Can I believe in Ghosts and not God?

You are absolutely correct, OP, and that is the heart of the matter. (IMO) there IS an after-life, another realm, where matter is thinner than this one, and whatever constitutes our souls go there after death. Religions are an attempt to explain this, but a poor attempt filled with dogma and talk of gods, and attempts to control human behavior.

It does not follow that BECAUSE there is an afterlife, THEREFORE God, Jesus, Allah, etc. The whole set-up could be something entirely different. We just don't know. Not only that, there is no guarantee we WILL know either. It could be a good, long time before we, if we stay being ourselves, discover what is really going on.

a reply to: Moresby

In a way what you are suggesting is that we used to have more of a collective universal intelligence idea, of which we were all a part, as opposed to an ego-driven individualistic view of the soul. Whether that may be, and whichever, if any of those ideas is true, the basic premise is that there is more than just physicality involved with life, right?

Maybe it is simply the nature of a sentient creature to be unable to imagine that once we are gone, we are gone. But I certainly feel special enough to deserve my right to go on, after this body has worn out. How about you?

And let's be honest, even if it is true, that there is no soul, and when we are gone we really are gone...well, who cares at that point?

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Well obviously I can, I can think what i want, 'cause I'm the boss of me.

Indeed. And in my case, "God" or "gods", who are not incarnated in a particular human, animal or plant form, are considered as sissys, cowards or concepts at best. If something does not have some sort of a body, it does not exist, it just seem to exist, in my perspective.

The philosophy behind this, is that I think the premise of afterlife is unrelated to religion. For some reason I have had a fellow 'atheist' (I just usually say I don't believe in a Gods rather call myself an atheist) say I can't believe in one superstition, and not the other.

I think so called ghosts are the dirty legacy of someone, who was once alive, but is now ceased (dead) and died without archieving what was neccessary to archieve in its life-time. Therefore the un-resolved engergy of that is still around in the so called collective unconscious.

Or, in other words: The desire is still there, but not the body-mind-complex to fullfill that desire. And maybe it was a desire that can not be fullfilled anyway, without violating the rules and laws that apply here, in this realm.

I think that traditionally people think religion has overseen the domain of death and spirit, but there is not steadfast rule that the two have to be related.

Yes. Religon merely points to something, if it is worth something. But mostely it just messes with the minds of the believers without delivering anything of any value.

Can one believe the biological entity can create or be attached to a non biological component? Does that mean a spirit/soul has to be controlled by a god figure? What is a spirit or soul? How does a ghost differ to inspirit/heaven?

A soul, in my definition, is a certain part of the "collective unconsciousness" that was created in former life-times and can now be exessed or exercised by the currant particular body-mind-complex, who created it. And if what was created was nasty, mean, evil or ugly, that's how the soul is experiencing it now. And if it was beautifull, true, good, funny, interesting and helpfull for the most part, then that is how the soul is experiencing it.

No god-concept is needed for that to be the case.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

I wouldn't see being it necessarily a problem really, but from what your attempting to point they are completely separate. Is this mainly about the Abraham pov of the afterlife? I personally have had no ghostly experiences, maybe a few what if's, but not to the point of turning spooky white from seeing one. Although I've seen plenty of weird enough crap.

Many older, polytheist religions, believed that when they die, that every soul would be sent to the underworld, and that they'd be judged by the God of that realm, Hades, Odin to Hel, Osiris and even Anubis. I kinda of believe that these after death personifications, were attempts at explaining the natural order or processes of the Here After, no different then any other God that rules the Here Now Realm, like the Sun or the Sky. Usually the Underworld sounds like a giant industrial factory or a Government registration building, with long line ups, for one instantaneous decision. And usually these God at time were more powerful then High father Gods, due to Death being an absolute.

Thing is, when someone dies, does the whole concept of individuality stays with the body, or does one maintain it when they die?

a reply to: Specimen

Thing is, when someone dies, does the whole concept of individuality stays with the body, or does one maintain it when they die?

If reincarnation is to be believed, then individuality stays with us in the afterlife, and carries on into the next life. However, from every thing I've read or seen, it seems only the individuality of the most recent incarnation comes through the strongest in the present life. As I said; if it is to be believed. There are still questions about reincarnation that are unanswered.

I see this wrongful correlation very often. When people hear "atheist" they assume "Doesn't believe in anything" (which includes anything paranormal).

The only defining feature of an atheist is a lack of belief in god, that is it. I know spiritual atheists, I know atheists that reject evolution, I know atheists that meditate, and my wife and I both both believe Ghosts exist.

The important thing to note is that we don't believe any 'afterlife' stories within any religions at all, and we don't assume there is an afterlife. In fact, our definition of "ghost" is very abnormal simply because we can't know with any certainty what we've seen and experienced, but there are bits of information/evidence that is intriguing, just not in any way conclusive.

Who knows if what we've seen is the product of some kind of interdimensional slip, a hallucination (although some occurrences had multiple witnesses), or is in fact what the general description of a 'ghost' is; some kind of representation of an individual whom has passed away but able to interact with the natural world still, somehow.

We don't believe that heaven or hell exist, or any other name for those same concepts used by thousands of religions. We don't believe in demons or angels. However, we are open to one day believing in them, if there i sufficient evidence, or even proof, that would make those things likely to exist. So far, there is no evidence of them.

That's about that.

originally posted by: Ghost147
I see this wrongful correlation very often. When people hear "atheist" they assume "Doesn't believe in anything" (which includes anything paranormal).

The only defining feature of an atheist is a lack of belief in god, that is it. I know spiritual atheists, I know atheists that reject evolution, I know atheists that meditate, and my wife and I both both believe Ghosts exist.

The important thing to note is that we don't believe any 'afterlife' stories within any religions at all, and we don't assume there is an afterlife. In fact, our definition of "ghost" is very abnormal simply because we can't know with any certainty what we've seen and experienced, but there are bits of information/evidence that is intriguing, just not in any way conclusive.

Who knows if what we've seen is the product of some kind of interdimensional slip, a hallucination (although some occurrences had multiple witnesses), or is in fact what the general description of a 'ghost' is; some kind of representation of an individual whom has passed away but able to interact with the natural world still, somehow.

We don't believe that heaven or hell exist, or any other name for those same concepts used by thousands of religions. We don't believe in demons or angels. However, we are open to one day believing in them, if there i sufficient evidence, or even proof, that would make those things likely to exist. So far, there is no evidence of them.

That's about that.

Please don't speak for all atheists.

a reply to: Moresby

I wasn't, nor did I say that I was.

when I said "we" I was referring to my wife and I.

a reply to: Klassified

However, from every thing I've read or seen, it seems only the individuality of the most recent incarnation comes through the strongest in the present life.

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe our most recent incarnation was a distraction or a detour, maybe even a vacation or a reward. Perhaps, after death we reunite with our fellows and reevaluate the next course of actions that will best help us achieve the finality of this "Great Work", this project, from a higher level, before we go onto an even greater Great Work.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

I have actually considered the idea that we are god, in other words, we are the creators. No separate entity that runs things - it's all us.

What if you're right and there is no God... yet?

Which came first... the chicken or the egg?

originally posted by: Ghost147
a reply to: Moresby

I wasn't, nor did I say that I was.

when I said "we" I was referring to my wife and I.

It's not clear. The "our" and "we" look like you're talking about all atheists.

Thanks for clarifying.

a reply to: Moresby

no problem, I can see how it can be misinterpreted

Of course you can. There are cultures right now that believe the spirits of our ancestors remain around us as "ghosts" (as well as the spirits of other entities). Then you have jinn, demons, youkai, and a bunch of other phenomena (like "multiple personality" syndromes, hallucinations, etc). And in some cultures, they believe that all objects can have a separate soul, including rocks, trees, and objects fashioned by humans (and some believe that external souls can "possess" those objects or be sealed into them).

And of course, no religion explains everything about our existence anyway. So who knows what the full story is?

a reply to: zazzafrazz

I can only speak from a scholarly angle as regards this topic, so please don't misconstrue my reply as representative of my own personal beliefs, for they are not necessarily the same.

The oldest organized forms of religion which we possess in some kind of documented form come from Mesopotamia and Egypt. Of these two, the elder writings are from a people known as the Sumerians, who settled southern Mesopotamia (modern day Iraq) around 4000 BCE, and developed a written language called cuneiform around 3500 BCE. By 2800 BCE the Sumerians had compiled a rich literature covering astronomical, economic, and spiritual topics. The Egyptian hieroglyphic language originates around 3300 BCE, and was used to record numerous kinds of Egyptian literature for the next 3000 years or so.

Now, according to Sumerian and Egyptian literature from this ancient period, the Netherworld was the afterlife destination where human spirits or souls ventured upon their bodily death. These realms were called Irigal in Sumer, and the Duat in Egypt, and the ethereal bodies which lived in each were called im or gidim in Sumer, and ba, ka, or akhu in Egypt. This is, of course, an oversimplification of a very complex aspect of these ancient faiths, but it suffices to establish that both Sumer and Egypt possessed an understanding of the human spirit, and believed in a destination for it after death.

Finally, we come to the most important part: can the concept of life-after-death be separated from the notion of a God, or the gods? In the case of the Sumerian and Egyptian people, the answer is no.

Sumerian religion identifies a royal family of gods who governed the Netherworld, a noble court of emissaries and functionaries with divine offices who maintained it, and a whole host of associated deities, demons, and spirits that populated the afterlife wilderness. The most prominent Netherworld figures in Sumer were the Queen of the Dead, a goddess named Ereshkigal; her son, the Divine Physician and King of the Snakes, Ninazu; her minister and the warden of disease, drought, famine, and plague, Namtar; and a sampling of dying-and-rising vegetation/harvest gods who predate the resurrection of Christ, including Dumuzi and Ningishzida. There are about two dozen more deities who populate the Netherworld and in some way lord over the souls of dead humans, but it is unnecessary here to enter into discussion about them.

Egyptian religion, meanwhile, also has a noble court of Neteru (their word for divine-essence) who reside in a glorious hall called Usekht-maāti, the Hall of Two Truths. In this hall the heart of every dead soul is weighed against the Feather of Maāt (a symbol of virtuousness and ethical purity) in a process known as weshim-ib or the Weighing of the Heart. Souls that are found to be pure are rewarded with admittance to one of two paradisaical realms called Sekhet-Ȧaru or Sekhet-Ḥetepu, the Field of Reeds and Field of Peace, respectively. The specific Neteru who oversee this process include: Osiris, the Lord of the Duat, who oversees the weighing of the heart; Anubis, who guides the deceased through the Netherworld to the Hall of Two Truths; and Thoth, who places the heart upon a scale alongside the Feather of Maāt. Once again, this whole process has been grossly oversimplified for the sake of space, and upwards of 40 more deities are involved in the process.

To conclude, the oldest human writings we possess on religion, the soul/spirit, and the afterlife, intimately connect all three aspects to a Deity, or, more specifically, numerous deities (as Sumer and Egypt were polytheistic civilizations). Therefore, the scholarly answer is no, the concept of life-after-death, from the angle of human consciousness, has never been separated from the supposition that some form of God or Gods exist which oversee it.


~ Wandering Scribe

The modern concept of the soul really begins with Plato. He saw it as the part of us that is immortal and lives on after death. And he saw it as in some basic way our true self. He also thought ghosts were connected to the souls of the dead.

However, by the Roman period, the attitude to ghosts seems more like our own. When discussing some ghost phenomena, Pliny the Younger ask the fundamental question, do "ghosts exist and have a shape of their own and some kind of supernatural power, or that they are empty and of no substance, taking their image from our fear?"

He could be a contributor to ATS. We've all seen versions of that question on this forum many times. But Pliny wrote those words in the first century.

So it's clear that by the first century religion wasn't offering all the answers about ghosts. At least not for educated Romans.

a reply to: Wandering Scribe

To add on:

The Egyptians left Ka statue's in their tombs for the life-force (spirit or soul or whatever you want to call it) of the deceased to reside in after death, which is interesting.

The belief that an individuals life-force survives the bodies physical death gave the Egyptians all the incentive to try to preserve the actual body by mummification- and just for good measure they also left the statues just in case the bodies weren't good enough for the life-force.

I'm currently taking an Art History Course and learned about these ancient statues.

The Sumerian's were different of course but they, too, believed in an afterlife. And there's this one tomb that stuck out to me, a woman who was so loved that her servants, some small children, and possible relatives and guards seemed to have partied in her tomb and then committed suicide, as if to follow her into the afterlife.... the bodies are all strewn around the tomb indicating this. Wow! A real suicide ritual party! Google Queen Puabi for more on that, if you're interested.

As for me... I'm with you, OP. 100%. I don't see why one(the existence of a soul) has to indicate the existence of another (god). It may be that for thousands of years people have generally almost-always correlated the two, but... it doesn't mean it's true.

a reply to: zazzafrazz


Ummm...only if you want to...

I've always viewed apparitions as out of phase events in either...

A...Time
B...Interdimensionality
C...Or between universes

Or any combination of the above...
Having never witnessed such an event...even when I was in my "Ghost hunting" phase...where I used to visit all sorts of purported haunted places...I really can't say...

(I've seen plenty of UFO's though)...NOT...claiming they were anything other than unidentified flying objects...
NO...I'm not a believer in the ET probe gig...either...
For me...these things have to be verifiable...by myself...not by someone making a claim to such...

A skeptical optimist I am...(please insert pseudo Yoda voice over here)






YouSir

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Klassified

However, from every thing I've read or seen, it seems only the individuality of the most recent incarnation comes through the strongest in the present life.

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe our most recent incarnation was a distraction or a detour, maybe even a vacation or a reward. Perhaps, after death we reunite with our fellows and reevaluate the next course of actions that will best help us achieve the finality of this "Great Work", this project, from a higher level, before we go onto an even greater Great Work.

That may be, but what I'm saying is, memories and symptoms of our most recent incarnation seem to be the most prevalent in this life, if we remember at all. Which I suppose makes sense. I'm sure there are exceptions to that though.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

How can you say 'your ghost' is not a God manifesting itself in this plane of existence? I believe that soul thing you're talking about belongs with the creator. When your body ceases to function it's job is to return.

I believe there are a whole host of Gods (or minor deities). I have encountered distinct traces of at least two. They're picky about being revealed. It's my opinion they are geographically limited (even though that is the 'worst' description possible for what I'm trying to convey.)

As for religions ... the dudes writing that stuff down on paper got it fairly screwed up. That said, I do believe there was a time before our present history where 'we' did have it right. Ain't no shovel gonna get us back there either.

Pretty crazy sounding reply, isn't it?

a reply to: zazzafrazz

I'm agnostic kind of and I believe in spirits, but I even believe that spirits are actually alien beings with such advanced tech they appear supernatural to us from another "dimension" aka the "spirit realm". Never can you let others influence your own opinions, so good on you.