Alternate Explanation for Resurrection?

[Crimson Glow]

Ok. This response kind of has my mind all over the place, now, so bear with me here...

So you're basically saying it's just kinda'....there? You can just feel it? But then if this is so, why were you athiest to begin with? There are other things built into us, like survival. We fight tooth and nail when our lives are threatened and fear death, even the most faithfull "believers". If we have such faith that there is something greater than this beyond death, why fear it so? What is giving us that inner instinct to try and cheat death as long as possible? Why does a faithful man who has led a healthy, full life fear the end when he is lying on his death bed?

And as for the example you have presented....what of the people who deviate from this "inner morality" and have no qualms with their concsious about it? And what about the variances on opinions of morality? And isn't a lot of what's "right and wrong" taught to us? A child doesn't know any better, and takes what it pleases if it desires to play with it, etc. It has to be taught that this is stealing, and he/she should NOT take something that doesn't belong to them.

So if we inherent faith, morality, etc. from an outside driving force, why the discrepancies in the way those things are perceived and displayed? And what of those things that are integrated in is that seem to be in direct opposition of one another (faith in god/heaven vs. not willing to let go of this existence)? Not arguing, just interested in you take on this.

[loseyourname]

So you're basically saying it's just kinda'....there? You can just feel it?

He's said before that he has had religious experiences that have convinced him of this truth. No one believes anything on pure faith. That would be stupid and he knows it.

What is giving us that inner instinct to try and cheat death as long as possible? Why does a faithful man who has led a healthy, full life fear the end when he is lying on his death bed?

If we had no instinct to remain alive as long as we could, we wouldn't last long. The only reason this instinct exists is because a species without it couldn't exist.

And as for the example you have presented....what of the people who deviate from this "inner morality" and have no qualms with their concsious about it?

Can't some people have a better moral sense than others? Every other sense operates this way. Some people see 20/20, some don't.

And what about the variances on opinions of morality? And isn't a lot of what's "right and wrong" taught to us? A child doesn't know any better, and takes what it pleases if it desires to play with it, etc. It has to be taught that this is stealing, and he/she should NOT take something that doesn't belong to them.

This is enough commonality to induce the possibility of an inborn sense of fairness and justice. Remember that man has been a social animal for millions of years. Whatever instincts served to create a viable social group would almost have to be hardwired.

[Anonymouse]

So you're basically saying it's just kinda'....there? You can just feel it? But then if this is so, why were you athiest to begin with?

Precisely. We are all endowed with a sense of morality since we are all as individuals created by a creator who endowed us with that gift in our conscience, and with morality comes free will, because in order for man to be a free agent to do good, he must have the ability to do evil as well. And the reason loser is mentioning some experiences I've had has nothing to do with this, nor why I believe what I do, although it did act as a powerful catalyst.

As for why I was an atheist, that has to do most likely with my personal problems, my own life history and not being able to understand. Even when I was an atheist and an agnostic things did not make sense, because innately, in my conscience, I just knew morality was instilled in me as if held constantly by the spark of God, and I felt it; I knew what was right and what was wrong. Even as an atheist I had trouble understanding how morality can be anything but objective, and I saw people using atheism and agnosticism as an excuse for their own personal gratifications and irresponsibilities, because if morality is objective then it means we are responsible for our actions, whereas atheism and agnosticism imply moral relativism, and that "society instils its morals on us" ( the view you subscribe to ), and no one is responsible for anything. By the logic of relativism, the Turks were justified in what they did to Armenians, ditto for Jews, ditto for the victims of Stalin, ditto for the Cambodians and Rwandans, etc.

I do not have the time or patience or enthusiasm now to get into this, but I will address your other points later.

[dusken]

Funny, but I don't see implied in the title of this thread that the topic has anything to do with dusken and Mousy bashing each other.

Two exchanges. Do not get so trigger happy.

[dusken]

... whereas atheism and agnosticism imply moral relativism, and that "society instils its morals on us" ( the view you subscribe to ), and no one is responsible for anything. By the logic of relativism, the Turks were justified in what they did to Armenians, ditto for Jews, ditto for the victims of Stalin, ditto for the Cambodians and Rwandans, etc.

I wish that one day you will understand why this post of yours was phucking stupid. Until then I have no respect for you. And stop trying to turn every thread into a discussion of morality, something you do not understand anyway... or choose not to.