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.
There is no hell as in Eternal Torment. It is a ludicrous belief that blasphemes the nature of our loving God. Any who believe it of God reveal a lack of understanding of God's love for us all. It is an indoctrination disaster that the religious leaders will carry a heavy burden for.
Hell as a "geographical" reality is as real as the noses on our faces.
I more than understand God's love. I experience it, though I do believe as even dogs eat crumbs that fall from their masters' tables, that this is how I do.
God loves us all and yet He indeed will be sending some to a literal hell. It is a huge insult to Him to suggest that anything truly vile could possibly be allowed to taint the Eternal Heaven.
Of course, some folks do not believe either exist.
Hell as a "geographical" reality is as real as the noses on our faces.
Nonsense.
Quote:
I more than understand God's love. I experience it, though I do believe as even dogs eat crumbs that fall from their masters' tables, that this is how I do.
I fear that you do not.
Quote:
God loves us all and yet He indeed will be sending some to a literal hell. It is a huge insult to Him to suggest that anything truly vile could possibly be allowed to taint the Eternal Heaven. Of course, some folks do not believe either exist.
There is a huge difference between not allowing anything evil or vile into God's presence . . . and eternally tormenting any of us. We are NOT all one thing. We are an accumulation over our lifetime of evil and good . . . only the evil or dross needs to be "refined out" if it has not already been corrected through repentance while we were alive. God does not punish . . . only corrects.
Not in the least. The NDEs also prove this, but I didn't need them to do so.
I fear that you do not.
Your fear is not reality-based. Relax....and perhaps do as my Cherokee mama used to tell me to do. "Get behind a tree and watch self go by." It is well with my soul, thank you.
There is a huge difference between not allowing anything evil or vile into God's presence . . . and eternally tormenting any of us. We are NOT all one thing. We are an accumulation over our lifetime of evil and good . . . only the evil or dross needs to be "refined out" if it has not already been corrected through repentance while we were alive. God does not punish . . . only corrects.[/quote]
You, Sir do not yet have the light on this issue. I wish you well.
Not in the least. The NDEs also prove this, but I didn't need them to do so.
I fear that you do not.
Your fear is not reality-based. Relax....and perhaps do as my Cherokee mama used to tell me to do. "Get behind a tree and watch self go by." It is well with my soul, thank you.
There is a huge difference between not allowing anything evil or vile into God's presence . . . and eternally tormenting any of us. We are NOT all one thing. We are an accumulation over our lifetime of evil and good . . . only the evil or dross needs to be "refined out" if it has not already been corrected through repentance while we were alive. God does not punish . . . only corrects.
You, Sir do not yet have the light on this issue. I wish you well.
My light is just fine, thanks. Our loving God would never eternally torment any one for any reason, period. Eternal torment is an inconceivable evil that any loving Spirit would automatically condemn.
We all want to punish evil doers MysticPhD, punishing them eternally seems to be one of our most lustful aspirations; don't you think that someone who'd never change against his evil should remain in lamentation?
Dear Sunnysee, perhaps it is not his ego that cares for your knowledge and beliefs, but his pity. A pity well wasted, because by his own beliefs God will not fail at saving you. Of course, by your own beliefs, God's pity is well wasted too, if such a thing is even capable of pity.
If I do say so myself, I'm having a near death experience right now... well, in the grand scheme of things.
I wonder if such a God is aware of the NDE's of people. I mean, for an all-knowing being, you would think it would know what it's like to not know. Well, I suppose that if such a being would incarnate as a human, it would know... or perhaps not; but if not then it can't be said that such a being incarnated as a human, but merely that it took on human-form, or something like that.
The brain is a complicated organ. But it appears to be a mass of cells as if it were only so many amoebas.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 02-01-2012 at 11:17 PM..
It remains a gross, New Age Lie that we all, eventually end up at the same destination.
The multitude of NDEs report the reality of both Heaven and Hell. Just as demons exist, so do folks that belong to them.
Why? why are they allowed in human form? We are not God, and we are not given all knowledge, but we see dimly until we, too are in the next realm.
Certainly, you believe were given knowledge about demons, heavens, and hells. Why not then about the reasons behind the movement of things? I most certainly would not want to end up in the same destination as someone in your current state. The multitude of NDE's report the experience of NDE's, nothing more. Don't you think the Pagans reported their NDE's? You might call it a "gross New Age Lie" but that is likely what the Jews and Romans were calling Christianity. The "experiences" of Christians and lapsed-then-reformed Christians carry about as much weight as "experiences" of The Republic's Er.
Well thank you for at least outing the caliber of argument you are offering here. If you really think that the work of an illusionist is not illusion then all bets are quite literally off as to what you will believe, espouse and why.
The point you willfully miss is that magicians are people who trade in illusion, and they admit this. They do not claim to actually be doing magic. They admit that they are engaged in illusion.
There are charlatans like Yurri Geller who do on occasion try to claim they are really doing magic with real powers. They are very quickly lambasted by the Magician Community for doing so however and outed by the likes of James Randi and Micheal Shermer.
The boat crew you mention picking him up for example were, he admits himself, part of the act.
But this shows just how poor your quality of evidence is. People in a trade like this openly admit they are engaged in illusion. They are TELLING YOU that it is not "magical" but illusion but you just want to believe it anyway. That is really really poor form, and certainly has no place on a thread where we are trying to discuss actual facts. You have just talked yourself out of being taken seriously in this conversation at all. Willfully.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidneytinhtut
It was not illusion since he was not on land or in a studio.
You appear to be willfully ignoring what I wrote, and also willfully ignoring the dictionary. There is nothing in any definition of "illusion" that requires it to be on land or in a studio. You are just making that up. Illusion can be performed anywhere. Where you get this mad notion that illusion suddenly stops being illusion if it is taken outdoors is beyond me but as I said it is a claim that literally erodes all credibility in anything you now say.
It all also has absolution nothing to do with this thread or the subject of NDEs.
Exactly. The question then becomes "why". It seems you are rejecting the hypothesis of our reality being virtual out of hand
Because you are presenting it "out of hand". As the late Christopher Hitchens used to say "That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". You are making a claim that sounds good to you, but sounding good to you does not substantiate it. When some actual evidence is presented to support the claim we can talk. Otherwise we are just in the business of trading and dismissing fantasies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss
without even examining whether or not it's possible.
Of course it is "possible". I never claimed otherwise. Many, many.... many..... things are possible". I am not sure where you are at, but where I am at is not discussing whether X is possible, but whether there is any reason to think X actually is. It is possible that there is an invisible alien behind every one of us right now controlling us with a system of strings like puppetry. Does that "possibility" lend even a modicum of credence to the idea there IS such aliens doing such things? Not a jot.
If all you want is to get people to concede possibilities then you may as well stop posting now. You can make up anything at all you want and I am likely to say "its possible". Important however is not to start pretending "possible" is synonymous with things like "credible" or "substantiated" in any way.
Alas in conversations such as this the proponents of woo and magic very much want to paint them all as synonyms. I am not in the business of assumption however and if you want to assume this is all VR in order to make NDEs be what you desperately want them to be then that is great for you. When you are prepared to return to reality and put down the fantasy and assumption I am all ears however.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss
Thousands of stories, many of which are very similar to each other, mean something is happening.
You are repeating yourself now. We have already agreed "something" is happening. The discussion is about what that something is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss
I haven't seen you propose any alternative theories
Then you have been willfully ignoring everything I posted in the thread as I have done so in more than a few places.
For example one of the most common experiences cited by NDE patients is that of being outside their own body. By far the vast majority of anecdotes I have heard on the subject cite this experience.
And it is an experience which has been replicated in controlled situations, and can be repeated, by people like VS Ramachandran and Micheal Percinger.
So I am afraid the onus of explanation is on you. If we know the part of the brain that causes this sensation, we know how to make it happen and can do it artificially almost at will.... then the onus is on you to explain why you think people in uncontrolled situations involving massive stresses to the brain who also have the same experience must suddenly require some kind of special explanation. Why is the explanation we have already not good enough?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss
People are forming memories under conditions under which it's physically impossible to form memories.
A claim you made before and then willfully ignored by request to substantiate it. So I ask you again: Substantiate it. What makes it thusly impossible? What mechanisms are there preventing it? You are making here an explicit positive truth claim and are running away from any request to substantiate it in any way.
Simply saying something is impossible does not make it so, but saying it is impossible is a truth claim and one for which you have an onus to substantiate. Especially in the light of the fact people in various states of unconciousness create memories all the time. Take dreams for example.
You appear to want to operate under the fantasy that the brain is either on or off. 0 or 1. Unless a person is fully 100% in control of their senses then it is 0 and no memories or experiences are possible. I simply see no reason to think this is so and we can easily see under FMRI that even when a patient is unconciouss their sensory organs still operate, still process inputs, still turn them into electrical outputs and still sent those outputs to the brain.
Your entire approach to this conversation therefore is to simply declare by fiat that certain convenient things are impossible and then run. Comical therefore that you accuse others of "bad science".
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss
What if.... What if.... What if.... If.....If... what does that mean?
I am not in the business of "What if". I am in the business of what we can actually show to be true. Data we actually have, not data we imagine we have. There is simply too many "what ifs" out there. Anyone can ask "what if" on any subject at all.
I would give the same answer to you as I do to any of the "what ifs". The business of science Theory is this: To unite all the data you have; without ignoring data you do have or inventing data you do not have. So the answer to your "what ifs" is simple. IF we get new data, such as the data in your fantasy, then we have to add it to all the rest of the data and change current Theory to fit it. Simple as that.
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.
