Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Radorth · 12-24-2002, 03:01 PM

Gee, another thread with my name on it. Oh stop you guys! I don't deserve any of the honors I get here. (Ahem) Well shucks, my fan is clapping back there so I guess I ought to chip in.

Hell, in one of my scenarios, is where atheists and unsaved theists end up together. Both are too self-righteous for heaven. Neither sees the slightest need for a savior. Hypocrites and hypercrites flaming each other for all eternity.

In another scenario, it is simply a place where you are judged by your own rules, and experience exactly what you wish for others, forever. What's wrong or unjust about that? Did you think you could spend your whole life condemning and judging others, pretending there is no log in your eye, and go to heaven still wallowing in your own self-righteousness?

In my favorite scenario, not well supported by scripture, you simply get whatever you want, forever.

The best proof of an afterlife are the near/after-death experiences of thousands of people, who have been both places. It absolutely slays me how these are attributed to oxygen deprivation, etc, just because a pilot saw a tunnel for fifteen seconds. One who one can read, for example, the story of Carl Jung and ineqivocably deny life after death is a truer believer than this one.

Atheists can misinterpret, misrepresent and judge me all they want, but I do not wish anything for anyone but a bit of heaven on earth and in the world to come. I hope Adolph Hitler is there, if he has truly repented, and even Daggah the Righteous, (a long shot I know).

Rad

[ December 24, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>

Radorth · 12-24-2002, 03:15 PM

BTW, I have never once, ever, in 4000 posts, said non-Christians go to hell by definition.

Rad

Yellum Notnef · 12-24-2002, 03:33 PM

Well that was a lovely and heart warming Christmas message from Radorth.

I don`t know how many scenarios for Hell this guy has,but knowing Radorths imagination he probably has dozens.
I wonder if he`s thinks of this one while he lays in bed awake with the covers pulled up to his neck.......

Radorth ends up in Hell for worshipping god incorrectly or for worshipping the WRONG god and finds that he doesn`t have to work 2 hours a day like he figured he`d do in Heaven,but 16 hours a day plus overtime to pay the tab for everyone elses sinfull welfare babies to go to secular schools and learn about the REAL motives of Americas founding fathers.

Radorth · 12-25-2002, 07:48 AM

Well! Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me for answering the thread question and ignoring those who troll around looking for Rad's posts and engaging in off-subject ruminations.

Rad

HelenM · 12-25-2002, 08:17 AM

Merry Christmas, Rad!

Dr Rick · 12-25-2002, 08:58 AM

Yes, with genuine sincerity, a Merry Christmas to you, Rad, and a Merry Christmas to you, Helen.

Rick

Philosoft · 12-25-2002, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth:

The best proof of an afterlife are the near/after-death experiences of thousands of people, who have been both places. It absolutely slays me how these are attributed to oxygen deprivation, etc, just because a pilot saw a tunnel for fifteen seconds.

Oxygen deprivation is a perfectly good explanation for some of the characteristics of NDEs. So is the drug ketamine. This is real, repeatable stuff; data taken from subjects who were not near death. Ketamine is even used by some psychologists in what I believe is called 'death-rebirth psychotherapy,' although I don't know how widely it is used. A supernatural explanation here has Occam's Razor written all over it.

Quote:

One who one can read, for example, the story of Carl Jung and ineqivocably deny life after death is a truer believer than this one.

Still

What am I missing? Is there something particular about Jung's NDE? Sure he claimed to have received insights from his NDE that formed the basis for his archetypes and collective unconscious. So what? Is that really what you are so confident about?

Corona688 · 01-03-2003, 05:17 PM

Hi. Sorry, lost track of this thread over Christmas and the vBulletin changeover.

Quote:

Originally posted by A3
Hello Corona688

A: What we see is not created inside the eye and what we say is not created inside the mouth. Why are you stuck in thinking that what we think is created in the brain?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C688: Modern technologies like Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Positron Emission Scanning have conclusively shown direct relationships between thoughts and brain activity.
---------------------------------------------
A: There is a definite relationship, no question about it. But which is doing the receiving and what is doing the responding? There are clear indications that a brain seems to process thought, but there will never be evidence of what that thought is about or what is being thought because that is a discrete degree above the physical.

Ugh, down THIS road again...

If something cannot be observed or inferred, there is no way to distinguish between it not existing at all. Until we see evidence the said something DOES exist, we go by the assumption it does not. Otherwise, we'd have to assume all sorts of insane things like invisible pink unicorns and stuff.
Science is not the study of sciency stuff. Science is the study of REALITY. If you think this stuff is real, it's your job to demonstrate it as such. :banghead:

Quote:

�The doctrine of degrees is peculiar to the Swedenborg�s writings and fundamental to an understanding of their philosophy. The gradations from light to shade, fine to gross, rare to dense, loud to quiet, etc., are continuous degrees, which are degrees of one thing -measurable by various types of instrumentation. Discrete degrees are the degrees of the formation or composition of one thing from another. They exist in all things, but each distinctly, although they make a one when taken together. They are related as end, cause and effect, and the only ratio between them is that of correspondence; that is, the higher degrees can flow into the lower ones, but not the lower into the higher. Lower degrees have qualities not found in higher ones, but these are qualities of limitation. Love, thought and speech are a series of discrete degrees. Thought cannot formulate all that love perceives, and speech cannot express all that man thinks. However, discrete degrees are homogeneous, and it is in the ultimate degree that all the power of a series is exerted. The three heavens and the three degrees of the mind are discrete series.Yet it should be noted that there are discrete degrees in natural as well as in spiritual things..�

Spiritual things? Show me one.

Quote:

Human beings are, for specific reasons, the only species that can reflect on their own thoughts and so influence and modify their behaviour.

All this talk about degrees, and you abandon it in an instant? We're not the ONLY ones, we're only the ones that are the best at it.

Quote:

The concept of this duality seems often compared with the common radio.
I know next to nothing about the inner parts of radios (or brains for that matter)

Do tell.

Quote:

but with the right tools it should be possible to determine (guided by schematics) that radio waves are being processed, in stages, from the moment they are received untill they emerge as sound.

Heck, you don't even need schematics for that. Take a radio into a shielded chamber; no radio waves, hence no sound(except static). From this we can infer that something's being blocked.

Quote:

Radio waves are completely separate from the radio. We can damage or destroy the radio but the radio waves will still be there.

Yes, they are - and are DEMONSTRATABLY so.

Quote:

C688: Another point - those with damaged brains often have impaired mental abilities. A 'spirit', being invisible and noncorporeal, could not be hurt in such a way.
A: It isn�t. It is like a car and driver. The driver can only communicate by means of the car, such as the lights, horn etc. If parts brake down so does communication but the driver is relatively fine.

Please provide evidence.

Quote:

A: ....the system Swedenborg erected is entirely rational, with no contradictions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C688: This may be true, but only because it provides no answers either. Saying 'goddidit' doesn't contradict itself but is utterly useless in describing reality.
---------------------------------------------------
A: If that were all it said. Yes!... but how about a rational explanation of creation and why. A thorough treatment of Who and What God is

Swedenborg on God: "By Divine creation and order, the Word of God is the only object on this planet that has dual existence in a mode available to our intellect, hence understanding." aka "God Works in Mysterious Ways". His works are a carefullly-crafted and extremely wordy evasion; little else.

Quote:

and His (hopefully) reciprocal relationship with us. Why we are male and female and have a male and female mind.

For explanations of that, I suggest biology. Or do you know next to nothing about that as well?

Quote:

And I can go on for some time but the crux of the matter is that this is fully compatible with the inner meaning of the Bible and our own normal, everyday experiences (foremost in marriage).
==========================
5. Usefulness. In today's world of accountability and big budget deficits it is imperative that the proposed theory have a good possibilities for payoff in terms of community or client delivery of services.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C688: Wrong. Science doesn't seek to create a theory that everyone likes; science seeks to create a theory that works.
----------
A3: Would you, as an employer, reimburse your employee for a visit to a psychiatrist that proves useless?? Please read in a calm fashion and cool the knee-jerk reactions.

Huh? I see no relationship between that statement and mine. I shall restate my earlier statement more clearly, if that's what you mean.

No, science does NOT necessarily produce theories that have good possibilities for payoff in terms of community or client delivery of services. That is Engineering's job - use scientific principles to accomplish these goals. Science only attempts to describe reality.

Quote:

=====================
C688: He doesn't know what Spiritual Substances are!
--------------
A: OK, you tell me.

Would 'love' be nothing maybe?
=====================

Very well. 'Spiritual Substances' are an evasion he cooked up to put a put a fancy-looking veneer on the words 'I haven't a clue what I'm talking about'. Unless anyone can demonstrate they exist, then that's ALL he's saying.

Love is a subjective emotion.

-C688

seebs · 01-03-2003, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Volestrangler

I have a question for you, and for any other theists that would care to attempt an answer.

What is your best evidence for the existence of Hell?

Good question. I guess, the stunning similarity between descriptions of Hell (taking them as somewhat metaphorical) and what it is to know that I am wrong, and not be ready to stop yet.

That, continuing forever, would match the description of "Hell" pretty well. It's a sick, horrible, feeling.

Quote:

I mean, it's your ultimate argument for converting people. Believe in XYZ (depending upon the denomination), or be tortured in Hell forever. It's the Christian way. If all else fails, use threats.

While some Christians may do that, I don't think it's *the* Christian way; if it were, all of us would. I personally don't think that's a very good model, for a number of reasons.

Quote:

Given that it is such an oft-used threat/argument, I challenge you to prove that Hell exists. As those making the positive assertion, the responsibility for providing evidence falls upon your shoulders, meaning if someone replies "prove Hell doesn't" exist, I will respond by asking you to prove that there isn't an invisible UFO in the tail of the Hale-Bopp comet.

I don't think I can prove much of anything. I can observe that the sick feeling I have when I know I am cutting myself off from those who love me is awful enough, and is a weird combination of cold, burning, and everything else wrong. Sounds like Hell to me. If you have never experienced this, I am very glad for you, but I will be unable to show you anything, because states like this are primary experience, not subject to "demonstration". If you have felt like this, you have *my* answer, anyway.

Starboy · 01-04-2003, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth
The best proof of an afterlife are the near/after-death experiences of thousands of people, who have been both places. It absolutely slays me how these are attributed to oxygen deprivation, etc, just because a pilot saw a tunnel for fifteen seconds. One who one can read, for example, the story of Carl Jung and ineqivocably deny life after death is a truer believer than this one.

Guys, why do you waste your time on Radorth? He is a supernaturalist. When it comes to his religion, he automatically accepts supernatural over natural explanations. What is the point of expecting him to do otherwise?

Starboy

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-24-2002, 03:01 PM	#51
Radorth Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,872	Gee, another thread with my name on it. Oh stop you guys! I don't deserve any of the honors I get here. (Ahem) Well shucks, my fan is clapping back there so I guess I ought to chip in. Hell, in one of my scenarios, is where atheists and unsaved theists end up together. Both are too self-righteous for heaven. Neither sees the slightest need for a savior. Hypocrites and hypercrites flaming each other for all eternity. In another scenario, it is simply a place where you are judged by your own rules, and experience exactly what you wish for others, forever. What's wrong or unjust about that? Did you think you could spend your whole life condemning and judging others, pretending there is no log in your eye, and go to heaven still wallowing in your own self-righteousness? In my favorite scenario, not well supported by scripture, you simply get whatever you want, forever. The best proof of an afterlife are the near/after-death experiences of thousands of people, who have been both places. It absolutely slays me how these are attributed to oxygen deprivation, etc, just because a pilot saw a tunnel for fifteen seconds. One who one can read, for example, the story of Carl Jung and ineqivocably deny life after death is a truer believer than this one. Atheists can misinterpret, misrepresent and judge me all they want, but I do not wish anything for anyone but a bit of heaven on earth and in the world to come. I hope Adolph Hitler is there, if he has truly repented, and even Daggah the Righteous, (a long shot I know). Rad [ December 24, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>

12-24-2002, 03:15 PM	#52
Radorth Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,872	BTW, I have never once, ever, in 4000 posts, said non-Christians go to hell by definition. Rad

12-24-2002, 03:33 PM	#53
Yellum Notnef Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Gone Posts: 4,676	Well that was a lovely and heart warming Christmas message from Radorth. I don`t know how many scenarios for Hell this guy has,but knowing Radorths imagination he probably has dozens. I wonder if he`s thinks of this one while he lays in bed awake with the covers pulled up to his neck....... Radorth ends up in Hell for worshipping god incorrectly or for worshipping the WRONG god and finds that he doesn`t have to work 2 hours a day like he figured he`d do in Heaven,but 16 hours a day plus overtime to pay the tab for everyone elses sinfull welfare babies to go to secular schools and learn about the REAL motives of Americas founding fathers.

12-25-2002, 07:48 AM	#54
Radorth Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,872	Well! Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me for answering the thread question and ignoring those who troll around looking for Rad's posts and engaging in off-subject ruminations. Rad

12-25-2002, 08:17 AM	#55
HelenM Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Ill Posts: 6,577	Merry Christmas, Rad!

12-25-2002, 08:58 AM	#56
Dr Rick Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: USA Posts: 5,393	Yes, with genuine sincerity, a Merry Christmas to you, Rad, and a Merry Christmas to you, Helen. Rick

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.