18056A Teachable Moment: Esquire Versus Dr. Eben Alexander
- Jul 12 1:07 AMNHNE Wavemaker News List
Current Members: 541
NHNE Summer Fundraiser
Amount Needed: 4,500.00
Amount Raised: 1,325.00
Money Still Needed: 3,175.00
Number of people who have helped: 26
To make a tax-deductible donation, go here:
To mail in a check:
NHNE, P.O. Box 2242, Sedona, AZ 86339
Subscribe / unsubscribe / important links at the bottom of this message.
All of you already know that Esquire published a hard hitting expose'
about NDEr and New York Times best-selling author, Dr. Eben Alexander. I
posted major portions of this important article on NHNE Pulse, and all
of it on NHNE's NDE main NDE network. Within a couple days of posting
this information, a lawyer representing Esquire contacted me and asked
me to remove the content from both websites, which I did. You can read
the letter I received here:
In order to keep this information in the public domain, I have since
summarized it. In Sedona's Tuesday night NDE class, I presented this
summary, along with additional background information, videos, reader
comments, and preliminary take-aways. To see, read, and watch
everything, go here:
An email version follows which, unfortunately, does not contain all the
links and formatting. You'll need to visit the link above to access
While the summary portion of this post contains information not found in
Esquire's original article, the information that you will probably be
most interested in follows thereafter...
-- David Sunfellow
P.S. NHNE's Summer Fundraiser is almost over. If you find posts like
this one valuable, please consider sending in a few bucks to keep NHNE's
A TEACHABLE MOMENT: ESQUIRE VERSUS DR. EBEN ALEXANDER
Speaking of the dark side, a rare and wonderful opportunity to learn
more about this subject erupted this past week around Dr. Eben Alexander
and his best-selling book, Proof of Heaven. Here's a report from NBC
that we watched in class:
What, exactly, is going on here? Who's telling the truth? Who's lying,
dodging, fudging, and generally playing fast and loose with the facts?
The current controversy erupted with Esquire publishing a lengthy
article by Luke Dittrich. Here's a summary.
THE DARK SIDE OF ESQUIRE & LUKE DITTRICH
• In order to read Dittrich's article, you had to pay 1.99. Some people
felt that Esquire published this article, and locked it behind a
mircopayment door, to ride the coat tails of Alexander's book, which has
reportedly sold over two million copies. More charitable views suggested
that Esquire, like many other print publications, was simply
experimenting with new ways to generate income from its online and
• It appears that Dittrich intended to write, and Esquire intended to
publish, an expose' on Alexander from the get go. Unfortunately for
Alexander, he apparently didn't realize this until it was too late.
• The finished article doesn't beat around the bush. It immediately
calls Alexander's credibility into question. And then, step by step,
makes its case, uses damning facts that are drilled home by clever
So what, exactly, did the Esquire article say? The summary I shared in
class is included below. To read the complete article, go here:
By Luke Dittrich
July 2, 2013
"Before Proof of Heaven made Dr. Eben Alexander rich and famous as a
'man of science' who'd experienced the afterlife, he was something else:
a neurosurgeon with a troubled history and a man in need of reinvention."
• Dittrich personally interviewed Alexander several times, including at
his home in Lynchburg, Virginia.
• Dittrich provides a quick outline of Alexander's history: He was
adopted, athletic, loved science fiction, became an enthusiastic
skydiver, dreamt of flying on the space shuttle, of helping to build the
International Space Station, went to medical school instead and grew up
in the shadow of his famous neurosurgeon father.
• He became an expert in stereotactic radiosurgery, a type of treatment
that burned away the problems inside a patient's brain, cauterizing
aneurysms, cooking tumors, without the skull even needing to be opened.
• Many people associated with Alexander were interviewed for the story.
The residents that went to medical school with Alexander described him
as charming, larger than life, a charismatic barrel of energy, and
“brilliant”. He also liked to wear bow ties.
UNFOCUSED, WITH A TENDENCY TO "DOCTOR" MEDICAL RECORDS
After Dittrich provides basic background information about Alexander, he
begins to paint a very unflattering picture of Alexander. While other
attending surgeons could completely lose themselves in an operation,
Dittrich says that Alexander wasn't like that:
"He'd come rushing into the OR, talking to the nurses and the residents
and anyone else who'd listen, rambling about near-earth asteroids or
dark matter or whatever other topic in astrophysics he'd been reading
about in his spare time. It would take him a while to get down to
business, to focus on the matter at hand."
This comment helps set the stage for the first malpractice suit that
Dittrich mentions. This law suit was filed by a woman who suffered
partial facial paralysis as the result of an operation that Alexander
performed. She claimed that Alexander had not adequately informed her of
the risks. The woman's lawyer, according to Dittrich, also suggested
that Alexander had doctored her records:
"When Alexander found things that didn't fit the story he wanted to
tell, he changed them, or made them disappear."
Later on in the article, Dittrich discusses another malpractice suit in
which Alexander operated on the wrong part of a patient's spine. Worse,
Alexander not only didn't tell the patient about it, but he altered the
patient's medical records to make it look like he had operated on the
correct part. Writes Dittrich:
"On August 6, 2008, the patient filed a $3 million lawsuit against
Alexander, accusing him of negligence, battery, spoliation, and fraud.
The purported cover-up, the changes Alexander had made to the surgical
report, was a major aspect of the suit. Once again, a lawyer was
accusing Alexander of altering the historical record when the historical
record didn't fit the story he wanted to tell."
And once again, Alexander settled.
Dittrich reports that Alexander settled on another case that took place
two weeks after the first botched job in which Alexander operated on the
wrong vertebra of another patient. He also settled with a woman who sued
him for leaving a small piece of plastic in her neck.
While malpractice suits are apparently not unusual in high risk surgery,
Dittrich wanted to make three basic points:
1. Alexander was involved in more malpractice suits than usual:
“By the time all his pending cases are resolved, Alexander will have
settled five malpractice cases in the last ten years. Only one other
Virginia-licensed neurosurgeon has settled as many cases in that time
period, and none have settled more.”
2. Alexander had a habit of doctoring medical records.
3. Is it ethical to write a book in which you present yourself as a
famous and well-respected neurosurgeon without mentioning you've also
been involved in several malpractice suits, been fined by The Virginia
Board of Medicine, and ordered to take continuing education classes in
ethics and professionalism?
Towards the end of the article, Dittrich actually asks Alexander about
this directly. We'll get there in a moment. What's important to add now
is that Alexander does, in fact, allude to these problems in his book.
After mentioning that he struggled with -- and overcame -- a drinking
problem in medical school, he talks about how an emotionally brutal
experience in his life pushed him over the edge again. The incident
involved learning that after he had been put up for adoption as a child,
his birth parents got married and had three more children, all three of
whom they kept and raised. According to Alexander, this information
completely derailed him, both emotionally and professionally.
"So I struggled. And I watched in disbelief as my roles as doctor,
father, and husband became ever more difficult to fulfill. Seeing that I
was not my best self, Holley [Alexander's wife] set us up for a course
of couples counseling. Though she only partially understood what was
causing it, she forgave me for falling into this ditch of despair and
did whatever she could to pull me up out of it. My depression had
ramifications in my work. My parents were, of course, aware of this
change, and though I knew they too forgave it, it killed me that my
career in academic neurosurgery was slumping -- and all they could do
was watch from the sidelines."
-- Page 57, Proof of Heaven
Dittrich apparently didn't feel that this general admission went far
enough. Besides malpractice suits and the repeating pattern of doctoring
medical records, which you can learn more about by clicking here, there
were also other issues.
TURBULENT RELATIONSHIPS WITH BOSSES & EMPLOYERS
Dittrich reports that there were conflicts with bosses and institutions
where Alexander had worked -- some that were dramatic enough to end up
in the pages of a best-selling novel that Alexander contributed to.
WHAT'S UP WITH CHUCK?
Chuck shows up in the opening pages of Alexander's book. He is
identified as a fellow skydiver. What makes Chuck significant is that
Alexander makes Chuck the central figure in an elaborate
near-skydiving-crash that convinced him that there was a part of us that
was deeper, and could react more quickly, than our brains.
But did Chuck actually exist? And did the incident that Chuck played a
central role in actually happen?
Dittrich was able to track down a man named Chuck who was in the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Sport Parachute Club the
same time Alexander was. But he wouldn't return Dittrich's calls.
Chuck's sister-in-law did. According to Dittrich, the sister-in-law read
Proof of Heaven and immediately thought to herself that the Chuck in the
book must have been her brother-in-law. Via email, she contacted Chuck
and Chuck told her that he remembered Alexander. He didn't, however,
remember anything like the incident Alexander describes in his book.
What does Alexander have to say about this? Dittrich writes:
"It's not Chuck," Alexander says today. "I probably should have put a
disclaimer in the front of the book saying that Chuck is not Chuck. It
is actually somebody not named Chuck. Because I cannot give the name of
the person it was. Because the attorneys at Simon & Schuster would be
mad at me. Because potentially they did something wrong. Potentially
they were liable for causing trouble, etc., etc. So I am under very
strict advice from the Simon & Schuster attorneys not to divulge who
So he had changed the character's name to Chuck, which happened to be
the real name of someone he did skydive with?
"It's not Chuck," he repeats. "It's not Chuck."
Is he still in touch with Chuck?
And fake Chuck?
"No, I don't know what happened to fake Chuck."
WEATHER REPORTS & MISSING RAINBOWS
There are also problems with the weather. In Chapter 21 of Alexander's
book -- a chapter called "The Rainbow" -- Alexander reports that his
sister, Phyllis pulls into the hospital parking lot where he is staying.
After reading a text message from a member of a prayer group that said
"expect a miracle" she notices a perfect rainbow. Later that day,
Alexander miraculously came out of his seven-day-long coma.
After noting that "every part of [Alexander's] story seems to be
connected to every other part in mysterious ways," Dittrich says that he
contacted Dave Wert, meteorologist in charge at the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration office that encompasses Lynchburg and asked
him to review the weather records for the week of November 10 through
16. Could there have been a rainbow on the morning of the sixteenth?
"No," Wert says.
COMAS & CALLING OUT FOR HELP
There are also problems with Alexander's coma. Was it caused by a rare
case of E. coli bacteria meningitis? Or was it caused by one of
Alexander's attending physicians, Dr. Laura Potter? According to
Dittrich, the answer is Dr. Laura Potter and her fellow doctors. They
induced a coma so they could treat Alexander and keep him safe.
Was he in a coma for all seven days he was in the hospital? Apparently
not, as Dr. Potter reports that when they tried to wake him to see what
he would do, he awakened in the same agitated state that he arrived at
In his book, Alexander writes that in the final moments before leaving
the emergency room, after two straight hours of guttural animal wails
and groaning, he became quiet. Then he shouted three words that were
heard by all the doctors and nurses present. The three words?
"God, help me!"
Dr. Potter, according to Dittrich, has no recollection of this. After
intubating Alexander more than an hour before he left the emergency
room, which included putting a plastic tube down his throat, through his
vocal cords, and into his trachea, she told Dittrich that she couldn't
imagine him speaking at all.
Significantly, while Alexander told Dittrich that he would allow three
doctors who treated him to speak about his case, his medical records are
confidential and he does not plan to make them public.
PUBLISHERS CREATE CATCHY TITLE & ALTER CONTENT
According to Dittrich, the title of Alexander's book, Proof of Heaven,
was generated during a meeting the Alexander didn't attend -- a meeting
between executives at Simon & Schuster and executives at various ABC
television programs, including Good Morning America, 20/20, and Nightline.
Dittrich remind's Alexander of what he said about his book's title and
asks whether there were any parts of the book's contents he would
concede "are similarly hyperbolic." He says no, there are not. But
P.M.H. Atwater disagrees. In her November 13, 2012 newsletter, she writes:
“There is one factual error in the book on page 78, where he states that
he was allowed to die harder, and travel deeper, than almost all other
NDE subjects. Almost all? Well, not exactly true, but sort-of. Come to
find out his editor insisted that this line be in the book, even though
Eben did not agree and felt it was a stretch. Seems to be the way of
publishing these days -- when in doubt, exaggerate. There are several
who evidenced medical conditions similar to Eben’s…”
After detailing all the information I have summarized above, Dittrich
now enters the home stretch. Here's how he describes his last interview
with Alexander, which took place via Skype:
We talk about rainstorms and intubations and chemically induced comas,
and I can see it in his face, the moment he knows for sure that the
story I've been working on is not the one he wanted me to tell.
"What I'm worried about," he says, "is that you're going to be so busy
trying to smash out these little tiny fires that you're going to miss
the big point of the book."
I ask whether an account of his professional struggles should have been
included in a book that rests its authority on his professional credentials.
He says no, because medical boards in various states investigated the
malpractice allegations and concluded he could retain his license. And
besides, that's all in the past. "The fact of the matter," he says of
the suits, "is they don't matter at all to me.... You cannot imagine how
minuscule they appear in comparison to what I saw, where I went, and the
message that I bring back."
His survival is a miracle, he says. His doctors told him that he is
alive when he should be dead, and he believes intensely that he is alive
for a reason, to spread the word about the love awaiting us all in
heaven. To heal.
By focusing on the inconsistencies in his story, on recollections that
don't seem to add up, on a court-documented history of revising facts,
on the distinctions between natural and medically induced comas, he
says, is to miss the forest for the trees. That's all misleading stuff,
irrelevant to his journey and story.
Toward the end, there's a note of pleading in his voice.
"I just think that you're doing a grave disservice to your readers to
lead them down a pathway of thinking that any of that is, is relevant.
And I just, I really ask, as a friend, don't..."
THE DALAI LAMA: EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRE RELIABLE WITNESSES
Finally, Dittrich brings the Dalai Lama into the fray. He describes the
"Life and After Life" symposium which took place at Maitripa College in
Portland, Oregon on May 10, 2013. Along with other scientists and
scholars, the Dalai Lama and Dr. Eben Alexander both attended this
conference. Dr. Alexander spoke first. Then the Dalai Lama. As Dittrich
describes the event, you are given the impression that the Dalai Lama
thought Alexander might be playing fast and loose with his facts. Here's
how Dittrich describes the encounter:
The Dalai Lama is not a native English speaker, and when it's his turn
to speak, he does so much less smoothly than Alexander, sometimes
stopping and snapping his fingers when a word escapes him, or turning to
his interpreter for help when he's really stuck. He is not using notes,
and the impression he gives is that of a man speaking off the cuff. He
opens with a brief discourse about the parallels between the Buddhist
and Shinto conceptions of the afterlife, and then, after glancing over
at Alexander, changes the subject. He explains that Buddhists categorize
phenomena in three ways. The first category are "evident phenomena,"
which can be observed and measured empirically and directly. The second
category are "hidden phenomena," such as gravity, phenomena that can't
be seen or touched but can be inferred to exist on the basis of the
first category of phenomena. The third category, he says, are "extremely
hidden phenomena," which cannot be measured at all, directly or
indirectly. The only access we can ever have to that third category of
phenomena is through our own first-person experience, or through the
first-person testimony of others.
"Now, for example," the Dalai Lama says, "his sort of experience."
He points at Alexander.
"For him, it's something reality. Real. But those people who never sort
of experienced that, still, his mind is a little bit sort of..." He taps
his fingers against the side of his head. "Different!" he says, and
laughs a belly laugh, his robes shaking. The audience laughs with him.
Alexander smiles a tight smile.
"For that also, we must investigate," the Dalai Lama says. "Through
investigation we must get sure that person is truly reliable." He wags a
finger in Alexander's direction. When a man makes extraordinary claims,
a "thorough investigation" is required, to ensure "that person reliable,
never telling lie," and has "no reason to lie."
Did Dittrich fairly and accurately describe this encounter? You can
decide for yourself. Here's a videotape of the event. The portion that
Dittrich is referring to begins at 0:46:05.
Dittrich continues and ends his article with this:
Alexander listens quietly, occasionally fidgeting with the program in
his hands. He's a long way from home, and even further from the man he
once was. It's been a dizzying journey, but his path forward seems set.
He's told people that God granted him so much knowledge, so much wisdom,
so many secrets, that he will have to spend his entire life unpacking it
all, doling it out bit by bit. He's already working on the follow-up to
Proof of Heaven. In the meantime, anyone can pay sixty dollars to access
his webinar guided-meditation series, "Discover Your Own Proof of
Heaven," and he's been consulting with a pair of experts in
"archaeoacoustics" to re-create some of the music that he heard while on
his journey. You can even pay to join him on a "healing journey" through
In his past life, Alexander went through some hard times, but those hard
times are far behind him now.
He is in a better place.
EBEN ALEXANDER’S STATEMENT
What was Alexander's response to Dittrich's article? Here's the response
that was posted on July 6th on his Facebook Page:
For those concerned by issues raised in a recent article, Dr Alexander
offers the following:
"I stand by every word in my book Proof of Heaven and have made its
message the purpose of my life. Esquire's cynical article distorts the
facts of my 25-year career as a neurosurgeon and is a textbook example
of how unsupported assertions and cherry-picked information can be
assembled at the expense of the truth."
A complete response is forthcoming. Remember - Love has infinite power
THE NET ERUPTS
As you might imagine, as soon as Esquire's article appeared online,
droves of people read it and started commenting on it. In the NDE world,
these three networks were buzzing:
NHNE’s NDE Network
The Near-Death Experience Research Foundation (NDERF) Network
You can also find pertinent comments on:
Eben Alexander’s Facebook Page
NHNE’s NDE Facebook Page
Most people were quick to take sides, including many who hadn't even
bothered to read the article! They either believed Alexander had told
the truth and was being unjustly crucified by Esquire, or they felt
Esquire had revealed, in technicolor, that Alexander was a charlatan who
was making a fortune selling tales of an afterlife to the gullible masses.
Here are a few comments from Alexander's Facebook Page:
"Don't let the bastards grind you down Doctor!!"
"Very interesting! Esquire?!? I thought they are a progressive bunch of
people and NOT backward thinking lying lunatics?"
"Keep carrying the torch Dr. A. You have far more supporters than
"Pseudo skeptics (media whores) trying sell their scientism masquerading
as science and in reality hidden materialist agendas are often at work
in these situations."
"What you wrote was the Gospel truth Eben...Don't let the naysayers,
scoffers and cynics get you down."
"I was computing some numbers in my head. If Eben sold about 2 million
books and let's say that there were 2 million book buyers who bought one
book each; then, if Esquire were able to sell it's 'research' to, let's
say, at most half of the book buyers, at $1.99 a pop, that's almost $2
million revenue for Esquire. So, I guess from a marketer's perspective,
whether the so-called critics' claim was true or not, it is still quite
profitable. If I am a purely money-grabbing business person, I say
'stirring the pot' is a very profitable venture. Don't you think?
Business is business, right?"
Of the 60 comments that I read, only one reader dared to offer a more
"The allegations are big and I think more evidence Is needed to support
While the comments on other NDE-friendly networks were more mixed, they
also tended to side with Alexander. Most felt Esquire's article was a
hatchet job; they believed skeptics, materialists, atheists, Christian
fundamentalists, and money-grubbing corporate interests were behind the
story. Many believed Alexander’s past mistakes were not relevant because
he has now been changed by his near-death experience and is trying to
live more lovingly and consciously. Some NDErs also took the whole
episode very personally; they felt that they had been misrepresented and
abused by the mainstream media and that the same thing was now happening
Other comments included these three gems, the last of which was written
THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK
Eben Alexander says: "Esquire's cynical article... is a textbook example
of how unsupported assertions and cherry-picked information can be
assembled at the expense of the truth." But isn't that a two edged
sword? Has Eben produced unsupported assertions and has he cherry-picked
things from his experience to make things look a certain way? I'm not
passing judgment, just stating an opinion on his statement.
I remember the discussions on this forum when his book first came out
and there were rumors that he had changed things in the book because
that is what the publisher wanted. I do not know the truth of it. But I
do know this, when I've spoken of my experiences, I spoke my truth and
then walked away, I didn't really care whether others believed it or
not. I was not going to argue with them, as he seems to be doing with
the esquire story. But then again I wasn't trying to sell a book and
make people think one way or the other.
EVERYTHING COULD BE FABRICATED
I agree about the necessity of serious NDE research.
I also think people need to open their minds to the possibility that
everything Alexander wrote about his NDE in his book was fabricated. As
a professional writer, for example, I know it would be an interesting
and relatively easy task to write a narrative about a personal NDE that
the community would salivate over. That isn't something I would do, but
such a writing project would be a relatively simple matter for anyone
who liked to write and who had knowledge of NDEs and who knew the
buttons to push to excite the NDE community.
I've seen conscious deception of this magnitude (for financial and/or
ego reasons) from best-selling authors and personalities several times
in the natural health, enlightenment, and vegan communities, and I see
no reason why the same thing couldn't happen in the NDE community.
To start wrapping this up, most everyone who's taking part in this
discussion appears to be a lot less cynical than I am, thank God, but
the goal of the discussion is to seek truth, right?
And, in this world, sad to say, there are many individuals fully capable
of convincingly lying about anything for financial and/or ego reasons,
including an NDE.
We know from the article that Alexander is a careless surgeon who fused
the wrong vertebrae in two different patients in a matter of weeks and
that he doctored records in one of these two instances to cover up his
egregious errors. Medically speaking, Eben Alexander is not just an MD
who has been savaged by greedy lawyers to make money. Anyone who would
doctor records to cover up serious mistakes, in my book at least, could
also realize that a ruined medical career could be replaced by using
neurosurgeon and MD credentials to provide scientific legitimacy to an
NDE -- a "proof of heaven."
America has a long history of Barnum’s who don't mind fooling the
public... especially when BIG money is involved.
Finally, I know that suggesting Alexander may be a fraud who fabricated
much (if not everything substantive) in his book may not be a popular
point of view in this discussion, but it is a point of view that
deserves intelligent consideration.
AS WITHIN, SO WITHOUT
Wholesale fraud in Eben's case seems very unlikely to me. I [do,
however,] agree that we must exercise conscious, careful, caring
I’ll go a step further, however, and say that we all -- every single one
of us -- have areas in our lives where shadow issues are running amuck.
The way we view and react to people and situations on the outside, is
usually an accurate gauge for how we are treating ourselves on the
inside. As within, so without. Are we really, deeply looking at our own
issues -- the places within ourselves where we lie, cut corners,
exaggerate, refuse to see the truth, avoid admitting mistakes? Do we
also bristle, boil, and attack others for daring to notice the undone
areas in ourselves? Or are we able to remain calm and even-handed? Do we
make healing, and an honest search for the truth, more important than
saving face and getting our feathers ruffled?
Treating myself -- and others -- with deep love and respect, while at
the same time, holding both accountable, is an extremely tall order in
this world. We prefer -- deeply prefer -- to swing one way or another:
ignore all the developmental/dark side business, or jump in shoot
Which reminds me of one of the most important insights I think NDEs have
to offer us. They offer us a breathtaking example of how to live
healthy, balanced lives. On the one hand, they use life reviews to call
every single transgression to mind. None of us gets away with anything.
And on the other hand, we are absolutely, wholeheartedly and
unconditionally loved. We are not condemned for our shortcomings, but
encouraged to become ever more full blown, crystal clear embodiments of
the divine. That, I think, is the proper attitude.
Again, this is a profoundly difficult posture to maintain in this world:
to treat ourselves and one another with the same kind of discerning eye
and loving heart that we are treated with on the other side. But that, I
think, is what we need to strive for.
Back to Eben. The question I’m asking myself right now is this: Am I
treating Eben, Luke Dittrich, Esquire, and everyone else involved in
this situation like we are treated on the other side -- in a loving,
clear seeing, constructive way? Or am I swinging to extremes? As within,
Which Way Will The Wind Blow?
Alexander mentioned that he intends to provide a "complete response" to
the Esquire expose'. If his response tackles the issues raised in the
Esquire article head on, clarifying misunderstandings and admitting
where he may have been less than honest, I will be cheering him on. If
there is one thing this world needs, it is people who are big enough to
admit mistakes, without resorting to blanket denials or lawyerly-worded,
If, on the other had, Alexander sticks with the first statement he made
-- that he stands by every word in his book -- then we are probably
looking at a situation that will continue to escalate until the truth,
whatever it is, finally emerges for all to see.
Take-Aways & Suggestions
So what can you and I learn from this situation? Here are a few concrete
• Tell the truth. Tell the truth. Tell the truth. Don't embellish,
fudge, doctor, spin, or alter facts so they read better and/or sell more
books (or articles). And this applies as much to authors as it does to
journalists, politicians, scientists, doctors, teachers, theologians,
mystics, gurus, plumbers, carpenters, what have you. Tell the truth.
Tell the truth. Tell the truth.
• Remember that spiritual experiences do not magically make us perfect.
If we were wounded and undeveloped beings before a spiritual experience,
we will still need to work on the imperfect sides of our human nature
when we return to this world.
• Pay attention to the dark side, in both ourselves and others.
• Rather than automatically taking sides, make a sincere effort to see
both sides of every situation -- and extend love, compassion, and
forgiveness to all parties, including those who have engaged in
behaviors that are less then loving, compassionate, and forgiving
As we discussed these ideas, one class member wondered aloud about
hooking people up to some kind of lie-detector machine. That prompted me
to mention that the days of lying are rapidly coming to an end. Along
with the internet, which allows human beings to quickly compare notes
with other people all over the world, we are also developing
increasingly sophisticated methods to find out what really happened. In
the end, it seems clear that this world is step-by-step moving closer to
how it is on the other side of the veil. Eventually, we'll no longer be
able to lie to ourselves or others in this world any more than we are
able to lie to ourselves and others on the other side. We might as well
start learning how to tell the truth, all the time, now!
Founder & President
Phone: (928) 239-4133
Fax: (815) 642-0117
To subscribe to NHNE's News List, send a message to:
To unsubscribe to NHNE's News List, send a message to:
To support NHNE
How Near-Death Experiences Are Changing The World
NHNE NDE Resource Center & Social Network
NHNE Pulse NDE Resource Page
NHNE NDE on Facebook
NHNE NDE on Google+
P.O. Box 2242
Sedona, AZ 86339 USA