Like what? Just one will suffice.
Any atheists here? Have you come to terms with your new reality?
I believe that in order to have a useful debate with somebody you should present their position in such a way that they would not want to correct it. From there you can discuss why you disagree.
You do the opposite of that every time.
I spend pages trying to correct your wilful distortions of my position and never make any progress on the actual conversation that matters.
So no example of a distortion then? Just more general accusations, kicking dust in the air.
And how hypocritical is that: when have you ever presented my views on postmodernism (or anything else) in terms that I would recognise? All I get is insults, and mockery as above.
Condolences on the passing of your mother. I do not wish to sound insensitive to your loss but must ask:
What function(s) was your mother's soul responsible for during her lifetime versus during her end of life experience?
Where was your mother's soul hiding? Area after area of the brain has yielded up its secrets to the probing of neuroscience, and not a trace of the soul has been found.
Can you definitively prove that:
- your mother's brain, though eaten up with cancer, Alzheimer's etc was not the source of her behaviour during her final hours?
- whatever behaviour your mother experienced during her final hours was taking place separately from her brain?
What if your mother was not dying from Alzheimer's, brain tumor etc but was dying from something else that did not impact her brain and yet her end of life behaviour was nevertheless the same, and she screamed the same words: "I don't want to die" and yelled out other fears shortly before her death?
Would you also conclude that this behaviour was taking place separately from her brain?
dubstepped: "... the thought of losing my life ..."
You need to come to grip with the fact that it's not real. It's just a figure of speech. I know you know that on a conscious level. But do you know it on a subconscious level? You'll never lose your life - no one loses their life. You only lose the life of loved ones that die. Only the living lose lives. Losing something means having the experience of being deprived of it. The dead experience nothing therefore they don't lose anything. Death doesn't harm the dead. It only harms the living - those who lose loved ones in death and those who needlessly worry about their own future death because of the psychological torture of the figurative phrase "losing your life".
Island Man: You need to come to grip with the fact that it's not real. It's just a figure of speech. I know you know that on a conscious level. But do you know it on a subconscious level? You'll never lose your life - no one loses their life. You only lose the life of loved ones that die. Only the living lose lives. Losing something means having the experience of being deprived of it. The dead experience nothing therefore they don't lose anything. Death doesn't harm the dead. It only harms the living - those who lose loved ones in death and those who needlessly worry about their own future death because of the psychological torture of the figurative phrase "losing your life".
I guess technically you are right, in that once dead there is no feeling of loss. However, there might be a sense of great loss before that moment of death, and I was referring to losing this life that I built and love. I will know that I'm leaving it behind. I will know that I'm leaving people behind that care about me and will miss me dearly. I will know that my chance of going on to try new things is over with, well, except that I get to try out death after having lived. I think I get what you're saying on a philosophical level, or maybe just semantics over word usage, but it doesn't make me feel better about those moments leading up to death, particularly if I get to grow old and die and it isn't something sudden. Or maybe I misunderstood or just disagree, but I think I get you.
The dead experience nothing therefore they don't lose anything. Death doesn't harm the dead.
That is what the WT taught us. But it is not biblical.
Rev. 6 - I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Clearly death doesn't mean annihilation of consciousness like the WT teaches. From the above verse, you can deduce that souls have their original identity (mind), have emotion, & memories.
The definition of death isn't non-existence. It means that the soul and body are separated when the body "sleeps" or stops functioning. That is the biblical definition of death.
The greatest hope of atheists, which they have no empirical data to support: is that when they die, their consciousness will stop. It is a vain, unfounded hope.
Unfortunately, they fail to realize that this was never part of the original design. We were created in the image of an eternal God, that we might fellowship with him forever.
Without Jesus, they will experience eternal separation from God, their second greatest wish.... that is until they actually get what they want. But, then it is too late. Eternal, conscious loneliness (outer darkness.) And, that is a best case scenario. Other scriptures suggest much worse, forever.
Can you definitively prove that:
There is the bible, there are millions of NDE and Terminal Lucidity cases that suggest this. And, I have personal experience that leaves no doubt for me that the soul absolutely can function without the body.
Perry: The greatest hope of atheists, which they have no empirical data to support: is that when they die, their consciousness will stop. It is a vain, unfounded hope.
Lol, like there's empirical data supporting your beliefs? I mean, come on Perry, I like you and you seem like a good dude, but you brought up the term "empirical data".
I'm with the poster above in offering my condolences for the death of your mother, but I too wonder what proof you have that the Holy Spirit helped you during conversations, and that consciousness goes on because terminal lucidity exists? I mean, you have to meet the same burden of proof that you want atheists to meet, right? And no, the Bible doesn't count as empirical data.
I understand wanting to have hope, but hope based on unfounded stories is not real hope.
I have come to terms with my lack of belief in personal deities. Technically I don't call myself an ideological atheist, although I may be a functional atheist. I leave some room for the possibility that something I don't know about might exist, which makes me some sort of an agnostic. For sure, I am an apatheist - it makes no difference if deities exist or not.
i have once defined lightheatedly myself as "absentheist" - some people here took exception with that term and called me everything from fool to pathetic to whatnot - but to me it actually defines my point of view: God wasn't found where he was supposed to be, therefore I can only say that he's absent. Could it be because he never existed to begin with? Could it be because he created life but doesn't care for our well-being? Could it be because he is just silent and requires faith and has a plan for you and me? I don't know with 100% certainty, but all evidence available points towards a non-existing deity.
Life and death make a lot more sense once you remove God from the equation. I have made my peace with it.