Why there is belief in an afterlife

[A Shieldmaiden]

I answered your questions.

It is all there in the Scriptures.

I believe that you need to check everything out for yourself. Don't just believe what someone else tells you. If it is something from the Bible go look it up for yourself.

[WendyDarling]

I answered your questions.

It is all there in the Scriptures.

I believe that you need to check everything out for yourself. Don't just believe what someone else tells you. If it is something from the Bible go look it up for yourself.

You did not answer my questions based on your beliefs, what scriptures? Go reread what I asked from you.

(Liberals get their dishonesty and their disingenuous ways from Christians I believe.)

[A Shieldmaiden]

Wendy wrote:

(Liberals get their dishonesty and their disingenuous ways from Christians I believe.)

Of course you do.

[WendyDarling]

Wendy wrote:

(Liberals get their dishonesty and their disingenuous ways from Christians I believe.)

Of course you do.

If you paid one wit of attention, you'd know that your sarcastic remark is not accurate and your behavior is not honest.

[Fixed Cross]

In Europe and America, a big change came with the "Death of God".
Fear of Dantes hell subsided, and people were no longer able to care as much about doing the right, vs the wrong thing.
But the idea of an afterlife that rewards stayed attractive to them.
So hell was abandoned, and people began investing heaven, make it more interesting, attractive.
Then, when heaven was made into a modern type paradise (I live on, my soul lives on) people started to imagine the things they would have to do to get there - -- oh, lo! It turned out to be exactly those things that they were ready doing.

This transformed the afterlife form a stimulus to discipline oneself to a certain standard (in ancient days, heroism, in Christian days, meekness) to something that is just there to take away the annoying thought that ones ego will at one point wither and die, and allows the ego to imagine itself important, the source of all things (the spark of god) and capable of transcending death by lucid dreaming. Its only effect is radically increasing the human capacity for egoism and bigotry.

[Fixed Cross]

Back to the original notion of the afterlife, the fruit of ones actions in the world. Here is a very good short paper on the subject:
https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/history/21h ... rev_dn.pdf

Honor & Glory in the Iliad: Life After Death

Honor and glory are central to the Greek character. Since heroes are the essence of the society from which they come, Greek heroes live their lives according to honor and glory, in all their varied forms. Honor and glory trigger an epic war that takes the lives of numerous men, and shape its development at every stage. The fall of Troy is “a thing... whose glory shall perish never (Homer, Iliad 2.324)”. The goal of the Greeks is the fame that resounds even after death, and they let nothing bar their way. The honor of the individual, family, and community guide every action and response. Honor and glory define the hero, and therefore are the foundations for everything that comes to pass in Homer’s Iliad.

I do believe that this is the only afterlife that a sane human would be considering.

In case someone woud crave being able to look toward a personal afterlife, where the ego gets to continue its little games, where the experience of the self can continue without all the Earthly conditions that made it, it will always resemble a teenage girls bedroom - colourful, emotional, empty of ideas of responsibility - an instrument to self-pleasing.

[Fixed Cross]

In as far as the continuation of the fruits of our actions pertains to us personally, we have the notion of karma.
Throughout all cultures that influenced the west, it has been the planet Saturn that has been attributed the function of karmic receptor and distributor.

Saturn, the horned one, the dweller on the threshold, the judge of what lives on and what must be ground back to nothingness - this planet was given the name of The Devil.

In the 20th century there was a German mystic who went very far in exploring this concept called Rudolph Steiner.
I am just posting this as an interesting facet of the pervasive belief in life after death.

OLD SATURN






True-believing Waldorf school teachers think that they and their students used to live "on Saturn" — or, more exactly, they and their students lived through the Old Saturn stage of evolution. That’s what their mentor, Rudolf Steiner, taught.

Here’s the story. The Creation occurred, in some fashion, as we have seen. [See the section titled "Origins", above.] It produced a vague, ethereal solar system in which everything was intermingled — everything that would eventually separate out as individual entities and objects was, at that stage, united as a single insubstantial, semi-spiritual mass. This first phase of our evolution (which was also the first stage of the evolution of our entire solar system) is called Old Saturn. The solar system was then, for the first time, physically manifest, but only in a very preliminary way. It was suffused, in a sense, by the forces of Saturn, as the gods poured out their benevolence to prod us into existence.

Steiner taught that the solar system blinks in and out of existence, manifesting and then re-manifesting in successive states, beginning in a delicate, virtually impalpable state and then becoming progressively denser, more physical, and more individualized in later manifestations. The first state, the first blink, was Old Saturn, which would be followed by a second blink called Old Moon, then a third called Old Sun, and then our current blink — the phase of evolution in which we currently exist — called Present Earth. Following Present Earth, we will proceed to additional states (blinks), but the movement toward physicality will be reversed; we will become more spiritualized again, in stages. We are currently about as densely physical as we can be — meaning we are about as far removed from the spirit realm as we would ever want to be. In our future evolution — the states will be Future Jupiter, Future Venus, and Future Venus — we will rise again toward spirituality, but in far higher, more perfect forms than in our distant past. [See, e.g., "Matters of Form".]

Here are the stages of our evolution, as generally described by Steiner. Starting with OId Saturn, we gradually descend to Present Earth, then we gradually will ascend to Future Vulcan:

◊ 1. Old Saturn ◊ ◊ 7. Future Vulcan ◊

◊ 2. Old Sun ◊ ◊ 6. Future Venus ◊

◊ 3. Old Moon ◊ ◊ 5. Future Jupiter ◊

◊ 4. Present Earth ◊....


The planets that we see in the sky now (Saturn and the rest) should not be confused with the phases of evolution that bear the same or similar names (Old Saturn and the rest). Still, the planets and the phases are related. The Saturn that we see overhead is a physical planet; it exists here and now, in the present solar system (i.e., it exists during Present Earth). It is a sort of remnant or miniature reincarnation of Old Saturn, which was an evolutionary state long, long ago. (Steiner's use of language is often a problem. He wrote and spoke as a mystic, using mystical — and, one might suspect, intentionally mystifying — terminology. Thus, he often referred to Old Saturn, Old Moon, etc., as "planets," and he sometimes called them Saturn, Moon, etc., and he even sometimes spoke of life "on" those "planets" when he meant life during those periods... Keeping your bearings as you read Steiner can be a challenge. But buck up. It can be done.)

OK. Back to Old Saturn, our first stage of evolution. Old Saturn was a phase where everything was initially quite undifferentiated, being essentially just warmth. Steiner considered warmth to be a sort of physical substance, but he stressed that "warmth" during Old Saturn was different from "warmth" as we know it now. The "warmth" of Old Saturn was the essence of our being, it was what we were made of. Put it this way: During Old Saturn, we were brought into semi-separate, semi-physical, lukewarm existence in the form of “eggs of warmth.” We got that way under the benign authority of gods of various ranks (Dominions, Mights, and so on). These gods were evolving, like us, only they were much farther along than us, and they elevated themselves further by helping us.





The gods called Spirits of Personality (or Archai or Zeitgeists) were especially important in getting us going during or "on" Old Saturn:

40) [Us, as Eggs]

“What is the power that rules in the Spirits of Personality [gods three evolutionary levels higher than humanity] on ancient Saturn [i.e., during Old Saturn]? It is no other than that which we know in modern man as the power of thought. For in reality, the Spirits of Personality did nothing else on ancient Saturn but exercise the power of their thoughts ... [T]he Spirits of Personality were powerful magicians. They formed those eggs of warmth [i.e., us] on Saturn by the force of their thoughts ... It is perfectly comprehensible that an entity who is really human should take on form from his surroundings (for the eggs that were formed there were constructed out of the surroundings [i.e., substance] of Saturn) and those eggs were bewitched, or chained to a further existence [i.e., the eggs became destined to continue their existence in future, higher incarnations].” — Rudolf Steiner, THE SPIRITUAL HIERARCHIES (Anthroposophical Publishing Co., 1928), lecture 4, GA 110.

The Spirits of Personality advanced their own evolution by ministering to us during Old Saturn — selflessness and kindness always produce spiritual rewards. "On" Saturn, we were not yet human, by a long stretch of the imagination. In fact, the term “human” can be quite confusing. According to Steiner, being human is not a matter of lineage or species; it is a matter of spiritual evolution — beings at a certain stage of their development are “human.” Generally, beings become human when they reach the fourth stage of their evolution. [See the entry for "human stage of evolution" in the Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.] Thus, for instance, the gods called Spirits of Personality began their own evolution three incarnations prior to Old Saturn. That incarnation, of course, occurred outside our solar system, which first came into existence during Old Saturn. So, the Spirits of Personality began evolving in a different solar system from ours, in a time before any time we have known. By the time we first came into existence, the Spirits of Personality were in the fourth phase of their own evolution — so they were "human" during Old Saturn. (Besides being "human," they were also gods, which is a little confusing. But so goes Anthroposophical doctrine.) We ourselves, being mere eggs of warmth during Old Saturn, would not become "human" until our own fourth phase of evolution — Present Earth. The whole point of evolution, according to Steiner, is to evolve to higher and higher states, attaining higher and higher forms of consciousness.





Our consciousness "on" Saturn was extremely dull, whereas the various gods above us possessed higher forms of consciousness (the higher a god's rank, the higher that god's consciousness). On or during Old Saturn, we were essentially comatose:

41) [Us, Awfully Dim] (The following is difficult. I will try to help via footnotes.)

“The human being himself can make no use of his luminosity on Saturn. [1] The luminosity of his sensory germs could not express anything in itself, but through it other more exalted beings are given the possibility to reveal themselves to the life of Saturn. [2] ... These are exalted beings ... [T]hey now radiate something of their nature out of ‘free will.’ [3] ... These Sons of Twilight develop in the ancestor of man a kind of understanding, of which however, in his dull consciousness, he himself cannot yet make use. [4] ... Man has now reached the point where he can work unconsciously on his own material body. [5] Through his activity in the utter dullness of Saturn existence, man produces the first germinal predisposition to the true ‘spirit man.’” [6] — Rudolf Steiner, COSMIC MEMORY (Rudolf Steiner Publications, 1959 ), chapter 14, GA 11.


[1] By “the human being,” Steiner means us (although we were not yet human). We had a sort of potential spiritual/mental light within ourselves, but we couldn’t make use of it “on Saturn.” We were too unevolved. (Don't be thrown by Steiner's use of the present tense. He often did this, perhaps for narrative effect. He was speaking of things long, long ago.)

[2] We had seeds ("germs") of illumination within us, which eventually would enable us to perceive and affect phenomena outside ourselves. But "on" Saturn, we couldn't use these seeds. However, our seeds enabled higher beings (gods) to reveal themselves — and to act — within the developing life of Old Saturn.

[3] The gods ("exalted beings") helping us did it by their own free choice, a voluntary act of benevolence that elevated them further in their own spiritual evolution. They imparted some of their divine essence to Old Saturn.

[4] Among our helpers were “Sons of Twilight” — gods one rank above us. They “developed” a “kind of understanding” within us, i.e., they helped us, the eggs of warmth, to have an early sort of comprehension. (Steiner here refers to us as the ancestors of men — he means us as we were during Old Saturn, when we were still far from becoming human. The eggs of warmth (us), having been enchanted, would reincarnate as higher beings during Old Sun, and higher yet during Old Moon, and even higher yet during Present Earth — when they would become us as we know ourselves now, as human beings.) The understanding the Sons of Twilight gave us was important — it was our first stage of consciousness — but it was so low and dull that we could make no use of it during Old Saturn.

[5] Despite being so dim, we could start, unconsciously, developing our physical bodies. ("Physical" is another relative term, however. We would not develop physical bodies as we now know them until Present Earth.)

[6] Dimly, dimly, we started to evolve toward our own true spiritual identity, although attaining that identity was still far, far off. All we could work up, on Saturn, was a germ of a predisposition toward attaining our eventual ‘spirit.’ (“Spirit man” has a specific meaning in Theosophy and, by extension, Anthroposophy: It is atma, which can be considered the god within.)


So, we started our journey. Things went along, and time as we know it (more or less) began: The solar clock started to tick, as it were. Also, Saturn rotated — which caused separations, which would ultimately create openings for Lucifer and Ahriman to get at us. So, there was trouble ahead.





When things during Old Saturn went as far toward materialization as possible under the prevailing conditions of dimness, everything reversed course, disintegrated, and became wholly nonphysical again. Then, after everything had disappeared, there was a period of rest called a pralaya. (Like much of the terminology used by Theosophists and Steiner, "pralaya" is a Hindu term — it means, approximately, melting away):

42) [Time Out]

“No condition of Pralaya could have arisen for Saturn through [the actions of] the Spirits of Personality alone. Higher spirits [i.e., higher gods] had to come into action in order to dissolve Saturn so that a Pralaya, or state of transition, of disappearance and of sleep might take place. Higher spirits, the Thrones [gods seven levels above us]...had to dissolve all this, so that, as the life of Saturn reached its end, the following process was carried out. The Spirits of Personality had attained self-consciousness [i.e., they had become "human"], had breathed in again a part of the warmth, had realised the Self as the centre of their being [i.e., they gained their spiritual egos], and left behind them a lower kingdom [i.e., they evolved higher, leaving behind their previously lowest layers]. Now entered the kingdom of the Thrones and dissolved that which had been left behind, and Saturn entered into a sort of planetary night.” — Rudolf Steiner, THE SPIRITUAL HIERARCHIES (Anthroposophical Publishing Co., 1928), lecture 3, GA 110.

So, we lapsed into sleep and absence, along with all of the solar system. The Thrones (aka Spirits of Will) kindly made this possible. The Spirits of Personality, having been very kind to us in their own special way, graduated to the next stage of their own evolution.

I will now take a pralaya myself. The next episode or two of Steiner Static will go elsewhere. But before long I’ll swing back to Steiner’s cosmic history, and I’ll tell you about life "on" Old Sun.

In leaving, I’d just ask you to meditate on this: Waldorf students are taught by people who think they see good, solid sense in Rudolf Steiner’s teachings. They think that the history we are reviewing is the true story of our existence. What do you think? `

((( https://sites.google.com/site/waldorfwatch/ )))

[Fixed Cross]

Ideologies of reward without sacrifice are of course ignoble.
Saturn is the planet associated with death, harvest, natural cycles, hardship, bare bones necessity, learning from experience.
We can easily associate it with karma.

Jupiter is the planet associated with ideology, fanaticism, luck, self-exaggeration, prophecy and priesthood.
We can associate it with al the other ideas about afterlife. Both the warlike forward striving sacrificial will of heroes and the dreamlike imagination of the new age explorer.

Karma is a legislative idea, it commands an awareness of the consequences of ones action on the greater world.
Regardless of its physical truthfulness, it is a powerful idea that can hone the half beast that any human is born as into a cultivated entity.

[Fixed Cross]

I just found a video locked on my account that I never published but which is really good, comparatively, compared to my videos in general.
I post it here and not in The Philosophers because half way I actually explain the idea much more lucidly than I do in the OP.

[A Shieldmaiden]

It seems to me whatever philosophy or religion one is drawn to there is the same underlying theme. Reward. I know not of any religion or philosophy that does not promise the reward of an afterlife in some form or other.

I was discussing the question of life after death with a minister and during his conversation I realised that this was something I did not particularly strive for or want. When I die and go to the grave, why not leave it at that. I don't want any surviving consciousness, or any communications with the dead. Death is like snuffing out a candle. The light is extinguished. Surprisingly, he agreed with me, (I suppose having to deal with people 24/7 would do that to him, LOL). However, I do want to be basically a 'good' person while I am alive and not for the reason of a reward of an afterlife. Frankly, to live 'forever' has no appeal for me.

So, if a person does not want this promise of an afterlife, do they have to take it? I don't see anywhere in the Scriptures where this can be arranged, unless of course you choose not to believe, which poses a problem for me.

There are a lot of assholes in the world. Some of them are Christians. Actually, one of them is me, so I guess I won't be dragged kicking and screaming into heaven.

[Fixed Cross]

Not so much reward, as consequence.
Afterlife is the result of the idea that one should still care for the consequences of ones actions that happen beyond ones death.

Weak people will convince themselves that they need to do as little as possible to attain this - a risk free life will lead to their reward, that is how they live, and that is how they face death.

Strong people convince themselves that they need to do more than they really humanly could be expected to do.
They know that the consequences of their actions live on, that their name wil be immortal. That is all they care about, they identify truly with their values and not with their ego which will die, unlike the consequences to their actions.

Strong people know what is solid, basically. Their afterlife is the sort of afterlife that the Jews have, which is the state of Israel, all Earthly.

[Magnus Anderson]

Strong people convince themselves that they need to do more than they really humanly could be expected to do.

Sounds degenerate to me.
Do you make your decisions based on what is unlikely or based on what is likely?

[Ierrellus]

We are genetically programmed to believe in futures.

[Fixed Cross]

Strong people convince themselves that they need to do more than they really humanly could be expected to do.

Sounds degenerate to me.

You mean scary.

Do you make your decisions based on what is unlikely or based on what is likely?

You mean do I take risks, where homely shut-ins don't?
Yes. All men do. Even boys.
I don't know what you are.

[Magnus Anderson]

You mean scary.

No, I mean degenerate.

You mean do I take risks, where homely shut-ins don't?
Yes. All men do. Even boys.
I don't know what you are.

Making decisions based on what is unlikely is gambling.
Gambling isn't courage, gambling is foolishness.
You're confusing the two.

[Fixed Cross]

Sure, Maggie.

[URUZ]

Some people stake bets on values, no matter how unlikely they seem to be. Other people simple coast through life following the "safe" path, never "gambling" on anything because they're too afraid of losing.

[Fixed Cross]

In nature, males take risks, females are risk averse.
Largely because they are preparing for the huge risk of childbirth.

[Magnus Anderson]

You are a suicidal retard who does not know how to distinguish between courage and recklessness.
Courage does not mean absence of caution.
Without caution, no goal can be attained.
Without caution, a father cannot save his child by risking his life.
Without caution, a stuntman cannot perform his stunts.
Without caution, no soldier can complete his mission.
Without caution, you cannot even posture that you're courageous.
Without caution, you do nothing but set yourself up for failure.
There is no courage in dismissing reality.
Only comfort. And a pretense that you're courageous.

The point is to attain your goals.
And in order to do that, you need to be realistic, which means, you need to wisely choose your goals, based on what you can do and not merely based on what you want to do.
Otherwise, if you choose based on what is unrealistic, the only thing you're going to do is make a fool out of yourself.
Which is what you're already doing.

[Magnus Anderson]

Some people stake bets on values, no matter how unlikely they seem to be. Other people simple coast through life following the "safe" path, never "gambling" on anything because they're too afraid of losing.

The approach to life that you describe that can simply be referred to as gambling is for losers who want to "get rich overnight". Basically, these are people who want to get out of their skin, which they find to be very tight, as soon as possible. If you think that greatness is born through sheer luck and not through laborious and meticuluous process that spans over many generations then . . . what does that say about you and Mr. Mixed Cross' philosophy?

[A Shieldmaiden]

Fixed wrote:

In nature, males take risks, females are risk averse.
Largely because they are preparing for the huge risk of childbirth

.

Bad childbirth stories can overshadow the good ones and this often produces a fearful reaction in others. A lot depends on pain tolerance and anxiousness, as to why some women deliver easier than others, we just don't hear about it as often.

[Fixed Cross]

Fixed wrote:

In nature, males take risks, females are risk averse.
Largely because they are preparing for the huge risk of childbirth

.

Bad childbirth stories can overshadow the good ones and this often produces a fearful reaction in others. A lot depends on pain tolerance and anxiousness, as to why some women deliver easier than others, we just don't hear about it as often.

Its the ground to most psychology. Only psychology of pure genius can be separate of this primordial female power.

The quintessential thing that is too weighty to speak out in general context.
Like on the masculine side what is common knowledge in military or finance will never be known to the public even without secrecy being enforced - the pubic doesn't want to know. It makes life more serious and involved.

[URUZ]

Some people stake bets on values, no matter how unlikely they seem to be. Other people simple coast through life following the "safe" path, never "gambling" on anything because they're too afraid of losing.

The approach to life that you describe that can simply be referred to as gambling is for losers who want to "get rich overnight". Basically, these are people who want to get out of their skin, which they find to be very tight, as soon as possible. If you think that greatness is born through sheer luck and not through laborious and meticuluous process that spans over many generations then . . . what does that say about you and Mr. Mixed Cross' philosophy?

Haha.

So you see all risk-taking as gambling on the Lotto?

Fair enough. I won't even bother mentioning what that says about you.

[URUZ]

Fixed wrote:

In nature, males take risks, females are risk averse.
Largely because they are preparing for the huge risk of childbirth

.

Bad childbirth stories can overshadow the good ones and this often produces a fearful reaction in others. A lot depends on pain tolerance and anxiousness, as to why some women deliver easier than others, we just don't hear about it as often.

Its the ground to most psychology. Only psychology of pure genius can be separate of this primordial female power.

The quintessential thing that is too weighty to speak out in general context.
Like on the masculine side what is common knowledge in military or finance will never be known to the public even without secrecy being enforced - the pubic doesn't want to know. It makes life more serious and involved.

This sex/gender difference also manifests itself genetically in the fact that males have much more variability of IQ whereas women tend to cluster around the mean IQ. Nature genetically experiments with males in a way it doesn't with females.

[Magnus Anderson]

Some people stake bets on values, no matter how unlikely they seem to be. Other people simple coast through life following the "safe" path, never "gambling" on anything because they're too afraid of losing.

The approach to life that you describe that can simply be referred to as gambling is for losers who want to "get rich overnight". Basically, these are people who want to get out of their skin, which they find to be very tight, as soon as possible. If you think that greatness is born through sheer luck and not through laborious and meticuluous process that spans over many generations then . . . what does that say about you and Mr. Mixed Cross' philosophy?

Haha.

So you see all risk-taking as gambling on the Lotto?

Fair enough. I won't even bother mentioning what that says about you.

You would do well to avoid vague terms such as "risk-taking" if you want to faciliate successful communication.
There is a difference between a father trading his life in order to save his child (which you can call risk-taking if you will) and a moron who denies reality and sides with a plan that is unlikely to succeed (which you can call risk-taking just as well.)
You and your friend are reality deniers i.e. you belong to the second group of risk-takers.

Let me remind you what your friend said:

Strong people convince themselves that they need to do more than they really humanly could be expected to do.

Basically, he's telling you that you should set for yourself unrealistically high goals.
Because otherwise, he believes, you can't become anything great.
And he calls it risk-taking and compares it to what, say, soldiers do for their people.

Soldiers don't set unrealistically high goals.
They don't suffer from self-hatred and megalomania.
They do what is realistic, i.e. safe, in order to achieve their ends -- protect their people.
Even if that means trading their lives.

Soldiers must be realistic -- they must follow the safe, tried and proven, path -- if they want to be successful.
In other words, if they want to attain their goals -- protect their people.
Without that, they can never be successful.

Neither you nor your friend have anything close to what soldiers have.
You are average braggarts who brag about imaginary possessions, abilities and success.

You are self-hating, over-compensating, morons.
You can't stand the reality of your situation.
You have to blindly hope that you will become something way beyond your ability.
And that's why your friend thinks you can never become anything great without aiming for greatness.
Because it's true: if he were to accept reality of his situation as it is he would have to accept that he would never become anything great.
The only thing he does not realize is that strong desire and motivation won't help him either.