Bill:

There are various ways to detect that kind of illogic. One of them is inconsistency -- a religion in support of human life leading people to destroy human life is inconsistent; and to my way of thinking a religion that is not in support of human life is undesireable, but that's another matter. The idea that the truth can be unethical is pretty illogical to me. But it is clear that blowing up humans innocent of wrongdoing is unethical.

A large number of people -- perhaps a majority, I don't know -- experience some moments from the outside of their bodies rather than inside. This means that (1) they are telling the truth about what they experienced or (2) they are wilfully altering what they experienced or (3) they are subject to a mass illusion that is very widespread.

For reasons I do not quite understand you gravitate toward the 3rd interpretation, but I would argue with you that this explanation requires the most complex of models to be deemed "true".

A very large number of people have NOT experienced any moments that they can report outside of their bodies. This means that (1) anyone who says they have done so is lying or (2) anyone who has NOT done so is lying or (3) such experiences are possible, but there are other variables involved as to when and who might experience them.

If I were to choose, given the earlier population mentioned above, I would have to say (3) is the right explanation. I would hazard a guess, further that the variables primarily revolve around the deep and wonderful maze known as "decisions", and further hypothesize that the ingredients that influence individual life-changing and awareness-changing decisions are many, including emotion, pain, confusion, duress, hypnosis, biochemical influences, and more positive components like long-term personal spiritual goals that stretch across lifetimes, the hunger for insight and discovery, compassion, and the ability to perceive. Among other things.

If one person has experienced a genuine experience independent of a body, you are faced with a white-crow phenomenon, meaning it disproves the absolute notion that all humans are just their bodies. If one human is demonstrably more than his body, than it opens the possibility that N... are, or even possibly that all are, possibly.

To find one case history that seems consistent and acceptable to your standards of logical data should be fairly easy if you try -- the libraries are full of studies on re-incarnation, and related studies.

A