The Evangelical Universalist Forum

ADCs and NDEs: Their Evidential Value for Apologetics


#61

Ndes are often unreliable and contradict each other and sometimes even themselves. I attribute them to fever dreams of when the brain is still active while the body is still dead. None are raised from the dead yet except Christ. And the dead know nothing at all. so if they knew something then they were not dead. On a side note the ones i find funniest are the ones of people who say “they saw eternal hell” but somehow got out.


#62

On the contrary, the evidence from NDEs and ADCs is far, far superior to that for Jesus’ resurrection. You clearly pontificate from ignorance without having watched the posted videos or read through all the cases I’ve posted. Nor have you or anyone else here shown cause why the apparent contradictions I have outlined about the Gospel resurrection narratives are do not justify the legion of scholars who reject Jesus’ resurrection precisely because of these difficulties.


#63

The problem with all this “evidence”, is that scientists and medical doctors…can find scientific evidence and explanations - to explain them away. Now, don’t get me wrong. I believe in the supernatural. And there are cases, where this NDE and ADC stuff is real. But there are also cases, where scientific evidence and explanations - to explain them away - are also valid. I first seek scientific explanations. Then I look for a supernatural one.

For example. Let’s look at this now diseased Indian guru, materializing stuff.

Is this:

Someone doctoring the video professionally?
A professional stage magician?
The result of demon activity?
The result of natural abilities, by practicing yogic disciplines?
God acting through them?
Etc?

Things are NOT always black and white. Or, for that matter - simple.

Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth. Arthur Conan Doyle


#64

whos nde do we uphold? The hindus, the christians, the muslims? What of the ndes of hell where one says they see nothing and the other says they see everyone burning? What of the ones that say both in one testimony.

You would have to be selective to say which is true or not because not all can be true at one time. In comes information bias.

could i be wrong? yes. But theres too many conflicting nde’s that makes me weary to take any as credible.


#65

Holy Fool and ATR:
It seems that both of you will say practically anything to avoid the hard work of actually watching the posted videos and carefully reading my NDE and ADC accounts. These accounts are so compelling precisely because there is no scientific explanation for them, contrary to the scientists you cite. To use your rationales, Jesus’ resurrection can be rejected simply by citing all the heretical Gnostic claims of resurrection appearances. Nor have either of you addressed the long list of apparent contradictions I have posted on the Gospel resurrection sequence, contradictions which have prompted many formerly evangelical scholars to reject Jesus’ resurrection. This is an apologetically critical issue that requires close scrutiny instead of your cavalier treatment.


#66

Berserk, when are you going to explain the gospel contradictions?


#67

Oh come on now. If I were to present these videos, to filmmakers at some Hollywood studio. Or even more directly, folks that create Japanese Anime. And some scientists at Fermilab, the University of Chicago, Northwestern University or Argonne National Laboratories (all within my living area). Are you saying the film professionals (i.e. animators, video producers, etc) or Anime producers…and the scientists (physicists, chemists, electrical engineers, medical professors, etc)…CAN’T come up with explanations???

Is THAT what you are saying?


#68

No, Holy Fool, instead I make these 2 points:
(1) The nonsense expressed in your last post further demonstrates that you have not watched the videos. The doctors is the videos identify their sources, have written well-documented books on the evidence, and make themselves available for cross-examination.
(2) The Gospel resurrection narratives are presumably based on anecdotal testimony which has dubious connections with eyewitness sources and is riddled with apparent contradictions.

So again, I challenge you: do you have the intellectual integrity to engage the hard work of research and critical thinking to assess your biased and ill-grounded perspective?


#69

I bet anything in play money, that if I watched these videos…and did a search for professional criticism of them…I could find it, from distinguished doctors, scientists, etc. It’s the nature of academia and how profession academia works. But suppose I were to watch them. What would happen? That I would become convinced of supernatural stuff? Well, I have experienced that. Both in a Christian setting. And other religious settings (i.e. Native Americans), So there’s no need to convince me. But I am a professional researcher - now retired. And I have worked in both academic and non-academic settings. So I can find professional criticism, of anything you present - if I wanted to.

So, let’s just say I’m a believer in BOTH science and the supernatural. And you can “sell” your video presentations, to our forum audience.


#70

i would watch them but you see when i click on the link all i get is the bing video search homepage so…

But regardless if you base your claims on ndes, and there are many ndes that all contradict each other, are you just cherry picking the nde you claim is true?

Ive watched many ndes. I can find an nde for any religions or ideology i want to. So which one is right.


#71

So, let’s do something simple - shall we? Let the poster post ONE YouTube video or link, they think is noteworthy. Then

  • See how many hits it has. Unless it gets a few thousand, then it’s not worthy of our time. As it’s not worthy of the Google world, Internet audience - in general.

  • Suppose it has a few thousand hits. And I find professional criticism of the video, done in a academic manner. Would the forum poster here, be willing to respond to the professional criticism…in a professional, academic manner?


#72

Berserk,
I think claiming Acts 9.7 & 22.9 are contradictions is a stretch in that in Acts 9 they heard “a voice” which could have been Saul’s voice or any voice whereas in Acts 22 Luke was specifically referring to Jesus voice and what he was saying to Saul. It also may mean they didn’t make out the words spoken to Paul by Jesus therefore they didn’t understand the words spoken.


#73

Holy Fool reminds me of Fundamentalists who rail against evolutionary theory, but constantly find excuses to avoid defenses of evolution by articulate and well respected biologists like Kenneth Miller (as opposed to fundamanetlist apologists). Can you say “integrity?”

For a summary of Dr. Ray Moody’s book on Shared Death Experiences, see:

https://www.near-death.com/experiences/triggers/shared-death-experiences.html

For one of Dr. Moody’s many riveting online lectures on Shared Death Experiences, see:

\https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=share++death+experiences+youtube+moody&view=detail&mid=2E4ED094272230C97EF92E4ED094272230C97EF9&FORM=VIRE

For Dr. Scott Taylor’s personal Shared Death Experience, see:

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=scott+taylor+present+youtube&view=detail&mid=101EE27C3699FAF2E67B101EE27C3699FAF2E67B&FORM=VIRE


#74

Im curious, as im not gathering a whole lot of your philosophy, genuinely I do want to hear your point of view. Cause I do,even when i disagree, enjoy hearing other peoples opinions.

That being said, what do you think happens when we die?


#75

Actually, just the opposite. I see no conflict between theology and science. I follow the scientific trail, wherever it may lead. But I also am familiar with the scientific method. Since I have a bachelor’s degree in math from Aurora University, a masters in psychology from Norwich University and was a statistical methodology black-belt at Motorola.

I’m familiar with academic presentations, as well as academic criticism. NDE and ADC experiences, can be viewed many ways. They can have spiritual explanations…as well as explanations from brain chemistry, neurology and other scientific disciplines. You can’t just pick and choose, the scientific experts you like. And ignore the criticism, of the scientific experts you don’t like. In fact, I did a lot of research on PhD dissertations - by PhD nurses… on the subject of therapeutic touch. Where I actually spent time, with the original co-founder.

Acutally, the ONLY way to know for sure…is to experience it for yourself. I might send some folks to Heartfulness - to learn meditation. Or to the Bruno Groening Circle of Friends,
Sukyo Mahikari and Johrei - to experience healing and purification. All at no charge to them. I tell them to go experience it for themselves. Do whatever you are currently doing, in theology, science and medicine. Don’t change that. Just add these experiences to the mix.

If you want to read something good on NDE’s for laymen, then check out Scientific American:

The Death of “Near Death”: Even If Heaven Is Real, You Aren t Seeing It


#76

Holy Fool,
So give me a scientific explanation for perfectly healthy witnesses having OBEs in which they share their loved one’s experience of the Being of Light, the encounters with deceased relatives and friends, and even their loved one’s past life review? And what is your scientific explanation for th ability of the deceased to come back, drive their loved one around in a truck or car, and providing paranormal information unknown to their earthbound loved one?


#77

Well, read the Scientific American articles I posted - in my previous posts. You will see they address, the questions you just raised.

The Death of “Near Death”: Even If Heaven Is Real, You Aren t Seeing It

Same thing goes for UFOs spotted. A few decades back, my father owned a plastic shop. And there was a minister’s son, who worked during the summer. And he saw some flying saucers. And he even showed me, a picture he took. Well:

  • It could be lights from various scientific phenomena, that’s happening at the same time.

  • It could be men and women from Mars, or some galaxy - far, far away.

  • It could be demonic activity - trying to fool us (which is another possible explanation, for your NDE and ADC stuff).

  • He could have a brain disorder… an organic disease,…his glasses were foggy… he was suffering from side effects of prescription medication… or maybe smoking some weed or drinking some alcohol.

The possibilities are endless.

Let’s briefly look, at the possibility of demon activity:

Now I hung around for many years, with the Two Feathers Medicine Clan. Which is Native American spirituality. And they use things, like Peyote and Ayahuasca - as sacraments and medicine. Within the context, of an all night ceremony. And my typical CIA answer, is I can neither confirm nor deny… that I have ever joined them, in these ceremonies.

image

However, they might see things you talk about. Is this:

  • The side effects of a hallucinogen?

  • Or is it opening up the door, to see reality as it really is?

You decide!

Just a footnote here. They say you can’t exit the sweat lodge, until the ceremony is complete (in the above video). This is NOT a universal way. In Lakota, Ute and *Ojibwa tribal ceremonies I attended…You can ask to leave any time and it’s granted.

Just another footnote here. Diame is another name for Ayahuasca.


#78

(11) NDEs Supporting Claims that the Dead Monitor the Living:

I had just performed a wedding at my church in Buffalo, NY, and was now attending the reception at a country club. I happened to sit next to Phyllis, a rather aloof but attractive blonde doctor and medical researcher. She shared her 2 highly instructive NDEs with me. She had never believed in NDEs prior to her own experience. The first was triggered by a car accident. She found herself floating up to “a mall that really wasn’t a mall. It was a mall composed of white light.”

There she came upon a court area with several tables and a hidden orchestra playing beautiful music. Seated at one of the tables was her deceased mother. When Phyllis joined her, the Mom chided her, “You really need to grieve over my passing. Your inability to do so in hampering my progress over here!” This guilt trip made Phyllis very uncomfortable. She had always dealt with tragedy and disappointment by detaching from her emotions. Finally, she excused herself,“Well, I guess I’ll try to get back into my body now.”

A couple of years later, Phyllis was taken to the hospital for a serious operation.
She didn’t explicitly identify her illness, but she gave me the impression it was a woman’s ailment like cervical cancer. Her illness triggered another NDE. She again found herself in the “mall of white light” at her mother’s table in the court area. Her mother again lit into her," I told you your failure to grieve my passing is preventing my progress over here! Why haven’t you done what I asked?"

The soothing orchestra music in the background actually grated on Phyllis’s nerves. She hadn’t expected this second confrontation. Upset, she again suggested that she should leave. But her mother retorted, “No, you’re not ready to leave! You need to go with these 2 gentlemen.” Two tall men in white robes appeared and led her to “an elevator that wasn’t really an elevator. It was an elevator of white light.” They ascended to what seemed like a spirit hospital. Some sort of “medical” procedure was performed on Dr. Phyllis, which she didn’t understand. Then she was returned to her hospital bed in this world. The “medical” procedure had cured her and she was released from the hospital!

I never saw Phyllis again. Obviously, I was only dimly aware of the psychological baggage between her and her Mom. I have since often wondered if Phyllis was ever able to get in touch with her emotions and grieve her loss. Two intriguing inferences might be drawn from her


#79

Im still not understanding this pick and choosing of these phenomenon. At best it seems like research bias. Where you pick which ones will fit your personal convictions and uphold them as truth and ignore the ones that discredit or contradict it.

And as such, and how varying they all are, I dont put any credit to them.


#80

Yes, you hit on key words…“Research bias”. Folks like to present their key theories…but ignore professional criticism, of such presentations…or research that presents the opposite, of the original presentation. It’s NOT science - it’s “selling”. Same goes for “visionaries extraordinarily”. Can such visions CONTRADICT, Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition? Are such visions to be interpreted literally, figuratively - or otherwise? And is there a scientific or medical explanation? And why isn’t the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Church or Native American tribes…honoring and praising this “visionary extraordinaire”. Or why don’t I see this research emphasized in scientific academic journals, or even lay scientific journals - like Scientific American?