How Do Atheist Deal With Death?

[Vigile]

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A claim that witnesses saw an extraordinary event is hearsay and thus less than ordinary evidence. It's as if we are debating a child.

[Guest amazed]

 

Have you read the other side that shows the gospels are not fables and are in fact reliable historical reports?

 

 

Historically reliable? Yeah that bit in the gospels about Jesus being from Nazareth - a place that didn't even exist when Jesus lived. Oh yeah, that's historically reliable.

 

The entire Bible is so full of made up crap, it's not even funny.

Have you seriously looked at the historical evidence for Christ? If i'm not mistaken there are a number of atheist scholars who believe Christ existed.

 

Is your view of the Bible based on your study of it or is this just your opinion? I know countless scholars who study this book and come to different conclusions that you have. Secondly, who made up all the stuff you don't like in the Bible?

[oddbird1963]

This guy is starting to sound more and more like LNC! I think it is either LNC, or another Habermas drone.

[bdp]

I know countless scholars who study this book and come to different conclusions that you have.

 

Right back at ya.

[bdp]

This guy is starting to sound more and more like LNC! I think it is either LNC, or another Habermas drone.

 

I had that same 'Habermas drone' thought.

[Vigile]

 

Have you seriously looked at the historical evidence for Christ? If i'm not mistaken there are a number of atheist scholars who believe Christ existed.

 

Is your view of the Bible based on your study of it or is this just your opinion? I know countless scholars who study this book and come to different conclusions that you have. Secondly, who made up all the stuff you don't like in the Bible?

 

Don't move the goal posts. Did he exist? Maybe. Evidence is unclear. Was he resurrected? Not bloody likely. The evidence falls, WAAAAAY short.

[bdp]

Scholars may believe that a 'Jesus' existed, but a Christ..?

[Japedo]

 

Actually if you look carefully at what these other religions taught and said you find they are not saying the samethings as Christianity. Secondly, morst these religions actually come after Christianity. This stuff sounds like the movie Zietgeist which has been soundly refuted by scholars.

 

Have you studied Krishna,Mithra,or Adonis in depth and demonstrate that the authors of the New Testament did indeed borrow from these religions? If so, can you name the sources you have that have done this?

 

 

OMFG!!! The Romans/ Greeks incorporated all of their pagan holidays and just renamed them Xtians ones, that is an Indisputable FACT. Winter Solstice was the roman holiday for the Birth of the Sun, the days started getting longer. You still worship the birth of the sun/son. ( Jeremiah 10:1-4 Go read about Xmas trees) Ishtar/ Easter is a holiday that celebrates fertility. (eggs and rabbits and you can also see why Ham is the favored dish) Look for yourself.

 

I want examples of what pagan religions taught that Christianity didn't mirror. Specific Examples.

 

Listen here Amazed, You're the one making the claims. I've spent years looking for "Truth" I was on my own mission to find God, It's not my fault that the facts disagreed with my (at the time) beliefs. If the facts aren't wrong, it must be one's beliefs right?

 

Look in your own "Bible" specifically in the Torah part of your bible. The Mizvots (commandments) (all 613 of them, not just the 10 you acknowledge)

will clearly tell you of the other 'gods' and other gods to stay away from. Ask yourself why Jews ( you know the original writers of the first part of your bible) don't follow Christ.

[Guest amazed]

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A claim that witnesses saw an extraordinary event is hearsay and thus less than ordinary evidence. It's as if we are debating a child.

Lets apply this method to other areas of knowledge. The big bang is the best theory of the origin of the universe. Who saw it happen? Who was there to witness it? Or take the origin of life. Who was there to observe it? Both of these are extraordinary claims and yet we have no eyewitnesses. This must mean they did not happen.

[Tabula Rasa]

Amazed, here's my take on things. I do hope that there is some sort of afterlife, but I'm trying to come to terms with the idea that when I die that's it.

 

As for dealing with the death of a loved one, it'll be hard and I'll mourn and miss them, but this sort of thing happens even in life.

Those of us who were kids before the internet and cellphones came along, can remember when a friend moved away, chances are we might never see them again. Sure you could get their address and phone number from where they're moving to,but even with writing letters and telephoning, a lot of the time eventually the phone calls and letters would stop. Our old friend might forget us because of their new lives. We'd be sad because we'd probably never hear from them again,but we got past it , and went on with our lives.

[Japedo]

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A claim that witnesses saw an extraordinary event is hearsay and thus less than ordinary evidence. It's as if we are debating a child.

Lets apply this method to other areas of knowledge. The big bang is the best theory of the origin of the universe. Who saw it happen? Who was there to witness it? Or take the origin of life. Who was there to observe it? Both of these are extraordinary claims and yet we have no eyewitnesses. This must mean they did not happen.

 

 

You do know what Theory means right?

 

 

the⋅o⋅ry

  /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA

Use theory in a Sentence

See web results for theory

See images of theory

–noun, plural -ries.

1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.

4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.

5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.

6. contemplation or speculation.

7. guess or conjecture.

[bdp]

'amazed' you have nothing new, we've very recently been all through this same stuff with another Xtian here, and I have no desire to slog through it all again for your benefit. I'm out. Everyone else, have at him.

 

but, amazed, I think you were very disingenuous when you first showed up, you didn't want to 'understand' us you just wanted to throw out your crap.

[Guest amazed]

 

Actually if you look carefully at what these other religions taught and said you find they are not saying the samethings as Christianity. Secondly, morst these religions actually come after Christianity. This stuff sounds like the movie Zietgeist which has been soundly refuted by scholars.

 

Have you studied Krishna,Mithra,or Adonis in depth and demonstrate that the authors of the New Testament did indeed borrow from these religions? If so, can you name the sources you have that have done this?

 

 

OMFG!!! The Romans/ Greeks incorporated all of their pagan holidays and just renamed them Xtians ones, that is an Indisputable FACT. Winter Solstice was the roman holiday for the Birth of the Sun, the days started getting longer. You still worship the birth of the sun/son. ( Jeremiah 10:1-4 Go read about Xmas trees) Ishtar/ Easter is a holiday that celebrates fertility. (eggs and rabbits and you can also see why Ham is the favored dish) Look for yourself.

Can you give me a couple of direct quotes from these mystery religions that you think Christianity copied from?

 

I want examples of what pagan religions taught that Christianity didn't mirror. Specific Examples.

 

Listen here Amazed, You're the one making the claims. I've spent years looking for "Truth" I was on my own mission to find God, It's not my fault that the facts disagreed with my (at the time) beliefs. If the facts aren't wrong, it must be one's beliefs right?

Your the one making the claim that Christianity copied from these relgions not me. You bear the burden of proof not me on this one. Secondly, you must demonstrate that the authors of the NT did indeed know about these religions and borrowed from them. The movie Zietgeist made assertions that were not backed up.

 

Look in your own "Bible" specifically in the Torah part of your bible. The Mizvots (commandments) (all 613 of them, not just the 10 you acknowledge)

will clearly tell you of the other 'gods' and other gods to stay away from. Ask yourself why Jews ( you know the original writers of the first part of your bible) don't follow Christ.

It is true the OT does mention these other false gods and to stay from them. There are many Jews who do not follow Christ and have their reasons. This is true of non Jews also. Keep in mind though that there were many Jews and leaders during the time of Christ did follow him.

[Vigile]

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A claim that witnesses saw an extraordinary event is hearsay and thus less than ordinary evidence. It's as if we are debating a child.

Lets apply this method to other areas of knowledge. The big bang is the best theory of the origin of the universe. Who saw it happen? Who was there to witness it? Or take the origin of life. Who was there to observe it? Both of these are extraordinary claims and yet we have no eyewitnesses. This must mean they did not happen.

 

Yes, let's do that. As I understand it, the big bang is a mathematical reality. Eyewitnesses are not the only type of evidence available. In fact, they are one of the most unreliable sources of evidence.

[Guest amazed]

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A claim that witnesses saw an extraordinary event is hearsay and thus less than ordinary evidence. It's as if we are debating a child.

Lets apply this method to other areas of knowledge. The big bang is the best theory of the origin of the universe. Who saw it happen? Who was there to witness it? Or take the origin of life. Who was there to observe it? Both of these are extraordinary claims and yet we have no eyewitnesses. This must mean they did not happen.

 

 

You do know what Theory means right?

 

 

the⋅o⋅ry

  /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA

Use theory in a Sentence

See web results for theory

See images of theory

–noun, plural -ries.

1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.

2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.

4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.

5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.

6. contemplation or speculation.

7. guess or conjecture.

You made the eyewitness test the main test to see if a claim is true or not. I merely demonstated how absurd this can be. The big bang and the origin of life theories are extraordinary claims that have no eyewitnesses to these events.

[Vigile]

Dude, all you are demonstrating is your lack of education.

[Shyone]

What do you think of near death expierences where those who have died for a time and are able to recount events miles away?

 

Have you ever read the New Testament and the evidence it offers for the resurrection?

Near death experiences with curious coincidences have not been validated, and in fact are not necessarily more than imagination. Right now, do you have any idea what your friends and loved ones are doing? Actual attempts to document such things as OOB experiences have failed.

 

Have I ever read the New Testament? Jesus H. Fucking Christ, do you know where you are? This is Ex-Christian.net. And as for evidence, the entire Roman Senate saw Caesar Augustus ascend bodily into heaven. I don't believe that either, but given the caliber of the witnesses and the documentation (which is concurrent rather than belated), I'm sure you do.

 

The "evidence" is, in many cases contradictory, and attempts to create a patchwork to explain the contradictions 1) satisfies those who will believe no matter what and 2) is proof that apologists are desparate liars who will ignore the obvious to create unrealistic and fanciful explanations for the discrepancies.

 

Maybe you would like to take the Resurrection Challenge.

 

Here is one man's attempt to harmonize the gospels.

 

My take, like one of the commenters, is "How is this for a contradiction: dead people don’t come back to life."

[Kyle]

Very interesting thread, but I want to reply to the OP.

 

Since becoming an atheist, I've lost my granmother who was very close to me. I was able to handle her death much better than I did when I lost my grandfather. Without the false hope of some reunion in the sky, I was able to truly grieve my loss and remember her as she would have wanted to be remembered. I have been able to appreciate the life she lived and the things she taught me without the false yearning to see her again.

 

As said earlier, the cold hard truth beats the fairy tale. My coping skills are much better since I broke free of the xian bondage.

[Guest amazed]

You made a number of assertions here claiming these accounts were emblished. Can you show from the texts this was indeed the case? What evidence do you have to back these assertions up?

Because the stories differ between the Gospels. The older Gospels have less details, while the newer ones have more details, which is indicative of a behavior of embellishment.

 

In one story the travelers with Paul hear a voice, but do not see the light. In the other story, they all see the light, but don't hear any voice. (If I recall correctly)

 

Different stories, with different embellishments to increase the tone. It's all manufactured to impress the audience.

Actually the differences in the gospel accounts are an advantage. Take the 9-11 terrorist attacks. Do all the accounts that were recorded the identical? Does it mean that they are not mean they are not true accounts? Of course not. Each author of the gospels share in many core events and have some differences. This does not mean these are embellished accounts. The gospels were written to persuade people to repent of their sins and put their faith in Christ for eternal. This was not unusual in ancient works.

[Guest amazed]

What do you think of near death expierences where those who have died for a time and are able to recount events miles away?

 

Have you ever read the New Testament and the evidence it offers for the resurrection?

Near death experiences with curious coincidences have not been validated, and in fact are not necessarily more than imagination. Right now, do you have any idea what your friends and loved ones are doing? Actual attempts to document such things as OOB experiences have failed.

 

Have I ever read the New Testament? Jesus H. Fucking Christ, do you know where you are? This is Ex-Christian.net. And as for evidence, the entire Roman Senate saw Caesar Augustus ascend bodily into heaven. I don't believe that either, but given the caliber of the witnesses and the documentation (which is concurrent rather than belated), I'm sure you do.

 

The "evidence" is, in many cases contradictory, and attempts to create a patchwork to explain the contradictions 1) satisfies those who will believe no matter what and 2) is proof that apologists are desparate liars who will ignore the obvious to create unrealistic and fanciful explanations for the discrepancies.

 

Maybe you would like to take the Resurrection Challenge.

 

Here is one man's attempt to harmonize the gospels.

 

My take, like one of the commenters, is "How is this for a contradiction: dead people don’t come back to life."

I don't assume that ex-christians have read or studied the NT much. Many in the church don't even today.

 

What evidence in the gospel accounts is contradictory?

[Vigile]

We are laughing at you, not with you. That's probably rude, but when you keep on making these ridiculous claims and using such funky reasoning...

[Midnight-mindwanderings]

Its hard to have a discussion with you because you do not accept our answers. You are making absolutely no effort to see things from our perspective. We have seen things from your perspective, both on death and towards atheists but you are refusing to change your preconcieved notions on the way atheists are or think.

 

You asked me why thinking about death and the afterlife led to my deconversion. Its the problem of hell. I was taught, with biblical support, that the majority of people, including the majority of Christians, were going to hell. Even if I could have felt secure as one of the saved, I could never be happy about it because anyone being eternally tortured made me incredibly depressed. I loved other cultures and religions and I couldn't understand how a loving god could condemn them for being different. Thus there could be no heaven for me, because there could be no peace or happiness with the knowledge of eternal suffering for others. The ideas of heaven and hell are contradictory to logic. The worst person in the world I would forgive before condemning them to hell, does that mean I have more empathy and compassion than god? With this philosophy there was no where to go. To save myself seemed selfish, to willfully go to hell seemed insane, but in the end it doesn't matter because god can do whatever he wants and I have no way of knowing what that is.

 

How can you be sure that the hijackers of 9/11 are not in heaven? They acted with more faith and conviction in their religion that serves the same god as you than any Christian has for centuries. I think they are abominable, and I think the religions of Abraham are abominable because this is where they lead when followed completely. You might think those involved with the Inquisition were not Real Christians, but they had biblical support for what they did. To save a few souls from eternal hell meant it was worth it to torture and kill so many people. Their lives meant nothing because only saving a soul for the afterlife mattered. It makes a twisted amount of sense if you are taking the bible literally.

 

Many religions have different ideas about the afterlife that make more sense and offer more hope. The eastern idea of re-incarnation and enlightenment for example. I don't necessarily believe in it or live my life by it, but if there is an afterlife, I imagine it resembles their idea more closely than yours.

[Vigile]

 

I don't assume that ex-christians have read or studied the NT much. Many in the church don't even today.

 

Thus begging the question...

 

Care to guess what it is?

 

Ok, I'll help you out. Those who pay the most attention often end up here not in a pew.

[Guest amazed]

Have you seriously looked at the historical evidence for Christ?

 

You mean "looked for"? Yes. Extensively.

After your study what makes you think Christ did not exist?

[Japedo]

 

 

Can you give me a couple of direct quotes from these mystery religions that you think Christianity copied from?

 

I did already, I gave you 3 gods who existed long before Christ did. Go open a history book.

 

 

Your the one making the claim that Christianity copied from these relgions not me. You bear the burden of proof not me on this one. Secondly, you must demonstrate that the authors of the NT did indeed know about these religions and borrowed from them. The movie Zietgeist made assertions that were not backed up.

 

It's clear you're not reading anything I posted. I specifically named the Egyptian god Horus, and listed things he did long before Christ came along.

 

 

It is true the OT does mention these other false gods and to stay from them. There are many Jews who do not follow Christ and have their reasons. This is true of non Jews also. Keep in mind though that there were many Jews and leaders during the time of Christ did follow him.

 

You willfully stay ignorant, it's not my fault. The information is there, all you have to do is get off your all knowing lazy ass and look. No Jews did not follow Christ, not unless they were Torah breakers. To Follow Christ would be a direct SIN to entertain and follow other gods. Christ himself broke Torah laws, The Jewish Prophecy was nothing to do about following a godman, that's a pagan concept. The Jewish Prophecy is about a great man, like Moses, nothing Godlike, a normal human being. But of course you'd know this if you knew jack about the original Jewish Prophecy, which is why Jews will never follow Christ. He claims to be god, which goes against the Law that god said would endure even if time stopped.