• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

A God without compelling evidence?

Ummm....That would be you.

View attachment 31683

What is the scientific test for irreversibility? Wait 3 days?

Also, your contempt of science is showing. Typical of religious fanatic anti-intellectuals.

You're the one displaying a closed-mind.
Shouldn't scientists be open-minded?

Your lack of answer is conspicuous.
What is the scientific test for irreversibility? Wait 3 days?
 
What is the scientific test for irreversibility? Wait 3 days?

The process for brain death certification includes

Identification of history or physical examination findings that provide a clear etiology of brain dysfunction.

The determination of brain death requires the identification of the proximate cause and irreversibility of coma. Severe head injury, hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage, aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, hypoxic-ischemic brain insults and fulminant hepatic failure are potential causes of irreversible loss of brain function.

The evaluation of a potentially irreversible coma should include, as may be appropriate to the particular case; clinical or neuro-imaging evidence of an acute CNS catastrophe that is compatible with the clinical diagnosis of brain death;

Exclusion of any condition that might confound the subsequent examination of cortical or brain stem function. The conditions that may confound clinical diagnosis of brain death are:

Shock/ hypotension

Hypothermia -temperature < 32°C

Drugs known to alter neurologic, neuromuscular function and electroencephalographic testing, like anaesthetic agents, neuroparalytic drugs, methaqualone, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, high dose bretylium, amitryptiline, meprobamate, trichloroethylene, alcohols.

Brain stem encephalitis.

Guillain- Barre' syndrome.

Encephlopathy associated with hepatic failure, uraemia and hyperosmolar coma

Severe hypophosphatemia.

Performance of a complete neurological examination. Components of a complete neurological examination are:

Examination of the patient-absence of spontaneous movement, decerebrate or decorticate posturing, seizures, shivering, response to verbal stimuli, and response to noxious stimuli administered through a cranial nerve path way.

During the examination spinal reflexes may be present.

Absent pupillary reflex to direct and consensual light; pupils need not be equal or dilated. The pupillary reflex may be selectively altered by eye trauma, cataracts, high dose dopamine, glutethamide, scopolamine, atropine, bretilium or monoamine oxidase inhibitors.

Absent corneal, oculocephalic, cough and gag reflexes. The corneal reflex may be altered as a result of facial weakness.

Absent oculovestibular reflex when tested with 20 to 50 ml. Of ice water irrigated into an external auditory canal clear of cerumen, and after elevating the patients head 30'. Labyrinthine injury or disease, anticholinergics, anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, and some sedatives may alter response.

Failure of the heart rate to increase by more than 5 beats per minute after 1- 2 mg. of atropine intravenously. This indicates absent function of the vagus nerve and nuclei.

Absent respiratory efforts in the presence of hypercarbia.

Generally, the apnoea test is performed after the second examination of brainstem reflexes.

The apnoea test need only be performed once when its results are conclusive. Before performing the apnoea test, the physician must determine that the patient meets the following conditions:

Core temperature ≥ 36.5°C or 97.7°F

Euvolemia. Option: positive fluid balance in the previous 6 hours

Normal PCO2. Option: arterial PCO2 ≥ 40 mm Hg

Normal PO2. Option: pre-oxygenation to arterial PO2 ≥ 200 mm Hg

After determining that the patient meets the above prerequisites, the physician should conduct the apnoea test as follows:

Connect a pulse oximeter and disconnect the ventilator.

Deliver 100% O2, 6 l/min, into the trachea. Option: place a cannula at the level of the carina.

Look closely for any respiratory movements (abdominal or chest excursions that produce adequate tidal volumes).

Measure arterial PO2, PCO2, and pH after approximately 8 minutes and reconnect the ventilator.

If respiratory movements are absent and arterial PCO2 is ≥ 60 mm Hg (option: 20 mm Hg increase in PCO2 over a baseline normal PCO2), the apnoea test result is positive (i.e. it supports the diagnosis of brain death).

If respiratory movements are observed, the apnoea test result is negative (i.e. it does not support the clinical diagnosis of brain death).

Connect the ventilator, if during testing

the systolic blood pressure becomes < 90 mm Hg (or below age appropriate thresholds in children less than 18 years of age)

or the pulse oximeter indicates significant oxygen desaturation,

or cardiac arrhythmias develop;

Immediately draw an arterial blood sample and analyze arterial blood gas.

If PCO2 is ≥ 60 mm Hg or PCO2 increase is ≥ 20 mm Hg over baseline normal PCO2, the apnoea test result is positive (it supports the clinical diagnosis of brain death).

if PCO2 is < 60 mm Hg and PCO2 increase is < 20 mm Hg over baseline normal PCO2, the result is indeterminate and a confirmatory test can be considered.

When appropriate a 10 min. apnoea test can be performed after preoxygenation for 10 minutes with an Fi02 of 1.0 and normalization of patients PaCO2 to 40 mmHG.

Assessment of brainstem reflexes

Pupils- no response to bright light Size: midposition (4 mm) to dilated (9 mm) (absent light reflex - cranial nerve II and III)

Ocular movement- cranial nerve VIII, III and VI

No oculocephalic reflex (testing only when no fracture or instability of the cervical spine or skull base is apparent)

No deviation of the eyes to irrigation in each ear with 50 ml of cold water (tympanic membranes intact; allow 1 minute after injection and at least 5 minutes between testing on each side)

Facial sensation and facial motor response

No corneal reflex (cranial nerve V and VII)

No jaw reflex (cranial nerve IX)

No grimacing to deep pressure on nail bed, supraorbital ridge, or temporo-mandibular joint (afferent V and efferent VII)

Pharyngeal and tracheal reflexes (cranial nerve IX and X)

No response after stimulation of the posterior pharynx

No cough response to tracheobronchial suctioning

Clinical observations compatible with the diagnosis of brain death:

The following manifestations are occasionally seen and should not be misinterpreted as evidence for brainstem function:

spontaneous movements of limbs other than pathologic flexion or extension response

respiratory-like movements (shoulder elevation and adduction, back arching, intercostal expansion without significant tidal volumes)

sweating, flushing, tachycardia

normal blood pressure without pharmacologic support or sudden increases in blood pressure

absence of diabetes insipidus

deep tendon reflexes; superficial abdominal reflexes; triple flexion response

Babinski reflex

Oh sorry, was this too much for you to read, because you can't understand jack shit?
 
None of this constitutes "wait 3 days". You're only showing your massive ignorance here.
 
Brain death is not irreversible. See Webb Adam C., and Samuels Owen B.. 2011. Reversible brain death after cardiopulmonary arrest and induced hypothermia. Critical Care Medicine 39, no. 6: 1538–42. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318218668

Joffe Ari R., Kolski Hanna, Duff Jonathan, and deCaen Allan R.. 2009. A 10-month-old infant with reversible findings of brain death. Pediatric Neurology 41, no. 5: 378–82. doi: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2009.05.007

13 year old Jahi McMath was pronounced “brain-dead” (with absence of brain electrical activity and of blood flow to the brain) in December 2013 by three different neurologists, including Dr. Paul Fisher from Stanford University. By October 2014, however, it was shown that she could move her hands and feet, in response to her mother's verbal requests.

"Equally disturbing are reports of patients who, after having failed the apnea test, had a return of their respiratory capacity"(Joffe et al. 2009; Joffe, Anton, and Duff 2010)
 
Having presumed "brain death" was a terminal singularity - point of no return - and gradually discovering this is not a scientific fact, medical science is now obfuscating and moving the goal posts. "...oh, well...if you had an OBE/NDE, maybe you weren't really brain dead afterall.
 
There are verses to be found that support opposing propositions, soul, no soul, predestination, freedom, eternal torment, universal salvation, etc, etc...
Yes like in post #142 Genesis 2 they are initially mortal.

to claim that verses which clearly describe eternal damnation mean something they do not say or mean is false.
I'm saying it is a church tradition from the 2nd century because of the Greek belief in the immortality of the soul. You keep on ignoring my major points like post #138 etc.

BTW Zondervan is the creator of the NIV...
"...'immortality of the soul,' as normally understood, is not a Biblical doctrine" (The International Bible Commentary, second edition, Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan Publishing House, 1986, p.60 column 2)

And living eternally in hell would mean the soul is immortal....
Though I'm just going around in circles....

''Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.
1 Corinthians 15:51-55

I'm talking about the bible as a whole. I am saying that there are contradictions. That Greek thought diverged from orthodox Judaism doesn't alter what is in the bible as it is presented to us. What is in the new testament does not necessarily relate to the Torah or the books of the OT. That verses on eternal torment in the NT contradict things in the OT doesn't alter the fact that there are verses on eternal damnation and torment in the NT.....which I have quoted. They are there for all to see.
 
"...oh, well...if you had an OBE/NDE, maybe you weren't really brain dead afterall.
Otherwise that would be proof of a supernatural aspect of the brain and I believe that can never be proven in a way that would convince skeptics.... I believe in supernatural phenomena (like an intelligent force in a simulation) that isn't obvious to skeptics...
 
  • Like
Reactions: WAB
...''Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.
1 Corinthians 15:51-55
That sounds like what I'm talking about - mortals that are given eternal life.... and I think that passage is talking about believers...

I'm talking about the bible as a whole. I am saying that there are contradictions. That Greek thought diverged from orthodox Judaism doesn't alter what is in the bible as it is presented to us. What is in the new testament does not necessarily relate to the Torah or the books of the OT. That verses on eternal torment in the NT contradict things in the OT doesn't alter the fact that there are verses on eternal damnation and torment in the NT.....which I have quoted. They are there for all to see.
I agree that the Bible has contradictions... I guess I can never convince you but I think there are reasonable interpretations that can explain away apparently eternal torment for humans (by saying the fire or smoke is what is eternal, etc, etc) [and that immortal beings like angels would suffer forever]
 
No, it doesn't. People who have been pronounced brain dead have revived
Thereby demonstrating that misdiagnosis is possible. Doctors are not infallible. Who'd a thunk?
and recounted out of body sensory experiences while their body was clinically dead - brain dead.
No, by definition. Dead is an irreversible state. That's the difference between dead and unconscious.
because that would render the term brain dead meaningless.

No, it wouldn't.

Yes, it would and it does because you can't pre-define the term "irreversible" without post-hoc benefit of hindsight.
Of course you can. The second law of thermodynamics applies.
Its like saying you're not completely dead- just mostly dead - and we won't know if you meet the definition of dead unless and until you stay dead.
Do you genuinely think that a rotting cadaver or skeleton has a non-zero chance of returning to life?

Misdiagnosis of death is far from commonplace. There are plenty of ways to be completely certain that a person is dead. But that doesn't mean that there are no misdiagnoses in short terms of people in medical settings.

The only unequivocal standard that separates death from unconsciousness is that the dead never recover.
 
Having presumed "brain death" was a terminal singularity - point of no return - and gradually discovering this is not a scientific fact, medical science is now obfuscating and moving the goal posts. "...oh, well...if you had an OBE/NDE, maybe you weren't really brain dead afterall.

If you are communicating with someone, it's an absolute and undeniable certainty that they have not yet died. Ever.
 
I agree that the Bible has contradictions... I guess I can never convince you but I think there are reasonable interpretations that can explain away apparently eternal torment for humans (by saying the fire or smoke is what is eternal, etc, etc) [and that immortal beings like angels would suffer forever]

How does eternal smoke and fire make sense if punishment is temporary?

''the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality.'' ◄ 1 Corinthians 15:53 ►

''Then he will say to those on his left, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. . . . And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” - Matthew 25:31-46
 
I agree that the Bible has contradictions... I guess I can never convince you but I think there are reasonable interpretations that can explain away apparently eternal torment for humans (by saying the fire or smoke is what is eternal, etc, etc) [and that immortal beings like angels would suffer forever]

How does eternal smoke and fire make sense if punishment is temporary?
https://www.jewishnotgreek.com/
Some excerpts about the smoke:

It is not proper hermeneutics to view the Scripture in Revelation 14:10 apart from how any other biblical writer uses it. And not one of them uses it to imply eternal torment. Again, look how Isaiah uses the exact same wording about the city of Edom being destroyed, "the smoke thereof shall go up forever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever." (Isaiah 34:10). Edom was destroyed and the smoke rising forever was meant as a remembrance statement. Obviously, there is no smoke today still rising from the location of Edom. It is figurative language denoting that God's work of their destruction will "never be forgotten."


We also read in Isaiah 34:10 that while Edom was burning day and night the smoke of the city would ascend up forever and ever. Does that mean that Edom would never stop burning? Of course, not! The language simply signifies that the burning of Edom will ultimately end in permanent (or irrevocable and eternal) destruction. We know that Edom doesn't exist anymore. Similarly, we are to understand the same from the passage in Revelation 14:9-11. The smoke of their torment arising "forever and ever" in the passage does not mean that the torment of the wicked will never end. The language simply signifies that the torment of the wicked will lead to their permanent (or irrevocable and eternal) destruction. During the process of their destruction the wicked will be tormented but that process will ultimately end in their eternal destruction (annihilation), [emphasis mine] which is what is signified by the use of the figure of smoke arising "forever and ever."

About an eternal fire - see post #138:

Trees with bad fruit are burned (Matthew 7:19), and so are unfruitful vines (John 15:6) and useless weeds (Matthew 13:40). These figures are all employed to depict the fate of sinners at the final reckoning. They will be cast into "unquenchable fire." This is the Greek word asbestos which means "inextinguishable." It describes a fire which burns without interruption; it is an enduring fire which none can extinguish no matter how hard they might try. It is important to notice here, however, that it is the fire that Jesus describes as enduring, NOT that which is cast into it. To try and transfer the quality of endurance from the fire itself to that which is cast into it is completely unwarranted either grammatically, logically, or theologically.

That which is cast into the fire will BURN UP. This is the Greek word katakaio which means "to burn up; consume." It signifies to completely, utterly, totally destroy with fire. It is enlightening, in the context of this study, to note that this word is used in the LXX (Septuagint) in Exodus 3:2 where Moses beholds a burning bush-"The bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was NOT consumed." This particular bush was preserved in the fire (what the Traditionalists proclaim will happen with the wicked)

....Isaiah 66:24 states "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh."

Why is this verse key? Because Jesus quotes it verbatim in Mark 9:48. Therefore, it is a clear statement about Gehenna (hell) and must be looked at in the context of Isaiah 66. (Jesus would have known it in context and so should we.) Also, the word "Gehenna" is what Jesus used whenever he spoke of "hell" and that was the name of the garbage dump in Jerusalem! So His listeners would not have understood Jesus as speaking of eternal torment here. Gehenna was a place where worms and fires lived, but not people! Now back to Isaiah 66:24.

Maybe you can kind of understand how it could be said that the smoke and fire is eternal while the suffering is temporary. (it could be said that the "punishment" is eternal though because the punishment of death has eternal consequences)
 
Does that have something to do with the idea that God doesn't want to be obvious to people?


You said what I think or believe about God is BAD and "fucked up on a level Lovecraft wrote about". My point is that it could be MUCH worse (to believe in hell for most and think that is perfectly loving). Note that this forum is "Existence of God" so it is partly about Christians.

The bible game appears to be, accept Jesus as your saviour, believe this or face the consequences: eternal damnation.

That's only one set of clothes. Being a chameleon is part of the whole religious charade.

The bible doesn't just sway back and forth on the issue of eternal punishment, it does so on everything. Love, lust, war, slavery, death, life, prayer, and god's actions. Exodus 4:24-26 has to be the weirdest verse in the bible. lol

Thank-you, OLDMAN!
 
I agree that the Bible has contradictions... I guess I can never convince you but I think there are reasonable interpretations that can explain away apparently eternal torment for humans (by saying the fire or smoke is what is eternal, etc, etc) [and that immortal beings like angels would suffer forever]

How does eternal smoke and fire make sense if punishment is temporary?
https://www.jewishnotgreek.com/
Some excerpts about the smoke:

It is not proper hermeneutics to view the Scripture in Revelation 14:10 apart from how any other biblical writer uses it. And not one of them uses it to imply eternal torment. Again, look how Isaiah uses the exact same wording about the city of Edom being destroyed, "the smoke thereof shall go up forever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever." (Isaiah 34:10). Edom was destroyed and the smoke rising forever was meant as a remembrance statement. Obviously, there is no smoke today still rising from the location of Edom. It is figurative language denoting that God's work of their destruction will "never be forgotten."


We also read in Isaiah 34:10 that while Edom was burning day and night the smoke of the city would ascend up forever and ever. Does that mean that Edom would never stop burning? Of course, not! The language simply signifies that the burning of Edom will ultimately end in permanent (or irrevocable and eternal) destruction. We know that Edom doesn't exist anymore. Similarly, we are to understand the same from the passage in Revelation 14:9-11. The smoke of their torment arising "forever and ever" in the passage does not mean that the torment of the wicked will never end. The language simply signifies that the torment of the wicked will lead to their permanent (or irrevocable and eternal) destruction. During the process of their destruction the wicked will be tormented but that process will ultimately end in their eternal destruction (annihilation), [emphasis mine] which is what is signified by the use of the figure of smoke arising "forever and ever."

About an eternal fire - see post #138:

Trees with bad fruit are burned (Matthew 7:19), and so are unfruitful vines (John 15:6) and useless weeds (Matthew 13:40). These figures are all employed to depict the fate of sinners at the final reckoning. They will be cast into "unquenchable fire." This is the Greek word asbestos which means "inextinguishable." It describes a fire which burns without interruption; it is an enduring fire which none can extinguish no matter how hard they might try. It is important to notice here, however, that it is the fire that Jesus describes as enduring, NOT that which is cast into it. To try and transfer the quality of endurance from the fire itself to that which is cast into it is completely unwarranted either grammatically, logically, or theologically.

That which is cast into the fire will BURN UP. This is the Greek word katakaio which means "to burn up; consume." It signifies to completely, utterly, totally destroy with fire. It is enlightening, in the context of this study, to note that this word is used in the LXX (Septuagint) in Exodus 3:2 where Moses beholds a burning bush-"The bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was NOT consumed." This particular bush was preserved in the fire (what the Traditionalists proclaim will happen with the wicked)

....Isaiah 66:24 states "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh."

Why is this verse key? Because Jesus quotes it verbatim in Mark 9:48. Therefore, it is a clear statement about Gehenna (hell) and must be looked at in the context of Isaiah 66. (Jesus would have known it in context and so should we.) Also, the word "Gehenna" is what Jesus used whenever he spoke of "hell" and that was the name of the garbage dump in Jerusalem! So His listeners would not have understood Jesus as speaking of eternal torment here. Gehenna was a place where worms and fires lived, but not people! Now back to Isaiah 66:24.

Maybe you can kind of understand how it could be said that the smoke and fire is eternal while the suffering is temporary. (it could be said that the "punishment" is eternal though because the punishment of death has eternal consequences)

You ignore the wording of the verses that specify eternal torment. That is cherry picking. You should simply acknowledge that there is a contradiction, that we have eternal damnation/torment, simple death, or at the other end of the spectrum, universal salvation.....take your pick, it's all there.

The rationale that the smoke of "Gehenna" is eternal while the suffering of "beast and his followers and everyone who's name is not in 'the book of life' is absurd, given the wording of these verses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WAB
I'll just say briefly...

It won't make sense obviously when some atheists "think" in their minds that the texts describes every sinner, regardless of the severity of the sin, like for example: a horse-thief to mass-murderer, would somehow get the "same eternal" punishment This of course gives the false impression/ contradiction that God is unjust and Jesus condemns just about everyone with equal measure (the line that atheists often like to argue).

A little more perspective on these contradictions as I see it :

The bible has a particular understanding - that each individual is accountable and is punishable as according to their sins.

Matt 18:9 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire.

Exodus:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.


Jusice: The severity of the sin is met with the severity of the punishment (in the fire).

you could both be part right to some degree.

(good discussion btw)
 
I'll just say briefly...

It won't make sense obviously when atheists "think" in their minds that the texts describes every sinner, regardless of the severity of the sin, like for example: a horse-thief to mass-murderer, would somehow get the "same eternal" punishment This of course gives the false impression/ contradiction that God is unjust and Jesus condemns just about everyone with equal measure (the line that atheists often like to argue).

A little more perspective on these contradictions as I see it:

The bible has a particular understanding - that each individual is accountable and is punishable as according to their sins.

Matt 18:9 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire.

Exodus:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.


Jusice: The severity of the sin is met with the severity of the punishment (in the fire).

(good discussion btw)

Nobody is saying every sinner suffers the same fate....only those who's names are not written in 'the book of life.'

'And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.'' Rev 20:15
 
I agree that the Bible has contradictions... I guess I can never convince you but I think there are reasonable interpretations that can explain away apparently eternal torment for humans (by saying the fire or smoke is what is eternal, etc, etc) [and that immortal beings like angels would suffer forever]

I don't understand this way of thinking. Why would you try to explain it? Why not just accept the mystery? You don't do this about anything else in life, do you? "I wonder if the shop I used to go to as a child is still around?" "I wonder if the price of beef will be lower tomorrow?"

It's this type of behaviour and thinking that leads to me having trouble respecting many religious people.

My girlfriend is Christian. She'd never claim that any interpretation of the Bible is inherently superior or that her version of Christianity is the one that got it correctly. She'd never claim to be sure she will go to Heaven. The Bible teaches us to be humble. How about listening to that nugget of advice?

What's the point of speculating on things nobody will ever know? It's a pointless exercise that cannot lead to any greater understanding of anything
 
I adjusted my previous post.

you could both be part right to some degree.

Both can't be right, either one is right and the other wrong or there is a contradiction. Eternal Damnation, by definition, is forever.

The christian end consists of two extremes, there is nothing in the middle. One is either eternally blissful or eternally in torment. So apologia notwithstanding that's the deal, the christian is either perfectly good or perfectly evil when finally judged. That's fucked up.

The question worth asking is what exactly accounts for a given christian's inability to recognize the striking idiocy of this position? What is it that he or she is trying to force-feed themselves and why? What is their fantasy attempting to accomplish?
 
  • Like
Reactions: WAB
Back
Top Bottom