Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of religious people who have NDEs come back and say they no longer believe in organized religion or "one true god." It can go either way.

Yes, but there is at least one mean atheist who doesn't want to talk reasonable and only wants to demean and make fun of Christians and other believers. That is totally different than the people you are talking about. That person(s) sound like my uncle who converted to some extreme Christian off-shoot and spent his time demeaning people and telling everyone how they were going to hell. It is the atheist version of that type of personality/religion and it makes you all look bad. That person is so vocal it presents atheism as judgemental, irrational, narrow minded and unwilling to respect others or discuss things rationally.

Anonymous wrote:A lot of religious people who have NDEs come back and say they no longer believe in organized religion or "one true god." It can go either way.

Anonymous wrote:I think Earnest Catholic Lady dragged us off-course with:

My grandfather had a NDE when he had a heart attack in his late 40s. He was pronounced dead, but he revived some time later. He was already a man of deep faith, so he felt no need to talk about the details of the experience, but he lived the next 30+ years with great peace, love, and joy.

For those with no faith, no metaphysical mystery will be great enough to instill awe. There are so many things about the human experience that defy understanding. I read The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven with interest, and I've been meaning to take Heaven is for Real out of the library. I find the stories intriguing. But they are not necessary for my faith.

I do wonder about those who don't know or care about the possibility of an afterlife. The degree of confidence you must have in materialism goes far beyond the confidence most people have in God. Why so certain when you have no material evidence you are correct?

My grandfather had a NDE when he had a heart attack in his late 40s. He was pronounced dead, but he revived some time later. He was already a man of deep faith, so he felt no need to talk about the details of the experience, but he lived the next 30+ years with great peace, love, and joy.

For those with no faith, no metaphysical mystery will be great enough to instill awe. There are so many things about the human experience that defy understanding. I read The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven with interest, and I've been meaning to take Heaven is for Real out of the library. I find the stories intriguing. But they are not necessary for my faith.

I do wonder about those who don't know or care about the possibility of an afterlife. The degree of confidence you must have in materialism goes far beyond the confidence most people have in God. Why so certain when you have no material evidence you are correct?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many non-believers are confusing a "religious" God with spirituality. The two are different.

Wrong. They're both metaphysical phenomena that have no support from any kind of evidence. They require "faith"--the willing suspension of disbelief. They're equally likely. Or unlikely as the case may be.

Think what you will, but spirituality is not about guidelines taken from some book. It's inclusive. They are different. Spirituality is a connection among people that breaks through barriers. If you deny this basic component of our nature, then you can't really call yourself a human.

If you define "spirituality" as "a connection among people that breaks through barriers" then you're essentially defining the metaphysical component out of existence. So sure, it's a bit like answering the anti-theists by saying "God is love". Obviously people make emotional and social connections with one another. Count me in; I'm spiritual too.

Just so long as you don't--after sneaking under the rope--then go on to make all sorts of meta-physical claims. That's the kind of game of whack-a-mole the theists play all the time.

"God is love. That's all!"

"Ok, sounds good. Obviously there's love."

"And when He spoke to..."

"Whoa, whoa, whoa! What do you mean 'He'? I thought he was 'love'?"

"Well, we already agreed we all believe in God, so...MOVING ON..."

don't know about whack-a-mole

But you've certainly given enough evidence to support that you're a wackado.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many non-believers are confusing a "religious" God with spirituality. The two are different.

Wrong. They're both metaphysical phenomena that have no support from any kind of evidence. They require "faith"--the willing suspension of disbelief. They're equally likely. Or unlikely as the case may be.

Think what you will, but spirituality is not about guidelines taken from some book. It's inclusive. They are different. Spirituality is a connection among people that breaks through barriers. If you deny this basic component of our nature, then you can't really call yourself a human.

If you define "spirituality" as "a connection among people that breaks through barriers" then you're essentially defining the metaphysical component out of existence. So sure, it's a bit like answering the anti-theists by saying "God is love". Obviously people make emotional and social connections with one another. Count me in; I'm spiritual too.

Just so long as you don't--after sneaking under the rope--then go on to make all sorts of meta-physical claims. That's the kind of game of whack-a-mole the theists play all the time.

"God is love. That's all!"

"Ok, sounds good. Obviously there's love."

"And when He spoke to..."

"Whoa, whoa, whoa! What do you mean 'He'? I thought he was 'love'?"

"Well, we already agreed we all believe in God, so...MOVING ON..."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many non-believers are confusing a "religious" God with spirituality. The two are different.

Wrong. They're both metaphysical phenomena that have no support from any kind of evidence. They require "faith"--the willing suspension of disbelief. They're equally likely. Or unlikely as the case may be.

Think what you will, but spirituality is not about guidelines taken from some book. It's inclusive. They are different. Spirituality is a connection among people that breaks through barriers. If you deny this basic component of our nature, then you can't really call yourself a human.

If you define "spirituality" as "a connection among people that breaks through barriers" then you're essentially defining the metaphysical component out of existence. So sure, it's a bit like answering the anti-theists by saying "God is love". Obviously people make emotional and social connections with one another. Count me in; I'm spiritual too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many non-believers are confusing a "religious" God with spirituality. The two are different.

Wrong. They're both metaphysical phenomena that have no support from any kind of evidence. They require "faith"--the willing suspension of disbelief. They're equally likely. Or unlikely as the case may be.

Think what you will, but spirituality is not about guidelines taken from some book. It's inclusive. They are different. Spirituality is a connection among people that breaks through barriers. If you deny this basic component of our nature, then you can't really call yourself a human.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many non-believers are confusing a "religious" God with spirituality. The two are different.

Wrong. They're both metaphysical phenomena that have no support from any kind of evidence. They require "faith"--the willing suspension of disbelief. They're equally likely. Or unlikely as the case may be.

But to poke fun of people who have experienced life-altering experiences is just plain cruel - and steeped in ignorance.