• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Ultimate Lie of Religion: Life After Death

You will not die; the ultimate lie of religion. Out of all the other bull****, this lie remains the single greatest force for keeping the sheep in the faith. "Human-kind has always feared what it doesn't understand". The ultimate unknowable for humans is death, so for many it stands as their greatest fear. Perhaps not an immediate fear, or even one that exists in the forefront of their minds, but when thought about for long periods of time, it can be the most terrifying thing to attempt to imagine, and that is what makes it so terrifying: you can't imagine it. This might be one of the reasons why seemingly intelligent people cling to religion, whether they realize it or not.

So as humans tend to do, when we cannot think up a logical, reasonable, scientific explanation for something, we often create ANYTHING to fill the gaps, just to have those gaps filled. Since we cannot imagine non-existence, we create a belief that endlessly perpetuates what we do understand, that of simple existence. And because humans are so incredibly stubborn in giving up traditions, even the smaller ones, it only makes sense that we would keep the traditions around that were created thousands of years ago specifically for these unanswerable questions. And since humans thousands of years ago possessed very poor moral ideals, compared with our ("our" meaning most of the developed world) modern conception of morality, these traditions upon which they so stubbornly cling to are filled with the horrid morals of humans thousands of years ago. So really, religion as it exists today is an inevitability.
 

DDD

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
12,351
Reaction score
1,918
Location
Republic of Dardania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes very good. But it gets worse than just fooling people about the "afterlife." Religion while doing that also drains a bit of people's money, receives charity, and is exempt from tax. After it receives such funding it tends to work as a large party at times and sometimes gets involved with politics!

So you end up having mass followers of "God," obeying its "representatives," with a religious tunnel vision of fundamentalists (i.e., irreconcilable) taking action on the "representatives" and hence "God's" behalf. Free money, free followers, all doing what "representatives" want them to by fooling them that they are helping with an act of "God!"

It is like an army of indoctrinated soldiers that work day and night in media, culture, education, military, etc for the "divine" calling! The "representatives" get a happy life in power, commanding the fooled, and paint a medievil reality for the rest of us. This is the type of a disease that religion is today.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,822
Reaction score
28,339
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Because a Supreme Being would be unimaginable and unknowable, I've concluded that agnosticism is the only reasonable position. If there is a God then He/She/It can certainly get along without my allegiance. If not then I haven't wasted any time/thought/effort/money on the matter. The frustrating thing is that we are all guaranteed to know the answer some day but we can't tell anyone.:peace
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
17,282
Reaction score
5,807
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
First off I have to disagree on the concept that such is a lie. While this may seem to be a semantic issue to some, I think the distinction is rather important. In order to lie, one has to know the truth, and then deliberately give statement other than the truth with the intent to deceive. If someone believes something which is not true, while they may perpetuate a falsehood, they are by no means lying. There are very few to whom the label of liar could be applied. In fact, as per my next point, I would say that there could be none, save in that they believe one thing to be true and intend to deceive by saying something else.

My second point to this concept is that in order for any religion to have generated the "original lie", there would have to be definitive evidence to prove that there is no "life" after "death". Quite frankly, anyone who says that they have such proof are either lying, or honestly believe they do but are still perpetuating a falsehood. There is simply no way to prove the concept of life after death as true or false. It doesn't matter what your belief system (or lack thereof) is, this is just logical fact.
 

DDD

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
12,351
Reaction score
1,918
Location
Republic of Dardania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Speaking of logic appealing to the unknown of an afterlife is a direct fallacy of logic. That fallacy is a constant preach with the religious. They teach fallacies in logic if not lie.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
17,282
Reaction score
5,807
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Exactly! The afterlife is an unknown, regardless of whether it is real or not. Therefore it is a logical fallacy to claim proof either way. It is ALL belief.
 

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
31,009
Reaction score
9,029
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Of course it *belief*. It provides, among other things, guidelines for living the here and now.

Why tempt fate when you can have faith.
 

Hypersonic

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
212
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
If you seen enough dead bodies as I, I you would believe in a soul. I think us a corporeal beings die but our soul, our energy lives on. Now whether we go to a heaven or hell is another story.
 

DDD

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
12,351
Reaction score
1,918
Location
Republic of Dardania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I have seen many out of thousands of dead bodies that was conducted from the Serbian government organized ethnic cleansing of thousands of innocent civilians here. There is no soul.
 

Crossroads

Active member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
408
Reaction score
70
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
maquiscat;bt2511 said:
First off I have to disagree on the concept that such is a lie. While this may seem to be a semantic issue to some, I think the distinction is rather important. In order to lie, one has to know the truth, and then deliberately give statement other than the truth with the intent to deceive. If someone believes something which is not true, while they may perpetuate a falsehood, they are by no means lying. There are very few to whom the label of liar could be applied. In fact, as per my next point, I would say that there could be none, save in that they believe one thing to be true and intend to deceive by saying something else.

My second point to this concept is that in order for any religion to have generated the "original lie", there would have to be definitive evidence to prove that there is no "life" after "death". Quite frankly, anyone who says that they have such proof are either lying, or honestly believe they do but are still perpetuating a falsehood. There is simply no way to prove the concept of life after death as true or false. It doesn't matter what your belief system (or lack thereof) is, this is just logical fact.


If I claim to know something that I literally cannot know, that is me speaking a direct untruth, a lie. I make the truth claim that we don't know, the other side says they do know. If a side were to say that they KNOW there is no life after death, that might be a lie of a kind, if they truly hold such a belief with complete certainty.

I cannot speak for all religions or faiths except for the one I am familiar with, but Christians who defend such a belief claim that the evidence provided to believe such a thing is SO MASSIVE that they can believe in an afterlife with near absolute certainty (that is to say, enough certainty to devote their lives to this ideology).

The lying that takes place (what I'm really getting at here) is not really a person telling another person a falsehood, it's more the lie that the individuals tell themselves to make themselves feel better about a very bleak situation. If someone makes a claim that the evidence is overwhelming, then they are lying to themselves.
 
Top Bottom