May 25, 1998 (actually, several times between Nov. or Dec. 1997 to present) Hi again, Karen!

Im now going to try to toner a response to you (since I cant say pen...), finally responding to one of your e-mails re: our discussion of the Bible. I first want to apologize for the length of this letter. However, its shorter than it would have been had I not discarded pages that basically added only quantity to the present content. Since its a personal letter thats taken a long time to compose, Ive feared that you might choose to not read all of it, and numerous hours would thus have been wasted - (indeed, its not necessary to read all of it of you realize that my two main points, which Ill soon identify, are true); so, I want to plead with you to just read this letter (ignoring all else Ive ever sent you). Ive struggled with how to word this letter, trying to ensure that youd trust me enough to believe that its important (and Ill say more shortly about the reasons I believe it is important), and find it palatable enough to read it and see for yourself what Im saying. Judge it to your hearts content after youve read it, but take the time to read it all (if you dont quickly accept what Im saying, as I mentioned) to see if Im speaking the truth. Id like you to know something. In a recent e-mail, after you received the birthday flowers we sent, you said, I think of you guys every time I look at them and feel loved. I love you guys and am privileged to have you as family. I dont think you can accept this right now, but after reading this letter, I think youll understand that sending you flowers is nothing compared to compiling this information for you. This information does not tear down faith; it enhances faith by refining and maturing spiritual understanding (including, especially, Christianity). Most of this material is from my own research over decades, and not from Steve Allens books (Steve Allen on the Bible, Religion, and Morality, and More ...). I have found that a number of sections in his books are not clear-cut. In these, hes used Bible passages that can be interpreted more than one way. So, perhaps its best that you did not read his material, but instead are exposed to what Im presenting here after my own criteria of fairness are applied. Also, this time I will begin by telling you what I DO believe, rather than what I do not (and Im suspecting itll surprise you). And, Ill add that what I do believe (which means, what I strongly suspect to be true), is the result of having seen strong evidence to support it; further, since faith can cause belief in any concept, I consider it to be the ultimate in untrustworthiness as a means of finding reality. (This is the logical reason, I expect, that God would never require faith in any particular religion, although I think one kind of faith is important, and that is faith in the purposefulness of life; without that, motivation to live ethically and have vitality is more difficult to sustain. Another kind of faith, the one that speaks of being sure without evidence, is touted as admirable within many religious communities, but in reality, such faith is necessarily an act of dishonesty. To say that one is sure when one cannot be sure can be more damaging than fingering the wrong suspect in a police lineup.) With your background in journalism, you know how tenuous is that which is taken as the truth. For example, less than sixty years after the Holocaust, thousands of American right-wing radicals believe the event never happened and that a Jewish conspiracy is responsible for news about it. Similarly, powerful church zealots persecuted Copernicus, Galileo, and many others for independent thinking and

research. Should it surprise us that strict beliefs might continue to exist as impediments to a better understanding of God? One main thrust of this letter, then, is to get at the truth by drawing from The Book (i.e., The Bible) passages that indisputably reveal that it contains errors, leaving the only possible conclusion that strict reliance on it for literal truth can be dangerous (and that, essentially, is the first point Im trying to make). Then, after several clear examples of these, and after the hurtle of accepting Bible error has been leaped, Bible quotes are presented that relate events that can be rationally accepted as only myths or folklore, similar to some ancient American Indian beliefs. Following this, its an act of responsibility to look at interpretations of the Bible that may cause, or may have caused injustices. Finally, what seems to be the truth about our reality is discussed, based on what seems to be the best evidence available to us (which is evidence from the statistically significant consistency of the accounts of Near Death Experiences, which is the second point Im trying to make), and how closely it resembles aspects of religion as we have known them. So, please stay with me as I get a bit wordy in telling you what I do believe. But before I quote from the Bible, Id like to give you one single example of evidence for the real reality and how I try to use it (and other evidence) to draw the deepest meanings possible. When Howard Storm, the Near Death Experiencer I know second best in the entire world, was being saved from his desperate condition during the negative portion of his NDE, he called out specifically to Jesus. His exact words were, as I recall them, Jesus, please save me!. By his account, the light that came to him and caused him to quickly feel whole and loved was none other than Jesus Christ, although for quite a long time, out of reluctance to state this publicly in his talks for fear it would seem weird or cause portions of his audiences to disbelieve him, he referred to Jesus as his friend. Because of his account of the experience in which Jesus personally transported him to the realm of other loving lights, and to the withinapprehending-distance vicinity of the enormous light he presumed to be God, and what he reported about his interaction with Jesus, and, slightly because other NDEers seem to be as specific about Jesus greeting them personally, I suspect strongly (which is almost like others saying I believe...) that Jesus is: (1) vital (i.e., alive), or Jesus exists as a spirit-dimension being; (2) accessible by thought (or prayer) at least sometimes by some people, under some conditions (as some people surmise from sections of the Bible); (3) capable of, at least, [a] causing the kind of rehabilitation that made Howard feel whole, [b] transporting a non-physical being or consciousness, as Howard was, away from something that was negative, or evil, in some effective way (perhaps spatially, although we cant be sure of that because of the numerous reports that space and time seem to have no meaning in that realm, or dimension) (might this make Jesus a mediator, or perhaps a savior?), and, [c] knowing the person hes dealing with very intimately; (4) seemingly loving to a degree beyond our comprehension, including having characteristics such as being totally accepting, non-punishing, caring, and providing of understanding and solace even to persons with histories of selfishness (or, shall we say, sin), without purgatory preceding such solace - - providing same without even a prerequisite belief in His existence;

(5) capable of communicating telepathically and spending what we think of as time with individuals while, certainly, other individuals, (i.e. individuals other than Howard), at the same time as we experience time, are in need. With these beliefs about Jesus Christ, I suppose that I am unavoidably categorized as a Christian, although I cannot go past the evidence Ive seen and embrace affirmations like the Apostles Creed. A bit of thought about any kind of evidence (like Howards experience) that seems to deserve inspection, raises hundreds of questions. A very small example of these might be: what would have happened if he hadnt called to Jesus for help?; What if hed instead called for God, or been non-specific and asked for supernatural help from the good of any kind?; If it hadnt occurred to him to call for help at all, would he still be there, in that condition, with his earthly body presumably eventually dying?; Would he have been pulled back from that place automatically if his body had received the needed operation, and been stabilized?; Would he possibly have existed in a dual state (an absolutely non-obvious question, but one which is suggested by two incidents, one of which was a (tape-recorded) hypnosis session with a person exhibiting multiple personalities in which the subjects consciousness was apparently split between the one with me, a young girl in Puerto Rico, and a spiritual higher-self personality, all at the same time) - - the point being that no matter how much of reality seems to be indicated by one experience, its very difficult to define the operating mechanism, or the reality behind the events, that is at play. So, from anecdotes such as this, and from many other things Ive witnessed, experienced, heard, or found from purposely not-limited research, I piece together some of what seems most likely to be reality (and some of what seems to be almost certainly not part of that reality). Remember that Ive personally witnessed psychic phenomena (and have researched its history, even visiting Dr. J. B. Rhine at the FRNM, the Foundation for Research on the Nature of Man at Duke University in the Seventies), had dozens (and probably more than one hundred) hypnosis sessions with people over a thirty-some-year period from which Ive witnessed evidence of past lives and between-life existence (alternatively thoroughly researched by Dr. Ian Stevenson who wrote Twenty Cases Suggestive Of Reincarnation, and Dr. Joel Whitten who wrote Life Between Life), been impressed by an almost certain communication through a medium by our brother Dave a few years after his death, interviewed people whove seen and interacted with ghosts, collected and devoured professional papers on psi phenomena and NDEs (like articles that appeared in the IEEE Spectrum magazine, Journals of the APA and the Intl. Assoc. for Near Death Studies, etc.), read portions of holy books of several religions (including the Bible), read numerous books on related topics and have many of them in my library, studied the work of Joseph Campbell who specialized in mythology and the similar stories that exist in many religions and cultures, and many other avenues that would fill at least another half page. [Ive also found less professional witnesses, or flakes that draw specific conclusions too easily and become misguided, and frauds that capitalize on mans tendency to believe in the supernatural; after so many years, these people are fairly easy to identify and dismiss, and I lose very little time to them.] In short, Im not, as Werner Erhard would use the phrase, just a guy in a diner. But, Id like to go on describing a few things that I think are true. I believe that a single creator (God) is behind the whole plan of the universe, and that includes all the other likely lives on the perhaps one hundred million million planets calculated to be habitable. (You may know that this is a subset of the Drake equation that derives the probability of this cosmology from known astronomical data*, and even 3

Dad was convinced that there was life elsewhere in the universe. If that is the case, why is such an important truth not mentioned in the Bible, and what does that imply about how the tenets of Christianity would be applied to such life? Did Christ die for the sins in those persons lives too? Surely, someone among other populations of life in the universe would have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Why would God create the heavens and the Earth and describe such creation without mentioning a purpose for the remainder of the universe which we only recently learned exists? Could one hundred billion galaxies, each having about fifty billion stars [give or take a dozen] have no purpose but to remain invisible without the most powerful telescopes, to the inhabitants of the only planet in the universe to have life? Did God go crazy and not know when to stop creating? Have you seen any of the riveting Hubble telescope pictures?) I further "believe (again, from strong evidence) that existing spirit life is more than simply aware of us humans; rather, it surrounds us, with some of it assisting and protecting some of us, sometimes (as so many of the published angel stories indicate). It seems (from my own experience and what I derive from the accounts of others) that the assistance and life-direction that we receive is at least in part a function of how we think, our level of enlightenment, and whether, and perhaps how we ask for assistance (through what is clearly in the category of prayer), and/or how we express thankfulness for assistance and opportunity. (I apologize for the generalness of this, but I think your own beliefs would leave you describing the operation of reality just as generally; we dont know enough to be more explicit.) I believe in: the importance of love actively shown others; integrity in relationships relative to how we treat all other humans, animals (which is a tough one for me because Id pay money to not have any pets in this house), and perhaps even the earth; honesty, fairness, and perhaps above all, contributing to life (or giving back what we take and are given). I believe one of the greatest of badnesses (sins?) is negatively impacting others lives in any way this can be done (i.e. physically, emotionally, financially, and even happiness-ly). Again, I think regular spiritual communication is important, even if its one-sided (and it obviously almost always is). This helps one live for such positive purpose while, essentially, walking with God, or at least walking through life with the selfreminded consciousness of the plan of God that we all think weve sincerely found. [This isnt always so innocuous, since some think their walk with God includes killing Christians or Jews or Arabs. The pursuit of God is important, but for a large percentage of the earths population, the wrong road is certainly being traveled (to which Im sure you concur), despite its sincerity.] And, I believe in creation! I expect that the evolution that we know exists (in viruses, fruit flies, and what is evident from zoology) may extend to man to some extent, but not to the popular extreme of the one-celled organism generating all earthly life. For example, I dont think a half-formed organ, like a not-yet functional eye, could be useful and benefit from evolutionary pressures to eventually become an operational eye after once being a light-sensitive spot. Even the Big Bang theory supports the concept of creation, in my opinion (despite the recent quandary among astrophysicists who have found that the universe is not only expanding, but is apparently expanding at an ever-faster rate!). Bucky Fuller said, (here in Cincinnati), that the theory was ridiculous, saying something like, Where do you get the energy to Bang? Since the theory is so well supported, suggesting that the universes origin was from a minute spot at some once-center point, it seems to me that the only way the existing matter in the universe could have been formed is by the action of a creator who can create 4

matter from enormous energy from a pinpoint. Scientists seem to never ask the question that Bucky asked, which was essentially, Where could such energy have come from? The only reasonable answer, recognizing that physics doesnt allow for such an energy density (neutron stars and black holes notwithstanding), is a creator. So, I think the universe was created, and I very strongly suspect that life, having some developed maturity, was also created. I am convinced, from a mountain of evidence, that the Grand Canyon was eroded slowly over at least millions of years, that the earth is billions of years old, that carbon dating is at least not 99.999 % inaccurate (which it would have to be if the earth were very young), and that at one time dinosaurs did exist in such numerous types that they alone could not have fit, and survived a lengthy voyage, on an ark. The evidence for an earth that is billions of years old exists in such amounts that the surprisingly large percentage of Christians Ive interviewed who think that the earth is only about six thousand years old (including Martys sister and brother-in-law) are almost inconceivably ignorant to think such a thing. (Im not saying that theyre stupid or in any way mentally incapable; theyre just ignorant of what geology has found about erosion, plate tectonics, the evidence that a land bridge once connected Australia with the Americas, and a plethora of other planet processes.) Such thinking is very nearly as archaic as thinking the earth is flat. And again, even our Dad, and Im pretty sure this is true for even Mother, realized that the earth is indeed billions of years old, and neither of them derived the typical fundamentalist interpretation of the earths age from the Bible. So, does this tell you something about my beliefs? And, do they surprise you? I believe in God, the existence and importance of Jesus, in prayer, in creation (generally), the existence of evil apart from the existence of good, and probably numerous other things that you believe, based, I suspect, on the Bible. Therefore, it seems that a great deal of what exists in the Bible is accurate, but it also seems, after careful consideration, that quite a bit of the remainder of the Bible is not accurate, and the reason that this fact is important is that in the absence of such careful consideration, a Bible reader can be misled to judgments, behaviors and perceptions that are counterproductive to Gods purposes, and ultimately unfair to others, including people that simply believe differently, and people that are different from the norm, such as homosexuals. Such judgments throughout history, have been numerous and severe, leading to torture and (premature) death. In other words, the Bible reader can be misled to commit, however unintended, sin, ranging from innocuous to horrible. The results of such confusions, even in this relatively enlightened age, are significant problems (which is half of the reason I think this matter is important). They negatively impact peoples lives, to say the least. As an example, the KKK has used the Bible for decades to support segregation, white superiority over blacks, and slavery. It also has promoted, as two of its most strongly held beliefs, the reading of the Bible in schools and the suppression of the theory of evolution. Now I want to tell you the other half of the reason this matter is important to me. Its my awareness of my own adolescent reaction to what I considered to be a religion filled with error being shoved down my throat (which ultimately caused a good deal of alienation within our family), a reaction, that I think, could be now or later felt by Billy and/or Katie. For example, I think that Billy has interests and desires w.r.t. females that could easily be demonstrated by full engagement in sex, clearly against what your belief holds as an edict of God. If Billy rejects that part of your religious belief, he might also reject the more fundamental aspects and feel more justified in his own behavior out of a feeling of disrespect for your beliefs, just as I rejected the beliefs of Mother (and even other aspects of her being) some 35 years ago. If Billy and/or Katie ever have/will think for 5

themselves about these issues, enough to think more like the majority of Christians, and place your beliefs in the boxes of cults or extremists, you will very possibly suffer a certain amount of alienation since you will feel some discomfort and inability to talk with each other (the way we, I believe, have sadly engaged with each other for several years: it seems that any time we even get close to a discussion involving philosophy, you seem to be feeling anger, and you seem to become quite defensive). But, enough of that; I think you get the point. It would seem to me to be very unfortunate and very unnecessary because I fully believe your honest look at just the material in this letter, for about one hour, would be enough to convince you that such strict interpretation of the Bible is wrong. (There are actually other reasons it could be important to you to consider this material. Anyone who places so much trust in a particular belief is prone to affect major decisions in their personal lives that could be disadvantageous. A Catholic, for example, might remain in an abusive marriage; a dominated woman may feel that the Bible demands submission; a person whod had premarital sex may feel guilt throughout their whole life; homosexuals might feel that desires over which they have no control are going to condemn them to Hell. For many such situations, of which these examples are a very small subset, Id consider this to be a good third reason that logical consideration of ones religion is important. A fourth reason is that it may be important to society; when one makes decisions in a voting booth that might affect teachings in schools or laws that govern punishment of citizens, ones responsibility to society is unavoidably colored by ignorance, a situation probably more common in history than uncommon.) So, finally to the question that parrots the title of an old, but quite excellent book, What Can A Man Believe? by a Christian minister named Bruce Barton. (I suspect I once sent a photocopy of this out-of-print book to you.) We honestly can believe only that which is not inconsistent with what we know. And, by this time in our collective history, theres a lot that we do know, and that which we do know which does not fit with Bible stories means that one or the other is wrong. (In fact, it means the Bible is wrong on these matters.) Here are some examples of what we do know. We know the real causes of natural events such as earthquakes, lightning, rain, tornadoes, and disease, and that these things are not the punishments from God believed by those of Biblical times, and described so often in Bible stories. We can honestly question whether snakes and Asses talk, and that Aarons walking stick turned into a snake. (Incidentally, its known that a particular Egyptian snake is used by magicians of that area to do a trick, even in this modern day, based on the fact that when a certain part of its head is pressed and rubbed, the snake straightens and becomes very rigid. Fakirs who employ this illusion have walking sticks that resemble the snakes in this condition, and allow the stick to be examined to see that it is made of wood, and after appropriate distraction, the temporarily paralyzed snake is switched with the stick and the snake is thrown to the ground, an action which causes reversion to normality and the audience is fooled. It seems likely that the Bible story was fairly accurately recounting such an event, but that it was written from the standpoint of someone who didnt know the trick.) We know that the moon is not a light, lesser or otherwise. ( We know that angels with any mass greater than a few pounds wouldnt be able to fly in our atmosphere with wings.) We know that if the sun were to stand still (which we now know would mean that the earth would have to stop its rotation for a while) there would have been enormous forces within the earth that would have caused huge earthquakes, and everything on the earths surface (near the equator) to be decelerated from 6

the usual speed of just over 1000 miles per hour to zero, which, even if accomplished slowly would still have caused oceanic flooding of western seashores at this stopping, and eastern seashores at its re-starting {unless the sun were to suddenly change its speed and direction enormously to appear stationary to earthlings [which would have altered the orbits of the other planets and created enormous forces within the sun that Id need an astronomer to comment on as to such being noticed as large changes in light level on the earth]}. We know that if people dont eat for thirty days, as Moses commanded his people (and supposedly was similarly deprived for forty days when the ten commandments were written), many would have become sick and died. We are rather sure there never were any fiery serpents which God supposedly caused to bite people for criticizing the food they were provided. We know that the acids and lack of atmosphere in the belly of any great fish would kill a man very quickly. We know that homosexuality is generally not a delectable perversion upon which the average person would ever decide, because the requisite desire to act as a homosexual, outside the confining walls of prison for extended periods of time (during which time sexual compulsions often drive the behaviors of inmates), would not exist. We know that slavery is inherently not fair and would not have been a practice guided by God with rules about how slaves should be properly punished (crazily, instructing the driving of an awl through their ears!) for specific transgressions against a master. We seem to have rather strong evidence for civilizations outside of the Middle East that existed during and prior to those indicated in the Bible, yet they are not mentioned. And, with what we know about people and building construction, its difficult to accept that a man set fire to 300 foxes, killed a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass, had strength that was dependent on the length of his hair and which was sufficient to move the main supporting girders of a building of more than 2000 years ago - (think about this, now,) - a large enough structure to have had three thousand men and women on its roof (or upper floor), all of whom died when he moved only two of what would have had to have been a great number of columns supporting so large a building. (That storys not a myth?) (We even know that chimpanzees have 99.4 % of the same genetic material that we humans have, and an apparently true sense of self. Could this really be meaningless?) We know that many, or perhaps most of the estimated 6500 (of the estimated 15,000 more original) existing languages have common roots, or are derivatives of each other, having variations that would have naturally formed when cultures lost contact with each other for long periods of time, (which would be millennia, incidentally, not just centuries). The point of this is that mankinds languages would probably not be linked in this way if he had really been sentenced to speaking different tongues the way the Bible describes. (Ive never heard this mentioned by anyone.) The point is that many Bible stories can be likened to Greek mythology and American Indian lore, not sensible accounts of deeply important spiritual truths that relate to our reality. They are, in fact, seemingly so inconsistent with reality that they should give us pause and motivate us to read the Bible carefully to see if, beyond its contents not agreeing with what mankind has learned, there are other reasons to question what is there. And, upon such reading, Im trying to show you that there are such reasons to question the texts, simply because in much of the remainder there are both contradictions and absurdities. (Would you ever prefer that I not tell you about them?) Ive taken the time to identify several of them, and Im asking only that you read these to see if you come to the same 7

conclusion. If you continue to think that each point has to be answered with detailed research into the Bible (as you began to do) rather than considered in a quick reading of the lot using only common sense, it will seem that you distrust your own sense of judgment and rationality. (Fear of examination and of listening to opposition is the nature of cult followers.) However, if you do read all of this, and you retain your belief that the Bible is without error and totally trustworthy for guidance, then so be it. At least you will have had the chance to profit from my work, and my effort will have been made. I would likely never understand how you could possibly not agree with the dozens of straightforward examples of Biblical error, but that would make no difference in my love and high respect for you. Well probably all know the truth someday, and the entire matter will, I think, be moot. As far as youre concerned, from a personal consequence standpoint, I think that what you believe, or what anyone else believes, makes no difference to their souls anyway, unless what they believe takes them away from spiritual progress, (as Im sure it does for someone in the KKK). So, after considering how the Bible jibes with what we know (and finding it wanting), the next step is to consider its contents for believability. Consider first some rather apparent contradictions that anyone can verify easily, (and some of these get boring; Im sorry, especially since theyre not as interesting, or even as convincing of error as are the absurdities in the Bible stories that are repeated, starting at the bottom of page 10 of this letter ...): In Genesis 1:25-26, God is said to have made the beasts of the earth, the cattle, and those things that creepeth, after which God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.... In Genesis 2:18-20, we can find the words: And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam... Was man made before or after the beasts? It cant be both. 2 Samual 6:23: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no children unto the day of her death. 2 Samual 21:8: ...and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel... Num. 33:39: And Aaron was an hundred and twenty and three years old when he died in mount Hor. Deut. 10:6: And the children of Israel took their journey from Beeroth of the children of Jaakan to Mosera: there Aaron died, and there he was buried; Gen. 6:19: And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. Gen. 7:2, 8,9: Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are clean by two, the male and his female ... Of clean beasts and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowl .. There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah. In Matthew 3 were told that the Devil took Jesus to a high mountain from which the two could see all the kingdoms of the world. Since from the earths highest mountain its not possible to see more than about one hundred miles, it wouldnt have even allowed the two to see all of the then-known kingdoms of the world. In Deuteronomy 24 were told that 1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another mans wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house, or if the latter husband die, which took her 8

to be his wife; 4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance. (...the land??) Anyway, presumably because she had relations with the second husband, she cant return to the first husband. (Thats Gods law that the first husband can send her away...), BUT, reading Matthew 5:32, we read But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. (There are numerous conflicting rules like that one. Doesnt that cause one to wonder how the Catholic Church can support its divorce laws?) In the first verses of Genesis, we read, And God said, Let there be light, and there was light. God saw that the light was good and he separated light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness he called night. And there was evening, and there was morning - the first day. Shortly after that, in verse nine, the text reads: And God said, Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth. And it was so. God made two great lights - the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning - the fourth day. The first problem between these texts is the identifications of the two lights. On the first day, God is said to have created light and called it day, but the light which produces daylight, the sun, or the greater light, wasnt created until the fourth day. (Thats one of the biggest no-brainers of them all.) The stars, by the billions, and in billions of galaxies (as already mentioned) are said to have been set in the expanse of the sky to give light to the earth. Whats known today is that the vast majority of the stars are not even visible to our eyes, and dont affect the earth by their light. So, their stated purpose could not be true. (And again, but in more detail, what is the purpose of these stars so far distant that only recently have we made them visible with powerful telescopes, unless they also contain intelligent life? And again, if many of these worlds have life, would all of those individuals not be children of God? But if so, has Jesus descended into these worlds also to die, repeating his earthly experience? But, were getting ahead of ourselves.) And finally, there is no lesser light, as I already mentioned. The light that governs the night, so to speak, is sunlight reflecting from our moon. Time is another disturbing factor. In the beginning, Adam was supposedly created in the first days (or first seven thousand years if St. Peters thousand-years-to-one-day-in-Gods-time is reckoned, as some believe, although this is apparently literal as the implication of Romans 14:5 indicates) and according to Matthews list of sixty-three generations between Adam and Jesus, even if each generation had lasted a thousand years (considering fathering of children taking place at even the end of the lives of men who lived nearly one thousand years per Genesis 5) the age of the earth at Jesus birth would have been well under 100,000 years. Since geologists have found ample evidence that the earth is billions of years old, this is a considerable discrepancy. An even more puzzling aspect of the earths age arises when one considers the existing evidence of dinosaurs, known to have existed for about fifty million years, and thought to have been extinct for over sixty million years. This is compounded by recent evidence that some stage of mankind inhabited the earth with the dinosaurs since fossilized footprints of both dinosaurs and man have been found on the same slabs of rock. (Even if the time element problem is neglected, if animals were to have been saved by Noah during a flood, its hard to imagine that the varieties of dinosaurs would have had enough room to fit on the ark. And, what of the flood?) 9

 Many questions come to mind when considering the story of the great flood. In this story, God is said to have commanded Noah to build a boat longer than a football field (450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet, or three decks, high, per Gen. 6:15) presumably with tools that had been invented during the first ten generations of man. Per Genesis chapters 6 and 7, on the 17th day of the second month during the 600th year of Noahs life, water began accumulating for forty days (or about 960 hours). During this period and the next 150 days before which the Ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat, Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died (including mosquitoes, fruit flies, tarantula spiders, termites, scorpion flies, rats, all of which were to survive because Noah was to house sufficient progenitors to again populate the earth with them). God is said to have sent a wind over the earth to make the waters recede, presumably by evaporation from the wind, until ...the water had dried up from the earth completely by the 27th day of the second month of Noahs 601st. year. One can wonder where the water or the water vapor went since the atmosphere could not have contained all of it, and even if it could have, one wonders how so much could have evaporated between the 17th day of the seventh month (which ended the 150 days) and the 27th day of the second month of the next year when the earth was completely dry (and why babies would have had to die in the flood since they couldnt have been evil by that time). The period of time between the end of the 150 days and the completely dry date is 220 days, or, conveniently, 5280 hours. If the highest mountain were one mile high, or 5280 feet high, that would have required the water to evaporate from the wind at a rate of one foot per hour (over the surface of the entire earth). That in itself would be too much to ask of a wind of any conceivable speed at standard temperature and pressure [the conditions at sea level] and even if it were possible, the maximum water vapor that the atmosphere could hold would require about 1600 miles of atmosphere at standard temperature and pressure (instead of our actual thirty-or-so miles of significant atmosphere) since (at STP) water vapor occupies about 1600 times the volume of water which produced it. I wouldnt be so picky about this if the Bible hadnt implied facts like the wind being sent to dry the earth. Ecclesiastes 1:4 states Generations come and generations go, but the earth remains forever. while II Peter 3:10 states But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare. Romans 5:14 states that Nevertheless death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, while in Hebrews 11:5, Paul claims that Enoch (the father of Methuselah) by faith, ...was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death. (Apparently death didnt reign for everyone in that time period.) In John 3:13, Jesus is reported to have said, No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven - the Son of Man. Contradicting that is what we find in II Kings 2:11 where it states that ... suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind. (Aficionados of aliens tend to like this verse because to them it indicates rocket-powered craft were seen.) There is a difference between two reports of the fate of Judas, who took money to betray Jesus. Matthew 27:5 states, So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The following verses relate that the chief priests would not use the money because it was blood money, so instead they (the priests) bought a potters field to be a burial place for foreigners. It states that it ...has been called the Field of Blood to this day. (which suggests that the book of Matthew was written at a date quite a bit later than the event, incidentally). However, Acts 1:18 states that With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so 10

they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood. (This quote is from the NIV Bible I got from Mother, so it lacks the usual singsong old English sound.) The stories here are quite different. Apologists attempt to explain this and in the NIV Bible, state, Judas bought the field indirectly. The money he returned to the priests (Mt 27:3) was used to purchase the potters field (Mt 27:7). fell headlong. Mt 27:5 reports that Judas hanged himself. It appears that when the body finally fell, either because of decay or because someone cut it down, it was in a decomposed condition and so broke open in the middle. Another possibility is that hanged in Mt 27:5 means impaled.... It appears to me that to go this far to excuse the differences in actual scripture means that true believers will simply not entertain the possibility that something might not make sense. In the meager eight pages devoted to contradictions in Josh McDowells A Ready Defense, (where he doesnt comment on any of the apparent contradictions Im referencing), he comments on this particular event, and his explanation is both a bit of a stretch, and. since it doesnt cover all of the above issues of this case, incomplete. ( One example of where an apparent inaccuracy may be explained is where the original language may have had a different meaning, as in the following example to which Mr. McDowell refers. In Acts 9:7, one reads about Paul, when he was known as Saul, traveling to Damascus where its reported that The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. In Acts 22:9 it is reported that My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me. This discrepancy seems to be minor until we look at a more original text, not modified to be a study Bible, where, in the King James version distributed by The Gideons (who claim that their version was Translated out of the Original Tongues), the first verse states And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. In the other referenced verse, one reads And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. (emphasis mine in all references). The Confraternity version, or Catholic Bible with its text translated from the Latin Vulgate (or literally the vulgar language) translates this latter verse as And my companions saw indeed the light, but they did not hear the voice of him who was speaking to me. Perhaps the reference to the Greek word to hear which, in one form implies understanding, can account for the apparent difference.) The requirements for salvation are also contradictory. In John 3:36 the Bible states, Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for Gods wrath remains on him. However James 2:26 states in opposition to this, As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead. (Ive heard the faithful argue this point for hours, and Im sure youve heard this discussed as well.) An interesting implication of the former verse is the fate of people whove never heard the gospel. Missionary work and evangelism have the goal of saving souls, but if those who havent heard the gospel are not responsible for accepting or rejecting the story, then all evangelists run the risk of being responsible for the hearers who reject the message, consequently deserving hell. This also raises the question of what happens to persons who are too young to make a real decision, or are mentally incapable of understanding the choice. Salvation arranged by a just God would not likely depend upon belief in the factuality of a single sacrifice, the hearing of which is not freely available, or equally available (i.e. for the same number of years and opportunities and environments) to all people. Again, we are reminded of John 15:22, in which Jesus is quoted as saying, If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin. Now, however, they have no excuse for their sin. The collection of statements about salvation form a hodgepodge of confusing requirements. In 1 Cor. 7:29, Paul says, But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none; encouraging married people to avoid sexual contact (how short was the time he 11

thought people had? I think there are verses that suggest that even Christ was quoted as saying the judgment or the second coming would occur while the listeners were still alive). This contradicts verse 3 wherein Paul says, Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband., indicating that they should give to each other sexually. (This isnt a strong contradiction but in light of the short time quote, it may be noteworthy.) In Ezekial 18, theres a profound segment relating to the issue of original sin applying to all mankind. In verses 14 through 20 we read, 14 Now, lo, if he beget a son, that seeth all his fathers sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like, 15 That hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, hath not defiled his neighbours wife, 16 Neither hath oppressed any, hath not withholden the pledge, neither hath spoiled by violence, but hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment, 17 That hath taken off his hand from the poor, that hath not received usury or increase, hath executed my judgments, hath walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live. As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, spoiled his brother by violence, and did that which is not good among his people, lo, even he shall die in his iniquity. 19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. This theme is repeated in Ezekial 18:20: The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. In direct contrast to that in Exodus 20:7 we find the words, You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me... So, the contradictions come from both the Old Testament and the New Testament, although I suspect theres a great deal more truth in the New than the Old. The point is, a bible that really were the total word of God would have no contradictions, and would be perfect in what it communicates about nature and what we know of the hard sciences, like astronomy and geology, and the softer disciplines like philosophy, morality, and ethics, such that it would be the pinnacle of justice and fairness, opposed to things like slavery and war. In addition, it would not have stories about commandments and miracles of God that have the attributes of myths. This leads to my next point: many of the Bible stories are downright ridiculous. Here are some examples of nonsensical stories. In Exodus 7:10 through the end of chapter 11: Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh and his servants and it became a serpent (referencing the trick I alluded to above). Then Pharaoh called his wise men and sorcerers, the magicians of Egypt, and they did in like manner with their enchantments. Then Aarons rod swallowed up the other rods ... and with the same rod being used, (in vs. 20) all the rivers and holdings of water were turned to blood. In vs. 22 its reported that the magicians of Egypt did so (i.e., likewise) with their enchantments and Pharaohs heart was (again) hardened; but wait - if all the water in Egypt were already turned to blood, how did the magicians do the same thing? Then to attempt to soften Pharaohs heart, the Lord spake unto Moses and told him to tell Pharaoh that if he refuses to let the people go, He will smite the borders with frogs. Frogs ultimately covered the land of Egypt. Then the magicians did so with their enchantments, and brought up frogs upon the land of Egypt. (Why would there be more frogs, and how would it be possible to know that this latter 12

onslaught was a new group of frogs?) Then in verse 17, after Pharaoh hardened his heart again, after first agreeing to let the people go because of the frog infestation, the Lord told Aaron to smite the dust of the land and turn it into lice throughout the land of Egypt. The magicians this time could not produce the same result when they tried to bring forth lice, (again, thered be no way to tell if there was a new infestation since there were lice already throughout the land of Egypt) but the magicians said, Hey Pharaoh, this must be the finger of God this time..., but Pharaoh was unmoved and the Lord had to infest the country with flies as the next miracle. Pharaoh begs Moses who gets the Lord to remove every last fly, but then hardens his heart again, but then the Lord slays all the cattle of Egypt (isnt this a great childrens Sunday school Bible story?) leaving the cattle of Israel untouched. Then the Lord caused boils to break out on everyone in Egypt when Moses and Aaron sprinkled furnace ashes toward the heaven (which way is heaven - above that part of the round earth?) (Have you ever heard of American Indian story tellers and their stories about the great bear and the great spirit, etc. etc. - is there not a similarity here?) Next theres a pestilence of grievous hail when (vs. 23) ...Moses stretched forth his rod toward heaven (again, wheres heaven to someone who doesnt know the earth isnt flat?) and the Lord sent thunder and hail, and the fire ran along upon the ground... (the fire?) (vs. 24) So there was hail, and fire mingled with the hail (in the midst of all that rain?) but even that wasnt enough(!) (even after Pharaoh said hed sinned this time, and that the Lord is righteous, and he and his people were wicked). Then the locusts came which were to (vs. 5) cover the face of the earth, that one cannot be able to see the earth (right...); (ch. 10, vs. 15) For they covered the face of the whole earth, so that the land was darkened ... and (vs. 19) ...the Lord turned a mighty strong west wind, which took away the locusts, and cast them into the Red Sea;.. (man, what an intelligent specific-purposed wind!) ... there remained not one locust in all the coasts of Egypt. (Only a storyteller would state so specifically that not one would remain.) Again Pharaoh, after stated contrition, says I still wont concede. There was pitch black darkness for three days, and the people of Egypt ...saw not one another, neither rose any from his place for three days: but all the children of Israel had light in their dwellings. (Were there no candles? Did they not eat, go to the toilet (requiring them to rise from his place during the three days.) Then, in vs. 27, we read that ...the Lord hardened Pharaohs heart, and he would not let them go. Why on earth would the Lord harden his heart? (There are many other examples Ive read in the Old Testament where God, who supposedly doesnt interfere, by His own admissions causes this kind of rebellion to be waged against Himself, another set of contradictions, surely.) Then in Chapter 11, vs. 4, the Lord says hell go out into the midst of Egypt (isnt He already omnipresent?), about midnight, and all the firstborn in the land of Egypt will die (which is another example of the barbarous killing of innocents). And of course, heres the Passover, and carefully deposited blood on door jambs (and a bunch of other rules and regulations that people have to follow) and by vs. 30, all the firstborn had died. Finally, then, after 430 years of being in bondage (a long lineage there; would they still have been culturally the same?) ...the hosts of the Lord... (the children of Israel) ...went out from the land of Egypt. Can anyone reading that story take it as the literal truth? One has to be conscious of the potential for gullibility. It takes a heap of faith and a great deal of decision to not question with logic, and to accept every word of the Bible as literal. In Numbers, the Lord supposedly is instructing Moses on how to deal with an unfaithful wife and a jealous husband. Num. 5, 12-31 states, 11 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, (and Im making this smaller text to suggest that you skim it) 12 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any mans wife go aside, and
commit a trespass against him, 13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner; (which

I guess means that she doesnt have a period?) , 14 And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be
jealous of his wife, and she be defiled: or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she

13

be not defiled: 15 Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance. 16 And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the Lord: 17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water: (UGHH!!) 18 And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the womans head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth

the curse: 19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou has not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse: (Why

not just have her bitten with a poisonous snake? If she dies, shes guilty, and if she lives, shes innocent.) 20 But if thou has gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be
defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband: 21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The Lord make thee a curse and an oath among thy people,

when the Lord doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell; 22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot:
And the woman shall say, Amen, amen. 23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water: 24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter. 25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the womans hand, and shall wave the offering before the Lord, and offer it upon the alter: 26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the alter, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water. 27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it

shall come to pass, that if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. 28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled; 30 Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the Lord, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law. 31 Then shall the man be guiltless from

iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity. Now, did the Lord really

communicate such a crazy ruling to the people through Moses? (Did Moses have such a good memory that he could remember all of that, along with all the other stories, and write them later, verbatim, or even with such detail?) Is this not just as sensible as having someone drink poison and judge innocence by how ill he (or she) becomes, as was reportedly common among some of the ancient Indians? Is this not likely as sensible as the cultural habits of ignorant and barbaric people that youd judge to be unspeakably primitive? And, would a man somehow be guilty of iniquity if such a rule were not carried out, as is implied? (And finally, if shes pregnant, as the text seems to indicate, and indeed the condition of pregnancy seems to be what the husband is judging, the bitter curse will cause her to abort, which would be divinely sanctioned abortion. Im not positive shed be pregnant, but since it mentions that if she be clean, then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed., it seems that its describing her condition as being pregnant.) An even more absurd story is in the next chapter (which I dont feel like typing, but which you could read), wherein again, the Lord says to Moses, ...When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselves unto the Lord;... he must drink no wine or strong drink, he must not shave any part of his head, he must come at no dead body, including his family members because it would make him unclean (or, because the consecration of his God is upon his head), but if someone does die suddenly and he hath defiled the head of his consecration, then he shall shave his head in the day of his cleansing, on the seventh day shall he shave it. 10 And on the eighth day he shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons, to the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: 11 And the priest shall offer the one for a sinoffering, and make an atonement for him, for that he sinned by the dead, and shall hallow his head that same day 12 And he shall consecrate unto the Lord the days of his separation, and shall bring a lamb of the first year for a trespass-offering: but the days that were before shall be lost, because his separation was defiled. Then there is a bunch of other rules that he must abide by to fulfill the requirements that I dont feel like typing, but you can find it in a hurry and laugh 14

at it as I do. Its total absurdity, and if it were actually the word of God, it would suggest an idiocy where God is concerned, just as other stories suggest barbarity where God is concerned. (How many stories are necessary to demonstrate the impossibility of these parts of the Bible being Gods word?) Heres another good one. In Numbers 15:32-36, we read, 32 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day. 33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. 34 And they put him in ward because it was not declared what should be done to him. 35 And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. 36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died, as the Lord commanded Moses. Even orthodox Jews of today would not consider such a penalty for something, even if it were considered some kind of trespass, for the very reason that it would be barbaric and cruel and unusual punishment. Would it be possible that such a wrong would be ordered by the same personage who created the earth and the entire universe (and the probable other life-bearing planets having intelligent life)? Would He busy Himself with such inanity and with personal communication with one human intercessor of one of numerous groups of human beings on one planet? God Himself told one human to instruct a congregation of humans to stone to death a man for this? How about Jonah Chapter 4? Jonah was to preach to Nineveh to save the people of the city, an act which he finally did after protest, and his mission was successful enough that God supposedly spared the city from being overthrown after forty days. For some reason, this outcome made Jonah angry and he asked God to kill him. His anger was questioned by God, so Jonah made a booth to give himself shade at the edge of the city so that he could watch and witness the citys fate. After that, 6 ...the Lord God prepared a gourd, [whatever that was] and made it to come up over Jonah, that it might be a shadow over his head, to deliver him from his grief. [He already had shadow from the booth hed made, so why was the gourd necessary, and how did it remove his grief? Was it some kind of drug-plant that exuded a hallucinatory vapor?] So Jonah was exceeding glad of the gourd. 7 But God prepared a worm when the morning rose the next day, [God surely is busy taking care of important things, as usual] and it smote the gourd that it withered. 8 And it came to pass, when the sun did arise, that God prepared a vehement east wind; [all these quotes are from Dads Schofield Bible, by the way] and the sun beat upon the head of Jonah, [what happened to the booth that did this job?] that he fainted, and wished in himself to die, and said, ... [etc.]. That doesnt seem particularly edifying. God personally has a dialog with Jonah; thats not very believable. Was God audible? Visible? Wouldnt the wind have kept Jonah cool? What was the wind for? Who would know that God sent a worm to wither a gourd? This is a story in a book of Gods instructions to his creatures? The story of Samson, is another extremely intriguing story that Id say is certainly a fable (as I implied earlier) which goes on and on for whole chapters. Reading it with an ounce of thought is sufficient to produce tons of skepticism (as it were), and worth pages that I wont take time or space to consider here since this letter is already so long. One of the far rights intentions is to have Gods word be the source of our laws. In Lev. 20:9, God supposedly says, For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him. 10 and the man that committeth adultery with another mans wife,,, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. ...13 If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Theres the big rub - - you and I privately know of one who fought 15

against urges of homosexuality, and not because of any choice on his part; do you think that the Bibles exhortations for such punishment should be brought to bear to put him to death? Then, vs. 14, And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you. 15 And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. (Did the beast do wrong? Is the beast sinful? Does the beast deserve to be punished?) etc. etc., for a woman with a beast, if a man lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath discovered her fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people (man-oh-man, God surely is said to be worried about important stuff!), and finally in vs. 27, A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them (you and I both know of people who have had psychic awareness, beyond their choices, of course; shades of the Salem witch hunts!) (None of this recent stuff is from Steve Allens book, by the way - its from my own reading and, frankly, general disgust at things like the Bibles stances on many issues like war and the spoils of war, treatment of women, sacrifices, divine justice, etc., etc.) I would not expect God to require burnt offerings, which would do Him no good; rather, the choice food they burned should have been given to the poor. I think the whole idea that the inconceivably magnificent God ever required or would desire any kind of sacrifice, burned or otherwise, is really absurd and an outgrowth of the great superstition and ignorance of early man. I hope that you realize that the intent of this letter to you is to refine and better identify the truth, or the reality, for humans, and additionally when applicable, the true nature of God, exposing aspects of things believed to be true about God that would be very likely not true and typically diminishing of, or demeaning to God. Finding tenets of specific religious doctrines to be questionable permits growth and expanded understanding, and does not imply that other aspects of the religion(s) are necessarily false, or that theres reason to throw out the baby with the bath water. Honest investigation can never be a threat to the truth! The Judeo-Christian God who demanded sacrifices to be appeased, who destroyed people with famine, plagues and pestilence, who promises spoils of conquest to predatory tribes, is one which has qualities that are too human and barbaric to be either believable or worthy of worship. As a single example of the Show no pity (Deut. 19:21) kind of justice that makes a bad case for God being love, Deut. 20:10-14 instructs the Jews to make an offer of peace when attacking a city, and if the offer is accepted, the inhabitants shall be subject to forced labor, and if the offer is not accepted, they are instructed to lay siege to that city and kill all of the men, and take as plunder all the women, children, livestock and everything else. In Isaiah 42: 24, we read Who handed Jacob over to become loot, and Israel to the plunderers? Was it not the Lord ... for they would not follow his ways and did not obey his law, so he poured out on them his burning anger and violence of war. These are almost certainly justifications invented by warring leaders to generate allegiance, allay guilt, provide positive expectancy, and unified force. Any question of the righteousness of God is dismissed by true believers simply because God is assumed to show mercy when he feels like it and by definition, that is accepted as justice. God supposedly even ...hardeneth... those he chooses to make antagonistic to him (Romans 9:13-18) and to justify that kind of thinking, Romans 9:21 speaks of the potter having the right to do as he desires with a lump of clay, as if the clay, which is devoid of consciousness and feeling, can be compared to a human being. God supposedly struck dead people who dared to look at the Ark of the Covenant, sentenced a man to be stoned because he picked up sticks on the Sabbath (as already mentioned), caused the firstborn of all people and animals in 16

Egypt to be killed, and directed barbarous pain and suffering that can be found described all through the old testament. Its interesting that of all the information thats found from studying near death experiences, there seems to never be anything to support such vengeance, hatred, prejudice of one group of people over another, sacrifice required for appeasement, forced labor or plunder, or simplistic analogies which supposedly explain the reasons for actions of the senior deity. Such a god seems clearly to be unfair, unloving and inconstant. In contrast to this, all spiritual beings referred to by NDErs are unconditionally loving. Perhaps, now, its time to have a critical look at the information supporting the reality of the Near Death Experience, a body of evidence that still leaves much unanswered, but which seems to be better supported. To begin with, here are a few facts about Near Death Experiences that make them seem so compelling. You already know about a lot of these, so skimming much of the next several pages is very much in order. I include its detail only in an effort to be complete. NDEs deal with issues such as life after death, the meaning of life, spiritual realities, and other subjects usually addressed by religion. However, NDEs are not about religion, in the sense that their effects generally enhance spirituality and not ones intensity of being religious. NDE research, then, by necessity, delves into areas of science, theology, religion, and metaphysics. And, for these reasons, you might expect that an NDE researcher would necessarily be a scientist, or scholar well versed in comparative religion and philosophy. But, as a physicist needs no expertise in alchemy to study nuclear fusion, an NDE researcher needs no exhaustive schooling in traditional beliefs. Therefore, after years of studying, Im nearly as qualified to become fairly expert in the field (with my decade of study) as any NDE-literate theology major would be. Further, compared to a typical theology major (of any religion) who has a detailed, and even modern (and therefore rather broad) theological background, but who has little exposure to NDEs and the strong evidence for their reality, I am more qualified to comment on what is evidently (i.e. supported by evidence) the plan of the creator for humanity, and the nature of reality for mankind. Im not being arrogant or demeaning of the diligent study of seminary graduates; Im simply characterizing the levels of ignorance regarding the available evidence for these truths, of most students of religion. So, for example, compared to our pastor cousin Leon, I have a far greater handle on the subject of the NDE, and on what it may contain that relates to the truth than he could possibly have regarding matters of the spirit and what might be thought of as the true religion. And, having said (written) that, I naturally have to give reason for such an opinion. (Im sure he would disagree strongly with my assertion that Im closer to having the real truth than he, but then he is basically not only limited to one source of knowledge, but to the confining stand he must take presuming that that source is without error.) Ive already alluded to the first half of why my understanding would be superior. Leon and other fundamentalist preachers (and I dont mean just Christian fundamentalist preachers - I include the Palestinian Hamas, Hindu nationalists, Muslim radicals, and militant Buddhists in Sri Lanka) - invest their full reliance on the perfection of the Bible (or the holy books of the non-Christians) and their own ability, using it, to interpret these and reach the truth, and since the early part of this letter shows strong evidence of how the Bible (since this is directed to you) errs, this leaves the lot of them closed to other available literature and evidence for anything that would disagree with their presumptions. The second reason is the body of evidence for the reality of NDEs, which I havent, as yet, specifically addressed in this letter, although you probably already do think theyre 17

real; but probably misinformation sourced by Satan to deceive people (as is implied by radio and TV evangelists like John Ankerberg and guests like Douglas Groothius). After I list some of this evidence, I think youll see why I assert that if the reality of many NDEs were put on trial, the evidence for their being the truth would be overwhelming. Questioning their meanings would be rational, but denial of their existence would be arrogant, if not absurd. This doesnt mean that NDEers or NDE researchers understand characteristics such as the mechanisms by which the blind see under these conditions, or by which the typical NDEer can see, hear, and sense the thoughts of others, or consciously apprehend hours of information within seconds or minutes of seeming unconsciousness. However, as Sir William Crookes didnt comprehend the existence X-rays, we neednt comprehend the means by which these things happen to acknowledge and learn from them. As youll probably agree a bit later in this letter, the evidence for the reality of NDEs is sufficiently complete to be challenging to the most rigid skeptic, and should be thought provoking for the most orthodox believer. One reason for this is that portions of many NDEs have been validated by comparing experiencers observations with events that could not have been witnessed from the vantage points of the experiencers bodies, as was the case with my exceptionally honest wife Marty, and others I know personally. When exposed to such phenomena, all experienced by sane and respectable people, ignoring or writing off the lot of them is naive. So, from my vantage point and the evidence Ill mention shortly, to me the evidence indicates that with nearly absolute certainty, the near death experience is a real and valid phenomenon that reveals mankinds true relationships with other human beings, and even with the higher power (or God, The Great Spirit, Allah, or Yahweh); outside of having a personal experience, NDE information is likely the most authoritative source of spiritual knowledge (although certainly not the only) that has ever been available, and it could be the strongest unifying force for mankind in all of history. Thats why I give it so much importance! Ill say quite a bit more about this at the end of this letter. So, lets look at the evidence for and against NDEs, and what the average person knows about them. Some of the following comes from my manuscript (Implications And Applications of the Near Death Experience which I believe youve never taken the time to read), so it will be more wordy than it otherwise would be to make the following points, but it saves me a lot of time generating the basic thrust. To begin with, its clear that for most people, knowledge of near death experiences has been acquired only from the readily available sources of NDE information. These sources include hundreds of national and local television and radio programs, tabloid newspapers, magazine articles, and popular books authored by a handful of experiencers. They have informed the public that NDEs exist, but have been largely unsuccessful in presenting them as more than a superficial curiosity. Particularly for television talk shows, producers have tried to present both sides of the issue by including a skeptic who argues for reductionist interpretations of the experience. Like a confused jury in a technical court trial, the public sees the experts disagree over authenticity. As a result, the common perception is that all aspects of NDEs can probably be attributed to biological processes. One example of this occurred during a national TV appearance by Howard Storm. He related details of his profound NDE and was badgered by a skeptic who 18

admitted to Howard, after the show, that he didnt really hold such strongly negative opinions, but was invited to appear for the purpose of presenting counter arguments. But whatever impressions people retain from these sources, one dominant aspect builds public interest within those willing to consider NDEs seriously. That aspect is the fact that NDEs convey a view of death that is different from more common perspectives. Rather than returning grim and devastated, the positive experiencers who claim to have gone through the first stages of dying relate the experiences as painless and accompanied by indescribable beauty, love and peace. As a group, they are not only fearless of death, but rather look forward to it with longing and anticipation. Their collective agreement about this, and the fact that this confidence doesnt diminish with time, are powerful indications that non-experiencers can expect a comparable destiny. It also powerfully suggests that deceased loved ones had similar fates, no matter how horrible their deaths may have been observed to be. If strong evidence can be compiled for these experiences, great comfort can obviously be derived from such findings, sufficient reason by itself to search for validation. Although you probably dont need to, I want to review the main aspects of NDEs. As you know, they range in complexity from brief out-of-body views of operating rooms or accident scenes, along with awareness of the nearly always experienced peace, added knowledge and heightened sensing abilities, to lengthy, detailed experiences requiring hours to recount just their general aspects. Those in the latter category contain information most suggestive of the deep meanings and implications of NDEs, although many offering evidence for their reality come from experiences throughout this range. Noteworthy also is the fact that these aspects are not peculiar to just NDEs. Occasionally, they are available to those who practice disciplines that evoke similar conscious experiences such as kundalini yoga, meditation, and even (surprisingly!) baptism that involves long periods of immersion, which produce the initial stages of drowning. A synthesis of common aspects of detailed NDEs could produce a catalog of events that might read like this (and you probably want to skim this rather quickly): Usually, but not always following a traumatic stimulus, a person having an NDE begins to feel a sense of peace and well being which remains or increases in intensity during the experience. Soon after feeling this peace, the person sees his or her body (remarkably even if the person is blind when in the physical body) yet not necessarily immediately knowing that the body is his or hers. With more acute sensing capability, the person hears, sees and senses the physical environment including peoples actions, conversations, and often even thoughts. The person may be confused, or may realize a detachment and that its connected with a physical dying process; yet whichever is the case, the person is ultimately aware that whats being observed is very real and not a dream or hallucination. At some point, the person may perceive a dual awareness in that another reality may be seen, either along with the physical reality or replacing it entirely, and that willingly or unwillingly, there is something drawing him or her into it. This other reality will usually have the character of a tunnel or a void, and usually will seem like a peaceful environment, although at times, the person will encounter beings at some distance who will seem fearsome, or as in the case of some negative near death experiences, beings who will be physically and violently confrontive. In this latter category, experiencers have related these events as being hellish, 19

absolutely real and sometimes excruciatingly painful, ending only when desperately, or even prayerfully, requesting help. Following entrance into the other reality, at some point the person senses or sees a presence, which communicates telepathically. This presence is often described as a light, or a being of light. A clear and explicit telepathic dialog takes place leaving the person with complete understanding. The person is often asked questions about his or her life, and a review of that life is often shown in detail, not only from that persons perspective but also from the perspectives of those with whom the person interacted. From this interaction, the person often understands the sources of problems in his or her life, allowing a new sense of self-forgiveness and acceptance. Especially during this period of communication, it becomes clear to the person that in this other reality, time and space have no meaning, as inexplicable to us as this may seem. The person may interact with other presences or beings, some of whom may be deceased loved ones. The persons interaction with at least some of these beings often includes ecstatic feelings of being totally loved, accepted and understood. The person is told that its not yet time for permanent passage into the other reality, or is sometimes given a choice to either stay or return to the physical life. Often, thinking of ones loved ones, the person makes the decision to return. Upon making this decision, or sometimes simply unexpectedly (like with Marty who began to think about her husband and how she wouldnt grow old with him if she didnt return), the person is abruptly returned to the body. After re-entering the body, the person immediately loses all awareness of the other reality. Bodily sensations associated with that body return, including pain if the body has suffered trauma. The person finds it difficult to convey his experience to others, and often finds that the poor description offered is not believed and even taken as evidence of mental instability. NDEs which include the major and more detailed characteristics of this description are often referred to as core experiences. One researcher defines these characteristics, in more basic terms, as peace, body separation, entering the darkness, seeing the light, and entering the light. xi To gauge the implications of the near death experience, which will be done later, its best for our purposes to concentrate on those which contain these attributes. Ill begin the next section by using the introductory phrase, Sorry, but the NDE is Real! The apology is aimed at the first of two groups of skeptics which has attempted to explain the NDE as strictly a physiological event, and therefore akin to a dream or hallucination created by one or more of several bodily or brain functions. The other is the group which acknowledges that NDEs are real, but concludes that they are probably evil and intended to misguide believers among various religions. Although the occurrence of near death experiences in earlier centuries is a matter of historical record, its difficult to determine their specific characteristics from reports made before the middle of the twentieth century. Rather than being scientifically documented, these reports appear as definite or probable otherworld journey stories in Oriental, Mesopotamian and Greek mythology, in the works of Homer, Plato and Virgil, in religious writings such as the Christian Bible (in 2nd Corinthians 12, 1-4) in Jewish literature, in Dantes The Divine Comedy, in Shamanism, and in Gnosticism. Before the scientific investigation of such experiences, it was clear that something interesting was happening, but their reality and nature were more uncertain than they are today. 20

In recent decades, resuscitation techniques have improved and the percentage of people in the United States that has had a near death experience had risen to about five percent by 1982. Thats not an insignificant percentage, and it translated at that time to over eight million people, very likely including people youve known other than Marty. Dr. Raymond Moodys book Life After Life began to educate the public about this phenomenon, and the debate about the reality of the NDE, which had been known to exist from the writings of Dr. Elizabeth Kubler Ross, Dr. George Ritchie and others, began in earnest. Since then, a great deal of material has been accumulated and studied. Two levels of research can be examined, one built on the rigors of the scientific method, and the other which examines specific facts from these experiences and considers the possible explanations for them. Both of these strongly support the theory that near death experiences are objectively real and not the sole products of psychology or physiology. Ironically, the research that involves the more rigorous and scientific treatment, although quite strong in its implications, is not as irrefutable as the more mundane and simplistic evidence. Lets consider this one first. In this latter category, there is a plethora of documented cases in which the experiencer, after the NDE had ended, told others about observations made while supposedly separated from the physical body (as Marty did). These observations included physical environments that were not visible from the locations of the experiencers bodies, prohibiting the normal senses from being useful, and often took place while the person was, from all appearances, unconscious, or clinically dead at the time. Some of the best of many validated experiences come from the documented cases of Dr. Michael Sabom, a formerly skeptical cardiologist who interviewed a number of his own resuscitated patients for the purpose of finding evidence that they had not experienced an NDE. He was greatly surprised to quickly learn that two of his patients recalled experiences similar to those described by Moody. This persuaded him to study the phenomenon for five years in two Florida hospitals. In an attempt to perform a clean study, he and a colleague limited their investigation to subjects found through medical records alone, eliminating in the process subjects who were anesthetized or possibly emotionally or mentally disturbed. Of the seventy-eight subjects who were victims of cardiac arrest, coma or accident, thirty-four reported mystical or autoscopic (or out-of-body) experiences. (Autoscopy means self-seeing). Of additional interest is the fact that these reports were made during normal medical questioning during which the subjects were simply asked whether they could recall any experiences while unconscious. xii In another study, recounted by Moody in the source I used here, Sabom concentrated on thirty-two patients who claimed to have watched their resuscitations from an out-of-body perspective. He carefully compared their reports with twenty-five medically smart resuscitated patients and found that 92% of those in this latter category had made major mistakes in describing their resuscitations while none of the patients reporting near death experiences made mistakes in describing theirs. xiii The statistical significance of this result should escape no one. Numerous other examples appear in the writings of several NDE researchers. Moody speaks of a seventy-year-old Long Island woman who was resuscitated after a heart attack. Although she had been blind since her teens, the woman was 21

able to describe the instruments that had been used on her, even though they hadnt existed when she was sighted. She was even able to describe the colors of her surroundings down to the blue suit worn by the doctor who had attended her. xiv Kimberly Clark-Sharp, a Seattle nurse and NDEer met a woman who had suffered a cardiac arrest while in her hospital. The woman had had an autoscopic experience during which she had floated to a third floor outside ledge and noted there a tennis shoe with specific wear damage. Kimberly was asked to locate the shoe to validate the patients experience, and the shoe was found exactly as had been described. xv At the fifth annual North American Conference of IANDS, the International Association For Near Death Studies, held at West Hartford, CT in 1995, University of Connecticut psychology professor and one-time IANDS president Kenneth Ring, related the nearly complete results of an inquiry into the nature of NDEs among the blind. This single study offers some of the most compelling evidence for the reality of NDEs that has ever been conducted. It was begun in February 1994 with the assistance of a Lesley College graduate student named Sharon Cooper and involved contact with twelve affiliates of the American Association For The Blind, as well as various national, regional, state and local organizations. After requesting responses from blind persons who may have had, or may have believed that theyd had, an NDE, or even an out-of-body experience, forty-three blind people responded, thirty-one of whom met the criteria for the study. One member of the blind person group was found through Kimberly Clark-Sharp and was included in the sample. The study was centered upon three questions. 1) Do blind people have NDEs, and if they do, are they the same as for sighted people? 2) Can blind people see during these experiences? 3) If they do see, can the NDEs be corroborated on the basis of independent evidence? Of the original sample, fourteen had been blind from birth, twelve had lost sight before age five, and five had limited perception and were legally blind. The remaining eleven had had one or more out-of-body experiences, with the usual case being multiple OOB experiences. Some were blinded by the event that caused their NDEs. Of most importance was the fact that twenty of the blind people had had an NDE, and Vicki, the blind person furnished by Kimberly, was one of these. Vickis NDE was perhaps the most interesting since she had begun outside-utero life in 1950 as a 1 lb. 14 oz. 22-week-term infant who had suffered total blindness in her air lock incubator. Its useful to repeat some of the components of this experience as they were related by Dr. Ring. Vicki had had two NDEs, the first due to illness and the second due to a car crash. The NDEs were the only times in her life that shed been able to relate to vision. During her post-crash surgery, she was suddenly aware of being near the ceiling and seeing a body, at first being unsure that it was hers. She recognized the waist-length hair and her distinctive wedding ring. She heard a male doctor say that if she returned to consciousness she would likely be in a vegetative state. She tried to scream at them with every ounce of strength saying Im right here! Im fine! Cant you hear me? She had a sense of upward motion, floated through the ceiling and finally to the roof, recounting that objects were like nothing, and that Its like the roof just melted. She was aware of city lights, other buildings, and the street below. She indicated that seeing was overwhelming and even disorienting to her, and had a degree of unpleasantness. She was aware of 22

different shades of brightness and afterwards wondered if that was what people experienced as color. Ring commented that the statements about her quality of seeing lend a sort of plausible authenticity in that someone not accustomed to sight would be confused by the initial rush of new information, yet would be able to discriminate objects or persons through familiarity with tactile stimulation or verbal construction. Other accounts within the study offered similar evidence for the capability of sight among the blind. Without reproduction of their details, the results of the inquiry that were available were generally as follows: 1) Do blind people have NDEs? Yes - the reports do show that they are virtually identical to those reported by sighted people. 2) Do the blind see during this experience? Overwhelmingly, they can see. Fifteen of the twenty NDEers said that they unequivocally could see during some aspect of their experiences, and four were not sure and would respond by saying something like Well, Ive never seen, so I dont know what its like to see, but I seem to know these things. One person of the twenty denied being able to see. Also of interest is the fact that of the eleven people whod had spontaneous OOBs, nine had claimed that theyd been able to see during these experiences, one was not sure, and one had reported being unable to see at that time. Ten of the fourteen who had been blind from birth or near birth reported being able to see during these experiences, seeing things from both this world and the other world. 3) Corroboration was difficult and only questionably possible in a few cases. Only one case offered strong confirmation. Ring concluded his lecture with a comment and four questions. The comment was to the effect that at least one team of researchers is attempting to replicate these findings (in Italy) and that confirmation will provide further, and very provocative and powerful evidence to support the authenticity of the NDE, by which he meant that wed have more data that would make it difficult for people of skeptical persuasion simply to write off these experiences as hallucinations or some sort of complex fantasy. He added that he thought that this shows that not only the blind, but even those who have no history or concept of vision can, and do have classic NDEs of the form that Raymond Moody reported in 1975, and that at least in some cases, they reported these experiences even before Moodys book was published. The four questions, and their generalized answers were as follows: 1) Can we accept these self reports at face value? Ring commented that since the overwhelming majority of respondents gave similar reports, and that these dovetail so well with the accounts that many sighted persons have given of their NDEs and OOBs over many years, the fact that theres such concordance is very strong evidence for the veracity of the narratives, despite the seeming paradoxical implications that under some conditions, the blind can apparently see. He added that theres no reason to doubt that these reports are sincere and truthful. 2.) ...In what sense can it be said that the blind see during these experiences, since obviously, their vision isnt mediated physically? Or, Is it seeing? Ring commented that this requires close attention, and cautions, in that the blind use verbs more generously, broadly, and with greater latitude than sighted people. He stated that these are language-mediated events, and that particularly for those blind from birth, its not as certain that their descriptions are a mere analog of physical sight, and that some of what they refer to is instead a knowing, or awareness.

23

Throwing aside a bit of caution, I tend to think that from the descriptions of many NDEers, both blind and sighted, details and perspective suggest that sight during NDEs is more like physical perception, or normal seeing, than a knowledge about details, since descriptions include such things as instrument readings and positions of equipment and people that seem to usually involve a perspective and location, (I say usually because perception seems to sometimes involve several locations at once); similarly, hearing seems to be more like physical hearing than knowing what is said since conversations seem to be explicit to the words spoken, and since thoughts of people, also perceived, are understood and distinguishable from spoken words. 3) Is it possible that any conventional theory can explain our findings? Ring admitted that its tempting to resort to some kind of esoteric or paranormal perspective to understand them, but that we need to look at alternative explanations, including even the long-studied skin-based sensitivity, although this possible awareness cannot possibly explain all of the findings. It is a challenging phenomenon that is presently left to science to explain. 4) If these findings are valid, then what do they imply about life after death? Ring stated that at death, not only the senses, but the limitations of the senses are completely transcended, a statement supported by the opinions of blind people that they will see after death. In addition, people seem to become perfected, with conditions such as handicaps and added weight removed when there. There is a sense in these data that death restores us to our perfected selves, inviting us to think in fresh ways of the apparently unlimited potentials of human consciousness and understanding once we are finally free of the human body. As Ive indicated, it seems difficult to top the findings of this study. There are similar accounts with which Im personally familiar, not the least of which is that of Marty who, after she was shot, witnessed many minutes of detailed activities involving actions and conversations, in several parts of her house, of police, life squad members, a woman friend, and her then husband, many of which she was able to verify after her experience. Another is the experience of an acquaintance who teaches employees at GE Aircraft Engines in Cincinnati who suffered severe injuries during an explosion while in Viet Nam. While undergoing and observing from the ceiling his post-injury operation, on a hospital ship he had never seen, he observed and then followed an orderly carrying his belongings, including his gun, out of that room, down a few corridors, and into a storeroom, to which he was able to lead others after his ordeal. Many more cases could be cited to add to this list, but little would be gained if these are understood to be typical. So, what can be derived from these second category NDEs? We have to be careful to not draw conclusions that go beyond what the facts indicate, despite the strong suggestions inherent in them regarding life after death and the seeming universality of the experiences. At the least, however, we can draw two very specific and definite conclusions. Firstly, after reviewing the large number of cases which verify that NDEers observations were of real events, it is possible to say with certainty that these people were either (a) out of their bodies and observing objective phenomena with operational senses of at least sight and hearing, or (b) they were psychically aware of objective phenomena as if they were in the observation positions they claim to have occupied, whatever the means by which information was planted within the consciousness and became part of awareness. The first of these suggests that consciousness and even sensate awareness existed separately from their physical bodies, and the second suggests that some kind of psychic capability reliably 24

conveys detailed observational information during such an event. Either one of these speaks volumes about the incompleteness of normal physics in explaining our reality. Secondly, after interviewing many NDEers and witnessing their collective sincerity, its not difficult to think it likely that since their observations are so accurate, perhaps also is their testimony that, like these verifiable portions of their NDEs, the remainder of their experiences are also not dreams or hallucinations, a concept strongly supported by the very consistency of these other more mystical aspects of their experiences. A simple example of this is the fact that NDEers who experience spiritual events tend to adopt very similar philosophies after their experiences, no matter whether they entered their NDE incidents as atheists or highly religious people of any faith. These experiencers say that they do believe in God and have an appreciation for the spiritual, but in a way that is different from the more narrowly defined spiritual practices and doctrines that are characteristic of most religions. Instead, they say that important spiritual truths are about treating other human beings with love and respect, and are not at all about doctrine and denominations. To take this further, several important aspects of NDEs seem to be not influenced by situations present in the experiencers life. Documented cases of NDEs cover circumstances of combat, attempted rape and murder, electrocution, neardrownings, hangings, suicide attempts, etc. as well as a broad range of medical conditions. As both Ring and Sabom report, the lack of influence on these important aspects by circumstances in peoples lives remains valid for people of various occupations, social backgrounds, personalities, education levels, incomes, prior beliefs, prior knowledge concerning NDEs, or regions of residence, and note that studies have been made on NDEs occurring in South America, India, England, Continental Europe and Japan. Sex and race also show no relationship to these aspects of a persons NDE. Most surprising is the fact, already mentioned, that this holds true for religious orientation as well.xvi Again, the significance of these facts should be clear. If NDEs were the result of dreams and/or hallucinations, the chance that the entire group of reported results would agree on these items of spiritual importance would be vanishingly small. So, based on this second category of research, a strong case is made for the validity of the near death experience. This evidence, along with the following indications of what the NDE is not makes these experiences compelling in the extreme. Now, in the first, or other category of research, NDEs have been studied to determine if their characteristics can be explained by one or more physiological or psychological phenomena. A certain amount of overlap exists among these phenomena, and some of them may actually be operative during NDEs. The question of significance is whether or not they individually or in concert can account for all of the validated aspects of the NDE. If they can, the importance of the NDE is greatly reduced. If they cant, then either the present understandings of psychology, physiology and neurology are lacking, or the spiritual aspects of NDEs are real, and their information has at least some validity. Each of the theories has been addressed in an attempt to correlate the symptoms of each condition with characteristics peculiar to the near death experience. The proposed theories include the memory of birth; the temporal lobe seizure, hypoxia/ischemia, stress, and neurochemical imbalances; hypercarbia; hallucinogens; fear; mental or emotional conditions; autoscopic hallucination; subconscious fabrication; prior expectations; dreams; semiconscious perception; and coincidence. Lets look at the evidence against each of these explanations. 25

Again, were at a point where theres a lot of detail in which you may not have specific interest. You might want to skim or skip the evidence against the skeptics theories and move onto the commentary about NDEs as important influences in the advancement of our civilization. The first of these, the birth memory, is a proposed explanation of the NDE by astronomer Carl Sagan. He writes, ...every human being ... has already shared ... the sensation of flight; the emergence from darkness into light; an experience in which, at least sometimes, a heroic figure can be dimly perceived, bathed in radiance and glory. There is only one common experience that matches this description. It is called birth. xvii One respondent to this explanation is Carl Becker, philosophy professor at the University of Hawaii, who asserts that pediatric research shows that a baby doesnt remember being born and doesnt have the faculties to retain the experience in its undeveloped brain, and that in addition to that, an infants perception is insufficient to see what is happening at birth. Additionally, infants eye movements are rapid and disorganized, and vision would be blurred by tears in any event. Possibly of most significance is the fact that, during birth, a childs face is pressed against the wall of the birth canal, not directed outward to lighted objects and people. A 1988 project undertaken by an assistant professor in the Department of Neurological Sciences at the University of Chili was devoted to finding correlations between the NDE and several brain dysfunctions. He and another assistant professor developed a hypothesis based on research that was, as with many other medically based research efforts, purposely restricted in scope; in this case to neurobiology. Notwithstanding this restricted domain, it can be useful to investigate these possibilities because they may reveal processes that begin and/or direct aspects of NDEs; so, for understandable purposes, the researchers made a presumption that limited their model; in particular, they adopted the position that all thoughts and perceptions that accompany NDEs are hallucinations or dreams. This study focused on five identified brain processes or conditions including Temporal Lobe Epilepsy (TLE), hypoxia/ischemia, stress, and two neurochemical imbalances, along with current understanding of the language system of the brain, to form hypotheses that would explain near death experiences. They claimed that the NDE is derived from ...the abnormal functioning of ... portions of the central nervous system xviii and from this they developed a starting-point model for explaining the NDE neurophysiologically, ignoring metaphysical and psychodynamic possibilities. They speak of epileptiform activity ... producing a life review and complex visual hallucinations, and that, as one aspect of the limbic activity (usually associated with memory, mood and emotion) becomes involved, there is normal retrieval of stored information. Their conclusion is that The life review in the NDE can be understood as an abnormal retrieval of episodic memory contents by the dysfunctional limbic areas ... and that Out-of-body experiences (OBEs), which appear frequently in TLE ... can be considered as being complex visual hallucinations . They hypothesize that in the kind of imagery of past events that they presume to be operative, ... the individual always see(s) himself or herself from a birds-eye view and does not have the actual somesthetic, visual, and auditory perception as in the actual episode. Their bibliography is long and their coverage of recent discoveries in neurophysiology is impressive; nevertheless, their elaborate theories about how brain problems could cause the main experiential components is limited to the presumption that near death experiencers views of the physical world and encounters with deceased and living acquaintances, many of which provide the 26

corroborative evidence that validates their experiences, are completely invalid. Thus, their study cannot be the whole story although, as mentioned, some of these mechanisms may be operative during the NDE and may offer medical insights about what our brains are doing during these experiences. Their neurophysiology research is apparently respectable and probably employs the latest discoveries in brain functioning, about which I am unqualified to comment. From the standpoint of the breadth of NDE characteristics, these theories which find bases of support from known and demonstrable brain phenomena cannot account for the extraordinary and paranormal (or not yet scientifically explainable) aspects of the NDE. The most sensible-seeming perspective of such a study is that it may indicate possible brain activity during an NDE that could be either causative or associative. However, like the proverbial white crow hypothesis where it only takes one to disprove the thesis that all crows are black, it takes only one incident where at least part of an NDE observation is validated to show that its not all hallucinatory. As has been recently mentioned, there are many such cases where there is clear evidence that what was seen was real and previously outside the experiencers knowledge, as is the case with Saboms study in which the autoscopic descriptions by cardiac patients of their resuscitation procedures were accurate, and where at least some of these patients could not have physically seen what they described from the vantage points of their bodies. Similar thinking has arisen from the work of an early Canadian neurosurgeon, Wilder Penfield who made surprising discoveries about brain functioning while treating his epileptic patients. While mapping the cortex areas of his patients brains, a now common practice that helps the surgeon avoid damaging the brain during surgery, he found that when certain regions of the exposed cortex of conscious patients were stimulated with a lightly charged electrode, the patient would sometimes report vividly experiencing an incident from an earlier time. The detail of the stimulated memory was so complete that the patient experienced the sounds and other stimuli as if they were happening at that time. This occurrence has led a number of neurologists to speculate that this phenomenon is responsible for feelings of reality that an NDEer experiences. Of course, this possibility was studied by Sabom who concluded that such a generalization doesnt conform to the facts. For example, his findings indicated that the senses of taste and smell are not stimulated during an NDE, but are stimulated during an epileptic seizure. Another example is an aspect common to a seizure termed forced thinking. This aspect is characterized by the crowding of random thoughts and ideas into the mind of the patient in an automatic and obtrusive way. Forced thinking is not present in NDEs. So, from these alone, as suggestive as it is, stimulated memory cannot be the operative mechanism of the NDE. In the mid 1960s, while doing assigned reading in neurophysiology, I was intrigued by Penfields work from the standpoint of memory data compression. It seemed questionable that brain physiology exclusively, with its billions of cells and its interconnecting arrays of neurons, dendrites, and synapses, could lay down digital or analog memory sufficient to enable recollection of large quantities of information, accumulatable in multiple sequential time periods, and do so in a fraction of a second. We may not recall detail from a twenty-year-old incident, but if brain probing can stimulate such a smorgasbord of detail, the logical conclusion is that much of this information is still stored. Because modern computer storage media, including CDs, cannot approach this density, a storage mechanism with such capacity is difficult to imagine. Does the brain grow new synapses as information is collected? Are new brain cells modified 27

or grown in eye-blink time? Can even holographic models compare in capability to the processes of memory? With whatever physiology it is building, it seems capable of implanting details of perceived events and allowing access of those data milliseconds after they occur. Mammals cant grow cells to close a wound in so short a time period. Man is still left with little more than speculation to explain brain processes, especially the brains most complex one, consciousness. This and the dozens of other bodily processes and capabilities (such as the capability of eyesight) should give pause to even the most arrogant atheistic scientists who attempt explanations of their origins by gradual evolutionary variations that provide advantages to progeny. Arrogance tends to deny the possibility of an operational intelligence that cannot be visually identified or proven in the lab. Such intelligence, it seems, fitted into a theory of evolution, leaves too much unexplained to satisfy the theoretician. Even Darwin was aware of the difficulties with his theory. For example, a partly evolved eye would be small advantage to its owner. Theres a large gap between a lightsensitive organ and one with imaging optics. One aspect of Penfields work is even more interesting and is spoken about in a 1992 book by Calvert Roszell titled The Near Death Experience. xix He refers to a 1986 paper by Melvin Morse xx in which Morse found case histories in a textbook by Penfield where electrical stimulation of an area in the temporal lobe, just above the right ear, had elicited reports by patients that they seemed to be leaving their bodies. Whats more, stimulations of nearby surrounding areas led to claims of visions of deceased relatives, friends or of God. Added to that were claims of having experienced a life review and hearing majestic music. These histories seem to support the physiological origin of these aspects of NDEs, but again, the corroborated details of experiencers perceptions require more than what has been recorded in their brains. It is an exciting and provocative clue to associative processes that may provide insight and hard information to our understanding of the NDE. Similar reports of brain-probe-induced autoscopy are being reported by William Southerling, a neurologist in Los Angeles who may successfully compile demonstrable proof of out-of-body perception. Hypoxia, a condition in which the brain is starved for oxygen, is considered by some to be a likely cause of NDEs. Hypoxia is known to be a trigger for seizure activity in the limbic system. Preceding these seizures, there can be triggering of memory events. Whats more, hypoxia can elicit visions. In fact hyperventilation and breath retention can lead to visionary experiences, a state purposely created by early baptism experiences, as mentioned earlier, and even Indian Yoga practices. However, Sabom again produces evidence that at least some NDEs occur when there is no lack of oxygen and no excess of carbon dioxide as these were measured at the time of one patients cardiac arrest and subsequent NDE. Sabom further comments that hypoxia is characterized by reduced cognitive abilities, a state that is opposite to the clarity of remembering and thinking that NDEers demonstrate. As just stated, Saboms measurements of blood oxygen and carbon dioxide in one patient also preclude excess carbon dioxide, or hypercarbia, as being a cause of NDEs. That patient even reported a description of the blood test involved in making this determination. Whats more, hypercarbia often produces bright geometric figures or patterns, forced thinking, and hallucinations characterized by horror. xxi Work has been done to determine whether hallucinogens can produce NDEs. Indeed, it has been shown that drugs can induce genuine mystical experiences. 28

Several researchers have provided evidence that in a controlled setting, drugs can induce religious experiences that are essentially indistinguishable from spontaneous religious experiences. xxii, xxiii However, even if hallucinogens can stimulate an NDE, whats important are the facts that they are not the only possible causes of NDEs, and they do nothing to show that NDEs are simply psychological or physiological occurrences. Another identified cause of NDEs is fear, or response to the threat of death. A case in point involves a son of a friend and coworker who, as a youth, fell from a tree and witnessed his fall as an event that lasted several minutes. During his descent, a lady in white talked to him reassuringly and instructed him to place his head and neck in a particular position to avoid breaking his neck upon impact. The report of his account included a comment by his doctor to the effect that his landing could have broken his neck if his head had not been so positioned. Another more commonly referenced case is that of a Swiss geology professor who fell about seventy feet while mountain climbing in the Alps. His and thirty other cases in which people survived falls were cited in nineteenth-century euthanasia books, which were forerunners of the hospice movement that originally attempted to show that dying need not be painful. xxiv Professor of psychiatry Russell Noyes, Jr., and clinical psychologist Roy Kletti, both of the University of Iowa, consider this a variation on the depersonalization syndrome in which, under such circumstances, people experience vivid, racing thoughts, detachment from the body and surroundings, feelings of unreality, lack of emotion, an expanded sense of time, freedom from pain, calm objectivity, narrowed focus of attention, and sharper vision and/or hearing; that this ... phase is sometimes followed by lifereview elements and then in some cases by a stage of transcendent or mystical experience. xxv Kletti and Noyes acknowledged that these joyous aspects go far beyond the mere numbing of depersonalization. xxvi Mental and emotional conditions can be linked to several aspects of brain functioning that are common to NDEs, and therefore their causes seem to be possible attractive explanations for them. Daniel Carr, a neuropsychologist at Massachusetts General Hospital suggests that the brains morphine-like natural painkillers may be responsible for the NDE. Sabom, however, found that the effects of one representative substance, B-endorphin, explain neither the complete absence of pain and discomfort, nor the sudden return of pain at the conclusion of the near death experience. Stimulations such as the sting of a needle and physical contact are still perceived in patients not experiencing NDEs. And, as just implied, if the chemical inhibitor effect were responsible for these losses of pain, its effects would wear off gradually rather than suddenly. Further, these natural painkillers produce a loss of alertness and clarity of thinking which is the opposite of the states reported consistently by NDEers. Saboms work has helped to dispel several other theories that have been proposed. One theory involves autoscopic hallucination. In this condition, a person perceives his double, often as a haunting phantom image of the head and shoulders. This is far from the pleasant experiences generally reported by NDEers. The images are perceived as being unreal and mimicking of the persons own body gestures. Autoscopic hallucinations occur in cases of schizophrenia, brain trauma, epilepsy, temporal lobe dysfunction, and even alcoholism, making the near death experience seem even more likely to be unique. xxvii A second very simple theory is that NDEs fulfill prior expectations where peoples fantasies are produced to satisfy conscious or subconscious wishes. A third and equally simple theory is that NDEs are simply dreams. Sabom found nothing in subjects imaginations to support the details reported in NDEs, and as for dreams, he found that they 29

differed most notably in that the sense of reality consistent with NDEs is generally not true for dreams. xxviii Semiconscious perception is one of the most commonly offered explanations for the NDE because hearing has been shown to function during unconsciousness, and even nearly to the point of death. It has been speculated that sounds from the environment, including speech, are heard and translated into mental images. Sabom has referred to studies involving hypnotic regression where it has been shown that language heard in altered states of consciousness is not translated into visual images. More importantly, I think, is the fact that NDEers can easily distinguish between overheard speech and that which can be seen visually during their experiences. Coincidence is another explanation offered when NDEers report events that have been verified to have happened. Considering the single study of Sabom where resuscitations were described with essentially complete accuracy by NDEers, when a control group of more medically aware individuals could not achieve anything close to that degree of accuracy, the case for coincidence becomes absurd. At the 1990 international conference of the International Association For Near Death Studies (IANDS) in Washington, D.C., Dr. Bruce Greyson, a psychiatrist and past president of the organization, addressed the assemblage. ...What weve learned in the past fifteen years, with all these tools, has been very little about what causes people to have NDEs. Weve seen a lot of theories proposed, for example that NDEs are a type of toxic psychosis; that theyre related to insufficient oxygen to the brain; that they reflect impaired brain physiology; that they are drug-induced psychoses; that they are dissociative hallucinations; that they reflect mental illness; that theyre a fantasy or defense mechanism; or projection of wishful thinking; that they result from denial of the threat of annihilation; that theyre a symptom of temporal lobe dysfunction; and that theyre an artifact of endorphin release. None of these fine physiological theories account for all the common features of an NDE, and many of them, in fact, have been flatly contradicted by the data that we now have. This collection of proposed explanations is the basic set of theories to which skeptics cling. What can be said about them is simply this: all of them fail to account for the accurate and compelling information that NDEers can verify. One single example of many is Martys when she was accidentally shot in the chest seventeen years before I met her. This NDE is the experience that is closest to me, and interviews with her and her family have verified the detailed events she clearly saw while her body was convulsing and separated by walls from events she later accurately described. Id like to now look at some results of past scientific NDE research, much of which has been undeniable, despite the fact that the NDE is a difficult phenomenon to study in the laboratory. The reason for this difficulty is nearly obvious: the NDE cannot be observed objectively. Only the reports of near death experiences and the effects they seem to have had on the experiencer, can be observed. Troubling to scientists is the fact that these reports come exclusively from the memories of NDEers. That which they remember may not exactly match what they experienced, and what they relate may be changed or be limited by what they remember. Nevertheless, a great deal of information has been derived from these reports and from the behaviors of experiencers. A comprehensive explanatory listing of these items appears in a Scientific Commentary by Greyson, appearing at the end of a book titled Full Circle by Barbara Harris xxix which records much of the history of 30

NDE research. Some of the findings of his and others, only some of which have been mentioned earlier, include the following facts, reproduced as they appear in her book. NDEs can be rated by how many specific aspects were experienced in the four categories of (1) a Cognitive Component which includes time distortion, thought acceleration, life review, and sudden understanding; (2) an Affective Component, including feelings of peace, joy, and cosmic unity, and an experience of a brilliant light; (3) a Paranormal Component, including enhanced vision or hearing, apparent ESP, precognitive vision, and an out-of-body experience; and (4) a Transcendental Component, including encounters with an apparently unearthly realm, a mystical being, and visible spirits and a barrier or point of no return that, had the NDEer crossed it, would have precluded his or her return to life. Children have essentially the same kind of near death experience that adults report. Whats more, characteristics of the NDE such as the frequency with which people report NDEs and the type of experience that they report are found to be independent of age, sex, race, religious and educational background, previous paranormal or mystical experiences, prior expectations of death, prior knowledge about NDEs, type of approach to or brush with death, the level of consciousness prior to the NDE, blood oxygen level, blood carbon dioxide level, endorphin level, and mental health. Its interesting to note, however, that people who expected to die had fewer Cognitive experiences; drugs reduce ones chances of having an NDE; and thinking oneself to be near death may be as much of a stimulus to having an NDE as actually being near death. Despite the fact that near death experiences seem similar to hallucinations or dissociative states, its aftereffects are uniquely profound, pervasive and permanent, totally unlike the aftereffects of any phenomenologically comparable experience. Although suicide was presumed by some to become more attractive to people hearing about NDEs, the opposite has been demonstrated many times. And, as Ring found, NDEs increase spirituality, concern for others, and appreciation of life. NDEs decrease the fear of death, materialism and competitiveness. A decade ago, very little evidence existed to support the theory of star formation. With the aid of the Hubble telescope, we have seen the evidence of stars forming from gaseous clouds in the Eagle nebula. Science progressed from having no visible evidence to having clear and strong evidence, publicly reported in November 1995. Similarly, decades ago, mankind had very little of the enormous body of evidence validating NDEs. Today, one could take NDE testimonies into a courtroom and show stronger documentation than that used to win death penalties. It should by now be clear that NDEs are real. Of greater importance becomes the question of what is to be done with knowledge of them. Bruce Greyson, continuing his address mentioned above, added the following. But I want to focus in this hour, not on the causes, or the, quote, reality, of the NDE, but on the more interesting question, and the more readily answered question, So what?. This is the aspect of the NDE in which weve made our great progress over the past decade and a half. Many researchers, some of whom youre hearing speak at this conference, have established, in study after study, the sweeping transformations in attitudes, beliefs, and values that often follow NDEs; such things as decreased materialism, and competitiveness, increased altruism and spirituality, decreased fear of death, and with that, decreased fear of life, and for some NDEers, consequent problems, reconciling their new concepts of themselves with their old lives. Even after youve been through a transcendental experience, been touched by unconditional love, experienced unlimited knowledge, you still have to deal with the physical world and its mundane problems. He spoke of the problems this may cause for experiencers such as 31

necessary changes in lifestyles, careers, and relationships; that family and friends dont necessarily understand, or want the NDEer to change, and as a result, reject or ridicule the NDEer. After experiencing transcendental knowledge and unconditional love, a persons values and priorities can change dramatically. For you, Karen, what would be most important to you after such an event? By now, weve looked at the error of following a too-limited source of information about the greater questions that impact humanity. Weve covered difficult aspects of the Bible, related problems of presumptuousness to fundamentalists of all faiths, shown evidence for the reality of the near death experience, listed theories that have been used by the skeptics in their attempts to deny the strong evidence for this reality, and commented on aspects of NDEs that cannot be explained by any such imaginable theories. I now want to comment on the reasons that NDE information can be a positive influence on civilization and world peace, and how pursuit of such a goal will speed the betterment of the culture of man. If half of the phenomena associated with NDEs are real, and mankind doesnt attempt to utilize the findings for advancement of civilization, it will likely be delaying recognition of the Rosetta stone of human life. Were all making a kind of trip, with some of us thinking we have a sufficient road map for the journey. When a seemingly more universal road map is found, some data of which is strongly supported by scientific investigation, we should feel bound to investigate further and test its universality. How better can we counter two of civilizations most divisive influences - cultural and religious dissension? At some point in the future, a majority may begin to see the NDE as a phenomenon offering opportunity. NDEs may more likely be the cutting edge of societal evolution. They are what may best reach those who have nothing to do, nothing to hope for, and nothing to lose. The world is perpetually hurting. Only knowledge and the quelling of ignorance can significantly ease the pain. Pursuing that end is one of the major responsibilities of human beings. So, this material is really dead serious (no pun intended). The strong belief is that much can be done with this material, although much effort will be required to accomplish it. As global conditions change (for the worse, as many NDEers predict), more reason may be seen to resort to a spiritually transforming catalyst for their mitigation. When more people feel the heat, perhaps theyll see the light. Consider what information about NDEs could do to criminals. Criminals tend frequently to have a similarity of beliefs that support their crimes, and a similarity of justifications for committing their crimes, including the feelings or facts that: their own and their victims lives are of little importance; no one cares about them; they have little reason to respect themselves; they have little of importance to do or think about; death probably ends conscious existence; and life has cheated them and unfairly granted advantage to others.

These negative attitudes and characteristics of criminals are sometimes countered by simple tenets that appear, from NDE information, to be nearly unquestionable. These include the following six points. 32

1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)

Every person is of great importance in the grand scheme. Every person has others, on some level, who care about him or her. Each persons essence is not only respectable, but also worthy of reverence. Each persons life and how he or she lives it is of great importance. Consciousness and purpose continue after death. Our life situations have specific purposes and opportunities.

Because of the concentration on spiritual elements, theres a similarity in this proposal to various religious programs that involve acceptance of a specific religion. One example of such a program is the remarkable work of Charles Colson that is based on Christianity. In an NDE-based program, rather than promoting beliefs based on faith, only information which comes from medical and scientific research is included. Related to this is the main crux of such an idea: Ultimately, this more scientific approach seems more likely to be accepted as factual and authoritative by a greater number of people. It strengthens the reasons for a criminal to behave in a more socially constructive manner. Lets look more deeply at these tenets of NDEs. 1) Every person is of great importance in the grand scheme. Every person is purposefully here and has real importance, both to self and the plan that is glimpsed in NDEs. People with low self esteem profit from this knowledge as something to work from in building their confidence. 2) Every person has others, on some level, who care about him or her. These include guides and very likely loving deceased relatives, whose contacts are termed after death communications. ADCs have been found to be about six times more common than NDEs. The apparent communication from the writers deceased brother, already mentioned, is one such example. See a book by Bill Guggenheim and his ex-wife Judy Guggenheim, titled Hello From Heaven! vi which reports on over three hundred such cases drawn from interviews conducted with more than two thousand ADC experiencers. Fifteen of these were reportedly supported by evidence to show unmistakable interventions. Martys mother also had verified ADC experiences. 3) Each persons essence is not only respectable, but also worthy of reverence. Our spiritual essence (our soul, perhaps) is the surviving essential part of us that transcends this life; the part that remains conscious after we leave our bodies and looks upon them with detachment. No one is unworthy of respect on this level. 4) Each persons life and how he or she lives it is of great importance. Without knowledge that this is true, many people, especially those without present caring family members, often feel that there is nothing of importance in their lives to do or think about. With a kind of twisted logic, following from this is the feeling that the consequences of ones actions are equally unimportant. The opposite seems to be true, of course, and NDEers who have life reviews learn this most poignantly. 5) Consciousness and purpose continue after death. Those who think in terms of reward and punishment find difficulty relating to concepts of earthly-schoolrooms and after-death education and work, yet these are commonly indicated. 6) Our life situations have specific purposes and opportunities. NDEers whove experienced life reviews return with an understanding of the purposes and backgrounds of the incidents in their lives. Rather than these incidents being random or unfair, theyre characteristically seen as important to those purposes. 33

A seventh and general facet of imparted knowledge leaves an anti-crime impression on the NDEer; namely that Negatively impacting anothers life is wrong. The negative impact of a persons actions will evidently be experienced by the perpetrator, commensurately painfully (!) to educate him to the consequences of his actions, during or following the death process. The evidence for these principles, along with the noticeable life transformations caused by NDEs, support the foundation of a program for combating crime. Apparently, a broad-scale program using scientifically supported spiritual concepts has not been attempted. On a small scale, as with the detention home and with a local drug rehabilitation program, NDE information has been presented, but its results have not been assessed and published. (Such a program would be geared only toward the positive effects it can offer society. In contrast to an entrepreneurial venture that would be patented and protected for private gain, its details are unrestricted, with encouragement for involvement by others who would take it further, especially those more experienced and capable in the field of criminology. Success of the idea and carrying it to a logical pinnacle of usefulness would be the sole motivations.) To attempt to couch NDEs in a proper perspective, consider this hopefully relevant comment about human rationality. Throughout history, mankind has endeavored to become more civilized and to have ever-greater knowledge and understanding. Astronomy revealed our position and size within the universe, but it, and all other sciences, left unanswered the ultimate questions of life. Only religion and philosophy offered explanations, and their disagreements have been notable; mankind has been plagued with mythconceptions. But now, scientific exploration has accumulated evidence for some of these answers; evidence that at least points beyond the hill, if not yet to the distant horizon. Is it not rational to examine it with the fitting excitement of a scientist? Mankind goes to great lengths to solve lifes riddles. We support research into theoretical physics to investigate matter. We erect huge directional antennas to listen for intelligent communication from other sources within our galaxy. We send pioneers into space to learn about our world, and praise their efforts, as when President Clinton bestowed honor on the victims of Challenger 7 and ...all those that teach us our place in the cosmos., acts that NDEers and NDE researchers also do for us. We practically prove the Big Bang theory of the universes creation without seriously considering the source of the power that could generate such mass and energy from a pinpoint. The nature of our reality is a touchy issue. Our cultures and traditions are persistent; our investments great. To consider other possibilities is disquieting for some; anathema for others. The enlightened and proudly not superstitious risk professional integrity with academic peers if they reveal interest in controversial topics like a spirit realm. But progress is made by opening new frontiers. NDEs are one example, with attendant proof of some facets, and merely considerable evidence for others. Congenitally blind people demonstrably see during their NDEs. Events physically invisible and inaudible are witnessed and corroborated. Others thoughts are sensed and validated. Events like these that are studied are shown to have validation at statistically significant rates. What more do rational beings need to 34

pay attention to the likelihood that some answers to these questions of life are staring us in the face? Heres another thing to think about relative to the importance of these studies. Presently, most of humanity depends on inexpensive energy, the availability of supermarket supplies, running water, transportation and the chemicals that fuel it, fire and police protection, and not the least, an economy that can support a relatively low unemployment rate. We rely on the continuation of these necessities. In the 1970s, a perceived loss of a small percentage of our oil caused a rise in fuel costs and the temporary partial control of fuel sales. Shortly thereafter, I became aware of a videotape xxxiii made by Prof. Albert A. Bartlett of the Department of Physics at the University of Colorado, complete with Ross Perotstyle charts and graphs, indicating that our civilization was beginning to run out of available oil resources. Predictions by others were based on oil reserves and rates of usage that dated from the 1940s and 1950s. Bartlett claimed that the exponential rise in oil consumption, approximately doubling each of four decades, was not being noted by anyone speaking publicly about energy, and that actual reserves would be depleted before the end of the century if the usage rate werent slowed. He warned that early steps were needed to prepare for this eventuality so that our economy would not stop due to lack of power. The rate did slow, largely due to OPECs increase in oil prices, and his latest videotape, made in 1993, revised this figure to sometime between 2005 and 2010. Of course, it isnt certain that his prediction is accurate, but his plotted points are from accepted and published data. Even if oil companies reveal only a portion of their known holdings, for business reasons, limitations will still be applied sooner than the public expects. It was eminently clear from his quoted experts that the majority of the others predictions of oil depletion were grossly inconsistent, and on several occasions, absurd. In stark agreement with his findings is a long article that appeared in the March 1998 issue of Scientific American titled Special Report: THE END OF CHEAP OIL Its Coming Fast, But New Technologies Might Prevent an Energy Crisis. The byline at the beginning of the article is, Global production of conventional oil will begin to decline sooner than most people think, probably within 10 years. This nineteen-page special feature (which is enclosed because I want you to show it to Bill) states that What our society does face, and soon, is the end of the abundant and cheap oil on which all industrial nations depend. and that world production will have to fall by about 2010 (page 83), and the ...world could thus see radical increases in oil prices. The point of this relates to a sobering phrase. We have a thin veneer of civilization holding together our society. If large disruptions occur, (and the effect on the world economy can hardly be slight), and needs of many more people are not met, a pertinent question will be: How many more people will attempt to forcibly take what they want from those who (still) have it? Food, shelter, and fuel are our major necessities, and two of those are outside the control of most. In such an eventuality, the resulting deprivation and suffering may require more commitment and patience than was ever required during World War II, greater than our social advancement can produce absent an awakening to a higher ethic. Such an ethic is the essential message of near death experiences, a unifying force that conceivably could help to minimize the chaos of such a catastrophe. How much foresight, patience, resolve, initiative and energy will be available for maintaining the quality of our lives? The answer will always depend on the strength of our motivation, and the belief in its source.

35

How relevant, then, is the NDE to our society? To the degree that something as strong and spiritual as the NDE can be accepted as a working hypothesis, not out of faith, but out of evidence as presented above, it could be extremely relevant. It can help to ensure a great reduction in social evils such as abuse of children, spouses, the elderly, our planet and its resources; social ills like racism, prejudice, slavery, murder, theft, rape - you name it. More people would consider crimes to be unthinkable; unacceptable. The non-pathological, at least, would be inclined to grant freedom and security to others, and disinclined to maintain unfair conditions that stem from misguided culturalism, religion and nationalism. As always, education is the best, and perhaps only, solution. Very realistically, we may soon face a choice to go one-way or the other. (In fact, many NDEers claim to have learned that rough times are pending). The world economy may suffer a loss of confidence that would produce a worldwide depression, and for many, energy will rise to an unreachable premium. Its possible that mass starvation in civilized areas of the world could reach levels currently existing only in the poorest locales. Some would survive by resorting to violence. Others would be inclined to meet the challenges through exhaustive, positive efforts. To avoid the potential violence, most of the survivors will have to be in the second category. The NDE provides the feeling of purpose necessary to overcome such tragedies. Many people pulling in the same direction can be a powerful and inspiring force. Considering the possibilities for future difficulty, the NDE and its messages of hope, caring, spiritual reality, and a real and meaningful plan for mankind, has unparalleled relevance. Examining ourselves in light of new information is a necessary process of growth. The pain involved can be great, and the willingness to do so can be absent. Among friends and family, it can cause disharmony. But facing new information honestly can put an end to the dissension and prejudice that divide families and even whole nations. Society cannot simply adopt an attitude of acceptance for all beliefs and behaviors. Islamic fundamentalist that machine-guns tourists, cults subjecting Tokyo subway passengers to nerve gas, and terrorists bombing innocents in Oklahoma are obvious examples on which most would agree. But widespread consensus on womens rights in Iran, female circumcision in parts of Africa, and pre-arranged marriages is more difficult. Without trusted bases for judgment, these and the more mild injustices and disagreements, matters which similarly divide humanity with their more tolerated and subtle beliefs, may flourish forever without new impetus for change. Throughout history, mankinds beliefs have been challenged by discoveries. When the Earths shape was found; when its position in our solar system and its minor galactic position were determined by astronomy; when its age was established from geology; when ten thousand other findings enlightened the thinkers, and then the masses, mankind advanced. Similarly, NDE information is both advancing our knowledge and raising new questions. This is particularly true in science, where broadly accepted theories have effectively excluded the paranormal, and in religion, where broadly accepted doctrines have formerly excluded alternative thinking. In a more official study, perhaps other nagging questions could also be addressed. We might find answers to ethical questions pertaining to euthanasia, 36

abortion, capital punishment, reincarnation, and even a multitude of other laws, policies, doctrines and dogmas that currently guide peoples lives and leave them divided. So, the question, What does this have to do with me? is a logical one, leaving people to wonder what there is to do with this information. In my opinion, the answer largely depends on a persons lifes activities. For example, philosophers, theologians, and scientists certainly have new and pertinent material to study. And generally, others who have digested this material will always have the appropriateness of their treatment of others to think about. In short, in light of evidence for the schoolroom nature of our planet and for the lessons were apparently here to learn, the general question is simply, Are we living our lives responsibly? We can examine the information and evaluate ourselves. We must collectively give up more of our impediments to having the world work better. For example, if we live in the Middle East, we must recognize the futility of seeing only as enemies the people who are our neighbors, the ancestors of whom had issues with our ancestors. If we live to embrace one race or sex superior to another, we can admit to the absence of support for this in the other realm, and infer that all human beings are deserving of all of which we feel deserving. There should be no need to become agonizingly specific. We can imagine ourselves in the shoes of another and see our impact upon them. Our responsibilities are probably as large as our levels of influence. Whether parents or world leaders, NDE information makes our free-will choices more clear. Given the broad range of potential impacts, we cant afford the arrogance of presuming that NDEs have nothing to offer us. Remember: the smartest people learn from others experiences and can avoid the traumas those cause to themselves; its the more ignorant and hard-headed that must learn the hard way. It seems clear that one of our tasks as human beings is to positively contribute to our planets civilization. The more that were aware of this, the more were responsible. For people with NDE awareness, this task is better defined. In conclusion, Karen, we were brought up with only partially accurate information. Whats more, the information was extremely limited, giving us a kind of tunnel vision that requires education from which to escape. The information, like much that is dispensed in religions all over the world, is incomplete, containing of error, divisive, unfair in its implications, and ultimately dangerous to peoples lives as they try to live in the real world and make decisions about life based on it. In contrast to this, we have a source of information that has enough strong evidence to at least indicate that studying it puts us on a better track to the truth, even though, just like what we were exposed to as children, it is far from having all the answers to our questions. The basic core of this information is highly in agreement with the teachings of Jesus, and its message is far more palatable than the aspects of our early teaching that drove Archbishop John Shelby Spong, Episcopal Archbishop in Newark, to write, ...A literal Bible presents me with far more problems than assets. It offers me a God I cannot respect, much less worship; a deity whose needs and prejudices are at least as large as my own. I meet in the literal understanding of Scripture a God who is simply not viable, and what the mind cannot believe the heart can finally never adore.

37

Is there a truth beyond biblical literalism to which my life can be dedicated? Can I find this truth by probing the words of the Bible? Or, as many secular critics of religion maintain, has time run out on the Judeo-Christian tradition as it did on the gods of Olympus? The answers to these questions are not yet clear, but the issues are drawn powerfully and provocatively drawn. There is no way out except to walk into these questions deeper and deeper until either there is nothing left or a wondrous new meaning begins to dawn. That sums up my feelings about the literal Bible. It suggests there is new information to be found, and I suggest that the first stages of it have been revealed to us, by now, in such large numbers and with such strong evidence that we do a disservice to God and his plan for humanity to not turn our heads in that direction. If we dont, were simply stuck and not using the full measure of intelligence that God apparently gave us, keeping us in a kind of social dark age not unlike the oppressive influence of the middle-age Catholic church. We can choose to break from the invisible bonds, or we can ignorantly lie to ourselves and continue to worship in a veritable stupor. I think the future of our society might depend on our more advanced maturity, and without it, we may compound mans suffering by orders of magnitude. One can hardly listen to national news every day, as I do with NPR and other sources, and not expect that more difficult times will produce tragedy that would be avoidable only by a shift in collective consciousness for the whole world. NDEs seem to offer the only hope for such an advance, and its high time that a new paradigm is sought. Bye for now, Karen. I hope that this letter has a certain and positive effect on your thinking and cause that slight refinement that will free you from some of the unnecessary guilt and anxiety that I think you live with. Im not saying I live without these two attributes, but at least its not heightened or exaggerated by Bible teachings that indicate that were totally worthless worms whose best is garbage in the sight of God. It aint so, Karen, and I hope you realize it now. Love, Ed.

*[N=R*fpneflfifcL, where N = the number of civilizations in the Milky Way whose radio emissions are detectable, R* is the rate of formation of stars suitable for planets, fp is the fraction of those sun-like stars with planets, ne is the number of Earth-like planets per planetary system, fl is the fraction of those planets where life develops, fi is the fraction of life sites where intelligent life would likely develop, fc is the fraction of planets where technology would likely develop, and L is the length of time during which civilizations release signals into space; with this equation, Drake determined that there are likely 10,000 technological civilizations in our galaxy alone.] (Incidentally, regarding astronomical data, the number of planets in our universe is estimated to be about one sextillion, or 1021. This is considered to be about a

38

million times larger than the total number of words or sounds uttered by all human beings since the beginning of time!)

39

REFERENCES
i

Vanity Fair, January 1992, page 98 Bob Kerreys Odyssey, by Peter J. Boyer Ibid. iii The New York Times, April 22, 1984, Section 6, page 24, King Husseins Delicate Balance by Judith Miller, Cairo bureau chief iv Gallup, George, Jr., with William Proctor. Adventures in Immortality: A Look Beyond the Threshold of Death, New York, 1982. v U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, NIJ Research Plan, 19951996, pages 5,10 vi Guggenheim, William 3rd, and Guggenheim, Judith A., Hello From Heaven! A new field of research confirms that life and love are eternal, published privately by The ADC Project, P.O. Box 916070, Longwood, FL 32791-6070, U.S.A., (407) 862-1260; later published by Bantam. vii Crime In America by Ramsey Clark, 1971, Pocket Books, pages ix, 8, 24, 39, 50 viii Ibid, page ____ ix Ibid, page ____ x designfax, May 1995, page 6, pub. by designfax, P.O. Box 21640, St. Paul, MN 551210640 xi Heading Toward Omega by Kenneth Ring, 1985, page 26 xii Recollections of Death: A Medical Investigation New York, 1982 by Michael Sabom, Pages 181-185 xiii The Light Beyond by Raymond Moody Jr., MD, 1988, page 139 xiv Ibid., page 171 xv The Near Death Experience, Problems, Prospects, Perspectives, by Bruce Greyson, M.D. and Charles P. Flynn, Ph.D., 1984, Pages 242-3 xvi Heading Toward Omega by Dr. Kenneth Ring, 1984, Pages 45-8 xvii Brodas Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science, Carl Sagan xviii A Neurobiological Model for Near-Death Experiences, Juan C. Saavedra-Aguilar, M.D., and Juan S. Gmez-Jeria, Lic.Q., Journal of Near-Death Studies, Vol. 7, No. 4, Summer 1989 xix The Near Death Experience, Calvert Roszell, page 23, 1992, Anthroposophic Press xx M. Morse, P. Castillo, D. Venecia, et al. Childhood Near-Death Experiences, American Journal of Diseases of Children 140 (1986): 1110-1113 xxi The Near Death Experience, Calvert Roszell, page 27, 1992, Anthroposophic Press xxii Smith, Huston (1964), Do drugs have religious import? Journal of Philosophy, 41, 520 xxiii Grof, Stanislav (1972). Varieties of transpersonal experience. Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 4, 45-80. xxiv Otherworld Journeys, Carol Zaleski, page 99, 1987, Oxford University Press xxv The Near Death Experience, Calvert Roszell, page 31, 1992, Anthroposophic Press xxvi Otherworld Journeys, Carol Zaleski, page 116, 1987, Oxford University Press xxvii ibid., page 170 xxviii Recollections of Death: A Medical Investigation New York, 1982 by Michael Sabom, Pages 166-68 xxix Full Circle: The Near Death Experience And Beyond, Barbara Harris and Lionel C. Bascom, Pocket Books, 1990, Pages 253-270 xxx Coming Back To Life: The After Effects Of The Near Death Experience, P.M.H. Atwater, Ballantine Books, 1988, Page 118 xxxi ibid., page 130 xxxii Richard Moran, Professor of Sociology and Criminology, Mt. Holeyoke College, South Hadley, MA; later quote on June 6, 1996 during Morning Edition
ii

40

xxxiii

Albert A. Bartlett, Department of Physics Professor, Box 390, Boulder CO 803090390; 1983 and 1994 tapes supplied by University of Colorado at Boulder Television, Boulder CO 80309

41