questioner
Member
Although I accept near-death and out of body experiences, I'm sorry, there was something about her story that just didn't ring true.
Beverley's inability to give a direct answer to a direct question made for a long drawn-out proceedings.
I think Beverley's own answers show that we should not get too hung up on assigning of names.Alex's question at the end of the interview:
Do you think Beverley "encountered Jesus" during an out-of-body NDE experience, and what does it mean to even say that?
That sounds to me like a rhetorical question that means "yes"the response is neither to confirm nor to deny. "Why do you ask child, do you not know?".
Although I accept near-death and out of body experiences, I'm sorry, there was something about her story that just didn't ring true.
I don't read it that way. If 'yes', why not say 'yes'? We are used to rhetoric in our debates, but the consistency of Beverley's experience with others means it is something other than ordinary rhetoric. It does seem that names are unimportant. We should use other approaches to recognising who or what we are dealing with.That sounds to me like a rhetorical question that means "yes"
I respect your opinion.I'm personally with questioner on this one
Hey, I want the truth! I promise you, if my faith is proved wrong, I'm off down the pub to get wasted and have a good time before I die! If I was biased, I wouldn't believe in NDEs at all. I think that whatever the truth turns out to be, if it isn't in line with my faith, it's my faith that goes. Having said that, we all have subconscious biases but I do try to challenge mine.I respect your opinion.
However at the same time I'm wondering (based on some other discussion threads) whether you struggle with material which doesn't support your own faith. None of us would be comfortable to see the ground we stand on being eroded away. Perhaps.
Perhaps an attempt to imitate how one might imagine a fantasy Jesus to speak, such as in the use of the word "child" in this context. It's very early church and not very Jesus. It's also very trite!I don't read it that way. If 'yes', why not say 'yes'?
Hm I know what you mean but I am not so sure. Almost every development seems to have its dark application as well as its positive one. Perhaps if we have access to even more understanding it would cause problems we hadn't imagined.
I don't know either. It might work for you but someone different might react completely differently to it.I don't know. I think this lack of understanding as to who we truly are, may be one of the reasons for humanity's suffering. A particular individual may have a fear of loosing what he had gained in this short physical life which will lead to greed, perhaps suffering and even hate. These gains may be riches, loved ones, etc. This fear of loss of these gains may be because of this perceived transient life where there is nothing more afterwards. I mean ... who truly believes we are eternal? Who can actually grasp that concept without a greater understanding? I know I have a hard time with it and I find myself clinging to what I have and even wanting more from this temporal and temporary life before I expire. The question is ... will I truly expire? But to understand without a shadow of a doubt as to who I truly am and that I will never expire, wouldn't that alleviate my fear of loss?
I apologize if this is swaying off topic a little.
I saw this, and my reply to his post was that the description was quite similar to the ones in "Astral City".In response to yesterday's Manchester tragedy, Jurgen Ziewe put an post on Facebook from his book, Vistas of Infinity, describing the time he saw what happened to a suicide bomber when they passed.
http://www.unariunwisdom.com/what-happens-to-a-suicide-bomber-on-the-other-side/
Exactly my reaction. Since I have had OBE's, and they were quite similar to what she described.It sounded to me that she was having OBE's, rather than NDE's
Though in some of the content on her website she also refers somewhat indirectly to a tunnel with a light at the end and hints at a more NDE-like experience. Unfortunately, the details and full descriptions seem to be accessible only by buying her book - unless I missed something.Exactly my reaction. Since I have had OBE's, and they were quite similar to what she described.
However at the same time I'm wondering...whether you struggle with material which doesn't support your own faith. None of us would be comfortable to see the ground we stand on being eroded away. Perhaps.
Problem is, anybody could be wrong. Why should I believe one source over another, especially when Atwill's claims have been refuted many times over. I actually do try to look at all sides but it is so common here in skeptiko for people to just hold to their preferred views. My boundaries have changed a lot since I joined and the fact that there is little if any reliable, straightforward historical evidence for a historical Jesus is one thing I have had to accept as a result of that thread. In the case of this thread, should I not be joyous that somebody has met Jesus??? Not if I don't trust the rhetoric!Funny reading that comment to Brian, as I've been thinking that one critical subtext to Alex's post-interview question is his support for Jesus mythicism. I surmise he may be wrestling with a similar discomfort: "Wait a minute, could Joe Atwill be wrong?"
Yes, yes he is.
Many NDE reports do describe exactly that - except that rather than causing annoyance, all of their questions are answered!
The catch is that when returning to this physical reality afterwards, the answers are not retained. One possibility is that the information is deliberately blocked, so that the returning traveller has only the small fragments of information needed in order to continue their life. For example if we had a clear foreknowledge of our future life here on Earth, it would interfere with our ability to exercise our free-will, and thus would defeat the purpose of being here. Another possibility is that such understanding and knowledge requires a certain mental state which may not be consistent with our current state of physical existence. There are other possibilities I can think of, but it would drift into more and more idle speculation.
I kind of like what you say in this post, but isn't it kind of a rabbit hole as well? Real Jesus here, fake Jesus there......is it important that I figure it out?
I mean, in this sense its just like everything else paranormal out there - kind of straightforward at first glance but the deeper you dig the murkier and weirder it gets.
In this particular vision she saw Jesus 'with a forked beard, in two halves, which scared me, and he felt my fear so he sort of covered it up with some balls of floating light which were around his face, to make it less scary'...
Problem is, anybody could be wrong...but it is so common here in skeptiko for people to just hold to their preferred views.
My boundaries have changed a lot since I joined and the fact that there is little if any reliable, straightforward historical evidence for a historical Jesus is one thing I have had to accept as a result of that thread.
In the case of this thread, should I not be joyous that somebody has met Jesus??? Not if I don't trust the rhetoric!
Thank you for making this point David. This reminds me of something I found out shortly after the Brussels bombings (which inevitably affected me considerably since I live in that city, and one of the suicide bombers blew himself up in an underground station where I would go practically everyday -- I no longer do, for many reasons). I wanted to post these links on this Forum but then I never got round to it in the end. I'll do so now as this is relevant to this discussionI think that is the problem in a nutshell. I mean when someone tells you that you should reform, or continue as you are, that can be interpreted as freedom, but it can also be interpreted as some sort of control.
This is not just an obscure technical point. The man who killed all those kids in Manchester the other day, was reported to be very religious. I'll bet that man was pointed to other 'great martyrs', and he probably felt love for them. Maybe there was even some sort of spirit guide helping him to 'be strong' and 'do what he had to do'.
David
My feeling is that wherever the 'miscommunication' takes place, it most certainly does happen in many instances. Many of the people on Skeptiko have been burned off by religion to a greater or less degree, and even some of the sceptics are clearly here partly because of their own experiences, and their contemplation of events like that.Thank you for making this point David. This reminds me of something I found out shortly after the Brussels bombings (which inevitably affected me considerably since I live in that city, and one of the suicide bombers blew himself off in an underground station that I would be in practically everyday -- I no longer do, for many reasons). I wanted to post these links on this Forum but then I never got round to it in the end. I'll do so now as this is relevant to this discussion
http://boredjihadi.tumblr.com/post/142889314077/three-dreams-of-a-brussels-bomber
"As regular readers of this blog will know, jihadis discuss their dreams all the time"
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/brussels-isis-suicide-bomber-vision-7745742
"I then saw my soul and those of the three soldiers. All of a sudden, the soldiers’ souls burned and vanished and, suddenly, the banner of Islam – represented in the dream by the flag of the Islamic State – came out of the earth and was shining brightly. My soul then became full of light.”
He added that his dream finished with a voice telling him that he had achieved 'deliverance' and he awoke with his heart racing."
I think that this is very interesting not only from the moral point of view but also if we simply objectively wish to understand who is "communicating" from beyond the Veil (supposing these contacts/visions/messages are real and not imagined, of course). Who exactly is giving these people such dreams/visions? If all is "love and light", whence all this? Does it all come from "Jesus" anyway, because horrifically (as this would mean that "the end justifies the means" both for Machiavelli and 'God' -- for those who believe in him) these tragedies HAVE to happen for us to 'learn'? In that case we should be grateful that suicide bombers get thus 'spiritually encouraged' to blow themselves up and kill dozens of innocents, so that we all get amazing opportunities to "learn"! How can we be sure that this reality is some kind of bizarre but ultimately benevolent (??) "splatter school" as many would like to believe, and not a place whose events (and even people) can be manipulated both by good and evil entities pursuing completely different agendas, instead?