Greg Koukl - What Can We Know about the Afterlife?

[TheGenuineChristian]

Well said.

[StormTrek]

Jesus is the eyewitness who testified what he knew about heaven and the life after afterlife which is resurrection of the dead. Reading stories about "NDEs" or about children who sat on Jesus' lap in heaven are a total waste of time. Jesus was witnessed in real history by real people and was not the figment of a single imagination as are the personal visions and dreams of Muhammad.

[leifey]

You can't really compare the testimony of a scientist with the experience of an individual. Yes, we generally accept the scientist's discovery based on authority, but the difference is that we can actually repeat the scientist's experiment to see for ourselves and we should get the same results. You cannot do the same with near-death experiences which can be wildly different depending on the individual. This argument would be stronger if all these experiences were the same, but they aren't.

[jcrebel18]

@leifey

First of all, scientists are people, so I'm not exactly sure what point you were making with your first statement. Second of all, when we're talking about the subatomic world, that's based on the Standard Model of Physics, which can be neither verified or falsified. The only reason we keep using it is because it's worked (so far), although, it's likely to change again in the near future. As for NDEs, there are small differences, but there are also some similarities, (cont.)

[leifey]

@jcrebel18 Scientists are people, but their testimony is backed with experiments that can be repeated by anyone with the correct training with consistent results. Consistency is part of the repeatability that is important to scientific experimentation and is better evidence to me than the unverifiable testimony of a person. We don't see that consistency with NDEs.

[jcrebel18]

@leifey

and, as I see it, you can only be skeptical up to a certain point. That's pretty difficult considering how many there have been.

[leifey]

@jcrebel18 For me to believe that a NDE was anything more than just a misfire of the brain (which we know happens), there had better be consistency on par with that seen with physics. When I see testimonies by Christians that see Jesus and then Muslims that see Muhammad, is it really that odd that I'm skeptical? How do I differentiate an actual vision from the afterlife from a simple misfire of the brain?

[jcrebel18]

@leifey

...which is why I referred to the similarities. Although, I would still say it's hard to say whether seeing a religious figure is simply a "misfire," esp. when these experiences are in the millions, it is possible. Although, many have reported just seeing "loved ones" during NDEs, so it could go either way, seeing as religious people tend to revere and/or worship their religious figure heads. (cont.)

[jcrebel18]

@leifey

Of course, I'm not endorsing them either, though I'm sure you get that I'm more an agnostic to these types of things.

[leifey]

@jcrebel18 Considering how much we know about the human body today, the brain is still a bit of a mystery. What we do know is that it is very fragile and susceptible to misfires like hallucinations and delusions, especially when damaged or put in a state of stress. I have difficulty believing that NDEs are spiritual in nature when we know it can happen due to natural causes. That it happens in millions means little when you realize it can happen for these natural reasons.

[leifey]

@jcrebel18 And that's fine, I'm also agnostic with this, but I lean more towards skepticism of spiritual claims. To convince me that NDEs were actual glimpses at the afterlife, I would want to see consistency from a random sample including Christians, Muslims, atheists, etc. If Muslims and atheists also saw visions of Jesus, that might be more compelling to me. That we see who we want to see suggests simple brain misfires to me.

[bigolwingwang]

Also, if you hold to traditional authorship, Matthew and John were eyewitnesses. Mark is attributed to Peter's testimony and Luke was a companion of Paul. Ultimately, what I find convincing is the fact that a group of highly monotheistic people began to worship a man who was beaten and crucified after claiming to be the Messiah. What would cause these people to worship a man when we read all throughout the Old Testament about God strictly prohibiting such a thing? The Resurrection

[bigolwingwang]

1 Corinthians 15:1-11 an early declaration of faith from Paul. It can be traced back to within a few years of the Resurrection of Christ. It is an open invitation of the reader to ask these eyewitnesses themselves if they don't believe. Also, you have to account for the origin of the Christian faith which frankly IMO the other possible explanations for the Resurrection do not do it justice (swoon theory, conspiracy etc.) I personally find that convincing.

[southmcl]

So, heres my problem.. Most, and by that I mean the majority, of modern biblical scholars do not believe there is any reliable information about the resurrection of Jesus Christ contained in or outside the bible. There is no evidence from the period of time where Jesus supposedly lived that would support the life or resurrection story. There isn't even any eye witness testimony from the resurrection written by the eye witnesses, even within the bible. Yet you accept it as an authority... Why?

[fruitofspirit]

There's a book called, "Heaven Is For Real." It's about a child who had an out of body experience. When the boy talked about meeting his great grandfather in Heaven, his dad asked hum a trick question. He asked him if he would go stay at his great grandfather's house in Heaven when it got dark. And the boy said, "It doesn't get dark in Heaven, Dad! Who told you THAT?" The father, a pastor, kept pretending like he didn't know this. Then the boy said, "God and Jesus light up Heaven." -Rev. 21:23

[SeraphsWitness]

@fruitofspirit Great book. Biblically sound, too.