What happens after death for an atheist?

Hi there LDSdude. I was wondering if those responses were of any use to you. I think the clearest illustration of what atheists imagine was given by that rather foxy biomechanical lady off Star Trek - i.e. that the experience of being dead will feel pretty much how it felt to be not yet concieved. I don't know if that's what I'm EXPECTING exactly, but it seems fairly reasonable.Can you imagine what it would feel like to believe that you only had a few decades (if you are lucky) in which to be? Its certainly a scary thought, though if you're as lazy as me it might not motivate you to do a stitch more than you would do if you believed in eternal life. But it certainly does impress on you the specialness of existing. Think of all the millions of sperm who could have made it when you were concieved, and thus blotted out your existence. Weird, isn't it? Anyway.I think the point that you make - I guess it could be called an argument from incredulity? - namely, that its pretty hard to imagine not imagining, is totally sound. It is hard. But I don't think that this difficulty is evidence for the existence of any post death consciousness shenanigans.We are in a pretty special position: intelligent beings who devised pine-tree shaped air fresheners and who sometimes wear wedding rings. No other animal is tormented by existential confusiongasms of the complexity we enjoy on an everyday basis. My personal view is that when a being smart enough to use language witnesses the death of a loved one, its pretty inevitable that we're going to come up with some pretty rationalisations and explanations of where they have gone, because inescapably we are going too. But that's just my opinion.Now a barely related personal rant, prompted by a couple of responses to this question. I'm not trying to rattle anyone's cage here, and the idea of legacy is quite cool and all, but you can bang on about it too much. Its a bit of a tired cliche. I personally draw pretty scant comfort from the notion that I will leave a legacy in the memories of others - firstly because these people will die pretty soon anyway. Secondly, its all a bit like genes. People say that its really great to pass them on, as if they were handing on something that they actually had a hand in making themselves or something. But they just got issued with them, and the genes don't really "belong" to them in a meaningful way. The same with deeds and legacy: if I do nice stuff and pass it on, I can't really say that the nice stuff I did was MY nice stuff, because if I did it, I just learned it off someone else. Maybe I just say that because I have trouble with free-will, so I don't think people really choose to hand stuff on anyway. Okay, I'll shut up about that.But one more thing: the same goes for when people go all misty eyed about being made from stars. That really leaves me cold. At some point some of my atoms were probably a part of some medieval murderer of something, but I'm not going to get excited about it. Okay, rant over.

If that is the case, in what way does one go to Heaven, if whatever isn't "pure being" is removed and they are no longer conscious of their own identity? Do they still bear their memories of when they were alive? I am shaped by my memories, thoughts, and experiences, as well as genetic factors, and if these are all taken away, what is left? What would differentiate the soul of a person who lived a virtuous life from a serial murderer?

Those who experience Pure Being are those who are capable of it.Some who are very advanced in religious discipline can experience moments of it even in an earthly life.I'm just saying that earthly conditions and states of mind do not apply. Somebody might say, "Won't it get boring?" It would if the subject were in time as on earth, but eternity means "no time."This message has been edited by robinrohan, 02-04-2005 12:01 AM

Funny how that doesn't seem to apply the other way. If I do bad stuff and pass it on, I can't really say that the bad stuff I did was MY bad stuff?Oh, yeah, it was mine alright.

quote:

---

'God help me I can believe no other way

---

Hi, ABB
I believe it was Luther who said that."Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. God help me, Amen"

---

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Hey, Albert, I agree!

Can these people who can experience Beatific Vision while still alive do it at will? Are they able to do it in controlled conditions? Is there a difference between earthly experiences of beatific vision and going into a trance? Is it testable in any way?If they can prove that they can do that, James Randi will pay them one million dollars. Even if they aren't interested in the money, they could use it to help others in need, build churches to promote their religion, or just donate it to charity.JREF - HomeThis message has been edited by Gary, 02-04-2005 14:46 AM

The website seems to be looking for evidence of "occult power." What I am talking about is not that. It's an experience that people might have. There's no special powers involved in the earthly sense. It is the transcendence beyond the ego. This is way beyond all the claptrap and fradulent bullshit.

"At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event."This would be a supernatural power or event. It apparently defies our understanding of nature. Beatific Vision is outside of the range of normal human abilities. Therefore, if people are capable of Beatific Vision while still alive, they are eligible for the one million dollar prize.

What I am talking about is not "supernatural." There is no such thing as the supernatural in the sense you mean it. It's a natural psychological action that most of us are not familiar with because it takes a lot of sacrifice to acheive it. You might as well say that someone who is remarkably unselfish is "supernatural."

Hi Robin,As wonderful as a Beatific Vision can be it is transient. It arises and passes away. The awakening of the Buddha, or Bernadette Roberts is not spoken of as a momentary event but rather as a realizing of that which has always been the case. It can be called transcendent in the sense that it is not subject to the change. It is not ecstatic but profound such that the Buddha described it as a turning in the deepest seat of consciousness. I think it is when consciousness is freed from all the identifications that obscured it.It is not something someone experiences. It is what happens when conciousness realizes it never was a someone. The someone can be said to die, but that is a dramatic way of speaking. How can something that never existed die? An illusion is seen through is all.ABE: What happens to a characer protrayed by an actor, say Prospero in the Tempest, when the curtain falls and the actor returns to his dressing room? Shakespeare had some very deep insights to this.lfenThis message has been edited by lfen, 02-04-2005 15:31 AM

If it is a natural psychological action, have there been any scientific papers written about it? Has anyone studied it in depth from as unbiased a point of view as possible, to better understand it? Or is it just a whole lot of religious mumbo jumbo which makes no sense unless you assume that it is all true?Lots of people who aren't Christians claim to be able to leave their bodies and go into astral planes where they can see and do things which they normally cannot. I do not believe this is possible because they offer no reliable evidence to back up their claims. I see no reason why people who claim to be able to see Beatific Visions are any different.

Quite possibly it is mumbo-jumbo. I don't know since I never "experienced" it. I just read about it.Ifen can perhaps address this question.

---

The mind is its own place, and in itself
Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.---Milton

"ABE: What happens to a characer protrayed by an actor, say Prospero in the Tempest, when the curtain falls and the actor returns to his dressing room? Shakespeare had some very deep insights to this."Okay, this is starting to make sense. The consciousness is the character and the body is the actor. So in a Beatific Vision, the two separate, and the mind realizes that consciousness is just another part of nature?If this is what is meant, I would agree that it is not supernatural. It is what I have believed all along - that the mind came about through natural means. I don't get what this has to do with the concept of Heaven or God though.

Ifen knows a lot more about this topic than I do, but I can say something, I think.Ifen says it's not an "experience," which I don't understand, so I will just say that what is "experienced" when the ego is transcended is Reality. The world of ego is not reality. You can also call it God or nirvana. That's the connection.The Beatific Vision is an ecstatic experience.The closest I've come to a Beatific Vision is "Romance."This message has been edited by robinrohan, 02-04-2005 15:55 AM

I guess Terry doesn't have the answer to my question.Given the original meaning of "hell", everyone who is buried is actually in hell. I don't think the potatoes were baked or very well done when they pulled them out.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.