| 
Posted Jun 5, 2000 by Meister
I donīt agree with this entry.
It seems that you consider death as the unpleasant termination of the unimportant things you did during your life.
Iīm just presuming that they are unimportant, but Iīm sure they are.
I would appreciate a more serious discussion of this subject, as death is really the only thing you trust in. Nothing else in your life is determined, but the fact that weīre all going to die is what really makes us equal in the end.
Think about it.
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted Jun 18, 2000 by Bucephalus
I don't know about death being the only constant... Personally, I don't plan to die at all (although if it does happen, I want it on the record that I requested a New Orleans Jazz Band at the funeral). If I understand the hype about nanotechnology correctly, those really nifty little atom-manipulating-robots'll fix my death problem for ever. And since (from the last estimates I heard) we're merely 15 years away from such technology, if I live to 35 I should never need to worry about death again.
But as far as a serious discussion of death, I think this is all you need to know: There may, or may not be an afterlife. If there is no afterlife, when you die you just go away and, as a non-existent fomerly living entity, no longer care. If there is an afterlife, you will end up (by Western ideas at least) either in Heaven or Hell. If Heaven, you have a great time for the rest of eternity. If Hell, you end up in bad cartoons with siwwy wabbits and demons resembling used car salesmen. So, of the three possibilities, (non-existence, heaven, hell), only one of them can really be said to be the least bit uncomfortable.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 26, 2000 by Researcher 137178
I do not plan to die but it is not helping Bucephalus making what I
consider a challenge to seriously debate death can you conscionably
change that request to a serious discussion about life in paticular
eternal life.
Meister---- if accepting eternal life as a gift is a real option
why wouldn't that make us equal. if Slacker gave you a dollar and also gave vume (that is me) a dollar is not this equality.
Slacker-----the man that overcame death did it in 3 days and then stayed around for 40 days to flount his victory.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 28, 2000 by minerva
Personally, I think hell is reserved for people with a poor grasp of punctuation and I, for one, believe in God simply so that I won't have to spend an eternity with someone who can't properly place a question mark, and uses quotation marks for emphasis.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 28, 2000 by minerva
Forgot to stick this on the last bit:
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 9, 2000 by JAR (happy to be back, but where's Ping?)
About the guy who supposedly cheated death...
I assume you are talking about the lead character in the Bible II: The New Testament (Including an updated and (slightly) more Politically Correct God, and a brand new take on the concept of protagonist characters). If that is the case, you have fallen for one of the authers many lingual ploys. She writes that the Jesus-character rises on the third day, not that he was dead for three days. The day of ressurection should be defined as the first day of Gloating, not the third day of Being Dead. You see?
Just Another Researcher
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 12, 2000 by Researcher 137178
JAR
your observation is unique that makes you who you are. excuse me I think I see a flaw in what you say it is like you are perpetuating a hearsay. if there is truth that is what I want to pass on also to be constrained by. frist no one cheates death and the character, Jesus defeated death by the spirit of the Father. the truth is that the letter kills and the spirit gives life.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 12, 2000 by Bucephalus
Perpetuating a hearsay? Do you perhaps mean heresy? I'm not sure that saying Jesus cheated death is heresy... Look, assuming there's truth to the Bible (of which I'm not convinced), then it's Adam's original sin that made the world a bad place. I'm no theologan, but if I remember correctly, to redeem the world it was necessary to have a man live a perfect life, the problem being that humanity wasn't capable of that kind of thing after Adam's fruit salad of evil. So, to rescue the world from our hidious enslavement to such things as parties and beer, God goes after Satan using both human and divine natures in a kind of supernatural tag-team. Needless to say, God wins and his propogandists go to work.
Perhaps it wasn't cheating per se, but if I were Satan I'd probibly call "Foul".
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 13, 2000 by Researcher 137178
bucephalus
I was projecting my opinion toward JAR and again in my opinion JAR is expressing borrowed opinion what is call in court as hearsay. as far as you are concerned as long as you have brought it up what I understand you are saying it parobably should be called heresy. call me vume and I am open for a search for truth even if it is just truly your opinion.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 15, 2000 by JAR (happy to be back, but where's Ping?)
Dear Researcher 137178
You have successfully confused me. I do not know if you acuse (sp?) me of heresy or hearsay. If it is heresy you are unfortunatly wrong. I am not a christian, hence I can not be a heretic (to the cristian faith). Sorry.
On account of hearsay, I am less defended. Please explain, for I do not know the legal procedures very well at all.
(Oh, and what does "vume" mean? My dictionary got lost and my english is deteriorating)
Regarding death.
I see death as finaly escape. An action one takes (voluntarily or not) to escape something. Wether you want to escape a particulary nasty desiease and don't seem to heal, or that bullet to the chest just hurt so much it would be nice to make it stop, death is always an option. Death guarantees that you are out of your present misery. Death does not guarantee anything else, as coming back from the dead is hard. If dead for a short while, simple reviving (including mouth to mouth and heart-compression) might get you back, and you cheated whatever misery you were in prior to dying. (Granted the misery had something to do with choking, heart failure or related issues.) However, if you are dead for some time, revival seem impossible. At least so hard, noone I know of has done it.
In addition, we do not know for sure what happens if you stay dead. Of course, we know that your body decomposes unless treated, but what happens to the driving force behind the body is unknown. Theories range from eternal bliss in some garden somewhere, to simple nonexistance.
Death is a risk. Consider carefully before applying.
The other side of death
Some people are not in misery. They live perfectly nice lives. With or without a spouse, with or without a job, with or without anything really, they make through life without complain. These characters die as well. I wonder why.
It could be that there is some sort of mechanism that prevents overpopulation, but in that case the mechanism is flawed. At no time has there lived more people on the planet that now, and at the same time people (happy people included) live longer than ever.
I am dumbfounded.
Just Another Researcher (on the verge of aquiering an actual nick)
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 17, 2000 by Researcher 137178
JAR
sorry if I have judged you not intentional at all. you sure can express opinions whether you or hearsay I am not condemning . If my opinion means anything it is because I am a truth seeker and hope to stir that in anyone and everyone. when a person is raised to think a certain way it takes transformation to think different, in this world the only teachers willing to transform minds have ulterior motives. more later. vume you might just see me.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 17, 2000 by JAR (happy to be back, but where's Ping?)
Dear Researcher 137178,
I would hope we were all seekers of truth. That is a most commendable quest indeed! However, truth is a constantly changing thing and it is very hard to grasp it. No matter what subject. Often, truth is subjective. Even more often, one must find ones own truth. Pietous christians have found a (relative) truth in a holy book and a higher being watching over them. They claim to "know" the truth, because they _feel_ it (the power of faith) deep inside. There can be no other truth for these people. I find no such truth. My logic denies religion as impossible and false. To me.
Maybe i'm not making much sense here... I'll shut up.
Still don't know what to make of "vume"...
JAR
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 18, 2000 by Researcher 137178
hey JAR
this is the longest dialogue I have had here in the hitchhikers matrix. truth is absolute if it has been sent by GOD to light your life. I know I am not so important that God would deliver a gift of truth just to enlighten vume. as a prize for taking the right step when it came to making a definate choice between to believe or not to believe, out of my mouth came the fruit of faith. as a truth seeker you better be a believer. without the athority of a creator everything that is is not.
just another view----vume
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 19, 2000 by Meister
So, I donīt think that you understood what I tried to say.....
Anyway, if you have a dollar and I have a dollar the only thing we would be equal in is the amount of money we own (presuming that we both donīt have accounts on the bank...). There will still be a lot of differences and the only thing that is certainly happening to both of us (and anyone else) is our death. (And, of course, our birth; but thatīs just two sides of the same coin, isnīt it?)
The opportunity of an eternal "afterlife" is, besides the fact that itīs a weird idea that anything whatsoever could last forever, is not relevant for the point Iīm trying to make!
You donīt know if we will live in heavenly paradise forever and me neither and so the only thing we can really be sure of is the fact that weīre going to die.
So you better be prepared.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 19, 2000 by Meister
So, Iīm sorry to destroy your illusions, but actually death doesnīt guarantee anything at all!!!!
To believe that death is the end of your daily-life trouble might be a serious mistake (especially if your planning to commit suicide) because you just canīt tell, can you?
I mean, maybe we all died hundreds of times and were reborn, but no one remembers...(at least no one I know). So, if you die and the last trouble you had and were happy to escape now just goes on eternally in your "afterlife" you would be totally f****d, wouldnīt you?
I mean, we canīt escape death (...) but we shouldnīt be forcing it!
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 21, 2000 by JAR (happy to be back, but where's Ping?)
Well, you are both right and wrong. Death does deliver you from your present misery,. Death does not neccessarily deliver you from misery alltogether. I agree that after dying, you might get stuck in eternal suffering (allthough I find that highly unlikely). Death is therefore not a good option in any but the most extreme cases. One extreme case: All senses are gone, control of your body is lost, you're kept artificially alive through machines and there is no hope of recovery. Or perhaps I play the part of dr. Death...
JAR (Getting confused monday morning)
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 28, 2000 by Researcher 137178
hey meister
just the guide I am looking for destroy my illusions please, what is left will be the truth what I am seeking. if you could be so kind I request a lesson or two in destroying illusions.
also JAR
since meister initiated this guide I hope HG (honorable guide) will resolve any confusion you are troubled with (sorry about my English). At the present time all I offer is this URL:[Broken link removed by Moderator]
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 28, 2000 by JAR (happy to be back, but where's Ping?)
Dear Researcher 137178,
Thank you for interesting reading, but I'm confused with the authors motifes. It seemes to me he first goes on about how truth is a relative thing, and that one must find ones own truth. Then he explains the mechanics of Existance. That makes me stall and loose faith in the mans objectivity.
As I said, interesting reading (I love to read other peoples religious manifests), but it don't apply to me, as I do not belive in a higher power/creator. These convertion-bits (like the Moonies, the Jehovas Witnesses and just about every other missionary spread) demand that the listener already belives in some higher being. Barring that the argumentations becomes absurd.
Anyways, thanks for sharing
JAR, a bit on the material side of things....
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 29, 2000 by Researcher 137178
hey JAR
one suggestion, it seems to me people who get confused are denying the truth or are looking for arguments insted of facts. its like I already said you can not be a truth seeker and not a believer. listen I really apreciate the dialogue we have had thanks. vume
|
| | |
| |
Posted Aug 30, 2000 by JAR (happy to be back, but where's Ping?)
Dear Researcher 137178,
I disagree. To belive is to accept something to be the truth without seing any hard evidence to suggest that. Faith is therefore useless in an argument. It demands both parties of the dialouge to belive the same thing, thus rendering the dialouge void of substance. Fact is proven beyond doubt and is universially appliable and acceptable. (By that standard, very little is fact, but I've never claimed reality is easy to comprehend).
It is true that I am looking for an argument, for it is through discussion one reaches higher insight into the matter at hand. However, I am utterly unable to accept arguments based on faith or a notion that "this is the Truth".
I fear we are too far away from eachother religionwise to reach agreement here. It has been refreshing though. Thanks!
JAR
PS! It is dawning on me that "vume" might be your name or handle. If I am correct you might want to press the "Preferences" button on top and bottom of the page and change your name. Makes it easier for those you converse with to recognise you....
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
