Near Death Experiences

[buffalo]

I did understand your point the first time round. And I think it’s a monumental leap from there to a personal God - the personal God of revelation that Christians believe in. This supernatural force could be anything, from a benign disinterested ‘‘energy’’ to a positively wicked and beligerant cosmic ‘‘force’’ - it could be conscious or unconscious… it could be some kind of superior being where we find out we were nothing but lab rats for some kind of cosmic experiment…it could be anything… including a personal good God, but it seems to me you have no way to get to that God simply by virtue of the fact, for arguments sake, there is an afterlife. You would still have all the work to do to prove it is the God you believe in, as opposed to any of the other thousands of interpretations of God people believe in. And you’d end up coming right back to whether you believe in the Bible and the church - pretty much the arguments we have right now, and which, for the most part, dont move athesits or non believers on.

For clarity, Im just trying to think of scenarios quickly… I dont believe in ANY of the examples I just gave!

Sarah x

Here is how Catholics define God:

34 The world, and man, attest that they contain within themselves neither their first principle nor their final end, but rather that they participate in Being itself, which alone is without origin or end. Thus, in different ways, man can come to know that there exists a reality which is the first cause and final end of all things, a reality “that everyone calls God”.10

 

[exnihilo]

But there does appear to be a general concensus among those medics and researchers involved that death should not be viewed as a ‘‘point’’ in time, but rather a process that follows a set pattern.

Quite right. And as it turns out we actually dont have a solid definition of life. If we cant scientifically and precisely define life then how can we define death?

It is still a challenge for scientists and philosophers to define life in unequivocal terms. Defining life is difficult—in part—because life is a process, not a pure substance. Any definition must be sufficiently broad to encompass all life with which we are familiar, and it should be sufficiently general that, with it, scientists would not miss life that may be fundamentally different from life on Earth…

Since there is no unequivocal definition of life, the current understanding is descriptive, where life is a characteristic of organisms that exhibit all or most of the following phenomena…

(From the Wikipedia entry on Life)

I do not believe in life after death and I believe death is the end. If science can conclusively show otherwise, then so be it. But even if it did, that would not in any way prove the existence of a personal God.

Science is not the ultimate standard for knowledge. Science cant prove itself. In other words using science how would you show science to be a way to acquire knowledge? As it stands now science has no way of explaining our consciousness. No one is waiting around for science to show how we have consciousness before believing such a thing exists.

 

[atheistgirl]

No one is waiting around for science to show how we have consciousness before believing such a thing exists.

The scientific method has been holding it’s own for a long time now.

We dont need science to tell us sticking our hand in the fire will burn and then hurt like heck.

But there is nothing evening coming close to evidence for an afterlife. Faith and belief, yes, evidence no.

Sarah x

 

[JDaniel]

Quite. And people of faith are required to accept that presupposition, otherwise they would not have a belief in the resurrection of the body and eternal life of the soul.

Ag:

Not so. Theists are not required to accept any proposition. That theists accept that God exists is our belief from our reasons and our Faith, but most of all, grace. We do this in the same way as you reason and have faith in death being nothing more than death. Except, your reasons aren’t as profound, and you are, at this point, without grace.

I however, dont have that faith, and dont accept that presupposition.

As I said above, you have one but it’s different from ours.

I fully respect that many billions of people do

Your sincerity is refreshing.

God bless (if you don’t mind),
jd

 

[atheistgirl]

God bless (if you don’t mind),

Thank you. Of course I don’t mind. I think it’s very nice of you - especially in light of the tone and attitude of some posters here!

I would far rather walk down the street with someone who wishes their God’s blessing on me, than someone who would rape or kill me or do ‘‘whatever they felt like doing’’ only for the fact they believe their God is watching them, or someone who likes to lecture people on ‘‘charity’’ but positively leaps at the opportunity to read a typo as a sign of contempt for their faith, or someone who thinks it’s perfectly fine that some Christian missionaries engaged in genocidal acts as defined by the United Nations against my ancestors, because, hey, future generations would be better off with the white mans ways anyhow

No, I’m very happy with someone like you wishing your God’s blessing for me. Thank you.

Sarah x

 

[Fran65]

Is Pam Atwater from England? A similar case occurred in Arizona, USA, involving a doctor who was my surgeon, but I don’t know the woman’s name.

Hi Jim,

Yes it is the same woman. An astonishing case I agree.

Fran

 

[Fran65]

The human consciousness project, under Sam Parnia, has been looking at NDE’s for the last few years. It’s very interesting stuff, and still inconclusive.

But there does appear to be a general concensus among those medics and researchers involved that death should not be viewed as a ‘‘point’’ in time, but rather a process that follows a set pattern. Hence why people can be brought back from being clinically dead. There appears to be a window of opportunity. We know this as people have been revived. Asked last year I think I was, what he thought of NDE’s he said as a scientist he was open minded and objective but the evidence thus far seemed to say to him it was all illusionary. But the mechanisms are not properly understood, so his views are subject to change.

I do not believe in life after death and I believe death is the end. If science can conclusively show otherwise, then so be it. But even if it did, that would not in any way prove the existence of a personal God.

Sarah x

Hi Sarah,

You speak as if science were conclusive in all things, but science itself is a process and a set of paradigms that often conflict. The scientific method is not the same thing as the ‘science’ that is in the public domain. The studies that are published, the scientists that are interviewed, the conferences and the media reports are not an accurate portrayal of the current state of science. What is funded, what is published and what is commented upon is all part of a prevailing paradigm. This means that there is significant disagreement, alternative findings and theories and a great deal of subjective judgement going on in the scientific community regarding what ‘science shows’.

I grant that there are a number of physical laws which have been identified by science such as cause and effect, gravity and the laws of thermodynamics but these are the exception rather than the rule when it comes to science as it is practiced in the 21st century. The recent findings regarding the neutrino and the Higgs Boson particle illustrate this - providing you read the journals and serious commentators and press. Popular journalists will simplify and exaggerate to make a headline which leads to significant misinformation.

No serious and educated scientist would state that there is no afterlife and no God. At best they state that they don’t know, but are open to future evidence. They may give an opinion of such, but this is not the same as scientific findings. This is in contrast to your own statements which are radically materialist and therefore completely deny the possibilities. Chris Carter whose book I have recommended to you says ‘Absolute “certainty” is a term that has no place in empirical matters, and in this case indicates a mind that is closed to evidence that contradicts one’s beliefs.’ (Personal communication 22/12/2011)

He goes on to agree that there is no need for the ‘supernatural’ as in his opinion all that exists are aspects of nature that we do not understand (ibid).

For example one suggestion that I have read is that conciousness is instantiated via quantum fields and that this means that the field could remain coherent after the death of the physical organ through which it operates in the physical world. Whether the field remains coherent for long is unknown for now.

You are right in saying by the way that the existence of an afterlife does not mean that a personal God exists. That is correct, but it opens that possibility of aspects of nature that we do not yet understand and for me this includes a consciousness beyond or within our universe that underpins existence.

By the way - I am, like you, female!

Fran

 

[tonyrey]

I believe we will eventually pin down the biological mechanisms responsible and understand the processes fully.

Mindless explanations of minds demonstrate how meaningless mindless explanations of minds are!

To put it more succinctly:

Mindless “explanations” of minds are meaningless!

 

[atheistgirl]

Popular journalists will simplify and exaggerate to make a headline which leads to significant misinformation.

Exactly … like the reference to the ‘God’ particle.

No serious and educated scientist would state that there is no afterlife and no God. At best they state that they don’t know, but are open to future evidence. They may give an opinion of such, but this is not the same as scientific findings. This is in contrast to your own statements which are radically materialist and therefore completely deny the possibilities. Chris Carter whose book I have recommended to you says ‘Absolute “certainty” is a term that has no place in empirical matters, and in this case indicates a mind that is closed to evidence that contradicts one’s beliefs.’ (Personal communication 22/12/2011)

Again, I completely agree. SP didn’t make such claims either… he remains open. As do I. But did state, for clarity, regarding my position, I do not believe in any kind of afterlife, at this moment in time. That view is open to change.

He goes on to agree that there is no need for the ‘supernatural’ as in his opinion all that exists are aspects of nature that we do not understand (ibid).

Pretty much my view too … if these studies do show a consciousness existing outside of and after the death of the body, my default position is to think this is nothing more than a natural phenomina we dont yet understand.

By the way - I am, like you, female!

Fran

My apologies Fran. The Fran I know in real life is male, (Francis but he’s been called Fran since kindergarden) so I erred on the male side.

Thank you for your very interesting posts (and polite and charitable).

Sarah x

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Well, you can say I’m wrong all you like, and that’s what you believe and that’s fine. I believe something different. And until I find significant evidence to the contrary, annecdotes from patients, doctors or anyone else wont convince me. I mean, it’s not hard to find perfectly respectable rational and qualified scientists, doctors etc who believe in the Hindu gods, and UFO’s. Should I give their beliefs any more credibility just because they are doctors? Naw, I thought not.

Sarah x

If I say my father turned up the night he died, it may well be an anecdote. On the other hand, it is not exactly the sort of thing that is going to be subject to a scientific experiment. If I said I was driving home, and I saw a possum running across the road, you’d probably believe me because it fits into your normal experience. But I would not even be able to prove that, unless I just happened to record the experience somehow. It is a one off event.

My father died once. He appeared once to me in my bedroom at the time. He screamed terribly once. But I can offer you no proof, because I was simply unable to record it.

I did meet a bloke once who’d had an NDE. And oddly enough it even had a connection to my father’s death. Oh, by the way, I was an atheist when my father died, so the last thing I expected was him turning up in my room the way he did.

To get the next story in perspective, you need to realise the person who came to tell me my father had died was my mother’s brother. He lived most of his adult life in a suburb called Brighton.

Sometime around 2007/2008 I was arguing with atheists, and as usual getting nowhere, for much the same reason it’s a waste of time arguing with you. Unless we can get God to display Himself in a test tube, you won’t believe, despite the fact God is Spirit, and not subject to the laws of science - never has been, and never will be. We can tell stories, which are the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and you still won’t believe us.

Anyway I prayed I might meet someone who’d had an NDE. About two days later, I was in a suburb called Boondall in Brisbane, driving a Maxi Taxi (a couple of days a week, as I was doing 2 jobs), when a Maxi job came up on the screen. I hesitated for a while, but eventually took it. It was at a nursing home called Eventide. I eventually found the fare, a single bloke who’d only wanted a standard cab. I should never have got the job in the first place. So it was “reserved” for me by a human error or computer glitch.

Off we went. But we’d only been going a couple of minutes when he suddenly remarked, “I’m one of those rare people”. I asked him what he was talking about, and he said he’d been technically dead for ten minutes during surgery. Despite being dead that long, which should have left him a vegetable, he said he could hear everything that was being said (and he was under major anaesthetic too don’t forget, as he was having most of his stomach removed) eg. “He’s gone. Well, we’d better go and tell the registrar”. But then his finger must have moved and he trembled and he heard, “Hang on, he just moved. We better try again.” They did, and he came around.

In his own words, “You should have seen the doctor’s faces when they came to visit me in the ward.”

But what got me was that he went to school with the eldest son of the very same uncle who came to tell me my own father had died.

So there it is - I pray to meet someone who’d had an NDE, do so within two or three days by a glitch in the system, get a chance to talk to him for some time as he wanted to travel a fair way in the cab (to the Royal Brisbane Hospital from Brighton), and find he has a familial connection with my own father’s death via the man who came to tell me he’d died.

You can write it all off as coincidence - I don’t. And I’ve had other experiences also which I know full well are spiritual. But because I can’t “prove it” ie. produce them in a test tube, you won’t believe.

I think there will come a time when science will “prove” life is spiritual at its core. I think we’ll learn to quantum teleport material, and later biological, items. We’re at the very early stage at the moment, still mucking around with information, although I believe it’s only a matter of time before the physicists start teleporting atoms. A link to a popular journal follows -

pcworld.com/article/225394/quantum_teleportation_is_a_reality.html

Anyway I think we’ll eventually learn to teleport material items, but when we try to do so with biological living material, it will always arrive dead, as we will be unable to quantise the soul. Eventually we’ll get around that, but I think that will prove beyond doubt that there is a spiritual basis to all life.

We’ll just have to wait now till quantum teleporting gets advanced enough.

And you’re wrong - there’s life after death, as my atheist, lapsed Catholic father found out, too late. Unfortunately he also found out there’s a judgement with it. The Christian story isn’t a myth. The church hasn’t been around for 2000 years in a vacuum. 2000 years ago Christ walked and talked in Ancient Israel, was crucified, died and rose again, and on the Day of Pentecost He sent the Holy Spirit. And the church has been going ever since, despite its own human flaws. And it will continue to go on, long after the New Atheism had faded into the dust, like Christopher Hitchens.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

If I say my father turned up the night he died, it may well be an anecdote. On the other hand, it is not exactly the sort of thing that is going to be subject to a scientific experiment. If I said I was driving home, and I saw a possum running across the road, you’d probably believe me because it fits into your normal experience. But I would not even be able to prove that, unless I just happened to record the experience somehow. It is a one off event.

I extracted this from my post above. You may wonder why I used the example of the possum running across the road. The simple reason is that I saw just that a few nights ago, when I was driving at about 80km per hour on a nearby highway. A possum climed down a concrete barrier and crossed the road just in front of me. I couldn’t stop and I thought I’d hit him. But as I went past and looked in the mirror he was still going apparently unhurt.

He must have just gone under between the wheels.

Hopefully he survived and got across to the other side. I don’t like seeing dead animals on the road.

But apart from producing a flat possum, or other witnesses eg. the next driver, I can’t prove this even happened. It did, and even an atheist would admit it was possible since it fits in with their own experience.

But when your just deceased father turns up in your room, materialises near the door, starts with an apology, argues and converses, and then disappears with one almighty scream, there’s simply no way I can prove this happened, even if it’s true.

God won’t be pinned down to a test tube. You accept Him on faith or not at all. Same with NDE’s - unless you’ve experienced it yourself, the only evidence you’re going to get is anecdotes. And most people only have one NDE at most, if that. Most of the time they don’t live to tell about it.

And once you’re dead, there is no second chance to put things right with God. From that point on, your eternity is sealed.

 

[atheistgirl]

And you’re wrong - .

First of all thank you for taking the time to write your post. I didnt say this earlier and I should have, but I’m sorry to learn about the death of your father. (I’m guessing it was some time ago, but I still pass to you my genuine condolances).

Next, I do not deny for a single moment that your experiences were real, to you. And youre right when you say you cant prove it… and you gave a good comparison with the possum as yes, it’s much easier to accept things which are not outside the realms of every day experiences.

If there is a heaven and hell, I sincerely hope your father is in heaven, and not hell, which you seem to think he is. If there is a God, I sincerely hope He can see His way to ensuring your father’s eternal happiness as I’m sure that is what you would want.

Christopher Hitchens likewise. I understand he remained solid in his convictions to the end, and if there is a God, I would imagine intergrity, honesty, and living as best a life as you could in the circumstances must count for something.

Like him (CH) I just can not find that faith within me to belive.

Hitchens said he liked surprises Perhaps he’s got the surprise of his life

Sarah x

 

[buffalo]

atheistgirl - faith is a gift

III. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF FAITH
Faith is a grace
153 When St. Peter confessed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, Jesus declared to him that this revelation did not come “from flesh and blood”, but from “my Father who is in heaven”.24 Faith is a gift of God, a supernatural virtue infused by him. "Before this faith can be exercised, man must have the grace of God to move and assist him; he must have the interior helps of the Holy Spirit, who moves the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and ‘makes it easy for all to accept and believe the truth.’"25
Faith is a human act
154 Believing is possible only by grace and the interior helps of the Holy Spirit. But it is no less true that believing is an authentically human act. Trusting in God and cleaving to the truths he has revealed is contrary neither to human freedom nor to human reason. Even in human relations it is not contrary to our dignity to believe what other persons tell us about themselves and their intentions, or to trust their promises (for example, when a man and a woman marry) to share a communion of life with one another. If this is so, still less is it contrary to our dignity to “yield by faith the full submission of. . . intellect and will to God who reveals”,26 and to share in an interior communion with him.
155 In faith, the human intellect and will cooperate with divine grace: "Believing is an act of the intellect assenting to the divine truth by command of the will moved by God through grace."27

166 Faith is a personal act - the free response of the human person to the initiative of God who reveals himself. But faith is not an isolated act. No one can believe alone, just as no one can live alone. You have not given yourself faith as you have not given yourself life. The believer has received faith from others and should hand it on to others. Our love for Jesus and for our neighbor impels us to speak to others about our faith. Each believer is thus a link in the great chain of believers. I cannot believe without being carried by the faith of others, and by my faith I help support others in the faith.

171 The Church, “the pillar and bulwark of the truth”, faithfully guards “the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints”. She guards the memory of Christ’s words; it is she who from generation to generation hands on the apostles’ confession of faith.57 As a mother who teaches her children to speak and so to understand and communicate, the Church our Mother teaches us the language of faith in order to introduce us to the understanding and the life of faith.

159 Faith and science: "Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth."37 "Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are."38

 

[buffalo]

Faith and understanding
156 What moves us to believe is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we believe “because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived”.28 So "that the submission of our faith might nevertheless be in accordance with reason, God willed that external proofs of his Revelation should be joined to the internal helps of the Holy Spirit."29 Thus the miracles of Christ and the saints, prophecies, the Church’s growth and holiness, and her fruitfulness and stability “are the most certain signs of divine Revelation, adapted to the intelligence of all”; they are “motives of credibility” (motiva credibilitatis), which show that the assent of faith is “by no means a blind impulse of the mind”.30
157 Faith is certain. It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but "the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives."31 "Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt."32
158 “Faith seeks understanding”:33 it is intrinsic to faith that a believer desires to know better the One in whom he has put his faith, and to understand better what He has revealed; a more penetrating knowledge will in turn call forth a greater faith, increasingly set afire by love. The grace of faith opens "the eyes of your hearts"34 to a lively understanding of the contents of Revelation: that is, of the totality of God’s plan and the mysteries of faith, of their connection with each other and with Christ, the center of the revealed mystery. "The same Holy Spirit constantly perfects faith by his gifts, so that Revelation may be more and more profoundly understood."35 In the words of St. Augustine, "I believe, in order to understand; and I understand, the better to believe."36

 

[buffalo]

The freedom of faith
160 To be human, "man’s response to God by faith must be free, and. . . therefore nobody is to be forced to embrace the faith against his will. The act of faith is of its very nature a free act."39 "God calls men to serve him in spirit and in truth. Consequently they are bound to him in conscience, but not coerced. . . This fact received its fullest manifestation in Christ Jesus."40 Indeed, Christ invited people to faith and conversion, but never coerced them. "For he bore witness to the truth but refused to use force to impose it on those who spoke against it. His kingdom. . . grows by the love with which Christ, lifted up on the cross, draws men to himself."41

Perseverance in faith
162 Faith is an entirely free gift that God makes to man. We can lose this priceless gift, as St. Paul indicated to St. Timothy: "Wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith."44 To live, grow and persevere in the faith until the end we must nourish it with the word of God; we must beg the Lord to increase our faith;45 it must be “working through charity,” abounding in hope, and rooted in the faith of the Church.46

 

[Bob_Crowley]

First of all thank you for taking the time to write your post. I didnt say this earlier and I should have, but I’m sorry to learn about the death of your father. (I’m guessing it was some time ago, but I still pass to you my genuine condolances).

Thanks for your thoughts. You’re right - it was some time ago - 11th January 1979 to be exact. I still remember the terrifying scream at the end, and some of the things we said. And as a rule, I don’t remember dreams. I’m afraid I didn’t miss him much, and I still don’t - he was very cruel, and he admitted that night he had deliberately set out to destroy my confidence.

Next, I do not deny for a single moment that your experiences were real, to you. And youre right when you say you cant prove it… and you gave a good comparison with the possum as yes, it’s much easier to accept things which are not outside the realms of every day experiences.

All experiences are “real to (you)”, since the only way we can experience them is through our senses. Therefore any experience, mundane or unique, is still filtered through our personal perceptions. As far as I’m concerned, the experience was “real”, full stop, just as “real” as eating your next breakfast will be to you.

If there is a heaven and hell, I sincerely hope your father is in heaven, and not hell, which you seem to think he is. If there is a God, I sincerely hope He can see His way to ensuring your father’s eternal happiness as I’m sure that is what you would want.

I appreciate your human sentiments, which is also the reason most Christians don’t like to talk about Hell too much - we don’t like the thought there is a place of eternal torment, far worse than any concentration camp or prison. I’ve had other Catholics on this site try to tell me he’s in Purgatory, not in Hell etc, and the reason is that they’re human.

But you didn’t see the scream. It was absolute terror, pure and simple. And he was trying ward something off.

Christopher Hitchens likewise. I understand he remained solid in his convictions to the end, and if there is a God, I would imagine intergrity, honesty, and living as best a life as you could in the circumstances must count for something.

Like him (CH) I just can not find that faith within me to belive.

Hitchens said he liked surprises Perhaps he’s got the surprise of his life

With all due respect, I think that when Mr. Hitchens went to his judgement, he would have found out that his objections were nowhere near as honest as he thought they were.

For a start he’d have to reconcile to the supreme being how he explained the origin of the universe, the rise of life, the influence of the Jews, the reality of the Church, the fact the universe has to be very finely tuned to support life in the first place, the fact it is a “sum zero energy” universe, the fact we are beings who like things in “our own image” eg. anthromorphic robots (I wonder where that comes from), that we have a seven day week and attempts to fool with that haven’t worked, that we are a trinity (body, mind, soul / father, mother, child), that we know right from wrong, that the genetic code is inormation, and information requires a designer, that there is good and evil, that there is beauty even in the most mundane things. But he ignored all that.

And there is also the fact that if there is no God, we can do what we like. I wonder how many of us engage in wishful thinking on that account, and just hope we’re going to get away with it? My father did, and he found out he was wrong, when it was too late. His years of deliberate cruelty had been seen, and he had to account for it.

Yes. I think he did a surprise. He’d have found out he’s spent an entire life time pursuing a lie. I think that would have been the most galling part to him.

 

[Fran65]

if these studies do show a consciousness existing outside of and after the death of the body, my default position is to think this is nothing more than a natural phenomina we dont yet understand.

Hi Sarah,

Francis is male and Frances is female, but Fran can be either I now know.

I find it interesting that you use the phrase ‘nothing more than’ when referring to natural phenomena. It is a pity if you truly do not see the majesty, wonder and mystery that is the physical world. It speaks to me of someone who reduces the truly awe inspiring to the level of the trivial and banal. Of course I may be wrong and I hope that I am!

I see no contradiction between understanding how consciousness is embodied in the natural world whilst also accepting that there are aspects of the Universe (origin, creation and purpose) that are beyond the physical laws that we have discovered. We see the Universe from an anthropocentric perspective and reach conclusions based on what is available to us through our inherently limited senses. I suspect that the Universe in which my dog lives is a very different place to the one in which I live. She has experiences that I have not, but I cannot on that basis say that they do not exist.

To reject the subjective experience of millions of people when there is a demonstrable coherence and substantial agreement is a mistake. This applies to God as well as to NDEs. We can however reject most UFO experiences and alien abduction as they are meant to be physical phenomena operating in the physical environment and yet there is not reliable, validated empirical evidence to support the reported events. They also occur in isolation and tend to distort and disrupt the person’s life in a destructive way.

Likewise hallucinations that occur in mental illness are lacking in coherence and meaning and are also disjointed and often fragmentary. I was able to reject the hallucination of a patient who screamed and told me that there was a hungry lion in the corner of her room. There was no reason for a lion to be there and it disappeared and was replaced by other frightening images very quickly. The next day she had decided that it was essential to carry out a complex ritual involving crockery. No coherent meaning could be found in her experiences, she found them intensely distressing and was unable to function on any level. They are therefore qualitatively different to the experiences reported by saints, mystics and NDErs.

This is what is meant by discernment in considering spiritual experiences - are they consistent? Are they coherent? Do they lead to a flourishing of the person? This is a huge and complex area but it is an essential one when considering NDEs and spiritual experience.

Fran

 

[atheistgirl]

It speaks to me of someone who reduces the truly awe inspiring to the level of the trivial and banal. Of course I may be wrong and I hope that I am!

Hi Fran,

You can relax … you’re totally wrong I live every moment in awe and wonder at the world around us. From thinking about how a few tiny cells can lead to my beautiful, intelligent children to watching an awe-inspiring sunset, to the power of a huge electrical story, and the gentleness of a fox playing with her cubs, to watching the moons orbit Jupiter on a clear starry night. Every second I breath I appreciate the wonders of everything from the cell to the stellar. It’s all natural to me though - I see it all as part of nature, not created by or directed by anything outside of nature.

Sarah x

 

[tonyrey]

Hi Fran,

You can relax … you’re totally wrong I live every moment in awe and wonder at the world around us. From thinking about how a few tiny cells can lead to my beautiful, intelligent children to watching an awe-inspiring sunset, to the power of a huge electrical story, and the gentleness of a fox playing with her cubs, to watching the moons orbit Jupiter on a clear starry night. Every second I breath I appreciate the wonders of everything from the cell to the stellar. It’s all natural to me though - I see it all as part of nature, not created by or directed by anything outside of nature.

You have to decide whether nature is eternal, self-created or created by a rational Being because there is no evidence that nature knows what “she” is doing but we do!

Do you believe the process which led to the births of your beautiful, intelligent children is ultimately purposeless? I don’t!

 

[atheistgirl]

You have to decide whether nature is eternal, self-created or created by a rational Being because there is no evidence that nature knows what “she” is doing but we do!

I thought my position was clear on that.

I made reference in previous posts elsewhere to the fact I dont think nature knows we’re here, nor does it care.

The nature of the cosmos may or may not be eternal, (continuously expanding and contracting) but nature, as in encompassing all life and non life on earth is most certainly not eternal. We already know the sun is dying, so in 5 billion years give or take a day or two, the earth, and everything on it, will no longer exist.

Sarah x