LDS Freedom Forum

EdGoble wrote:

notjamesbond003.5 wrote:I'm trying to figure out why Ed Grapple has a problem with LDS NDEs, and what connection this Baptist boy's deceitful book has to do with truthful accounts by LDS NDEs.

Can anyone help us, please ?

njb

NJB, from a number of posts, it seems that you too, like a number of people here, have chosen to make yourself my enemy.
I would ask you to leave my name alone and not morph it into your sad attempt to be disrespectful to it again. You don't need to disrespect my name just because I want to try to persuade people of the value of critical thinking and skepticism.

It is obvious that there are a lot of gullible people out there, that believe in the claims of con-artists and liars that are NDE claimants and false prophets, and they ought to be skeptical of them all, and it is quite obvious that this is what I was getting at. Their first instinct should be skepticism toward their claims, not belief. Just because there are a number of published authors making these claims doesn't make them any different than sectarian Christian NDE claimants that are also published con-artists.

notjamesbond003.5 wrote:

EdGoble wrote:

notjamesbond003.5 wrote:I'm trying to figure out why Ed Grapple has a problem with LDS NDEs, and what connection this Baptist boy's deceitful book has to do with truthful accounts by LDS NDEs.

Can anyone help us, please ?

njb

NJB, from a number of posts, it seems that you too, like a number of people here, have chosen to make yourself my enemy.
I would ask you to leave my name alone and not morph it into your sad attempt to be disrespectful to it again. You don't need to disrespect my name just because I want to try to persuade people of the value of critical thinking and skepticism.

It is obvious that there are a lot of gullible people out there, that believe in the claims of con-artists and liars that are NDE claimants and false prophets, and they ought to be skeptical of them all, and it is quite obvious that this is what I was getting at. Their first instinct should be skepticism toward their claims, not belief. Just because there are a number of published authors making these claims doesn't make them any different than sectarian Christian NDE claimants that are also published con-artists.

And you're the The All Knowing Truth Detector?

Stop grappling Goble, move along.
Just because you were once gullible and duped once by a false messenger, doesn't mean all people are dubious, exaggerating or deceitful.
Stop living in a vacuum, get a grip friend.

njb

notjamesbond003.5 wrote:I'm trying to figure out why Ed Grapple has a problem with LDS NDEs, and what connection this Baptist boy's deceitful book has to do with truthful accounts by LDS NDEs.

Can anyone help us, please ?

njb

freedomforall wrote:
I contend

EdGoble wrote:By the way, you are not my friend.

mhewett wrote:Maybe he is saying ask God if what they say is true, don't be gullible and don't trust in the arm of flesh.

notjamesbond003.5 wrote:

EdGoble wrote:By the way, you are not my friend.

Well, you might wanna get right with that, cos you won't progress much in the hereafter, you see, if you go in with animosity towards some one, you stifle and impede your progression, according to scripture and the countless credible NDEs I've read and listened to, so Ed, not for me but for your spiritual and physical heath, love everyone, hint: it's a win-win, and I think you wanna be a winner-at the end of the day.

Also, watch who you call liars, and falsely accuse, you're held accountable for that too.

Warmly,

njb

EdGoble wrote:

notjamesbond003.5 wrote:

EdGoble wrote:By the way, you are not my friend.

Well, you might wanna get right with that, cos you won't progress much in the hereafter, you see, if you go in with animosity towards some one, you stifle and impede your progression, according to scripture and the countless credible NDEs I've read and listened to, so Ed, not for me but for your spiritual and physical heath, love everyone, hint: it's a win-win, and I think you wanna be a winner-at the end of the day.

Also, watch who you call liars, and falsely accuse, you're held accountable for that too.

Warmly,

njb

I think I have made progress, by keeping myself out of threads here that are so contentious, and being more of a lurker here. Even when I announced that I was leaving as a continual poster here, you yourself kicked me on the way out, while I was down emotionally.

I don't try to accuse or cast aspersions at anyone in particular, as much as I used to.
But I have tried to find a balance between stating my opinion on claims people make, that are obviously fabricated, and not trying to be disagreeable to them. I have tried to strike a balance.
I have not mastered that art.

And also by trying to use skepticism in the concepts that I favor.

I only choose to try to persuade people against the general tendency to be too believing in fabulous or marvelous things that people make public claims about, which are out of order. There is a reason that I don't and won't publicize my own spiritual experiences or whatnot, because making them public would undermine what I try to accomplish. And I do not have nor does anyone else have the right to share that kind of stuff publicly,.

notjamesbond003.5 wrote: Ed,

I think what causes people to take umbrage is when you clump one topic together and make blanket statements or comments.

Example: Non 6 year old LDS boy is coerced into fabricating a false story by disingenuous parents and that calls into question every truthful LDS NDE.
Are you also going to call Raymond Moody a respected researcher a quack or a crank?
Are you telling me all the NDE books sold at Desert Book are made by exaggerators and or fabricators?

The vast majority of NDEs only corroborate the authenticity of the Restored Gospel, concepts revealed to Joseph Smith are corroborated now nearly 2 centuries later by both Non LDS and LDS NDES -and you come in trying to censor people's words, by arbitrarily appointing yourself as Truth Czar-that's how it comes across, that's the rub.

It doesn't work here or in real life, as you have to parse your words carefully before you speak in real life often, should also before you launch a thread.

My intention was never to kick you when you're down Ed, but to defend honest sincere people who you offend, who cannot defend themselves.

A12 got it right, most people aren't as gullible as you think, but also not close minded.

Best to you,

njb

AI2.0 wrote:

notjamesbond003.5 wrote: Ed,

I think what causes people to take umbrage is when you clump one topic together and make blanket statements or comments.

Example: Non 6 year old LDS boy is coerced into fabricating a false story by disingenuous parents and that calls into question every truthful LDS NDE.
Are you also going to call Raymond Moody a respected researcher a quack or a crank?
Are you telling me all the NDE books sold at Desert Book are made by exaggerators and or fabricators?

The vast majority of NDEs only corroborate the authenticity of the Restored Gospel, concepts revealed to Joseph Smith are corroborated now nearly 2 centuries later by both Non LDS and LDS NDES -and you come in trying to censor people's words, by arbitrarily appointing yourself as Truth Czar-that's how it comes across, that's the rub.

It doesn't work here or in real life, as you have to parse your words carefully before you speak in real life often, should also before you launch a thread.

My intention was never to kick you when you're down Ed, but to defend honest sincere people who you offend, who cannot defend themselves.

A12 got it right, most people aren't as gullible as you think, but also not close minded.

Best to you,

njb

Thanks njb, I agree with you.

I believe Alex Malarkey's father and his publisher embellished and even made things up when they wrote that book. I'm glad the truth came out. I believe NDE's are real, but I do not believe every person who claims to have experienced one is telling the truth. I also believe that some people fabricate and embellish their stories, for different reasons.

After reading Onsdag's research on Julie Rowe's book I serious question her claim of an NDE. I think she believes she has a 'gift' and can see the future in her dreams and probably feels she has a 'mission' to warn the world of her prophecies. This is just my opinion, but I suspect she decided to say that the things she learned in her dreams came from an NDE because no publisher would touch a book about her dreams, but they would be more than happy to publish a book that centered on an NDE. NDE books are very popular and sell very well. Books about people's dreams do not.

If Julie is proven to have lied about her experience, it won't make me lose all belief in NDE's--I've heard many individuals relate theirs and I've read enough to believe that they are a real phenomenon.

freedomforall wrote:What is the difference between a NEAR death experience and being clinically DEAD and coming back to life? I don't think being near death qualifies for seeing things beyond this realm. Death gives way to a spirit actually departing a body, does it not? Someone near death could fabricate seeing anything, whereas a departed spirit can see the reality of things beyond mortality, wouldn't one think?

notjamesbond003.5 wrote: A12-

I looked at Onsag's thread and think that he/she is splitting hairs.
Reminds me of a person who wants to throw out The First Vision cos all 8 versions don't match up precisely with one another.
Why is this person so obsessed w Julie ?

Having met Julie, she seems genuine, and is an ordinary person.
You can see and sense how her physical body was damaged during her NDE.
The lady seems credible to me, not delusional. and not on a power trip.

njb

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=37001

Julie Rowe
“(1)I saw a man (2)enter a large city in the eastern United States, (3)go into the center of a busy downtown business area (4)and dump the contents of a large vial-shaped container (3)into the middle of the busy town square. (5)It was about the size of a half-gallon of milk (6)and the substance he dumped was a liquid that was somewhat transparent with a slight whitish hew to it.(7)It was extremely dangerous and contagious. (8)The people who were around him in the city square were totally oblivious to what he had done. No one was even paying any attention to him. (9)After the contents of the container were emptied, he quickly and discreetly left, blending into the crowd undetected. (10)This biological weapon was a disease that started with terrible white blisters, (11)of varying sizes, (12)that developed into pus-filled sores. (11)Some of the blisters were quite large, (13)and they appeared on the hands, faces, arms and necks of those who had contacted the disease. (14)The disease caused confusion, dizziness, and complete disorientation for those infected. The victims often could not remember where they were, who they were, or where they lived. They essentially went crazy. They would come in and out of consciousness, unable to speak, walk or listen and understand coherently. (2)This plague started in the eastern states, (15)but quickly swept across the country and spread quickly throughout North and South America” (A Greater Tomorrow, p. 131)

Sarah Menet
“(1)I then saw a man (3)walk into the middle of a crowd of people (4)and drop what seemed like a (5)quart jar (6)full of liquid. The jar broke and the liquid spread. (7)I understood that people nearby had become infected with a disease from the liquid, (8)and they didn’t even know it. (7)A day or two later people became sick and started dying. (2)I saw that this would happen in four particular cities: New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Salt Lake City. (10)The disease started with white blisters, (11)some of the size of a dime, (13)appearing on the hands, arms, and faces of the victims. (12)The blisters quickly developed into white sores, apparently filled with pus. (14)Those with the disease would stumble around for weeks and fall over dead.” (There Is No Death, p. 64)

Julie’s Account
“(1)David later became a very powerful man. (2)Like Saul, he was guilty of grave crimes, (3)but unlike Saul, David felt great sorrow and contrition for the sins he committed. (4)In spite of these great disasters, David accomplished many great things in his life. (5)He played a key role in uniting the tribes of Israel into one nation. (6)He secured possession of his country. (7)He established a government founded on religious laws and principles. (8)The will of God was the law of Israel. (9)David’s reign, and the government he established, gave the Israelite people an example or type of a better day–a more glorious day when the Messiah would reign personally upon the earth.” (p. 49)

Scripture Account
“(1)Each successive phase of experience developed in him the conscious dependence upon God that was the secret of his strength throughout his life. (2)Like Saul he was guilty of grave crimes; (3)but unlike Saul, he was capable of true contrition and was therefore able to find forgiveness, except in the murder of Uriah. … (4)In spite of these disasters David’s reign was the most brilliant of Israelite history, (5)for he united the tribes into one nation, (6)he secured undisputed possession of the country, (7)the whole government rested upon a religious basis, (8)and the will of God was the law of Israel. (9)For these reasons it was in later times regarded as the nation’s golden age and the type of the more glorious age to which the nation looked forward when Messiah should come.” (Bible Dictionary: David, p. 653-654)

freedomforall wrote:What is the difference between a NEAR death experience and being clinically DEAD and coming back to life? I don't think being near death qualifies for seeing things beyond this realm. Death gives way to a spirit actually departing a body, does it not? Someone near death could fabricate seeing anything, whereas a departed spirit can see the reality of things beyond mortality, wouldn't one think?

freedomforall wrote:I contend that if two or more people saw Jesus, their description of him would be identical...

Mark 16 wrote:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.
12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.
14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.

Neurophysiology can also explain the feeling of moving through a tunnel so commonly mentioned in NDEs. People are well known to experience "tunnel vision" immediately before fainting. Experiments with pilots spun around in giant centrifuges have reproduced the tunnel vision phenomena by increasing G-forces and decreasing blood flow to their retinas (the periphery of the retina is more susceptible to drops in blood pressure than its center, so that the visual field appears compressed, making scenes appear as if viewed through a tunnel). When special goggles that generate suction were applied to the pilots' eyes to counteract the blood pressure lowering effect of the centrifuge, the pilots lost consciousness without developing the tunnel vision effect-proving the experience of tunnel vision to be caused by decreased blood flow to the eye.

Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of NDEs is how often they're associated with out-of-body experiences. This, too, however, turns out to be an illusion. Evidence that out-of-body experiences have nothing to do with souls leaving bodies can be found in the observation that they've also been reported by people just awakening from sleep, recovering from anesthesia, while fainting, during seizures, during migraines, and while at high altitudes (there's no reason to think the souls of people are leaving their bodies during any of those non-life-threatening situations). But the most fascinating evidence that out-of-body experiences are neurological phenomena comes from studies initially performed in the 1950s by a neurosurgeon named Penfield. He was interested in figuring out how to distinguish between normal brain tissue and brain tumors or scars that were responsible for causing seizures. So he stimulated the brains of hundreds of awake patients in an effort to map the cerebral cortex and figure out where in our brains our physical body is represented.

One patient suffered from temporal lobe seizures and when Penfield stimulated the temporoparietal region of his brain, he reported leaving his body.

AI2.0 wrote:

freedomforall wrote:What is the difference between a NEAR death experience and being clinically DEAD and coming back to life? I don't think being near death qualifies for seeing things beyond this realm. Death gives way to a spirit actually departing a body, does it not? Someone near death could fabricate seeing anything, whereas a departed spirit can see the reality of things beyond mortality, wouldn't one think?

From the stories I'm familiar with, only a few were actually declared clinically dead--they have to have been at the hospital or had paramedics present for this to happen. George Ritchie is a great example of one who was pronounced dead. His book, 'Return from Tomorrow' is one of the most credible NDE's. Clinical death is not necessary to have a near death experience. Also, not everyone that has a brush with death has an NDE. Sometimes a journey beyond the veil does not include death--it can be simply an out of body experience.

Julie Rowe was not declared clinically dead and she never claimed to be--she said that her chart said she was 'sleeping' so I assume she was in a sort of coma. Being in a coma state is not uncommon in many near death experiences, Lance Richardson mentions having several experiences beyond the veil while he was in the hospital in and out of coma. His book is titled 'The Message'.

notjamesbond003.5 wrote:

AI2.0 wrote:

notjamesbond003.5 wrote: Ed,

I think what causes people to take umbrage is when you clump one topic together and make blanket statements or comments.

Example: Non 6 year old LDS boy is coerced into fabricating a false story by disingenuous parents and that calls into question every truthful LDS NDE.
Are you also going to call Raymond Moody a respected researcher a quack or a crank?
Are you telling me all the NDE books sold at Desert Book are made by exaggerators and or fabricators?

The vast majority of NDEs only corroborate the authenticity of the Restored Gospel, concepts revealed to Joseph Smith are corroborated now nearly 2 centuries later by both Non LDS and LDS NDES -and you come in trying to censor people's words, by arbitrarily appointing yourself as Truth Czar-that's how it comes across, that's the rub.

It doesn't work here or in real life, as you have to parse your words carefully before you speak in real life often, should also before you launch a thread.

My intention was never to kick you when you're down Ed, but to defend honest sincere people who you offend, who cannot defend themselves.

A12 got it right, most people aren't as gullible as you think, but also not close minded.

Best to you,

njb

Thanks njb, I agree with you.

I believe Alex Malarkey's father and his publisher embellished and even made things up when they wrote that book. I'm glad the truth came out. I believe NDE's are real, but I do not believe every person who claims to have experienced one is telling the truth. I also believe that some people fabricate and embellish their stories, for different reasons.

After reading Onsdag's research on Julie Rowe's book I serious question her claim of an NDE. I think she believes she has a 'gift' and can see the future in her dreams and probably feels she has a 'mission' to warn the world of her prophecies. This is just my opinion, but I suspect she decided to say that the things she learned in her dreams came from an NDE because no publisher would touch a book about her dreams, but they would be more than happy to publish a book that centered on an NDE. NDE books are very popular and sell very well. Books about people's dreams do not.

If Julie is proven to have lied about her experience, it won't make me lose all belief in NDE's--I've heard many individuals relate theirs and I've read enough to believe that they are a real phenomenon.

A12-

I looked at Onsag's thread and think that he/she is splitting hairs.
Reminds me of a person who wants to throw out The First Vision cos all 8 versions don't match up precisely with one another.
Why is this person so obsessed w Julie ?

Having met Julie, she seems genuine, and is an ordinary person.
You can see and sense how her physical body was damaged during her NDE.
The lady seems credible to me, not delusional. and not on a power trip.

njb

27. First Vision, part 1. “I heard them tell Joseph that although many of the churches taught good things, none of them contained the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I heard the Lord tell him that he should join none of the churches” (p. 77).

Compare with Joseph’s account: “I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: ‘they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof’” (JS-H 1:19).

Julie’s words sound rather positive towards all the other churches… quite the contrast to the words of Jesus Christ who was rather harsh and condemning of them. If I were to speculate I would almost think that Julie was trying to be political and alter Joseph’s account in order to sound more favorable towards other faiths…

28. First Vision, part 2. Julie says that during the First Vision a great many things were taught by God and Jesus Christ to Joseph, including “the Plan of Salvation, … the Atonement,” baptism and priesthood authority, “personal revelation, … the organization of the church, … prophets and apostles,” “apostasy,” “previous dispensations,” the restoration of the gospel, Joseph’s role in this work, God’s love for him and all people, the “adversary” and opposition he would face, and much more (p. 77-78).

While this may be possible it is highly unlikely. Our records only inform us of three things conveyed to him at this time: “Joseph was profoundly affected by the heavenly vision. In addition to being given the answer to his question about which church was right, he was told that his sins were forgiven and that ‘the fullness of the Gospel should at some future time be made known unto [him]’” (Institute Student Manual, “Church History In The Fulness Of Times,” Chapter 3: The First Vision). Julie’s words indicate a flood gate of knowledge and information poured out upon Joseph at this time, but realistically (and based upon the evidences) the knowledge and revelations came to Joseph slowly over time. We learn line upon line, precept upon precept, and receive grace for grace as we continue to work and learn over time.

Take for example baptism “by immersion for the remission of sins, by one having proper authority” – it wasn’t until 1829 when Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were translating the Book of Mormon that “the resurrected Savior’s visit to the inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere and his teachings about baptism were unfolded during the translation. At this point their souls were driven to mighty prayer to learn how they could obtain the blessing of baptism” (“Church History In The Fulness Of Times,” Chapter 5). It was then that an angel (John the Baptist) appeared to them and taught them and gave them the priesthood keys necessary for this work. This indicates that Joseph did not learn about baptism by immersion by the proper priesthood authority until many years after the First Vision. Likewise many of the other things Julie claims were taught at that time were not taught until later.

29. Visits with Moroni, part 1. Following Moroni’s visits, the next day Joseph was so exhausted that he could not work and his father sent him home. Upon crossing a fence Joseph fell to the ground and Moroni then appeared and visited with him a fourth time. After this final visit Julie says “I watched Joseph regain his strength and return home, going directly to his bed and falling asleep, his body so desperately needing rest. I later saw Joseph walk a great distance to the Hill Cumorah to the exact location he had been shown” (p. 82).

That is not how events played out. Joseph Smith, according to his own words, recounts of this last experience: “[Moroni] then again related unto me all that he had related to me the previous night, and commanded me to go to my father and tell him of the vision and commandments which I had received. I obeyed; I returned to my father in the field, and rehearsed the whole matter to him. He replied that it was of God, and told me to go and do as commanded by the messenger. I left the field, and went to the place where the messenger had told me the plates were deposited” (JS-H 1:49-50). Julie’s words completely contradict what truly happened.

30. Visits with Moroni, part 2. After Joseph arrived at the location where the plates are buried Julie says “I watched as Joseph followed the instructions he had been given, and as he rolled away the large stone that was covering the place the records had been stored” (p. 82).

Again this does not match with Joseph’s account of what happened. Says he, “This stone was thick and rounding in the middle on the upper side, and thinner towards the edges, so that the middle part of it was visible above the ground, but the edge all around was covered with earth. Having removed the earth, I obtained a lever, which I got fixed under the edge of the stone, and with a little exertion raised it up. I looked in, and there indeed did I behold the plates…” (JS-H 1:51-52)

As I read Joseph’s account it seems like the large stone is relatively flat, with a rounded top, much like an upside down plate would appear thicker in the middle and thinner at the edges. There is no mention of rolling the stone by Joesph, which would be more likely to occur if the stone was round instead of flat. Rather, he describes prying it upwards, much like a lid, which indicates the stone would have been relatively flat – something that would be very difficult to “roll away.”

AI2.0 wrote:
Having met her in person, this may influence your opinion of her. I have not met her so I am going purely on having read her book, comparing it to others' NDE experiences and having read all of the material Onsdag posted.

I agree that in some things he is 'splitting hairs', but, you've dismissed the bulk of what he wrote! I believe you only read the first part and possibly skimmed the rest--I don't blame you it was very long.

I did not find his criticisms valid regarding the age of spirits she saw in Heaven, eating in heaven, etc. I'm not sure we know enough about heaven to insist that she was teaching 'false doctrine' to suggest those things, but if you read the rest of his posts you will see he provided enough evidence that I think he made his case on these points below.

notjamesbond003.5 wrote:You ppl.

After he pried it up wouldn't he " roll it away" ?

And lugging 40 to 50 lbs of metallic plates 2 to 3 miles is a long friggin way.

Having visited Cumorah and the homesite it isn't "down the street" it's a ways.

You guys are too much.

Njb