Thank God I'm An Atheist (Warning: STRONG Content)

[water]

Crunchy Cat,

Such simplistic refutations discredit your scientificality.

 

[Internationalist]

They suffer because the rich don't give to the poor.

The rich didn't create ebola, cancer, AIDS, etc did they? Millions of orphans in Africa should be asking why.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Crunchy Cat,

Such simplistic refutations discredit your scientificality.

If sarcasm discredits my 'scientificality', then so be it. I will remain judged
on stimulus and response.

 

[water]

They suffer because the rich don't give to the poor.

The rich didn't create ebola, cancer, AIDS, etc did they? Millions of orphans in Africa should be asking why.

Think back, several hundred years -- and how one bad choice lead to bad consequences, and so on. People seeing they don't have enough food for themselves, and yet they had children. Whom they couldn't feed. Nobody told them to have children. If they had kept to what the environment can support, then the crisis wouldn't escalate as it has.

 

[§outh§tar]

Please. If we look at things only from the present perspective, it surely seems like things couldn't be more unfair than they are.

But think back in time, how one person has obstructed another, allegorically, Cain and Able -- and this is how the machinery of sin got rolling. We are, in effect, living with the consequences of the sins our ancestors have done, and with our own sins.

I am not sure how being yoked with the sin of ancestors is at all just. It doesn't even make sense! How can any man be found guilty and punished for the transgressions of his forefathers?

'The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'?

 

[§outh§tar]

If sarcasm discredits my 'scientificality', then so be it. I will remain judged
on stimulus and response.

I liked it. Original sin is synonymous with disregard for justice.

I suppose it was man's fault that there was an Ice Age too!

Think back, several hundred years -- and how one bad choice lead to bad consequences, and so on. People seeing they don't have enough food for themselves, and yet they had children. Whom they couldn't feed. Nobody told them to have children. If they had kept to what the environment can support, then the crisis wouldn't escalate as it has.

According to good Biblical principle, these people are in the right for multiplying as the Lord commanded. And then God puts His beloved children in a culture where this is encouraged. And the rains do not fall. And the absence of rain is not the doing of the children or the parents.

Will He find fault with rabbits?

 

[water]

I am not sure how being yoked with the sin of ancestors is at all just. It doesn't even make sense! How can any man be found guilty and punished for the transgressions of his forefathers?

They aren't guilty and punished for the transgressions of his forefathers, but they have to live with the consequences of these transgressions.

If your father was in debt, and then he died, you will have to pay the debt.

I liked it. Original sin is synonymous with disregard for justice.

I suppose it was man's fault that there was an Ice Age too!

Wa wa wa oooh.

According to good Biblical principle, these people are in the right for multiplying as the Lord commanded. And then God puts His beloved children in a culture where this is encouraged. And the rains do not fall. And the absence of rain is not the doing of the children or the parents.

God never said that people should not use their minds.

Now stop with this self-vicitmization, SouthStar, I'm getting tired of it.

 

[§outh§tar]

They aren't guilty and punished for the transgressions of his forefathers, but they have to live with the consequences of these transgressions.

If your father was in debt, and then he died, you will have to pay the debt.

Maybe where you are these things are so, but here I know of no such legislation. And even then, it certainly isn't Gods law but rather man's. For only man can come up with a law so daft and unfair and call it justice. I refuse to insult God anymore.

Wa wa wa oooh.

Burn my straw.

God never said that people should not use their minds.

Now stop with this self-vicitmization, SouthStar, I'm getting tired of it.

I wrote that with no intention of putting myself in the argument. See what I mean by 'don't read into it'?

Poor, poor me.

Kidding.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

They aren't guilty and punished for the transgressions of his forefathers, but they have to live with the consequences of these transgressions.

Having a pentalty (the consequences) imposed (they have to live with it)
for 'wrongdoing' is the very definition of a punishment.

If your father was in debt, and then he died, you will have to pay the debt.

In another life I worked for a debt collection agency. I can say with full
certainty that this is not true in my geography.

God never said that people should not use their minds.

Read 'God's definition of faith. That's exactly what 'he' says.

Carry on...

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Crunchy Cat,

Such simplistic refutations discredit your scientificality.

Wa wa wa oooh.

Something about a pot, a kettle, and a color...

 

[Internationalist]

Think back, several hundred years -- and how one bad choice lead to bad consequences, and so on. People seeing they don't have enough food for themselves, and yet they had children. Whom they couldn't feed. Nobody told them to have children. If they had kept to what the environment can support, then the crisis wouldn't escalate as it has.

This has nothing to do with my argument, those people did not create disease if God is a good one why would he create these diseases? Unless of course God is not good and is rational? You tell me?

 

[water]

Maybe where you are these things are so, but here I know of no such legislation. And even then, it certainly isn't Gods law but rather man's.

Have you ever owed money within a family?
Yes, certainly, it is man's laws, not God's.

I refuse to insult God anymore.

Really? Why, oh why do I doubt you?

Burn my straw.

Perfect.

I wrote that with no intention of putting myself in the argument. See what I mean by 'don't read into it'?

Poor, poor me.

Kidding.

Whatever you say about something, those words also say something about you.


* * *

They aren't guilty and punished for the transgressions of his forefathers, but they have to live with the consequences of these transgressions.

Having a pentalty (the consequences) imposed (they have to live with it)
for 'wrongdoing' is the very definition of a punishment.

Alright. If you one is born into a very poor family, or such with alcoholism and domestic violence, is one to be considered "punished"?

In another life I worked for a debt collection agency. I can say with full certainty that this is not true in my geography.

Legally, yes. But not within a family.
We had to pay our uncle's debts he made to the family.


What I'm saying is that one inherits the troubles of one's ancestors.

God never said that people should not use their minds.

Read 'God's definition of faith. That's exactly what 'he' says.

Your malevolent, human interpretation ...

Something about a pot, a kettle, and a color...

Unfortunately, knowing some members a bit better makes it possible that arguments are carried out differently, where only the two parties involved know the connotations, while the broad audience doesn't know what's going on.

I'm just being [the p-word]. (Again, something that only a few members here know ...)


* * *

This has nothing to do with my argument, those people did not create disease if God is a good one why would he create these diseases? Unless of course God is not good and is rational? You tell me?

Are you assuming God "created" diseases with the purpose to "test" man, to make him suffer? Or to naturally diminish man's population?
Diseases are a fact of life on earth. When about parasites, then it is merely organisms who all try to survive -- even if it comes at the cost of other organisms. As for degenerative diseases: they also "come with the package" of having a mortal body.
Complain that life is life, if you must, but don't blame God. Life on earth is, per definition, not heaven.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Alright. If you one is born into a very poor family, or such with alcoholism and domestic violence, is one to be considered "punished"?

Can't say based on the information provided. Is there a penalty (if so
what is it?), does the person have to live with the penalty, and is the
penality the result of a wrongdoing (if so, what is it?).

Legally, yes. But not within a family.
We had to pay our uncle's debts he made to the family.

What I'm saying is that one inherits the troubles of one's ancestors.

What has been established is that both sides have agreed the original
claim as being not true. The claim has thusly been re-formulated (which is
perfectly ok) and I will assert that this is not true again. If there is an
agreement made between the borrower and the family that *someone*
is responsible for the borrowers debt should he be unable to pay it off
then so be it. That's what a conceptual co-signer offers. If there is no
agreement then the lender is screwed if the borrower dies and there is
zero obligation in the family to pay off the debt.

I have a few Uncles whom have alot of 'troubles'... financially, legally,
emotionally, health-wise, etc. I can say with reasonable certainty that
I have inherited none of their troubles.

Your malevolent, human interpretation ...

The 'book' was written for humans after all; however, 'God's definition
of faith is very clear and it's synonymous to 'stop using your mind'.

Unfortunately, knowing some members a bit better makes it possible that arguments are carried out differently, where only the two parties involved know the connotations, while the broad audience doesn't know what's going on.

I'm just being [the p-word]. (Again, something that only a few members here know ...)

This is true and it doesn't change the result.

 

[water]

Can't say based on the information provided. Is there a penalty (if so what is it?), does the person have to live with the penalty, and is the
penality the result of a wrongdoing (if so, what is it?).

Don't be stiff. If a smart child is born into a poor single parent family, instead of studying, he will have to work to support the family.
His potential will go to waste because of immediate survival needs. If he were born into a middle-class family or richer, where parents can provide for their children, this would not be the case.

What has been established is that both sides have agreed the original
claim as being not true. The claim has thusly been re-formulated (which is
perfectly ok) and I will assert that this is not true again. If there is an
agreement made between the borrower and the family that *someone*
is responsible for the borrowers debt should he be unable to pay it off
then so be it. That's what a conceptual co-signer offers. If there is no
agreement then the lender is screwed if the borrower dies and there is
zero obligation in the family to pay off the debt.

Not if your family has mafia-like inclinations.

What I'm saying is that one inherits the troubles of one's ancestors.

Ever heard of "it runs in the family"? "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree"?

Not to forget: Our children will inherit this planet from us -- and in what state are we leaving it? Is it a healthy place to live in?

The 'book' was written for humans after all; however, 'God's definition
of faith is very clear and it's synonymous to 'stop using your mind'.

Then please give me what you think this definition of faith is.

This is true and it doesn't change the result.

Your point?

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Don't be stiff. If a smart child is born into a poor single parent family, instead of studying, he will have to work to support the family.
His potential will go to waste because of immediate survival needs. If he were born into a middle-class family or richer, where parents can provide for their children, this would not be the case.

Depending on the culture this is being applied to that's one possible
outcome. In other cultures, society will move the child to a new home
and all will be well... then again no matter which society we're in, we
need janitors, fast food service folk, etc. If everyone had a PHD we
would have some problems.

Anyhow, as 'stiff' as my original response was, I would still need the
explicit answers to those 3 questions.

Not if your family has mafia-like inclinations.

This is probably true, and we're again revising the claim. Revision is ok;
however, the frequency is high in this case which suggests there is
an opportunity to re-evaluate the idea and reconstruct it in a more
meaningful way.

Ever heard of "it runs in the family"? "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree"?

Yep. It usually referrs to the results of genetics.

Not to forget: Our children will inherit this planet from us -- and in what state are we leaving it? Is it a healthy place to live in?

What criteria are we using to detemine the state (remember a planet
is a huge complex thing and it would be impossible for you or I to declare
a perfectly aligned 'state' of the planet)? Same thing applies to the health
question.

Then please give me what you think this definition of faith is.

I am not sure my definition matters here; however, the definition I am
reffering to can be found right in Hebrews 11:1 (assuming my memory
is serving me correctly).

Your point?

Such simplistic refutations discredit your scientificality by those who will
judge you by your criteria.

 

[§outh§tar]

Really? Why, oh why do I doubt you?

Oh ye of little faith.

Whatever you say about something, those words also say something about you.

Only when you leave footprints in the sand.

Why waste my time shaking my fist at God when there are

 

[water]

Don't be stiff. If a smart child is born into a poor single parent family, instead of studying, he will have to work to support the family.
His potential will go to waste because of immediate survival needs. If he were born into a middle-class family or richer, where parents can provide for their children, this would not be the case.

Depending on the culture this is being applied to that's one possible
outcome. In other cultures, society will move the child to a new home
and all will be well...

It still applies that one cannot choose everything, and may have to bear the consequences of what his ancestors did.

then again no matter which society we're in, we
need janitors, fast food service folk, etc. If everyone had a PHD we
would have some problems.

This is backwards. Will you say then that it is right and just that some people are restricted in their progress?

This is probably true, and we're again revising the claim. Revision is ok;
however, the frequency is high in this case which suggests there is
an opportunity to re-evaluate the idea and reconstruct it in a more
meaningful way.

We'll see.

Ever heard of "it runs in the family"? "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree"?

Yep. It usually referrs to the results of genetics.

For example, my father has bad time-management skills, my mother as well, and so do I; but I am working to improve, and it is efficient.
I doubt poor time-management skills have something to do with genetics. But the effects of poor time-management are very real though, and very negative; I dread to think how much I've lost due to this.

An important part of how we inherit the sins of our ancestors is in the poor nurture they give us. Considering that the effects of poor nurture can be amended shows that they are not genetically predetermined and impossible to alter.

What criteria are we using to detemine the state (remember a planet
is a huge complex thing and it would be impossible for you or I to declare
a perfectly aligned 'state' of the planet)? Same thing applies to the health
question.

The heaps of garbage are not getting any smaller over time. I suppose you can argue that there is nothing wrong with having a landfill in front of your nose, and that it is just some "stupid subjective sensibilities" that make one consider it wrong.

I am not sure my definition matters here; however, the definition I am
reffering to can be found right in Hebrews 11:1 (assuming my memory
is serving me correctly).

Let's see:

Hebrews 11
1Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.​

The same way, by faith, I study, being sure of what I hope for -- that I will finish college. I am certain of it, but I really do not see it, for I cannot, for it hasn't happened yet. However, if I would not be certain of it, I'd have a really hard time getting myself to studying.

The way I understand faith, faith is about committing to an ideal, a goal, so that one can actively pursue it.

Such simplistic refutations discredit your scientificality by those who will
judge you by your criteria.

Inside stuff.
If I had refuted an argument by you the same as I did SouthStar's, then what you are saying above would apply, and I would agree with you.
But SouthStar and I went over that argument about a dozen times, and it's getting tired for us. Unfortunately, an outside observer may not know this, and to him, I certainly appear unscientific and inexact.


* * *

Oh ye of little faith.

And how much faith do you have?

Why waste my time shaking my fist at God when there are

... when there are what?

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Well it's all set. I am headed over to Zanket's hypnotherappist in the
beginning of April to explore past lives and in-between past lives. Any
way it shakes out, this will be quite a cool experience. I'll post the results
of my analysis and post-mortem with Zanket on the forum once everything
is complete.

-CC

It is done and it was quite an experience! Zanket, thanks for the tour
of Seattle, you are an awesome tour guide! If anyone wants a truly wild 2+
hour ride then I highly recommend using a hypnotherappist to explore. It's a
little pricey, but it's worth it.

The overall hypnotherappist event was approximately as follows over a
2-hour period:

* Using my imagination to explore known dreams.
* Exploring awesome real-time 'stimulus' such as playing a bizarre
musical instrument, experiencing 3 realities not even remotely related to
this one (orange beam world, black and white shapes world, light-outline
cosmos world-), experiencing a reality like this one and filled with
nightmarish occupants (super-sized spiders, pulsating crystal-like wall
hearts, shimmering shelf amobeas) and some cool architecture (living
units built and suspeded under bridges), experiencing a death (I was
crushed), and experiencing memory / emotion based on environmental
context.

It was cool stuff. The hypnotherappist made two claims that I found
particularly interesting:

* Not all souls choose to be the same life form / part of the same reality.
I am/have one of those souls.

* The 'light-outline cosmos world' I experienced is the spirit world that
all souls will be a part of in between lives (in this world I saw pulsars,
star clusters, etc., and outlines of peoples features made of 'light'.)

I made the following analysis during the experiences:

* I opened by eyes a couple of times (once at orange beam world and
once while staring at a giant oreo cookie in a red-oak doorway) and
the images stuck and then faded quite gracefully. This is the behavior
of hypnogogic hallucinations.

* Written text was difficult to read (blurry, changing, not really text...).
This is consistent with the behavior of lucid dreams.

* There was a lit lamp in some room and removing the lampshade and
restoring it did not affect the light output (i.e. there was no shadow
from the lamp shade).

* When on the threshold of hypnogigic hallucination and lucid dreams,
I had memories / feelings that were specific to the context of the
enviornment that I was in. This is consistent with the behavior of dreams.

* In 'light-outline cosmos world' there were only humans (not all the
other life forms as I would have expected based on the hypnotherappists
first claim).

The experience as a whole was very consistent with my lifetime of intense
dreams (lucid an otherwise) and hypnogogic hallunciations. My overall
analysis of the experience as a whole (based on the evidence above)
is that a hypnotherappist whom performs past life / in-between life regression
does the following:

* Brings a person to deep relaxation while visualizing (the same kind of
visualization that would occur while completely awake).

* Establishes and mantains hypnogogic hallucination / light lucid dreaming
and influence content through verbal suggestion (the content will
ultimately be generated by the imagination).

I discussed the results and analysis with Zanket and true to his word, he
considered this and it did influence his original assertions. I will let him
post his thoughts / conclusions on the subject seperately. It may take
a little time as he is involved in an important personal project at the
moment.

Oh BTW people, Seattle is an awesome place. They have a very rich
history, lots of great places to visit, excellent seafood, etc. I highly
recommend it!

 

[Crunchy Cat]

It still applies that one cannot choose everything, and may have to bear the consequences of what his ancestors did.

*may* is a key word here. It's different than obligation.

This is backwards. Will you say then that it is right and just that some people are restricted in their progress?

I will say that I am happy if people have the option to improve themselves.
Whether these people have privilaged backgrounds (self-improvement
is a free ride) vs. non-privilaged backgrounds (self-improvement is alot
of hard and risky work) doesn't concern me.

For example, my father has bad time-management skills, my mother as well, and so do I; but I am working to improve, and it is efficient.
I doubt poor time-management skills have something to do with genetics. But the effects of poor time-management are very real though, and very negative; I dread to think how much I've lost due to this.

It could have a genetic factor that influences it. There are four basic
human temperments and some of them have weaknesses in efficiency.
However, it could be due to other factors. Regardless, my assertion
was that the phrase 'it runs in the family' usually referrs to a genetic
condition (baldness runs in the family, blue eyes run in the family, etc).
This does not restrict it from being used to describe behaviors that people
may share.

An important part of how we inherit the sins of our ancestors is in the poor nurture they give us. Considering that the effects of poor nurture can be amended shows that they are not genetically predetermined and impossible to alter.

I disagree. Consider that a successful professional hit-man could be an
excellent father.

The heaps of garbage are not getting any smaller over time. I suppose you can argue that there is nothing wrong with having a landfill in front of your nose, and that it is just some "stupid subjective sensibilities" that make one consider it wrong.

Depending on which geography we're talking about this may be true
and may not be true. In my geography there is more recycling than ever
before and it is making a difference. Similarly, I know there are alot of
research efforts to increase decomposition cycles for grabage. I see alot
of people working hard to affect improvements.

Let's see:

Hebrews 11
1Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.​

The same way, by faith, I study, being sure of what I hope for -- that I will finish college. I am certain of it, but I really do not see it, for I cannot, for it hasn't happened yet. However, if I would not be certain of it, I'd have a really hard time getting myself to studying.

The way I understand faith, faith is about committing to an ideal, a goal, so that one can actively pursue it.

Nice example and I will assert that may not be quite aligned to the 'definition'.
Maybe the example could be modified to:

* I want to graduate by 2006 and I am sure of this.
* I am certain I will graduate in 2006 even though it has not occured yet.

Does this sound like a reasonable mod? Additionally, the definition can
be applied in other areas. For example:

* I want 'God' to exist and I am sure of this.
* I am certain 'God' exists even though I have seen no evidence of it.

 

[zanket]

I discussed the results and analysis with Zanket and true to his word, he considered this and it did influence his original assertions.

I'd like to hear from others who have had a past-life experience, especially via a hypnotist. An interesting thing that Crunchy Cat said is that in the spirit world he experienced, everyone cared about one another. That is consistent with everything I've read and heard from others. But it's not proof of an afterlife of course. Most peoples' past-life experiences (a.k.a. regressions) are of Earthly lives. Crunchy Cat's was otherworldly--even the hypnotherapist was surprised by that it seems.