does anybody here agree with me that reincarnation is a far more favourable alternative to the idea of heaven? Its far more plausible too i find. Souls being reused. Doesnt that explain why some people are jsut plain EVIL or GOOD too? i dont know just speculating, does anybody agree?

I must admit, I do quite like the idea of reincarnation, and I'm not overly keen on the idea of heaven.

quote:Originally posted by Adrenochrome:

I must admit, I do quite like the idea of reincarnation, and I'm not overly keen on the idea of heaven.

Me too.

1: There is no evidence of this "soul" you speak of.

2: The number of souls on this planet isn't anywhere close to constant, so you'd have to establish some sort of purgatory for body-less souls.

3: Invisible man in the sky/heaven vs invisible soul/reincarnation. We have no evidence for either. Both are equally ridiculous.

4: You're making the assumption that some people are inherently "good" or "evil," which I think is flawed. Furthermore, behavior is often determined by *gasp* life-experiences which shouldn't affect the soul (by your reasoning).

I am not convinced. Reincarnation, like any other supernatural claim, is fucking stupid.

I never said I believe in it - I’m an atheist - I just prefer the idea of it to the idea heaven.

I'd prefer that as well. Heaven always seemed to me like a golden prison.

quote:Originally posted by Dre Crabbe:

I'd prefer that as well. Heaven always seemed to me like a golden prison.

Heaven always seemed very facist to me. And I also couldn't understand how somebody would be happy in heaven knowing that friends and family are burning in hell for eternity, even if they're good people just for being atheists, unless they're forced to be happy.

quote:Originally posted by jsaxton14:

1: There is no evidence of this "soul" you speak of.

2: The number of souls on this planet isn't anywhere close to constant, so you'd have to establish some sort of purgatory for body-less souls.

3: Invisible man in the sky/heaven vs invisible soul/reincarnation. We have no evidence for either. Both are equally ridiculous.

4: You're making the assumption that some people are inherently "good" or "evil," which I think is flawed. Furthermore, behavior is often determined by *gasp* life-experiences which shouldn't affect the soul (by your reasoning).

I am not convinced. Reincarnation, like any other supernatural claim, is fucking stupid.

Em, then maybe you should leave this forum?

I do agree, reincarnation sounds much better than the idea of heaven, heaven (and hell for that matter) both sound just so damned monotoneuos (butchered?)- I'd take reincarnation over heaven on one preference- that I can choose how (assuming I deserve, if that's how a given religion has it, or the way it works) I am reincarnated.

What about the scenario wherein earth is destroyed, along with all humans? then would reincarnation cease to be?

quote:Originally posted by zebra head:

Em, then maybe you should leave this forum?.

Why should he? I agree with everything he said; that does not mean I shouldn't be reading and/or posting in this forum. I want to expose those theistic claims as fucking stupid. I don't like when reason takes a backseat to faith, and online discussions are a great way to show that and maybe even attempt to curtail it.

---------



Anyway, as for the original topic, if I were to believe in either of those concepts, I would choose heaven. Reincarnation seems trivial to me if I do not ultimately get to remember what I have experienced in past lives.

quote:Originally posted by Florida Snow:

What about the scenario wherein earth is destroyed, along with all humans? then would reincarnation cease to be?

Good one! I think we would all get stuck in the waiting zone mentioned in Hinduism.

In my personal belief, I don't believe the Earth can be destroyed until its time is up.

If I had no sure faith in something and or wanted a second chance at life upon looking back, I'd take reincarnation...But I love my face and body so much...If I was sure to some degree that I'd been good and right, with faith, I'd take an eternity in Heaven. If I felt I had wasted life and was likely to burn in hell, I'd quickly by a ticket on the reincarnation expression bound to chihuahuaville. Hopefully I'll get to live in some fashionable ladies purse.

In my personal belief, I don't believe in recycled souls, since new lives are constantly erupting since the population is rising. I believe in life, death, and ressurection and judgement day.

I believe in sex and death, two things that are only going to happen to me once, but at least after death I won't feel nauseous. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Adrenochrome:

I believe in sex and death, two things that are only going to happen to me once, but at least after death I won't feel nauseous. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

You feel nauseous after sex?

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

You feel nauseous after sex?

Obviously not a Woody Allen fan . . . .

quote:Originally posted by Adrenochrome:

Originally posted by Abrahim:

You feel nauseous after sex?

Obviously not a Woody Allen fan . . . .

http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif) Woody makes me laugh... I think it must be the way he says things lol. http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/frown.gif)

Adrenochrome, do you have MSN, AIM, YAHOO Messenger? I'd like to add you there! I know you might not like me but I'd really like to talk to you there, not about all this religious shmaz baz but other things.

quote:Originally posted by Adrenochrome:

I believe in sex and death, two things that are only going to happen to me once, but at least after death I won't feel nauseous. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

I've only one problem with reincarnation.

If you get reincarnated, but don't remember anything from your past life(s), then you're not you. What makes you you if not your life experiances and everything stemming from that (personality etc.)? I just woke up and am somewhat drowsy so forgive me if this doesn't make sense.

One solution to the conundrum of where souls go when there are not enough people for them all is to consider that maybe souls are not limited to this planet there by removing the need for a soul "limbo". Fluctuations in the amount of life on earth may be irrelevant to the reincarnation issue when viewed from the perspective of the universe as a whole.

Then the problem goes universal, or are you saying that the number of lives in the whole universe remains constant? There is nothing to indicate that there are other lives in the universe, let alone that totality of them remains constant. If Earth is any indication, they obviously do not.

my religion believes in reincarnation

(i agree)

If you want to be super technical reincarnation could be worms eating your dead body.

I think I believe in reincarnation, not to say I dont believe in heaven either>>How about, we reincarnate until we finally make it to heaven or nirvana or whatever you want to call it.

quote:Originally posted by rastapimp:

I think I believe in reincarnation, not to say I dont believe in heaven either>>How about, we reincarnate until we finally make it to heaven or nirvana or whatever you want to call it.

Church Lady says: Isn't that just dandy?

quote:Originally posted by T_R_U_T_H:

I've only one problem with reincarnation.

If you get reincarnated, but don't remember anything from your past life(s), then you're not you. What makes you you if not your life experiances and everything stemming from that (personality etc.)? I just woke up and am somewhat drowsy so forgive me if this doesn't make sense.

lol I love how simple and true that was. So simple and true that no one answered to it lol.

If you suddenly are born into a new body without remembering your past self, how is that the same person as the past self?

Why is life force, and souls, why are they identified with personalities by some, like people when they are just the energy that makes us live?

If I woke up in someone elses body, and didnt remember who I was before, then those are two seperate people, two different I's.

We as a person are made up of memories and actions we performed in our current body, if the body dies, and the memories are wiped, then who is to say that we, the old us, is being reincarnated and its not just another person? Recycling life force and energy? There is no limited supply on that!

The truth is when you die, your life force is simply utilized by the mass, your energy is converted, "your soul returns to the whole".

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

Church Lady says: Isn't that just dandy?



Church lady is a stupid bitch that wouldn't believe in reincarnation and eats up what she is told and only listens to religious idea's falling inline with the church.

... Someone's never heard of SNL...

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

Then the problem goes universal, or are you saying that the number of lives in the whole universe remains constant? There is nothing to indicate that there are other lives in the universe, let alone that totality of them remains constant. If Earth is any indication, they obviously do not.

There's nothing to indicate that reincarnation or souls exist either yet here we are discussing it. If we're going to presuppose the existance of reincarnation then why not condider it on a universal scale where hypothetically there is a constant level population of souls and by extension soul bearing lifeforms?

I'm not saying I believe this I'm just trying to think of principles by which reincarnation would operate if it existed.

I know what you are doing, I am pointing out how that doesn't help reincarnation to "operate" any better either. It still leaves us with the exact same problems that you sought to resolve when the issue was brought up on a Earthly scale. The problem of the totality of the population, and it being constant or not, is still there.

A "limbo" would resolve the problems, regardless of the scale.

Now that I've taken the time to think about it the whole thing is ridiculous and not even worth the novelty of discussing even in jest.

Although hypothetically it's possible for there to be a constant amount of life at present, for it to remain constant throughout eternity is just ridiculous, obviously there was no life during the big bang so this "life constant" would require just the limbo soul storage tank I was trying to avoid.

Like I said before the whole thing is ridiculous unworkable and frankly I regret that I even took the time to think about it.

Haha I WIN!

In the worlds major religons that believe in reincanation and heaven, you reincarnate untill you livea perfect life and then you go heaven, alsoif you live a very bad life you go to a temporary hell.

i'd rather live another life than be stuck in 'paradise'for eternity.

fuck, reincarnation kicks ass. heaven is gay and boring. all you people supporting it will just look down and say "shit, that looks fun." as an agnostic person, I don't give a shit so I take none of this seriously

and abrihim, Islam sucks, get over it

Also Reincarnation might require the belief that your life force, or energy, "soul" is a being and has a consciousness.

I do not believe that we are spirits or can waltz around and think in spirit form but it is dependant on the functioning of our body, that when we are dead, we are dead, no other realms.

Here is a relevant convo I had on the topic in relation to the Qur'ans views, the soul, and where "heaven and hell" comes into play:

Abrahim says:

you believe that a person lives, they die, and their energy is simply converted into something else right?

says:

I believe that once our conciousness has expired, there is simply no way one could "experience" heaven or hell

Abrahim says:

you are right completely

says:

would we have consciousness without a brain to support it? absolutely not.

Abrahim says:

absolutely not I agree completely when you are dead and without a body or brain to function it you are dead nothing experiencing absolutely nothing no heaven no hell nothing that I agree with.

says:

so could you experience heaven or hell? or any kind of neutral afterlife, for that matter? it seems not.

Abrahim says:

the "soul" is nothing, doesnt think, isnt our minds, isnt bad or good, its simply the energy of a living thing, or you know, like, life in the plant

you CAN NOT without a brain or eyes or body experience heaven or hell

says:

the soul is just an abstract thought to me

Abrahim says:

what would you call it our life force

says:

our conscious awareness, which expires when our brains expire?

Abrahim says:

I mean the life in a planet

says:

yes, that is what i would call it, if i absolutely HAD to refer to it as a soul. although i do think it's a nice metaphor

Abrahim says:

plant

says:

but plants aren't subject to afterlife existence, so what is the relevance?

Abrahim says:

what would you call the difference between a living plant and a dead plant what does one have that the other doesnt have

says:

^ see above. where is the relevance to the afterlife?

Abrahim says:

its important we're defining life force, energy, soul what is it? what shall we call it? the life in a plan plant

says:

you can call it "life". why introduce another metaphor, clutter it up even further?

Abrahim says:

ok we will call it life no its not a metaphor, the life in the plant is the same as the life in us

says:

now help me realize the relevance to this as concerned with the afterlife. i meant why call it anything BUT life?

Abrahim says:

exactly soul should just be a word for life, there is no such thing as a

spirit

says:

pull up a plant from the ground and sever it's roots ... it dies, the same as our "soul" to brain analogy

Abrahim says:

or a concious soul

says:

soul is a metaphor of life. established! life dies, soul dies. BAM!

Abrahim says:

yes but im clearifying that it has no being or form

says:

i agree with you there.

Abrahim says:

not the greek spirit concept or immortal soul concept there is no such thing and a soul can not experience anything

says:

no form, no being... but is still totally dependent on the brain for a person to be aware of it

Abrahim says:

it is nothing but a word for life life in a living thing

says:

i gotcha

Abrahim says:

ok good

says:

so this "life" dies. then what?

Abrahim says:

then we're on the same level and when you die your soul or life force or energy is converted, goes to the mass, whatever you wanna call it, decomposers use it, whatever, its GONE

says:

why does it have to be converted? why doesn't it just NOT EXIST, much like our bodies and bones don't exist, once they've decomposed?

Abrahim says:

no no thats not what im saying by converted im trying to say that life is gone when you are dead

says:

yes. go on

Abrahim says:

that energy returns to the mass of energy or if you dont want to say that, basically that your life is gone it doesnt "go" anywhere except back to the mass of energy or is no longer existing

says:

so where does the afterlife come in?

Abrahim says:

it doesnt when you're dead when you're dead, you're dead

says:

so why do they call it "after"life? heaven or hell cannot be had in "present"life. it insinuates that this all happens once you're dead ... or like most scriptures like to put it : "when you pass on from this realm to the next"

Abrahim says:

thats untrue, I mean that simply isnt true there is no realm

says:

to me, Abrahim, "afterlife" is the exact same experience as "beforebirth". You just - aren't.

Abrahim says:

where our bodies dont exist you were "dead" before you were born and so you will be "dead" again poof gone, nothing, no realm, no brain no thoughts done

says:

but YOU aren't YOU except for at one point in time... when you are alive! therefore, what happens to the "you" before or after that period ... is of absolute zero relevance!

Abrahim says:

yes

says:

the right here and now. it's all you can contribute to as a human being. those are my thoughts.

Abrahim says:

and it is ABSOLUTE zero too prior to your birth you were nothing afterwards you are nothing you are only now so lets see what we agree on

says:

so the scope of heaven and hell ... how would that affect a person? we agree on this: prior to your birth you were nothing, afterwards you are nothing

Abrahim says:

and we agree that when you are dead there is no realm and that life is nothing by itself except life it is not like a spirit waltzing around and we agree on the irrelevant option plain called Cantaloupe aka Reality and perceptions of it exist and we agree that life exists in a plant and does not exist when it is dead

says:

but i implore you: what is the relevance of heaven or hell, then? other than abstract thought and a metaphorical "incentive" for people to live good lives?

Abrahim says:

nope it doesnt exist when you are dead you are dead no heaven and hell

says:

why would the bible, the Qu'ran, and other holy scriptures point to it, then?

Abrahim says:

the Qur'an does NOT disagree with what we've said here it never suggests spirits waltzing around or being bad or good, or that they have a form or are independant from the body or life functions

says:

so how are they referencing it? I read your description of Paradise versus Hell is it all metaphor, incentive?

Abrahim says:

no

says:

then on what level does it happen?

Abrahim says:

and it says when you are dead you are dead, there is no communication or experience, you can think of it as sleep (dreamless) there is no soul in your body there is no life you are dead, nothing

says:

then what does heaven and hell encompass?

Abrahim says:

now paradise and punishment dont at all exist as alternate realms or during your death

says:

when, then?

Abrahim says:

nah I dont want to say lol

says:

umm, okay

Abrahim says:

I will say it though just finding quotes

says:

it's alright, you may use your own words. i prefer that to scripture. it's not the Qur'ans opinions I seek. It's Abrahims.

Abrahim says:

the Qur'an says it nicely because it gives your side of the argument too

says:

you're a wise fellow, I am sure you could piece it together for me nicely but if you prefer it that way, I understand and am cool with it.

Abrahim says:

dang so many quotes

says:

just say it from your head, and use your "heart" as a guidepost

says:

it's a good exercise in Independent Thinking

Abrahim says:

"And they used to say, "What! when we die and become dust and bones, shall we then indeed be raised up again?- And also our forefathers? ""Say: "Yea, those of old and those of later times, "All will certainly be gathered together for the meeting appointed for a Day well-known.

says:

if you are wondering, I have been punctuating with alot more smiley-faces than usual because I am trying to convey to you that I am willing and eager to understand your beliefs, even though I do not agree with them. And I wish to remain congenial and friendly while doing it.

Abrahim says:

They say: "What! when we are reduced to bones and dust, should we really be raised up (to be) a new creation?" Say: Be ye stones or iron Or created matter which, in your minds, is hardest (to be raised up),- (Yet shall ye be raised up)!" then will they say: "Who will cause us to return?" Say: "He who created you first!" Then will they wag their heads towards thee, and say, "When will that be?" Say, "May be it will be quite soon! "They say: "What! when we die and become dust and bones, could we really be raised up again?

"Such things have been promised to us and to our fathers before! they are nothing but tales of the ancients!" Say: Whose is the earth, and whoever is therein, if you know?

says:

Should I interpret "raised up" as reincarnated?

Abrahim says:

no you shouldnt hehe

says:

born again, then?

Abrahim says:

nope 075.001

I do call to witness the Resurrection Day;

Does man think that We cannot assemble his bones?

Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers.

But man wishes to do wrong (even) in the time in front of him.

He questions: "When is the Day of Resurrection?"

says:

resurrected, then. recreated. born again. basically.

Abrahim says:

rather yeah but rather ressurected on judgement day

says:

I see. I'm sorry I don't respond well to scripture, it's just that it's your individual thoughts I am interested in, and I could easily pick up the Qur'an if I was trying to get that particular view. i am learning though! and thanks for being patient about it.

Abrahim says:

lol yeah but I included the quotes because they showed the dissatisfaction of the people in olden days too

says:

right on, right on

quote:Islam sucks, get over it[/B]

Nigga, who is you?

quote:Originally posted by T_R_U_T_H:

Nigga, who is you?



lol T_R_U_T_H whats your MSN AIM OR YAHOO!

quote:Originally posted by T_R_U_T_H:

I've only one problem with reincarnation.

If you get reincarnated, but don't remember anything from your past life(s), then you're not you. What makes you you if not your life experiances and everything stemming from that (personality etc.)? I just woke up and am somewhat drowsy so forgive me if this doesn't make sense.



In order to grasp the idea, you have to think of the entity that transmigrates as a continuum, or a stream. The you of the past life is simultaneously the same, but different from the you of the present. Whether you're cogniznat of your past life or not, you're still a part of the stream.

Also, what is this thing known as "you" anyway? The human being is composed of matter, sensations (pleasant, unpleasant, nueutral), perceptions, mental formations, and consciousness. All of the aforementioned are in a state of ceaseless fluctuations at either a gross or subtle level at any moment in time. Upon the dismantle of this being, you find nothing but many parts that are only known as "you" in an abstract fashion. This would mean that all our being has no inherent existence and is "empty" of an essence, neither in existence or non-existence. If anything is traversing from life to life, it would have be consciousness, and not a "soul." Based on the premise that a soul is eternal, it couldn't adapt to each succesive life and would remain crystallized. I've yet to percieve anything in nature that was permanent anyway. The mind is pretty much the basis of existence. The objective world passes through our discriminatory filter and we mold it to our liking. In other words, we see things as we are. As long as we grasp to what and how we think the world is, we continue to travel from life to life. It is the concept of "I" that keeps us encapsulated in cyclic existence.

If rebirth is to be held as true, you also have to take into account the law of cause and effect (i.e. karma). Karma states than any thought, action, or word has an equivalent reaction which will occur when the causes and conditions are met for it to be manifest, whether immediately after the fact, later, or even in another life. It would be an adequate explanation for the multitude of differences between all beings and their temperments. With the prospect of there being different planes of existence (i.e. heavens, hells, other worlds) karma would be our reasons for being there and how long we must remain stagnant in that world.

I've read that there is a limbo known as "bardo" in Tibetan Buddhism. That might be worthy of looking into.

All of this may not be very coherent, but it's passed 3:30 in the morning and I'm tired.



[This message has been edited by NurotiK_SykotiK (edited 05-25-2006).]

I don't feel that it is completely fair or responsible to blame people's current life condition on a life they don't remember living, or have never lived, aka Someone Elses Life.

Imagine being in heaven.. pretty cool, but you're going to be there for eternity. Now coming back, possibly on other planets even, and experiencing different forms of life and or consciousness for eternity.. a bit less boring.

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

I don't feel that it is completely fair or responsible to blame people's current life condition on a life they don't remember living, or have never lived, aka Someone Elses Life.

As I stated in my initial post, it's both the same and different person (although I wouldn't just partition rebirth to life as a human being).

You could use the example of the you from a decade ago to the you of today. You're both the same, but different. Your physical/mental complex has changed drastically over the past decade because of the myraid of experiences you've encountered and obvious physical alterations, molding you into a different being.

Why wouldn't it be a fair process? If you didn't practice all manner of virtue in previous lives, wouldn't it only make sense for you to be reborn in a less than pleasant fashion? Besides, people are "blamed" for the actions they commit without remembering. People under the influence of alcohol to such a degree that they blackout are still blamed for their actions in the long run. After all, it was their own doing that brought them to such a state anyway.

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

Then the problem goes universal, or are you saying that the number of lives in the whole universe remains constant? There is nothing to indicate that there are other lives in the universe, let alone that totality of them remains constant. If Earth is any indication, they obviously do not.

Couldn't the constant be infinite?

Not that I'm saying that there is a soul ,but supposing that in an infinite universe there is more than enough room for an infinite number of beings ....

I've wandered that if I removed all the organs of a person ,and kept them working ,but seperate from the person. Then had the now organless body kept alive. Where would people say the soul was ?

Supposing I could stop each organ but the body would be whole and working ,or I could stop the body and allow the organs to live on. Where does this soul fit? And if it's not physical would it survive me tearing the body apart and taking it infinite distances from itself?

How many people would agree that this mass of organs and broken down systems to be the holder of a soul?

reincarnation kicks ass.

quote:Originally posted by beaver:

reincarnation kicks ass.

Hit the nail on the head. This is exactly why people believe in reincarnation.

I don't get reincarnation. If we have a soul which is our way of thinking, why don't I have any past memmories? It makes no more sense tha n Christianity. The difference is that reincarnation is like transplanting souls to babies, and the Christian heaven is like moving the soul to somewhere else entirely.

Stemming from the belief in souls being "spirit beings" instead of simply "life force"

quote:Originally posted by jsaxton14:

1: There is no evidence of this "soul" you speak of.

2: The number of souls on this planet isn't anywhere close to constant, so you'd have to establish some sort of purgatory for body-less souls.

3: Invisible man in the sky/heaven vs invisible soul/reincarnation. We have no evidence for either. Both are equally ridiculous.

4: You're making the assumption that some people are inherently "good" or "evil," which I think is flawed. Furthermore, behavior is often determined by *gasp* life-experiences which shouldn't affect the soul (by your reasoning).

I am not convinced. Reincarnation, like any other supernatural claim, is fucking stupid.

hahahahaha

...ownage.

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/ghost.html

You could probably, due to form, and time(within structure) prove that there is a prolonged duration in which reincarnation could take place.

ie-

there doesnt have to be life for there to be matter however time being based on the duration between Point A and Point B and this being a mathemathical language you could put forward the idea that there is in fact no Point B and B is merely the human understanding of the stopping of time. But how do you stop time and if time is also a quantity(the glass filled for 6 minutes) it is form also if represented in language.



K: structure of the thus understanding of physics;

that there has to be a point in which time must stop but that which is belonging to the physical structure of the universe continues:

Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity (and, by extension, the general theory) very explicitly permits a kind of time dilation that would ordinarily be called time travel. The theory holds that, relative to a stationary observer, time appears to pass more slowly for faster-moving bodies: for example, a moving clock will appear to run slow; as a clock approaches the speed of light its hands will appear to nearly stop moving. The effects of this sort of time dilation are discussed further in the popular "twin paradox".



Imagine if there was no longer anything. That would be Point B.

"Two events taking place at the points A and B of a system K are simultaneous if they appear at the same instant when observed from the middle point, M, of the interval AB. Time is then defined as the ensemble of the indications of similar clocks, at rest relatively to K, which register the same simultaneously."

We may well become someone or something else in time....!!!

I'm too good... http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

If we're someone else, then we're not who we used to be, thus it is someone entirely new.

It all depends on whether we exist in/within the interval point AB in this universe and when K occurs are simultaneously appearing at the same instant when observed from the middle point, M and so time is passing itself due to K having K,



K: structure of the thus understanding of physics;

that there has to be a point in which time must stop but that which is belonging to the physical structure of the universe continues:

K may be people sent apart, point A

Be at the same point in time but as a consequence of the experimentally verified phenomenon of time dilation, in which a moving clock is found to experience a reduced amount of proper time as determined by clocks synchronized with a stationary clock,

They may arrive at a point in which they arrived previously during,

the idea that at Point B there is no structure

making Point A transpire again

First let me say that I believe it is bad form to post a PM conversation without first consulting the other participant, irregardless if you expose their screen monikers or not. http://www.totse.com/bbs/mad.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/mad.gif)

Secondly, there's a few valid questions you either side-stepped, refused to answer, or just invoked vague scripture to explain. Here is but one of them:

but i implore you: what is the relevance of heaven or hell, then? other than abstract thought and a metaphorical "incentive" for people to live good lives?

I'm asking it again because although you seem to define them as being actual experiences, you won't give any validity to which state they occur in, and how it is so that the "experiencer" is conscious of this all taking place, while somehow still being connected to the memories and experiences of the previous life?

No Qur'an quotes, please. Just straight off the hip.

Edit: This was directed at Abrahim



[This message has been edited by AngryFemme (edited 06-04-2006).]

"Two events taking place at the points A and B of a system K are simultaneous if they appear at the same instant when observed from the middle point, M, of the interval AB. Time is then defined as the ensemble of the indications of similar clocks, at rest relatively to K, which register the same simultaneously."

As we are belonging to the physical,

K may be people sent apart, point A

Be at the same point in time but as a consequence of the experimentally verified phenomenon of time dilation, in which a moving clock is found to experience a reduced amount of proper time as determined by clocks synchronized with a stationary clock,

They may arrive at a point in which they arrived previously during,

the idea that at Point B there is no structure(its an impression of what is an idea)

making Point A transpire again.

Its not very realistic and qiute pointless but it would explain a sort of eternal life!!!???





[This message has been edited by Anti Christ Super Star (edited 06-04-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Adrenochrome:

I must admit, I do quite like the idea of reincarnation, and I'm not overly keen on the idea of heaven.