What do you think?
Rate this book
Immortality: The Other Side of Death
A fascinating, Bible-based look at life after death and the true meaning of the much-publicized "near death" experiences. By presenting the very latest scientific, philosophical, anthropological, ethical, and theological evidence on the topic, the authors confirm the timeless truth and validity of the Bible's teachings about life after death.
- GenresDeath
275 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 1992
2 people are currently reading
59 people want to read
About the author
Gary R. Habermas
62 books171 followersGary R. Habermas was born just outside Detroit, Michigan in 1950. Although he was raised in a Christian home and attended a German Baptist Church, he began having serious doubts about Christianity. For more than ten years, he faced uncertainty about key Christian claims and searched other religious and non-religious systems, especially naturalism. His studies centered chiefly on investigating various world views, occasionally getting close to what he thought might be the proper approach. During this time, as he explains, "The last thing I did at night was recall what I had learned that day to further my search. Early the next morning, it seems that the first thing that came to my mind was, 'Where did I end my studies last night?'" This continued for several agonizing years.
Habermas' interest in the field of apologetics began early in his search when he realized that some religions made claims that could be either verified or falsified. He searched the various religious systems to ascertain if such claims were verifiable. After several years of study, he concluded that very few religious claims could be substantiated. Habermas concluded that even Christianity suffered in this sense. While certainly having more evidential considerations than other religions, there always seemed to be a reason why the argument could not be finalized. While Habermas conducted detailed studies of creation, fulfilled prophecy, archaeological discoveries, and the general reliability of the Old and New Testaments, he constantly asked if there were any "clinching" arguments.
Habermas especially studied the notion that Eastern metaphysics were confirmed by modern physics, as well as the claims made on behalf of various other holy books. He reached the conclusion that, while religious beliefs could be held by faith, they usually lacked great evidence and could not be "proven" to be true.
Habermas' search frequently took the form of debating with various adherents of non-Christian as well as Christian views. He told practitioners from both camps that their beliefs were not as grounded as they would like to believe. He especially recalls one encounter where an exasperated Christian told him that he was filled with demons! Once his mother called to see how he was doing, and he announced that he thought he was close to becoming a Buddhist, his latest research interest.
During this time, one subject began to appeal to Habermas more than any other. He realized that if Jesus had been raised from the dead, this would go a long way toward arguing that Christianity was true. He also studied the founders of the major religious traditions, along with some lesser-known figures, to see if there were other claims that someone had been raised from the dead. He was especially interested in whether there was any historical or other evidence for any such teachings. Thirteen hundred note cards later, he was well on the way to a lifetime of being "hooked" on the subject of Jesus' resurrection. Little did he know that his early years of study on this subject would begin his fascination with the topic that has never lessened.
Habermas continued his search as an undergraduate student at Tyndale College, graduating in 1972 with three majors and three minors. Foremost on his mind was still the question of whether it could be known if there was any basis for answering his religious questions. Habermas went straight to graduate school at the University of Detroit. Studying philosophical theology and the world religions, he earned an M.A. a year later, in 1973. After taking a year off, he pursued a Ph.D. at Michigan State University, graduating two years later (1976), after keeping up a torrid study schedule.
Studying relevant historical, philosophical, and religious questions, Habermas proposed an historical study of Jesus’ resurrection (what else?) for his Ph.D. dissertation. The topic was approved by his committee, but he was told specifically that he could not
Habermas' interest in the field of apologetics began early in his search when he realized that some religions made claims that could be either verified or falsified. He searched the various religious systems to ascertain if such claims were verifiable. After several years of study, he concluded that very few religious claims could be substantiated. Habermas concluded that even Christianity suffered in this sense. While certainly having more evidential considerations than other religions, there always seemed to be a reason why the argument could not be finalized. While Habermas conducted detailed studies of creation, fulfilled prophecy, archaeological discoveries, and the general reliability of the Old and New Testaments, he constantly asked if there were any "clinching" arguments.
Habermas especially studied the notion that Eastern metaphysics were confirmed by modern physics, as well as the claims made on behalf of various other holy books. He reached the conclusion that, while religious beliefs could be held by faith, they usually lacked great evidence and could not be "proven" to be true.
Habermas' search frequently took the form of debating with various adherents of non-Christian as well as Christian views. He told practitioners from both camps that their beliefs were not as grounded as they would like to believe. He especially recalls one encounter where an exasperated Christian told him that he was filled with demons! Once his mother called to see how he was doing, and he announced that he thought he was close to becoming a Buddhist, his latest research interest.
During this time, one subject began to appeal to Habermas more than any other. He realized that if Jesus had been raised from the dead, this would go a long way toward arguing that Christianity was true. He also studied the founders of the major religious traditions, along with some lesser-known figures, to see if there were other claims that someone had been raised from the dead. He was especially interested in whether there was any historical or other evidence for any such teachings. Thirteen hundred note cards later, he was well on the way to a lifetime of being "hooked" on the subject of Jesus' resurrection. Little did he know that his early years of study on this subject would begin his fascination with the topic that has never lessened.
Habermas continued his search as an undergraduate student at Tyndale College, graduating in 1972 with three majors and three minors. Foremost on his mind was still the question of whether it could be known if there was any basis for answering his religious questions. Habermas went straight to graduate school at the University of Detroit. Studying philosophical theology and the world religions, he earned an M.A. a year later, in 1973. After taking a year off, he pursued a Ph.D. at Michigan State University, graduating two years later (1976), after keeping up a torrid study schedule.
Studying relevant historical, philosophical, and religious questions, Habermas proposed an historical study of Jesus’ resurrection (what else?) for his Ph.D. dissertation. The topic was approved by his committee, but he was told specifically that he could not
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
September 6, 2024
TWO FAMED APOLOGISTS LOOK AT A BROAD SPECTRUM OF ISSUES
Gary Habermas (born 1950) is Professor of Apologetics and Philosophy and chairman of the department of philosophy and theology at Liberty University, and is a foremost evangelical apologist who has written/cowritten many books such as 'The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ,' 'Resurrected?: An Atheist and Theist Dialogue,' 'Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?: The Resurrection Debate,' etc. J.P. (John Porter) Moreland (born 1948) is Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology at Biola University; he has also written books such as 'Scaling the Secular City: A Defense of Christianity,' 'The God Question: An Invitation to a Life of Meaning,' etc.
They wrote in the introductory section of this 1992 book, "When we do think about death, we're likely to raise the following questions: Is there really such a thing as life after death? ... What is the afterlife like?... Is reincarnation true? ... Is there a hell, and how can such a place be reconciled with a loving God?... In this book, we will explore answers to these questions as well as other related issues."
They note, "some near-death experiences have even been reported while the individual actually registered an absence of brain waves... It is fascinating to consider, therefore, that some of the most vivid memories in the lives of these people happened while their brains registered no known activity. Now it is conceivable that the EEG may not measure all brain activity; there may still be some residual action in the brain. However, presently the absence of any EEG brain wave function is the best and the most widely accepted indication that the brain is not functioning. And flat brain waves on the EEG, when present for long periods, are the chief contemporary definition of the nature of death." (Pg. 77)
They admit, "No one knows exactly why some persons have near-death experiences and others do not. It has been suggested that such incidents perhaps even occurred but are later forgotten, maybe due to the nature of the crisis itself, or from the administration of anesthetics or other drugs, or from any frightening or negative aspects to the episode." (Pg. 88)
They also observe, "no American claimed to have seen Shiva, Rama, or Krishna. Americans reported more than five times as many deceased figures as religious ones... But Hindus, conversely, saw almost twice as many religious figures as deceased ones... While Americans perceived 61 percent female figures, Indians claimed only 23 percent... which makes it tempting to claim that this is perhaps due to the apparently lower status of women in Indian culture." (Pg. 91)
They also concede, "While there have been various non-Christian religious groups associated with annihilationism, we must point out that a number of solid evangelical Christians---such as John Stott ['Evangelical Essentials: A Liberal Evangelical Dialogue'], Clark Pinnock ['Four Views on Hell'], John Wenham ['Facing Hell'], P.E. Hughes ['True Image'], and Stephen Travis [I' Believe in the Second Coming of Jesus']---have defended the view. While we are not convinced their view is true, we must say two things. First, these people are committed Christians, and they have appropriately reminded us of the importance of not being glib, much less gleeful, about the doctrine of hell... Second... we should listen and always be open to objective biblical, theological, and philosophical defenses of an idea." (Pg. 169)
About "those who have never heard," they suggest, "we believe it is certainly possible that those who are responding to the light from nature that they have received will either have the message of the gospel sent to them (cf. Acts 10) or else it may be that God will judge them based on his knowledge of what they would have done had they had a chance to hear the gospel... It does not seem just for another to be judged because of my disobedience in taking the gospel to others, and it is surely possible... that the gospel has not been taken to others in the way God commanded. We... are not sure this line of reasoning is true, but it does seem plausible in light of the information we have." (Pg. 175-176)
While not all Christians will agree with all positions taken in this book, this book will be very valuable study material for persons from all sides of these controversial matters.
Gary Habermas (born 1950) is Professor of Apologetics and Philosophy and chairman of the department of philosophy and theology at Liberty University, and is a foremost evangelical apologist who has written/cowritten many books such as 'The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ,' 'Resurrected?: An Atheist and Theist Dialogue,' 'Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?: The Resurrection Debate,' etc. J.P. (John Porter) Moreland (born 1948) is Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology at Biola University; he has also written books such as 'Scaling the Secular City: A Defense of Christianity,' 'The God Question: An Invitation to a Life of Meaning,' etc.
They wrote in the introductory section of this 1992 book, "When we do think about death, we're likely to raise the following questions: Is there really such a thing as life after death? ... What is the afterlife like?... Is reincarnation true? ... Is there a hell, and how can such a place be reconciled with a loving God?... In this book, we will explore answers to these questions as well as other related issues."
They note, "some near-death experiences have even been reported while the individual actually registered an absence of brain waves... It is fascinating to consider, therefore, that some of the most vivid memories in the lives of these people happened while their brains registered no known activity. Now it is conceivable that the EEG may not measure all brain activity; there may still be some residual action in the brain. However, presently the absence of any EEG brain wave function is the best and the most widely accepted indication that the brain is not functioning. And flat brain waves on the EEG, when present for long periods, are the chief contemporary definition of the nature of death." (Pg. 77)
They admit, "No one knows exactly why some persons have near-death experiences and others do not. It has been suggested that such incidents perhaps even occurred but are later forgotten, maybe due to the nature of the crisis itself, or from the administration of anesthetics or other drugs, or from any frightening or negative aspects to the episode." (Pg. 88)
They also observe, "no American claimed to have seen Shiva, Rama, or Krishna. Americans reported more than five times as many deceased figures as religious ones... But Hindus, conversely, saw almost twice as many religious figures as deceased ones... While Americans perceived 61 percent female figures, Indians claimed only 23 percent... which makes it tempting to claim that this is perhaps due to the apparently lower status of women in Indian culture." (Pg. 91)
They also concede, "While there have been various non-Christian religious groups associated with annihilationism, we must point out that a number of solid evangelical Christians---such as John Stott ['Evangelical Essentials: A Liberal Evangelical Dialogue'], Clark Pinnock ['Four Views on Hell'], John Wenham ['Facing Hell'], P.E. Hughes ['True Image'], and Stephen Travis [I' Believe in the Second Coming of Jesus']---have defended the view. While we are not convinced their view is true, we must say two things. First, these people are committed Christians, and they have appropriately reminded us of the importance of not being glib, much less gleeful, about the doctrine of hell... Second... we should listen and always be open to objective biblical, theological, and philosophical defenses of an idea." (Pg. 169)
About "those who have never heard," they suggest, "we believe it is certainly possible that those who are responding to the light from nature that they have received will either have the message of the gospel sent to them (cf. Acts 10) or else it may be that God will judge them based on his knowledge of what they would have done had they had a chance to hear the gospel... It does not seem just for another to be judged because of my disobedience in taking the gospel to others, and it is surely possible... that the gospel has not been taken to others in the way God commanded. We... are not sure this line of reasoning is true, but it does seem plausible in light of the information we have." (Pg. 175-176)
While not all Christians will agree with all positions taken in this book, this book will be very valuable study material for persons from all sides of these controversial matters.
October 5, 2020
Argument: The mind isn't reducible to the body and so there is a prima facie case it survives the body's death.
Body and Soul Dualism
substance: an entity like an apple. A particular, individual thing. It cannot be in more than one place at one time. It is a continuant--it can change by gaining new properties and losing old ones.
Substances are not in other things or had by other things. Substances are unities of parts, properties, and capacities.
property: a universal, existent reality that can be in more than one place at one time. They are immutable. If the property redness changed to greenness, it would no longer be redness.
Mind-Body Problem
key point: matter doesn’t have consciousness.
Mental events:
sensations: characterized by a conscious feel. Being stuck with a pain is not the same thing as the sensation of pain.
propositional attitudes: have a certain mental attitude towards a proposition that is part of a that-that clause. I mean have an attitude of hope or fear about proposition p, yet hope is not the same thing as fear.
Acts of will/purposing. I can will to raise my arm. Yet if I am drugged to where I am paralyzed in my arm, then my purposing to raise my arm will not raise my arm. Therefore, the purposing is not the same thing as the neurons firing that would have raised my arm.
In Support of Dualism
No Physical properties are self-presenting
All mental properties are self-presenting
Therefore, no mental properties are physical properties.
Mental properties present themselves directly to the knowing subject (Moreland 29). The subject has them immediately in her field of consciousness. I can have access to my mental properties but not necessarily to physical properties.
My access to mental states is incorrigible (30). I can be mistaken that I see a green object, but it is impossible for me to be mistaken that I claim to see a green object.
Intentionality
Intentionality is the mind’s of-ness or about-ness of something (32). “Mental states point beyond themselves to other things.”
key point: intentionality is not a physical property. Physical properties stand in relation to physical objects, “but one physical object is not of or about another one” (32). Moreland lists six differences between intentionality and physical spaces (232-233):
when we represent a mental act to ourselves (thinking about something) there are no physical sense data associated with it.
Intentionality is completely unrestricted with regard to the kind of object it can hold as a term--anything can have a mental act directed towards it, but “physical relations only obtain for a narrow range of objects (magnetic fields only attract certain things).
To grasp a mental act, I must engage in a reflexive act of self-awareness (to grasp my reflection of a tree, I must be aware of an awareness).
A Short Case for Substance Dualism
Since a substance is not identical to its properties, it can exist as they come and go (33).
Indexicals:
I know myself by first-person acquaintance with myself.
Dualism and Eternal Life
If substance dualism is true, then the idea of eternal life--specifically in existing post-mortem--is logically feasible.
Body and Soul Dualism
substance: an entity like an apple. A particular, individual thing. It cannot be in more than one place at one time. It is a continuant--it can change by gaining new properties and losing old ones.
Substances are not in other things or had by other things. Substances are unities of parts, properties, and capacities.
property: a universal, existent reality that can be in more than one place at one time. They are immutable. If the property redness changed to greenness, it would no longer be redness.
Mind-Body Problem
key point: matter doesn’t have consciousness.
Mental events:
sensations: characterized by a conscious feel. Being stuck with a pain is not the same thing as the sensation of pain.
propositional attitudes: have a certain mental attitude towards a proposition that is part of a that-that clause. I mean have an attitude of hope or fear about proposition p, yet hope is not the same thing as fear.
Acts of will/purposing. I can will to raise my arm. Yet if I am drugged to where I am paralyzed in my arm, then my purposing to raise my arm will not raise my arm. Therefore, the purposing is not the same thing as the neurons firing that would have raised my arm.
In Support of Dualism
No Physical properties are self-presenting
All mental properties are self-presenting
Therefore, no mental properties are physical properties.
Mental properties present themselves directly to the knowing subject (Moreland 29). The subject has them immediately in her field of consciousness. I can have access to my mental properties but not necessarily to physical properties.
My access to mental states is incorrigible (30). I can be mistaken that I see a green object, but it is impossible for me to be mistaken that I claim to see a green object.
Intentionality
Intentionality is the mind’s of-ness or about-ness of something (32). “Mental states point beyond themselves to other things.”
key point: intentionality is not a physical property. Physical properties stand in relation to physical objects, “but one physical object is not of or about another one” (32). Moreland lists six differences between intentionality and physical spaces (232-233):
when we represent a mental act to ourselves (thinking about something) there are no physical sense data associated with it.
Intentionality is completely unrestricted with regard to the kind of object it can hold as a term--anything can have a mental act directed towards it, but “physical relations only obtain for a narrow range of objects (magnetic fields only attract certain things).
To grasp a mental act, I must engage in a reflexive act of self-awareness (to grasp my reflection of a tree, I must be aware of an awareness).
A Short Case for Substance Dualism
Since a substance is not identical to its properties, it can exist as they come and go (33).
Indexicals:
I know myself by first-person acquaintance with myself.
Dualism and Eternal Life
If substance dualism is true, then the idea of eternal life--specifically in existing post-mortem--is logically feasible.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews