Alex
Administrator
255. IAN MACCORMACK’S EXCLUSIVELY CHRISTIAN NEAR-DEATH EXPEIENCE
Interview with scripture-quoting Near-Death Experiencer, Ian MacCormack about his Christian interpretation of NDEs.
Last edited by a moderator:
Saiko, that wasn't his NDE. His NDE was what happened to him once he was in the hospital and "died" (see the account I just linked to).My take . . .on this specific incident as related by him
He thinks he's dying . . brings an image of his mother to mind. His mother is a devout Christian which he knows. I'd guess that she must have tried to make him one when he was a child and maybe even as an adult. All the rest seems to be thoughts based around stuff he's heard and "what ifs." It's similar to conversion stuff I've read by people who feared that they were going to be killed.
If by NDE we mean being in a state where one's awareness is not within the standard physical-oriented state, I don't see the incident as being one.
agreed. this fact combined with the "do unto others..." covers almost everything.Personally, this is why I just stick to "do we survive" ?
Saiko, that wasn't his NDE. His NDE was what happened to him once he was in the hospital and "died" (see the account I just linked to).
Are there any known cases where during NDE someone who'd never heard about Jesus encountered what they believe to be him?
All it takes is one human, right? Just because it's one person says nothing about the validity or truth of it.I won't be changing my view of NDE's because of any persons interpretation of them, Ian has one interpretation of it, but it's one human?
So basically any NDE that is 32 years old should be considered shaky on the same grounds, right?It has been filtered through his brain, with his strengths and weaknesses and his ego and his Mum's religion and everything else he has experienced up to the moment, 32 years on , that Alex interviewed him.
All it takes is one human, right? Just because it's one person says nothing about the validity or truth of it.
So basically any NDE that is 32 years old should be considered shaky on the same grounds, right?
Just an observation (and I mean no offense to you, Steve, specificially): It's interesting to see proponents using similar tactics that skeptics use to cast doubt on events that don't fit within the "accepted" understanding. In this case, the understanding being that the specific God of the bible couldn't possibly be the actual reality. I have to say I'm impressed that Alex is willing to pit these seemingly disparate NDE accounts against one another to try and understand what's going on. I myself have no idea how to even begin to unpack it. But I can't, and won't, dismiss any part of it.
how about this:I think the smart thing is to decouple seemingly connected events as much as possible. In the case of an NDE, you have a visionary experience apparently induced by the cessation (or severe reduction) of brain activity.
Since this isn't CD, let's go with the working assumption that mind does things without brains during an NDE. (Not to mention we have physician confirmation of this that Jim posted in the last thread.)
At that point people have incredibly coherent experiences. But are there people who have incoherent visios, or just silly dream experiences as well? I think there are records of this, and I'll try to find some links. So that's one hurdle.
Let's then look at the coherent visions. We have a lot of comparative accounts from different religions about needing to be saved from Hell through Jesus, or a particular Buddhist doctrine, or Plato's ideas of virtuous action. We'll have to also try and find Indian/Native American/African/etc NDEs to compare at some point as well.
So there's commonality in the basic idea of Hell, Heaven, and some means of avoiding the former to end up at the latter. But these are different means, that seem very culturally dependent. So that's another hurdle.
Then we have the NDEs that tell us not to worry about Hell, to avoid playing the Magical Belief Lottery and hoping we picked the right means of escaping damnation. Better to be a spiritual person who picks the best path for themselves. Another hurdle.
Throw in the negative NDEs, not to mention other high strangeness, and you have a forest of hurdles...
None of this means Jesus wasn't a real person or didn't have an important role to play - for example it's possible his role was similar to the one Steiner accords him. I also think people's past negative experiences with Christianity make them more anxious to see it replaced with something new, ignoring the reality that one can find a fulfilling path to the Numinous within its confines without being as exclusionary as Ian Maccormack.
But it seems to me, given all the hurdles, the important lesson is to not abandon reason and to support the values of secular democracy, the latter being the best hope of gaining any real understanding of Reality.