162 replies to this topic

[shadowhawk]

[Danail Bulgaria]

All physical life will die: Wrong

 

Your idea, that there have been a powerfull cataclism,that has turned the Earth into a molten lava is wrong. At this moment there havent been a cataclism, that to desroy all of the life on the Earth. If such existed, we would not be here today.

The cataclism that killed the dinosaurs haven't killed all possible life forms. So it is a proof of the resistence of the life, not of its incappailit of surviving cataclisms.

 

No environment is unsuitable for the life as general. There is at least one life form, that can sattle each one possible environment. Some life forms can survive and even thrive in surprisingly extreme environments.

 

I havent met fundamental laws of science, that ensure by all means the death of the human. This is a reason for me to believe, that at some moment in the future physical immortality for the people will be possible.

 

And yes, if you want the human kind to survive all possible cataclisms, then the correct way is not to hope, that there is a spirit, but to speed up the science and make the different survival scenarios happen.

 

Near death experiences can be tricks of the duying brain.

 

 

P.S.

The last two videos are dumb

 

 

 

 

  SEIVTCHO:  The asteroid may have killed everything on the spot it hit the Earth. The question is, that the aftermath after that hit, for the entire planet, is what killed many life forms, entire species, incuding the dinosaurs, this is why it is a cataclism. But that cataclism didn't manage to kill out all possible forms of life, all possible species to the last individual, of the entire planet. Thus the life has survived the cataclism. And has thrived again. This is an example, proving, that life survives cataclisms. The life is destined to survive. Even if the entire planet gets smashed from a bigger asteroid, there still will remain some extremofil (like those, living directly on the magma in the volcanos, and after erruptions are being shot in the stratosphere alive), that will survive, and will retsart the evolution.

Actually there was an asteroid bombardment before the one that killed the dinosaurs that turned the entire earth into molten lava and there is no evidence that anything we call life survived.  Wnat the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs proves is that cataclysms can and do extinguish life.  The ones coming certainly are on a scale much bigger than the dinosaur asteroid.  As for your theory that life is being shot into space by volcano's, I would like to know your evidence for that..  
 

 

The survivability of the life, and the fact, that there are solutions for each cataclisms you wrote, are arguments against the view, that absolutely everything living will surely die. If the human kind manahes to make it, and survives too, it will be great, but the life and living things do not include only people. It includes absolutely everything alive, and yes, this absolutely everything alive can survive absolutely everythig, with or without the people.

In other words the life form lnown as humans, can be extinguished but there are life forms not human that can/t?  By the way, just as human life can be extinguished so can any form.  We can kill anything ourselves.

 

 

In brief, the idea, that everything living, that is physical will die is wrong.

There are environments where no life cam presently exist.  Astronomers are even now trying to find places where life CAN exist.  So far they have not found anything.  Thr way you describe it, life should be everywhere.
 
 

 

   If the people can survive all possible cataclisms or not is another topic.

Hardly.  What is it to you if some virus survives?  You will be physically dead.
 
 

 

And it is a completely third topic if particularly we, the people living today will manage to survive them. 

If the “You” is only physical, you won’t.  So it is on topic.
 
 

 

  If you want the human kind to survive all possible cataclisms, then the correct way is not to hope, that there is a spirit, but to speed up the science and make the different survival scenarios happen. 

Science?  You are not going to change the fundamental laws of science which predicts your death.
 
 

 

And back to the question - why do you think, that the soul exists?

I have presented several reasons already and you have not dealt with them.  Let’s deal with another, Near death experiences next.
 

 

 

[shadowhawk]

SEIVTCHO:  Quote from SH " All physical life will die:" Wrong

You act as if nothing can kill physical life.  It happens all the time and conditions exist which kill everything.  It is the norm.  For humans it is 100%.  Physical trauma can kill anything and conditions will exist in the future which will destroy all physical life.  Nothing will keep us all from physically dying.
 

Your idea, that there have been a powerfull cataclism,that has turned the Earth into a molten lava is wrong. At this moment there havent been a cataclism, that to desroy all of the life on the Earth. If such existed, we would not be here today.

   There have been a number of mass extinction events that have killed off most life on earth.  There cam be extinction events which could kill us all and these are small ones compared to what will eventually happen.  Asteroids and Comets have impacted the earth numerous times showing this can happen and it can happen at any time.  There is no evidence of life on earth during these bombardments so you cannot say life survived them. http://www.sciencewo...dment-earth.htm
https://en.wikipedia...ki/Impact_event
https://en.wikipedia...avy_Bombardment
http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/neo/life.html

The cataclism that killed the dinosaurs haven't killed all possible life forms. So it is a proof of the resistence of the life, not of its incappailit of surviving cataclisms.

It is proof that extinction is not only possible with the right extinction event.  Life cannot survive anything.

No environment is unsuitable for the life as general. There is at least one life form, that can sattle each one possible environment. Some life forms can survive and even thrive in surprisingly extreme environments.

 Nonsense.  There are environments which life cannot and does not survive and exist.  Our great search is to find another environment where it can exist.

I havent met fundamental laws of science, that ensure by all means the death of the human. This is a reason for me to believe, that at some moment in the future physical immortality for the people will be possible.

Every purely physical human that has ever lived so far is dead with the exception of the ones now living.  They have been killed by many causes from decease to accidents to war.  This is to name only a few causes of physical death.  There is so far 100% certainty.  So what law are you looking for?

 

And yes, if you want the human kind to survive all possible cataclisms, then the correct way is not to hope, that there is a spirit, but to speed up the science and make the different survival scenarios happen.

So far there is no evidence that science can or will give us inmortality.  In fact it has given us ways of killing each other big time.  The problem is not with science, it is ill equipped to teach us values because Science is a process not a code of morality.

 

Near death experiences can be tricks of the duying brain.

You have no evidence for this.  If we have a spirit we could expect experiences like this.

P.S.
The last two videos are dumb

What a dumb statement.  No logic, argumentation or reason.

 

[pajamas]

Like many of the posts here seem to imply, I would agree that whether or not "you" can achieve immortality through spiritual means is first dependent on your premise that 1) at least some people can achieve immortality, or 2) nobody can achieve immortality.

 

With the premise that some people can you are in luck as there are many spiritual means accessible to us that claim to lead to immortality. I wish you the best of luck in choosing the right one. Perhaps they are all correct or perhaps all incorrect.

 

With the premise that none can achieve immortality, well, you are less lucky in this situation.

 

In my experiences, I've learned a thing or two from a number of religions but mostly Biblical stuff as I went to church for most of my life. I don't know for sure if there is an afterlife because the nearest I've ever gotten is merely a drug induced out of body experience. I do think there is value in believing (having faith) that immortality through spiritual means exists though, especially if you believe you've attained access to it. The reason being that for many people who worry about death, not constantly worrying about it will enable them to devote more of their thoughts and actions toward productive means rather than wasting them on trying really hard not to die.

 

Maybe because I'm still young and healthy, I don't worry about death anyway, but I still find value in the spiritual teachings of/about gurus, prophets, and God in other ways that seem to make my time as a physical being seem more rewarding. The teachings I'm referring to are mostly related to providing advice that can lead to living a more productive life by not wasting my time and thoughts on unproductive things such as prejudice, worry, envy, revenge, etc. 

 

The spiritual directions provided by those more enlightened guys also seem like a really convenient way for them to direct their audiences to toward the right direction without overly violating their existing world views. And, if they are that far advanced in their thinking than the general population, maybe it makes sense to me that they are considered spiritual guides, prophets, or better.

[shadowhawk]

pajamas: Like many of the posts here seem to imply, I would agree that whether or not "you" can achieve immortality through spiritual means is first dependent on your premise that 1) at least some people can achieve immortality, or 2) nobody can achieve immortality.
With the premise that some people can you are in luck as there are many spiritual means accessible to us that claim to lead to immortality. I wish you the best of luck in choosing the right one. Perhaps they are all correct or perhaps all incorrect.

Or perhaps as with competing "physical," only approaches to immortality one may be correct.  Why assume because there is more than one choice they are all wrong?  Anyone care for being quick frozen?  

With the premise that none can achieve immortality, well, you are less lucky in this situation.

Which one do you chose?

 

In my experiences, I've learned a thing or two from a number of religions but mostly Biblical stuff as I went to church for most of my life. I don't know for sure if there is an afterlife because the nearest I've ever gotten is merely a drug induced out of body experience. I do think there is value in believing (having faith) that immortality through spiritual means exists though, especially if you believe you've attained access to it. The reason being that for many people who worry about death, not constantly worrying about it will enable them to devote more of their thoughts and actions toward productive means rather than wasting them on trying really hard not to die.

Happy drugs after you have gone to church?

 

Maybe because I'm still young and healthy, I don't worry about death anyway, but I still find value in the spiritual teachings of/about gurus, prophets, and God in other ways that seem to make my time as a physical being seem more rewarding. The teachings I'm referring to are mostly related to providing advice that can lead to living a more productive life by not wasting my time and thoughts on unproductive things such as prejudice, worry, envy, revenge, etc.

 Right thinking while still young?

The spiritual directions provided by those more enlightened guys also seem like a really convenient way for them to direct their audiences to toward the right direction without overly violating their existing world views. And, if they are that far advanced in their thinking than the general population, maybe it makes sense to me that they are considered spiritual guides, prophets, or better.

Do you have a spirit or are you just a bag of bones and meat?
 

[Danail Bulgaria]

Just a skin bag of bones and meat

 

controlled from the brain

 

This is what is proven with certainity.

 

The existence of the spirit is theoretical at the best.

[shadowhawk]

Just a skin bag of bones and meat

 

controlled from the brain

 

This is what is proven with certainity.

 

The existence of the spirit is theoretical at the best.

A skin bag of bones and meat includes the brain and everything in it is the materialist view.  Everything purely physical dies as I have been arguing.  Anyone who thinks otherwise is arguing theoretically at best.

[shifter]

What is the nature of the universe? Until you can definitively answer that how do you know? How does anyone know?

[shadowhawk]

The ground of being is spiritual but there is a physical world.  You may think you can  fly but jump off a cliff and you will find out there is a physical world.  On a deeper quantum level the idea that all things are just material - what ever that  is - the nature of the physical becomes much more problematic. 

[shadowhawk]

Spirituality and materialism.  What is truth.

 

http://www.c-span.or...-nature-science

 

 

 

 

 

[shadowhawk]

Theists often build their case on the following but this is not nearly all.

ositive arguments for Christian theism

• The kalam cosmological argument and the Big Bang theory
• The fine-tuning argument from cosmological constants and quantities
• The origin of life, part 1 of 2: the building blocks of life
• The origin of life, part 2 of 2: biological information
• The sudden origin of phyla in the Cambrian explosion
• Galactic habitable zones and circumstellar habitable zones
• Irreducible complexity in molecular machines
• The creative limits of natural selection and random mutation
• Angus Menuge’s ontological argument from reason
• Alvin Plantinga’s epistemological argument from reason
• William Lane Craig’s moral argument
• The unexpected applicability of mathematics to nature
• Arguments and scientific evidence for non-physical minds

[shadowhawk]

DO WE HAVE A SOUL (SPIRIT) or are we a spirit.

 

If you want Life are you only talking about your physical body?  Here is a interesting argument that we are more than just ur physical body.

 

http://www.saintsand...-you-have-soul/

 

 

 

[shadowhawk]

The soul is not some little guy setting in your head.  The soul is you.

[shifter]

I recently witnessed the birth of new life from death. Yes that's right. Life after death!

Saw a dead kangaroo in the grass and soon enough from its flesh spawned the new life of..... Maggots and larval looking grub things. Yep. From death rose new life. Originally we are all from star dust. Directly those maggot things are from that kangaroo.

We'll that's the physical aspect. Hopefully for us humans who are self aware of our own spirit we can live elsewhere for eternity that not even the eventual heat death of the universe could destroy us

[Danail Bulgaria]

The maggots and the larval looking grub things have come from already existing life - different insects, that lay their eggs on a rotting flesh. Even though, I maybe like you, believe, that the life has started from the non-life. My belief is, that random mixtures of organic molecules have produced the first mixtures, that are complex enough to be named alive, even the astronomically small chance to be produced life form by random mixing of organic compounds.

 

We, the people, can live for eternity, and not even the heat death of the universe will destroy us, but the path to that is the science, not the spirit.

[shadowhawk]

Science is a method of logic and it does not create anything.  Everything you mentioned dies a physical death.  While nothing physical is destroyed it ceases to be able to do anything or cause change.

[Danail Bulgaria]

By science I mean not only the sciencentific articles, but also absolutely everything, that can be considered a positive product of the human brain. I am simply short in my statement. And that product of the human brain accumulates. Here are included the technology, the knowledge, the stored information of everything found by chance (because you believe, that many things are just found by a chance), and everything, that homo sapiens has reached by himself on the bases of his brain work. And this thing create. I see it. Watch discovery "How its made". You will see, that this power is creative. Your computer is made thanks to this creative power of the human brain. The same with your car, your home, your clothes. Everything this is thanks to the accumulated human brain work. 

 

Everything physical dies, correct, but also it is correct, that some living things can be helped to survive everything. 

 

The correct path is to develope ways for the human to survive everything. 

[shadowhawk]

"Some living things can be helped to survive everything?  Proof.  This is not scientific.

 

[shifter]

What if the universe itself is a living entity? Existing on a level of consciousness or dimensions we could never comprehend? Are the microbes that live in us aware of our existence? With the greatest teachers and infinite time could they ever understand a fraction of what we know? To the universe, we could be as simple as the microbes are to us.

 

The great thing about this kind of science is I can make up a million different theories. You cant say any of them are wrong because the answer is not known or even unknowable.

[shadowhawk]

There is no evidence of any of this so the argument is moot.  You need something to base it on. ;0

[shifter]

Your problem shadowhawk is you see everything as some kind of argument. It's a debate throwing ideas around. I never argued a point. I didn't say 'This is how it is!' I simply put forward an idea You would make many more friends if you were less combative in your language and respected other peoples right of ideas. Even those that don't agree with your own.

 

You argue that a physical body will always end up dying. From our current understanding of life, this could very well be true if you look far enough into the future should the universe succumb to heat death or collapse into a singularity or whatever it's end is. But taking the actual end of the universe out of the equation, even if Earth was totally obliterated by a comet the size of a small moon and wiped out the biosphere and reduced Earth into millions of pieces of rock forming a new asteroid belt, life would/could go on elsewhere. Perhaps even on some of the debris. We simply don't know enough to say that's impossible. Improbable maybe. There's an infinitely vast universe out there I'm sure life isn't isolate to our small rock we call Earth. So as the old saying goes.... Life goes on

 

People on these threads go on as if, the answers to the questions of the universe, religion or spirituality will be decided in this thread somehow despite the fact that mankind simply does not have the knowledge or all the facts beforehand to reach a conclusive answer. You can only go on faith when all you can have are questions but you want some kind of answer.

 

I do believe in an afterlife but I think there could be several different means to several different ends. Even science and technology could provide us with a way to get there. With the exponential increase in technology over time, your imagination is the limit.

Edited by shifter, 05 April 2016 - 03:49 AM.

[shadowhawk]

The topic is not about me personally.  That is off topic and immaterial to the discussion though many think calling people names is a good point.  It reminds me of our current political situation .  As for your comment the topic is about immortality using spiritual means.  I do not see how it relates to the topic.  If the discussion turns into what ever we can dream up then it turns into nonsense.  That is why I asked for evidence.  Given the topic, GOD IS THE BEST EXPLANATION OF THE WAY THINGS ARE.  Want immortality?  you wont get it in materialism.  Sorry it offended you.

Edited by shadowhawk, 05 April 2016 - 10:48 PM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

@shadowhawk

 

I think, that I got an interesting idea for you to investigate. You seem to be very religeous. And the topic is "Immortality through spiritual means". Why not you investigate the such called uncorrupted bodies of saints, and eventually propose it as an alternative of cryonics. Is there a religeous belief, that the incorrupted corpses will rise again? You may collect information about that. It will be an interesting reading.

[shadowhawk]

@shadowhawk

 

I think, that I got an interesting idea for you to investigate. You seem to be very religeous. And the topic is "Immortality through spiritual means". Why not you investigate the such called uncorrupted bodies of saints, and eventually propose it as an alternative of cryonics. Is there a religeous belief, that the incorrupted corpses will rise again? You may collect information about that. It will be an interesting reading.

The topic is immortality through spiritual means.  I did not create it.  I have argued that every thing purely physical dies/  By that I do not mean physically cease to exist in some other form. (dust ?)  You can be frozen or dried out but the results are similar.  Either way you are not functioning.  However, being frozen does have the hope of being thawed out and resuming life until eventually you again die.  That is if you are ever correctly unfrozen and I see little advantage to that state and death.  Dante said the deepest parts of hell is being frozen.  Sense the ground of being in the topic is the spiritual things are not purely physical but their ground of being is spiritual.  What is Spiritual never dies since it is not subject to the same laws as the physical.  Spiritually no one ever dies.  So the physical corpse of the saint is dead though dried out and in cryonics you are dead if no one thaws you out correctly and then the physical laws again take over and you eventually die.  The issue is do we have a spirit. What then does spiritual death mean?

[shifter]

The term spiritual death makes no sense. If a spirit is not bound by the physical universe or linear time as we know it, then how can it 'die'.

[Danail Bulgaria]

 

@shadowhawk

 

I think, that I got an interesting idea for you to investigate. You seem to be very religeous. And the topic is "Immortality through spiritual means". Why not you investigate the such called uncorrupted bodies of saints, and eventually propose it as an alternative of cryonics. Is there a religeous belief, that the incorrupted corpses will rise again? You may collect information about that. It will be an interesting reading.

The topic is immortality through spiritual means.  I did not create it.  I have argued that every thing purely physical dies/  By that I do not mean physically cease to exist in some other form. (dust ?)  You can be frozen or dried out but the results are similar.  Either way you are not functioning.  However, being frozen does have the hope of being thawed out and resuming life until eventually you again die.  That is if you are ever correctly unfrozen and I see little advantage to that state and death.  Dante said the deepest parts of hell is being frozen.  Sense the ground of being in the topic is the spiritual things are not purely physical but their ground of being is spiritual.  What is Spiritual never dies since it is not subject to the same laws as the physical.  Spiritually no one ever dies.  So the physical corpse of the saint is dead though dried out and in cryonics you are dead if no one thaws you out correctly and then the physical laws again take over and you eventually die.  The issue is do we have a spirit. What then does spiritual death mean?

 

 

What? The corpses of the saints are just dried corpses? E.g. simple mumies? What the heck is the supernatural thing in their unrottenness then? There are many spontaneously mumified human bodies of people, who were not saints.

 

And why the Christianity claims, that the absence of rotting is some sort of a gift from the God, prooving, that the dead has been a saint? If it is only the spirit that matters, what is the meaning of keepig their bodies unrotten? The only meaning I see is these saints to be resurrected in their own bodies, just as the cryonicists want to be thawed back to life in their own bodies. 

[shadowhawk]

Death means separation..  The physical body dies when it is separated from the spirit.  The spirit of both Christians and non christians does not die because it is not material or physical.  Everything physical deteriorates and dies.  We need to be saved whether we are a saint or not..  There is another separation and that is relational.  I - Thou.  Us and God.  We decide whether we want this and God honors our decision.  Don't want to be with God?  Have it your way.  Now this will have an impact on the body but I don't want to raise to many issues yet.  This second separation is a spiritual death.  You do not spiritually cease to exist but you are separated from God.  You are spiritually dead since you are separated from your ground of being, God by your choice.

Edited by shadowhawk, 15 April 2016 - 01:48 AM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

You didn't answer the most important questions: 

 

- Are the uncorrupted bodies simple mumies? Yes or No. 

- Are they kept uncorrupted in order their spirits to be united again with their bodies, e.g. to be revived into the future.

- Until when they will be kept mumified? Until the immortality is invented or until something else?

- Can this be considered as some sort of cryonics alternative? 

 

If you are not sure or you don't know the answers, simply say I don't know. 

[shadowhawk]

1. Yes they are simply material bodies which are dead though they did not decay.

2.  Whether corrupted or not we will get our bodies and spirit again united in the resurrection in Christianity.

3.  I would assume some would decay slowly and some may not.  They are dead.

4.  No this is not cryonics. nor is it an alternative.  They are unrelated

 

We have had a discussion of the existence of the spirit earlier.  Cryonics is largely a hope not to physically die until thawed out.  But then what even if possible?

[Danail Bulgaria]

If the cryonics, or some of its alternatives works out, then the people will be able to be kept in some unchanging form until the science develops to the point when they can be revived and made physically immortal.

 

I don't believe in the spirit. I think, that all, that you name spirit (our thoughts, feelings, way of thinking, etc.) is nothing more than the workings of our brain, and when someone is frozen, his brain simply stops working. When the body is thawed back alive, the brain starts working again, and everything you name a spirit is restarted again.