nothing is broken in the big bang, or before when the particle, negative matter, or whatever was made.

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

"Our belief is not a belief. Our principles are not a faith. We do not rely solely upon science and reason, because these are necessary rather than sufficient factors, but we distrust anything that contradicts science or outrages reason. We may differ from many things, but what we respect is free inquiry, open-mindedness, and the pursuit of ideas for their own sake."
- Christopher Hitchens

This means that though we may not have the evidence, as long as it can be within the laws of physics, it's a reasonable belief. God is beyond reason, being invisible, creating the Earth out of nothing by making the matter-space ratio unequal, etc. That's why things like the Holocaust and the Greeks are accepted as reasonable beliefs to pretty much anyone. I think that the best way to believe in things that don't seem to make sense should be to accept evidence of it. The Holocaust, the Greeks, etc. do not apply because they are bound within the laws of nature.
Speaking of evidence, where's yours?

3 years, 6 months ago
pajrc1234
replied to...

wait so if we shouldn't take the Bible literally, then why take any of it literally? Why trust the Bible that God exists???

3 years, 6 months ago
thecries
replied to...

no. after I die all this will be gone, this place exist only for me... that's what I believe

3 years, 6 months ago

let's say you are 30 years old. your parents let's say they are 60 years old. will you believe they were alive before you.

3 years, 6 months ago

why should I go backwards, existence started when I was born... I can't prove that there was life before me... can't believe everything you read my friend, this is the world of illusions... don't forget

3 years, 6 months ago

I'm starting you think the world started when you were born. I'm guessing you don't believe in evolution then.

3 years, 6 months ago

no. I wasn't there... I only focus on my experience, I don't like to put faith in stories I can't prove is right...

3 years, 6 months ago

do you believe in WWII and the holocost?

3 years, 6 months ago

I can't speak on nothing I didn't witness too... I personally have to be there, you truth will always be different then my truth

3 years, 6 months ago

so you don't believe in them? you think they were fake?

3 years, 6 months ago

if I haven't witnessed it then I can't speak of it... I would look foolish speaking highly of something that I didn't experience

3 years, 6 months ago

never did say I believe in the moon landings...

3 years, 6 months ago

have you witnessed the moon landings? why do you believe them then?

3 years, 6 months ago

ow you going off books but haven't witnessed it,... well I'm going to leave y'all to it

3 years, 6 months ago

jesus, and lazerous, the guy who landed on Elisha's bones. all have came back. but jesus, who is God and knows all has told us.

3 years, 6 months ago

who has came back from the dead to say that there's life after death? no. skip that question, have you died yet?

3 years, 6 months ago

so yes, the cries.

3 years, 6 months ago

You also still have nothing to prove.

3 years, 6 months ago

the cries

what should I prove.

3 years, 6 months ago

pajrc

on the bible it says "one day for God is a thousand years, and a thousand years one day" not literal of course but back at creation God could not have seen a day being 24 hours. a day for God was different.

3 years, 6 months ago
thecries
replied to...

how do you know?

3 years, 6 months ago

also, Adam ate the apple and was supposed to die that day, but died 930 years later. A year isn't a year if there is no sun to revolve around. If one day is 930 years, God created the sun after almost four millenniums after the creation of the Earth. This is impossible.

3 years, 6 months ago

prove it...

3 years, 6 months ago

The church makes no statement on evolution, pope francis even agrees to it. Creation took WAY more then 7 days, the bible should not be taken literally. the flood was a really long time ago, not yesterday, so evidence to support it will not be that strong. also the flood only covered the part if earth where humans were, it could have covered the whole earth though.

the Catholic church knows the bible was written by people according to what they saw, Noah saw everything covered in water, so he said the while earth. the church leaves these topics open for one to chose. I chose to believe the earth is old because there is undeniable science to support it. I don't believe in evolution, not because the bible says so, but because I don't see any undeniable proof for it.


there are many prodestant denominations, and other religions that believe the earth is 6000 years old. this is disproved by science.

3 years, 6 months ago

Life exists only in physical form
life when a living organism can eat, breathe, poop, sex , move
As the physical form would decomposed
so there is no life after death

3 years, 6 months ago

Evolution, Noah's flood, and 7 days from beginning of time until humanity to name a few things.

3 years, 6 months ago

what do we today believe that goes against. science that we know of?

3 years, 6 months ago

that's exactly my point. the church doesn't change when met with proof that it should. it stays rooted in iron age thinking, unable to adapt. it takes centuries to accept things even when the evidence is shoved into their faces. even when most of the Catholic works demands it. in that case I'm referring to their recent decision to give communion to those who divorce and remarry. that which does not evolve will be out competed by others. there is a reason that Islam is the fastest growing religion. there is a reason that the majority of Catholics today are not in modern countries. they are in the developing world.

3 years, 6 months ago

at the time not only did the church not change but very little people changed. the church is pointed out because people like you hate the church and look for ways to discredit it. the church, like the majority of scientists at that time decided to make sure the sun being the center of the universe was true. turns out it's false.

the church dogma does not, today disagree with any science. if science wad truth, it would not need to be changed as it has many many times. the church has not changed its doctrines. it has changed in small ways, but not it's big beliefs.

3 years, 6 months ago

they denied the earth revolved around the sun for years. that was science. that was truth. they denied it. the church doesn't care about truth. they care about religious dogma. science is truth. it is probable. it is testable. if it turns out to be wrong it is changed. if the church is wrong they resist change for decades or even centuries before giving in.

3 years, 6 months ago

you soul lives on after you die. I know you don't believe in the soul because you can't see it.

science and the truth- I love it.
we all know what science is, i love science. now for the truth part. God is the truth. The Catholic faith, the one true faith, goes along with science. or at least does not deny any science.

3 years, 6 months ago
erikD9921
replied to...

Religion is a thing of the past, its time to move forward with science and the truth

3 years, 6 months ago

I go by science. when I die, I decompose. during the process my decomposing corpse provides nutrients for the soil, which provides food for autotrophs, then provides food for heterotrophs. so I'm dead, I won't love on, however I help out the ecosystem

3 years, 6 months ago

I am yet to think that there is a life after death. But I advocate believing so if it supplies you with sufficient impetus to do good and be good all day long. You know what? If there was a life after death, the dead ones wouldn't be called dead, they would be just referred as those who are reposing. Is it the concepts of heaven and hell which is bothering you? Man, stop it, heed me. The idea of heaven and hell is a creation of fantasy. It is how you behave in this planet which accounts for you being in hell or heaven. Just behave well with your neighbours. They themselves are just sufficient to make you feel what it is like in heaven. It can also go other way round of course. Your life, your destiny lies in your hands.

3 years, 6 months ago

BigB, various faiths believe in life after death in the form of reincarnation, which can exist independently of God.

3 years, 6 months ago
ADrunkenRobot
replied to...

Maybe because God himself isn't synonymous with the idea of an afterlife.

3 years, 6 months ago

What reliable testimonies are there that actually prove that there is an afterlife?

3 years, 6 months ago

Let me first make it clear that I don't believe in go or life after death. I believe that if there somehow is a life after death that there is nothing or nobody to say could have nothing to do with God or religion

3 years, 6 months ago

How can someone say there is life after death but say God does not exist? If there is life after death then we humans have souls. A possible gift from God?

3 years, 6 months ago

I don't think we have enough evidence, rational or scientific explanation of it. I would say it is yet to be proved.

3 years, 6 months ago

life after death is a concept created to make us feel better

3 years, 6 months ago

It would be possible to do that, so you're right on that part. The only factor making it impossible is that once we die, our brains stop working. We don't have those heads to imagine it after we die.

3 years, 6 months ago

There is no hard evidence of life after death, but that does not mean it is not a possibility. How do you know that your life is not an inverse reality of someone that has died before? What is hard evidence anyway? We humans just made these terms up to explain the inexplainable. It is our gift and yet it is also a curse for us humans to have the ability of reasoning. With that being said it is possible for us to create a reality in our own heads of life after death, but that reality would only exist in our own heads.

3 years, 7 months ago

We are actually just a bunch of reacting cells. These chemical reactions are how we move, think, etc. When we die, the cells stop reacting. There is no "soul" thing inside us. It's actually created out of fear, because those who created it were scared of death.

As for the visions, they were imagining it. They were thinking of what it would be like (if it was real).
People later have similar visions because they were taught these things. They want to think of what it would be like.

3 years, 7 months ago

if there is life after death then number of people/living organisms would be fixed because as the number of persons are dying would be exactly equal to number of people getting a new lives but we all observe that population is increasing day by day so given sentence is not true anymore.

3 years, 8 months ago

Exactly butterflywings. I have experienced and heard stories of life after death. It isn't heaven and hell. It's a energy world. You have no physical being. You are energy. It's a different dimension, and you guys are taking his all way too literally. "There's no evidence of this." Okay, so there's no hard evidence. How about the stories a 4 year old kid tells about how he lived in Ireland and describes his entire family and his memories? Scientists found that this family did in fact exist with flawless precision. People who die tell stories of what they saw. Do you seriously think every single one of them are lying? They're all in a grand plot to deceive you! At this point you arent even thinking scientifically anymore. You must admit that the chances of everyone lying are astonishingly minute. Either they are experiencing something psychological or are actual in the spirit world. The odds of it being psychological when the person is completely dead is also pretty ridiculous.

3 years, 8 months ago

non of you guys is wrong. Proof that life after death exists, has never been found, but that doesn't mean that it isn't there. This debate can never be won by anyone, because there is no truth.

3 years, 8 months ago

What some people have said about finding out when you die. OK, but remember there is good life after death in heaven, really bad eternal torture in hell, those in hell wish they had no life after death. To get to heaven you need to have faith, and do good works. That is said in the bible many times. saying, "we won't know until we die" is not having faith. i am not judging anyone I am just telling them what the bible says.

3 years, 8 months ago

Many have had visions of both God, angels, the devil, heaven, and Mary. St. John wrote a book on what he saw, Revelation, read it. How do you explain our Lady of Guatalupea. Here Mary appeared to a man several times and the man got a picture Mary's face on his cloak the cloak should have crumpled into dust 7 years after it was made, but is still intact and you can go see it. After that miracle many Indians converted because they saw the cloak. The Indians then told the story to other tribes and without seeing, they believed. How do you disprove this.

3 years, 8 months ago

I think the question " Is there life after death?" is stupid.
Can anybody tell me 100 % that after death, there is life?
No.
I think, life is there to have fun and don't think about it.
I don't mean that, there is no life behind death, but I think that we see it, when we get old and die.
That is my opinion about it.

3 years, 8 months ago

It's very simply, there is no evidence to support the position for life after death, therefore, for the sake of debate, there is no life after death. Alex, you claim there is evidence, however, you have failed to provide any such evidence. you are making a fallacy of assertion. Please provide us the your sources so we can evaluate the evidence. If you can't, then you must concede the notion. That doesn't mean you have to stop believing in life after death, but you will have to concede for the sake of argument.

3 years, 8 months ago

there is a lot of evidence for life after death.

3 years, 8 months ago

I have never knew what was hard to understand that after death is nothing. I know it's a bitter thought, but it's more logical than believing heaven, hell , reincarnation, spirit world, limbo, and everything else that people have come up with to hide themselves from the truth.

3 years, 8 months ago

Don't know why mine changed there i agree to life after death

3 years, 8 months ago

I already gave you my evidence.

3 years, 8 months ago

ok first of all, personal experience isn't valid evidence for anyone other than the person who experienced it.

There is zero valid evidence to suggest that an afterlife exists, if there is, could someone give me their best evidence?

3 years, 8 months ago

I firmly believe in life after death. So many cases of reincarnation and recollection of death and the spirit world. For me, it's too much to deny.

3 years, 8 months ago

HistoryBuff there is plenty of evidence. Many people have had visions of life after death. St. John even wrote a book on what he saw. Jesus tells us there is eternal life after death. The life may be good or bad. one may wish for nothing if they get Hell.

3 years, 8 months ago

How can something come from nothing? I do agree your notion of soul; there simply isn't any proof. But alas I think we can prove nothing. Is this world real, and not a hologram? Are space and time illusions? Prove to me life is real. The theory she refers to is the multiverse theory, which who knows could be true.

3 years, 8 months ago

there's simply no evidence that a soul exists, it would be a nice back up I agree, but no evidence for it. As far as we know, when we die, it would be like it was before you were born, nothing

3 years, 8 months ago

In my opinion, life after death does exist. I believe in reincarnation. If an event in History was to swap (for example Hitler won the second world war) then you might not be who you are now because of a death in your family before you were born. But there would be another you in this time period. I haven't got any evidence, but I think that a soul is something that destiny can't touch, souls control destiny. It is only my opinion.

3 years, 8 months ago

because? what evidence makes you say there is no doubt?

3 years, 8 months ago

No doubt! There is life after death

3 years, 8 months ago

Well, You cant guarantee that their is life after death. First what would be the basis that there is life after death? Second is that if youre going to use the bible as the basis of this motion its because not legit there are different versions and interpretation in the bible plus bible is only made by a man we cant assure that those things written in there is a fact or the truth .

If there will be a proof that there is life after death then the motion is over.

3 years, 8 months ago

There is no proof that there is life after death, so,,nobody could tell that life exists after death. There should be proof for that.

3 years, 8 months ago

well I didn't mean to insult anyone, sorry if I did. People do get offended by common knowledge, that can't be helped.

As far as people thinking that they've achieved immortality by having children is just broadening the definition of immortality to being redundant. They are still mortal.

leaving traces of your life isn't an extension of your biological life, it's a good thing to remember people, but it's not life after death

3 years, 8 months ago

XKCD did a comic about it called Ten Thousand as "for each thing that "everyone knows" there are, on average, 10,000 people in the US hearing about it for the first time."

3 years, 8 months ago

If we should avoid comments that "everyone knows" because you find them insulting to your intelligence, many debates will run into problems. "Everyone knows" that man evolved from other forms of life, the Earth orbits the sun, and that our actions are causing climate change, but for all of these things there are those who deny them and believe differently. Kindly avoid being insulting simply because you feel that a point is common knowledge.

People describe having children as a way of achieving immortality since they will carry on your genes, as well as remembering you. Both of these are sometimes considered ways of living past the end on one's natural life.

Likewise artists who achieve sufficient success are said to have gained some measure of immortality through their work. Leonardo DaVinci have been dead for many, many years but we remember his name as well as many of his works. Some consider this to be a way of living on after death.

3 years, 8 months ago

children remembering a past life? we all know children don't have extreme imaginations, and couldn't just be making stuff up.... Personal experiences aren't really evidence though anyway, scientifically speaking.

As far as the subject, it depends what you mean by "life after death".

agreeing there is because subsequent generations of life will exist after ours is kind of dumb, we all know that.

however, if you mean a mystical place where your consciousness goes to when you die, of course there's no evidence for that.

3 years, 8 months ago

how could u tell that particular site is fictional? And if u want to read authors than read Raymond moody, Damien echols etc.
even there are cases where children remember their past lyf. and even quantum science says that it is possible.

3 years, 8 months ago

If you mean the one that was originally in the World News Daily Report, that is a fictional news site. Otherwise, could you provide the authors or something to make it easier to track down?

3 years, 8 months ago

History buff, Actually debate occurs on topic of which outcome is uncertain. And u told there is no evidence. pardon me u have not analyzed the topic yet German scientists have proven with their evidence. Google it if u doubt.

3 years, 8 months ago

Assuming the question refers to an afterlife and not the circle of life, then its not possible to debate it. there is no evidence either way. its all oppinons, conjecture and faith. not very useful for an intellectual debate.

3 years, 8 months ago

One individual's death does not end the world. Life continues with or without us, so there is life after death. Even is that life is simply the materials that composed our bodies breaking down or being eaten.

3 years, 8 months ago

there is no evidence at all for an afterlife, or any other invisible made up places.

3 years, 8 months ago
Discuss "There is life after death" life philosophy religion
Add an argument!
Use the arrow keys to navigate between statements. Press "A" to agree and press "D" to disagree.