A recent poll has found that 1 in 25 people claim to have had near-death experiences. A quick search at Amazon will show many books have been written about near-death experiences (NDEs) claiming the experiences are proof of heaven, an afterlife or even hell.  I read my first book on NDEs back in the 90’s.  It was Dr. Maurice Rawlings’ book, To Hell and Back.  If you ask most people what they think about NDEs they will say it is always like heaven.  They will think of beings of light and lush indescribable gardens.  However, what struck me about Rawlings’ accounts was that the after-life people were experiencing was not always heavenly; in fact it was darn right hellish.  Recently a very popular book came out describing the events of a 4 year old boy who recounts an experience of heaven while his body was in emergency surgery.  In Heaven is for Real, Colten explains what he saw and who he met.  Skeptics will no doubt discount his experiences because there is no way to verify what he saw.  However, Colton said he met his miscarried sister, whom no one had told him about, and his great grandfather who died 30 years before Colton was born, then shared impossible-to-know details about each.  The question remains what do you do with stories like that?

In a recent interview Gary Habermas relates what we can and cannot learn from NDEs.  Habermas explains that one of the most import aspects of researching near-death experiences (NDEs) is the determination of verifiable evidence.  Many people who have had a near-death experience relate that they went to heaven or, in some cases that they went to hell.  However, stories like this are subjective.  They are subjective in the sense that what they saw may have been true, but there is no way of verifying their experience.  This simply means that NDEs don’t prove whether heaven or hell exists.  However, some people relate stories where they see or hear something somewhere where their body could not have possibly seen or heard. (For example, seeing shoes on the roof of the hospital or hearing what nurses were saying three floors up.) When those stories relate to things that the person had no way of knowing and that can be verified, it is a good indication that the mind is more than the matter in your head and that our conscious mind is non-corporeal (not physical). Essentially, verifiable NDEs are convincing proof that materialistic naturalism is false and supernaturalism is true.

I don’t know that I would call NDEs proof of heaven or hell.  It's not that I discount those stories. For me, I wouldn’t want to overstate what the evidence proves.  What is convincing for me is that NDEs seem to be strong evidence that militates against a materialistic naturalistic worldview, where the only conclsion is your mind is nothing more than the material in your head. NDEs prove the mind is not material and that lends strong credibility to an afterlife.

If you plan to investigate NDEs I suggest you start with Habermas’ book, Beyond Death: Exploring the Evidence for Immortality.  Then I would move on to Steve Miller’s book, Near-Death Experiences as Evidence for the Existence of God and Heaven: A Brief Introduction in Plain Language.

Reference Notes:

• Koukl, Greg and Habermas, Gary. 'What We Can and Cannot Learn from Near Death Experiences?' Stand To Reason Podcast. 25 FEB 2013 http://www.str.org/site/PageServer?pagename=podcast accessed 04 MAR 2013
• J. Steve Miller, Brain Autin. 'Steve Miller Intertview' Apologetics 315 Interviews Podcast http://www.apologetics315.com/p/interviews.html accessed 18 MAR 2013

See Also:

• Beyond Death: Exploring the Evidence for Immortality by Gary R. Habermas and J. P. Moreland
• Near-Death Experiences as Evidence for the Existence of God and Heaven: A Brief Introduction in Plain Language by J. Steve Miller and Jeffrey Long MD
• Life after Life: The Investigation of a Phenomenon - Survival of Bodily Death by Raymond A. Moody
• Reflections on Life After Life by Dr. Raymond Moody
• Return from Tomorrow by George C. Ritchie and Elizabeth Sherrill
• To Hell and Back by Maurice Rawlings
• 23 Minutes In Hell: One Man's Story About What He Saw, Heard, and Felt in that Place of Tormentby Bill Wiese
• 90 Minutes in Heaven: A True Story of Death and Life by Don Piper & Cecil Murphey
• Heaven is for Real: A Little Boy's Astounding Story of His Trip to Heaven and Back by Todd Burpo & Lynn Vincent

This is first in a series of posts about miracles. I have wanted to explore miracles for some time now. Lately, I have had some time to think about miracles while reading some materials preparing a class. This is a very interesting subject and there are a number of theories out there. People tend to hold to their theories very strongly. I am not sure why people hold their theories so strongly, given proving one way or another may be impossible. Proving any theory on miracles is out of reach at the moment. The best we can do is, objectively, explore the possibilities and see which one fits best with what we know.

This will be a series of posts, as I don’t think I can contain all of my thoughts in one short post. Difficult topics are never easy or straightforward. As I explore this topic, I welcome your comments. I welcome them because that is how we learn and there is nothing an amateur philosopher likes more than to be challenged. ;-)

In order to have a meaningful conversation about miracles, we are going to have to nail down the theories of causation first. We have to start with causation because a miracle, by definition, is something unnatural, unwarranted and unexplained. In other words, the only explanation, or cause, is something beyond our normal natural experience. Since we don’t see an obvious cause, we then theorize about what the cause might have been. God is generally seen as the cause, however others may see the cause as something spiritual or even some type of non-cognizant power or energy. For this first post, I will limit my comments to God as the cause and simply note that I understand there are other points of view. I hope to address these other theories in future posts.

In western cultures, there are two opposing theories about causation, Supernaturalism and Naturalism.

Supernaturalism posits a Universe where God is the cause of all things. Supernaturalism holds that God is the immediate cause of all effect. In other words, if you place water on a gas stove it would not be the flames or heat that boils the water, it is God who boils the water. Supernaturalism in this sense is not necessarily the action of spirits, ghost or the paranormal. Supernaturalism requires one cause; multiple causes (various spirits etc…) would be causing different things in different ways and nothing would be predictable. However, our experience is predictable.

I can see three problems with Supernaturalism. First, scientific inquiry seems like it would be impossible. Science requires predictability. If God intervenes unpredictably or does not cause water to boil just once, science is rendered useless. Second, supernaturalism leaves us with a deceptive God because the universe appears to follow natural laws. Finally, if God causes all things, it is not the ax murderer who kills people, it would be God. In addition, there would be no such thing is free will. Again, we seem to have a free will and if we seem to and we don’t, we end up with a deceptive God again.

A key thing to remember about supernaturalism is that science does not disprove this position. Science and predictability would only prove that God, “the cause of all things” is consistent, as consistent as the laws of nature.

Naturalism, in the classic sense, posits a God who created the Universe, the laws that govern it and was the primal cause by starting all things. Think of a line of dominoes, you hit the first one and then the one you hit, hits the next one and so on. If we look at the last domino to fall we can determine that the cause was the previous domino falling on it. We can look at all the dominos and see that this cause and reaction are predictable. We call the predictability natural laws and they are and we can determine their immediate cause. You can make the case that you dropped the last domino though secondary causes or a type of causal change. God is the primal cause and thus the source through inheritance for all other causes. In creation, we call this causal chain the cursus communis naturae or the common course of nature.

One problem with naturalism is it seems to support either a deist or atheist position. In its extreme form, naturalism is a deist position. God, like a watch maker, winds up the universe and lets it run without intervention. Naturalism denies miracles and requires an, as of yet anunknown, cause for anything that is labeled as a miracle. This position militates against many religions and theologies that see God as intervening in the world.

These two theories are seen as extreme ends of a large continuum of intermediate positions. Through most of Church History the majority position has been that God created the Universe with natural laws to govern them and that, on rare occasions, God intervenes. These rear incidents are considered miracles because they don’t fit in the normal course of nature. This position squares better with what we know from our experience and revelation.

In a later post I will explore some different questions about miracles:

• What if a miracle has a natural cause? Is it still a miracle? 
• Can science explain all miracles? If we can show a scientific explanation or natural causes for miracle, does that disprove God?
• What about the objection that eventually our science will catch up to the point that we will be able to explain miracles. Just because it can’t now, doesn’t mean that will always be the case.
• What about some of the extreme positions on miracles?
• Do you have a question about miracles?

Bibliography
Principe, Lawrence M. "Science and Religion." Chantilly,VA: The Teaching Company Limited Partnership, 2006.
Williams, Thomas. "Reason and Faith: Philosophy in the Middle Ages." Chantilly,VA: The Teaching Company, 2007.

When researching the topic of spiritual warfare, one of the problems you will run into is the vast majority of books on the topic center on what I call the spiritual dimension with things like witchcraft, demonology, possession and Satanism. The problem with this narrow interpretation is that it focuses on only one of the domains of spiritual warfare.

What are domains of warfare? In modern combat, the US military has determined that there are five (5) domains of warfare. You may have heard of air, land and sea as the 3 traditional domains of war. Recently, the US military has added space and cyberspace as new domains of war for the 21st century. Having been a Marine and understanding the basics of combat and warfare has led me to the conclusion that spiritual warfare is far larger than a single domain.

Have you ever thought about missions as spiritual warfare? Every time we bring the good news to a lost person, the adversary risks losing one of his tortured souls. When a person becomes a Christian as a result of a missionary or evangelist, the adversary loses ground and the Church gains ground. Missions and evangelism are offensive military actions against our enemy. There are no two ways about it.

Have you ever struggled with sin in your life? You are battling the sin-nature that seeks to take you out of the fight. If it can’t take you out, it seeks to neutralize you on the battlefield. If you overcome the sin, the adversary loses his hold on your life. If our adversary can't take us out, the next best thing is to render our actions ineffectual.

In combat, the first thing to do is understand the battlefield. I have come up with three (3) domains of spiritual warfare. You can view spiritual warfare as being internal, external or spiritual.

• The internal battlefield is your mind and will, the sin-nature we are born with. As Paul puts it, “For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.” Romans 7:18 (NIV)
• Next, we have the battlefield that is external to us. This would be things like false ideologies, people, injustice, etc. These are the areas we encounter every day. “Jesus said to them, ‘Watch out! Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees!’" Matthew 16:6 (ISV)
• Then finally we have the spiritual, the non-corporeal realm or dimension, where the dark adversary resides. This is where we see witchcraft, demon possession and exorcisms. As Paul puts it, “For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.” Ephesians 6:12 (NLT)

Like it or not we are at war. Understanding the domains of spiritual warfare will aid us in better understanding the war that we are in. It will help remind us not to focus on one domain of warfare to the neglect of the others.

Remember: If the enemy is in range, so are you.

I've thought of three domains of spiritual warfare. What are some others that you've thought of?

The exorcism account in the book of Tobit is an important story for us to study as it gives us an understanding of second temple period Judaism and early Christian views on the topic of demon possession and exorcism.

Background of Tobit
Tobit was from Israel and part of the deportation to Assyria. This story should give some insight in how Jews saw demon possession. This would be either from the time of the exile, although others would give the book a later date sometime during second temple period.

Situation
A girl named Sarah was possessed by a demon named Asmodeus and that demon caused the death of 7 of her husbands. I have to wonder how the 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 husbands felt about their respective engagements. I would be leery if I was husband 2 let alone 7. Sarah's solution to this problem was suicide; however, she did not go through with it. Instead she prayed to God to take her life, rather than bring dishonor to her father by committing suicide. Her concern about suicide was not the disposition of her soul; she wanted to protect her families honor over relief from her possession.

One noteworthy part of this story is the desire for the possessed person to seek death. Sarah sought suicide but ultimately did not. Contemporary cases of supposed demon possession often include suicidal tendencies. Her we have a correlate between ancient evens and contemporary events leading us to the conclusion that one indication of possession is the desire to relief themselves by committing suicide.

In answer to Sarah's prayer, Raphael (one of the 7 archangels) was dispatched and Sarah was given Tobit's son Tobis for marriage. God answered her prayer to take her life with an alternative she did not ask for. I wonder why she did not ask for a solution other than death. In any case God answer the prayer with angelic assistance.

Events were arranged to bring Tobis to Sarah. Raphael disguised as a distant relative agrees to accompany Tobis for protection on a trip for him to recover money for his father. Raphael accompanied Tobis on that trip, and during their travels they stop along the way and Raphael tells him to catch a fish and gut it.

“Cut open the fish and take out its gall, heart, and liver. Keep them with you, but throw away the intestines. For its gall, heart, and liver are useful as medicine.” Tobit 6:5 NRSV

Raphael later explains why he wanted Tobis to keep the fish guts.

“As for the fish’s heart and liver, you must burn them to make a smoke in the presence of a man or woman afflicted by a demon or evil spirit, and every affliction will flee away and never remain with that person any longer. And as for the gall, anoint a person’s eyes where white films have appeared on them; blow upon them, upon the white films, and the eyes will be healed.” Tobit 6:8–9 NRSV

Raphael arranges for Tobis to meet Sarah and take her as wife. Raphael gives Tobis instructions on how to expel the demon.

"When you enter the bridal chamber, take some of the fish’s liver and heart, and put them on the embers of the incense. An odor will be given off; the demon will smell it and flee, and will never be seen near her any more. Now when you are about to go to bed with her, both of you must first stand up and pray, imploring the Lord of heaven that mercy and safety may be granted to you. Do not be afraid, for she was set apart for you before the world was made. You will save her, and she will go with you." Tobit 6:17–18 NRSV

This is an interesting text. Apparently, according to this text, demons, which are spiritual entities, have senses here in the physical world. Did they use the senses of Sarah or did they have their own? Does the fish liver and heart have some sort of energy or power? Some exorcists claim that objects can by bless, that is imbued with some sort of spiritual power, most notably Catholics. Other exorcists, however, do not feel that objects such as holy water or crosses have any power or do anything to remove demons. They feel the power that removes the demon is the name of Jesus Christ or the faith of the exorcist in conjunction with the faith of the possessed. In this story the burning of the fish liver and heart acts as an irritant and there is no indication that there is some sort of spiritual power related to burning the dead fish parts. I guess dead fish smell is so bad it can scare demons away ;-).

Another interesting point here is that Raphael promises the demon will not return. However we will see later that Jesus indicates demons can return and even stronger (Luke 11:24-26). Raphael also tells them to pray for safety. Today paranormal investigators and sensitives will often prey for protection if they think they are going into a hostile area. Again we see a correlation between modern activities and ancient ones.

Tobis follows Raphael's instructions.

"Then Tobias remembered the words of Raphael, and he took the fish’s liver and heart out of the bag where he had them and put them on the embers of the incense. The odor of the fish so repelled the demon that he fled to the remotest parts of Egypt. But Raphael followed him, and at once bound him there hand and foot." Tobit 8:2–3 NRSV

I have to admit the resolution is not what I expected. The demons fled to Egypt and Raphael bound him there. What does that mean? Why did the demon go to Egypt? Is this how Raphael knows that the demon would not return because he was going to bind him?

Footnote
Tobit is an apocryphal book used by most Christian groups Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox and some Protestants. It is also included in LXX, [Septuagint], Vulgate and five fragments were found at Qumran.
The cannon was created to include books that were thought to be inspired by God. This does not mean books outside of cannon are not true, it simply means some people don't think it is inspired by God. I include this as an example of Jewish exorcism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon