Studies that say NDEs are not real.

[bippy123]

As a former atheist...

Nothingness was all I was in reality defending. Could not escape that fact.

Again; what is "nothingness"?

Next point... Materialism involves relativistic morality as an absolute. I recall we and others disused this with you before. Do you recall these discussions?

If you do, then what I mentioned may make a bit more sense, if not, let me know...

I do not remember.

Ken

Nothingness is non being. Very simply not existing . It's not a material nothing but a complete nothingness

[bippy123]

""something/somethings have always existed.
Ken""


Ken awesome
You understand a major part of the first cause argument .

[B. W.]

As a former atheist...

Nothingness was all I was in reality defending. Could not escape that fact.

Again; what is "nothingness"?

Next point... Materialism involves relativistic morality as an absolute. I recall we and others disused this with you before. Do you recall these discussions?

If you do, then what I mentioned may make a bit more sense, if not, let me know...

I do not remember.

Ken

Nothingness is non being. Very simply not existing . It's not a material nothing but a complete nothingness

Bippy123 answered this with finesse

As I read your post in response to others, you are certainly defending nothingness as Bippy illustrated no matter what verbal judo you try to use, atheist are defending nothingness.

After one dies, atheist state you go into nothingness. Billions of years later, the sun implodes, and earth goes into nothingness. In this nothingness there is no God, no morals, just nothing that somehow randomly creates more nothingness to happen in some unknown future state of time.

As for the next point:

With this concept comes the atheist debate over morals. Atheist view is that human beings create morals, not God because there is no God, only nothingness. Again morality of atheism is based upon nothingness. One day we die and puff into nothingness we all go, and then in billions of years the sun implodes, and earth goes into nothingness. Rather hopeless.

Therefore human beings do make their own morals primarily based upon Epicurean thought - anything goes. People always slide toward justifying an immoral form of morality no matter the evidence of the harm caused by bad behaviors. Alcoholism is one example, sexual deviance another, and many more things we do. Investigate Miley Cyrus to see further what I mean or ISIS for another different example. Human beings are not prone to create the 10 Commandments as there are too many things to worship rather than God, like self, philosophy, atheism, fornication in all forms, taking what belongs to others, etc and etc

According to Aristotle: the goal of the ethics is to determine how best to achieve happiness. Happiness defined by him concerns living in accordance with appropriate virtues. What is appropriate is based upon the individual naturally being predisposed to behave in the right ways and for the right reasons deriving pleasure from behaving rightly mainly by the reward of feeling. A person arrives at this when they come to a balanced state between extremes of excess and deficiency. However this state of balance varies from person to person as one person may like a little vice and another maybe more balanced in their exercise of the pleasure of vice. There are no rules on how best to avoid vice due to the happiness it causes.

With Aristotle it is the agent, individual, acting voluntary and not an outside force that determines virtue (noble good), yet an outside force, like one under duress can force one to behave in a manner that goes against the virtue of noble good. It is by rational deliberation and choice that influences one's voluntary actions based upon pleasure/happiness in essence of a job-well-done feeling that comes by feeling one did or behaved nobly good however they define what is nobly good.

For Aristotle one compares moral virtue with its opposite such as Courage is superior to fear and thus courage good. Modesty is superior to shame, etc and etc You also have three social virtues of amiability, sincerity, and wit that make life pleasant. Basically Aristotle basically goes down the Golden Rule and leaves out the part of loving God with all ones being and simply bases his ethics on doing unto others as you would have them do unto you as the bases of his ethics. Sound familiar?

Despite this, has humanity improved and always strive for virtue after all these years since Aristotle died in 322 BC? It appears that Aristotle owed his philosophy to the writings of King Solomon and blended others into his own due to his seeking knowledge from afar. It was documented that Aristotle said: "I do not deny the revelation of the Jews (context was about Jewish revelation of God and not about knowledge), seeing that I am not acquainted with it; I am occupied with human knowledge only and not with divine" (Judah ha-Levi, "Cuzari," iv. 13; v. 14).

Basically, he took God out of the moral equation and based morality upon the individual to do the right thing because doing the right thing makes one and everyone else most happy. Has the world improved? No, it has not as the historical record proves. While we can create morality, we cannot maintain it because one man's virtue is another man's vice. Instead, you have a constant influx of conflict between good and evil. Evil derives pleasure of happiness being evil and good derives pleasure of happiness trying to be good. There is no solid foundation to base or guide what is absolutely right or wrong when God the creator is left out of the picture and when after all die, we all fade into nothingness - morals, happiness, pleasure mean nothing.

Actually, the ability to discern morality proves that human beings were designed to be moral beings morally accountable to God who teaches right from wrong. However, atheism rejects this and extols the virtue of nothingness as supreme. Nothingness as in non being. Very simply not existing. It's not a material nothing but a complete nothingness atheist defend.

Kenny, do you understand now? Your attempts at verbal gymnastics prove that atheist are bent on defending nothingness. Long ago, I could not escape this fact and neither can you.

Have a good day - but what is good worth when nothingness is all that awaits?

One day, the sun implodes and no more earth too...
-
-
-

[Kenny]

As a former atheist...

Nothingness was all I was in reality defending. Could not escape that fact.

Again; what is "nothingness"?

Next point... Materialism involves relativistic morality as an absolute. I recall we and others disused this with you before. Do you recall these discussions?

If you do, then what I mentioned may make a bit more sense, if not, let me know...

I do not remember.

Ken

Nothingness is non being. Very simply not existing . It's not a material nothing but a complete nothingness

So how as an atheist did you look around you and see the wonders of this Earth and equate it with nothing? Did you see anything that doesn't last a trillion years as equal to nothing?

Ken

[Kenny]

""something/somethings have always existed.
Ken""


Ken awesome
You understand a major part of the first cause argument .

Why does this surprise you? Did you make the mistake of assuming that because I might disagree with something, I just don't understand it?

Ken

[Kenny]

Bippy123 answered this with finesse

As I read your post in response to others, you are certainly defending nothingness as Bippy illustrated no matter what verbal judo you try to use, atheist are defending nothingness.

What have I said that gave you this impression?

After one dies, atheist state you go into nothingness. Billions of years later, the sun implodes, and earth goes into nothingness. In this nothingness there is no God, no morals, just nothing that somehow randomly creates more nothingness to happen in some unknown future state of time.

I love it when those who know little about me tell me what I believe. (LOL) So where is it written that Atheists are required to believe all this stuff?

As for the next point:

With this concept comes the atheist debate over morals. Atheist view is that human beings create morals, not God because there is no God, only nothingness. Again morality of atheism is based upon nothingness. One day we die and puff into nothingness we all go, and then in billions of years the sun implodes, and earth goes into nothingness. Rather hopeless.

Here the only thing you got right is Atheists don't believe God makes morals; everything else you've gotten wrong.
This is great! Unfortunately I'm in a bit of a hurry, I will respond to the rest of it later

Ken

[PaulSacramento]

Actually, atheists MUST believe that nothing happens after death ( other than the decomposing of matter) because to suggest otherwise is to believe in what there is no evidence for, which would make them hypocrites as opposed to simply atheists.

If a person believes that there could be something after death but doesn't know, then they are agnostic in that regard.

[Nicki]

Bippy123 answered this with finesse

As I read your post in response to others, you are certainly defending nothingness as Bippy illustrated no matter what verbal judo you try to use, atheist are defending nothingness.

What have I said that gave you this impression?

After one dies, atheist state you go into nothingness. Billions of years later, the sun implodes, and earth goes into nothingness. In this nothingness there is no God, no morals, just nothing that somehow randomly creates more nothingness to happen in some unknown future state of time.

I love it when those who know little about me tell me what I believe. (LOL) So where is it written that Atheists are required to believe all this stuff?

As for the next point:

With this concept comes the atheist debate over morals. Atheist view is that human beings create morals, not God because there is no God, only nothingness. Again morality of atheism is based upon nothingness. One day we die and puff into nothingness we all go, and then in billions of years the sun implodes, and earth goes into nothingness. Rather hopeless.

Here the only thing you got right is Atheists don't believe God makes morals; everything else you've gotten wrong.
This is great! Unfortunately I'm in a bit of a hurry, I will respond to the rest of it later

Ken

The idea of the nonexistence of God does seem to imply nonexistence of the supernatural and anything beyond what we can discern empirically, and going into nothingness is current scientific thought about the fate of the earth if things carry on as they are. So what's your own belief about what happens after death and humanity's future, if not that?

[B. W.]

...Here the only thing you got right is Atheists don't believe God makes morals; everything else you've gotten wrong.

This is great! Unfortunately I'm in a bit of a hurry, I will respond to the rest of it later

Ken

Paul answered very well...

Actually, atheists MUST believe that nothing happens after death ( other than the decomposing of matter) because to suggest otherwise is to believe in what there is no evidence for, which would make them hypocrites as opposed to simply atheists.

If a person believes that there could be something after death but doesn't know, then they are agnostic in that regard.

That is the point about atheism I was making Kenny. Do not forget, you did ask for clarity and it has been provided.

There are folks who think they are atheist but in reality share agnostic belief system concerning the after life and thus are not true atheist at all. Such folks as this gel with a mix of Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist thought and since they do, they are not atheist in any sense of the word. A true atheist lives, defends, and dies for nothing...
-
-
-

[Kenny]

Therefore human beings do make their own morals primarily based upon Epicurean thought - anything goes.

Many man made laws are based upon morality. When you look at the real world, does it seem most laws are based upon Epicurean thought? I don’t know what country you live in, but not in my country.

People always slide toward justifying an immoral form of morality no matter the evidence of the harm caused by bad behaviors. Alcoholism is one example, sexual deviance another,

In my country, alcoholism is vilified and seen as a disease that needs to be cured. Many types of sexual deviant behaviors are actually illegal.

Investigate Miley Cyrus to see further what I mean or ISIS for another different example. Human beings are not prone to create the 10 Commandments as there are too many things to worship rather than God, like self, philosophy, atheism, fornication in all forms, taking what belongs to others, etc and etc

You are aware Christianity is not the only religion that has a list of laws to follow; are you? Many religions have them. They may not be called commandments, and they may not be 10, but they are basically the same thing for their religion as the 10 commandments are for yours. Buddhism for example has the 5 Precepts.

For Aristotle one compares moral virtue with its opposite such as Courage is superior to fear and thus courage good. Modesty is superior to shame, etc and etc You also have three social virtues of amiability, sincerity, and wit that make life pleasant. Basically Aristotle basically goes down the Golden Rule and leaves out the part of loving God with all ones being

Since when did the Golden Rule have anything to do with loving God?

and simply bases his ethics on doing unto others as you would have them do unto you as the bases of his ethics. Sound familiar?

Yes! That’s the Golden Rule. I believe Confucius was the first religious leader to state it on record; since then plenty of other religious leaders have quoted the Golden Rule on record as well; your Jesus included.

While we can create morality, we cannot maintain it because one man's virtue is another man's vice. Instead, you have a constant influx of conflict between good and evil. Evil derives pleasure of happiness being evil and good derives pleasure of happiness trying to be good. There is no solid foundation to base or guide what is absolutely right or wrong when God the creator is left out of the picture

Laws are the solid foundation created by mankind. They ain’t perfect but it’s the best we’ve got. With God in the picture, there is no solid foundation because nobody agrees on what God says and God doesn’t speak for himself but has others going around speaking for him.

Actually, the ability to discern morality proves that human beings were designed to be moral beings morally accountable to God who teaches right from wrong. However, atheism rejects this and extols the virtue of nothingness as supreme. Nothingness as in non being. Very simply not existing. It's not a material nothing but a complete nothingness atheist defend.

Judging from your description; I doubt there is a person on Earth who fits your description of Atheism. Now what does that tell you?


Ken

[Kenny]

If a person believes that there could be something after death but doesn't know, then they are agnostic in that regard.

There are plenty of Atheists who also identify as agnostic as well. As a former Atheist, surely you are aware of this! And where is it written if a person believes in life after death, reincarnation, or whatever a healthy imagination can come up with; he cannot be atheist? Where are you getting this stuff?

Ken

[RickD]

If a person believes that there could be something after death but doesn't know, then they are agnostic in that regard.

There are plenty of Atheists who also identify as agnostic as well. As a former Atheist, surely you are aware of this! And where is it written if a person believes in life after death, reincarnation, or whatever a healthy imagination can come up with; he cannot be atheist? Where are you getting this stuff?

Ken

There are plenty of atheists who also identify as agnostic (regarding God), as well?

Kenny,

Do you know of any atheists that believe in life after death? Do you know of any atheists that believe in reincarnation?

[Kenny]

The idea of the nonexistence of God does seem to imply nonexistence of the supernatural and anything beyond what we can discern empirically

I disagree. Just because a person doesn’t believe in God doesn’t mean they don’t believe in spirits, ghosts, fairies, unicorns, and other imaginary creatures.

and going into nothingness is current scientific thought about the fate of the earth if things carry on as they are.

You aren’t making the mistake of assuming is someone doesn’t believe in God they believe what science says are you? Too many theists make this mistake.
And what is this deal with nothingness? I cannot imagine a person noticing all that exist and claiming it is nothing. Has anybody told you they believe in nothing? Or is this just a label you like to attach to people

So what's your own belief about what happens after death and humanity's future, if not that?

I think to ask what happened to your life after you die is like asking where did the flame go after blowing out a candle.

Perhaps we have a different interpretation of what an atheist is. To better understand each other; I will give my view of atheism. I believe an atheist is just a person who doesn’t believe in or recognize something as God. Example; there are people who worship the Sun. I recognize the existence of the Sun; in theory I can even believe the Sun is responsible for all that exists! but because I don’t call it God, I am not a Sun worshipper.
I believe a person can believe in the existence of your God, he may even believe he is creator of all that exist! but if he doesn’t believe he is a God (he may believe he is a spirit, fairy, pixie, ogre etc) he is still atheist.
I suspect your views are different which may be why much of what you say doesn’t make sense to me.

K

[Kenny]

There are plenty of atheists who also identify as agnostic (regarding God), as well?

Yes.
http://www.stanleycolors.com/2013/07/at ... l-you-are/

Kenny,

Do you know of any atheists that believe in life after death? Do you know of any atheists that believe in reincarnation?

I used to work with a lady who was Buddist. They are considered atheist because their religion does not contain a God. They also believe in reincarnation.

K

[abelcainsbrother]

One thing I think needs to be pointed out is that a lot of atheists are being led to believe by blind faith infinite regression is possible,when it is impossible.But atheists are buying into the universe had no beginning and is eternal which is a blind faith belief in infinite regression and all because they cannot believe God is eternal,all- powerful who can create universes easy if he chooses to.

Sure you still hear " I don't know" sometimes but this is just covering up their blind faith belief in infinite regression.Atheists believe some things do not have a cause and that all things that are caused are not caused by something else even though we know by logic,reason and facts that ALL things have a cause and ALL things that have a cause are caused by something else.

There will never be any science that comes out proving or demonstrating infinite regression,yet atheists believe it.