in chapter five dr. egnor shares considerable detail about near-death experiences (nde), and i recommend this chapter to you. (i have also posted a number of earlier blogs dealing with this issue.) dr. egnor describes the experience of a patient named pam reynolds who had a dangerous, life threatening aneurism at the top of her basilar artery against her brainstem. during the surgical procedure to treat the aneurism she was converted into a brain dead state with no blood flow to her brain, all blood within the brain drained out, her body temperature cooled to 25 degrees fahrenheit, the heart stopped, and her brain waves ceased. by multiple criteria she was dead. during this state she had a successful removal of the aneurism and was carefully resuscitated to full life. the description of the experience she had while clinically dead is an interesting read on pages 84-93, and mirrors the Nde’s of so many others across the world.

“. . . pam reynold’s ‘brain death’ was deliberately planned and carried out under meticulously documented circumstances. it entailed knowledge, verified later, that she could only have had if her soul - the immortal part of her mind - functioned while her brain was dead. it is clear evidence that the mind can function quite independently of the brain.”

an important take-away from this description is that there is increasing evidence that physical death does not include death of the human spirit and soul. it is of vital importance that we address this eventuality, even reality, in our lives on earth with the acceptance that we physically die to live . . . eternally . . . and by god’s grace, in the presence of his son, jesus christ, whose holy spirit seeks to indwell us in a personal interactive communion both in the present life and that to come.

in chapter three dr. egnor shares that “the mind is not simply the physical activities of the brain, that it also has an independent existence. this is often called the dualist view.” (see my PRECEDING blog)

“IF THE MIND IS PARTLY THE PRODUCT OF THE MATERIAL FUNCTION OF THE BRAIN AND PARTLY THE PRODUCT OF SOMETHING THAT IS BEYOND NATURE, THEN:

1. THERE WILL BE SOME MENTAL PHENOMENA WITHOUT THE BRAIN FUNCTION.

2. AS BRAIN FUNCTION IS ALTERED, THE MIND WILL NOT NECESSARILY BE ALTERED.

3. IF THE BRAIN IS DAMAGED, THEN MENTAL FUNCTION WILL NOT NECESSARILY BE DAMAGED.

4. BRAIN DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT NECESSARILY CORRELATE WITH MENTAL DEVELOPMENT.

5. WE WILL NOT ALWAYS BE ABLE TO CORRELATE BRAIN ACTIVITY WITH MENTAL ACTIVITY - NO MATTER HOW WE CHOOSE TO LOOK AT IT. . . .

   THE MIND GENERALLY DEPENDS ON THE FUNCTION OF THE BRAIN. BUT IT CAN ALSO, AT TIMES, FUNCTION INDEPENDENTLY.”

as you read my blog posts you may be wondering “so what?” i am providing increasing compelling evidence for the nature of the human mind that makes it receptive to the mind of god/the holy spirit who is also immaterial and immortal. the human mind was created in the image of the mind of god. it cannot be reduced to the physical/material functions of the brain and its synaptic networks though it interacts with it, a process referred to as dualist interactionism.

i begin this blog with a quotation from mortimer adler.

Mortimer Adler, in his philosophical work, notably Intellect: Mind Over Matter, addresses the relationship between the brain and thinking:

Brain as a necessary but insufficient condition

Adler argues that the brain is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for conceptual thought. In other words, while the brain plays a vital role, the human intellect, which enables us to engage in conceptual thinking, is considered something beyond mere brain activity. 

a helpful paraphrase i adopted from Kenneth samples, scholar at reasons to believe (reasons.org), is, “we need our brains to think, but we do not think with our brains.”

in chapter two of dr. egnor’s book he states that “. . . one thing we can say for sure is that the popular image of the brain as a ‘meat computer’ is wrong. it is not like a machine at all. through all this, the human mind remains not only a unity but also an agency - it can do things - even while working around very severe natural brain deficiencies.”

dr. egnor cites the neurosurgeon dr. wilder penfield in the first chapter of his book. dr. penfield’s primary research and work concerned the treatment of epilepsy in awake patients. this he could do since the brain has no pain receptors. patients needed only local anesthesia for the scalp and coverings surrounding it. during the operation he would stimulate foci in the brain to find the region from which seizures arose which would be removed, sparing vital regions that controlled neurophysiological functions.

“penfield observed that the mind has an existence independent of the brain, and that the mind uses the brain to interact with the world, in a way analogous to the way a computer programmer uses a computer to accomplish tasks. . . . penfield was amazed that there were some thoughts he could evoke just by stimulating the patient’s brain (for instance, a memory), and there were other thoughts that he could not evoke by stimulating the patient’s brain (such as the patient’s capacity for reason and reflection). . . . there was a key exception to what penfield could stimulate in the brain. he was never able to stimulate abstract thought - that is, the sense of self, the capacity to reason, and the exercise of free will. . . . neither epilepsy nor neurosurgeons, it seems, could evoke abstract intellectual thought by stimulating the brain. . . . he concluded that abstract thought is a function of something other than or beyond the physical brain. he came to define the mind as the element in an individual ‘that feels, perceives, thinks, wills, and especially reasons.’”

in his book, the mystery of the mind, dr. penfield stated “what a thrill it is, then, to discover that the scientist, too, can legitimately believe in the existence of the spirit. . . . the mind must be viewed as a basic element in itself . . . that is to say, it has a continuing existence. this seems to mean that the mind or human soul does not die with the body.”

dr. egnor states that “the immortal aspect of the human soul - that is, the mind that penfield observed while he was cutting into the brain - is unity. it has no parts, so it cannot be split or multiplied. . . . because the soul is not composed of separate parts, it cannot decompose, as a dead body does. like the abstractions it can uniquely comprehend, it is not mortal.”

Dr. egnor begins his book discussing split brain function. the two hemispheres of the brain are connected by a medial structure, the corpus callosum consisting of a “massive bundle of millions of nerve fibers that connects the two hemispheres of the brain. . . . epileptic seizures, which are random uncontrolled electrical discharges in the brain, can jump from one side of the brain to the other through the fiber bundle, causing catastrophic convulsions each day. . . . seizures can often be treated successfully with medications, but sometimes that’s not enough. radical surgery is a last resort,” the cutting of the corpus callosum in half, separating the two hemispheres entirely. but dr. egnor goes on to state that “the corpus callosum doesn’t seem to have an irreplaceable neurological function in the brain. . . . even when the brain is split in half, many important aspects of the mind remain unified. thus, the mind is something that the brain isn’t. . . . what is most remarkable about the split-brain evidence is the unity of the mind despite splitting of the brain. . . . split-brain patients have split perception but unified consciousness. . . . it splits what we perceive with our eyes but not what we understand and reason about.”

i encourage those who are interested in delving deeper into this topic to obtain and read this book and selected references. what has been emphasized so far is that there is evidence that the mind is not the brain. dr. egnor cites the neurosurgeon, dr. wilder penfield, in his initial chapter, and this topic will be the focus of my next blog.

I stated not long ago that i had purchased the book by Dr. michael egnor and denyse o’leary, the immortal mind: a neurosurgeon’s case for the existence of the soul, worthy publishing, new york, nashville, 2025. as planned, i shall include selected excerpts from the book that apply to points i have made in my books and blogs from my own research extending well over a quarter of a century. where i may disagree with a given point made by these authors, i shall endeavor to explain the reason why. for the greatest part i have found no significant disagreements and highly recommend this book.

the mind of man, created as it was/is in the image of the mind of god, is an immaterial entity that interacts with the material, physical synaptic networks of the brain of man. the authors show that it is also immortal, created to be eternal, irreducible to the material brain.

i look forward to presenting my discussions of the excerpts taken from the text of this outstanding book. along the way i shall also emphasize the role of information instantiated within ALL that god has created, the manifestation of god’s creativity and purpose. we must be aware that our concept of the biblical god may be entirely too small.

so i invite you to read on, and i thank you for your interest in learning to know more about our god, our lord and savior.

My second book is entitled “the boundless love of god: a holy spirit story.” my wife and i attended a memorial service this past saturday at a church we formerly attended. it was in honor of a dear christian friend who lived near us and who became like a member of our own family, along with her parents, her husband and three children. one of the songs we sang at that service was “how deep the father’s love” written by stuart townend, if you have read my second book you will understand why i am posting this song on this blog. the thoughts expressed mirror my book so closely. i want to share it with you and hope you are blessed by it.

how deep the father’s love for us

how vast beyond all measure

that he should give his only son

to make a wretch his treasure

how great the pain of searing loss

the father turns his face away

as wounds which mar the chosen one

bring many sons to glory

behold the man upon the cross

my sin upon his shoulders

ashamed i hear my mocking voice

call out among the scoffers

it was my sin that held him there

until it was accomplished

his dying breath has brought me life

i know that it is finished

i will not boast in anything

no gifts, no power, no wisdom

but i will boast in jesus christ

his death and resurrection

why should i gain from his reward?

i cannot give an answer

but this i know with all my heart

his wounds have paid my ransom

dr. egnor continues:

“consciousness is not a spot, a lobe, or even a process in the brain. . . . the widely accepted recent theory that consciousness resides in the prefrontal cortex . . . has come under serious challenge. scientists at the allen brain institute reported on a multi-year study testing . . . the two leading materialistic theories of consciousness. . . . materialistic theories of the mind that each posit a different kind of brain socket (or cpu or whatever) for consciousness, although both theories posit that the prefrontal cortex [is] the region of the brain . . . essential to consciousness. [these research scientists report that] the prefrontal cortex supports neither theory. . . . you don’t need a prefrontal cortex, or any cortex at all, or even brain hemispheres, to be conscious. you need brain parts to do some mental things - to see, to move, to feel, to remember, etc., but consciousness is not made of meat. you need a soul . . . to be conscious. . . . consciousness is the ability conferred by our . . . soul to have experience [or an awareness] - the means, not the object, of our thoughts. . . . the search for consciousness in the . . . prefrontal cortex or anywhere in the brain is, and will always be, a fool’s errand.”

Dr. egnor describes a “spiritual soul” in this article. i have chosen to delete “spiritual” since in my writings, my books and blog posts, i differentiate between the human soul (mind, will, emotion, conscience) and the human spirit “breathed into man at his creation which is the means for personal communion with the holy spirit of the triune god the father and his son jesus christ. it is the portal through which communion occurs with the human soul.

i look forward to discussing elements of the book by egnor and o’leary, the immortal mind: a neurosurgeon’s case for the existence of the soul, due to be released june 3, 2025. it should provide compelling support for dualist interaction between the immaterial mind of god and of man and the material components of the brain’s neural synaptic networks.

i continue with the following excerpt:

“[egnor defines] consciousness in a simple way: it is the means by which we have experience. by ‘experience’ i mean the spectrum of the mental powers we use - moving, perceiving, remembering, emoting, imagining, understanding, judging, willing, etc. by ‘means’ i mean that consciousness is the instrument that enables experience. but it is not something that can be known itself.”

(I parenthetically add that the experience also involves an awareness, a cognitive function of the immaterial mind/soul.)

egnor continues:

“. . . consciousness is a power of our soul that is always invisible to us, because it is the instrument, not the object, or our knowledge. it is the means by which we experience, not what we experience. thus we can’t ‘find’ it in the brain.”