How to have real repentance, real conversion and a real relationship with Jesus?

[ARBITER01]

If I were, I should be able to know, right? So the very fact that I'm even asking these questions seems to indicate that I'm probably not ...

I like your straight to the point style though.

I think an important question to ask is: if a person is born again, do they know it? Can a person be born again already and not know it?

I'll just say this,.... you're never going to have the answers that you want unless you start getting in prayer with Jesus and asking Him to forgive you of your sins and come into your heart.

Otherwise, you can ask us all sorts of questions, but we will never be able to give you a substantial answer for what you want inside. It must come from Him.

 

[aiki]

Yes, I do believe they can overlap. But you shouldn't be able to fully reduce a genuine spiritual experience to a mere materialist, psychological/neurological explanation.

Yup. I agree.

How could you possibly justify this claim? What about near-death experiences? What if the person had spiritual experiences but they don't remember them after the coma, etc.?

A person in a coma can have spiritual experiences? Do you know of such an instance? I don't.

I don't think an NDE is comparable to someone in a coma... An NDE is remarkable in part because it was consciously experienced and remembered.

How would a spiritual experience had while in a coma, that one could not remember, be any different essentially from not having had such an experience at all? How could one claim such an experience has even happened if one can't remember it at all? Your question seems to make a distinction without a difference.

Do you think the changes listed in your post can be obtained through psychotherapy or any other secular self-help techniques?

In some measure, yes. Both God and secular psychotherapy use the same basic human psychology God created to enact change in the individual. But God's way of changing us and the results of His doing so are distinctly different from what mere psychotherapy and self-effort can produce. Most importantly, God's transformation of us deepens our knowledge and experience of Him while self-effort merely deepens our knowledge and experience of ourselves. And God's way of changing us is not a torturous process of self-repression, but employs His infinite power in a subtle, almost unnoticeable transformation of our desires as well as our thinking and conduct (John 5:14-15). And at its end, the believer has grown in his love for the Lord, in his delight in God, not merely been altered in his living.

Like begets like. Godliness is only begotten in us by God. We can only produce - beget - more of ourselves. This is always very evident in the difference in the change that is made between self-effort and Spirit transformation. Holiness, humility, joy, peace that passes all understanding, unshakeable inner stability, sacrificing, enduring love that passes knowledge - these are things only God can produce in us in a lasting, profound, Christ-centered way (Galatians 5:22-23; Ephesians 5:9; Philippians 4:7; Ephesians 3:19; 2 Timothy 1:7, etc.). Self-effort counterfeits of God's work are easy to spot when one has experienced the actual work of the Spirit within.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

A person in a coma can have spiritual experiences?

Why not?

Do you know of such an instance?

No, but lack of evidence is not evidence of absence. Also, how do you know that people during comas don't experience anything? If you claim they don't, you have the burden of proof.

How would a spiritual experience had while in a coma, that one could not remember, be any different essentially from not having had such an experience at all? How could one claim such an experience has even happened if one can't remember it at all? Your question seems to make a distinction without a difference.

In the same way that people might have dreams that they don't remember.

 

[aiki]

Why not?

Because they're in coma.

No, but lack of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Sometimes it is, though. The total absence of evidence for, say, 20-foot-tall, two-headed, purple unicorns roaming Paris is very good evidence of their absence, of them NOT roaming Paris. One can go to Paris, see no giant, two-headed, purple unicorns roaming anywhere there and quite reasonably and properly conclude there are no such creatures roaming Paris. The faulty logic in this instance would be to assert that the absence of evidence of giant, purple unicorns roaming Paris is not evidence of their absence.

In the same way, the total absence of any evidence for a person having a spiritual experience while in a coma strongly suggests, at the very least, that such a thing is highly improbable, if not impossible. In light of this, why argue for such a thing?

If you claim they don't, you have the burden of proof.

No, you're the one suggesting they may have such an experience, so the burden of proof actually falls to you. I've seen no evidence to suggest they do, so why should I think otherwise? And how, exactly, could I prove to you that I haven't seen any such evidence beyond saying so? No, you're the one making a positive claim that something does happen to people while in a coma. So, prove it.

In the same way that people might have dreams that they don't remember.

But, again, I know of no one who has had any such thing. Do you? If not, why argue the point? If so, please provide a verifiable instance of such an experience.

In any case, this all seems quite off-point. I'm not sure why you think its worth arguing...

 

[TruthSeek3r]

Because they're in coma.

How do you go from "they're in coma" to "they can't have spiritual experiences"? How does one thing entail the other?

Sometimes it is, though. The total absence of evidence for, say, 20-foot-tall, two-headed, purple unicorns roaming Paris is very good evidence of their absence, of them NOT roaming Paris. One can go to Paris, see no giant, two-headed, purple unicorns roaming anywhere there and quite reasonably and properly conclude there are no such creatures roaming Paris. The faulty logic in this instance would be to assert that the absence of evidence of giant, purple unicorns roaming Paris is not evidence of their absence.

Fair enough. I was a bit sloppy in my statement. I should've said that the non-exhaustive absence of evidence (in the domain where evidence is expected to exist) is not evidence of absence. For example, claiming that aliens do not exist in the entire universe just because we haven't come across one would be fallacious because we haven't exhaustively explored the entire universe yet. The reason why this fallacy does not apply to your "20-foot-tall unicorns in Paris" example is because we have pretty much exhaustively explored Paris already, unless you allow possible secret underground bases containing unicorns underneath Paris in your definition of Paris, or if you allow the thought experiment to be more complicated, say, 20-foot-tall unicorns that go invisible or escape to another dimension whenever someone is about to spot them, etc.

In the same way, the total absence of any evidence for a person having a spiritual experience while in a coma strongly suggests, at the very least, that such a thing is highly improbable, if not impossible. In light of this, why argue for such thing?

The issue I see with your objection here is that you need to define first what you would count as evidence in general, and evidence of a spiritual experience in particular. If you have evidence that the spiritual realm exists, how about publishing that evidence in a peer-reviewed scientific journal? Will they accept it as evidence? Probably not. And if they are right in their rejection, it would mean that there is an overwhelming absence of evidence of the spiritual realm, and therefore, we should conclude that it's very likely that the spiritual realm doesn't exist ... wait, we wouldn't be happy with that conclusion, would we?

No, you're the one suggesting they may have such an experience, so the burden of proof actually falls to you. I've seen no evidence to suggest they do, so why should I think otherwise? And how, exactly, could I prove to you that I haven't seen any such evidence beyond saying so? No, you're the one making a positive claim that something does happen to people while in a coma. So, prove it.

I never made the positive claim that people actually have spiritual experiences while in coma. I simply proposed it as candidate hypothesis, but I never claimed that this hypothesis is true. Therefore, I don't have the burden of proving that it is true (because I never claimed so). On the contrary, you have suggested that the hypothesis is false, which is a claim, so you have the burden of proof.

Now, I understand your point of bringing up the absence of evidence to make a probabilistic case against spiritual experiences while in coma, but then you face the issue of how to justify your probability. How do you know that the search space has been exhaustively explored? Have you exhaustively interviewed every single person who has returned from a coma in the history of humanity to make sure that they didn't have a spiritual experience that they could remember? And what about spiritual experiences that they didn't remember? Were you there in the "spiritual realm" monitoring them all throughout their comas to make sure that they didn't have a single spiritual experience at any single moment?

But, again, I know of no one who has had any such thing. Do you? If not, why argue the point? If so, please provide a verifiable instance of such an experience.

I was informally aware of the idea that most people don't remember most of their dreams. However, there appear to be more serious sites claiming this to be the case. For instance, I quickly found this site How Long Are Dreams? | Sleep.org which says:

It's difficult to say for certain whether or not we dream every night, since people don't always remember their dreams (1). Researchers may soon be able to detect when we are dreaming based on certain types of brain waves (2) that seem to consistently appear during dreams, but this is still a developing area of research.

In studies in which researchers purposely wake people up while they sleep, up to 50% of people woken from non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep (3) and 80% of people woken from rapid eye movement (REM) sleep (4) report that they were dreaming. These percentages suggest we spend a significant portion of the night dreaming.​

This site https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-power-rest/201704/are-we-dreaming-all-the-time also says:

1. People dream throughout the night. In so called “dream sleep” or REM sleep, those awakened described dreams 95% of the time, but also did so 71% in Non-REM (NREM) sleep. NREM normally takes up a bit less than 80% of overall sleep time. People were dreaming and dreaming all through the night.

2. Most of the dreams were not remembered. When they were recalled, parts of the pre-frontal cortex involved in memory and memory consolidation lit up.​

In any case, this all seems quite off-point. I'm not sure why you think its worth arguing...

Sure, let this be the last post on this specific topic.

 

[chad kincham]

I recently posted a thread titled Top reasons for deconversion and how to counteract them? (feel free to check it out). One member made a very insightful comment on post#3:

"I don't think you can reduce real Christianity to a mind game that comes and goes.
Real conversion establishes a permanent change in our identity, we are transferred from one spiritual kingdom to another and given the power to become son's and daughters of God.
His indwelling presence seals our salvation.
It is much more than giving mental assent to a philosophy.
For this reason I conclude that real faith cant be lost - it is a relationship with Jesus Himself and nothing can seperate us from His Love."
​

This has led me to ask the follow-up questions of this thread: How to have a real, genuine conversion? How to have a real, genuine repentance? And how to have a real, genuine relationship with Jesus Christ?

Jesus Himself taught that some believe only for a while, but in time of testing, fall away.

Hebrews 3 cautions tge brethren not to harden their hearts through the deceitfulness of sin, and thus DEPART from the living God.

Jesus taught that the prodigal son was dead in his sins while out sinning in the world, and became alive AGAIN when he returned in repentance.

A believer can fall away and be lost again, is the reality of scripture., there are many more scriptures on that.

 

[aiki]

If you have evidence that the spiritual realm exists, how about publishing that evidence in a peer-reviewed scientific journal?

Why would one publish in a journal occupied with examination of the natural realm events that occur in the supernatural realm? By what means are scientific processes and evaluations able to properly assess the veracity of spiritual, supernatural occurrences? And there is, of course, in most secular scientific journals a very strong bias in favor of philosophic materialism/naturalism such that granting the idea of a supernatural dimension is ruled out entirely.

Will they accept it as evidence? Probably not. And if they are right in their rejection, it would mean that there is an overwhelming absence of evidence of the spiritual realm, and therefore, we should conclude that it's very likely that the spiritual realm doesn't exist ... wait, we wouldn't be happy with that conclusion, would we?

Between science and religion there has been a longstanding dispute over the "evidence" for God and spiritual experience of Him. As far as I can tell, though, the dispute isn't actually over the evidence but over how it ought to be interpreted. Each interpreter of the evidence the empirical method uncovers interprets according to their own philosophical presuppositions. So, when, a naturalistic scientist dismisses out-of-hand the Christian's worldview, it isn't the evidence for their worldview they are dismissing, often, but the Christian's interpretation of the evidence in accord with their theistic presuppositions. When, then, a secular scientist claims there is an absence of evidence for the Christian worldview and spiritual experience, they aren't often dealing with the actual evidence a Christian produces but with the Christian's interpretation of that evidence. Consequently, the "absence of evidence" protest against the Christian falls flat, being a matter ultimately of philosophy rather than empirical data.

I never made the positive claim that people actually have spiritual experiences while in coma. I simply proposed it as candidate hypothesis, but I never claimed that this hypothesis is true.

What is such a declared hypothesis but a claim - however tentative - about what is (or may be) true? Such a hypothesis requires supporting data if it is to be given any consideration; otherwise, it is mere unfounded, useless speculation and ought, therefore, to be ignored.

On the contrary, you have suggested that the hypothesis is false, which is a claim, so you have the burden of proof.

I have asserted that you have no basis for your assertion (aka hypothesis) that folks who are in comas have spiritual experiences. So far, you have not offered anything that shows I'm wrong. I have, however, heard people who have been in comas describe being comatose as a complete blank, no sense of the passage of time, no awareness of anything, no dreams, and certainly no spiritual experiences.

How do you know that the search space has been exhaustively explored? Have you exhaustively interviewed every single person who has returned from a coma in the history of humanity to make sure that they didn't have a spiritual experience that they could remember?

But, you see, I didn't ask you for such an accounting of the matter of human experiences while in a coma. I asked only if YOU had any data supporting YOUR idea that spiritual experiences happen to people while comatose. Maybe you do; maybe you don't. I'm open to hearing what basis you have for suggesting they do have such experiences. Rather than answer, you've got us embroiled in semantics and philosophic wrangling.

Sure, let this be the last post on this specific topic.

Okay.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

But, you see, I didn't ask you for such an accounting of the matter of human experiences while in a coma. I asked only if YOU had any data supporting YOUR idea that spiritual experiences happen to people while comatose. Maybe you do; maybe you don't. I'm open to hearing what basis you have for suggesting they do have such experiences. Rather than answer, you've got us embroiled in semantics and philosophic wrangling.

These might be of interest:

• Nasir Iqbar's Coma: A Portal to Christ: https://www1.cbn.com/700club/nasir-iqbars-coma-portal-christ
• COVID-19 survivor says he saw God during coma: COVID-19 survivor says he saw God during coma | 8News
  
• Neuroscientist Sees 'Proof of Heaven' in Week-Long Coma: Neuroscientist Sees 'Proof of Heaven' in Week-Long Coma
  
• In my coma, God was present. Near death experience:
• Girl in coma says Jesus spoke to her before miraculous recovery: https://www.wtvr.com/2016/06/16/jesus-miraculous-recovery/
  
• Broke neck in two places and while in a coma met Jesus Christ:

Also, see What does the Bible say about a person who is in a coma / comatose? | GotQuestions.org:

While no specific passages of Scripture speak about the state of being in a coma, we do know that, since only God can give life, we must leave the decision to Him about when that life ends (see Deuteronomy 32:39; 1 Samuel 2:6). Murder is always wrong because it places us in God’s role of pronouncing personal judgment on another human being (Genesis 9:5–6; Exodus 20:13). The personal choice to end an innocent life is always condemned by God (Exodus 23:7; Jeremiah 22:3; Revelation 22:15). Hastening the death of a comatose patient may fall into this category.​

As stated above, at best you can be agnostic (i.e. withhold judgement, acknowledge that you don't know) with regards to the possibility of spiritual experiences in a comatose state. Claiming that it is impossible for a human being to have spiritual experiences in a comatose state has no biblical basis whatsoever and is contradicted by testimonial evidence to the contrary, such as the stories listed above.

Ok, let this now be the last post on this topic.