Eternal Life (thanks, but no thanks)

OK - but you can't make that look attractive? Understood.

Good question! The analogy here could be a grand social event of extended timeframe. Were I invited to such an event, I would do several things. First, it would be proper to know the host of such an event. Lets say, for example, that my employer invited me to move to a new town. First, it would help if someone whom I actually knew in the company contacted me, as opposed to someone who represented the company but whom i did not know. Second, it would help to know if anyone else whom I knew and/or worked with would also be relocating. Thus, knowing the host, and knowing others who were also attending.Lastly, what were my alternatives?
In the case of Heaven, or eternal life, would I have the opportunity to enjoy eternal life elsewhere, perhaps a neutral land with no gods or demons present, either of themselves or in some of the people of this land.If I simply ceased to exist, having no perception of regret, the entire argument becomes irrelevant in the first place.Thus, this entire thread discussion is based on the premise that we humans will have some sort of option for continued existence in some place, doing something.

And as Phat, I obviously believe this to be true! Again, I assert that nobody should be forced into choosing a deal that they have no solid assurance of being attractive, wise, and freely chosen.

That brings us back to square one; evidence of Jehovah and credibility of the Biblical record. So long as you reject that, the Biblical model, and for that matter no model of eternal life will look attractive to you, the atheist or agnostic, whatever you are.You pre-determined the answer to your thread question. Your mind is set. No eternal existence model will ever disuade you from that mindset, no matter how attractively it is presented (abe: or how much evidence is cited). Edited by Buzsaw, : as noted in context

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Perhaps what Modulous may like to know is how has your relationship with God allowed you to know Him better? Has He only spoken to you through His Word or has there been certain lessons, revelations, insights, and reaffirmations of His involvement in your life?In other words, why is this Master worth trusting? How have you grown personally through your communion with God?

You seem to have quoted me, but responded to an entirely different post. Looking back through the other nearby posts I'm not sure whatever you are responding to was even in this thread. In the spirit of benefit of the doubt, I will assume whatever conversation you were having was quite interesting.Midway through you only tangentially begin to address a portion of my point so I will start there. This is hardly the case. If Buzsaw's interpretation is correct, every human has a vested interest in not getting to know God. Its true that to the annihilated soul the point is moot, but souls presumably have a vested interest in avoiding annihilation. The only type of soul that could possibly benefit from a relationship with God are the ones created already knowing him, so to them the point is also moot. No, not necessarily. Well, at least not this slight tangent of Buzsaw's proposed eternal life scenario. In this case humans are simply offered an opportunity for voluntary soul annihilation; if there is an afterlife for humans who don't accept God isn't really defined or particularly pertinent. Even if humans were to just die and be gone at the end of their earthly lives it would still be in their best interest not to destroy themselves with choice during their life.So in conclusion I have no idea where you were going with this, or even where you started.

I don't require evidence - I'm happy to grant whatever eternal life you want to conjure up as being true in order to sensibly discuss it. I'm just asking for you to make it sound attractive.

It's interesting that it seems Buz is using the Borg like fantasy from Revelation 21 as the basis of his heaven.

quote:

---

9One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, "Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb." 10And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. 11It shone with the glory of God, and its brilliance was like that of a very precious jewel, like a jasper, clear as crystal. 12It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. 13There were three gates on the east, three on the north, three on the south and three on the west. 14The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

​

15The angel who talked with me had a measuring rod of gold to measure the city, its gates and its walls. 16The city was laid out like a square, as long as it was wide. He measured the city with the rod and found it to be 12,000 stadia in length, and as wide and high as it is long. 17He measured its wall and it was 144 cubits thick, by man's measurement, which the angel was using. 18The wall was made of jasper, and the city of pure gold, as pure as glass. 19The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third chalcedony, the fourth emerald, 20the fifth sardonyx, the sixth carnelian, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth chrysoprase, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst. 21The twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate made of a single pearl. The great street of the city was of pure gold, like transparent glass.

​

22I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. 26The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. 27Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.

---

It's a pretty classic example of numerology again playing with the number 12 in different formats.It's a fantasy of some great Borg cube coming down to rest on the Earth.

Doing some quick figures, such a cubic city would have roughly 70% the volume of Earth's moon. Even assuming that it is much less dense, one would be able to walk on the sides of the cube. If placed on Earth, such an object would probably sink right through the crust causing some sort of titanic geologic event.The logistics of even viewing such a city are implausible. Even assuming viewing from Everest and the middle of one side of the city, the theoretical maximum line of sight is only just over half the distance to the far edge. Assuming the city actually entered the atmosphere essentially 100% of the sky would be taken up by a single side. The corners of such a side would be well outside Earth's atmosphere regardless, and the International Space Station would collide with such a cube a mere 15% up its edge. One shudders to think of the structural stresses involved in keeping such a structure cubic, much less performing the gymnastics required to display itself to a mountain-top viewer.Its fictional magic of course, but its obvious even the writers didn't fully comprehend what they were claiming.

It is stylistic, an example of Apocalyptic Literature, and was meant for the audience of the day. It is not and never was meant as factual.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

LoL, Phat. I wish it were that simple.What members like Modulous verbally call for is evidence. But when solid evidence is cited, they reject it, requiring higher standards than they require for things secular.Modulous, et al's problem is twofold:They don't want to be held accountable to a higher power and their minds have been mesmurized into secularism to the point that no amount of evidence to the contrary will alter that mindset.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Have I done so on this thread? I must have missed that. I took your golden city with gems at face value and rejected it as something that I don't look forward to. I didn't request evidence such a place exists.

You're contradicting yourself, Mod. I'm honing on on the phrase, "as being true." How can you espouse something as being true aside from evidence to support it's truthfulness?Attractive? Like living happily ever after? Like Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

First, one would not expect to find evidence of an existing place. One would look for evidence supportive to the Biblical record which cites such a place as existing.Secondly, my comment as to required evidence relates to your MO in the EvC archived debates. You (abe: usually) advocated cited evidence for all things alleged to be true, did you not? Edited by Buzsaw, : As noted in context.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

I'm not espousing it as true, I'm granting it as true. I don't need to believe it is true in order to make decisions about its appeal. Right - see OP for why I don't find this attractive. Yes - but the truth of the claims in this thread is not relevant so raising that objection in this thread is irrelevant. You claim 'my mind is set' - but if my mind was set I would not have started a thread to discuss it. I wanted to hear why other people found eternal life attractive, but it turns out that for the most part they have seriously divergent tastes than I do.Of course, you could assume the worst of me, that I am discussing in bad faith. But it makes no odds to my metahphysical position one way or another whether an attractive eternal life could be conceived. I admit, I was fairly certain that the dilemma is complete - that there is no escape route. However, I am more persuaded this is the case having subjected it to rigorous testing from the members here at EvC.You have a notion of eternal life that you find attractive. I'm sure that's very comforting. I don't find it attractive, and I can't be blamed for that! Sorry Buz, you tried - but your incentive scheme isn't as compelling to me (and others) as you might have assumed.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.