The Evangelical Philosophical Society (EPS) is pleased to introduce a unique and ongoing project on “Philosophical Issues in ‘Afterlife Apologetics’: Assessing the Evidential Values of Near-Death and Deathbed Experiences.” Your contributions, readership, exploration and support are most welcomed. For more on this theme and additional Christian contributions to philosophy, become a subscriber – for as low as $25 per year! – to Philosophia Christi, the peer-reviewed journal of the EPS (all EPS members receive Philosophia Christi as part of their membership).
Project Summary
Afterlife Apologetics proposes that the best studies of near-death experiences (NDEs) and deathbed experiences (DBEs) provide evidence for the existence of a personal, loving God, a separation of the soul/mind from the body at death, the afterlife, and much more. Yet, Christian scholars have been slow to assess the data accumulated by 50 years of near-death studies and over 130 years of deathbed studies. This web project encourages participation by philosophers and theologians in this emerging field with candid reflections, challenges, and observations from various related fields of study. Multidisciplinary insights are encouraged with an emphasis on ‘philosophy of’ factors and their implications for Christian apologetics.
The International Association for Near-Death Studies defines an NDE as “a distinct subjective experience that a minority of people report after a near-death episode. In a near-death episode, a person is either clinically dead, near-death, or in a situation where death is likely or expected.” Core elements include leaving the body, otherworldly vistas, visiting with deceased relatives, angels and God, absence of time, mind-to-mind communication, passing through tunnels, life reviews, a decision to return, return to the body.”
Our definition for DBEs is our own, since many terms have been in use to refer to several different experiences surrounding death. DBEs are here defined as “a cluster of experiences surrounding final earthly death, including deathbed visions, terminal lucidity, crisis apparitions, shared death experiences, premonitions of death, and after death communications.”
Areas of the Web Project
We are focused on philosophical topics related to the afterlife and how other areas of importance (e.g., substance dualism versus monism, phenomenology, plausibility of miracles, theism, visions, religious experience, grief studies) bear upon an assessment of the evidential values of near-death and deathbed experiences.
Current Papers
Core Project Questions
Seven core areas of project inquiry:
- What might be philosophical, theological, or historical, sociological, and institutional reasons that have contributed to Christian scholars slowly/cautiously assessing the data that has been accumulated by 50 years of near-death studies and over 130 years of deathbed studies?
- What are the strengths and limitations of different epistemic perspectives (e.g., first-person perspective, compared to second-person or third-person perspectives) when describing and explaining NDEs and DBEs?
- What insights from this emerging field might apply to/from such philosophical/theological specialties as substance dualism, phenomenology, the problem of evil, moral absolutes, the emergence of religious beliefs in ancient and indigenous cultures, supernaturalism, miracles, visions, and the resurrection of Jesus?
- Which worldview(s) provide the best fit for the present state of NDE/DBE data? How/Why?
- Do naturalistic explanations (e.g., anoxia, hallucinations, latent brain activity at death) provide satisfactory explanations of NDEs/DBEs?
- Are NDEs most consistent with Christianity, Islam, New Age, Hindu, or another religion?
- Are elements such as reincarnation and universalism widely reported in such experiences, or are they so rare as to be anomalous?
- Do Christians typically report seeing Jesus, while Muslims report Muhammad and Buddhists report Buddha?
- Are the types of evidences used in this field truly scientific? How can our understandings of “science,” “the scientific method,” “historical evidence,” “legal evidence,” and “testimonial evidence” clarify the claimed quality of evidence?
- How can we differentiate seemingly legitimate reports from those influenced by mental illness, demonic activity, attention-getters, etc.?
- What are some compelling epistemic and institutional factors to weigh and envision for the future development of a philosophical Afterlife Apologetics?
- What specific holes in the research need to be filled? How can philosophers best contribute?
- How can philosophers most efficiently get up to speed in this field (e.g., review and contribute to the most important studies, summaries of studies, bibliographies, and literature reviews, including literature attempting integration with Christianity.)
- Should the development of the field be seen as an extension of insights from philosophy of religion, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of science?
- Could/should Afterlife Apologetics be seen as a form of “Ramified Natural Theology”?
- What can positively shape the plausibility conditions for thinking that Afterlife Apologetics can compel believability in the Trinitarian God of the Bible (vs. a more generic theism)?
- Given the philosophical-theological merits and limits of an Afterlife Apologetics, is it best articulated in a cumulative apologetic approach (vs. a ‘stand-alone’ argument)?
Find this Project Interesting? Enjoy other EPS Web Projects
Want to Contribute to the Project on Philosophical Issues in ‘Afterlife Apologetics’?
Options for Contributing: We’re open to a wide variety of contributions, since this is an emerging field, including, but not limited to philosophizing about fresh research, developing reflection essays (e.g., from a first-person perspective) about a personal experience or one from your circles of trust, responses to other essays [critical or confirmatory or clarifying], summaries of research, book reviews, theological/biblical contributions, practical essays on harnessing afterlife apologetics to impact others, ministering to those who’ve had such experiences, etc. We welcome responses to any of the Project’s papers.
Length: While longer papers [6,000 + words] are permitted, shorter papers [500-2000 words] may invite more responses to specific ideas. Consider dividing longer pieces into several essays, each covering a tidy topic.
Suggested topics: Near-death experiences as evidence for the afterlife and cumulative arguments for theism; explanatory opportunities and limits to ‘Afterlife Apologetics’; assessment of methodological issues when researching and assessing the plausibility of NDEs and DBEs;
Explore further with the co-editors, including different possible levels of engagement with the project.
Submit a Proposal: Email a topic, thesis and description of the proposed paper (250 words max) to Project Editors J. Steve Miller and Stuart H. Gray [see below]. They will help guide your proposal toward being a contribution of this web project.
Lead Project Editors & Coordinators
Web Project Overseer: Joseph E. Gorra, Consulting Editor, Philosophia Christi.
Please consider becoming a regular annual or monthly financial partner with the Evangelical Philosophical Society in order to expand its reach, support its members, and be a credible presence of Christ-shaped philosophical interests in the academy and into the wider culture!
