Do you believe in an afterlife?

[HipKat]

22 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

So you would be ok with Allah being on all your money, government buildings, etc? Maybe you wont care, but i can tell you right now 10s of millions of people would lose their fucking minds. Just look at how butt hurt they are when someone takes down a statue of a traitorous confederate leader.

In God We Trust is on all our money. Do you not spend money because it says God on it?

[f8ta1ity54]

2 hours ago, HipKat said:

In God We Trust is on all our money. Do you not spend money because it says God on it?

The bible says you cant serve God and money, so why are you so worried about getting so much of it?

[HipKat]

2 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

The bible says you cant serve God and money, so why are you so worried about getting so much of it?

If I was worried about getting so much money, I would be like moment or silly and brag about all the money I have. All I’ve ever been interested in is having enough to pay my bills, buy the things I need when I need them and save a little where I can.

[LiterateStylish]

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

OK, but what new evidence have you provided with your claim that NDEs are not biological function of the brain but some sort of metaphysical event?

Admittedly, I have had to spend the majority of this debate showing that what you are saying is completely wrong. From you falsely stating that Christians believe good works get you to heaven, to you falsely stating that scientists believe C02 causes NDE's, to now finding out that scientstics recently admitted they have no idea what is causing NDE's. So I havent had as much time to present anything new. 

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

how did you prove your hypothesis to be correct?

With as much evidence as you have with your belief that they are a biological process. You have provided zero evidence as well. Actually, to be fair you provided some evidence, it just turned out to be proven wrong years later.

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

OK, so where is this evidence that is changing the mind's of scientists?

I quoted the lead scientist who said they thought they had an idea of how it occurred but now theyre realizing they were wrong and dont actually know.

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

semantics. scientists know that NDEs are a biological process.

Tell that to the lead scientist that said they have no idea how theyre occurring and every time they form a hypothesis it is proven wrong.

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Can they fully eliminate a metaphysical reason for it with 100% accuracy? NO. but they are still 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999% sure.

"there is no definitive explanation for why near-death experiences happen. "

Yeah... that sounds like a person who is 99.9999999% sure.

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

OK, so where is your new evidence? otherwise you are just using the fact that we can never be 100% certain on anything as justification for why you believe something with 0% evidence.

Its not that we can never be certain, its that we have "no definitive explanation for why near-death experiences happen. "

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

yes they do.

No they dont.

"there is no definitive explanation for why near-death experiences happen. "

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Nor does it prove spiritual interpretation. For one to believe that there is a spiritual interpretation, there should be evidence to support the claim. something that can be measured and repeated.

Its funny how this has come full circle.

f& in the beginning: "I believe in science!"

f& now: "Those 2 scientists you're quoting who said that there is no explanation for NDE's and that NDE's may be spiritual are wrong!!!"

20 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

even of Jesus existed, the bible is not proof of his divinity. It is merely a claim that Jesus was devine. I'm gunna need evidence. If you write enough things down about the future, some of them are bound to be "true".

If he existed (he did), and a whole lot of people wrote about his miracles having seen them, to the point that it started the largest religion in human history... Do I have to finish this logical thought for you...?

[shiva2999]

 

[SackMan518]

1 hour ago, LiterateStylish said:

Its funny how this has come full circle.

f& in the beginning: "I believe in science!"

f& now: "Those 2 scientists you're quoting who said that there is no explanation for NDE's and that NDE's may be spiritual are wrong!!!"

That's the thing about science - it's right until it isn't. Science isn't a gospel based on faith and accounts of others during the time or something that operates by consensus but rather an ever evolving field that MUST be challenged constantly to delve into the real truth. I could list scores of examples of scientists who got it wrong and set back research for years but those who don't want to hear wouldn't listen anyway. In my opinion science is really lacking in the spiritual and mental aspects of life as evident by the field of psychiatry where they thought lobotomies, shock therapy, and giving everyone SSRIs were great ideas and they know even less about consciousness. Religion taps into aspects of existence that science hasn't explained yet.

[f8ta1ity54]

42 minutes ago, LiterateStylish said:

Admittedly, I have had to spend the majority of this debate showing that what you are saying is completely wrong. From you falsely stating that Christians believe good works get you to heaven, to you falsely stating that scientists believe C02 causes NDE's, to now finding out that scientstics recently admitted they have no idea what is causing NDE's. So I havent had as much time to present anything new. 

With as much evidence as you have with your belief that they are a biological process. You have provided zero evidence as well. Actually, to be fair you provided some evidence, it just turned out to be proven wrong years later.

I quoted the lead scientist who said they thought they had an idea of how it occurred but now theyre realizing they were wrong and dont actually know.

Tell that to the lead scientist that said they have no idea how theyre occurring and every time they form a hypothesis it is proven wrong.

"there is no definitive explanation for why near-death experiences happen. "

Yeah... that sounds like a person who is 99.9999999% sure.

Its not that we can never be certain, its that we have "no definitive explanation for why near-death experiences happen. "

No they dont.

"there is no definitive explanation for why near-death experiences happen. "

Its funny how this has come full circle.

f& in the beginning: "I believe in science!"

f& now: "Those 2 scientists you're quoting who said that there is no explanation for NDE's and that NDE's may be spiritual are wrong!!!"

If he existed (he did), and a whole lot of people wrote about his miracles having seen them, to the point that it started the largest religion in human history... Do I have to finish this logical thought for you...?

I'm done. You are just going to default to the god of the gaps whenever you can. Whether its NDEs or origin of the universe, wherever there is a gap in scientific knowledge you are going to shim god in there because it makes you feel better. 

So your argument is that because some 2000 year old cultists said they saw Jesus perform miracles (even though the new testament was written 70 years after Jesus died) that means it must be true. WOW. WOW. 
There are spiritual texts that are thousands of years older than the bible. How did you determine that the supernatural events in those books were less credible than the bible. I mean, they were written by cultists and saw some supernatural shit, so how did you make that distinction? 

 

 

[f8ta1ity54]

13 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

That's the thing about science - it's right until it isn't. Science isn't a gospel based on faith and accounts of others during the time or something that operates by consensus but rather an ever evolving field that MUST be challenged constantly to delve into the real truth. I could list scores of examples of scientists who got it wrong and set back research for years but those who don't want to hear wouldn't listen anyway. In my opinion science is really lacking in the spiritual and mental aspects of life as evident by the field of psychiatry where they thought lobotomies, shock therapy, and giving everyone SSRIs were great ideas and they know even less about consciousness. Religion taps into aspects of existence that science hasn't explained yet.

My argument is not that science is never wrong, my argument is that there is no verifiable evidence to believe NDEs are super natural. You can say "well science is never 100% settled" because by the nature of science, nothing is ever settled because new evidence may be introduced. OK, great. But in regards to NDEs, no new evidence has been provided that can say NDEs are supernatural experiences. So to just keep defaulting to "there is no definitive explanation for why near-death experiences happen. " is false. Science knows its a biological process. Can they explain it to every minute detail, no, not yet. But that doesn't mean "god did it". The burden of proof is on the person making that claim.

[SackMan518]

19 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Science knows its a biological process. Can they explain it to every minute detail, no, not yet. But that doesn't mean "god did it". The burden of proof is on the person making that claim.

No they don't. Science can't even explain consciousness much less any NDE experience so I don't know where you get this idea from. Some things in life are fed through the spirit and the experiences are hard to explain because the voice of God (however you want to picture it) is voiceless and confers wisdom that can't be reduced and dismissed as delusion. Of course, if you don't believe in your own spirit and identify too much with your ego then you will never be open to such revelations and will remain trapped thinking only of the universe as a giant mechanism that you are stuck in.

I admit to myself that I cannot change your mind on this no matter what I say and anything that could affect that will have to come from your personal experience.

[shiva2999]

21 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Some things in life are fed through the spirit and the experiences are hard to explain because the voice of God (however you want to picture it) is voiceless and confers wisdom that can't be reduced and dismissed as delusion. 

Could you clarify this because I don't get it.

"Fed through the spirit"...

Huh?

[f8ta1ity54]

2 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

No they don't.

So in your opinion, doctors are just throwing their hands up in the air because they are without an explanation for NDEs?

lol ok pal

2 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Science can't even explain consciousness much less any NDE experience so I don't know where you get this idea from.

they can explain consciousness occurs in biology. There is no evidence that consciousness exists outside of biology. None.

2 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Some things in life are fed through the spirit and the experiences are hard to explain because the voice of God (however you want to picture it) is voiceless and confers wisdom that can't be reduced and dismissed as delusion.

This is all subjective and left to interpretation. sorry, its worthless to me.

2 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Of course, if you don't believe in your own spirit and identify too much with your ego then you will never be open to such revelations and will remain trapped thinking only of the universe as a giant mechanism that you are stuck in.

You know what's cool enough for me? We are all made up of particles that came into existence when the big bang happened. We are part of the universe. We are the universe aware of itself. Be kind to all, we are all one. Boom. good enough.

2 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

I admit to myself that I cannot change your mind on this no matter what I say and anything that could affect that will have to come from your personal experience.

My mind is always open, but apparently my standards for believing in things are different.

[shiva2999]

 

[SackMan518]

10 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

Could you clarify this because I don't get it.

"Fed through the spirit"...

Huh?

Do you believe in a soul or subconscious?

7 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

So in your opinion, doctors are just throwing their hands up in the air because they are without an explanation for NDEs?

No, they're not throwing in the towel but their hubris would have them convinced that they have the capability now to explain things through limited scientific knowledge.

8 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

they can explain consciousness occurs in biology. There is no evidence that consciousness exists outside of biology. None.

Not yet, but there are indicators that it does.

9 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

This is all subjective and left to interpretation. sorry, its worthless to me.

That's fine, my job is not to open your eyes.

9 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

You know what's cool enough for me? We are all made up of particles that came into existence when the big bang happened. We are part of the universe. We are the universe aware of itself. Be kind to all, we are all one. Boom. good enough.

But that's not good enough because you're alluding to the happy accident that we all just randomly occurred idea.

10 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

My mind is always open, but apparently my standards for believing in things are different.

Sounds nice but from what I've seen of that is not true.

[shiva2999]

9 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Do you believe in a soul or subconscious?

 

A soul? Only metaphorically.

A subconscious? Yes.

[SackMan518]

8 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

A soul? Only metaphorically.

A subconscious? Yes.

Ok then, it's not a stretch to believe that you can be inspired by something emerging from your subconscious to conscious mind?

[shiva2999]

1 minute ago, SackMan518 said:

Ok then, it's not a stretch to believe that you can be inspired by something emerging from your subconscious to conscious mind?

Of course.

Keep going.

[f8ta1ity54]

21 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Do you believe in a soul or subconscious?

I do not believe in a soul. I believe there are some decisions your brain makes that you are not necessarily aware of, not anything supernatural.

21 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

No, they're not throwing in the towel but their hubris would have them convinced that they have the capability now to explain things through limited scientific knowledge.

Welp, you have to give me a good reason why I should listen to a doctor talk about metaphysical concepts instead of what they can empirically measure or explain through a logical framework.

21 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Not yet, but there are indicators that it does.

indicators? wouldnt that be evidence?

21 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

That's fine, my job is not to open your eyes.

my eyes are open to evidence. 

21 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

But that's not good enough because you're alluding to the happy accident that we all just randomly occurred idea.

And youre alluding to a divine plan that there is no evidence of.

21 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Sounds nice but from what I've seen of that is not true.

Well, you arent exactly rational so...I dont expect you to understand.

[SackMan518]

10 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

Of course.

Keep going.

Ok, then the next step is if you believe that this knowledge can be divinely inspired by an entity that you may not have comprehension of?

[shiva2999]

1 minute ago, SackMan518 said:

Ok, then the next step is if you believe that this knowledge can be divinely inspired by an entity that you may not have comprehension of?

it's not a step, it's a leap.

A leap of faith.

I don't see any reason why my having a subconscious should suggest the divine.

[SackMan518]

3 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

I do not believe in a soul. I believe there are some decisions your brain makes that you are not necessarily aware of, not anything supernatural.

That is true. Your brain does make snap decisions often based on experience every day however this does not preclude the existence of a spirit.

4 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Welp, you have to give me a good reason why I should listen to a doctor talk about metaphysical concepts instead of what they can empirically measure or explain through a logical framework.

Why? Because there are forces that we do not have the technology to measure yet. Think about it, you have a cellphone next to you right now that transmits data via radio frequencies to a nearby tower. Now, you don't have any instruments on you to measure or see this but you know that it exists because you've seen the technology work. I can pull out an RF meter and see how much power the phone is putting out even though you cannot see a radio wave. My point being is that we cannot see or measure everything in reality and because of that it doesn't mean that they aren't present. Much of what we have technologically today would have been considered occult magic because they operate via mechanisms that aren't visible to the naked eye. In my own field I work with high powered fiber optic signals that also can't be seen because the wavelengths are above 1000nm and visible light is only between 400 - 700nm. If you were to stare directly into the end of the fiber your eye would suffer irreversible damage even though you never "saw" the light.

11 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

indicators? wouldnt that be evidence?

Indicators can prove things through logical conclusions even if you don't have the whole picture much like circumstantial evidence in a court of law. I'm actually surprised that I have to explain these concepts to a grown man. Did you go to college at any point in your life?

12 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

my eyes are open to evidence. 

You can't differentiate between what is or isn't evidence so I would say that you need to focus on that first son.

13 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

And youre alluding to a divine plan that there is no evidence of.

If you walked into a forest with electronics parts strewn about and then suddenly found a computer sitting there would you consider that a happy accident from the parts merging together or evidence of some sort of intelligent creator?

14 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Well, you arent exactly rational so...I dont expect you to understand.

I'll let my fellow Rangers be the judge of that.

[SackMan518]

10 minutes ago, shiva2999 said:

it's not a step, it's a leap.

A leap of faith.

I don't see any reason why my having a subconscious should suggest the divine.

So you assert that you are not tapped into any other sort of consciousness and your mind exists on its own island?

[f8ta1ity54]

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

That is true. Your brain does make snap decisions often based on experience every day however this does not preclude the existence of a spirit.

Sure, since you are making the claim that it does, provide evidence.

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Why? Because there are forces that we do not have the technology to measure yet.

I have a red floating invisible dragon in my garage, unfortunately there is no way to measure yet. You believe me right?

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Think about it, you have a cellphone next to you right now that transmits data via radio frequencies to a nearby tower. Now, you don't have any instruments on you to measure or see this but you know that it exists because you've seen the technology work.

ok.....

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

I can pull out an RF meter and see how much power the phone is putting out even though you cannot see a radio wave. My point being is that we cannot see or measure everything in reality and because of that it doesn't mean that they aren't present.

ok...So how will you be able to demonstrate that your "god measuring device" is actually measuring god and not something else?

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Much of what we have technologically today would have been considered occult magic because they operate via mechanisms that aren't visible to the naked eye.

So how would you know someone is divine if you wouldnt be able to distinguish it from an advanced technology?

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Indicators can prove things through logical conclusions even if you don't have the whole picture much like circumstantial evidence in a court of law. I'm actually surprised that I have to explain these concepts to a grown man. Did you go to college at any point in your life?

So you think circumstantial evidence is enough to prove the existence of god? And you want to know if I went to college? LMAO

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

You can't differentiate between what is or isn't evidence so I would say that you need to focus on that first son.

If god knows my thoughts and everything about me, he would know exactly what evidence would be needed to convince me. 

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

If you walked into a forest with electronics parts strewn about and then suddenly found a computer sitting there would you consider that a happy accident from the parts merging together or evidence of some sort of intelligent creator?

Ahhh, the watch maker argument. Do I really need to debunk this too?

7 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

I'll let my fellow Rangers be the judge of that.

i dont care what the peanut gallery thinks.

[shiva2999]

32 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

So you assert that you are not tapped into any other sort of consciousness and your mind exists on its own island?

I have a conscious and a subconscious.

So does everyone else.

Again, I don't see anything that suggests the divine other than metaphor.

[Very Wide Right]

2 hours ago, shiva2999 said:

Of course.

Keep going.

[SackMan518]

1 hour ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Sure, since you are making the claim that it does, provide evidence.

That's the catch. At this time we don't have any sort of "soul detecting device" on hand but some of the greatest scientific minds in history posit the existence of such since reality cannot be entirely explained by physics especially when delving into the field of quantum mechanics.

"The difference between souls is ultimate, unanalyzable by anything else. A soul has no extension. It is an 'immaterial particular', to use an old-fashioned philosophical term. It does, of course, have characteristics, properties. It has thoughts, feelings, attitudes, and so on. But the way we distinguish in practice between souls is in terms of the bodies with which they are associated because the difference between your soul and my soul, being ultimate, does not consist in their relations to our respective bodies. There is of course nothing paradoxical about the difference between souls being unanalyzable, because some differences must be ultimate; if you can analyze 'a' by 'b' and 'b' by 'c' and so on, you eventually get to things which you can't analyze, and the differences between human souls in my view are one of those things."

1 hour ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

I have a red floating invisible dragon in my garage, unfortunately there is no way to measure yet. You believe me right?

No... because you're not being honest and only attempting to troll me.

1 hour ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

ok...So how will you be able to demonstrate that your "god measuring device" is actually measuring god and not something else?

We don't have this sort of technology and I'm not in a position to create it. Everything we can discuss is speculation and hypothetical.

1 hour ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

So you think circumstantial evidence is enough to prove the existence of god? And you want to know if I went to college? LMAO

Yup, see: Black Holes.

1 hour ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

If god knows my thoughts and everything about me, he would know exactly what evidence would be needed to convince me. 

God certainly does however your mission here is not to have God prove his own existence to you. That's just you being egotistical thinking that an Ultimate Creator must answer to your demands. You're on your own spiritual quest here and you can do with your life as you will.

1 hour ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Ahhh, the watch maker argument. Do I really need to debunk this too?

You can't. You will assert that we were created through random encounters with elements and not be able to prove a thing.

1 hour ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

i dont care what the peanut gallery thinks.

Yeah you do.

1 hour ago, shiva2999 said:

I have a conscious and a subconscious.

So does everyone else.

Again, I don't see anything that suggests the divine other than metaphor.

That's your own belief. I'm not in the business of inculcating people and will explain my beliefs if they are challenged. You're on your own with this one, God speed.