Do you think science will someday get proof about near death experiences not being literal?

[PureX]

Do you think science will someday get proof about near death experiences not being literal?Or the other way around?I am not sure one way or another.I was raised believing the soul leaves the body and goes to heaven.But if you read stuff like Ecclesiastes 9:5.It gets confusing.Because my whole life was centered around the idea that the soul goes right to heaven.

Maybe, but it's a very long way off. Right now science has no known metaphysical medium to study, and no known means of studying it.

 

[HonestJoe]

NDEs at some point do become something the scientific method can not address.

Why will this lie not die? Please explain exactly why any observed phenomena can’t be addressed by scientific method. Think carefully what that phrase actually means and what it doesn’t mean. For example, it makes no statement about who is using scientific method or any physical limitations of their capabilities.

If we, for example, have 1000 people who have NDEs who report something that they observed that they could not have known about otherwise, we can say that there is a real phenomenon because it's inexpiable by the laws of physics.

The problem is that you’re making an unsupported assumption. You talk about something they “could not have known about otherwise” but you have no justification for presuming what that “otherwise” leads to and therefore no justification for presuming it is “beyond the laws of physics” rather than just “beyond what we currently understand”.

I’d go further and suggest, the concept of “beyond the laws of physics” makes no sense in general. If something exists, it is within the workings of the universe by definition and the “laws of physics” is one of the ways we describe those workings, even though our understanding is incomplete. There are lots of weird and wonderful things out there we couldn’t have possibly imagined before we discovered them, expanding or adjusting how we perceived and understand the universe we live in. I see no reason why whatever the explains NDEs wouldn’t fall within the same category.

Proving a mechanism such as leaving the physical body is beyond the reach of science because science does deal with the physical world.

How can something moving from inside to outside of a physical body not be within the scope of the physical world? Remember that you can’t simply declare that some “non-physical” thing exists, especially if you’re proposing that it can interact with and affect the physical. That is where scientific method could and should be applied. Remember that it doesn't guarantee definitive answer though.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Jesus body was in the grave but his soul was three days in the heart of the earth please accept the Scriptures. And where was Jesus inside the earth? In paradise. (Luke 23:42)

There's only one paradise and only one heaven. You as Jehovah's Witness should know that the both are not the same.
And since when is heaven in the heart of the earth?

It proves that the soul is still alive after physical death. This is a logical conclusion from Luke 23:43, otherwise Jesus wouldn't have said "today".

Here’s a non-JW source...good reasoning points...

I am not clear about Luke 23: 43, where Jesus told one of those crucified with Him that he would be with Him in paradise. I've heard it explained that the comma is in the wrong place, which changes the meaning. Can you help clarify this verse?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

@calm ,
In Genesis 3:19, God told Adam, “You will return to the ground...”
“Your body” was not the Hebrew term used!

In Psalms 146:3-4, it states about the dead, “their thoughts perish.” The person has thoughts...the body doesn’t.

Words in Scripture can’t be altered — not honestly, anyways. As for punctuation in the NT, it was added after the fact, according to the language the text was translated into.

The comma placement in Luke 23:43, found in many translations, does not accurately reflect what the Scriptures teach.

Why would you want to support a contested view of mainstream Christendom, when mainstream Christendom has shown itself willing to support conflicts of the world, getting involved in killing their own brothers in other countries?! That alone discredits their claim of being Christ’s followers. John 13:34; 1 John 3:10-15. Cf. Matthew 5:44

This reputation they’ve established throughout the centuries, should bring all their tenets into question!

Keep in mind, Daniel 12 states that “in the final part of the days, true knowledge would become abundant.”

What does that say about views held, prior to?

But you’ll do as you want.

You’re still my cousin.

 

[calm]

Here’s a non-JW source...good reasoning points...

I am not clear about Luke 23: 43, where Jesus told one of those crucified with Him that he would be with Him in paradise. I've heard it explained that the comma is in the wrong place, which changes the meaning. Can you help clarify this verse?

It doesn't matter if the source is from the Jehovah's Witness or not. That is wrong.
Just the sentence structure "Truly I say to you today, you shall be with Me in Paradise" makes no sense. I ask you to read this page.
Annihilationism and Luke 23:42-43, the thief with Jesus in the afterlife the day of his death | CARM.org

 

[Hockeycowboy]

It doesn't matter if the source is from the Jehovah's Witness or not. That is wrong.
Just the sentence structure "Truly I say to you today, you shall be with Me in Paradise" makes no sense. I ask you to read this page.
Annihilationism and Luke 23:42-43, the thief with Jesus in the afterlife the day of his death | CARM.org

I’ve read it. It promotes their a priori views, not the Bible’s.

Sure Jesus’ reply "Truly I say to you today, you shall be with Me in Paradise" makes sense. Jesus was dead...then was resurrected by God three days later. Tell me, what is a resurrection?

 

[calm]

In Genesis 3:19, God told Adam, “You will return to the ground...”
“Your body” was not the Hebrew term used!

That means the body.
Man consists of three things, soul, spirit and body.(1 Thessalonians 5:23)
The body when it dies becomes dusty, but the soul still lives and goes into the realm of the dead(Isa 38:11) and the spirit of man given by God goes back to God.(Ecclesiastes 12:7)

In Psalms 146:3-4, it states about the dead, “their thoughts perish.” The person has thoughts...the body doesn’t.

Look at the context of the verse:
ESV
"Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation.
4 When his breath departs, he returns to the earth; on that very day his plans perish."
As you can see it doesn't relate to consciousness but to the person's plan who thinks he can help but he can't. That's why when he dies his plans or "thoughts" are gone. In this context "thoughts" does not mean consciousness but "plans" the plans of man. Therefore many other translators write "plans" instead of "thoughts".

 

[calm]

@Hockeycowboy
Jesus himself said that man is sent to hell only after he is dead (physically) and he distinguishes between soul and body.
Luke 12:4-5
I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do. 5 But I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him!

And Jesus himself said that after his crucifixion he will be three days and three nights inside the earth (Matthew 12:40). His dead body was in the tomb but his soul was inside the earth (realm of the dead). To be more precise, Jesus was in paradise after his death. For shortly before Jesus died, he spoke to the criminal who was crucified with him: "And he said to him, Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."(Luke 23:43)

Paradise and hell are clearly mentioned in Luke 16:19-31, where, for example, Abraham, which was already dead (physically), is also mentioned.

The souls of Moses and Elijah appeared to Jesus and spoke with him, and we also know that both have been dead for a long time. Mark 9:4
Did Jesus talk to people who were not there at all? I don't think so.

And the souls of the dead who are in the interior of the earth (the realm of the dead) are talking to God.
Revelation 6:9-10
When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne. 10 They cried out with a loud voice, "O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?"

Can dead souls who have no consciousness speak? I don't think so.

 

[ecco]

Right now science has no known metaphysical medium to study, and no known means of studying it.

Perhaps because it's really hard to come up with a plan to study nothing.

 

[ecco]

How can something moving from inside to outside of a physical body not be within the scope of the physical world?

It is within the scope of the physical world!

21 grams experiment - Wikipedia
The 21 grams experiment refers to a scientific study published in 1907 by Duncan MacDougall, a physician from Haverhill, Massachusetts. MacDougall hypothesized that souls have physical weight, and attempted to measure the mass lost by a human when the soul departed the body. MacDougall attempted to measure the mass change of six patients at the moment of death. One of the six subjects lost three-fourths of an ounce (21.3 grams).​

I guess for the other five people (where there was no discernible change in weight) they had previously given their soul to Satan.

 

[ecco]

Please explain exactly why any observed phenomena can’t be addressed by scientific method.

NDEs have been addressed by scientific methods. Double blind studies have determined that there is no evidence for an NDE having any supernatural origins. In many cases oxygen shortages to the brain accounted for the "visions".

If you want to see a dark tunnel with a point of light at the end, just stand at attention is the hot sun for a period of time.

 

[ecco]

Jesus was dead...then was resurrected by God three days later.

According to many Christians, maybe including JW, Jesus was alive and part of God from the very beginning. If this is the case, there is no reason to believe that Jesus "died". It just means that Jesus left his human body for a period of time, and returned three days later. Then He hung around in His human persona for a few more days before whisking himself up to rejoin the other two parts of Him.

What a sacrifice!

 

[Hockeycowboy]

According to many Christians, maybe including JW, Jesus was alive and part of God from the very beginning. If this is the case, there is no reason to believe that Jesus "died". It just means that Jesus left his human body for a period of time, and returned three days later. Then He hung around in His human persona for a few more days before whisking himself up to rejoin the other two parts of Him.

What a sacrifice!

Understanding it that way, would make it mean very little.

But, as the Scriptures say, it was God’s firstborn Son. (Not part of a Trinity.)

Would you do that? Would you give your son’s life, allowing him to suffer painfully, to give others a chance to gain eternal life?

 

[PureX]

Perhaps because it's really hard to come up with a plan to study nothing.

Good thing you aren't a scientist. That bias of yours would be awfully inhibiting.

 

[ecco]

Understanding it that way, would make it mean very little.

But, as the Scriptures say, it was God’s firstborn Son. (Not part of a Trinity.)

Well, pardon me if I can't keep all the theistic interpretations of scripture clear as to who believes what.

In this forum, there has been at least one Christian who asserted that all three whatevers have always existed. He/She/They disagree with your concept.

Would you do that? Would you give your son’s life, allowing him to suffer painfully, to give others a chance to gain eternal life?

How do you know He suffered painfully? How do you know that an omni-all entity can feel pain?


I wouldn't want to inflict the prospect of eternal life on anyone. Well, maybe Donald Trump. I kinda like the idea of him going insane doing the same thing eons after eons after eons - f o r e v e r.

 

[ecco]

Good thing you aren't a scientist. That bias of yours would be awfully inhibiting.

More male bovine feces nonsense. Please show a scientist who studies nothing.


ETA: Show how you would begin a scientific investigation of nothing.