What happens after we die

[Mock Turtle]

Sure



The evidence is there. Some will follow it where it leads; some will take it to where they want it to be, in both cases, it’s a matter of freewill.

Do you have any knowledge of the "NDE" research?

Without any scientific study, near-death experiences “NDE" were previously assumed to be imagination, hallucination, or oxygen deficiency. This is no longer the case. NDE has been the subject of scientific research for few decades now. NDE studies showed that during the state of a lifeless body and without a functioning brain, an enhanced (non-local) consciousness, with unaltered self-identity was experienced. The observations are verified, documented and published in scientific journals. It cannot be disputed.

In 1988 the Dutch author Pim van Lommel launched a study of near-death experiences after cardiac arrest that was published in the medical journal the Lancet in 2001. In 2007, the first edition of his bestseller Consciousness Beyond Life: The Science of the Near-Death Experience, was published.

Pim van Lommel - Wikipedia

And from the Wiki - citing some issues:

Neurobiologist Dick Swaab praised van Lommel's research for mapping patients’ experiences and opening up the subject of near-death experiences (NDEs) to the medical world. But he also claimed that Lommel's book ignores scientific knowledge, including some conclusions from his own research. He further argued that van Lommel does not refute neurobiological explanations, gives no scientific basis for his statements and borrows concepts from quantum physics without ground (quantum mysticism). According to Swaab, Van Lommel deviates from the scientific approach and Consciousness Beyond Life can only be categorized as pseudoscientific.

Jason Braithwaite, a senior lecturer in Cognitive Neuroscience in the Behavioural Brain Sciences Centre, University of Birmingham, issued an in-depth analysis and critique of van Lommel's prospective study published in the medical journal The Lancet, concluding that while Lommel's et al. study makes a useful contribution, it contains several factual and logical errors. Among these errors are van Lommel's misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the dying-brain hypothesis, misunderstandings over the role of anoxia, misplaced confidence in EEG measurements (a flat electroencephalogram (EEG) reading is not evidence of total brain inactivity), etc. Jason concluded with, "it is difficult to see what one could learn from the paranormal survivalist position which sets out assuming the truth of that which it seeks to establish, makes additional and unnecessary assumptions, misrepresents the current state of knowledge from mainstream science, and appears less than comprehensive in its analysis of the available facts."

In his book van Lommel also supported alleged psychic abilities of some NDErs. In a review, skeptic Donna Harris wrote the research was unreliable as it was taken from self-reported surveys and interviews and "since any type of paranormal or intuitive power remains unproven, it is troubling that the author doesn’t question these abilities, and just includes them as accepted facts."

 

[Twilight Hue]

There should be an option for "there is absolutely no objective evidence that we can survive our own deaths in any meaningful way"

Well there is objective evidence.

Your birth.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Is there more?

If religious Bob says there is heaven or hell after death and nonreligious Bill says there is nothing after death....
Aren't they both simply assuming what they don't know?

Yes, we are all speculating - sometimes, from things that we’ve experienced [in life] that feel to us like somewhere “on the way” to death.

I’ve had a few “close encounters” with physical death and, though it’s likely that one’s body (brain) goes into shock and creates all sorts of oddities, I bear the memories of those experienced oddities with me afterwards and they impact on my ideas of what happens to us on “our way out”.

At the times of my first three such experiences, I was an atheist. The first time was in a swimming pool at the age of eight (drowning), the second time was during surgery in my early 20’s (overdose of anaesthesia) and the third was at home, at 28 (diabetic coma). Two of these times, I am told that I had flatlined.

Each of those times, I experienced many things that made no sense to me then. I won’t get into details because …honestly, it bores me a little by now. But, my experiences during the third time came to change my view on reality, life and death going forward.

By my fourth experience however, in my mid 40’s (road accident), I knew what experiences to expect and had my ideas as to why. It made good sense to me now.*

To summarise what is of importance to me about what has always happened when my body [brain] goes into that sort of shock: emotions that I have caused onto others, come back to me as though they were my own and I get to experience their experiences (of what I have done to/for them) in person.

Whether the cause is physical, psychological, spiritual or all of the above; the worse I’ve done onto others, the more hellish my “close encounters” with my own death have been for me.


Humbly
Hermit

 

[Revoltingest]

I think the evidence seems to point to reincarnation. Like the Laws of Thermodynamics.

Thermodynamics would only say that
you assume room temperature....
....& that lawyers will divide up whatever
you own for themselves.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Nope, but it still doesn't surprise me you don't understand the difference. I'd be minded to help edify you, but your posts long ago suggested a mind so closed as to make it a futile effort.

In my opinion, your criticism of @We Never Know is inaccurate and uncalled for. I also agree with @Trailblazer about him being one of the more open-minded people on this forum, despite not being a religious follower. In fact, he once asked me for my opinion on a matter that he thought was unusual because he was aware of my personal experiences with the paranormal. I therefore consider him to be quite open-minded toward subjects like the one being discussed in this thread, even though he is not a religious follower.

 

[LIIA]

And from the Wiki - citing some issues:

Neurobiologist Dick Swaab praised van Lommel's research for mapping patients’ experiences and opening up the subject of near-death experiences (NDEs) to the medical world. But he also claimed that Lommel's book ignores scientific knowledge, including some conclusions from his own research. He further argued that van Lommel does not refute neurobiological explanations, gives no scientific basis for his statements and borrows concepts from quantum physics without ground (quantum mysticism). According to Swaab, Van Lommel deviates from the scientific approach and Consciousness Beyond Life can only be categorized as pseudoscientific.

Jason Braithwaite, a senior lecturer in Cognitive Neuroscience in the Behavioural Brain Sciences Centre, University of Birmingham, issued an in-depth analysis and critique of van Lommel's prospective study published in the medical journal The Lancet, concluding that while Lommel's et al. study makes a useful contribution, it contains several factual and logical errors. Among these errors are van Lommel's misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the dying-brain hypothesis, misunderstandings over the role of anoxia, misplaced confidence in EEG measurements (a flat electroencephalogram (EEG) reading is not evidence of total brain inactivity), etc. Jason concluded with, "it is difficult to see what one could learn from the paranormal survivalist position which sets out assuming the truth of that which it seeks to establish, makes additional and unnecessary assumptions, misrepresents the current state of knowledge from mainstream science, and appears less than comprehensive in its analysis of the available facts."

In his book van Lommel also supported alleged psychic abilities of some NDErs. In a review, skeptic Donna Harris wrote the research was unreliable as it was taken from self-reported surveys and interviews and "since any type of paranormal or intuitive power remains unproven, it is troubling that the author doesn’t question these abilities, and just includes them as accepted facts."

some will follow the evidence where it leads, and some will take it to where they want it to be. We’re free.

The link below is for another article published by NIH/PMC. The article is authored by a recognized world expert on near-death experiences Dr. Jeffrey Long. Dr. Long established the nonprofit “Near Death Experience Research Foundation" and a website forum (www.nderf.org) for people to share their NDEs.

Check the “Line of Evidence” #1 through #9, the “Conclusion of Study” and finally the “Conclusion”.

Near-Death Experiences Evidence for Their Reality

Here is a quote from the Conclusion of Study:

“Many of the preceding lines of evidence would be remarkable if they were reported by a group of individuals during conscious experiences. However, NDErs are generally unconscious or clinically dead at the time of their experiences and should not have any lucid organized memories from their time of unconsciousness.”

Here is a quote from the Conclusion:

“Any one or several of the nine lines of evidence would likely be reasonably convincing to many, but the combination of all of the presented nine lines of evidence provides powerful evidence that NDEs are, in a word, real.”

 

[LIIA]

Yes, we are all speculating - sometimes, from things that we’ve experienced [in life] that feel to us like somewhere “on the way” to death.

I’ve had a few “close encounters” with physical death and, though it’s likely that one’s body (brain) goes into shock and creates all sorts of oddities, I bear the memories of those experienced oddities with me afterwards and they impact on my ideas of what happens to us on “our way out”.

At the times of my first three such experiences, I was an atheist. The first time was in a swimming pool at the age of eight (drowning), the second time was during surgery in my early 20’s (overdose of anaesthesia) and the third was at home, at 28 (diabetic coma). Two of these times, I am told that I had flatlined.

Each of those times, I experienced many things that made no sense to me then. I won’t get into details because …honestly, it bores me a little by now. But, my experiences during the third time came to change my view on reality, life and death going forward.

By my fourth experience however, in my mid 40’s (road accident), I knew what experiences to expect and had my ideas as to why. It made good sense to me now.*

To summarise what is of importance to me about what has always happened when my body [brain] goes into that sort of shock: emotions that I have caused onto others, come back to me as though they were my own and I get to experience their experiences (of what I have done to/for them) in person.

Whether the cause is physical, psychological, spiritual or all of the above; the worse I’ve done onto others, the more hellish my “close encounters” with my own death have been for me.


Humbly
Hermit

Thank you for sharing your experience.

Many of the near-death experiencers (NDErs) had a single NDE encounter. it’s unusual that a person experience/survive multiple NDEs, in that sense, your experience is really unique.

Near Death Experience Research Foundation (NDERF) website was established to facilitate sharing the info and conduct NDE research.

If you didn’t share your NDEs on the NDERF website, it would be a good idea to do so. Here is the link.

NDERF Home Page

 

[LIIA]

Yes, we are all speculating - sometimes, from things that we’ve experienced [in life] that feel to us like somewhere “on the way” to death.

I’ve had a few “close encounters” with physical death and, though it’s likely that one’s body (brain) goes into shock and creates all sorts of oddities, I bear the memories of those experienced oddities with me afterwards and they impact on my ideas of what happens to us on “our way out”.

At the times of my first three such experiences, I was an atheist. The first time was in a swimming pool at the age of eight (drowning), the second time was during surgery in my early 20’s (overdose of anaesthesia) and the third was at home, at 28 (diabetic coma). Two of these times, I am told that I had flatlined.

Each of those times, I experienced many things that made no sense to me then. I won’t get into details because …honestly, it bores me a little by now. But, my experiences during the third time came to change my view on reality, life and death going forward.

By my fourth experience however, in my mid 40’s (road accident), I knew what experiences to expect and had my ideas as to why. It made good sense to me now.*

To summarise what is of importance to me about what has always happened when my body [brain] goes into that sort of shock: emotions that I have caused onto others, come back to me as though they were my own and I get to experience their experiences (of what I have done to/for them) in person.

Whether the cause is physical, psychological, spiritual or all of the above; the worse I’ve done onto others, the more hellish my “close encounters” with my own death have been for me.


Humbly
Hermit

You have been given multiple chances, make use of it.

Again, Thanks for sharing

 

[Trailblazer]

some will follow the evidence where it leads, and some will take it to where they want it to be. We’re free.

The link below is for another article published by NIH/PMC. The article is authored by a recognized world expert on near-death experiences Dr. Jeffrey Long. Dr. Long established the nonprofit “Near Death Experience Research Foundation" and a website forum (www.nderf.org) for people to share their NDEs.

Check the “Line of Evidence” #1 through #9, the “Conclusion of Study” and finally the “Conclusion”.

Near-Death Experiences Evidence for Their Reality

Here is a quote from the Conclusion of Study:

“Many of the preceding lines of evidence would be remarkable if they were reported by a group of individuals during conscious experiences. However, NDErs are generally unconscious or clinically dead at the time of their experiences and should not have any lucid organized memories from their time of unconsciousness.”

Here is a quote from the Conclusion:

“Any one or several of the nine lines of evidence would likely be reasonably convincing to many, but the combination of all of the presented nine lines of evidence provides powerful evidence that NDEs are, in a word, real.”

Thanks for sharing all that information about NDEs. I definitely believe they are real experiences, but I do not believe that those people who experienced them actually crossed over into the spiritual world. I believe that they only caught a glimpse of it. Many NDEers report that they were given an opportunity to choose to live and come back to their life in this world or to die, go through the portal, and enter the spiritual world. Obviously, those who came back to tell us what happened are those who chose to live. Those who did not have a choice because they were beyond saving with medical intervention continued on to the spiritual world, but there are no reports from them since they never came back to tell us what it was like.

I believe that psychic mediums can communicate to spirits who are in the spiritual world.
A couple of books I have read on the subject are as follows:

The Afterlife Revealed

Private Dowding

 

[Mock Turtle]

some will follow the evidence where it leads, and some will take it to where they want it to be. We’re free.

The link below is for another article published by NIH/PMC. The article is authored by a recognized world expert on near-death experiences Dr. Jeffrey Long. Dr. Long established the nonprofit “Near Death Experience Research Foundation" and a website forum (www.nderf.org) for people to share their NDEs.

Check the “Line of Evidence” #1 through #9, the “Conclusion of Study” and finally the “Conclusion”.

Near-Death Experiences Evidence for Their Reality

Here is a quote from the Conclusion of Study:

“Many of the preceding lines of evidence would be remarkable if they were reported by a group of individuals during conscious experiences. However, NDErs are generally unconscious or clinically dead at the time of their experiences and should not have any lucid organized memories from their time of unconsciousness.”

Here is a quote from the Conclusion:

“Any one or several of the nine lines of evidence would likely be reasonably convincing to many, but the combination of all of the presented nine lines of evidence provides powerful evidence that NDEs are, in a word, real.”

Since even 'clinically dead' is still disputed, I think there is more to this than the views of some 'experts' you might find on NDEs.

 

[LIIA]

Since even 'clinically dead' is still disputed, I think there is more to this than the views of some 'experts' you might find on NDEs.

You didn’t read the “Line of Evidence”, if you do, then you will see that your comment about “clinically dead” is actually irrelevant. Yes, there is more to this for those who are interested. If you’re not, then it's simply a matter of “freewill”, it's your free inclination towards one side or another, evidence no matter how conclusive it is may not necessarily change your inclination/which side you want to be on.

How we see things, is not necessarily dependent on how it looks but mainly on how we want to see it.

 

[LIIA]

Thanks for sharing all that information about NDEs. I definitely believe they are real experiences, but I do not believe that those people who experienced them actually crossed over into the spiritual world. I believe that they only caught a glimpse of it. Many NDEers report that they were given an opportunity to choose to live and come back to their life in this world or to die, go through the portal, and enter the spiritual world. Obviously, those who came back to tell us what happened are those who chose to live. Those who did not have a choice because they were beyond saving with medical intervention continued on to the spiritual world, but there are no reports from them since they never came back to tell us what it was like.

I believe that psychic mediums can communicate to spirits who are in the spiritual world.
A couple of books I have read on the subject are as follows:

The Afterlife Revealed

Private Dowding

Thank you.

I also agree with you that they only caught a glimpse into the spiritual world. I think it’s a message, guidance and mercy for us to help us find the way and make the right choices in life.

Thank you for sharing your comments and the books, here is another important book for those who may be interested in the subject:

Amazon.com: Consciousness Beyond Life: The Science of the Near-Death Experience: 9780061777264: van Lommel, Pim: Books

189523-MOMed.pdf (nih.gov)

 

[Mock Turtle]

You didn’t read the “Line of Evidence”, if you do, then you will see that your comment about “clinically dead” is actually irrelevant. Yes, there is more to this for those who are interested. If you’re not, then it's simply a matter of “freewill”, it's your free inclination towards one side or another, evidence no matter how conclusive it is may not necessarily change your inclination/which side you want to be on.

How we see things, is not necessarily dependent on how it looks but mainly on how we want to see it.

Not really, given the definition has changed over time, and is probably still not set. But it's also relevant to when such NDEs occur - given the subject probably will not know. Even measurements of such might be misleading or not accurate. If you really had some impartial nature you would be searching for all evidence to disprove NDEs - not confirm them.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

You have been given multiple chances, make use of it.

Again, Thanks for sharing

Thank you LIIA. I hope and do believe that I am. Life to me, is not about ourselves, so I live a quiet and humble one and try to remain open [trusting] towards and attentive to those I encounter and to their own predicaments.


Humbly,
Hermit

 

[LIIA]

Not really, given the definition has changed over time, and is probably still not set. But it's also relevant to when such NDEs occur - given the subject probably will not know. Even measurements of such might be misleading or not accurate.

You didn’t read the line of evidence (#1 through #9), did you?

If you consider line of evidence #2 and #3, you will see that the definition of “clinical death” is irrelevant. Whatever the definition may be, the observations remain unexplainable.

Line of evidence #2:
how would someone clinically dead (whatever the definition is) or unconscious accurately report verified events from a location apart from the physical body at the exact time while being unconscious? A common characteristic of near-death experiences is an out-of-body experience (OBE).

Multiple studies were conducted to investigate the accuracy of out-of-body observations during near-death experiences by many scientists such as Dr. Michael Sabom, Dr. Penny Sartori, Dr. Janice Holden. These multiple studies that were documented and published in scientific journals found that near-death experiences were often remarkably accurate in describing the verified details of the OBEs.

Dr. Holden found that 92% of the case reports were completely accurate with no inaccuracy whatsoever when the OBE observations were later investigated.

Another major study on NDEs that had OBEs with sufficient information to allow objective determination of the reality of their descriptions of their observations during the OBEs, found that 97.6% of the cases were accurate.

The high percentage of accurate out-of-body observations during near-death experiences while the NDErs were verifiably clinically comatose without any possible physical sensory awareness yet verifiably obtain accurate info that is not attainable through any physical means (even to a fully conscious person from their body location) remains unexplainable.

Whether the NDErs were conscious or not and regardless of any definition of “clinical death”, the obtained accurate info during the OBEs remains totally unexplainable.

Line of evidence #3:
Vision in near-death experiencers that are blind, including totally blind from birth, has been described in many case reports.

A large study by Dr. Kenneth Ring on individuals who were blind from birth showed that the majority of NDErs described highly visual experiences consistent with typical NDEs.

For the first time in their lives, some reported vision of leaves on trees, bird’s feathers, bird’s eyes, details on telephone poles and what was in people’s back yards with accurate details that cannot be attained with normal 20/20 vision, the ability to see above, below, right, left, behind, and everywhere at the same time (360-degree vision).

The evidence revealed that vision during NDEs is usually different from normal everyday vision and often described as supernormal.

NDErs blind from birth accurately described visual experiences of their surroundings, their own body, the emergency room, the medical team, accurate details of what happened to them while being unconscious in addition to true events from locations apart from the physical body.

The definition of “clinical death” is irrelevant; the visual experiences of the blind/unconscious NDErs cannot be explained even if the NDErs maintained any degree of brain function/consciousness.

Those scientists/experts who worked on NDE research and published their work in scientific journals were not trying to impose any conclusions; they were conducting scientific research, documenting and verifying actual observations. The goal was not to prove or disprove NDEs, the goal was to study the phenomenon scientifically.

If you really had some impartial nature you would be searching for all evidence to disprove NDEs - not confirm them.

Why? How is that impartial?

A person with an impartial nature would study a phenomenon and follow the evidence where it leads.

“A man should look for what is, and not what he thinks should be.”
-Albert Einstein

Skepticism is an integrated component of the scientific research, it continues till the evidence proves otherwise, this is what happened in the NDE studies. The evidence proved observations that were not expected or considered to be possible. Our consciousness with the continuous experience of self, does not always coincide with the functioning of our brain: enhanced or non-local consciousness, with unaltered self-identity, can be experienced independently from the lifeless body.

 

[Mock Turtle]

You didn’t read the line of evidence (#1 through #9), did you?

If you consider line of evidence #2 and #3, you will see that the definition of “clinical death” is irrelevant. Whatever the definition may be, the observations remain unexplainable.

Line of evidence #2:
how would someone clinically dead (whatever the definition is) or unconscious accurately report verified events from a location apart from the physical body at the exact time while being unconscious? A common characteristic of near-death experiences is an out-of-body experience (OBE).

Multiple studies were conducted to investigate the accuracy of out-of-body observations during near-death experiences by many scientists such as Dr. Michael Sabom, Dr. Penny Sartori, Dr. Janice Holden. These multiple studies that were documented and published in scientific journals found that near-death experiences were often remarkably accurate in describing the verified details of the OBEs.

Dr. Holden found that 92% of the case reports were completely accurate with no inaccuracy whatsoever when the OBE observations were later investigated.

Another major study on NDEs that had OBEs with sufficient information to allow objective determination of the reality of their descriptions of their observations during the OBEs, found that 97.6% of the cases were accurate.

The high percentage of accurate out-of-body observations during near-death experiences while the NDErs were verifiably clinically comatose without any possible physical sensory awareness yet verifiably obtain accurate info that is not attainable through any physical means (even to a fully conscious person from their body location) remains unexplainable.

Whether the NDErs were conscious or not and regardless of any definition of “clinical death”, the obtained accurate info during the OBEs remains totally unexplainable.

Line of evidence #3:
Vision in near-death experiencers that are blind, including totally blind from birth, has been described in many case reports.

A large study by Dr. Kenneth Ring on individuals who were blind from birth showed that the majority of NDErs described highly visual experiences consistent with typical NDEs.

For the first time in their lives, some reported vision of leaves on trees, bird’s feathers, bird’s eyes, details on telephone poles and what was in people’s back yards with accurate details that cannot be attained with normal 20/20 vision, the ability to see above, below, right, left, behind, and everywhere at the same time (360-degree vision).

The evidence revealed that vision during NDEs is usually different from normal everyday vision and often described as supernormal.

NDErs blind from birth accurately described visual experiences of their surroundings, their own body, the emergency room, the medical team, accurate details of what happened to them while being unconscious in addition to true events from locations apart from the physical body.

The definition of “clinical death” is irrelevant; the visual experiences of the blind/unconscious NDErs cannot be explained even if the NDErs maintained any degree of brain function/consciousness.

Those scientists/experts who worked on NDE research and published their work in scientific journals were not trying to impose any conclusions; they were conducting scientific research, documenting and verifying actual observations. The goal was not to prove or disprove NDEs, the goal was to study the phenomenon scientifically.



Why? How is that impartial?

A person with an impartial nature would study a phenomenon and follow the evidence where it leads.

“A man should look for what is, and not what he thinks should be.”
-Albert Einstein

Skepticism is an integrated component of the scientific research, it continues till the evidence proves otherwise, this is what happened in the NDE studies. The evidence proved observations that were not expected or considered to be possible. Our consciousness with the continuous experience of self, does not always coincide with the functioning of our brain: enhanced or non-local consciousness, with unaltered self-identity, can be experienced independently from the lifeless body.

Perhaps when the larger body of science accepts such things I might do so. Just as I am sceptical of UFOs and alien sightings. I do not have the expertise or knowledge so as to judge this area, but given that I am pretty certain that scientists still don't know enough about what occurs in the brain, I will await what might happen in the future - if such happens - rather than be swayed by evidence that might be misinterpreted or based upon wrong suppositions. One issue being conscious experiences versus unconscious or subconscious experiences - and how we might measure or assess such.

 

[syo]

Is there more?

Yes. Reincarnation.

 

[LIIA]

Yes. Reincarnation.

The NDE evidence (See # 75, #66, & #60) showed that our consciousness beyond the lifeless body continues with unaltered self-identity. The identity doesn’t change, and the return was always to the same physical body. There is no evidence otherwise.

 

[LIIA]

Perhaps when the larger body of science accepts such things I might do so.

What do you mean? There is no scientific rejection for the NDE studies. If you don’t know about it or don’t hear much about it, it doesn’t mean its not accepted scientifically.

yes, there is no physical explanation for NDEs but that is irrelevant to the fact that the observations itself are documented and true. The evidence proved that our consciousness continues beyond the lifeless body. Nothing about this special experience is physical yet it’s evidently very true.

Just as I am sceptical of UFOs and alien sightings.

How you equate NDE with UFOs? Is it only because this is how you think of it? We are talking about acknowledged and published scientific studies.

I do not have the expertise or knowledge so as to judge this area

Then, on what basis you are making a judgment? These are credible published scientific studies.

but given that I am pretty certain that scientists still don't know enough about what occurs in the brain

Yes, the brain is a black box and will continue to be but that is irrelevant. Brain functions don’t explain verified experiences physically very far away from the location of the physical body or accurate visual experiences of those lifeless/blind NDErs who never saw anything in their entire life and evidently impossible for them to physically have any visual experience of any kind.

I will await what might happen in the future

The future is now. The experiences that were in the past not much more than some scattered stories became verified and documented scientific observations.

rather than be swayed by evidence that might be misinterpreted or based upon wrong suppositions.

There are no interpretations, suppositions of any mechanism or explanatory theoretical framework other than documenting the verified facts that enhanced or non-local consciousness, with unaltered self-identity, can be experienced independently from the lifeless body.

One issue being conscious experiences versus unconscious or subconscious experiences - and how we might measure or assess such.

No matter how you think about it or try to justify it, the verified OBEs in addition to the visual experiences of the blind are unexplainable through any physical means.

Your position is not based on evidence or knowledge. It’s merely a choice, only you can decide which side you want to be on.

 

[LIIA]

Thank you LIIA. I hope and do believe that I am. Life to me, is not about ourselves, so I live a quiet and humble one and try to remain open [trusting] towards and attentive to those I encounter and to their own predicaments.


Humbly,
Hermit

Things happen for a reason. Most people don’t get a second chance. You got four. Its a gift, not only for you to do better and properly get done with whatever you need to get done with but also a gift for others to have a glimpse of that special realm through your experience. Don’t hesitate to share it.

No matter how many chances or how long is our test, it must finally come to an end. Life is about the test of freewill, our choices are not equal and it shall have consequences. Our choices reflect who we are. Our real life after our test will be eternally consistent with who we are. We never know when the test will end but we know it will. You know what you need to do. Choose wisely. Choose God.

Thank you