Evolution

[Angrboda]

Every time I read your posts I have to realize that you reach new and new lows.
How low can you get yog?
You already float in the mental sewer.  

Or you have the brain of a 5 years old that can not understand much or you are so dishonest that in order not to sink even further you restore to dirty games such as creating an artificial case saying that that is what I said and then expect me to give evidence.

Why it is so hard to admit that you failed and you are mentally bankrupt?  

The more you trash talk, the more I laugh at you.

Here I copy and past the same answer once again.

The same answer that didn't answer the question before!  You go to great lengths to avoid answering a simple question.

Well, if you're not going to answer how we know that the welcome is over, then I guess we never know that the welcome is over, and every last moment of every NDE is nothing but a welcome that reflects the person's prior beliefs.  Apparently, we never do get to anything 'real'.

1) The welcome has very little to do with what the NDE give you.
The welcome only reflect your free will.
If your free will tell you that God is represented by Jesus then God will show as Jesus or any figure that your free will indicated to you.
As far as you realize that God has no human figure then automatically you will perceive God as pure light or in a spiritual form and the initial welcoming will turn into the reality of how God should be perceived.
This is the beginning and the end of the story related to the welcome.
This welcome is totally irrelevant to the NDE but considering that you put so much energy in this welcoming and the end of it only show how stupid you are.

What's really stupid is you thinking that this answers the question I asked.  It doesn't, so re-pasting it is pointless.

1) About your new NDE from Lorraine Tutmarc.

No, it does not contradict Cathleen NDE at all.
You are the idiot that didn't get it.
You haven't showed any contradiction in fact.

A possible eternity in a river of death isn't inconsistent with an NDE in which the only two alternatives are reincarnation and staying with a wonderful god?  A traditional Christ figure who talks about being crucified for man's sins isn't inconsistent with a god figure that offers reincarnation?  How stupid can you be?  The figure in Lorraine's NDE is clearly Jesus Christ and despite her claim to not remember much about her Sunday school experiences, she is clearly able to recognize him for who he is.  As Lorraine says, "He knew everything I had ever done, and everything I would ever do in the future, both bad and good," so he would know that she would recognize him as Jesus Christ.  Unless of course, by presenting himself as Jesus Christ he was deceiving her.  Merriam-Webster defines deception as, "the act of causing someone to accept as true or valid what is false or invalid."  If he was presenting himself as the classical Jesus Christ, when in fact he was not, then he was engaged in deceiving her.  We have two possibilities:

a) He was not deceiving her, in which case the traditional Jesus Christ is the real god, and we have a conflict with Cathleen's NDE.  In that case we can't believe either NDE.
b) He was deceiving her, in which case, the true god is a deceiver and we can't trust what he says in either Lorraine or Cathleen's NDEs.

Which goes back to something I brought up many days ago.  Namely that you have no good reason to believe that the fantastic, God-experiencing portion of an NDE is a reflection of anything real.  It's entirely possible for the OBE portion of an NDE to reflect something real, and the more fantastic portion of an NDE to not reflect anything real.  There is no contradiction inherent in that.  The only reason you give for believing the fantastic portion of an NDE, beyond your prior beliefs, is that the experience is vivid and memorable and life changing.  But it's been pointed out to you numerous times that the vividness of the content isn't related to its truthfulness, as oxygen deprived subjects and people on ketamine have vivid experiences which are nonetheless fanciful.  When I was a child, I had a very vivid experience of a two-headed horse coming out of my bookcase and attacking me.  I don't know whether that was a dream or a hallucination, but I was terrified to be left alone in the dark in that room thereafter.  It had an enormous impact upon me.  Yet for all its vividness and effect on me, I have no hesitation in saying that I do not believe that there was a two-headed horse living in my bookcase.  And that's all the evidence you have that Cathleen's fantasy about a god and many doors was not a fantasy -- that it was vivid and had a profound effect on her.  That isn't evidence of dick squat.  Do you have any evidence to confirm that the images from Cathleen's NDE were anything but fantasy, propelled by her prior beliefs?  No, you don't.  It's known that certain themes continually crop up in dreams.  There are common themes in NDEs despite the differences, but all that shows is that as human beings we are more alike than different.  In sum, you've got nothing but your belief and the shaky claim that they couldn't be as vivid and profoundly affecting if they weren't true.  So you've got nothing.

All you show is some religious story from Matthew which has absolutely nothing to do with the spirituality that we find in the NDEs.

Bare assertions aren't evidence.  One of these days, I'm hoping you'll learn the difference.  I'm not optimistic.

Corrupted priests changed all the story about Jesus life for obvious reasons which are related to these priests hold on power.

You seem to keep forgetting that you are making a positive case here.  It's not enough simply to assert something, you need to provide evidence for the things you claim.  Do you have evidence that the priests changed the story of the life of Jesus?  Here's what actual scholarship says about the question of the reliability of the biblical texts we have now.

In 1948, some Old Testament manuscripts (along with some non-biblical writings) were found in caves near the Dead Sea which dated as early as 250 B.C.E., about a thousand years before the Masoretic text. These are known as the Dead Sea Scrolls. Instead of being anywhere from 1000-3000 years from the original, these are as close as a few hundred. In the case of one of these scrolls – a copy of the book of Isaiah – the only difference between its text and the Masoretic text, was three words, and these only differed in spelling! Though over 1000 years separate these two texts, there are only three spelling changes! This shows the care with which the Masoretes and other scribes had worked.
. . . . . . . .
There are 24,000 manuscripts of the New Testament, 5,000 of which were written in the original Greek language. Of these thousands of manuscripts, no two manuscripts are identical. These differences lead to hundreds of thousands of variations. At first impression, this fact makes the Bible sound like the most unreliable book possible! These variations, however, are surprisingly not a major concern. Rather, more manuscripts lead to a greater possibility of figuring out what the original was. F.F. Bruce explained it well:

Fortunately, if the great number of MSS [manuscripts] increases the number of scribal errors, it increases proportionately the means of correcting such errors, so that the margin of doubt left in the process of recovering the exact original wording is not so large as might be feared; it is in truth remarkably small.

Is Today's Bible the Real Bible?

So despite your unsupported ranting about priests supposedly corrupting the original stories, we actually have good reason to have faith that the bible we have today is very close to the original.  So, no, you're wrong, and Christ's testimony about heaven and hell stands as recorded in the bible.

Do me a favor yog.
Next time you try to contradict NDEs use something else.
Avoid religious stories.
They carry no truth.

More bare assertions based upon your ridiculous belief that the text has been changed by corrupted priests.  I've presented evidence.  Where's yours?

If you really wish to know Jesus life you should read the The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ.  

A 20th century book, written by a lone author, who claims to have accessed a supposed Akashic record.  Do you have evidence that the Akashic record exists?  No?  Then what you have is nothing more than the unverified ramblings of a lone wingnut.  Compare that to the ministry of Jesus Christ which was witnessed by many people and attested to by multiple authors.  Your preference for the Aquarian Gospel over the Holy Bible makes it pretty plain that you don't base your choice of what to believe upon reason and evidence, but rather upon whimsy and the teachings of a moronic guru.  You truly are an idiot.

2) Clairvoyance?
Again it is up to you to prove that.
You are the one who introduce the topic.  

I guess we'll just have to record this as yet another simple question that you are afraid to answer.  Do you have any evidence that OBEs are a result of consciousness leaving the body rather than clairvoyance?  I guess not.  The more you run away from such questions, the more obvious it becomes that you are full of shit.

6) People born in a certain situation clearly prove that in the universe there is order and justice.
This is also reiterated in both Cathleen and Ritchie NDEs.

It's obvious from talking to you that you frequently claim that this or that "clearly" indicates something, or that something is "obviously" true, when you don't really have the first fucking clue.  You regularly mistake your mere belief for fact, and constantly evade answering crucial questions, such as the welcome and clairvoyance questions.  So, no, you need to do more than simply claim it.  If you can't demonstrate why what you say is true, then this is just another one of your silly claims, which we can dismiss without a thought.

And no answer here.

4) Ritchie does not say that hell is for ever.
In fact he said that life is for ever.
You are the IDIOT that twist his speech so stop being an AH.  

Even more hideous than the bites and kicks they exchanged, were the sexual abuses many were performing in feverish pantomime.  Perversions I had never dreamed of were being vainly attempted all around us.  It was impossible to tell if the howls of frustration which reached us were actual sounds or only the transference of despairing thoughts. Indeed in this disembodied world it didn't seem to matter. Whatever anyone thought, however fleetingly or unwillingly, was instantly apparent to all around him, more completely than words could have expressed it, faster than sound waves could have carried it. ... What was it going to be like, I thought with sudden panic, to live forever where my most private thoughts were not private at all?


Heaven and hell : Dr. George Ritchie's near-death experience [emphasis mine]

And no answer here, either.


Despite all your boorish trash talk, you continue to avoid questions like they were kryptonite.   Why don't you just answer the questions?