If you believed in God but no afterlife, how would you live your life differently?

[All-Rounder]

<<The Apocalypse of Paul goes into considerably more detail than the Apocalypse of Peter on the nature of heaven. In chapters 20–30, heaven has three divisions. "Paradise" is the third heaven is where Paul arrives first, but it is not closely described. Paul then descends into the second heaven afterward, the "Land of Promise", a reinterpretation of the "land of milk and honey" (in heaven, rather than the land of Israel) which is seemingly a holding area for deceased saints who are waiting on the Second Coming of Jesus and the millennial kingdom of God.>>

Apocalypse of Paul - Wikipedia

St Paul has seen heaven, or will eventually see it. But he wrote something from his imagination.

 

[Twilight]

As an atheist, I would live the exact same way as I do now. I would not worship a god who is all-powerful but does nothing to stop pain or suffering. I would probably make it a point to blaspheme more often, and I wouldn't just do it for fun like I do now.

There are lots of things I disagree with and dislike in the Bible, so that's another point against it, I guess. Once again, I wouldn't want to worship that god.

There are good things in the Bible of course, but I don't need Christianity to behave decently or to be a good person. I prefer to make good choices because it's the right thing to do, not because a holy book tells me to behave a certain way. Some precepts in the Bible go against my personal moral code, so that's another issue.

I don't even like everything Jesus supposedly said, either, although he is one of the better Bible characters in my opinion.

 

[Ella Spell]

I believe in God (or some sort of maker-force) and Heaven, but neither have anything to do with God or Jesus, or the Bible story, or any organised religion. I don't personify God, and Heaven doesn't have "people" sitting around counting their blessings. It's all a combination of physics, philosophy, and my personal credo.

If there were no afterlife but the remnants of religion were still practised and taught as a value system I believe people would be liberated in many ways, without the fear of judgment by an all-knowing, omnipresent force which could punish them for eternity. Likewise with striving for Heaven.

Despite the liberating aspect, I believe this could have a negative impact on social systems but I've already said that in an earlier post. There would be no "ultimate morality" to determine good from bad and Heaven from Hell, because the basis of common law would be affected. I imagine more murder and and selfishness for some people who might otherwise be restrained by shame and fear.

 

[Jonn]

If you believed in God but no afterlife, how would you live your life differently?​

Apart from being angry, I would live it pretty much the same as I do now.
Treading water until I fall off "the perch".

 

[SusanLR]

I wouldn't change anything or live any differently.

I would still be wondering why and how life came to be and the universe with all it contains.
And I would still entertain the idea of perhaps there is an afterlife and ponder what it would be like.

I started forming my own ideas on what God is, how did creation come about,
why is there life as we know it, and what, if anything, awaits our consciousness when the body dies.

 

[Au Naturel]

What if you believed in God. But, felt unworthy of the afterlife he offered?

That's not your decision to make.

 

[Au Naturel]

Believing in God doesn't solve the problem of origin. If I believed in a deity, it doesn't tell me where the deity came from. It doesn't solve the most fundamental problem.

Believing in God doesn't solve the problem of free will. It still doesn't tell me if I have agency or if I'm just a ball in a Pachinko machine being bounced around by powers beyond my control. It doesn't even tell me if God has free will.

It doesn't tell me which, of all equally improbable deities, I should believe in. Or if everyone has it wrong.

It would be nice to hang around long enough to get bored of life, particularly if an interesting afterlife could be guaranteed. But the nature of such an afterlife is unknowable or even if one exists. It could be more of the same, or it could be completely incomprehensible, or it could be horrendous. It could be mere oblivion.

But one should not worry over that which one has no control over, so I can't imagine it making a difference.

 

[AprilR]

I would be a lot more depressed that's for sure. Although i can't imagine believing in God, an eternal source of life and than believing mortal life is all there is. It is a bit contradictory

 

[Jonn]

But the nature of such an afterlife is unknowable or even if one exists. It could be more of the same, or it could be completely incomprehensible, or it could be horrendous. It could be mere oblivion.

"Mere oblivion"?
"Oblivion" is PRECISELY my concept of heaven.
And reason would suggest that is exactly what happens when the brain disintegrates after death.

All concepts/beliefs/perceptions are only possible through the filter of a brain, after all.

R.I.P., all and sundry.

 

[Shevek]

No change. I run by the Golden Rule.

 

[Aspychata]

First it's impossible for me to separate religion from afterlife, so it's impossible for me to consider this what if senerio. All religion uses the afterlife to keep it's flock in line. I believe in universal rules, don't steal, don't cheat, don't......
So l guess l hope my soul comes back into life, and l may just be hanging out in a video arcade which really isn't considered a afterlife, just a limbo place where l can race little cars, and snowboard.

 

[Streetwise]

To clarify if it's necessary: The thought exercise I propose in this thread and the question stemming from it is to picture the Bible NOT professing an afterlife. Picturing the Bible still existing but imagine if there were no references to an afterlife because in this thought exercise, the Christian religion wouldn't have any afterlife as a tenet.

That's the question. Not, "the Bible talks about Heaven so I couldn't dismiss the idea of Heaven but believe the rest."

"Sin" as believed in and described by Christian faith can have temporal consequences (ie they can affect the "sinner" in this life because they're choices made) but a key aspect of "sin" is the consequence to the "sinner" in the afterlife (ie punishment, hell, potentially eternal punishment). If there was no punishment after life whatsoever because there was no afterlife whatsoever, then I would have a hard believing that a lot of people wouldn't change things about their lives.

St. Paul talks about this and says among other things that if there was no heaven then people should "eat and drink for tomorrow we'd die"; meaning it only makes sense to live it up if this is all there is (ie you live, you die, that's it). St. Paul went as far as to say that if there was no heaven, no afterlife, then Christians would have it more wrong than anyone else in believing that there was an afterlife. Did he go as far as to even say, pathetic? I don't recall.

So what happens to fearing death ?as many do, does that mean no death?

 

[Magna]

So what happens to fearing death ?as many do, does that mean no death?

That's true, with this thought exercise, some people might change their lives from how they think of their mortality now vs. how they might think of their mortality if there was no afterlife whatsoever.

I think mortality is a rich enough topic for a separate discussion and one I'd definitely participate in.

The way I see it for those who do not believe in an afterlife is that I think many likely still fear the act of dying, but once dead, if there is no afterlife whatsoever, then a person literally ceases to exist. Absolutely no way whatsoever of having any cognition or awareness of their death.

I think of it like someone watching a really good movie that they like. They like the movie so much, they don't want it to end. They might even have some anxiety or "fear" that the movie is going to end because they want the movie to go on and on. Of course the movie is going to end. That's inevitable. Perhaps the closer the movie comes to its ending, the more anxiety the viewer has. But finally, the movie ends. Does the person still have fear about the the movie ending? No. It ended. It's done. It's over. That's it. There's nothing to fear about it at that point because the movie stopped playing. In a certain respect (ie the act of watching the movie) the movie ceased to exist.

Another way I look at it is that if there is no afterlife of any kind it would be literally impossible for a dead person to fear the lack of an afterlife once they're dead. Every aspect of their ability to be sentient is gone.

That's my question: No afterlife of any kind whatsoever but God still exists...would you change anything about your life at all?

 

[Dagan]

Heaven for me would be that my consciousness leaves this body only to awaken in another body on another planet. Like Avatar. Just, I don't want to have to work and pay bills the whole time again.

 

[Ella Spell]

I wouldn't change anything about my life. I'd be a little sad I think, but c'est la vie.

 

[Ella Spell]

Just to clarify, @Magna -

Are you saying

a) there would be no Heaven or afterlife, definitively, as if it were somehow proven and ruled out once and for all,

or,

b) it stops being mentioned in religious doctrines (or had never been mentioned in the first place) ?



If a) I would be a little sad. I'd feel like a biological lump of disposable cells, which I guess is true regardless, but somehow I'd feel robbed of hope and wonder. That's why I said it would disrupt law, ethics, justice, and many systems. Some people could become very violent, thinking they'll never need to atone for their sins. Of course there'd also be some benefits, mostly in terms of mental health relief for people who stress about the after life their entire lives, or experience systemic and cultural gaslighting for their beliefs and actions.

If b) I think people would invent it themselves, even if it wasn't in any religious book. Philosophers have discussed metaphysical forms and energy since ancient times. We continue to explore the afterlife theme with ghost stories, near death experiences, and tarot readings, and forms of spiritualism that actually predated Christianity and many other religions. I believe removing it from religious texts wouldn't stop people from staring at the sky, or a loved one's grave, and wondering how life and karma works -- regardless of what those doctrines did or did not say.

 

[Magna]

Just to clarify, @Magna -

Are you saying

a) there would be no Heaven or afterlife, definitively, as if it were somehow proven and ruled out once and for all,

or,

b) it stops being mentioned in religious doctrines (or had never been mentioned in the first place) ?



If a) I would be a little sad. I'd feel like a biological lump of disposable cells, which I guess is true regardless but somehow I'd feel robbed of hope and wonder. That's why I said it would disrupt law, ethics, justice, and many systems. Some people could become very violent, thinking they'll never need to atone for their sins. Of course there'd also be some benefits, mostly in terms of mental health relief for people who stress about the after life their entire lives, or experience systemic and cultural gaslighting for their beliefs and actions.

If b) I think people would invent it themselves, even if it wasn't in any religious book. Philosophers have discussed metaphysical forms and energy since ancient times. We continue to explore the afterlife theme with ghost stories, near death experiences, and tarot readings, and forms of spiritualism that actually predated Christianity and many other religions. I believe removing it from religious texts wouldn't stop people from staring at the sky, or a loved one's grave, and wondering how life and karma works -- regardless of what those doctrines did or did not say.

Good question. For this thread topic idea I'm thinking of both I guess. Proven, no afterlife and no religion talking about afterlife. This is it. Nothing after.

Much of the practices of the followers of religions that tout an afterlife is based on reward vs. punishment. Reward being...afterlife. If there was no afterlife, period and that was common knowledge, how would a person change things about how they live now?

 

[Twilight]

I don’t believe in an afterlife but don’t consider myself a lump of biological cells. The universe is full of more wonder and awe than my former belief system allowed.

Becoming an atheist has made me a more moral person overall. I think that education is the key towards making decent citizens. Social systems which ensure that people’s basic needs are being met helps, too.

Many societies that have a high rate of atheism don’t seem to have more issues with crime than more religious ones.

 

[Twilight]

[D]ata from the Federal Bureau of Prisons suggest that atheists are far less likely to commit crimes than religious people, and globally the least religious countries have the lowest crime rates.

https://today.uconn.edu/2017/08/thi...from the Federal,have the lowest crime rates.

 

[Ella Spell]

I'm having an existential crisis just thinking about it. Life would seem so .... pointless or devoid of meaning. It's not that I believe in God as a being, or Heaven as a place, but I believe in the concept of some form of afterlife even if it's through reincarnation or being a ghost. Not to derail but I've seen a ghost, so that would really mess with my head.

I'd have to reframe a lot of my beliefs concerning energy, matter, and physics, so in that respect it would change my view of science and empirical evidence. It wouldn't change my views on morality, ethics, or following the Golden Rule, though. I didn't follow the Golden Rule to get my butt into Heaven, or to reap an eternal reward, but because I knew it was intrinsically just, from the time I was small.

Back to your question about what I'd "DO" differently -- nothing I suppose, other than spending a long time rereading and reframing my knowledge of Science, or feeling rather flat.