Topic: Why do Atheists Hate Religion? - page 328. (Read 901367 times)

Then this ideal would have to focus on all religions and not just the more common western world religions.

The page you posted shows that there are numerous similarities and 90 percent of those on your list explain the same visions and can thus be concluded as a near death experience based on past events or studies.

Now the tricky part is knowing what to experience, which is dictated heavily by your culture and background. Christians, Hindu, Buddhist, Islamic, and Vedic near death experiences are going to be different as they each have their own pre-defined belief system.

So you cannot prove near death experience to be true unless you can control a study that produces equal results among people who fall within the same religion or pre-defined belief system. This goes deeper than the most modern religions.

I believe I am the true Virtual God, and I have been for the last three years here on this forum.  My afterlife is exclusive - no other afterlife exists.

Like you posted, you need to prove that my afterlife does not exist.

Until you can prove that, your afterlife cannot exist.   

No, I want you to behave rationally and evaluate evidence like a scientist.
I want you to evaluate the evidence, and then propose an explanation for it.
The evidence is generally thought to be so overwhelming
that an explanation not involving the survival hypothesis
(the idea that some personalities survive death, some of the time)
is not plausible in the least.

Hi Sorryforthat,
You have pointed out Two points that need to be explained further, especially with regards to our definition of NDE; it is to be expected that you will find apparent contradictions when encountering a new theory; perhaps one point of those two is wrong, or perhaps there is no real contradiction after all (only apparent contradictions). In any case, there are 50 other points for you to examine, and then plenty of evidence on top of that, like the AWARE study referenced in the introduction.

I found that point 52 was particularly helpful in helping me to understand the nature of hallucinations and NDE; take a look.

This is what they call evidence? Its very skeptical.

This study titled "NDEs can be replicated using drugs satisfying the scientific method." explains its replication with the use of ketamine. Ketamine produces very heavy hallucinations for the user.

The results of this study?
a.   NDEs and ketamine produce identical visions. - www.maps.org/kdreams/
b.   NDEs and ketamine both induce real visions of a real god.--www.lycaeum.org
c.   Ketamine affects the right temporal lobe, the hippocampus and associated structures in the brain (the "God" spot).
d.   NDEs are an important phenomenon that can safely be reproduced by ketamine. - www.near-death.com

Now.....

The one just under that one titled "NDEs are different from hallucinations." It mentions the following, "There are not the distortions of time, place, body image and disorientations seen in drug induced experiences"

So now you want people to prove that your personal afterlife doesn't exist?

Why would they?  They have their own personal afterlife that they believe in - and you haven't proven it doesn't exist.

Until you prove my afterlife doesn't exist, yours cannot exist.  

The bible says it, quite clear. The people who miss it, have hardened hearts and don't have the Holy Spirit guiding them.

Ephesians 4:18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:

Matthew 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: 15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Yes, the burden of proof HAS shifted;
you chose to ignore the evidence when I linked you to it,
so you would not know what the evidence proves or does not prove.

I will link it again; perhaps you will read it this time?
http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html

Sorry MMH, but Jesus never ONCE suggested he was your "SAVIOR".
All you have is one passage that you want to interpret your way.
Why did he not repeatedly say he was your "SAVIOR"? God has no mysticism nor hidden agenda—God is open.

John 14 is pretty much about the Holy Spirit being with us.  23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

This shows we have the Holy Spirit with us. Jesus is making a place for us in Heaven.

1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. 2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

1) John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

The ONLY way to the Father is through Jesus. There are plenty of other religions that teach to be moral, a good person, and to not harm others. They will not get to the Father but through Jesus.

2) Matthew 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? 11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

(I Speak in Parables So They WON’T Understand.)

3) Jesus told us.

4) Jesus told us, loving our Lord with all our hearts, mind and souls, is giving Him the Glory He deserves for Jesus dying for us. That is included in the 2 commandments, and you are breaking them if you don't believe Jesus died for our sins.

Oh, the one question that all physicist hate. Can you prove it doesnt exist?

This is really what it all boils down to. Although they are skeptical, there is no verifiable proof that none of this exists. Sad but true.

Aristotle alone added the three miracles of cosmogony, where he explains cause sui or "cause unto itself." It explains that the cosmos was set into motion by an unmoved mover. He explains that since motion must be eternal and must never fail, there must be some eternal first mover. This unmoved mover has no potential to change, only to change other things and thus must be a being of pure thought unchanged by the rest of the world.

Not that he himself believed in this miracle, but it was necessary for the list to be complete.

No it hasn't.

It's up to you to prove there is an afterlife, not for us to prove there isn't one.

That's like trying to prove there isn't a tooth fairy.  Or an easter bunny.  Can you prove those things don't exist? 

MMH,
It's too bad we can't agree completely, because we did agree on a lot...

You say you disagree, but you are only speaking from your interpretation of the Bible,
Let's use reason instead of trusting an ancient book with our souls.

I think we should use the question format again:
1) Is there any point at which Jesus suggests that he is anyone's "SAVIOR"?
2) If that teaching was so important, why was it not repeated explicitly, again and again?
3) If it is only repeated by Man, and it was never stated by Jesus; why should we accept it?
4) Jesus taught the New Commandment (his ONE COMMAND), and he never once suggested he was your "savior", so why this false, projected Commandment to "believe in the 'savior'"?

Like I said, we're not going to agree on this. I believe God needs a blood sacrifice, and they did in the past, and Jesus was our blood sacrifice, and now we're clean of sin for free. But since we believe that He did that for us, we will do the commandments.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on who's our savior. I say Jesus, you say yourself.

New developments in quantum physics show that we cannot know phenomena apart from the observer.
You think that all gods are made up, but you are very far from proving this.
Also, The burden of proof has shifted to skeptics of an afterlife. You are very far from proving anything at all!

Let me first say that it is good that you think that this teaching in the Journals is sufficient as per the commandments that Jesus gave us, and that it is in harmony with those commandments; we agree on a lot, and even if you suspect my teachings come from demons, you cannot deny that they are identical in this respect and therefore sufficient to bring me life, as Jesus said.

Brother, I do not believe that someone else can be responsible for my obeying the Laws ("getting clean"), nor do I think that anyone else can perform sacrifice to appease God on my behalf, I think all of that is just magical thinking, you can't say that someone else has taken responsibility for you because YOU have to stand responsible for obeying the laws, you cannot just "sit there" and believe in a "savior" because then nothing will get done and there is no magic that will bring about these Godly works that are required. Similarly, you cannot have a "savior" for this nation called America; each and every citizen must be responsible for saving the nation, and no one wo/man can do it alone.

I love to acquire knowledge, and it is that curiosity that led me to the Phoenix Journals. Fortunately, these writings led me to the truth, which is no different from the New Commandment given to us in the Bible. There was no commandment to "believe that I am your savior". If this "savior" doctrine was the real teaching, it would have come before the New Commandment and it would have been stated explicitly, many times, in each of the Gospels, and not in the writings of a man who never knew Jesus. Plus, Jesus would have admitted that he is the Son of God at his trial, since God has no mysticism nor hidden agenda—God is open.

I doubt many things in your Bible, like the story of the attempted sacrifice of the child Isaac; are we to suppose that God will terrorize children in order to teach their fathers a lesson? The Bible has been modified by man (especially that one man named Saul of Tarsus), so I am suspicious of most of it, but I think we have already pointed out the most important lesson, called the New Commandment. The point is this: MAN'S DOCTRINES WILL NOT GET YOUR TICKET HOME.

Love does not require sacrifice; just love God and love your neighbor (as best you can), then you will live and there is no need for anything else. Emmanuel did not EVER ONCE suggest he was your SAVIOR. MAN HAS PROJECTED THAT LIE UPON YOU TO KEEP YOU FROM FINDING YOUR TRUTH WITHIN GOD.

Well of course.  Our own personal god resides within all of us.

It would be stupid to make up a god and not have him reside within you...

Wow, just wow.

John 15:19: "If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own." So you see that the world can love, even though it has nothing to do with Jesus.

Jesus stated many things. Out of context they can be twisted to mean anything. Neither you nor any other man, woman or child keeps the law perfectly, the requirement to live. If you keep the law quite well from now on because Jesus told you to, then you are believing in Jesus. He will judge whether or not it is enough faith in Him so that you can live.


The raising of Lazarus, John 11:41-43:
As has been said, when you look at the writings of Paul, he formally upholds the things of Jesus. The reason there appears to be a difference at times is, Paul is giving many explanations of the way that things work that Jesus didn't express. Also, Paul is talking to Gentile people. These people understand things differently than the Jews. He has to speak their language.