Jay Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 I noticed your caveat of, "At this point in my life, I believe I am ready to die for my faith". Does this imply that dying for Jesus is only acceptable when you're an old used up rag doll? I suppose when you're young and have "so much" life left to live, then sacrifice is out of the question?Well, I am 40 now, and I have "lived" a lot more than I had when I was 20. I think that, as time has progressed, my faith has grown. I do not believe I would have been willing to die for my faith when I was 20. But, no, never mind. I don't even want you to answer that, as I am done with my inquest of you. I am satisfied, Jay. You're no hypocrite. You're a fanatic. A religious zealot. Very good. You're the Christian equivalent of the Fundie Muslim. The Muslim is ready to KILL for his faith, and YOU are "ready" to die for yours. (Now that the time is right, at least.) You're two sides of the same coin. You believe that it's noble for a human to sacrifice his or OTHERS' lives for the glory of his/her chosen deity. Wait a minute...I didn't say anything about nobility...all I said is that is where I am in my life. It does not make me any better or any worse than anyone else. But I do know THIS--I don't want to have shit to do with either one of you! Do me a favor and keep your strange beliefs to yourself and away from me and my loved ones. Kay?Sheesh! (I think I prefer the hypocrites! Well, there are certainly plenty out there. There are people in this country who would be willing to die for freedom (and I am definitely NOT referring to the war in Iraq, so don't bring that up). Or maybe some who would die for their families. Or some who would die to save someone in a burning house. I wonder if you cnsider those people nutty as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerise Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 Dying to save someone else is not the same as dying for one's faith (or more precisely their religion). In one case, a life continues. In the other, only death is the result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 Slight difference Jay, those other things are real, not a myth. Some would argue that freedom is an illusion. Regardless, I do not believe my faith to be in a myth. Dying to save someone else is not the same as dying for one's faith (or more precisely their religion). In one case, a life continues. In the other, only death is the result.That may be, if one looks only t the physical world. If it is true, that life continues after the death of the physical body, then you are not correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 Well, I am 40 now, and I have "lived" a lot more than I had when I was 20. I think that, as time has progressed, my faith has grown. I do not believe I would have been willing to die for my faith when I was 20. Funny how things can be so different. I was willing to die for my faith when I was 20, but now when I'm 40, I'm not, since I don't believe at all. Well, there are certainly plenty out there. There are people in this country who would be willing to die for freedom (and I am definitely NOT referring to the war in Iraq, so don't bring that up). Or maybe some who would die for their families. Or some who would die to save someone in a burning house. I wonder if you cnsider those people nutty as well. I read about Atheists dying as martyrs too. The willingness to die for ones belief or ideology is common in the human psyche. And we are easily fooled too. A rational person should weigh the gain and loss when dying for their ideology, since they have to be sure what they believe is worth dying for, and not just a fable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 Funny how things can be so different. I was willing to die for my faith when I was 20, but now when I'm 40, I'm not, since I don't believe at all.Indeed...things do change. Which is why I am so distrustful of personal experience.A rational person should weigh the gain and loss when dying for their ideology, since they have to be sure what they believe is worth dying for, and not just a fable.Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerise Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 That may be, if one looks only t the physical world. If it is true, that life continues after the death of the physical body, then you are not correct. There is nothing "more" then the physical world. "Life after death" is an oxymoron. Death is the end of life, not the beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmatically_challenged Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 Indeed...things do change. Which is why I am so distrustful of personal experience.A rational person should weigh the gain and loss when dying for their ideology, since they have to be sure what they believe is worth dying for, and not just a fable.Indeed. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So what are you trying to say here? That you only trust bible god in liue of your own personal experiences? In reality you are mindlessly trusting in a story from peoples you never met in your life and you can not possibly know if any of them ever existed. Just as you don't know that bible god exists. I see were this might be leading, but it won't work here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedPillAddict Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 There is nothing "more" then the physical world. "Life after death" is an oxymoron. Death is the end of life, not the beginning. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I died over 200 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmatically_challenged Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 I died over 200 years ago. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Saviorforsale, if I pray to you every day will that pay the bounty of you kicking Jays butt? I believe that you are the way and the light in my salvation. hehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 There is nothing "more" then the physical world. "Life after death" is an oxymoron. Death is the end of life, not the beginning.Can you prove that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 Can you prove that? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Cerise probably can't, Jay. Neither can you prove the eternal continuance of consciousness after death. But, after examining all of the evidence, which is the best probability? What seems to make the most sense? Doubt if you'll find a large christian contingency amongst neuroscientists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmatically_challenged Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 Can you prove that? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You are a gutless puss who believes in stories about an afterlife that have ZERO evidence for it. Are we to plan our lives on every claim ever made that have ZERO evidences for them? We will soon run into contradictions that will paralyze us in doing or planning anything if we did that you idiot. To devote our lives to things that are evident and to reject things that have ZERO evidence we will not run into such a problem. That is precisley why..... THE BURDON OF PROOF IS ON YOU! IDIOT! death (dth) KEY NOUN: The act of dying; termination of life. The state of being dead. The cause of dying: Drugs were the death of him. A manner of dying: a heroine's death. often Death A personification of the destroyer of life, usually represented as a skeleton holding a scythe. Bloodshed; murder. Execution. Law Civil death. The termination or extinction of something: the death of imperialism. Life after death is indeed an oxymoron. You morron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmatically_challenged Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 I think our knowledge of brain damage and how it affects a person if enough. Without your brain, who are you? If you got amnesia tomorrow and didn't remember anything about your life, who would you be? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> My uncle got in a motorcycle accident (severe head trauma) and had a personality change. He was a mean bastard afterwards. A totaly different manky than he was before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 If you got amnesia tomorrow and didn't remember anything about your life, who would you be? I'd be myself but with amnesia. Likely my family would try to brainwash me into Christianity again, though. And might succeed, since I wouldn't remember why I left, and they probably wouldn't respect my lack of belief. And I'd probaby catch a Star Trek rerun on TV somewhere and think, "Gee, this is cool. Whoever dreamt this up?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerise Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Can you prove that? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I can prove that death does not equal life the same way I can prove that a circle is not a square. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 I can prove that death does not equal life the same way I can prove that a circle is not a square. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Can you prove that the physical life is all there is? I only ask because you are the one who made the dogmatic statement: There is nothing "more" then the physical world.That is what I was looking for proof for. It would seem to me that some might say they do not believe in such things. But to categorically insist that it does not exist requires a little more.Cerise probably can't, Jay. Neither can you prove the eternal continuance of consciousness after death.Indeed. But I am not the one who made a dogmatic statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vixentrox Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Can you give us proof that Zeus isn't the true god? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerise Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Can you prove that the physical life is all there is? I only ask because you are the one who made the dogmatic statement: As soon as you can give a definition for "spiritual" that isn't completely meaningless, then you can go about "proving" its existence. In the meantime, you might as well go around asking for proof that Gambisblatt or Snorkdoogles don't really exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 As soon as you can give a definition for "spiritual" that isn't completely meaningless, then you can go about "proving" its existence. In the meantime, you might as well go around asking for proof that Gambisblatt or Snorkdoogles don't really exist. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Indeed. Just curious, though...I did not bring up the word "spiritual". All I am asking for is your proof that the physical life you currently life is all there is. I suppose "spiritual" could be included in "anything that is not physical", but I certainly am not limiting you to that one narrow area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerise Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 All I must do is prove that physical life exists (which it does). And as you cannot give a clear concept of any other option other then physical life, it becomes rather pointless to speculate about whether or not it is proven that that's all there is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmatically_challenged Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Jay. Please forgive me my total lack of decency towards you in this thread. My behavior was totaly uncool and you did not in any way deserve my immature attitude. I am a total putze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vixentrox Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 I'm waiting....can you prove Zeus isn't the True god? Even better......how about proving that Allah isn't the True god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Jay - after you prove that Zeus isn't true, go ahead and take a stab at disproving the holy trinity. You know - Atum, Horus, and Ra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 Jay - after you prove that Zeus isn't true, go ahead and take a stab at disproving the holy trinity. You know - Atum, Horus, and Ra. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The thing is... I didn't make any claims about Zeus, Allah, or any other beings. Cerise made an affirmative statement that there is nothing other than what we see. If I would have made such a claim, stated in such a matter-of-fact manner, you all would be insisting that I prove it. I am asking the same of her that most of you would ask of me. For the record, I to not believe in the trinity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 You don't believe in the trinity? You mean the Egyptian, or are you talkin Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Just tryin to pin you down. JW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts