Argument from divine hiddenness

https://www.amazon.com/Christianity-Compatible-Deathbed-Near-Death-Experiences-ebook/dp/B0CFYCWKHB

As a skeptic how do you view this science? Do you deny science simply because it contradicts your worldview?

What scientific journal is this study published in? It's Facebook or Youtube, isnt it? 😆

https://www.amazon.com/Christianity-Compatible-Deathbed-Near-Death-Experiences-ebook/dp/B0CFYCWKHB

Oh, I stand corrected! Its an ebook on Amazon aimed at 15 year olds written by an apologist with a Master of Divinity. Perhaps you should check your own obvious biases rather than question mine.

As i said, All one has to do is search for Christian v non-Christian ndes and you'll see how hard it is to find non Christian ones and then reading them how obscure they are. Quantitatively and qualitatively different. 

I encourage you to do your own research. There is undeniably a lot of prosyletizing dressed up as science (see link above), but that does not give an accurate accounting of the of the data.

Here is a study comparing Western and Japanese NDEs. Western folks tend to view their experience through a religious lense while Japanese do not. Japanese do not personify aspects of their experience. Ie. There might be a bright light, but it doesnt have personality, etc.

What if all these studies are correct? You would have a point that not knowing much about Jesus isn't going to suddenly make someone see him in an nde. But they do see a being of light. And those that do know him or even skeptics who are just more familiar do see him and Christian content at a significant rate such that it's a core component of ndes. Doesn't happen quantitatively or qualitatively the same with other religions. Again this is based on that formal study but also just looking into these things with your own eyes in an impartial way.

On a side note, do you seriously take the position that humans are nothing other than elaborate flesh robots who sometimes hallucinate elaborate afterlife stories when they die? Isnt that what atheism or skepticism or materialism is reduced to these days? Plain evidence staring us in the face, but y'all wanna ignore it, like an ostrich with his head in the sand

But they do see a being of light

And? It is only through a filter of Christianity where Jesus alone could equate to light.

And those that do know him or even skeptics who are just more familiar do see him and Christian content at a significant rate such that it's a core component of ndes. Doesn't happen quantitatively or qualitatively the same with other religions.

So you claim.

On a side note, do you seriously take the position that humans are nothing other than elaborate flesh robots who sometimes hallucinate elaborate afterlife stories when they die?

I would question and/or disagree with that characterization.

Isnt that what atheism or skepticism or materialism is reduced to these days?

What does this have to do with NDEs? Are you lashing out? 😄

Plain evidence staring us in the face,

"Plain evidence" like the non-scientific tome for 15yos cited above? Suffice to say, thats not strong evidence of your conclusions.

So you claim.

If im wrong show me im wrong. I probably wouldn't accept a couple anecdotes but apparently you can't even provide that. I know I can't recall ever seeing Mohamed or Buddha ndes. And the couple Indian ones were open to interpretation or didn't look credible. Just take my advice and look into it with your own eyes, tell me what you conclude, and then tell me why you insist on adhering to your worldview despite the evidence and what your own eyes can see

On a side note, do you seriously take the position that humans are nothing other than elaborate flesh robots who sometimes hallucinate elaborate afterlife stories when they die?

I would question and/or disagree with that characterization

Why? This is a debate site, not a place to make arm chair conclusory statements

If im wrong show me im wrong.

That is not how a burden of proof works. Claims need evidence to stand.

Why? This is a debate site, not a place to make arm chair conclusory statements

It is a strawman. ...probably thrown out to distract from your inability to support your own conclusory statements.

So i say its raining outside and I tell you there's someone with a PhD who teaches logic and critical thinking (like the guy who wrote the book i showed you) who also says its raining outside, your response is to say its not your responsibility to look outside? and you will only accept peer reviewed scientific evidence that its raining outside and I have the burden to show this evidence?

I mean you are capable enough to know why id call your position as humans being elaborate flesh robots who Hallucinate elaborate afterlife stories. Free will and the plain evidence of ndes and nde science. So its fair of me to expect a reply right? Maybe im just not capable, but i dont know else to characterize it, other than to say you'd think its too simplistic and hurts the feelings of skeptics, even though what im saying is essentially true

So i say its raining outside

That's not a valid analogy. Rain is sometjing every one has experienced. NDEs are not. Even if I am willing to risk my life (which I am not), there is no guarantee of NDE.

and you will only accept peer reviewed scientific evidence that its raining outside and I have the burden to show this evidence?

If you're going to argue NDEs are scientific, then, yeah, you have the burden of proof and scientific evidence will be required. It's not that I will only accept this type of evidence, but that this is the standard of evidence you set.

humans being elaborate flesh robots

As opposed to what - soul radios?! 🤔

For sure, robots are relative to human thought constructs.

And NDE's are not dead thought constructs, whereas DE's are unknowable.

Soul = biological ergo synonyms { biologic/soul }

Spirit-2 = energy { physical reality }

Di = 2-ness

Vine = ...' Etymology: The word traces back to the Latin vinum, which means "wine," as the original definition was specific to the grapevine '...

1} seed { fetus/baby },

2} fruiting body { born outward yet still attached }.

3} hydrates until maximum plump-ness and color,

4} picked from vine and squished by human toes - feet,

5} juice extracted placed in bottles to ferment,

6} older the fermentaion is sometimes associated with a better wine i..e approaching de-vine beverage for the soul/biologic.

Woman X x - Man X y = di-vine complex organism with woman numerically more complex than man, if not also synergetically more complex.

Only some female organisms --not any males ever-- can pop-out exact clones of them selves.

Bilateral is the most complex biologic/soul organisms we know to exists:

1} two hemi-spheres with intermediating corpus callasum,

2} 31 left spinal nerves and 31 right spinal nerves > see also 5-fold icosahedron --{ 12 around-none equal radius spheres-vertexes }-- that has 31 left skew set of 31 great circles and 31 right-skew set of 31 great circles,

3} brain stem has 12 or is it 24 nerves with the largest nerve in body the vagus nerve. The 4-fold cubo-octahedron is 12-around-1 equal radius spheres-vertexes, and has special-case set of 24 radii and 24 chords when constructed from four circle { with hexagonal-triangular folds } planes.

4} mice and other animals have hexagonal-triangular grid pattern process used in brain for location finding.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/brains-positioning-system-linked-to-memory-20141007/

In 2014 two people found won nobel prize for their findings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ujnZcaqf-4

You've just proved that if there is God, he's not loving because this is your assumption in your first statement.

Agreed. This is significant to any individual or religion which claims a loving god exists.

Cultural and Religious Mirroring Research indicates that while the core elements of NDEs (peace, out-of-body experience, tunnel, life review, beings of light) are universal, the specific entities encountered often reflect the experiencer’s cultural or religious background.  For Christians, the Being of Light or guide typically appears as Jesus Christ; for Buddhists, it is often Buddha; and for Hindus, figures like Krishna or the Lord of Death.  This suggests that the subjective content of NDEs is influenced by personal belief systems, even if the underlying experience is consistent. 

Yes, perfect love.

Yes, it was indeed, perfect love.

You have rightly transcribed the Greek Septuagint version of the verse in Matthew, "ἠλὶ, ἠλὶ , λεμὰ σαβαχθάνι," but ignore the early 16th century religious meaning of the word "forsaken." in late Old English [early 16th century] from the Tynsdale translation, adopted by King James, and others] which was not understood as abandonment of God as if Jesus had done something so horribly wrong, he was being dismissed by God, but that God knew, and Jesus then learned, as well, that the entire spiritual support of Jesus by God and angels had to be withdrawn such that Jesus could fulfill the need that he, alone, make atonement effective for mankond on his own shoulders, alone. Neither God the Father nor angels could lend their support in that hour, or justice would not be satisfied. You may not find that in Merriam-Webster, but will in the OED; a more complete [most complete] English dictionary.

1} if there is a god, She is perfectly loving, and pregnant --one in the oven-- ergo 12-around-one { nucleus in the womb/oven { 12 spheres }.

Start with most refined and accurate definitions before moving forward with false information

Not on this Earth. By your description of "Her" preganacy, you imply mammalian birth, and. sorry, but among Earth's mammals, not one is or ever was capable of pathenogenesis [virgin birth], and no one but another god, a male one, by the way, could impregnate her since virgin birth capability is denied to all Earth mammals, your mathematics notwithstanding. Yes, that is Occam's razor.

Bestselling “New Atheist” author Richard Dawkins famously asked: does religion turn people stupid, or do stupid people become religious?

By your description of "Her" preganacy, you imply mammalian birth..

My reference to more complex, bilateral humans was clarity for those who have no idea, that there can exist no y chromosom only, organism. No evidence any where for such. Whereas we know that women can and do exist with only one X chromosome.

Sorry if my comments caused you to infer something I did not intend nor ever would

1} I was clear with my comments and here they are again. Word was not used mammal not used in this context.

..........................Only some female organisms --not any males ever-- can pop-out exact clones of them selves........... ' can you read my lips when im talking to you '......comedian hart in some comic movie I saw.

Bestselling “New Atheist” author Richard Dawkins famously asked: does religion turn people stupid, or do stupid people become religious?

Its a two way street. For various reasons humans see some out of ordinary, and assign a religous phenomena to it, kinda of above and beyond the normal.

Then others here the story, record it and retell it is a religious phenomena above and beyond normal.

So on and so on ---> God must have done it. Who is God then? A human man with long white beard who created us humans in his image, and not with his power, ergo we are slaves for eternity.

So we exist eternally? Male God exists eternally? If male comes from female, then there must also female God eternally existent?

.........space......@........space.....

@ is symbolism for eternally existent, finite, dynamic, occupied space Universe. @ must have at least two parts, or aspects or forces, or whatever to have High Divine-ness?

1} Gravity { ultra-micro non-quantised } = outer positive ( ) curved ( ) surface set of geodesic events,

2} physical reality aka observed { quantised } time is the nucleated ---associetated with sine-wave pattern-- aspect of all space and time horn tori,

3} Dark Energy { ultra-micro non-quantised } = inner negative )( curved )( surface set of geodesic events

These space and time tori come i many frequencies starting with the 18/0, 3 hexagonal frequency, --with 9 as the semi-non-nuclated yet internal to the tube agent of change via inexactitude--. After that every third every third nucleated event is central to Minimal Pulse of Universe, the graviton-darkEon, and the next frequency is 24/0, > 30/0 > 36/0 etc in hexagonal leaps.

Only some female organisms --not any males ever-- can pop-out exact clones of them selves

That's fine, as far as it goes. My point was that "pop-out exact clones" do not happen to humans, nor any other mammal.

That's fine, as far as it goes. My point was that "pop-out exact clones" do not happen to humans, nor any other mammal.

My point of course was I did not state or suggest such to occur with mammals, and was clear what I meant. Thank You!

Yes I know its fine as far as it goes. It appears were all good now. I hope.

If there was a God religion would exist. Religion exists therefore there is a God and religion tries to explain God’s existence.