The Atheist and Agnostic

Originally posted by dj2becker
You have so eloquently portrayed how you simply debunk NDE's simply because you don't 'believe' in the supernatural.

If the person claims their NDE is supernatural, they must provide evidence to support this. Is there any? No. Consequently it would be irrational to presume that they are supernatural experiences. Why is that so hard to understand?

Originally posted by aardvarkhome
Did you hurt your foot when you stumbled over this pile of bullsh*t

I bet he swallowed it whole.

Originally posted by frogstomp
I bet he swallowed it whole.

The foot, or....

P-

Originally posted by frogstomp
I bet he swallowed it whole.

Nah, I just planted the landmine. Everybody has gone and stepped in it.

Of course I had to shove YOUR petite-featured face into it Froggy. 😉
Since man evolved from it, there's nothing wrong with you meeting your true self.

Originally posted by Halitose
His heart aches for every precious life with him upon the raft - drifting, drifting drifting, whither no one knows.”

Many of the sentiments in this piece, in my view, are better applied to the religious, especially christians.

It is the christian who must worry about everyone's eternal fate. He is commanded to witness to the lost. He is burdened with guilt should he fail to win them over. He is haunted by images of those around him burning in hell for eternity. It is an old mind control trick that has worked far too well - it preys on the natural human fear of the unknown.

Originally posted by LemonJello
[b]But what purpose is there then to life, adrift on that raft?

you'll have to ask Dr. Fullofshit. i wouldn't know what it is like to drift aimlessly on a raft with only my self-pity and despondency to keep me company.[/b]

Okay forget the raft. Its only a figure of speech.

I'm intrigued by what makes an athiest tick. What purpose is there to life? What is happiness? How do you find it?

Originally posted by Halitose
Nah, I just planted the landmine. Everybody has gone and stepped in it.

Of course I had to shove YOUR petite-featured face into it Froggy. 😉
Since man evolved from it, there's nothing wrong with you meeting your true self.

hey sis , we ain't the ones that have a breath problem

and you aint man enough.

Originally posted by Halitose
I'm intrigued by what makes an athiest tick. What purpose is there to life? What is happiness? How do you find it?

Not much different than a believers purpose, I imagine, except for the "surrender my will to god" thing. Health, family, contentment, achievement. 'Course, I can't speak for all the heathens in here. Maybe they think sacrificing the ribs of pigs on a pit of fire is good times. Who can say for sure? Heathens are like that.

I'm interested to know what makes a believer tick... Do you not think you could find happiness without the teachings of Jesus?

Originally posted by Halitose
Okay forget the raft. Its only a figure of speech.

I'm intrigued by what makes an athiest tick. What purpose is there to life? What is happiness? How do you find it?

halitose (you realize that's almost halitosis?):

needless to say, i found your initial post in this thread rather insulting and myopic. i also find your methods here rather ineffective. why are you tiptoeing around like a thief at night? you wouldn't be posting such posts and asking such questions if you didn't think that happiness and purpose to life are contingent upon one's holding a belief in god. so just say it already, and make a case for it. start with a definition of happiness, and present an argument why you think the atheist/agnostic cannot be truly happy. i will be even more than happy to debate you at that juncture.

What purpose is there to life? What is happiness? How do you find it?

golly, gee whiz. these are hard questions...i guess i should just read a book and let someone else tell me the 'answers'...

EDIT: i think both the atheist and the theist can be happy...probably for reasons that are altogether very similar.

Originally posted by Halitose
... He stands in awe and reverence before the vastness and majesty of the universe, knowing not whence he came or why...

On the other hand, the believer in an omnimax God wonders why the sheet of flowing lava maims and kills animals who are guilty of no sin. The braver among them (or should I say the more desperate) concoct the idea: It is the fault of the first two humans. If they had not been disobedient, there would be no volcanoes or hurricanes or earthquakes. The moons of the outer planets would bear no evidence of past battering by asteroid impacts. Humans are the ones responsible for calamities.

Originally posted by LemonJello
halitose (you realize that's almost halitosis?):

needless to say, i found your initial post in this thread rather insulting and myopic. i also find your methods here rather ineffective. why are you tiptoeing around like a thief at ...[text shortened]... be happy...probably for reasons that are altogether very similar.

Okay here goes nothin'...

My definition of HAPPYNESS is contentment and inner peace. My happyness is based on my faith in God. I am content in life, because ultimately I know that God is in control. I cannot prove it, so don't ask me to. This contentment, together with a faith in the afterlife gives me inner peace.

Okay. Don't be insulted, but here is my hypothesis, on why, according to my definition of happyness, an athiest cannot be truly happy. If there is no God, and if the now, is all we have, then that is all we can aspire to enjoy and find happyness from, to the best of our definition of happyness. If there is no God and no ultimate authority, then whatever feels good that we should do. If it is drug or alcohol abuse, then so be it. But then why are drug addicts some of the unhappiest people in society? You can't really explain that from the athiest perspective.

Like putting wood on a fire; trying to just do what feels better, you are stoking an unquenshible fire. Never will this fire stop needing wood, because you'll always be looking for the next thrill and ride; the next fix, the next being layed, the next smile out of your child; the next family reunion; the next practical joke on the inlaws; The list can go on. Some of the criteria can be more noble, but ultimately its a viscious circle that leaves one panting for the next kick.

I still find it hard that man, as an evolved animal would need happyness. From the athiestic perspective, what are these emotional persuits? What are they for? Why do you need happyness, if all we are geared towards is survival and passing on our genes? Why do we need to do noble deeds, if they are in their very essence going against evolution (e.g. the firefighters during 9/11)? Did they just do that for a bigger pay cheque? What is noble anyway, other than the daydream of a greek philosopher? What would lead him to think "noble" thoughts?

I'll stop there with my questions for now and wait for a rebuttal. I hope I'm not stamping on anybody's toes here, but these are questions that I can't find reasonable answers for in the athiestic worldview, that is why I take the position that it do.

Originally posted by Halitose
Okay here goes nothin'...

My definition of HAPPYNESS is contentment and inner peace. My happyness is based on my faith in God. I am content in life, because ultimately I know that God is in control. I cannot prove it, so don't ask me to. This contentment, together with a faith in the afterlife gives me inner peace.

Okay. Don't be insulted, but here ...[text shortened]... k "noble" thoughts?

I'll stop there with my questions for now and wait for a rebuttal.

good...now we are getting somewhere. right now, i need sleep in a major way. i'll rebut tomorrow.

Originally posted by LemonJello
good...now we are getting somewhere. right now, i need sleep in a major way. i'll rebut tomorrow.

Sure. I'll be waiting...

Originally posted by Starrman
If the person claims their NDE is supernatural, they must provide evidence to support this. Is there any? No. Consequently it would be irrational to presume that they are supernatural experiences. Why is that so hard to understand?

b]If the person claims their NDE is supernatural, they must provide evidence to support this.

You don't seem to understand that NDE's ARE the evidence of supernatural experiences.

[b]Is there any? No. Consequently it would be irrational to presume that they are supernatural experiences.

Well the only reason you don't accept NDE's as evidence for the supernatural is because you don't believe the supernatural exists, and thus you will accept no evidence for it.

Originally posted by dj2becker
You don't seem to understand that NDE's ARE the evidence of supernatural experiences.

That's like saying a supernatural experience is evidence of itself.

Well the only reason you don't accept NDE's as evidence for the supernatural is because you don't believe the supernatural exists, and thus you will accept no evidence for it.

As I have said before, but you continue to ignore it, I chose not to believe because I have not seen any evidence for it, not because I am predisposed to refute the supernatural. If you are saying it is intrinsically self evident, it would be ridiculous for me to believe in it, since the only evidence is its supernaturality, something I do not believe exists to start with.

Your arguement is circular. Perhaps you could tell me why you believe. It is strange to me, since you believe in NDE's as a supernatural phenomena, but offer no reasons for doing so, nor ever having seen any natural evidence for them.