Any atheists here who were once believers?

[Seattle]

No, Seattle spoke from emotion, not from reason. He said stupid things like "Everybody knows that love isn't material" when in reality love is a chemical reaction within the brain.

That's a bit harsh. Nor was I being emotional. I do agree with you that one can consider "love" as being related to chemicals in the brain as is "consciousness". You can also consider both of them as being more than that but not in a supernatural sense. Just, as in the sense, that we don't totally understand consciousness.

They were hardly "stupid" comments however. I'm guessing you don't play well with others. You also appear to be the "emotional" one

Peace

 

[Robittybob1]

Yeah, this happened in the French Quarter while my mom worked at the Voodoo museum as a reader. But it was still spectacular.

What changes have you made in your life since then?

 

[Mazulu]

That's a bit harsh. Nor was I being emotional. I do agree with you that one can consider "love" as being related to chemicals in the brain as is "consciousness". You can also consider both of them as being more than that but not in a supernatural sense. Just, as in the sense, that we don't totally understand consciousness.

They were hardly "stupid" comments however. I'm guessing you don't play well with others. You also appear to be the "emotional" one

Peace

Your comments were reasonable. Baleron is just a troublemaker around here.

 

[Mazulu]

What changes have you made in your life since then?

It gave me confidence that there were things beyond this existence, that we do have a soul and that this is a spiritual journey.

 

[Robittybob1]

That's a bit harsh. Nor was I being emotional. I do agree with you that one can consider "love" as being related to chemicals in the brain as is "consciousness". You can also consider both of them as being more than that but not in a supernatural sense. Just, as in the sense, that we don't totally understand consciousness.

They were hardly "stupid" comments however. I'm guessing you don't play well with others. You also appear to be the "emotional" one

Peace

Read this post and explain how that happens and we might begin to understand what consciousness is.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...d-discussion&p=3113907&viewfull=1#post3113907

How can I have something telling me what another person was dreaming about?

 

[Mazulu]

Read this post and explain how that happens and we might begin to understand what consciousness is.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...d-discussion&p=3113907&viewfull=1#post3113907

How can I have something telling me what another person was dreaming about?

Can't always be sure who or what is whispering in your ear. If a spirit is telling you something that sounds like bad advice, you are wise to ignore it.

 

[Seattle]

How can I have something telling me what another person was dreaming about?

I think the more telling sentence was your last sentence..."I've never had that again."

In a word, you didn't read "David's" dream. You had a guy staying in your house and you have a young daughter. You were thinking about your daughter and so was David.

I doubt that he really was going to ask you to marry your 12 year old daughter. You probably fit his comments into what you remember from that dream.

He liked your daughter and you sensed that a guy you had staying in your house liked your young daughter. You asked him about it and you were right.

If you read peoples minds though dreams every night with no discrepancies then I'd say get tested and see if you continue to be able to do this. It will fall apart at that stage.

I know it seems psychic when it happens but things happen. People worry that their kids are going to be in a wreck and then they are in a wreck. It's seems psychic but they have those thoughts every time their kids leave the house at night but only recall them if it actually happens.

 

[Robittybob1]

I think the more telling sentence was your last sentence..."I've never had that again."

In a word, you didn't read "David's" dream. You had a guy staying in your house and you have a young daughter. You were thinking about your daughter and so was David.

I doubt that he really was going to ask you to marry your 12 year old daughter. You probably fit his comments into what you remember from that dream.

He liked your daughter and you sensed that a guy you had staying in your house liked your young daughter. You asked him about it and you were right.

If you read peoples minds though dreams every night with no discrepancies then I'd say get tested and see if you continue to be able to do this. It will fall apart at that stage.

I know it seems psychic when it happens but things happen. People worry that their kids are going to be in a wreck and then they are in a wreck. It's seems psychic but they have those thoughts every time their kids leave the house at night but only recall them if it actually happens.

You get my respect for you actually read it. But some of what you say could be right or wrong who knows but in the end the one feature you didn't mention was the timing, he dreamt it the same time as I was being told what he had dreamt about. How would you rationalize that? Purely chance again.

So while we have such skeptics there will never be any proof of anything for you will always concoct stories like you've done purely out of your own imagination and expect me to prove what you say is untrue.

You want proof and when you get it, you deny it.

 

[Robittybob1]

....
If you read peoples minds though dreams every night with no discrepancies then I'd say get tested and see if you continue to be able to do this. It will fall apart at that stage.

I know it seems psychic when it happens but things happen. People worry that their kids are going to be in a wreck and then they are in a wreck. It's seems psychic but they have those thoughts every time their kids leave the house at night but only recall them if it actually happens.

Please read through the thread and keep an eye on it for there were periods where every night I'd have a dream that would be a deja vu of the next day. OK this has stopped now, but while it was happening I would take notes of the dreams and keep the newspaper articles that confirmed it. It was really weird.
( later when the TV series Early Edition came out that was what it was like. Early Edition (1996–2000), but these things were happening before I started working in Wanganui i.e. before 1995.)
It was just like I could sense the minds of the editors of the papers. ... it freaked me out.

But one i'll write into the BCS thread today and I promise this will make some of you believe. Maybe not you Seattle for you are a tough nut, but you will crack in the end too for I feel you are seriously searching for the truth.

 

[Bells]

@ wegs - if you want to find God's truth doing LG 's way will drive you mental. It isn't found by looking for it. It is found by stepping out in faith, that even a child can do it.

Or perhaps she doesn't want to find it because she does not believe in it and if she does, she can find it in her own way, whether that way is LG's way or not.

In short, it is not your place to dictate what path people take regarding their belief.

 

[Robittybob1]

Or perhaps she doesn't want to find it because she does not believe in it and if she does, she can find it in her own way, whether that way is LG's way or not.

In short, it is not your place to dictate what path people take regarding their belief.

Do you understand LG? The language is rather academic and surprisingly I do find wegs seems to pick up on what is being said, but I have basically no idea what he is saying until someone comments on it. So all I was saying to wegs is that to believe is not that complicated. You don't need a degree in Philosophy to believe.
She was a believer once and now tentatively an atheist. Some (on this forum) say I am also an atheist but that classification baffled me.

It is definitely not a dictate but simply a suggestion of an alternative method. Did you think it was a dictate? If it was I will modify the words.

PS: I will modify the words to "I suggest ....

 

[Seattle]

You get my respect for you actually read it. But some of what you say could be right or wrong who knows but in the end the one feature you didn't mention was the timing, he dreamt it the same time as I was being told what he had dreamt about. How would you rationalize that? Purely chance again.

So while we have such skeptics there will never be any proof of anything for you will always concoct stories like you've done purely out of your own imagination and expect me to prove what you say is untrue.

You want proof and when you get it, you deny it.

I'm just saying that our definitions of proof are different.

I have no doubt (from reading your posts) that you believe the conclusions that you have come to.

Proof to me is make a prediction that isn't something that's likely to happen anyway and then to have it happen after the prediction and to have this happen more than chance would account for.

The proof can't be solely from the person making the prediction. Most people who see UFO's are sincere as well.

 

[Robittybob1]

I'm just saying that our definitions of proof are different.

I have no doubt (from reading your posts) that you believe the conclusions that you have come to.

Proof to me is make a prediction that isn't something that's likely to happen anyway and then to have it happen after the prediction and to have this happen more than chance would account for.

The proof can't be solely from the person making the prediction. Most people who see UFO's are sincere as well.

So all the events I could predict were going to happen or had happened, so they happened by chance, but what are the odds of always being able to see them in the dream before they happened (published). I wasn't living in the Editor's office.

.... "and to have this happen more than chance would account for."
How do you work out the chances of that happening?

 

[Bells]

Do you understand LG?

When I read it, yes.

The language is rather academic and surprisingly I do find wegs seems to pick up on what is being said,

Could you be more insulting and condescending?

Does it surprise you that she is able to read something that is "rather academic" with big words and not dumbed down?

but I have basically no idea what he is saying until someone comments on it.

Perhaps that is just you?

So all I was saying to wegs is that to believe is not that complicated. You don't need a degree in Philosophy to believe.

Why does she have to believe though? What if she is happy not believing?

She was a believer once and now tentatively an atheist.

Which is her choice and her decision. If she enjoys discussing with people who use language that is academic to describe their beliefs, then it is her choice.

Some (on this forum) say I am also an atheist but that classification baffled me.

Then they understand atheism as well as you do.

It is definitely not a dictate but simply a suggestion of an alternative method.

You don't seem to understand what I am saying to you.

Why does she or anyone else need any method to determine their beliefs? Why do you believe that people need a guiding hand or dumbed down version with small words that aren't academic to determine their faith or lack of faith? Why are you so uncomfortable that she (and others for that matter) is so comfortable being an atheist or agnostic, so much so that you are hopping around like an over-excited puppy trying to get her to look at you and your dumbed down version of what you believe faith and God is?

Did you think it was a dictate? If it was I will modify the words.

You do dictate and you do demand that she and others believe as you do. You have no respect for her beliefs or lack thereof.

Perhaps it is better to respect the person as a whole and the path and journey they chose to take for themselves than to demand expect people believe so that you can respect them for who they are. Just like you commented to Seattle, that he is a tough nut to crack, but you believe he will crack. No. it doesn't work that way. Perhaps he is happy with himself and his choices and his beliefs and/or lack of belief.

But you and others cannot seem to accept that. Instead you get into their faces and demand they think and believe like you do, so much so that you are trying to dictate what path they take to get to your destination. In other words, back the hell off and stop expecting and demanding that people believe your beliefs.

Belief, religion and spirituality is personal and private. You cannot expect others or demand others believe like you do. You trod the path for yourself. Respect others for their right to do the same, regardless of where it takes them. That is their path and theirs alone.

 

[Balerion]

What's wrong with emotions?

As a tool for discovering truth? What's right with emotions?

Logic and reason should be your guides. Saying things like "Everybody knows love is immaterial" only makes you look like an idiot.

What was your question?

You've cut away the majority of my last several questions and flung ad homs instead of actually addressing anything I've asked you. Read over those posts and answer the questions I've asked you. Meet the challenge, don't run from it.

Your question was a red herring anway.

How so?

 

[Balerion]

That's a bit harsh. Nor was I being emotional. I do agree with you that one can consider "love" as being related to chemicals in the brain as is "consciousness". You can also consider both of them as being more than that but not in a supernatural sense. Just, as in the sense, that we don't totally understand consciousness.

We're not talking philosophy here, we're talking science. Saying love is "more than" matter is ridiculous. I can appreciate that we're only just now scratching the surface of neuroscience, but when you're discussing the material nature of the universe with a crank, you're only feeding him when you say "Well of course love is immaterial."

 

[Robittybob1]

Can't always be sure who or what is whispering in your ear. If a spirit is telling you something that sounds like bad advice, you are wise to ignore it.

But in this case it was the truth, wasn't it?
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...d-discussion&p=3113907&viewfull=1#post3113907
but the secondary consequences were quite devastating.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...d-discussion&p=3113915&viewfull=1#post3113915

 

[Seattle]

So all the events I could predict were going to happen or had happened, so they happened by chance, but what are the odds of always being able to see them in the dream before they happened (published). I wasn't living in the Editor's office.

.... "and to have this happen more than chance would account for."
How do you work out the chances of that happening?

It depends on what you are predicting and when. If you are telling someone about it after the event and you are the only evidence then that doesn't count obviously. Randi had a method that would have worked but you felt that it was asking "too many questions".

If you are predicting whether a coin will be heads of tails then if you can call it more than 50% of the time correctly given a large enough sample that works.

Predicting David's dream in your dream and then having only you or David give the feedback isn't going to pass any scientific test.

 

[Seattle]

So all the events I could predict were going to happen or had happened, so they happened by chance, but what are the odds of always being able to see them in the dream before they happened (published). I wasn't living in the Editor's office.

.... "and to have this happen more than chance would account for."
How do you work out the chances of that happening?

It depends on what you are predicting and when. If you are telling someone about it after the event and you are the only evidence then that doesn't count obviously. Randi had a method that would have worked but you felt that it was asking "too many questions".

If you are predicting whether a coin will be heads of tails then if you can call it more than 50% of the time correctly given a large enough sample that works.

Predicting David's dream in your dream and then having only you or David give the feedback isn't going to pass any scientific test.

 

[Seattle]

We're not talking philosophy here, we're talking science. Saying love is "more than" matter is ridiculous. I can appreciate that we're only just now scratching the surface of neuroscience, but when you're discussing the material nature of the universe with a crank, you're only feeding him when you say "Well of course love is immaterial."

No, pretending that science can currently pin point "love" is ridiculous.