Atheists and theists are the same.

[Alisa]

...and, lo, did God create the first Access database, to allow accurate trackiing of all the beasts of the field and birds of the sky. And did He create an entry form for said data. And the Lord God did apply the rule that 'if the number of each species > 2, then error, else if sex of each species <> (1 male and 1 female), then error.

And Noah did see the Access database and based on his previous experience with Microsoft, he was very afraid.

Ah, but what about the asexual organisms . . . I think you need a case statement in there

 

[Alc]

Ah, but what about the asexual organisms . . . I think you need a case statement in there

Take it as a quote from the Bible (any errors or inconsistencies can be ignored )

 

[Adam Caramon]

But how can you be terrified of something you will never experience? At the moment of your death, you simply stop experiencing anything, you cease to exist. How is this state of nonexistence any different than the state of nonexistence that went on for an eternity before you were born? Nobody laments the years before their birth, because they accept that they didn't exist yet, so there is no suffering. Likewise, there is no reason to lament the years AFTER your death. Because you don't exist, you are not capable of suffering, so what is there to be scared of?

Well, you don't start knowing anything until you are born, so there is no loss there. You can't feel a loss of something you never had. However, once you are born into the world, you are alive. As you grow up all of you thoughts, feelings, emotions, etc. are dependent upon being alive.

Once you die, no one really knows what happens. Some people who are religious might wonder if some of the 'bad' things they did in their life will send them to eternal damnation. Being afraid of the unknown is a very popular sentiment in human nature.

I want to stress that I agree with you, I personally do not fear dieing. However, I think being able to be empathetic with others who do fear it important.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

But how can you be terrified of something you will never experience? At the moment of your death, you simply stop experiencing anything, you cease to exist. How is this state of nonexistence any different than the state of nonexistence that went on for an eternity before you were born? Nobody laments the years before their birth, because they accept that they didn't exist yet, so there is no suffering. Likewise, there is no reason to lament the years AFTER your death. Because you don't exist, you are not capable of suffering, so what is there to be scared of?

It's not fear of experiencing nothing - that's logically impossible, as you point out. It's fear of having to finish, and not wanting to finish. Plus fear of all the stuff you've worked hard to create fading away or being forgotten.

 

[gmatriix]

But how can you be terrified of something you will never experience? At the moment of your death, you simply stop experiencing anything, you cease to exist. How is this state of nonexistence any different than the state of nonexistence that went on for an eternity before you were born? Nobody laments the years before their birth, because they accept that they didn't exist yet, so there is no suffering. Likewise, there is no reason to lament the years AFTER your death. Because you don't exist, you are not capable of suffering, so what is there to be scared of?

Alisa, you are correct....
Eccl 9:5 "For the living are conscious that they will die, but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them have been forgotten."

 

[Alc]

because the remembrance of them have been forgotten.

Does that mean nobody remembers them or that they can remember nothing?

 

[ColinEssex]

It's fear of having to finish, and not wanting to finish.

Which begs the question, should people be allowed to choose when they die?

For example - If someone has done everything they wanted to, then they reach retirement age, why not say ok I've had enough now - time to die.

Col

 

[Adam Caramon]

Which begs the question, should people be allowed to choose when they die?

I think they should be able to. I'm all for individual's rights. If someone is in real pain, or simply decides they do not want to live anymore, they should be allowed to go to an end-of-life clinic and begin the process. I think the process should include some sort of psychiatric exam just to make sure that the person wasn't suffering from clinical depression or something.

After those steps have been taken, and the person told the psychiatrist's thoughts, they should then have the right to decide to end their life if that is what they choose.

Adam

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

Which begs the question, should people be allowed to choose when they die?

For example - If someone has done everything they wanted to, then they reach retirement age, why not say ok I've had enough now - time to die.

Col

George Eastman (founder of Kodak) committed suicide when he became ill, leaving a note that said "My work is done. Why wait?"

I don't really see any reason to ban suicide - there are cases where it causes harm to innocent people (such as young children, if their parents commit suicide, leaving them), but if someone has truly had enough of life, whose right is it to make them continue to endure it?

 

[Alc]

George Eastman (founder of Kodak) committed suicide when he became ill, leaving a note that said "My work is done. Why wait?"

I don't really see any reason to ban suicide - there are cases where it causes harm to innocent people (such as young children, if their parents commit suicide, leaving them), but if someone has truly had enough of life, whose right is it to make them continue to endure it?

Agreed totally, in theory, but it does leave the door open to abuse from people.

I'd imagine it could be difficult to know that someone was doing it because they wanted to, as opposed to having been convinced/bullied into it by somebody else. Even people who've always said that they would do so if they got terminally ill might change their mind at the last minute.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

All true. It's quite possible that permission to die when you've had enough might turn into an obligation to die when other people have had enough of you...

 

[Alisa]

Reason Number 1 why atheists and theists are NOT the same:
Theists sit around and say, I can't imagine how this happened, so god must have done it.
Atheists work on figuring out how it could have happened:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/science/14rna.html?_r=1

 

[The_Doc_Man]

All true. It's quite possible that permission to die when you've had enough might turn into an obligation to die when other people have had enough of you...

(Atomic Shrimp)

Oy, is THAT ever a dangerous doctrine! And the source of movies such as Logan's Run There are some people on this forum for whom "having had enough of you" is already in the past for many of us. But I'll be generous and not mention names.

Myself, I've already decided how I want to go. I want to be shot and killed by a jealous husband who catches me "in the act" when I'm age 105. OK, might be setting the sights a bit high on that one, but then again, if you set your sights too low in life, you'll always be disappointed with your success.

 

[pbaldy]

I want to be shot and killed by a jealous husband who catches me "in the act" when I'm age 105.

Similarly, I told my wife I wanted to out while "in the act". For some odd reason, she wasn't so enamored with the idea.

 

[Mike375]

The_Doc_Man,

Would you have been on the forum from say about 5 hours before you posted through to about 2 hours or so. If so, did you see me posting on one of the Access forums.

What made you bring this thread up, something in the sub consious.

My question relates to the topic because of something very strange.

 

[Rich]

(There are some people on this forum for whom "having had enough of you" is already in the past for many of us.

I can only think of one, who else was on your list?

 

[laxster]

Reason Number 1 why atheists and theists are NOT the same:
Theists sit around and say, I can't imagine how this happened, so god must have done it.
Atheists work on figuring out how it could have happened:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/science/14rna.html?_r=1

Nice way to mis-characterize things complete. As a God-fearing man, I view science as explaining the means of God's creation. All science does for me is further prove that there is intelligent design in this universe, and how very miraculous it is. I have a hard time believing that this all just happened "by chance" and it seems illogical from my point of view.

Regardless, the issue isn't belief vs. lack of belief, but rather belief in what? Faith in what? Most athiests I've met are actually people of incredible faith.

I would imagine thinking that earth -- and the universe for that matter -- are all hear because of being in the exact right time at the exact right place would require tremendous amounts of faith to believe.

 

[Rabbie]

I would imagine thinking that earth -- and the universe for that matter -- are all hear because of being in the exact right time at the exact right place would require tremendous amounts of faith to believe.

And I think you are imagining wrong. If you go the atheist route then any planet where life evolves has to have suitable conditions for life or it wouldn't evolve there. No need for an intelligent designer. The mammalian eye although functional is not well designed with nerves having to pass over and shading the light sensitive retina bfore exiting through the retina leaving the fovea(or blind spot). An intelligent designer shoul have one better. And where did the the intelligent designer come from? i he evolve or did sombody else design him(or her - I'm not sexist)

The real argument is really spontaneous evolution or Creationism. Intelligent Design is just a fudge by some creationists to get round the arguments of the evolutionists.

Also bear in mind there are many Christians who accept evolution.

 

[Mike375]

The mammalian eye although functional is not well designed with nerves having to pass over and shading the light sensitive retina bfore exiting through the retina leaving the fovea(or blind spot). An intelligent designer shoul have one better.

This to me has always meant if there is/was a creator then it was only a kick start job by laying down the laws of nature. Although that still leaves a question that the laws of nature come up a bit imperfect etc.

 

[laxster]

Oh, I do accept evolution. It completely explains how God created what we see all around us today. I find it ridiculously foolish that people science and religion both butt heads when they both explain the same thing, just in different ways. It's not evolution vs. Creation, but rather how they fit together and are a part of each other. Ying and Yang. Remember, Darwin was a devout Christian. And there's nothing that occurs in the account of Creation which conflicts with Evolutionary theory. NOTHING.

I just don't accept that life is limited to what we as humans can see, taste, smell, feel, or hear. I would say that it's myopic to think that we are the end-all-be-all creatures who can possibly determine existence beyond that which we cannot see. It's like purposefully leaving the blinders on.

In fact, since we are given free will, we are free to think what we want. I accept the Lutheran view of Christianity - but not everyone does. Everyone is free to believe what they want. But NO ONE can tell me that the power of prayer is nothing. That miracles can just be boiled down to weird anomalies. That there isn't a driving force behind all of this. It just doesn't make sense. The chances of having everything in place occurring by chance are miniscule. It would be like a tornado sweeping through a city and leaving behind a perfectly constructed 747 out of all the wreckage. It's simply not something I view as being even remotely plausible.

This is why I say it's not about belief or no belief. Faith or no faith. Rather faith in what, belief in what. Because all atheists have clearly taken enormous leaps of faith and seem to have incredibly strong beliefs that we're all here because "conditions were favorable".

i he evolve or did sombody else design him(or her - I'm not sexist)

Neither am I. Unfortunately, our languages divide everything into masculine and feminine, and when referring to a collective body, the proper rule is that you use the masculine term. God is not a he or a she up in the sky with a long white beard, but is inately everywhere. God doesn't just sit back; God's everywhere. Everything we encounter is a fragment of God's identity.

And why does God have to be created? I accept that God just is, and there are things we will never be able even begin to comprehend. Including God. I just accept it at face value.

We might not see eye-to-eye, but this is an intellectually stimulating thread.