Copyrighted Logo

css menu by Css3Menu.com


 

Bruce's 5th book, a Home Study Course, is now available.
Books & Tapes by Bruce Moen
    Bruce's Blog now at http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/blog....

  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegister  
 
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 
Send Topic Print
Nanci Danison's NDE (Read 118415 times)
recoverer
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #165 - Mar 3rd, 2014 at 1:32pm
 
Hello Dina:

It is hard to say what is always correct, but I believe what you said is true most of the time.

Thomas Sawyer had an expansive NDE and he stated that he could remember only a small portion of what he experienced during his NDE. Memories of what he experienced came back in pieces.

During one of her videos Nanci states that as her NDE came to an end she tried to remember everything and the beings that were with her told her "don't" because she won't be able to. They told her to remember the love part.

Albert


dina wrote on Mar 3rd, 2014 at 11:00am:
No NDEr has remembered enough as to write 3 complete books. I think her NDE was real but most of what is written is added by her own way of thinking, not because she remembers all. Many of the things she writes seem logical but contradict what most NDErs experienced

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BobMoenroe
Ex Member


Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #166 - Mar 8th, 2014 at 5:47am
 
Right. I've got an axe to grind with the spam users. Kiss
Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 8th, 2014 at 5:26pm by N/A »  
 
IP Logged
 
a channel
Ex Member


Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #167 - Mar 15th, 2014 at 4:42am
 
  Well, finally got around to reading Nanci's first book.  Impressions, first part very dry and lecturing, with some interesting and insightful parts, sort of reminded me some of Tom Campbell's MBT in that sense.

   Overall, very much agree with her main message, that "love is all that matters" or what matters most, rather.  Much that i agree with.  It's not that there is much specifics that i would disagree with, more the emphasis of certain parts.

A number of parts confirmed my earlier impression that she tends to be a bit over polarized to the Yin side of consciousness in her perceptions and translations.

  There are some major contradictions with other respected sources of info. 

  For example, she says that it doesn't matter what you do or don't do, etc each individual will merge with Source, that there is no discriminating, nothing to rectify, etc. 

   Contrast this with Bob Monroe's experience with going beyond the aperture, starting to merge with Source, and communicating with some Consciousnesses that already were consciously within that state.  *We made the transition as a species at the same time*

    Bob was told by some of these completed Beings that he was still yet small and incomplete (and thus could not stay).  In a sense, he did not yet belong there, he had work to do, parts of both the smaller self and some of the larger to gather.  He was to bring "gifts" back to the Whole.

  In other words, according to the Like attracts, begets, and resonates with Like Law that Source built into reality as a universal law.  Bob was not yet in full resonation with Source. 

   Neither was or is Nanci.  She didn't get to merge fully with Source, and if she had, it would have been temporary, like Bob's experience (well, Bob didn't fully remerge either). 

    This is a consciousness law that cannot be side stepped.  To be fully One with Source consciously, you have to be fully like Source again. 

   Anyone who understands and is attracted to the life, example, and teachings of Yeshua, knows and understands that is what his whole life here was about, to show and demonstrate what this full Source attunement looked, acted, and was like.  And he out and out said, if you want to be One with Source like me, you must be like me, must live and choose like me. 

    It is not enough to just "know", say, or perceive that we are One with Source, a part of same, etc, but to live it.  The "way" to same, is via pure, universal, unconditional love.  But "Love" is bigger than what even Nanci perceived.  There is a tough love, or Yang side of Love too.   

  See Aramaic to English translation below in my signature area of a quote of Yeshua to the misleading, corrupt, self serving, and spiritually harmful Pharisees, etc. 

    Strong words, no?   Yet, while he called them out and pointed out to them and to the people in general that these groups were largely in league with the serpents of old, aka the "Reptilians", he still loved them.  He wouldn't do anything to truly harm them, except to hold a mirror up and call them out. 

  He had it within his power, to just think them dead.  He even had it within his power to dismantle their Soul's consciousness--a true and final death.  Neither did he do.  Yet, the people who had let themselves become dependent on these needed to be warned what and who they were dealing with.  Tough love, tough words. 




Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
MarkyG
New Member
*
Offline


ALK Member

Posts: 7
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #168 - Apr 6th, 2014 at 8:57am
 
There is something i find slightly troubling about this business with human animals possessing consciousness independently of the souls which inhabit them. How can we tell which one we are - the LB soul inside or the human animal. The list of criteria given in Nanci's Backwards books gives a reasonable indication of whether or not one is a soulless human, based on certain personality traits. The crucial point here is that humans are generally not aware of being inhabited by another entity, a point made by Nanci herself. And in effect this eliminates any chance of discerning which of the two entities you yourself are, for the following reason:- suppose i were to read the list of criteria in Nanci's books and subsequently come to the conclusion i am not a soulless human. I then proceed to crack open a bottle of champagne to celebrate. But the human animal, as always, has engaged in exactly the same behavior as me. Since it is not aware of being inhabited by another entity it must attribute this action (cracking open the champagne) as coming from its own volition, and has therefore, presumably, come to the conclusion it itself is the LB soul. If this were not the case the human animal would get the sense of being controlled by some unknown force - an unlikely scenario. This begs the question - am i the one who is the human animal mistakenly believing itself to be the soul inside the human.
Nanci does state that human animals have a level of awareness significantly below that of the LB soul which inhabits them, so perhaps this potentially provides a way out of this dilemma. I feel I enjoy a reasonably high level of consciousness (at least after sufficient dosages of caffeine) so must therefore be the soul inside and not the human animal. Problem solved! But perhaps i believe this for the same reason my goldfish believes itself to possess a reasonable level of consciousness, for like me he has nothing to compare his level of consciousness to. Without a point of reference an entity cannot make any meaningful judgement regarding its own level of consciousness.
Anyone know how to resolve this problem??? Sad    
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
seagull
Senior Member
****
Offline


ALK Member

Posts: 269
land sea sky
Gender: female
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #169 - Apr 6th, 2014 at 9:14am
 
I have not read her books but only listened to most of a video a while back. I think that, regardless of her way of illustrating what she experienced, there is always a personal compass which is a preferable guide over any outside information about who you are, and that is your own personal exploration of your internal life. Meditation is an excellent way to begin and, if you are successful, you will always have a place of comparison in order to know "how you are doing" in your daily life. The "real" you is the part of yourself you will encounter during meditation, and it is beautiful. This is not the only method, but it is one which has merits, I believe, over studying charts or other interpretations of human character available to us here.

Additionally, I don't know you personally, or anyone else on the forum, so this reply is no assumption about you, just a random personal opinion prompted by my reaction to your question. That's all it ever is.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
MarkyG
New Member
*
Offline


ALK Member

Posts: 7
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #170 - Apr 6th, 2014 at 9:34am
 
Thx for the swift reply to my query Seagull. What you say does make some sense. But one thing to bear in mind is my basic argument can be generalized to any similar situation. For instance, i could go through a period of meditation, have an experience that indicates to me i am the soul, and perform some action as a consequence of this realization to celebrate this fact.
The basic point i am trying to make is that ANY belief or idea can be an accompanied by corresponding behavior, and this behavior will always be common to both the human animal and the LB soul. This suggests that in any situation which gives rise to my belief that i am an LB soul rather than the human, the human animal must always account for the corresponding behavior which goes along with that belief. So in your example of meditation, would this not suggest the human animal also has attained the belief it itself is the soul and not the animal. If not, how would it account for any accompanying act of celebration? And if it does indeed come to this conclusion the initial problem remains fully intact.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
seagull
Senior Member
****
Offline


ALK Member

Posts: 269
land sea sky
Gender: female
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #171 - Apr 6th, 2014 at 9:53am
 
I kind of understand what you are saying. It's a pretty complicated version of 'we are here now' -- and I don't actually have a clear explanation of why that is, only that it is so.

Our greater consciousness extends into the human animal body, as does the greater consciousness of any other living creature, and even what we perceive as nonliving entities. It's a very strange situation to be in, in which we perceive ourselves as being the center of reality, but we are only viewing a tiny layer, as if we were each an outer layer of an onion which can only view the rough brown surface of ourselves. However, in some circumstances, we can see through some of the layers.

What the 'human animal' part of myself experiences itself as is always flawed. It must be. It is the nature of the 'unreality' of what we are experiencing here, which can be considered a kind of simulation, and one which is uniquely personal to us.

That is not going to make sense to a lot of people, so they will not want to believe it, and will want to create their own manageable boundaries and understandings of their situations.

So, I'm not sure there is an answer to your question, but maybe there is, from a different perspective than I have.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
MarkyG
New Member
*
Offline


ALK Member

Posts: 7
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #172 - Apr 6th, 2014 at 10:29am
 
Thx Seagull. I relate well with what you say about our world being a simulation. Studying theoretical physics at university left me in no doubt that what we are experiencing is not real in the traditional sense of what we think of as real, and in effect could be regarded as some kind of virtual reality. And i understand from higher levels of reality this 3D ‘solid world’ would look very unreal indeed. And this brings me nicely to my next point, one that i see has been a central feature of this forum thread discussion – the significance of our actions on others and the issue of moral relativism.

Whilst our world is not physically real, our experiences in it are certainly real. This is analogous to our dreams. Our dream worlds are not real either, but the experiences we have whilst we are in the dream can be very real indeed (and even hyper-real if, like me, you have the occasional lucid dream!) Although not a literal analogy, we could reasonably regard our current reality as being more akin to a shared dream. Whilst i don’t want to push this analogy too far, it is certainly far less misleading to think about it in those terms than to regard our world as real in the traditional everyday Newtonian way of thinking about our reality. But this should not lead us to believe our actions on others are unimportant and inconsequential – life review or no life review. What we do to others DEFINITELY has the potential to cause suffering, and at times great suffering!

I agree with the view that Nanci has generally leaned a bit towards the ‘anything goes’ kind of thinking, basing this on reading all of her books (to date). But it would be unfair to suggest she has gone to this extreme without at least certain caveats in place, as she does not exactly say that our actions do not matter per se. Her view is slightly more nuanced than this. She has mainly emphasized this point in relation to the standard religious view that we can be punished for all eternity for our sins. It is clear to me that one of Nanci’s main motivational factors when dispensing her message to people is to displace her former false beliefs in connection with her Catholic upbringing. She is mighty keen to emphasize the fact that our traditional views of evil are misleading, to some degree arbitrary, and largely a human invention. And also that we have unwittingly projected our own human judgement values on our creator. All that i am ok with, and totally understand where she is coming from. She has nonetheless, at least in certain parts of her books, strayed a bit too far into the idea that it is all good, irrespective of the impact of our actions of others. And this i don't agree with.There are parts of her book which IMO do effectively condone violence (at least some forms of violence) and whilst i do not think for one minute believe Nanci is deliberately trying to encourage violent behaviour, her zealousness in emphasizing the point that there is no evil has caused her from time to time to say some less than ideal things. There is a fine line between saying that everything is acceptable at the spiritual level of perspective and condoning bad behaviour, but IMO Nanci has definitely crossed that line. 
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
MarkyG
New Member
*
Offline


ALK Member

Posts: 7
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #173 - Apr 6th, 2014 at 11:04am
 
BTW, is there no provision on this forum to edit typos on posts which have just been made? I see no edit button anywhere. That is highly unusual.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
seagull
Senior Member
****
Offline


ALK Member

Posts: 269
land sea sky
Gender: female
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #174 - Apr 6th, 2014 at 11:40am
 
There is a modify button if you go into the actual post on the thread, but it is only active for a certain amount of time.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Rondele
Ex Member


Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #175 - Apr 6th, 2014 at 12:03pm
 
It would also be nice if there was a separate modify button for when someone leaves the board and then re-registers with a new name.... Wink

R
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
seagull
Senior Member
****
Offline


ALK Member

Posts: 269
land sea sky
Gender: female
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #176 - Apr 7th, 2014 at 7:26am
 
It is not okay to do bad things, but there comes a point when it is most important to understand motivations, history, biology, how things were taken to the next level, etc. Once the precursors are understood it is from a different perspective that a greater being can offer love, warmth and caring responses which are beyond what was understood in a less knowledgeable state.

I doubt that Nanci or anyone else would seriously propose that doing harm to others is fine as long as you're having the most fun possible doing it. And, if someone were to believe that, it would be because they had a screw loose, or for a better description, a sort of mental disability. A person who believed so wrongly could possibly be persuaded that it is in their best interest not to act on those beliefs. But, that's another topic, I guess.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
recoverer
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #177 - Apr 9th, 2014 at 7:59pm
 
Regarding what Nanci says about everything being okay (MarkyG spoke of this a bit), perhaps to some degree what Eban Alexander wrote in his book “Proof of Heaven” applies  (the words within brackets are explanations of what he means by the words “Orb” and “Om”, my translation).

From page 48: “Through the Orb [a light being], Om [God] told me that there is not one universe but many—in fact, more than I could conceive—but that love lay at the center of them all. Evil was present in the all the other universes as well, but only in the tiniest trace amounts. Evil was necessary because without it freewill was impossible, and without freewill there could be no growth—no forward movement, no chance for us to become what God longed for us to be. Horrible and all-powerful as evil sometimes seemed to be in a world like ours, in the larger picture love was overwhelmingly dominant, and it would ultimately be triumphant.”

My feeling is that we can’t completely comprehend what is good if we don’t also understand what is bad.

Nanci speaks as if God is a being who lacks judgment.  She doesn’t mean judgment like in “good judgment.” She means it in a negative sense.  I believe that being able to discern what is and what isn’t good isn’t the same thing as being judgmental. Going by what she wrote, Nanci seems to have missed this point.  Certainly the Source of all is capable of having good discernment without being judgmental.

Nanci wrote that she used to speak to some people in an unkind way.  If she was able to have the discernment to see why it isn’t good to speak to people in an unkind way, then why couldn’t God/Source/Om have such discernment?

I’d like to add that I recently read much of Nanci’s first book. I didn’t read the parts about spiritual growth a lot because I didn’t feel like I was learning anything. I don’t mean that she didn’t have anything good to say, rather, to a large extent I already knew what she was talking about.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
recoverer
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male
Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #178 - Apr 9th, 2014 at 8:04pm
 
I'd like to add another thought to the post I just wrote (I couldn't edit).

I don't believe that God feels judgment towards beings who do negative things, but he "IS" able to tell that they are doing something negative.

My guess is that God is also aware and wise enough to appreciate when a person/Soul does something that is motivated by love.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Rondele
Ex Member


Re: Nanci Danison's NDE
Reply #179 - Apr 10th, 2014 at 9:51am
 
Couldn't edit?

I just did, that's what the Modify button is for. 

R
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 
Send Topic Print


This is a Peer Moderated Forum. You can report Posting Guideline violations.