Blasphemy or Biblical?

[_Drifting]

What's your explanation for OBE's?

I have no "explanation"...]

Got it.

[_Themis]

Why would an atheist not be concerned with either?

because they are metaphysical/supernatural, and to affirm the existence of anything of that sort allows the camel's nose under the tent on the existence of God.

So our whole problem in this discussion is your incorrect idea that morals are metaphysical/supernatural. They are independent of this, even though religious individuals and groups may attribute their moral code to God. Atheists can have moral codes without God being involved at all. I doubt most religious people would be ignorant enough to say what you did.

Furthermore, an atheist can not support any notion of right/wrong without subscribing to a moral code...in other words, PRINCIPLES which distinguish right from wrong.

And they do it without any metaphysics or the supernatural.

Whatever do they found these principles on? Whatever can they base these principles upon? - They have only one footing which they can bear any moral PRINCIPLE upon...and that is on the self...they must admit and adhere to the notion that only their own self is the source of morality, and as such that is the source for any other person's morality, and ergo their behavior.

They do base it on the individual, but also the group. Different individuals and groups including religious ones have different moral codes to some extent, although they are many that are agreed upon between all groups religious or not. I think though it's your hatred of the non-religious that makes you want to attack them about anything, no matter how dumb your reasoning is.

Thus they have no actual principle for resolution when any 2 principles come into conflict with each other.....well, except for the reliable notion that "justice is might". With this in mind then physical domination becomes the actual principle for any and all "atheist morality". Which is arguably just "fine"...but they can surely be nothing more than hypocritical when the crusades come to town and burn them at the stake for being "wrong".

Try this link and go from there if you want to learn about morality

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality

[_Themis]

Perhaps, I should have stated, being seen by a reliable and trustworthy witness. As I stated before, there have been many reliable accounts of OBE's. The particular one I mentioned was verified by a very skeptical doctor.

And you know this how. Do you know this doctor. Do you know all the events surrounding this event. Do you have her words unedited, as well as others who were there. There is so much we don't know that it really is not good evidence. I am not saying your conclusions are wrong, but are based on little evidence and are being interpreted based on what you want to believe. I have read about the study and research about reincarnation. They have their stories as well. Even scientists how believe we do have past lives. Their evidence is of the same level as the ones people believe show we have spirit independent our our physical bodies. I think Drifting is just trying to show that you put more stock in testimonies that you think fit your beliefs then those that don't.

[_Drifting]

I think Drifting is just trying to show that you put more stock in testimonies that you think fit your beliefs then those that don't.

Correct.
This confirmation bias comes through on ever thread that gdemetz trolls on.

[_Nomomo]

It is certainly without doubt that the phenomenon of the OBE exists. I can see where you can claim the explanation of exactly what is occurring or what is the meaning\interpretation of the experience may not be credible. But as one who has had multiple experiences of the OBE phenomenon I can assure you without any doubt that they occur.

Now here is where it gets interesting.
How do you explain to yourself what your experiences are?

Yes, that definitely get interesting. But is following a different track than my addressing your claim there is no such thing as a credible OBE by my asserting that the phenomenon of the OBE in fact exists irregardless of what is or is not what you may define as "credible".

In answer to your question: How do I explain to myself what my experiences are?

My experiences are (as is myself and all of which exists) the multiverse "realizing" itself.

Is that interesting enough for you ~_-

Don't take this as a slam as I do mean it as an insult in any way, but I doubt very much this is something you are going to comprehend.

[_Drifting]

Yes, that definitely get interesting. But is following a different track than my addressing your claim there is no such thing as a credible OBE by my asserting that the phenomenon of the OBE in fact exists irregardless of what is or is not what you may define as "credible".

In answer to your question: How do I explain to myself what your experiences are?

My experiences are (as is myself and all of which exists) the multiverse "realizing" itself.

Is that interesting enough for you ~_-

Don't take this as a slam as I do mean it as an insult in any way, but I doubt very much this is something you are going to comprehend.

The multiverse (or meta-universe, metaverse) is the hypothetical set of multiple possible universes (including the historical universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists and can exist: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them. The term was coined in 1895 by the American philosopher and psychologist William James.[1] The various universes within the multiverse are sometimes called parallel universes.
The structure of the multiverse, the nature of each universe within it and the relationship between the various constituent universes, depend on the specific multiverse hypothesis considered. Multiverses have been hypothesized in cosmology, physics, astronomy, religion, philosophy, transpersonal psychology and fiction, particularly in science fiction and fantasy. In these contexts, parallel universes are also called "alternative universes", "quantum universes", "interpenetrating dimensions", "parallel dimensions", "parallel worlds", "alternative realities", "alternative timelines", and "dimensional planes," among others.

Hmmm....perhaps you're right, I don't comprehend...

[_Buffalo]

So in addition to science, you also don't quite get how fallacies work. I appreciated the tacit admission that you're a poor debater (see link 3). Thanks!

you really don't read much do you?
just because you think it was does not make it so....but i understand that is your modus operandi

tacit indeed

Surrender accepted.

[_subgenius]

Personal opinion.

I still say that there are really no credible OBE experiences, nor are there any credible Nessie experiences, nor are there any credible ghost stories, nor are there any credible Vision stories...etc ad infinitum...

sure you ca n"say anything"...and thus rendering your definition of "credible" to being nothing more than "personal opinion"

[_Drifting]

Personal opinion.

I still say that there are really no credible OBE experiences, nor are there any credible Nessie experiences, nor are there any credible ghost stories, nor are there any credible Vision stories...etc ad infinitum...

sure you ca n"say anything"...and thus rendering your definition of "credible" to being nothing more than "personal opinion"

Not at all.
There is credible evidence that the Roman Empire existed.
There is credible evidence for the existence of oceanic currents.
There is credible evidence on photosynthesis.

[_subgenius]

Surrender accepted.

good for you ....the first real step towards healing is "acceptance". The rest of us had accepted your surrender long ago....nice to see you on board.