Near Death Experience proves

[Anonymous]

So in other words, you don't have a theory to explain it but believers do and always have for thousands of years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So in other words, you don't have a theory to explain it but believers do and always have for thousands of years.

Believers' theory is the same for anything they don't understand: "God did it." end of story.

Scientists have different theories for different things that they don't understand, then, when they have the proper tools, they test their theories. That's what they're doing right now with the study of the brain (and many other things). It might take them a long time, but until they have actual data they won't say they have an explanation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So in other words, you don't have a theory to explain it but believers do and always have for thousands of years.

Believers have an explanation that's tangible and that's been reviewed by peers?

lol!

You're a moron if you think the bible is "evidence."

Since when is fiction fact?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So in other words, you don't have a theory to explain it but believers do and always have for thousands of years.

Believers have an explanation that's tangible and that's been reviewed by peers?

lol!

You're a moron if you think the bible is "evidence."

Since when is fiction fact?

Not a moron --a person of faith. Many people of faith don't think the bible is all fact-based, but it doesn't matter because they have the gift of faith. Sometimes their faith may falter, but it always comes back -- usually stronger, for some reason. People who don't have that gift - who don't even try to believe things that on the surface seem unbelievable - can't understand people who do have it. "Their loss" thinks the person of faith, who is happy and secure in the love of God, without concern for logic in matters of faith, though they may be entirely local people in other aspects of their lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So in other words, you don't have a theory to explain it but believers do and always have for thousands of years.

Believers have an explanation that's tangible and that's been reviewed by peers?

lol!

You're a moron if you think the bible is "evidence."

Since when is fiction fact?

Not a moron --a person of faith. Many people of faith don't think the bible is all fact-based, but it doesn't matter because they have the gift of faith. Sometimes their faith may falter, but it always comes back -- usually stronger, for some reason. People who don't have that gift - who don't even try to believe things that on the surface seem unbelievable - can't understand people who do have it. "Their loss" thinks the person of faith, who is happy and secure in the love of God, without concern for logic in matters of faith, though they may be entirely local people in other aspects of their lives.

local = logical

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So in other words, you don't have a theory to explain it but believers do and always have for thousands of years.

Believers have an explanation that's tangible and that's been reviewed by peers?

lol!

You're a moron if you think the bible is "evidence."

Since when is fiction fact?

Not a moron --a person of faith. Many people of faith don't think the bible is all fact-based, but it doesn't matter because they have the gift of faith. Sometimes their faith may falter, but it always comes back -- usually stronger, for some reason. People who don't have that gift - who don't even try to believe things that on the surface seem unbelievable - can't understand people who do have it. "Their loss" thinks the person of faith, who is happy and secure in the love of God, without concern for logic in matters of faith, though they may be entirely local people in other aspects of their lives.

I suppose those who killed Hebdo and his crew were VERY faithful, as they did come back "stronger."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So in other words, you don't have a theory to explain it but believers do and always have for thousands of years.

Believers have an explanation that's tangible and that's been reviewed by peers?

lol!

You're a moron if you think the bible is "evidence."

Since when is fiction fact?

Not a moron --a person of faith. Many people of faith don't think the bible is all fact-based, but it doesn't matter because they have the gift of faith. Sometimes their faith may falter, but it always comes back -- usually stronger, for some reason. People who don't have that gift - who don't even try to believe things that on the surface seem unbelievable - can't understand people who do have it. "Their loss" thinks the person of faith, who is happy and secure in the love of God, without concern for logic in matters of faith, though they may be entirely logical people in other aspects of their lives.

I suppose those who killed Hebdo and his crew were VERY faithful, as they did come back "stronger."

They are an example of faith gone wrong. Not everything about faith is necessarily good. It can distort reality in negative ways. Most people of faith are not terrorists. They are just people who do not rely on logic when it comes to their religious beliefs.

[Anonymous]

I suppose those who killed Hebdo and his crew were VERY faithful, as they did come back "stronger."

They are an example of faith gone wrong. Not everything about faith is necessarily good. It can distort reality in negative ways. Most people of faith are not terrorists. They are just people who do not rely on logic when it comes to their religious beliefs.

You said it yourself; it can distort reality.

And that is because it IS reality for even the "calmest" of believers.

And you added (if I read this correctly) that most religious folks don't rely on logic, yes?

So religion is not logical, therefore allowing the craziest believer to take matters into his/her hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I suppose those who killed Hebdo and his crew were VERY faithful, as they did come back "stronger."

They are an example of faith gone wrong. Not everything about faith is necessarily good. It can distort reality in negative ways. Most people of faith are not terrorists. They are just people who do not rely on logic when it comes to their religious beliefs.

You said it yourself; it can distort reality.

And that is because it IS reality for even the "calmest" of believers.

And you added (if I read this correctly) that most religious folks don't rely on logic, yes?

So religion is not logical, therefore allowing the craziest believer to take matters into his/her hands.

In some cases, yes, with terrorists as an example, but most people find comfort in religion, that's all. Though others encounter pain when, for instance, their prayers are not answered, or when they think they or a loved one has done something that will doom them to hell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you for sharing 11:08! As another poster mentioned, nderf.org is full of similar accounts (going back home, "how could I have forgotten?" Etc) and has changed my view on religio/faith (it's stronger now) and ideas on an afterlife.

The naysayers will find out eventually but for now they're clearly intent on sounding salty and soulless.

Maybe that's the brain's way of shutting down - feeling at one with the universe - not struggling, feeling loved. A pretty nice final memory.

I thought about that. But there would have to be a biological reason for that, wouldn't there? If there is nothing after death, then why would it matter what your final memory is? Everything our body does, it does for a reason. What would be the reason for a peaceful death, biologically speaking?

The biological process and how we interpret it aren't necessarily the same thing. People who experience the biological process of the brain shutting down may interpret that as feeling peaceful and loved, but that doesn't mean that there was some kind of evolutionary benefit to the process of shutting down producing that effect. It may just be a nice side effect of the process.

Agreed. We have no memory of being born -- and it seems like it would be a rather shocking experience from the baby's point of view.

When my sister was two, she used to tell my mom about how warm and wet it was inside her belly. She also told her she liked the drum she heard while in there.

[Anonymous]

I find comfort in my husband talking to me about physics. Energy cannot be destroyed. We are all made of energy. So when we die, our energy has to go somewhere, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find comfort in my husband talking to me about physics. Energy cannot be destroyed. We are all made of energy. So when we die, our energy has to go somewhere, right?

sure

It could fly off into a tree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find comfort in my husband talking to me about physics. Energy cannot be destroyed. We are all made of energy. So when we die, our energy has to go somewhere, right?

sure

It could fly off into a tree.

It could. This is true. It would still exist and then go somewhere else. So regardless of whether or not the soul exists beyond physical death, part of us still survives. If that is the case, then why would it be so far fetched that our souls continue on too? I am not religious, but I have had some crazy experiences in my life that have shown me there is MUCH more than what we know. Though, whatever you do believe, we all came from the same place and the same thing happens to us when we leave this world.

[Anonymous]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2225190/Can-quantum-physics-explain-bizarre-experiences-patients-brought-brink-death.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If many of you believe that NDEs experience the afterlife, you must also believe that schizophrenics can experience other dimensions.

makes sense

Friend's mom was schizophrenic, and she told my friend that even though she's on the meds, they only slow her down - but that the people she sees and voices she hears are still there.

just another topic to throw into the mix

This makes no sense. It would be an accurate comparison if the people she saw and heard turned out to be real, or something similar. NDE'ers testified hearing detailed conversations of people in faraway locations and this was verified, often by surgeons themselves. It does not compare to your example.

Yes, both are the same.

A person dies and claims s/he heard a conversation in another room. A schizophrenic (alive) claims s/he hears voices and sees people from other dimensions. To both people, these "visions" (for lack of a better word) are real to them.

But there's no proof in the scientific world to support their claims.

same
same
same

The difference is that schizophrenics make this claim with no reasonable person to validate their claim. And medication seems to eliminate or greatly reduce this episodes. Here, with NDE'ers, surgeons and / or friends or family members who were participants in the conversation are validating the testimony of the patients.

still doesn't make it proof of an afterlifel -- it means it's something we don't understand yet

I'm telling you there exists testimony of other reasonable people as evidence and you are denouncing that it proves anything except confusion. The evidence is proof that the consciousness is surviving and that, yes, it's confusing to you. But it still means the consciousness survives.