Near-Death Experiences as Evidence for the Existence of God and Heaven: A Brief Introduction in Plain Language (16 page)

Nelson
blithely ignores this relevant data. These oversights are quite astounding,
especially in the light of his demeaning attitude toward other researchers. 

Nelson
appears to assume that by suggesting naturalistic explanations of certain
elements of the experience, that he’s explained away all supernatural elements.
If so, his argument runs something like this:

Since we know that natural processes,
from dreaming to fainting to taking LSD, can cause elements similar to those in
NDEs, the experience requires no explanation beyond the brain.

But
suggesting naturalistic hypotheses in no way disproves all the positive
evidence. Allow me to illustrate.

Imagine
that Dr. Nelson recently extracted a tumor from my brain and he’s visiting me
several days later in my hospital room. I tell him, “I’m feeling so much
better! In fact, I escaped from the hospital this morning and sipped a latte at
the Starbucks next door.”

Dr.
Nelson replies, “Mr. Miller, please understand that after a surgery of this
nature, people often slip in and out of REM sleep in such a way that they
experience vivid hallucinations. Since we know that the brain can produce
dreams of this nature, there’s no reason for me to believe that you shuffled
over to Starbucks in your hospital gown.”

“But
Dr. Nelson,” I object, “here’s my Starbucks cup and my receipt, dated at 8:30
AM. Why don’t you call Starbucks and ask the baristas if they just served a
patient in a hospital gown?”

Therein,
to me, is the central weakness of the book. Nelson assumes that if he can show
that the brain can produce an experience resembling an NDE, that he would
thereby prove that NDErs never leave their bodies. He needs to go further and
deal seriously with the positive evidence that researchers offer to corroborate
the stories.

Example:
Nelson tells of his friend Jake, who woke suddenly at 3:00 A.M., “felt a breath
on his face, smelled his mother, and strongly sensed her presence. At that
apparent moment she died a continent away.”
(20)  

Nelson
explains this experience naturalistically in two ways. First, we know that
stimulating a specific region of the brain can cause a person to sense a
presence, although none is there. Thus, perhaps Jake was dreaming of his mother
and woke suddenly out of REM sleep, experiencing her presence because his
“temporoparietal region was still turned off from REM.”
(21)
So let’s
grant that the brain can produce a sense of someone’s presence.  

But
what of the remarkable timing? Nelson suggests that perhaps it was merely
close
to the time of her death, but not exactly.
(22)  

At
this point, it would seem that Nelson shows a deplorable lack of scientific
curiosity. In his first mention of the incident, he says that Jake woke at the
“apparent moment” that his mom died. Well, you referred to Jake as your friend.
Why not ask him some relevant questions to get to the bottom of this? Did he
look at his clock when he woke to make sure it was 3:00 AM? Is there confirmation
(death certificate, report from the family or hospital) that his mom died at
precisely 3:00 AM? Does he often wake up sensing his mother’s presence, like
every other day, thereby increasing the odds that this would happen on the
morning of her death?

If
Jake has never before woken up abruptly, sensing his mother’s presence, then
why, during the week of her illness, out of 56 possible sleeping hours, did he
wake and sense her presence at the precise hour (or even precise minute, if
this could be verified) that she died?

And
how does this compare with the many other reports of people sensing a friend or
relative’s death? I mentioned my cousin Bucky waking in the middle of the night
with a shared death experience at the precise time of his father’s passing,
then immediately receiving the phone call that his dad had died. In Bucky’s
case, he hadn’t been worrying about his father’s health. The heart attack was
sudden and unexpected. He’d not been ill.   

Granted,
the brain can produce many varied experiences. But the remarkable timing
suggests to me that something outside of Jake’s and Bucky’s brains prompted
their experiences.
(23)  

Dueling
Neurologists

Since
Nelson emphasizes repeatedly that trained neurologists are uniquely qualified
to understand the nature of NDEs, those who read Nelson should also read Dr.
Eben Alexander’s
Proof of Heaven
. Alexander is an academic neurosurgeon
who taught for 15 years at Harvard Medical School and published over 150
articles and chapters in professional medical literature. After experiencing a
deep NDE of his own, he examined his experience in the light of neurological
science. Alexander concluded that he truly experienced life and God in another
dimension, separate from his body.
(24)

Appendix #7
Reflections on NDEs and Christian
Teachings

NDE
researchers run the religious spectrum from traditional to New Age, from
fundamentalist to atheist. Christians often want to know how NDEs mesh with
Christian teachings. It’s interesting in this regard that Dr. Ritchie, the
psychiatrist at the University of Virginia who profoundly influenced Moody,
reported that the being he encountered was “the son of God.”
(1)
When
Moody asked Dr. Ritchie if he could dedicate
Life after Life
to Him,
Richie replied, “I appreciate that, but I would rather you dedicate it to Jesus
Christ because he is the one who gave me this experience.”

But
Moody wanted to “stay neutral on the question of religion,” so he dedicated it
“to George Ritchie, MD, and through him to the One whom he suggested.”
(2)
It’s
interesting that as Ritchie spoke to groups about his experience, people began
sharing their experiences with him and writing him letters. Not having the time
to respond, his wife threw them away. Had he put them in a book, the beginning
of NDE research might have had a more distinctively Christian flare.

Yet,
it’s questionable whether the scientific community would have responded at all,
since it would have been considered a “religious” book. Perhaps it’s
providential that Moody presented NDEs to the world in a nonreligious context,
making no claims about religious implications. In this way, doctors and other
scientists felt comfortable studying them objectively, as a scientific rather
than religious enterprise.  

Here
are a few thoughts that Christians should consider.  

1.
The dominant experience appears to be consistent with biblical teachings.
I
laid out some of those consistencies in Chapter 6.

2.
Elements that occur infrequently – that aren’t considered part of the core
experience – should be regarded with more skepticism.
After all, in a medical crisis, a person might have both a legitimate NDE and a
vivid hallucination, failing to distinguish the two. Reports of prophecies,
memories from past lives, etc., should especially be looked upon with a
skeptical eye, since they aren’t reported in the typical experience.
(3)  

3.
Jesus, angels, and other specifically biblical beings and imagery are often
reported in NDEs.
Yet it’s often difficult to determine if the
experiencers merely
assumed
that the being they saw was an angel (or
Jesus), or if the being actually identified itself in some way. In other words,
a celestial messenger may be reported by a Christian as an angel
(transliterated “angel” from the Greek word meaning “messenger”) or identified
by a Hindu as a Yamadoot (also a messenger). Perhaps both saw the same being –
a celestial messenger – but named that messenger according to their traditions.
(It’s interesting that in Dr. Ritchie’s NDE, the being wasn’t
assumed
to
be the Son of God; He was
introduced
in the NDE as the Son of God.)

4.
Discern the difference between the experience (which may be legitimate) and the
interpretation (which may be influenced by a person’s worldview).
One
person may insist that her experience proves that we’re not individuals at all,
but a part of a universal consciousness. But was this conclusion drawn solely
from the experience itself, or did she interpret it in the light of her
worldview?   

5. Maintain
a healthy skepticism.
Solomon warns us that “The naïve believes
everything….” So don’t be naïve. If someone claims that, in her NDE, God told
her to start a new church and that you should join, should you believe her? 

“Don’t
believe every spirit,” the apostle John warns us, “but test the spirits,
whether they are of God, because many false prophets have gone out into the
world.” (I Jn. 4:1) Just as false prophets in Old Testament times said “Thus
saith the LORD” when God hadn’t spoken (Ezekiel 13:6, Jeremiah 23:16), so
today’s self-proclaimed prophets should be tested as well. The ancient Hebrews
tested prophets in several ways. Had 100 percent of their previous prophecies
come true? (Deuteronomy 18:21,22) Were their prophecies consistent with what
God had previously revealed? (Deuteronomy 13:1-3) Do they have potential
ulterior motives for sharing their stories (e.g., speaker fees, book sales,
etc.)?

Christians
have various views on NDEs. Christian apologist Gary Habermas argues that,
while veridical perception provides a good argument for the separation of mind
and body, there’s no evidence to verify that people’s experiences with God and
other celestial beings is accurate, since we have nothing to corroborate that
part of the experience. He holds that NDEs provide strong evidence for life
after death, but no evidence for the distinctive truth claims of any one
religion.
(4)  

6.
Be wary of seeking the experience.
It’s tempting to assume that
since NDEs are such life-changing experiences, we should seek elements of the
experience, such as training ourselves to astral project or trying to
communicate with deceased relatives. While the scriptures speak of people
having visions and even on occasion communicating with the dead (Matthew
17:1-3), we’re never encouraged to seek such experiences. 
 

Scriptures
teach that just as there are good and evil people on earth, so are there good
and evil beings in the spiritual dimension. Malevolent beings are often
reported in distressing near-death experiences. Since the evil one “masquerades
as an angel of light” (II Corinthians 11:14), how can we be certain that
everything we (and others) might experience on the other side is benevolent and
represents the truth?

Thus,
the Scriptures consistently forbid consulting mediums. "Do not turn to
mediums or seek out spiritists…” (Leviticus 19:31). Again, even if mediums
truly contact beings in a spiritual dimension, how can we know that the beings
are benevolent and speaking the truth?
(5)

7.
Determine your primary source of spiritual knowledge.
Christians typically believe that their Scriptures are authoritative in matters
of teaching. Thus, they should be wary of any experiences that teach anything
contrary to the Scriptures, or that claim to add new revelation, even if it
appears to be spoken by an angel from heaven (Galatians 1:8,9; Deuteronomy
4:2,12:32; Revelation 22:18,19).

In
this regard, it seems wise to regard NDEs as natural revelation (e.g., learning
about God from His creation) rather than special revelation (learning about God
from Scriptures and His actions in history). By observing the created world, many
philosophers and theologians deduce that a wise and powerful God exists. But
magnifying atoms and observing galaxies tells us little about how to secure
heaven after death. Those who hope to learn this from NDEs may be expecting too
much. 

8.
The lack of “sharing the gospel” by celestial beings may bewilder some people.
If
salvation is through Jesus, then shouldn’t NDErs typically report Jesus urging
them to accept Him as their savior? Yet, this would seem to violate the general
thrust of Scriptures – that God has left the sharing of the gospel story in the
hands of believers. We never see a vision in the Bible that includes a
presentation of the gospel. When Saul had his vision, Jesus directed him to
enter the nearby city, where Ananias spoke to him. (Acts 9:1-18) 

9.
Why do some NDE studies report experiencers moving away from traditional
Christianity (like leaving church) and adopting a more non-traditional spirituality
(like New Age)?
Actually, research is divided on this point.
Van Lommel reported a tendency for NDErs to leave the traditional church, but
also noted that this may have been due to a general movement away from the
church in Holland, rather than being caused by the experience itself.
(6)
Sabom
researched this issue in his second NDE study, concluding that NDErs became
more
committed to their local congregations, not less.
(7)  
He concluded that
“A belief in reincarnation and in Eastern, universalist religion is
not
a
direct aftereffect of the near-death experience.”
(8)
In Sartori’s study,
“All patients reported an increased tendency to pray, go to church, and read
the Bible.”
(9)
Of course, NDErs typically crave more information about
their experiences. If they find satisfactory explanations offered by a certain
religion, they may gravitate toward that religion. 

10.
Don’t confuse near-death experiences with final death or Revelation’s New
Jerusalem.
Christians often picture life after death as identical
with the “new heaven and new earth” of Revelation 21, complete with a “new
Jerusalem” and streets of gold. But according to Scripture, this is established
after
the final judgment and
after
the earth as we know it has
“passed away.” Perhaps the near-death experience is closer to what the apostle
Paul experienced when he spoke of being “caught up to the third heaven” and
“caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words…” (2 Corinthians
12:1-7). “Inexpressible” – we’ve certainly heard that from many NDErs!
Since the Bible never purports to tell us everything about the afterlife, shouldn’t
Christians remain humbly open concerning how creatures or “geographical”
sections of the afterlife should appear? Perhaps life on the other side offers virtually
endless visual feasts, with an extraordinary variety of breathtaking flora,
fauna, and vistas. Perhaps its inhabitants can travel endlessly through diverse
lands and cultures. In light of the possibilities, let’s be careful not to put
God and heaven into a tidy, but unnecessarily limiting box.      

Conclusion

NDEs
seem, as a whole, to be consistent with a biblical worldview and have much to
offer Christians. While historical and philosophical arguments for religious
claims appeal to some, many others find such arguments dry and tedious. Yet, NDEs
seem inherently fascinating and compelling.

And
it’s not just those who
experience
NDEs whose lives change – those who
study
NDEs are impacted as well. A survey of those studying NDEs on the
university level found the students reporting increased compassion, increased
self-worth, a stronger conviction of life after death, a strengthened view of
God, a stronger spiritual orientation, and a stronger conviction of the
purposefulness of life.
(10)  

I
suggest that we need more engagement with these and related issues from theologians,
philosophers, and pastors. Sartori noted a puzzling dearth of literature by
theologians examining NDEs.
(11)
People who experience NDEs spend
significant time trying to understand their experiences. New Age writers have done
an excellent job of describing the experience within the context of their
worldview. Regrettably, the literature from Christians has so far been scant.
An experience of such importance to the experiencer, and of such interest to
the general public, deserves a more thorough examination by theologians
specifically and Christian thinkers in general.