Don:

As you know, I've had experiences with Christ.  The first time was when I had my night in heaven experience. It began with the understanding that in some way Christ is a reality, the person of Jesus did exist, and he did represent divine truth when he was here.

For a while I wondered if the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke most accurately represent Christ, or the Gospel of John. Because Christ's being seemed so holy during my night in heaven experience, I tried to elevate his status by considering the gospel of John viewpoint.

I can't say I know what his being is all about, but right now I figure he is a Soul, a child of God like the rest of us. It is just that he reached a state of being while human that many people don't reach while human.

I believe that when any Soul reaches a certain level of development, it understands about its oneness with God. This doesn't mean that a particular Soul's being is the being that created everything. It means that a particular Soul's being has reached the level where it lives according to the same love and wisdom that God's being lives according to. I believe that just about all of us are destined to reach this level. I believe that the spirit of Jesus is very supportive of us doing so.

I don't believe that Jesus needs us to attribute things to him that aren't accurate, in order for him to be a divine being.  To do so is to not understand what divinity is really about. Just as you can't make a human being more divine by electing he or she to be the President of the United States, you can't make a Soul more divine by attributing special titles.

Notice that there are some NDEs where the spirit of Jesus brought a Soul to the presence of God, as happened with Howard Storm's experience.

I believe one of the reasons the spirit World delivers information to people in different ways, is because it understands that different people are open to hearing different information.  Perhaps Emanuel learned about Christ in the manner he did, because many people including Emanuel weren't open to hearing a different viewpoint during Emanuel's time period. I figure that when Jesus thinks of himself he thinks of himself more as the Christ spirit that abides in all of us, rather than a particular person. I figure he doesn't believe that he can be Christ more than we can be Christ, even though his role in the grand scheme of things is in some ways bigger than it is for other Souls.

I figure there are a lot of planets in this universe and other universes that can inhabit life. If as some people believe Jesus is God himself, consider how many times God would have to incarnate and possibly go through some sort of ordeal. I believe it would be quite unfair to expect this of God. In the end you get only one being. On the other hand, if Jesus is a Soul just like the rest of us, then he and many other beings like him get to enjoy their existance along with God, just like the rest of us.

I do not believe it is irreverent to think of Jesus as wonderful elder brother who knows more than me and can help me.

Perhaps more people in this World would be accepting of Christ, if some people didn't contend that you better believe or else.  I really doubt that God and Jesus would put things in such a repressive test framework. If a Soul reaches the point where it wants to live according to love and humility, then it will be open to accepting truth as it is, regardless of what it is. There would be no reason to be concerned about any particular part of truth. Each of us will have many surprises when we find out what divine truth is.

I don't believe it is necessary to minimalize spiritual experiences that dont include Jesus. If a person experienced divine love during an NDE, then he or she experienced what the spirit of Christ is about. I feel confident that Jesus appreciates such experiences.  

I think your criteria for a true heaven, Don, describes a lovely place which I hope does, indeed, exist. Although my own personal opinion holds little value, my own experiences both in meditation alone and with others here, and my own reading and life experiences, support much of what you list numerically.

To be honest, I feel that whether a person is greeted by a Being/Christ or whether they are simply invited into a unique experience of love like no other they have known....there is no difference.

But I would hope that Christ remains very real to those who need him. I personally have never clung to his person, that I know of, at least, knowing that it was him. I, like many others, only know when I am comforted by the source of all love.

wishing you a lasting peace, blink

I agree to a certain extant with all you guy's...True Heaven seems to be the ultimate domain in which we, all souls, will eventually gravitate too..Jesus, that beautiful and wonderful man, from the middle east 2000 years ago, testifies that this statement is truth, among several other great souls that taught us here on Earth, before and after Lord Jesus...I will not add anymore, as I wish to not add to what is and what is non acceptable, in written posts by certain members of this forum, by those who rule and censor this message board...Harvey.

Very nice thread.  Some thoughts:

Using the words a "true" heaven, imply the existence of false or hollow heavens.  It also implies one correct or true path for spirit or consciousness - all others being the "wrong" way for spiritual progression.

I believe that hollow heavens are merely realms of consciousness that are centerd on a mental plane that denies or does not fully accept love.  That is what causes them to be "hollow;" there is more out there for the soul/mind to experience.  There is a divinity that we are part of, and it consists of our acknowledgement of the source of PUL being God, and the manifestation of PUL being in ourselves.  Once we recognize this, or the inconsistencies in any hollow heaven/mental plane, we are freed and open to new possibilities.

I am intrigued by Don's reports of christian conversions, but I reject at this time, the notion that a true heaven is only attainable by one who recognizes one path (christianity).  If I, as a loving Jew, believe in the same principles of love of God, God as the foundation of my being, and love of his creation (including my fellow man), would I not qualify for entrance into a "true heaven," although I did not follow the doctrine of christianity?  I believe, that I would - as would others.  I believe that one's spiritual inclinations are more important than earthly identifications with a single religion.

Matthew

Take care

Alan

Matthew (et. al.)

Your statement Quote:
really struck me.

How can there be anyone who does not fully accept love? What does it mean to fully accept love? This is a profound concept.

Yet that is correct. I certainly have struggled to love myself, not in the narcissistic fashion but in the PUL fashion. I once found a scholarly work having to do with the idea that self-love was a blasphemy at certain historical time periods, and it helped me see what a false idea it is to not love yourself. I think I had the idea that it made me more pure and holy to not love myself, or to love others more than I loved myself. This is a false idea that ws promulgated by religious teachings.

So how many hollow hells are occupied by folks who have the idea that loving does not include loving yourself? Hollow hells aren't necessarily occupied by folks who hate others. Not loving yourself sufficiently would also cause grief.

It is hollow to love your neighbor as yourself if you don't first love yourself.

Heaven isn't a place, it is a state of being.

Matthew,

The Being of Light normally does not identify itself to non-Christians, but is the target of projected identifications from the percipient.  What is crucial is not the human identity of the being, but the quality of the love ethic that its radiance implies and the beauty of the relationship with it that its invitation offers.  In Storm's NDE, Jesus insists that the "right" religion is the one that brings you closest to God.  Storm's Jesus also claims that His "atonement" made this relationship with God possible.  But this claim is irrelevant to your point because you would not be expected to violate your current conscience and accept beliefs that you are honestly not ready to embrace.  

Your last paragraph makes the crucial concession: if your postmortem self realizes at some point that you need to rethink the Jesus question, you are more than willing to do so.  I reject the claim that formal belief in Jesus is a decisive factor in who can and cannot ultimately gain access to a "true" heaven.  By the same token, I hope I would be open in my afterlife to being corrected about any of my misconceptions of Jesus' role.  The Bible itself teaches that God communicates under different symbols to peoples of different religous and cultural backgrounds.  But as I said, I still want to learn what more comprehensive cross-cultural NDE research might reveal.  In that respect, scientific afterlife research is still in its infancy.

Don      

I dislike using the term "heaven" at all, simply because it implies certain concepts about the afterlife to most people which are false. 

It is important to understand there is no one place we go after death to stay for eternity.  Rather, there are an infinite amount of "places" (dimensions) to explore within our consciousness, as it is ever expanding, and so we are constantly progressing through these infinite levels of existence. 

Our consciousness is currently in need of the learning and experience of rather basic truths. As we learn these truths and move on to explore more of our greater inner reality, (which is what happens when we leave the earth experience system for example) , we enter more advance systems capable of a greater expression and experience of consciousness. 

PUL is in the equation, of course.  The more we learn to truly know ourselves(which is what happens throughout the entirety of our infinite existence, as we are always experiencing ourselves and simultaneously growing and expanding into more of what we were), the more we move towards PUL, for they go hand in hand. 

The problem with looking only to NDE reports for personal answers regarding the reality of "heaven" is that the individuals are only able to explore the porch, they haven't even entered the house of "heaven" yet... and did I mention that this house is infinite in size and has an infinite number of rooms to experience...and that these rooms increase in all ways as you progress through them... and that this "infinitly-sized house" you are in is really the totality of yourself, which is essentially The One, Source.

Bets wrote: "Harvey--there was a play about Harvey, 'a large transparent hare; you couldn't see him anywhere.' --Is he your avatar?  "

Recoverer responds: Perhaps Harvey believes that having a difference of opinion is censorship. Perhaps it is censorship to suggest that a person can't have a difference of opinion. If people don't want to have their statements contradicted, perhaps they shouldn't post them on the internet. Why do some people believe that free speech applies only to the first person to make a statement?

What if some people wanted a kid to eat an ice cream cone? Would they have to threaten this kid with being thrown into a tub of boiling water in order to get this kid to eat the cone, or will the kid be more than happy to do so simply because he or she knows that ice cream tastes good?

Since Jesus spoke about how knowledge, happiness, beauty, peace and love can be found, would it be necessary for him to scare people in the way fundamentalists try to scare people?

Perhaps people who came after Jesus tried to make it seem like you better believe in him or else, because this was their way of controlling people. Perhaps it is more of a matter of trusting what he says. Certainly a wise and loving God would understand that Souls will find him in many ways.    

Greetings,

I'm wonderring that since the Earth has its own Lucifer angel, maybe it also has its own best Messiah---? 

Maybe there's something lacking in humans' souls that is best taken care of by attitudes that result from what JC advocated.

I'm just wonderring.....

Bets

Betson:

The Book of Isaiah was written somewhere around 600 to 800 B.C. It spoke of a fallen king of Babylonia, a physical person. About a ""THOUSAND YEARS"" later fallen angel language was added, and this supposed fallen angel was given the name of Lucifer. I've noticed that different new age sources speak of Lucifer in differing ways.  Perhaps this is because these sources haven't got a clue as to the history of Lucifer. Perhaps this says something about the credibility of these sources. This doesn't mean that such sources don't have anything to say. It depends upon how a particular source represents itself. If a source claims to come from a being who really knows what's going on, somebody might ask this source how it got the Lucifer thing so wrong.


betson wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2008 at 4:30pm:

Betson:

The only part of the Bible other than the book of Isaiah which speaks of something akin to a fallen angel is the book of Revelations, when it speaks of a seven headed dragon that fell from heaven, swept its tail, and took a third of angels with it.

The language in the Book of Revelations is highly symbolic. It is a letter from John (not John the Baptist) to the Christians of the day that were having a lot of problems with Romans. The seven heads probably refer to seven hills in Rome. 

-Even if an angel who was created by God and abided in the glory of heaven could fall, would this angel be allowed to sweep its tail and take a third of angels with it?

-Even if it did, wouldn't these swept angels on their own volition return to heaven?

-Wouldn't any angel be wise enough to know that God is infinite in nature and that there is no way a limited angel, no matter how large it is, could take on the infinitude of God?

Some people might say free will would enable an angel to fall, but having a free will doesn't mean you have to act in the most stupid manner possible.  I figure humans turn away from God and love, because there are various negative influences this World includes, including our self defense instinct. The same instinct that causes a neighborhood dog to bark at everybody who passes by. What negative influences would an angel be exposed to?

Some people claim that jealousy of God would prompt an angel to fall. Jealousy of what? Power? Power is something beings crave when they become concerned about how to find things such as security, happiness, peace and love. Would an angel who abides in heaven have a problem finding such things? Would an angel who knows about oneness be competive with others.

Going by my experiences divine love feels so wonderful and humbling, there is no way an angel who is exposed to divine love would want to fall.

If angels can fall, then what would prevent any spirit who makes its way to heaven from falling? Isn't abidance in heaven supposed to be an eternal reality?

When it comes to the boogie men/spirits of the World, perhaps it is best to consider the spirits of humans who lived their lives in a negative way, and perhaps alien beings who are unfriendly for whatever reason, rather than a fallen angel.

I believe the odds are very high that new age sources which speak of fallen angels,  got the idea from an inaccurate understanding of the history behind fallen angel talk within the Bible.  Some sources adhere to the concept that this World is a big mistake, not the result of divine will, and blame it's creation on Lucifer, even though a being named Lucifer didn't intially exist within the Bible, and even though Lucifer isn't spoken of as creator of this World, after the name "Lucifer" was added.  I suppose such sources get away with such misinformation because many people, even though they've heard of the name Lucifer, don't know the history behind the name.






 


betson wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2008 at 5:01pm:

Hawkeye:

If we lived in an Islamic country, we probably wouldn't get away with having a conversation like this.

Have you ever read the words of Mohammed? As I stated earlier, I haven't. Perhaps if each of us did so we would find that the words attributed to Jesus are more positive than the words attributed to Mohammed.

It is also a matter of which former person exists as a light being who can help people. Going by a number of messages and experiences I've had, Jesus is a light being who can help people. I haven't received any messages or had any experiences that involved Mohammed. It seems like the NDEs Don spoke of go along with some of the things I found out.

I believe it is possible that this World will evolve beyond the need of dogmatic belief systems.  Perhaps it is unrealistic to hope that such an evolution will occur in one big swoop.  It will need to take place in increments. Some belief systems are more dogmatic than other belief systems. This isn't a prejudicial statement. It is a statement of fact. Therefore, isn't it possible that some people will need to be brought along in stages, rather big leaps?

There is also the factor of how a person who was really into some form of fundamentalism, just might not be open to having an NDE that is too far to the other extreme. Therefore, they are presented with a light being who actually exists, and also has a historical connection to what they believe.  If they had an NDE with Mohammed, they might have a hard time disassociating him from ways of thinking such as the 72 virgin thing.

There is also the factor of who Islamic people who have NDEs communicate with. If they try to tell other Islamic people about an experience with no historical connection to what other Islamic people believe,  these other people might not listen to them. If they speak of a being other Islamic people know about, Jesus, the people they speak to will be more accepting of what they have to say. They might go from believing in a man who told people if you go out and kill people you'll be rewarded with 72 virgins, to a man who tells people to love your neighbor as yourself, including people you consider to be enemies. Kill vs. Love. Quite a difference. Perhaps we should have more faith with how the light helps people have NDEs. Perhaps they know what they are doing.

I believe it is unfair to equate Jesus with the fundamentalists who have misrepresented him in various ways.



hawkeye wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2008 at 5:38pm:

Hawkeye:

Even if Mohammed was misrepresented by the Koran, a lot of people would be inclined to believe that the Koran does represent him, so they might believe it is divine will to go kill people and that they'll be rewarded with 72 virgins.  The below article talks about how domestic violence is sanctioned by the Koran with his words and example.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/020060.php  

bets

I find I am a bit hypersensitive of criticisms of Lucifer..probably because that name and mine have the same Lation root, and my college friends affectionately called me "Lucifer" on occasion.

Over a period of time I have come across different stories about the meaning of calling a devil "Satan" or "Lucifer." I was delighted to see some of them collected on our new old friend, wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer

This account includes a version of the Sufi interpretation I once read, here attributed to J. Campbell. The symbolism is intense.

Enough for now. I vote for all these accounts being personification.

And I also believe in my heart of hearts that you Don, you are going to find just exactly what you think you will when you get to your heaven. The light, music, all the rest. I know it will be so nice for you. I am not sure what you believe "hell" is like. Perhaps you can share that with us also. (Am I to assume correctly that you also believe in Hell along with this Heaven?) Is there a fear that if things don't go quite right, and you mess thing up, that you might be spending a short time there in  hell before you move on to heaven?
Joe

Labelling higher states of consciousness "heaven" is of course somewhat arbitrary.  In 2 Corinthians 12 Paul describes his apparent OBE visit to Paradise which he locates in the traditional Pharisaic location, the 3rd heaven, and this presumes a multiplicity of heavens and especially a first and 2nd heaven.  Yet ancient Jewish descriptions of the first 2 heavens create a picture more akin to a hell or purgatory.  In 1 Corinthians 3 Paul intriguingly claims that believers whose works don't bear up under close scrutiny are nevertheless ultimately "saved, yet so as by fire."  This text smacks of the later Catholic concept of purgatory.  Yet in ancient Judaism the salvation process "saved, yet so as by (purifying figurative) fire" takes place in Gehenna, Jesus' term for Hell.  The ancient rabbis taught that souls with a rudimentary spirituality spend about a year in Gehenna before they are ready to rise to a higher plane. 

One of the most famous sayings of Jesus about Heaven in the King James Bible is this: "in my Father's house are many mansions (John 14)."  But in the Greek the term translated "mansion" is "mone," which literally means "resting place" or "inn."  The thought is that new arrivals have temporary lodgings in a long journey towards an ever closer oneness with God; and that is precisely how the early church Father, Origen (225 AD) interprets this saying.  But if God is the ground of all being, then Jesus seems to imply that we ultimately become more and more one with all creation, just as mystics often report of their ineffable experiences.

SWEDENBORG ON THE NATURE OF HEAVEN AND HELL

In the heavens communication is telepathic, and so, is no longer based on human languages.  As ES puts it, "They are not able to utter...any name (AC 1876)."  There is no time as we know it in the heavens.  This transcendence of time explains why ES's angels can be so accurate in their predictions. Modern adepts are often fooled by astral  predictions that emanate from ignorant but pretentious lower planes.   

ES encounters beings from other planets in the universe who expand the immensity of heaven.  In the heavens, everyone lives in societies with people of similar uses and disposition.  tHE stereotype of a boring heaven of sterile rest and worship is admittedly reinforced by many Christians.  But ES's astral travels reveal that heaven is far from a place of idleness.  Everyone there has spiritual work to do:

"Some spirits have believed that heavenly happiness consisted of a life of leisure.  Then they were shown in many ways that heavenly life consists of...thoughtful actions...that are services to others...So that these people might feel shame...they are allowed to perceive what kind of life this [idleness] would be.  They see that it is thoroughly miserable (HH 403)." 

ES's picture fits neatly with biblical teaching.  St.
Paul asks rhetorically: "Don't you know that the saints will judge the world?...Don't you know that we will judge angels (1 Corinthians 6:2-3)?"  The Greek for "judge" can be translated "exercise jursidiction over" and the Greek for "world" ("kosmos") can be translated "universe".  So Paul's questions might be translated; "Don't you know that we will have jurisdiction over angel?"  and "Don't you know that the saints will exercise jurisdiction over the universe?"  Thus understood, the latter question may imply a future role for humans as co-creators with God in new universes!  In this regard, the identity of the "us" in Genesis 1:27 is intriguing: "Let us make man in our image."  This can be neither a literary we nor a reference to the Trinity.  So the "us" may refer to intelligent beings from prior creations and may thus hint at our ultimate destiny.  ES learns that there is government in heaven, but only those who are truly useful to others are allowed such power.  This insight parallels Jesus claim that the extent of personal civic jurisdiction in heaven depends on one's faithfulness in performing earthly responsibilities (Luke 19:16-19).

Spirits in the hells and the intermediate realm (ES's "world of spirits") are visible to souls in the heavens.  But "the heavens are not visible to spirits in the world of spirits unless their spiritual sight has been opened (HH 583)."  Those bound for heaven sense that there is an ultimate higher power and are determined to relate to it. 

In my view, Robert Monroe's aversion to the loving God of conventional spiritualities prevents him from exploring the heavens beyond Focus 27.  Some of his "Knowns" seem traceable to misunderstandings emanating from the lower astral planes:  e.g.

"These to me are Knowns: This, our Creator...does not demand worship, adoration, or recognition, does not punish for `evil' or `misdeeds', does not intercede or interdict in our life activity (UJ 224-25)." 

His biased terms "demand" and "punish" deflect attention away from two  truths disclosed by Swedenborg's angels: (1) the heavenbound delight in in worshiping God and feasting on His love.  (2)  Many people are truly evil, but they in effect punish themselves by choosing to ignore the godly loving path in favor of the hellbound path on the basis of the principle like attracts like. 

Entities from the lower astral convey a contrary narcissistic principle to Monroe: "There is no good, there is no evil.  There is only expression (UJ 217)."  This stress on self (valueless self-expression) stands in contrast with the resolve of the heavenbound according to ES: their humility and respect for the greatness of creation fuels a deep resolve to be with others and be of significant use to them.  In the heavens, says ES, the joy of one is the joy of all.  By contrast, the general design of the hells is an orientation towards self over others.  This splits existence apart and causes hell's  dissension.  Despite this, those with this orientation will most comfortably drift towards the company of likeminded people in the hells because they nevertheless feel better there than in the company of saints.  It just suits them better than the heavens. 

According to Monroe, in the astral planes, "there is no greater, there is no lesser.  There is only balance (UJ 217)."  This claim echoes ES's principle which, in my view, expresses this truth more accurately: "The relationship of heaven and hell...is like that of two opposites that act against each other.. This action and reaction yield a state of equilibrium within which everything exists...This is the spiritual balance which provides us with our freedom for thinking and intending (HH 536-57)."  Thus, hell is part of the enrichment of ultimate possibilities.   

Don

  A holistically logical counter balance:

  This is the full prose that Monroe wrote

Quote:

    As I keep stressing time and time again, an individual's perceptual capacity and accuracy is directly related to their average, consistent degree of attunement to PUL and the Creator Consciousness within themselves. 
   Bob Monroe was definitely an "old Soul", but he was no Yeshua, therefore, he didn't have 100% clear and accurate perception and translation.  Let's take a guess that Bob had about 85% overall, average/consistent attunement to PUL when UJ was written.  That leaves 15% that is muddy, distorted, not clear. 

  Bob got the above ROTE from Beings and a level where they were 100% attuned to PUL and the Creator.  However, he still had to perceive and then translate it.  Not only that, he had to put it into this funny, limited, lacking form of communication called human "words" and "language".  Hence, how likely is it completely true to what these Beings gave it to him as?  Probably unlikely it's 100% correct as THEY know and understand it. 

    These are physics that apply to spiritual reality, just as much as gravity, light, magnetism, electricity, etc apply to the physical world.  These spiritual laws are far, far more pervasive and universal, because they don't just apply to this dimension but ALL dimensions.  There is NO going around the Law of Like attracts and begets Like. 

    Regarding what Monroe received and translated, try to imagine this: You are are completely immersed in the full Oneness of the Whole.  You can fully see each individual in the pattern, and the larger pattern at the same time.  You can see that for the most part, the overall movement of stuck parts of the Whole is towards Love and growing in that awareness of Oneness with the Whole and with our Source. 

    From that ultimate perspective, you understand that limited use of freewill, is almost an invariable or give in by some parts of the Whole (you yourself once experienced that).  Using one's freewill in a limited way and contrary to the Creator's ways and beingness can be considered as "evil" or "sin".  But, from a MUCH larger, broader perspective that almost none of us humans currently have (important to keep in mind), it really could be considered more "temporary immaturity or distraction". 

  Evil, like cold in physics, is not an objective force and reality.  It's a temporary one that the children of the Creator have temporarily manifested. The Creator did not (there is no negativity/lack of Love within the Creator Itself).  When those children fully grow up and become adults, it ceases to exist, and the foundation of consciousness and reality is revealed--Love, and we becme Companions and Co-Creators with the First Self. 

  So, in a very real and ultimate sense, there no good and no evil, for all of it comes from and goes to Love.

Now, while that is a truth, it's not a very helpful, pragmatic, and comforting truth to those of us still caught up in suffering and the duality/polarity schism.  For us, suffering is very real and should not be discounted.  It's real for those Completed Beings too, because they feel everything we feel and know everything we know. 

  They do care, and they do, usually, try to gently guide us back to them and our Source. 

   To make casual judgements that Monroe was just getting deceived by immature or deceptive beings, only shows one's own ignorance and lack of deeper insight into the nature of reality from a bigger perspective. 
    Did Monroe get it all right?  Course not, as mentioned, he was no Yeshua in the flesh.  However, he was/is a Helper, and worked for Yeshua unbeknownst to himself for a long time.  He eventually did learn this.  In fact, he was given Big clues even earlier on.

  In his second book, he talks about viewing the craziness of the Earth from outside of same (before he got involved I believe), and a large White curl, comes up to him and says something like, it's craziness down there, they're killing and hurting each other, let me tell you about a plan...

    Whom was this large White curl?   None other than Yeshua's Soul.  He meets him later in his last book, when he asks his guidance if he could meet the most mature/evolved human in his space/time and meets one "He/She" aka the Risien, immortal Christ Yeshua.  What does He/She say to him, "let me tell you about a plan..." 

   Now, Bob was concerned about being overly associated with religion and Christianity, so he kept some of his knowledge and awareness hidden, and even added a bit of misdirection. But, the man was married to a Christian mystic for Christ's sake.     
  The man was interested enough in Yeshua, to have his then friend and military trained remote viewer, Joe McMoneagle, to try to remote view a subject that was sealed in an envelope (see McMoneagle's book Time Machine...).  Joe picked up pretty quick that he was viewing Jesus Christ and his influence/impact on humanity (which LATER Monroe revealed the contents of the envelope after the remote viewing was done). 
   Interestingly, Joe saw this Being of immense power, had come in human form a number of times at different points in humanity's history to correct/redirect it's path.  Oddly, for some reason, he often had the same form and appearance, and for some reason, had reddish hair. 

    It's very clear that some speak more from knowing and truth, and some speak more from ignorance, supposition, prejudice, and distorted belief systems.

  The following was one of Monroe's bigger errors/misinterpretations:

“[Advanced souls] know that they cannot change the system and they don't wish to. They are content to enjoy themselves in the Earth Life System and the only influence they exert is to maximize their experience.” 

  Clearly, Monroe himself wasn't speaking completely out of real knowns and knowledge about this.  He was projecting his own beliefs onto the world.  He completely discounted the lives of countless Helpers like Dr. King, Gandhi, Yeshua, Susan B. Anthony, etc who specifically came to nudge the system in certain, more positive directions.  Deep down, Monroe didn't want that kind of responsibility and degree of self sacrifice and so he took the easier way and convinced himself that the system couldn't be changed and truly mature Souls don't try to change it. 
     He was comforting himself/his own ego, as many, many humans do constantly.  Yet, ironically, he himself did try to nudge the system with The Monroe Institute and Hemi-Sync. He could have gone a few steps farther had he had more self discipline and deep desire.  He could have realized full Christ Consciousness while connected to a body.  But as the Teacher of teachers once said, "The Spirit is indeed willing, but the flesh is weak."

  Some have come, are here and who are as we speak, in the process of overcoming the flesh and world, even as He did, and just like with Him, most know them not and spit on them instead.
         

When a person's comments are found to have no basis in reality, then it is usually a sign that there is a lack of clear perception taking place.

One example might be to say that a person is speaking out against someone or something, when in reality, no such thing took place. Applied to this case, the claim that I was speaking out against Monroe is a gross distortion of reality, as I said nothing against him. I simply spoke against my blind faith in him.

Another example might be to take something harmless and to twist it out of proportion and make it something it is not. Applied to this case, I said that I was a fanboy of Monroe, and was told that this was disrespectful. Let's take a look at the definition of fanboy: "a boy or man who is an extremely or overly enthusiastic fan of someone or something." The term has no reflection on the object of obsession, so it's not offensive to Monroe. Nor does it have to do with anyone else. I expressed the fact that I was overly attached to his work with an appropriate term.

Yet another fine example of how making everything personal swiftly takes a thread off track. It was unnecessary to mention us "speaking out" against Monroe and trying to attribute it to our beliefs. Not only because your statement was false, at least concerning myself, but a more appropriate approach would be to directly address the content of what we are saying. If you have an issue of what is said about Monroe, then refute it with facts. Your ad hominems are getting old. The fact that you consider it disrespectful for me to call MYSELF a fanboy, which isn't even necessarily a negative term, shows just how bent you are on making everything a personal argument. If this continues you will be reported.

Perhaps it's possible to appreciate a post without necessarily agreeing with every single statement made. I don't know what the true nature of Monroe's experiences were. I'm not interested in what you think Don's motivations are, nor am I interested in what you think you need to prove to people on this forum. I'm interested in reading and discussing the topics on this forum and learning from it. Not arguing about personal issues.

What Monroe said is essentially nothing different from any other new age source or spirit channel that came before him. Now let's see if we can discuss this without making any personal remarks about anyone on the forum.

Could it be possible that due to his lack of faith in the Biblical God, Monroe had a different idea of what the creator actually was, and thus found himself with a being that conformed to his idea and this was not the true God? After all, there's a different between not being religious and not having any preconceived beliefs.To claim he was unbiased or without belief would be a lie. Does the God encountered in near death experiences match what Monroe found? Do any NDEs speak of an "aperture?" Where was the being of indescribable unconditional love that is so often encountered in NDEs? I don't recall this in his books.

Thanks for sharing, although I was looking for NDE accounts. I don't hold what that person experienced with any level of credibility. For all I know, he could have experienced a manifestation of his beliefs.

Wasn't she the person who claimed that she had a prior existence as a fish on a watery planet?

It's been a long time since I read her book so I may be mistaken.

R

Justin said: "Judging everything and everyone by other people's interpretations of a book is a very limiting way to live, and it's not what Yeshua himself wants.  Don't believe me, pray to communicate to the loving God and him only, and ask these what they think and feel about such a choice and lifestyle."

Recoverer responds: "If a person has too many definitions of how God should answer, God might have a difficult time responding.

     

Recoverer 2 wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 11:20am:


  Yes, but asking them without preconceptions, I thought,  was kind of implied/a give in. Or at least should be.

    Vince, I didn't say that you don't pray to God for guidance, but I suggested praying to the loving God and Yeshua and asking them about this.

    If one's conceptions of God are limiting or distorted, well my spouse was very clearly shown in a dream, that one can connect to not the true God aka the First Self, and prime Creator, but to other, deceptive beings that while they consider themselves "gods" are far from. 

  For example, my spouse's mom is a fundamentalist, extremist Christian, and not a particularly happy or balanced person to put it mildly.  She is rather judgmental of others in a extremist, negative, and consistent sense. For example, she believes most people are going to eternal hell (though of course, she is going to Heaven). 

  One time, my spouse had a dream of viewing her mom "praying to God", but instead of connecting to The God (the Abba that Yeshua spoke of and to), she saw very clearly that her mom was connecting to a group of negative ET's that she saw as reptilian-humanoid in form.  As a side note, I believe that was her 2nd dream at the time of specifically observing this negative, reptilian-humanoid ET group.

That's why I specify connecting to the loving God, or God of Love. Putting Yeshua into the mix helps us to connect to the true God as well, since Yeshua came to express, live, and teach God's highest aspect--pure, universal, unconditional Love. 

   Albert and I are not your enemies btw, though we have spoken critically of you--well more so of your current approach.  Neither are we enemies of Don.  But we are enemies of dogma, distortion, and the hindering forces involved with this world. 

Those hindering forces like fundamentalist, extremist forms of Christianity and other religions and like when humans become involved in them, because these collective thought-form belief systems of humans have been very influenced by them, and have a tendency or influence to actually keep people from getting closer to the true God, Love, and Yeshua.  Like my spouse's mom for example.  Most of us know some folks that are very involved in a very fundamentalist and extreme form of Christianity or another religion and the bad effects that these have on them. 

   I believe (rather know), that Bob Monroe's Soul was a long time Helper, that part of his service job in coming to the Earth, was trying to help nudge people in a different direction.  One not so caught up in dogma, doctrine, and distortion, but based more on people's own experiences and direct guidance communication. 

   The latter is actually what Yeshua recommended when he was publicly teaching.  He constantly stressed that people should go within and pray directly to the Abba in conjunction with living a loving, ethical, responsible life, and that these were the primary ways to truth. 

    How often did he tell people that they needed to read the Torah?  He often only brings up the Torah, the 10 commandments, etc in relation to others asking him about it or bringing these up, and time and time again he stresses that the whole of the Law hinges on/revolves around the Love of God and of creation, and that if a person did this (as well as prayed to God), that all wisdom, all truth would come to them. 

  You're talking to two people that have made this a practice for decades of their life and they are trying to nudge you in a better direction because they deeply care about you and everyone in a universal, unconditional way. 

  The best and most effective way to truth, is not to listen to fellow humans (unless you meet Yeshua in the flesh, which is possible and actually will become probable for some later), but to pray directly to the Loving God and It's Son, the Light of Creation (well in this Universe), and then live the truth as he taught/exampled/lived in conjunction.

   That's all that any soul truly needs.  All the rest, is either trying to get a person to that state and approach, is superfluous, a distraction, or hindering. 

I Am Dude wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 8:47pm:


Justin,

Please respect Vince's request--no more personal comments towards him.  I will send you a PM about this and if you need to talk about it with me do so that way.  Please do not respond here on this thread about it. 

Vicky

The difference is that my comments are not of a personal nature. I speak of concepts in and of themselves. I do not criticize others for entertaining those concepts. You haven't proven yourself able to discuss a topic without making personal remarks about those you are speaking to. It is not disrespectful to discuss a topic related to the afterlife on an afterlife forum. It is not disrespectful to have a different opinion about afterlife-related concepts. It is disrespectful to say that a person is hysterical for finding Christ and being transformed by the power of God, as you did to me. It is also disrespectful to make repeated ad hominem attacks. So please, show some respect.

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.


I moved my own comment.