What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?

[He lives]

I already know there are some people who wrote fake NDE stories. I have read many books on NDEs and watched TV shows,etc. I believe that most of the full blown NDEs are reputable. An unfortunate consequence is there is a high divorce rate for people who have NDEs. I believe this is due to the great change in lifestyle and conviction that comes to those who experience an NDE. Some of the people who have had NDEs have come back with greater knowledge as was the case with Rajaa Benamour. One of my neighbors had a NDE. She has since moved. She told me about what she saw and how it changed her life. In her life review she was shown how she could have done some things differently. Each story, though different, is kind of like another piece of a puzzle to me as I want to know what the spirit world is like. I also believe that testing people who have never had a real OBE or a did not have a NDE, is not practical or reliable.

These were NDE accounts collected by reputable researchers.  The only reason you want to discount them is because they don't fit your narrative.  That's confirmation bias plain and simple.  You count the hits but ignore (or rationalize away) the misses.  That's only proof that you want so badly to believe that you're willing to distort the evidence to fit.  That only leads to unreliable conclusions based on fallacious reasoning.  If you're willing to distort the evidence because of such strong, irrational bias, why should we believe anything you have to say about NDEs?  We've already seen you present a misleading account of Charles Tart's research.  I read some of the entries on that page you linked to earlier and the facts were either distorted or outright misrepresented in practically all of the ones I examined.  And this type of lying and misrepresentation is common among NDE researchers.  The charge of fake NDE is more justifiably leveled at the accounts of NDEs in general.

It depends on which account of Charles Tart you believe. Anyone can post on Wikipedia and express their views and although I like Wikipedia, it is still biased. Susan Blackmore expressed her opinion, but she was not there. Neither were the others who expressed their opinions. Charles would have continued his study had not the woman moved away. I did nothing to misrepresent the account. What I posted was from the account and I didn't change one word.