Slashdot Mirror
Study Finds the Pious Fight Death Hardest
Stanislav_J writes "A US study suggests that people with strong religious beliefs appear to want doctors to do everything they can to keep them alive as death approaches. The study, following 345 patients with terminal cancer, found that 'those who regularly prayed were more than three times more likely to receive intensive life-prolonging care than those who relied least on religion.' At first blush, this appears paradoxical; one would think that a strong belief in an afterlife would lead to a more resigned acceptance of death than nonbelievers who view death as the end of existence, the annihilation of consciousness and the self. Perhaps the concept of a Judgment produces death-bed doubts? ('Am I really saved?') Or, given the Judeo-Christian abhorrence of suicide, and the belief that it is God who must ultimately decide when it is 'our time,' is it felt that refusing aggressive life support measures or resuscitation is tantamount to deliberately ending one's life prematurely?"
Because they don't really believe and haven't had time to consider and come to terms with their own mortality.
I'd be praying for a quick death so my family wouldn't have to pay the millions to keep me alive after hitting the limit on my insurance policy.
Wow. That's actually a rather interesting occurrence. One would, most certainly, assume the pious would accept death. But, when faced with death, I suppose a lot of beliefs become shaken.
because they're deliberately scared to shit of their 'afterlife'. pay your church or suffer horribly after death, little human!
The pious have the greatest fear. This is why piety, a close relative of conservatism, is associated with a variety of risk-averse thoughts and behaviors to preserve "status quo," even to the extent of apparent paradox.
Perhaps its the belief that all life is sacred and prescious that makes them want to hold on to life, regardless of their belief in the afterlife. If life matters...then you hold on to it....if its not, and existance ends at death....why prolong the enevitable (sp?)?
And yes, lets exclude the godhatesfags.com people and other such hate groups that hide behind religion to commit their hatred from the "all life is sacred" discussion.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Maybe, since they believe in a higher power, they believe that they "belong" on Earth and "have work to do" and that they can actually make a difference in the universe.
Compare this with an atheist who might believe that life is futile, fleeting, and nothing they do matters in the long run... they might be more accepting and complacent.
I'm not saying that either of these two are the case, my real point is that there are a billion different ways to look at this.
It's not really addressed in the summary or the article, but this sounds like it could also be family intervention, considering the article refers to the last few days or week before death - ventilators, feeding tubes, and similar usually end up being used when the spouses or families of these people decide they want their spouse/parent/grandparent kept alive for as long as possible.
It may be a case of the religious families being unable to let go.
*hides*
This could get ugly.
I'd be inclined to suspect(admittedly without experimental evidence) that, rather than being cause or effect of one another, piety and pursuit of aggressive EOL care are both effects.
People with the greatest fear of death would be inclined both to fight it medically and to seek reassurance against it theologically.
Piety is the result of being terrified of death, and scared into believing *anything*, however unlikely.
Highly religious people are more likely to place a premium on preserving life in all circumstances. Hence the religious are more likely to be anti-abortion, anti-assisted suicide, and anti-euthanasia. (The death penalty is probably a notable outlier here).
Maybe those of us who don't pray are just comfortable and have a clear conscience?
The official reason (for most pious Americans), is that suicide, or otherwise giving up on life, is a sin. They believe life is not just worth fighting for, but that NOT fighting for it is an affront to their creator.
The real reason, of course, is that they are scared shitless of death, as are most people, as well as the afterlife.
TFA didn't say if the people were hardcore bible bangers BEFORE getting terminally ill. Maybe the conclusion should be "Those who are most scared of death are more willing to try anything to remain alive, including intensive life-prolonging care AND prayers"
People who don't fear death have no need to pray, so only the people enough afraid of death go to Church.
The weak-willed and fearful are those who come to (or stay with) religion, therefore they are the most likely to fear dying.
Obviously God punishes the non-believers by causing them to deny themselves critical end-of-life care.
Probably get modded down for this.. for "religion" has always struck me as a haven for the fearful, those who lack self-esteem, or narcissistic personalities looking for external justification for their insane behaviour.
When such an individual is confronted with the prospect of death.. all that doubt, self-loathing and regret must really be a lot to suddenly bear when they "know" they're about to face the final judge.
I think there's a common paradoxical belief amongst Christians in the US that, rather than life being sacred, being alive is sacred. Life as a whole would include the entire cycle from birth to being consumed by the Earth. In this case though, I think it's more a case of FUD injected into their veins by the Church. I have no problems with religion, and consider myself to believe in some higher power. However, in my experience, Christian Churches spend way more time preaching about the punishment that awaits those who are not "saved" than they spend talking about how great it is to go out into the world and help your fellow man. The very concept that there is nothing you can do beyond blindly holding a belief to prevent eternal suffering in hell creates lots of FUD. It is not in the human nature to constantly blindly believe without at least occasionally questioning it. And the moment that you question it, is the moment that you create an instance where you will go to hell upon death.
I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
I don't know about 'most people', but I can speak for myself. I want everything possible done to keep me alive because I believe in loving life and being thankful for every single moment of it. I believe if I'm in pain with no hope of the pain going away before I die, that life is still worth living and that only God has a right to decide when my time is. So, unless, I'm just wasting people's time and money because there is really no hope in prolonging my life through seeking treatment I believe I have a moral obligation to seek that treatment.
That philosophy is consistent with certain veins of catholic-Christian thought.
Pope John Paul II refused to have a hip replacement, because he wanted to sympathize with the poor who could not afford one. He persisted valiantly to the end as he died of Parkinson's disease.
Christians and epically Catholics do not view suffering in general and especially at the end of life as a negative experience, but rather as an opportunity to unite oneself with the suffering of Jesus who was crucified. That suffering can be beautiful and since offered to Jesus can be of immense use and value in the preparation of one's soul for the afterlife and the salvation of other souls. For a catholic there is no such thing as useless suffering.
I suspect the answer to the questions posed are related for many Christians.
Did the study hold for regularly praying Buddhist or Hindu's?
From what I heard, being close to death from terminal cancer is painful. Therefore, if you believe life is about maximizing pleasure, the last weeks are probably of negative value. Might as well end it and get rid of them - it would be a better life overall.
If you believe that suffering can be good for you in some ways, then it is not necessarily of negative value. If you believe you have higher callings in life than to avoid pain and pursue pleasure, then again - those last weeks may be valuable. Those beliefs tend to be taught by religions.
-- Support a free market in the field of government
People who follow the instructions of authority, believe others should follow such instructions, and tend to believe that authority is right most or all of the time, are called authoritarian. People who hold to belief systems dictated by a hidden power with perfect judgement are some such. Those people also tend to believe/believe in other authorities judgements and power. Thus, people who hold strong religious beliefs tend to be the same people who most strongly believe in (and expect results from) the abilities of health care authorities -- doctors.
The same paradox was noted by Stanley Milgram in the Yale Experiments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment A nurse was one of the people who continued to follow instructions and "shock" a subject after the subject appeared dead, just because she was told to. At first it seemed a paradox that a nurse would follow instructions that would harm another. He figured it that he was equivalent to a doctor in the nurses mind, and so she was following his instructions to the letter without evaluation, just as she was trained to do with doctors. (Nurses these days are trained differently).
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Religion teaches that you have to do certain things (be good) to go to heaven. When death approaches people may start to wonder if they did enough good and the scales tip in the wrong direction for them.
This is contrary to Christianity. Christianity states that we can never make up for all the lying, coveting, blasphemy, etc. We cannot trust in our own works, but we can trust in the work of Jesus who payed the fine for us. A Christian that is dying that has a proper view of the gospel should not have any fear of dying. God is completely just, yet full of loving kindness.
They believe that all the things they have done are going to come up for judgement.
Most christians are hypocrites, have a long list of sins to pay for and are perfectly aware that they are going to burn for eternity.
Deleted
Other studies put an inverse correlation between the IQ of a person and their belief in God. So it's not very surprising that
peoples with low IQs believe in God and try to prolong their life (even when that mean suffering even more, or having your hospital bed as your HQ for a long time.) While peoples who don't believe in God (and are generally smarter), prefer to let nature follows its course...
It's not because of self-doubt or fear of damnation. It's because as religious people, they believe they have more to live for. They believe that a supreme being has taken a personal interest in their individual lives, and that whatever is happening to them serves an important purpose in the greater scheme of things. If there is any chance of recovery at all, they'll hang on to it.
The definition of faith is the belief in that for which there is no evidence, so perhaps religious people are less likely to give up hope.
--WH--
A few notes to remember about this study:
Personally, I would much rather go for hospice care. Aside from being more comfortable for the patient, it also gives them a chance to say goodbye to everyone properly, rather than just gurgling at your horrified visitors from inside a torture chamber.
Wow, I have to say that the comments so far as well as the proposed explanation in the summary really fall short of anything approaching objectivity or restraint from bias, even more so than is the norm for /.
What is with jumping to the conclusion that faithful people are desperately trying to avoid death because they're secretly not faithful, or afraid that they're wrong? Not only does this sound like a desperate grasping of straws to provide an explanation, but it also belies a tremendous lack of respect for any lifestyle that incorporates a little spirituality.
My first thought after I RTFA was that the non-religious are less equipped to cope with facing their own demise. I would suggest the opposite of the theories proposed so far, which is a much more intuitive and simple explanation: that when one realizes that they've lived a selfish, faithless life, they realize that there's very little reason for them to cling to it, just as how one loses the drive to continue working on a project which is flawed beyond hope once they realize just how flawed it is. Or perhaps the atheist realizes that he's only been kidding himself about how fulfilled he feels his life really is, and is less motivated to continue such a meaningless existence.
Yes, I would call myself a pious person who prays regularly (though I rarely go to church), but I am far from being a jesus freak. I just think it's pretty sickening how any report about a given behavior of religious people in general, whether it is rational or not, is instantly met with derision and disrespect by the greater internet community.
more likely that people that choose not to fight don't love life as much as people that do choose to fight.
Even if I was laying face down in the dirt after just having both arms and both legs amputated in a horrible accident, you can bet that I will be crawling with my chin. No matter how much my life sucks, I would much rather be alive than dead. I would much rather my consciousness persist than decay. Perhaps that is the ultimate sign of an egotist?
I'm not exactly sure which part my will to do God's work plays in my will to live.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm pretty religious and I actually like my life. I enjoy spending time with my family and I'd like to hang around for a while. I actually don't spend a great deal of time thinking about the afterlife. I find that living my beliefs makes me happier in this life.
Basically what a lot of 'religions' teach is that you will be judged by $DIETY after you die. When you're no good, you go to a bad place (or you won't get resurrected) and if you're good you will go to a good/better place (or you will get resurrected in paradise).
Whether or not that's true I'll leave in the middle in order not to spark huge debates but the leaders of those religions have you believe that you're always bad and everything you do is bad (you're born a sinner and we can't do anything about it) unless you tell $CHURCHLEADER about it and let him tell you what to do (whether it be paying cash, prayer,...), then you're good for a little bit until your next mistake. Off course we all make a lot of mistakes and some things we have never told to anyone or we have done and we think that we can't be forgiven for it (maybe because other people haven't forgotten about it) so we take those secrets/unforgiving sins with us as we die. However those secrets might doom us for eternity (it's not clear cut as to what will doom us or what won't) so we rather hold on to what we know than to what we don't know.
Another theory would be that if we hold on to life as long as we can and we think we lived a good life, that $DIETY might step in and miraculously heal us.
Somebody should ask them. Why do you want to live so badly, there's no hope for you.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
... I'm going to go with the Parable of the Talents as my answer to the question.
:) ). But I also believe that loving God means working for God as expressed in what we do with what the life we're given. And deciding to end my life on this Earth early, either by hand or someone else's, is taking this marvelous gift of life and throwing it away.
Yes, I believe in salvation by grace alone (hey, what can I say, my family's Presbyterian.
Is that a sin? Dunno, others do, I don't.
Is that taking a gift and throwing it back in the face of the one who gave it? IMO, yes.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
This study was done on terminally ill cancer patients. My wife is an RN, and in our discussions about her job it has been very apparent to her that death by cancer, slowly, causes a very different reaction in most people she has seen than other terminal illnesses.
I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the study, but I would like to see it expanded to, for example, heart/lung failure and other forms of terminal disease, and see what the difference is.
One aspect that I have seen in cancer end-of-life treatment is the heavy reliance on pain-killers to cope (nothing WRONG with that, just an observance). This could also have a very serious effect on EOL decisions.
-- I really need to bleed off some of this
By turning this discussion into science vs. religion, this assures that the MBA-driven
cost-obsessed insurance companies and their stooge doctors can freely choose to disconnect
people who disagree with their 'scientific', 'medical', and professional judgement.
We are on a dangerous path to state-sanctioned mercy-killing by trying to justify
forced DNR orders based on so-called 'research' saying that pious people fight
harder for life.
This is not research, and is not worthy of holding any sway in policy considerations
of right-to-life issues.
I would like to think that, as a lifelong non, un and anti-pious person, my choices in an end of life scenario would be ruled by reason. I would not refuse extreme measures if the likely outcome were acceptable, nor would I greedily demand all measures if the likely outcome were unacceptable.
Define likely, acceptable and unacceptable according to your personal taste.
I have to admit that I do find the implication in the headline that the pious value life more highly than the non/un/anti-pious to be typical religious bullcrap - they're always buying all the tickets to their own show..
its called hypocrisy
those who profess the highest of religious purity, according to whatever arbitrary standards, and pass judgment on others, according to their psychological poverty, are often the biggest hypocrites you find in this world
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
"Everybody wants to go to heaven,
Nobody wants to go now."
Maybe these folks just love life, and regard it as a great gift, something they don't want to end so soon...?
Nope, this is not a religion-bashing post, so I doubt it gets much support. I do find it interesting that so many here have to be so critical of other peoples life choices.
Standard disclaimer: Not a religious person, personally. But so long as your religion doesn't call for you to kill me because I don't pledge my life to your Deity, then it's fine with me that you believe whatever you want to. His Noodly Greatness forgives all, in the End. ;)
"...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
Doesn't always work though. I think most of the oldest people at my church have DNR's. But we're 'spiritual' people, not 'religious'.
Also, given that these are are terminal cancer patients, some christians could get really confused and think that just because God can heal them, he just hasn't yet and "must need more time" (obviously a logically fallacy).
While it's true that people with a greater fear of death are more likely to explore religion and that it may attract them to explore a belief, I seriously doubt that would get them to devote their life to it. Fears are only motivating when we are immediately faced with them. I've met very few people that actually live with a constant sense of foreboding (actually none).
I'd be really interested in any data on this when is comes to deaths that are less premature/illness related.
I cannot speak for all the pious, nor do I know how the study defines the pious so I will speak for myself. [cue the anti-whatever snarks...]
I believe we---mankind---were created for this world, not some ethereal place in the clouds. The Bible teaches that the people of God will live on earth forever, with a brief (relatively speaking) intermission elsewhere (between death and the return of Jesus Christ). It's quite interesting that the Bible begins with the Tree of Life in a garden (Eden) and ends with the Tree of Life in a city (see Genesis 2-3 and Revelation 21-22). Actually, the Tree of Life is still in a garden-like area that we would call a park. When Jesus returns He will create a sort of heavenly Central Park in the midst of a great city.
God intended from the beginning that man should live on the earth and the great promise is that one day man will live on a newly recreated earth and God will dwell with man forever in a world of peace, free of greed and anger and malice and war and poverty and hunger. In other words, people were created for this world and it should come as no surprise that they want to stay in it as long as possible. If, however, one does not believe this or one believes that this world is all there is, why delay the inevitable? Non-existence can often seem more desirable than a bad existence in this fractured, fallen world. For those who have hope for a future, existence in this broken world is desirable because they believe they were meant for it all along.
Life is short; think quickly.
I certainly can't speak for every Christian, but as believer myself, I think it's because we value life so much.
Yes, heaven will be so much better. That doesn't mean a mortal existence is bad. As a Christian, eternal life doesn't start after you die. It starts immediately when accept you Christ.
Also, if you know you're on the brink of death, you might want to hang onto life a little harder because you might get the opportunity to tell just one more person about Christ before you leave this world.
Simply speaking as a Lutheran Christian, I regard death as the enemy. However I believe that Christ conquered death so it is not to be feared. Death should never to be treated with dignity, but given the scorn it deserves. It doesn't need to be fought, but life is our gift and to be preserved as far as it is reasonable.
I'd hardly call this a study. They took 345 people dying of terminal cancer. You can make a hundred different inferences from such a small sampling. Here's a few:
Maybe some/most of these people were pious because they were dying
Maybe these people actually enjoyed their life more because they were pious
Maybe they were more pious because they were younger and didn't actually want to die
etc.
Nothing is learned from this study other than the fact that some religious people who have cancer don't want to die.... WOW. That should be in tomorrow paper... errr perhaps they'll need a special edition.
I'm inclined to agree with you but there are a few things that puzzle me. The study's abstract points out all patients were terminal cancer patients. I am assuming they all knew their cancers were terminal. It's interesting that the study even factored in patients' "preference for heroics" and still found people who rely on "positive religious coping" are more likely to want life support.
As well, I am assuming the patients were predominantly Christian. Death is nothing to fear for a Christian ("O Death where is thy sting? O grave where is thy victory") But if that's the case, why endure life support, even though the study also said it decreased their quality of life?
Maybe it's got something to do with "fighting the good fight" or some kind of subconscious view that life is a gift from God; therefore it should not be given up easily. Or, as you suggest (and like I said I'm inclined to agree with you) they are both effects of fear. But it puzzles me, and I think there must be some other factor, or maybe it reveals the schizophrenic nature of faith.
Oh believe me, I agree with you 100%
I would choose to consider myself a "Christian", if one were to apply a label to my religious beliefs.
The core tenent of Christianity is to (paraphrasing) "Love God above everything, love others as much as you love yourself."
Now I have serious problems with pretty much all organized Christian faith. They spend all their time telling you that you're going to burn in hell if you don't do this, or don't say that, or if you vote in favor of gay marriage, or eat red meat on Fridays during Lent, or use a condom or Pay us 10% of your wages or fail to wear your holy underwear at all times. You have the godhatesfags.com morons who obviously really fucking hate themselves if they're "loving others as much as you love yourself".
Its not my place to pass judgement on ANYONE. I live my life, believe what I believe, pass on my beliefs when appropriate, and try my best to be good natured. And I fail miserably at times :). I try to do good overall in the world, and help other people out when they need it. And quite frankly, I can do that without someone telling me the myriad of ways I'm going to go to hell.
But I agree..the Burn in Hell shit is nothing but FUD. These people who call themselves Christian and constantly tell you how you're going to burn in hell....well, assuming hell IS real, my personal opinion is they'll probably be there too.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
So... why don't they want stem cell research then?
(And yes, for the record, I complete acknolege the hypocracy of the above post...passing judgement on people who pass judgement. Sue me)
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
First and foremost the post & article says "strong religious beliefs" this may not be strictly Christians. Most of the posts here are targeted towards Christians. (Broaden your scope people.)
It's also apparent by the posts that most people who've responded to this are either not Christians themselves or have not spoken with a Christian about their views on death. The second rhetorical question listed (as far as I have found) is closer to the reason why they fight harder than most people.
"Or, given the Judeo-Christian abhorrence of suicide, and the belief that it is God who must ultimately decide when it is 'our time,' is it felt that refusing aggressive life support measures or resuscitation is tantamount to deliberately ending one's life prematurely?"
It's not a fear of death, just a desire to make sure you're doing everything possible to not be "deliberately ending" your life. Christians tend to believe that they have more of God's work to do on Earth and should fight as hard as possible to stay here in order to complete it.
As a counter rhetorical question, does the fact that those without strong religious beliefs choose not to receive intensive life-prolonging care mean that they believe they have nothing to live for?
I thought original sin was a catholic idea. Granted, catholics outnumber other christians in most places, but it still warrants pointing out that they are not representative in this regard.
I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
The best way to determine whether Pious Fight Deaths are Harder than Non Pious Fight Deaths, would be to have some Pious folks fight each other to the death and also some Non-Pious folks fight themselves to the death and then ask them about how hard they thought their deaths were. It might be difficult however to get the non-pious to participate in the study.
Another problem is that nobody would get to experience both a Pious Fight Death and a Non-Pious Fight Death to compare. Perhaps the very Piety of the Fight Death would effect the percieved Hardness of the Death in such a way as to skew the results away from the true Hardness value. Then again the difference between the true Hardness of a Death and the percieved Hardness of the Death may be only philosophical.
...
It would be dreadful to suffer this fierceness and wrath of Almighty God one moment; but you must suffer it to all eternity. There will be no end to this exquisite horrible misery. When you look forward, you shall see a long for ever, a boundless duration before you, which will swallow up your thoughts, and amaze your soul; and you will absolutely despair of ever having any deliverance, any end, any mitigation, any rest at all. You will know certainly that you must wear out long ages, millions of millions of ages, in wrestling and conflicting with this almighty merciless vengeance; and then when you have so done, when so many ages have actually been spent by you in this manner, you will know that all is but a point to what remains. -- "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God", Jonathan Edwards, 1741.
The more interesting bit of the study is that (if I recall correctly): If you were religious (versus non-religious), you were twice as likely to not have a living will (70% versus 40%), twice as likely to not have life insurance (70% versus 40%), and much less likely to understand a do-not-resuscitate order (don't remember the stats).
The study also covered Medicare expenses by race. This was also interesting, as Caucasian required something in the order of $20,000 (per year, I believe), black $26,000, and Hispanic $31,000. There was a strong correlation between religiousness and race, namely black and moreso Hispanics were more religious (and again, less likely to have life insurance, a will, or understand a DNR order).
Religious people are more likely to fight longer to stay alive, which I recall the study signatories saying was attributed to a sense of meaning, purpose, and comfort that religious people had.
I just read the study a day or two ago - I can't find it now, though.
My personal take is that religion is probably just an indicator of the level of education, modified by cultural attitudes. Religious piety and lower levels of education seem to correlate.
And maybe they just wanna sin some more. . .
What?
"These findings merit further discussion within religious communities, and consideration from those providing pastoral counsel to terminally ill patients with cancer," wrote lead researcher Holly Prigerson.
I honestly cannot fathom the moral fortitude of a pastor or other religious figure who counsels someone with a terminal disease instead of recommending them to a qualified physician.
What would possibly influence the pastor to have any informed opinion on how to deal with cancer? Is he a doctor or a pastor? Where in biblical teachings does it qualify a pastor or priest to lead someone through life with a terminal disease?
Imagine the outrage from a pastor if a doctor told his or her patient that praying accomplished nothing and that modern medicine was the only way to attempt to beat something like cancer. The pastor would be furious. These are the same people that try faith healing and praying away cancer...sickening...
Lastly here's two links for any bored person from The Times Online. The first one dealing with how the church handles diseases like HIV/AIDS, the second one discussing how atheism is America is rising.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5923927.ece
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article5907453.ece
Hypothesis: those who are most afraid of dying are most likely to be religious.
Maybe more "pious" people tend to be part of tighter-knit families and wish to spend as much time with their loved ones as possible. Absolutely correlation not causation in this guessing-game of a "study".
After 5 years I've logged in again to /. to post a reply >.
Anyway I wanted to say that there's nothing impossible in religion. Those who are religious tend to hang on longer because they believe a higher power is at work and can solve impossible things. It has nothing to do with being afraid of death, rather being hopeful that their terminal ailment CAN indeed be cured.
Meanwhile the non religious would normally just give up and die.. because some guy said so.
did you forget to take your meds?
In outright atheism one may find oblivion appealing rather than a compulsory eternal life, one may also treasure the finite term of consciousness a little more and when you're done you're done, there's not a sodding thing you can do about it. That's not what I think myself, but thats possibly the point of view of many non-pious, they've already found their peace in life and fear nothing.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
Britain apologies for 'Third World' hospital. Coming to a country you live in. I doubt there are many bible thumpers getting their way with the British doctors in Stafford. Good. Stupid gits. They were treating sky-daddy worshipers exclusively in that place, right?
You people must be prepared to accept the judgment of bureaucrats that decide who gets what treatment and who is denied. That will be a lot easier if you are predisposed to think the worst of anyone that might complain or expect more than merely 'cost effective.'
This story neatly erects a pigeon hole into which we may comfortably stuff those who resist collectivized medical authorities. Be prepared to encounter similar 'research' at even higher frequency than normal. The push is underway. You must be convinced that you're justified in supporting a system that denies whatever treatment you're told is 'excessive' or 'experimental' or 'too expensive'.
You're going to eat it all up as well, because at the end of this ugly rainbow is the ultimate vote buyer; 'free' health care.
How is 345 considered a study?
people so scared of death the ahve to create an imaginary world where they never die fought for life the most.
News at 11:05
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I will be ready for death if God wants me to go. I know I won't live long with my health issues (born with multiple disabilities). :)
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Perhaps they're just putting off death hoping that a 'miracle' happens...
People don't typically want to die- afraid or not...
You can still want more time with your family, etc-
maybe they just keep praying for that miracle cure to happen and want to stick around for it as long as they can to plead their case...
or we christians just don't believe in God... whatevvvv
The pious tend to view this world as a battlefield, not a vacation spot.
They are here to die fighting, much like the Spartans. Refusing treatment is seen as quitting; what kind of soldier lies down to die, who has a chance to take some of the enemy beforehand?
No data, no cry
Obviously, the entire post was crafted with one and only purpose in mind: to make a trollish statement about "nonbelievers who view death as the end of existence, the annihilation of consciousness and the self". The rest was added for the sole purpose to make the trolling less obvious.
I'm not trying to say the two are exclusive, but one thing I've always wondered is why devoutly religous people accept treatment for illnesses. You often hear people say something to the effect "it was God's plan" when someone dies tragically or unexpectedly... Well if you get cancer, why isn't that God's plan also?
Really, this is only aimed at the people who say it was God's plan when a cared one dies. You can't pick and choose how you want to devote yourself to God.
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
... they KNOW what awaits them.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
Are you serious? You're drawing that conclusion after only 345 people, all of which were terminal cancer patients?
Note that nothing in the article states what religious faiths were included in the sampling.
There is also no mention of whether or not any of these people became religious AFTER they were diagnosed.
"Those who regularly prayed were more than three times more likely to receive intensive life-prolonging care than those who relied least on religion."
It doesn't even say HOW MANY there were that prayed regularly? Are we now trying to draw this conclusion based on 1 or 2 people out of a total 345?
The data is pretty easy to explain based on the hypothesis that religion is motivated by an irrational fear of death; the same irrational fear of death also motivates the desire for excessive medical intervention. The religious are also are much more afraid of violent crime than the rest of the population.
Unfortunately, the paranoid fears of this group is responsible for bad public policy, such as imposing unwanted life extending measures on others, irrational security features, human rights violations in the name of national security, and an irrational and unforgiving "get tough on crime" approach.
People pray a lot. The question is what they actually do with their lives.
Many church regulars will tell you about people they know who attend every Sunday, yet who live some of the most amoral lives imaginable.
So prayer itself isn't a measure of religiousness. It may even be a measure of self delusion so that people can live with what they have done with their lives.
Too many people don't know why they live. They don't really believe in anything, so the thought of death scares them to no end. They seek prayer as an affirmation that they're basically good people, even if they don't feel like their time on Earth was a good thing.
I call that a guilty conscience, not a pious person.
Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
I can explain where I'm coming from at least. I was a Christian for years before being diagnosed. I am currently on my third clinical trial. No trial has given me any hope of a cure, but I would hope that I am giving hope to those who come next, perhaps through giving doctors a way to cure this disease.
I don't fear death, I'm going to be glad when the end finally comes. I am not, however, looking forward to my wife losing her husband and my children losing their father. I am also still the primary bread-winner, even though I am on full disability thanks to a successful IT career. That gives me more motivation to continue to live as long as possible, to spare my wife financial difficulty.
Bottom line, every case is different, every person is different. I would hope that people facing death can be honest with themselves and others when their time comes and do as much good as they can when it seems to count the most.
They have a close family that loves them more often. The others in the sample may be people that are all jaded and broke all ties with family and community (including religion) and don't care as much.
This does not mean atheists don't care if they live. What it does mean is the people break off from both communities but the loner stones get lumped back into the atheist group.
It's a broken study. Lovers fight harder than haters, regardless.
The article summary is incredibly ignorant. As are the majority of comments here.
I'm not trying to negate the argument here. It's just very annoying to see an ignorant summary and ignorant responses stated with such confidence. Confidence of what you don't know is the definition of idiocy.
this is new for nerd? this is stuff that matters?
Bullshit that what this is. Someone finds out they are gonna die and the all of a sudden find jesus. Then the asshole that wrote this obvious hate piece gets massive trolling by a bunch of faggots that are gonna pray five times a day when they find out they are gonna die...
Good Job there dickbag
Makes a lot of sense to me.
Psychologically, the whole "afterlife", "heaven", etc. fancy is just an expression of fear of death. These are people who can't come to terms with the fact that just as there was a time when they weren't yet there, there will also be a time when they won't be there anymore.
It's a form of egomania, expressed through faith. Not a big surprise that these people don't want to die, because despite all the faith camouflage, what really haunts them is still unchanged.
Maude: Oh Neddy, it was terrifying. I thought I was headed for the eternal bliss of paradise.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
IMHO most persons are "religious" because they fear death to begin with and can't accept they are limited in space and time.
Non religious (does not mean atheists) guys tend to accept their condition and see death as perfectly natural and nothing special. they learned to live with it as part of their non-reliousity.
You cannot proceed from the informal to formal by formal means
Perhaps a big part of it is the fact that religious people tend to live happier lives. Studies have shown this to be the case. Viewed through that lens, it makes sense that those living fulfilling lives are less likely to welcome the end.
As for me, when this biological unit is too run down to continue I'll be looking for a good research medical school too. Not for a life extension, but rather for educational post mortem forensics analysis. The stories I could tell! My only misgiving is that I won't be able to sit in on the autopsy, lectures, nor help grade the tests. After that I'll finally be retired from research completely.
Those with strong religious beliefs generally believe they are "Special" and usually are incredibly selfish (in my experience). They generally see any acceptance of their own mortality as an admission that they're really not that special after all.
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
if I don't have to go I am not going. Call my faith in question all you want if that makes you more comfortable with your lack of faith. Really the "bash believer orgies" that occur here anytime something like this comes up are at times hilarious and other times they are depressing. Do some people really need to find, invent, whatever, flaws in others to feel good? This is like the study where they found people would give up money if it meant people better off had to lose more.
Our we that selfish we have to jump up and down, break out the balloons and confetti, anytime we can find fault with someone else?
I have the same mindset as my grandfather... I am not going till I have done everything I can reasonably do so. Sorry, far from lack of faith it is the expression of faith. Why would God want you to give up? Who wants a quitter? Go read the Bible and understand the mindset, nothing about faith is easy. Nothing about living is easy. I was raised to not give up, do it myself, and so on. I am sure quite a few others were raised the same. My beliefs and the way I live my life come from my faith, others may come from their upbringing which does not involve faith in God. So what? The end result is the same, we have our lives and to live them to their fullest is to try anything we can to live.
Just quit the relishing the hope of find fault with those believe, it really is immature and only cements the belief of those who believe that your seriously lacking something... something like faith... either in your beliefs or lack there of.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Personally, I'd classify myself as a "Christian" and this is the main reason that I can believe -- while I am totally comfortable with death (not to the extent that I'm going to go play on the freeway) I also see the possibility of "supernatural events" aka "miracles" to occur and thus can see that prolonging a loved one's life via life-support seems plausible, particularly for a younger individual. However, myself, if I was old and have had a full life, I don't think I see the need to be on life support -- I've done what I need to do in this life.
This idea isn't discussed in the originally linked BBC article, but comes up in other articles on the same study (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/story?id=7105959&page=1 for example)
So no, I disagree that it's patients being "unsure" about the afterlife or that they're unwilling to accept death. I just think it's relatives that are praying for a miracle.
Every religious group is a hate group to some extent. You must have a them to rally against.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Believers (Christians, Jews, Muslims) think their lives are a gift of God, and that it's not just up to them to decide that their life isn't worth living any more. Sure, there are believers who fear death when you come right down to facing the real thing; but the flip idea that this study "proves" that believers are all really hypocrites doesn't actually explain why they would fight against death harder than unbelievers. If you really do think that the explanation is that believers are afraid to die and face judgement, then you just haven't met many. I don't think many of the comments are intended to be taken as more than on opportunity for abuse.
Aberrations have appeared in my destiny prognostication engine!
Remember that you too must die.
The most religious were also the poorest and least educated. They did not perform a multivariate analysis to see what dropped out...In today's medical climate where doctors no longer "order", it is not hard to see people reading more hope than not into various statements. Most docs won't tell people that it is "hopeless", and as long as it is not "hopeless" some people will interpret that as meaning that there is a possibility of recovery.
To interpret these data properly we need more information about how the patient's immediate condition was communicated to the family and the patient.
The only Christians I've known to spread the "everyone's going to burn in hell" stuff don't really know what their Bible is saying.
1 Timothy 2:3-4
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
Ephesians 2:4-5
4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressionsâ"it is by grace you have been saved.
Romans 10:9
9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Nothing about hellfires, nothing about condemnation. Try searching the New Testament of the bible for any verses saying you are condemned to hell when your heart is right. If you believe in God, your are saved. No hellfires.
Christianity isn't about punishment and judgement, it's about freedom.
I would tend to think that there's just a correlation between conventional thinking and a sort of religious conviction. This is the same reason that (on a whole) religious people tend to be more socially conservative across the board then the non-religious--because "religion" is a conservative social value. Since "preserve life at all costs" is also a conservative social value, it's not really surprising that the two are correlated.
Personally, I don't think that that sort of Christianity is Christianity at all. True Christianity is a radical thing, iconoclastic in the extreme, and if anything it tends to be socially progressive rather than socially conservative (although perhaps not socially progressive in the manner prescribed by humanist systems.) What the socially conservative value is not Christianity, but "civic religion" in any form. If they had been Romans, they'd be sacrificing to the genius of the emperor just as readily, since that was the received wisdom of THAT era.
But that's really another topic.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
They spend all their time telling you that you're going to burn in hell if you don't do this, or don't say that, or if you vote in favor of gay marriage, or eat red meat on Fridays during Lent, or use a condom or Pay us 10% of your wages or fail to wear your holy underwear at all times.
Wow, you've never been to a GOOD church. They do exist -- the ones that preach the benefits of being a christian instead of the punishment for not being one. "You matter" is the message, not "do this or go to hell." Try this example: http://gccwired.org/ "Watch Services" on the left, if you're interested. Now for my comment on the article. How many times have people pointed out that correlation does not imply causation? What other factors do these people have in common? This study is hardly complete with these bits of information.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that we actually enjoy living.
Perhaps the pious have MORE doubt, which led them to the piousness in the first place. That would explain a lot.
....that these religious folks were being completely honest while others were just giving the easiest answer possible on the survey (i.e. 'do nothing'). Okay, maybe not.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
And not a lot of information on who made up the small sample. Pretty much like every other "newsworthy" study that the media gloms onto. Makes a good headline but a quick read into what facts they decide to share and it is obvious that the results are inconclusive at best.
But it sure brings out the arm chair theologians! I didn't know so many geeks were so deeply involved in the study of comparative religion. The level of intellectual theological discourse is mind boggling. :]
This isn't "people who have the opportunity to go out and enjoy life with their family one last time before dying are more likely to take it if they're religious".
This is "people who are laid up in a hospital bed in agony up to the eyeballs on morphine agony and are more-or-less guaranteed to die within a few days are more likely to cling on if they're religious".
That direction, though a bit sad, is much more expected.
It's like everything else in our society, everything is the opposite of what it appears.
The religious are atheists, the atheists are religious.
It has potential to be somewhat less messy, I'd guess.
Of course there's the problem of how you were made, so you'd have to be in-vitro, and also with male genetic material taken in non-natural way.
Then it should be orderly, clean, non-messy process.
Though I guess the only sure way to paradise would be artificial uterus.
One that hath name thou can not otter
Most organized religious views of God, reality, and the afterlife are seriously flawed. Decades ago I was a right wing conservative Christian and I can tell you that the belief system is akin to insanity. Your life revolves around understanding a set of rules that basically say that if you follow the rules precisely then you get to go to heaven but if you violate any of them you go straight to Hell. This makes facing death a very scary thing. I had the fortunate experience of dying from a heart attack and the related experiences removed any fear of death. However, long before this I had had a set of other experiences that had already lead me completely away from religion. Over several decades I was able to remove all traces of religious belief and develop a fairly solid understanding of the afterlife. But it took an actual death experience before I was able to loose all fear of death. Organized religion serves a very important role in our reality but the teachings as relate to God and the afterlife are pretty much wrong. It is true and rather ironic that the more religious you are the more trouble you're going to have with death and death recovery in the afterlife.
what they've believed their whole lives might actually not be true
Actually, I'd expect it to be the reverse. If I expected my eternal destiny to be judged upon death, I'd be pretty anxious to postpone my trial.
Well, I don't know if they surveyed Orthodox Jews, but although Orthodox Judaism doesn't mandate life-support, it does mandate that once life-support is given, it should not be withdrawn; unless the person no longer is breathing. (There is no halachic (Jewish law) concept of "brain death", unless you hold by the minority view of Rabbi Moshe Tendler, which is like that a bit.) So this is a different reason, since Jews don't tend to think they're headed for eternal hell (which is reserved for the very wicked in Jewish theology.)
I'll preface this by saying that I'm more or less an atheist (formally I'm an agnostic because I've never felt the whole thing worth investing much mental effort on, but I can't imagine myself ever being a believer).
I think we can look at the death of Pope John Paul II as illustrative. John Paul had staked a lot of his papacy on what he saw as the inviolability of life, arguing ultimately, as we all remember, that life is the gift of God and therefore we need to do everything we can to preserve it. So, when he was at his own end, hopelessly and obviously terminal, he had his doctors do everything in their power to preserve his own life as long as possible, with the idea that if this life is indeed God's gift then everything possible must be done to preserve every second of it. This was widely reported at the time.
Now, we can argue all day about what life is and when it begins and ends, about whether or not John Paul's papacy did anything to preserve life in the world, and so on. But his death and the way he handled it demonstrate that if you accept the premises of Christianity then there are very good reasons to do everything possible to stave off death, beyond the various forms of hypocrisy, fear, self-delusion, and so forth that the average Slashdot responder is so quick to cite.
I live my life, believe what I believe, pass on my beliefs when appropriate, and try my best to be good natured. And I fail miserably at times :). I try to do good overall in the world, and help other people out when they need it.
That is my life motto, if there would be a God (and I am certain that there is not), it would have to be very erratic to judge that my life was bad.
Dawkins said: A believer in life after death can never be ultimately disillusioned.
Load New Commander (Y/N)?
I think that religious people subconsciously fear that there's nothing after death. The rest of us don't think nothingness is such a bad outcome considering the possible alternatives (e.g. being tortured for thousands of subjective years in some wierdo virtual reality by some sadistic game programmer). Oops. Sorry. My coworker told me that someone else already thought of this one, but you get the picture.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Simply because there are too many of them, most of them exclusive.
So it's pretty arbitrary which unsurance policy (because that's what all religions are) one chooses, it's inevitable to break immense amounts of rules and "go" after death to many, many hells. Hence there's this lingering thought in many religious people (the ones not totally brainwashed at least), that it's all BULLSHIT.
Why wouldn't they dedicate their entire lives to adhere to and preach their religion to everybody if that wasn't the case?! I mean, you have the prospect of ETERNAL suffering/happiness.
Because they feel it's just bs. HOWEVER that doesn't stop them from pushing many grave, important questions (who am I? What will be my part in the universe? etc.) into the realm of their religions, effectively completely neglecting them - that's just easier in day to day life; not think, shovel the issue somewhere.
But when death is getting near...they panic. They don't have any answers.
One that hath name thou can not otter
Luke 1:27-38 ... And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. For with God nothing shall be impossible. And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
Sorry. It certainly wasn't in her plans to get pregnant before marriage, but when Gabriel spoke with her, she said yes - let it be so. You may not believe the account, and that is your right. But if Mary had told Gabriel no, God would have respected that. He gave everyone free will.
I wondered which he'd choose if he had to choose just one: prayer or medicine.
So much of it is so disingenuous. If you really thought that you were going to a better place, you'd be trying to accelerate the process (like southerners do with fried food) and, as a friend of mine says, once you're diagnosed with a terminal illness, god has decided. Are you trying to re-negotiate? Of course, if religious folk are just chickensh*ts who will cling to as many things as possible (even incongruent ones simultaneously) to avoid facing the fact that the lights are going to go out and that's the end of the show, then these findings make perfect sense.
This just provides more rationale for my suggestion for the stem-cell debate. Let's give gov't funding for stem-cell research but require that doctors inform their patients if any treatment options are derived from it. Slightly akin to the "dolphin-safe" tuna labels of 15 years ago, we could have doctors telling their patients "Well, we've got this treatment that will cure your 'XYZ'... but I'm required to tell you that the treatment was developed through research on embryonic stem-cells". My hunch is that, when forced to make a choice between their bible-thumping principles and self-preservation, most of them will let go of their opposition to research. This latest report makes me believe that even more of them would.
Devout practitioners of religion should not be confused with the masses of sheep that follow them. In the context of sheep, this is not paradoxical at all: their acceptance of religion, in the first place, is predicated upon their fear of death and the unknown, hence when it is "their time" they act according to their deepest fear, and not according to the teachings of the religion.
In other words, fear of death is the root for both their religious beliefs and their inclination to do everything possible to keep themselves alive.
People who are unafraid of death have no need for religion.
On the contrary. Religious people are often those most taken by fear, thus all the praying. It's no wonder then, that they would also be afraid of death.
find me at haszak.org
being able to have faith in something you've never seen would probably indicate you can have stronger faith in something more tangible
The pious love love being alive more than the un-pious...
Interesting study. I wonder if the same pattern would emerge if the study were done in a non-western culture. Attitudes about death are quite different in East Asian, for example, even among the religious in there.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
I read that as, "the pious fight to the death the hardest"
Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
And I mean that in a nice way.
It is not fear of death. It is the firmly held belief that there is a loving God that has the power to heal you completely at any time. You hold out hope that if you wait a bit longer, you will be healed and get to spend the rest of your days with your loved ones. Christians don't fear death or judgement -- that is the "good news" -- that Christ took our punishment for us.
He compared the watch on the heath with a rock. Paley was no geologist, and didn't have any idea that you could actually inspect the structure of the rock, and get a very good idea of how long it had been there, how recently and how many times it has been buried, subducted, uplifted and exposed.
Rocks are beautiful and intricate. They're every bit as designed as life.
--
E_NOSIG
and that every moment is a gift. Even the bad moments. You are supposed to respect life and fight to maintain it as long as you can. This study doesn't surprise me at all, as it shows people acting in a manner consistent with their beliefs.
As a doctor with a significant proportion of palliative care work I believe the findings reflect my practical experience - on average, religious people appear to die harder and accept their fate less than non-religious people.
However, most of my religious patients subscribe to punitive monotheism (eg christians, jews) - and that might influence their feelings about death more than being religious as such. The few buddhists I had witnessed dying seem to cope much better in general.
Personally, I would attempt to receive the best treatment to prolong my life for the simple fact that life is too valuable to just surrender. As long as I am coherent and able to make my own decisions, I will attempt to glorify God by living. Anyone can die and eternity is a long time.
I think most posters have the causation backwards. The reason seems obvious. Individuals who are the most terrified of death search the hardest for ways to avoid it. And a supernatural afterlife is the ultimate escape from the inevitable (you even get to eat happy cakes with Jesus for ever and ever). A dread fear of death comes first. Religion is an obvious (but apparently not entirely convincing) defense mechanism and clinging to life-saving treatment is another.
First, I have to say, if you don't hold to religious views your thought processes must be quite different from those who do.
As a religious person from a religious family(Christian). From a family, where my father battled cancer for over two years. I can honestly say, I have a pretty good perspective on this. I make some assumptions based on the fact that these people "regularly prayed." They are clearly people who believe prayer is useful as well as find prayer comforting.
Christian beliefs highly regard altruism, where suffering on others account is the 'greatest' form of love. In my case, my father expressed a real desire to not suffer, but he knew that his family was cherishing every last minute of his life. None of us wanted to see him suffer, but none of us wanted him to go sooner than he had to, knowing that in this life we would never see him again.
This quote really shows a total lack of understanding regarding Christian and religious culture; Because they ... haven't had time to consider and come to terms with their own mortality. Within Christian teaching there is quite nearly an obsession regarding death. If anything, Christians fight death, because they are more aware of their own mortality.
Lastly, Christians are very sensitive about the value of human life. They believe each human is created in the image of God therefor each is precious and worth all the effort in the world to save. It runs completely against the moral grain of a Christian to think that a life could be saved, but it's too expensive or painful to do it. Likewise, Christians value individual lives over money, personal gain or temporary happiness.
Now, before you deride this as hypocritical, keep in mind that these views are not comprehensive(There is more to it) and are also idealistic. Dealing with the imminent death of oneself or a family member brings ones ideals into clear focus. This is only meant to make the picture of the religious mindset a little more clear and hopefully some non-religious persons will learn not to assume such negative views so dogmatically.
Out of 341 replies, only 6 slashdotters comment with something approximating, "I reject this study! The sample is too small and I think the science was bad."
Compare this to ANY other study posted here which makes claims having the audacity to criticize some accepted aspect of the scientific realm.
I'm by no means a religious person. . , come on people! Aren't you embarrassed? Skepticism my arse. Science doesn't need bias to protect it. Unlike religion, science is wonderful stuff; it won't vanish in a puff if nobody leaps to defend it with brute force and sheer ignorance.
-FL
technology will be relevant. Look at the miracles Jesus performed. He walked on water dammit. He made a crap load of food from just a few baskets. I don't see how technology will be useful. You can't compete with magic.
They're grateful for every minute.
Or it could be that in suffering they find themselves identifying with the suffering Christ underwent on the cross.
Or perhaps they believe their suffering has been brought to them for some higher purpose. They view whatever fate God has assigned them as a test of their faith.
Or perhaps they believe there is something noble about never giving up. Some of those dying of cancer today were of the same generation that stormed the beaches of Normandy...
If I really believe that God created me, then for me to have a passive attitude toward death is hippocritical; how could I expect God to care about my life if I didn't?
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
"I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions of years before I was born and had not suffered the slightest of inconvenience from it." -- Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens).
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
the most religious people I know are also the most fearful.
there are many institutions that exploit natural human fear, from insurance companies, to political parties to churches.
The more fearful a person is, the more likely they are to support and fall in line with these organizations.
Nowhere is this more evident than when it comes to death. This is stereotyping of course, but I know quite a few highly religious people.
When it comes to other people dying, they just *can't wait* to tell you all about how great of a new place the person has moved on to, and quite possibly try to proselytize at the same time. i.e. "let me lay some god-logic on you, and then you'll see it's all ok".
When it comes to *them* or someone *close to them* dying, it's pure hysteria.
I don't think this is a case of shaken faith, necessarily.
If you spend your whole life being in an heightened state of fear of one boogie-man or another, and are then confronted with a real, visceral, certainty of death ... it just blows your mind I think (i.e. OMG, it's real now).
And I say this as a person of faith (within reason of course). Some people just take it too far ... because they're scared shitless all the time (or so it seems to me)
Well I think you might have the same thing going on as the correlation does not equal causation stance. Human beings recognize beauty in chaotic situations all the time. Hell, Jackson Pollock made a good living doing just that. Just because we can interpret a situation to have a seemingly organized function doesn't mean that it came about that way in the first place. I think reverse engineering can sometimes give us a false sense of preordained order. I'm not saying that there isn't a big old man in the sky but nothing has proven it on any level that would be considered physical that can not be explained in a natural way. It just so happens that to explain things we actually had to have an understanding of what we were looking at. Meaning that for most of human existence we had to stop explaining at "god must have done it"? Only in the last hundred years do we start to see things for what they really are. Complex...very complex. Ouch my brain hurts complex. Not magical man in the sky mystical though.
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/301/11/1140
Decide for yourself, rather than letting a BBC article tell you what to think about the results of the study.
Personally, I think if 88% of the people you study are "religious" you're a hell of a lot more likely to find that "religious" people cling to intensive life-prolonging care than "non-religious" people.
I tend to think that the same fear and unwillingness to consider the potentially terrifying thought of non-existence that drive them to religion in search of an afterlife are the same forces that drive them to be so adamant about clinging to the life that currently prevents them from having to deal with the idea of non-existence.
Really not surprising. They would all embrace death if they actually believed the "heaven and eternal bliss" nonsense.
But it makes me a little less cynical about the human race that deep down they apparently know that it's all lies.
More interesting will be all the weasling around in these comments by the faithful, where they'll pick and choose, just like they do with their holy books where they insist on literal meaning except for the "though shalt not suffer a witch to live" part, which was of course meant metaphorical. :-)
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Most devout religious people I know are very happy and feel quite fulfilled in their lives. They enjoy life, have a family that cares about them, and don't want to leave all that. Maybe statistically, people that are bitter, have no family, hate their life, and don't care about prolonging it, are more likely to be irreligious?
People who fear death the most find as many ways as possible of fighting it.
If someone despises (really down and out despises) the thought of dying, the thought of them disappearing forever, what should you expect except for them to adopt an unfounded belief in benevolent creators, magic, and undying life-after-life?
Those people with a massive death phobia are the ones who are most likely to attach themselves to the concept of an afterlife, and they're also the people you'd expect to resist death as strongly as possible in every other way.
People who are more pragmatic about death are less likely to find find the idea of an afterlife attractive.
I work as a geriatrics nurse, and work hand in hand with hospice. I find the larger determiner of whether or not someone really pursues all options at the end of life, is education on their disease, and in general. Folks that are educated on what to expect, and how realistic the course of the disease will go, tend to opt for palliative care. Those that are uneducated, and hide their heads in the sand often have really unrealistic expectations at end of life treatment. Family also plays into this in the same way.
Of course, this is all anecdotal, and is probably subject to my own confirmation bias.
I dream of tools.
The core tenent of Christianity is to (paraphrasing) "Love God above everything, love others as much as you love yourself."
No, that's the core of Christian ethics. The core of Christianity is the Lordship of the risen Christ and the uniqueness of His role as a mediator between man and God.
As to organised Christian faith: there are churches which are based on grace rather than legalism, although I can't guarantee that there are any in your town/city.
On the surface the study sounds incomplete compared to the research of Harriet Kubler Ross last century. Ross, for years,with the permission of the dying and the families observed "how people die." Whether they went peacefully or "clutching the sheets".
The general order of worst scenarios is as follows to the best of my recollection.
Worst: 1. Priests
2. Nuns
3. Lawyers
4. Doctors
5. Teachers (high school - college)
The most peaceful deaths seemed to go to fundamental Christians, children, and entrepreneurs . Of course the implications of her study was that many thought she was biased against Catholics and various trades. I poo poo this.I suspect the research should be done over with many thousands over decades as Ross' research was.
When will they quit calling every half assed social experiment they can think of a "study"?
Studies should be reserved for serious science and not some "grade" made of spin pleasing only some professor with an agenda.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
From watching both my very Christian parents pass quite naturally; one in my right before my eyes, and the other very nearly so, both had things they felt they needed to get done. A stewardship of relationship with family, friends, and acquaintances. They worked hard at reconciliation with people they loved and those they didn't get a long with at all. My Dad worked very hard, all the while struggling to breath; pulmonary fibrosis. My Mom, was more serene, but dedicated; cancer with no pain meds and no complaints (three rounds of chemo!!!). Neither expressed any fear whatsoever. They valued life and both lived it to the fullest and sucked out the very last ounce of it. When they finished, and only on reflection did I know they were done, then they departed.
The folks I know had things to do in this life and wanted to get them done, finished. No fear.
I'm sorry if this is a repeat, but I dont have time at work to read all the replies but i wanted to get this in.
This story puts the cart before the horse, people are not more afraid to die despite being religious. People who are more afraid of death are more likely to cling to irrational beliefs.
--------------------- Turn evil by smiling.
Now I have serious problems with pretty much all organized Christian faith. They spend all their time telling you that you're going to burn in hell if you don't do this, or don't say that, or if you vote in favor of gay marriage, or eat red meat on Fridays during Lent, or use a condom or Pay us 10% of your wages or fail to wear your holy underwear at all times.
Only the catholics and the baptists. Try Anglicanism.
Perhaps they and their loved ones believe that if death is staved off long enough a "miracle" healing will occur or a cure will be found. I've had discussions with several believers along this line and these are a couple of the reasons they vehemently oppose the right of individuals to chose suicide (yes the "sanctity of human life" plays in that too but one must "never give up").
Faith holds depression and despair at bay. Those who, because of faith, are living in emotional comfort wish to avoid death. It is not that they do not believe. It is simply that a tiny whisper of doubt haunts them. After all, they are human.
If you believe in God and believe that he gave you life, you probably also believe that he gave you life for a purpose, and that purpose is something to live for. That's why I wish I had more religious faith than I do, because the times I've contemplated the end of my own life, I find myself reluctantly admitting that it doesn't matter much when I go, or how. I'm no one special; if I lived to be 90 I probably wouldn't contribute much more to the world than if I died tomorrow.
(Predictions: if anyone notices this post at all, the vast majority of replies will be along the lines of "See! Those stupid hateful awful religious-types think they actually have a purpose to their lives! Obviously we much smarter atheists should continue mocking and insulting them every chance we get, because this will surely show them reason!" and few, if any, "Hmmmm... maybe I shouldn't be working so hard to deprive all those people of a belief that makes their lives bearable?")
It's a consequence of the way things are tied together. If one of us sins, it affects us all. So simply by being in a world filled with sin, we are tricked into going along with it. It's the worst for children, who are totally dependent on their parents. Once we learn to sin, we need to spend the rest of our lives learning not to.
That's why it's not easier of you die young, time is on your side. The more time you have to learn the truth about the world and start living, the more likely you are to have figured it out by the time you die.
I believe that we can not be saved by our works, and I believe that we all have sin in our lives. Christianity teaches us that we must learn to accept forgiveness for our sins, and apologize for them in order to have eternal life.
So yes, original sin is messed up. The world is a horrible messy place. The question is will you mindlessly perpetuate that, or will you stop and think about the situation. Will you accept your part in it and make a deliberate effort to stop adding to the problem and become a part of the solution. Will you accept God's forgiveness and enter into the kingdom of heaven. Original sin is messed up, but you can chose whether or not that's the final word in you life.
I hope I've helped explain it a little. I can't believe I just posted this on Slashdot.
The monotheistic confessions and - among other things - their concept of heaven and hell is built on fear. It is actually those with the least spiritual lifestyle and with the most guilt weighing in on their concience that do the most praying, preaching, missioning, curch services and such. Monotheistic convessions thrive on deranged societies in dire need of moralin and the easiest way it is provided is via a monotheistic convession that tells you no matter how hypocritic your life is, you'll allways get by if you just do what the priest/mullah/holy book or your temples rules say.
It is these religions that also build the highest and most elaborate temples and do/have done the most killing of non/un-believers today and in the past. It is therefore entirely normal that people who have the least connection to spiritual concepts are those who pray the most, go to services and mass the most and, naturally, get the creeps much more intense than somebody who doesn't feel the urge to turn to a institutionalised join-our-club-otherwise-burn-in-hell spiritual insurance policy sham in the first place.
The fear and doubtfull turn to these monotheistic confessions as a remedy for their soulfelt miseries - that they turn to doctors as much as possible when dying fits the picture just fine.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
For what it's worth, you may be wiser than most Christians.
I'm a Christian and I don't believe in hell. I believe in universal salvation and eventual reconciliation. Here's a website about it
http://www.tentmaker.org
People that are more likely to pursue every option available to them to achieve their goals in life are more likely to both ask for all available treatments and pray more.
People less likely to pursue every option available to them to achieve their goals in life are more likely to roll with the punches and accept death more willingly.
It wouldn't surprise me. In contrast to some of the posts saying it's because they're faithless, fearful, or foolish, here's some fair possibilities as to why they may wish to prolong life:
1) Those who believe they were given life SHOULD value it more than those who believe we are products of randomness.
2) Similarly, they likely believe this life has eternal significance rather than temporal only.
3) They believe they must answer for how they spent their life and may feel shame & regret at all their shortcomings (no matter how minor or major). They tend to want a second chance (Like in Schindler's list "I could've got more...")
4) For some, it might even be more like pre-wedding jitters.
I don't pretend to know people's motivations. They could all be faithless, fearful, and confused. But I really don't think it's intelligent to attempt to draw out definite conclusions based on the behavior of such a small subset of humans, especially where it is so dependent on their honesty. For example, it wouldn't surprise me if more than 50% of the people who said they prayed regularly didn't pray at all.
Those who are most afraid of death are those who chose to believe in the afterlife.
No surprise there.
The Christian teaching is based on love, tolerance and acceptance. The Church has transformed it into one of fear, cruelty and separation.
When you are consistently indoctrinated/brainwashed from the age of zero to believe that someone is watching your every move and keeping a balance sheet which may send you to a place of eternal agony, it is normal to freak out a little when you approach your transition into death.
How about leaving children alone and letting them choose their own faith when they feel ready to do so?
Any religion with an institution behind it is structured to oppress the individual and benefit the institution. Spirituality is one's personal relationship with what they perceive as their spirit. Religion is all about what the institution tells you that relationship is and should be.
I Guess it depends on what denomination you follow but for me, when it comes to the "burn in hell" stuff most people think is FUD , it's really the punishment for not following the religion. The punishment for Sin is Death. The Punishment for not following Christ is an eternity separated from God (hell though what form hell really takes is up to interpretation as Hell is not clearly described in the bible). The best description I've heard is "a complete separation from God". Even now in the world, according to most forms of Christianity, we are surrounded by the Essence of God (the Holy Spirit) and hell is the universe devoid of that essence. I think a lot of People confuse the 2 punishments. Really it can be summed up like this: If you are a Christian, chances are you have heard these ideas:
- The basic nature of Man is Sinful (sins of the flesh)
- The Soul of Man is pure
- When Christ died for us his blood has the power to wash away all our sins (all is forgiven for the saved)
- God DID NOT have to send Christ to die for us. It was his choice and it's our choice to follow him or not (free will)
- For those who do we must now try to live as Christ like a life as possible "love God above all others, Love others as much as yourself" (this is where most stumble - some more-so than others. It is possible to sin and be saved. You won't go to hell for being sinful for it is in the nature of the flesh to do so. We are however, expected to do our best not to, and we do need to ask for forgiveness when we do stumble)
- Once saved, God will never walk away from you, but you can walk away from him.
- Those who do not accept Christ will spend eternity separated from God (which in God's mind, there is no greater punishment and I'm inclined to agree). Entrance in to heaven is secured through the death of Christ who became the ultimate sacrifice (in Eden its god who takes the first life, a lamb if I remember correctly, clothing Adam and Eve and showing them that it is only with blood can they atone for their sins)
- Judgment and Life and Death are powers of the Lord and the Lord alone. "Let ye who is sinless cast the first stone". as for life and death this is debated but apparently Christ took back the keys of life and death from Lucifer during the 3 days in which he was dead, now those powers lie with God. The main point is Judge nobody unless you want God to Judge you hear and now.
The reality is that Christians are not supposed to brow beat people with the bible which they tend to. They are supposed to simply live the best life they can and let their actions witness for them. God will shine through them. I think the message gets lost to most.
Oh and as to this whole fear of death, I'm not afraid of dying. I'm afraid of pain. I fear for my family, What will they do when I'm gone, did I prepare everything that they need? Will they be taken care of properly? These are the things that would worry me. Will I be needed after I'm gone? I'm not worried about where I will spend the afterlife for I know I am saved. I'm worried that there are still things I need to do to make sure that the family I leave behind will be taken care of. And if I get all of those questions answered I feel I can pass on to the afterlife with little problem (so long as it don't hurt). Problem is, I don't think anyone ever gets 100% satisfactory answers to those worries. Again this is just my take.
The core tenent of Christianity is to (paraphrasing) "Love God above everything, love others as much as you love yourself."
Spot on. Matthew 22:36-40.
Now I have serious problems with pretty much all organized Christian faith. They spend all their time telling you that you're going to burn in hell if you don't do this, or don't say that,
As another poster suggested, perhaps you've been going to the wrong churches. Yes, you'll burn in hell if you aren't saved, but salvation is a free gift, not a reward; you can't earn it by doing the right things or not saying the wrong things (Ephesians 2:8-9). Christianity isn't about rules to govern our behavior (1 Corinthians 10:23), but your actions and words are a reflection of your heart (Luke 6:43-45); if you know God and love God, then your actions and words will naturally fall into line with God's will, and you won't need rules to adhere to.
or if you vote in favor of gay marriage,
That's a tricky issue; clearly God doesn't approve (Leviticus 18:22) but legislating morality generally doesn't work. The call to love our neighbors isn't restricted to just our straight neighbors, but different people have a variety of interpretations of what they think the right thing to do is.
or eat red meat on Fridays during Lent,
Lent is not a Biblical concept; it was invented by the Catholics, and most other Christians don't usually observe it. If you do observe Lent, you certainly don't have to choose red meat; whatever vice you think would be the most beneficial to give up is fine. I've heard some people are giving up texting and Facebook for Lent this year.
or use a condom
Contraception is definitely not prohibited by the Bible. Again, another screwy Catholic thing.
or Pay us 10% of your wages
The Jewish concept of setting aside 10% is rather different than the modern Christian concept of tithing; see Wikipedia.
or fail to wear your holy underwear at all times.
And that one's a Mormon thing, also not even close to Biblical.
You have the godhatesfags.com morons who obviously really fucking hate themselves if they're "loving others as much as you love yourself".
Yeah, no kidding. Assholes.
Its not my place to pass judgement on ANYONE. I live my life, believe what I believe, pass on my beliefs when appropriate, and try my best to be good natured. And I fail miserably at times :). I try to do good overall in the world, and help other people out when they need it. And quite frankly, I can do that without someone telling me the myriad of ways I'm going to go to hell.
That's a great attitude to have. Unfortunately, it won't keep you out of hell - that free gift of salvation I mentioned must be accepted, or it doesn't apply. None of us is inherently good enough to be permitted into the presence of God (Romans 3:23), no matter how good we try to be, because like you said, you fail miserably at times - we all do, and it only takes once. God doesn't recognize any difference between tiny little sins and great big huge sins, nor between one or two sins and a lifetime of constant sinning; it's all sin, and it must be paid for. Jesus died to pay for that sin, but you must turn your life over to Him in order to accept that gift (Romans 10:9-10).
But hey, if you'd rather not, that's your choice to make, not mine.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
It actually makes perfect sense if you look upon acceptance of religion as a really deep seated fear of the "ending of self".
Because they are so afraid of dying or ending, they cling to religious belief to make them feel better that they will "continue after death". But deep down they don't truly _feel_ that certainty. So they fight death with all the fear that drove them to religion in the first place.
Those of us who have accepted that death mean the ending of self don't _want_ to die. But we've accepted it becasue we are no longer _afraid_ of it.
Saddened by it, yes. Want to avoid it, yes. But terrified of it to the point that we will lie to ourselves about the existence of an afterlife?
No.
-- Voltaire, on his deathbed, on being told to renounce Satan.
I currently have a relative with little time left. She is a fairly devout Christian.
In her case, despite odds of success near 0, she is trying every treatment possible to overcome the condition.
I am sure that the reasons devout people fight death are varied, but in my relative's case, she fights for the small chance to not have her family saddened. I'm sure she doesn't want to leave her 3 children either.
But in general, I would guess that many devout Christians, who love their families and hate to see them sad, almost feel a bit 'christ-like' as they suffer for a chance at a better outcome.
I personally wouldn't choose to fight to my last breath if I knew that it was pointless, and I would hope that my family would support me in ending things sooner.
and I find that extremely comforting. The odd thing is, religious people find their religion comforting. I don't see why.
When I was younger, I was exposed to religion. Not just any religion. Southeastern U.S. Christianity. I found it terrifying that there was a god who would judge me to an eternity in hell because of something I did wrong, and did not repent my sins. That's what they told me would happen. Then it occurred to me, what if I worshiped the wrong god, and made the real god very angry by doing that? And what if I misunderstood what I was supposed to do, or got bad information, and got sent to hell anyway?
Then I realized these people didn't know any better than I did. I just never developed the faith. The idea of great ghost in the sky, who will punish me if I do wrong, just doesn't make sense to me.
I enjoy life. But if I learned that I am terminally ill, hell would not be my concern. And if I know I'm going to die very painfully and slowly, I see nothing wrong with suicide once my symptoms making being alive worse than being nothing.
So yes, in the right situation I would sign a DNR order, no ventilation order, power of attorney, and whatever else I thought was right. If I'm dying, there is no sense in adding unnecessary suffering.
i would willingly let the doctors replace by body by mechanical part to avoid death.
Narcissism is a human fault. What would a god need with worship? If I were a god that "invented" the universe and the humans within it, I certainly would not "require", "want", or "need" any kind of worship whatsoever. Worship is something that was demanded, or desired by earthly kings, and is narcissistic. Worship probably arose out of the "alpha male" aspect of the human animal social groups, or "tribes". The whole idea of worship is utterly silly indeed.
Monty Python's "Holy Grail" made the worship idea poignant in the following exchange...
GOD: Oh, don't grovel! If there's one thing I can't stand, it's people groveling.
ARTHUR: Sorry--
GOD: And don't apologize. Every time I try to talk to someone it's "sorry this" and "forgive me that" and "I'm not worthy". What are you doing now!?
ARTHUR: I'm averting my eyes, oh Lord.
GOD: Well, don't. It's like those miserable Psalms-- they're so depressing. Now knock it off!
When most people argue or debate the existence of a "god", most of the time all the "believers" really want is that you "worship" something that they believe in. This is quite shameful actually.
Also since when did the word "god" start standing in for the "name" of the being, and not the "description" of the thing?
The word "god" is mostly "without meaning" anyway. So you can politely ignore people who discuss it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theological_noncognitivism/
I can't answer for others, but for orthodox Catholics, this isn't a surprise whatsoever.
Their self-worth is not based on their utility to society, but their simple existence: that God loved them enough to give them the gift of life - the gift of their very selves. Additionally, he loved them enough to make them like unto Him, free and able to will the Good, endowed with an intellect and will, and capable of being in relationship - that is, of loving and being loved.
Many people of faith (specifically and consciously, Catholics) live in an intelligible, "finalistic" universe: that is, one that can be (at some level) understood and that has a "final end", commonly called a purpose.
Hence, the nature and mystery of suffering is not something which produces a sense of futility and absurdity, but we look to our Lord, Jesus Christ, Perfect Man and Fully God, and we see His suffering for our redemption, we see the possibility of us also suffering redemptively, and the other suffering we encounter in life starts to make much more sense.
Catholics who suffer well know that the suffering makes us more like Him, and as we become more like Him, we can see Him face-to-face - that is, as He is: a transcendent God who became imminent and suffered (and suffers) for love of His children. We participate in that suffering because we participate in the body of Christ, the same body that was crucified, the same body in the Eucharist at Mass.
The "mystery" of the presence of evil in life isn't very mysterious to the orthodox Catholic, so life takes on the very value it should have - very high. No reason to 'cling' to life by recourse to 'extreme' measures beyond the realm of reason, but every reason to take all the available measures within reason. One more moment of loving your family, one more prayer, one more breath are great gifts of God - what are we to say no, to reject such a gift?
Firstly, this thread seems to forget that there are many religions, not just Christianity. Each religion treats the coming of death differently. We Muslims are actually taught to be fearful of God and the coming of death. Being fearful of God and death is judged a positive trait.I have said before and I will say it again: you do not need a God to justify doing bad (and good) things in life. Atheists are as prone to having "insane behaviour" as religious people, or any human being. In fact, we say that those who don't believe in God are the ones who are narcissistic, in that by not believing in God, they elevate themselves to Godhood.
There are many verses in the Quran and hadiths that says every little action, good or bad that we do in this world, hidden or clearly seen, will be replayed and judged on Judgment Day and we are constantly reminded that death afflicts the young and healthy as equally as the old and sick. Muslims are taught to pray for an "easy" death, easy in the sense that the soul leaves the body without much suffering to the body. We fear death because we might not have asked people for forgiveness when we had the chance, or we had not carried out our duties and responsibilities to the best of our abilities, or we have taken more than we have given back. Yet we do not "hate" death because life and the whole Universe is an illusion, a game. We score points by doing good and lose points when we do bad things. The "real" life begins after death, one that is eternal and where we reap our rewards or receive our punishments. There are many verses in the Quran where non-believers and sinners on Judgment Day, will beg for another chance to return to this life and do better, but always the answer is it is too late.
Thus, it is a duty of a Muslim to live as long as possible, while doing as much good deeds as he can, to prepare for the inevitable. When a Muslim is on his death bed, his family and friends will attend to him, and whisper in his ear "there is no God but Allah" and asks him to repeat it so that it will be his last words. Quranic verses will be recited in his presence to calm him down and to face death with dignity. And when he dies, it is the duty of his children to regularly pray for him so that God forgives him.
So you obviously don't believe in God. I accept that. Then why do you belittle those who do? You choose to highlight evil religious people, yet you conveniently ignore those who serve the community and do good deeds. We Muslims are taught to praise and respect people who do good deeds, be they Muslims or not. If you don't believe in the Afterlife, does that invalidates the good deeds of those who do? Will you not benefit from the positive effects of good deeds done by the pious? Or are you ironically succumbing to the same dogmatic stance that you accuse believers of having?
(It never ceases to amaze me how stupid some people can be, and yet write well, and have so many arguing stupidly.)
News Flash: Wanting to live is not necessarily due to a fear of death.
I believe in God and an existance after biological life ends. I believe God created us and this life for a reason and purpose- one bigger and more complicated than we can understand, no matter how many of us try. My purpose is to be here as long as I can, to do what I believe God wants me to. Including being repentant for thinking people are stupid and telling them so.
I have an open mind and think about many things quite often, but I only believe in what can either be observed or proven. Everything else is a waste of time and effort. For me personally, I would much rather use my time for something constructive for this society. I don't want to believe something that in the end might not even happen. I would have wasted 10% of my life. I try to follow common sense (which many people lack). I don't need to know how I got here, because I assume we are not meant to know or intelligent enough to understand. I just make the most of my life here and now. In my oppinion religion is the sole source of war in the history of human race. Yes, there is racism, tribalism, greed and all the other negative human behaviours BUT if you look back in history religion is the one common factor. Religion combined with these negative human traits are a lethal combination. Religion is used as an excuse for murdering and killing. Yes, povery, disease and lack of money are all factors, but religion is used as an excuse. The hundreds of religions out there are just fairy tales made up by people who needed an explanation or excuse for why they exist, and I guess until we find out it will continue. At one stage people were killed for suggesting that the earth was round, so I guess in another 1000 years we might understand more. As knowledge rises, religion falls simply because we don't need excuses anymore.
Let's look at evidence.
(1) The serpent on a staff is the symbol of medicine and psychology, as the assertive arbiters of all things to be determined and remedied.
(2) War itself being codified as an art by many successful generals are able to win by all means of deception and among many terms by contaminating the food supply before a single bullet may even be fired.
(3) The governments of men being aware of war, in attempt to regulate criminals by hindrance through physical or economic means in voluntary registry, assumes that all is criminal until proven otherwise by a preponderance of evidence over time itself upon execution of procedure; the Food And Drug Administration is formed as well as the USDA allies closely to U.S. Army to optimize their law enforcement efforts.
(4) The governments of men being aware of war, decide foremost to assert regulation on what material thought is pressed to the public for general consumption; thus the War Department, The Pentagon, and many others spring-up a number of U.S. Government owned or subsidized "corporations" that (despite not having the living/inherint right to "free speech") assert themselves as proper companies that are able to the corrections enhanced by the 1st amendment to freedom of speech, thereby diversifying advertisements of deception in war-time to consumption by the civil populous.
(5) The Book of Genesis, not so much as being written by God itself, himself, or herself, contemplates of the man arches of knowledge in tree form by "consumption", where one tree is guarded by a serpent of its self-will able to rebel against its alleged creator (aka, a "genie" or jin to hindu and druid lore).
(6) The serpent, being so-named a "Serpent" and described in God's word as "subtle", and being in capacity to rule over a god aptly named "God", reasons to fact as opposed to truth in God's word. Either the "Holy" Bible is political propoganda against a rulying party of one entity (God) or the Serpent is some kind of name for a Romish Pontiff corporation of its church-state.
(7) The serpent in this instance, reasoning between mental "state" and soil "State", brings Adam to his reality through Eve.
In a parallel world, what if the serpent being able to assume any form it wants, truly became God to write the Bible in its perspective, and gave the dastardly title of "Serpent" to whomever he hated like "Jesus." After all, because if you look into the Pentateuch you'll find that Moses puts a serpent on a cross and raises it in the air to remind the people to repent of their "sin." I find it very interesting how the expression of mental accuity and thought in psychology is known as to "sign," while the mathematical function of moving value in commerce is known as "sine" among accountants and "sign" among engravers in commercial matters.
Congratulations. Someone brainfucked you not by being born, but by sending you to school KINDERGARDEN first. I remember my teacher back in pre-school had a box of toy animals; among those elephants and giraffes were turtles. My teacher taught me to build on the most stable foundation. Jesus Christ said to build upon a rock/solid foundation like Simon Peter was taught; I'm afraid that if you attended KINDERGARDEN, that it's turtles for us...all the way down.... But wait! You too can be saved from those Sea Turtles! Accept the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in your heard and you'll enter the Spirit of God as commanded by King Nebuchadnezzer "Cowboy Curtis" himself! And you get 72 virgin grapes your first visit, but it's all runny-eggs thereafter! I wonder what "Louie" Cipher would do...
Just because I believe in an afterlife doesn't mean I want to die today.
Maybe those who fear death the most are religious because it offers some hope of immortality?
Mal-2
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
From a memetic point of view, this only makes sense. Any religion that believe offing yourself as fast as possible was a good idea would be like the Ebola of religions, wiping itself out before getting a good shot at jumping hosts.
As the suicide thing was explained to me:
1) Early Christians attempted to get themselves into a state of grace by good works and baptism. Many of them, when they had convinced themselves they had achieved it, tended to suicide rather than taking the risk of backsliding and dying while out of grace. The religion survived mainly because, on the average, it recruited faster than it lost adherents due to suicide.
2) The church officials came up with an interpretation of the scriptures that made committing suicide a sin that would, itself, pull the adherent out of a state of grace. This was, of course, a mortal sin, not because it was particularly evil, but because, being dead, the adherent could no longer repent, atone, and again achieve grace. Oops!
This didn't stop the behavior, of course. But now it became a game of the adherent trying to get somebody ELSE to kill him, rather than doing it himself, and goading them into it in a way that did not constitute sin.
A lot of Christians were in the Roman Empire and annoying Roman officials became a common method. (They had policies of non-interference with the local religions as long as they weren't a problem and of making a painful and fatal example of anyone who upset the operation of their empire.) Things like aggressively preaching using the governor, the general, the bureaucrats, and the legionaries as shining examples of horrible sinners, gang protests, etc. You get the idea. Get killed while trying to propagate the religion and not only hold onto the state of grace but gain some martyr points. The Romans were more than happy to oblige. (Volunteers for the games!) Thus was born the Roman Persecution
3) Eventually the church officials came up with another interpretation to close off that route (and practically made "rendering onto Caesar" a duty, turning the church into something suitable for making the adherents more docile subjects rather than toxic pains-in-the-neck). Roughly that time a Roman emperor converted and gave state sanction to the church. Suicide-by-cop was now out and the church-state connection born.
Now I don't claim that this is accurate. But assuming it happened this way it makes sense in three ways:
- Legitimate (and perhaps divinely inspired) interpretations - straight face value.
- Cynical design by officials to raise their congregations' size and donations, or survival rate.
- Meme-theory evolution, with the pro-survival doctrinal mutations becoming more successful as their hosts live longer and better, propagating this version of the infection farther and faster.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Increased "religiousness" may be correlated with increased "fighting death", but this does not imply causation. It is likely the case that an increased fear of death cause both an increased "religiousness" and an increased "fighting death". ---- The number of bars for a city is also positively correlated with the number of churches a city has - more bars imply more churches. Why? Because larger cities have more of each.
I was raised a very "on fire" Evangelical Christian, but have since seen the light and accepted myself as my Personal Lord and Savior--a spiritual condition which has brought me much more happiness and peace than Jesus ever did.
As such, I think I have a very keen insight into the psychological differences between highly religious people and agnostic/atheistic people.
Basically, the belief in an afterlife that is great (for you and people who agree with you, anyway) really shields you from ever having to sit down and think, "I am going to die. It's not going to be some other person--some old man--who looks like me. It's going to be me. Just like I am now, but I'm going to look like that old man." Instead, the whole concept of mortality is couched in language like "going to a better place" or "being with Jesus" or whatever. Your entire concept of death is euphemistic. As a result, you have a sense of peace and well-being because you don't need to worry about death.
All that changes, I imagine, however, when the time actually comes. Suddenly you can't be euphemistic anymore. It isn't so much this "meta" idea of death. It is your lungs filling up with fluid. It is pain wracking your body as the cancer spreads. It is the heartbreak of knowing that you and your loved ones are going to be separated now, and you don't know when you'll see them again, or in what form (this is assuming you really believe in heaven). Suddenly it's not so beautiful. Suddenly it's the nuts and bolts of your body--the only vessel you know--falling apart and failing you. Suddenly it is very real and very immediate.
And you weren't ready for that.
Atheists, however, accept death--the nuts and bolts--as inevitable, and probably first thing you have to come to terms with if you are an atheist is how you're going to think about death. And, I think, most people have to put themselves through that process of thinking and realizing that, yes, you are going to die. Your lungs will fill with fluid. Your body will be wracked with pain. By the time you get to that point, you have already thought a lot about this, and have resigned yourself to the pitiful, painful, undignified end almost all of us eventually face.
So you don't see any point in fighting.
Furthermore, a mindset that believes in a "super-natural" world--a world and truth and story that supersedes and explains everything we experience and in which we play an important part--comes to see death as more important than it really is. Part of the benefit of religion is that it makes one feel that everything they do is part of a Grand Plan, that everything fits together and has meaning. As an atheist, I know that it doesn't. I know that whether I live or die is wholly inconsequential. I am the product of an incredibly complex physical system that started moving billions of years ago when something exploded. Whether I lived or did not makes no difference whatsoever.
And herein lies one of the most important distinctions between religious people and atheists: Religious people find that viewpoint hopelessly sad and question why we would want to live. Atheists think that the pleasure of typing into a textbox on Slashdot while nibbling black licorice is plenty reason to keep processing oxygen and sugars for as long as they can. The warmth and camaraderie of friends and family are enough. Life is worth living for life's sake. That may be the genes, who are selfish and want to be propagated, talking, but who cares?
Religious people's peace and happiness are conditional, and when the conditions change, they often don't know how to cope. Atheists are unconditional, and therefore don't kick up such a fuss when it's over.
My $0.02.
Religion is for those who fear the reality that the universe is truly indifferent to their existence
those with the greatest interest in god seem to be the least interested in meeting him
I think the root cause here is a desire for greater control. Prayer is one way of expressing a desire for control. So is instructing doctors to take every measure possible to prolong your life, in whatever quality. If these two observations are not directly causal, they likely have a common root cause.
And John 13:34,45 tells you how to find the real ones.
It is not hypocritical to call a spade a spade, as long as you are not one also. Romans 2:21-24 Paul knew that back then too.
But the problem is found in 2 Peter 2:1-3, actually predicted/prophesied all that long time ago.
Any "Christian" who says 'I can't judge anything another does' doesn't have a firm grasp of the Bible, or is not obeying it. See 1st point above.
I was told today that I was going to die and go to hell to burn forever if I didn't become born again. Then the same man told me there were two sides of hell (one good and one bad) That was after I trapped him at "Jesus was in hell for 3 days" Then he said Hell was just a holding place for dead when I read him Revelation 20:13-15
Also, to believe in 'my God decreed time to die' would also mean the rest of the verses there literally are true. Ecclesiastes 3:1-8
And allowing self to die as some unforgivable sin? Check out John 19:30-33
That was a lot of work...
I don't hate those people. I want anyone involved with those things to stop. Of their own free will.
Coercion is not the best answer. It may be the currently most effective though.
If a doc told me I had a year to live but I'd be in a hospital bed hooked to machines the entire time, I would walk out the door (assuming I was capable).
I would much rather spend the last few months of my life touring the world and seeing things most never get the chance to than rotting away completely immobilized.
Name...That...Autocomplete!
Perhaps its the belief that all life is sacred and precious that makes them want to hold on to life, regardless of their belief in the afterlife.
That's pretty much why Orthodox Jews have to do everything in their power to stay alive: Life/saving a life is the most important commandment there is (you can break pretty much all the other ones to save a life, yours included) and therefore if it's medically possible to keep on ticking, unless there's a really good reason not to they'll do it. The value of a person's life is held so high that the reasoning for abortion goes that it's allowed basically because mother's life>fetus, so it's considered a form of self-defense.
open source modern art: laser taggi
I'm probably too late to get modded in any direction, but articles like this are great bait. We get hundreds of comments about how not only is "guy who thinks different from me"'s choice is wrong, but also, he's an asshole for making it.
Now, I do have a side, I'll admit: I think it's awfully condescending to impugn someone's motives who wants to live just a little bit longer, no matter the pain or discomfort. Nobody has a certain answer for what, if anything, happens after death, so it certainly is not an insane proposition to try and avoid it as long a possible.
I mean, ask yourself, genuinely ask yourself whether, if given the choice you'd prefer hell or oblivion. Is it really so hard to imagine someone might make a different choice from yours? Do you really think it makes them selfish or morally repugnant in some way?
Some people simply believe their life is a gift and they should do everything they can to live on. Not really a bad idea, I can certaintly relate to that more than resigning. Besides, I pay a lot of taxes and likely will for some time, I wanna suck away a few bucks in medical hardware before I go.
This study claims that religious belief causes fear of death which may sound illogical given the promises most religions have for the afterlife.
But couldn't it simply be so that fear of death is the main driver for religion in the first place, so that, instead of stating that religious belief implies fear of death I would rather state that fear of death implies religious belief.
Well at least the godhatesfags people are consistent. But it must be nice to pick-and-choose what you like..
While there may be a lot of theories that could be devised, that wouldn't mean there wouldn't be a most accurate one.
Here's one that probably works better:
People who are anxious about death tend to flock towards religion more than others.
(Conservatism is highly correlated with death anxiety (r=.50), and religiosity is correlated with conservatism.)
Great! We got the Borg mentality ...
Guess we're now missing the Borg overlords to finish the job for you ;)
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
That's a tricky issue; clearly God doesn't approve (Leviticus 18:22)
Well, don't quote any book of the Bible (Leviticus is a fine example) as evidence of what God supposedly wants unless you also accept what the rest of the book says.
Because Leviticus... boy, oh boy. There are some strange rules in there.
How in the world do you decide which bits to quote? People talk with such confidence about what God wants, and back it up with very carefully cherry-picked quotations. It always kind of baffles me; I've actually read the Bible.
I think it shows that those that are religious are truly believers. The reason I think they want to put off death is because they have spent a lifetime of using God and Religion for all the hate they brought into the world. Now that they are close to death their fear of "what will God do to me for all the hate I inflicted?" has seized hold of them. They want to put it off as much as possible so maybe they can make amends and truly do some good. So, it's not so much a fear of death as it is a fear of consequences for their actions. Those that don't have a strong belief in God or Religion don't have a this fear of their actions have clearer conscience that they have lived a good life and it is probably time to go. I believe in the Universe as a deity but, personally, the whole heaven/hell thing is really something that seems to be more man-made. What happens when we die? I ain't dead and I refuse to speculate. The Universe evolved me to have a rational mind and I intend to use it to not have irrational fears.
Save Pangaea!! Stop Continental Drift!!
Because they believe they MIGHT get better.
I find the Christian God to be a nasty, vindictive and spiteful entity, if your bible is anything to go by. Drown the world and save a few of your mates? What about the animals you made, that never did anyone any harm? Turn people into pillars of salt, 'cos you have a problem with them? Ordering people about, to do what you want?
Sorry, but if you do exist, which I doubt, you don't seem to be the sort to be worthy of respect.
I listen to metal and I respect Mr Dawkins for opening my eyes! So if you're right, me, Dawkins and the other millions of sensible, logical people will be roasting on our spits come the afterlife! If not, I'll catch you good people on the next plane of existence!
Later!
Mature folks seem to have an understanding and acceptance of themselves and the world.
Perhaps religious beliefs correlate to a lack of maturity, a lack of having thought things through for yourself.
When things aren't looking so hot, their beliefs bring about faith-based responses to extraordinary events such as miracles.
We're looking at this the wrong way. People who are highly religious don't want to avoid death because of some doctrine or belief, but people who are scared of death are more likely to be highly religious.
I'm a psychologist (amongst other things).
So religion is the cause of our soaring health care premiums? Can health insurance premiums be based on the religious affiliation of the insured? (Of course they can't...)
Wait a minute; what is it they really measure here?
Is frequency of prayer really a good indicator of how religious you are?
I don't think they have correlated the treatment thing to strength of conviction or diligence in religious practice at all.
What they've done is correlate it to a recurring behavior pattern of irrationally trying to affect what is not under your control. Whooopee. Who'd have thunk it?
sudo ergo sum
Atheists should pay lower health insurance premiums.
As a significant portion of overall health care costs are imputable to intensive care and other reanimation-related costs, this is a logical commercial conclusion. ...at least for those who support a fully privatized and market-driven health insurance system.
This would be worth a long blog post instead of a quick forum reply, but here goes:
TFA was too indefinite about its methods and analysis to know about the cause and effect here - and besides, most people's publicly professed faith is different than the one they live. Faith is what you live, not so much what you think and say, although a living faith does indeed affect one's patterns of thought and expression.
Most people with religious cultural background and/or upbringing become more religious as they approach the inevitability of their demise, regardless of their earlier professed agnosticism/atheism. I've witnessed that in many people I have known well.
Furthermore, insofar as religion is a "crutch" - as many atheists say it is - it can indeed be, for people, who fear death, something they cling to with a desperate hope, that faith and its outward manifestations will postpone their expiration date. Thus, they also cling to gestures they associate with religiosity, including prayer as just one example. For them, it logically follows, that they also use up all the chances medicine can offer to prolong their life.
I myself don't consider myself "pious", although I'm religious, but I do pray, read the Scriptures, go to church and many other things associated with religion. While I am by no means in a hurry to die (too many interesting things around, and my family!), I have given unequivocal instructions to my family and my ecclesiastical leaders, that I am not to be kept alive for years on artificial life support. And if I found out tomorrow, that I have Alzheimer's (which I know about from seeing my mother go that way - all the way) or an extremely painful untreatable cancer (again something I have seen close to me), I certainly would try to choose the path that would be easiest for my family. Thus far, it's just theoretical in my mind, but it may some day be an issue to solve. I'd like to be able to solve it with a clear mind. As of now, I think I'm not afraid to die. I have also had a medical situation, where I did prepare myself for it, although it wasn't extremely risky.
The fact that most Christian sects teach, that unbaptized people go to hell (or Limbo - same difference - see that Wikipedia article), was what drove me away from our state church and then further and further away from organized religion in all its forms, until I had a paradigm shift 30 years ago.
We have to remember also, that Protestants are generally big on predestination. They don't quite know how to reconcile it with the idea of the unbaptized going to Hell (and many other ideas).
I try to live up to pretty high standards, that I believe in, without wanting to impose them on others. That may put me in a minority among outwardly religious people. Anyhow, this is not a religion forum, so I'll be a good boy and shut up now. If you want to, you can check up my my blog on Wordpress.com for sources about this stuff. I'm new to blogging, and have only just started it; having been otherwise occupied. One day I may be serving it up from my own server, if it hods my interest...
Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
Obligatory Monty Python reference
"No matter where you go, there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
Finally scientific proof that God does prolong life!
O this learning! What a thing it is - William Shakespeare
On judging others Jesus, who you claim to follow, says (Mathhew 7, NIV): "You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
Notice he doesn't say not to judge at all just that you should get yourself in order first so you're able to help others.
If the New Testament is correct that (1 Corinthians 6, TNIV) "[...] wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral [...] nor practicing homosexuals [...] will inherit the kingdom of God." then loving someone enough that you don't want them to spend eternity away from God means steering them away from any of these things that will prevent them from going to heaven, such as practicing homosexual behaviour.
Doing "good" is not the requirement, (John 14) "no-one comes to the Father except through [Jesus]".
I was going to say just that. Fear of death is the most obvious reason people turn to religion. It follows that strong believers will try harder to avoid death.
Yes, you'll burn in hell if you aren't saved
See, I and many others have a little problem with this concept. Specifically, are you saying that every single person in human history up until after Christ died is now burning in hell? All miscarried babies are burning in hell? (Limbo was recently rejected as a concept after all) Granted, Yahweh is a wrathful God (not to say that's bad, but it's a fact many Christians like to gloss over), so maybe. But in general I have a hard time buying into this argument. The Church makes a lot of presuppositions based on what the founder of the modern church Saul said, but he never met Jesus. The Church has all taken his claim to having a vision of Jesus on the cross at face value.
That's a tricky issue; clearly God doesn't approve (Leviticus 18:22)
Leviticus? If you ever want someone who isn't a Christian to take you seriously, never bring up Leviticus as law that should be followed. If you believe it's words on homosexuality to mean that homosexuals are going to hell, then so is anyone who wears poly/cotton blend shirts, has a menstrual cycle, disobeys their parents (ever), shaves, get's a hair cut, is crippled, blind, or has a flat nose. If a priest's daughter is a whore, she is to be burned to death (but not if your daughter is apparently). So tell me... are you going to Heaven still?
I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
Not at all. We know where God's moral standard is (He regularly committed and/or ordered genocide and mass murder and he invented ebola for a laugh) and we know that people who only come up to that level are generally called monsters and we lock them in cages or execute them
If you delete a program you've written, you've done no wrong. If you remove subroutines from a program you've written, you've done no wrong. If you destroy a device that you built, you've done no wrong.
If someone else's progran deletes your files, or changes portions of them, you have been wronged. If someone destroys a device that you've built, they are vandals and have done you wrong.
Free Martian Whores!
Wow this has generated a lot of comments!
Anyway, I know a man who is a hospice chaplain. He said very few devout Christians die peacefully. When he asks them why they are afraid to die, they almost always have a fear of facing judgement for something that they've done in their past.
As they say in the military, there are no atheists in a fox hole. I would certainly not suggest that these people who "come to God" at the end of their lives are insincere, but when faced with the end, people will go to any length to extend their life.
As the submission points out, it's really a lot simpler than the people who want so desperately to make snide insults and accusations of hypocrisy are making it.
1) Pulling the plug is, essentially, a form of suicide.
2) Many religions believe suicide to be a serious sin, and thus a thing to be avoided.
3) Therefore, people who believe in these faiths do not pull the plug.
It's very simple, and has very little if anything to do with hypocrisy or fear. It's just a matter of not giving up: not always the most pleasant of tasks, but avoiding wrongdoing however you define it is a worthy goal, is it not?
As a reminder, next time you'll look for something, open your eyes, if will be easier to find something ....
Logic & consistency are well advertised in several religions :
- Ancient Greek's invention of democracy
- Islam's original praise of philosophy (perverted through the XIX & XX century's British & French invasions)
- Hinduism, Buddhism & Jainism all have the core teachings of logics & praise of Truth (see India's moto, for instance)
While I perfectly understand your comment in the light of the Old Testament (Genesis 2:17, do not eat the knowledge tree, then goes on towards Genesis 12:13, punishing pharaoh for a crime he did not knew he committed), I do not understand your crusade against the religions that you do not know
These people who call themselves Christian and constantly tell you how you're going to burn in hell....well, assuming hell IS real, my personal opinion is they'll probably be there too.
Whenever a Christian tells you that you are going to hell, ask if God gave him/her the authority to determine who is going and who isn't.
But would you really want to spend eternity with those closed-minded, righteous Christians?
(Thank God, there are Christians who don't act that way.)
As one of those heathen religious people here I think some of you are missing the point (or at least, from my point of view).
Bit of disclosure, I'm not a Christian, so please keep in mind that I don't believe in the whole fire and brimstone, "God punishes me terribly...but he loves me," kinda thing.
With that noted, whenever challenged with death I fight very hard to live. Do I think there's a happy afterlife? Yeah, I think there's something more than, "you die, that's it," but it's irrelevant. Life is a gift, and one I'm not going to give up on. If I wasn't supposed to fight for my life I wouldn't be able to, if I was just supposed to give up and die it would've happened a long time ago. It'd be a terrible insult to simply give up on the greatest gift in the world. No, I think I'm supposed to live...that's why I'm alive.
Besides, whatever waits for me after I die will still be there, it's not like it's going anywhere. I like living, I like the everyday struggle to survive, and I don't see any reason to pull my plug early. To me it sounds depressing not to fight...it'd be like watching Rocky get in the ring and not last two rounds before saying, "You know what, I'm gonna lose anyway, so I'm going to quit here."
But hey, I could be wrong, maybe we're all supposed to realize it's pointless and end our suffering before it gets much worse.
"Just a fox, a whisper."
Its not my place to pass judgement on ANYONE. ... These people who call themselves Christian and constantly tell you how you're going to burn in hell....well, assuming hell IS real, my personal opinion is they'll probably be there too.
Don't feel bad, you made it about six sentences.
Let me get this straight : ... A Vatican, Rome political election IS NOT God's hand ...
a single man can not know/alter the will of God(s), unless he's been touched by His hand
He may find things depressing, sad and unfair ... but that does not mean they will change !
I find it sad that all humans presently living on Earth will die within the next 130 years ... but (eschatological events aside) that will happen !
Within previous catholic popes, there were murderers, liars, hereditary(!)-held titles, several fans of genocides and generic xenophobia, ... As a whole, papacy violated every single commandment written in the Bible, although some of them may have been Saints !
... I do not *think* the Jewish view is fully correct either, through their mysticism leads to interesting ideas in cryptography, creative finance & cymatics ...
The belief in parallel universe is held by :
- stupid atheists (according to parent poster)
- bright quantum physicists (according to their latest theories)
- Hindu, Buddhist & Taoist religions (according to their teachings)
It may have to do with a person's belief regarding the value of life. If a person believes that human life has value and purpose given by its creator, that person might fight harder to preserve life than someone who believes that life is the result of random chance and has no inherent value or purpose.
How do you know? If I were a "god" that "invented" the universe and the "scare quotes" within it I would be very different from how I am now, and I think you would be too.
This is a strange response, and one that isn't worthy of a reply, but I will nonetheless reply to it.
It is obvious that if "I" were something else, then "I" would not be "me". And if the "not me" ideas about the world were different, then the "not me" might "require", "want", or have "needs" that are different from "mine". However those ideas are still not god-like qualities (characteristices) in any situation.
I don't pretend to know the minds of gods, or "the" god, yet I can "by definition" rule out those characteristics of un-god-like minds. That is, unless you believe that gods are just like ordinary people, with faults just like our own. This pretty much demotes gods to earthly kinds, or at least aliens from other worlds with technologies beyond our own.
In which case this brings us right back to (again) "theological non-cognitivism"...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theological_noncognitivism
It is very annoying when someone (like you) responds to my posts in such a way as to frame everything in cultural relativism. If every persons unique ideas were the truth, then we would have no need for discussion of any kind. Going on the assumption that you are right, then there are no absolutes, and gods don't exist anyway.
So ok, I gladly agree.
Any group that preaches hate is NOT a Christian group, despite what they would have you believe.
Jesus himself warned against hypocrites who pretended to be religious, like (I'm paraphrasing) a pot that is cleaned on the outside while the inside festers. These apeople are what he called "wolves in sheep's clothing".
Free Martian Whores!
I should have clarified; the part of Leviticus 18:22 I was thinking of is the part that says "that is detestable". As Christians, we are not bound by the old Law or the old Covenant, but the requirement not to wear cotton/poly blends in Leviticus 19:19 doesn't say to do so is disgusting, it just says not to do it. Christians aren't bound by the legal requirements in Leviticus, but if God says something is detestable, that might be worth paying attention to.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
They love so much to communicate with their deity in worship that they just don't want to stop doing it!
Have you guys never heard of Pascal's Wager?
Look it up. Probably good that Pascal published it posthumously though...
Negating an accidental mod...
This information is not surprising to me.
When you believe there is an afterlife, you are never forced to get comfortable with the idea of death. It takes a long time to deal with the topic of your own demise, perhaps even a lifetime.
This is reminiscent of a teenager who is learning to awkwardly define who they are. Over time, after trying many things and failing at some and succeeding at others, the kid turns into an adult. The path behind them, full of good and bad experiences, defines this person and shapes who they are as an adult.
The other word for this is ... maturity... Oddly enough, it is not just for kids. Maturity is a process that defines how you deal with any awkward or uncomfortable situation. You simply muddle your way through it, learn something and use that experience the next time you see the same situation. Over time, you get better at it. Eventually you look pretty polished, and if you're lucky, you'll even feel pretty polished.
Anything that seeks to insulate you from reality, prevents you from maturing. The end result will not be pretty when it comes to a terminal issue like death...
*Condense fact from the vapor of nuance*
I think Romans makes this clearer. Everyone who has heard of Christ and what He did must make a choice as to whether or not to accept Christ's death on the cross as his sin sacrifice and follow Him. It is your free choice, and the Bible is clear that if you don't choose Christ after hearing about Him, there is no other sacrifice that is acceptable to save you from eternal damnation. In the case of people who have never heard of Christ, they will be judged based on what their consciences told them were right and wrong. The Holy Spirit works in every person's heart trying hard to guide them to make the right choices and warn them away from wrong choices. Those who never heard of Christ will be judged on the basis of whether or not they obeyed the Holy Spirit's leading.
As far as babies and kids are concerned, it is fairly clear that everyone starts out written in the Lamb's Book of Life. When you reach the age that you are accountable for your actions (which varies with each individual) you must make a choice to accept Christ as your Saviour or reject Him - for those who know about Him - and for the few who don't in this day and age - see the first paragraph. If you reject Him, your name is blotted out of the Lamb's book of life. That's a paraphrase of what I believe the Bible says, but I think it is a consistent reading of the Word.
Limbo was an invalid concept that should never have come about. Before Christ died on the cross, you either went to hell or paradise. They were close enough that people could be identified from one to the other and could talk with each other. There was a gulf preventing passage from one to the other though. While Christ was in the grave, He went to paradise, identified Himself as the expected one due to Jewish prophecy, and took all the people there to heaven with Him. Post resurrection, you go to heaven to be with Him or to hell, reserved until the great white throne judgment. There is no limbo that you can be prayed or bought out of and there never was.
Saul did meet Jesus on the road to Damascus.
The evangelical and pentecostal branches of the church believe in the continued working of the Holy Spirit which gives direction via prophecy, messages in tongues and interpretation to its followers today just as He did to the early church and Paul.
God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. His standards in the Old Testament stand just as true to condemn mankind as the New Testament. Nonetheless, the irritation over Leviticus is irrelevant. There are many passages in the New Testament which continue to voice His displeasure with homosexuality. He does love everyone, but He demands righteous living.
None of us are perfect as we all started with an inherited nature of sin that Christ didn't have. We are all saved by grace through faith in Christ. I am far from perfect, but have faith in Christ to have provided the sin offering once for all that I have done and will yet do that displeases God. I try to live better each day than I did the day before. I'm not always successful. What I do with my life, however, doesn't change God's standards a bit. In both Testaments He has declared certain things to be at enmity with Him.
As a Christian, I must love everyone equally, even when it is hard. I can't, however, tell people God really didn't mean something He declared in many places He hated just to make them feel better about their life and what they're doing. God can forgive anything if they will ask, but repentance must come after that. That doesn't mean I hate them. It should always be done in love. But you just can't say I will accept the bits and pieces of the Bible that I like and form a religion around that and ignore the inconvenient bits. The law was harsh. The Old Testament times were harsh outside Israel as well. But Hell is much harsher, and if I believe the Bible bits about salvation, then I have to believe the Bible bits about judgment as well. I don't know how far God's grace will extend. But when the consequences are eternal, it is better to err on the conservative side than the lax side.
Sorry for the long reply.
As far as babies and kids are concerned, it is fairly clear that everyone starts out written in the Lamb's Book of Life.
I don't believe this is true. Can you find any basis for it in Scripture? If so, where?
While Christ was in the grave, He went to paradise, identified Himself as the expected one due to Jewish prophecy, and took all the people there to heaven with Him.
I've heard this too, but I haven't been able to find any mention of it in the Bible. Did I miss something?
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
First, in two places Christ spoke that people needed to become like little children in their faith and belief to enter into the kingdom of heaven. Mt. 18:1-10, 19:14. The wording suggests that little children are under grace to start with and start out part of the kingdom of God.
For the book of life reference, my interpretation is by inference from only a couple of scriptures. I can't make a really strong case for it. Rev. 3:5 refers to blotting out a name from the Lamb's book of life, which at the very least allows for backsliding. At the end of Revelation in 22:19, there is a reference that if any man (not just people who have accepted Christ) shall take away from the prophecy of Revelation, his part shall be taken from the book of life. I will freely admit that this is perhaps weak, but it does seem to be consistent. Many other references refer to sin being something that will cause your name to be blotted out of the book of life (Ex 32:32-33, Ps. 69:27-28, 109:13 (Here some codices refer to let his name instead of let their name, making this a prophecy of Judas Iscariot).
The second reference is much easier. Let's start with the prophecy of it in the Old Testament - read Ps. 68:18. For Christ's prophecy of the period of time between his death and resurrection, see Mt. 12:38-40 (and yes, that means that He was crucified on Wedn. and not Fri. as some teach), and finally Paul's account of what He did during that time Eph. 4:7-11.
I love how the so-called "tolerant" and "enlightened" people here are always the most prejudiced and condescending when it comes to religion. You all talk about religion as if no religious person could possibly be intelligent, and heaven forbid they read Slashdot. Has it occurred to any of you to be anything more than self-righteous whiners on this issue?