Is this the 'smoking gun' mankind has sought since it emerged from the primordial slime, or a family on the make? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-went-heaven-met-dead-sister-knew-about.html OK, I know it's the Daily Mail, but there's some weird stuff he could not have known about (unless his parents tutored him).
How about actually address what was presented and not something else? Excuses to avoid what one does not want to acknowledge are still excuses.
I will explain it slowly. 1. People of all faiths have near death experiences 2. These faith contradict each other 3. They cannot all be correct 4. A single case does not prove anything 5. A single case is cited in this thread. Do you have any further questions?
Did the post deal with all these other "faith's" you just referred to? I didn't read that. Are you just putting that crap in there when there is no reference to other religions? I believe so. Thus, the post saying you are just putting in a bunch of crap means exactly that...
This might mean something if near death experiences were exclusive to Christianity and not the manifestation of a dieing brain.
While I am sure it makes for an interesting story and a great book (since they actually did publish a #1 bestseller about this boy), there is still no fact to it. Everyone has the ability to lie or to embellish their stories/experiences, coaching is also a major possibility on behalf of the parents. You never really know. I honestly believe this boy, while in critical care probably did dream up a lot of things about heaven and Jesus, things he already knew about. But I think his parents embellished a lot of it afterwards and yes, they probably coached him on the story of his sister and not knowing his mom had a miscarriage, etc. So long as the ability exists for people to lie and there is no solid evidence either way there will be doubt and skepticism.
So you say, now prove it. Notice the appeal to authority again? Are we just supposed to take your word on it because you are an expert on near death experiences? Go ahead. Now, lets try logic shall we. Lets say I had a chance encounter with Harry Potter (an atheist favorite). I could regale you the tale, but you might not believe me, correct? And if ONLY one other person corroberated this story ... well, its obviously not true? Need more? And atheists always will. Because this is not about evidence. And this case is not alone, and, indeed, the fact that the boy new he had a sister AFTER the incident certainly points to something worth examining does it not? Well, not if you are atheist looking for reasons to reject something it doesn't.
All of those are purely speculative. We have no way of knowing whether the parent coached, and usually, publication, means that a certain standard has been met. If it is published and untrue, wouldn't it be MORE likely that other people present would come out and say as much? that some other reason COULD have happened is as much about faith, and even more so, than the report of what DID happen from the witnesses to the event.
We all come to our own conclusions on the subject. I speculate what I think is most likely true from what I have read here and based on what I know just as you do. We may come to different conclusions but that's only because of a lack of evidence pointing to any real direction. But don't fret, even some other Christians are skeptical of this boy's interpretation of Heaven. The first few 1 star reviews appear to be from Christians who are in fact pretty doubtful about the events this boy recounts in his book. http://www.amazon.com/Heaven-Real-L...?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&filterBy=addOneStar This was probably my most favorite review on it in fact, by someone who takes scripture very seriously. [ame="http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A2PLHFCOTJT2IF/ref=cm_pdp_rev_title_1?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview#R3AR5KHJWTO60M"]Amazon.com: Profile For Reid: Reviews[/ame]
Ok, then we will restrain ourselves to the confines of the article. The boy said it is true, so it must be true. The debate is over I suppose.
Which is what it will probably turn out to be, that or he heard them talking about it in what they thought was secret, or it's statistics, as in for everyone who guesses something right hundreds or even thousands get it totally wrong, by due to selection bias those cases are ignored.
Eyewitnesses are incredibly sensitive to suggestion from questioners, whether intentional or otherwise. For parents to avoid asking leading questions about their child's dead sibling would be near impossible given their emotional involvement and lack of training in conducting such interviews. Preschool children are especially easy to coach. https://web.uvic.ca/~dslind/publications/1995PooleLind.pdf
The problem is that many, many people report having expereinces with God. God is not just a bunch of words in a book, and indeed states as much in the book. He created us, he loves us, he cares for us and he wants what is best for us. Its not a shock, particularly as others pass through the veil that we have reports such as this. However, and in the review, just like I said, the poor reception is not from someone who witnessed or was otherwise associated with it. Its a guy that, IMO, is downplaying an important aspect of God because of ... jealousy? Because he or she does not believe God, a God who sent his Son down for us, would reveal himself to a four year old? The simple aspect of him knowing that he has a sister is the part that gets you. Could be a lie, but the fact that no one associated with this story has come forward to acste doubt on the veracity of the claim makes that extremely doubtful. Why would a mother tell her four year about a missacarried baby? So what other explanation do you have for the apparent miraculous event? Knowledge of the unknown? That someday it will be explained through science? What if we already have the answer: God is real.
You'd be astonished how many things kids at that age can pick up without their parents ever actually telling them. All in all the description this kid gives of heaven is very typical of the image of heaven a Christian kid at that age would have. So no, this story is not 'proof' of heaven. Other stories of people who were clinically dead and were brought back also indicate that death is not an unpleasant experience. These stories of the light at the end of the tunnel etc. - however comforting they are - are also no 'proof' of heaven, but could be explained by chemical reactions of the brain, final bursts of endorphine etc. Mind you, I'm a Christian and I believe there is a heaven and eternal life. But I doubt anybody in this life will ever be able to prove that it exists. It's a matter of faith and that's probably what God intended it to be.
Again, I doubt very seriously that a kid would pick up that he had a sister than was never born and than imagine her at the exact time he was passing back and forth between the veil. Once again, if you are looking for evidence that support your beliefs, you run across stories like the one in the OP, and others. http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2009/05/scientifically-documented-miracles.html There is certainly more than enough instances like these that you would be hesitant to deny that there is a God. After all, each instance of the events comes with a different explanation for its improbable happening. At some point, you should begin to notice that you are really just explaining why things are not rather than why they are. And when yo try to explain why they happen? Suddenly you are left with only a few choices - and one of them is just continued denial. Just remember, it every bit as likely that this kid and his parents are telling the unvarnished truth as it is that they are lying.
dont think so the story does not add up for one a mis carry does not result in death because life does not begin until birth and even then people don't have any memories of life until their a few years old. this may be evidence of the harmones that are released during pre death which give people hallucinations and sometimes psychic powers
Are you suggesting that prior to "a few years old", that the human brain is incapable of forming memories? Can you prove that claim? If that were true, then a child of 1 year of age, would not be able to tell the difference between his/her parents and total strangers. Are you sure you want to stick to that claim?
