Anti-Semitism In France!

[Ron Cusano 0]

From my vantage point, not being able to consider there is a God, is as closed minded as never have ever having a doubt. To make a decision for either position you would think one would have to weigh the evidence to come to a colclusion.

If considerring the possibility there is a God is more positive than being close minded. Is not being able to consider the possibility that there is no God negative and close minded?

[Wheetsin 714]

I think to be open minded enough to consider one position is being open minded enough to consider the opposite position.

Not sure I'm following. Are you saying that by considering one possibility, you're automatically open-minded? Or that by considering "no god", you've automatically considered "yes god"? Or are you saying something entirely different?

[green 6]

I, like most of you have been faced with the loss of a loved one. Although I do not believe they are in heaven I have no concern that I will never see or be with them again. They continue to live in me, in my memeories and in my heart. I see them on regular basis, in my thoughts, my dreams and my day dreams. We all live on in the people we leave behind. I visit my Sisters grave on a regular basis and I talk to her, not because I think she can hear me but because I can hear me and these moments make her memory more vivid.

I take great comfort in those visits because she exists in me, not believing in God or heaven has no impact on my ability to spend time with my memory of her.

I am where you are at, TommyO. After my mother died I came into possession of my father's ashes and my mother's ashes as well. To tell you the truth, I was the sole executor, I was very distraught, and I didn't really know how to deal with their ashes. And so they sat on the floor of my hall closet on the main floor of my house for approximately 9 months. It was only when I was preparing to relinquish them to my surviving brother that I realised that I had derived some degree of comfort from having them with me and that I would miss them.

Grief places one in a very strange state. I still have a half-finished bottle of my mother's foundation make-up. The smell and the colour will always be able to conjure her up for me.

We had no service when my father died. He was cremated. The family gathered around and ate a meal in a steak house on his dime. My father loved a good meal and he loved steak. After a few days my mother went to reclaim his ashes but he wasn't sufficiently cool for her to bring home. She found this wildly funny.

She kept his ashes on her bedroom dresser and as she was dying we placed them in her hospital bed. This was probably a sentimental gesture on our part, she was in a coma, but it gave us comfort.

Our family marked both my brother's death and that of my mother in exactly the same fashion as we had marked my father's. We gathered together and we ate together. As we did so we talked about the missing ones.

We are still atheists. Maybe we were born without the belief gene. Who knows? Certainly we miss them and we are anxious to hold on to such totems of them as are available of them. It is nice to have material around that will evoke a vivid memory of someone whom you love, be it through hearing a voice, seeing a photograph or smelling a characteristic fragrance.

But this, the dreadful sense of loss, belongs exclusively to those of us who are still alive. And when we die we will, of course, be beyond it.

This is, for better or for worse, how this atheist sees it.

[TommyO 5]

Green, I think that whether we believe in God or not the pain we go through when we lose the people we love is the same. When one of my Aunts died I drove my other aunt (her sister) to the funeral. She wept for most of the drive, about 2 hours. She missed her sister until the day she died and she went through all of the same emotions that I did when I lost my sister. We had long discussions over this sense of loss and it was intersting to us how we both seemed to share a similar experience given that I am an athiest and she was a Nun. She had a very strong sense that she would meet her sister in heaven but still she felt a sense of loss and was often overcome with grief.

We get through it by going through it, we may use different tools but we make it to the other end.

Believing in life after death may help some of us through these tragic periods but I beleive that demanding Life during Life is what gets us through to the other side.

[Ron Cusano 0]

What I'm saying is, to reach the conclusion there is a God or to reach the conclusion there is no God, means that you have to make a decision based upon "something"! You are not just born favoring one or the other.

To weigh whatever it is you are considering means you have to have somewhat of an open mind either way, other wise there is no decision to be made, because you are closed to it.

Not sure I'm following. Are you saying that by considering one possibility, you're automatically open-minded? Or that by considering "no god", you've automatically considered "yes god"? Or are you saying something entirely different?

[TommyO 5]

The statement "I don't believe in God" in no way implies that there is no God nor does it imply that it is a factual statement. When one includes the term "believe" in a statement there is an implification that they could be wrong. Traditionaly Atheists tend to say things like they don't beleive in God. Theists on the other hand tend to make statements that are more definitive like "God exists of that I am certain" That is why there may be a sesnse that fundamenatlist Chrsitians are more close minded.

I should also add that most atheist do not fear the reprecusions of there being a God because it makes no sense to them that he would be a bad diety and send them off to hell simply because the chose not to believe. I guess that is why fundamantalist Christians respond with the great fear factor "Your gonna burn"

Just my thoughts!

[Ron Cusano 0]

I think that fundementalist Christians speak in term of "certainty" because they have weighted all the evidence and have been convinced beyond any doubt that our understanding is correct.

I, and I think most other Christians don't believe that the reason unbelievers are destined to Hell is because the chose not to believe. We believe that we were ALL destined to Hell because we are imperfect (sinful) and God is Holy (perfect), we were not fit to be in His presence and have fellowship with Him. The difference between Believers and unbelievers is that we believe that the one who was perfect, Jesus, paid the penalty for our imperfection (sin), making us once again fit to be in Gods presence, and we humbly accepted that salvation as a free gift from God.

I think that sometimes unbelievers thing that Christians think they are better that you. Nothing could be further that the truth. We were all unbelievers once too! We aren't better, just forgiven!

The statement "I don't believe in God" in no way implies that there is no God nor does it imply that it is a factual statement. When one includes the term "believe" in a statement there is an implification that they could be wrong. Traditionaly Atheists tend to say things like they don't beleive in God. Theists on the other hand tend to make statements that are more definitive like "God exists of that I am certain" That is why there may be a sesnse that fundamenatlist Chrsitians are more close minded.

I should also add that most atheist do not fear the reprecusions of there being a God because it makes no sense to them that he would be a bad diety and send them off to hell simply because the chose not to believe. I guess that is why fundamantalist Christians respond with the great fear factor "Your gonna burn"

Just my thoughts!

[gadgetlady 4]

I read this article a few years ago and just found it while cleaning:

Medical Prayer Tests

Researchers have found that heart disease patients were helped when prayers were said on their behalf by strangers who had only the patients' names. Those prayed for had fewer complications, fewer cases of pneumonia, needed less drug treatment and left the hospital earlier.

Neuropsychiatrist Dr. Peter Fenwick told a meeting of 400 top scientists at the University of Salford (UK) that devout Christians may have been right all along. He said, "These are very good studies, properly done. Subjects who are unaware they are being prayed for can be significantly helped."

The Sunday Mail (Qld), 21 September 2003, pg. 47.

[Wheetsin 714]

Gadget - I'll completely remove this from the topic of religion, just because it's pretty out there - even for someone as abstract as I am - and I don't want my comments to be seen as negative or poking fun.

There's a theory (I could have told you the name of it before I started writing this post, but now I'm having a total brain fart) around energy and transference of energy... it's the "something" electromagnetic field theory. Learning theorists (including psychologists) were the first to consider it, and then some medical practitioners followed suit. I've worked quite a bit with the man who fathered the theory (he's a little out there too!), and while I'm not a subscriber, it's interesting food for thought.

The catalyst questions were along the lines of, "How can a twin here think of something, and twin there can tell you what the other is thinking?" Or, "How can one person think of being in a very hot place, and the body temperature of the person next to them starts to rise?" Or in general, how is it that people who are seemingly not connected, or moderately connected, or deeply connected, can seem to share thoughts and ideas?

Anyway, the jist if the theory is that we're surrounded by electromagnetic fields, and that these fields serve as a type of RAM for our psyche. If you aren't familiar with computer terminology, RAM is the computer's version of short term memory (volatile memory). Kind of. Things are stored on the hard drive (brain), but when something needs to be accessed (active memory) it's brought into RAM (our working memory or recall processes). When we're done working with it, it goes back into storage (aka is "filed" back into our brain for storage). Ok , so that's not entirely accurate, but it would take me two or three pages to go into enough detail to make the analogy spot-on correct. Anyway...

The theory supposes that everything that can be known, felt, and understood is based on energy (fundamentally this is true) -- and the energy that is "us" can freely flow in and out of the energy that is in our EMF. And his same energy can mingle with others' energy - especially people we're somehow (psyche) connected to.

Prayer healing was one of the things used as example phenomena. As were things like two friends who haven't spoken in years calling each other at the same moment -- the "I was just thinking about you" type of events, or thinking of a long lost song moments before you hear someone else starting to sing it.

[Ron Cusano 0]

I think that Christians might call that "something electromagnetic field " the Holy Spirit!!

Gadget - I'll completely remove this from the topic of religion, just because it's pretty out there - even for someone as abstract as I am - and I don't want my comments to be seen as negative or poking fun.

There's a theory (I could have told you the name of it before I started writing this post, but now I'm having a total brain fart) around energy and transference of energy... it's the "something" electromagnetic field theory. Learning theorists (including psychologists) were the first to consider it, and then some medical practitioners followed suit. I've worked quite a bit with the man who fathered the theory (he's a little out there too!), and while I'm not a subscriber, it's interesting food for thought.

The catalyst questions were along the lines of, "How can a twin here think of something, and twin there can tell you what the other is thinking?" Or, "How can one person think of being in a very hot place, and the body temperature of the person next to them starts to rise?" Or in general, how is it that people who are seemingly not connected, or moderately connected, or deeply connected, can seem to share thoughts and ideas?

Anyway, the jist if the theory is that we're surrounded by electromagnetic fields, and that these fields serve as a type of RAM for our psyche. If you aren't familiar with computer terminology, RAM is the computer's version of short term memory (volatile memory). Kind of. Things are stored on the hard drive (brain), but when something needs to be accessed (active memory) it's brought into RAM (our working memory or recall processes). When we're done working with it, it goes back into storage (aka is "filed" back into our brain for storage). Ok , so that's not entirely accurate, but it would take me two or three pages to go into enough detail to make the analogy spot-on correct. Anyway...

The theory supposes that everything that can be known, felt, and understood is based on energy (fundamentally this is true) -- and the energy that is "us" can freely flow in and out of the energy that is in our EMF. And his same energy can mingle with others' energy - especially people we're somehow (psyche) connected to.

Prayer healing was one of the things used as example phenomena. As were things like two friends who haven't spoken in years calling each other at the same moment -- the "I was just thinking about you" type of events, or thinking of a long lost song moments before you hear someone else starting to sing it.

[Carlene 12]

I should also add that most atheist do not fear the reprecusions of there being a God because it makes no sense to them that he would be a bad diety and send them off to hell simply because the chose not to believe. I guess that is why fundamantalist Christians respond with the great fear factor "Your gonna burn"

Just my thoughts!

I think Atheists don't "fear the loss of heaven and the pains of hell" (a quote from the old school Act of Contrition) for the same reason that I don't fear being abducted by aliens - they don't believe God exists - or heaven, or hell.

[BJean 16]

Wheetsin: My sister and I always knew when to call each other no matter how far apart physically we were, even when she lived in England and I lived in Virginia. We grew up finishing each other's thoughts and sentences. My DH said that we could both talk at the same time and understand each other perfectly when no one else had any idea what we were talking about. She was very much like my twin although we were actually 13 months apart.

When she went in for her mastectomy, she told the doctor and nurses that she really did not want anything negative said in the operating room. She told them that even though she was "out", she would soak up those negative vibes and that she would really appreciate it if they would think happy thoughts and speak upbeat words. She was not a mystic, didn't believe in anything weird. She was a teacher, a Presbyterian and was very smart and I miss her every moment of every day.

[lisah25 3]

I think that fundementalist Christians speak in term of "certainty" because they have weighted all the evidence and have been convinced beyond any doubt that our understanding is correct

Hi Ron, I have a question for you if I may. How do you define Faith?

[lisah25 3]

Wheetsin: My sister and I always knew when to call each other no matter how far apart physically we were, even when she lived in England and I lived in Virginia. We grew up finishing each other's thoughts and sentences. My DH said that we could both talk at the same time and understand each other perfectly when no one else had any idea what we were talking about. She was very much like my twin although we were actually 13 months apart.

My mom and her sisters were very much like that. Often they would send each other the same cards, it wasn't rare that mom would get the same B-day card from each sister, even though they lived 600 miles apart.

When my dad died, my mom called the one sister, and she answered the phone saying "It's Bob, isn't it?". Now, this was long before Caller ID, she didn't know it was my mom calling, let along have any way to know why.

[Ron Cusano 0]

I guess I would define it as believing in something unseen and without definitive proof. With Christianity, there is not definitive proof by scientific standards, but I believe there is enough convincing evidence of it's authenticity to establish believing faith.

Hi Ron, I have a question for you if I may. How do you define Faith?