Please prove that souls exist and that they are either resurrected or reincarnated

[Compassionist]

Most religions claim that souls exist. Some religions claim that souls are immortal and are reincarnated after the death of the body while other religions claim that souls are immortal and are resurrected after the death of the body. Can anyone please prove that souls exist and are either resurrected or reincarnated? Thank you.

[A Freeman]

If someone who has never seen nor flown in an airplane comes along and provides you with what they believe to be "solid evidence" that planes don't exist, should someone who has actually flown on a plane take them seriously? Or tell them to stop clowning around?

Having had my own personal experience, which was as real as it gets, there is NO DOUBT that we are NOT the human body that each of us is temporarily incarnating. That's what it means to actually KNOW something is real, having experienced it personally. And to know that others who haven't simply don't know what they're talking about.

So someone can come along and ignore thousands of thousands of personal testimonies from unrelated people with different belief systems, that are scattered across the globe, all of whom had similar experiences during their NDEs, and claim "it's subjective" either because they read that somewhere or that's what they want to believe, neither of which makes it so.

It's NOT subjective. It's just inconvenient for those who have invested so much of their time and energy into trying to convince themselves there is no God nor any spiritual world, because their own fear blinds them to it.

[Diagoras]

If someone who has never seen nor flown in an airplane comes along and provides you with what they believe to be "solid evidence" that planes don't exist, should someone who has actually flown on a plane take them seriously? Or tell them to stop clowning around?

This analogy doesnt really work very well. For starters, solid evidence for something not existing is problematic. What I shared in my post was an alternate explanation. I never claimed it was solid evidence of NDEs not existing.

Secondly, I hope we can all agree that the evidence for airplanes comes in a variety of forms. They are actual, physical objects seen in the sky, people fly in them, build and service them, etc. Different people can examine a plane in great detail over an extended period and agree on almost every little detail. Things like ghosts and NDEs, on the other hand cannot be examined in the same way.

For the plane analogy, you would drive them to the airport and lead them onto an actual plane. I fail to see how this could be replicated for NDEs unless you tried to very nearly kill me - and youll understand my reluctance to take part in any experiments along those lines

Having had my own personal experience, which was as real as it gets, there is NO DOUBT that we are

<extra bolding mine>

Stopping you there because its not possible to draw a conclusion about the wider population from just the one persons experience.

That's what it means to actually KNOW something is real, having experienced it personally.

I disagree. Someone who hallucinates meeting their dead father would experience it personally but that wouldnt make it real.

And to know that others who haven't simply don't know what they're talking about.

How do you know that I havent had a NDE? I might just not be comfortable talking about it. By your own logic, since you havent had my experiences, you cant know what I know.

It's NOT subjective.

Yes it is.

Subjective is an adjective that describes something as being based on individual perspectives and experiences (e.g., "That movie is too long in my opinion"). Objective means that something is based on verifiable data or evidence (e.g., "That movie is 180 minutes long").

I can accept that you hold an unusually strong opinion here, but it is subjective.

We continue to wait for evidence of souls (as per the OP).

[A Freeman]

You can't explain what colour is to a blind man.

Similarly, you cannot explain anything spiritual to a human, as they lack the facilities to see, hear or understand anything spiritual.

John 3:3-7
3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born from above, he cannot SEE The Kingdom of God.
3:4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water (human) and then is born (later) from above as his spirit-"Being" (his REAL self which is NOT human), he can NOT enter into The Kingdom of God (Who is a Spirit-"Being").
3:6 That which is born of the flesh is human; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (a spirit-"Being") - (a human+Being).
3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

[Diagoras]

You can't explain what colour is to a blind man.

Similarly, you cannot explain anything spiritual to a human, as they lack the facilities to see, hear or understand anything spiritual.

Interesting that you should claim that, when not so long ago, you posted this:

It's difficult to capture the unseen world on film. Even so, there's a glimpse at a soul leaving its body shortly after death that was captured on camera, and which has been included in the article.

Would you care to address this apparent inconsistency?