She Survived Three Near Death Experiences! | Lynnclaire Dennis Near Death Experience Part 1

32 Comments

1. Fascinating!

2. (Yes this is a very long comment and may overwhelm the non-reader who prefers only YouTube videos, but for those accustomed to reading you might find this interesting and informative. It is an examination of a near-death experience as if it were a case in a court of law and help some understand the reasoning behind the skepticism faced when making such NDE claims. I wrote it. It's mine and I would be happy to argue any refutations to it. It is opinion, not fact, and only follows the Laws of Logic as a guide, not any belief or political agenda.)

   Suppose we took this evidence of a near death experience to court and presented legal arguments based on the testimony of the witness. The witness being the one who claimed to have the experience, who in our scenario would be the defendant who is defending their claim. Now let's pretend that I am the prosecuting attorney for the State and give my opening statement to the court before proceeding with the trial. This is NOT a refutation of the witness' claim, but establishing the expectations of the defense to present their case according to the law. In this case, the law being the Laws of Logic since no criminal laws obviously apply here. But some framework must be established to test the validity of their testimony against a reasonable precedence. So, here is a proposed opening statement by the prosecution presented before the judge who, in this case, the judge is our own reason:

   Ladies and Gentleman of the Jury. Your Honor. The State now wishes to proceed with our opening statement in the case of "Our Reason" vs "NDE and the Afterlife"

   What is Death? What is Life?

   Can we be both alive and dead at the same time? Can we coexist with death? And let's be clear the difference between being alive and being dead. Being alive we have thought, memories, emotions, sensation, awareness, and a body with senses in which we can experience all these elements of life. Of being alive. So is there any single one of these aspects of being alive which the Law of Contradiction does not apply, thus breaking the law itself?

   If the law still holds, then no aspect of life can be a part of death. And death is the absence of life by definition. And so if we attempt an alternate definition of death to escape the Law of Contradiction regarding our coexistence with it, what is the epistemic discernment we must use to do so? Empirical or Theoretical deliberation? Does it require presuppositions that are derived by means outside the definition of death itself?

   And furthermore, if we still hold true the Law of Contradiction, then we cannot also change the definition of death, and that it is the absence of life and all the aspects we described life such as thought, memories, emotions, sensation, awareness, without breaking another law called The Law of Identity. The Law of Identity states that a thing is identical to itself and is defined as a term and not a proposition. And The Law of Identity would conclude that death is the opposite of life and cannot contain any property that is used to define life itself.

   Therefore, based upon the logical parameters presented so far, according to the Law of Contradiction and the Law of Identity, there can be no afterlife. No continuation of any aspect of life, as defined, which would contradict the Law of Identity or The Law of Contradiction. We therefore, upon death, cannot expect to have thinking and deliberation, the memory of who we were or the experiences during our lives, any emotions such as love, anger, happiness or sadness, any sensation of sights, sounds, tastes, smells or touch, and any awareness of our surroundings or the conditions we would be in, pleasurable or painful. A dreamless sleep as Socrates contemplated while awaiting his execution. An afterlife identical to the beforelife, at the same place we were during the Civil War or when the Pyramids were built.

   Any attempts to redefine either the meaning of life or death using presuppositions, such as "eternal life" or "immortality", are illogical and contradict both the Law of Contradiction and The Law of Identity. And if a proposition is derived through the use of illogical presuppositions, then it's conclusions can also be considered illogical and therefore irrational given the deliberate use of the illogical premise. Further appeals to faith do not override the deliberate misuse of logic and if it persists, then it can be concluded that the proposition is irrational and therefore false. A false pretense predicated on the assumption of illogical conclusions derived through illogical means.

   But a philosopher who did not contradict himself regarding his proposition on death is Epicurus who said: "When we are death is not and when death comes we are not" and he used proper discernment based on the Law of Contradiction and the Law of Identity. And when Paul approached the Epicureans, followers and students of Epicurus, and the Stoics, followers and students of Zeno, in Acts 17:18 of the New Testament at the Agora in Athens, the philosophers called him a babbler, using the same false pretenses explained previously, and sent him on his way. For he spoke of dead people coming to life again and even then, without evidence, that requires the suspension of our reason and disregarding known observations of death to accept, prompting the Epicureans and Stoics rejection of Paul's claims of resurrection as well as the "strange god" he presented. But of course, philosophers have more strict epistemic discernment!

   And upon further examination of such claims within scripture, there are inconsistencies in those claims which provide further evidence of their erroneous nature. I am referring to Matt. 27:52–53 which states "The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many." Here we see a claim of resurrection involving "many bodies" which then rose and "appeared to many". Given the significance of even the single resurrection of Jesus which essentially the entire religion is based, we find it impossible for the claim of many resurrections of the saints, who appeared to many, to be omitted or ignored in the other three gospels which are also claimed to be testimonies to the same events that would have been occurring during the reported rising of the saints. Many bodies rising is more significant than one and we feel such a claim should not have gone unnoticed by the other three gospels of Mark, Luke and John. And furthermore provides reasonable doubt and skepticism of such general claims of resurrection having taken place at all.

   So, in conclusion, the State has strong evidence to be skeptical of any claims of an afterlife experience according to the Laws of Logic. We feel the evidence of such experiences fail to meet either the logical or empirical requirements to consider such evidence as valid, nor meets the demands necessary to establish such evidence as fact. In addition, we feel there is sufficient medical evidence available which provides reasonable doubt to the claim, and the acceptance of claims of NDE or the Afterlife, including contact with deceased relatives or deities, therefore must be considered subjective testimony and biased considering any attempted presuppositions by the defense regarding an established belief (i.e religious) in such claims, and the claims of subsequent believers, who may be operating under the limitations of cognitive bias compelled by, but not limited to, the internalized fear of death and the hope of the continuation of themselves beyond the extinction of the body, the brain and the consciousness to allow the capacity to reunite with beloved family members and their own respective deities.

   That indeed these psychological compulsions are producing the emotional barriers that contribute to the cognitive bias and their inability to employ logic for the purposes of critical thinking and discernment. Therefore, these testimonies of NDE's are accepted as the necessary evidence to confirm their preexisting beliefs and demonstrate the cognitive bias in effect, and when confronted with opposing facts and logical refutations to these NDE testimonies the resulting cognitive dissonance produces the adverse effects inherent in it's condition, such as discomfort, anger, stress, worry, and general feelings of negativity. In addition, as a result of their preexisting beliefs resulting in cognitive bias it may be preventing the objective assessment of the evidence limiting them to their own subjectivity regarding the validity of this, or any other NDE testimony, as well as contributing to the alleged NDE claimed by the defendant themselves through their own subconscious desires and expectations of the existence of an afterlife during their experience.

   The State Rests, Your Honor

3. I’m stunned to see Lynnclaire Dennis! She spoke about her experience many years ago in Glenview, Illinois. I bought her book that night. It’s great to see her again.

4. what's the gift when you lose your soul mate to death? what's the gift being left behind?

5. 🙏🙏🙏

6. Freaking amazing!!! I was so blessed by this beautiful story!!!! As an empath I want to say thank you! You touched my heart.🤩🤩🤩❤🙏🙏

7. Interesting interview, how do I email you..?

8. One of my favorite lines from A Course In Miracles is "Can you find light by analyzing darkness, as the psychotherapist does, or like the theologian, by acknowledging darkness in yourself and looking for a distant light to remove it, while emphasizing the distance?"

   That was dictated by Jesus in the late 60s or early 70s.

9. My dad always believed his mother would get to raise the baby she lost.❤️

10. Wow . She's "special" all right. Talk about entitlement . It was very hard to listen to this interview . Not your fault , Melissa . Let's be very clear about that . I won't be buying her book.

11. Wonderful! Simply wonderful!

12. Negotiating…
    Ushuti Karishi undi faktshi

13. https://youtu.be/kr5jbdl1xs0
    https://youtu.be/yIUG3t4MrwQ
    https://youtu.be/AEZpC4lCTy8

    https://youtu.be/DLclWdK0cy4
    https://youtu.be/8AJa8uM84iI
    https://youtu.be/EQYHx7drUWE
    …

14. That shape before she manipulated it I just started seeing it in my meditations starting two or three days ago.

15. Oh, and that combo of alcohol would make me🤮
    》》🤢《《Me, the next day

16. What a splendid metaphor the ball gown was for the self image, the surface presentation, the pretending. I hope others had a better response to Lynnclaire than I did but I didn't feel that I had got to know her. It is as though she were still putting on a show, and hiding her real self. Fascinating experience of being healed.

17. The pattern of love looks like the way that electrons would surround the space inside of an atom, circling around it as they are attracted to swirl around it in an never-ending motion of love!!!!

18. Hi melissa, thank you for your channel. I am a pastor or i was hehe from the philippines. I love the content of your channel it has given a clearer perspective on God. It is really all about love. So love your channel. I am jay ramirez from the philippines.

19. I hope she, or others, have the ability to be knocked out while putting a halo on. My Dad had to have it done, fully conscious, no painkillers, due to an electrode being put in his brain to prevent the trembling from Parkinson disease. Horrible, horrible, horrible……

20. Melissa, I just love your work and the way you do your interviews!!! That's awesome and wonderful!!!

21. ☀️♥️💛💚💙💜🌸

22. i am not allowed to comment on this presentation today.
    (………..strict orders..)

23. I say this about each guest you have on and I’ll say it again..i hung onto every word.. I just don’t have the words to express the depth of I guess joy I have listening to her story…it seems we have not been taught the truth about what is important in this life and it is a struggle to break free of the conditioning we have been brought up with..these conversations give us the opportunity to understand the bigger picture of our life. Thank you so much

24. Ditto.. another great interview ❤️.. Really looking forward to part two. Thank you 🙏🏻

25. Thank you dear Melissa

26. You can negotiate with the universe. That's very empowering.

27. Fascinating account(s). Funny, just after I hit the 28th thumbs up on this she talked about them saying "we will meet again in 27 = 1.

28. Melissa, thank you for not interrupting as your guests tell their experiences. This is helpful with the flow.

29. Hi can you please make a video on how to raise children like the one you did on your Instagram stories thanks

30. ~You will never remember the light by analizing the darkness~ powerful.

31. WOW Great interview Dear Melissa I love this so much wisdom in this and so interesting to hear and watch Big thanks to her sharing her experience I enjoyed it so much Blessings to Her and U Melissa BIG THANKS

32. L C L👼 ❤️❤️❤️

Comments are closed.