Atheists/Agnostics & Death

[Deidre32]

I am sorry for your loss. No matter faith or no faith losing a loved one or friend is sorrowful for all.

Before dialoging on your question can you explain your Christian 'experience.' You said 'pious one.' Can you expand on that a bit. I ask because you obviously are familiar with Christianity and not just learning about it.

Sure.

I was raised in a Christian home, and I simply never questioned the beliefs that were being taught to me. There was a comfort that I felt, despite seeing the fear that religion can often instill in a person. Personally, I enjoyed prayer life very much, and felt a deep connection to 'god.' But, as I started to have doubts about heaven/hell, and parts of the Bible that run in circles, and contradict themselves, I found myself not being able to justify what it was I was finding comfort in. Four years ago, I eventually left Christianity, but my deconversion wasn't a simple over night process. I sometimes hope that a god exists, but deep down, there is no evidence to really support the existence of one. To simply 'feel' that a god might exist, isn't enough anymore for me to pray and go to church. So, I feel comfortable with an atheistic/agnostic view, at this point.

There is much more to the story/my journey than that, but at the risk of putting everyone to sleep....

 

[SkyWriting]

Some might, but it is reason that offers a way out.

Oh sure. That's why "He always listens to reason!" is such a common phrase.
No, the scientific method is all about ignoring your own bias and exposing your
reasoning to other to pick apart. That's the entire point of scientific publishing.
For others to ignore your conclusions and test your data with their own reasoning.

 

[SkyWriting]

I sometimes hope that a god exists, but deep down, there is no evidence to really support the existence of one.

That's why it's called faith. Else it would just be some fact on a sheet of paper.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Oh sure. That's why "He always listens to reason!" is such a common phrase.

It is a way out, even if sometimes people don't listen to reason. The point is: sometimes they do.

That is why science exists at all. If scientists were to ignore the results of experiments and go with any biases they might have, it would never advance. Reason is essential to science.

Science doesn't offer an alternative to reason. It is reason as applied to the study of the natural universe, since reason is what is required to examine the natural world and to draw sound conclusions.

Experimentation does not provide something in addition to reason, it is what reason requires of scientific investigation.

I'm not suggesting that biases are impossible. Of course people may have them. However, if biases were all that people had, there would be no science. It is only because scientists at least try to be rationally virtuous that science can advance.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Colter]

Before space and time God brought into being space and time, establishing a magnificent existence for humans in an awesome environment, while revealing the consequences of choosing "man's understanding."

Man's understanding is incapable of comprehending God. He, and He alone, revealed all that there is to know, Spiritually. The single revelation, the single understanding, was synonymous with the single creation.

God revealed; man's interpretation is pointless. There is no "spiritual and historic evolution of one particular vein" that is not revealed between Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 22:21. One and only one vein is revealed, that by the Holy Spirit. There is nothing external to that one revelation. It is continuous, unchanging, forever. It is not subject to monitoring, auditing, or editing by man. The Holy Spirit has always been. He IS, without man's evaluation.

Man can bounce around all over the place, only to discover in the end that everything he needed to know, Spiritually, had been presented instantaneously, bursting forth from God's eternal plan, formed before the creation, and right there on the pages of THE Book.

That is your philosophy about God, his creation and book worship. What book was there before Moses? Abraham and his family worshiped other Gods beyond the rivers before his conversion to worshiping El Elyon. The Books of Judaism date to about 600 +/- BC, the period of the Babylonian captivity when the were edited and redacted by the priestly elite. The Bible itself evolves from beginning to end. For the open minded, more will be revealed.

I do not share your dim view of man, my Father is a God, I am a child of God. I am ennobled by this truth which was central to the original Gospel of Jesus. God can be known and loved.

Cultic church indoctrination reduces man to a hopeless idiot for purposes of control.

 

[Colter]

Sure.

I was raised in a Christian home, and I simply never questioned the beliefs that were being taught to me. There was a comfort that I felt, despite seeing the fear that religion can often instill in a person. Personally, I enjoyed prayer life very much, and felt a deep connection to 'god.' But, as I started to have doubts about heaven/hell, and parts of the Bible that run in circles, and contradict themselves, I found myself not being able to justify what it was I was finding comfort in. Four years ago, I eventually left Christianity, but my deconversion wasn't a simple over night process. I sometimes hope that a god exists, but deep down, there is no evidence to really support the existence of one. To simply 'feel' that a god might exist, isn't enough anymore for me to pray and go to church. So, I feel comfortable with an atheistic/agnostic view, at this point.

There is much more to the story/my journey than that, but at the risk of putting everyone to sleep....

Thanks for sharing.


If I may make an observation. You didn't originally find comfort in the Bible to begin with, that's not where you first found the real God. You found a genuine and sincere comfort/faith/trust in the indwelling spirit of the personal God of creation. You had the kind of trust that a child has in a parent. You really did have a deep connection with the Living God.

But, that connection came to be at odds with the inconsistent teachings of the religious institution of your upbringing. You heard things taught by others as well as in the Bible book collection that just did not sound right, things that you intuitively knew were wrong. So that realization lead you to doubt the sincere relationship that you already had.

The problem wasn't you or your growing relationship with God.

As a child they dragged me kicking and screaming to a rather moderate Methodist Church. I recall my violent internal aversion to the goofy explanations and concepts they tried to convey. I was a critical thinker. While other kids were content making paper animal cutouts to put on the ark, I was like "what the $*&3@!!! "A freaking 500+ year old man with two of every living thing on earth on a boat for a year while God drown the whole word because HE was disappointed in HIS creation!?!?!." "Do you people expect me to believe that garbage!"

Well I didn't, I didn't then, I don't now and I never will because it's obviously not true. There are many things in the Bible that are not true, but because they are in the Bible people have been shamed into believing ridiculous things by the association of the stuff that is true in the bible books.

 

[Winken]

If I may make an observation. You didn't originally find comfort in the Bible to begin with, that's not where you first found the real God. You found a genuine and sincere comfort/faith/trust in the indwelling spirit of the personal God of creation. You had the kind of trust that a child has in a parent. You really did have a deep connection with the Living God.

But, that connection came to be at odds with the inconsistent teachings of the religious institution of your upbringing. You heard things taught by others as well as in the Bible book collection that just did not sound right, things that you intuitively knew were wrong. So that realization lead you to doubt the sincere relationship that you already had.

---inconsistent teachings......... based upon _________?
---things that just did not sound right....... compared to _________?
---intuitively knew were wrong........ based upon _________?

And your solution, Coulter, is for her to continue to question God, to reject the Body of Christ because of the short-comings of man, along with rejection of the Bible since some of it didn't make sense (at least in your judgment).

That is the essence of man defining God rather than the other way around. That is the essence of the deception of Urantia, a book with no author, no insights other than those that would be offered by a psychic or a psychiatrist. Those who lay on the couch finally leave it, to walk in newness of mind over matter.

Questioning God, coming up with one's own insight and watering it, is fruitless, having been planted and nourished by questioning and blaming others, rather than yielding life-long to that indwelling Spirit of the personal God.

Faith, Belief, Hope, Trust, are constants. Each is consistent, nonstop; continuous calm, confident assurance, without interruption or fading. "Even the Faith comes from Him."

 

[KCfromNC]

Isaiah was persecuted- pawed in half for writing what he put down in scripture, foretelling the Messiah seven centuries before his coming.

It's easy to dismiss things when you leave out important details.

So any religion which has some members which have been persecuted must be true? Looks like you'll have to convert to, well, pretty much all of them.

I don't see that as a particularly useful outcome.

 

[Colter]

---inconsistent teachings......... based upon _________?
---things that just did not sound right....... compared to _________?
---intuitively knew were wrong........ based upon _________?

And your solution, Coulter, is for her to continue to question God, to reject the Body of Christ because of the short-comings of man, along with rejection of the Bible since some of it didn't make sense (at least in your judgment).

That is the essence of man defining God rather than the other way around. That is the essence of the deception of Urantia, a book with no author, no insights other than those that would be offered by a psychic or a psychiatrist. Those who lay on the couch finally leave it, to walk in newness of mind over matter.

Questioning God, coming up with one's own insight and watering it, is fruitless, having been planted and nourished by questioning and blaming others, rather than yielding life-long to that indwelling Spirit of the personal God.

Faith, Belief, Hope, Trust, are constants. Each is consistent, nonstop; continous calm, confident assurance, without interruption or fading. "Even the Faith comes from Him."

* based upon the inconsistencies of the Bible

* compared with common sense, the same way we know Star Wars is just a movie

* intuition

She wasn't questioning God, she had begun to know him. She was questioning things said about God, his ways, his creation. She was doing better without the Bible, without the baggage of religious opinion and speculation.

Anyone searching for God has already found God.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

So any religion which has some members which have been persecuted must be true? Looks like you'll have to convert to, well, pretty much all of them.

I don't see that as a particularly useful outcome.

I couldn't imagine a person who'd risk getting sawed in half would do so based on things he wasn't thoroughly convinced of. The same thing happened with almost all the apostles as well, they were persecuted. In fact, they had gone from scared men to being virtually fearless because they saw something which you believe didn't happen.

This is very potent evidence, as it was evidence which brought people to believe them in the first place. It's easy to wave it away thousands of years later- that's really the only reason atheists get by with trivializing everything. The buffer of time.

 

[SkyWriting]

I'm not suggesting that biases are impossible. Of course people may have them. However, if biases were all that people had, there would be no science.

Well bias is all an individuaL has. They only know what they themselves, know.
And the scientific method is the "fairest" method we have come up with to combat it.
As long as I can recreate your observations, I can dispute them.

 

[KCfromNC]

I couldn't imagine a person who'd risk getting sawed in half would do so based on things he wasn't thoroughly convinced of.The same thing happened with almost all the apostles as well, they were persecuted. In fact, they had gone from scared men to being virtually fearless because they saw something which you believe didn't happen.

This is very potent evidence, as it was evidence which brought people to believe them in the first place.

Sounds like you are willing to convert to any religion I can find that has members suffer persecution or death due to their beliefs. I'll get a list together.

It's easy to wave it away thousands of years later- that's really the only reason atheists get by with trivializing everything. The buffer of time.

The cool thing is I can find this sort of stuff happening much more recently. It is why you are taking your own advice and have already converted to be both followers of the LDS church and Branch Davidian teachings. After all, you've argued that their sincere belief in the face of persecution is very potent evidence for their beliefs. I trust you'll convert at once.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

Sounds like you are willing to convert to any religion I can find that has members suffer persecution or death due to their beliefs. I'll get a list together.



The cool thing is I can find this sort of stuff happening much more recently. It is why you are taking your own advice and have already converted to be both followers of the LDS church and Branch Davidian teachings. After all, you've argued that their sincere belief in the face of persecution is very potent evidence for their beliefs. I trust you'll convert at once.

They wrote the Bible and faced deadly persecution. Paul was a persecutor of Christians, became a Christian, and then persecuted by the Jews.
When Christ was crucified, thousands of believers were baptized. Martyrs were routinely imprisoned or even fed to lions.

Yet, Christianity took over without raising a single sword just as Christ said it would.

Sorry, but your argument doesn't stand.

 

[Deidre32]

I appreciate all of your thoughts and support here. Let me say though, that many atheists/agnostics were once theists. It's not like we missed a class or something or a week's worth of school and we have fallen behind on the lessons. I'm well aware of what Christianity teaches, and it wasn't a choice on a conscious to leave it, like many people might think. It took me a few years to accept that I just simply didn't believe what I once did. This isn't to say that I'm not open to the possibility of a deity existing, but it's just not what I once believed. It's not a crisis of faith, or anything like that. It can be somewhat insulting, although I know it's not intentional, when some theists insinuate that I must not have understood Christianity or the Bible, or I didn't give myself enough to the Lord. Just because I don't believe as some of you here do, doesn't make me less than you. I just thought it was necessary to express that, at this point.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Sure.

I was raised in a Christian home, and I simply never questioned the beliefs that were being taught to me. There was a comfort that I felt, despite seeing the fear that religion can often instill in a person. Personally, I enjoyed prayer life very much, and felt a deep connection to 'god.' But, as I started to have doubts about heaven/hell, and parts of the Bible that run in circles, and contradict themselves, I found myself not being able to justify what it was I was finding comfort in. Four years ago, I eventually left Christianity, but my deconversion wasn't a simple over night process. I sometimes hope that a god exists, but deep down, there is no evidence to really support the existence of one. To simply 'feel' that a god might exist, isn't enough anymore for me to pray and go to church. So, I feel comfortable with an atheistic/agnostic view, at this point.

There is much more to the story/my journey than that, but at the risk of putting everyone to sleep....

Deidre,

One thing that may help in your ongoing evaluation of religion and/or Christian faith is to question (and explore) the concepts that typically make up the main stream of secular political thought and epistemology.

For instance, the concept of "evidence" itself gets bandied about with very little reflection as to just what constitutes its ontology as an entity of thought, or as to how it really is used, applied, or understood, or as to some of the intricacies underlying the whole concept itself. This all gets ignored for pragmatic reasons, because practitioners often conclude too early that...well, heck, if something seems to "work" why look at anything more deeply. But, I don't think this should be the case.

Just something to think about in your ongoing journey.

2PhiloVoid

 

[El' LeJeune]

Sure.

I was raised in a Christian home, and I simply never questioned the beliefs that were being taught to me. There was a comfort that I felt, despite seeing the fear that religion can often instill in a person. Personally, I enjoyed prayer life very much, and felt a deep connection to 'god.' But, as I started to have doubts about heaven/hell, and parts of the Bible that run in circles, and contradict themselves, I found myself not being able to justify what it was I was finding comfort in. Four years ago, I eventually left Christianity, but my deconversion wasn't a simple over night process. I sometimes hope that a god exists, but deep down, there is no evidence to really support the existence of one. To simply 'feel' that a god might exist, isn't enough anymore for me to pray and go to church. So, I feel comfortable with an atheistic/agnostic view, at this point.

There is much more to the story/my journey than that, but at the risk of putting everyone to sleep....

First, I want to say that I am truly and sincerely sorry for the loss of your friend. I pray that Jesus Christ comforts you and your friend's family during this time. If there is anything I can do, or if you ever need someone to talk to please feel free to message me.

The question you asked is what would I say to an atheist about God and the afterlife. My response would be simple: Consider the fact that both exist. Whether we choose to believe it or not there is, in fact, a Creator out there who truly loves us and has built a home for us in heaven with Him. I have read some previous comments that say "there is no real proof of the existence of God or the afterife" My response to that is... BULL! Anyone who is truly intellectually honest with him or herself cannot deny the mountain of evidence in support of the existence of a creator. Even those such as Dawkins, who are antagonistic towards religion, will openly admit that evidence exists to indicate an intelligent creator behind the scenes. Einstein said that anyone who is intellectually honest with himself cannot deny the existence of a creative intelligence driving the universe.

My second thought relates to the existence of the afterlife. I am a relatively smart person. For the life of me I cannot possibly concede to the idea that God is separate from an afterlife. Is it POSSIBLE that God created us than washed his hands of us.... maybe. Is it likely or even plausible? NO. Frankly, what would be the point? I cannot imagine a creative intelligence that would create the vast intricasies of the universe as some sort of hoax or science experiment. The delicate intricasies of the universe around us point to a creator who has love for his creation. The human body (or any animal body for that matter) is a marvel of engineering. It is the closest thing to perfection that is known to exist. A creator would not to go these lengths unless he cared for his creation.

The second thing that convinces me of the afterlife are the over abundance of evidence in support of it. It is a fool who looks at the millions of yearly eyewitness accounts regarding afterlife and simply dismisses it. The fact that die hard atheists are revived from death telling doctors and family members about their time in heaven/ hell speaks volumes. When a Buddhist, Muslim, or Jewish person dies and comes back to life explaining how they met Jesus in the afterlife, that speaks volumes. Many try to dismiss this as hallucinations, but that idea has been discredited for years.

The most compelling aspect of Near Death Experiences are the ability of the deceased to be able to accurate describe what went on in other parts of the hospital and beyond with accurate and specific detail. There are literally millions of accounts of the newly revived deceased being able to accurate relate to a friend, doctor, or family member something that was done or said in other wings of the hospital.

The third major concept that comes to mind when I consider the existence and love of God is Jesus Christ. You have said that you are a former Christian, so I am sure that you are familiar with the New Testament writings. I won't preach to you about something you already know, but I will say this... the one that truly convinces me of the love of God for his creation is the sacrifice of Christ on our behalf. The fact that God came down to us, reached down to us instead of asking us to reach up to him, gave us free gift of salvation instead of asking us to try to earn it..... that is mind blowing to me. I think the life of Christ is the perfect example of God's love.

 

[redleghunter]

Sure.

I was raised in a Christian home, and I simply never questioned the beliefs that were being taught to me. There was a comfort that I felt, despite seeing the fear that religion can often instill in a person. Personally, I enjoyed prayer life very much, and felt a deep connection to 'god.' But, as I started to have doubts about heaven/hell, and parts of the Bible that run in circles, and contradict themselves, I found myself not being able to justify what it was I was finding comfort in. Four years ago, I eventually left Christianity, but my deconversion wasn't a simple over night process. I sometimes hope that a god exists, but deep down, there is no evidence to really support the existence of one. To simply 'feel' that a god might exist, isn't enough anymore for me to pray and go to church. So, I feel comfortable with an atheistic/agnostic view, at this point.

There is much more to the story/my journey than that, but at the risk of putting everyone to sleep....

Thank you sharing what is no doubt some of your more personal experiences. My walk led me to examine the various manuscript evidence for the NT and compare it to secular manuscript evidence of the same time period. That was for my brain What I found out was interesting. Out of all of antiquity in the Western World (Roman Empire included) the NT books had the earliest and most numerous extant manuscipt evidence. Again that was for my brain, my intellect. But no matter how much one studies the Bible and looks at the scholarship, if there is not that Divine 'spark' which helps your heart understand the message, just reading it and studying it becomes an exercise in, well, just scholarship.

If you are interested in exploring the reliability of the manuscript evidence let me know. The 'spark' part is in God's Divine Providence.

 

[Hawkins]

I've lost a friend recently who was an atheist. As he would put it, a 'dogmatic' atheist.' I consider myself to have an atheistic view, but also agnostic. I was once a Christian, a very pious one. I keep wondering about an after life, since his passing. If there is one, and if there is...what might a religious person tell an atheist in such a case?

Just thinking out loud, I guess.

The math is rather simple. Everyone will have to have a religion.

Does after life exist?

In addressing the above question, there are 2 possibilities. Both require faith to believe.

1) No, nothing serious would happen
2) Yes, something serious would happen. You thus need to responsibly seek out what would happen

If you believe 1) is the case, your religion is that you believe with faith that "nothing serious would happen". That remains your religion of faith but possibly without your own awareness.

If you believe 2) is the case, it branches out into the various religions.

Now here you go;

A religion acts as a reliable vessel for an important message (truth) to pass along the line of humanity. The method employed to pass such a message is called human witnessing. This is the most efficient way for a truth to be conveyed among humans as long as God has a strong reason not to show up to humans in majority. There's no other way round.

1. Not all religions have a strong reason for their gods to hide behind. If a god is much more superior than humans and he cares about humans he should show up publicly to guide humans.

The strong reason for the Christian God to hide behind is that all humans are bound to a covenant which everyone requires faith in order to be saved. God shows up to everyone simultaneously means no one can be saved.

On the other hand, if God doesn't show up to anyone, then no humans can get to know who God is. No humans can know what are God's requirements set forth for humans to follow.

The only way which works for a hiding God to make Himself known to humans, to make His requirements known to humans is to show Himself up to a small group of direct witnesses (explicitly His prophets and chosen witnesses), and for them to write about Him and what He wants then for others (humans in majority) to believe or not.

There's no other way round for such a truth to be conveyed.

2. Now which God can explicitly name this method of conveying truth?

Multiple accounts of witnessing, witnesses, prophets being explicit called God's witnesses, emphasizing on no false witnessing allowed, these are all unique characteristics of Christianity.

No other gods can be true in this perspective.

Moreover, no witnessing can be made more valid than those who martyred themselves for what is said and done. Today we have photos and videos in supporting our witnessing though.

 

[Loudmouth]

The math is rather simple. Everyone will have to have a religion.

Does after life exist?

In addressing the above question, there are 2 possibilities. Both require faith to believe.

1) No, nothing serious would happen
2) Yes, something serious would happen. You thus need to responsibly seek out what would happen

3) There is no evidence that there is an afterlife, therefore there is no reason to believe one exists.

That doesn't require faith.

Just because someone believes in one deity or another does not make disbelief in that deity a religion. Faith involves a positive belief in that deity, not disbelief.

 

[redleghunter]

3) There is no evidence that there is an afterlife, therefore there is no reason to believe one exists.

That doesn't require faith.

Just because someone believes in one deity or another does not make disbelief in that deity a religion. Faith involves a positive belief in that deity, not disbelief.

There is evidence of an after life. Some choose to dismiss the evidence or write it off as a conspiracy theory.

To claim there is not an after life is akin to denying that Homer, Caesar and every historical figure from antiquity is fable.

Do you believe Julius Caesar fought in the Gallic wars? If so why?