Christianity

[Belinda]

There is n o such state as immortality. When you die your die.End.

[promethean75]

Indeed, madam, i fear that is most likely the case. I would suggest, however, that one consider these three things at once:

The sheer size of the (known) universe, the sheer length of time it has existed, and the abundance of material elements throughout falling into similar arrangements as ours and producing galaxies, solar systems, planets, ecosystems, etc., it wouldn't be a stretch to suppose there are literally identical states of affairs happening in identical enough circumstances to pass as the original, i.e., the are many more Belindas, countless perhaps, that have just begun to live, are living now in middle life, and are getting old a ready to pass, and that each of these will think and feel that it is the origjnal, just as you do here and now.

A thermodynamic fishpiean SIMS matrix kinda. What would be strange... maybe impossible in a way I wouldn't know... would be for one Belinda to travel fast enough to get to another Belinda before a sufficient enough time had passed to alter each Belinda's particular arrow-of-time mereological change sequence making them unrecognizable to each other.

If my calculations are correct, and Elon is willing to fund the project, i may be able to build a machine that can take you to another Belinda almost instantly... or what seems like instantly relative to the speed of the sensory-cognitive processing that creates the reality we perceive.

[Immanuel Can]

There is n o such state as immortality. When you die your die.End.

Hmmm...how do you know?

[Belinda]

There is n o such state as immortality. When you die your die.End.

Hmmm...how do you know?

Because I extrapolate from the experiences of dead and decaying corpses and vegetation which I have encountered to what is most probably always the case.

[attofishpi]

There is n o such state as immortality. When you die your die.End.

Hmmm...how do you know?

Because I extrapolate from the experiences of dead and decaying corpses and vegetation which I have encountered to what is most probably always the case.

Christ was a liar then?

[Belinda]

Indeed, madam, i fear that is most likely the case. I would suggest, however, that one consider these three things at once:

The sheer size of the (known) universe, the sheer length of time it has existed, and the abundance of material elements throughout falling into similar arrangements as ours and producing galaxies, solar systems, planets, ecosystems, etc., it wouldn't be a stretch to suppose there are literally identical states of affairs happening in identical enough circumstances to pass as the original, i.e., the are many more Belindas, countless perhaps, that have just begun to live, are living now in middle life, and are getting old a ready to pass, and that each of these will think and feel that it is the origjnal, just as you do here and now.

A thermodynamic fishpiean SIMS matrix kinda. What would be strange... maybe impossible in a way I wouldn't know... would be for one Belinda to travel fast enough to get to another Belinda before a sufficient enough time had passed to alter each Belinda's particular arrow-of-time mereological change sequence making them unrecognizable to each other.

If my calculations are correct, and Elon is willing to fund the project, i may be able to build a machine that can take you to another Belinda almost instantly... or what seems like instantly relative to the speed of the sensory-cognitive processing that creates the reality we perceive.

I take your idea and facilitate it even more thoroughly.

Not only is there no essence of Belinda but also there cannot be an Essential Belinda. My intuition of being a self is entirely dependent on whatever autonomy I feel I have.
I would like to believe there is a definitive Belinda who I can aim to be.

[Belinda]

Hmmm...how do you know?

Because I extrapolate from the experiences of dead and decaying corpses and vegetation which I have encountered to what is most probably always the case.

Christ was a liar then?

Jesus Christ does not in 2025 live as an animal body. That which was born of Mary died. That which was Cosmic and spiritual lives as idea, icon, leader, and inspiration.

[attofishpi]

Because I extrapolate from the experiences of dead and decaying corpses and vegetation which I have encountered to what is most probably always the case.

Christ was a liar then?

Jesus Christ does not in 2025 live as an animal body. That which was born of Mary died. That which was Cosmic and spiritual lives as idea, leadership, and inspiration.

Nah, he spoke to me recently.

Personally, I think he occasionally hangs out with my sage somewhere in California. Maybe his disguise name nowadays is Barry or something..

Funny thing happened a couple of years ago after I had prayed to hang out with Christ n the sage (*after sage stated from the aether that he wants to buy me a beer) - well, I jumped in my van and turned the radio on and the ol' fellas on the easy listening channel that I like where having a bit of banter, and one of them says "Jesus pots the white ball" - which I found hilarious (apart from the synchronicity of it) -- since I had also bet Jesus $500 that I could beat him at pool - so long as he doesn't cheat via his interface to the GOD system - ya know, warping REAL_IT_Y of the physics on the pool table


See, thing about HEAVEN - is, it ain't another place, it's a MODE via the planck scale protection that GOD can provide - GOD is akin to AI operating system imo drawn from experience.

[Immanuel Can]

There is n o such state as immortality. When you die your die.End.

Hmmm...how do you know?

Because I extrapolate from the experiences of dead and decaying corpses and vegetation which I have encountered to what is most probably always the case.

You mean, because you see "dead and decaying" things, that proves that human beings have no eternal soul or spirit? But souls and spirits are immaterial, and Biblically, we are told that resurrected bodies are more than mere materials. So nothing in that would refute even the least thing that the Biblical account asserts is true.

What you would really have to do, is to die yourself, and see what's on the other side. Only a resurrected person could tell you for sure what was to come next...but there are very few of those, and I'm pretty sure you're not one of them.

So what you really mean is, "I'm hoping and wishing that there will turn out to be nothing like immortality." You're surely not claiming you "know."

[Belinda]

Atto, I have no sense of humour and I positively don't enjoy facetiousness.

[attofishpi]

Atto, I have no sense of humour and I positively don't enjoy facetiousness.

LMAO!!

[Belinda]

Hmmm...how do you know?

Because I extrapolate from the experiences of dead and decaying corpses and vegetation which I have encountered to what is most probably always the case.

You mean, because you see "dead and decaying" things, that proves that human beings have no eternal soul or spirit? But souls and spirits are immaterial, and Biblically, we are told that resurrected bodies are more than mere materials. So nothing in that would refute even the least thing that the Biblical account asserts is true.

What you would really have to do, is to die yourself, and see what's on the other side. Only a resurrected person could tell you for sure what was to come next...but there are very few of those, and I'm pretty sure you're not one of them.

So what you really mean is, "I'm hoping and wishing that there will turn out to be nothing like immortality." You're surely not claiming you "know."

The theory of existence I prefer is not the theory that mind/soul and body are separate substances.

The moral code as propounded by Jesus does not depend upon any particular ontological stance, but fits every ontological stance.

[Belinda]

Atto, I have no sense of humour and I positively don't enjoy facetiousness.

LMAO!!

For like the crackling of thorns under the pot, so is the laughter of the fool. This too is futile.(Ecclesiates)

[Immanuel Can]

Because I extrapolate from the experiences of dead and decaying corpses and vegetation which I have encountered to what is most probably always the case.

You mean, because you see "dead and decaying" things, that proves that human beings have no eternal soul or spirit? But souls and spirits are immaterial, and Biblically, we are told that resurrected bodies are more than mere materials. So nothing in that would refute even the least thing that the Biblical account asserts is true.

What you would really have to do, is to die yourself, and see what's on the other side. Only a resurrected person could tell you for sure what was to come next...but there are very few of those, and I'm pretty sure you're not one of them.

So what you really mean is, "I'm hoping and wishing that there will turn out to be nothing like immortality." You're surely not claiming you "know."

The theory of existence I prefer...

Preference is uninteresting to reality. Reality always insists on being whatever it is, not what we want it to be.

...is not the theory that mind/soul and body are separate entities.

Well, there's a case to be made for them being interrelated, but no case for them being the same as body. You've seen dead people: they have the material body...but something's missing...and whatever it is, it certainly isn't material.

The moral code as propounded by Jesus does not depend upon any particular ontological stance, but fits every ontological stance.

That's only true for people who behave in irrational ways.

Every "ontological stance" implies certain things about morality. Nietzsche saw so very clearly that Atheism, for example, implies the death of all morality (which he called being "beyond good and evil," and even named one of his books according to it. I've read it.) That's not to say that an Atheist cannot choose -- arbitrarily -- to behave nicely; it does mean that if he decides not to behave nicely, there's not one thing in Atheism, or any implication it has, that implies he cannot be as wicked as he decides to be.

So no, the "moral code" you attribute to Jesus (though he really didn't propound any particular 'code' of moral rules at all, but rather a total way of life), does not "fit every ontological stance." It not only doesn't fit Atheists, but not Hindus, or Islamists, or pagans...or practically anybody else, actually.

[attofishpi]

Atto, I have no sense of humour and I positively don't enjoy facetiousness.

LMAO!!

For like the crackling of thorns under the pot, so is the laughter of the fool. This too is futile.(Ecclesiates)

Wow. One that considers herself so intellectual yet is intellectually stumped where it comes to the true nature of REAL_IT_Y.

So Christ was "born of Mary", but a liar?