Hi Pericles.
another good effort !
Before I forget, have u considered writing for newspapers on various topics ? You should ! A friend from Church had an article published last week or 2. You have a gift. USE IT :)
Now, going in a circle does not mean you or I have learnt nothing.

Stretching and tugging, selective application.
P, I think u misunderstood my intent there. I was in no way suggesting that YOU make selective application, I was speaking more generally.

ARGUE/DISCUSS TOWARD TRUTH.
yes.. ur right. That should be the goal. And it is my goal. But remember what I shared about 'Christ died'= fact "for our sins" = interpretation. The diff between us on the fact of Christs death is our understanding of it. That's not about selective application or tugging and stretching. Its a position we arrive at thru faith in my case and lack of that same faith on your side. Not a criticism, but an explanation of why we have gone about as far as we can go on that thing. I happen to feel there are very solid and reasonable grounds for accepting the interpretation of 'for our sins'. But to reach that position requires the acceptance of the reliability of the documents which report it.

Truth can exist by itself in the form of an event. "Person A killed Person B". Now.. lawyers for 'A' will seek to stretch and tug at that to show it was 'justified' or to weaken the prosecution case which will be to attempt to emphasise the willfulness and culpability aspect. Neither approach will change the fact that A killed B.
Am I sufficiently distinquishing my perspective here ?

The only thing left would be to attempt to 'prove' or reduce the negative probabilities in your mind so that u also can arrive at the same faith. Or in ur case, possibly the converse to me. but faith seldom comes thru that approach.

Please don't thing the exercise has been without merit or value, I have found the encounter quite an education :)

I’ve never been a spiritual person and nor were my parents. As a child it never entered my mind that there was such a term as “Atheist”. When I became aware that others had beliefs in the supernatural I was simply in shock. Left to my own devises and raised as I was with no comments regarding such things here in Australia I never thought much about the possibility. Stories were stories and myths were myths.

However as an adult I consider it a real possibility that if everyone suddenly became "Atheist" it would be a simple case of another ideology taking its place. I consider this the unfortunate nature of man. Man has needs and often uses his views for destructive purposes. Fundamentalism of any kind is dangerous. This is why I don't label myself. Why give oneself a label and then spend ones days defending it? I let others do that. You may label as you wish.

Perhaps an ideology that preaches, "be good to thy neighbor" and that offers "hope" is a touch better then a cold Political ideology that in practice “may” end up causing greater harm. I don’t claim any knowledge regarding such things but the thought has crossed my mind.

My Grandmother had Alzheimer’s and lost virtually all her memories. It seems obvious to me that memories have a physical form in the brain. My only conclusion is that when you die you will cease to remember having ever existed. This is not a very good essence or soul. Others may be able to interpret such evidence differently and perhaps these people are more gifted then me.

How do religious people interpret facts regarding brain damage?

I’ve always been curious, as I know that being religious does not mean being stupid. It just seems that case study after case study of brain damage victims reveals a direct link between brain structure and function. When we see what is taken away from an individual in terms of personality and the like. I couldn't convince myself that ones memories are restored after death even if I desperately wanted to.

After looking death in the face via the sudden and unexpected loss of both my brother and mother it seems obvious to me that death is the end. That life is frail and unfortunately there is nothing more to it. I simply wish to do the very best to enrich the lives around me and keep smiling. I do this not because of some super being with a brownie point checklist but rather because I have such empathy for all fellow beings, religious or not, human or not. For me that’s what life’s about. These are my beliefs.

My mother and brother were bother were both strong atheists. My mother worked hard as an English teacher and devoted an enormous amount of time to charity work. She was an awesome mother and gave an unbelievable amount in life to all people. Both were killed in a freak accident. I can't help but have a degree of anger at people who say that she, after the life she gave, is now burning for an eternity in the equivalent of a nazi gas chamber called hell. To me it equates with saying that she "deserved" to be put to death or locked up in prison.

This is of cause an atheists perspective because I am assuming that “some religious people” believe anyone who does not believe in god is evil, immoral and "deserves" to go to hell rather than "will" go to hell. My inner ethical compass is so apposed to such a notion. I can’t help but feel religion of this kind is monstrous and barbaric in the extreme. My ethical compass stems from empathy. If I feel pain I know that others do to. Some people don't have the ability to feel for others and may need religions hand to direct them.

For those of you who hold a strong faith and conviction in an after life and a universal justice I really hope you are right. There is nothing wrong with such a faith even if it turns out to be “factually incorrect”.

For those who believe that heaven is not about giving and being charitable to your fellow man but rather about believing in a book written by men and a feeling that may turn out to simply be written in the brain by chemicals and a belief that all who do not believe are going to hell - I truly think you are wrong and unethical in the extreme for dismissing one of the most basic of ethical premises - empathy for your fellow man - religious or not.

I have some religious friends and some atheist friends. Personally I just stay way from labels. All I really know is that I was made by my parents and they were made by theirs. Evolution has a strong case - up until organic molecules have to form a simply living organism. No doubt we aren’t any closer to solving that one accurately but so what. Knowledge does not come from ignorance. I’m just happy to say, “I don’t know” because I don’t and neither do you. If evolution was some how proven wrong and an alternate idea was proven correct I would not have any problem appreciating the new theory/fact or what ever it is. The only reason I feel Evolution has such a strong case is because of all the little facts that point in its direction.

Not all atheists are militant like for example, R. Dawkins. Some are just strongly without (A = without) theism. Still I worry about people who have to label themselves. Any reflective person knows that no one is born with religious belief. They are educated into it. Environment is the most important factor. I’m the same as I was when I was born. I have no knowledge and until I do the question is simply rhetorical.

Albert Einstein once said: “A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man”.

These are my thoughts as well.

Beno
I can understand your feeling and situation. But needless to say I don't share it.
I truly wonder about people who 'do good' without reference to God. I just 'dont get it'. 'why'? I just cannot see any reason to do other than indulge ones-self in carnal pleasures for the duration of this meaningless life. (if God is 'not') u may not see this, but I draw your attention to it because it is the dilemna addressed by a lot of major philosophers of the existential ilk. (Sartre and others). Even existentialist web sites usually declare openly that once u take away God, everything becomes absurd.
http://www.interchange.ubc.ca/cree/ have a read of this.

I think the desire to do 'good' without reference to God, actually stems more from our cultural conciousness which itSELF comes from our Judao Christian heritage. The point is, that without God, its just as much an option to be 'evil' as we would understand the term, as it is to be "good" and in the end, it just doesn't matter, because this is all there is.
The other point I'd like to make is that the Christian faith is based on historical events, well attested by witnesses. It's worth thinking about.

BOAZ_David
So are you saying that the “standards” created but Christianity have flowed over into society and have given structure in the way of standards to peoples lives. I feel that there are many avenues to standards and that they are mostly in place to help a society “work”. I have no problem with the notion that I have been influenced by Christian standards.
I believe strongly in standards. Without them society would not function. They contribute to the world I want to live in and I am prepared to give up certain freedoms to keep contributing to this world. A world where children have the safe secure upbringing I did and where people help eachother. Sadly the world is dog eat dog and it has nothing to do with atheism.
So why do so many non-believers like myself remain faithful to our wives and partners, refrain from drugs and adhere to the standards of society. I refrain from such things because I have empathy for other people and because I can so clearly see the pitfall of a society that does not have such standards.
Surely you don’t believe things just because it's written in a book or passed down via word of mouth from over 2000 years ago?? History is written but people not truth!
Also why is it that… “High levels of organic atheism are strongly correlated with high levels of societal health, such as low homicide rates, low poverty rates, low infant mortality rates, and low illiteracy rates, as well as high levels of educational attainment, per capita income, and gender equality. Most nations characterized by high degrees of individual and societal security have the highest rates of organic atheism, and conversely, nations characterized by low degrees of individual and societal security have the lowest rates of organic atheism. : See Atheism: Contemporary Rates and Patterns.
http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/faculty/zuckerman/atheism.html
This is not to say that atheism causes such things but rather that these things cause atheism".
Just some thoughts
Beno

Beno
you raise some interesting issues.
Our culutre (western) is intimately linked to the Judao Christian heritage, yes. But to try to outline this in a few sentences would be overly optimistic.
One issue is that the newer atheistic philosophies of life, such as from Neitzche and Sartre, and others, take time to filter down to the masses. Not only this, the masses actually find it most difficult to accept a world based on such fundamentals, where atheism leads to nihilism....http://www.iep.utm.edu/n/nihilism.htm

"nihilism is most often associated with Friedrich Nietzsche who argued that its corrosive effects would eventually destroy all moral, religious, and metaphysical convictions and precipitate the greatest crisis in human history."

He reasoned thus, because when there is nothing to believe in, humanity has lost its anchor. Any decency in such a society is not based on its basic beliefs, but on a sentimental clinging to ideas that deep down it knows to be false, but which it cannot face. (for atheists I mean)

As for nations with strong atheist tendencies and the correllation with societal health. My goodness, such a connection that one is due to the other is tenuous at best, ludicrous at worst, and seems to be ignoring quite a lot of history.

I read your link, can I offer one to you also ? please read the whole chapter
http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=15&version=31

From what I can see good education, good medical access and a good standard of living correlates with greater disbelief. I feel that under such circumstances people are less likely to cling to religion. Where people have to fight to survive they need to believe in something more to give them purpose and structure in life. They need the community of church and the comfort of their belief. I don’t think this is a wild statement.

I am certainly not a nihilist and neither are most non-god-believers. I have no problem with the notion that I take a leap of faith in believing that there is a rational explanation for everything regardless of our ignorance. I feel that if the computer in front of me stops working it is because the hardware has broken or that there is a programming error. I believe that every one of the millions of computers in the world today works for a reason will break for a reason and may get fixed if we know the reason. I could be wrong and I’m not dogmatic.

I also believe in freewill. The determinist may say that an unbroken chain of prior occurrences determine every physical event, including human cognition and action. I believe that this is a little unfounded! I have the ability to pause, discern and decide. Even if the choice is just an algorithm in my head. Therefore I am responsible for my actions!

I must say though that the "Fundamentalism" I have seen among young people seems to be preoccupied with the notion of self – “my salvation” “my relationship with god” and “my peace of mind”. People in this group proselytize and concern themselves with conversion while the more moderate Christians devote time to expressing their faith via charitable acts. I have no problem with the moderate religious belief. I just feel that extremes of any kind are dangerous.