A neurosurgeon's near-death experience.
Top o' the Stack.
Is Heaven Real?
by
Tags:
Comments
13 responses to “Is Heaven Real?”
-
Bill,
“For how does he know that his cortex was “simply off”? Failure to detect the functioning of the cortex does not entail that the cortex was not functioning. It might have been functioning below the detectability of the instruments and might have been generating the experiences all along.”
This is an excellent objection, the force of which is bolstered by research on the continued brain activity in the flatlined brains of some patients after cardiac arrest, to which I referred in my comment to your post “Jeffrey Long, M.D. on Near Death Experiences (NDEs).” The findings of a more recent study, headed by researchers at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine, published in the journal Resuscitation and summarized here: https://nyulangone.org/news/patients-recall-death-experiences-after-cardiac-arrest). The gist of this study, which utilized specialized instruments to measure continuing waves in flatlined brains, is as follows:
“Survivors have long reported having heightened awareness and powerful, lucid experiences, say the study authors. These have included a perception of separation from the body, observing events without pain or distress, and a meaningful evaluation of their actions and relationships. The new work found these experiences of death to be different from hallucinations, delusions, illusions, dreams, or CPR-induced consciousness.
The study authors hypothesize that the “flatlined,” dying brain removes natural inhibitory (braking) systems. These processes, known collectively as disinhibition, may open access to “new dimensions of reality,” they say, including lucid recall of all stored memories from early childhood to death, evaluated from the perspective of morality. While no one knows the evolutionary purpose of this phenomenon, it “opens the door to a systematic exploration of what happens when a person dies.”
“Although doctors have long thought that the brain suffers permanent damage about 10 minutes after the heart stops supplying it with oxygen, our work found that the brain can show signs of electrical recovery long into ongoing CPR,” said senior study author Sam Parnia, MD, PhD, an associate professor in the Department of Medicine at NYU Langone Health. “This is the first large study to show that these recollections and brain wave changes may be signs of universal, shared elements of so called near-death experiences.”
Vito -
Thank you for the reference, Vito. I will study it.
My main point is that one ought not dogmatize on either side of the question: Do we survive death? It remains an open question.
I am convinced that it is open because of the massive evidence adduced in Gallagher’s book which I re-read last week and discussed with an M. D.
More later. -
Bill,
I agree that the question is an open one, and I certainly don’t deny the possibility of post-mortem survival. Like you, I just think that we have to be very cautious in regarding first-hand testimonies of NDEs as “proof” of this claim.
Yes, Gallagher’s book is worth rereading.
Vito -
Bill,
Gallagher strongly criticizes another psychiatrist, M. Scott Peck (Glimpses of the Devil: A Psychiatrist’s Personal Account of Possession, Exorcism, and Redemption), who, along with a lay team, conducted an “exorcism” of two women without the presence of a Catholic exorcist, for “once describe[ing] a diabolic attack as a rare mental condition,” not realizing that although they “do entail a cognitive aspect, diabolic attacks are a spiritual disorder” (79).
Looking further into this issue, I found this interview with Peck that demonstrates the questionable logic of his view on demonic possession, which, on the one hand, he argues should be included as a psychiatric condition in the DSM-IV, with “an equal status to multiple personality disorder,” and which, on the other hand, he attributes to the actual existence of “demons,” whether multiple evil beings or many manifestations of the Devil. Gallagher attributes the shortcomings of Peck’s treatment of possession to his ignorance of the theological literature on the forms of demonic attack and the actual practices of Catholic exorcists.
In any case, this short interview with Peck may be of interest to you and your readers: https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/2005/01/the-patient-is-the-exorcist-interview-with-m-scott-peck.aspx
Vito -
Bill,
While this is a good bit of topic, I wonder if you’ve ever encountered any of the stories of “Spellers” and their parents, care-providers, and teachers? Spellers are non-verbal or near non-verbal autistic children who are taught to spell out words on letter boards, tablets, or computers, and in almost all cases eventually reveal evidence of their own telepathy. It’s… actually quite a more involved subject than I can believe, because the children often seem capable of more than just mind-to-mind speech. Although not even for one second do I believe that they are lying. You can check out any of the research that has been put out by Dr. Diane Powell, or the follow-up work carried out by the Telepathy Tapes podcast. -
Vito,
Thanks for the reference to the interview of Dr Peck. You seem to be endorsing Gallagher’s criticism of Peck: >> “once describe[ing] a diabolic attack as a rare mental condition,” not realizing that although they “do entail a cognitive aspect, diabolic attacks are a spiritual disorder” (79).
On a charitable reading, I think what Peck is saying is that a diabolical attack is both a mental and a spiritual disorder, not that it is mental/psychiatric but not spiritual. If a demonic attack is both a psychiatric and a spiritual disorder, then a case can be made for ncluding it in the DSM-IV.
I think it is clear that we need a tripartite distinction between mere physical disorders, psychiatric disorders, and spiritual disorders. But it is not clear to me that the psychiatric should be so defined as to exclude the spiritual. If oppression and possession are caused by pure spirits, then these disorders are spiritual in origin and can be classified as spiritual disorders. But surely they also manifest mentally in the unfortunate people who suffer under demonic assault. To the extent that they manifest mentally, they belong in the psychiatric category broadly construed. -
Bill,
Yes, obsession and possession, while “caused by pure spirits,” do “manifest mentally in unfortunate people who suffer under demonic assault.” However, I fear that placing such phenomena “in the psychiatric category broadly construed” will result in more harm than good, since psychiatrists, the vast majority of whom reject the possibility of preternatural spiritual powers, will inevitably be encouraged in their anti-spiritual assumptions and seek explanations for these disorders in genetics, family histories, and so forth. Therefore, I have sympathy for Gallagher’s critique of Peck, since what is essential to keep the psychiatric focus on the spiritual battle, one that is waged by the exorcist(s), with the medical professional in a secondary role of aiding the healing of afflicted persons only after the demons have been banished. Classified in this way, as a post-exorcism psychiatric intervention, a DVM entry does make some sense to me.
Vito -
Bill,
I want to clarify my last comment: I do not want to give you the impression that I deny the need of psychiatrists to work with exorcists during and exorcism, since these can be long and since psychological disorders are often present in afflicted persons; in fact, their help is often necessary. So, I think that we are in essential agreement on this matter, if the DVM entry were properly worded, keeping the underlying spiritual cause in focus.
Vito -
Richard,
Thanks for the comment, but I know nothing about the autistic Spellers. -
Vito,
You and I will agree that when dealing with putatively demon-caused phenomena we must always first see if they can be explained naturalistically. Peck would agree, while also agreeing with Gallagher that the evidence in many cases does justify preternatural explanations.
So what we may have here may be a mere terminological quibble.
I am not a demon, though I may come under demonic influence. But I believe myself to be an embodied spirit. A substantive question is whether I am a spirit in the same sense in which a demon is a spirit. -
Bill,
FYI: Gallagher speaks highly of this just published book by the exorcist Fr. Carlos Martins, The Exorcist Files: True Stories About the Reality of Evil and How to Defeat It. And today, Rod Dreher speaks of the book on Substack (https://roddreher.substack.com/p/father-carlos-martins-spiritual-warrior). It is available on Amazon, and I am considering purchasing it.
The question that you raise about the spiritual natures of men and demons is really intriguing.
Vito -
You’re the man, Vito!
I just now ordered Martins’ book. If I am going to write about this stuff I’d ‘damned well’ better know more about it.
I will now go read Dreher.
As for the question I raised, the trad RCC view as I understand it is that we were created to have bodies, such that the disembodied state is for us a deficient state, whereas angels and demons (fallen angels) were created not to have bodies. -
In other words: we are ontologically incomplete without bodies, whereas angels are complete whether or not they acquire bodies — which both angels and demons (fallen angels) can do.
Leave a Reply to BV Cancel reply