Near-death experiences!

Ossai said:
PetriFB
That’s nice, when exactly is this new covenant supposed to start? According to the bible it won’t start until the 2nd coming of Jesus, so technically we’re still under the first covenant.

So stone, stone, stone away...

Ossai
Click to expand...

2Co 3:6 ¶ who also made us able ministers of a new covenant, not of letter, but of Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit makes alive.

After Jesus' death started New covenant.........
 
CFLarsen said:
Originally Posted by PetriFB :
After death of Jesus and fulfillment of New covenant filled in pentecost day ...
Click to expand...
So, when Jesus lived, he was promoting Old Testament ways?
Click to expand...

If Jesus promoted Old Testament ways, do you think the religious leadership would have been able to justify his death sentence?

Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone.
Click to expand...
 
Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone.
Click to expand...

Thats not even in the oldest manuscripts available, and doesnt appear for 1000 years after Jesus lived. Jesus never said this quote.
 
Johnny C. said:
Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone.
Click to expand...
Thats not even in the oldest manuscripts available, and doesnt appear for 1000 years after Jesus lived. Jesus never said this quote.
Click to expand...

Source

Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone.

John 8:7
Click to expand...

Footnote, New American Bible (source linked above):

[7] The first stones were to be thrown by the witnesses (Deut 17:7).

At the execution, the witnesses are to be the first to raise their hands against him; afterward all the people are to join in. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The New American Bible is the official RCC Bible for North America. The introduction for the Book of John states:

The Gospel according to John is quite different in character from the three synoptic gospels. It is highly literary and symbolic. It does not follow the same order or reproduce the same stories as the synoptic gospels. To a much greater degree, it is the product of a developed theological reflection and grows out of a different circle and tradition. It was probably written in the 90s of the first century....

.... The final editing of the gospel and arrangement in its present form probably dates from between A.D. 90 and 100. Traditionally, Ephesus has been favored as the place of composition, though many support a location in Syria, perhaps the city of Antioch, while some have suggested other places, including Alexandria.
Click to expand...
 
Please dont tell me you believe something written 1900 years ago that was not only translated but rewritten by numerous srcibes and past down for centuries remained completely unscathed.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060738170/qid=1152572778/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-7840067-3404106?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

I know when it was wirtten, and I know it is in modern bibles. But was it actually written by John. Nope.

Edit: I wasnt trying to argue, just found it interesting how when we read the bible, quote it, or reference it, we never know if what we are using Jesus words, or some peasants.
 
Last edited:
Johnny C. said:
Please dont jump into a conversation between two people. Read whats going on and then you'll see how stupid you sound.
Click to expand...

This is a public forum, not a two way conversation. I doubt I sound silly for doubting your silly claims.

As someone said earlier, I dont know if they did any measurement of brain activity, but his breathing and heart had stopped. As if that isn't an extraordinary feat.
Click to expand...

So goes the story. We don't know what really happened though. The extraordinary feat isn't followed up with extraordinary evidence.

Medical records are pretty much confidential, and I dont recall his book being timestamped.
Click to expand...

Confidential unless released by the person. This guy claims to have died for 28 minutes but doesn't have evidence to support his claim.

I havent read it in awhile anyways. Im not willing to waste my time looking up this information when anything presented you wont accept.
Click to expand...

That's wrong, skeptics will accept verifiable evidence. So far, you've only given stories and anecdotes as evidence.

He didnt have a pulse or breath for nearly a half-hour. Your response, but was he brain dead?
Click to expand...

Yes, that is part of my response. If he's brain-dead for 28 minutes, he will not come back to life at all.
 
thaiboxerken said:
This is a public forum, not a two way conversation. I doubt I sound silly for doubting your silly claims.
Click to expand...

When I am specifically addressing someone else to find out if they researched the subject, yea, you sound stupid, and I dont doubt it.
 
Johnny C. said:
When I am specifically addressing someone else to find out if they researched the subject, yea, you sound stupid, and I dont doubt it.
Click to expand...

Wrong. I'm simply pointing out that the burden of evidence lies on YOUR shoulders, not theirs. You made a ridiculous claim, you need to back that claim up with evidence. So far, you haven't.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Wrong. I'm simply pointing out that the burden of evidence lies on YOUR shoulders, not theirs. You made a ridiculous claim, you need to back that claim up with evidence. So far, you haven't.
Click to expand...
Haha, okay bro. I have no idea how I could be wrong when I know I was talking to Foster and not you. Whatever gives you that warm fuzzy feeling I suppose.
 
Johnny C. said:
Please dont jump into a conversation between two people. Read whats going on and then you'll see how stupid you sound.


As someone said earlier, I dont know if they did any measurement of brain activity, but his breathing and heart had stopped. As if that isn't an extraordinary feat.
Click to expand...

First, let me point out that you jumped into a conversation between me and someone else and no one had the gall to suggest that you were overstepping the bounds of forum protocol. Anyone here is welcome to comment on anything they read. Perhaps I should explain that in a debate forum the whole point is to exchange ideas with people with differing points of view. Challenging an idea or a claim is a fundamental part of debate. Some people may have ideas or methods of reasoning that drive you crazy and again, that's a fundamental part of being here. But the most important thing I would like to point out is that a challenge to a claim or statement is not a personal attack! If you can't read a challenge to one of your posts without becoming emotionally upset you may want to consider not wasting your time here. But if you show a little maturity you may find this forum highly informative whatever your beliefs.


I bolded the above because I think it bears consideration. In a skeptical forum you'll find many people who's first reaction to a story like Brinkley's is not credulous acceptance but rather the opposite. As Carl Sagan was fond of saying "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". This is the whole basis of the JREF million dollar challenge by the way. "You talk to the dead?" "You see the future?" "Fine, PROVE IT!" You yourself have mentioned the thousands of deliberate and accidental changes to the New Testament over the first centuries of Christianity. The original autographs are completely lost to us in fact. (If you haven't read Misquoting Jesus by Bart D. Ehrman you may enjoy it.) So where is that skepticism when regarding a man who claims to have died and seen spirits but offers no proof? He can't even predict the future as he claimed to do. I suggest you also read The Faith Healers by James Randi for an example of how people can make claims to amazing powers and seem sincere to many but just be opportunistic cheats. Berkley may fall into the category of the self deluded but the way in which he makes his "prediction" and the way he financially exploits his story make me, well, Skeptical.

Steven
 
Last edited:
Huntster said:
Got your "facts" straight?:
Click to expand...

Notice he didn't say "In specific medical terms she was dead"? I asked a friend about this. He's not a neurosurgeon... but he is a PhD in cellular biology. He said he'd heard of this case but hadn't thought it presented any convincing evidence or even anything unusual. He informed me that they actually chilled her body to prevent the brain from dying during the lengthy procedure. He pointed out that low temperatures drastically slow the chemical processes of the cells so that their rate of oxygen consumption becomes much lower. As long as ice crystals don't form in the cells rupturing the cell walls the cell will remain alive. This is why people who have been under the ice in freezing water are able to be successfully revived without brain damage long after brain death would have occurred in warmer water. They may seem dead when they are chilled like this but they are not,technically dead. I suspect Pam Reynolds sincerely believes that she was dead but people believe delusional things all the time without any malice. I did note that there are quite a few media for sale regarding this claim along the edge of the page though.

Steven
 
Foster Zygote said:
But the most important thing I would like to point out is that a challenge to a claim or statement is not a personal attack! If you can't read a challenge to one of your posts without becoming emotionally upset you may want to consider not wasting your time here. But if you show a little maturity you may find this forum highly informative whatever your beliefs.
Click to expand...

First, I am only hear to lower my blood pressure inbetween arguing with the Loosers.

Second, thanks for the emotional insight into myself because I was completely unaware that Im upset. You should enter Rani's challenge, being able to know how I feel through a computer and all.

I am quite calm. Remember when you double posted as soon as you came across some revelation about dannion (it ended up being wrong)? I dont think Im the insecure one here. My beliefs (which I have not told you, and are far from a dannion brinkley "advocate") arent at stake. Judging by your claim he is a woo (I havent been here long enough to know what that means) and immediately dismiss him, I think you do. Who here, among me and you, really has a reason to get emotionally upset?

Why I called him (thai) stupid was because you made a vague, unfounded claim, and when I asked you if you have support, all of a sudden that ******* comes out of nowhere saying I have the burden of proof. For what? I am attempting to prove anything, at least up to that point, besides the fact that NDEs typically involve more than a tunnel and some flashing lights, which I am more than aware pilots commonly have in training. Furthermore, after reading hundreds of accounts of NDEs, and explanations from several sides of the debate, I think I have researched this more than:

A) Thai, you hasnt posted anything besides garbage so far.
B) You, who at the time made an unfounded claim.

Now thats settled, Lets move on to whats relevent.

I bolded the above because I think it bears consideration. In a skeptical forum you'll find many people who's first reaction to a story like Brinkley's is not credulous acceptance but rather the opposite. As Carl Sagan was fond of saying "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". This is the whole basis of the JREF million dollar challenge by the way. "You talk to the dead?" "You see the future?" "Fine, PROVE IT!" You yourself have mentioned the thousands of deliberate and accidental changes to the New Testament over the first centuries of Christianity. The original autographs are completely lost to us in fact. (If you haven't read Misquoting Jesus by Bart D. Ehrman you may enjoy it.) So where is that skepticism when regarding a man who claims to have died and seen spirits but offers no proof? He can't even predict the future as he claimed to do. I suggest you also read The Faith Healers by James Randi for an example of how people can make claims to amazing powers and seem sincere to many but just be opportunistic cheats. Berkley may fall into the category of the self deluded but the way in which he makes his "prediction" and the way he financially exploits his story make me, well, Skeptical.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, everything you have posted so far, save the James Randi book, has been old information. The predictions are what really kills him. Not only are they incredibly vague and appliable to many situations, but he buys some insurance by saying something to the effect of "if humans change their habits, many of these predictions can be avoided". That set of quite a few red flags. You might as well say "I am making a prediction, you will either die tomorrow, or sometime after that".

There really is no way to prove whether or not he is authentic. The same goes for anyone that has an OBE or NDE. Lets say I told my friend that I had a dream that my neighbors house burned down, and he replied 'prove it'. There really is no way for someone to prove it, which is why I understand how many people can be skeptical.

The only way would be to self-induce an OBE, and see something that you couldn't normally see and report back. If I new anyone in real-life that could do that, I would definitely have them try this:

http://near-death.com/tart.html

But I think thats about as close as you're going to get for proof.
 
Johnny C. said:
Please dont tell me you believe something written 1900 years ago that was not only translated but rewritten by numerous srcibes and past down for centuries remained completely unscathed.
Click to expand...

Sorry. I believe those words a bit more than I believe yours:

I know when it was wirtten, and I know it is in modern bibles......
Click to expand...

After you wrote this:

Thats not even in the oldest manuscripts available, and doesnt appear for 1000 years after Jesus lived.
Click to expand...
 
Johnny C. said:
I am quite calm.
Click to expand...

You haven't the maturity to warrant my further time. I won't reward your evidently obstreperous need for conflict by playing your game. Even being only eighteen years old doesn't excuse your inability to engage in a public debate in a civilized manner. I wash my hands of you.

Steven
 
Johnny C. said:
Haha, okay bro. I have no idea how I could be wrong when I know I was talking to Foster and not you. Whatever gives you that warm fuzzy feeling I suppose.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter who you're talking to, if you say 2+2=5, you're still wrong. The same goes for the fallacy you are using. The burden of evidence is on you, you've claimed something extraordinary to be true and then want others to prove you wrong. It doesn't work that way, you need to provide substance to your claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom