A fear of death.

[Dawn]

Lady: 1)Do you think a bottle of wine really becomes the blood of Jesus in millions of churches around the world for millennium because a man in a long dress has said some words over it?

2)Do you think that some people voting on the specialness of a particular individual and thus elevating that person to "sainthood" effectuates any difference to the cosmos?3) Anyway who are the human beings to dictate to God who should be a saint? 4)What kind of a God is that.

1)Absolutely not.
2)Absolutely not.
3)Good Question.
4)Has little to do with God. 'What kind of people are those'? would be the question to ask yourself.
Answer: misguided but well-intentioned. Like yourself?

Say, we may have more points of agreement than you realize

[Interbane]

Jnoir, Johnson1010's argument is part of the Atheist Urban Legends. Show me the holy writings of Odin, or any other god.
Show me the schools founded to teach people about Odin.
Show me the cultures which have been improved by exposure to Odin.
Show me the Odin missionaries.
Show me the great art celebrating Odin
Show me the great music honoring Odin
Show me the live changed by Odin

Johnson1010's implication is that no one can know that Christianity is the true religion. That is not true.

Here's an excellent example to examine the logic of fundamentalism. Which of the factors Stahrwe mentioned supports the truthfulness of the bible? For example, is the bible true because it inspired great music? The answer is none of them. They are all factors that influence impact, not truthfulness. If they only show "impact" rather than truthfulness, how would we know that Christianity is the one true religion? The story of Jesus may have had more impact, but none of these factors support it's truthfulness.

[Randall R. Young]

My question is is there any hope of anything other than an oblivion of nothingness after death? If not, how do you cope? Do you just not think about death, or have you come to accept death without fear ( if so how).

Please help, if not i fear the worse, going back to being a sheep.

I would recommend you read a book by Douglas Hofstadter named "I am a Strange Loop".

In this book, he offers a non-theistic version of what a soul is, and I personally have no problem with this version. In fact, it is a way more uplifting version of a sort of "afterlife" than the customary Christian version of Heaven, as I understand it. (Plus, it never becomes interminably boring!)

You also might consider the position of the Singularitarians, which can be found in "The Singularity is Near", by Ray Kurzweil.

These views do not depend in any way on superstition, or the supernatural. Being that you are still young, Ray Kurzweil ought to give you quite a few reasons to be hopeful, if personal immortality is what you crave.

[johnson1010]

Quoth the Bane.

Here's an excellent example to examine the logic of fundamentalism.

Yeah, he pulled that out again on my thread about the one true religion.

http://www.booktalk.org/post90452.html#p90452

Remember how we all explained to him how it was a non issue for like 2.5 to 3 pages?

"It's not right. It's not even wrong."

here we all are explaining how terrible an argument this is a good four months ago. Despite being thoroughly destroyed from multiple angles, he's still dragging that corpse of an argument out of the bin and flopping it on the floor insisting that it's a prancing pony.

http://www.booktalk.org/the-nt-was-writ ... 4-300.html

Its like saying because a car is painted blue that it must be part of the ocean.

[lady of shallot]

Dawn we probably do agree on many things. While we agree on the two points about communion (BTW does your church take it?) Millions of Catholics worldwide do not agree with us. Nor do they agree with what you say about having a "personal relationship with Jesus" in fact they have no idea what that means.

I submit that both these belief systems are erroneous and faulty.

I fully admit that I may be well intentioned but misguided. Not misguided for me about religion but I do think there is something that is important to many people about having religious or spiritual or mythological beliefs. I don't have any argument with people holding those beliefs. What I do have a problem with is when they infringe on the rights and views of others. Like jnoir family. Where he must believe as they do. Very sadly the tenets of so many belief systems do not allow for any diversion from the version being presented.

[Harry Marks]

Ive been harmed by living the one life i have based on a lie. I appreciate you trying to help me, but i can't really see anything short of Jesus showing me the way himself that would change my mind.

Jnoir,

I think you have a good ability to think for yourself. You have realized that your parents would be very upset if you let them know you do not accept their views. But it is also true that they will learn to accept your free choice in time. My advice is to wait until a few years have passed and they are more satisfied as to your independence and maturity. Then when you tell them, they may be concerned for your soul but less likely for your judgment and survival.

[stahrwe]

Jnoir, Johnson1010's argument is part of the Atheist Urban Legends. Show me the holy writings of Odin, or any other god.
Show me the schools founded to teach people about Odin.
Show me the cultures which have been improved by exposure to Odin.
Show me the Odin missionaries.
Show me the great art celebrating Odin
Show me the great music honoring Odin
Show me the live changed by Odin

Johnson1010's implication is that no one can know that Christianity is the true religion. That is not true.

Here's an excellent example to examine the logic of fundamentalism. Which of the factors Stahrwe mentioned supports the truthfulness of the bible? For example, is the bible true because it inspired great music? The answer is none of them. They are all factors that influence impact, not truthfulness. If they only show "impact" rather than truthfulness, how would we know that Christianity is the one true religion? The story of Jesus may have had more impact, but none of these factors support it's truthfulness.

We have been through this before but thank you for allowing me to mention it again. No, 2000 years of good works do not prove that Christianity is true. Nor does great music, or works of art, or universities, or most of the other points I mentioned. But it does establish a pattern and an identity which can be used to evaluate claims. In the case of Christinaity and Judaism it also covers a time period sufficient to show prophecies fulfilled.

[lady of shallot]

We received an unusual piece of mail yesterday and I am posting about it here because it was an invitation to attend a Jehovah's witness rally at our civic center. Although we have had people visit our house (Latter day Saints and J.W.'s) this is the first time we have been contacted by mail.

This was done via a handwritten note. I am no handwriting analyst but some things about this jumped right out saying the writer was naive and probably very young, if not in years then in sophistication and/or education. The note was on lined paper. All the i's were dotted with circles. The letters were rounded and rather upright. In other words I would deduce that the writer has a rather simplistic, easily impressionable attitude toward religion and probably life.

[Harry Marks]

Jnoir, Johnson1010's argument is part of the Atheist Urban Legends. Show me the holy writings of Odin, or any other god.
Show me the schools founded to teach people about Odin.
Show me the cultures which have been improved by exposure to Odin.
Show me the Odin missionaries.
Show me the great art celebrating Odin
Show me the great music honoring Odin
Show me the live changed by Odin

Johnson1010's implication is that no one can know that Christianity is the true religion. That is not true.

Here's an excellent example to examine the logic of fundamentalism. Which of the factors Stahrwe mentioned supports the truthfulness of the bible? For example, is the bible true because it inspired great music? The answer is none of them. They are all factors that influence impact, not truthfulness. If they only show "impact" rather than truthfulness, how would we know that Christianity is the one true religion? The story of Jesus may have had more impact, but none of these factors support it's truthfulness.

Interbane,
Actually, impact is a dimension of truthfulness. We have to sort through all of the random noise in our environment to find that which is significant. Mere faithfulness to reality is not enough - a person who cannot distinguish the significant is an idiot savant, with perhaps phenomenal powers of recall and calculation, but not the ability to make a life. Thus, if people point out to us things that have helped them to identify the significant, it would be smart to pay some attention.

It may bother you that anyone would think Jungian archetypes are true, but I am bothered by people who think raw factuality is privileged in understanding what to pay attention to. If stories of a dying and rising God keep turning up, maybe it is because such a story captures something very important. It might be just bad science, but more likely it is good literature.

If you had to put together a society on a spaceship, say, that had to choose whether to take a volume by Galileo, one by Locke or one by Shakespeare, are you sure you would go by factuality?

[Randall R. Young]

If you had to put together a society on a spaceship, say, that had to choose whether to take a volume by Galileo, one by Locke or one by Shakespeare, are you sure you would go by factuality?

Being a practical man, I'd have to go with the Principia, or maybe Euclid's Elements. (Unless it's unfair to bring a work in three volumes...)

Stories we can make up, when we get there. (In fact, it's probably unavoidable.) Science is a good deal harder to come up with, from scratch.

But the real question, it seems to me, is which volume would you want the designers of your spaceship to have read?