Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

It's interesting how much the video landscape has changed over the years. A major factor in the death or (near death) of video providers has to be the 800 pound YouTube gorilla. For a lot of these guys the plan seems to be to stick to a niche - but even there YouTube is probably better at making you money for your original content than self-hosting.

Reuters, I noticed, has decided to just put everything up on YouTube and do away with their own player. Probably a smart economic move.

Yeah, this was very painful to watch. I just don't know what to do with human beings like this, other than flog them to near-death.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

At first I was like, meh, then I was like wahhh?


Completely agree.

Which is sad because that means we have become so desensitized from crashes/accidents/near death events that it took the guy flipping out of the truck unharmed for us to be impressed. I'm not sure how it's come to this.

Anywho... Time for me to get back to playing some BF3. I need to pilot a jet and ram it into the enemy's base so I can hijack one of their helicopters in order to blow up some tanks.

THANK YOU!

Saved me typing it out.

In reply to this comment by ChaosEngine:
>> ^lantern53:

Atheism is really the most awful thought, I don't know how anyone can possibly entertain it. Life is so short, what is the point if there is nothing after death.
You may not want to believe in a higher power, but for your own sake or curiosity, do a little research. I recommend studying near death experiences.
Or not, no skin off of my nose if you have no curiosity about the greatest questions of all time.
Fortunately for the wave, the ocean will eventually re-absorb it. Just because the wave doesn't believe in the ocean, doesn't mean the ocean will reject it. The ocean doesn't give a good crap what the wave believes.


Leaving aside the greeting-card level of philosophy on display here, what the fuck does that have to do with this video?

>> ^lantern53:

Atheism is really the most awful thought, I don't know how anyone can possibly entertain it. Life is so short, what is the point if there is nothing after death.
You may not want to believe in a higher power, but for your own sake or curiosity, do a little research. I recommend studying near death experiences.
Or not, no skin off of my nose if you have no curiosity about the greatest questions of all time.
Fortunately for the wave, the ocean will eventually re-absorb it. Just because the wave doesn't believe in the ocean, doesn't mean the ocean will reject it. The ocean doesn't give a good crap what the wave believes.


And yet we're still regularly subjected to this kind of sanctimoniousness kindergarten philosophy.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^lantern53:
Atheism is really the most awful thought, I don't know how anyone can possibly entertain it. Life is so short, what is the point if there is nothing after death.
You may not want to believe in a higher power, but for your own sake or curiosity, do a little research. I recommend studying near death experiences.
Or not, no skin off of my nose if you have no curiosity about the greatest questions of all time.
Fortunately for the wave, the ocean will eventually re-absorb it. Just because the wave doesn't believe in the ocean, doesn't mean the ocean will reject it. The ocean doesn't give a good crap what the wave believes.

Leaving aside the greeting-card level of philosophy on display here, what the fuck does that have to do with this video?

>> ^lantern53:

Atheism is really the most awful thought, I don't know how anyone can possibly entertain it. Life is so short, what is the point if there is nothing after death.
You may not want to believe in a higher power, but for your own sake or curiosity, do a little research. I recommend studying near death experiences.
Or not, no skin off of my nose if you have no curiosity about the greatest questions of all time.
Fortunately for the wave, the ocean will eventually re-absorb it. Just because the wave doesn't believe in the ocean, doesn't mean the ocean will reject it. The ocean doesn't give a good crap what the wave believes.


Leaving aside the greeting-card level of philosophy on display here, what the fuck does that have to do with this video?

Near death experiences have been scientifically investigated, and reproduced.

Large power, low frequency EM waves induce similar "white tunnel" prospect.
As does depriving the brain of oxygen.

Its not supernatural, its a hallucination cause your brain gets fucked up as you near death and cant process the world like it should.

Blue screen of death...if you will.

Atheism is really the most awful thought, I don't know how anyone can possibly entertain it. Life is so short, what is the point if there is nothing after death.

You may not want to believe in a higher power, but for your own sake or curiosity, do a little research. I recommend studying near death experiences.

Or not, no skin off of my nose if you have no curiosity about the greatest questions of all time.

Fortunately for the wave, the ocean will eventually re-absorb it. Just because the wave doesn't believe in the ocean, doesn't mean the ocean will reject it. The ocean doesn't give a good crap what the wave believes.

>> ^deathcow:

Oh great! If you stop submitting videos there will only be shitty videos posted. You need to keep submitting videos because you know everyone elses videos suck and basically you're the only thing this place has going for it.


What he said....knock down those kitty viddies and human idiocy through self-imposed near-death scenarios....

Less Politics

Less Death and Mayhem

More Revolutionary and Imposing ideas....free us from the constraints of our own dis-belief!

i always find it interesting when people assume that i get my information from zeitgeist.as if the idea that i studied under a biblical scholar is something to not even be considered.

as for defending the sabbath as being sunday. might i suggest that when you use a souce *cough* wikipedia *cough* that you may wish to read the article in its entirety.

What I am assuming is that you (and the biblical scholar you studied under) are poorly researched, because the information you've provided here:

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen046.html

is nearly completely false.

If you disagree, then please provide pre new testament sources for some of the claims, such as:

Horus having 12 disciples

Horus being a child teacher

Horus being baptized at age 30

Horus walking on water

Horus being known as the way the truth the light lamb of God, etc

Horus being crucified, dead for three days and resurrected

I'll wait..

As far as the Sabbath, I never claimed it was on Sunday. I said Sunday is the Lords day, not the Sabbath.

shiny.
you know i have no interest in changing how you believe or perceive the world around you.
Your faith is your own but please put a tad bit more time into rebuttals when concerning my posts.

If you actually provided a cohesive argument that was sourced, then I would have put more time into it. As it stands, all you did was link to a bunch of unsubstantiated claims.

apply to boston university and get your degree.i hear their theology courses are top notch.
ooooor continue to play whack a mole with every post,comment or inference that challenges your world view based on limited religious and biblical understandings.

I've done the same research you have and come to different conclusions. I used to have some of the same beliefs that you do, remember? I know quite a bit about what you believe and why you believe it. The Lord has shown me these arguments to be foolishness. They are predicated on very poor (or made up) evidence which has been in every case heavily exaggerated. Bible skeptics are willing to believe anything that is contrary to the bible being accurate, and never apply the same level of skepticism to those arguments.

i am sorry if that offends or hurts you but i read your posts and it is painfully obvious that you dont know what you are talking about concerning religious history.

so.try seminary school.
graduate and then our arguments can become legendary!

There isn't much to argue about. You've rejected the Lord Jesus Christ, and you teach others to do the same. You want to do things your own way, and you're willing to risk that you won't face judgment for your sins. God is willing to open your eyes, if you would humble yourself and repent.

oh.and another thing.scholars are still unsure of the exact date of resurrection.
just sayin....

For you, man is authoritative on these issues. I believe Gods word.

>> ^enoch

>> ^enoch:

>> ^lurgee:
i have always wanted to stone jesus freaks that work on a sunday at wally world.
praise the lard!

the sabbath is actually saturday.
the irony is that sunday is representative of the sun god amen ra.
sun god.
sun day.
see: horus
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen046.html
(i couldnt resist using this site as a reference.oh how i do love delicious irony)


http://stupidevilbastard.com/2005/01/ending_the_myth_of_horus/

Use your head for second..do you think that's what Sunday means in Hebrew? We worship on the Lords day, which is Sunday, because that is the day of the resurrection.

why do christians have to copy other beliefs?>> ^enoch:

>> ^lurgee:
i have always wanted to stone jesus freaks that work on a sunday at wally world.
praise the lard!

the sabbath is actually saturday.
the irony is that sunday is representative of the sun god amen ra.
sun god.
sun day.
see: horus
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen046.html
(i couldnt resist using this site as a reference.oh how i do love delicious irony)

>> ^lurgee:

i have always wanted to stone jesus freaks that work on a sunday at wally world.
praise the lard!


the sabbath is actually saturday.
the irony is that sunday is representative of the sun god amen ra.
sun god.
sun day.
see: horus
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen046.html

(i couldnt resist using this site as a reference.oh how i do love delicious irony)

If we're using terms like "tangible evidence", then I assume we're talking in scientific terms. If we're talking scientifically, then you need phenomena, a theory to explain them, and ways of testing that theory. "I would say..." isn't a scientific statement. What qualifies as "tangible evidence" has to be easily understood and agreed upon by everyone. If people don't agree that something is evidence of something, then it's meaningless. Like, if I suggest that graphite pencils are electric insulators, and you say that's bollocks, we can create an electric curcuit with a light bulb. We both agree that if the light bulb turns on when the electric circuit passes through a graphite pencil, then it's definitely not an insulator, regardless of our initial positions. So if the world at large doesn't agree that NDEs are necessarily evidence of God, then it's a meaningless argument. When you theorize God, it doesn't flow logically that when people are near death that they will necessarily see God. You can look at evidence and say, "This fits in with a theory of God." That's fair, but calling it evidence is not scientific. NDEs also fit with my theory that people seek ultimate authority the the worse and worse their living conditions are. I don't claim that it's evidence that I'm right, just that it supports or "fits" my theory. In other words, it proves nothing at all.

I said NDEs do provide tangible evidence of a spirit, not God. Having a spirit is tangible evidence of God. Not all NDEs provide such evidence, but as I mentioned, some people come back to life with information they shouldn't, or couldn't have.

I confess I didn't watch the whole thing (I guessed where it was going once it trailed away from logical enquiry, and so far I haven't heard any surprises -- if there's anything new and interesting in this particular story, lemme know where and I'll watch).

That's fairly typical, I have to say. I don't know if it an atheist thing, or a generational thing and I am speaking to a lot of young atheists, but very often people will refuse to even look at certain kinds of information and testimony, based on their preconceived notions, and their own self-confidence that they've "predicted" what is coming. This is of course a perfect shield for their own ignorance, the censoring of anything which could possibly change their mind, by discounting it in advance. Many atheists have outright told me that if it's longer than a paragraph or two they won't even read it.

The testimony in this video is unique and very interesting, nothing short of incredible actually, and no you couldn't possibly predict what was going to happen. You didn't even make it to him getting into the ambulance.

About the mother praying at that moment. It's possible that there is some connection between mother and child that hasn't been properly measured, that only occurs when children are under extreme stress, and even then, only in rare cases (most mothers don't report "knowing" their children were suffering or dying when they hear the news later). That doesn't require Yahweh, or even any God. It's just a phenomenon that we don't know about. And again, "We can't explain it," isn't evidence of God any more than fully explaining the phenomenon is proof that God is fake.

God told her to pray at that moment, and Ian heard the words of her prayer. You need to watch the video if we're going to have a meaningful conversation about this.

If you cannot provide a test whose conclusion we both agree on for God's existence, then by scientific definition, you have no theory at all. When I press you, the only test you provide is me givnig myself fully to God, and the proof will be that he will contact me eventually if I do it well enough. There's so many loopholes in that to begin with, that no matter how long I did it without result, you'd be able to say why it didn't work. Also, even if it did have a result, I wouldn't agree that the result is proof of God. My theory is that if someone wants to believe something hard enough, and if they bend their will to believing it, they can come to beleive anything they want. It's widely dismissed as "self-delusion" or "choosing to live in a fantasy world" if you're talking about anything other than religoius faith. Some, including myself, also include religious faith in that category. No matter how real it seems, if you convinced yourself of it, that's a good reason to believe you might be deluded. Bottom line, there's no test that we generally agree on, so there's no theory, just your faith that it's true.

You are still operating under the faulty premise that you could suss God out by pointing an instrument at Him. Does that seem logical to you, that you could test for God? That if you just had the right test, suddenly God will appear and say "I guess you got me." The very notion is absurd, yet here you are demanding empirical proof for Gods existence.

What I told you is that only God can provide you revelation of His existence. He has given you a way to know Him, through His Son Jesus Christ. Yet, you refuse to do the one thing which would yield any results. You could pray this prayer, for instance:

"God, I don't know if you're there or not. If you are there, I want to know you. Please let me know you are real and I will give my life to you. Please come into my life as Lord and Savior."

Could you pray that prayer and mean it? Are you interested in the truth?

I'm not sure why, but to people of faith, there seems to be a fear that everything unexplained, if not explained by their God, is somehow a strike against him. That's not at all how science or logic work. There is no phenomenon that requires God to be responsible for it, except the ones he is specifically described as having done himself in the Bible. There's nothing in the Bible that says people's experiences when suffering extreme mental trauma must be caused by God. If they're explained some other way, your theory of God stands just as strong as before. It's when you go attributing everything that YOU don't understand to God's hand that you get yourself into trouble because when those things are later objectively explained another way then you have to change your story. Better to think critically from the begining, and say with authority what God definitely is and isn't, and what God definitely is and isn't responsible for. Then, if any single one of those things is disproven, then you can simply agree that your description of God is wrong.

Again, I said that NDEs evidence of a spirit and not necessary God.

You missed my comment above about God and patience. You've said elsewhere that God lives outside time, and looks at the history of the universe like a movie that he can browse and interfere in at will. But then you also say that he has "patience" which can "wear out". "Patience", by definition, means being forced to wait, and "wearing out" means eroding in time, both of which require living in time. These two ideas of God both living outside of time and having patience which wears out, if words have meaning, are incompatible. They cannot both be true. If you continue to hold to both of those claims about your God, then that's proof that he doesn't exist as you describe him

That isn't how I described it. That was your interpretation of my comment, that God peruses the Universe like a movie. God necessarily exists outside of time and space because He created them. Since He is eternal He is not bound by time. However, that isn't to say that what is happening "now" isn't real. God is the reason we have time, and that things are happening in this moment. The future has not happened yet, there is only now. God operates in this moment, and He isn't limited by time. That is how He can be everywhere at the same time, doing an infinite number of things at the same time. God can also step into time, as His Son did.

>> ^messenger: