:We all have our own way of thinking, I suppose. For me, as a scientific skeptic, I require concrete scientific evidence of something for me to believe in something. That some people have had "near death" experience and experienced pain or light or euphoria doesn't amount to much more than anecdotal evidence. Further, it isn't evidence of God. And understand, I don't beleive in God; however, I am open to the possibility of God. This is how a true skeptic thinks. I only base my beliefs on logic and rational scientific discovery. Currently, in my eyes, the evidence for religion is that no institution or concept in the history of mankind has been more responsible for murder than religion. It is paradoxical since most (if not all) religions teach the Golden Rule. And even Christianity, though a religion of pacifism (Jesus was basically a hippie after all - with all due respect), has been used to justify hundreds of millions of murders in the past two thousand years. What I am saying is: religion doesn't have a very good track record. Why? Because arguing over whose version of the "boogey man" is correct is futile because true believers can have no evidence which will make them change their mind. Why? Because all of the evidence and beliefs are based soley on faith. There's no winning arguments or wars when fantasy is the terms. We'd have better luck fighting over which flavor of ice cream is the best. At least there we are dealing with somewhat of a realistic concept - ice cream. In summary, I think that for all the goodness they preach, religions have proven themselves to be very hazardous to our health. While it may once have been a good way to teach people the difference between right and wrong, I think we are creative enough to think of a lesson plan grounded in reality and still have the same net effect as far as getting the message across. I'll leave you with this question for you to ponder: Did God create us in His own image or did we create Him in our own?