For me, it can only be my own experience, though most of the things you mention can help with understanding your own experiences. 

I try to be open minded, yet skeptical.

That's the thing 'the truth is out there' as they say. I find it frustrating that some people are suffering because they essentially think that the world is a meaningless accident: I don't think its any accident that a number of prominent athiests suffer from clinical depression: I think of depression (at least that not directly caused by chemical imbalance) as a disconnect from Source. On the other hand blind faith does'nt do it either; after all its blind faith which allows religious zealots to kill unbelievers with alacrity.

Some people think that an interest in the afterlife is morbid- after all why not just concentrate on the life  now? But our attitudes towards death affects greatly how we live our lives now.For instance actions might have no consequences beyond physical life so treat people how you like or the way which we react to a diagnosis of terminal illness (although of course all physical life is terminal!).

I guess the evidence which people find most compelling depends on their backgrounds and characters. For an intuitive-type person personal symbols and meaningful coincidences are powerful validations while hard-headed scientists types might find their own senses untrustworthy but find a highly statistically significant controlled study much more persuasive.

Gman wrote on May 8^th, 2016 at 8:03am:


NDEs such as the Pam Reynolds case and Eben Alexander are pretty compelling.

To me, none of the suggested were really compelling evidence when I researched every aspect of them and found believable causes to doubt for any of them.

It would have been compelling for me if the Aware study had come forth with verifiable recognitions of the pictograms they had in emergency rooms, however it did not. This is not evidence that there is no afterlife, but also no evidence to the contrary.

Soooo - as things are now, I think personal experience is the only thing that can really be convincing.

Hello Heisenberg69,

I have to admit I don`t remember what it was with the Eben Alexander case, but with Pam Reynolds, I read a detailed account of the procedure and the moments when she was possibly aware and when she was not. This account showed that it is at least possible that Mrs. Reynolds was only aware during those parts of the procedure when there was still substantial brain activity. I could search for the link, but I don`t like to post links. It was a medical site of some sort.

What casts some doubt on the whole thing as well as gives credit to this version of events is that of all the many hypothermic procedures that take place, only this account has become known. One would think that at least one or two more would have surfaced if those were true OBEs.

However: This, for me, does not mean that Mrs. Reynolds did not have a true OBE and that her account was not very astounding and may have been a true case of leaving the body. However, for me to accept something as compelling evidence, I must be free of all reasonable doubt. In this case, some doubt that it was "just" an amazing case of awareness during anaesthesia (which does happen) remained.

If I remember correctly (but I`m not sure), my problem with Eben Alexander`s account and similar is that they were very interesting, but there was no objective evidence that it was not all in his head, so to say. During the time when I researched NDE`s, I read dozens of accounts. Some are a  lot less known. They are not all structured and many suggest a dreamlike state or some sort of hallucination. Clear, more or less lucid experiences do not seem to be the norm. When they happen, however, I agree that they are very fascinating and possibly could point to the existence of an afterlife. But nothing has convinced me 100%.

On the contrary, I struggle how to believe in an afterlife when the personality and memory of a human being with, say, severe dementia or substantial brain damage changes so drastically. I personally know of some cases where a brain tumor changed a person quite substantially. Operating it, the old personality resurfaced. How can this be if the "us" doesn`t sit in the brain?

This is why, for me, only personal experience and verifiable personal experience at that would change things. Regrettably.

Chris

Especially, regarding the brownie points, who wouldn't want those...you know?  I feel that I could especially use some brownie points.

And more brownies.

Heisenberg69,

I agree. However, your question was "what is the most compelling evidence for you" 

Among all these, the NDEs are the most compelling for me, but not sufficient (yet) for conviction, that is what I meant.

Chris

Or, the brain can be like a radio.  If you showed a radio to a caveman, they would assume perhaps that tiny people lived inside the radio and talked or made music.  What other explanation could there be? 

With the brain, we assume it is the center of consciousness.  But what if it is just the receiver of consciousness like a radio is a receiver of radio waves?  If the brain interfaces with our consciousness in a different plane of existence, then it is the organ that allows our spirit to interact with physical matter.  Ah, but you might say, "why do people who have strokes lose the ability to move an arm, a leg, or speak if the brain does not create consciousness?"  Good question.  What if we take the radio as an example?  If I damage a speaker, or break a component, the sound might become distorted.  If I damage the antenna, only certain signals might be received, etc.  So the fact that certain brain injuries result in deficits still does not tell us that the brain is the originator of thought. 

I am biased here, in thinking, like Kathy, that thought originates in a mental plane, and simply interpenetrates the brain.  An interesting experiment was carried out by a neuroscientist named Lashley.  In it, he gruesomely burned out various parts of the brains of mice, in order to find out the one part which carried the information on how to run through a maze to get food (after they were trained to run the maze).  He became frustrated because he could not localize that memory and thought to one area.  Indeed, some mice had over half their brains burned out and still recalled how to run the maze after being taught.   

These findings then led to quantum theories about the brain.  That there may be a kind of holographic memory, or that memory may be present in more than one location at a time.  But to me, these awful experiments were just one more piece of evidence that the brain may be a receiver of consciousness, but not the creator of thought. 

Matthew

Exactly, your thoughts do influence your physical brain structure. Many things influence it. And, the pursuit of that illusive "I" which does the observing creates a noticeably different view of reality.

What happens to someone who has an out of body experience and experiences 360 degree vision? How do you describe that? It is first hand experience.

heisenberg69, I think you are right in assuming that the opposition against scientists who even think about going against the mainstream materialist view is lessening somewhat. However, it is still very strong, so strong that even nobel prize winners are sometimes ridiculed for "such ideas". I personally agree to the original Heisenberg and all his successors that, in the end, all science ultimately ends in questions or, as the belief may be, with God, and therefore, the so-called "paranormal" observations should be approached with an unbiased mind.

After all, "paranormal" is just what has not been explained YET. And a consciousness that is not limited to the confines of the material world as we see it as of 2016 is a possible explanation of some observations.

Wikipedia is, in my opinion, not a valid source for any scientific discussion. If I want to research something, I`ll go to the studies directly. And read them, of course. And scientists sometimes contribute in magazines like the scientific american or similar, which is admittedly also not really a scientific source, but understandable.

A French Christian's dogmatic view on NDE's. I did not expect otherwise.   https://reflexionsjesus.wordpress.com/2014/10/06/the-near-death-experiences-nde/

Hi Bruce,

would you not also agree that a world where science takes the possibility of an afterlife seriously would help people (particularly logical,rational types) to accept their own experiences more easily in a kind of 'rising tide raises all ships' kind of way? I know you have looked at the possibility of some kind of engineered communication device- have you made any progress on this?

Okay, I'm back, what can I say? Some misunderstandings took place.

Whatever the case, I feel very grateful that I've had a number of experiences that let me know that the after life exists. It is possible to have spiritual experiences that provide a level of certainty that is beyond what typical human intellectual activity can provide. Having such knowledge provides a perspective that helps you deal with the challenges of life. It also enables you to have a perspective with which you can view all of the troubles that exist in this world. I figure that compared to all of the love, light and joy that exists within the totality of God's being, the troubles of this world are like a small temporary itch on one small part of your body.

When it comes to my spiritual growth, I do not believe it would've been possible for me to grow to the extent I have, if I didn't have access to the spirit levels of my being.

Regarding what is the most compelling evidence, I've had experiences where I was able to verify information I received through spiritual means at a later time, and experiences where I was at a level of being where I was connected to universal knowledge and the certainty of such knowledge was quite clear. Both types of verifications have validity, but if I could have only one, I would pick the type where I am connected to universal knowledge. Such knowledge involves the heart level of being.

Albert

I'd like to add then when I read about some NDE accounts I understand why some experiencers feel so certain of what they experienced, because I've experienced such levels of being, and when you do so, you are certain of the reality of what you experience. You understand that that level of being is what your existence is truly about, not this body-based existence in the world. To the extent that is practical,  I prioritize my life.

Hi Albert-

I'm glad you returned.  I had deleted my account but this board is so important to me that, as I told Bruce, I was going to re-up! 😊  I respect your experiences and realize completely what you're saying. I too had experiences that are unexplainable and point to an afterlife, but all I'm saying is that I doubt science will ever be able to provide conclusive evidence.

I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.

R

heisenberg69 wrote on May 13^th, 2016 at 3:27pm:


Yes, the "problems" most of us think we have are definitely not third world problems.  While we discuss the possibility of the afterlife, they worry about starvation, disease, and whether they'll be alive the next day.  Children being beheaded and their bodies crucified, girls being kidnapped and raped, women being murdered while their husbands are being forced to watch, men being put in cages and burned alive,and scores of other atrocities, really do put things in perspective.

R

I have often heard that ine should not think overmuch about the afterlife or any other philosophical item because the arguer did not believe it relevant to "real" life.

I agree insofar as one should definitely not neglect actual life joys and pains for philosophy. Also, I share thr buddhist view of being aware of the present moment.

However, as DocM says, suffering is not limited to the third world. Nor do I believe poor people do not think about philosophy. The least which is often - and corretly- heard is that the world is sometimes very cruel and unfair. But by what does one measure what is fair and what isn't? This distinction alone is already philosophical in nature and probably unique to sentient beings.

From thinking about what is fair between individuals, it is a small step to think about how life should be between groups (such as nations or religions). And from this, it is also a tiny step to ponder whether our life has any context and meaning at all. And I do believe that apart from situations of immediate danger, all humans think about these things sometimes. Many have written philosophical texts while imprisoned, for example.

We have lots of ways to describe our fears, but all fear is actually the fear of the unknown.  There are countless ways in which we all try to alleviate our fears, especially the fear of death.  Sometimes just realizing we do go on is enough to adequately alleviate the fear to live a life relatively free of emotional suffering at least until we are confronted with death in some meaningful way.  However, even proving to yourself, or even if there's confirmation the non-physical exists, that alone likely would not be enough to change the current paradigm from one that is fear based to one that is based on love, caring and understanding.

Institutionalized religions, governments, businesses, politicians, or anyone who wishes to manipulate a relationship has capitalized on fear, especially fear of death throughout time.  And as long as our collective philosophies and belief systems based on fear continue that likely will not change.  What is needed is a new, verifiable paradigm that can incorporate and explain the unexplained.  I don't think this would completely eliminate human fear initially because of our intrinsic survival instinct, but I do believe it would go along ways in the evolution of human consciousness and humanity as a whole.

Like Matthew, I have no doubt that consciousness is not only primary, but also a process.  Consciousness is an unstoppable activity that is constantly changing... evolving, or devolving.  Human consciousness is only a minuscule part of a larger organism that is Consciousness as a single, evolving process.  Nothing actually exists outside of consciousness and we as human consciousness live and move within this larger Being. 

We are the movements of consciousness interacting with itself as consciousness within consciousness.  We are not in the world, the world is in us.  We are not in our body, our body is in us.  We are not in the mind, the mind is in us.  We are the presence in which any and all things that we view as external circles around.  Even when we move our awareness out of presence to seek something we want such as happiness, the happiness we seek can still only be experienced in the presence so presence is also the end point. 

We are the presence from which awareness arises and falls.  We, as human consciousness are that awareness and we don't die because death is only an awareness of a space/time event.  A space/time event is only part of the fluctuation of awareness that arises and falls from the presence that we are as a being of consciousness.

Once we are able to understand and internalize the idea that we are at a fundamental level consciousness and only consciousness we begin to look at things from a different perspective.  One that is from the top down instead of the bottom up so to speak.  This also brings about new possibilities to explore on a personal level that can give us a greater understanding of all of our experiences.

K

Knowing you are eternal and having somewhat of an understanding of the big picture can help you understand what's important now.

Say you have a stage of life where you have to devote a lot of time to helping another. If you believe you have only a minimal number of years this might be difficult. But if you know that you are eternal, you'll know that you'll never run out of time. Spending a period of time helping another might help the big picture of your soul.

What I know has helped me with issues that relate to grief. It is possible to be certain about the existence of the afterlife in a way that goes beyond truisms.

My Dad died about seventeen months ago. In a way it was a relief when he died because he was suffering a lot (various physical problems). Since I was so certain of the afterlife when he died, I was relieved that he gained freedom from his suffering and was able to move on.

My Dad and I had baseball in common. About a week after he died I was meditating one night and I was shown a baseball bat. On the bat were the words "I love you." I believe this was a message from my Dad. I don't believe it was a hallucination because I have become very familiar with what spirit messages feel like.

Of course you can miss a person who has passed on, but it is nice when you "know" that he or she continues to exist as a spirit being.

rondele wrote on May 14^th, 2016 at 5:35pm:

<<What I know has helped me with issues that relate to grief. It is possible to be certain about the existence of the afterlife in a way that goes beyond truisms.>>

Albert, I understand your point and agree.  In my case the death of my parents was a blessing.  They lived a long life.  But there's a difference between feeling sadness and acceptance about the inevitable death of elderly parents and the emotions that would accompany the tragic death of a child.  It's not a feeling of fear, it's the feeling of loss that predominates. Not just the loss the parent has for the child, but the loss of life of someone at a young age.

Fear is built into our DNA as well as animals. Survival instinct is powerful and primal.  When I read about people like Bonhoeffer, I am so overtaken with the spiritual level he and others like him who have put personal fear aside to help others, even at the cost of their own life, that words escape me.  God bless them.

R

recoverer wrote on May 15^th, 2016 at 12:35pm:


"Be still and Know that I am God" from the Bible it means quiet, reflection or meditation on the Divine Being and his goodness.

I've just finished reading Erlandur Haraldsson and Loftur Gissurarson's book about Indridi Indridason, the Icelandic Physical medium. I would say that it provides pretty strong afterlife evidence. Indridison (1883-1912) had a career cut short by TB but in his short career ( 1905-1909) was a very impressive medium. He produced a great variety of phenomena including interestingly a dematerialised arm! They write ' five men searched many times for the missing arm by feeling Indridi's upper body all over.They did this repeatedly, and matches were lit many times during the search, but no one found the arm '(p49).Other phenomena observed included table tilting, autoamtic writing, trance speaking, levitations, olfactuary sensations,apports,independent voices, gusts of wind and materialisations of human forms.

Some of the sessions could however be violent; a flavour of this comes from Haraldur Nielsson’s report from pages 93-94:

‘The medium again started to dress, and having got his trousers on, he once more screamed for help. Mr Brynjolfur had been standing in the outer room, but now rushed to the medium and saw him balancing in the air with his feet towards the window. Mr Brynjolfur took hold of him, pulled him down onto the bed and held him there. He then felt the medium and himself being lifted up.Mr Brynjolfur shouted to Mr Oddgeirsson to help him. Oddgeirsson went into the bedroom, but a chair was hurled at him and fell beside the stove in the outer room. Oddgeirsson moved aside to avoid the chair and went into the bedroom. Brynjolfur was then lying on the medium’s chest. Oddgeirsson lay down on the knees of the medium, whose whole frame was in motion on the bed.Then a bolster, which was under the medium’s pillow, was thrown into the air; it fell on the bedroom floor. Simultaneously the candlesticks which were in the outer room came through the air and were flung down in the bedroom …’

The authors go on to note that the violent phenomena started on 7 December 1907 and ended on 6 January 1908 with a climax on Jan 4th with about 50 occurrences observed and recorded. The violent incidents were attributed to the unhappy spirit of a man named Jon Einarsson who drowned himself in the Westman Islands on 9th October, 1906. The story has a happy ending however in that Jon was in the end pacified through the help of the spirit of Rev. Hallgrimur Petursson (1614-1674) who ‘ brought Jon one level up from the lowest black pit. He was now in lighter spirit. For a while he suffered intolerable fits of remorse and regret over having committed suicide, and for having used his connection with this group for destructive purposes and to harm people’ (p.101). The authors report however that he went  on to become a ‘great friend’ of the medium helping and working with the controls.

Indridisson was investigated by Gudmundar Hannesson, a noted scientist, Professor of Medicine at the University of Iceland and founder of the Icelandic Scientific Society. The previously sceptical Hannesson came to believe in the genuineness of the phenomena who concluded after attending many of the medium’s sessions that ‘You may state as my firm conviction, that the phenomena are unquestionable realities’ (p.203). The book details many of the controls and methods that Prof Hannesson used in his investigations and concludes that Indridisson bears comparison with the best of other physical mediums such as the celebrated DD Home.

Cheers Gman. I find it sad that there is a great deal of evidence out there but but the scientific community , as a whole , either ignores it or dismisses it with token explanations that are very weak and just does'nt account for what's happening.Hopefully that will change.

For me the most compelling evidence is my own direct experience particularly with OBEs, and then also reading about or talking with someone who has had the same kind of experiences.  I feel more validated when I read or hear about someone describing the same kinds of experiences or the same kinds of perception, although I do respect that a lot of people can have their own unique experiences even if I don't understand it or have a frame of reference for it.