If there is a heaven, why so much mystery? Why would a God not just let us all know that it truly exists by showing us. Perhaps we would all be better behaved if we could actually know that it exists and not have to rely on numerous interpretations and blind faith.

Anonymous wrote:Slightly OT but kind of relevant. Doesn't the fact that we exist at all just blow your mind? For me that was one of the driving forces in investigating the existence of higher power - in my case God/Jesus. I really find it amazing that people dismiss God outright without any attempt at finding out if He exists.

How do you suggest we go about this?

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone read this book? If so - what do you think?

For those who haven't it's by a Harvard-trained neurosurgeon, who didn't believe in God and was a doctor and scientist all his life. Then was in coma, had a near death experience where he saw different beings, dimensions and God. He started going to church after that.

For a harvard-train neurosurgeon, he's got a pretty fuzzy grasp of the concept of proof.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hormones make the brain see and feel all kinds of wacky things - especially the hormones released near death, like dimethyltryptamine.

So you think he, a neurosurgeon, a doctor for 30 years, hasn't figured it was the hormones?

There are scientists that still don't believe in climate change. There are lawyers that defend child rapists. There are engineers that poorly design buildings. There are physicians that believe in "faith healing." A person's career has nothing to do with it. A person's career also doesn't stop someone from potentially having ulterior motives. Or from being a plain ol' idiot.

Anonymous wrote:Hormones make the brain see and feel all kinds of wacky things - especially the hormones released near death, like dimethyltryptamine.

So you think he, a neurosurgeon, a doctor for 30 years, hasn't figured it was the hormones?

Hormones make the brain see and feel all kinds of wacky things - especially the hormones released near death, like dimethyltryptamine.

I had a NDE, but wasn't actually near death. It is a form of dissociation. Some elements can be recreated in a lab. NDEs have been reported by pilots who blacked out from high g force.

My NDE was an overwhelmingly loving and peaceful place. I guess they affect people differently. My switch to atheism started after mine.

Anonymous wrote:

Yet somehow, people with a same religious tradition disagree strongly on many facets of their faith. Religion is what people make of it and how they personally choose to apply/interpret it - religion in practice has very little to do with literal word.

It's hard to interpret black for white. Christianity teaches you that you'll go to hell for bad deeds and you should work on improving yourself and your actions while the message in the book is unconditional love, "there is nothing to fear, there's nothing you can do wrong". These are quite opposite messages.

Anonymous wrote:

I went to Harvard. From personal experience, that label doesn't mean much in terms of intelligence or legitimacy. Plenty of people with a Harvard background do all kinds of things for gain - financial, to be a contrarian, or otherwise.

I may be wrong, but to me writing a NDE book in Harvard medical community is like admitting that you were abducted by blue men on a UFO and now they're reading your thoughts. You have to really believe in it.

Read "Many Lives,Many Masters" by Dr. Brian Weiss. That will tell you everything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Those are the messages supported by contemporary interpretations of many major religions (though perhaps not the orthodoxy).

How so?

Christianity and Judaism and Islam all teach there is a wrong way and the right way, all threaten with punishment by God - you will be judged, so the love is conditional rather.

Yet somehow, people with a same religious tradition disagree strongly on many facets of their faith. Religion is what people make of it and how they personally choose to apply/interpret it - religion in practice has very little to do with literal word.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I will be the lone voice of dissent, but I did not like the book. Nothing about it came anywhere near close to convincing me this man's experience was "real."

To me the fact that a doctor, a Harvard doctor, a scientist wrote this book is proof in itself. It's a very brave thing to do because you're putting your reputation on the line - your peers are most likely to be very skeptical and will never look at you the same way again. Only a person who truly believes would risk his career just like that.

I went to Harvard. From personal experience, that label doesn't mean much in terms of intelligence or legitimacy. Plenty of people with a Harvard background do all kinds of things for gain - financial, to be a contrarian, or otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anecdotes aren't "proof."

In this case his experience does prove scientifically (he's offering his opinion as a scientist) that conciseness exists beyond our bodies and beyond our death.

There's Science and there's "science." His anecdote is the latter. Do not confuse it with the former.

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I will be the lone voice of dissent, but I did not like the book. Nothing about it came anywhere near close to convincing me this man's experience was "real."

To me the fact that a doctor, a Harvard doctor, a scientist wrote this book is proof in itself. It's a very brave thing to do because you're putting your reputation on the line - your peers are most likely to be very skeptical and will never look at you the same way again. Only a person who truly believes would risk his career just like that.

Anonymous wrote:Anecdotes aren't "proof."

In this case his experience does prove scientifically (he's offering his opinion as a scientist) that conciseness exists beyond our bodies and beyond our death.