Sociopath Community

Why would anyone prefer to go to Heaven or Hell instead of being immortal? 

 That's the whole question surrounding religion.

It all comes down about Faith.
The ones who deserve Heaven are people who are willing to risk themselves for the greater good and be rewarded with it.

This is to separate the people who are willing to do the good, and the ones who would do it only because they would be sure granted passage afterlife. 

Are you a good person only when you know people are looking, or you are genuinely someone very empathetic? 

Bad Vibes Mickey said: 

 

Why would anyone prefer to go to Heaven or Hell instead of being immortal? 

 That's the whole question surrounding religion.

It all comes down about Faith.
The ones who deserve Heaven are people who are willing to risk themselves for the greater good and be rewarded with it.

 

 

This is to separate the people who are willing to do the good, and the ones who would do it only because they would be sure granted passage afterlife. 

 

Are you a good person only when you know people are looking, or you are genuinely someone very empathetic? 

Bad Vibes Mickey said: 

Why would anyone prefer to go to Heaven or Hell instead of being immortal? 

That's the whole question surrounding religion.

Nine times out of ten, the "whole question" surrounding religion, in spite of it being a life path, tends to be over "where we go when we die". 

Naturally Christianity and most other religions would fear or revere the notion of immortality, as humanity gaining it would make us exempt from many punishments and, otherwise, as if the Gods of old. 

I mostly wonder what religion's bound to transform into once "where we go when we die" becomes an obsolete question. 

Are you a good person only when you know people are looking, or you are genuinely someone very empathetic? 

Can't it be both? 

Turncoat said: 

Bad Vibes Mickey said: 

Why would anyone prefer to go to Heaven or Hell instead of being immortal? 

That's the whole question surrounding religion.

Nine times out of ten, the "whole question" surrounding religion, in spite of it being a life path, tends to be over "where we go when we die". 

Naturally Christianity and most other religions would fear or revere the notion of immortality, as humanity gaining it would make us exempt from many punishments and, otherwise, as if the Gods of old. 

I mostly wonder what religion's bound to transform into once "where we go when we die" becomes an obsolete question. 

Are you a good person only when you know people are looking, or you are genuinely someone very empathetic? 

Can't it be both? 

1. Yes, but there is a clear distinction between physical and spiritual immortality.  One could one day be made by mankind and the other is our true essence, given by nature/god himself. The spirit is our energy, our core, the thing that sparked inside our physical form to give us life.

Why do you even think such a question will ever be answered? This life might be just a test, to set apart people who are animalistic in their nature and spirits that are evolved, and evolving each reincarnation if there is such, until they are pure light and instead of reincarnating, they use their energy to help others living beings who are struggling in life. Who knows, anything is possible. Maybe some people's energy frequency vibes in such a way they are able to experience a whole new dimension after death which cannot be explained or described.

 This is all speculation of course. But the moment you stop and accept that there is only this world, and after death there is nothing, you will be just like the people from the old days, that believed the sun circled around the earth and that was it.

2. You can be both, or just one of them, or neither. The point is, are you evolved enough to do good deeds willingly and being happy to help the other without having anything granted in return? If that is a yes, most likely, your spirit will be welcomed in Heaven.

Bad Vibes Mickey said: 

1. Yes, but there is a clear distinction between physical and spiritual immortality.  One could one day be made by mankind and the other is our true essence, given by nature/god himself. The spirit is our energy, our core, the thing that sparked inside our physical form to give us life.

You've seen the shit you let go of when you become a spirit, right? 

Letting go of the ego, of sin, isn't a desirable choice unless you see no sense of personal attachment to yourself. Why let go of that if you don't have to? 

Why do you even think such a question will ever be answered? This life might be just a test, to set apart people who are animalistic in their nature and spirits that are evolved, and evolving each reincarnation if there is such, until they are pure light and instead of reincarnating, they use their energy to help others living beings who are struggling in life.

I say why conform to that once other options exist? 

Do that if you'd rather, but why not opt for physical immortality instead? 

Who knows, anything is possible. Maybe some people's energy frequency vibes in such a way they are able to experience a whole new dimension after death which cannot be explained or described.

I find myself more curious about how others respond to life's questions at this point. 

 This is all speculation of course. But the moment you stop and accept that there is only this world, and after death there is nothing, you will be just like the people from the old days, that believed the sun circled around the earth and that was it.

How much of you is "you" once you're elsewhere though? 

2. You can be both, or just one of them, or neither. The point is, are you evolved enough to do good deeds willingly and being happy to help the other without having anything granted in return? If that is a yes, most likely, your spirit will be welcomed in Heaven.

The requirements according to The Holy Bible itself claims otherwise. What you're selling is snake oil, feelgood nonsense. 

To (attempt to) answer the larger question, I'd say that my concern and empathy betrays me, but that I'm learning to be less of a sucker with age while otherwise more discerning of what I do and don't subscribe to socially. Otherwise I'd express that my empathy expressions show how one can utilize it to be parasitic, as my appetite for people's kinda like food to me, but "you are what you eat" can apply if I don't diversify. 

I'm forced to see and feel a lot when I'm near people, their faces and everything say so much (microexpressions and subtext are like flavor). It's easy to get sucked into another person's world through this from having an arguably weakened sense of my own. It's super easy to lose myself into other people if they have a good enough hook over how I find them far more interesting and novel than myself. 

TLDR; I'd argue that it's an oversensitive form of empathy that's otherwise become a hunger through codependency. 

I love the fact we are born just to die 

love that for me 

Blanc said: 

I love the fact we are born just to die 

 

love that for me 

We were born to fuck, but we did too good of a job at it and fucked it up. Humankind otherwise through it's ability to observe changes across periods of time has founded the means of cultivation unlike any other species on Earth, allowing us to exaggerate anything we focus on to the point of absurdity. 

We live in a society where we've outlived our species' life goals, so we're now left otherwise largely existential by comparison to our original drives. This is why you still see such strong urges to fuck in spite of it's necessity, and why Porn itself is practically a modern day Totem Goddess. 

I can still predict it will ... not .. be a leap year.

Turncoat said: 

Bad Vibes Mickey said: 

1. Yes, but there is a clear distinction between physical and spiritual immortality.  One could one day be made by mankind and the other is our true essence, given by nature/god himself. The spirit is our energy, our core, the thing that sparked inside our physical form to give us life.

You've seen the shit you let go of when you become a spirit, right? 

Letting go of the ego, of sin, isn't a desirable choice unless you see no sense of personal attachment to yourself. Why let go of that if you don't have to? 

Why do you even think such a question will ever be answered? This life might be just a test, to set apart people who are animalistic in their nature and spirits that are evolved, and evolving each reincarnation if there is such, until they are pure light and instead of reincarnating, they use their energy to help others living beings who are struggling in life.

I say why conform to that once other options exist? 

Do that if you'd rather, but why not opt for physical immortality instead? 

Who knows, anything is possible. Maybe some people's energy frequency vibes in such a way they are able to experience a whole new dimension after death which cannot be explained or described.

I find myself more curious about how others respond to life's questions at this point. 

 This is all speculation of course. But the moment you stop and accept that there is only this world, and after death there is nothing, you will be just like the people from the old days, that believed the sun circled around the earth and that was it.

How much of you is "you" once you're elsewhere though? 

2. You can be both, or just one of them, or neither. The point is, are you evolved enough to do good deeds willingly and being happy to help the other without having anything granted in return? If that is a yes, most likely, your spirit will be welcomed in Heaven.

The requirements according to The Holy Bible itself claims otherwise. What you're selling is snake oil, feelgood nonsense. 

To (attempt to) answer the larger question, I'd say that my concern and empathy betrays me, but that I'm learning to be less of a sucker with age while otherwise more discerning of what I do and don't subscribe to socially. Otherwise I'd express that my empathy expressions show how one can utilize it to be parasitic, as my appetite for people's kinda like food to me, but "you are what you eat" can apply if I don't diversify. 

I'm forced to see and feel a lot when I'm near people, their faces and everything say so much (microexpressions and subtext are like flavor). It's easy to get sucked into another person's world through this from having an arguably weakened sense of my own. It's super easy to lose myself into other people if they have a good enough hook over how I find them far more interesting and novel than myself. 

TLDR; I'd argue that it's an oversensitive form of empathy that's otherwise become a hunger through codependency. 

 Ok, I will reply to you about what you've written, however, if we are going to keep arguing  I must tell you something: do it so using the whole argument instead of fragmenting what I said into tiny phrases.

The reason is that when you do what you did, it turns into analysis and not a conversation. On top of that, it takes a bit of the context away to what I will be replying.

And if I sounded like a jerk telling you that, I am not being one, on the contrary, I would ignore if I was being one and had no intentions to reply that as you may already know.

If this format isn't what you want to do...

...that sucks?