Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Spearthrower · **#121** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 7:34 am

carl wrote:
Even scientists who put their faith in evolution actually question evolution because of the nanotechnology which makes up our bodies:

Evolution requires faith?

Do you have any idea what bollocks you're now spouting, Carl?

Perhaps best to retreat from this contention rapidly, unless of course you actually wish to learn why you're wrong.

carl wrote:"It is the sheer universality of PERFECTION, the fact that everywhere we look, to whatever depth we look, we find an elegance and ingenuity of an absolutely TRANSCENDING quality, which so mitigates against the idea of chance. Is it really credible that random processes could have constructed a reality, the smallest element of which - a functional protein or gene - is COMPLEX BEYOND OUR OWN CREATIVE CAPABILITIES, a reality which is the very antithesis of chance, which EXCELS IN EVERY SENSE ANYTHING PRODUCED BY THE INTELLIGENCE OF MAN?" (M Denton, PhD, Molecular Biologist)

Yep, Denton's wrong too.

carl wrote:Comment: When we see a hi-tech device, we know several things about its maker:
1) High intelligence, and in the case of the single biological cell, absolute supreme intelligence.
2) Extreme care in making the device.
3) Device made with specific intent/purpose.

A hi-tech device is not analogous to a living organism. It doesn't hold the properties by which life evolved, namely DNA and inheritance.

See the giraffe's recurrent laryngeal nerve for an example of a biological structure that CANNOT be explained by reference to intelligence, to design, to purpose, to intent.

One black swan, Carl.

carl wrote:These 3 assumptions are made by everyone on this planet, unless of course, it involves the possibility of a supreme being.

Of when people possess sufficient knowledge to see that there's no magic man behind the curtain, just plain old natural mechanisms generating complexity.

Spearthrower · **#122** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 7:38 am

carl wrote:
Shrunk wrote:No. There is a rule against preaching, though. And one against trolling, too.

So there is no rule whatsoever about avoiding answering a question? There should be.

As for preaching and trolling, have any of your posts fallen into the category of preaching and trolling? Just because you're an atheist talking about atheistic viewpoints, does that mean anything you say cannot possibly be construed as preaching?

Preaching is the delivery of a sermon or religious address to a congregation of people.

Atheism isn't a religion, and holds no religious beliefs.

However, this is a red herring because no one is offering anything atheistic here. You have asked people to explain what people who don't believe in the wooly fantasy of an after-life feel that they are living for. If the non-belief in an after-life is partially based on a lack of belief in divine beings, then people must necessarily respond from within the context of atheism.

However, this doesn't remotely amount to preaching atheism, and it's duplicitous of you to suggest so.

Best go check out that FUA which you expressly agreed to follow when you signed up here.

Spearthrower · **#123** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 7:45 am

carl wrote:In Genesis it says death and disease came into this world due to sin.

Well, it doesn't actually, but even if it did, it would be a stupid contention.

If a 10 ton rock fell on a mouse' head prior to 'sin', would the mouse have been just fine?

What did organisms eat prior to sin? Only, you must maintain that all the highly complex organs for eating must have been designed by your god, yet why would they have needed to consume food if they didn't need to eat to live? This is particularly pertinent as the majority of the diversity of organisms on our planet necessarily kill other organisms to gain their nutrients, whether they be plants or animals.

Ergo, either god knew in advance that sin would occur and thereby designed creatures for the after-in inclusion of death, or it's abject nonsense.

The wealth of evidence suggests the latter. Not least because life was on this planet hundreds of millions of years prior to the arrival of humanity who allegedly committed the requisite sin. Fossils show very clearly that animals did in fact die and suffer disease prior to the arrival of humans, ergo the Bible is wrong.

carl wrote:Prior to that time, God saw that the original creation was very good ("Then God looked over all he had made, and he saw that it was very good!").

Yeah, it's stupid and it boggles my mind that people can actually believe this wankery.

carl wrote:But here is another question for fearful atheists to avoid.

Fearful atheists? You are obviously here for a scrap, Carl. In what way has anyone either shown a) their fear or b) their atheism?

Answer: none.

Either you have been here before and are now operating under a different username, or you are rehearsing your prejudice.

carl wrote: If you're really really fearful, tell the moderator to ban or censor me and we will end this thread:

Why would anyone want to do that, Carl? Your arguments are wooly wankery and easily defeated by application of logic and evidence. I personally welcome theists like you as it gives us the opportunity to show what idiotic beliefs are intrinsic to theism.

carl wrote:Question: If a carmaker has a recall, do we immediately assume the hi-tech car has no maker, no engineer, no manufacturer?

Question: if a dog takes a shit, does that mean god designed that shit?

carl wrote:As for me, such a conclusion would be an intellectual embarrassment.

Most of your conclusions have been an intellectual embarrassment, so one more would hardly make much difference!

Fallible · **#124** by **Fallible** » Oct 01, 2014 7:49 am

Also carl, preaching here means preaching religion, trying to tell others what they should be doing in relation to it, that it's the only proper way to live, that they are lesser if they do differently and especially with the element of threat of supernatural consequences for people who do not follow your preferred path. The rule against it exists because one of the purposes of this place is to provide somewhere that atheists don't have to be exposed to the kind of nonsense that so often pervades every corner of life outside the internet. In many parts of the world, it still is not safe to say you don't believe in a god. This place is supposed to be somewhere that we don't have to deal with people telling us we're bad, we should change and if we do not, we will suffer the consequences for eternity. You seem like a smart person, so by now you should have managed to work out that under this definition of preaching, an atheist cannot preach.

You came here voluntarily, you sought us out, you agreed to abide by the rules in place. So far you have shown that you are willing to lie in order to have the opportunity to hound atheists even in their own haven with your tiresome fairy story. What, you don't think we hear your claptrap enough and we need to actually be sought out online to be told it again? No, carl. We don't. We don't need to hear the nonsense you are prepared to regurgitate as though it's meaningful in yet another arena. Now you're welcome to be here and talk about your religion, but you need to keep to your promise that you won't do the things listed in the FUA. If you don't do that, you will sooner or later be banned. You will not be banned because we are afraid to hear the 'truth', or because we cannot refute your claims. You will be banned because you lied about what you would do here, in order to hound people who have already had enough of hearing your ill thought out, childish crapulence - something which should concern you if you're looking forward to heaven.

Spearthrower · **#125** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 7:50 am

carl wrote:
Shrunk wrote:Maybe carl will share the many accomplishments he currently enjoys in his life. Let's hear it, carl.

yes, I do enjoy life also, having a family, a career (previously in aerospace and now in healthcare), traveling a lot (we go on trips several times per year - we have been all over the US and some of Europe), and knowing I will see my loved ones in heaven.

How do you know you will see your loved ones in Heaven?

First of all you are (entirely typically) acting as the adjudicator. How do you know YOU will go to Heaven? Perhaps Yahweh didn't like something you did and therefore you won't get in - presumably you won't know until then.

Likewise, how do you know all your family will be there? How do you know there's nothing they've done without telling you which would lead to them being forbidden?

Now let's turn this round.

If you died and found yourself in Heaven - hooray! - but found that NONE of your family made it through with you.... would it still be Heaven?

carl wrote:There is one caveat to the last one about heaven for which we will undoubtedly hear a huge amount of atheist preaching about no evidence for a place called heaven but here goes

Stop this puerile trolling.

You ASKED people to substantiate their positions, now you are calling their responses 'preaching'!

As if words mean whatever you want them to mean - go play humpty dumpty somewhere else!

Lewis Carrol wrote:"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

carl wrote:only those who have asked for forgiveness of their sins and placed their trust in Jesus have any reassurance of getting to heaven. Why? Because according to the Bible, one lie is worthy of death (a capital offense in God's sight). Hence, since we are all liars in this regard, we need a Savior of which there is only one.

Ignorant regurgitated preachy wibble is ignorant regurgitated preachy wibble.

carl wrote:And therein lies my hope for a future: To spend eternity with my Savior and my saved loved ones (my family and some friends).

Already busted - you're doing something expressly forbidden in the Bible! :lol:

Spearthrower · **#126** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 7:52 am

carl wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
Ven. Kwan Tam Woo wrote:Since when are biological organisms "high-tech devices"?

Not even William Paley thought so. He immediately realized the watch was different from the heath surrounding it....

Was Paley a molecular biologist? Let's listen to a molecular biologist:

"Molecular biology has shown that even the simplest of all living systems on the earth today, bacterial cells, are exceedingly complex objects. Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 gms, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machine built by man and absolutely without parallel in the nonliving world."
― Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory In Crisis

You will notice the description using the words "machinery", "factory", "complex objects". This scientist is speaking of nanotechnology. Would any of us like to use our intellect to challenge and supercede the biological cell with our own nanotechnology design? Any takers? Didn't think so.

This is why the Bible says our bodies are "fearfully and wonderfully made". If anyone here is smart enough and can do better, please speak up now and tell us how.

Denton's position is not the consensus - he is not a representative of Molecular Biology, ergo your appeals to him as such ignore the fact this his position is entirely irrelevant to the authority for which you appeal to him.

Molecular Biologists do not share Denton's credulity.

Spearthrower · **#127** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 7:53 am

carl wrote:
Ven. Kwan Tam Woo wrote:
carl wrote: Because according to the Bible...

And why should we put any stock in what the Bible says?

one lie is worthy of death

Then priests, bishops, reverends and pastors the world over are in some very deep shit!

Priests, bishops, reverends and pastors are all liars....like you and me. In addition, the Bible says "to whom much is given, much more will be required". So people in such positions of authority will be held to a higher standard of accountability.

That's why every human being needs a savior.

How many lies does it take to be a liar? Well, let's see, how many people do I have to kill in order to be a murderer?

Nope, humans don't need an external saviour to rescue them from themselves.

They need to grow up and stop creating sky papas to sternly love them and forgive them for their sins. Instead, they should aspire to maturely acknowledging the harsh facts of existence and making the best lives and world they can for each other.

Spearthrower · **#128** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 7:54 am

carl wrote:
Onyx8 wrote:When you get to this (incoherent concept of) heaven, what are you gonna hope for then? An after-after-life to give that one meaning? Then what?

I answered this previously but here it is again: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no mind has imagined what God has prepared for those who love him."

We don't know what heaven will be like but we know its going to be very good and very interesting and very exciting. How do we know this? Because we will be with the God who made the universe and the universe is full of interesting things, like animals, plants, planets, galaxies....you get the picture.

Yes, so you agree that it's an incoherent concept of heaven. You don't even know what you're betting on! :lol:

Spearthrower · **#129** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 7:56 am

carl wrote:
We might? Without any intelligence involved? Really? Are you in that much denial about the absolute necessity for intelligence to produce hi-tech things?

No intelligence is required to produce natural things. That's kind of the definition, Carl.

Biological organisms possess no characteristics of design which we can measure. Vast amounts of evidence show that life speciated through evolution and was lumbered with previous traits which it could not 'design away'.

So, the contention that a hi-tech product is analogous to a biological organism is complete bunk. It necessarily relies on total ignorance of what constitutes a biological organism.

Spearthrower · **#130** by **Spearthrower** » Oct 01, 2014 8:02 am

A religious life is an uninspected life.

You live but for the whim or pleasure of something else. Your own life has no essential meaning beyond that which it provides to an overbeing.

It's just like being a slave, but worse as there's allegedly no hope of ever being free - not even death.

BlackBart · **#131** by **BlackBart** » Oct 01, 2014 8:24 am

carl wrote:
BlackBart wrote:Why would I hope for an eternal afterlife? You might be able to amuse yourself for a couple of thousand years, but after a few quadrillion years it'd get a little repetitive and after a few billion googlplex years I'm pretty sure it'd be a living death of boredom. And that's the first 0%

Too many people say they study the Bible when it is clear they don't.

Where did I claim I read the Bible? I was told by theists like yourself there was an eternal afterlife - were they lying?

The Bible says: No eye has seen, no ear has heard
and no one’s heart has imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him.

So there's absolutely no evidence for it then?

We don't know what God has prepared but we do know it will be good. How? for several reasons:
1) God shows his goodness through our families, friends, etc.

He also shows his badness through Concentration Camps, Childhood Leukaemia and Cancer, so how do we know it won't be bad?

2) The fact that we woke up today to live another day

Wait? What? If we didn't wake up then surely we'd be dead and going to the afterlife, so the fact God hasn't sent us to the afterlife is evidence that there's an afterlife? That doesn't follow. :eh:

the list goes on.....

Seems to me your list is based on cognitive bias. You're not selling this I'm afraid.

I also note you've not answered my question; so we're supposed to be with our families and sunshine and puppies and everything nice for the next Graham's number of years (Graham's number, BTW, is a number so large, if you converted all matter in the universe into ink, you still wouldn't have enough to write it down). How are our families and puppies supposed to keep us entertained for that amount of time? Most can't manage a weekend.

Sciwoman · **#132** by **Sciwoman** » Oct 01, 2014 8:57 am

Spearthrower wrote:A religious life is an uninspected life.

You live but for the whim or pleasure of something else. Your own life has no essential meaning beyond that which it provides to an overbeing.

It's just like being a slave, but worse as there's allegedly no hope of ever being free - not even death.

As someone who's been there, I can tell you that is true. My life has far more meaning now than it did when I was a believer.

Scot Dutchy · **#133** by **Scot Dutchy** » Oct 01, 2014 10:48 am

You are born and then you die. What happens in between is really of no consequence just make the most of it.

Mankind is of no consequence like all creatures of every stripe. The Earth will revolve round the Sun until the Sun dies. Then that's it for this planet.

Xaihe · **#134** by **Xaihe** » Oct 01, 2014 11:58 am

carl wrote:Bertrand Russell said: "That Man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labors of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of Man's achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins--all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built.

What does an old, aged atheist who rejects Eternal Life look FORWARD to?
1) Losing his body - dying and turning into dust.
2) Losing all ties to loved ones, friendships, possessions, etc...
3) Losing any remembrance or significance of their life.
4) Losing absolutely EVERYTHING.

Atheism offers these typical NON-answers:
1) "I don't fear death." This does not answer the question but simply avoids it. The question is NOT about fear but HOPE for the future. "Fear" and "Hope" are vastly different.
2) "I look back on a full life." This is only looking back and does not answer the question about a future Hope.
3) "Even if the Bible gives hope, that doesn't mean its true." This does not answer the question but avoids it.
4) "I just look forward to the next day". A day-by-day, hand-to-mouth existence - again, nothing to look FORWARD to.
5) "I have hope for future generations." When you're dead, you have no hope for YOU and does not answer the question.
6) "I will live on in my children". This is only a RELATIVE hope, and does not answer the question beyond when your children do, in fact, also die.
7) "I don't have to look forward to meeting God." Since God is nonexistent according to atheism, this answer is nonsensical.
8) "I don't have to worry about going to hell." Since hell is nonexistent according to atheism, this answer is nonsensical.

Psalm 112: The wicked man will see and be vexed, he will gnash his teeth and waste away; the longings of the wicked will come to nothing.

Ecclesiastes 3: He has also set eternity in the hearts of men... Note: All human beings are sentient and want to live on, both for themselves and their loved ones.

I am more than just this "self" that is contained in my mind/brain/body. It may seem that I am distinct from everything else living on this planet, but that is just an illusion stemming from an over-attachment to the "self". I am biologically connected to all life on this planet. I am you, you are me. When the "I" part dies, the rest lives on. For quite a while. Perhaps a few billion years (if we don't manage to move to another star), perhaps 100 trillion years (estimated time when new stars stop forming). That's long enough for me. If it's not long enough for you, you can comfort yourself with some kind of eternal life fantasy.

At the heat death of the universe, is it all for nothing? Only if you care about nothing but the end result. I care about the process. Let's see what I can do in my own lifetime. Let's see what we can do while we're alive. And maybe in a few trillion years, we'll know more about the universe than we do now. We went from sticks and stones to everything we have now in just 10000 years. Who knows what's possible and what isn't? If you need hope, that can give it to you.

Animavore · **#135** by **Animavore** » Oct 01, 2014 12:45 pm

I'm just after watching a BBC Horizon special on the possibility and challenges for a manned mission to Mars.

To me this is the pinnacle of what dreams and hopes are made of. Setting goals to do something daring, bold and original in this very life. The people who go to Mars will be pushing frontiers and doing things no other humans have done before. This is what humans live for and what life should be about. And it doesn't have to be on this scale for everyone, we all have our own dreams of various sizes. Wanting to further and better yourself and try create a legacy that lives past you is what life is about. Not idley dreaming away of some afterlife where you get to see your family and friends and sit around with Jesus for all eternity.

While theists lie on their deathbed wondering about the afterlife and possibly worried or fearing if they've lived a good enough life to go to heaven, I want to be able to look back on my life and feel like I've done something valuable and leave on a good note feeling satisfied with what I've achieved and hopefully not fretting that I haven't done enough or wasted my life. I'm no where near this goal at this time, though. So I hope my arrival on my deathbed doesn't come any time soon.

Rumraket · **#136** by **Rumraket** » Oct 01, 2014 12:46 pm

carl wrote:What does an old, aged atheist who rejects Eternal Life look FORWARD to?

I simply look forward to new and interesting experiences. I enjoy the company of friends and family, I enjoy music, art, nature, good food, beverages, rubbing the tip of my penis and a whole host of other kinds of entertainment.

I enjoy a good scientific mystery, I enjoy reading fiction, I enjoy playing (roleplaying, computer, video and board)games, I enjoy drawing, fishing from the local pier or beach, I enjoy looking at beautiful girls(and, well, not just looking at them) and I enjoy completing a difficult task. I enjoy the sensation of sun on my skin, the sound of the ocean and the chirping of birds. I enjoy seeing landscapes and geographies foreign to me, I enjoy wondering about what could be out there in the cosmos.

That is what I live for and that is enough. I feel they make my life worth living. If that is not a good enough reason to live, to you, then I feel sorry for you. You must be having a shitty existence or a blank and boring mind.

carl wrote:4) "I just look forward to the next day". A day-by-day, hand-to-mouth existence - again, nothing to look FORWARD to.

Yes it is. You answered your own question. It is in the eye of the beholder whether something is worth looking forward to, you are not the ultimate judge who decides whether life is worth living to other people.

chairman bill · **#137** by **chairman bill** » Oct 01, 2014 12:57 pm

I've had a new bottle of Lagavulin delivered. Holy Spirit. Clearly mankind was created to produce such a delight & to grace the Cosmos with its flavour. I am here to savour it.

Thomas Eshuis · **#138** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Oct 01, 2014 3:11 pm

carl wrote:
BlackBart wrote:Why would I hope for an eternal afterlife? You might be able to amuse yourself for a couple of thousand years, but after a few quadrillion years it'd get a little repetitive and after a few billion googlplex years I'm pretty sure it'd be a living death of boredom. And that's the first 0%

Too many people say they study the Bible when it is clear they don't.

Or in the case of many Christians: they don't read it period. Only the selective passages their minister proscribes.
There has been more than one poll that has demonstrated that atheist, on average, know more about the holy scriptures of the major religions than the adherents themselves do.

carl wrote: The Bible says: No eye has seen, no ear has heard
and no one’s heart has imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him.

We don't know what God has prepared but we do know it will be good. How? for several reasons:
1) God shows his goodness through our families, friends, etc.

Circular reasoning.

carl wrote: 2) The fact that we woke up today to live another day, the list goes on.....

More circular reasoning.
You first have to:
A. Demonstrate your god exist.
B. Demonstrate that it's because of him we have family and wake each day.

Thomas Eshuis · **#139** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Oct 01, 2014 3:12 pm

carl wrote:
Ven. Kwan Tam Woo wrote:Stop violating the FUA.

There are certain concepts which cannot be explained without me pretending I got the idea myself. Me quoting Scripture is the real me and who I am. Should I pretend to be something I'm not? Should I 'change' who I am and how I express myself for your sake?

Have I asked anyone here to stop preaching the foolishness of the Bible? Or the foolishness of the afterlife? Can you honestly say you have never 'preached' your point of view, ever?

If you want me banned, so be it.

But if your want a real conversation about real issues, like I do, then a person here has to express himself in the way that ideally does just that.

Quoting scripture instead of presenting arguments is a cop-out.
You're not reasoning, you're copy-pasting.

Thomas Eshuis · **#140** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Oct 01, 2014 3:17 pm

carl wrote:
kennyc wrote:
carl wrote:Bullshit! Prove it.

LOl! That's a good one!

Even scientists who put their faith in evolution

They don't, at least not in the sense that theist have faith in their religion/god.

Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Re: Without Hope for an Afterlife, What Are We Living For?

Who is online