All people as spirits in the pre-mortal world took part in the creation of the earth. We were thrilled to be part of it. We were with God, and we knew that he was our Heavenly Father and that we were literally his spirit children. . . . Also, Jesus Christ was there. I understood, to my surprise, that he was a separate personage from God our mutual Father. My Protestant upbringing had taught me that God the Father and Jesus Christ were one being.

An Aside re: Eadie's Mormonism and Psychic/Religious Publishing Strategies

Before comparing and contrasting this description of Deity with Browne's, it is necessary to explain that Bettie Eadie's vision of God and Christ and humanity's literal spirit-child relationship with the Father God, and of humanity's role in the creation, is pure Mormon doctrine. Although it is not apparent at all in the book itself, Eadie was a Mormon prior to her NDE. This is made clear in an insert to the book, placed into the book by the publisher for copies to be sold out of Mormon bookstores. So, how does she explain her "surprise" at seeing the separateness of the Father and the Son which is a basic article of the faith of every Mormon?
 

The insert explains that, yes, she was a Mormon convert, but neither active nor knowledgeable about her new faith:

Because of her unfamiliarity with the gospel [note: shorthand word for the Mormon faith] at the time of her death experience, much of what she learned during the experience was new to her. The reality of the preexistence, for example, and the paradisiacal state of loving spirits after this life, both surprised her. After her experience, she began studying the gospel with renewed interest, not tp prove that her experience was genuine, but to see how Church doctrine stood in relation to it. She was continually surprised at how accurately the gospel reflected what she had seen. . . . 

These sentiments are not reflected in her subsequent books, however, and I suspect this is part of a marketing strategy to maximize the potential audiences for her books, and that is fine by me. I suppose that it is more important to get her basic message out to a wide audience than to fortify belief in one specific group's beliefs. She says as much in her discussion of why there are many churches (religions), on pages 45-46, and why they are all necessary and important to match where people's spiritual capacities are. She says it may be good, as one progresses, to change religions, but "we have no right to criticize any church or religion in any way." Perhaps either a bone or criticism is thrown to Mormons in this discussion, who believe they have "the fulness of the gospel," when Eadie says (p. 46): "There is a fulness of the gospel, but most people will not attain it here. In order to grasp this truth, we need to listen to the Spirit and let go of our egos." 
 

The insert in the Mormon-audience "version" of the book could make one assume that the next book, if there is to be one, would straighten this relationship to Mormonism out by declaring it more forthrightly. But instead, in her second book ("The Awakening Heart: My continuing journey into Love," 1996, Pocket Books, New York) she explains on page 41 that after her experience she
 

began attending two different church groups. In one church I found a spiritual expression of God's love and in the other, a knowledge of God's plan. . . . I found a place for both faiths, balancing the two different belief systems in my heart. I knew from my experience that each church fulfills spiritual needs that perhaps others cannot fulfill. I know experienced the truth of that in my own life.

Not to belabor the point, but it is in the interest of promoting her audience that, no doubt she created her own foundation and has become self-publishing, to promote the reach of her teaching. Her latest book, "The Ripple Effect, Our Harvest" (1999) is published by her new publishing house, Onjinjinkta Publishing in Seattle. The ripple effect is something she learned of in her life review (see page 113 of "Embraced by the Light", hereinafter referred to as simply "Embraced"). Fiscal considerations must be secondary, since she "saw how damaging lust for the things of this world can be. All real growth occurs spiritually, and worldly things like possessions and rampant appetites smother the spirit." (Page 116 of "Embraced")
 

I mention this only because this pattern of establishing ones own organization for spreading ones version of the truth, and even ones own publishing house, is a ubiquitous thing among visionaries. Joseph Smith's Mormonism and its Deseret Book publishing house are an example, as are the (albeit posthumous) Edgar Cayce and Swedenborgian foundations, movements, churches, and publishing ventures. Even Sylvia Browne, in her listening to another psychic's misinformation, formed her own foundation to promote the teaching of correct principles (page 23 of "Life on the Other Side"), and, later, seeing the misinformation in religions, she founded her own church to teach what was really true, and publishes the simple articles of her faith on page 45!
 

Back to God
 

And this brings us back to the comparing and contrasting of the visions of Edie and Browne. Browne says in no uncertain terms, based on her incredibly full history of experience in and with the afterlife, that, almost exactly like Eadie, states unequivocally that (p. 45):
 

We are all created and unconditionally loved by God, His genetic heirs who are equal in His eyes.

The very next statement differs radically from Eadie's perceptions, however:

 
There is a Mother God, Azna, who is the female, emotional aspect of the deity, just as the Father God is the male, intellectual aspect. . . . Throughout our tour of The Other Side I'll be using masculine pronouns like He and Him to refer to God, but only because I find the constant use of He/She and Him/Her as annoying to write as it is to read. But the truth is, the Mother God, Azna, and the Father God make up the Godhead together. 

Like Eadie, Browne then emphasizes the loving, accepting nature of God, and rejects the judgmental aspects that are the hallmark of the eternal damnation school of thought. Both agree there is a self-imposed separation from evil and misbehavior, but it is not eternal. There is no eternal hell.

So, we have two witnesses with different views of the Godhead, one sees it as male, the other as male and female. A third witness is perhaps advisable to break this tie. Jan Price wrote, from her own experience,"The Other Side of Death," (Fawcett Columbine, New York, 1996). On her page 61, she wrote of her experience of unity in the temple of the world of spirits:
 

A sweetness, an essence so pure, filled me, was me. This is what God is, all is, I am. With purity of heart I saw God and knew there is nothing else. I felt myself merging with, and ascending into, that crystalline brilliance. I touched true Joy, and I was lifted into the fullness of Being-the Essence of Life. In this glory I was free, and I beheld the Love that knows no conditions-the self-givingness of the Lifeforce we call God, ever nurturing and sustaining itself. All outlines disappeared, and there was no separation. Maintaining individual awareness, I was one with the Whole. . . . In the center of the universe I stand encircled by Divine being.

She continues to explore the idea that God and Love are the same thing and calls it "GODLOVE." On page 62 she exults: "GODLOVE. It fills and sustains me. It is me. It is all, for it is all. I am that I am." Her exultation ends on the next page with: "There is no end to what I am. For I am God and God is me and there is nothing else to be." 
 

To me, this is reminiscent of the mystical experiences of unity I really like and relate to from the Middle Ages. These words of the German Beguine, Mechtild of Magdeburg, have exactly the same message, in my opinion:
 

The day of my spiritual awakening
was the day I saw
and knew I saw
all things in God

and God
in all things. 

[As translated in Sue Woodruff, "Meditations with Mechtild of Magdeburg,"
(Sante Fe, New Mexico, Bear & Company, Inc., l982) Page 22.]
 

Mechtild explained that the soul was God and God was the soul, just as Jan Price saw her self in God and as God:
 

What is the human soul?
The soul is a god with God.
This is why God says to the soul:
I am the God of all gods;
But you are the goddess of all creatures.
Stand in fatherly fashion
by all people who bear my likeness.
For I am
your soul. 

[Woodruff, page 33.]
 

Mechtild pulls her powerful insights immediately into life's arena: God is your soul, hence, love your fellow beings--for they are all tabernacles of God. And that is also where Jan price's book takes its readers.
 

God is a Life-Force, Love. God is all in all. God is not confined into a single personal spirit-being, and is not confined to being in a couple of beings, male and female. Does Jan Price mention the male and the female aspects of God? In the context of reincarnation, yes (p. 64):
 

As though looking into a kaleidoscope, I saw myriad lifetimes and experiences. Oh, the wonder of me. This powerful creative energy could take on any form it chose, and right now it was expressing as a woman called Jan, so of course I would perceive it as feminine.

So, our three witnesses don't add up to one story, unless one suggests each is emphasizing a different aspect of the ineffable concept collectively called God.
 

But the difference between Browne and Price is not as great as the difference between both of them and Eadie. For example, Browne says on page 174 that:
 

An argument can be made that because God is actually a Force, the Great Unseeable, the whole concept of His having a Face or Form is a moot point.

But to make a very basic analogy, electricity is a force too, and it's very visible, no matter how briefly, when it arcs.

And then there's the fact that trying to apply earthly laws of physics to God is too limiting to have any relevance at all.

The truth is, both the Father God and Azna, the Mother God, who together make up the Godhead, do make brief and unspeakably sacred appearances on The Other Side, on the rarest and holiest of occasions known to and observed by the whole population of spirits.

Apparently this is an accommodation of both the personal God and the Jan Price type of GODLOVE God.
 

But did Browne ever see God? In the physical sense? Yes. She asserts that, as we are about to descend to earth from our spirit abode (pp. 222-223):

We have the unspeakably divine privilege of two private audiences after we've said farewell to our friends.

The first is with our messiah. Every messiah who incarnated to bring the message of God to earth is alive, active, . . . . Before we return to earth, we are given several moments with the messiah to whom we've always felt closest, at a site of our own choosing. . . .

Whoever the messiah, and whichever the location, they are there to embrace us in their divine light . . . reminding us . . .that there will never be an instant when their presence is not with us. . . .

The second audience is an awesome glimpse of the actual materialized presence of Azna, the Mother God, the exquisite, perfect, emotional half of the deity who created us, whose mere glance reconfirms our eternal place in Her heart as Her cherished child. . . .

On page 226 she reveals there is actually also a third encounter with the Divine:
 

. . . the last thing we feel before we leave The Other Side for each new, daunting, courageous lifetime is the actual touch of the Finger of God, just above the bridge of the nose where our third eye would be. It is God's kiss, not of good-bye but only of a brief farewell . . . .

So, there is a pecking order: messiah, Mother God, and God. This is somewhat reminiscent of the primacy of the male in the visions recounted by Eadie. But the references to reincarnation that are central to both Browne and Price's accounts are not countenanced by Eadie.

The role of gender, and the role of reincarnation, are addressed next. Note, however, that about 2500 BC the Sumerians already had a more aloof set of Gods, male an female, as well as a more personal God who took care of them from day to day and interceded for them with the rather unpredictable major Gods. Where we have come a long way is infusing the God(s) with love, acceptance, and whose greatest punishment is allowing us to withdraw from the Divine Presence. We are, in this New Age, no longer dealing with capricious Gods who could cause grain to grow or to wither in our fields, and who plotted and executed revenge, now or later, when disobeyed or not properly served. But what we have lost is perhaps the Sumerian appreciation of the sexual act between a man and a woman as the symbol of the creative act of the Gods. We no longer apply for a bountiful harvest by having the king mate with the chief priestess, representing the God and Goddess in heaven, and if she is well pleased our land will bring forth great increase. In fact, Browne is emphatic: gender: yes, sex: no, in the after life. This must definitely also be addressed.
 

Gender and Sex in Heaven
 

We have already seen that gender plays little role in the God-vision of Jan Price, because if she accepts that through reincarnation she, who is in God and who is God, can be a male at one time and a female at another time. Sylvia Browne sees reincarnation the same way, but accepts the fact that the Godhead is made up of a male and female personage. However, these personages appear to not be limited in any way as mortal personages are. 
 

Browne, however, does see a definite difference between the male and the female in the Godhead, and that difference reflects the human brain's division into a left and a right hemisphere, which is most curious. But in her vision, the Council of Elders that helps decide on the content of one's next incarnation is composed of a "phylum of eighteen advanced male and female beings who essentially act as God's spokespersons on The Other Side." Her continuing description on pages 160-161 explain that these eighteen were an exception to the rule of all beings being 30 years of age in appearance, they were venerable, beautiful, dressed in long flowing robes, and appointed to their stations for all eternity. Browne says they sit around a U-shaped table (p. 161). Like Angels, Browne says, these beings never incarnate (p. 160). We will return to that idea later.
 

By contrast, Eadie saw a "Council of Men," . . . "seated around the long side of a kidney-shaped table. I was led to stand in front of them within the indentated portion of the table. One thing struck me almost immediately; there were twelve men here-men-but no women." (Pages 108-109 of "Embraced.") Eadie explains that had it not been for her just having witnessed a vision of the earth's creation and the story of Adam and Eve, she may have objected to this scene of an all-male council. But she writes that:
 

I had seen the differences between Adam and Eve. I was shown that Adam was more satisfied with his condition in the Garden and that Eve was more restless. I was shown that she wanted to become a mother desperately enough that she was willing to risk death to obtain it. Eve did not 'fall' to temptation as much as she made a conscious decision to bring about conditions necessary for her progression, . . . .

This is largely the Mormon view of the Adam and Eve story, by the way, as documented in the Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 2:22-25, which explains there could be no joy, no progeny, and no progression had Adam not fallen. The verses end with the famous couplet: "Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy."
 

Eadie, on pages 110-111, continues to explain that women are naturally more attuned to the spiritual, and are closer to God because they can bear children and are thus co-creators with Him. The other side of this two-edged sword, she explains, is that women are also more restless, like Eve, and are Satan's favorite prey because "once Satan had the women, the men would easily follow." Thus, it was right for men to lead: "I began to see the differences in the roles between men and women, and I understood the necessity and beauty of those roles."
 

Eadie's 1996 book "The Awakening Heart" adds to this thought that (p. 212) part of her call was, as a grandmother among grandmothers, to fight Satan's "plan to undermine the nurturing power of women and destroy the family." In her 1999 book "The Ripple Effect," Eadie says she has received a lot of disapproving comment on this all-male Council she met. She replies in similar terms as used in "Embraced." On pages 5 and 6 of this third book she says essentially that this is the way it is and everyone in the spirit abode is perfectly happy with it:
 

I understood that our father in heaven created man in his own image-which is that of a perfect and multifaceted man. Women, too, are in the image of God and are multifaceted. Women's bodies are co-creators of mortal life and this makes us Godlike in a literal sense. In heaven, women and men are perfectly balanced in their roles and are equal. Standing side by side they are perfect complements of each other.

Note that in making this latter statement, she is almost painting the same picture of a male and a female together, as Browne paints of the father God and the mother God in making up the Godhead. Browne and Eadie are not that far apart. Reincarnation, the potential assumptions of different gendered bodies, does not keep Browne from drawing conclusions about the human pair from the God-pair. She asserts that although we can be incarnated as men or women, at Home we always assume the gender in which we were first created, and always keep the name given us by God at that time (see page 135).
 

It is reincarnation that Browne uses to argue that there is no marriage that last forever, no permanent association from the fact of being married on earth. Associations are, she explains on pages 146-148, instead based on other considerations. She explains on page 147 that marriage was invented to manage procreation, and there is no procreation at "Home." She continues:
 

If you're even tempted to be discouraged by the fact that marriage doesn't exist at Home, you might want to take this into account: on The Other Side, we spend eternity surrounded by loved ones from this life, every past life we've ever had, and countless loved ones we've never happened to incarnate with.

On page 148 she suggests you do the math, if you have had fifty lifetimes and at least one marriage in each, to be married that many times forever makes no sense. Of course to a person believing in eternal polygyny (the one male-many females version of polygamy), or in polyandry (the other version), this is probably food for thought.
 

But, the more important question is: if there is no marriage and no procreation, is there sex?
 

No, says Browne on page 134. But it is not because the organs are not there. On page 128 she explains that:
 

We absolutely have bodies on The Other Side. We have eyes that blink, hearts that pump blood through our veins, and organs that are a mirror image of our bodies on earth, . . . .

Browne asked her Spirit Guide, Francine by name, why there are organs that serve no purpose, and the answer was simply that God made us that way. Browne accepts that answer.
 

But for those lamenting the eternal loss of the sex act, she encourages (page 134): "The good news is: we engage in another form of intimacy there that far exceeds the sexual act in its intensity. It has nothing to do with lust or hormones and everything to do with the singularly amazing act of fully experiencing another being. It's neither called nor thought of as sex on The Other Side. Instead, it's descriptively called 'merging.' Merging is the act of two souls literally blending together, physically, spiritually, and emotionally, to a state of utter mutual bliss." She goes on to explain that this is not an exclusive act, but a way for two people to share their knowledge as well as self in "a blinding flash of perfect harmony." Elsewhere she explains that it is the technique used to conduct historical research, (see page 105) which could explain the general enthusiasm for, and joy in, learning! As Browne observes on page 179, "And believe it or not, one of our greatest sources of fun is studying." 
 

I believe it, but am also making light of a very serious book, which is not respectful and I apologize. Swedenborg's vision, which did not contain reincarnation, showed there to be marriage, and intimate relations, in the after-life. His intimate relations were comparable, if I recall what I read a few decades ago, to the concept put forth by Browne.
 

What About Messiahs and Reincarnation?
 

It has been noted that reincarnation is a fact of eternal life by both Browne and Price. But Eadie strongly disagrees. As hypnotherapists, both Eadie and Browne have encountered past life memories in others as well as in themselves, however. Eadie interprets them this way (page 93 of "Embraced"):
 

I learned that all thoughts and experiences in our lives are recorded in our subconscious minds. They are also recorded in our cells, so that, not only is each cell imprinted with a genetic coding, it is also imprinted with every experience we have ever had. Further, I understood that these memories are passed down through the genetic coding to our children. These memories then account for many of the passed on traits in families, such as addictive tendencies, fears, strengths, and so on. I also learned that we do not have repeated lives on this earth; when we seem to 'remember' a past life, we are actually recalling memories contained in the cells.

Eadie's experience of soul-mates (see pages 151-158 of "Awakening") is explained as the recognition of spirits with whom she had a specially close relationship in the pre-earth life. She again denies reincarnation on page 157. Why? Because she sees it is not so, surely, but no doubt also because she believes in there being one Savior, Jesus Christ. It would be confusing to have multiple lives in the context of a salvation/savior-based religion that promises once for all saving from death in exchange for belief. But Eadie does not mention this as an objection to reincarnation in any of her books. Of the three authors being reviewed, however, she is the only one that argues for one, exclusive, messiah, Jesus Christ whom all mankind must recognize and believe in to be saved. That teaching actually matures in the succession of three books she has written.
 

In "Embraced," Eadie mentions Christ as "Savior of the earth" (p. 53) and suggests the importance of "allowing the light of Christ to enter our lives" on page 91. In "The Ripple Effect" she explains the centrality of Jesus Christ in her vision-experience as indicating that (pages 108-124) it is true as the New testament says, that all must be saved through Christ. But she asserts that not everyone need do so while here on this earth, and Christ can save after this life as well. She does not refer to the Mormon version of this doctrine, which included the living being baptized on behalf of the dead, allowing their salvation as they are taught about Christ in the next life, however. She again asserts that no single church can bring a person into knowing God fully, that is an individual effort. The fear taught in some churches is sinful, she states, but all sin is to be forgiven by a merciful God. In "The Ripple Effect" Eadie is at her most Christian, is my impression, and she cites Christian scripture more freely than in her previous books.
 

I believe the less specific multiple savior concept in the Browne book is approached by Eadie when she says in "The Ripple Effect" that (page 109-110):
 

Jesus is known by many names around the world, but what we call him is not as important as what he represents, especially in the sacrifice he made to bring us home to the Father. . . . Sometimes he [God] places teachers of greater knowledge into a religion to raise its level of awareness and growth.

This compares to some degree with the notion of Browne, except that in her case the "messiahs" are the "great spiritual leaders this world has been privileged to know." (Page 222). Browne explains that her messiah is Jesus (p. 223), and lists other well-known messiahs as including Buddha, Mohammed, Baha-Allah, and Apollonius of Tyana (p. 222).   This kind of syncretism approaches the eclecticism  of Patricia Kirkmond, and seems quite contrived and phony to me.  Sorry.
 

This view of messiahs is quite a different view from that of Eadie's really, in terms of the exclusive status and role of Jesus in Eadie's view. I believe the difference is directly relatable to the disbelief in, and belief in, reincarnation of these two visionaries. If one believes in reincarnation, a savior in the classical and exclusive Christian/Eadie sense is a difficult concept. Browne insists that early Christians were reincarnationists up to the time of Constantine, one that she calls "Pope Constantine," in error I believe. Her use of scripture is interesting, but not convincing, to me. Especially since she has to redefine the concept of a messiah in order to then reconcile the religion with reincarnation. Either way of believing is a matter of faith. 
 

Talking or mute Angels?
 

It is interesting, to me, to read Eadie's description of angels. In "Embraced" she mentions their rejoicing in rendering assistance (page 53), she had ministering angels assist her and explain things to her (page 82), she mentions thousands of them singing (page 120), and their watching over us earth beings (page 121), and cheering when things went right with someone in mortality, and being sad when things go wrong (they are very expressive of their emotions, it seems).
 

In "The Ripple Effect" Eadie explains more about angels on pages 10-12. She makes it very clear that they speak to us, if we but know how to listen, and that they are of the same species as ourselves. Speaking of guardian angels she explains: "These angels may have lived on earth previously, or they may not have come here yet. They may be relatives or best friends who have passed on, or they may be unknown spirits. If we are ever blessed to have an angel appear to us, we may relate with it by simply speaking to it."
 

On page 11 she also warns that there are angels who are not from God. "We can know if a message or an angel is from God because we will sense no darkness in them. No unclean thought or thing can come from God. We can test their spirits by remembering this." An even more ominous note is addressed on page 12 where she describes "Warring Angels," who prevent evil from triumphing and prevent Satan from being "unjust," and "tempting anyone beyond their power to endure. Warring Angels protect us from evil forces, from destructive thoughts, and from the unfair tactics of Satan. They see to it that our course is clear to do God's will. However, we are always to exercise our own faith."
 

Note the contrast between these descriptions of the angelic force and the one given by Browne. On page 114 and on page 155 Browne unequivocally says angels are not of our species and do not speak, even amongst themselves! They communicate telepathically with each other, and with us. They do sing, however, and as they sing all of creation is filled with "sacred grace."
 

The telepathic communication idea is not all that opposed to Eadie's idea that angels speak to us if we but know how to listen. But on page 155 Browne makes it crystal clear that angels do not show emotion:
 

Without ever looking grim or unfriendly, they never change expression, never smile, never frown, never laugh, and never cry, because they've never experienced any feeling except pure, uncompromised devotion.

This is in keeping with an earlier observation on that page that: "Angels are their own separate species, created by God to be our messengers and protectors, His divine legion of activists." And just in case this failed to make its point, on the next page she adds:
 

We will never become Angels, nor will Angels ever incarnate and become human. The reason is simple-we don't 'graduate' from one species to another on The Other Side, any more than we do on earth.

On pages 156-158 she describes a whole hierarchy of angels, with members of the different orders being differentiable by the colors and the markings on their wings.
 

Different species in heaven? Well, yes, Eadie does not recall seeing animals in heaven, but her belief is that "we will enjoy the comfort and love of our pets in the next life if we so desire." (Page 7 of "Ripple"). Browne suggest there is every imaginable, even mythical type of animal there except for insects! (Page 101). And on pages 76-77 she paints this charming and fun picture of a reunion of a recently deceased person coming into The Other Side:
 

. . . every pet we've ever had, from every lifetime we've experienced, gathers around us with such urgent joy that the people waiting to welcome us have a hard time getting to us through the happy crowd of animals.

Did I mention animals only because of the idea that angels were a different species? No, not just that, but also because animals can take on some angelic duties: (p. 77) "Never believe for one moment that our animals on The Other Side don't watch over us during our journeys on earth."
 

In fairness to Browne, however, she differentiates Spirit Guides from Angels, whereas Eadie functionally lumped them together. Browne suggests on page 189 that:
 

There's no question that most if not all of us will take our turn as a friend's Spirt Guide sooner or later. . . The Spirit Guide relationship begins on The Other Side, when someone with whom we have a special connection makes the difficult decision to leave Home for another incarnation.

She adds that this shows much love and trust, ant the Spirit Guide's preparations may take "years, decades, or centuries" because it is necessary to know this person inside and out. It is a mystery to me why the concept of "merging" is not brought up in this context, the intimate act of becoming temporarily one, and thus passing along all of this information simultaneously. If "merging" is used for rather impersonal "historical" research, as explained on page 101, why not employ it here as well where there is already an intimate bond?
 

But what is the difference between the Spirit Guide and the guardian angel? I suspect that in Eadie's vision there is no difference, but that in Browne's vision there is. Recall that angels, in her vision, have no emotions. She makes this point again in the context of explaining why we, after incarnation, make good Spirit Guides (pp. 189-190):
 

We have the advantage of having lived on earth ourselves at least once, so we can empathize with the complicated emotionalism of being human-emotionalism that would seem utterly alien to Angels and the Council who, never having incarnated, can't relate to negativity, meanness, aggression, hatred, depression, and other inevitable facets of earthly life.

Angels, on the other hand, may be our guardians also, despite their inability to empathize (p. 156):
 

Whether they're protecting us from harm, saving lives, or simply bringing us messages of joy, hope, comfort, and love, Angels are truly God's mightiest, most direct link between here and The Other Side, His physical means of carrying us on His shoulders in times of fear, sorrow, and desolation until we're strong and steady enough to walk beside Him again.

This is very similar to Eadie's concept of guardian angels, and, in my opinion, very similar to the Spirit Guide concept except perhaps for the Angel's apparent ability to intervene physically in an earth life.

What is baffling, however, is that not only are the Council not going to ever incarnate, as previously noted, but they also have never incarnated. This was not at all clear to me when reading of the comparison between the Council and the Angels on page 160, where we read before that the Council will not incarnate (I thought it meant incarnate "again" when I read it there, and thought the Angel comparison was not to be taken too far since they were a different species. But page 189 makes it very clear that the Council, like Angels, never has incarnated! Why is this so baffling to me? Because it is the Council that works with us in planning out every nuance and happening in our next incarnation. Yet, they totally lack incarnate experience!
 

Planning our Incarnation
 

Eadie makes it quite clear that ones life-duration is not a matter of chance, but of planning (pages 94-97). Physical attributes, including handicaps, were also part of this planning, and life roles were also known before hand, but there was still freedom of choice in determining how we would live and carry out our missions. Browne's description is very similar at that level, but then dives into a much deeper level of detail suggesting our life course is charted to a very painstakingly fine degree (pages 211-220), including several possible exit (death) points (p. 107-109). She also suggests that the chart we make up may tend to be too ambitious because we are so power-filled as to have forgotten how weak we can be in the flesh p. 213). Although everything is scripted, there is still plenty of room for free will (pp. 212-213):
 

A charted life is in no way a life without options. It exemplifies the fact that the value of our lives isn't dictated by what we're confronted with but by what we do with what we're confronted with. Finally, because we tend to be too optimistic, the Council negotiates our final plan with us, to root out where we may have heaped too much on ourselves.

This, enigmatically, is the Council that has no experience incarnating.
 

This is all explained on pages 215 to 220 after the introductory sentence:
 

Once we've completed the long, arduous task of writing our chart, based on such decisions as our goals, Life Themes, and Option Lines, we leave the Orientation room and, with our Spirit Guide, proceed to the heart of the Hall of Justice, to the magnificent white marble sanctity of the vast arena where the Council sits at their gleaming U-shaped platform, waiting to receive us.

Browne then explains their role in cutting out life ambitions down to size so that the crises and goals we have selected do not (p. 216) "cause us so much pain that we'll miss the point of what we're hoping to accomplish." But even a terrible life is not a punishment for a past life's misdeeds, says Browne, it is likely the opposite: greater challenges have been allowed by the Council for a specially capable spirit (p. 217).

I never felt right about this type of vision, since it makes seeing terrible suffering in this life seem like it was meant to be. It could also suggest we should not interfere to make it less so or we may be thwarting that person's life plan. That latter view is unethical, to me, and the fact that much effort is expended on The Other Side to alleviate human suffering is refreshing (pages 182-183), but seemingly contradictory to what is described here in terms of life planning to include suffering.
 

However, after agreeing on the scope of life, according to Browne, we go and recruit the Angels that are to watch over us. The number and types of Angels assigned to watch over us depend on the difficulty of the life that has been charted (see page 219). Fewer than two assigned Angels is rare, as many as five or six is common, with the higher numbers attending those here for their last incarnation.

Last incarnation? Yes, Browne, like Buddha before her, announces she herself is on her last incarnation on page 187. But unlike the Buddha, she is planning to stay in the lower six levels of advancement available in the spirit world, the levels where she remains a spirit entity and engages in many good causes, acts as a Spirit Guide, etc. The seventh level, one longed for by the Buddha, is not appealing to her even though she did know one man (in her entire lifetime) for whom it had great appeal (p. 187). The seventh level of advancement is (p. 185):
 

The level to which only a few rare souls choose to advance, where the spirit forfeits its identity and is willingly absorbed into the 'uncreated mass,' or the infinite, unfathomable force field from which the love and power of God emanate.

On the next page she likens this to a cup of water rejoining the Pacific Ocean.
 

Material-ism: Time, Research, Bodies, Destruction, Homes-Gardens-Temples, Etc.
 

Time:
 

Eadie reports there is no time, as does Browne. On page 79 Browne declares . . ."there really is no such thing as time in the context of eternity" . . . . However, there does seem to be a forward momentum to events:
 

A nice long lifetime on earth is perceived by the spirits on The Other Side as a quick trip away from home. So even if you discover that your loved one has incarnated again, it won't bother you in the least. As far as you're concerned, you'll be seeing them again in just a few minutes. 

On page 98 Browne comes right out and says The Other Side is a place . . ."where time does not exist, where every living thing always was and always will be, nothing ages, nothing rots, nothing corrodes. Every square inch of land and water is magnificently, eternally new." We return to that aspect of timelessness below.
 

A question I asked myself while reading is how there can be historical research when there is no concept of time. An answer seems to be given on pages 106-108 where we learn that one can "merge" with someone's life chart, and learn of past, present, and future events and what the person is or will be feeling and how he has or has not, or will or will not, cope. On pages 76 and 77 of "Embraced," Eadie describes what is essentially the same experience occurring in a library, a repository of knowledge without books.
 

Research
 

Both Browne and Eadie suggest there is research in the world of the spirits and communication of discoveries from one world to the other. Eadie, on page 48 of "Embraced," suggests: "Many of our important inventions and even technological developments were first created in the spirit by spirit prodigies. Then individuals on earth received the inspiration to create these inventions here." Browne goes into much more detail on the same subject.
 

On page 182 of Browne's book, she states:
 

Remember, there is no disease on The Other Side . . . . It is our nature to be humane, and on The Other Side we have the luxury of focusing the generosity of our efforts where they are needed.

So an essential part of our joyful research is devoted to our active, ongoing partnership with humankind for enhancing the quality of life. Our brilliant minds at Home will be hard at work until we cure cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and every other debilitating plague on earth . . . .

On the next page she addresses the way this information, when it is ready, can be passed on to us: "Infused knowledge," which is the "direct transfer of information from one mind to another with no conscious information of where that information came from." She continues by observing that this explains simultaneous breakthroughs in several widely separated locations in the world.
 

Bodies
 

Eadie describes ones spirit on pages 4 and 5 of "The Ripple Effect." Our spirit exists . . . "in the same image as our bodies, including heads, arms, hands and feet, but made of refined spirit matter and light instead of flesh and blood." Browne, as we have already noted, (from her page 128) suggested there was indeed blood flowing in our veins in the next life, or the life between lives. But, she notes, there are organs present for which there is no purpose. She mentions the processes of food digestion and elimination, but as we have already seen, sex organs are also useless. Both authors suggest we have a unique "visage" or "presence" by which we are always known even if, for fun, we opt to alter our appearance.
 

Destruction
 

Why are there no organs for consuming and expelling foodstuffs? I suppose it is for the same reason that materials used for building cannot be real wood or other "grown" materials. No destruction. On page 118-119, Browne explains at length that:
 

The one rule that applies to all construction, whether it's by projected thought or by hand, is that nothing is ever to be destroyed in the process, so that not a single flower, tree, stream, or hillside is touched, and all existing structures and natural beauty remain perpetually, flawlessly intact. That rule obviously extends to building supplies, which aren't a problem, since they come from the same projected thought from which entire houses are assembled.

How one sites a building without destroying native vegetation is not addressed.
 

The heavenly realm is like the earth itself was in a more pristine state, prior to the weathering and eroding of its landscapes. Page 98 explains that there are nine continents, Atlantis still lies in The Other Side's Atlantic, Lemuria still lies in its Pacific, nothing has changed since creation. I suppose that plate tectonics does not apply in a spirit-matter world: no forces causing continental movement, no friction between plates and recycling of crust at depth causing volcanoes and earthquakes, and no weather. So, why is there not just one continent, Pangea, as older myths and even current science suggest was the primal state of the world?
 

Yet, even with all that is said, and nobly so, about there being no destruction whatsoever, in the back of Browne's book what symbols are carried by the artwork depicting god/goddess-like statues? Spears, arrows, swords and shields. The artists used by Browne apparently captured the truth of Home very accurately (p. 249):
 

. . .they created beauty so accurate that it whispered a longing familiarity deep in my soul, still another reminder that we all came here from that divine place and we will all go there again. I hope these drawings bring you the same comfort and peace they continue to bring me.

Nice sentiments, but they do not inspire peace in me. The drawing of the Orientation Center has a woman with a sword; the drawing of the Towers has a man and woman both with a sword, and she has a shield; the Hall of Wisdom has male and female angels, which already violates the no-gender-androgynous rule for angels (page 155), with spear and sword; and the Gardens drawing has a warrior female with sword. Oh, and by the way, heaven could use some diversity training, only one race is depicted in its art. [But what really irritated me was the promise on page 109 of a drawing of Azna, the Mother God, in statue in front of The Hall of Justice. There was no such drawing in the book. I hope at least she is not brandishing a weapon!]
 

Homes, Gardens, Temples
 

All three of our witness, Price, Eadie and Browne mention buildings. Originally I was going to play a silly game and compare their descriptions. Then it occurred to me that if this were a criminal case and these were eye witnesses recalling places and events from some time ago and far away, the discrepancies within these stories wouldn't be all that unexpected. A table is kidney shaped or U shaped, a council was twelve men or eighteen men an women, etc. Who cares about the details when it should be a wonder of the first magnitude that there are official buildings and tribunals at all in these stories. In symbolic terms they are quite comparable even though their Gods and angels and councils are described differently. But where it counts, in their bottom line of teaching love as the key to human progress, they are identical. So why quibble over the little things?
 

But the question that nags me is, why all these edifices? Not to keep light out, not to keep wind out, not to keep rain out, not to protect against theft, not to keep processes or proceedings away from unauthorized eyes. Well, except in one case where the phenomenon of a spirit shrinking to fit into its new baby-body is kept from onlookers (Browne, page 224-225). And why throw that in, to make fun of it? No, it underscored for me the fact that in Browne's vision , where she sees that it is not legitimate to apply earthly laws of physics to limit God (page 174), earthly laws of physics are applicable to the human spirit. That is surprising, and seems wrong.
 

The question about the reason for needing these edifices is not answered except for homes, which exist not because they are needed, but because it is soothing to have a place to call our own (p. 117). They are also used for parties and small gatherings, as are all other locales except those (p. 196) . . . "set aside for worship, meditation, or study." I suppose it is just the way it is, over there, and there is no use questioning why things are that just are. After all, the Bible refers to a heavenly Jerusalem, so it must be so.
 

On Browne's page 122 libraries, schools, and research centers are described. In these, . . . "studies and experiments are eternally ongoing for the good of humankind throughout the universe, as well as for our own enlightenment," . . . . So, the spirit word is a lot more physical than I ever dreamed, or so it seems. The next page, in fact, describes roads and hovercraft (not necessary, since travel is through the mind, but fun and part of the ongoing technological development work). These little craft are "atomic-powered." This suggests that radioactive elements do decay, releasing heat, and that time moves forward.
 

All earth art and architecture exists in perfection in the spirit world, and Greco-Roman classical architecture was, in fact, developed there and imported to earth. (Pages 98-99 and 104 make these things clear.) Page 99 also mentions that the Dead Sea Scrolls exist here in their perfection and are . . ."fondly read and understood." This does not excite me in any positive way, since these scrolls describe an extremist sect that I think would be abhorred by Browne's and Eadie's notions of an all-loving and all-forgiving God. The idea that God requires no exactness in performing religiously symbolic duties and requires no ascetic sacrifices to obtain approval and holiness would, in my opinion, be horrifying to these people who thought the Jews in Jerusalem were the spawn of darkness because they tried to assure their survival by making some accommodations required by their heavily armed foreign oppressors.
 

Pages 196-197, where buildings and parks as recreation sites are mentioned, also mention pastimes, music-making, and sports for the great outdoors. Stadium sports are mentioned, and all the cheering is because of the perfection with which the game is played, not for a winner defeating a loser. Right, that could be exciting because the only ball games I find interesting enough to watch are those tied up at the very end. White-water rafting is mentioned, which requires a driving force to move water across rock, but the rock is not ever dissolved or eroded away. Gives the appearance of a Disneylandish artificiality, does it not? Does to me.
 

Cities? No large cities. Small towns regularly spaced. Reminds one of the vision of a certain Joseph Smith, first prophet of the Mormons, whose "Plat of Zion," as revealed to him by God, included the concept that all men should live in towns from which farms radiated until the next set of farms surrounding another small town. Smith said that was the way the earth would be replanned after the reign of Christ brought heaven back to earth. I mention this only because it is so uncannily like the scheme outlined on page 121. 
 

Etc.
 

Speaking of Mormon insights, I thought it was interesting that that religion's second prophet, Brigham Young, once declared that if we could see ourselves as we really are, as we were prior to this life, we would fall down and worship ourselves. Jan price came close to this, and these sentiments are reflected in almost the same words in both Eadie's and Browne's books.
 

Can you tell that the rest of items on my list, including other worlds and aliens, are just going to have to be left untouched? Suffice it to say both Browne and Eadie mention other worlds and other children of God throughout the universe. Mormonism shares that view, by the way.
 

Finally, I couldn't help but smile to myself as Browne uses the same line of reasoning as do Mormon missionaries (I have used it, it is a very powerful appeal because there is an underlying truth in it). Her version is on page 46:
 

All I ask is that you keep your mind and heart open, and pay attention to any detail that rings some quiet, comforting bell in your soul. I promise, you're not imagining things. You're just remembering and yearning for the exquisite joy and beauty of Home.

Go Back to Afterlife Part 1 of 4

Go Back to Afterlife Part 2 of 4

Go to Afterlife Part 4 of 4

Go Home