Near Death Experiences of Christians and others.

[William]

I have recently being injecting the idea of afterlife from the perspective of people who have experienced OOBEs and NDEs who for the most part are not Christians and share their experiences in the knowledge that they understand the experience as something which they had a part in creating for themselves.

Now I want to shift that from the non-Christian experiences being shared, to those of Christians who have had the same types of experiences and report back the same types of encounters but who don't always report that they understand their experience(s) to be something of their own creation.

It is my understanding that the experiences are both very similar in nature but also unique to the individual. 'Heavens' and 'hells' are also unique to the individual, but encounters with entities are remarkably similar.

THIS WOMAN DIED TWICE, FIRST WENT TO HELL, THEN EXPERIENCED HEAVEN AND MET JESUS

[yt]HvlWYOvtYRo[/yt]

In the channel description is the claim "100% PROOF THAT CHRISTIANITY IS THE TRUTH " which - if Christians were to do serious study on the subject of the Astral Realm from the testimonies of those who say they have experienced this, would come to understand that what it shows is that life doesn't end at the death of the body, and that Christianity is not the only religion which believes such and nor are Christians the only ones who have these experiences.

For that matter, many non religious individuals have experienced this, and while it does indeed change their whole outlook on life, and they adopt a more spiritual outlook, they do not see any necessity in suddenly coming to the conclusion that Christianity is 'The Truth' or that they have to become Christians because of their experiences.

The key points of this particular personal testimony are;

✪ She had her first NDE while in a coma, (2008) in which she ended up in a 'dark place' which she describes as extremely terrifying and refers to as 'hell' and accompanied by a feeling of dread and loss.

✪ Upon awakening from her coma, she recounted her experience to her loved ones gathered around her, and there was verification in relation to what she experienced with what they experienced in regard to a particular time in her experience to which she was aware of to do with the particular event she was speaking about, which coincided with the doctors notifying the family that she was dying and asking the family to gather and say their final goodbyes.

✪ This was then regarded as a miracle that she came through and recovered and due to being told a particular church group had been praying for her, she eventually joined that church and became a 'born again' Christian.

✪ In 2011 she fell sick again and was placed into a coma. She experienced an OOBE and this time it was different. She was floating above her body -looking down at it in the hospital bed. She then experienced a male entity join her and the entity was 'as bright as the sun' only looking at him didn't hurt her eyes.

✪ She experience a profound feeling of pure love from this entity - a love she has never felt from anyone in her whole experience, even from her family or parents... she describes the love was for her and was so strong and powerful and she just knew this entity loved her and this also gave her a feeling of being totally safe and protected and at peace.

✪ She says that there was telepathic communication between her and the entity but that she cannot remember what was said to her and she believes that the entity was Jesus himself.

✪ She comments that she is aware of other testimonies from others who have experienced similar encounters with this alternate reality. She also says she believes that she experienced 'a section of hell' rather then 'the whole of hell'. She says the same in regard to her second experience - that she was 'in a part of heaven' but did not see 'all of heaven'.

✪ She ends her testimony stating that 'we don't just die but go somewhere else and that hell is real, heaven is real and Jesus is real.

Now obviously she makes certain assumptions which are connected to her beliefs and these should be taken in that context. Her parting comments generally show what motivates a lot of Christians in relation to their beliefs.

Point being, as anyone can see through a bit of investigating into such stories will begin to see clearly that there is more than meets the eye as the pieces all fit together, re all such stories of such type experiences. Stories which not only are not going to go away or be so easily ignored/swept under the carpet - but will continue to grow in number as more people having them, share them with the world.



Questions for those who are Judaist, Christian or Muslim, are;

1: To what degree do you believe that these experiences are indicative of truth and need to regarded as genuine?

2: In relation to other faiths, where people encounter similar experiences, how does that stand in relation to your own faith in your own particular beliefs re the group/denomination you invest in?

3: In relation to those who are of no particular faith and have similar - life changing experiences, (these ones often become more spiritual but not necessarily develop religious beliefs) how does that stand in relation to your own faith in your own particular beliefs re the group/denomination you invest in?

Thanks.

[William]

[Replying to post 50 by JehovahsWitness]

Do you believe it is logically conceivable that if sprits are not equal there could exist a SUPREME spirit more powerful than the others?

It appears you require nothing more than a 'yes' or 'no' answer, which - given the subject - is an illogical requirement in and of its own. It will always require explanation, and explanation is what I have already given.

The answer I have already given is 'no' because it is illogical to believe that a SUPREME spirit more powerful than the other spirits created those other spirits from something other than Itself.

Hench the reason for my last answer. The idea that all things are of this SUPREME spirit is that it is supreme in it's wholeness and that there is not actual 'others' as far as It's perspective is concerend.
SUPREME then is under question - as your use of it implies that 'others' are not of IT, but are separate from IT, as well as using the idea of supremacy from a purely humanistic level of understanding, such as one would use the expression that 'America is the most supreme nation on the planet among other nations.' as one example.

So, if one were to take the humanistic approach to answering the question, it might appear the answer 'yes' is the logical one, until examined in more detail - under the light of truthfulness.

The reasoning I give here also hearkens back to your wanting the cake and to eat it to. You cannot claim that human understanding is in no position to:

Do not trust your own judgement

Post 14

and then proceed to state that human logic can debate such a subject... here you are attempting to do just that...even if it is trusting your own judgement to trust the judgement of others (writers and interpreters of the bible). That is illogical. How can you not trust your own logic to trust what you believe is the logic of others?

and also, you stated;

ACTS OF GOD OR ACTS OF DEMONS?

Logically if demons are created beings then their creator is superior in power and ability. In order to identify Himself as the Supreme ruler (and the one that should be trusted) this One would logically have to make a demonstration of power that cannot be matched by those that are lesser .

Post 18

You apply logic with the assumption that the entity who created all other beings is superior in power when all other beings are subject to that creator. If they are subject to that creator, then they are logically aspects of that creator, rather than separate and sovereign unto themselves - autonomous and subject to no other.

That is illogical. They cannot be both. yet here you are arguing that they can.

[William]

✪ She says that there was telepathic communication between her and the entity but that she cannot remember what was said to her and she believes that the entity was Jesus himself.

Could "the entity" not have been a demon PRETENDING to be Jesus?

Since Member Jehovah's Witness made that suggestion there have been a few posts of exchanges of argument which has shown that - if not specifically, then certainly generally - the Christian approach to the question of NDEs is that they are all to be considered untrustworthy because of the ingrained belief that demons are able to trick people and pretend to be GOD, Jesus and even the Holy Ghost.

This may explain why Christians on this board by and large have chosen not to engage with the thread subject. In their minds, even to do so is to bring their beliefs about GOD the bible under the spotlight in a way they are simply not comfortable with, so it is better simply to ignore.

However, there is enough info on the internet which Christians publish to do with arguing their beliefs re this subject so while I await JWs response to my arguments already made, I would like to study in more detail what I am happy to now assume is the general Christian argument and show the reader any holes in those arguments, as I find them.

In post 42 of this thread, I had this to say in reply to JW:

I am of course very happy to continue debating the Christian perspective related to all this...it would appear that the general argument from Christians is similar in context to this;

What does the Bible say about an out of body experience / astral projection?

as you seem to be offering the same arguments, which I have briefly responded to.

So from that link, the question asked is;

Question: "What does the Bible say about an out of body experience / astral projection?"

Answer: Information about the "out-of-body� experience is both vast and subjective....

This is true from what I have gathered from my own studies...

...According to Wikipedia, one out of ten people claims to have had an out-of-body experience (OBE), and there are many different types of the experiences claimed. They range from involuntary out-of-body experiences or near-death experiences that happen after or during a trauma or accident, to what is called “astral projection" in which a person voluntarily tries to leave his/her body behind and ascend to a spiritual plane where he/she believes he/she will find truth and clarity...

The stats that 1 out of 10 people claims to have had OOBE would suggest that worldwide the number of people having OOBEs (and the related experiences)

World Population figures 7.6 Billion (2018) so this means that over 7,600,000 individuals on the planet claim to have had some kind of alternate experience, and that is only those who choose to come forward and tell others. The number could be significantly higher.

However, from what I have studied, those who actively practice Astral Projection don't do so because he/she believes he/she will find truth and clarity. There is no belief involved in relation to that, as the experiences are considered to be real. It is more about exploring the realm and studying its properties, and for some, reporting their experiences re this.

...A few famous Christians have had what might be called, in today’s world, an out-of-body experience, most notably the Apostle Paul. He says in 2 Corinthians 12:1-4, In the verses preceding this passage, Paul lists his "boasts" or the things that, if he were counting on works and good deeds to secure his salvation, would get him into heaven. Though he seems to be referring to a third party, scholars agree that he is speaking of himself in the third person. Therefore, he is including this apparent out-of-body experience in his list of boasts. The point he is making is that any revelation that comes from outside the Bible (extra-biblical revelation) is not a reliable source, and as Paul says, "There is nothing to be gained by it." This does not mean that his out-of-body experience wasn't real, only that he is not relying on it to give him truth or really to benefit himself or other people in any way.

2 Corinthians 12:1-4 New International Version (NIV)
Paul’s Vision and His Thorn
12 I must go on boasting. Although there is nothing to be gained, I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord. 2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows. 3 And I know that this man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows— 4 was caught up to paradise and heard inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell.

One is not sure whether this 'not permitting to tell' is because there are no adequate words to describe the experience, or because the man was told not to say anything about his experience.

If one reads the chapter prior to this one gets the impression Paul is keen that people only believe what he say's about his version of Jesus and sows the standard enough seed of doubt into those he is continuing to try and persuade that there are 'impostors' who are not telling the 'truth' as he is telling the 'truth' and he fears that what he has taught them so far is not sufficient to insure that they will continue to believe in his preaching/teaching, rather than drift to the competition.

What it amounts to is medium-ship. Apparently people in those ancient times had no skills in figuring things out for themselves or even establishing a relationship with a personal GOD because they could not be trusted to follow their own powers of reasoning on the matter, something easy enough to convince people of, especially if self-doubt is a conditioning of their formative years.

I do not get the impression that Jesus preached a message which capitalized upon the individuals own self doubt. Certainly it is apparent that he understood that this condition was prevalent in human beings, which in some way can explain why he offered himself as the idea of how a person would behave who had a personal relationship with GOD, but we cannot even be sure as to what stories attributed to Jesus were true and which were not.

Therefore, even in that, we are left to decide for ourselves, as individuals. That is just the fact of the matter. Sort the wheat from the chaff.

With Jesus effectively out of the situation, men such as Paul fill the void and become mediums/mediators between GOD and the self-doubting individual. Sure, they are only 'pointing the individual in the direction of Jesus' but it is their own interpretation of Jesus which is what they are pointing to.

What we are told of Paul.
We understand that prior to his alleged alternate vision experience, Paul was Saul - a Roman Jew under official orders to persecute and to murder individuals who were involved in this new movement, which Romanism and Judaism found offensive and threatening, perhaps for different reasons, but ultimately if Rome decreed violent deaths to these heretics, Jews were not going to argue the point, and had their own problems to contend with anyway.

So we have the word of a murderer apparently reformed by the power of Christ who eventually became THE spokesman for what Rome would eventually adopt as its official religion.

Hardly the greatest CV, but accepted by the majority of Christians from then until now, as legitimate. Noticible murder and oppression followed Christianity wherever it went, which is telling in and of itself.

One only has to take the words of Paul and compare them with those of Jesus to determine if indeed there is any contradiction between the two. Is Paul's version of Jesus the same as the actual Jesus, or is Paul one of those who Jesus warned about who would come in his name ad deceive the multitudes.

One can say at least, that the only multitudes which have done anything in Jesus' name, derive from Christendom, and that alone, so a big clue right there.

The point he is making is that any revelation that comes from outside the Bible (extra-biblical revelation) is not a reliable source, and as Paul says, "There is nothing to be gained by it." This does not mean that his out-of-body experience wasn't real, only that he is not relying on it to give him truth or really to benefit himself or other people in any way.

This in itself is (unsurprisingly) deceptive. There actually was no bible when Paul wrote his letters, so the Christian answering the question does so on a false premise.
The Christian is using this false reasoning in relation to what Paul wrote in the preceding verses...and in that there is one particular verse from which Christians get the idea that demons are able to trick people and pretend to be GOD, Jesus and even the Holy Ghost.

12 And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. 13 For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

Nothing like the art of projection to throw the unwary off the scent...simply point at other impostors (the competition) and make claims about them which you are doing yourself. In this it is easy enough to understand why politics and organised religion are so easily bed-mates.


A theology painting itself into a corner.

The idea that the arch villain of ones theology is empowered to be able to pretend to be the hero's of the theology effectively requiring 'holy' books in which the adherents have to regard as the only truthful medium between humans and GOD - effectively GOD becomes the books and the books become the idols as objects of worship.

[JehovahsWitness]

the Christian approach to the question of NDEs is that they are all to be considered untrustworthy because of the ingrained belief that demons are able to trick people and pretend to be GOD, Jesus and even the Holy Ghost.

So you believe that demons are powerful and intelligent but unable to trick? Is that your position? If information is {quote}" vast and subjective", would that not mean that the possibility of spirit trickery should be a consideration? Indeed if you suggest that The Aposle Paul's experiences were either fictional, deceptive or of nefarious origin, would you not in fact be proving my point ie not all such experiences should be taken on face value?

Since Member Jehovah's Witness made that suggestion there have been a few posts of exchanges of argument which has shown that -...all to be considered untrustworthy

Regarding your mention of the word ALL (emphasis mine) I would like to draw your attention to the post below where I believe I clarified my position on that matter
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 32#p928332

TRUSTWORTHY


I cannot speak for the entire Christian community, but if by "untrustworthy" you mean did not genuinely happen then I have to disagree, however if you mean every subject should presume benevolence that would be both naive and dangerous.





RELATED POSTS

What is spiritism?
viewtopic.php?p=955577#p955577

Are exorcism legitimate?
viewtopic.php?p=765712#p765712

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

WITCHCRAFT, SPIRITISM and ... NDE*

*Near Death Experiences

[JehovahsWitness]

Could "the entity" not have been a demon PRETENDING to be Jesus?

While it is admirable that you took the time to post, I don't see an answer to my question? Is it or is it not possible?

[William]

[Replying to post 54 by JehovahsWitness]

I did answer the question - more than once. I do not see how that is possible, and explained why.

[William]

[Replying to post 53 by JehovahsWitness]

So you believe that demons are powerful and intelligent but unable to trick?

Assuming demons exist, I would say that they would not be able to pretend to be GOD or Jesus or The Holy Ghost, and explained why this would be illogical in my prior arguments.

If information is {quote}" vast and subjective", would that not mean that the possibility of spirit trickery should be a consideration?

One should consider all possibility, shouldn't one?

Indeed if you suggest that The Apostle Paul's experiences were either fictional, deceptive or of nefarious origin, would you not in fact be proving my point ie not all such experiences should be taken on face value?

I mentioned Saul's experience as argument against your belief that such experience could be demons pretending to be Jesus. If that is your argument based on that belief, then would that not mean that the possibility of spirit trickery should be a consideration in regard to Saul's experience? Did you not understand that?

Regarding your mention of the word ALL (emphasis mine) I would like to draw your attention to the post below where I believe I clarified my position on that matter...

Well that is the implication you argue is it not? Are you saying that some experiences should not be considered spirit trickery? If so, why not?

I cannot speak for the entire Christian community,...

That goes without saying...

...but if by "untrustworthy" you mean did not genuinely happen then I have to disagree, however if you mean every subject should presume benevolence that would be both naive and dangerous.

You missed another option, and one which I was clear about.

So the opportunity for you to explain why Saul's experience can be considered trustworthy - since indeed it appears from his account that he presumed the experience was genuine and benevolent. So too were the entities experienced by the two women in the first two videos of this thread and the man in the third.

Take you time with this, please read carefully what I have already written as argument before replying.

Thanks.

[William]

Okay - to carry on with examining the apparently general Christian belief about demons parading as GOD, Jesus and the Hole Ghost...

I am of course very happy to continue debating the Christian perspective related to all this...it would appear that the general argument from Christians is similar in context to this;

What does the Bible say about an out of body experience / astral projection?

as you seem to be offering the same arguments, which I have briefly responded to.

So from that link, another answer given to try and link OOBEs and encounters with entities as being 'demons pretending';

An involuntary out-of-body experience or a near-death experience, like the Apostle Paul's, should be treated in the same way as a dream in the life of a Christian—an unexplained phenomenon that may make a good story, but does not give us truth.

So - let us see why this should be the case...

The only place we find absolute truth is in the Word of God.

So there it is again. An individuals personal subjective experience is to be counted as 'just a dream' in relation to 'the absolute truth of the bible' and if not, then a person who believes their experiences are true are being deceived by demons'.

All in all one can see how organised religion promotes self doubt and gives great powers to it's 'enemies of GOD' in order to get individuals to trust in what they are told about the religions holy books. Apparently holy books are the only thing which demons have not been able to infiltrate. Funny that...in an eye rolling kind of way.

All other sources are merely subjective human accounts or interpretations based on what we can discover with our finite minds.

Like the bible isn't also something which has been interpreted through the same process and indeed, is made up of many stories of human accounts and interpretations.

The book of Revelation, or John's vision, is an exception to this, as are the prophecies or visions of the Old Testament prophets.

There we have it. One allows for exceptions to ones rules where one's rules imply that one's holy book of individual subjective experiences should also be scrutinized under the same set of rules.

The smell of rat is strong in this one.

[SeaPriestess]

[Replying to post 20 by William]

Thanks for posting that.

The mind functioning well, even better when the brain isn't functioning is an interesting concept. I wasn't able to watch the last part of the video. Does the neuro-scientific community conclude that there is definitely something to these NDEs that without a doubt cannot be explained? Do you have any references where they stand today on this specifically? Thanks

[William]

[Replying to post 58 by SeaPriestess]

I wasn't able to watch the last part of the video.

Is that the part where the scientist speaks?
Why were you unable to watch?

Does the neuro-scientific community conclude that there is definitely something to these NDEs that without a doubt cannot be explained?

Explaining consciousness is an ongoing pursuit. Those who are involved in these type of studies are not explaining anything other than the correlation of the data and what that implies.
https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-studies/

A more general consensus from neuroscience does not involve itself with such studies and those studies it does involve itself with - Anatomy, Biochemistry, Computer Science, Neurology, Pharmacology, Physiology, Psychology and Zoology - tend towards the conclusion that consciousness is solely an emergent property of the brain and does not exist outside of the brain.

[William]

[yt]YzFUXKk2B4I[/yt]

[My notes in blue text]

The interesting thing about the Rabbis take on afterlife is that it fits in with the insights many who practice Astral Projection have to say about that alternate realm of existential experience, whereby those who depart the life experience of a human being take that memory with them, including the beliefs they adopted while on earth and those beliefs place them in specific circumstance peculiar to and mirroring said beliefs.

Rabbi Friedman mentions 'Jewish souls' as to differentiate between those and other souls, and what Jewish souls will experience re 'heaven' or 'hell' in relation to the Jewish traditions which practice methods of mourning and prayer etc to do with the dear departed.

Of course the beliefs of all alternate religions all fit in with the insights many who practice Astral Projection have to say about that alternate realm of existential experience...the Astral Realm has a particular property which enables this to happen.

So their are 'Jewish Souls' 'Christians Souls' Buddhist Souls' 'Hindu Souls' 'Atheist Souls' etc et al. All 'sorted' into the categories through which their beliefs predetermine or shape in their lives as humans on planet Earth.

According to this Rabbi, the soul is the person and is always alive as it is 'life' and cannot ever 'die'. It this the implication is clear enough. The soul is an aspect, fragment, particle of GOD which can be integrated into experiences.

Whereas the body is not a living thing but 'borrows' life from the soul. When the soul departs the body, it 'goes back to being a soul - among souls' and the body turns to dust. "From dust you are and to dust you will return" - which implies the person is the body (not the soul) unless the 'you' is referring to the body not the person - the Rabbi states that everything which essentially altogether amounts to the person & personality, lives on in the soul and that the 'to dust you will return was never said about the soul, because the soul is life, and life does not die.

He says that the soul was always alive and will always continue to be alive- to live, and that one can have a relationship with departed souls. [9:20] were that soul 'needs' to be commended by the (prayers) of those yet to depart because this helps the departed soul in relation to its next experience in 'after-this-life'.

There is the belief in the idea of the soul returning to its resurrected body - a body which will then never be able to die. To me at least, this seems like an unnecessary thing, given the universe itself is going to 'die' - thus what will all these souls in bodies which cannot die, then do with their existence? Yet this belief is seen as a 'reward' but then 'explains' this idea by using an analogy which speaks about punishment. I am left wondering then if this 'ultimate reward' a soul receives is not really anything other than a punishment. To remain eternally in the physical universe, while knowing there is so much more and so many better things a soul could be experiencing in the other dimensions and plains of existence.

[14:00] What is hell?
According to the Rabbi hell is when the soul returns to 'heaven' (the natural abode of souls) after having spent a lifetime as a human being and that souls 'smells' like it doesn't belong in heaven because it has experienced earth and being a human for so long it finds itself in a strange place where it is 'different' from the other souls and 'that is hell' for that soul.

The 'fires of hell' in which a soul burns, 'has got to be' the fire of shame. The soul burns with shame. Shame is the only fire that a soul can feel. The shame lingers for a maximum of 12 months. The 'smell' wears off. Because it is only physical so how long can it last?

I would argue right here that the soul is not physical so if it is dealing with this shame, the shame is not a physical thing, but a mental/emotional thing.


After this process the soul is no longer in hell - it is restored, refreshed, cleansed, no longer has the shame, and sits in heaven.

Basically the soul reintegrates with the abode of the souls (heaven) by peeling away the trauma and drama attached to it through the memories of being human. The idea of human beings offering prayers on behalf of the departed souls is to help that soul ease its way back into heaven.

[24:00]What is a soul?

GOD created things that never existed.

Thus, GOD creates things which then can be experienced

The Rabbi say's "A soul...A Jewish soul, is a little piece of GOD which has always existed just as GOD has always existed. The soul is alive like GOD is alive.
GOD is a living being.
What does the soul bring with it?
The soul has "the ten facilities with which GOD functions as a creator."

The soul has intelligence and emotions.

A soul can love and hate, understand and reason, be stubborn and determined, it can communicate.

A Human soul ... is similar except that it is 'created'. It is mortal. We have two souls...a Godly soul with 10 Godly functions and a human soul with 10 human functions. The 2 souls reason each in their own way...the intelligence of your Godly (Jewish) soul understands things from a Godly perspective, the human soul understands things from a human perspective. Godliness doesn't make sense. The Godly soul must teach the human soul to appreciate what is holy and Godly.

That way when the soul leaves the body it has no 'foreign smell' and comes back to heaven as if it had never left. It even brings with it, some of the Human souls 'energy' that has now become 'holy'.

In this way one elevates the Human soul and that is the whole purpose that the Godly soul is willing to spend a human lifetime in a body on earth.

This is to say that the Godly Soul is fishing for Human Souls in order to elevate these Human souls into being Godly soul. Seems unnecessarily convoluted to me.

The 'predicament' of a Godly soul in a body is that it has a problem in conveying what it wants or what will make it happy in relation to the Human soul. The Human soul is devoted husband to the Godly soul, but it is a peasant because it does not understand Godliness and thus what will make the Godly soul happy in that relationship.

There seems to be a definite idea to make the body 'have its own [human] soul' which the Godly soul is trying to get to work for it rather than against it. This in itself can be problematic because it makes the Godly soul a type of victim to it's circumstance as it were. It is 'in the body' specifically to engage with the 'created human soul' and analogy is reminiscent of psychological projection.

If one removes the idea of the 'created human soul' one can simply focus on the requirements of the Godly soul experiencing human form. To introduce the aspect of a 'human soul' which was 'created'' adds to the conundrum/complexity something which is unnecessary.

If the human form which is dead only gets it's LIFE from the Godly soul, with the idea of a created 'human soul' one would have to say that the form/body is 'living' because it has a 'human soul' (which contradicts the theology that the Godly souls give the form life) and thus the human soul essentially has to be 'saved' by introducing Godly souls into the form as well, in order that this can take place.

It would be far better to just say that the Godly soul is what makes the body animate (be alive) as a container for the Godly soul to experience through the form, and in doing that, the Godly soul also loses touch with its former existence and regains something of a connection with that through its experience while in a human form, experiencing being 'human'...if it allows itself to do so.

Upon the bodies death, depending on the Godly souls choices when being human, the next phase will help that soul reintegrate with the knowledge of its TRUE self as it was before it incarnated into the human experience - because that TRUE self cannot be erased, even through the experience of being human.

Therefore, the experience of being in human form adds to the overall experience of the Godly soul in ways which cannot have happened without that experience, for purposes which cannot be fully understood from the souls human perspective, while it is still within that human experience.

[32:40] The justification of the Godly soul experiencing the harshness of the human experience - to 'prove itself' so that 'in the end the soul will have proved itself.'

What need is there for a particle of GOD (the Godly soul) to 'prove itself'? Is there some self doubt in GOD to which this whole creation and immersive experience is conjured? That something therein will have proved itself? 'Proved itself' what? To be GOD? Is this to say that this GOD doubts himself? Certainly this theology seems to be saying just that.

It is a type of justification for the Jewish belief systems and accompanying stories which the astute can easily enough show as being wanting. This is the idea of trying to separate the GOD from his creation by introducing 'aspects of GOD' as 'Godly souls' which are required to mediate between the GOD and the 'created human soul' in order that those 'Godly souls' which are particles of GOD can 'prove themselves' through 'saving' the 'human souls', which were created 'unsaved' and 'separate from GOD'...it is bizarre.

[33:33] The Jewish perspective of 'The Jew'

"Where there are 10 Jews in one room, angels are afraid to enter"

This Godliness transforms the world. The Jews 'fix the world' because the creator of the world has a plan. It is his world and he has a vision of what he would like it to be, and Jews are his agents and partners in turning the world into his kind of world. A world that pleases and welcomes him, so that he can have his home in the lowest of worlds.

As a result of the Jew bringing holiness and godliness to the world the day will come when GOD will be One and his world will be One with him and that is due to our (Jewish) efforts.

The soul yearns to go back to heaven, feels uncomfortable encumbered by a body, but it knows its mission and is humble enough to accept the mission.

The First Step:
The Godly soul come into the body in increments rather than suddenly. 40 days before conception, the soul is told it is going to placed into the human body. The soul has to be given some time to adjust to the idea of being a human. The soul is told to get ready. The soul is not thrilled by that idea. To leave heaven. To be constricted into the limitations of the human body. To share that body with a human soul that has human demands. Not an appealing prospect but...if GOD says...the soul gets ready.

The Second Step:

Conception.

Every soul goes through the valley of the shadow of death just through the experience of birth as a human being in this universe.

[43:10] According to the Rabbi, NDEs are 'flashbacks' of peoples experience of being born. They are reliving that experience. Everyone who has had an NDE comes out of that believing in GOD.

NDEs are the experience of 'being born'

"The world needs to know these things, because it is a blessing to know these things and we as the Jewish people have an obligation to be 'a light to the nations' to share with them the knowledge that come only from Torah, because 'we know things that can't be seen'."

The main issue I have with the theology overall is that it seems neither intelligent or reasonable to create 'human souls' in the first place and then to 'download' 'Godly souls' in order for Godly souls' to [hopefully] ' be able to 'prove themselves' by convincing 'human souls' to be Godly.
The better way to do the whole thing would be to create the perfect bodies (the bodies the 'resurrection' will provide) in the first place, which the Godly souls can occupy 'forever' in this universe.

From my own perspective and experience there is much more to know and learn and piece together which comes from other theologies as well, and also other types of philosophies. As pointed out already, the holes in the individual theologies - each claiming to 'be the one and only' - serve the observant individual to see through those theologies and what is then seen, allows that individual to know more than these individual theologies claim as 'the truth'

Whenever there is a theological based organisation which promotes itself as 'the truth' and all others as 'deceived/liars/lied to/tricked by demons et al - one already knows that such are not being truthful at all.