Dr. Shades wrote:..Dreams are notoriously unreliable--right? Things that happen to you while you're awake, while perhaps not 100% reliable from a philosophical point of view, are nevertheless infinitely more reliable as true occurrences than things which happen in your dreams--right?
It just seems to me that if a deceased relative wished to return and convey some sort of information, that it would be counterproductive to do so in a venue which is so notoriously unbelievable. If they wished to be believed, it makes the most sense to appear in a venue which is the most believable--right?
Dreams are notoriously unreliable. I've discarded all of them and refuse to be influenced by them anymore.
When was the last time you ever heard of a deceased relative coveying information in any other venue? Dreams just happen to be the only place where there is a connection - if any.
Which brings me to my point. Messages that deceased relatives convey in dreams are not necessarilly reliable. They've been influenced in mortality and have passed on. Perhaps they are no more intelligent now than they were when they were alive. My point is, according to many NDE accounts, they are close by and have the potential to influence us.
Note, for instance, how much dreams have influenced the Mormon church - the appearances of Smith and other founders to the presidents that have followed. When was the last time these presidents spoke of dreams where they were visited by Jesus? I can't recall any off hand.
All I am saying is that there may be a connection. I am no more sure than anyone.
Most, if not all of the spiritual manifestations I've witnessed seemed to validate a sincere and good intent, however, they were not all based upon truth or even right reason.