With my genealogy chart showing blanks for spouse/partner/children, losing my closest brother two days before Christmas could turn out to be the most significant loss of my life.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1467175,1467175#msg-1467175

My brother's unexpected departure triggered me to check out an online link I happened to see regarding "Life Between Lives". What I discovered has totally shocked and amazed me.

I'm sure many of you have heard about Past Life Regressions via hypnosis. Me too. Potentially worthwhile insights for the person being regressed. Well, turns out that a California PhD counseling psychologist using hypnosis for age regression therapy accidentally discovered years ago that a subject in a very deep (superconscious) trance not only re-experienced a past life, but then unexpectedly transcended beyond her death into the spirit world ... where souls go between lives.

The psychologist's name is Michael Newton. His subject's detailed level of recall of her spirit world experiences was astonishing. He perfected his regression methods and ended up spending 30+ years doing Life Between Lives (LBL) regressions on thousands of people. He discovered that all of their stories correlated to form a startlingly detailed landscape of spirit world experiences of souls before birth and after death on planet Earth.

I watched an online video by Michael Newton and immediately bought his 3 books from amazon. What he has discovered by questioning thousands of people in a superconscious hypnotic state has to be the most startling and significant information I've ever encountered ... information I presumed was simply inaccessible by earthbound humans because of The Veil ... within the exclusive purview of "prophets, seers and revelators."

I'm sure many of you will be pleased to hear that this information has NOTHING to do with religion, and ALL to do with the human condition itself.

Here are a couple of quotes from his books. I'm glad I got all three of his books because these choice quotes don't appear in his first book 'Journey of Souls' (1994).

-- "People come to us from all walks of life, with many belief systems, ranging from atheism to fundamentalist religious persuasion, and yet, once in deep hypnosis, they all recount memories of an afterlife that is strangely uniform in concept and perception." 'Memories of the Afterlife' (2009), p. xiv

-- "In all my years of research, I have never had a single subject who was met [after death] by a major religious figure such as Jesus or Buddha." 'Destiny of Souls' (2000) p. 2 [note added for clarification]

-- "Because it was my first LBL case, it will always be embedded in my memory as the beginning of my fulfilling my purpose in this life: to offer a new, very personal belief system WITHOUT THE NEED FOR INSTITUTIONS OR INTERMEDIARIES." 'Memories of the Afterlife' (2009), p. xvi [caps added for emphasis]

Geeze! How cool is that? An atheist psychologist dude ends up discovering how to access a rich database of detailed, repeatable, consistent, corroborating information that has opened a previously closed window into what goes on before birth and after death! By fully answering the age old questions "Where did I come from? Why am I here? Where am I going?", Dr. Newton has pretty much singlehandedly obsoleted all religious dogma on planet Earth!

In case your interest is piqued, here are video and book links:

Video: Part 1 of 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a2gzzUGJTQ (watch all 5. There are other Michael Newton videos I haven't watched yet.)

1st book: 'Journey of Souls' (1994) (read first)
http://www.amazon.com/Journey-Souls-Studies-Between-Lives/dp/1567184855

2nd book: 'Destiny of Souls' (2000) (read next)
http://www.amazon.com/Destiny-Souls-Studies-Between-Lives/dp/1567184995/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1421110554&sr=1-1&keywords=destiny+of+souls

3rd book: 'Memories of the Afterlife' (2009)
http://www.amazon.com/Memories-Afterlife-Between-Personal-Transformation/dp/0738715271/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1421110675&sr=1-1&keywords=memories+of+the+afterlife+by+michael+newton

=========

Here's a bullet list of just a few topics described in detail based on Dr. Newton's detailed questioning of subjects in a deep, superconscious hypnotic state ... experiencing vivid recollections of personal experiences in the Spirit World (in my own words here ... summarizing what I read):

-- Does each of us belong to an enduring "soul group" of a couple dozen souls who repeatedly incarnate together with a variety of relationships on earth? Spouse, child, parent, best friend, lover, etc? Does each soul have an actual name? What are some of these actual soul names? (hint: not the 'new name' from the temple)

-- After death, how do souls returning to the spirit world describe their reunion with their true family? How do they describe the feeling of truly Coming Home?

-- What does a spirit body look like and feel like? How do you recognize someone from your earth life if they left their body behind? What does it feel like when two disembodied souls existing as light and energy greet and embrace each other?

-- Do souls start out as inexperienced beginners and gradually increase their wisdom and spiritual competence with focused study and learning in the spirit world, to be tested and refined with incarnation on earth in a human body?

-- Is each incarnation on earth carefully planned in advance, including which parents? what kind of body will be conceived?

-- When does the soul enter the baby's body? Can the soul leave and come back? Is it challenging for the soul to integrate its energy with the human body's brain? What is the functional, working relationship between the soul and the human brain function and human survival ego?

-- Why is there so much suffering and mayhem on Planet Earth? Does it serve a worthwhile purpose, or is it just random madness?

-- Is there a healing, nurturing, restoration process for disturbed or shattered souls after death?

-- Where do souls come from in the beginning? (hint: not from Kolob-esque sex orgies) How are souls created? What do baby souls look like?

-- Are there other planets that support life? Do souls who incarnate on earth also spend time on other planets?

-- Do highly advanced souls participate in physical creation? Do lower level souls get to practice creation skills? How does evolution work? Is there a creative soul at work behind the evolution of new life forms?

-- Is there one Supreme Source? Are there many creators with varying levels of skill and ability at work?

In his first two books, Dr. Newton presents the reader with 96 actual case transcripts of his conversations with subjects under hypnosis. You will read what kinds of questions Dr. Newton asks, and how they answer, and how real their recollections feel to the subjects. The third book contains an additional 32 reports and transcripts of other therapists trained by Dr. Newton to perform Life Between Life regressions.

Ladies and gentlemen of the Recovery Board, I cannot overstate the mind blowing magnitude of what I am discovering via Michael Newton's unprecedented tour through the non-physical world we will all return to when our heart beats its last beat and we get to go Home again. The doubters will have to explain how thousands of human subjects who do not know each other can independently provide Dr. Newton with more and more pieces of the puzzle that has vexed humankind since the first knuckledraggers looked into the night sky and wondered, "Geeze! What's all them stars up there all about?"

===========

My conjecture is that most believers in a religion could be expected to dismiss this discovery as more NewAge nonsense. I expect that your "shelf" has to fall on the floor before these thoughts will get past your filters. Certainly the lion's share of NewAge material is suspect, but my bullshit detector has not gone off yet with Dr. Newton's seeming honesty and unpretentiousness about his work. He anticipates and acknowledges inevitable doubters. The following is from his Conclusion to 'Journey of Souls' p. 274:

"All the accounts of life after death in my case files have no scientific foundation to prove the statements of these subjects. To those readers who find the material offered in this book too unprecedented to accept, I would hope for one thing. If you carry away nothing except the idea you may have a permanent identity worth finding, I will have accomplished a great deal.'

And from 'Destiny of Souls', p. 113:

"I am drawn to people who think they are going crazy because of unexplained phenomena in their lives. I know what this feels like personally. Many of my old, traditional colleagues are convinced I have lost my marbles."

A google search on 'Life Between Lives' turns up lots of hits on lots of info and practitioners . . . so this stuff is not news by any stretch ... but news to me. I'm surprised I haven't run into it head on before. I was never drawn to the Past Life Regression stuff, however, my brother's death piqued my interest in the LBL focus to learn more about where his soul might be as-we-speak and what he might be up to now that his human body is ashes in a bottle. Also, maybe I'll get some info on what, if any, relationship he and I have had across lifetimes, etc.

My plan is to undergoe a Life Between Lives session myself to hopefully experience this remarkable phenomenon personally. Trained LBL therapists are listed on the therapist directory website:
http://newtoninstitute.org/locate-a-therapist/

========

Some of you will recall that Michael Newton's books have been mentioned previously on RfM:

http://exmormon.org/phorum/search.php?2,search=%22Michael+Newton%22,author=,page=1,match_type=ALL,match_dates=0,match_forum=2,match_threads=0

None of these previous posts even came close to communicating the jaw-dropping, life changing implications of Michael Newton's discovery and body of research, which I will describe as a "virtual wormhole to the Real Universe beyond our Life on Earth."

Many of you will understandably brush this post off as silly at best, or a manifestation of beyondashadow's mental illness at worst. Whatever your reaction, thank you for reading this. I figured there's a non-zero chance that some of you might be interested in what could be a refreshingly credible, spiritual belief system based on an impressively diverse, empirical observation database that has nothing to do with any church or religion.

I have lots more to study and learn, of course. Maybe something will throw cold water on my excitement, but for now I will forge onward with this new project to learn all about LBL and maybe experience some of it personally.

At least watch the youtube videos with the thought that, if he's not crazy, Michael Newton may have discovered something amazing that could forever alter your perception of earth and your purpose being here. Could even gift you with new insight to hurt less from the bumps and bruises of Life and maybe even clear up your vision enough to drive around some of those chuckholes instead of driving into them (again).

... just sayin' ...

- beyondashasow



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2015 10:25PM by beyondashadow.

I recommend watching "Cosmos" with Neil Degrasse Tyson (sp?). This series will point every human in the direction we should be going or at least looking to for answers.

Yes! "Cosmos" is better than any religion or any single theory. A Must See!

I've still got too questions I haven't thought up yet, to frivol away my time looking at somebody else's answers.

Nothing personal, you understand...

I've got far too much life crammed into this life to give attention to other lives and the spaces between them, with the exception of life stories. Those interest me.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066181/?ref_=nv_sr_1

I'd like to see some peer-reviewed research, still smells like wishful thinking.

I'm glad you found something that works for you beyondashadow.

From a skeptic's point of view, there isn't anything in Michael Newton's work that materialistic psychology can't explain. Not that it proves that he is wrong, only that it is not worth investigating.

It sounds like Michael Newton knows psychology, and he probably knows how to help people get more out of life. That is why his books will work for some people, not because of an external pre-existence or after-life.

Not got a horse in this race but he knows psychology because he has a degree in psychology. His PhD is a doctorate in counselling psychology.

Dead Again (1991)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101669/

Hi BeyondAShadow,

Before you start talking about "soul groups," you really need to ask yourself a fundamental set of questions, including:

What do I mean by a "soul?"

Do "souls" exist?

Fast forwarding a little:

Why don't people such as Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins ever have an NDE and become convinced of post-mortem survival? Why is it almost always poorly educated housewives?

Of course, you find Mike Newton exciting. That's what enables him to sell books, so that he doesn't have to actually work in a faceless corporation for a living. He's selling you exactly the message that you want to hear. That doesn't mean that he's a fraud, but you really should ask: Why should I believe Mike Newton? How do you know that he, himself, isn't deceived?

Why is it that when you, yourself, try to find concrete evidence of post-mortem survival, it vanishes? So long as it appears in print in a book, it's safe from scrutiny. Since there's no way to disprove what's written, anything can be written in these types of books.

It's good to read and think with an open mind, but at some point, you have to read and think critically, and question received "wisdom." For example, chiropractic is an imaginary practice. It has no evidence whatsoever behind it. There is no such thing as a "subluxation," and yet, it has still been allowed to go on. Why do patients claim that it works? Of course, it's the placebo effect, and a patient's relationship with the chiropractor.

If you actually investigate reports of extraordinary claims, you'll find them completely unbelievable. Try this for yourself. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

There's plenty of neuroscientific evidence that shows that "the interpreter," the linguistic circuits in our brains, makes up stories (it confabulates) when it can't explain something. It's as if behavior happens, and the interpreter makes up a story to go along with it. Most of the time that story is true. Sometimes it's false.

It's far more likely that there is no "you," but that "you" are an illusion created by neural processes that synchronize and integrate sensations, perceptions, emotions, and--most importantly--concepts through words, making it seem as if there is someone at the wheel, so to speak. What if there's not? Then the likelihood of a soul dwindles precipitously.

Mike Newton's stories make you feel good. My post won't. Just remember: if something seems too good to be true, it probably is. When, in your experience, have you found that not to be the case?

I find it funny that religion could ever be viewed as not obsolete. Just what do you think that religion accomplishes? Do you seriously believe that it has ever conveyed metaphysical truths? If so, how could those ever change over time (thus becoming "obsolete")? It would be like saying, if you were born between 1950 and 1970, you'd survive death, but since 1970, survival has been discontinued and you're screwed.

By all means, have a "past-life (hypnotic) regression" (whatever that means). Why do I know--and why do you know--that it won't "work?" Sometimes you have to find out the hard way, so go for it. A sucker is born every minute, as someone once said.

Steve

"Why is it almost always poorly educated housewives?"

You can take the philosopher out of Mormonism but you can't take the Mormon out of the philosopher.

It's one discovery in a greater body of work.

Scientific study of precognition is another: Everybody has it and uses it all the time. You make decisions a split second before the thing to decide appears in reality, then your brain compensates for the time delay to make it seem like you decided after the reality was presented to you. But it's not much different from the double slit experiments where they put the particle detector past the observer so some weird backward time effects are necessary to destroy coherence.

Princeton's PEAR lab does a lot of this stuff. It's all scientifically rigorous. There are many indications that the material view of consciousness is wrong. Defending it is like defending the BoM.

The instant that some body claims that they were met by Jesus during their NDE, then I KNOW they are full of CRAP !!!

Thank you for your report. I am always interested in others' experiences. I will look into him.

And, yes, I am one of the woo-woo people here on the board.

Sometimes I'm jealous of the "woo woo" people. My brain refuses to woo woo. Enjoy.

Religion is already "obsolete." No discoveries, amazing or other, are needed.

"Geeze! How cool is that? An atheist psychologist dude ends up discovering how to access a rich database of detailed, repeatable, consistent, corroborating information that has opened a previously closed window into what goes on before birth and after death! By fully answering the age old questions "Where did I come from? Why am I here? Where am I going?", Dr. Newton has pretty much singlehandedly obsoleted all religious dogma on planet Earth!"

If you want to believe this stuff, great -- enjoy.
None of it is repeatable, consistent, or corroborated, though.

Thanks for commenting, ificouldhietokolob.

(BTW, what IF you could hie to Kolob?)

I must respond to your statement:

"None of it is repeatable, consistent, or corroborated, though."

Within MN's data set of many hundreds of hypnosis subjects, the background context of a non-physical world populated by non-physical, conscious, intelligent entities is very repeatable, quite consistent, and internally self-corroborating.

And additional data points have been gathered by other therapists using regression techniques taught by MN ... with similar results and data replicated by others.

If one is open to acknowledging that one's personal paradigm might be limited, one could observe that some aspects of Scientific Method are in play here. Are others skilled in the art able to replicate similar results using similar procedures?

The answer is well, maybe. What if it's true that someone who learn's MN's methods can replicate his findings with new hypnosis subjects.

What if MN's findings turn out to be repeatable, consistent, and corroborated by others using similar methods? MN's third book 'Memories of the Afterlife' documents 32 cases of similar findings by others trained in the art.

What if the ONLY way to access this information is to place human beings in an extraordinary state of awareness and interview them to find out what they see and experience in their mind's eye?

It's easy to filter this information out (dis-confirmation bias) without inspecting it closely. Is there some possibility it's not BS? And if it is BS, how does one explain many hundreds of data points - from multiple experimenters?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2015 03:17PM by beyondashadow.

I wouldn't call it an "amazing discovery". Similar experiences were thoroughly investigated by the British Society for Psychical Research beginning back in the 1880's. A number of prominent scientists and highly educated individuals were involved. After some thirty years they were never able to conclusively prove "life after death". Before getting too excited, I would recommend reviewing their investigative work which were published in their journals and are available on the internet.

What Newton is pedaling is simply "old wine in new bottles".

Hey, thank you all who have weighed in so far on Life Between Lives.

I'll be the first to admit that I don't KNOW anything for sure. I base my enthusiasm for Michael Newton's findings on the following:

-- My gut feel reading what MN wrote leads me to think he is not lying - making stuff up that MN did not personally experience. (Contrast MN with Joseph Smith for example.)

-- If MN is not lying, then could his hypnosis subjects be lying to MN? As in making up stuff they were not 'seeing, experiencing' while in trance? MN's descriptions of subjects' astonishment responses, animated verbal outbursts, pointing and gesturing as if they are 'seeing' things, shaking, sweating, physically agitated, etc. seem convincing. He audio-recorded all of the sessions and describes what happened with lots of detail. I do not sense anything from MN's accounts to suggest MN is being scammed by his subjects 'acting' (making up) what they report.

-- An individual past-life-on-earth regression (not LBL) is one "data point" that cannot (usually) be corroborated by any other past life regressions of other individuals - who have their own, different past lives. What is unique in MN's findings is his collection of hundreds and hundreds of individual data points that combine to paint a picture of what 'life' is like in the Spirit World, including the common denominator observations that a conscious, non-physical entity-being is ejected from human bodies upon death, and that these 'light/energy' souls report very similar experiences on their way to the Spirit World and after they arrive there. It's true that each individual reports details unique to their own experience, but what's remarkable is the common background Spirit World context reported by hundreds of individuals. And I find the level of detail common to these reported Spirit World experiences to seem very convincing.

-- Restating, it's the existence of hundreds of cross-corroborating data points I view as compelling. What is a rational explanation for hundreds of individuals who do not know each other to report a very similar background/context for their individual experiences recalled during 'superconscious' mental state not normally experienced during regular waking awareness? If this is not evidence of hundreds of independent witnesses of the same Spirit World, then what is it? What is a tenable, alternative theory to explain this data? If the data is bogus, how does one explain the consistency of common denominators within the data?

-- One poster requested 'peer review' data. Well, MN's third book 'Memories of the Afterlife' is a collection of 32 'peers' reporting their own accounts of hypnotic regressions with still more human subjects. More 'peer' data points adding to MN's published findings.

===========

I have no need to convince anyone of anything, but I do feel motivated to share what I see as exciting, life changing information with others interested in changing their lives with a way-wider-angle-lens on our existence here on Earth.

I acknowledge this information is all second and third party hearsay. I hope to become a first hand witness personally if I can connect with a MN-trained therapist.

In the meantime, I still have 3/4 of MN's second book 'Destiny of Souls' to read. I find this new-to-me information fascinating, and particularly so because it might not be science fiction.

========

And thank you to those who suggested of other sources for me to investigate. I will check 'em out.

Life can be an incredible adventure. Discovery and creation is so much more fun than sacrament meeting.

beyondashadow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> -- My gut feel reading what MN wrote leads me to
> think he is not lying - making stuff up that MN
> did not personally experience. (Contrast MN with
> Joseph Smith for example.)

Your "gut feel" may feel good, but it is not a reliable indicator of fact or truth. Period. Witness all the people with a "gut feel" that mormonism is true...


> -- If MN is not lying, then could his hypnosis
> subjects be lying to MN? As in making up stuff
> they were not 'seeing, experiencing' while in
> trance? MN's descriptions of subjects'
> astonishment responses, animated verbal outbursts,
> pointing and gesturing as if they are 'seeing'
> things, shaking, sweating, physically agitated,
> etc. seem convincing. He audio-recorded all of the
> sessions and describes what happened with lots of
> detail. I do not sense anything from MN's accounts
> to suggest MN is being scammed by his subjects
> 'acting' (making up) what they report.

Numerous objective, proper scientific studies have shown that people under "hypnotism" do not produce reliable data. Some "lie," some relate imagined things, and a majority try to please the hypnotist, so if any "leading" questions are asked, the response the hypnotist wants is given. There is no evidence anything said is factual or real in the vast majority of cases.

"Scientific consensus is that the memories are the result of cryptomnesia, narratives created by the subconscious mind using imagination, forgotten information and suggestions from the therapist. Memories created under hypnosis are indistinguishable from actual memories and can be more vivid than factual memories. The greatest predictor of individuals reporting memories of past lives appears to be their beliefs..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_life_regression

(follow some of the referenced papers at the end)


> -- An individual past-life-on-earth regression
> (not LBL) is one "data point" that cannot
> (usually) be corroborated by any other past life
> regressions of other individuals - who have their
> own, different past lives.
> And I find
> the level of detail common to these reported
> Spirit World experiences to seem very convincing.

Uncorroborated/unproven "data" remains uncorroborated/unproven whether you have one instance or 10,000 instances.
See above about people under hypnotism being susceptible to suggestion and trying to "please" the hypnotist with the "right" answer. That data, by the way, all came to light after hypnotic regression was used to "prove" cases of childhood molestation, and after objective testing it was found to be worse than useless for that task.

> If
> this is not evidence of hundreds of independent
> witnesses of the same Spirit World, then what is
> it?

It's evidence that his subjects apparently said similar things. It's not evidence of any "witnesses of the same Spirit World." Did he report on subjects that *didn't* have similar experiences? Or did he leave them out because they were inconvenient? Were his questions leading? Is there any evidence outside of stories under hypnotism to back up what could simply be imagination?



> What is a tenable, alternative theory to
> explain this data? If the data is bogus, how does
> one explain the consistency of common denominators
> within the data?

See above. By the way, the form of "It's supernatural unless you can prove it isn't" is fallacious and a bit silly.

> -- One poster requested 'peer review' data. Well,
> MN's third book 'Memories of the Afterlife' is a
> collection of 32 'peers' reporting their own
> accounts of hypnotic regressions

"Peer review" doesn't mean getting people who agree with you to write about them agreeing with you. It means submitting your data and findings to an objective group of people knowledgeable in the field in question, and having them review your data for errors, biases, etc. He hasn't done that.

> I have no need to convince anyone of anything, but
> I do feel motivated to share what I see as
> exciting, life changing information with others
> interested in changing their lives with a
> way-wider-angle-lens on our existence here on
> Earth.

Great. Share away. Be prepared to accept criticism where warranted, though. And I'm just going to point out that your OP didn't present this as simply something to consider, but was very enthusiastically describing it as all true. Evidence doesn't support that enthusiasm.


> Life can be an incredible adventure. Discovery and
> creation is so much more fun than sacrament
> meeting.

There we agree completely :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2015 03:13PM by ificouldhietokolob.

ificouldhietokolob wrote:
>
> Your "gut feel" may feel good, but it is not a
> reliable indicator of fact or truth. Period.
> Witness all the people with a "gut feel" that
> mormonism is true...
>
I completely agree that 'gut feel' is not a truth indicator. Now then if I had felt a 'burning in my bosom' (which I have not regarding MN) then we would have to talk. ;-)

ificouldhietokolob wrote:
>
> Numerous objective, proper scientific studies have
> shown that people under "hypnotism" do not produce
> reliable data. Some "lie," some relate imagined
> things, and a majority try to please the
> hypnotist, so if any "leading" questions are
> asked, the response the hypnotist wants is given.
> There is no evidence anything said is factual or
> real in the vast majority of cases.
>
> "Scientific consensus is that the memories are the
> result of cryptomnesia, narratives created by the
> subconscious mind using imagination, forgotten
> information and suggestions from the therapist.
> Memories created under hypnosis are
> indistinguishable from actual memories and can be
> more vivid than factual memories. The greatest
> predictor of individuals reporting memories of
> past lives appears to be their beliefs..."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_life_regression
>
> (follow some of the referenced papers at the end)
>
Thanks for the links. I agree that much of what is "recalled" under hypnosis is probably imaginary BS. Two thoughts, which you can easily reject: 1) MN asserts that he is not using a 'regular' hypnosis process, but rather deeper than usual state of 'superconscious' awareness he discovered by accident. He prepares the subject with a 'regular' past life regression to determine their ability/susceptibility to hypnosis, and follows up on a different day with the deeper LBL process. (He wrote a book describing his process 'Life Between Lives: Hypnotherapy for Spiritual Regression'); 2) He wrote about his awareness of the pitfalls of asking 'leading questions' which he consciously avoided. You can read his questions and determine for yourself if he was 'leading the witness'.

Did MN cherry pick his data to support a foregone conclusion? Well, we get to decide whether to believe him when he claimed to see a recurring background tapestry of Spirit World ambience details. It would seem that random imaginings would show frequent recurrences of Jesus figures, which he reported did not happen. In fact, per my OP, he reported the conspicuous absense of Jesus/Buddha characters. I think these 'sightings' might be more common to regular NDE reports (my conjecture).

If the many hundreds of data points are random imaginings, one could expect a wider variation of background context than MN is reporting. If recollections are lost fragments of memory, why do so many report similar lost fragments of memory? Including so many details that are not part of the Judeo/Christian imaginary paradigm. If The Veil is not hermetically sealed, is it possible for fragments of pre-birth or post-death memories of a non-physical life to show some consistency if we all originated from and return to the same Spirit World?

ificouldhietokolob wrote:
>
> Uncorroborated/unproven "data" remains
> uncorroborated/unproven whether you have one
> instance or 10,000 instances.
> See above about people under hypnotism being
> susceptible to suggestion and trying to "please"
> the hypnotist with the "right" answer. That data,
> by the way, all came to light after hypnotic
> regression was used to "prove" cases of childhood
> molestation, and after objective testing it was
> found to be worse than useless for that task.
>
We must define 'uncorroborated'. I will agree that hypnotic regression data is intrinsically unreliable. But when you have a large data set that is internally consistent and cannot (by definition) be corroborated by any normal earthbound data sources, you might attempt a theory to explain the observed consistency, or show the consistency exists only in the mind of the beholder (MN).

ificouldhietokolob wrote:
>
> It's evidence that his subjects apparently said
> similar things. It's not evidence of any
> "witnesses of the same Spirit World." Did he
> report on subjects that *didn't* have similar
> experiences? Or did he leave them out because
> they were inconvenient? Were his questions
> leading? Is there any evidence outside of stories
> under hypnotism to back up what could simply be
> imagination?
>
I've already addressed the issues of 'cherry picking' the data and 'leading the witness'. Based on what I've seen so far, I don't suspect that MN did either to make his point. Regarding evidence outside of stories under hypnosis, is that a fair question? It's like asking a scientist to replicate experimental results without doing the same or similar experiment. If the 'recalled' memories are random imaginings, one needs to explain why so much of the recollections appear to come from the same imaginary stage.

ificouldhietokolob wrote:
>
> By the way, the form of "It's
> supernatural unless you can prove it isn't" is
> fallacious and a bit silly.
>
I agree with your statement. I am basing my enthusiasm for MN's findings on what I interpret as a compelling set of data. If you determine a priori that the data is BS, then no further investigation is needed. If there's a baby in the bath water you toss out, there goes another perfectly useful baby. If no baby, then you saved yourself time and energy.

ificouldhietokolob wrote:
>
> "Peer review" doesn't mean getting people who
> agree with you to write about them agreeing with
> you. It means submitting your data and findings
> to an objective group of people knowledgeable in
> the field in question, and having them review your
> data for errors, biases, etc. He hasn't done
> that.
>
OK. Let's try this on for size. How would you assess the following hypothetical 'peer review' experiment: 1) Select one of MN's subjects he wrote about; 2) Have the same subject be hypnotized by several therapists; 3) See if the subject reports the same Spirit World recollections to all of the therapists?

This experiment is worthless on its face for obvious reasons. The only way to gather potentially meaningful data is to use 'virgin' subjects untainted by a previous hypnotic regressions. That is what MN did, and his student therapists replicated the process on more 'virgin' subjects.

You get to decide how to interpret everything contributing to MN's conclusions. If you dismiss the data as contaminated, then your investigation is done. If you dismiss the investigators as dishonest or deluded, job over.

ificouldhietokolob wrote:
>
> Great. Share away. Be prepared to accept
> criticism where warranted, though. And I'm just
> going to point out that your OP didn't present
> this as simply something to consider, but was very
> enthusiastically describing it as all true.
> Evidence doesn't support that enthusiasm.

Fair enough about my OP describing it as all true. I plead guilty to my overstatements. I don't know if it's true or if MN is a convincing liar, or honestly deluded. I once told lots of people that I KNEW beyondashadow of a doubt that Joseph's Myth actually happened as described in one of the First Vision accounts. So we already know I am gullible. I make an effort to not get sucked into every good sounding BS that comes along. I admit that MN's BS sounds pretty good to me and that the supporting data seems compelling.

At this moment in time, I don't think it's BS and hope it's not BS. I think it's very cool that there is an actually possibility that I can personally experience my own data point on topic. My intention is to make that happen. How often do we have the opportunity to replicate a curious experiment personally?

One could argue that I am pre-tainted by exposing myself to MN's work. Hopefully I will be able to report back on RfM what happens (or not) for me personally. I'm a willing Guinea Pig ... motivated enough to travel and spend lots of money if I have to to make it happen.

beyondashadow wrote:
> >
> > Life can be an incredible adventure. Discovery and
> > creation is so much more fun than sacrament meeting.

ificouldhietokolob wrote:
>
> There we agree completely :)

Nice to find a toehold of common ground.

Thank you, ificouldhietokolob, for your thoughtful and stimulating comments.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2015 05:39PM by beyondashadow.

I don't think for a minute that Newton is lying or bending the facts. I'm sure that the people who report "other side" contact really believe what they experienced was real. The British group went out of their way to collect eyewitness testimonials from family members and associates would could help attest to the thousands of cases they investigated. It wasn't that individuals misrepresented the facts, it's just that they could not be independently verified which they tried very hard to do.

A typical problem they encountered - a unknown person goes to a medium and the medium accurately describes a dead friend or relative and says things known only to the sitter and the dead person. While it sounds very convincing, they were unable to exclude telepathy as the source of the information.

On rare occasions, the medium said something that only the dead person would have known such as a hidden will which was later found to be where the dead person indicated. However, such cases were so few and far between (two or three out of a thousand), they clearly did not have a large enough sample to be of use. Also, they had to consider the fact that the sitter may have been told previously and had simply forgotten it.

As Carl Sagan often remarked: "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2015 04:28PM by Templar.

Another problem to be aware of in considering material of this nature is sample bias.

Very often, the subjects for these "studies" are found at "past life" conventions or respond to requests made in psychic magazines. The investigator is seeking individuals who have had the desired experiences. Self selecting groups such as this would have been exposed to the same ideas and similar experiences of others. In other words, would share your so-called "data points". The fact that the subjects reported similar things is really not significant unless an complete cross section of all individuals is included in the study.

Consider this, if I were to go to a typical mormon ward house and request the members to complete a survey of what happens after death would I not get similar answers ("comparable data points") from the vast majority?

Thank you, Templar, for the interesting and relevant information.

A surprising discovery for me upon reading MN's material so far is this: I encountered page after page of Spirit World information that I had NEVER heard before (that I know of). It's not part of Mormon doctrine or any other doctrine I know about.

Another observation is that the Spirit World described by MN makes complete sense. There is no onerous judgment and punishment happening. There is loving and respectful help offered by competent entities who have each soul's best interest at heart and want to help with spiritual growth and learning.

And MN offers scenarios about what happens with ostensibly evil souls who commit serious mayhem and harm on earth.

My feeble attempts to here communicate the amazing content of MN's writings are very inadequate. If I'm able to pique enough interest in some RfMers to sample MN personally, I will be pleased.

This is the Conference Talk that trumps everything you've ever heard in Church. And I guarantee that you will stay on the edge of your seat with your jaw dropped - if you are in a place to allow the information past your filters, as I am.

Is it all BS? I challenge all of you out there to make your own determination. For me, this is hands down the most exciting and relevant information I have discovered so far ... after leaving Moronism in my rear-view mirror 35 years ago.

Many people feel that religion is already obsolete.

Especially me.

1) What's wrong with this life? (I'm with Don B. on this point)

2) Follow the money.


Ok, a third thought: Figure out what draws you to this experiment...you are enthused about this possibility. Why?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2015 03:48PM by iflewover.

I'm not the OP, but I find his work very interesting and plan to pursue it as well.

Why? Because I want to continue to believe that this is not all there is. Some here cannot believe in something after Mormonism. Some choose not to believe. There are those of us who believe, and then some who want to believe. I am a believer, and want to explore what others have found in this area.

Heidi GWOTR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Some here cannot
> believe in something after Mormonism. Some choose
> not to believe.

And others have found that "believing" is not very useful, because people can and do "believe" just about anything. Instead, we've chosen to decide things by facts and evidence, and when there are no facts or evidence for a claim, to reject "belief" in the claim. Because that's reasonable, rational, and shown to be very reliable.

"Choosing" to believe something because you *want* it to be true -- not so much.

And, you know what? That's cool with me. I have absolutely no problem with taking that path.

I will honestly say that there is probably something lacking in me that makes me want to believe.

And, if I wasn't clear in the earlier post, I see that there are 4 different kinds of folks after Mormonism. I do not judge one over the any of the others. I think a lot of it is hard-wired.

1. Some here cannot believe in something after Mormonism. (for the reasons you just mentioned.)

2. Some choose not to believe. It actually is a choice for them.

3. There are those of us who believe. We have our reasons. You may not agree with them, but they're good enough for us.

4. Some who want to believe.

Thanks for your enthusiastic post about Michael Newton's work. I first learned about the book "Journey of Souls" on RfM. I read it and his subsequent books and found them fascinating. You may also find Brian Weiss's books of interest, beginning with "Many Lives, Many Masters".

I'm not sure that I believe any of it in the way I once, long ago, believed in Mormonism. And, the betrayal of Mormonism does kind of taint one for belief in anything other than the material world. But, I do find the books interesting.

If there is anything after this life (and I have no idea if there is), I think the afterlife much more likely resembles the Michael Newton/Brian Weiss view of it than TSCC's three kingdoms on Kolob approach.

Reincarnation makes sense to me if, indeed, we have ended up on this planet as a result of anything other than natural law and physics. I just don't know the answer to that.

I do take some comfort in the reincarnation view of things, having recently lost two people who were incredibly dear to me and whom I miss terribly.

I read "Journey of Souls" a few weeks ago. I really liked the IDEA of it. Very comforting.

The more I read, however, the more I felt that he had just a little too much detail. I felt like he worked out his own THEORY of what happens, and then created a story around his theory.

Since that is very much like what Joseph Smith did, perhaps that influenced my opinion. I decided that I just couldn't believe his story and I just couldn't get past Chap 9.

So I don't totally discount the possibility of reincarnation, I still like that idea, but I just don't find him believeable.

The death of a close loved one near Christmas is unspeakably difficult.

Beyond, it's your money and your time. If it helps you heal in the wake of the loss of your brother, go for it.

Saree