Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Godless Internets Tubes

There is no God on the Internets Tubes. Even sixty percent of US Internet users says there is no God. Throw a vote in and have your say!

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think you have some problems with God right now. You may not appreciate me saying this to you, but I just wanted to let you know that I am praying for you. Perhaps someday you will cry out to God for forgiveness. If that happens then I know that God will hear you.

my email is followerinhim@yahoo.com if you would like to contact me.
I have some information that I would like to give you.

Anonymous said...

If it hadn't happened to me twice I would Not have believed it to be true. It's ok.
I can't deny what happened to me (us). I love it, I feel so lucky that I experienced it, I do not know why it happened, I am not religious. I do not attend church.
I do not read the Bible.
I am a grandmother.
It doesn't matter if you believe me or not. I find it hard to accept myself.
Around 1975 I was in bed in my then husband's mother's guestroom.
All the windows were shut; no flowers were in the house. No talc or perfume had been used by either of us.
The next morning, my husband (who considers himself agnostic and has a Ph.d)told me this: "last night the strongest scent of bath powder or flowers woke me up. It was weird. Do you want me to wake you up if it happens tonight?" and I said, "sure."
We had a nice day with his mother and went to bed. In the middle of the night he said, "Suzy! Wake up! Can you smell that??" and there was a strong scent of flower petals that lasted about 10 seconds. For some reason he said, "Go away, Granny." We went right back to sleep.
When we awoke, my husband told his mom what had happened. She said, "mama used to sleep in that bed." (speaking of my husband's grandmother). Nothing else was said.
About ten/twelve years later we divorced. I had been looking after my father in a local nursing home. We were never close and he suffered a lot physically and emotionally. I still visited him. I'd take him milkshakes.
Soon after he died, which was frankly a relief, I was sitting at my computer in our new home. Suddenly, this lovely scent of rose petals filled my space. It lasted about ten seconds and dissipated. I Knew I had been visited by either him or my mother who had died 2 yrs previously. WE were close.
A year later my father in law died. We went up to Chicago to visit his mother (I remarried in '87). I slept in the bed my father in law had slept in. He did not die in that bed. Soon after I fell asleep I felt someone give a firm pinch to my big toe. I woke up with a start; no one was there, no scent. I just Knew that it was his dad. It was something he would have done to me being a handsy person who liked me.
Because of these three things I know without question that there is some sort of afterlife. I do not know Anything about it and I am not searching to find out. I just know that there is Definitely Life after Death and it doesn't depend upon which denomination you believe in or if you go to church. It's simply there and there's my 2 cents.

sacred slut said...

Wow, so granny and dad have nothing better to do in the afterlife but visit their relatives and pinch their toes while wafting perfume?

As Hume said:
"The plain consequence is (and it is a general maxim worthy of our attention), 'That no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavours to establish....' When anyone tells me, that he saw a dead man restored to life, I immediately consider with myself, whether it be more probable, that this person should either deceive or be deceived, or that the fact, which he relates, should really have happened. I weigh the one miracle against the other; and according to the superiority, which I discover, I pronounce my decision, and always reject the greater miracle. If the falsehood of his testimony would be more miraculous, than the event which he relates; then, and not till then, can he pretend to command my belief or opinion."

Amalek said...

I suppose you could call be an agnostic, because there is something mysterious about life. How can life spring from minerals, without some intelligence guiding the life forms? I believe this intelligence is beyond human comprehension. I think it is neither, merciful or unmerciful, it is just is. I hope that death is just an end to life and not the torture, the religious tries to impose on us.

breakerslion said...

"How can life spring from minerals, without some intelligence guiding the life forms?"

Gee, what do you think, TV-rerun ghost of Fred Rogers?

"Can you say infinite regression? Sure, I knew you could!

Me and Carl Sagan have been kickin' it lately.

Can you say transdimensional temporal anomaly? Got you there smarty-pants!"

Anonymous said...

life does not spring from minerals and people do not come back to earth after they die. God created you and he loves you.

Glintir said...

If fascinates me to know end how clueless the religious are. When you say to an atheist God loves you. It has as much meaning to us as when we say to you, a dragon is going to eat you.

Aaron Kinney said...

Re: Amalek,

I suppose you could call be an agnostic, because there is something mysterious about life. How can life spring from minerals, without some intelligence guiding the life forms?

And who made that intelligence? And who made the intelligence that made the intelligence? "Turtles, all the way down!" as they like to say.

I believe this intelligence is beyond human comprehension.

And yet, you comprehend it enough to propose it... ?

Aaron Kinney said...

Sacred Slut and Angels Depart,

Good comments. Thanx! I love the Hume quote especially :)

Anonymous said...

what i can't stand is why people just shove christianity into the religious group. if they actually read and understood the bible then they would come to the conclusion that jesus came not to start another religion, but so we sinners could be saved from the flames of hell.

The Cookie Monster said...

HI all,
Well I feel like crap, as I have some sort of flue virus thing. Seems to be coming to the end though.
Anyhow, personal experience counts for a lot doesn't it? It is however personal, so talking about it to others that have not experienced the same situations, emotions and realities is usually at best fruitless and at worst pointless and possibly damaging.
Surely what we all want is reality, and isn't reality all about experience?

wade419 said...

very interesting and meaningful words, cookie monster. I don't think I agree that sharing personal experiences is always fruitless, but I can definitely see where you are coming from. I'd be interested to hear your take on how that connects to the existence of God. or anybody else's, for that matter.

Amalek said...

Sorry, if I offended anyone.

http://amalek-amalek.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

This poll is an internet poll; I find it hard to believe that it's an accurate representation of the beliefs of the entire planetary population.

Also, I believe "kill the afterlife" is almost as nonsensical as the "god hates fags" slogan. why do you feel the need to create a blog to destroy the concept of "the afterlife" in the minds of the spiritually inclined when it is completely impossible to know whether or not any sort of afterlife exists? we barely have an accurate understanding of physics and chemistry, for instance, as it is. how arrogant and fundamentalist it is to presume that what you believe to be true is the only possible reality. while I agree that some organized religions have been utilized by violent and harmful people as a form of social control, but you cannot simply write off the human need to understand. we are wedded to the science of our day; it makes us rigid and scientific progress difficult. like the natural philosophers who existed mere centuries ago (and believed the earth to be flat, or the center of the universe, only to find out that it was round and relative to the size of the universe, smaller than a grain of dust) we are still fumbling in the dark for understanding. this sort of attitude, putting so much energy into destroying religion and spirituality, is arrogant and a waste of time. atheist, theist, pantheist, whatever, we need to be more compassionate and treat other human beings with respect; work towards progress and understanding, not hatred and shortsighted divisiveness. we need to keep in mind that we barely understand the universe at this point, and we should work on improving human lives as well as pursuing scientific progress. If people need spirituality to endure, if they can't exist without finding solace in spirituality, I don't believe them to be weak or small-minded; I respect their right to believe what they do. they may even be right. being an atheist does not make you an authority on the creation or purpose of the universe any more than being a fundamentalist theist does. I personally refuse to attack people for seeking emotional refuge in a world that can seem so cruel. I will criticize people who attempt to force their beliefs on anyone, though, whether they be religious or atheistic.

Aaron Kinney said...

Re: Anonymous,

I believe "kill the afterlife" is almost as nonsensical as the "god hates fags" slogan.

Whats nonsensical is the concept of a life after death. Death is the end of life.

why do you feel the need to create a blog to destroy the concept of "the afterlife" in the minds of the spiritually inclined when it is completely impossible to know whether or not any sort of afterlife exists?

It is certainly not impossible to figure out that the afterlife is bullshit, and I feel the need to argue against the afterlife because it is an idea that is detrimental to those who hold it. Im doing it because I love my fellow humans.

how arrogant and fundamentalist it is to presume that what you believe to be true is the only possible reality.

What is arrogant is belief in an afterlife that cannot be supported by empirical evidence or logical reasoning. There is nothing arrogant about arguing against ideas that have no rational justification.

while I agree that some organized religions have been utilized by violent and harmful people as a form of social control, but you cannot simply write off the human need to understand.

It is the religious and superstitious people that write off the need to understand, not me.

I will criticize people who attempt to force their beliefs on anyone, though, whether they be religious or atheistic.

I dont force my beliefs on anyone. I didnt force you to visit and read my blog, for instance. I merely offer my ideas to those who are interested in hearing them, as well as challenging them.

Anonymous said...

Re: Aaron

"[Afterlife] cannot be supported by empirical evidence or logical reasoning."

True, however the only logical place you end up with pure reason is solipsism. If "I" am the only thing that exists, why the hell isn't an afterlife at least possible? No pretending to know how it actually is, but the possibility is there.

Just like the possibility external objects actually do exist outside your mind.

Anonymous said...

One distinction I wish to draw on my previous comment is about the nature of afterlife belief versus that of external object belief.

I agree with David Hume in that the belief in external objects is a natural belief because it's necessary for survival. This is in contrast to the belief in the afterlife which is not necessary for survival. In that sense, the afterlife could be considered a less valuable belief and indeed it is.

But I think that although it isn't terribly valuable, it is an ethically acceptable belief (based on faith). It's ethical as long as the believer in question has no delusions as to knowing what the afterlife is like, and is not emotionally attached to it.

I may have left out some other conditions, but these two cause the biggest problems in terms of devaluing human life. So if you fall under this category, stop it! Even if the afterlife exists, this is the only life you know and care about, don't waste it on delusions caused by a *non-valuable* belief.

Anonymous said...

An afterlife is immoral? Immoral? Is that your best argument? I say your hopeless "this life is it" outlook is immoral. Like it or not you are nothing but a fanatic. A fundamentalist dirtbag who believes that your view is the only right view. There is far more supporting a continued existence after death than your view that "this life is it."

You say holding the view than there is an afterlife is harmful? BS I say. Not believing in an afterlife is harmful and YOU make the perfect example to demonstrate this fact.

You are the immoral and illogical one here and the majority of humanity will always believe in something after death. It is human nature.

Anonymous said...

Best thing about that YesNoGod poll is the one respondant from Vatican City voted No