Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: floo on November 02, 2015, 02:09:59 PM
-
What is your idea of heaven, either in the religious or secular sense of that word?
My idea of heaven would be no deity, no afterlife and ceasing to be when I kick the bucket.
-
Good, because that's most likely exactly the case :)
-
Heaven ...... A blissful (inner) state of being which one is or can be conscious of.
Paradise ..... ( ?from Greek para deisos) beyond form e.g. beyond the self created mental forms and forces.
-
Good, because that's most likely exactly the case :)
That is what I reckon as there is no evidence to prove otherwise.
-
Good, because that's most likely exactly the case :)
That is what I reckon as there is no evidence to prove otherwise.
If I post what would be heaven/paradise before death it would get me banned!
After death? To take my place in the Summerlands, rest, recuperate and learn from my experiences in this life so that I am prepared for re-birth.
-
Back in the day it was a cool gay club in London. Don't know if it's still open.
-
If heaven was an absolute paradise which lasts forever, surely that would get extremely boring?
-
If heaven was an absolute paradise which lasts forever, surely that would get extremely boring?
Only if time was linear and stretched out moment by moment, as many feel to be the case in the world now. That's leaving aside the thorny issue of time in a supposedly timeless existence, of course.
On the other hand, if heaven was a moment of supreme bliss trapped in stasis for ever, like a DVD or a Sky+ programme on permanent pause/freeze frame, I can see the attraction.
-
Ditto.
-
Over the channel first then onto an 850 Moto Guzzi Eldorado with my wife, the perfect pillion passenger, then touring the whole of the continent only having to carry a debit card; day one somewhere in in a hotel, appropriate to my status, in the Black Forrest; Heaven.
ippy
-
If heaven was an absolute paradise which lasts forever, surely that would get extremely boring?
Only if time was linear and stretched out moment by moment, as many feel to be the case in the world now. That's leaving aside the thorny issue of time in a supposedly timeless existence, of course.
On the other hand, if heaven was a moment of supreme bliss trapped in stasis for ever, like a DVD or a Sky+ programme on permanent pause/freeze frame, I can see the attraction.
I must admit I hadn't thought of it like that.
-
As well as no time, it would also suggest no individuality, since that is a time based concept.
-
If heaven was an absolute paradise which lasts forever, surely that would get extremely boring?
Only if time was linear and stretched out moment by moment, as many feel to be the case in the world now. That's leaving aside the thorny issue of time in a supposedly timeless existence, of course.
On the other hand, if heaven was a moment of supreme bliss trapped in stasis for ever, like a DVD or a Sky+ programme on permanent pause/freeze frame, I can see the attraction.
If that's the case, though, it just begs the question 'Why not start everyone in heaven in and leave them there?' Why mess around with creating the universe and bodies in the first place?
O.
-
If heaven was an absolute paradise which lasts forever, surely that would get extremely boring?
Only if time was linear and stretched out moment by moment, as many feel to be the case in the world now. That's leaving aside the thorny issue of time in a supposedly timeless existence, of course.
On the other hand, if heaven was a moment of supreme bliss trapped in stasis for ever, like a DVD or a Sky+ programme on permanent pause/freeze frame, I can see the attraction.
If that's the case, though, it just begs the question 'Why not start everyone in heaven in and leave them there?' Why mess around with creating the universe and bodies in the first place?
O.
How else would the deity get its kicks, if it didn't have the 'pleasure' of watching human suffering?
-
If heaven was an absolute paradise which lasts forever, surely that would get extremely boring?
Only if time was linear and stretched out moment by moment, as many feel to be the case in the world now. That's leaving aside the thorny issue of time in a supposedly timeless existence, of course.
On the other hand, if heaven was a moment of supreme bliss trapped in stasis for ever, like a DVD or a Sky+ programme on permanent pause/freeze frame, I can see the attraction.
If that's the case, though, it just begs the question 'Why not start everyone in heaven in and leave them there?' Why mess around with creating the universe and bodies in the first place?
O.
Free will...., out of time..., mysterious ways..., love..., beyond comprehension..., look at the shiny thing.
-
I couldn't help tagging "Oooh, squirrel!" onto the end of that post, NS (only makes sense if you've seen Over the Hedge though).
-
What is your idea of heaven, either in the religious or secular sense of that word?
My idea of heaven would be no deity, no afterlife and ceasing to be when I kick the bucket.
So, a non-existence heaven. A very interesting definition
-
If that's the case, though, it just begs the question 'Why not start everyone in heaven in and leave them there?' Why mess around with creating the universe and bodies in the first place?
O.
How else would the deity get its kicks, if it didn't have the 'pleasure' of watching human suffering?
Or, how would the deity know who wants to live with him without providing each person with life and the frrewill that goes with it?
-
Omniscience rather than a practical trial should take care of that, I'd have thought.
Or do you not hold with that alleged attribute?
-
Heaven.
A state of happiness, where there are no worries, no suffering and no strife.
-
Or, how would the deity know who wants to live with him without providing each person with life and the frrewill that goes with it?
Notwithstanding the ongoing explanation for how 'free will' might conceivably be a thing - how would anyone make an informed choice on the patchy, unreliable information provided?
O.
-
Notwithstanding the ongoing explanation for how 'free will' might conceivably be a thing - how would anyone make an informed choice on the patchy, unreliable information provided?
I suppose it depends on whether one is a physical, scientific evidence-only sort of person, or whether one sees reality as being broader than these, which I believe more people do globally than don't.
-
With as little justification and explanation as you, no doubt.
Good of you to play the argumentum ad populum/numerum, though. I was getting worried.
-
What about the rest of the universe & also reincarnation ANYWHERE ?!!?!?
Nick
-
Notwithstanding the ongoing explanation for how 'free will' might conceivably be a thing - how would anyone make an informed choice on the patchy, unreliable information provided?
I suppose it depends on whether one is a physical, scientific evidence-only sort of person, or whether one sees reality as being broader than these, which I believe more people do globally than don't.
You mean whether one wants to make an informed evidence based decision or guess on a hunch.
-
If that's the case, though, it just begs the question 'Why not start everyone in heaven in and leave them there?' Why mess around with creating the universe and bodies in the first place?
O.
How else would the deity get its kicks, if it didn't have the 'pleasure' of watching human suffering?
Or, how would the deity know who wants to live with him without providing each person with life and the frrewill that goes with it?
Because, supposedly, he knows what everbody thinks, he is omniscient, or so you and the other Christians on this forum keep telling us!
So he knows from second one after birth who will want "to live with him",
Personally the only reason that I would want to meet him would be to slug him one in the mouth for all the unnecessary suffering he inflicts on the weak and the helpless. A sadistic evil bastard who demands absolute obedience or else!
Eternal life in a Heaven that had him as part of it would be absolute Hell to me.
-
According to a consensus of teachings from spirit guides that I heard speak through trance mediums. We do not go to heaven or hell forever, we go to a higher plane of existence where we assimilate the lessons of our life on earth. When we have been in this higher realm for long enough we realize the only way for us to spiritually evolve further is to reincarnate. We may reincarnate as many as thousands of times on many different planets, before reaching a state of grace, or enlightenment. At that time we will have settled all karmic debts from our past actions and become free of the need for rebirth. After our final incarnation we continue to grow as immortal beings in even higher realms of existence. There is no heaven or hell there is only continual growth toward unity with God.
-
According to a consensus of teachings from spirit guides that I heard speak through trance mediums. We do not go to heaven or hell forever, we go to a higher plane of existence where we assimilate the lessons of our life on earth. When we have been in this higher realm for long enough we realize the only way for us to spiritually evolve further is to reincarnate. We may reincarnate as many as thousands of times on many different planets, before reaching a state of grace, or enlightenment. At that time we will have settled all karmic debts from our past actions and become free of the need for rebirth. After our final incarnation we continue to grow as immortal beings in even higher realms of existence. There is no heaven or hell there is only continual growth toward unity with God.
The emboldened words above agree with neo-pagan thinking regarding the cycle of birth, life, death and re-birth.
The rest not so much.
-
Because, supposedly, he knows what everbody thinks, he is omniscient, or so you and the other Christians on this forum keep telling us!
So he knows from second one after birth who will want "to live with him",
So, you'd agree with the post that you have quoted that he only knows what we think once we have been born: hence my suggestion that we need to have lived in order to have made a decision and therefore for God to know what we think.
Personally the only reason that I would want to meet him would be to slug him one in the mouth for all the unnecessary suffering he inflicts on the weak and the helpless. A sadistic evil bastard who demands absolute obedience or else!
And what "unnecessary suffering" does he inflict on the weak and the helpless. Floo has made the same accusation on many occasions, yet has never been able to provide any evidence in support of the accusation, when challenged. Do you have any such evidence?
-
Because, supposedly, he knows what everbody thinks, he is omniscient, or so you and the other Christians on this forum keep telling us!
So he knows from second one after birth who will want "to live with him",
So, you'd agree with the post that you have quoted that he only knows what we think once we have been born: hence my suggestion that we need to have lived in order to have made a decision and therefore for God to know what we think.
Personally the only reason that I would want to meet him would be to slug him one in the mouth for all the unnecessary suffering he inflicts on the weak and the helpless. A sadistic evil bastard who demands absolute obedience or else!
And what "unnecessary suffering" does he inflict on the weak and the helpless. Floo has made the same accusation on many occasions, yet has never been able to provide any evidence in support of the accusation, when challenged. Do you have any such evidence?
What's that old song "Here We Go Again", happy as can be etc etc la la la la la
ippy
-
What's that old song "Here We Go Again", happy as can be etc etc la la la la la
ippy
And I'm glad that you acknowledge that you feel it necessary to do so, ippy.
-
Because, supposedly, he knows what everbody thinks, he is omniscient, or so you and the other Christians on this forum keep telling us!
So he knows from second one after birth who will want "to live with him",
So, you'd agree with the post that you have quoted that he only knows what we think once we have been born: hence my suggestion that we need to have lived in order to have made a decision and therefore for God to know what we think.
Personally the only reason that I would want to meet him would be to slug him one in the mouth for all the unnecessary suffering he inflicts on the weak and the helpless. A sadistic evil bastard who demands absolute obedience or else!
And what "unnecessary suffering" does he inflict on the weak and the helpless. Floo has made the same accusation on many occasions, yet has never been able to provide any evidence in support of the accusation, when challenged. Do you have any such evidence?
What's that old song "Here We Go Again", happy as can be etc etc la la la la la
ippy
'All good friends and jolly good company'! (But that will be in hell);D
-
So, you'd agree with the post that you have quoted that he only knows what we think once we have been born: hence my suggestion that we need to have lived in order to have made a decision and therefore for God to know what we think.
Although true to form you were unable to answer the question when put to you, we can take this as an admission that you don't think your god is omniscient.
And what "unnecessary suffering" does he inflict on the weak and the helpless. Floo has made the same accusation on many occasions, yet has never been able to provide any evidence in support of the accusation, when challenged. Do you have any such evidence?
Any evidence for your assertions, hypocrite?
-
Although true to form you were unable to answer the question when put to you, we can take this as an admission that you don't think your god is omniscient.
And which question was that, Shaker? The one that you posted in response to my answer to the question that hadn't been posted at that point? OK, I'll try to spell it out in words of 2 or fewer syllables for you. God knows all things, but chooses to allow us to choose our own way. Until we have made that choice he can't know what we are thinking since we haven't thought up till that point.
Any evidence for your assertions, hypocrite?
Yes, Shakes. God is a God of love and wants humans to live in harmony with each other and himself. As a God of love, he is also merciful, even when humans screw it up. Do you have any evidence that what I have said isn't the case?
-
'All good friends and jolly good company'! (But that will be in hell);D
Quite possibly will be, Floo, especially for those who have chosen that destination.
-
And which question was that, Shaker?
The one that you either missed or ignored in #18.
OK, I'll try to spell it out in words of 2 or fewer syllables for you.
No, I'm quite at home with longer words.
God knows all things, but chooses to allow us to choose our own way. Until we have made that choice he can't know what we are thinking since we haven't thought up till that point.
The second sentence contradicts the first (and vice versa, obviously), so you're as confused as ever. Still, the second sentence reiterates your denial of your god's alleged attribute of omniscience.
Yes, Shakes. God is a God of love and wants humans to live in harmony with each other and himself. As a God of love, he is also merciful, even when humans screw it up. Do you have any evidence that what I have said isn't the case?
I have abundant evidence that you can't put your hands on a keyboard to post here without either a bald, unevidenced assertion or some form of fallacious "thinking," usually your beloved negative proof fallacy, both beautifully exemplified by the above-quoted mess.
-
Hope, Bran the blessed's head talked after he was dead; it was then buried facing the sea, reputedly at the hill where the Tower of London is now and for as long as it stays there Britain has his protection.
Do you have any evidence that this isn't the case?
-
'All good friends and jolly good company'! (But that will be in hell);D
Quite possibly will be, Floo, especially for those who have chosen that destination.
Well it can't be any worse than heaven in the company of the Biblical deity! ;D
-
And which question was that, Shaker?
The one that you either missed or ignored in #18.
I missed it until I was responding last time. Howervcer, since myu post answers the question even before you asked it, I wasn't too worried.
No, I'm quite at home with longer words.
You didn't seem able to understand the original version that only had 2 words of more than 2 syllables in it, so I thought you might need some help ;)
God knows all things, but chooses to allow us to choose our own way. Until we have made that choice he can't know what we are thinking since we haven't thought up till that point.
The second sentence contradicts the first (and vice versa, obviously), so you're as confused as ever. Still, the second sentence reiterates your denial of your god's alleged attribute of omniscience.
Oddly enough, the 2nd sentence doesn't contradict the first, because no-one can know what anyone is thinking before they start to think - which, of course, requires life to occur. As your 2nd sentence makes no sense.
Yes, Shakes. God is a God of love and wants humans to live in harmony with each other and himself. As a God of love, he is also merciful, even when humans screw it up. Do you have any evidence that what I have said isn't the case?
I have abundant evidence that you can't put your hands on a keyboard to post here without either a bald, unevidenced assertion or some form of fallacious "thinking," usually your beloved negative proof fallacy, both beautifully exemplified by the above-quoted mess.
Sorry Shkes, I'd forgotten that you are limited in your understanding of reality to the purely physical. Before you play the 'negative fallacy' card you love so much, do you have any evidence for the assertions that you make?
-
Well it can't be any worse than heaven in the company of the Biblical deity! ;D
Well, since it will be the non-believer's equivalent of heaven, that doesn't make sense, unless (in view of your descriptions of Heaven) you believe that it will be a place of suffering.
-
Oddly enough, the 2nd sentence doesn't contradict the first
Yes it does. "God knows all things" (first sentence) is denied by "God doesn't know what we're thinking until we have thought it" (second sentence).
because no-one can know what anyone is thinking before they start to think
That perfectly describes a human being working with partial knowledge and constrained by time (in fact any human being often can't know what another is thinking until the other vocalises what they're thinking), but not a god to whom those limitations are alleged (by believers) not to apply. An omniscient entity not bound by time, freed from past, present and future, would be able to know what someone thinks before they think it - that's what the word means. And your god is traditionally alleged to be both omniscient and not constrained by past, present and future. However, I see that here you're denying those attributes, though you can't seem to bring yourself to say so, which is wholly understandable - it's an illustration of how nonsensical the whole concept of gods really is, and that's bound to be disturbing to those who purport to believe in such things.
Sorry Shkes, I'd forgotten that you are limited in your understanding of reality to the purely physical.
I've not been furnished with any evidence that there's anything else, and you certainly aren't going to provide it. You claim that there is, but you seem to be short on evidential backing. Who'd have thought it?
Before you play the 'negative fallacy' card you love so much
I'm not the one who loves it - that couldn't possibly be more directly the opposite of the truth. I detest the sort of sloppiness of thought and laziness of mind that gives rise to such fallacious nonsense, but despite having been told innumerable times that it's a fallacy, here you still are still using it day in, day out. So out of the two of us, who loves it?
I remember that you once typically asserted in your usual evidence-free manner that I had not only used this fallacy but had done so more than you, but of course, every request from me for you to substantiate this claim has met with the usual cowardly silence.
do you have any evidence for the assertions that you make?
Which ones, and given that you provide no evidence for yours, why should I?
-
Well it can't be any worse than heaven in the company of the Biblical deity! ;D
Well, since it will be the non-believer's equivalent of heaven, that doesn't make sense, unless (in view of your descriptions of Heaven) you believe that it will be a place of suffering.
No I don't believe heaven or hell are a place of suffering as I don't believe they exist except in the mind of believers. It is just possible I suppose that when we die we pass on into another dimension, and then another and another and another, forever and ever!
-
Personally the only reason that I would want to meet him would be to slug him one in the mouth for all the unnecessary suffering he inflicts on the weak and the helpless. A sadistic evil bastard who demands absolute obedience or else!
And what "unnecessary suffering" does he inflict on the weak and the helpless. Floo has made the same accusation on many occasions, yet has never been able to provide any evidence in support of the accusation, when challenged. Do you have any such evidence?
Come on Hope! Even at your worst you cannot be that daft!
Childhood cancer - for one and all the rest of the horredous illnesses that children suffer.
Do not give that old eye-wash about him not inflicting these on kids - All things bright and beautiful - he made them all, but let's conveniently forget that he made everything - EVERYTHING - including the most unpleasant of diseases.
-
Hope isn't playing negative fallacy Top Trumps with me. :(
-
Hope isn't playing negative fallacy Top Trumps with me. :(
Wanna bet? He plays it with everybody else ... regularly. Your turn will come soon enough ;)
-
If the deity doesn't cure a Christian, then you sometimes hear the excuse, 'they are now in a better place', meaning heaven!
-
To be honest, in those situations you hear every excuse going.
-
Hope isn't playing negative fallacy Top Trumps with me. :(
I don't need to play them with you - you don't use them. Shakes, on the other hand, plays them all the time.
-
Hope isn't playing negative fallacy Top Trumps with me. :(
I don't need to play them with you - you don't use them. Shakes, on the other hand, plays them all the time.
Find me an example.
But you won't will you, you great big festering old hypocrite, you? As I said just an hour and a quarter ago:
I remember that you once typically asserted in your usual evidence-free manner that I had not only used this fallacy but had done so more than you, but of course, every request from me for you to substantiate this claim has met with the usual cowardly silence.
And round and round the magic hypocrite's roundabout we go.
-
To be honest, in those situations you hear every excuse going.
Yup, Shakes, I've heard some wonderful ones from medics. 'Their condition was too advanced for treatment'; 'I've never known this treatment fail to work before'; 'There is no reason why the treatment we recommended didn't work'; 'We've realised that we treated your ... for the wrong condition'; 'I'm so sorry that I didn't recognise your ...'s condition before it was too late'; ... (these two to the families of two of our neighbours)
Mind you, any faith healer who claims that their 'treatment' is foolproof should be steered well clear of. No human being knows when someone's time is up, and whilst the family may be desperate for them to recover, that might be more of a death sentence for the person than death. Sadly, it happens all too often under the scheme favoured by medical science, which can seem too interested in proving itself than caring for the person.
-
To be honest, in those situations you hear every excuse going.
Yup, Shakes, I've heard some wonderful ones from medics.
We've only your word for that, and given your record if you said it was raining I'd go outside to check. I was referring to the parade of excuses we get from believers in a deity supposed to be omnipotent (though not to you - you've implied that very clearly) whose alleged powers suddenly desert it whenever it's actually supposed to do stuff.
-
I'm thinking of starting the stopwatch on my phone to see how long Hopeless (who has conveniently disappeared again) will duck, dive, dodge, evade and avoid the fact that yet again he's made an assertion he can't back up ... only I don't think the stopwatch will go up that high.
-
"...if you said it was raining I'd go outside and check." No you wouldn't Shaker, I doubt you could find ten people that would bother rolling your sofa out the door. And I betcha your doors aren't wide enough for both you and your arrogance.
-
Isn't there a harmless wild animal you should be out killing somewhere, Moodie?
-
"...if you said it was raining I'd go outside and check." No you wouldn't Shaker, I doubt you could find ten people that would bother rolling your sofa out the door. And I betcha your doors aren't wide enough for both you and your arrogance.
You have to be seen as evenhanded about these things Woody, sorry Shaker, if Hope says it's raining outside he will be right for most of the time, I think you've forgotten Hope lives in wales, the Welsh don't ask if it's raining there, they only ask is it dry today?
It's the mountains it sends all of that moisture laden air gathered on it's path over the North Atlantic on it's way upwards into the cold where it precipitates it's self into that almost continuous band of rain dropping on to this western part of our British isles called Wales.
Living in the South East we have to thank our fellow UK, Welsh division for suffering that rain and at the same time handing us the driest part of the country with the fewest dark, rain sodden days.
I wouldn't want to be seen as making a meal out of the fact that this part of the UK on average has the driest weather it's possible to have if you live here in the UK but I did think it might be relevant to mention how dry it is here for most of the time, that is that it's so dry compared to Wales.
By the way did you know we have the same amount of average rainfall as Jerusalem Jordan here in Essex?
ippy
-
"...if you said it was raining I'd go outside and check." No you wouldn't Shaker, I doubt you could find ten people that would bother rolling your sofa out the door. And I betcha your doors aren't wide enough for both you and your arrogance.
You have to be seen as evenhanded about these things Woody, sorry Shaker, if Hope says it's raining outside he will be right for most of the time, I think you've forgotten Hope lives in wales, the Welsh don't ask if it's raining there, they only ask is it dry today?
It's the mountains it sends all of that moisture laden air gathered on it's path over the North Atlantic on it's way upwards into the cold where it precipitates it's self into that almost continuous band of rain dropping on to this western part of our British isles called Wales.
Living in the South East we have to thank our fellow UK, Welsh division for suffering that rain and at the same time handing us the driest part of the country with the fewest dark, rain sodden days.
I wouldn't want to be seen as making a meal out of the fact that this part of the UK on average has the driest weather it's possible to have if you live here in the UK but I did think it might be relevant to mention how dry it is here for most of the time, that is that it's so dry compared to Wales.
By the way did you know we have the same amount of average rainfall as Jerusalem Jordan here in Essex?
ippy
Why wasn't Jesus born in Essex?..........They couldn't find Three wisemen or a virgin.
-
"...if you said it was raining I'd go outside and check." No you wouldn't Shaker, I doubt you could find ten people that would bother rolling your sofa out the door. And I betcha your doors aren't wide enough for both you and your arrogance.
You have to be seen as evenhanded about these things Woody, sorry Shaker, if Hope says it's raining outside he will be right for most of the time, I think you've forgotten Hope lives in wales, the Welsh don't ask if it's raining there, they only ask is it dry today?
It's the mountains it sends all of that moisture laden air gathered on it's path over the North Atlantic on it's way upwards into the cold where it precipitates it's self into that almost continuous band of rain dropping on to this western part of our British isles called Wales.
Living in the South East we have to thank our fellow UK, Welsh division for suffering that rain and at the same time handing us the driest part of the country with the fewest dark, rain sodden days.
I wouldn't want to be seen as making a meal out of the fact that this part of the UK on average has the driest weather it's possible to have if you live here in the UK but I did think it might be relevant to mention how dry it is here for most of the time, that is that it's so dry compared to Wales.
By the way did you know we have the same amount of average rainfall as Jerusalem Jordan here in Essex?
ippy
Why wasn't Jesus born in Essex?..........They couldn't find Three wisemen or a virgin.
Vlad you've written another post in plain English? Everything OK?
ippy
-
"...if you said it was raining I'd go outside and check." No you wouldn't Shaker, I doubt you could find ten people that would bother rolling your sofa out the door. And I betcha your doors aren't wide enough for both you and your arrogance.
You have to be seen as evenhanded about these things Woody, sorry Shaker, if Hope says it's raining outside he will be right for most of the time, I think you've forgotten Hope lives in wales, the Welsh don't ask if it's raining there, they only ask is it dry today?
It's the mountains it sends all of that moisture laden air gathered on it's path over the North Atlantic on it's way upwards into the cold where it precipitates it's self into that almost continuous band of rain dropping on to this western part of our British isles called Wales.
Living in the South East we have to thank our fellow UK, Welsh division for suffering that rain and at the same time handing us the driest part of the country with the fewest dark, rain sodden days.
I wouldn't want to be seen as making a meal out of the fact that this part of the UK on average has the driest weather it's possible to have if you live here in the UK but I did think it might be relevant to mention how dry it is here for most of the time, that is that it's so dry compared to Wales.
By the way did you know we have the same amount of average rainfall as Jerusalem Jordan here in Essex?
ippy
Why wasn't Jesus born in Essex?..........They couldn't find Three wisemen or a virgin.
Vlad you've written another post in plain English? Everything OK?
ippy
No....Some bloke from Essex keeps posting Secular Humanism.
-
"...if you said it was raining I'd go outside and check." No you wouldn't Shaker, I doubt you could find ten people that would bother rolling your sofa out the door. And I betcha your doors aren't wide enough for both you and your arrogance.
You have to be seen as evenhanded about these things Woody, sorry Shaker, if Hope says it's raining outside he will be right for most of the time, I think you've forgotten Hope lives in wales, the Welsh don't ask if it's raining there, they only ask is it dry today?
It's the mountains it sends all of that moisture laden air gathered on it's path over the North Atlantic on it's way upwards into the cold where it precipitates it's self into that almost continuous band of rain dropping on to this western part of our British isles called Wales.
Living in the South East we have to thank our fellow UK, Welsh division for suffering that rain and at the same time handing us the driest part of the country with the fewest dark, rain sodden days.
I wouldn't want to be seen as making a meal out of the fact that this part of the UK on average has the driest weather it's possible to have if you live here in the UK but I did think it might be relevant to mention how dry it is here for most of the time, that is that it's so dry compared to Wales.
By the way did you know we have the same amount of average rainfall as Jerusalem Jordan here in Essex?
ippy
Why wasn't Jesus born in Essex?..........They couldn't find Three wisemen or a virgin.
Vlad you've written another post in plain English? Everything OK?
ippy
No....Some bloke from Essex keeps posting Secular Humanism.
I knew there had to be some reason, does it hurt?
ippy
-
Notwithstanding the ongoing explanation for how 'free will' might conceivably be a thing - how would anyone make an informed choice on the patchy, unreliable information provided?
I suppose it depends on whether one is a physical, scientific evidence-only sort of person, or whether one sees reality as being broader than these, which I believe more people do globally than don't.
Not scientific evidence only, just evidence only. Claims, unsubstantiated by logic, a verifiable methodology or successful outcomes, are just unsubstantiated claims.
O.
-
"...if you said it was raining I'd go outside and check." No you wouldn't Shaker, I doubt you could find ten people that would bother rolling your sofa out the door. And I betcha your doors aren't wide enough for both you and your arrogance.
You have to be seen as evenhanded about these things Woody, sorry Shaker, if Hope says it's raining outside he will be right for most of the time, I think you've forgotten Hope lives in wales, the Welsh don't ask if it's raining there, they only ask is it dry today?
It's the mountains it sends all of that moisture laden air gathered on it's path over the North Atlantic on it's way upwards into the cold where it precipitates it's self into that almost continuous band of rain dropping on to this western part of our British isles called Wales.
Living in the South East we have to thank our fellow UK, Welsh division for suffering that rain and at the same time handing us the driest part of the country with the fewest dark, rain sodden days.
I wouldn't want to be seen as making a meal out of the fact that this part of the UK on average has the driest weather it's possible to have if you live here in the UK but I did think it might be relevant to mention how dry it is here for most of the time, that is that it's so dry compared to Wales.
By the way did you know we have the same amount of average rainfall as Jerusalem Jordan here in Essex?
ippy
Why wasn't Jesus born in Essex?..........They couldn't find Three wisemen or a virgin.
Vlad you've written another post in plain English? Everything OK?
ippy
No....Some bloke from Essex keeps posting Secular Humanism.
I knew there had to be some reason, does it hurt?
ippy
since Secular humanism is arseclenchingly sentimental.........Yes.
-
I thought I would see if there was an mileage in bumping this topic up.
-
I thought I would see if there was an mileage in bumping this topic up.
Why?
-
Why?
Why not?
-
I thought I would see if there was an mileage in bumping this topic up.
Heaven and hell are typically Christian and Islamic concepts. Even in Judaism only some sects believe in heaven and hell. It is relevant only if we believes in one life and a Judgement after that based on which people are sent to heaven or hell for eternity.
In Hinduism, there is no concept of heaven and hell. We believe in thousands of births and rebirths during which the spirit incarnates in many bodies including animals, then we are born as humans where again there are several births in different bodies and different circumstances. We thereby develop, learn and grow till we become saintly and selfless people. After this is Mukti or Freedom whenwe are out of this cycle of birth and death.
There are said to be spiritual worlds called Swarg and Narg (heaven and hell broadly) where we reside temporarily till we are reborn depending on our spiritual level. During the cycle of rebirth and death, we do experience what is called swarg and narg on earth depending on where we are born.
Neither of these states (happiness, pleasure and Sorrow, suffering) are permanent and the goal is to rise above both these illusionary and relative states of mind.
-
Why not?
Well normally threads die because nobody has got anything left they want to say on them. I thought you must have some new insight or something - otherwise, it'll just die again straight away.
-
Well normally threads die because nobody has got anything left they want to say on them. I thought you must have some new insight or something - otherwise, it'll just die again straight away.
If it dies, I won't bother to resurrect it again.
-
Sririam has said quite a bit, I assume he hasn't said it on this thread before (haven't checked). Sometimes Hinduism makes a lot of sense to me so I'm always interested to read what he says. Would be nice to think that, when I've shuffled off this mortal coil, I will have another bash at life starting from a better position. Just a thought. Probably anathema to most Christians but I have heard some Christians put forward the view that reincarnation is not totally incompatible with Christianity. We believe in spiritual rebirth.
-
B
Indeed I agree about Hinduism as it seems a more logical & kindly thing for a god to do rather than say 'right you pillocks, made a bollox,sorry- DOWN you go' ?!!??!?
-
B
Indeed I agree about Hinduism as it seems a more logical & kindly thing for a god to do rather than say 'right you pillocks, made a bollox,sorry- DOWN you go' ?!!??!?
Doesn't that depend on the reality of the belief?
What evidence is there for reincarnation?
Jesus Christ is evidence of the OT God.., Yes, I know, we discuss the contents of the bible.
But given mans own evilness why would anything appear logical or kindly in being born over and over again to suffer?
-
Doesn't that depend on the reality of the belief?
What evidence is there for reincarnation?
Jesus Christ is evidence of the OT God.., Yes, I know, we discuss the contents of the bible.
But given mans own evilness why would anything appear logical or kindly in being born over and over again to suffer?
There is more evidence for reincarnation than for the 6 day creation....or Adam & Eve....or eternal damnation. It also makes more sense, every one is ultimately equal and free, and is more in tune with evolution and slow development than the 'one life-judgement-damnation' theory.
Here is something on reincarnation in Christianity. It is just a site I came across...not sure about the quotes. You decide.
http://reluctant-messenger.com/origen3.html
Cheers.
Sriram
-
Doesn't that depend on the reality of the belief?
What evidence is there for reincarnation?
Jesus Christ is evidence of the OT God.., Yes, I know, we discuss the contents of the bible.
But given mans own evilness why would anything appear logical or kindly in being born over and over again to suffer?
The tales about Jesus are no evidence of anything. Compared with the Biblical god humans are angels!
-
TOTALLY AGREE Sriram & Floo !!
Jesus is proof of nothing at all !!!!
Sass
YOU try & argue your POV with a Muslim ?!!?!??
Nick
-
Doesn't that depend on the reality of the belief?
What evidence is there for reincarnation?
Jesus Christ is evidence of the OT God.., Yes, I know, we discuss the contents of the bible.
But given mans own evilness why would anything appear logical or kindly in being born over and over again to suffer?
Sassy
http://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/380302/jewish/Gate-of-Reincarnations-Introduction.htm
It's also features in some writings in some parts of Judaism.
http://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/380599/jewish/Judaism-and-Reincarnation.htm
Many Jews are surprised to learn, or may even wish to deny, that reincarnation…is an integral part of Jewish belief…
-
Do Jews believe in reincarnation?
8 ANSWERS
David Mescheloff
David Mescheloff, Ph.D. mathematics, Ph.D. Talmud, Orthodox community rabbi and organizer of ra...
Written Sep 2
As Ara Ogle wrote, some do and some don’t. Those who do also insist that it is an absolutely required and necessary fundamental Jewish belief. Those who don’t believe in it point to the complete absence of any such notion expressed explicitly anywhere in early Jewish literature (see more details in other answers to this question).
Some don’t take a hard and fast position on this one, and believe that reincarnation is a possibility and may happen with some, even if it doesn’t occur generally.
After all that has been said … if what you’re asking about is an ultimate “reincarnation” of all righteous people, which we usually call “the resurrection of the dead”, then, indeed, the Mishnah (second century CE) describes this as a wfundamental Jewish belief, and Maimonides (12th century CE) included it in his list of fundamental Jewish beliefs. Yes, Orthodox Jews believe in that. We don’t know when it will take place, nor do we know the mechanism by which it will take place. Judaism is very much a concrete, here and now way of life, so we don’t spend too much time thinking about it, we just settle for confirming our belief in it regularly.
https://www.quora.com/Do-Jews-believe-in-reincarnation
-
Aish is usually a good source
The fact that reincarnation is part of Jewish tradition comes as a surprise to many people. 11 Nevertheless, it's mentioned in numerous places throughout the classical texts of Jewish mysticism, starting with the preeminent sourcebook of Kabbalah, the Zohar :12
As long as a person is unsuccessful in his purpose in this world, the Holy One, blessed be He, uproots him and replants him over and over again. (Zohar I 186b)
All souls are subject to reincarnation; and people do not know the ways of the Holy One, blessed be He! They do not know that they are brought before the tribunal both before they enter into this world and after they leave it; they are ignorant of the many reincarnations and secret works which they have to undergo, and of the number of naked souls, and how many naked spirits roam about in the other world without being able to enter within the veil of the King's Palace. Men do not know how the souls revolve like a stone that is thrown from a sling. But the time is at hand when these mysteries will be disclosed. (Zohar II 99b)
The Zohar and related literature 13 are filled with references to reincarnation, 14 addressing such questions as which body is resurrected and what happens to those bodies that did not achieve final perfection, 15 how many chances a soul is given to achieve completion through reincarnation, 16 whether a husband and wife can reincarnate together,17 if a delay in burial can affect reincarnation,18 and if a soul can reincarnate into an animal. 19
http://www.aish.com/jl/l/a/48943926.html
Why only think some Jewish writings are relevant to Christians?
If Judaism is the root from which Christianity sprang, then surely it's relevant in that it's there at all.
Christianities knowledge of God comes from Judaism after all.
-
........ more in tune with evolution ....
An interesting phrase - what do you mean by that Sriram?
-
There is more evidence for reincarnation than for the 6 day creation....or Adam & Eve....or eternal damnation. It also makes more sense, every one is ultimately equal and free, and is more in tune with evolution and slow development than the 'one life-judgement-damnation' theory.
Here is something on reincarnation in Christianity. It is just a site I came across...not sure about the quotes. You decide.
http://reluctant-messenger.com/origen3.html
Cheers.
Sriram
Sriram,
One could say there is more evidence for Satan existence given the evil man does to each other.
As for Adam and Eve the evidence is us and that evidence outweighs evidence for reincarnation. Re-incarnation would suggest the word of a being outside that of man for such a thing to exist. It would also give credence to the truth the soul never dies giving even greater meaning and making possible the resurrection of Christ.
As for eternal damnation those atheists who died and came back having experienced hell, now believers in Christ as more worthy of being believed than those who never came back, surely?
It depends how you process evidence. The fact people are being healed by the power of God is evidence for God on a greater scale. We need to examine all the evidence. I do not believe that re-incarnation can happen. But that is the difference between our faiths. :)
-
TOTALLY AGREE Sriram & Floo !!
Jesus is proof of nothing at all !!!!
Sass
YOU try & argue your POV with a Muslim ?!!?!??
Nick
Nick,
Has Mahomet, actually done something to bring peace to the world as Christ did?
A Muslim could not argue a point in such circumstances as Christ was foretold, Mahomet wasn't.
I honestly do not believe any points can be raised which are not in line with the truth given by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel.
-
Sassy
http://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/380302/jewish/Gate-of-Reincarnations-Introduction.htm
It's also features in some writings in some parts of Judaism.
http://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/380599/jewish/Judaism-and-Reincarnation.htm
Morning Rose,
I took a quick look but the Torah does not suggest of even support reincarnation.
Their have been many beliefs of the century which are not and never were part of the teachings of the Law and Prophets.
Pharisee and Sadducee held contrary beliefs to one another about the existence of Angels and Resurrection.
A point to note is if several people have existed with one soul and all were different in the lives. How could that soul live in all persons they had been at resurrection?
They may there is evidence of some Jews having believed in something not part of the covenants of Abraham and Moses.
But there is nothing in the Torah the first five books of the OT to suggest it was ever God given to them. :)
-
An interesting phrase - what do you mean by that Sriram?
Just guess...! I have written about this many times.
-
Aish is usually a good source
Why only think some Jewish writings are relevant to Christians?
If Judaism is the root from which Christianity sprang, then surely it's relevant in that it's there at all.
Christianities knowledge of God comes from Judaism after all.
The two Covenants are independent of each other.
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
God himself said the final covenant would not be based on the written law. The Torah and the other books of the Prophets but as Christ said that his commandments sum up all the laws and teachings of the Prophets.
A way in which the believers both Jew and Gentile would live in agreement through the Messiahs teachings and them being on the inside of the person. So it negates the way of the old covenant (outward expression of the law by man) putting in place the way of Spirit and Truth. Meaning God pouring his Spirit on all flesh.
-
Not like you to not want to write a lot more about it Sriram.
-
As for eternal damnation those atheists who died and came back having experienced hell, now believers in Christ as more worthy of being believed than those who never came back, surely?
You think people have actually died and come back from Hell?
-
You think people have actually died and come back from Hell?
Some people claim to have had a NDE some positive and others negative.
I don't think all the negative ones were unbelievers, particularly.
It does seem to be life changing though, but I'm not sure they come out of it as being exclusive religious believers of the bible sort.
http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence/people-are-dramatically-changed-by-ndes.html
https://pmhatwater.hypermart.net/resources/PDFs/Articles/Hannover-NDE-Aftereffect.pdf
-
Sassy: "I honestly do not believe any points can be raised which are not in line with the truth given by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel."
In fairness. Islam is an Abrahamic religion.
Some 'peaceful' (in a sense), things that Mohammed did early on was restrict polygamy, rife at that time, to four wives with consent of existing wives, allow women to keep their money, either what they had before marriage or accued after; a couple of other things which will come to me later or I'll look up.
I am not saying fuelled by an opinion, merely in the interests of fairness, to give balance.
-
Some people claim to have had a NDE some positive and others negative.
I don't think all the negative ones were unbelievers, particularly.
It does seem to be life changing though, but I'm not sure they come out of it as being exclusive religious believers of the bible sort.
http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence/people-are-dramatically-changed-by-ndes.html
https://pmhatwater.hypermart.net/resources/PDFs/Articles/Hannover-NDE-Aftereffect.pdf
I'm very aware of reports of NDEs - having discussed this many times with Sriram in particular. People certainly report experiences when they have recovered from near death situations (near death being an important thing to note) but what causes these experiences we do not currently know. I guess I shouldn't be surprised if Sassy believes these are reports of people actually dying, going to hell, then returning, but I was.
-
If heaven was an absolute paradise which lasts forever, surely that would get extremely boring?
Indeed - but not as boring as your repetitive anti-religious posts. For someone who doesn't believe in God, you seem to be pretty obsessed with him/her/it/them.
-
I'm very aware of reports of NDEs - having discussed this many times with Sriram in particular. People certainly report experiences when they have recovered from near death situations (near death being an important thing to note) but what causes these experiences we do not currently know. I guess I shouldn't be surprised if Sassy believes these are reports of people actually dying, going to hell, then returning, but I was.
NDE's are the most prolific and most convincing evidence yet for an after-life. The fact that many people choose to regard them as some sort of a brain generated illusion, only shows the compulsive need in some people to find a material explanation for all experiences, at all costs. ;) Its a mental block that is not easy to remove.
Perhaps another generation has to pass before an after-life will be commonly regarded as a fact of life and people would integrate that idea into their daily lives. It will not be a matter of 'faith' or 'belief' any more but a real experience that people can look forward to after they leave the body. As real as looking forward to going home from boarding school during the holidays. That would be a good situation instead of all this tiresome 'blind man's buff' with the universe that we are currently indulging in. :)
-
Oh there is some bollocks talked here.
-
Oh there is some bollocks talked here.
Right!!
-
Right!!
And the people that believe unevidenced things, post the most.
-
NDE's are the most prolific and most convincing evidence yet for an after-life. The fact that many people choose to regard them as some sort of a brain generated illusion, only shows the compulsive need in some people to find a material explanation for all experiences, at all costs. ;) Its a mental block that is not easy to remove.
Perhaps another generation has to pass before an after-life will be commonly regarded as a fact of life and people would integrate that idea into their daily lives. It will not be a matter of 'faith' or 'belief' any more but a real experience that people can look forward to after they leave the body. As real as looking forward to going home from boarding school during the holidays. That would be a good situation instead of all this tiresome 'blind man's buff' with the universe that we are currently indulging in. :)
Or perhaps in another generation, the situation will still be the same with some people still relying on anecdotal evidence in support of their preferred conclusions, or indeed, there may be some breakthrough which may provide conclusive evidence one way or the other. By that time however I would assume I would be long gone, and will actually know if there is a life after death...or not, as the case may be. :)
-
NDE's are the most prolific and most convincing evidence yet for an after-life. The fact that many people choose to regard them as some sort of a brain generated illusion, only shows the compulsive need in some people to find a material explanation for all experiences, at all costs. ;) Its a mental block that is not easy to remove.
Perhaps another generation has to pass before an after-life will be commonly regarded as a fact of life and people would integrate that idea into their daily lives. It will not be a matter of 'faith' or 'belief' any more but a real experience that people can look forward to after they leave the body. As real as looking forward to going home from boarding school during the holidays. That would be a good situation instead of all this tiresome 'blind man's buff' with the universe that we are currently indulging in. :)
It could just as easily be said that the fact that many people choose to regard them as evidence for the after life shows the compulsive need in some people to find a non-material explanation for currently unexplained experiences, at all costs. ;) Its a mental block that is not easy to remove.
NDEs happen, no doubt. To take them as evidence for an afterlife requires a belief in such a thing. As it stands they are evidence of nothing.
-
I thought there was a natural explanation for NDEs.
-
I thought there was a natural explanation for NDEs.
There are suggestions of possible natural causes but nothing more than that since they haven't really been studied that closely. Its not easy to do scientific studies on someone in a near death situation of course.
-
There are suggestions of possible natural causes but nothing more than that since they haven't really been studied that closely. Its not easy to do scientific studies on someone in a near death situation of course.
It's worth noting that Sriram does not see an afterlife as a supernatural claim, rather he sees it as part of a natural claim that is evidenced by the experiences
-
It's worth noting that Sriram does not see an afterlife as a supernatural claim, rather he sees it as part of a natural claim that is evidenced by the experiences
Thanks NS. Very true!
-
NDEs happen, no doubt. To take them as evidence for an afterlife requires a belief in such a thing. As it stands they are evidence of nothing.
When millions of people around the world experience almost the very same things and they actually experience being out of the body and in another place during such events.....why would that be discounted and all their experiences be regarded as merely brain generated?!! ::)
That is the most bizarre and myopic view anyone can take.
-
When millions of people around the world experience almost the very same things and they actually experience being out of the body and in another place during such events.....why would that be discounted and all their experiences be regarded as merely brain generated?!! ::)
That is the most bizarre and myopic view anyone can take.
can I just check an assumption based on this and a couple of your recent posts? Would I be correct in thinking that you would see alien abduction stories as true in some sense but relating to other universes?
-
Nick,
Has Mahomet, actually done something to bring peace to the world as Christ did?
A Muslim could not argue a point in such circumstances as Christ was foretold, Mahomet wasn't.
I honestly do not believe any points can be raised which are not in line with the truth given by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel.
Sass
I totally agree - we need only see what's happening today to see the legacy of Islam. These Muslims are doing precisely what their fascist leader did THEN.
We must remember he didn't do it all alone !?!?!? ;)
-
When millions of people around the world experience almost the very same things and they actually experience being out of the body and in another place during such events.....why would that be discounted and all their experiences be regarded as merely brain generated?!! ::)
That is the most bizarre and myopic view anyone can take.
Millions of NDEs? Experiencing the same thing means nothing other than they are going through the same process with the same cause. Who said their experiences should be discounted? Not me. Merely that the cause of their experience is not known.
-
When millions of people around the world experience almost the very same things and they actually experience being out of the body and in another place during such events.....why would that be discounted and all their experiences be regarded as merely brain generated?!! ::)
That is the most bizarre and myopic view anyone can take.
Because that isn't quite true, is it? Millions of people around the world don't experience 'almost the very same things' at all. In fact, the only things which one can say seem to be universal are the idea of meeting other beings and entering a different world, and even these are hugely different in description and seem to reflect the culture of the person concerned. Try looking at some of the evidence.
-
can I just check an assumption based on this and a couple of your recent posts? Would I be correct in thinking that you would see alien abduction stories as true in some sense but relating to other universes?
I have no idea of alien abduction stories. I have not studied them in any way.
They are not comparable to NDE's. NDE's are many more in number, much more varied in terms of gender, age, community, country etc. and have been investigated by hundreds of doctors and psychologists around the world in modern hospitals.
Dismissing NDE's by lumping them with alien abduction stories is the easy way out.....and very short sighted and disingenuous.
-
I have no idea of alien abduction stories. I have not studied them in any way.
They are not comparable to NDE's. NDE's are many more in number, much more varied in terms of gender, age, community, country etc. and have been investigated by hundreds of doctors and psychologists around the world in modern hospitals.
Dismissing NDE's by lumping them with alien abduction stories is the easy way out.....and very short sighted and disingenuous.
if you haven't studied them, how can you know if NDEs are many more in number?
Oh and BTW, reread what I posted. It doesn't dismiss anything. You read that into it when I asked a non judgemental question.
-
if you haven't studied them, how can you know if NDEs are many more in number?
Oh and BTW, reread what I posted. It doesn't dismiss anything. You read that into it when I asked a non judgemental question.
Yeah...I am sorry. I thought I was writing to Maeght. Well...actually I don't know much about alien abduction stories...but I am sure that in terms of sheer numbers they would not be as many as the NDE's. If I am wrong please confirm.
About parallel universes....since scientists postulate such worlds...and they match up with ancient stories of angels and spirits that descend from the skies....I think it is possible that these universes are somehow involved with our world rather than aliens from exoplanets that are thousands of light years away.
Goodnight!
-
Yeah...I am sorry. I thought I was writing to Maeght.
Why? I haven't mentioned alien abductions - that was Nearly Sane.
-
Yeah...I am sorry. I thought I was writing to Maeght. Well...actually I don't know much about alien abduction stories...but I am sure that in terms of sheer numbers they would not be as many as the NDE's. If I am wrong please confirm.
About parallel universes....since scientists postulate such worlds...and they match up with ancient stories of angels and spirits that descend from the skies....I think it is possible that these universes are somehow involved with our world rather than aliens from exoplanets that are thousands of light years away.
Goodnight!
Goodnight to you too. I don't know anything about the numbers involved but logically more alien abduction experiences would make sense simply because more people could experience them.
I think there is a whole thread to consider what we think of as the value of individual experience, and how we connect that ad bring the same or similar to others' experiences but I fear that may be a bit esoteric
-
NDE's are the most prolific and most convincing evidence yet for an after-life. The fact that many people choose to regard them as some sort of a brain generated illusion, only shows the compulsive need in some people to find a material explanation for all experiences, at all costs. ;) Its a mental block that is not easy to remove.
Perhaps another generation has to pass before an after-life will be commonly regarded as a fact of life and people would integrate that idea into their daily lives. It will not be a matter of 'faith' or 'belief' any more but a real experience that people can look forward to after they leave the body. As real as looking forward to going home from boarding school during the holidays. That would be a good situation instead of all this tiresome 'blind man's buff' with the universe that we are currently indulging in. :)
They are NEAR-death experiences. The person recovered to tell the tale, so they didn't actually die. Therefore, such experiences tell us nothing about what, if anything, lies beyond death. (I know we hear people say things like "I died three times on the operating table", but what they mean is that their heart stopped three times. Now that hearts can be re-started, the stoppage of the heart is no longer the definition of death. Death is final, so, barring a miracle strictly so-called, if someone comes back to tell the tale, they weren't actually dead.)
-
Goodnight to you too. I don't know anything about the numbers involved but logically more alien abduction experiences would make sense simply because more people could experience them.
I think there is a whole thread to consider what we think of as the value of individual experience, and how we connect that ad bring the same or similar to others' experiences but I fear that may be a bit esoteric
I don't have any comparative statistics on NDE's and alien abductions. Alien abductions seem to happen typically in isolated areas and there are normally no independent witnesses to such events.
But NDE's usually happen in hospitals under the full supervision of doctors. In many cases doctors have confirmed that the patient had died in medical terms. In some cases even the EEG have indicated death. In spite of that, there have been many accounts of patients watching and reproducing conversations, medical procedures and so on, which they could not have known.
I agree that lot more research needs to be done on NDE's and more accurate information need to be produced. But the attitude of many people dismissing such experiences entirely as 'just hallucinations' is what is not acceptable. It smacks of mental blocks and rigid materialism.
Natural phenomena need not be always material.
-
They are NEAR-death experiences. The person recovered to tell the tale, so they didn't actually die. Therefore, such experiences tell us nothing about what, if anything, lies beyond death. (I know we hear people say things like "I died three times on the operating table", but what they mean is that their heart stopped three times. Now that hearts can be re-started, the stoppage of the heart is no longer the definition of death. Death is final, so, barring a miracle strictly so-called, if someone comes back to tell the tale, they weren't actually dead.)
Dr.Sam Parnia has confirmed that these experiences are after death experiences and that 'Near death' is a misnomer. Many of these patients had actually been declared dead.
-
Dr.Sam Parnia has confirmed that these experiences are after death experiences and that 'Near death' is a misnomer. Many of these patients had actually been declared dead.
A person who is really dead doesn't come back to life again that isn't possible.
-
Dr.Sam Parnia has confirmed that these experiences are after death experiences and that 'Near death' is a misnomer. Many of these patients had actually been declared dead.
Unsure what criteria Dr Parnia is using for his diagnosis of death. Is it just that the heart stopped beating?
If so that really isn't death until that cessation is of a long enough duration to ensure no chance of recovery.
-
Unsure what criteria Dr Parnia is using for his diagnosis of death. Is it just that the heart stopped beating?
If so that really isn't death until that cessation is of a long enough duration to ensure no chance of recovery.
I understand death is when the brain is no longer functioning.
-
Dr.Sam Parnia has confirmed that these experiences are after death experiences and that 'Near death' is a misnomer. Many of these patients had actually been declared dead.
Well, either Dr Parnia is wrong, or you have misunderstood him.Bashful Anthony, Trentvoyager, and (for once) Floo, above, are all correct. Death is irreversible, by definition, and nowadays the criterion used is brain-death, not heart-stoppage.
From Wikipedia: Parnia and others have suggested that a mind that is mediated by, but not produced by, the brain, is a possible way to explain NDE.[4][24][25]
Science writer Mike McRae has noted "While Parnia's work contributes valuable data to understanding NDE as a cultural phenomenon, his speculations do indeed sit on the brink of pseudoscience."[26] Neurologist Michael O'Brien has written that "most people would not find it necessary to postulate such a separation between mind and brain to explain the events," and suggested that further research is likely to provide a physical explanation for near-death experiences.[4] The psychologist Susan Blackmore appeared with Parnia and Peter Fenwick on a BBC documentary called "The Day I Died" and disagreed with their interpretations of NDEs, finding purely physical explanations to be more plausible.[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Parnia
-
I understand death is when the brain is no longer functioning.
Yes - that is part of the definition that is commonly used. But as ever with medical issues it gets very complicated. Don't google it for goodness sake - it'll just confuse the issue even more.
But Dr Parnia can't be using that definition because if the brain has stopped functioning the person obviously cannot come back to tell us about it. So I just wondered what definition he was applying. ???
-
further to my last post he is using heart stoppage:
He has stated: “contrary to perception, death is not a specific moment but a potentially reversible process that occurs after any severe illness or accident causes the heart, lungs and brain to cease functioning. If attempts are made to reverse this process, it is referred to as ‘cardiac arrest’; however, if these attempts do not succeed it is called ‘death’. He has mostly studied those who have no heart beat and no detectable brain activity for periods of time and believes cardiac arrest is the optimal model to help understand the human experience of death.[1][16][17]
This looks like a redefinition of death to support his theory to me.
-
This is a good article covering NDEs and the investigation of them
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/04/the-science-of-near-death-experiences/386231/
-
further to my last post he is using heart stoppage:
This looks like a redefinition of death to support his theory to me.
My thought exactly. He's obviously got his own agenda, and is being very selective with the facts, and eccentric in his definitions, to support it.
-
Bashful Anthony is correct. Death is when the brain ceases to function. If I recall correctly, the cessation of brain stem activity is regarded as the determinant of death.
I think that what Sriram is not considering is that death is a process not an event. It is clearly possible to reverse the process at an early stage. NDEs are products of the living brain and, as someone else noted, differ in different cultures - which suggests that they may have some learnt component.
-
Bashful Anthony is correct. Death is when the brain ceases to function. If I recall correctly, the cessation of brain stem activity is regarded as the determinant of death.
I think that what Sriram is not considering is that death is a process not an event. It is clearly possible to reverse the process at an early stage. NDEs are products of the living brain and, as someone else noted, differ in different cultures - which suggests that they may have some learnt component.
I wonder if the NDE experiences vary depending on one's culture and/or religion?
-
Apparently so, it all depends on what is in the unconscious mind. I would probably have vaguely Judeo-Christian images whereas a Hindu would have Hindu images in their mind, which would give each of us a different experience with different characters present.
-
Apparently so, it all depends on what is in the unconscious mind. I would probably have vaguely Judeo-Christian images whereas a Hindu would have Hindu images in their mind, which would give each of us a different experience with different characters present.
But that is no different to describing the process of dreaming, surely.
-
Hi everyone,
This is probably the wrong thread to elaborate on this subject...but what the heck..!
Most NDE features are common across cultures, age, gender and class. When a person meets with an accident or has a heart attack or something...the following usually happen.
1. Out of body experience...they see their own body lying down there. They realize they are 'dead'.
2. Often they cannot recognize their own body except through some object like a ring. Seems alien to them.
3. They feel happy and peaceful.
4. Sometimes they feel a sense of lose for leaving behind some one like their children.
5. Some people see dead relatives who come to help them.
6. Some of them have a rapid life review. They see all the harm and pain they have caused.
7. Some of them have a sense of absolute knowledge. All questions are answered or seem irrelevant.
8. Some of them see dead people waiting to be reincarnated.
9. Some of them float through a dark tunnel or a staircase.
10. They see a bright light that they identify with God or Jesus or Ram or Allah. Some people think of it as their Higher Self.
11. They are asked to go back and finish their duties.
12. Some people see a Silver Cord that seems to attached them to their body.
13. They then feel themselves being pulled back into their body.
14. They feel heavy and uncomfortable back in their body. Most of them want to stay 'dead'.
15. They are able to recount the events that transpired at the hospital/accident site when they were lying dead. They can identify objects, medical instruments and people who were involved.
16. It is life changing and the people become more loving and selfless. Life begins to have a meaning and purpose.
17. Some people (a minority) have negative NDE's where they feel fear. They see suffering and pain.
Broadly these are the experiences that most people have during NDE's. they are common across cultures except that the bright light is identified with different deities in different cultures. Reincarnation is mentioned even by people who do not believe in reincarnation( Christians, muslims).
If there is anything to take away...it is that religion is not important and that secular spiritual development, love and good deeds are more important.
Cheers.
Sriram
-
They might think they are dead, but of course they aren't.
-
But that is no different to describing the process of dreaming, surely.
Perhaps an NDE is nothing more than a vivid dream brought on by - perhaps - unusual neurochemical events associated with the early stages of the dying process and experienced when the individual is in a semi conscious state?
-
Perhaps an NDE is nothing more than a vivid dream brought on by - perhaps - unusual neurochemical events associated with the early stages of the dying process and experienced when the individual is in a semi conscious state?
That seems likely.
-
Perhaps an NDE is nothing more than a vivid dream brought on by - perhaps - unusual neurochemical events associated with the early stages of the dying process and experienced when the individual is in a semi conscious state?
Well maybe - but I am still puzzled by the many similarities people experience. It's a bit like that other dream/nightmare prevalent through a lot of cultures (forgotten what it is called but the crouching creature thingy) why the similarities across different cultures.
-
One thing that puzzles me, is how can these people 'see' these things if they are genuinely 'out' of their body?
Where does this power of sight come from? :-\
-
You think people have actually died and come back from Hell?
Rose points toward near death experience but some have actually died and come back having seen hell.
Just google... :)
-
Oh there is some bollocks talked here.
Does the reality that some have died and come back claiming they have seen hell and been raised when they cried out to Jesus actually alarm you?
I ask because you are making a blanket statement that people are talking bollocks. But in reality you cannot dismiss what others claim without addressing the issues themselves.
-
Hi everyone,
This is probably the wrong thread to elaborate on this subject...but what the heck..!
Most NDE features are common across cultures, age, gender and class. When a person meets with an accident or has a heart attack or something...the following usually happen.
1. Out of body experience...they see their own body lying down there. They realize they are 'dead'.
2. Often they cannot recognize their own body except through some object like a ring. Seems alien to them.
3. They feel happy and peaceful.
4. Sometimes they feel a sense of lose for leaving behind some one like their children.
5. Some people see dead relatives who come to help them.
6. Some of them have a rapid life review. They see all the harm and pain they have caused.
7. Some of them have a sense of absolute knowledge. All questions are answered or seem irrelevant.
8. Some of them see dead people waiting to be reincarnated.
9. Some of them float through a dark tunnel or a staircase.
10. They see a bright light that they identify with God or Jesus or Ram or Allah. Some people think of it as their Higher Self.
11. They are asked to go back and finish their duties.
12. Some people see a Silver Cord that seems to attached them to their body.
13. They then feel themselves being pulled back into their body.
14. They feel heavy and uncomfortable back in their body. Most of them want to stay 'dead'.
15. They are able to recount the events that transpired at the hospital/accident site when they were lying dead. They can identify objects, medical instruments and people who were involved.
16. It is life changing and the people become more loving and selfless. Life begins to have a meaning and purpose.
17. Some people (a minority) have negative NDE's where they feel fear. They see suffering and pain.
Broadly these are the experiences that most people have during NDE's. they are common across cultures except that the bright light is identified with different deities in different cultures. Reincarnation is mentioned even by people who do not believe in reincarnation( Christians, muslims).
If there is anything to take away...it is that religion is not important and that secular spiritual development, love and good deeds are more important.
Cheers.
Sriram
Anyone can say can state that most NDE features are common across cultures, age, gender and class, and then enumerate them with the vague decription as 'some of them'. Why not look at a real study on, for instance, non western cultures and experiences of NDEs.
For instance the following study:
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc799379/m2/1/high_res_d/vol26-no4.pdf#page=9
finds the following:
No instances of OBEs in Africa or Aboriginal Australia
No instances of the tunnel effect in India, Tibet, Guam, Aboriginal Australia or Native America
No instances of a life review in Guam, Hawaii, Maori new Zealand, Aboriginal Australia, native America or Africa
The only two NDE experience strands from this study that do seem cross cultural are encountering other beings and moving into another realm, and, even here, there is great variation on who/what is encountered.
Not exactly a massive endorsement for your statement that 'Most NDE features are common across cultures, age, gender and class.' is it?
Also, I find it interesting that in the years following Moody's 'Life after Death'(1975), there was scant reference given to distressing and frightening NDE experiences, possibly because the overarching influence was firmly put on radiant experiences, dominated by pleasurable emotions, and also possibly because people were more reluctant to talk about their distressing experiences. Now, we have many more accounts, and it seems likely a minority, as you say(but possibly as much as 20%), do experience NDEs with distressing/frightening elements.
-
Sass
I totally agree - we need only see what's happening today to see the legacy of Islam. These Muslims are doing precisely what their fascist leader did THEN.
We must remember he didn't do it all alone !?!?!? ;)
Christ clearly points out that the descendants of Abraham are those men who do as he did.
Christ being the Son of God doing as he did. But both Abrahams' Son Isaac and Gods Son Jesus Christ were part of promises from God. God said he would make Ishmaels people a great nation he never made a covenant with them because Isaac was the chosen son and the covenant covered all that were circumcised. But they left the truth and we see not Ishmael not his direct descendant but someone claiming to be his descendant went against the truth of the covenant of God with Abraham and Isaac. Just as they ignored the Christ the Messiah and went there own way again.
Adam and Eve did it all on their own. No matter how much you tell the truth and warn humans they still go their own way. We know that they did do it all alone. :)
-
A point for those discussing NDE and actual resurrection after death.
Christ, at his death is recorded as having blood and water pour from his side when a spear punctures his body. Water was a clear sign that Christ was dead. Any person who has died gives off clear signals today (medically) in the body that shows them to be dead.
We can argue but we cannot deny the medical facts that people have come back from the dead.
-
enki...
Psychologists like Raymond Moody, Kenneth Ring and others started early (in the 1970's) to investigate such phenomena. Medical professionals like Sam Parnia have been very devoted in their research for many years now and many hospitals in the west are equipped to deal with such matters. Many of them also have trained professionals to survey and investigate such patients. The chances of people surviving a 'death' situation are also much higher in the west due to the immediate medical care available.
The same cannot be said of places like Africa, aborigines in Australia, native Americans, many places in India etc. The chances of people surviving traumatic events are small and the chances of trained professionals being readily available to investigate such cases are also very small. We don't know what questions they asked, in what language, how frightened the local people were, how many times people bothered to repeatedly contact them after their discharge from hospital and so on. These are tricky situations and getting correct information is not easy, especially from people with a rural and tribal background.
So, the samples taken from such communities cannot be taken as very representative. As more of such research picks up worldwide and trained professionals become available, information may become more reliable. The fact that the information is generally in line with the other surveys should be enough. Too much details will be difficult to come by.
Sebastian toe.....
The soul/spirit is said to have all faculties such as sight, hearing, smell etc. It doesn't need eyes and ears.
The body is like a robot or probe using which we live and experience this world. Or we can think of the body as a space suit. We experience the environment through it. If something goes wrong with the robot or probe or space suit...we will not be able to see or hear anything. That does not mean that we become blind or deaf. If we leave the robot or probe or space suit...we can see and hear very well....in fact better than from within the heavy appendage.
It is similar with the spirit and the body. If something in the eye or ear or the brain goes wrong we cannot experience the world....but if we leave the body we can experience the world better and more vividly than from within the body. This is what many NDE people say. We have seen that many born blind people have NDE's and see everything just like everyone else. It is the body that is blind or dead. Not the spirit....which is what you really are.
More tomorrow. Goodnight everyone!
-
Does the reality that some have died and come back claiming they have seen hell and been raised when they cried out to Jesus actually alarm you?
I ask because you are making a blanket statement that people are talking bollocks. But in reality you cannot dismiss what others claim without addressing the issues themselves.
Aye. Well now you are back the bollock talking has increased tenfold.
-
Aye. Well now you are back the bollock talking has increased tenfold.
...fold? I would have said factorial.
-
enki...
Psychologists like Raymond Moody, Kenneth Ring and others started early (in the 1970's) to investigate such phenomena. Medical professionals like Sam Parnia have been very devoted in their research for many years now and many hospitals in the west are equipped to deal with such matters. Many of them also have trained professionals to survey and investigate such patients. The chances of people surviving a 'death' situation are also much higher in the west due to the immediate medical care available.
The same cannot be said of places like Africa, aborigines in Australia, native Americans, many places in India etc. The chances of people surviving traumatic events are small and the chances of trained professionals being readily available to investigate such cases are also very small. We don't know what questions they asked, in what language, how frightened the local people were, how many times people bothered to repeatedly contact them after their discharge from hospital and so on. These are tricky situations and getting correct information is not easy, especially from people with a rural and tribal background.
So, the samples taken from such communities cannot be taken as very representative. As more of such research picks up worldwide and trained professionals become available, information may become more reliable. The fact that the information is generally in line with the other surveys should be enough. Too much details will be difficult to come by.
Which points I am very happy to accept. In which case, the same arguments must apply to your 'most NDE features are common across cultures' comment equally. :)
-
Rose points toward near death experience but some have actually died and come back having seen hell.
Just google... :)
My response to Rose was
'I'm very aware of reports of NDEs - having discussed this many times with Sriram in particular. People certainly report experiences when they have recovered from near death situations (near death being an important thing to note) but what causes these experiences we do not currently know.'
That people have died and gone to hell then come back isn't a fact but a belief I'm afraid.
-
A point for those discussing NDE and actual resurrection after death.
Christ, at his death is recorded as having blood and water pour from his side when a spear punctures his body. Water was a clear sign that Christ was dead. Any person who has died gives off clear signals today (medically) in the body that shows them to be dead.
We can argue but we cannot deny the medical facts that people have come back from the dead.
Why is water a clear sign of death?
-
Why is water a clear sign of death?
...because Her Sassyness says so. ::)
-
Aye. Well now you are back the bollock talking has increased tenfold.
Would that be a statement of a personal nature?
Where you are referring to your posts?
I guess you could try showing some proof giving us a running commentary and evidence.. That would be a 'No' then as you made it up.
:)
-
My response to Rose was
'I'm very aware of reports of NDEs - having discussed this many times with Sriram in particular. People certainly report experiences when they have recovered from near death situations (near death being an important thing to note) but what causes these experiences we do not currently know.'
That people have died and gone to hell then come back isn't a fact but a belief I'm afraid.
Wrong on the first account it is documentated in medical history in France of such a things happening. A man died of a heart attack and came back to life having gone to hell and shout to Jesus to save him.
Of course if you have never really studied these subjects or seen them on TV you won't be expected to have that knowledge. But shouldn't you at least check the facts before you make unsustainable statements about these things? :)
-
Why is water a clear sign of death?
Because it meant the spear had not only punctured the lung but the penetration of the heart causing an outpouring of blood and pericardial fluid which was referred to as water. So ensuring he was dead.
-
Which points I am very happy to accept. In which case, the same arguments must apply to your 'most NDE features are common across cultures' comment equally. :)
When I talked of all cultures I obviously meant all cultures where such research and investigations has been done to an equal level of reliability. Not with tribal and rural folk where even contacting and interviewing them would be a problem.
Even in major cities in India for example, though we have big modern hospitals...I am not sure that they are equipped to investigate NDE's. That sort of thing requires a very different focus and a different set of trained professionals. Patients would need to be contacted months after they have recovered and maybe over several sittings, without hurting their sentiments etc. Normal doctors on duty may not be able to devote their time and energy to such matters.
I was referring to different countries like the US, UK and Europe and people belonging to different beliefs and religious backgrounds like Christians, Muslims, Hindus (Anita Moorjani for example), atheists etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Moorjani
http://www.near-death.com/religion/atheism/an-analysis-of-the-ndes-of-atheists.html
-
Would that be a statement of a personal nature?
It may well be personal in that it applies to you as a person, but it is also factual.
-
Wrong on the first account it is documentated in medical history in France of such a things happening. A man died of a heart attack and came back to life having gone to hell and shout to Jesus to save him.
Let's rewrite this:
There is a report from France (reference please) which states that a man whose heart was restarted after a myocardial infarction had apparently suffered a dream-like illusion in which he had imagined himself going to Hell and then invoking the name of Jesus in order to save him.
So what?
-
You may find this of interest. Dr Jane Aspell is a cognitive neuroscientist at Anglia Ruskin University.
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/interviews/interview/1000981/
-
Wrong on the first account it is documentated in medical history in France of such a things happening. A man died of a heart attack and came back to life having gone to hell and shout to Jesus to save him.
Of course if you have never really studied these subjects or seen them on TV you won't be expected to have that knowledge. But shouldn't you at least check the facts before you make unsustainable statements about these things? :)
Since medicine is methodologically naturalistic, your above claim is false by definition
-
Wrong on the first account it is documentated in medical history in France of such a things happening. A man died of a heart attack and came back to life having gone to hell and shout to Jesus to save him.
Of course if you have never really studied these subjects or seen them on TV you won't be expected to have that knowledge. But shouldn't you at least check the facts before you make unsustainable statements about these things? :)
As I said in my post I am well aware of accounts of NDEs so not sure why you talk about checking facts or suggest I have not studied the subject or seen them on TV (!?).
I accept that claims like this are made - as I have said we do not know the cause of such claims and to just accept what someone claims without supporting evidence is not really a good idea or anything to base an argument on. That someone died, went to hell and came back is not a fact but a claim made by people who went through a traumatic experience, nothing more.
-
Because it meant the spear had not only punctured the lung but the penetration of the heart causing an outpouring of blood and pericardial fluid which was referred to as water. So ensuring he was dead.
I think pericardial fluid forms around the lungs and heart and within the chest not inside the heart or lungs so it wouldn't mean the heart and lungs were penetrated.
-
You may find this of interest. Dr Jane Aspell is a cognitive neuroscientist at Anglia Ruskin University.
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/interviews/interview/1000981/
This makes interesting reading, HH. Incidentally the type of objective evidence that was mentioned some way down(hiding cards/pictures in places that only a person experiencing an OBE could see), was done by the Sam Parnia Aware study as one of his methods(' objective verification of claims of awareness using specific tests.').
Unfortunately, as in all other similar tests, the results were negative. That is not to say that OBEs do not take place, of course, but it would, indeed, be a boost to the reality of OBEs, if such testing had had some positive feedback..
-
If it dies, I won't bother to resurrect it again.
Kudos, Floo, your resurrection of the thread worked as more posts since you brought it back from its NDE than prior
-
Kudos, Floor, your resurrection of the thread worked as more posts since you brought it back from its NDE than prior
I got lucky, I suppose! :D
-
Just a slight aside, I DO apologise BUT...
when Jesus went out into the desert etc & was 'talking' with God, schizophrenic?!?!!?, who recorded His words ???? :o
Nick
-
When I talked of all cultures I obviously meant all cultures where such research and investigations has been done to an equal level of reliability. Not with tribal and rural folk where even contacting and interviewing them would be a problem.
Even in major cities in India for example, though we have big modern hospitals...I am not sure that they are equipped to investigate NDE's. That sort of thing requires a very different focus and a different set of trained professionals. Patients would need to be contacted months after they have recovered and maybe over several sittings, without hurting their sentiments etc. Normal doctors on duty may not be able to devote their time and energy to such matters.
I was referring to different countries like the US, UK and Europe and people belonging to different beliefs and religious backgrounds like Christians, Muslims, Hindus (Anita Moorjani for example), atheists etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Moorjani
http://www.near-death.com/religion/atheism/an-analysis-of-the-ndes-of-atheists.html
Hi Sriram
Good to see mainstream has finally acknowledged Anita Moorjani's NDE. It seems, sometimes the experience has something to 'tell' us. Some have had their lives changed dramatically, as in Anita's case. (Apologies, a lot of 'somes' there.... Izzz a wee bitty tired! Well, that's my excuse!).
Here is Anita at TEDx in San Franscisco. I don't agree with all that she says, but her general message is heartening:
http://tedxtalks.ted.com/video/Dying-to-be-me-Anita-Moorjani-a;search%3Aanita%20moorjani
-
Let's rewrite this:
There is a report from France (reference please) which states that a man whose heart was restarted after a myocardial infarction had apparently suffered a dream-like illusion in which he had imagined himself going to Hell and then invoking the name of Jesus in order to save him.
So what?
No! that is not correct the guy in question was an hardened atheist.
Who was dead for about 3 hours or more.
If I can find it, so can you if you really want to that is.
I watch programs where these things are spoken about.
-
Hi Sriram
Good to see mainstream has finally acknowledged Anita Moorjani's NDE. It seems, sometimes the experience has something to 'tell' us. Some have had their lives changed dramatically, as in Anita's case. (Apologies, a lot of 'somes' there.... Izzz a wee bitty tired! Well, that's my excuse!).
Here is Anita at TEDx in San Franscisco. I don't agree with all that she says, but her general message is heartening:
http://tedxtalks.ted.com/video/Dying-to-be-me-Anita-Moorjani-a;search%3Aanita%20moorjani
Hi SweetPea...thanks for that.
Yes....more and more people are beginning to accept the reality of NDE's in general. I saw a Hollywood movie on TV recently ...not sure of the name .."Heaven is real' or something like that, in which the NDE of a small boy is the theme. Based on a real story apparently. In India of course, NDE's are commonly used in movies.
I guess in coming generations it will become more accepted as a normal part of life. Death will lose its sting....which is the way it should be...!
Cheers.
Sriram
-
This makes interesting reading, HH. Incidentally the type of objective evidence that was mentioned some way down(hiding cards/pictures in places that only a person experiencing an OBE could see), was done by the Sam Parnia Aware study as one of his methods(' objective verification of claims of awareness using specific tests.').
Unfortunately, as in all other similar tests, the results were negative. That is not to say that OBEs do not take place, of course, but it would, indeed, be a boost to the reality of OBEs, if such testing had had some positive feedback..
There are some reasons why placing placards near the ceiling may not work.
1. For dead people, 'above' may not mean the same as as it means in the physical world. I mean to say, when a person says he saw his body from above....he may not necessarily be 10 feet or 15 feet above the ground. When people die they probably go into another dimension which can only be described as 'above'.....but they need not actually be near the ceiling. So....they may not see everything that is placed near the ceiling.
2. The spirit or soul is connected with the mind and the mind sees only what is relevant to the person at that time. Just because you don't remember seeing certain sign boards on Oxford Street...doesn't mean you haven't been there.
3. The dead person would in all probability be very disturbed and confused. In that state of mind they may not observe all and sundry items in the room unless they are in some way emotionally connected with them. Its probably not like flying by casually and looking around at everything on the way.
The conversations and medical procedures that the 'dead' person is able to see and recall have been verified in many cases and found to be true. That is probably the only way it can be verified objectively.
-
There are some reasons why placing placards near the ceiling may not work.
1. For dead people, 'above' may not mean the same as as it means in the physical world. I mean to say, when a person says he saw his body from above....he may not necessarily be 10 feet or 15 feet above the ground. When people die they probably go into another dimension which can only be described as 'above'.....but they need not actually be near the ceiling. So....they may not see everything that is placed near the ceiling.
2. The spirit or soul is connected with the mind and the mind sees only what is relevant to the person at that time. Just because you don't remember seeing certain sign boards on Oxford Street...doesn't mean you haven't been there.
3. The dead person would in all probability be very disturbed and confused. In that state of mind they may not observe all and sundry items in the room unless they are in some way emotionally connected with them. Its probably not like flying by casually and looking around at everything on the way.
The conversations and medical procedures that the 'dead' person is able to see and recall have been verified in many cases and found to be true. That is probably the only way it can be verified objectively.
Actually I didn't mention 'placards near the ceiling' at all. In one study(Holden 1989) of 63 OBEs, 70% reported consciousness located above their physical bodies, most at or near the ceiling. These findings confirmed what other authors had suggested. So, to isolate the stimulus, it should be located above the eye level of any person and facing towards the ceiling, so that it would be only visible from the vantage point of the ceiling. In the Miner-Holden study of visual perception, about 75% suggested they saw clearly and without distortion, that colour matched the physically perceived colour and that their field of vision was as good as, or better than their physical field of vision. About 60% suggested that they had mostly or totally accurate memories of what they saw, and that they could probably or definitely read during their experiences. However, I do agree that somewhat less encouraging is the fact that, regarding attention to extraneous detail, only slightly more respondents said that they would be attentive to such detail as would not.
It is also interesting that no less a person than the eminent NDE researcher Kenneth Ring(in an email exchange with Bruce Greyson) said, in 2006:
but isn't it true that in all this time there hasn't been a single case of a veridical perception reported by an NDEr under controlled conditions? I mean, thirty years later, it's still a null class(as far as I know). Yes, excuses, excuses-I know. But, really, wouldn't you have suspected more than a few such cases at least by now?
As far as I know all the studies relating to the placing of such visual targets have produced entirely negative results to date.
It seems to me that if you want to establish to the scientific community that there really is a personal consciousness/soul or whatever you wish to call it absent from the brain, you really need some form of objective methodology such as the above, so that it can then be investigated further. I wish you luck, and, certainly, if anybody comes up with such repeatable evidence, then I, for one, will take such claims seriously.
-
No! that is not correct the guy in question was an hardened atheist.
Who was dead for about 3 hours or more.
If I can find it, so can you if you really want to that is.
I watch programs where these things are spoken about.
Do you mean this?
http://blog.godreports.com/2012/03/atheist-professors-near-death-experience-in-hell-left-him-changed/
Anecdote appearing in a blog called "godreports" - about as unreliable as it gets. Everything reported by him with not a single independent word of confirmatory evidence.
Tripe for the credulous.
-
It is also interesting that no less a person than the eminent NDE researcher Kenneth Ring(in an email exchange with Bruce Greyson) said, in 2006:
As far as I know all the studies relating to the placing of such visual targets have produced entirely negative results to date.
It seems to me that if you want to establish to the scientific community that there really is a personal consciousness/soul or whatever you wish to call it absent from the brain, you really need some form of objective methodology such as the above, so that it can then be investigated further. I wish you luck, and, certainly, if anybody comes up with such repeatable evidence, then I, for one, will take such claims seriously.
Yeah...I agree. The problem is that often only after more and more people start taking it seriously will we find the necessary build up.
Gathering objective evidence can take many decades. It happens all the time even in hard sciences like biology, QM and cosmology. In soft areas like spirituality it is likely to take much longer. Methodologies have to be tried and tested and developed slowly over time. They have to evolve suitably to match the requirements and after that they will suddenly start yielding results.
-
Do you mean this?
http://blog.godreports.com/2012/03/atheist-professors-near-death-experience-in-hell-left-him-changed/
Anecdote appearing in a blog called "godreports" - about as unreliable as it gets. Everything reported by him with not a single independent word of confirmatory evidence.
Tripe for the credulous.
Notably nothing in it about being dead, and a quick jibe against 'socialised medicine'
-
Do you mean this?
http://blog.godreports.com/2012/03/atheist-professors-near-death-experience-in-hell-left-him-changed/
Anecdote appearing in a blog called "godreports" - about as unreliable as it gets. Everything reported by him with not a single independent word of confirmatory evidence.
Tripe for the credulous.
It can't be that. Sassy said he was dead for 3 hours - not unconscious for 30 minutes. Unless of course she was mistaken.
-
Do you mean this?
http://blog.godreports.com/2012/03/atheist-professors-near-death-experience-in-hell-left-him-changed/
Anecdote appearing in a blog called "godreports" - about as unreliable as it gets. Everything reported by him with not a single independent word of confirmatory evidence.
Tripe for the credulous.
No that isn't it.
-
No that isn't it.
I suspect no one will be able to find it.
-
This is the longest NDE I can find.
http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence/some-people-were-dead-for-several-days.html
I bet it freaked out the person doing the autopsy too, I wouldn't be surprised if they needed counselling after that.
It's interesting that the man was an Athiest originally and he didn't come out believing in the God of the Jews or of any particular religion.
But he believes in something.
-
This dated 2014 is from the university of Southhampton, interesting.
In 2008, a large-scale study involving 2060 patients from 15 hospitals in the United Kingdom, United States and Austria was launched. The AWARE (AWAreness during REsuscitation) study, sponsored by the University of Southampton in the UK, examined the broad range of mental experiences in relation to death. Researchers also tested the validity of conscious experiences using objective markers for the first time in a large study to determine whether claims of awareness compatible with out-of-body experiences correspond with real or hallucinatory events.
http://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2014/10/07-worlds-largest-near-death-experiences-study.page#
Their results were published here, but you have to log in to buy it.
http://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(14)00739-4/pdf
-
There are some reasons why placing placards near the ceiling may not work.
1. For dead people, 'above' may not mean the same as as it means in the physical world. I mean to say, when a person says he saw his body from above....he may not necessarily be 10 feet or 15 feet above the ground. When people die they probably go into another dimension which can only be described as 'above'.....but they need not actually be near the ceiling. So....they may not see everything that is placed near the ceiling.
2. The spirit or soul is connected with the mind and the mind sees only what is relevant to the person at that time. Just because you don't remember seeing certain sign boards on Oxford Street...doesn't mean you haven't been there.
3. The dead person would in all probability be very disturbed and confused. In that state of mind they may not observe all and sundry items in the room unless they are in some way emotionally connected with them. Its probably not like flying by casually and looking around at everything on the way.
The conversations and medical procedures that the 'dead' person is able to see and recall have been verified in many cases and found to be true. That is probably the only way it can be verified objectively.
The notion of dead people being able to see and hear begs the question of what then is the point, or the difference, in being alive. Seeing is a highly procured information flow through complex visual systems found in living beings, likewise, hearing is another modal phenomenological information flow through a system. Evolution has honed these information systems over billions of years, seems a bit of a waste of time if all that complex information flow is just there somehow by magic.
-
The notion of dead people being able to see and hear begs the question of what then is the point, or the difference, in being alive. Seeing is a highly procured information flow through a complex visual system, likewise, hearing is another modal phenomenological information flow through a system. Evolution has honed these information systems over billions of years, seems a bit of a waste of time if it all that complex information flow is just there somehow by magic.
Being alive you have a body, you can reproduce, explore, and experience the universe in a different way.
You can also relate to others and learn.
Normally it's the religious that look for a purpose in life. ;)
There doesn't have to be a purpose we understand totally, perhaps the difference is being alive we have to " work it out for ourselves".
Perhaps we don't learn and experience in the same way if we are formless concienceness.
It isn't any more " mad" than scientists who suggest the universe is like a huge simulation.
Maybe it is ;)
Perhaps whatever is, wants our experiences within what we think of as the natural world.
Who knows what some alien super being could want?
It may want something from us we consider more mundane, like our daily struggles etc.
Like a reality programme. Perhaps it's that our bodies limit our experiences making them more interesting to whatever wants them.
We will have to explore and wait and see.
Perhaps what ever started off the universe wants to experience the whole of its creation, from the first few cells of life.
-
The notion of dead people being able to see and hear begs the question of what then is the point, or the difference, in being alive. Seeing is a highly procured information flow through a complex visual system, likewise, hearing is another modal phenomenological information flow through a system. Evolution has honed these information systems over billions of years, seems a bit of a waste of time if it all that complex information flow is just there somehow by magic.
Being alive you have a body, you can reproduce, explore, and experience the universe in a different way.
You can also relate to others and learn......
But if dead people can see and hear, then presumably they can also taste, and smell and feel, and presumably then they could also relate to others and learn and study medicine and play backgammon in the shade of olive trees. If the dead can do living things then there is no point in being alive.
-
This dated 2014 is from the university of Southhampton, interesting.
Their results were published here, but you have to log in to buy it.
http://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(14)00739-4/pdf
..or you can read some reviews;
http://web.randi.org/swift/no-this-study-is-not-evidence-for-life-after-death (http://web.randi.org/swift/no-this-study-is-not-evidence-for-life-after-death)
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=24542 (http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=24542)
https://god-knows-what.com/2014/10/08/new-evidence-for-life-after-death/ (https://god-knows-what.com/2014/10/08/new-evidence-for-life-after-death/)
-
Being alive you have a body, you can reproduce, explore, and experience the universe in a different way.
You can also relate to others and learn......
But if dead people can see and hear, then presumably they can also taste, and smell and feel, and presumably then they could also relate to others and learn and study medicine and play backgammon in the shade of olive trees. If the dead can do living things then there is no point in being alive.
The man in the article wasn't dead though. His body responded to the knife incision and it appears that his brain was able to retain and access the memories of his ND experiences. It appears that whilst in the near death state the consciousness was cut off from its body awareness but was still receptive to other imagery, just as we are in dreams and deep thought.
-
What if your perception of time goes before you are dead? Effectively you would feel you are in eternity conscious but not conscious of time?
There would be nothing to compartmentalise the feelings of wrongs committed and they would be part of your new perceived ''eternal'' consciousness.
-
The notion of dead people being able to see and hear begs the question of what then is the point, or the difference, in being alive. Seeing is a highly procured information flow through complex visual systems found in living beings, likewise, hearing is another modal phenomenological information flow through a system. Evolution has honed these information systems over billions of years, seems a bit of a waste of time if all that complex information flow is just there somehow by magic.
What is the point?...... is a question we can ask of the Big Bang, Evolution, Parallel universes etc. etc. But there are no easy answers. It is similar in such matters as spirituality and NDE's etc. I don't know what the point is....nor does anyone else.
As I have pointed out many times...we cannot deny QM just because it cannot be reconciled with Relativity. We cannot deny Dark Matter just because it is counter intuitive. We just have to observe all the different facets of the universe and try to put them together as well as we can, using our limited capabilities.
We cannot keep denying observations and experiences just because we are unable to make sense of them or are unable to put them together with certain other observations.
Materialists tend to believe that life just happened by accident because the conditions happened to be right. Evolution happens just as a natural consequence of the properties of certain chemicals, environmental pressures. Consciousness is an emergent property of evolution.
However, from NDE's and other such phenomena, we find that Consciousness exists as a separate entity in the body. It has all faculties... and as I explained earlier, it is similar to living in a space suit or probe. The body can be blind or deaf but not the spirit/soul/Consciousness.
Now...how all this fits in with evolution and the Big Bang etc. is not easy to say outright. It needs to be investigated and understood. It may take several centuries to understand even in a rudimentary fashion. We do have some philosophical ideas on why and how these things happen but they are just musings. We don't know for certain.
The point is that just because we are unable to fit certain phenomena into our known ideas of the world...does not mean we can simply ignore them or deny them or keep turning a blind eye to them. We have to face all aspects of life regardless of whether they make any sense to us or not.
-
I always love the old Buddhist idea that people who have a strong religious faith might experience their idea of 'Paradise' for a limited period after their death.
The Christian enters the Pearly Gates to be greeted by Saint Peter and led through to "eat foie gras to the sound of trumpets" and generally enjoy the fruits of their righteousness, but just as they are starting to settle-in, saffron robed figures grab them and drag them back to the material world to a copulating couple - their next parents :)
-
I always love the old Buddhist idea that people who have a strong religious faith might experience their idea of 'Paradise' for a limited period after their death.
The Christian enters the Pearly Gates to be greeted by Saint Peter and led through to "eat foie gras to the sound of trumpets" and generally enjoy the fruits of their righteousness, but just as they are starting to settle-in, saffron robed figures grab them and drag them back to the material world to a copulating couple - their next parents :)
But that would only be the case if reincarnation actually occurs; what is more, since no-one in the East ever seems to want to be reincarnated as a woman, ...
-
But that would only be the case if reincarnation actually occurs; what is more, since no-one in the East ever seems to want to be reincarnated as a woman, ...
Obviously, the whole idea of what happens to our consciousness after death is 'highly speculative' (to put it mildly). I find reincarnation the only reasonably feasible option, though of course, the 'Hard Atheists' will point-out that our consciousness resides in a material brain that will rapidly self-destruct after death.
Still, they can't account for 96% of whatever it is that makes up the universe so there is plenty of room for a soul to exist in. :)
-
Are you sure no-one in the East wants to be reincarnated as a woman, Hope? Presumably, if there is such a thing as reincarnation, there would be no choice. However there are plenty of powerful female deities in Hinduism and the Zoroastrians believe 100% in equality of the sexes.
-
Wrong on the first account it is documentated in medical history in France of such a things happening. A man died of a heart attack and came back to life having gone to hell and shout to Jesus to save him.
He didn't die, or he wouldn't have come back to talk about it.
-
Obviously, the whole idea of what happens to our consciousness after death is 'highly speculative' (to put it mildly). I find reincarnation the only reasonably feasible option, though of course, the 'Hard Atheists' will point-out that our consciousness resides in a material brain that will rapidly self-destruct after death.
Our consciousness does not even survive falling asleep at night, it is that ephemeral, goodness knows how anyone could think it could survive the catastrophic cellular breakdown of death.
-
He didn't die, or he wouldn't have come back to talk about it.
Sorry, SteveH,
The man was dead three hours he then descended into hell and in his fear he called our for Christ and he rescued him and sent him back to preach the gospel. I saw this man on television and I see no reason for anyone to doubt the medical reports.
You see there are others who have died and come back look at this one.
This is another incident of someone being raised from the dead...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Wxbv-julc
-
Our consciousness does not even survive falling asleep at night, it is that ephemeral, goodness knows how anyone could think it could survive the catastrophic cellular breakdown of death.
As far as I am aware, no one has actually come-up with a satisfactory definition of what 'consciousness' is!
We feel it, we know it, we ARE it - but what is it?
Certainly, the brain appears to be central, it connects 'us' to the material world, so no big surprise that 'we' are not present when the brain 'shuts down'.
If I were to do some theology/cosmology 'on the fly' I might hypothesis that a part of us consists as a 'clump of dark matter' that becomes attached to living things.
-
Sorry, SteveH,
The man was dead three hours he then descended into hell and in his fear he called our for Christ and he rescued him and sent him back to preach the gospel. I saw this man on television and I see no reason for anyone to doubt the medical reports.
You see there are others who have died and come back look at this one.
This is another incident of someone being raised from the dead...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Wxbv-julc
TV fiction for the credulous.
-
Creepy too. When I die I want to stay dead, thank you.
-
TV fiction for the credulous.
Sells lots of books too.
-
TV fiction for the credulous.
Hardly be on he News if fiction? HH, you have to make your own choices.
-
Hardly be on he News if fiction? HH, you have to make your own choices.
Well, the moon landings were on the news so they could hardly be fiction then could they?
Just sayin' ::)
-
Well maybe - but I am still puzzled by the many similarities people experience. It's a bit like that other dream/nightmare prevalent through a lot of cultures (forgotten what it is called but the crouching creature thingy) why the similarities across different cultures.
I'm inclined to believe a NDE is a type of dream too, Trentvoyager and whilst there are cultural differences there are bound to be universal experiences because we are all human beings with emotions, fears, etc so we'll have a lot in common. I wonder if anyone on here has had a lucid dream in which they thought they were awake? Perhaps that's another subject but I wonder if a NDE is similar.
I've not seen any news reports of dead people returning to life, as opposed to near death experiences, nor any TV documentaries about them. Maybe they are on obscure channels that I cannot access but I would watch or read if anyone pointed me in their direction. My mind is not completely closed on the subject but I do find it somewhat disturbing and seriously do not want it to happen to me.
-
Our consciousness does not even survive falling asleep at night, it is that ephemeral, goodness knows how anyone could think it could survive the catastrophic cellular breakdown of death.
Well...we do always remember having a good night's sleep! That requires consciousness. It is Consciousness that has experienced the good nights sleep. And the fact that you wake up as the same person you were before shows the consciousness did not really die during the sleep. It was merely unconnected. Like switching off the wifi. So...saying that Consciousness does not SURVIVE falling asleep is wrong.
Many people sleep walk..... when their subconscious/unconscious mind stays awake though the person does not remember the event. This shows part of our consciousness stays awake even when we sleep. The Unconscious mind is part of our Consciousness. We cannot ignore it.
-
Are you sure no-one in the East wants to be reincarnated as a woman, Hope? Presumably, if there is such a thing as reincarnation, there would be no choice. However there are plenty of powerful female deities in Hinduism and the Zoroastrians believe 100% in equality of the sexes.
Hope has been in India and Nepal some decades ago as a missionary. He clearly was on a mission to convert and change (and presumably 'civilize') the East in line with Christian culture. His perception of all that is Hindu and Jain and Buddhist has been obviously coloured by that zeal and that sense of superiority. ;) :D
-
Hardly be on he News if fiction? HH, you have to make your own choices.
Sassy, look at it again. The whole thing is anecdote. Where is there any reference to medical records? At one point there is determination of heart function by pulse but in another by ECG. The whole thing has "studio recreation" written all over it.
And what do you know about the TV station? Who owns it? What is its target audience?
TV for the credulous.
-
Hope has been in India and Nepal some decades ago as a missionary. He clearly was on a mission to convert and change (and presumably 'civilize') the East in line with Christian culture. His perception of all that is Hindu and Jain and Buddhist has been obviously coloured by that zeal and that sense of superiority. ;) :D
Well, even in my lifetime and culture men were considered to be somewhat above women and it showed in all spheres of life: education, work, property, marriage, you name it, and a lot of women supported all that. When I first started working, men doing the same job earned more than woman and when I married in the mid-1970s and we bought our first house, the building society would only count one year of my salary towards the mortgage. It was very difficult for a single woman on an average salary to get a mortgage. Women were also expected to wait on men, what's more most of our mothers thought that was right! The first female news reader (Angela Rippon) was a really big deal, there were no women fire fighters and policewoman had to wear skirts despite being expected to run and climb over fences (never mind the male officers putting their hands up skirts to see if the women wore stockings or tights). Seems scandalous now - but we in the West have no reason to crow, it was definitely a man's world not that long ago.
-
Hardly be on he News if fiction? HH, you have to make your own choices.
They are reporting a sensational story, and it is clear that people in near death situations do have a story to tell, but that doesn't mean the story is accurate.
-
They are reporting a sensational story, and it is clear that people in near death situations do have a story to tell, but that doesn't mean the story is accurate.
I strongly suspect that if you were the one who had lived through the experience it would be extremely real to you.
-
Well, the moon landings were on the news so they could hardly be fiction then could they?
Just sayin' ::)
Until you have the ability and knowledge to prove by process they went to the moon. Should you be making comments you cannot support?
There is a difference between being unable to believe based on sound reasoning than to make statements of belief they went because you saw it on TV. I saw fireball XL5 on tv does that mean it really exists, or stingray...
Is that where all things you believe in come from? ;D
-
Until you have the ability and knowledge to prove by process they went to the moon. Should you be making comments you cannot support?
There is a difference between being unable to believe based on sound reasoning than to make statements of belief they went because you saw it on TV. I saw fireball XL5 on tv does that mean it really exists, or stingray...
Is that where all things you believe in come from? ;D
There is a lot of strong scientific evidence for the moon landings. There is none for god beliefs.
Believing far-fetched stories about "gods", and denying scientific evidence is not the way to go for reasoning minds.
-
I strongly suspect that if you were the one who had lived through the experience it would be extremely real to you.
Of course its a real experience to them but that doesn't mean that they died, went to hell and came back. That seems obvious from what I have said - so not sure what point you were making really.
-
Until you have the ability and knowledge to prove by process they went to the moon. Should you be making comments you cannot support?
There is a difference between being unable to believe based on sound reasoning than to make statements of belief they went because you saw it on TV. I saw fireball XL5 on tv does that mean it really exists, or stingray...
Is that where all things you believe in come from? ;D
The point was that you said they wouldn't have put it on the TV news if it wasn't true however you don't think man went to the moon but this appeared on the TV news.
-
Until you have the ability and knowledge to prove by process they went to the moon. Should you be making comments you cannot support
Unless you have the ability and knowledge to disprove the process by which they went to the moon. Should you be making comments you cannot support?
Thought not!
-
Well...we do always remember having a good night's sleep! That requires consciousness. It is Consciousness that has experienced the good nights sleep. And the fact that you wake up as the same person you were before shows the consciousness did not really die during the sleep. It was merely unconnected. Like switching off the wifi. So...saying that Consciousness does not SURVIVE falling asleep is wrong.
Many people sleep walk..... when their subconscious/unconscious mind stays awake though the person does not remember the event. This shows part of our consciousness stays awake even when we sleep. The Unconscious mind is part of our Consciousness. We cannot ignore it.
A number of inaccuracies and misunderstandings there Sriram, and I suppose my previous post was also somewhat sloppily worded.
Consciousness is something that admits of degrees, it is not an either/or thing, in fact we measure its strength now by an index, the perturbational complexity index, or pci for short. It normally reduces during sleep and is maximised during states of high alert and minimised or even zero under general anaesthesia or coma or dreamless sleep. We tend to think of being awake and consciousness as being the same thing but that is not really true either; people in a vegetative state have periods of sleep and wake, but they are not conscious whilst awake.
I think you are mixing up memory with consciousness. Consciousness does not 'experience' anything, rather it is a synthesised retrospective experiential phenomenon of what the (unconscious) body collectively experienced just a moment ago. The fact that we wake up feeling the same person as when we went to sleep is due to memory retention, not the persistence of consciousness during sleep. There are occasional islands of conscious experience during sleep, we call them dreams.
There is nothing in the current flood of research that would support a notion of consciousness as being somehow a separate thing from the body, rather it is a process produced by a complex biological system and this process evolved primarily to provide a service of interoception, ie a holistic registering of the internal state of the body derived from data procured by a central nervous system; complex living bodies produce consciousness just as they produce many things, perspiration, for instance, and the idea of a consciousness separate from a body makes no more sense than the idea of perspiration existing independently of the body producing it.
-
the idea of a consciousness separate from a body makes no more sense than the idea of perspiration existing independently of the body producing it.
The other view is that consciousness produces living bodies as distinguished from inanimate objects and that perspiration can exist independently of the body producing it, until it changes its form through evaporation or merging with water.
-
A number of inaccuracies and misunderstandings there Sriram, and I suppose my previous post was also somewhat sloppily worded.
Consciousness is something that admits of degrees, it is not an either/or thing, in fact we measure its strength now by an index, the perturbational complexity index, or pci for short. It normally reduces during sleep and is maximised during states of high alert and minimised or even zero under general anaesthesia or coma or dreamless sleep. We tend to think of being awake and consciousness as being the same thing but that is not really true either; people in a vegetative state have periods of sleep and wake, but they are not conscious whilst awake.
I think you are mixing up memory with consciousness. Consciousness does not 'experience' anything, rather it is a synthesised retrospective experiential phenomenon of what the (unconscious) body collectively experienced just a moment ago. The fact that we wake up feeling the same person as when we went to sleep is due to memory retention, not the persistence of consciousness during sleep. There are occasional islands of conscious experience during sleep, we call them dreams.
There is nothing in the current flood of research that would support a notion of consciousness as being somehow a separate thing from the body, rather it is a process produced by a complex biological system and this process evolved primarily to provide a service of interoception, ie a holistic registering of the internal state of the body derived from data procured by a central nervous system; complex living bodies produce consciousness just as they produce many things, perspiration, for instance, and the idea of a consciousness separate from a body makes no more sense than the idea of perspiration existing independently of the body producing it.
We have discussed this many times. There are two basic assumptions...
If we start of with a materialistic assumption, life has arisen just by accident. Evolution happens because DNA happen to mutate. Consciousness is a emergent property at certain stages of evolution. NDE and other such phenomena are just brain generated hallucinations.
Second assumption is that.... NDE and such other paranormal phenomena are evidence of a separate Consciousness/spirit/soul. This makes life and evolution as products of this Consciousness. Evolution has a direction and complexity is deliberate.
I go with the second.... and obviously you go with the first.
-
The point was that you said they wouldn't have put it on the TV news if it wasn't true however you don't think man went to the moon but this appeared on the TV news.
The point was:-
Sassy
Hero Member
Re: Heaven
« Reply #195 on: September 25, 2016, 01:32:23 PM »
Quote from: Sebastian Toe on September 25, 2016, 01:40:33 AM
Well, the moon landings were on the news so they could hardly be fiction then could they?
Just sayin' ::)
Until you have the ability and knowledge to prove by process they went to the moon. Should you be making comments you cannot support?
There is a difference between being unable to believe based on sound reasoning than to make statements of belief they went because you saw it on TV. I saw fireball XL5 on tv does that mean it really exists, or stingray...
Is that where all things you believe in come from? ;D
It is self - explanatory that my reply was about the general belief that anything on TV or even the News is true/fiction.
But we see the man alive and we see that the doctors and nurses witnessed it.
We see it made news media. But we choose in the end, what we believe.
So hence it is about processing the evidence in the case of the moon there was none we could process.
Because there is nothing to prove it happened at that time. With this we see the man alive and the
doctors and nurses who witnessed it. The photographer accused of helping MI6 to murder Princess Diana was found in a burnt-out BMW with a hole in his head, a court heard today.
So my post is clear... Somethings are not just simply what others would perceive them to be.
-
Unless you have the ability and knowledge to disprove the process by which they went to the moon. Should you be making comments you cannot support?
Thought not!
I have the ability and the knowledge to know that you and others, even the evidence they put forth do not prove they went to the moon. We had movies and we had tv programs where the landing on the moon could have been recorded WITHOUT going to the moon. The USA wanted to be first... the science today which they could not account for then, show is less likely that they actually got to the moon. What it does it support the possibility they never went there.
Can you or I prove otherwise... NO! because the men who could talk about it were all mysteriously killed.
Will they kill the scientist today? Will they kill the astronauts? NO! Because there is always another scientist or astronaut who will come along and tell people the same thing.
We have to choose and frankly our choice now even on this website is immaterial. No one is interested in if they went to the moon or not because it makes no difference to the future. That was then, and now is now. I can tell you there won't be another moon landing... :)
-
Spot the paradox.
Collection of old fairy stories, myths and legends about old man in the sky who does nasty things to people (like drowning everyone except one family) and who who makes a virgin pregnant. Their offspring, who does conjuring tricks, is executed, becomes alive again and then does an imitation of a helicopter and disappears into the sky. Total lack of supporting evidence, contemporaneous eye-witness reports and reliable archaeological evidence.
Sassy - every word is unfailingly true.
A mission by the USA to send men from Earth to the Moon and back again. Every single detail is verifiable, every technical component is feasible and entirely consistent with metallurgy, chemical engineering, electronic engineering and Newtonian physics. Every second of the mission is recorded in detail and independent observations made by totally independent and non-American agencies.
Sassy - this is a confidence trick played on the world. Total fiction.
-
Spot the paradox.
Collection of old fairy stories, myths and legends about old man in the sky who does nasty things to people (like drowning everyone except one family) and who who makes a virgin pregnant. Their offspring, who does conjuring tricks, is executed, becomes alive again and then does an imitation of a helicopter and disappears into the sky. Total lack of supporting evidence, contemporaneous eye-witness reports and reliable archaeological evidence.
Sassy - every word is unfailingly true.
A mission by the USA to send men from Earth to the Moon and back again. Every single detail is verifiable, every technical component is feasible and entirely consistent with metallurgy, chemical engineering, electronic engineering and Newtonian physics. Every second of the mission is recorded in detail and independent observations made by totally independent and non-American agencies.
Sassy - this is a confidence trick played on the world. Total fiction.
,
You may not believe in God, and goodness' knows you've taken long enough to say so, but to be as childishly derisive as you have been in this post does you no credit, and if you wish to be considered as a sensible debater, I suggest you argue with a little more maturity.
-
An absurd post. Grow up!
Not absurd at all.
You really seem to struggle with posts that challenge your view of things. HH is just contrasting two issues which Sassy talks about and makes a valid point. Regardless of whether one believes in Christianity or not, from our pov in the early 21st century there is an abundance of evidence for the moon landings and rather less for the virgin birth.
It is perfectly reasonable to compare and contrast the two on a MB.
The silly order to grow up appears to be all you've got by way of an argument.
NB I note you've changed your original post. But still all you have is the sneering insult - childishly derisive - well you'd know all about that!
-
The other view is that consciousness produces living bodies as distinguished from inanimate objects and that perspiration can exist independently of the body producing it, until it changes its form through evaporation or merging with water.
I've never heard of a body being produced by perspiration. Neither have I heard of living bodies being produced by consciousness, not unless we are using some sort of New Age babble meaning for consciousness. Consciousness refers to the state of alertness of a body. A state of alertness can no more create bodies than a particular state of fear, or a state of temperature. It describes the condition of the body at a moment in time.
-
Obviously, the whole idea of what happens to our consciousness after death is 'highly speculative' (to put it mildly). I find reincarnation the only reasonably feasible option, though of course, the 'Hard Atheists' will point-out that our consciousness resides in a material brain that will rapidly self-destruct after death.
It's not 'hard atheists' pointing that out, it is called science and we are fools to ignore research in favour of some or other unsubstantiated woolly make-believe. If you really find reincarnation feasible then what is your justification for that ?
-
I've never heard of a body being produced by perspiration. Neither have I heard of living bodies being produced by consciousness, not unless we are using some sort of New Age babble meaning for consciousness. Consciousness refers to the state of alertness of a body. A state of alertness can no more create bodies than a particular state of fear, or a state of temperature. It describes the condition of the body at a moment in time.
You are once again adopting your materialistic POV and analyzing it accordingly. You are not seeing it from the POV of the second assumption.
'Consciousness is a state of alertness'...is just your definition. 'Consciousness is an independent form of existence that forms the core of all creation'....could be another definition. 'Consciousness is what makes everything exist' ....could be another.
In a simulated universe for example...Consciousness is everything. A TV picture or a computer game is nothing but electrical or magnetic impulses. It becomes a picture only due to Consciousness. Even in our own brain all inputs that we see and hear are just electrical impulses. They become meaningful only due to Consciousness.
-
Not absurd at all.
You really seem to struggle with posts that challenge your view of things. HH is just contrasting two issues which Sassy talks about and makes a valid point. Regardless of whether one believes in Christianity or not, from our pov in the early 21st century there is an abundance of evidence for the moon landings and rather less for the virgin birth.
It is perfectly reasonable to compare and contrast the two on a MB.
The silly order to grow up appears to be all you've got by way of an argument.
NB I note you've changed your original post. But still all you have is the sneering insult - childishly derisive - well you'd know all about that!
You accuse me of being unable to accept views that challenge me: fool, that's what debate is about. You are the same , everyone is. As to the sneering snipe; re-read your post. You really are a pretty huge hypocrite. As to the post in question; wouldn't expect you to find any fault in it: the childish allusions are right up your street. I had once thought you were a reasonable person: how wrong I got it!
-
Sorry, SteveH,
The man was dead three hours he then descended into hell and in his fear he called our for Christ and he rescued him and sent him back to preach the gospel. I saw this man on television and I see no reason for anyone to doubt the medical reports.
You see there are others who have died and come back look at this one.
This is another incident of someone being raised from the dead...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Wxbv-julc
If they came back, they didn't actually die, by definition. Whatever they saw or heard was some kind of hallucination.
-
(1)I've never heard of a body being produced by perspiration.
(2)Neither have I heard of living bodies being produced by consciousness, not unless we are using some sort of New Age babble meaning for consciousness. Consciousness refers to the state of alertness of a body. A state of alertness can no more create bodies than a particular state of fear, or a state of temperature. It describes the condition of the body at a moment in time.
(1) Perhaps I was misunderstanding what you meant by "perspiration (not) existing independently of the body producing it." You can see it existing separately on a sweaty pair of socks. It's only an excretion of what was taken into the body.
(2)I don't think the suggestion is that consciousness creates the physical forces but more that it merges with the physical and distinguishes the living from the dead. It allows for the modification of the body. Of course, if we are restricting the definition to some sort of scientific babble then that is the end of the discussion.
-
You are once again adopting your materialistic POV and analyzing it accordingly. You are not seeing it from the POV of the second assumption.
'Consciousness is a state of alertness'...is just your definition. 'Consciousness is an independent form of existence that forms the core of all creation'....could be another definition. 'Consciousness is what makes everything exist' ....could be another.
In a simulated universe for example...Consciousness is everything. A TV picture or a computer game is nothing but electrical or magnetic impulses. It becomes a picture only due to Consciousness. Even in our own brain all inputs that we see and hear are just electrical impulses. They become meaningful only due to Consciousness.
Anyone can invent new definitions for words, that doesn't make them valid. If you want to propose new scientific paradigms for the basis of existence it would be better to use new words to avoid the confusion. Anaesthetists have been working with consciousness for decades already, it is their day job to know how to control it, subdue it, make it go away. I don't think they would recognise your definitions.
-
(2)I don't think the suggestion is that consciousness creates the physical forces but more that it merges with the physical and distinguishes the living from the dead. It allows for the modification of the body. Of course, if we are restricting the definition to some sort of scientific babble then that is the end of the discussion.
Not all living things are conscious. Mammalian consciousness evolved 525 mya, but we are not so sure about birds, fish, reptiles and insects. Bacteria are alive but not conscious, so using consciousness as a marker for living things is incorrect.
-
You accuse me of being unable to accept views that challenge me: fool, that's what debate is about. You are the same , everyone is. As to the sneering snipe; re-read your post. You really are a pretty huge hypocrite. As to the post in question; wouldn't expect you to find any fault in it: the childish allusions are right up your street. I had once thought you were a reasonable person: how wrong I got it!
And again with the insults.
It's astonishing that you can't see the way you behave makes you look silly.
Never mind, thanks for the laughs.
-
And again with the insults.
It's astonishing that you can't see the way you behave makes you look silly.
Never mind, thanks for the laughs.
You have some problems with anything that is even vaguely intelligent. You seem totally, constitutionally, unable to differentiate between insult and fact. And you finish with a cheap shot, even though you take me to task for so-called insults. Classic!
-
You have some problems with anything that is even vaguely intelligent. You seem totally, constitutionally, unable to differentiate between insult and fact. And you finish with a cheap shot, even though you take me to task for so-called insults. Classic!
Of course dear. Now time to get back under that bridge.
-
Of course dear. Now time to get back under that bridge.
More cheap and nasty comments. Look up "hypocrite, "it's something else you don't understand.
-
More cheap and nasty comments. Look up "hypocrite, "it's something else you don't understand.
One
-
Not all living things are conscious. Mammalian consciousness evolved 525 mya, but we are not so sure about birds, fish, reptiles and insects. Bacteria are alive but not conscious, so using consciousness as a marker for living things is incorrect.
Well it might depend upon how one understands consciousness. I'm quite happy to be open to the possibility that there is a rudimentary consciousness or awareness at cellular level which distinguishes a living cell from say, a grain of sand.
-
Well it might depend upon how one understands consciousness. I'm quite happy to be open to the possibility that there is a rudimentary consciousness or awareness at cellular level which distinguishes a living cell from say, a grain of sand.
We already have descriptions from biology and biochemistry of the salient differences between living and non-living material at the cellular level; for instance homoeostasis, cell division, metabolism, proton gradients, semi-permeable membranes etc. There is no need to redefine these phenomena with the word 'consciousness' as this more properly applies to a neurological phenomenom in higher animals of orders of magnitude greater complexity. It just causes unnecessary confusion. Bacteria do not have complex states of arousal corresponding to those found in higher animals.
-
,
You may not believe in God, and goodness' knows you've taken long enough to say so, but to be as childishly derisive as you have been in this post does you no credit, and if you wish to be considered as a sensible debater, I suggest you argue with a little more maturity.
Sassy doesn't believe people have been to the Moon, but she does believe in a ludicrous 2,000 year old myth.
I'd say childish is the least derisive way of describing her position. I'm leaning towards "bonkers".
-
We already have descriptions from biology and biochemistry of the salient differences between living and non-living material at the cellular level; for instance homoeostasis, cell division, metabolism, proton gradients, semi-permeable membranes etc. There is no need to redefine these phenomena with the word 'consciousness' as this more properly applies to a neurological phenomenom in higher animals of orders of magnitude greater complexity. It just causes unnecessary confusion. Bacteria do not have complex states of arousal corresponding to those found in higher animals.
Those descriptions appear to be functions of life forms. They don't indicate what 'life' is nor what 'awareness' is. It is not about redefining those phenomena but being open to the possibility that there is a simple awareness which allows those phenomena to function rather than remain inert like a grain of sand. Who dictates that ' 'consciousness' more properly applies to a neurological phenomenon in higher animals of orders of magnitude greater complexity.'? Consciousness may be simple rather than complex and it is just the life form which changes in complexity and which gives the illusion of a complex underlying consciousness.
-
Can you or I prove otherwise... NO! because the men who could talk about it were all mysteriously killed.
All?
All - except for those astronauts who actually went to the moon, they can and have talked about it often.
Some of them Christians.
Are those Christians liars Sassy?
For example;
James Irwin , Apollo 15 astronaut,
For two decades, Irwin traveled the world and presented small flags he carried from the moon to the leaders of various countries. “These flags were so powerful,” says Bill Dodder, a close friend to Irwin. “He took flags to each country as a means to witness for Jesus Christ.
http://www.godreports.com/testimony-view/1249
Sassy, did he lie when he said to all of those people that the flags were from the moon?
or
Buzz Aldrin Apollo 11 astronaut;
Here he is writing about his path to being the first and only man to take communion on the moon.
https://www.guideposts.org/faith/stories-of-faith/guideposts-classics-buzz-aldrin-on-communion-in-space?nopaging=1
Quote
And so, just before I partook of the elements, I read the words which I had chosen to indicate our trust that as man probes into space we are in fact acting in Christ.
I sensed especially strongly my unity with our church back home, and with the Church everywhere.
I read: "I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me, and I in him, will bear much fruit; for you can do nothing without me." John 15:5 (TEV)
Is Buzz a liar Sassy?
or
Eugene Cernan,the last man to walk on the moon said;
We launched off that pad in a big Saturn V rocket that took us to the Moon. People had dreamed of leaving the cradle of civilisation – this Earth of ours – and we did it. Fortunately, I was one of the guys to go out there, to look back at the Earth and try to comprehend the meaning of it all.
When I left the Moon and started up the ladder, I was really at a loss. I didn’t want to leave and I looked down at my last footsteps and realised I wasn’t coming this way again
I searched for that answer, I needed more time. I wanted to press the freeze button, stop time to give myself a chance to think about it. I had an opportunity to sit on God’s front porch looking at the small part of the civilisation of this universe that he created.
Is Eugene a liar?
Sassy?
-
Spot the paradox.
Collection of old fairy stories, myths and legends about old man in the sky who does nasty things to people (like drowning everyone except one family) and who who makes a virgin pregnant. Their offspring, who does conjuring tricks, is executed, becomes alive again and then does an imitation of a helicopter and disappears into the sky. Total lack of supporting evidence, contemporaneous eye-witness reports and reliable archaeological evidence.
Why use the above? It means nothing at all in the great scheme of things.
I know people all over the world who believe receive healing.
The evidence it there, the truth is you cannot handle the truth.
You are in denial.
.
Sassy - every word is unfailingly true.
As you have never done anything for yourself or searched for truth we have to dismiss what you say. Having witnessed the statements and the testimony of others, I have to say you are wrong. Feel free to prove differently. But not opinion please. The opinions you have shared so far are all outdated. :)
A mission by the USA to send men from Earth to the Moon and back again. Every single detail is verifiable, every technical component is feasible and entirely consistent with metallurgy, chemical engineering, electronic engineering and Newtonian physics. Every second of the mission is recorded in detail and independent observations made by totally independent and non-American agencies.
Behave....if is was provable there would not be physicist and other scientist saying it wasn't possible. There would be no dispute or us talking about it.
Sassy - this is a confidence trick played on the world. Total fiction.
You have never looked into the issue. In fact your own quoting of others proves it.
Thomas Ronald Baron was a safety inspector in Apollo 1’s construction. After the fire, Baron testified before Congress that the Apollo program was in such disarray that the United States would never make it to the moon. He claimed his opinions made him a target, and on 21 April 1967 reported on camera to news reporters that he and his wife had been harassed at home. As part of his testimony Baron submitted a 500 page report detailing his findings. Exactly one week after he testified, Baron’s car was struck by a train and he, his wife and his stepdaughter were all killed instantly. Baron’s report mysteriously disappeared, and to this day it has never been found.
Still believe in your own testimony?
-
Thomas Ronald Baron was a safety inspector in Apollo 1’s construction. After the fire, Baron testified before Congress that the Apollo program was in such disarray that the United States would never make it to the moon. He claimed his opinions made him a target, and on 21 April 1967 reported on camera to news reporters that he and his wife had been harassed at home. As part of his testimony Baron submitted a 500 page report detailing his findings. Exactly one week after he testified, Baron’s car was struck by a train and he, his wife and his stepdaughter were all killed instantly. Baron’s report mysteriously disappeared, and to this day it has never been found.
Wow, Sassy. You've got me convinced.
You've got to admire the dastardly cunning, haven't you! Being able to magic-up a train just at that very moment. Incredible.
If I were you, I'd be very careful. For giving away information like this , you are almost certainly on their hit list ....
-
Those descriptions appear to be functions of life forms. They don't indicate what 'life' is nor what 'awareness' is. It is not about redefining those phenomena but being open to the possibility that there is a simple awareness which allows those phenomena to function rather than remain inert like a grain of sand. Who dictates that ' 'consciousness' more properly applies to a neurological phenomenon in higher animals of orders of magnitude greater complexity.'? Consciousness may be simple rather than complex and it is just the life form which changes in complexity and which gives the illusion of a complex underlying consciousness.
I don't see that we need to add any extra ingredients to understand the phenomenon of life. Living things are made from the same stuff as non living things, the difference lies in the degree of complexity of organisation. Do we need to add any extra ingredients to understand subjective experience and awareness and qualia, or are the underlying models of quantum theory up to biochemistry sufficient ? This is where it gets more interesting. It might be that we simply need to improve our understanding of the concepts of subjectivity and emergence; others go further, Chalmers says we need to accept that information has a phenomonenological aspect. I'm not sure about that, watch this space I think. What I'm not keen on is people seizing on gaps in knowledge to licence their pet flaky ideas that lack scientific rigour. We don't understand the origin of the universe, so we get people claiming 'God', who doesn't like gays by the way, as if this sort of thinking had the same rigour as is practised in cosmology. Similarly we don't fully understand consciousness and so we get people claiming spirit worlds and reincarnation within the same intellectual space as neuroscience as if there is some equivalence of intellectual discipline there.
-
I don't see that we need to add any extra ingredients to understand the phenomenon of life. Living things are made from the same stuff as non living things, the difference lies in the degree of complexity of organisation. Do we need to add any extra ingredients to understand subjective experience and awareness and qualia, or are the underlying models of quantum theory up to biochemistry sufficient ? This is where it gets more interesting. It might be that we simply need to improve our understanding of the concepts of subjectivity and emergence; others go further, Chalmers says we need to accept that information has a phenomonenological aspect. I'm not sure about that, watch this space I think. What I'm not keen on is people seizing on gaps in knowledge to licence their pet flaky ideas that lack scientific rigour. We don't understand the origin of the universe, so we get people claiming 'God', who doesn't like gays by the way, as if this sort of thinking had the same rigour as is practised in cosmology. Similarly we don't fully understand consciousness and so we get people claiming spirit worlds and reincarnation within the same intellectual space as neuroscience as if there is some equivalence of intellectual discipline there.
You are still confusing 'religion' with phenomena that are natural but currently outside the scope of science.
People are not 'claiming' spirit worlds and reincarnation out of the blue. They are actually experiencing them and it makes sense to them too. Problem is that many science enthusiasts have got into the habit of dismissing all experiences that we don't understand, as just anecdotes and brain generated imagery. Nothing to see here folks!!
Fortunately, there are many scientists, doctors etc. who do see these experiences as actual experiences of another reality. If we do take such phenomena seriously, it could turn many scientific theories upside down. What has been presumed as an outcome could become the cause.... and vice versa.
And that probably is what all the resistance is about.
-
People are not 'claiming' spirit worlds and reincarnation out of the blue. They are actually experiencing them and it makes sense to them too. Problem is that many science enthusiasts have got into the habit of dismissing all experiences that we don't understand, as just anecdotes and brain generated imagery. Nothing to see here folks!!
Where we dismiss anecdotal claims of exotic experience it is because we have learned the hard way that this is the weakest form of evidence. We hold to the principle that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence for very good reason, if we abandoned that rigour we would still be in the seventeenth century in knowledge terms. There is no body of theoretical work supporting notions like spirit worlds and reincarnation, however the disposition of humans to lie and to be mistaken and for brains to produce exotic phenomenology under particular circumstances is well understood.
-
Where we dismiss anecdotal claims of exotic experience it is because we have learned the hard way that this is the weakest form of evidence. We hold to the principle that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence for very good reason, if we abandoned that rigour we would still be in the seventeenth century in knowledge terms. There is no body of theoretical work supporting notions like spirit worlds and reincarnation, however the disposition of humans to lie and to be mistaken and for brains to produce exotic phenomenology under particular circumstances is well understood.
You insist on using a microscope to look at the stars and then claim...'there is nothing there'! :)
-
;D ;D
-
Thomas Ronald Baron was a safety inspector in Apollo 1’s construction. After the fire, Baron testified before Congress that the Apollo program was in such disarray that the United States would never make it to the moon. He claimed his opinions made him a target, and on 21 April 1967 reported on camera to news reporters that he and his wife had been harassed at home. As part of his testimony Baron submitted a 500 page report detailing his findings. Exactly one week after he testified, Baron’s car was struck by a train and he, his wife and his stepdaughter were all killed instantly. Baron’s report mysteriously disappeared, and to this day it has never been found.
It has been pointed out to me by Sebastian Toe that I have made an incorrect statement. I am therefore amending this post,
Amendment 1
Thomas Ronald Baron was not a NASA employee, but an employee of North American Aviation - a contractor to NASA.
Since his death preceded the Moon landing mission by more than two years he cannot be considered to have been a witness to any cover up. I would like to know how his death, caused by a collision with a railway train and independently witnessed, could have been engineered by external forces. It is also not clear that he had a "500 page report". It is more likely that he had collected 500 or so individual report forms.
Amendment 2
Space vehicles launched by Russia, Japan, China and India have all produced photographic evidence of the presence on the Moon of Apollo missions.
"Chandrayaan sends images of Apollo 15 landing". The Times of India. New Delhi: The Times Group. September 2, 2009.
"Chandrayaan's moon findings: Water, rocks and traces of Apollo". MSN India. Redmond, WA: Microsoft. India Syndicate. October 22, 2009.
Lina, Yang, ed. (February 6, 2012). "China publishes high-resolution full moon map". English.news.cn. Beijing: Xinhua News Agency.
-
I don't see that we need to add any extra ingredients to understand the phenomenon of life. Living things are made from the same stuff as non living things, the difference lies in the degree of complexity of organisation. Do we need to add any extra ingredients to understand subjective experience and awareness and qualia, or are the underlying models of quantum theory up to biochemistry sufficient ? This is where it gets more interesting. It might be that we simply need to improve our understanding of the concepts of subjectivity and emergence; others go further, Chalmers says we need to accept that information has a phenomonenological aspect. I'm not sure about that, watch this space I think. What I'm not keen on is people seizing on gaps in knowledge to licence their pet flaky ideas that lack scientific rigour. We don't understand the origin of the universe, so we get people claiming 'God', who doesn't like gays by the way, as if this sort of thinking had the same rigour as is practised in cosmology. Similarly we don't fully understand consciousness and so we get people claiming spirit worlds and reincarnation within the same intellectual space as neuroscience as if there is some equivalence of intellectual discipline there.
Yes, I understand where you are coming from. I think the goals of religion initiators and science investigators are different. The former is transformation oriented and the latter information oriented. To relate it to the topic of this thread, the former seeks within for a heavenly state of being, bliss, nirvana, peace, harmony etc. and the latter seeks without for answers to create models and theories of the physical landscape to better understand it and perhaps manipulate it. The former uses mythos to communicate and the latter logos. The former is experiential and personal and the latter experimental and impersonal. The former is not concerned about understanding consciousness but more about clarifying it and freeing from intellectual and emotional baggage.
-
And again with the insults.
It's astonishing that you can't see the way you behave makes you look silly.
Never mind, thanks for the laughs.
BA's posts reveal large chips on shoulders I've always thought.
-
His collision with the train had occurred five months earlier, in November 1966.
You might want to double check that.
I think he left NASA in Nov 1966....
Baron was a rank and file inspector at Kennedy from September 1965 until November 1966, when he asked for and received a leave of absence.
http://history.nasa.gov/Apollo204/barron.html
-
Yes, I understand where you are coming from. I think the goals of religion initiators and science investigators are different. The former is transformation oriented and the latter information oriented. To relate it to the topic of this thread, the former seeks within for a heavenly state of being, bliss, nirvana, peace, harmony etc. and the latter seeks without for answers to create models and theories of the physical landscape to better understand it and perhaps manipulate it. The former uses mythos to communicate and the latter logos. The former is experiential and personal and the latter experimental and impersonal. The former is not concerned about understanding consciousness but more about clarifying it and freeing from intellectual and emotional baggage.
That's all fair enough, although we can never entirely separate the two principals - the urge to experience and the urge to understand experience. I suppose it all comes back down to that old split brain thing in the end.
-
You might want to double check that.
I think he left NASA in Nov 1966....
Baron was a rank and file inspector at Kennedy from September 1965 until November 1966, when he asked for and received a leave of absence.
http://history.nasa.gov/Apollo204/barron.html
Thank you, Sebastian. I have checked other sources and found that the one I had used earlier was incorrect.
Nevertheless, I find it difficult to conceive how Baron could possible even be connected to any cover-up. He was a low-ranking technician working for a contractor - he would have no access to any strategic information. His death took place more than two years before the eventual Moon landing. There does not appear to be any evidence that Baron was not certain that the Apollo mission was anything other than genuine.
Again, I ask why it is that Sassy should be absolutely certain that events for which there is no other evidence than questionable stories more than 2000 years old should be true, and one of the most completely recorded events of recent times should be a hoax.
-
BA's posts reveal large chips on shoulders I've always thought.
With respect, SD, you thought wrong. Frustration, yes irritation, yes; but no more. They are my faults here, but I put them down to my age as much as anything!
-
Wow, Sassy. You've got me convinced.
Mockery! Really? ???
Joseph Goebbels
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
The lies you believe are the greatest enemy of the USA. But yet you see not the truth so as to be able to understand it's consequences.
You've got to admire the dastardly cunning, haven't you! Being able to magic-up a train just at that very moment. Incredible.
If I were you, I'd be very careful. For giving away information like this , you are almost certainly on their hit list ....
It is not I, which poses any threat but the truth. As we advance your science reveals the untruths, only the scientist are a risk. What would uncover the truth is any attempt to go to the moon again. The bible tells us that Christ is able to save unto the uttermost all who come unto him by God. The bible tells us that those who set traps for others will fall into them themselves. The most likely truth is your frightened that if you allow yourself to believe the truth maybe they did not go to the moon that it opens a more fearful prospect that the USA will kill to cover the truth.
You and I, are no threat we have no qualifications just our opinion. Do you realise how many of the worlds people they would have to murder to make the disbelief go away?
To be honest it is of no importance today. No one can change or do anything about that which might have or might not have been. Frankly, I am surprised you would suggest such a thing. America has bigger things to worry about. :)
-
opens a more fearful prospect that the USA will kill to cover the truth.
It's a given that most, maybe all, nations at one time or another have killed to cover the truth. So a fearful prospect, yes - but not at all unknown.
However, with so much readily verifiable information about the moon landing your stance on this is incorrect.
-
BA's posts reveal large chips on shoulders I've always thought.
Did you bring the salt'n'vinegar ? That way you can make a meal of it...
I am surprised Susan that you would suggest such a thing when you know how sincere BA's beliefs are. It does not become you. Rather sad you do as others do and insult rather than reply with an argument regarding the actual issues. :(
-
It's a given that most, maybe all, nations at one time or another have killed to cover the truth. So a fearful prospect, yes - but not at all unknown.
However, with so much readily verifiable information about the moon landing your stance on this is incorrect.
What was that I said about believing a lie and it becoming the truth?
There is absolutely NO verifiable evidence. If it had existed they would have been able to produce it by now and put an end to the argument.
Scientist don't agree with you... those scientist you have proffered as evidence for how long?
-
That's all fair enough, although we can never entirely separate the two principals - the urge to experience and the urge to understand experience. I suppose it all comes back down to that old split brain thing in the end.
Quite possibly, I suppose the ideal is a harmony of the two without either seeking dominance. Bringing such a heavenly harmony to earth seems far away despite the prayer of 'Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven'.
-
Did you bring the salt'n'vinegar ? That way you can make a meal of it...
I am surprised Susan that you would suggest such a thing when you know how sincere BA's beliefs are. It does not become you. Rather sad you do as others do and insult rather than reply with an argument regarding the actual issues. :(
Sassy. Thank you for that vindication. It's appreciated.
-
What was that I said about believing a lie and it becoming the truth?
There is absolutely NO verifiable evidence. If it had existed they would have been able to produce it by now and put an end to the argument.
Scientist don't agree with you... those scientist you have proffered as evidence for how long?
Which scientists - all of them. I think not.
Anyway its only wiki but have a read and take your conspiracy goggles off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
-
That's all fair enough, although we can never entirely separate the two principals - the urge to experience and the urge to understand experience. I suppose it all comes back down to that old split brain thing in the end.
Exactly! Its about two aspects of our personality that seem to be split. That is why we often have this problem with integrating the material with the non-material.
The purpose of Yoga (union) is to unite the two principles. This gives us an integrated view of life without the duality. This is considered a privileged and superior world view.
-
What was that I said about believing a lie and it becoming the truth?
There is absolutely NO verifiable evidence. If it had existed they would have been able to produce it by now and put an end to the argument.
They have, as has been pointed out to you before.
Scientist don't agree with you... those scientist you have proffered as evidence for how long?
Yes, the vast majority do. Again, as has been pointed out before.
It won't make any difference of course, but worth pointing out again.
-
Sassy
What do you consider would be verifiable evidence?
What do you understand by the term "verifiable evidence"?