"Larry King Live" 9:00 PM -James Story
- Thread starter deborah
- Start date
My family and I watched the show last night.
To me, the best part of the show was that it wasn't hosted by Larry King. Therefore, the questions were a little more probing. I felt Jeff, the host, followed the discussion well and asked good questions. Actually, he didn't have to do much once Deepak started challenging the obligatory, professional skeptic and sparks flew. That was fun to watch. The whole panel, who have all written books with "Life After Life" in the title made the point that NDE's and past life memories defy traditional explanations. They are at the point where science and spirituality meet. (You must watch the whole discussion when it shows up on a website.)
The Leiningers were not able to tell their whole story, leaving out the most important feature: that they were able to identify who James was in his previous life. So I felt that their case was not as strong as it could have been. Hopefully, people will read the book. James looked very uncomfortable sitting between his parents. He is usually very poised. Chase could relate!
Jim Tucker joined the ranks of MD's and a PhD on the panel and succinctly made some important points about children's memories when asked to comment on the Leininger case. He added some credibility to the discussion, but he didn't have much time.
One surprising statistic was mentioned from the latest Pew poll (I believe it was): that 30% of Catholics (American?) believe in reincarnation. That was interesting.
I hope you get a chance to see the discussion. It was intelligent--for a change!
To me, the best part of the show was that it wasn't hosted by Larry King. Therefore, the questions were a little more probing. I felt Jeff, the host, followed the discussion well and asked good questions. Actually, he didn't have to do much once Deepak started challenging the obligatory, professional skeptic and sparks flew. That was fun to watch. The whole panel, who have all written books with "Life After Life" in the title made the point that NDE's and past life memories defy traditional explanations. They are at the point where science and spirituality meet. (You must watch the whole discussion when it shows up on a website.)
The Leiningers were not able to tell their whole story, leaving out the most important feature: that they were able to identify who James was in his previous life. So I felt that their case was not as strong as it could have been. Hopefully, people will read the book. James looked very uncomfortable sitting between his parents. He is usually very poised. Chase could relate!
Jim Tucker joined the ranks of MD's and a PhD on the panel and succinctly made some important points about children's memories when asked to comment on the Leininger case. He added some credibility to the discussion, but he didn't have much time.
One surprising statistic was mentioned from the latest Pew poll (I believe it was): that 30% of Catholics (American?) believe in reincarnation. That was interesting.
I hope you get a chance to see the discussion. It was intelligent--for a change!
I felt that Jeff saying that James was a WWII pilot who had returned in the body of a small boy (or something like that) was not a really good way of saying that he was a soul reincarnated as James. It seems to me that people tend to emphasize the past life in a way that almost sounds like we are possessed by the person who we were previously. I think that Deepak was trying to make the point that we are not the same person that we were before and that our consciousness is an ever changing experience - moment to moment, lifetime to lifetime. Unfortunately, Deepak was, to me, ignored when trying to make that distinction.
Hi,
I enjoyed it. It was well done for the most part. It did seem to jump around a lot though and the fact that the three scientists were from a culture that believes in the after life - probably not a convincing factor for most Christians.
Yeah, Jame's case was not fully presented, :butbut: and if I had not been sitting next to my fiance explaining the parts left out he would have no other way of knowing the proof or validations they witnessed. It would have helped if they had some quick graphs during the talk that showed numbers for cases by Ian Stevenson, the specific cultures and religions that believed and a chart to break the silly numbers game the skeptics always bring up. All this should have been laid out pre-conversation. You know - Helen Wambach style.
My 2 cents. It's always good to see this stuff becoming more mainstream though.
I enjoyed it. It was well done for the most part. It did seem to jump around a lot though and the fact that the three scientists were from a culture that believes in the after life - probably not a convincing factor for most Christians.
That was interesting. Aili and I saw Deepak's lecture in Calgary -- May 2008. He was so calm, collected and sure of himself. It appeared to me that some things were said off camera that sparked much more than was presented. He seemed irked at best.
Yeah, Jame's case was not fully presented, :butbut: and if I had not been sitting next to my fiance explaining the parts left out he would have no other way of knowing the proof or validations they witnessed. It would have helped if they had some quick graphs during the talk that showed numbers for cases by Ian Stevenson, the specific cultures and religions that believed and a chart to break the silly numbers game the skeptics always bring up. All this should have been laid out pre-conversation. You know - Helen Wambach style.
My 2 cents. It's always good to see this stuff becoming more mainstream though.
I agree with you, Stardis and Deborah, on those points.
It seems that many TV programs that I've seen or participated in about this topic always lead in with a concept that sounds more like possession than reincarnation. It's as if they intentionally make it sound creepy, as if your child needs to be exorcised. Jim made the point that characteristics carry over from one life to another. If he had had the time, he could have expanded on that. I was pleased that Jeff, the host, brought up birthmarks and birth defects can be carried over from one life to another.
There never seems to be enough time for anyone to give a full answer. If only Bill Moyers would do a program on this...
Skeptics always bring up the argument that reincarnation couldn't exist because of the number of souls on earth presently being more than have existed in the past. It was good that the panel had a chance to respond to that.
And I agree, it didn't help that all three panel members were either Indian or Hindu. That weakened the case a bit.
It seems that many TV programs that I've seen or participated in about this topic always lead in with a concept that sounds more like possession than reincarnation. It's as if they intentionally make it sound creepy, as if your child needs to be exorcised. Jim made the point that characteristics carry over from one life to another. If he had had the time, he could have expanded on that. I was pleased that Jeff, the host, brought up birthmarks and birth defects can be carried over from one life to another.
There never seems to be enough time for anyone to give a full answer. If only Bill Moyers would do a program on this...
Skeptics always bring up the argument that reincarnation couldn't exist because of the number of souls on earth presently being more than have existed in the past. It was good that the panel had a chance to respond to that.
And I agree, it didn't help that all three panel members were either Indian or Hindu. That weakened the case a bit.
Truthseeker
Former Moderator
I noticed that too. I wonder if things escalated between Deepak and the skeptic during the commercial break because his body language suddenly suggested that he was irritated, and he began engaging the skeptic very aggressively.Deborah said:It appeared to me that some things were said off camera that sparked much more than was presented. He seemed irked at best.
The Leininger story was cut very short. "Life after death" was just too broad of a subject to cover in one hour. This forced the discussion to jump around a lot due to time constraints. I wish they would have expanded this subject over more than one night on the show so they could go into more depth on each topic.
For those interested in The Increasing Human Population vs Soul Population Debate this thread might be of interest.
Titus Rivas
Senior Registered
Disappointing, but thrilling
I enjoyed the show because at least it did address the issue and because it was the first time I saw the Leiningers on a live show. I must disagree with Carol about the host, as I personally like Larry King quite a lot and missed his warmth and charm.
Apart from that, I found most of the content rather disappointing. Both the skeptic's contribution, as he clearly was not aware of the evidence in the case of James Leininger and hid behind the (dishonest) cliché that it is no problem to admit that one just 'doesn't know'. And especially Deepak Chopra's contribution as he struck me as overly dominant (even a bit rude) and, worse still, quite inconsistent in what he was saying. However, my main problem with Chopra's position is that he has an Advaita background and does not believe in personal reincarnation. There are many people, including myself, who believe in personalism, and it was not very nice to hear Chopra claim that reincarnation obviously is not personal at all. For me, even the (misleading) skeptic was not as irritating as Chopra in this respect.
James Leininger and his parents did not get the chance to tell the essence of their story.
But apart from all these criticisms, it was still quite a thrill to watch the show.
Titus
I enjoyed the show because at least it did address the issue and because it was the first time I saw the Leiningers on a live show. I must disagree with Carol about the host, as I personally like Larry King quite a lot and missed his warmth and charm.
Apart from that, I found most of the content rather disappointing. Both the skeptic's contribution, as he clearly was not aware of the evidence in the case of James Leininger and hid behind the (dishonest) cliché that it is no problem to admit that one just 'doesn't know'. And especially Deepak Chopra's contribution as he struck me as overly dominant (even a bit rude) and, worse still, quite inconsistent in what he was saying. However, my main problem with Chopra's position is that he has an Advaita background and does not believe in personal reincarnation. There are many people, including myself, who believe in personalism, and it was not very nice to hear Chopra claim that reincarnation obviously is not personal at all. For me, even the (misleading) skeptic was not as irritating as Chopra in this respect.
James Leininger and his parents did not get the chance to tell the essence of their story.
But apart from all these criticisms, it was still quite a thrill to watch the show.
Titus
Titus Rivas
Senior Registered
That explains a lot, Deborah.
By the way, a very happy 2010 to yourself, to Carol, and to all the other great people who keep this forum going.
Titus
By the way, a very happy 2010 to yourself, to Carol, and to all the other great people who keep this forum going.
Titus