*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Whale-Fall-A-Beautiful-Short-Film-About-a-Whales-Afterlife

Oh, I got one, albeit succint (here): believers go to heaven, non-believers to hell, end of story. So it makes sense that this video, which presents the child-torturers believers in a bad light, should be downvoted.

I for one look forward to not having to share my (non-existent) afterlife with child-beaters, kiddifuckers and 99.8% of criminals.
>> ^Gallowflak:

>> ^hpqp:
@ant's downvote seal of approval has been cast, the quality of this video is now indisputable!

Sure would be nice to have a cogent, complete and honest opinion or argument for once, rather than a naked and unsubstantiated downvote, but whatever. Who am I fucking kidding?

@SDGundamX

On the So-Called Benifits of Religious Belief

First, I'm going to assume that you simply googled "religion+health+studies" or stg like that, and did not read before posting; frankly, I don't blame you. I can only hope you are not as intellectually (and downright) dishonest as the second link you posted: the very first study cited is completely misinterpreted; basically, since kissing multiple partners can increase probability of meningococcal disease, and strict religious tradition would prevent that, religion prevents meningococcal disease. Yeah, really strong science in favour of faith right there. Some of the studies cited actually prove the opposite of what the site is peddling, but they excuse this by accusing the meddling of "Jews and Buddhists" in the prayer groups. I'm actually surprised at some of the studies the website cites, one of which concludes that "Certain forms of religiousness may increase the risk of death." Some of the studies make no mention of religion whatsoever. I could go on, but the point is made.

As for the studies - and they exist - that show positive correlation between health and religion, they concern only the social benefits of religion as community*. The so-called "New Atheists" are the first to point out this positive role, although the uniting and socially reinforcing factor of religion is the same force that fosters and reinforces hate, prejudice and discrimination against the self (guilt) and the "Other" (non-members of the ingroup, "heathens", gays, blacks, "Westerners", you name it). When people use the socially unifying and reinforcing benefits of religious organisations to defend religious beliefs, a certain comparison quickly comes to mind, which Godwin's law prohibits me from making...

As for faith itself, a recent study suggests that it can actually have negative effects on health, because of the stress and guilt believers put upon themselves when prayed for (link). Regardless, even if a positive placebo effect could/can be attributed to faith/rel. belief, it does not make it any less idiotic or objectionable than the belief in homeopathy or vaudou.
_{(if interested in what I think of the "faith is comforting" argument, pm me, I'm filling this thread enough as is)}

Your "two-sides of same coin" analogy fails entirely: telling a believer they're delusional is not denying their perception of their own happiness. A child happy at the prospect of Santa delivering presents is delusional, but truly happy. The idea that there is the same amount of evidence against and for religious belief is pure ludicrous. The Abrahamic God (let's not bring in the thousand and one others for now) has been logically disproven, even before el Jeebs showed up with his promise of hellfire. There is also substantial evidence that he is man-made, as are the book(s) describing him, which are full of inconsistencies (and outright fallacies) themselves.

Your comment about John Smith suggests that the only evidence that could convict a fraudster is confession; good thing you aren't a judge! Seriously though, your doubt probably stems from your lack of acquaintance with the evidence. You can start by reading his brief biography on Wikipedia; his con trick of "glass-seeing" (looking at shiny stones in a hat and pretending to see the location of treasure), for which he was arrested several times, is eerily familiar to the birth of the Book of Mormon (looking into a hat and "transcribing" gold plates that probably did not exist). He even had to change a passage after losing some pages of the transcript He received a divine revelation that the exact pages of the transcript that he lost needed to be changed, and that God had foreseen the loss of those papers (link).

The further one goes back in history, the harder it is to get historical evidence against religious beliefs, but there are always logical arguments that count as evidence as well (in arguing the idiocy of certain beliefs). Since my Santa analogy above seems not to have appealed to you, here's a different one. Imagine Kate were to have said "I do not believe in witchcraft/vampires because I'm not an idiot." Audience response? "Duh!" or stg similar. And yet there is the same amount of evidence for witches and vampires as there is for deities and afterlife**. The only difference between these three once highly common delusions is that one of them persists, even demanding respect, when it deserves at best critical scrutiny, at worst nothing but scorn.


<sub>*(and sometimes those benefits stemming from certain rules, like no alcohol/extra-marital sex etc... still nothing to do with belief.)

**Actually, there is relatively more evidence in favour of vampirism than of deities and afterlife</sub>


tl;dr: faith/rel. belief has no health benefits (check sources b4 posting); argument of religion's social role is double-edged; delusions are still delusions if they make you happy (try drugs); Joseph Smith Jr was a (convicted) fraud; idiotic beliefs are still idiotic when shared by the majority, just more socially unacceptable to mock.

>> ^SDGundamX:


See my answer to @BicycleRepairMan--what people accept as evidence in this matter and how much evidence is required for people to believe (or not believe) in a religion varies from person to person. Further complicating matters is that belief is not binary--it's a very wide continuum that includes people who aren't sure but practice the religion anyway.
My point about the New Atheists is that they feel the evidence against religion is sufficient. They are entitled to that opinion--but at the end of the day it is only an opinion. They should be free to express that opinion and tell people their reasons why they came to that conclusion. But they shouldn't pretend that their opinion is "fact" or belittle those who haven't come to the same conclusion.
About the "faith improving lives" bit--there is a fair bit of empirical evidence for the benefits of religious faith (in terms of both physical and psychological health: see here and here for more info) so I can't see how you can argue it is "delusional." Unless you meant that religion isn't the only way to obtain the same benefits, in which case I absolutely agree. But I find an interesting parallel in your thinking the New Atheists can tell a religious person that he/she is delusional if that religious person believes religion has a positive effect on their life with Christians who claim that atheists think they are happy but in reality suffering because they aren't one with Christ. Seems like two sides of the same coin to me.
I'm glad I amused you with my reference to Scientology. But this is a very rare case where we have a "smoking gun" so to speak. While I agree with you that there is a some suspicious stuff going on with Mormonism (how some passages in the Book of Mormon are very similar to other books available at the time John Smith lived), I'm unaware of any hard evidence that John Smith actually admitted to making it all up. Again with Mormonism, we're back to people having to personally decide for themselves what to believe (and all the issues that entails). [...]

Trouble is that by being rude (it was rude, be honest) she immediately turned the other debatees against anything else she might have said, and anyone in the audience who was on the fence would have chalked it up against her, too. Better would have been to say that faith wasn't good enough for her, or that she demands more than faith, or that she values evidence above faith. The fact that she called them idiots makes her look inarticulate, sarcastic and angry. She's right, of course - the afterlife is indeed an idiotic notion - but a formal debate is not the place for name-calling.

The faithful aren't interested in facts, evidence, history, reality, or anything outside their personal fantasy bubble. Where did that guy get the belief that aborted fetuses go to heaven? What happened to unbaptised babies going to limbo?

If there was a way to prove there's no god or afterlife, I'd laugh at them for a month.

you can't tell a group of people they are wrong without providing explanations... that cuts both ways doesn't it?

i mean, i don't believe in god or an afterlife, but plenty of religious people tell me I'm wrong and give me no explanations...

and beliefs don't qualify as explanations ... there needs to be some level of verification beyond "because i believe it to be true" or "this book says so"

that the difference between atheism and religious belief... an atheist is humble enough to admit he doesn't know, a religious person substitutes belief into the "know" part of the equation and figures problem solved

and then sometimes even takes pity on you for not "knowing" like they do

now THAT is offensive

Actually, I have to say Freddie had a reasonably profound effect on my world view. When I discovered he was gay, I was a typically bigoted ignorant young teenage male (the fact that I didn't realise he was gay probably tells you as much as you need to know about me at that age).
I only found out he was "a queer" when he died, but I'd always thought his voice and music were epic. It forced to re-evaluate my stereo-typed view of the world, which lead to a number of important epiphanies in my life.

I don't believe in an afterlife, but if I'm wrong, I hope he's up there jamming with Hendrix, John Bonham and John Entwistle.

As a former agnostic materialist secular type who has seen both sides of the fence, I would characterize the way the world is set up presently as a type of matrix. I marvel at the grand deception being perpetrated..Satan is truly an unparalled genius amongst all the created beings. On the surface it appears one way, and people who are totally committed to it can't tell there is anything wrong..but people who aren't living for it can see there is something fundementally wrong with the world, and can perceive in some manner that it is a deliberate illusion created by the powers that be. These people are seeking to be liberated from it, and want to know the truth. They are seeking the one who made it all, and controls it all..and that is Jesus Christ our Lord.


>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Yes, the Kingdom of Heaven will be on Earth..when Christ comes back He establishes His Kingdom here and reigns for a thousand years..and after that is the final judgement, called the white throne judgement. When that is finished, Heaven and Earth are remade and established forever.
>> ^luxury_pie:
>> ^SDGundamX:
I think you just proved his point for him. According to the website you linked to, being wildly generous with estimations, the total number of Jehovah's Witnesses is around 20 million worldwide. Compare that with 2.1 billion Christians worldwide and do a little math and you'll see the Jehovah's Witnesses represent less than 1% of Christians.
>> ^DerHasisttot:
>> ^Morganth:
At least for Christianity, Hitchens is really arguing against a minority position. This "screw the world, we want the apocalypse so we can go to heaven" mentality is a small portion and has not been the historical position of Christianity. This came about with American dispensationalism in the mid-19th century, where it's still confined to today so it's not only the minority position in Christianity, but also American Christian denominations. These are the churches that sadly ignore the fact that a lot of Jesus' ministry included feeding and healing the poor and outcast. These are people who ignore what Jesus said - that the law could be summed up with "love God and love your neighbor as yourself." In practice, these are the churches that never help their communities because they have an Us vs. Them mentality. Churches that say, "Screw you, go to hell" totally missed it. What did Jesus say about your enemies? Love them. Jesus asked God to forgive his murderers as he was dying a torturous death.
Hitchens is arguing against the minority position.

Repeat it more often, you might just convince yourself. The Jehovas Witnesses are all over the world. And they heavily promote the end-times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_behind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premillennialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennialism
Edit: And these are just the outspoken tendencies of Christians.


So this "afterlife" everybody is eager to have, it's taking place in this world then?


Kinda sounds like the Matrix.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Yes, the Kingdom of Heaven will be on Earth..when Christ comes back He establishes His Kingdom here and reigns for a thousand years..and after that is the final judgement, called the white throne judgement. When that is finished, Heaven and Earth are remade and established forever.
>> ^luxury_pie:
>> ^SDGundamX:
I think you just proved his point for him. According to the website you linked to, being wildly generous with estimations, the total number of Jehovah's Witnesses is around 20 million worldwide. Compare that with 2.1 billion Christians worldwide and do a little math and you'll see the Jehovah's Witnesses represent less than 1% of Christians.
>> ^DerHasisttot:
>> ^Morganth:
At least for Christianity, Hitchens is really arguing against a minority position. This "screw the world, we want the apocalypse so we can go to heaven" mentality is a small portion and has not been the historical position of Christianity. This came about with American dispensationalism in the mid-19th century, where it's still confined to today so it's not only the minority position in Christianity, but also American Christian denominations. These are the churches that sadly ignore the fact that a lot of Jesus' ministry included feeding and healing the poor and outcast. These are people who ignore what Jesus said - that the law could be summed up with "love God and love your neighbor as yourself." In practice, these are the churches that never help their communities because they have an Us vs. Them mentality. Churches that say, "Screw you, go to hell" totally missed it. What did Jesus say about your enemies? Love them. Jesus asked God to forgive his murderers as he was dying a torturous death.
Hitchens is arguing against the minority position.

Repeat it more often, you might just convince yourself. The Jehovas Witnesses are all over the world. And they heavily promote the end-times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_behind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premillennialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennialism
Edit: And these are just the outspoken tendencies of Christians.


So this "afterlife" everybody is eager to have, it's taking place in this world then?



Kinda sounds like the Matrix.

>> ^rottenseed:

the benefits of the delusion of an afterlife


There's a lot of delusions people hold onto that have benefits. Like I'm deluded into thinking I'm smarter and superior to everyone, so I post on message boards all day.

What I always found funny about the afterlife is that it's supposedly a reward.

If you avoid all these sins and live a good life...you get to live in an afterlife where you basically get to indulge in sin after sin.

Heaven has been associated with decadent things....ultimate comfort, eating extremely decadent food without getting fat, being able to indulge in all these things that....oh wait....are supposedly sins.

So be good...avoid sin, so you can live an immortal life doing all the things we said were sinful.

Yes, the Kingdom of Heaven will be on Earth..when Christ comes back He establishes His Kingdom here and reigns for a thousand years..and after that is the final judgement, called the white throne judgement. When that is finished, Heaven and Earth are remade and established forever.

>> ^luxury_pie:
>> ^SDGundamX:
I think you just proved his point for him. According to the website you linked to, being wildly generous with estimations, the total number of Jehovah's Witnesses is around 20 million worldwide. Compare that with 2.1 billion Christians worldwide and do a little math and you'll see the Jehovah's Witnesses represent less than 1% of Christians.
>> ^DerHasisttot:
>> ^Morganth:
At least for Christianity, Hitchens is really arguing against a minority position. This "screw the world, we want the apocalypse so we can go to heaven" mentality is a small portion and has not been the historical position of Christianity. This came about with American dispensationalism in the mid-19th century, where it's still confined to today so it's not only the minority position in Christianity, but also American Christian denominations. These are the churches that sadly ignore the fact that a lot of Jesus' ministry included feeding and healing the poor and outcast. These are people who ignore what Jesus said - that the law could be summed up with "love God and love your neighbor as yourself." In practice, these are the churches that never help their communities because they have an Us vs. Them mentality. Churches that say, "Screw you, go to hell" totally missed it. What did Jesus say about your enemies? Love them. Jesus asked God to forgive his murderers as he was dying a torturous death.
Hitchens is arguing against the minority position.

Repeat it more often, you might just convince yourself. The Jehovas Witnesses are all over the world. And they heavily promote the end-times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_behind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premillennialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennialism
Edit: And these are just the outspoken tendencies of Christians.


So this "afterlife" everybody is eager to have, it's taking place in this world then?

>> ^SDGundamX:

I think you just proved his point for him. According to the website you linked to, being wildly generous with estimations, the total number of Jehovah's Witnesses is around 20 million worldwide. Compare that with 2.1 billion Christians worldwide and do a little math and you'll see the Jehovah's Witnesses represent less than 1% of Christians.
>> ^DerHasisttot:
>> ^Morganth:
At least for Christianity, Hitchens is really arguing against a minority position. This "screw the world, we want the apocalypse so we can go to heaven" mentality is a small portion and has not been the historical position of Christianity. This came about with American dispensationalism in the mid-19th century, where it's still confined to today so it's not only the minority position in Christianity, but also American Christian denominations. These are the churches that sadly ignore the fact that a lot of Jesus' ministry included feeding and healing the poor and outcast. These are people who ignore what Jesus said - that the law could be summed up with "love God and love your neighbor as yourself." In practice, these are the churches that never help their communities because they have an Us vs. Them mentality. Churches that say, "Screw you, go to hell" totally missed it. What did Jesus say about your enemies? Love them. Jesus asked God to forgive his murderers as he was dying a torturous death.
Hitchens is arguing against the minority position.

Repeat it more often, you might just convince yourself. The Jehovas Witnesses are all over the world. And they heavily promote the end-times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_behind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premillennialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennialism
Edit: And these are just the outspoken tendencies of Christians.



So this "afterlife" everybody is eager to have, it's taking place in this world then?

the benefits of the delusion of an afterlife