Is there life after physical death, and is there a God?

[RBPerry]

Do you have any actual evidence that gods exist or that there is "life" after physical death, or is it just wishful thinking?

Since I'm sure you studied all the evidence laid out on the Near-death forum, then no, I have nothing to offer you.

 

[RBPerry]

I skimmed the material. But I'm not going to invest much time, until you point me into a specific direction. I could read the entire piece(s), reply with rebuttal(s), only to have you then state that those areas of rebuttal aren't what compelled you regardless

Rather, if you do not mind, would you point me to the specific area in question within the cited article?




Does it really matter? Does an MD receive a course(s) in distinguishing 'the spirit leaving the body', where-as an RN, RT, pastor, family, other, does not?



Define 'period of time'? Are you familiar with ACLS protocol? Further, is it possible pronoucement of 'death' sometimes happens prematurely?



Yes. I've also had colleagues tell me of their own 'personal experiences'.



Details please?



Thank you for acknowledging that anecdotal testimonials are a dime a dozen:

I gave you two excellent examples, how about if we just discuss those two. The first area of question is the brain death, the other is death for three days before returning to life.

No, your position doesn't matter, just wanted to get a little better understanding of where you are coming from.

I'm not familiar with all the ACLS algorithms, but if my old memory is right there were seven or eight around cardiac arrest. So it's possible pronouncement of death could be premature. Actually isn't the new confirmation of death based on lack of any brain stem activity?

Details, I gave them to you, George Rodonaia was clinically dead for three days, came back in the morgue when a pathologist began to cut him open for an autopsy.

Sure there are many testimonies, the more testimonies that carry the same message adds greater credibility to all of them. It's like having an eye witness account, one person is normally weak evidence to say the least, however multiple witnesses ad credibility to the testimony.

So you have heard of these cases from your colleagues, and you are a skeptic. I like skeptics because to me that mean you don't have an absolute belief one way or the other. Am I correct in assuming that?

 

[RBPerry]

Here is one I'm amused by.
Atheists have deathbed experiences and near-death experiences just like everyone else does. The philosophy of Positivism, founded by the famous atheist named A. J. Ayer, is the philosophy that anything not verifiable by the senses is nonsense. Because NDEs mark the end of the senses, Positivists believe the survival of the senses after death is nonsense. But this philosophy has been challenged by its founder A. J. Ayer himself. Later in life, Ayer had an NDE where he saw a red light. Ayer's NDE made him a changed man: "My recent experiences, have slightly weakened my conviction that my genuine death ... will be the end of me, though I continue to hope that it will be"

 

[RBPerry]

This is only an sampling of research done by professional of atheists experiences.

NDE Researchers Analyze the NDEs of Atheists

Dr. Barbara Rommer has this to say about atheist NDEs:

It appears that disavowing the reality or possibility of the existence of a Higher Power may contribute to the why of a Less-Than-Positive (LTP) Experience: 19.4 percent of my LTP study group labeled themselves as atheist or agnostic prior to their experience.

Dr. Kenneth Ring concludes that religious belief is not required:

Religious orientation was not a factor affecting either the likelihood or the depth of the near-death experience. An atheist was as likely to have one as was a devoutly religious person. Regardless of their prior attitudes - whether skeptical or deeply religious - and regardless of the many variations in religious beliefs and degrees of skepticism from tolerant disbelief to outspoken atheism - most of these people were convinced that they had been in the presence of some supreme and loving power and had a glimpse of a life yet to come. Almost all who experienced an NDE found their lives transformed and a change in their attitudes and values, and in their inclination to love and to help others.

Some atheists do not need to have an NDE to have their life changed. Dr. Diane Komp, a pediatric oncologist at Yale, was transformed by hearing about children's NDE reports, such as that of an 8-year-old with cancer envisioning a school bus driven by Jesus, a 7-year-old leukemia patient hearing a chorus of angels before passing away. Dr. Komp states the following about her conversion:

I was an atheist, and it changed my view of spiritual matters. Call it a conversion. I came away convinced that these are real spiritual experiences.

Dr. PMH Atwater concluded the following about atheists NDEs:

No matter what the nature of the experience, it alters some lives. Alcoholics find themselves unable to imbibe. Hardened criminals opt for a life of helping others. Atheists embrace the existence of a deity, while dogmatic members of a particular religion report feeling welcome in any church or temple or mosque.

Dr. Raymond Moody concluded that the identity of the Being of Light is based on the experiencer's religious background:

Of all the possible near-death elements, the light exerted the greatest influence on the individual. Patients interpreted the light as a being - a being that radiated love and warmth. Christians recognized the light as Christ. Atheists identified the spirit only as a guide. (The Light Beyond, p.22)

Dr. Susan Blackmore concludes that a belief in an afterlife is not necessary:

NDEs happen to people who don't appear to have any need to believe in an afterlife: they are as common among atheists as they are among the devout.

 

[cvanwey]

I gave you two excellent examples, how about if we just discuss those two. The first area of question is the brain death, the other is death for three days before returning to life.

Great. Let's explore

No, your position doesn't matter, just wanted to get a little better understanding of where you are coming from.

Here is where I am coming from... Whether you are a neurologist, or a drive-thru attendant, it would not matter; when seeing someone on the verge of 'death.' You asked me to 'use my senses' the next time I watched as someone passes. I then asked for elaboration. I have yet to receive any?

So I now pose to you instead... An MD, a pastor/priest/minister, RN, RT, and family, all watch as the patient takes their perceived last breath. What should these individuals now be vigilant towards, in their senses? What 'senses' should they use, and how do they now manage their senses 'correctly', to now discern and witness the 'spirit leaving the body?'

I'm not familiar with all the ACLS algorithms, but if my old memory is right there were seven or eight around cardiac arrest. So it's possible pronouncement of death could be premature. Actually isn't the new confirmation of death based on lack of any brain stem activity?

1. My point being is that medical intervention is often times administered prior to stopping tx. Meds have half lives. Medicine, in general, is called a 'practice' for a reason. Science still admits there is much of the human brain yet to be discovered.

2. If you acknowledge that 'death' can be pronounced prematurely, then it is also possible all anecdotal claims of 'return from death' are then possibly deemed false. And since you now acknowledge this possibility, then you must revoke your prior assertion, that 'it is obvious when the spirit leaves the body.' To instead now admit you only have mere speculation/assumption, at best; just like I do about the opposite assumption/speculation (that when you are truly dead, that's all)

3. Has a neurologist ever read an EEG incorrectly?

4. Is an EEG the be-all-end-all tool, to determine actual brain activity/death? Further, is it likely that testing procedures will advance in the future? Or, is this the 'best' we will ever have to determine actual life/death?

In my experience, our current imaging kind of sucks for screening. But that is for another forum thread....

Details, I gave them to you, George Rodonaia was clinically dead for three days, came back in the morgue when a pathologist began to cut him open for an autopsy.

You understand a morgue is just above freezing, right? You also understand hypothermia measures are often administered to preserve/slow unwanted processes, right?

Sure there are many testimonies, the more testimonies that carry the same message adds greater credibility to all of them. It's like having an eye witness account, one person is normally weak evidence to say the least, however multiple witnesses ad credibility to the testimony.

Depends on the claim You do understand we have countless claims of haunted house events, alien sightings, opposing god contact claims, etc...

So you have heard of these cases from your colleagues, and you are a skeptic. I like skeptics because to me that mean you don't have an absolute belief one way or the other. Am I correct in assuming that?

Yes

 

[Mitty]

I gave you two excellent examples, how about if we just discuss those two. The first area of question is the brain death, the other is death for three days before returning to life.

No, your position doesn't matter, just wanted to get a little better understanding of where you are coming from.

I'm not familiar with all the ACLS algorithms, but if my old memory is right there were seven or eight around cardiac arrest. So it's possible pronouncement of death could be premature. Actually isn't the new confirmation of death based on lack of any brain stem activity?

Details, I gave them to you, George Rodonaia was clinically dead for three days, came back in the morgue when a pathologist began to cut him open for an autopsy.

Was Jesus clinically dead when Joseph and Nicodemus untied him from his execution scaffold and treated him with 30 kg of healing agents including Aloe vera (John 19:39-40)?

 

[RBPerry]

Great. Let's explore



Here is where I am coming from... Whether you are a neurologist, or a drive-thru attendant, it would not matter; when seeing someone on the verge of 'death.' You asked me to 'use my senses' the next time I watched as someone passes. I then asked for elaboration. I have yet to receive any?



1. My point being is that medical intervention is often times administered prior to stopping tx. Meds have half lives. Medicine, in general, is called a 'practice' for a reason. Science still admits there is much of the human brain yet to be discovered.

2. If you acknowledge that 'death' can be pronounced prematurely, then it is also possible all anecdotal claims of 'return from death' are then possibly deemed false. And since you now acknowledge this possibility, then you must revoke your prior assertion, that 'it is obvious when the spirit leaves the body.' To instead now admit you only have mere speculation/assumption, at best; just like I do about the opposite assumption/speculation (that when you are truly dead, that's all)

3. Has a neurologist ever read an EEG incorrectly?

4. Is an EEG the be-all-end-all tool, to determine actual brain activity/death? Further, is it likely that testing procedures will advance in the future? Or, is this the 'best' we will ever have to determine actual life/death?

In my experience, our current imaging kind of sucks for screening. But that is for another forum thread....



You understand a morgue is just above freezing, right? You also understand hypothermia measures are often administered to preserve/slow unwanted processes, right?

Yes

As I stated earlier, I can not give you evidence that supports my belief that I can sense at times when the spirit leaves the body, I also stated that I shouldn't have mentioned that for that very reason.

Just because a premature death call is made doesn't imply that everyone is or even a high percentage is. My guess would be it is rather rare. What the implication is that we really don't know when someone is actually dead. If that's the case when death is pronounced the medical staff should wait a few days to make sure the person is actually dead, I know, that is ridiculous. Kick them down to the morgue and harvest anything worth while, just kidding.

Has a neurologist ever read an EGG incorrectly, have no way of knowing but I can recommend a good book by a neurologist that might shed a little light on the question. Would you like the book?

You are correct there is a lot to be learned about the brain. I have been studding the ageing brain recently and today we have a great deal of knowledge of the brain and how it functions but we have a long way to go. You must know once diagnosis of brain death is made and confirmed the body will not function on it's own, sure you can put it on life support, unplug it, and the patient dies. So is it possible the brain is still working, I honestly don't think so, but I'm not a neurologist.

I do understand the skeptic view points, and you have valid arguments, what I ask if someone is truly interested in the subject try to evaluate the available information without presuppositions, and I know how difficult that is.

We haven't even dove into out of body experiences that I find are pretty hard to explain away.

My day is done here, I will follow up later.

 

[cvanwey]

Just because a premature death call is made doesn't imply that everyone is or even a high percentage is. My guess would be it is rather rare.

Yes, exactly. Most people die, and remain dead objectively. Rare, are these 'one-off' claims of 'near death' experiences; when compared to the number of recorded deaths - period. So we have to ask ourselves... What's more likely?

A. A sparse number of 'return from death' events are actually happening?
B. We do not know all the <ins and outs> about when to actually pronounce actual death?

What the implication is that we really don't know when someone is actually dead.

We use the tools we have. We trust in them, but know that sometimes, maybe these tools will someday be improved/replaced/upgraded to further verify higher accuracy.

Has a neurologist ever read an EGG incorrectly, have no way of knowing but I can recommend a good book by a neurologist that might shed a little light on the question. Would you like the book?

No thanks. I'm not here for a book list. Furthermore, I could 'recommend' books for you to read. I'm here to challenge your claim(s). And thus far, I'm trying to wrap my head around why you have concluded what you have concluded?

You are correct there is a lot to be learned about the brain. I have been studding the ageing brain recently and today we have a great deal of knowledge of the brain and how it functions but we have a long way to go. You must know once diagnosis of brain death is made and confirmed the body will not function on it's own, sure you can put it on life support, unplug it, and the patient dies. So is it possible the brain is still working, I honestly don't think so, but I'm not a neurologist.

Again, I feel the instruments we have, to 'confirm death', need improvement.

I do understand the skeptic view points, and you have valid arguments, what I ask if someone is truly interested in the subject try to evaluate the available information without presuppositions, and I know how difficult that is.

The current 'consensus' is that 'no one has returned from the dead to tell us what happens, if anything.' 'Near death' claims are not concluded as 'correct.' Meaning, thus far, we only have speculation, one-off books, etc, much like what you have provided here...

You raise a good point about presupposition. The question is, whom harbors more 'presupposition'; me or you?

Again, here's my claim. When you actually die, you do not return from the dead. You claim otherwise. In being honest, which one of our two claims carries more 'supporting evidence'?

 

[RBPerry]

I would love to continue this debate, but I'm returning to work. I'm almost 72 and was a tough decision, but in today's world we all need to do what we can. To be continued.....

 

[Larniavc]

The only thing that supports such a belief would be a belief in God.

Not true. It could be that there is a post physical existence that no one has imagined yet.

I’m an atheist but it won’t rule out a post physical existence (I don’t think there is one but I can’t rule it out -it would be a nice surprise).

 

[cvanwey]

I would love to continue this debate, but I'm returning to work. I'm almost 72 and was a tough decision, but in today's world we all need to do what we can. To be continued.....

Good luck out there. Please address post #49 when you happen to get the chance. TY!

 

[JIMINZ]

Not true. It could be that there is a post physical existence that no one has imagined yet.

I’m an atheist but it won’t rule out a post physical existence (I don’t think there is one but I can’t rule it out -it would be a nice surprise).

Then your (Post Physical Existence Theory) is a total assumption with you statement (It could be) you can rule in or out anything that you so desire to.

You cannot out of hand just say what I have said is NOT TRUE.

The Post Physical Existence Christians know about and acknowledge is Hell and the Lake of Fire, I do not think you would believe that to be a nice suprise.

 

[cvanwey]

Here is one I'm amused by.
Atheists have deathbed experiences and near-death experiences just like everyone else does. The philosophy of Positivism, founded by the famous atheist named A. J. Ayer, is the philosophy that anything not verifiable by the senses is nonsense. Because NDEs mark the end of the senses, Positivists believe the survival of the senses after death is nonsense. But this philosophy has been challenged by its founder A. J. Ayer himself. Later in life, Ayer had an NDE where he saw a red light. Ayer's NDE made him a changed man: "My recent experiences, have slightly weakened my conviction that my genuine death ... will be the end of me, though I continue to hope that it will be"

Is it possible that when the brain is going though such a 'process', such 'characteristics' manifest? Much like some of our vivid dreams... They too sometimes seem all too real, until awaken. Again, we do not know nearly enough about the capabilities of the human brain to conclude the answer...??.?.

I could only imagine that if a non-believer were to experience something so graphic, so 'real', so specific, they too might alter their 'conclusion'; post 'NDE'. Heck, I might myself. Some studies have demonstrated that surges of highly synchronized brain activity occur, in post cardiac arrest patients, for example. -- Quoted from the following article: (Here's What Happens to Your Brain When You Die).

However, we must ultimately and fundamentally ask ourselves...

1) Is the brain merely manifesting something, because of such a traumatic state? Or, 2.) was the brain truly dead, and is/was receiving a glimpse of the 'other side to come?'

You know where I'm placing my hunch

 

[RBPerry]

You raise a good point about presupposition. The question is, whom harbors more 'presupposition'; me or you?

Again, here's my claim. When you actually die, you do not return from the dead. You claim otherwise. In being honest, which one of our two claims carries more 'supporting evidence'?

Been a very long day, Who is more set in the convictions, I'm sure it is me because you are a skeptic.

Good luck out there. Please address post #49 when you happen to get the chance. TY!

Been a very long day, maybe later I will be more mentally fit to engage in our discussion, as for now I'm bowing out. Lots of material on the near death web site, if your inclined review it an make you own decision as to the validity or lack of. That is the best I can do for now, need to get some sleep. Take care and stay safe.

 

[Mitty]

Is it possible that when the brain is going though such a 'process', such 'characteristics' manifest? Much like some of our vivid dreams... They too sometimes seem all too real, until awaken. Again, we do not know nearly enough about the capabilities of the human brain to conclude the answer...??.?.

I could only imagine that if a non-believer were to experience something so graphic, so 'real', so specific, they too might alter their 'conclusion'; post 'NDE'. Heck, I might myself. Some studies have demonstrated that surges of highly synchronized brain activity occur, in post cardiac arrest patients, for example. -- Quoted from the following article: (Here's What Happens to Your Brain When You Die).

However, we must ultimately and fundamentally ask ourselves...

1) Is the brain merely manifesting something, because of such a traumatic state? Or, 2.) was the brain truly dead, and is/was receiving a glimpse of the 'other side to come?'

You know where I'm placing my hunch

And as well as our daily dreams, our brains can play tricks if we use psychedelic drugs and for those people with some psychiatric disorders.

 

[jayem]

That theory has been explored extensively, it was referred to as the dying brain theory. There are many examples that will prove that theory wrong in my opinion. First being subjects that were clinically dead, meaning no brain activity that could be detected by an EEG or other tests.

The other issue is people being able to describe activities going on that they observed while being out of their body and clinically dead.

I worked 40 years as a health care provider and served 10 years on my hospital's ethics commitee. I have some experience in death and dying. First, some terminology. It may be tautological, but "Dead" strictly defined, is the IRREVERSIBLE cessation of all cardiorespiratory activity, or, the IRREVERSIBLE cessation of all brain function including the brain stem. Though you see the term "clinically dead" it's vague and misleading. It's often used to refer to a patient in cardio-respiratory arrest. But that's not death until it's determined that breathing and cardiac activity cannot restored. There are also very specific, published standards for diagnosing death by neurologic criteria. Among which are a total absence of brain stem reflexes on 2 examinations; no signs of hypothermia; no evidence of sedative or paralytic drugs; no spontaneous respiration with the ventilator turned off; angiographic absence of cerebral blood flow above the carotid and vertebral arteries in the neck; and two EEGs, performed 24 hours apart, confirming no electrical activity when set to the highest gain. And only when several of these findings exist in combination, should death be declared.

Remember the scene in the Wizard of Oz, when the house falls on the wicked witch? After checking her, the coroner says this:

"As Coroner I must aver,
I thoroughly examined her.
And she's not only merely dead,
she's really most sincerely dead."

I'd like to see a reference in the legitimate, peer-reviewed medical literature, of a patient returning to life, after meeting the criteria for being really, most sincerely dead.

 

[RBPerry]

I'd like to see a reference in the legitimate, peer-reviewed medical literature, of a patient returning to life, after meeting the criteria for being really, most sincerely dead.

Dr. Michael Sabom is a cardiologist whose book entitled Light and Death includes a detailed medical and scientific analysis of an amazing near-death experience (NDE) of a woman named Pam Reynolds (1956--2010). In 1991, at the age of 35, Reynolds underwent a rare operation to remove a giant basilar artery aneurysm in her brain that threatened her life. The size and location of the aneurysm, however, precluded its safe removal using the standard neuro-surgical techniques. She was referred to a neurosurgeon, Dr. Robert F. Spetzler, of the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, Arizona, who had pioneered a daring surgical procedure known as deep hypothermic cardiac arrest. It allowed Pam's aneurysm to be excised with a reasonable chance of success. This operation, nicknamed "standstill" by the doctors who perform it, required that Pam's body temperature be lowered to 60 degrees, her heartbeat and breathing stopped, her brain waves flattened, and the blood drained from her head. In everyday terms, she was put to death. After removing the aneurysm, she was restored to life. During the time that Pam was in standstill, she experienced an NDE. Her remarkably detailed veridical (i.e., verified) out-of-body observations during her surgery were later verified to be true. Her case is considered to be one of the strongest cases of veridical evidence in NDE research because of her ability to describe the unique surgical instruments, the surgical procedures used on her, and her ability to describe in detail these events while she was clinically brain dead. Pam Reynolds Lowery ultimately died from heart failure, on Saturday May 22, 2010, at the age 53.

That is about as close to being dead as one can be, along with the description she gave of the surgical procedures. To me the combination of no brain activity and her out of body witnessing is pretty strong evidence of spirit and body being separate.

 

[RBPerry]

Again, here's my claim. When you actually die, you do not return from the dead. You claim otherwise. In being honest, which one of our two claims carries more 'supporting evidence'?

Both you and Jayem and others want to debate the issue of actual death. First of all many people are diagnosed as dead without any EEG much less 24 hours apart. How long does the brain actually continue to fire after the loss of blood flow is a good question for a neurologist that may have done actual research on the subject.
You currently having people in New York reported as DOA by paramedics with no physician verification. The reality is your splitting hairs and claiming many of these people weren't clinically dead even though they were pronounced dead.
Actually an acquaintance that is a neurologist told me in his opinion "once the frontal lobe is dead nobody is home", and to me that makes sense even though the body may still be functioning, he wasn't implying that constituted death.
The implication here is that our doctors are calling it prematurely, and that may have happened, but it isn't the norm, and to imply it is the norm is an insult to medical professionals.
Much of the literature I have suggested is written my doctors and a couple by neurologist, the refusal to evaluate the information with an open mind to me implies it just might enlighten you something you really are afraid of.
Again, this isn't about religion, or spiritual beliefs, it's about scientific research that is current and ongoing.

 

[RBPerry]

Here is another for consideration, and yes I know how cold a morgue is, and that wasn't a factor after three days.
George Rodonaia (died 2004) underwent one of the most extended cases of a near-death experience ever recorded. Pronounced dead immediately after he was hit by a car in 1976, he was left for three days in the morgue. He did not "return to life" until a doctor began to make an incision in his abdomen as part of an autopsy procedure. Prior to his NDE he worked as a neuropathologist. He was also an avowed atheist. Yet after the experience, he devoted himself exclusively to the study of spirituality, taking a second doctorate in the psychology of religion. He then became an ordained priest in the Eastern Orthodox Church. He served as a pastor at St. Paul United Methodist Church in Baytown, Texas. Reverend Rodonaia is one of the NDE experiencers profiled who was dead for days during his NDE. Dr. Rodonaia's experience in his own words from Phillip Berman's book, The Journey Home:

Good night, and stay safe.

 

[cvanwey]

Both you and Jayem and others want to debate the issue of actual death. First of all many people are diagnosed as dead without any EEG much less 24 hours apart. How long does the brain actually continue to fire after the loss of blood flow is a good question for a neurologist that may have done actual research on the subject.
You currently having people in New York reported as DOA by paramedics with no physician verification. The reality is your splitting hairs and claiming many of these people weren't clinically dead even though they were pronounced dead.

I don't think so. If your brain still has the ability to manifest, then the term NDE is just that, 'near death', and not instead "I was all-the-way-death, and now I'm going to tell you what happens when you die and come back to tell of it."

Actually an acquaintance that is a neurologist told me in his opinion "once the frontal lobe is dead nobody is home", and to me that makes sense even though the body may still be functioning, he wasn't implying that constituted death.
The implication here is that our doctors are calling it prematurely, and that may have happened, but it isn't the norm, and to imply it is the norm is an insult to medical professionals.

Would it be safe to say we have much left to learn of the brain? Often times, the MD is on the forefront to admitting they do not know something. Further, they often times recommend second opinion. Is there any wonder it's called a 'practice'.

Much of the literature I have suggested is written my doctors and a couple by neurologist, the refusal to evaluate the information with an open mind to me implies it just might enlighten you something you really are afraid of.
Again, this isn't about religion, or spiritual beliefs, it's about scientific research that is current and ongoing.

I sincerely doubt such research, in an attempt to obtained these objective conclusions, are [provided] from these sources

From what I've read from them, they reference cases, where the recipient(s) in question would have been preserved. (i.e) in a morgue, or under ice.