Opinionated2, how is this helping? Your campaign against Christianity is in error and misinformed. But also here it is misplaced and a tangent to swallow the topic as a whole, as well.

Go back to what you had to offer before. The two friends that passed on and kept their promise to contact you all when they died. This is an experience that I see no challenges on. No one is saying your dreams are just dreams, or that you weren't contacted by those two people.

It's amazing to me that I could give 4 fairly common types experiences that relate to life existing after death, and get blasted for it. Hulicanations and mockery comparing dreams of your nature to dreaming of a pet dog that passed on. But when there is an actual example of one of those types of experiences what happens? You approached it and then quickly moved on to the favorite topic of your choice. Trying to dismantle Christianity, or to dismantle Christians themselves. But not a word on your dreams. Thank you for sharing your experiences. I looked up the conversation I was thinking about with NDE, and though it wasn't you it just adds one to the number of people who's had an experience (within this online community as well).

Paul and Tony, why the silence? Where's the potent jabs? Or does Opinionated2 serve a different purpose to ignore his testimony of life existing after death. That because he also stands against Christianity that you can ignore his experience challenging your stance on no life after death?

This isn't about Christianity or about religion, because as far as I'm aware Nathan who stated this conversation is not Christian, nor has a stated religion (that I've heard from him about). Those subjects relate to death and afterlife briefly. But no one has to be religious, or Christian to see what is plainly seen. Mankind has frequent brushes with life after death. Rare enough that not everyone has these experiences, but common enough that we all know someone who has. Of those experiences, I find it very arrogant for people to pass them off so casually. Take note of any experience. Not as a statistic (because you both seem keen to ignore the numbers), but as each individual case. There is overwhelming observations of life existing after death. The issue from there is that it can't be qualitative of what exists after death, only that something does.

//Paul and Tony//

Who's Tony?

//It's amazing to me that I could give 4 fairly common types experiences that relate to life existing after death//

No, you gave two fairly common types of experience (dreams and hallucinations) and one fairly uncommon one (NDE's), and completely failed to explain how they demonstrate life after death. I guess we're just meant to assume that part, are we?

//and get blasted for it.//

Nobody has 'blasted' you for anything. They've just asked you to back up your claims. If you can't tell the difference, it's time to switch off the computer and go play outside in the fresh air for a while.

//mockery comparing dreams of your nature to dreaming of a pet dog that passed on.//

Oh, I see. There's different types of dreams, are there? The dreams that are real and the ones that aren't. With the distinction to be made arbitrarily on the basis of whatever supports your preconceived notions.

Sounds like you're trying to have an each-way bet on this one. The way I see it, the only reasonable positions are that they're all real (for a given value of real) or that none of them are.

//Trying to dismantle Christianity, or to dismantle Christians themselves.//

What, taking them apart to see how they work, that sort of thing? The problem with that - as with so many other things in this world - is that when you take them apart to see how they work they generally stop working, thus defeating the whole purpose of the exercise. And of course, they're a right bugger to put back together when you're finished. There's always a few small screws left over.

http://welsh-nutter.co.uk/rune/screw.htm

//But not a word on your dreams.//

Well no, apparently my dreams don't count. Apparently, my dreams aren't good enough.

Do you reckon Freud would have ever gotten anywhere if he'd been so selective in his interpretation of dreams? 'Ah, vell, you see I vould like to help you but I am afraid you haff ze wrong sort of dreams. So sorry about zat. Next patient please!'

//Mankind has frequent brushes with life after death.//

That remains to be proven.

//Of those experiences, I find it very arrogant for people to pass them off so casually.//

Why? You do it.

//There is overwhelming observations of life existing after death.//

You've yet to demonstrate that.

Sorry, missed this bit.

//Take note of any experience. Not as a statistic (because you both seem keen to ignore the numbers), but as each individual case.//

What statistics? You haven't given us any statistics. Remember that it was me who had to direct you to some actual research with actual numbers? It's a bit rich for you to be lecturing anybody on the importance of statistical evidence when you're so very, very fond of anecdotal evidence, NNS.