First, I think it is important, if possible, to get rid of the idea of wanting to believe, or 'believing' in a rush of emotion, because this is ultimately meaningless, and I suspect that those who think that way probably come to suspect their 'belief' as time goes on.
The problem is that various areas of science have come to believe that they know more than they do. Neuroscientists treat the brain as some sort of information processing machine - oblivious to the fact - pointed out by the philosopher David Chalmers and others - that it can't be just an information processing machine, or if it is, the mind must reside elsewhere. The most obvious example of an information processing machine, is a computer, and does anyone think that when it is processing emotionally charged data (recognising cancer cells, say) that it feels angst? Does anyone believe that it may not want to be turned off (ignoring for now Microsoft updates!) because it fears oblivion?
Supposedly, real science enjoys paradigm breaking ideas, and neuroscience should be eager to explore NDE's, yet with rare exceptions, neuroscientists want to ignore this evidence. There is also the related phenomenon of so called 'deathbed visions', described here by practising nurses:
http://allnurses.com/general-nursing-discussion/death-bed-visions-301825.html
My advice, is to explore more of what SKEPTIKO has to offer, before coming to any conclusion. I would also suggest that, like me, you try to come to a tentative conclusion. I think conventional religion is in a mess because it prizes belief above reason.
David