Of course, critics have been pointing out for years that witness testimony can be unreliable. Is there really a good reason to believe all the "eyewitness" accounts of various supernatural phenomena, ranging from UFOs and Bigfoot, to the Loch Ness Monster, Mothman, and the Chupacabra? But these have all been cheerfully cast aside by the Afore in the interest of continuing to preserve the very flimsy basis for believing the Book of Mormon "eyewitness."
Given all this, it surely comes as a massive shock to see that the Proprietor of SeN is actually quite selective when it comes to believing 1st-person eyewitness testimony, even when it comes to one of his favorite supernatural topics: NDEs:
Whoa! What?? He tends "not to rely very heavily upon first-person" accounts of their own NDEs?? This is shocking! Can you imagine what would happen if he applied this same standard to the Book of Mormon Witnesses? Does he not worry that voicing this tendency (and thus revealing his hypocrisy) might steer some of his readership straight towards apostasy? If the Witnesses should be treated with "skepticism" and curious Latter-day Saints don't need to "rely very heavily" upon the Witnesses's first-person accounts....then what will happen?On the whole, I’m more interested in relevant data than in “inspiration” from such accounts, and I tend not to rely very heavily upon first-person books about an author’s own NDE....But, although I’m skeptical, I don’t discount first person accounts completely or automatically, and this list has alerted me to some titles that I might perhaps want to read.
Quite interesting, in any case, to see such open admission of brazen hypocrisy.