Life after Death PART IV (Religious View)

Perhaps we could best describe religion as a middleman between us and spirituality. God would probably be more like a 'force' rather than just a physical entity and would be more encompassing, omnipotent, and without limitations than we may be presently able to readily comprehend.
Prophets and messengers who claim to be giving us the teachings from God to us (such as Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Guru Nanak, etc.) have laid the foundations for the world's major religions. They have all given us a teaching that there is an afterlife and our souls go there after we die. These messengers and the resulting religions cannot be merely dismissed as not being evidence for the existence of God and an afterlife as many atheists would have us believe. Though this is not evidence in an empirical sense, it is evidence nonetheless. For many wise, intelligent, educated, and open minded people, just one of these religions is all the evidence they need to have absolute faith in its teachings. Many scholars have studied there chosen religion in great depth and come to the same absolute belief. If only one such prophet had come to earth giving us one religion, then it might all be easier to dismiss as some sort of misinformation.
But the fact is that this has happened several times independently so that this evidence becomes harder to reject or discount. Could all these prophets and religions be just dismissed as being wrong?
® If one does not wish to believe that none of Jesus Christ, Mohammed, etc. were telling us the truth about life after death, then they are left to account for their messages by one or more of the following: (1) they were suffering from some serious psychological disorder, (2) were manipulated by aliens, and/or (3) masterminded such a grand deception, the likes of which the world has never seen, for some motive or benefit which is unclear. These alternate explanations would be highly unlikely for every single messenger unless it were explained by (2) in which case the number of messengers would probably be irrelevant.

∙ Most priests of the major religions undergo a scholarly education. This is especially true of Christians in the west. Typically they study to at least a bachelors degree level in religious or theological studies. Yet seldom (or never) do we hear of scholars reject or refute say the Koran or New Testament - they may question certain inconsistencies in these Holy Books (for example, with the New Testament, there are bound to be passages which may not be divine as they were written by mortal men about 40 or so years after the death of Jesus). Even allowing for the fact that these people are typically believers to start with, this suggests that the more one is to investigate one of these religions for 'authenticity', the more likely they are to become true believers of it. Even if there is the odd discrepancy in these Holy Books, the religion does not rest or fall on such and therefore a critic cannot rationally conclude there is no God or an afterlife.

∙ The problem many people have with religious arguments is that they have to be open for debate on the evidence for their claims. Though not all, but a fair number of religious people are not willing to engage in an open exchange of dialogue or critique of their religion. Also, the messages of the prophets suited the time periods they were in and that is why some of their messages may seem somewhat overly simple to some of us today and may not always apply fully to the world we live in now.
One general problem with religion is worshiping without respecting other views and possibilities. This applies to any form of belief whether it is capitalism, communism, atheism, materialistic science, or militant or fundamentalist interpretations/forms of different religions. In addition, all belief systems share the same problem in that they will not hold up to rational arguments for every single one of their teachings or interpretations.Let us examine the logic of Satan if he indeed exists. It is told in the Bible that Satan is to be destroyed by God. Satan not being stupid, wants eternal life. So why would Satan not denounce his evil ways and go back to God's side? Either Satan believes what the Bible says will happen isn't necessarily going to happen (maybe he will be forgiven and redeemed at the end) and he is right or maybe Satan is just some foolish entity? Or maybe Satan doesn't even exist (though God does)?
∙ There were reported visits by Jesus Christ after his physical death to many people. It is unlikely that these were just bereaved people seeing something they wanted to because two of his disciples seen him but did not recognize him at first (there was also another sighting where recognition was not made right away).
∙ Possibly the best approach for evaluating religion as evidence for the non-believer and for many of the rest of us also is to look for events such as miracles (which would have to be supported and validated historically) and knowledge revealed through the religion which could not have been known at the time otherwise.
∙ If reincarnation is true, then one could not progress to the highest levels of spiritual progression just by following some external doctrine (ie. religion). For this would not significantly change the soul, but only the person. One's soul would have to reach such a high level by internal improvements which improve thoughts and feelings as well as actions and behaviour.
∙ Even allowing for man changing religious teachings, the fact still remains that there are fundamental differences between religions that should not be there if all are true. We should expect almost full agreement between them and since we do not find such, this can be taken to mean either that all sources are not divine or are not fully credible. This fact weakens some (or all) religions and their evidence for an afterlife to an extent.