Eban Alexander  and psychic Susan Rienjts were in communication during his coma, they say.  They are giving a presentation about their meetings at the Rhine Center in Durham NC on Friday, Feb. 22. Susan visits comatose people in order to encourage and ease them.

Susan’s work offers another possibility within the broad field of retrievals. It’s a good reminder that there is still much that can be done once we ‘draw back the veil.’ 

Bets   

How much does he or her charge for their 'services'?. Harvey.

Hi Harvey,

The program tickets cost $20 each and that’s mostly rent on the Millenium Hotel meeting room.

The issue i wanted to point out was that ‘retrievals' are a very broad category. Giving counselling to people in comas --who’ve withdrawn from life to that extent -- is an interesting and welcome variation, imo.

Probably the coma state of consciousness has its own signal to others who are beyond their bodies (OB or imagination method or...). Just like fear does, and other states of mind do. So a sensitive ‘retriever’ could learn to pick up on that, -- or not ‘learn,' just set one’s intent to be guided by the Higher Intelligence that/Who is working for doing good.

Bets

Harvey, please don’t try to pick a fight with me on this. It’s information, -- use it or leave it.

betson wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 8:35am:

Hi Harvey, The program tickets cost $20 each and that’s mostly rent on the Millenium Hotel meeting room. The issue i wanted to point out was that ‘retrievals' are a very broad category. Giving counselling to people in comas --who’ve withdrawn from life to that extent -- is an interesting and welcome variation, imo. Probably the coma state of consciousness has its own signal to others who are beyond their bodies (OB or imagination method or...). Just like fear does, and other states of mind do. So a sensitive ‘retriever’ could learn to pick up on that, -- or not ‘learn,' just set one’s intent to be guided by the Higher Intelligence that/Who is working for doing good. Bets Harvey, please don’t try to pick a fight with me on this. It’s information, -- use it or leave it.

Bets. Your heart has always been in the right place. Listen to it sometimes, more often. It will tell you who is lost or found. Harvey.   

Hi

Did you get a chance to go or know someone else who did?

Alexander had mentioned that in an early interview with Skeptiko; use "find" to search for "SUsan" to get there quickly
http://www.skeptiko.com/154-neurosurgeon-dr-eben-alexander-near-death-experience/

Hi Bets,

Were you able to go to that presentation--have you read his book? I'm picky about reading material but this sounds very interesting to me.

Much love,

Ginny

I've watched several of Eben's Youtube interviews about his NDE.  I have a question for anyone who has read the book: Does it contain much new material that was not disclosed in his Youtube interviews?

Don

Yes, there was some information that was not in interviews, quite a lot of personal information about himself before his experience, and a description of the process by which he regained his memories afterwards. The book contains a lot of information which may not seem relevant, but really is, because knowing his history and putting his experience in the context of his life makes it richer. People don't just have near death experiences, they have their individual lives too, and those are just as important.

Hi,

While I was out looking for someone who had attended that presentation, isee answered.
(I didn’t get to attend.)
I think Alexander’s credibility comes more from the mix of his professional background with what he experienced than from his description alone of what he experienced while ‘not here.’  His wonder and joy in the afterlife took unique forms. His Interpreter is alot different from mine! (-:

Bets

Thanks Bets and Isee and I'm looking forward to his book. He seems sincere and dedicated to sharing his NDE.

Ginny

I want to emphasize that it actually is courageous and deserving for medicinal scientist to write a book of this kind. It is more worth than statements of hundreds of scientists who always work with that same lame terms like: "Hallucinations brought by [physiological blabla] and evolutionary benefits".

I wonder if he some day would add something to his book (as he wrote he is still trying to remember more of his "trip"), especially to what he said about the evil/bad and free will, as I found this not very insightful.

However, an impressing book.

Spooky

Nice to hear from you again Spooky ! If I remember you are sceptical of the notion of freewill; what did he say which you didn't find very insightful ?

Yes Heisenberg,
you remember right, I'm sceptical about the common concept of free will.
   Following Alexander's experience, the evil (or, as far as I remember, as well suffering in general) on our earth is necessary to provide free will. This is something I've heard before from others, and here, too, I miss a critical revision of this concept of free will, if it is real and how it can be real at all, why it is necessary even when it implies suffering.

Spooky

Freewill seems to be one of those emotive subjects which although at the heart of everything, often seems to go unexamined. I remember that you stated that a deterministic cause/effect chain would invalidate freewill (which goes against modern insights from quantum physics which say that systems are fundamentally undeterminable) - is your objection to the quantum argument that randomness/uncertainty isn't the same as freewill ?

Consider the expectation that each throw of a a dice has a random 1 in 6 chance of immediate repllcation.  Now consider a dice slightly loaded in favor of 6s with an expectation of 6s 40% of the time.  If 100 shakes produces 6s that number of times, the result would be random.  But what if the dice were shaken exactly the same way each  time and 6s seldom showed up?  Such a result could not be explained in terms of random or determined causation.  It would at best be an extremely improbable consistent outcome.  Of course, to speak of free will, one must acknowledge the variable of consciousness lacking in a dice.

Still that theoretical consistently improbable outcome is a good analogy for the necessary condition for free will.  There is no free will without a somewhat loaded dice, i. e. without inclinations or predispositions to make certain choices.  The capacity to choose contrary to one's inclinations is a necessary condition for free will; a pattern of choices that runs contrary to one's inclinations (or loading, if you will) is the best analogy for actualized free will.  Examples might include (1) the inclination to choose various forms of immediate gratification (sexual, alcohol, etc.) vs. the wish to make moral decisions that take the Big Picture or the long-range impact into account; (2) the inclination to makes choices that avoid immediate pain vs. noble outcomes that require pain to be achieved (e. g. diving into freeaing water to rescue a drowning child). 

Free will and conformity:
Children, you gotta have 'em I've heard people say, and when asked why boils down to 'err... you gotta have 'em!' Shhh..ure, that makes...sense, sort of. Want to be a doctor but your dad wants you to write poetry? Too bad dad.

Free will and raising children:
Your children wants to go out and play in the blizzard of the century. Ok dear children, don't forget to wear your hats, and a shovel if the going gets tough, because it's your free will to dig one cave for the both of you, right? Anyways, good journey and come back safe, if that's your free will.

Free will and retrievals:
Pffft, you can't stay here, I'm here to retrieve you, and that's that. Unless you want to? Unless I find a clever way to trick you to leave? Ooooh. Free will that, sucker.

Laws of physics and free will:
If you want to fly to work one day you'd better have a plane handy. Want to play the guitar but the arms don't agree with that? Tough luck arms and years of no practice. Summer in the wintertime? Seasonal free will to wait for summertime.

Free will and the forum:
It's my free will that everybody gets how glorious it is stand next to the warm fire of MY thoughts on every given subject, and that you will be subjected to regardless of YOUR free will, though it can be your free will not to read, disregard, 0,001% interest and so on. Your free will is to disagree, but, that's not my free will, now what.

Free will, jesus and Moen:
Yes, Lord/Ball & Chain, your wish is my command. Pray more, think less. No questions asked, purely and unconditionally! Btw jesus, happy ishtar, I knew something was up with the eggs and bunnies!

Free will and the I-There:
Dear whole I, it's my free will, well, this portion of me that is really you, to, what, oh, have a happy life with no friction. Go.

Dear whole I, there's still friction, what's up? Can't I/We learn the easy way? Btw, what's your/my free will? If your will is to succeed, why do we sometimes fail?

Free will, writing this and the cat:
Meowing at the door, and thus the writing stops for this time.

Hi "Bob".                                                                                                                                                       So.... your kid runs into the street, but your..... thinks "it's their free-will, it's their choice" and you watch them get hit by a car.                                      You do nothing. And then... you laugh about it?                                                                                         What's important in a situation like that? Being a passive observer? No, it's how you respond to what's in front of you.                                                                             How you respond to what's in front of you doesn't mean you are any better than any other being. It might mean you have more experience in that particular situation and can lend a hand.  F@ck ideas about "free-will". Lend a hand if you can. I'll buy you a drink at the Tavern of Ruin afterwards.                                                                                                                                         Tim                                                                                                  p.s. I'm glad you responded to your cat.                                                                              

so, does free will apply to the personality, to the soul, or to spirit?

Hey Tim,


Quote:

What's important in a situation like that? Being a passive observer? No, it's how you respond to what's in front of you.

Of course, but that doesn't mean being an observer is invalid in other situations. Passive, that's watching dude, not observing.


Quote:

F@ck ideas about "free-will".

If you don't want to talk about it, but some do, then some do, but not you, and we do what we do even without nike shoes.


Quote:

Lend a hand if you can. I'll buy you a drink at the Tavern of Ruin afterwards.

Nice gesture. As an example, if I were to help you, how would I do that?


Quote:

p.s. I'm glad you responded to your cat.

He's not mine, but an awesome buddy. Glad he isn't a child wandering into all the human possibilities of and in this world. I don't know if I could cope with all the worry.

Alright Bob, still life in this thread!                                                                                                                Crickets were chirping after your first post.                                                                             Yeah, you might be able to lend me a hand. I can always use more musicians, depending on the configuration. Can you harmonize?                                                                                                                                Maybe you can help me in other ways too.  When I die, will you check up on me? If I'm confused, could you gently say "Hey Tim, you've died. You're dead."  I think death might be confusing for me, especially if I have a sudden death.                                                           There's other ways you might be able to lend me a hand but it depends on what you're able to do.                                                                                Is there anything I can lend a hand to you for?                                                                                          Tim

spooky2 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 6:49pm:

Yes Heisenberg, you remember right, I'm sceptical about the common concept of free will.    Following Alexander's experience, the evil (or, as far as I remember, as well suffering in general) on our earth is necessary to provide free will. This is something I've heard before from others, and here, too, I miss a critical revision of this concept of free will, if it is real and how it can be real at all, why it is necessary even when it implies suffering. Spooky

  Re: that general concept, i'm not sure i agree.  When freewill was first experienced by us individualized parts of the Whole, things were a lot more blank and homogenized i sense.  Not completely, but a lot more than now. 

  Choosing to use our freewill in a limiting manner is what created "evil" or negativity.  That was not a give in necessarily.  Was it possible sure, probable, who knows, maybe eventually... 

   I don't think it was a "necessity" though, but what's the saying, when life hands you a lemon, you make lemonade, and so that's what the Creators, we and much of the total sum/Whole have been trying to do since...hence all this Retrieval action and focus. 

   I do think suffering, in some ways, can helps us to grow faster once we do become stuck due to our limited choosing. 

  Since we are both One and individual at the same time, there is a collective "pull" in this as well--not oft considered or talked about.  Some of us were hanging out in the White Light (a "metaphor") or in full PUL, and all pure like, and there was a pull from a section of the force so to speak, part of that pull was the suffering of others and part of it was just the influence of others, parts of the Whole influencing the Whole. 

  Which is why it's so important to attune oneself to the most expanded as one can within this now since it helps to heal the Whole, and the more who do it, the easier it will become for all.  Eventually, there will be perfect harmony, until another Reality and more Consciousnesses created.

   That healing is not rushed or forced by the most expanded, purely creative-constructive levels of the Whole, but it is greatly desired, "hoped for", and definitely worked towards.  Knowing that, is why i have disagreed with Bruce's "vacation" analogies or what not.  There is some relative truth to it, but it can be taken too far and incline others to be over passive/Yin in the process.  Just as nondualistic teachings, certain New Age or channeled teachings, etc. 

The Teacher of teachers exampled and taught a way of perfect balance between activity and receptivity, but ultimately with a bit more emphasis on the active in service, in love, in positively affecting others.  Hard footsteps to follow at times though.  We try, we will get there. 


  btw, good to see you around Spooky, was thinking about you before you showed up a little while back.  Hope you are doing well, especially spiritually.

I believe we are created with free will; however, we aren't able to use it wisely until we have the wisdom and freedom of mind that enables us to do so.

You wouldn't expect a piano player to be able to improvise with a lot of freedom before he learned to play real good.

Just as it takes a lot of practice and study to become a really good piano player, it takes a lot of effort to become a soul that is able to use its free will in the most loving and wise way possible. If a Soul gets confused for a while and decides that it doesn't have free will, this will become a self fullfilling prophecy that hinders its growth.

Even when there are a limited number of wise choices there is still free will, because it is a matter of being free to clearly see what is best, rather than being able to do whatever one wants regardless of the consequences to one's self and others.

Tim, I don't want to be a fifth wheel on your functioning car, but wouldn't mind checking out songs you or the band are playing?


Quote:

If a Soul gets confused for a while and decides that it doesn't have free will, this will become a self fullfilling prophecy that hinders its growth.

Recoverer, this will become? That's a little bit restricted. ;) I get what you're saying. Then again an addict will sometimes tell you heshe is free as bird, no problem, ready to fly, any day now. The system we're in now has a lot of rules/restrictions and that's what makes it this very system. Plant eater or meat eater? Free as a bird I tell you, and some will indeed view eating "the lesser lifeform" as the wiser choice. Even the phrase is a bit odd, as if being a bird is the epitome of consciousness. Basically, being a physical ain't exactly free, but part of learning I guess.

Bobmoenroe:

Regarding the meat/plant eat thing, at the very least it would be nice if animals that are eaten are raised in nice conditions so they could live a good life before they are killed.


wrote on Mar 31^st, 2013 at 7:55am:

Tim, I don't want to be a fifth wheel on your functioning car, but wouldn't mind checking out songs you or the band are playing? Quote: If a Soul gets confused for a while and decides that it doesn't have free will, this will become a self fullfilling prophecy that hinders its growth. Recoverer, this will become? That's a little bit restricted. ;) I get what you're saying. Then again an addict will sometimes tell you heshe is free as bird, no problem, ready to fly, any day now. The system we're in now has a lot of rules/restrictions and that's what makes it this very system. Plant eater or meat eater? Free as a bird I tell you, and some will indeed view eating "the lesser lifeform" as the wiser choice. Even the phrase is a bit odd, as if being a bird is the epitome of consciousness. Basically, being a physical ain't exactly free, but part of learning I guess.

I do not believe it does although I no longer have a
copy of his book.

I met him, briefly, at an IANDS meeting here; I
was impressed by his very upbeat demeanor.

You could order a used copy of his book through
Amazon.com.  I think it would be a good addition to
your church's library.

Thanks again, Don, for your ever-interesting comments.

Dear people,

I am not for or against free will of a person. But for me, I found out that the concept of free will of a person is not logical, it just doesn't make sense. Therefore, I, for me, have left this concept.

1. The very core of the definition of what is a "person" is it's memories (experiences, things learnt, education, insights and so on), together with it's genetical heir (male or female or inbetween, tall or small, bulky or slender, quick or slow and what not all).
   This is the base on which a person will make decisions.
   So, if a person makes a decision, it is dependant on the history of this person. Therefore it is not free, but, as said, dependant.

2. There had been arguments as "Yes, but sometimes it can be that I would make a decision which is free from my history, where I start something really new!"
   To say that such a "new start decision" is a "free" decision is to disrespect a person's evolution, it is to undermine the concept of the person. When a person changes it's habits, and, so to say, becomes someone new, it is because of the breaking of belief systems within that person under the actual situation. To interprete this as "free decision" is, again, a great disrespect to this person's evolution, as it actually undermines the concept of "person" at all, in propagating there is an instance somewhere outside this person, which "creates" a new person through an act of "free will". It is necessary that "free will" in this meaning negates the concept "person", because if a person had free will, it must necessarily be void of it's memories* and this is a contradiction in itself, because then it won't be a person no more at all. (*I mean memories, experiences, things learnt, education, genetical heir).

3. As to the scientific-physical-dimension on this, in fact, if we had a classic "Newtonian" universe we could imagine a "Laplace-Demon" who would predict everything to the end of time if he/she/it only had the whole data (btw, is this classic LaGrange three-compound-problem mathematically solved? If not, the Laplace demon would have problems). With the upcome of quantum physics (amplified by the understanding of nonlinear processes in nature, "Chaos physics") this strong determination is of yesterday. Our brain can be thought as to be an amplifier of quantum effects, taking micro random processes into our real macro world.
   Yet, this doesn't make the concept of a "person's free will" more acceptable. To the contrary, if absolutely non-predictable processes would be the root of someone's free will, then this free will just won't have anything to do with this person; now you would say, but these random quantum effects would interact with the amplifying, memorizing brain, then we are back at my point 1., as these preformations would channel the random quantum processes, and filter them, and that's just not freedom.
   In a way, random processes are the ultimate freedom. Non-predictability is the only way absolute freedom can be defined. But of course, it doesn't fit together with the concept of a person. A person, by definition, is dependant on causality; without causality someone would act randomly (freely), but we won't call this one a person, maybe a shizophrenic person, but a totally randomly-willed human would be quite more strange, in fact, it wouldn't survive, as it would, if really randomly (free) acting, destroy it's body.

I hope, from this, it has become clear that the concept of "free will of a person" is unlogical because "person" and "free will" are not compatible.

Spooky

Spooky questions  “...this concept of free will, if it is real and how it can be real at all, why it is necessary even when it implies suffering.” What if the concept of free will was pretty much the same as it’s always been, but the revision comes from what we consider to be “God”?

Who’s to say that a God who provides rides on butterflies is less a god than one who recalls a soul from a body dead three days? Each soul needs some sort of reminder.

What if when we get off the path, “God” makes sure we get nudged--and then harder and harder -- to push us back? Eventually the nudging hurts if we haven’t found our way.
Or perhaps the further we are on the path, the stronger nudge/push/shove we receive?

What about those who are so far off the path as to be considered evil, or lacking in light, based on their "decisions", or influence upon them by others?

Sounds like we need a new thread.