Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
even if you heard you would not believe--just call me someone that's been there__btw i was NOT recusitated
well,I would.but I have yet to see anyone come back to life after death at the cellular level.it's sometimes possible to be revived before cellular death has occured,but I have certainly never heard of anyone being revived after say,being embalmed.doesn't happen.
nonetheless,I am a realist,and while the story is beautiful,awesome,and amazing,I don't qualify it as a bonifide miracle.
I don't see a miracle here. I see a doctor that made a mistake. The baby wasn't dead in the first place.
True. It happens all the time, and there are even posts here on C-D about medical mistakes. But doctors also openly admit to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BudinAk
I am a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ; and that He is fully able to bring the dead back to life, if He so wishes. Your criteria for "death" is not necessarily the criteria accepted by others...
Bud
I accept your beliefs, Bud, but I"m also simply questioning if there isn't possibly an "alternate" option here, as as been shown to be the case in so many of these so-called miracles. For instance, as you know, the incidence of improvements or remissions apparently brought about by fervent prayer, or of other medical miracles through Godly interaction, is statistically not so rosy, with slightly more Christians dying when the family or they personally prefer prayer to stone-cold science. Now how can that be?
Well, in fact the truth is there's no actual difference in the rate of recovery with or without religious intervention, if the medical treatments are identical, however many dedicated Christian believers will forgo that unpleasant procedure the doctor is recommending, or that nasty chemo treatment "unless it's absolutely necessary", and they thus prefer to rely on God's holy participation. Now if, as I believe, there is no God, then one readily an see where this might not be the best decision....
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMOST2L8
Rifleman, Is this sort of like the "just a hopeful, wishful guess" of the big bang THEORY??? Yea, you are right. It must have been the mothers squeezing, because those unbelievably educated doctors could have never thought of such a remedy (as primitive as science is and all). It must be hard to disprove God with science, and then have to turn around and make science look absolutely ridiculous in order to yet try and prove there is no God!!
Good luck with all that!!!
GOD BLESS!!!
DALE
Nope. Not ridiculous. As a career professional (now retired) scientist, engineer and geologist, I just prefer weighing ALL the alternatives and not coming to a premature conclusion. I also trend towards the more likely, relaistic, rational and explainable answer, and I'm very aware that this sort of recovery does happen.
The older criteria for "technical death" was, at first, pretty uninformed, as you know from watching Gunsmoke re-runs, when ol' doc held a mirror to your mouth. Very technical! "Nope, the boy's gone sheriff. I"ll tell his parents.". And then they buried him, post haste. Wonder how many might still have been alive....
Within the next few decades and centuries, we decided when the person was dead if we could not immediately detect electro-encephalographic brain wave activity, or a heaqrt rate, or breathing, but that then proved to be not so accurate, as the brain, lungs and heart often tend to shut down temporarily when they lack oxygen, or are down excessively.
Then there's all those kids who fell into icy ponds and remained submerged for (there have now been cases of >..) 2 hours that, when properly, technically warmed up, came back, and didn't even suffer any permanent brain damage due to the cold.
Now, we know that the criteria for living tissue to remain viable, especially in the right environment, has been more carefully evaluated, and that, under extreme conditions, it can [and does, as in this case] recover consciousness. This incident would tend to support that observed phenomenon once again, IMHO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HalfNelson
Seriously!? Did I miss something about the OP? Was it originaly posted in the main R&P forum? I did not read anything in the OP that suggested it was atheist bait, meant to prove God is real.
Quote:
Wasn't. Am I not allowed, here on City-Data's open fora, to comment? And then you make an unwarranted comment simply because you don't like my commentary, specifically:
Why the snide attempt to belittle a beautiful story?
Quote:
Mind pointing out the specific "snide" comment please? I didn't say anything like "You silly Christians", or any other such demeaning comment. I simply introduced another element.
I didn't realize you folks were intolerant of.. no, I'll refrain, though here, I could make a snide comment, especially since you have, about my beliefs, but I'll refrain.
Nope. I only wanted folks to think about what the very real alternatives are here. After all, a number of these so-called miraculous recoveries have been subsequently proven to just be good medicine.
Life itself is a Miricle of God.
Quote:
Opinion. Just opinion. Craig Venter's recent research at starting reproducing life out of nothing but chemical constituents is proof of life's simple technical nature. The Brits are on track to publish their recent seminal research where they mixed some common chemicals in the right environment, and BINGO, out came all the necessary amino acids that Craig Venter then mixed up and created a living cell. Ooops, huh?
See? It's not so miraculous after all. You wait. Ever wonder what we'll see in the next 10 or 20 year?. Want to bet that they don't come up with a living organism that then evolves, as any DNA based organism must?
With all our scientific understanding there is still no way a scientist can explain how nonliving matter became living matter.
Quote:
Ooops. You haven't been keeping up. You don't get out much in the scientific literature do you? Understandable, since you have the end-all and be-all explanations in the bible. I understand.
Can you name a single experiment in which scientists have taken non-living matter and had it turn into living matter? Yet here you are, a living breathing organism, that according to atheistic scientists, came from inorganic nonliving particles. Sounds like a miracle to me.
Well, yes: I already did name the experiment you wish/claim/hope can't be done. Google The Craig Venter Institute, 2009 - 2010 research on prepping a living cell and "read it and weep" or, alternately, "cry out for joy" at the utter logic of it all. Your choice, of course. I expect you'll deny it all, or choose too provide your own commentary, just as I did on this reported case. Hmmm..perhaps you'd like to bet on what science will accomplish in the ongoing study of life processes in the next 10 - 20 years? You think they'll just find NADA? Like they have(n't) so far? Riiiigghhttt...
You're welcome. And again, I'm very happy this baby lived. I have three of my own I've raised to be independent, intelligent, thoughtful and critical thinkers. One's en-route to becoming an advanced EMT who may well save your life some day, purely by science and education.
It's simply how it happened in this reported case that I wanted to comment, totally without ANY snide attitude. You only see what you want to see, obviously.
Honey, you can sigh till the cows come but it will not alter either scientific fact or my opinion.
Things like this do happen,granted. The reasons however have nothing to do with miracles. Don't get me wrong. I wasn't raised by a bunch of atheists. Both of my grandparents were ministers,as were two uncles. However religious my family was they also taught us the fine art of critical thinking. Blind acceptance was not expected. Now when you combine that with several years in the medical field I think I have a little background on which to base an opinion.
I applaud your belief but reality must also be considered.
Then there's all those kids who fell into icy ponds and remained submerged for (there have now been cases of >..) 2 hours that, when properly, technically warmed up, came back, and didn't even suffer any permanent brain damage due to the cold.
Now, we know that the criteria for living tissue to remain viable, especially in the right environment, has been more carefully evaluated, and that, under extreme conditions, it can [and does, as in this case] recover consciousness. This incident would tend to support that observed phenomenon once again, IMHO.
good post,and while I do believe in God,what I think happened is most likely this baby's core temp dropped,causing him to become limp and cold.
and since he wasn't dead at a cellular level yet,conciousness was still possible.and so when mom did the kangaroo care of placing him on her chest and warming him up,he seemingly came back to life.
I'm glad she went with her gut instincts.
eta: I think what this tells us is that we need to expand on the time spent to revive newborns,even preemies,as they are probably much more viable than previously thought (sans birth defects that make them unviable at all),for a longer period of time after birth.I felt that way after seeing the unsolved mysteries segment many yrs go,and especially now,after seeing this latest story.
good post,and while I do believe in God,what I think happened is most likely this baby's core temp dropped,causing him to become limp and cold.
and since he wasn't dead at a cellular level yet,conciousness was still possible.and so when mom did the kangaroo care of placing him on her chest and warming him up,he seemingly came back to life.
I'm glad she went with her gut instincts.
eta: I think what this tells us is that we need to expand on the time spent to revive newborns,even preemies,as they are probably much more viable than previously thought (sans birth defects that make them unviable at all),for a longer period of time after birth.I felt that way after seeing the unsolved mysteries segment many yrs go,and especially now,after seeing this latest story.
One should never underestimate a mother's instinct.
The parents themselves attribute the successful outcome to their use of the "kangaroo care" method. The doctor, who refused to give an interview (I'm sure from the embarassment or ineptness at declaring the baby dead), even admitted that it was unlikely that the baby was "dead" as the kangaroo method would not resusitate a deceased child.
We all know God didn't revive this baby. He was too busy making sure all the traffic lights were green and that everyone wins a part of tonight's lottery drawing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
