Man has NDE, told not his time, then dies for real 2 minutes later

#1
I was listening to season 15, episode 8 of the mysterious universe podcast, and starting at the 42nd minute, the hosts were talking about a story of a man who died, was resuscitated and had an NDE. He described his NDE and was told that it was not his time. But two minutes later, he experienced another seizure and died (permanently this time).

I was a little confused about this story first of all because I found it hard to believe someone experienced cardiac arrest, then is brought back and in a period of two minutes, talks about his NDE and then dies.. but even if it was not literally two minutes as the hosts suggest, and it was 5 or 10 minutes or even 10 hours for that matter... it is weird.

That account left me quite perplexed. What are your guys' thoughts on that. How would someone be told it is not his time but then die a couple of minutes later?
 
#2
Or as a follow up (I posted my previous thread prior to finishing the podcast) , they shared another story of a person having an NDE and being told it was his time, only to eventually be told towards the end of his NDE that they got it wrong and he was brought back.

What are we to make of stories like these? I suppose I am troubled by accounts like these because I am so used to hearing about "typical" NDE's with light and love and the occasional distressing NDE but haven't really been aware of accounts such as these..
 
#3
Perhaps his "final mission" was to convey the message that there is life after death. to those particular people who were around to hear him. Maybe this was needed for those persons to change their frame of mind, or alter their current life-pattern somehow. This last "mission" of his might have repercussions on many other peoples life, just by conveying that message. Therefore these 2 extra minutes filled a purpose. Who knows?
 
#5
It may be somewhat unclear as to the exact details, so anything we conclude may be based on uncertain events.

However I think we need to distinguish at least two different aspects.
1. The 'love and light' and so on.
2. factual information, such as predictions of the future and so on.

It often seems to be the case in reading NDE accounts that when someone is told "it is not your time", this interweaves very neatly, like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, with real-world activity such as the actions of the attending doctors, or perhaps the arrival of a rescuer. The idea of "it's not your time" seems very often intrinsically linked with these external, physical events. Perhaps the problem is that we tend to take these pronouncements from beings encountered during an NDE as somehow all-wise, all-knowing, and that they tell us our destiny. Perhaps what they are sometimes doing is just stating the blooming obvious, and there is not necessarily great wisdom or deep meaning.
 
#6
Is there a real reference for this, or is it just "I heard this story about ..."
I don't believe there is. I know there are links in the show notes but all the commentater said was remembering a story about... so and so. It was related to the discussion they were having and I don't think he ever referenced where it was from .
 
S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#7
Reminds me of the little doctors in Stephen King's Insomnia, where two of the docs work toward Purpose but the other works simply for Chaos.

I think NDEs are weirder once you start including any conscious experience that happens past the point of clinical death where we presume, if not 0 brain activity, the loss of enough activity to suspend even the possibility of dreaming.

I would love to see some examination of all the NDEs that are just incredibly odd. The one about spirit-bureaucrats being mistaken about the person's time reminds me of something from mythology, possibly and Indian or Chinese tale?
 
#8
I don't believe there is. I know there are links in the show notes but all the commentater said was remembering a story about... so and so. It was related to the discussion they were having and I don't think he ever referenced where it was from .

Okay, then my answer to the op: I don't like to comment on unverified reports because it could be misreported or an outright hoax. We need to stick to facts because there are a lot of people who want to discredit the whole subject ... and it is not really useful to sincere seekers to read speculation about something that might not be true.
 
#9
To me, being told "it is not your time", which is extremely common, kind of implies that there is some temporary confusion about the situation out there. Sometimes this remark doesn't seem to be addressed only to the person in question , but also to others who are there to greet him or whatever.

Maybe things out there don't necessarily run totally smoothly!

David
 
#11
Or as a follow up (I posted my previous thread prior to finishing the podcast) , they shared another story of a person having an NDE and being told it was his time, only to eventually be told towards the end of his NDE that they got it wrong and he was brought back.

What are we to make of stories like these? I suppose I am troubled by accounts like these because I am so used to hearing about "typical" NDE's with light and love and the occasional distressing NDE but haven't really been aware of accounts such as these..
It's possibly because the recalled narrative of these experiences, also incorporates localised information (from around environment of the patient being resuscitated), and third party information (strangers, and relatives/friends) in a way that we don't currently understand.

Once you drop the idea of a strictly isolated 'self'... that's the everyday, isolated 'self' we experience, where we understand information from the perspective of a location in spacetime.

Instead, accepting that 'self' cannot be strictly isolated. Then it becomes easier to think about understanding within spacetime as being rather more flexible. Such that the perspectives from which you understand information may not be yours.

Once you start thinking about 'self' and it's perspective in space and time, interacting with third party 'selves' from their perspective in space and time, I think things get a little easier to understand.

It's putting 'self' in some sort of strict straight jacket of isolation that causes confusion.

We've got plenty of evidence that information can be dislocated within space time, the same must go for 'self', not just yourself, but third parties as well.
 
#12
Reminds me of the little doctors in Stephen King's Insomnia, where two of the docs work toward Purpose but the other works simply for Chaos.

I think NDEs are weirder once you start including any conscious experience that happens past the point of clinical death where we presume, if not 0 brain activity, the loss of enough activity to suspend even the possibility of dreaming.
I think it's likely that 'dreaming' uses a similar mechanism to NDE's, such that your past days thoughts get listened too. Its just in the classic hospitalised NDE things can get more exposed than usual... one listens to more... stuff that ones self usually wouldn't have direct access to.
 
S

Sciborg_S_Patel

#13
I think it's likely that 'dreaming' uses a similar mechanism to NDE's, such that your past days thoughts get listened too. Its just in the classic hospitalised NDE things can get more exposed than usual... one listens to more... stuff that ones self usually wouldn't have direct access to.
So you'd say dreams also "loosen" our mooring in the present, allowing our minds to extend into space/time? (Admittedly I need to review the stuff you've said about said in the past about time/space, just spit-balling here.)
 
#14
So you'd say dreams also "loosen" our mooring in the present, allowing our minds to extend into space/time? (Admittedly I need to review the stuff you've said about said in the past about time/space, just spit-balling here.)
Yeah, I'd say dreams were the process of doing something like that... but it's a process focused on you, and that process is under some control... (I.e you're mainly listening to yourself). Where as classic hospitalised NDE's seem less under control, indeed other people (external) seem to be able to randomly focus you, rather than you just focusing yourself. So you experience them, rather than just you, even though everything (you & them etc) gets combined into 'self'.

Where there is a difference between you, (your experiences and how you think), and them (their experiences and how they think), that difference often seems to be understood as the message people take away from the NDE.

Depending on the relative difference between the positions that form this NDE message.... we often seem to get either attractive or repelling narratives.

Those are narratives where we are pushed away from one way of thinking, or attracted towards another way of thinking. But it all seems rather relative... one persons push, is someone else's pull... just depends on your perspective compared to the others perspective.

One has to keep thinking how things would appear to 'self', if there was more than just one 'self' involved in the experience.

For instance, think about the patient and the emergency medical team...
And think about the different mind sets of a team trying to bring you back, vs a team who is getting you back, vs a team who is stopping you from going away. Then think about how each of the teams members, thinks about each of the other teams members. It's a complicated mesh.
 
Last edited:
#17
Which would be fine if there were none with veridical content.
I hear you. Still I'm yet to be totally convinced that the few documented veridicals have what it takes to keep up ith the proof grounded model that we need. I feel that under serious scrutiny these 'veridical' have a tendency to somewhat fall appart, like the ones of Pam Reynolds or Maria's shoe (to benoted that the latter would be the real deal if proven genuine, considering the perception of the target shoe was out of reach regarding physical means of perception).
 
#19
As has been shown many times in Alex's interviews, it is no longer about the evidence. It hasn't been for a long time. It is rather about how willing people are to cling to treasured beliefs, come what may, evidence or no evidence. That is the real sticking point. Arguing about facts does nothing here.
 
#20
This is an interesting video for anyone curious about the methodology in Parnia's research. Looks like he's had portable stands made to hold up the target pictures in his Aware study. Not only that, they're using audible cues fed into the patient's ears (during cardiac arrest) to presumably test whether patients can still pick up sounds. Apologies if this has been posted somewhere else already.

http://www.today.com/health/near-death-experiences-may-provide-clues-about-afterlife-t105985
 
Top