It may be that the specifics of an afterlife don't matter too much, but whether or not there is an afterlife does. But logic does not dictate that there is an afterlife. It is because we do not know that there are no agreed upon specifics. In my opinion, logic dictates that we should not live in accordance with something that may not be. That this life matters immensely because for all we know there is only this life. — Fooloso4
Does he? God acknowledges the deficiency and says: — Fooloso4
The union of Moses and Aaron seems to be a symbolic representation of the union of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. — Fooloso4
Since whether or not there is an "afterlife" is unknowable, I think investing more, or all, value in the merely imaginable instead of in this life is literally to value nothing. As Freddy remind usIn considering the afterlife to be high value, itisn'tnihilistic — Agent Smith
... man would rather will nothingness than not will — On the Geneaology of Morals, Third Essay
The stakes are very high if you're wrong here. — Moses
I'm honestly just not particularly interested in a universe where there is no afterlife/judgment. — Moses
In that case I agree with Paul: "eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die." — Moses
So I commend the enjoyment of life, because there is nothing better for a person under the sun than to eat and drink and be glad. Then joy will accompany them in their toil all the days of the life God has given them under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 8:15)
There's no doubt that the speech impediment presents a challenge; but it's not a deficiency. — Moses
11 The Lord said to him, “Who gave human beings their mouths? Who makes them deaf or mute? Who gives them sight or makes them blind? Is it not I, the Lord? — Moses
The Lord's work is not deficient; it is exactly as intended. — Moses
The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. (Genesis 6:6)
Forming light, and preparing darkness, Making peace, and preparing evil, I am Jehovah, doing all these things. (45:7)
The disabled are just another part of the human condition; not beings to be regarded as inferior. — Moses
What would you do differently if you were convinced there was no afterlife? — Fooloso4
We are all inferior to others in one way or another, but this is not the same as saying that some of us or all of us are inferior beings. — Fooloso4
Since whether or not there is an "afterlife" is unknowable, I think investing more, or all, value in the merely imaginable instead of in this life is literally to value nothing. As Freddy remind us
... man would rather will nothingness than not will
— On the Geneaology of Morals, Third Essay — 180 Proof
I think it is rather the case that you are imposing assumptions on the text. In my opinion, as a general principle of interpretation, the attempt must be made to understand the story on its own terms. Is there any indication that the author(s) of the story do not mean that they are temporally or physically located characters? See, for example, Francesca Stavrakopoulou, "God: An Anatomy". The ancient peoples of the Levant did think of their gods as temporally or physically located characters with intentions, desires, and emotions. — Fooloso4
And how can we learn from it if, for example, the wager is only an
apparent ‘wager’
— Possibility
? — Fooloso4
In the story the wager was not an "apparent wager". A wager was made. If we are to understand the story then we must accept that in the story a wager was made. To read a novel and point out that the things that happen in the novel did not actually happen is pointless. — Fooloso4
No, you’re assuming the story actually happened — Possibility
[emphasis added]To anticipate the obvious objection, yes this is not meant to be taken literally, but we should take the story on its own terms. These things happen in the story and if we are to understand the story we must attend to what happens in the story. — Fooloso4
To read a novel and point out that the things that happen in the novel did not actually happen is pointless. — Fooloso4
A story’s terms should not be bound by what happens. This only limits understanding. — Possibility
Read it again - there is no talk of a wager made at all. — Possibility
WAGERused to say that you are certain that something is true or will happen in the future:
I'd wager (that) she's interested in you.
He regrets doing that, I'll wager.
To wager is also to suggest as a likely idea:
I would wager that not one person in ten could tell an expensive wine from a cheaper one.
Job does not claim to be blameless but doesn't accept that he must be wrong by default either. — Paine
And by bringing up Job, I was thinking that expecting good results from living a good life is sort of an argument for the normative. — Paine
Anglicans, Lutherans, and Methodists have a lot more in common with Catholics and Orthodox than most people realize. — Dermot Griffin
A story's terms should be bound by what happens in the story. — Fooloso4
The real meaning of the Gospel is simple to understand in three easy steps:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
"You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth"
“Go into the world. Go everywhere and announce God’s good news to one and all.” — Joe Mello
This is what is truly remarkable; St. Stephen asks God to forgive his persecutors in the Book of Acts. This brings me to the sobering fact that New Testament Christianity is dead and needs a revival. Kierkegaard, for example, wrote to an entire country that he felt had never been authentically Christian. — Dermot Griffin
I suppose the human journey can be summed up as a struggle against nihilism. Some might even say it is the most dangerous idea to come out of the human mind - it rejects/denies/everything by definition and that includes the stuff close to our hearts and therein lies the seeds of untold suffering. :sad: — Agent Smith
It is drawn very directly from scripture. See Mark 12:28. I believe it is the most important teaching in the NT. Many Christian denominations consider it the core of their religion.
It actually is meaningful. People could live life any number of ways and there's no reason that one necessarily needs to prioritize love. — Moses
Much of your description of a 'continual process of change' reminds me of Gene W Marshall's Primer on Radical Christianity. One can safely say it is a very different response than the Evangelical churches of today but probably is an example of the 'modern' that Dermot Griffin objects to. — Paine
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.