independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Mon 22nd Oct 2018 2:12pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > From a Christian to a non Christian
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 4 of 6 <123456>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #90 posted 02/07/17 10:33am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

In this video I side with Hitchens, not the Christian:

I will say, Wilson makes great defenses of God, but his limits are his fundamentalism, which limits certain obvious things. I am a Christian but do not believe in talking snakes and Noah's Ark is a crock of shit.

There was no Garden of Eden. Eden is allegory for the beauty of nature and relation with God. Why I'm a Christian and environmentalist. Keep Eden clean.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #91 posted 02/07/17 10:34am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Fear doesn't mean scary fear. Fear in the Bible means respect.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #92 posted 02/07/17 10:38am

Dasein

QueenofCardboard said:

Dasein said:


I'm speaking specifically about figuring out what existential principles to live by while you are
still breathing in the here and now.




Why didn't you just say so?

I can tell you that right now.

It is THE GOLDEN RULE.



Doing unto others what you would have them do unto is a good way to live your life sometimes.
But, I can see situations where I would do unto others what I wouldn't have them do unto me
depending upon the context and what was at stake.

That being said: I don't believe that because one has discerned a viable existential principle in which
to live their life out authentically means that cognitive energies can now be spent mulling over what
will happen after you're dead.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #93 posted 02/07/17 10:47am

QueenofCardboa
rd

avatar

Dasein said:

QueenofCardboard said:


Why didn't you just say so?

I can tell you that right now.


It is THE GOLDEN RULE.




Doing unto others what you would have them do unto is a good way to live your life sometimes.

But, I can see situations where I would do unto others what I wouldn't have them do unto me depending upon the context and what was at stake.

That being said: I don't believe that because one has discerned a viable existential principle in which to live their life out authentically means that cognitive energies can now be spent mulling over what will happen after you're dead.



The world is what it is.

Life is what it is.

THE GOLDEN RULE,

is just a principle on which our ethics are based.



"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Donald Trump
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #94 posted 02/07/17 10:57am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

The universe is only matter and motion, how they can we know what is moral?

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #95 posted 02/07/17 11:01am

Dasein

QueenofCardboard said:

Dasein said:



Doing unto others what you would have them do unto is a good way to live your life sometimes.

But, I can see situations where I would do unto others what I wouldn't have them do unto me depending upon the context and what was at stake.

That being said: I don't believe that because one has discerned a viable existential principle in which to live their life out authentically means that cognitive energies can now be spent mulling over what will happen after you're dead.



The world is what it is.

Life is what it is.






I emphatically disagree.

The world is not what it is; it is, instead, to be perceived and interpreted. Claiming that the world
"is what it is" assumes our senses, albeit our best reality perceptive tools, are not deceiving us;
and, you're assuming that the world is real apart from our sensory perception of it.

Depending upon how you're using the word "life," I think it is mostly what we make of it.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #96 posted 02/07/17 11:05am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

There is no perception since it is all matter and motion.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #97 posted 02/07/17 11:05am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Remember, the brain is just a bunch of atoms.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #98 posted 02/07/17 11:13am

Dasein

2freaky4church1 said:

There is no perception since it is all matter and motion.


That don't make no damn sense, Freaky; I perceive motion and matter all the time!

Fuck; I gotta go back and find my George Berkeley notes.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #99 posted 02/07/17 11:16am

Dasein

2freaky4church1 said:

Remember, the brain is just a bunch of atoms.


This reduction is unnecessary and too simplistic. It's almost like saying:

"The sperm in my balls is just a bunch of atoms."

Yeah, but it's more than that too.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #100 posted 02/07/17 11:22am

QueenofCardboa
rd

avatar

Dasein said:

QueenofCardboard said:



The world is what it is.

Life is what it is.






I emphatically disagree.

The world is not what it is; it is, instead, to be perceived and interpreted.

Claiming that the world "is what it is" assumes our senses, albeit our best reality perceptive tools, are not deceiving us; and, you're assuming that the world is real apart from our sensory perception of it.

Depending upon how you're using the word "life," I think it is mostly what we make of it.


Did I read you right?

Did you just bring in the question, If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is there to hear it, is there a sound?

I have always given an emphatic YES to that question.

Nothing in this world, exists, is the way it is, because of me.

I am just passing through.


[Edited 2/7/17 12:35pm]

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Donald Trump
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #101 posted 02/07/17 11:28am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Troll alert. Daisn.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #102 posted 02/07/17 11:47am

QueenofCardboa
rd

avatar

.

[Edited 2/7/17 12:32pm]

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Donald Trump
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #103 posted 02/07/17 11:49am

Dasein

QueenofCardboard said:

Dasein said:


I emphatically disagree.

The world is not what it is; it is, instead, to be perceived and interpreted.

Claiming that the world "is what it is" assumes our senses, albeit our best reality perceptive tools, are not deceiving us; and, you're assuming that the world is real apart from our sensory perception of it.

Depending upon how you're using the word "life," I think it is mostly what we make of it.


Did I read you right?

Did you bring in the question, If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is there to hear it, is there a sound?

I have always given an emphatic YES to that question.

Nothing in this world exists because of me.

I am just passing through.





[Edited 2/7/17 11:23am]


You did not read me right! Claiming that the world is not "what it is" but to be perceived and
interpreted does not mean that events that do not occur within my sensory perception of them
do not exist. That's like saying the waves crashing against the sand on an island uninhabited
by a sentient being do not make a sound, yet that contravenes the laws of physics.

What I meant by asserting: "The world is not what it is; it is, instead, to be perceived and inter-
preted" was to keep us safe from ever postulating with 100% certainty what is "real" in the world
in the face of the many assumptions we make about the world in the first place, chief among
them being that the world is "real" altogether.

When people say: "it is what it is", they usually mean "I can't do anything about what just hap-
pened." But I find that to be contrary to what I think is vital to being human: the freedom to
choose how we respond to events that occur within the world.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #104 posted 02/07/17 11:51am

Dasein

2freaky4church1 said:

Troll alert. Daisn.


I'm not trolling. I enjoy speaking with Queen and am responding honestly to comments she
makes in her posts.



  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #105 posted 02/07/17 12:00pm

Dasein

QueenofCardboard said:

2freaky4church1 said:

Troll alert. Daisn.



???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????




I don't know what he's talking about either. I quite enjoy our conversations and my posts have
been topical and substantive despite being provocative and/or evocative.

I hope I'm not offending you; that ain't my goal.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #106 posted 02/07/17 12:37pm

QueenofCardboa
rd

avatar

Dasein said:

QueenofCardboard said:



???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????





I don't know what he's talking about either.

I quite enjoy our conversations and my posts have been topical and substantive despite being provocative and/or evocative.

I hope I'm not offending you; that ain't my goal.



No.

You are not offending me, and I hope that I am not offending you, or anyone else on this thread.

I thought he was saying that I was trolling you.

2Freaky4church can be really confusing sometimes.






[Edited 2/7/17 12:41pm]

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Donald Trump
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #107 posted 02/07/17 12:54pm

Dasein

QueenofCardboard said:

Dasein said:


I emphatically disagree.

The world is not what it is; it is, instead, to be perceived and interpreted.

Claiming that the world "is what it is" assumes our senses, albeit our best reality perceptive tools, are not deceiving us; and, you're assuming that the world is real apart from our sensory perception of it.

Depending upon how you're using the word "life," I think it is mostly what we make of it.



Nothing in this world, exists, is the way it is, because of me.

I am just passing through.


[Edited 2/7/17 12:35pm]


You're a mother, so you can't possibly believe that nothing in this world is the way it is because of
your direct interaction with it. And look at our human stewardship of the planet! We're ruining the
Earth!

Humans are meaning-making creatures, so I also disagree with the notion that we are "just
passing through" all of history. The evolution of human consciousness is integral to our ability to
adapt and survive and make meaning out of our existence, dontcha think?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #108 posted 02/07/17 1:28pm

morningsong

Dasein said:

morningsong said:



Imma call bull on this. Why? Because it is only in our time in history do people have time on their hands to spend focusing on anything that's not happening in front of them, yet majority of our religious faith comes for people who really were spending all their time living or else they died trying. People are designed to think about more than what's going on in front of them, personally I believe it's what makes human beings damned near extinction proof.


But your calling bull on this doesn't speak to my point:

Even if you only had two hours of leisurely time sufficient enough for mulling over an after-life
philosophy in 17 A.D., that was two hours of leisurely time sufficient enough for mulling over and
actually reifying a this-life philosophy. The fact that I have triple that amount of time in 2017 A.D.
doesn't mean that I am then justified in mulling over after-life philosophies.

I say abandon all worries and concerns with the after-life and get your mind right on figuring out
this mutherfucker right now!



Pulling from my "the 10 commandments were taken from the 42 laws" days, which most definitely comes before Christianity, the 42 laws that is. What in those laws is all about the afterlife? It's the core of a religion by ancient people. Somebody thought long and hard about them.

And yikes this seems to be a Christian thread but still, the idea was flippant and without thought of where religion comes from. All these books are not filled 99% about the afterlife, so if they aren't all about the afterlife then the next idea is they are all about how to live here. Right, wrong or indifferently. People aren't spending majority of their free time just contemplating about the afterlife.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #109 posted 02/07/17 1:40pm

QueenofCardboa
rd

avatar

Dasein said:

QueenofCardboard said:



Nothing in this world, exists, is the way it is, because of me.

I am just passing through.


[Edited 2/7/17 12:35pm]



You're a mother, so you can't possibly believe that nothing in this world is the way it is because of your direct interaction with it.

And look at our human stewardship of the planet!

We're ruining the Earth!

Humans are meaning-making creatures, so I also disagree with the notion that we are "just passing through" all of history.



The evolution of human consciousness is integral to our ability to adapt and survive and make meaning out of our existence, dontcha think?



Okay, what I did to effect the world was to use birth control, to limit the number of children I would produce.

So I guess, yes I did do something that effects the world in the present and the future.


The evolution of human consciousness is entirely due to the adaptations that we have made to survive and thrive in a world that changes.

Technology is obviously a big part of this, and technology is causing cultural changes at an accelerated rate.

Most cultures cannot adapt/change fast enough to keep up with rapid technological change, and that results in violence.

America is a youth loving country, so we adapt quickly.

Other culture are emphasize respect for tradition and the elderly.

Such cultures, resist change.

But we have digressed so much that I have totally forgotten what your question/point is?

biggrin


[Edited 2/8/17 11:09am]

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Donald Trump
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #110 posted 02/08/17 11:03am

Dasein

morningsong said:

Dasein said:


But your calling bull on this doesn't speak to my point:

Even if you only had two hours of leisurely time sufficient enough for mulling over an after-life
philosophy in 17 A.D., that was two hours of leisurely time sufficient enough for mulling over and
actually reifying a this-life philosophy. The fact that I have triple that amount of time in 2017 A.D.
doesn't mean that I am then justified in mulling over after-life philosophies.

I say abandon all worries and concerns with the after-life and get your mind right on figuring out
this mutherfucker right now!



Pulling from my "the 10 commandments were taken from the 42 laws" days, which most definitely comes before Christianity, the 42 laws that is. What in those laws is all about the afterlife? It's the core of a religion by ancient people. Somebody thought long and hard about them.

And yikes this seems to be a Christian thread but still, the idea was flippant and without thought of where religion comes from. All these books are not filled 99% about the afterlife, so if they aren't all about the afterlife then the next idea is they are all about how to live here. Right, wrong or indifferently. People aren't spending majority of their free time just contemplating about the afterlife.


Hmm . . . .

You're accusing me of making an argument I never made. I never said people are spending the
"majority of their free time just contemplating about the afterlife" or anything like that. Go look
back at the post I made where you wrote your initial response.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #111 posted 02/08/17 11:49am

morningsong

Dasein said:

morningsong said:



Pulling from my "the 10 commandments were taken from the 42 laws" days, which most definitely comes before Christianity, the 42 laws that is. What in those laws is all about the afterlife? It's the core of a religion by ancient people. Somebody thought long and hard about them.

And yikes this seems to be a Christian thread but still, the idea was flippant and without thought of where religion comes from. All these books are not filled 99% about the afterlife, so if they aren't all about the afterlife then the next idea is they are all about how to live here. Right, wrong or indifferently. People aren't spending majority of their free time just contemplating about the afterlife.


Hmm . . . .

You're accusing me of making an argument I never made. I never said people are spending the
"majority of their free time just contemplating about the afterlife" or anything like that. Go look
back at the post I made where you wrote your initial response.



I highlighted in your post what I called bull on...

If you're focused on this life, you've no time to focus on the possibility of "the next."

Your arguement is nobody should have time to focus on the afterlife if they're living this life. I say human beings are far more multifunctional than that and of course some time is going to be spent by a large percentage thinking about the afterlife. Death is the end game for everybody. And I say no religious writing that I know of in history spends that much of it's writing talking about the afterlife which means majority of religion is about figuring out how to live in this life.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #112 posted 02/08/17 1:04pm

Dasein

morningsong said:

Dasein said:


Hmm . . . .

You're accusing me of making an argument I never made. I never said people are spending the
"majority of their free time just contemplating about the afterlife" or anything like that. Go look
back at the post I made where you wrote your initial response.



I highlighted in your post what I called bull on...

If you're focused on this life, you've no time to focus on the possibility of "the next."

Your arguement is nobody should have time to focus on the afterlife if they're living this life. I say human beings are far more multifunctional than that and of course some time is going to be spent by a large percentage thinking about the afterlife.


And I say that is to the detriment of their living this life. I'm being strict here for a reason: I've
no time for creating an elaborate after-life philosophy because I'm too busy trying to create and
reify an elaborate this-life philosophy. Sometimes we dream about what could come next be-
cause what's coming now fucking sucks. Well, do something about the "now fucking sucks"!

People who live and live well probably don't create after-life philosophies; instead, these flights
into vagaries probably comes from people who are oppressed in some form or fashion.





  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #113 posted 02/08/17 1:25pm

QueenofCardboa
rd

avatar


Read;

The Birth and Death of Meaning

by Ernest Becker


and

Denial of Death

by Ernest Becker



[Edited 2/8/17 13:26pm]

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Donald Trump
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #114 posted 02/08/17 1:34pm

morningsong

Dasein said:

morningsong said:



I highlighted in your post what I called bull on...

If you're focused on this life, you've no time to focus on the possibility of "the next."

Your arguement is nobody should have time to focus on the afterlife if they're living this life. I say human beings are far more multifunctional than that and of course some time is going to be spent by a large percentage thinking about the afterlife.


And I say that is to the detriment of their living this life. I'm being strict here for a reason: I've
no time for creating an elaborate after-life philosophy because I'm too busy trying to create and
reify an elaborate this-life philosophy. Sometimes we dream about what could come next be-
cause what's coming now fucking sucks. Well, do something about the "now fucking sucks"!

People who live and live well probably don't create after-life philosophies; instead, these flights
into vagaries probably comes from people who are oppressed in some form or fashion.







You don't need to. It's all been done for you a thousand times over. In fact given percentages very few people in the history of humankind has philosophied about afterlife stuff. It's not a very deep statement to proclaim how you don't have time because you're living this fulfilled life. I highly doubt you are exceeding DiVinci in how much life you're living but even he had some kind of philosophies. He left 6,000 pages of his own musings.



  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #115 posted 02/08/17 2:05pm

Dasein

morningsong said:

Dasein said:


And I say that is to the detriment of their living this life. I'm being strict here for a reason: I've
no time for creating an elaborate after-life philosophy because I'm too busy trying to create and
reify an elaborate this-life philosophy. Sometimes we dream about what could come next be-
cause what's coming now fucking sucks. Well, do something about the "now fucking sucks"!

People who live and live well probably don't create after-life philosophies; instead, these flights
into vagaries probably comes from people who are oppressed in some form or fashion.







You don't need to. It's all been done for you a thousand times over. In fact given percentages very few people in the history of humankind has philosophied about afterlife stuff. It's not a very deep statement to proclaim how you don't have time because you're living this fulfilled life. I highly doubt you are exceeding DiVinci in how much life you're living but even he had some kind of philosophies. He left 6,000 pages of his own musings.




Where did you get the notion that "In fact given percentages very few people in the history of
humankind has philosophied about afterlife stuff" from? - because I disagree with you. { source }

And I am not trying to make a "deep statement" about how I spend my time. I'm simply stating
that you gain more from focusing on the here and now as opposed to the mysteries after death.

Finally, you're kinda ticked off (I don't know why) so maybe you don't see that you've struck upon
something I think is integral to my argument: I don't always want the knowledge or claims of
knowledge from someone else's realizations. I can think for myself. So, because something has
been "done for you a thousand times over" doesn't mean I shouldn't look into how I can do for
myself!

Let's keep this cool, by the way!



  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #116 posted 02/08/17 2:32pm

morningsong

Dasein said:

morningsong said:



You don't need to. It's all been done for you a thousand times over. In fact given percentages very few people in the history of humankind has philosophied about afterlife stuff. It's not a very deep statement to proclaim how you don't have time because you're living this fulfilled life. I highly doubt you are exceeding DiVinci in how much life you're living but even he had some kind of philosophies. He left 6,000 pages of his own musings.




Where did you get the notion that "In fact given percentages very few people in the history of
humankind has philosophied about afterlife stuff" from? - because I disagree with you. { source }

And I am not trying to make a "deep statement" about how I spend my time. I'm simply stating
that you gain more from focusing on the here and now as opposed to the mysteries after death.

Finally, you're kinda ticked off (I don't know why) so maybe you don't see that you've struck upon
something I think is integral to my argument: I don't always want the knowledge or claims of
knowledge from someone else's realizations. I can think for myself. So, because something has
been "done for you a thousand times over" doesn't mean I shouldn't look into how I can do for
myself!

Let's keep this cool, by the way!





Being on people's mind and philosophing about it is 2 different things. People picking up a book and reading about something isn't philosophying. Curiousity comes in all shapes and sizes, just because you aren't curious enough about any subject to learn more about it doesn't mean that other people who are aren't living their lives or living in the here and now. I haven't disrespected you nor have you disrespected me, so it's cool as far as I'm concerned. I just found that particular statement, kind of bizarre. I mean I've heard it before, but what does it mean outside of "I'm not interested in that subject and nobody else should be either"?

I'm saying that as a Christian who has never read a book focused on afterlife experiences. I don't do ghost, meaning I don't have a interest in ghost but I wouldn't tell someone else that they aren't being "whatever" just because they are into it. How would I know?

[Edited 2/8/17 14:38pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #117 posted 02/08/17 3:07pm

Dasein

morningsong said:

Dasein said:


Where did you get the notion that "In fact given percentages very few people in the history of
humankind has philosophied about afterlife stuff" from? - because I disagree with you. { source }

And I am not trying to make a "deep statement" about how I spend my time. I'm simply stating
that you gain more from focusing on the here and now as opposed to the mysteries after death.

Finally, you're kinda ticked off (I don't know why) so maybe you don't see that you've struck upon
something I think is integral to my argument: I don't always want the knowledge or claims of
knowledge from someone else's realizations. I can think for myself. So, because something has
been "done for you a thousand times over" doesn't mean I shouldn't look into how I can do for
myself!

Let's keep this cool, by the way!





Being on people's mind and philosophing about it is 2 different things. People picking up a book and reading about something isn't philosophying. Curiousity comes in all shapes and sizes, just because you aren't curious enough about any subject to learn more about it doesn't mean that other people who are aren't living their lives or living in the here and now. I haven't disrespected you nor have you disrespected me, so it's cool as far as I'm concerned. I just found that particular statement, kind of bizarre. I mean I've heard it before, but what does it mean outside of "I'm not interested in that subject and nobody else should be either"?



You have officially crossed over into "arguing for the sake of it" as now you're wanting to make a
distinction between "people picking up a book" and "philosophying." The fact that life after death
books are a boon for publishing agencies speaks to my claim that people spend a lot of time worrying/
thinking/dreaming/philosophizing about what happens after death when that time could be spent
developing a way to live a better, more meaningful life today. If I'm focused on making sure my
current marriage is functioning in a healthy, fulfilling way, why would I spend anytime thinking about
what happens after a divorce?

Interestingly enough, "self-help" books are a boon too!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #118 posted 02/08/17 3:22pm

morningsong

Dasein said:

morningsong said:



Being on people's mind and philosophing about it is 2 different things. People picking up a book and reading about something isn't philosophying. Curiousity comes in all shapes and sizes, just because you aren't curious enough about any subject to learn more about it doesn't mean that other people who are aren't living their lives or living in the here and now. I haven't disrespected you nor have you disrespected me, so it's cool as far as I'm concerned. I just found that particular statement, kind of bizarre. I mean I've heard it before, but what does it mean outside of "I'm not interested in that subject and nobody else should be either"?



You have officially crossed over into "arguing for the sake of it" as now you're wanting to make a
distinction between "people picking up a book" and "philosophying." The fact that life after death
books are a boon for publishing agencies speaks to my claim that people spend a lot of time worrying/
thinking/dreaming/philosophizing about what happens after death when that time could be spent
developing a way to live a better, more meaningful life today. If I'm focused on making sure my
current marriage is functioning in a healthy, fulfilling way, why would I spend anytime thinking about
what happens after a divorce?

Interestingly enough, "self-help" books are a boon too!


Then we just have to not agree. Given this thread's OP, time for me to let it go.

I'd say most people worry about working on their marriage to avoid divorce, and probably know more about what happens after a divorce than they want to, so I don't know what that means since death is inevitable and completely unavoidable as of this date.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #119 posted 02/08/17 3:43pm

Dasein

morningsong said:

Dasein said:


You have officially crossed over into "arguing for the sake of it" as now you're wanting to make a
distinction between "people picking up a book" and "philosophying." The fact that life after death
books are a boon for publishing agencies speaks to my claim that people spend a lot of time worrying/
thinking/dreaming/philosophizing about what happens after death when that time could be spent
developing a way to live a better, more meaningful life today. If I'm focused on making sure my
current marriage is functioning in a healthy, fulfilling way, why would I spend anytime thinking about
what happens after a divorce?

Interestingly enough, "self-help" books are a boon too!


Then we just have to not agree. Given this thread's OP, time for me to let it go.

I'd say most people worry about working on their marriage to avoid divorce, and probably know more about what happens after a divorce than they want to, so I don't know what that means since death is inevitable and completely unavoidable as of this date.


People do not work on their marriage only to avoid divorcing, although I imagine that factors into
the thought process of those who are working on their marriage. But the fact remains that when
you are focused on having a great marriage, you are not spending much time thinking about what
happens after you're married. Why? Because just like those who are living well, you're too focused
on the here and now to worry about or spend too much time thinking about the unknown - this is
the basis of the marriage/after-life analogy.

Yet, people who work on their marriage, and devote themselves to saving it and do so in part by not
focusing on what happens when the marriage is over have a leg up on those who work on their lives,
but think about/fret over the after life for obvious reasons.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 4 of 6 <123456>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > From a Christian to a non Christian