sad for your loss but realistically death is the end.....sadly

the only thing that proves is that they have functioning brains that have evolved to accomodate vision.

@@AceofDlamonds You are wrong. This has nothing to do with the physical.

@@julianmann6172 How??? If it doesn't have a physical substrate, what other possibility is there??

@@AceofDlamonds A person blind from birth has no conception of what it means to see. There have been cases where eyesight has been restored to some extent by an operation. it is worth listening to what the patient has to say regarding their experience. There is much more to the experience than purely physical. Underlying this is the recognition that consciousness is non physical. For instance there are many documented cases, particularly among medical professionals, where it continues even beyond brain death, for example in serious road accidents where the victim continues to see what is going on around him, despite having no life signs or brain activity. These are known as near death experiences. There are also cases involving past lives, where children can recall past events in their previous lives, where according to our world view, this should be impossible.

@@julianmann6172 Timeout for a second. Can you provide me a link to an actual study or good artlcle detailing this anecdote? It's one thing to find stories like this from niche websites dedicated to that kind of "spooky" stuff, it's another completely to publish the story in an actual scientific journal.

Link?

wow nice analogy

But the pc will not have a trustworthy record of the software, prior to when it was repaired and the software could run on it

oh, an dead-brained, this may be accurate, mostly fabled imaginary foolishness, sure, dummy

@@allentomas3417 wow name-calling! That’s not serious thinking.

Okay time out. Firstly, the appropriate authorities to discuss this are neuroscientists.Secondly, the idea that memories don't reside in the brain is flat out insane in this day and age. Where is Professor Moreland getting this?

@@AceofDlamonds You do realise, don't you, that some of the leading neuroscientists and philosophers are panpsychists now? You are assuming that the brain produces consciousness but we don't know that. In fact, we have very good reasons to suppose that that's wrong.

@@bayreuth79 Panpsychists? The hell? Leading neuroscientists? Name em. Don't just go to your favorite safe space for pseudoscience and then claim they are being totally objective with the evidence.

@@AceofDlamonds You are not exactly at the cutting edge of modern intellectual developments, are you? Professor David Chalmers, who coined the term "the hard problem of consciousness", is a panpsychist. Other notable panpsychists are neuroscientists Tononi and Koch (two of the leading figures in their field). And then Thomas Nagel, Galen Strawson, Donald Hoffman, David Bohm (who worked with Einstein) and many, many others. You haven't even begun to grapple with consciousness. Do some bloody research instead of coming on here and spouting your profound ignorance as though it were fact.

@@bayreuth79 "Modern intellectual developments"? I'm interested in SCIENCE, not vague notions and speculation. Neuroscience in the last 100 years has slowly found the brain to be the source of our consciousness. How exactly the brain is arranged to cause it is unknown, but we at least know where it arises. Biological beings like us developed over millions of years. If there is some transcendent material above the nervous system, when would it have entered the human species? Look at the thousands of prehistoric human remains.

Good luck with living your life in the paradigm.

I also doubt it. I am curious as to whether people who believe in the existence of God. and an after life, think that this is only for human animals, but not for other animals. Only mammals. What about ants and worms and skunks and chickens. The video demonstrates a common problem with this topic, A lot of assertions, with absolutely no evidence.

But this is simply fallacious and there's zero evidence for it. Memories reside in the material brain.

Jim Habash Brian Doyle!!! Haha. No JP Moreland is a too notch philosopher - but he does favor BDM

@@Gatorbeaux I was just kidding great interview. Hah funny huh !

?MASH GromPsychiatrist The Is This Is IsI

@@owenohara623 oh, stupid people, sure

still jumping to conclusions :)

argument from analogy is weak, almost inherently weak if the purpose is to push a hypothesis based on an analogy. You haven't proved the analogous relationship. It's begging the question.

Do you feel better?

Christian "apologists" who have desensitized themselves to common sense definitions of "love" and "value" will answer that true ""love" does not provide any guarantees of protection (they have to say this because they are painfully aware that their god likewise promises no protections consistent with normative views of "love"), therefore, under their logic, you can genuinely "love" somebody while doing things similar to what God does, such as knowingly infecting a healthy person with cancer, or AIDS, or whatever. What apologists fail to note is that if "love" really is this expansive thing that doesn't necessarily protect from any evil thing, then "love" is a mere label that cannot be meaningfully distinguished from hate. If God hated children, that would explain his giving children cancer just as easily as his mysterious "love" for them would. Of course, Calvinists are quick to point out that God never intended for certain persons to be saved, so there is the immediate problem of Christians who disagree amongst themselves about how extensive God's love is for each sinner. As a skeptic, I point to this disagreement among people who use the same bible version, to rationally justify my view that the biblical data on the subject are fatally ambiguous, and I'm probably not creating any more danger for myself in completely ignoring the entire business, than I am in ignoring the contradictions between the different schools of quantum physics.

@@barryjones9362 Thanks Barry. I think also it is the Jehovas Witnesses that believe that the Devil is in charge of the world at the moment, and use this to explain suffering. They are all weak excuses to me. I do believe in a God but not necessarily how it is taught in the Bible.

Not all theists believe that God "gives" cancer to children. I would believe that God created a universe that has an element of spontaneity, creativity, and freedom. I believe we can witness this in the basic composition of matter at the subatomic level where electrons seem to be more spontaneous and utterly random. This extends right up to higher levels of consciousness which appear to have free will. This means atoms, and people, have a degree of freedom and this means things can work out very badly in the short term (cosmic time). Atoms and molecules will do whatever they do. People will make their own decisions. From God's perspective, the cosmos is in a state of becoming. The universe is moving from non-existence toward its full actualization. It is, therefore, necessary that the universe will lack much of the good God intended for it for a period of time. You can't get to 50mph before reaching 40mph. God is intimately present with everything and is moving the cosmos toward its final end through the slaughter bench of history, through hope and despair, through love and hate.

ah yes, the typical "g-d doesn't do what I want" argument to prove he doesn't exists

Wow come out swinging much? lol. People who make fun of it or undermine are those who know for a fact up to this point in history that it doesn't exist in any form under any evidence.

Perhaps it would be better not to know? If we discovered that there is an afterlife, then a lot of people would commit suicide to get there. If we discover there isn't one, then many people would become despairing and fall into depression.

I’m 60 years old and one consistent trait I have seen since I was a child is that those who ridicule God, or the belief in an afterlife are the same ones who totally approve of whatever degeneracy that plagues society at that current time. Today they would be the people who say that men get pregnant too and that children should dance as drag queens and be mutilated with transgender surgery. They’re the subhuman bottom feeding scum of the earth.

In other words, spiritually dead people should not only consider arguments for life beyond death, but should also be discerning enough to tell when spiritually alive conservative Christian philosophers are wasting time talking past each other. Nevermind that Steve's hyper-Calvinist god might have infallibly predestined those unbelievers to misunderstand the issues. Nevermind that Steve's hyper-Calvinist god might have told them, in his revealed will, to come to the truth, while intending by his secret will, that they never come to the truth. If you think God's telling you openly to refrain from adultery, while secretly willing that you commit adultery, is nothing short of sadistic psychotic lunacy, this would just convince Steve of the amazing accuracy of 1st Cor 2:14. Steve is a staunch 5-Point Calvinist, he wrote an article in which he defends the divine goodness of his belief that God's secret will is very often diametrically opposite to his revealed will (i.e., god might secretly will that you commit adultery despite telling you in the 10 commandments to refrain from it). You know: the parent who says "don't get into the cookies before dinner", but secretly and intentionally sets up the situation so the child will give in to temptation, then the parent gets angry at the child and punishes him for doing exactly what the parent wanted the whole time. In other words, you discover why Calvinists are so quick to damn "worldly wisdom" and pretend that what passes for "common sense" is actually devilish deception. They are forced by their lunatic theology to pretend that they think common sense is just proof of sinful deception. The level of deception in people like Steve is no less than the level seen in the minds of the fools who refuse to listen to reason and think that playing with live rattlesnakes is a sign of spiritual maturity. Using argument to convince a snake handler he's wrong is utterly useless because he has already convinced himself that opposition to his beliefs can only come from the devil or biblical ignorance, and its exactly the same with Steve. triablogue.blogspot.com/2017/12/gods-secret-will.html Maybe somebody should contact Steve Hays and ask him how happy in Jesus he would continue to be, if God gave him a glimpse of infallible divine foreknowledge, and the bit he was given showed himself, 5 years from now, suffering in hell (i.e., being imperfect, Steve's belief that his heart was right with god, was false, in which case his doctrinally correct beliefs did not suffice to protect him from hell, anymore than doctrinally correct beliefs of fake Christians suffices to protect them from hell). Steve will insist that his beliefs are aligned with Jesus's teachings, but alas, if God's ways are mysterious, and if he can cause people to be severely self-deluded, and if sin is already infecting Steve's ability to discern spiritual truth to begin with, then Steve's ability to defend his views as "biblical" doesn't necessarily imply anything more significant than the Arminian Christian scholar's ability to defend his Arminianism from scripture. Steve must allow that regardless of how smart somebody is, how sincere they are, or how much knowledge they have about Calvinism, heremeneutics and apologetics, they can STILL be so wrong as to suffer a rather nasty surprise after death. How would Steve act after God gave him an infallible vision revealing Steve suffering in hell starting 5 years after the vision? Infallible means "incapable of failing" therefore, the vision, by being infallible, was depicting future events that were incapable of failing (i.e., Steve could not possibly avoid going to hell)? Or did Steve, just now, suddenly discover the blessed assurance of Molinism?

Poor Barry never refuted my post.

@@stevehays5029 Poor Steve has never refuted most of my articles that criticize his beliefs. Google "turchisrong" and "demolishing Triablogue". perhaps Steve is too busy with a second job in effort to help Jason Engwer pay for the digitization of the Enfield Poltergeist tapes. Poor Steve refused to answer the simple question posed: Would he continue to be happy in Jesus if his Calvinist god gave him a glimpse of infallibly divine foreknowledge showing Steve suffering in hell 5 years from now...yes or no? Should we thus draw conclusions from this alone, or might somebody's refusal to engage in criticism possibly have an innocent explanation? Let's just say that "well documented verdical apparitions" are not going to enable Steve to survive the challenge I post here.

@@stevehays5029 The SPR's early work with trance mediums is more impressive than apparitions. But in both cases (and in fact, for all evidence of the continuation of personality after brain death) one *cannot* in principle differentiate between the survival hypothesis and the living-agent-psi hypothesis, which both explain the data equally well. Braude (2003) argues that one can make (very sophisticated philosophical) arguments that *slightly* tip the scales in favor of survival, although Sudduth (2016) has offered a strong case in the other direction. One can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that anomalous information acquisition really *does* occur sometimes (and in the best cases we can rule out fraud and what Braude calls "the usual suspects"), but there's still a further step in concluding that survival is the best explanation.

Sudduth himself lived in a haunted house. Turns out the poltergeist activity began when a former owner committed suicide on the premises. That, in itself, is strong evidence for life after death,

I can't recall anything at all before I was born , so from my viewpoint nothing exists and nothing has ever existed !

@@MadderMel apart from this flash of self consciousness !

@@geraldhills41 you dummy

​@@MadderMel I can't recall anything from the time of my birth until when I was about four years old. Does that mean that I did not exist during those four years?

Seth Yellin I don’t disagree with you. I argue reliance on two non settled concepts isn’t really a good base. However, if we consider exactly ‘what’ our current thoughts are constructed of - are they protons, electrons? Or are they visceral self maintaining ‘things without physical construct’ ? I think if the latter is more true, thoughts can survive death. With respect

If one has the hope of heaven then it’s sort of a big deal- which is what the Christian believes. It’s not “ fairy tales” if you have a 2500 year old book that acts as a road map with hundreds of fulfilled prophesies and scientific and historical evidence.... of you do not care about where you will spend a potential eternity, you probably need to be more serious about that distinct possibility it is a reality coming rather fast at you.....

Julian Walker btw I grew up atheist and was a biologist until evidence of the complexity in DNA started by journey towards theism- The evidence for Jesus’s Resurrection made me a Christian after a few years of study on the subject - just some background that would go against a cultural bias towards a certain religion-

Bad really had me going until “the evidence for Jesus’ resurrection” well played sir, good trolling! 🤣🙌

Bad Gator oh my goodness thank you so much, you’re right, I should take prophecy, eternity, heaven and hell much more seriously... by the way when you have a minute can I share with you about my lord and savior Poseidon? (I identify as part dolphin...)

Julian Walker well if you could show me Poseidon’s literal existence and that he worked miracles, claimed to be God and was resurrected With historical evidence and 11 non biblical sources about his life/miracles and resurrection, of love to have that chat......😂.

And who stole it?

@@vicentezapata3040 My hypothesis is the Sanhedrin. As Peter says in Acts 2, the tomb of King David is still with us, implying that it was a commonly visited site in Jerusalem. The last thing they would have wanted was the tomb of someone who had gained some popularity, to become a focal point for pilgrimage. Problem was, they had no idea his followers would interpret - the very common - post-death vivid hallucinations of him afterwards as evidence of a resurrection and thus birth Christianity as we know it.

Proof of resurrection Shroud of Turin . The Shroud of Turin is a centuries old linen cloth that bears the image of a crucified man. A man that millions believe to be Jesus of Nazareth. Is it really the cloth that wrapped his crucified body, or is it simply a medieval forgery, a hoax perpetrated by some clever artist? Modern science has completed hundreds of thousands of hours of detailed study and intense research on the Shroud. It is, in fact, the single most studied artifact in human history, and we know more about it today than we ever have before. And yet, the controversy still rages. This web site will keep you abreast of current research, provide you with accurate data from the previous research and let you interact with the researchers themselves. We believe that if you have access to the facts, you can make up your own mind about the Shroud. Make sure you visit the page where you can Examine the Shroud of Turin for yourself. We hope you enjoy your visit. Barrie M. Schwortz, Editor. shroud.com/ ukposts.info/have/v-deo/r2SDdo6Nqm1hwJs.html m.ukposts.info/have/v-deo/bHdlp6Bvn4uHwo0.html

So you admit there was an empty tomb?

@@toma3447 Read above.

According to who?

QChronoD. I disagree with the final sentence or two of your post but have no energy to bother arguing it out in what would need to be a long diatribe. However, as for your query regarding the physical mechanism connecting consciousness to the physical body.....perhaps Dr. Stuart Hammeroff and Sir Roger Penrose's ORCH OR Theory is what you may be searching for. Their theory has been around for 20 plus years and was scoffed and laughed at for years....but has lasted till now and been passing trial after trial with facets of it holding more and more scientific " water " so to speak. In other words, it's growing legs insofar as it's plausibility. It is still looked down on by many but I think it may be a solid theory that might be accurate. It involves microtubules in the brain being the storage area for our consciousness and that at biological death...that consciousness is released and perhaps continues....intact....forever due to quantum entanglement. That is a VERY condensed summation of the theory but...as said, perhaps it is the kind of thing you are searching for. Look up Stuart Hammeroff on UKposts. Brave doctor...and professor....who has been scoffed at....but his theory was solid enough that the great, highly respected Oxford physicist and Philosopher of Science Sir Roger Penrose came on board with him, feeling it was a viable theory after reading it and speaking to Hammeroff many years ago.

@@philosopher0076 I took a quick look at what you brought up and it's an interesting mechanism for how our brain might work, and nothing seems to have been proven wrong (mostly because we don't yet have the technology to be able to see if its false yet) EDIT: BTW Unless there is something that I missed in my quick skim, it's still fully consistent with the laws of the universe and is a physical phenomena that occurs within the brain, and has nothing to do with some immaterial mind/soul/etc that is beyond our current knowing. But you go well beyond what it needs to be true and start introducing metaphysical aspects: "It involves microtubules in the brain being the storage area for our consciousness and that at biological death...that consciousness is released and perhaps continues....intact....forever due to quantum entanglement." So what is released? Is it a physical thing? Some sort of energy? How did it interact with the brain before death? If you want to use quantum entanglement, then I'm going to assume you mean it was some gestalt entanglement of all the quantum states of the particles in the brain. How does that continue to exist once we die? The brain turns to mush and all the physical materials get dispersed by decomposition. Are you positing there is some unknown type of matter that can carry on the pattern? How would it get the pattern from the brain? etc, etc, etc... Once you start to imply that there is a non-physical phenomena involved with consciousness then you now have to prove that there are entire aspects of the world that we have no way of detecting even exist right now (or else we would have likely seen evidence).

QChronoD. Send Hammeroff a letter asking him all those details. I don't have his depth of knowledge and you're asking a million question and I've not the hours to type all those kinds of answers. Or look at his lectures IN FULL and you'll get your answers. I will say one thing....you are saying how does the suggested, "consciousness/soul/etc) " copy the " patterns " in the brain once the brain is destroyed and so on. Who says the brain is the origin of the patterns?? What if the consciousness is the totality of the patterns and is an agent temporarily inside the biology of the brain? Then the destruction of the brain is just causing a release of a totality of consciousness. And to underline a bit of research data that in no way conclusively proves that...but certainly would be supporting evidence of the brain not being the actual source of consciousness...I give you that there have been cases of people who had NO BRAIN....only a brain stem, yet functioned moreover normally AND had a normal and sometimes high IQ. See Dr. Bruce Greyson's lecture which includes a brief overview of one such case: ukposts.info/have/v-deo/q4B4jol6b6WVqok.html

I see we have candidate for the traditional snotty philosopher/Scientist answer. When you guys stop ignoring the massive amount of evidence of NDEs, tell me where the mind is with proof and explain why atoms change their behaviour when you are watching it et al. Then i might believe you, not theory, not a good argument, but proof and test it. Because i can tell you this, get one atom and observe it, without it doing a runner. I do not care about getting another atom, i am talking about the Atom named QchronoD. I want evidence you can see and track that same atom over and over again. After all that is the same burden of proof you asking people who believe in the afterlife. So can it be done? Nope but i digress.

@@Mulberry2000 They can track individual atoms but it take an entire lab full of equipment to be able to do so. There are tons of papers about experiments that verify that capability. I've yet to ever hear of anything that even hints at the possibility that an afterlife is even hypothetically possible. Near death experiences all seemingly come back to eye-witness testimony which is about 1/2 step above useless. (Even worse, it's usually based on someones memories of something that supposed to happen when they had no brain activity) BTW "the Atom named QchronoD" makes no sense as a descriptor and can only be regarded as nonsense.

It's quite silly not to believe in an afterlife because science says an atom can communicate over long distances without the aid of a mind. The atom will change its behaviour if your looking at it. This has lead people to believe in parallel universes and if so life after death can be possible as one of them constructs. The christian should of asked the scientist where is the mind, because he fell into the trap that the damage brain is the mind because it cannot remember or create new memories. It stands to reason if the brain is damage it cannot create or remember new memories, just like a damage radio. A radio cannot receive or send signals but radio waves still exist and others are using them. Even if no one uses them the radio frequencies are stil there and can or do carry messages, ie verbal messages of humans if in use or the message of atoms. Also a person in the afterlife can remember memories forgotten, even if the brain is damaged, because memory was an atom ,a photon. Memories are not hindered by a physical brain. The brain may create news ones and forget them, as one part is damage, it does not mean they are lost forever, because of the above. So an afterlife world is not governed by our physical law and can create any form of memory created by the person. Equally a person who is blind can see in the afterlife, and they can see their own memories of the life they have left. It does not mean they will be "judged" on the memories as been seen. The person can see the events unfold and not see them at the same time. Time, events, blindness, physical illness, impairment, experiences et al are all happening at the same time and can be viewed from many different angles in the after life. When you get snotty scientists or doctors ask them where is the mind? They can only answer as the op in the video, it's in the head stupid because the mind creates them. Then ask them for proof? Silence.

@@Mulberry2000 I agree with you and it is very frustrating to keep on seeing people including scientists simultaneously use thought, emotions etc as a defining property of conciousness which it is not. I believe that after 500 - 1000 years from now we would completely decode the neural correlates of all human thoughts, emotions and feeling and we might literally be able to know what someone is thinking in an objective sense just by looking at their brain. Even though such a technology is immensely hard to invent it is not philosophically impossible. But what I feel as impossible is to objectively explain conciousness itself which makes subjective experience from the physically correlated thoughts and feelings and give them a subjective meaning, or at the most not with the scientific formalism that we have which strikes out any form of subjective property at the smallest of scales. And I like the idea of memories being translated after the so called "death" but was never able to have an intution about it even though much of vedanta and eastern wisdom traditions say such progression is indeed possible. Maybe these memories become the karma that guides us in the afterlife. When we die the correlations of conciousness might as you say shift from that of our brains to something of increased complexity which is possible - like an organized property hidden in chaos. But would the experience be the same as that when you were alive ? And that is what I meant and I never believe that conciousness is "in" the brain but you cannot deny the fact that brain is sensitive when it comes to conciousness which is why I believe that even if thoughts and emotions are indeed carried beyond death I am not sure what it would be like What I mean precisely is that your brain has some emotional and cognitive references - these references are what make you happy when someone is kind towards you and makes you sad in the event of death of a loved one. These references are learnt and evolved throughout life starting from birth and I that is what that might be lost or at least partly in death. So your memories might weakly continue after death in some highly abstract form but would it create the same subjective experience without the references which I call the discerning mind ? In the absence of such abstract references, the thought might still exist but it would be experienced as something entirely different.

@@delq They can do that now, with pilots thinking with their minds to shoot missiles etc . The problem is even though they can map thoughts and wavelengths, they will not be able to do it if they do know where the mind resides. Mechanical biology cannot do this job because it assumes too much and at the same time assumes too little. The answer is in quantum mechanics, or may be i am too. guilty of my criticisms of mechanical biology. The point though is if QM can point to parallel universes, who is to say one of them is not the afterlife!. After all from religious and NDE evidence, point to a realm totally different from ours. Most describe it as more real than this world. The quran says the exactly the same thing as well. All religions touch upon the subject but modern science is blinded by it hatred of them all. Yet they have created the most evil of all weapons, which could and can wipe us out in a flash. Scientist still say they are the most moral, better and superior to other generations. It seems to me they are full of hubris and have closed their minds.

@@Mulberry2000 Absolutely. Quantum mechanics is something that I strongly believe can provide some answers. But lately i am quite careful when i say it because lot of physicists say that just because two similar mysterious and unintuitive things cannot be connected for no reason which I am strongly against why : 1. Quantum mechanics is one of the pillars of reality and if it is universal(which it is) should have a model for everything including conciousness. People who say that is not required are the ones who deny the existence of conciousness and say it as an illusion created by the mind. 2. I have had a very subjective idea which is hard to explain but involves consciousness as a by product that you get when something is created from nothingness. Quantum mechanics says that fundamental quantities like position and momentum are not immeasurable but is intrinsically nonexistent until observation which is what I mean by nothingness. What is the difference between nothingness and existence ? Imagine a wall and you hit it what does it mean in the context of yourself to say that the wall exists - it would be the pain you experience when you hit it which is caused by a force acting against you when you make contact with it. So the physical existence of the wall is just the position of the wall and the force it gives out when you hit it. I summarize these two characters of the wall as the information that physical laws of nature need as the variables to its equations. And if you speculate on it deeply it feels like that is all there is - just the information. We feel the wall to be something of itself because we too are made up of information and therefore the obvious nature of information is lost. So I think conciousness is where that information resides. The information every piece of existence should have - an awareness that is fundamentally unique which allows it to behave in accordance with natures laws - a by product of existence.

@@delq What if a person can move is own atoms apart, with any hard to himself. Some say Aliens come to their bedroom and do not bust doors or do any damage. I am not going to deny people's experience because i have not experienced it myself. So what if a intelligent life form had developed that technology? Would put the cat among the pigeons literally their atoms to boot. Star Trek postulated this when they traveled from the ship to planets surface. . So what if a force beyond us, call it a god for argument sake, said BE and it is . BE and the photon or atom or essence of life BE and the atom "spoke" to the other atom. What if we invented that travel system? It would imply our atoms go somewhere else till it hit its destination. It's a fact our reality is made of something, what if that reality can open doors via photons, or something smaller than that, something we as humans say impossible. So ghosts are not of dead people but of people alive who happens to fade into our exist by a glitch or on purpose. After all there infinite millions of you and me in parallel universes, all separate, all real and yet, all are you and me. Think on it for one moment the gravity of that concept. The conscious will, the BE, is the command to form and who gives that command. Scientist say it's all an accident, its all fake. Everything looks made but it is not it just got there by randomness.. The cambrian fossil records, puzzle anthropologists because all of sudden new life forms came into existence with an evolutionary tree. My view some put them there and left them to develop. It's the BE concept, but if you do not believe that, well no animals was put there and they just evolved out of nothing. Except there is no evidence for that. We think because a tree, is not there because it does not exist, till someone discovers it. America did not exist till a European saw it first, never mind the fact people were living there. Who cares about them, they are nothing in our hubris. Yet the american indians knew and saw who created them.

Absolutely right.

But I don't see why they would continue with the burdens they have in life? I can ask, why would anyone, who is reasonably happy in life, not want to continue living forever?

Do you believe Napoleon existed or George Washington?

@@pauljohn1979 We have solid evidence that both Napoleon and Washington existed in this world. We only have anecdotal evidence that Jesus did.

Anecdotal? Even secular scholars know that the biblical accounts of Jesus are historically accurate. Archaeologists also agree on the archaeological accuracy of the bible. Furthermore more there are other accounts of Jesus in other historical writings such as by Poycarp, Ignatius and Tacitus to name but a few. Tacitus was a Roman and wasn't even a believer and he spoke about Jesus being crucified. I suggest you do some research because to suggest Jesus never even existed is utter madness. Bart Ehrman the leading biblical sceptic even acknowledges his existence.

@@beefy32 I think your knowledge of history is v weak

Proof of resurrection Shroud of Turin . The Shroud of Turin is a centuries old linen cloth that bears the image of a crucified man. A man that millions believe to be Jesus of Nazareth. Is it really the cloth that wrapped his crucified body, or is it simply a medieval forgery, a hoax perpetrated by some clever artist? Modern science has completed hundreds of thousands of hours of detailed study and intense research on the Shroud. It is, in fact, the single most studied artifact in human history, and we know more about it today than we ever have before. And yet, the controversy still rages. This web site will keep you abreast of current research, provide you with accurate data from the previous research and let you interact with the researchers themselves. We believe that if you have access to the facts, you can make up your own mind about the Shroud. Make sure you visit the page where you can Examine the Shroud of Turin for yourself. We hope you enjoy your visit. Barrie M. Schwortz, Editor. shroud.com/ ukposts.info/have/v-deo/r2SDdo6Nqm1hwJs.html m.ukposts.info/have/v-deo/bHdlp6Bvn4uHwo0.html

Because being non conscious is the worst thing there is. Imagine if you died right now, every pleasure you have, every moment etc will be lost forever

@@pedroroque829 it's not bad because you will forget everything and you won't worry about it

That's like saying why be so upset if your child dies. Your life was perfectly fine before they came along. In one case you have nothing to lose and no experience to leave behind or regret. Once you experience life the idea of leaving it us far more confronting and upsetting.

The sad truth is that most people don't even have a life experience.

@@Samsara_is_dukkha Ha, which is why I guess they're obsessed with death experiences. lol

@@Whippets Courtesy of mass extinction and thermonuclear war...

@@Samsara_is_dukkha Yes, just give them enough time ...

Looks like Mr. Kuhn is the adult based on his up-to-date knowledge of neuroscience. Moreland merely brushes off the FACT that memories reside in the brain. That's kinda insane I didn't expect that.

The question of an afterlife doesn’t presuppose God. If a soul exists, it’s at least conceivable that it could go on to exist after death, sans God.

JP mentioned that presupposition of God existing- but he does that with evidence so it’s not some wild presupposition with no basis in reality-

totalfreedom45 well said. Fear is what causes all the superstition and dogma. We fear what we have no control over.

Yes, and to you and Greg I add... Why religion? Fear of death strikes me as a weak hypothesis to explain something so complex. Surely it's much more likely that one will find a better answer in the study of the evolution of the mind?

Everyone has his idea and worldview u cant say that ur worldview is the truth because there are enough evidances for believers u think u came from nothingness but others cant accept that so be polite and respect other views

Morgan Andreasson Trouble is that the scientific view of the world is radically defective - vide for one intentionality.

Looks like you triggered the religionists.

Tobias N. Carroll is the farthest thing from dumb. Narrow minded to some areas of NDE and such research... but not " dumb " ? No no no.

Morgan Andreasson Jesus is history. Nothing to do with religion. It’s black or white

Our present is just as dark as our past.

Still better than an atheist.

@@srb00 Becaaaaause...there's just as much evidence for Lord Xenu as there is for old Yahwey?

@@librulcunspirisy not true

(1) The host is an atheist... (2) the idea of postmortem continuation of personality it not at all analogous to how many angels can dance on a pin (which was never a topic of serious discussion among theologians in the first place) given the arguments that one can make for it (see Braude 2003 and Sudduth 2016). But (3) I agree that Moreland is *not* particularly impressive or persuasive here (or anywhere else, as far as I can tell).

​@@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns 1. It sounded like Moreland goofed, saying "yes" at 7:46 and then "no" at 9:18 to the same question. I cringed so hard because I knew he should have said "no", so I had to wait through 90 seconds of confusion. I'm going to give Moreland the benefit of the doubt and assume he just misunderstood the question when Kuhn first asked it. But still, that confusion definitely made it more difficult for him to seem impressive or persuasive. 2. Moreland didn't really have much to say or prove, because of the questions asked. He laid out his three points, and then Kuhn immediately changed the subject to his own field of expertise. At the end of the video Moreland and Kuhn didn't really disagree on anything they had discussed in detail. Another reason why he may have not seemed impressive. 3. Other than the error detailed in (1), everything Moreland said seemed fairly obvious. It's obvious that theism, belief in the Resurrection, and evidenced NDEs could reasonably lead to belief in an afterlife. It's obvious that "memories" as colloquially defined aren't stored in the brain-they are an abstract concept. It's obvious that, assuming there's an afterlife, your soul wouldn't remember "memories" it never formed. So perhaps he wasn't very impressive here because he was just making very basic philosophical arguments that Kuhn already agreed with.

Chris Bandy I think Moreland didn’t completely understand the question. He said yes and know which logically is a contradiction, but he later explains he doesn’t know, as does anyone.

What evidence is there that you or anyone else is conscious?

And?

Spend a few days going through www.nderf.org

No....actually we're almost certainly NOT only our brains. Look up Dr. Bruce Greyson, Dr. Penny Sartori, Dr. Jeff Long, Dr. Kenneth Ring, Dr. Jim Tucker, Dr. Sam Parnia, Dr. Eben Alexander, Dr. Peter Fenwick, Dr. Raymond Moody, for starters......

Mr Incognito I am looking at this now. Thank you.

And our stomachs...

why is that sad? whether or not we have a soul our life is still the same

Proof of resurrection Shroud of Turin . The Shroud of Turin is a centuries old linen cloth that bears the image of a crucified man. A man that millions believe to be Jesus of Nazareth. Is it really the cloth that wrapped his crucified body, or is it simply a medieval forgery, a hoax perpetrated by some clever artist? Modern science has completed hundreds of thousands of hours of detailed study and intense research on the Shroud. It is, in fact, the single most studied artifact in human history, and we know more about it today than we ever have before. And yet, the controversy still rages. This web site will keep you abreast of current research, provide you with accurate data from the previous research and let you interact with the researchers themselves. We believe that if you have access to the facts, you can make up your own mind about the Shroud. Make sure you visit the page where you can Examine the Shroud of Turin for yourself. We hope you enjoy your visit. Barrie M. Schwortz, Editor. shroud.com/ ukposts.info/have/v-deo/r2SDdo6Nqm1hwJs.html m.ukposts.info/have/v-deo/bHdlp6Bvn4uHwo0.html

you're wrong

@@yungzooma3650 Prove it.

Why would anyone ask you?

A lazy answer. You have absolutely no idea about anything that may be once we leave here.

@Jeff a lazy reply to a lazy answer.

you're wrong

You’re being dishonest. Nobody knows. You are making a knowledge claim.