Three references which provide an Illuminated Understanding of this perennial dilemma.
http://www.beezone.com/death_message.html
What death requires of us
http://www.easydeathbook.com/purpose.asp
http://www.aboutadidam.org/dying_death_and_beyond/index.html

The problem with interpretation means? It can and has clearly been used to make a complete nonsense out of alleged holy scripture, then impose beliefs taken solely from the mouths of men/impostors!

Little wonder highly revised and endlessly edited to suit preferred dogma, holy books, have been subjected to holy wars/rivers of blood and claims that a preferred, selected deity, is the one true and only God.

And we'll kill/murder/maim anyone who says different!

Little wonder there's a mass exodus from traditional religion!

That said, if you would know the truth, first seek ye the Kingdom of heaven within. Quote unquote. Learn to meditate/still the conscious mind and the endless monkey chatter that is the nonstop thought process. Reading some alleged holy passage or other is not meditation! But may well be, self imposed brain washing? Particularly where ritualistic repetition, is part of the approved practice!

Know the truth and the truth will set you free!

One of those truths would appear to be, that there was no exodus from Egypt by alleged chosen people? Therefore, that myth or legend ought to be taken with a grain of salt and indeed anything that relies on it or similar myth and legend! That then is used to confirm claimed authority, power and privilege on self appointed elites!

Little wonder the master's last work was so descriptive of a very troubled mind?
Alan B.

I am past heaping scorn on those of my friends who believe in a life after death. Better to keep my own counsel on the subject. The line in the funeral ritual that calls on the faithful to look forward to being united with the Lord with a "sure and certain hope" never ceases to intrigue me. It is sort of like having a bob each way on a horse that is a certainty and you hope it will win. Why then did you also put your money on it for a place as well?

David

Scott MacInnes,

If you are going to use labels which are already understood by other people to mean something different, then it would help if you stated that at the outset.

As it stands, when you speak of ‘atheists’, you in fact only describe strong atheism (you throw philosophical naturalism in there, too); and when you speak of ‘agnostics’, you describe weak atheism (either explicit or implicit, depending on other factors):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive, they are two different answers to two different questions. Here’s a diagram which illustrates the difference between the two at a glance:

http://i.imgur.com/nzOxfIA.png

Theism and atheism are responses with regards to what one believes, while gnosticism and agnosticism are responses concerning knowledge.

Theism and atheism are two logical absolutes which conform to the law of the excluded middle (i.e. A, not A). Here is a sophisticated Venn diagram I put together to illustrate this more clearly:

http://i.imgur.com/LBo0WK3.png

I don’t like getting too caught up in labels, though. Labels can mean whatever people want them to mean, but you have to be able to agree on their definitions before any further discussion can be productive. And if you're going to stray from widely-accepted definitions, then this needs to be clarified first.

** But does living by such faith have any ultimate meaning or value beyond this finite existence?**

This life exists in time and space, whereas death is a timeless zone. No comparison can be made between the two.

AJPhillips.

And you didn't answer the question. Do it please.

Viz...
** But does living by such faith have any ultimate meaning or value beyond this finite existence?**