Posted on 04/03/2010 9:50:37 AM PDT by betty boop
Review of Life After Death: The Evidence
by Stephen M. Barr
Life After Death: The Evidence
by Dinesh D’Souza
Regnery, 256 pages, $27.95
While much apologetic effort has been spent arguing for the existence of God, relatively little has been spent defending the reasonableness of belief in an afterlife and the resurrection of the body, despite the fact that these are among the hardest doctrines of biblical religion for many modern people to accept. D’Souza brings to the task his renowned forensic skills. (By all accounts, he has bested several of the top New Atheists in public debate.) He understands that persuasion is less a matter of proof and rigorous argument than of rendering ideas plausible and overcoming obstacles to belief.
One obstacle to belief in bodily resurrection is the difficulty of grasping that there could be places that are not located in the three-dimensional space we presently inhabit, or that there could be realms where our intuitions about time, space, and matter simply do not apply. D’Souza rightly points out that modern physics has broken the bounds of human imagination with ideas of other dimensions—and even other universes—and has required us to accept features of our own universe (at the subatomic level, for example.) that are entirely counterintuitive. He shows how blinkered, by contrast, is the thought of many who think themselves boldly modern, such as Bertrand Russell, who asserted that “all experience is likely to resemble the experience we know.” Another impediment to belief in life after death is our experience of the disorganization of thought as sleep approaches and the mental decline that often precedes death. While near-death experiences do not prove as much as D’Souza suggests in his interesting chapter on the subject, the discovery that many have a surge of intense and coherent experience near the very point of death does counteract to some extent the impression of death as mere dissolution.
D’Souza approaches his subject from many directions. In two chapters, he gives a very accessible account of recent thought on the mind-body problem and the reasons to reject materialism. In the chapter “Eternity and Cosmic Justice,” he bases an argument for an afterlife on our moral sense. Our recognition that this world is not what it objectively ought to be suggests not only that there is a cosmic purpose, but that this purpose is unfulfilled and unfulfillable within the confines of this world. Some of his philosophical arguments, however, are less happy. In particular, his use of Hume and Kant to undermine what he regards as the pretensions of science will provoke not only scientists, but all those who have a strongly “realist” epistemology. D’Souza can also be faulted for sometimes claiming to demonstrate what cannot be demonstrated. Nevertheless, even those who find loose ends in his arguments will be rewarded with many fresh perspectives on the only question that really is of ultimate importance.
Only if they are ridiculous. Otherwise I respect everyone's beliefs as long as they are stated as faith and not fact. But you made your position clear and I respect that.
God's idea of control differs from yours. He is the source of freedom as well as of restrictions. Your concept of "control" seems static and rigid. God's is organic and dynamic.
I am only responding to what I see others arrogate about God. Either the world is to his satisfaction or it is isn't. Lacking in happiness is inconsistent with the idea of a perfect (complete) God.
I can discuss religious ideas or conceptions with people who hold beliefs I consider untrue without resorting to ridicule or contempt. You apparently cannot. As a student of the Vedas (what is popularly called Hinduism), there are many beliefs held by Christians I do not think are correct, or perhaps understood in the right way. But I never adress Christians - or I try not to - with ridicule or contempt.
Here’s an example:
If you take a long view of a large object, for instance a mountain, you see all the parts of it - the rock above the treeline, distant waterfalls, large ravines, maybe a glacier, perhaps several peaks, and some cloud cover.
Another person may be standing on the edge of one ravine, or next to the glacier, or one one of the peaks, and all they can see is the spot they are on.
Now picture several people on the mountain, each seeing a different part of the mountain. If each person thinks there is no more to the mountain than the spot they can view, are they wrong?
So even people with very differing understandings or beliefs, I often think that they are just standing on a different part of the mountain, maybe part is covered with clouds. At least they’re on the mountain.
It is stated in one or more of the Puranas that all contradictions are harmonized in God.
Decades ago, probably the 70s, I read a book called Life After Life on this same topic. IIRC, there was a description of a dark, frightening experience related by a man who had committed suicide but was then revived by medical care. He came away with the clear impression that he had done a very negative thing and was horrified at the prospects, had he remained dead.
I don't think that's conclusive at all. Some are clearly death and others could go either way. But in any event, the point is belief that a supernatural event intervened and resulted in life instead of death. I maintain that if one buys that, then it is easier to believe the plausibility of NDEs, i.e. one cannot say with certitude that NDEs are bunk.
Spiritual truth is a deeply subjective understanding of an absolutely objective reality. You cannot stand outside of faith and truly know it or understand it.
Billions of testimonials! Gee I didn't know. Perhaps you can calculate a Bayesian probability for the existence of spirits that have absolutely no energy in their composition, nor do they require energy in any way to perfom any of their energetic animations. Why bother with physics and neurology at all when there's billions of folks that have testified over the ages that all anyone needs to know is that animating spirits, created by god are what enables, drives and moves the nonliving material body.
"who made yours the signally "annointed vision" that shall finally establish the truth of reality, in light of the fact that human beings (in your judgment) have so miserably failed to do so down the ages?"
I use logic. Annoitment is not a logical operation as the councils and others believe when they use it to declare doctrine and fix mysteries as such forever.
"And it is only in the post-modern age that human beings are finally getting the hang of doing this "right?" "
Logic was around before, it just wasn't valued and used. Take the concept of the original sin for instance. It was declared doctrine by the Council of Orange. They declared that whoever rejects the doctrine is guilty of violating Ezekiel 18, the very Biblical chapter that contradicts the Council's declarations of this doctrine and proves it to be a complete falsehood.
Note that the councils of doctrine embrace post modernism's high value for the presence of inherent contradiction in their philosophical constructions.
"Do you want to expunge all of human experience and history on this basis, too, spunkets — or only that part of it that deals with God?"
The KISS principle applies. If the testimony conflicts with reality, it should not be regarded as evidence. In Deuteronomy Moses said God gave him the divorce laws. God later corrected that testimony and said it was not so. God said that what was so was that Moses gave the divorce laws, because of the hardness in the poeple's hearts.
That doesn't explain how can a perfect God dislike something in his Creation.
I apologize for being late to a thread (again) - and I still have company, so this will sadly be a hit-and-run.
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. – John 5:24
But the Lord is faithful, who shall stablish you, and keep [you] from evil. – 2 Th 3:3
This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. - I John 1:5-7
Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. - James 4:7
But the Lord is faithful, who shall stablish you, and keep [you] from evil. – 2 Th 3:3
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. - Genesis 6:1-2
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. - Jude 1:6
For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast [them] down to hell, and delivered [them] into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; - 2 Peter 2:4
For those interested, the pseudepigraphal book of Enoch goes into the story in great detail. In a nutshell, the angels were assigned to earth to watch after the banished Adamic men. Instead, they acted willfully having sex with human women and producing bloodthirsty giants. And more, they taught man all kinds of forbidden knowledge such as war and weapons.
The angels were seized and chained in darkness until the judgment and God took Enoch to be their advocate. Which he did, but their fate was sealed. The angels' plea was for their offspring. And, as I recall, the bodies of their offspring were destroyed by the flood but their spirits continued on the earth as the "demons."
And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. - Mark 8:29-31
The bottom line, as always it seems, is willfulness - pride.
Your discontent is yours alone. I am not responsible for your education; you are. Good night.
As long as the other side is respectful I remain respectful.
Now picture several people on the mountain, each seeing a different part of the mountain. If each person thinks there is no more to the mountain than the spot they can view, are they wrong?
What if each claims that his or her view is the only true one? And what if there is no mountain visible or detectable and they insist there is?
Nothing like deflecting the question you can’t answer.
I wouldn't think so since the ones who did not go with satan never sinned and did not need saving. I would say, though, that they were protected, but not saved in the sense that we normally think of it.
One distinction between humans and angels is that angels had everlasting life prior to being condemned, while humans have condemnation prior to having eternal life.
Yes, but if we compare Adam with the angels they were both created sinless, but with the potential to sin. God protected today's Heavenly angels from sin, but did not protect Adam or the fallen angels from sin.
My question has to do with the idea that God is in control and if he is in control then nothing in the world is against his will and a reason for him to dislike because everything is just the way he wants it. Otherwise he is not in control. If he is not in control then he is not sovereign.
I suppose you already know MY answer. :) God is sovereign and in control, and nothing that happens in the world is against His will. The Bible clearly teaches that God both hates sin AND that certain sin is in accordance with His plan and will. The easiest example is the crucifixion. It was not by accident but by Divine design, and required sin.
The reconciliation is that God's "likes" and "dislikes" are relative to the bigger or smaller picture. In the small picture of course God hated to see the sin of His Son being crucified. However, in the big picture He required it to happen for the greater will that His elect be saved. We are told explicitly that God uses sin for good:
Nearly 2 years ago my father-in-law died here in our home where we had been taking care of him. During the days & weeks leading up to his death, he had numerous ‘visions’ that he shared in what almost seemed halucinogenic moments.
The night before he died, he told me, ‘I will be leaving here tomorrow!’
Mid-morning he said, ‘I wonder who will be there to meet me at the gate’.
I have had other experiences with close relatives who apparently knew that they would be passing on in the next day, or even in hours - even those who were not obviously ‘breathing their last’.
What do they know, and when do they know it? I know that when they know, they are ready, and have no fear. They are even in a hurry to be with their Lord, and with loved ones who have gone before. For those whom I have seen, as described, what we call death is ‘commencement’.
My father, for the last several weeks of his life, commented ‘I just want to go home!’ I know he knew that ‘home’ meant ‘with the Lord’. He was looking forward to it. He anticipated it.
I have also watched one or two people, fighting cancer, and claiming to know the Lord, who were so frightened of dying that they were dying, not because of the cancer, but because of the fear.
I just share this because it sheds light on the current subject. The Lord tells us, ‘do not fear anything - fear is evil.’ We believe that. We are to comfort one another with the words of love, joy, peace and certainty that were given to us by our Lord.
I remember the title on an old gospel tract, one I saw as a kid, and the title was ‘Safety, Certainty and Enjoyment’. That is His message for us - We are safely in His arms, in His Care; we know that with certainty; and being there and knowing that we are, we are to enjoy it.
Of course there is life after death. Death is commencement. A new beginning, as we move from time to timelessness. It is not a secret to those of us who know our Lord Jesus, and believe what He says, and what He said.
Or not.
"It is valuable for those with the dream or vision gift to remain in fellowship with God, and commune with those with the spiritual gift of interpretation and discernment to assist in identifying if such perceptions are the work of spiritual deception or if they are the gifts from God.
"For those believers who have not fully studied or been exposed to such things, a good word study in Greek and Hebrew is very helpful in studying what is already provided us by God by His Word. Many such studies are frequently interpreted in a soulish fashion, paying more value to the reasoning in our minds, rather than through faith in Christ and relying on what He has provided us."
There's a distinct and remarkable disdain for and rejection of logic indicated here, yet logic is required to know and understand anything real- like the passage given from Mark.
Mark 2:6-8, "Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things?"
"Note that Christ was perceiving spiritually and then asked why they reasoned in their hearts, when the events should have been perceptible spiritually."
God was doing nothing more here than violating the FR ban on reading another person's mind. God's Spirit is His mind. Since the passage is given in plain language and is completely logical, rational inquery in a logical manner is the best way to understand this passage. If it were otherwise, Mark would have written it in code, so that only the gnostics geniuses would get the message.
Crucial sobering Scriptures, imho.
Thx.
However, don’t most of us willfully sin . . . whether it’s an unfitting piece of pie, speeding on the highway, being resentful, . . . whatever.
We pray for deliverance; to Love God so much we only want to please Him in all things . . . yet we still carry this carcass of flesh around . . . as Paul spoke . . . doing what I wouldn’t and not doing what I would do . . .
Sigh.
Perhaps... methinks... it may be best to even re-frame the question. “Life after death” assumes some kind of one dimensional time line extending into the ill-understood (to us, now) region often called eternity. “Life beyond this life” doesn’t have this problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.