Heaven is real, says neurosurgeon
- Thread starter arauca
- Start date
Not bad... Not bad at all!
You know I read somewhere that "when Balerion and Seagypsy begin to get along it is a sign of the second coming of Carl Sagan" or something like that, I can't remember the exact wording, maybe it was Einstein that is coming back.
If I have any say, it'll be Hitchens.
For the record, we've gotten along before. Our latest disagreement was compounded by horrible moderation, in my opinion.
I like that. Although I don't believe the world was created for my sake, that doesn't matter. I don't have a clue as to why the universe is here. So, as long as we can't "f" it up, it might as well be here for me, or you.
Actually, wynn, no offense, but this is the first time you've contributed something, which I found interesting. I located a sermon that took on a form of a letter,which was similar to what the neuroscientist, Rodolfo Llinas said, “I can imagine a religion saying that matter and energy is God. It’s a beautiful thought, but instead of understanding what you are, you want to be what you’re not. However, it’s just because they don’t understand how precious, and absolutely incredible matter is, or how precious you are, and it is sad. Just because we can understand feelings from a material point of view, people view it as though it somehow demeans our nature, but instead, it says that we are one with everything else. What more could you possibly ask for?”
I prefer, “I am nothing but dust from which the whole world was created.” This is enough to satisfy my oxymoronic desire of being one with all.
I prefer, “I am nothing but dust from which the whole world was created.” This is enough to satisfy my oxymoronic desire of being one with all.
That goes hand in hand with the whole "purpose" argument. Believers use their religion to give them some sense of higher purpose, and can't understand how someone can live without this guide. On the other hand, an atheist (not all of course, but some of us) can accept that the universe cares not one bit about us and has no set plan, but yet we can make our own purpose and be an important part of our little corner.
Fair enough. Do what you do best. Do the physics and engineering at the very challenging levels. Keep the economy growing with new products and services. Serve the community the way you do it best.
Those who have the instinct to worship, should worship. Donate to the poor/needy. Continue to fight for what you believe in. The Christians should continue reaching out to war torn areas of the world, spreading the gospel, love, civilization. I will do what I do best in my little niche of the universe.
Wow, you are kind of limiting people. I know plenty of theists that don't seem to give a damned about anyone but themselves and you couldn't get them to give to charity no matter if they won the lottery. And I know of atheists who work in soup kitchens,not for glory, eternal life, or even a pat on the back, but because it makes them feel good to help someone else out. I really hope you are not stereotyping people based on their faith or lack of faith. People are individuals and their belief or lack of belief in a God rarely has anything to do with how charitable a person is. Sometimes it's simply their own economic circumstances others its just how selfish or not they have learned to be throughout their life.
The statement that is not proven is not false, it's false only when it's proven that is false-from where did you get this idea? But life experience from people who try alternatives doesn't respect scientific laws, just because science says something it doesn't mean it's always the case. Yes, there are many frauds, but those people with genuine abilities (if there are any), will not respond to James Randi's 1 million dollar challenge and you will never see them or hear them in public, they are not interested in money and fame, I know I wouldn't if I had any of those strange abilities, I don't want to be scientific rat or being the joke where science is trying to disprove me with these materialistic views, in that area science has become pretty much like religion.
My entire argument is simple: you cannot prove disprove the existence of afterlife or God and similar., we know too little of the universe, and it's impossible to tell if there are other forces, energies and etc. that do not interact with the rest of the universe.
I don't kill people and it's not my intention to do an harm, my extreme post here was simply because what would happen it you scientifically prove that justice, good, bad or evil do not exist, and therefore those terms/concepts should be banned-we would kill each other. These fictional, man-made concepts is what brought us civilized behaviour and helped to our civilization to rise, without those concepts there wouldn't be any civilization.
My point: So if we believe in irrational, non-existent concepts like justice, good, bad, evil and etc., why it is forbidden to irrationally believe in God?
This is sometimes good and sometimes it is bad, it all depends who is using this for their own selfish interest and rule the world communities, or actually do something good in the name of this concept-God.
So because you wouldn't want the money you are projecting that onto everyone else? If I had psychic ability I'd be a rich woman. Yes it would be annoying to become a lab rat for some time if not the rest of my life but which of us is not a lab rat? I guess anyone who refuses to see a doctor would be free of that description.
I think its safe to say there are plenty of people that if psychic would want or need that money and would take the challenge if for no reason other than to donate the money to charity. So you can't rationalize that the reason they don't come forward is because no psychic would want the money and the evidence of that is because YOU would not want the money.
If we could prove those things, some people would go bat shit crazy and start killing all frivolous like. While the majority of people would still cringe at the sight of blood and go on about their lives as they do simply because there is no good reason to cause wanton destruction. The majority of atheists do not believe in evil, or absolute morality but they still resist the urge to go and kill just for fun. I don't believe in the existence of good or evil, yet most people who know me consider me to be a good person, charitable, and even altruistic at times. Funny that, a person with no god or absolute morality can still manage to behave as a civilized human being.
Those people don't want to be in public they want their own private life and leave me alone, you should respect that, he doesn't want to be famous and he doesn't want money. Your example with the doctor is apples and oranges example. Doctors are not stigmatized from the side of science, unlike people who have unusual abilities are, because their abilities do not play by the rules that science has and provides.
See my post 493.
Tell that to the wild west history. If there was no fictional concepts like law, there wouldn't be any humans left.
Yeah, ok- You don't know much about history do you?
Tell you what... Why bother with history?
Let's look at the most secular nations and what their crime rates are:
Most secular (average agnostic or atheist 15% or higher... Some were over the majority- higher than 50%)-
-Austria
-Belgium
-Czech
-France
-Germany
-Hungary
-Netherlands
United States is 79% Christian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Ruh Roh, we have a statistical problem here...
Most of the more secular nations have a lower homicide rate than the United States, which is vast majority Christian!
How do you KNOW what those people want? Are YOU psychic? Who is this "he" you speak of? I don't think you understood my analogy with the doctors at all. When you go see a doctor for being sick. Your doctor may prescribe for you a medicine. His hypothesis based on observation of other patients with similar symptoms is that you will have a similar response to the medication that other patients of similar symptom and medical background have had. Occasionally, this little experiment will fail and you will not have the expected response to the medication and they will have to change medications. In this case you have been experimented on so therefore you are a lab rat. The intentions of the doctor may not be the same as investigative scientists in a lab but the procedure and methods are the same.