The Celestial Database Theory

At one of my public talks I was asked a question about the origin of the past lives that Dr Helen Wambach and others were discovering when their subjects were regressed. The suggestion was made that on the point of death when the body and brain die all the information of that person’s life are uploaded automatically to a celestial database and this is what is being accessed during hypnotic regression. As these are real lives then it follows that Dr Wambach checks on historical accuracy would of course be correct.

This is an interesting theory but it presupposes that there is some automatic uploading to a celestial database of every detail of a person’s life which occurs at the moment of death. Alternatively, such details could be uploading all the time, every moment of every day. We know that the brain records every detail of our lives which can be accessed using hypnosis.

From a purely scientific point of view there is no evidence for any celestial database containing intimate details of all the many billions of lives that have occurred. Science tells us there is nothing left when we die. Once the brain dies that is the end and we are just become a memory in the minds of the people who knew us in the life just extinguished.

What we find in both Dr Wambach’s and in Dr Newtons work is the amazing amount of information regarding the death experience and all the details of what happens in the spirit world, all the healing, discussions and life reviews that go on. All this information correlates perfectly and is very consistent over the many thousands of hypnotic regressions performed. This information could not come from a celestial database that is only recording past lives. Similarly, all the fascinating detail of people we know in this life whom we have also known in past lives could not have come from this database of past lives.

For these reasons the celestial database hypothesis does not explain what has been found in the thousands of hypnotic regressions performed. So I would argue it is not a viable proposition.