The human race has evolved into a culture that expects proof of exceptional claims. In short, we don’t accept first-person narratives without logical or scientific backup, or, at least, multiple sources for the same claims.

It wasn’t always the case.

The most obvious example is the Bible itself. If we consider the Bible objectively, we would recognize that it is a unique collection of texts written by a variety of contributors claiming to be witnesses to the events they describe. It is also primarily a history book, written from a particular viewpoint. Finally, it is a collection of texts selected by a committee of clergymen. Over the centuries, the Bible became viewed as infallible. Those texts were accepted at face value with little debate over the validity of those messages.

Considering the profound impact of those ancient texts, we can only wonder what the response would be if those messages were produced today. There is little doubt that those same messages, if created today, would have been subjected to intense scrutiny.

We might wonder, “why don’t we receive those same inspiring messages today?” Perhaps a better question would be “If we were to receive such profound insights, would we believe them or reject them due to our doubts?”

If we accept that the authors of those texts in the Bible were gifted with visions and insights outside the norm of human experience, we might want to consider that today’s recipients of similar profound insights might be equally gifted. The question would then be – would we even recognize or acknowledge the messages we receive from those individuals? The first, and most obvious difference is that yesterday’s audience lacked the benchmarks of knowledge that would be the foundation of doubt.

Todays’ audience is well equipped with a basic grasp of logic, mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, physics, and all the other tidbits of knowledge that serve to provide us with a working knowledge of our world. Collectively, these sciences give us the tools we need to make judgments about the information we are subjected to. Ultimately, this package of knowledge causes us to set the bar pretty high before we will believe anything beyond the norm.

Once we apply the filter of logic to some of today’s messengers, we might find that the flow of messages from beyond has more credibility than we might want to admit.

There are those today who wear the label “medium” or “clairvoyant” and claim to have the ability to communicate with entities beyond death’s door. Undoubtedly, there are some who fake that ability for their own benefit, yet there is a standard of evidence that lends credibility to some of those claims. Subject to critical appraisal, those who demonstrate knowledge of minute details that don’t exist in documented records, demonstrate an ability that cannot be explained by other means.

Likewise, those who have reported a near-death experience (NDE) have credibility when they are able to describe conditions and encounters that correspond to similar reports from others when there is no connection between the individuals. Additionally, some who report a NDE have been able to describe actions or statements that occurred outside the physical presence of the person experiencing the NDE.

For centuries, we have accepted the testimony of the witnesses of biblical events. Perhaps it is time for us to apply our logical skills to re-evaluate the evidence submitted by today’s witnesses.