<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ten Reasons Not to Believe in God</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/</link>
	<description>by Hemant Mehta</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:10:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: alec orewiler</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-294090</link>
		<dc:creator>alec orewiler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 15:36:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-294090</guid>
		<description>your top ten ways are nothing but your own thoughts and forwhich more then half are wrong, i take that back, all are wrong. i will answer them according to the question numbers.

1. the supernatural occurances are those that have been done by god, we would not have supernatural occurances with out god.

2. the inconsistency of the world religons can be explained by common sense. One religon was started and due to what different people thought of that were good ways to teach or tell about the religion it was changed as time went on. and most religions are based off of judaism, and they are different due to different interpretations and thoughtsof to be right, but when it comes down to it, you basic belliefs are the same.

3. there is no weak religious arguement, we have science and our religion on our side if you were so ignoraunt, you would realize that, or maybe go talk to a pastor, someone who knows alot about the topic.

4. the beliefe of god in the science world is acutally increasing because of new findings that have made the big bang, abiogenisis, and evolution less probable and now have lack of support, and which god is gaining support, its called thermodynammics

5. this has nothing to do with it, atheisism runs in families too, if your brought up that way your going to believe that way until someone proves you otherwise.

6. who knows what your talking about, your soul belongs to god, and he decides whether you will go to heaven or hell 

7. you cant test something thats supernatural because god made it happen, so therefore god can explain it and science can&#039;t

8.again different perspectives, but same basic belief

9. christianity has improved and been clarified over time, duh, do some research.

10. we have more proof then you do, so to spout something like that only shows your ignorance. cell mutatuin proves god, thermodynamics proves god, the big bang proves god, i can go on and on about how many one thought ways to support evolution now support god due to the lack of evidence for evolution and the lack of understanding you your own thoery.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>your top ten ways are nothing but your own thoughts and forwhich more then half are wrong, i take that back, all are wrong. i will answer them according to the question numbers.</p>
<p>1. the supernatural occurances are those that have been done by god, we would not have supernatural occurances with out god.</p>
<p>2. the inconsistency of the world religons can be explained by common sense. One religon was started and due to what different people thought of that were good ways to teach or tell about the religion it was changed as time went on. and most religions are based off of judaism, and they are different due to different interpretations and thoughtsof to be right, but when it comes down to it, you basic belliefs are the same.</p>
<p>3. there is no weak religious arguement, we have science and our religion on our side if you were so ignoraunt, you would realize that, or maybe go talk to a pastor, someone who knows alot about the topic.</p>
<p>4. the beliefe of god in the science world is acutally increasing because of new findings that have made the big bang, abiogenisis, and evolution less probable and now have lack of support, and which god is gaining support, its called thermodynammics</p>
<p>5. this has nothing to do with it, atheisism runs in families too, if your brought up that way your going to believe that way until someone proves you otherwise.</p>
<p>6. who knows what your talking about, your soul belongs to god, and he decides whether you will go to heaven or hell </p>
<p>7. you cant test something thats supernatural because god made it happen, so therefore god can explain it and science can&#8217;t</p>
<p>8.again different perspectives, but same basic belief</p>
<p>9. christianity has improved and been clarified over time, duh, do some research.</p>
<p>10. we have more proof then you do, so to spout something like that only shows your ignorance. cell mutatuin proves god, thermodynamics proves god, the big bang proves god, i can go on and on about how many one thought ways to support evolution now support god due to the lack of evidence for evolution and the lack of understanding you your own thoery.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Piotr</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-229810</link>
		<dc:creator>Piotr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:27:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-229810</guid>
		<description>Oh man, don&#039;t compromise yourself with &quot;world is designed&quot; argument... This is plain cause &amp; effect mismatch... 15 milliards years ago the world wasn&#039;t that organised, you know. First there is something simple, most rudimentary rules, then there is evolution. If you say order proves God, then I say the opposite: order (and especially its strongest form, determinism) suggests that there is no God...

I&#039;ve just shown how unprobable it is that world (along with our species, our minds, our faiths and languages) was created with plan; look, the plan isn&#039;t arbitrary, if anything in this was otherwise, everything would have to be otherwise (this is the work of laws of nature)... If you change one element, everything changes... so you cannot really &quot;choose&quot; how the world would look like. As a Creator you wouldn&#039;t be free to create what you want, enclosing it at the same time in laws of nature so simple and repeatable as they are.

Imagine you are to write a book in such matter: you choose first two letters, and a mechanism, a table of transitions, which assigns every pair of letters another three letters they&#039;re transformed to. So you choose simple starting conditions, and the rest will follow. Would you be able to achieve Shakespeare&#039;s drammas in such way? Or, better, a theological book reflecting yourself?

People say e.g. &quot;if there was no water on earth&quot; etc. There are indeed millions of planets without water. Plus, it is not said that there is no life on them. There can be &lt;em&gt;another&lt;/em&gt; life... based on other substances. And such beings would say: &quot;oh, if there were no these other substances here, we wouldn&#039;t exist!&quot;. You keep confusing cause and effect. First there is water, then something tries to appear according to the circumstances already achieved here. We are the result, and not the reason, of why our planet is organised so-and-so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh man, don&#8217;t compromise yourself with &#8220;world is designed&#8221; argument&#8230; This is plain cause &amp; effect mismatch&#8230; 15 milliards years ago the world wasn&#8217;t that organised, you know. First there is something simple, most rudimentary rules, then there is evolution. If you say order proves God, then I say the opposite: order (and especially its strongest form, determinism) suggests that there is no God&#8230;</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve just shown how unprobable it is that world (along with our species, our minds, our faiths and languages) was created with plan; look, the plan isn&#8217;t arbitrary, if anything in this was otherwise, everything would have to be otherwise (this is the work of laws of nature)&#8230; If you change one element, everything changes&#8230; so you cannot really &#8220;choose&#8221; how the world would look like. As a Creator you wouldn&#8217;t be free to create what you want, enclosing it at the same time in laws of nature so simple and repeatable as they are.</p>
<p>Imagine you are to write a book in such matter: you choose first two letters, and a mechanism, a table of transitions, which assigns every pair of letters another three letters they&#8217;re transformed to. So you choose simple starting conditions, and the rest will follow. Would you be able to achieve Shakespeare&#8217;s drammas in such way? Or, better, a theological book reflecting yourself?</p>
<p>People say e.g. &#8220;if there was no water on earth&#8221; etc. There are indeed millions of planets without water. Plus, it is not said that there is no life on them. There can be <em>another</em> life&#8230; based on other substances. And such beings would say: &#8220;oh, if there were no these other substances here, we wouldn&#8217;t exist!&#8221;. You keep confusing cause and effect. First there is water, then something tries to appear according to the circumstances already achieved here. We are the result, and not the reason, of why our planet is organised so-and-so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Piotr</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-229806</link>
		<dc:creator>Piotr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:17:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-229806</guid>
		<description>Religion does not touch reality. There are beliefs which construct our reality - like these Kantian space, time, causality, and all our belief (or perspective) in laws of nature - these are useful. But religion is idle... nothing follows from it! &quot;How to achieve eternal happiness&quot;: damn, this is a good hypnotic...

Religion does not touch reality. You can&#039;t say something is God, or something is not. If you ever thought you&#039;d achieved &quot;another world&quot;, you&#039;d still be unable to say &quot;this is God&quot; and &quot;this is not God&quot;. That&#039;s because there&#039;s an infinite abyss between theological concepts and actuality. And therefore, religion is only an INTERPRETATION, a PERSPECTIVE, a way of thinking (or even a way of talking, of using language) -- it is not true or false in itself... Look, reality is only about actions &amp; events: and hell lot of religion is about arbitrary assignments of SUBJECTS, grammatical subjects (&quot;me&quot;, &quot;God&quot;, &quot;devil&quot;) to actions: that is something just superfluous... They don&#039;t know the real cause, so they use -- as a habit -- first thing that comes to mind, &quot;God&quot;... But this is nothing real, this is only grammatics.

However, if you have good definitions of being and non-being, you could argue that all attributes of God (perfection, invariability, omniscience, omnipotence, his will is always fulfilled, non-physical, &quot;pure spirit&quot;, infinite, non-temporal, non-spacial...) are attributes of non-being. This is how we define non-being, *nothingness*...

The Creator and the moral God (i.e. the one that wants good and not evil) can be overthrown in the same way, i.e. if one thing was otherwise, everything would have to be otherwise (interconnection of things). Therefore, there is no place for God&#039;s estetic patchwork. The probability that there is a Creator is like the probability that a number 428379491872349812 (place 10^120 further digits) is an integer power with (big exponent) of an integer (which here represent the laws of nature). Which is to say, it is astronomically unprobable.

Morality is another thing. One can argue morality is true or false, if only one has good definitions of &quot;truth&quot; and &quot;lie&quot;. Here are mine: truth = something that strengthens you, something useful to the one who hears it. Lie = pernicious fiction.

Finally, there is no God who wants you to change the laws of nature; and no God wants you to change your destiny (because it&#039;s impossible by definition). There is no &quot;will of Father&quot; that man would serve, no supernatural aim or target. If there was an aim in life, as an essence of life, it would just be achieved (and not slowly, through stupid cause &amp; effect). But the world has no aims, it is just stupid cause &amp; effect, that&#039;s why it takes time and effort to achieve a goal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Religion does not touch reality. There are beliefs which construct our reality &#8211; like these Kantian space, time, causality, and all our belief (or perspective) in laws of nature &#8211; these are useful. But religion is idle&#8230; nothing follows from it! &#8220;How to achieve eternal happiness&#8221;: damn, this is a good hypnotic&#8230;</p>
<p>Religion does not touch reality. You can&#8217;t say something is God, or something is not. If you ever thought you&#8217;d achieved &#8220;another world&#8221;, you&#8217;d still be unable to say &#8220;this is God&#8221; and &#8220;this is not God&#8221;. That&#8217;s because there&#8217;s an infinite abyss between theological concepts and actuality. And therefore, religion is only an INTERPRETATION, a PERSPECTIVE, a way of thinking (or even a way of talking, of using language) &#8212; it is not true or false in itself&#8230; Look, reality is only about actions &amp; events: and hell lot of religion is about arbitrary assignments of SUBJECTS, grammatical subjects (&#8220;me&#8221;, &#8220;God&#8221;, &#8220;devil&#8221;) to actions: that is something just superfluous&#8230; They don&#8217;t know the real cause, so they use &#8212; as a habit &#8212; first thing that comes to mind, &#8220;God&#8221;&#8230; But this is nothing real, this is only grammatics.</p>
<p>However, if you have good definitions of being and non-being, you could argue that all attributes of God (perfection, invariability, omniscience, omnipotence, his will is always fulfilled, non-physical, &#8220;pure spirit&#8221;, infinite, non-temporal, non-spacial&#8230;) are attributes of non-being. This is how we define non-being, *nothingness*&#8230;</p>
<p>The Creator and the moral God (i.e. the one that wants good and not evil) can be overthrown in the same way, i.e. if one thing was otherwise, everything would have to be otherwise (interconnection of things). Therefore, there is no place for God&#8217;s estetic patchwork. The probability that there is a Creator is like the probability that a number 428379491872349812 (place 10^120 further digits) is an integer power with (big exponent) of an integer (which here represent the laws of nature). Which is to say, it is astronomically unprobable.</p>
<p>Morality is another thing. One can argue morality is true or false, if only one has good definitions of &#8220;truth&#8221; and &#8220;lie&#8221;. Here are mine: truth = something that strengthens you, something useful to the one who hears it. Lie = pernicious fiction.</p>
<p>Finally, there is no God who wants you to change the laws of nature; and no God wants you to change your destiny (because it&#8217;s impossible by definition). There is no &#8220;will of Father&#8221; that man would serve, no supernatural aim or target. If there was an aim in life, as an essence of life, it would just be achieved (and not slowly, through stupid cause &amp; effect). But the world has no aims, it is just stupid cause &amp; effect, that&#8217;s why it takes time and effort to achieve a goal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Indriel</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-229784</link>
		<dc:creator>Indriel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:46:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-229784</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not really an atheist anymore unless your definition of atheist is someone who does not believe in a personal God. God is not personal from my point of view. I guess you could call me a panentheist. 

I just look at the world differently.  To me, a computer doesn&#039;t just evolve out of the forest.  You need someone to think it up and then create it. A human being is infinitely more complicated than a computer.  So the idea that there&#039;s no one outside of the natural world is just ridiculous to me. 
 
Skeptics often say when you see something that&#039;s not there you&#039;re having a hallucination but how do you know you&#039;re not having a hallucination right now?  How do you know that this world isn&#039;t a hallucination?  That&#039;s just how my mind works.

Also, I&#039;ve done research.  That&#039;s why I asked that question about number 7.  Complete failure of any supernatural phenomenon to stand up to rigorous testing?  Are you kidding me?!!!  I have found so much evidence that suggests the contrary.  For an example please go to www.skepticalinvestigations.org for thorough, exhaustively researched supernatural testing done by highly respected scientists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not really an atheist anymore unless your definition of atheist is someone who does not believe in a personal God. God is not personal from my point of view. I guess you could call me a panentheist. </p>
<p>I just look at the world differently.  To me, a computer doesn&#8217;t just evolve out of the forest.  You need someone to think it up and then create it. A human being is infinitely more complicated than a computer.  So the idea that there&#8217;s no one outside of the natural world is just ridiculous to me. </p>
<p>Skeptics often say when you see something that&#8217;s not there you&#8217;re having a hallucination but how do you know you&#8217;re not having a hallucination right now?  How do you know that this world isn&#8217;t a hallucination?  That&#8217;s just how my mind works.</p>
<p>Also, I&#8217;ve done research.  That&#8217;s why I asked that question about number 7.  Complete failure of any supernatural phenomenon to stand up to rigorous testing?  Are you kidding me?!!!  I have found so much evidence that suggests the contrary.  For an example please go to <a href="http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org</a> for thorough, exhaustively researched supernatural testing done by highly respected scientists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Bob</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-229376</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2008 12:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-229376</guid>
		<description>IDk im a huge nerd, im never really looking for any stability. What i dont get is that you&#039;re an athiest that believes in the afterlife?? i dont understand that, how does that work..? and im not trying to bash you i really dont understand what you mean by that.. im a huge information gatherer i mean i write research papers for friends for college just because i like info. I tell em its cause im a good friend and iwanna relieve them from stress hahha but the reality is, i just like knowing things. that&#039;s how the thinking about death thing comes in. the first time i tried it was a huge challenge not emotionally just strictly the strain on the brain and confusion. and ARNOC, what are people &quot;seeking&quot; as if it werer a form of enlightenment? what are you talking about? &quot;truth&quot;?  a truth is only as good as it&#039;s evidence &quot;proof&quot; doesnt have to be limited if people would just be open to the idea that there may be proof out there. the problem is people get so closed minded that they refuse to even look. 
Just thoughts</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IDk im a huge nerd, im never really looking for any stability. What i dont get is that you&#8217;re an athiest that believes in the afterlife?? i dont understand that, how does that work..? and im not trying to bash you i really dont understand what you mean by that.. im a huge information gatherer i mean i write research papers for friends for college just because i like info. I tell em its cause im a good friend and iwanna relieve them from stress hahha but the reality is, i just like knowing things. that&#8217;s how the thinking about death thing comes in. the first time i tried it was a huge challenge not emotionally just strictly the strain on the brain and confusion. and ARNOC, what are people &#8220;seeking&#8221; as if it werer a form of enlightenment? what are you talking about? &#8220;truth&#8221;?  a truth is only as good as it&#8217;s evidence &#8220;proof&#8221; doesnt have to be limited if people would just be open to the idea that there may be proof out there. the problem is people get so closed minded that they refuse to even look.<br />
Just thoughts</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arnoc</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-228818</link>
		<dc:creator>Arnoc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:11:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-228818</guid>
		<description>&quot;We’re all different people and what works for me might not work for you ...&quot;

I think thats what many do not get, while looking around. They try to work on a base that works for all, but on a thing like faith, something so personal, it just feels wrong to me.

Proof is limited, because truth is, I guess. There is no absolute in the relative, so why bother looking? Yet again some seek it as if it was an enlightment of some sort. Maybe out of fear, in need of at least something that is kind of stable.

Again, just thoughts. ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;We’re all different people and what works for me might not work for you &#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>I think thats what many do not get, while looking around. They try to work on a base that works for all, but on a thing like faith, something so personal, it just feels wrong to me.</p>
<p>Proof is limited, because truth is, I guess. There is no absolute in the relative, so why bother looking? Yet again some seek it as if it was an enlightment of some sort. Maybe out of fear, in need of at least something that is kind of stable.</p>
<p>Again, just thoughts. <img src='http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Indriel</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-228776</link>
		<dc:creator>Indriel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:14:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-228776</guid>
		<description>Tim Bob, 

Just to inform you I am not a Christian.  I am a former Christian who became an atheist then faced up to what you&#039;re saying and made peace with it. 
 
Have you tried imagining how you&#039;ll simply disappear then deciding &quot;Well, so what, at least I won&#039;t be bored.&quot; Then letting it go.

Try it sometime time.  And if you&#039;ve already done so, I commend you.  Yes, it&#039;s hard but it&#039;s so nice to let go of your fear of death, you know what I mean?

In my case I was able to relax enough to start thinking in a way that most Christians and atheists are not accustomed to.  That&#039;s what helped me get my faith back.  I never went back to being a Christian, but I did regain my faith in the afterlife.

Tim Bob, please understand I&#039;m not trying to discredit you or anything.  We&#039;re all different people and what works for me might not work for you or another atheist.  It&#039;s just what worked for me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim Bob, </p>
<p>Just to inform you I am not a Christian.  I am a former Christian who became an atheist then faced up to what you&#8217;re saying and made peace with it. </p>
<p>Have you tried imagining how you&#8217;ll simply disappear then deciding &#8220;Well, so what, at least I won&#8217;t be bored.&#8221; Then letting it go.</p>
<p>Try it sometime time.  And if you&#8217;ve already done so, I commend you.  Yes, it&#8217;s hard but it&#8217;s so nice to let go of your fear of death, you know what I mean?</p>
<p>In my case I was able to relax enough to start thinking in a way that most Christians and atheists are not accustomed to.  That&#8217;s what helped me get my faith back.  I never went back to being a Christian, but I did regain my faith in the afterlife.</p>
<p>Tim Bob, please understand I&#8217;m not trying to discredit you or anything.  We&#8217;re all different people and what works for me might not work for you or another atheist.  It&#8217;s just what worked for me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Bob</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-228714</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:27:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-228714</guid>
		<description>ummm  it doesnt make you get your faith back. its funny that people always say atheists are always trying to convince you of something and yet there you go with that crap.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ummm  it doesnt make you get your faith back. its funny that people always say atheists are always trying to convince you of something and yet there you go with that crap.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Indriel</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-228709</link>
		<dc:creator>Indriel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:15:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-228709</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;have any of you tried to think dircetly about non-existence? you know, tried to imagine death and how you’d just simply dissapear?&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Do it people! That&#039;s how I got my faith back!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>have any of you tried to think dircetly about non-existence? you know, tried to imagine death and how you’d just simply dissapear?</p></blockquote>
<p>Do it people! That&#8217;s how I got my faith back!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Bob</title>
		<link>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/09/17/ten-reasons-not-to-believe-in-god/#comment-228693</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:19:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friendlyatheist.com/?p=4629#comment-228693</guid>
		<description>here&#039;s a general question guys and gals, have any of you tried to think dircetly about non-existence? you know, tried to imagine death and how you&#039;d just simply dissapear? Nothing, it&#039;s hard hahha it hurts my head. IDK if i&#039;m a small percentage of people that try this or if anyone else out there has tried to think about it as well. If i&#039;m actually part of a larger group that has pondered how one&#039;s consciousness is no more it&#039;s a little easier to understand why others rely on religion it&#039;s the only thing out there that offers a conceiveable explanation to what happends to your consciousness after death. Of course i completely believe it just flat out ends... but it&#039;s completely unimaginable. perhaps thats why it&#039;s easy to not live your life like it may be the last day of your life even though you know it could be....  or maybe im just an idiot &lt;----  totally possible hahha</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>here&#8217;s a general question guys and gals, have any of you tried to think dircetly about non-existence? you know, tried to imagine death and how you&#8217;d just simply dissapear? Nothing, it&#8217;s hard hahha it hurts my head. IDK if i&#8217;m a small percentage of people that try this or if anyone else out there has tried to think about it as well. If i&#8217;m actually part of a larger group that has pondered how one&#8217;s consciousness is no more it&#8217;s a little easier to understand why others rely on religion it&#8217;s the only thing out there that offers a conceiveable explanation to what happends to your consciousness after death. Of course i completely believe it just flat out ends&#8230; but it&#8217;s completely unimaginable. perhaps thats why it&#8217;s easy to not live your life like it may be the last day of your life even though you know it could be&#8230;.  or maybe im just an idiot &lt;&#8212;-  totally possible hahha</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic (User agent is rejected)
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching using disk: basic
Object Caching 306/317 objects using disk: basic
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: S3: wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com (user agent is rejected)

Served from: www.patheos.com @ 2012-02-14 07:36:40 -->
