Hi, first post newbie... Great site BTW..

I've always wondered this, and I'd like other peoples input:

Why don't any of the worlds' religions ponder the (almost CERTAIN IMO!!) possibilities of other forms of intelligent life deep in space, and when life IS found out there someplace way in the future, how will religions explain it here on Earth??

Out of the deep vastness of space and the countless planets/solar systems/galaxies, it just seems unbelievable to me that the creator (God) would only put life on this ONE planet..(Earth)

All suggestions are welcomed!!

TIA

The reason the conventional religions do not deal with this is they
were invented at a time it was believed that the earth was the
center of the universe and the astronomical bodies all revolved
around it. Some fundamentalists do not even consider the possibility
of visitors from space to be a serious consideration.

In Ufology the reality of visitors from space is established.
Many varieties have been described. Some of these go in and out of
the higher dimensions as easily as we get on a commercial air
liner. They take their spacecraft with them into the higher
dimensions, so that it disappears, to us. Can you imagine them
believing the Bible? Their knowledge is far, far beyond.

Robert Monroe, in Far Journeys, said that other systems of planets
with reincarnation cycles and heavens were countless beyond
imagining. Space vistors have said that they could not cover more
than a tiny bit in a lifetime of exploring planets with life
on them.

There are more galaxies than there are stars in the milky way.
This has been established by the Hubble telescope.
If you were out in the middle of the universe, our galaxy would be
impossibly obscure, and you would need a map with billions of
listings in order to find our galaxy. Existing concepts of God
cannot fit anything on this scale. There would have to be millions
of religions. My contact with the Muslim religion would say they
just have no idea of all this. Muslims still believe that Allah is
on their side against the infidels.

For a discussion of the way religion might try to cope with this,
see:

 http://www.raidersnewsupdate.com/Pope-Aliens.htm

Given the size of the universe, and the almost
incredible juxtaposition of events and circumstances
which attended the development of complex life on
Earth... I'd say there likely ARE intelligent aliens out
there...
But we are looking at tens of thousands of years (if
indeed not MILLIONS of years) before we make contact with any of these other civilizations.
(Do a Google on "Rare Earth Hypothesis"... about the
best explanation I've yet seen as to why the universe
seems so "empty" despite decades of listening to
the stars with high-gain radio telescopes.)
By THAT time, if humanity is still around... the religion
problem won't amount to much, as I suspect that
our current "organized religion" concepts will be
considered so much prehistoric dross.
Moreover, we will likely by then have a good idea of the nature of true spirituality, whether "God" exists and what It might be, and the nature
of the afterlife due to application of a level of SCIENCE which will make us 21st-century earthlings look like Neanderthal men by comparison.
AND my guess is, it will be pretty much the same thing as the aliens have discovered. Talk about a meeting of the minds...
Fascinating stuff, no?

"But we are looking at tens of thousands of years (if indeed not MILLIONS of years) before we make contact with any of these other civilizations. "

Brendan, they are already here. Contact has been made. You need to study Ufology.

wrote on Apr 19^th, 2005 at 1:01am:

Given the size of the universe, and the almost incredible juxtaposition of events and circumstances which attended the development of complex life on Earth... I'd say there likely ARE intelligent aliens out there... But we are looking at tens of thousands of years (if indeed not MILLIONS of years) before we make contact with any of these other civilizations. (Do a Google on "Rare Earth Hypothesis"... about the best explanation I've yet seen as to why the universe seems so "empty" despite decades of listening to the stars with high-gain radio telescopes.) By THAT time, if humanity is still around... the religion problem won't amount to much, as I suspect that our current "organized religion" concepts will be considered so much prehistoric dross. Moreover, we will likely by then have a good idea of the nature of true spirituality, whether "God" exists and what It might be, and the nature of the afterlife due to application of a level of SCIENCE which will make us 21st-century earthlings look like Neanderthal men by comparison. AND my guess is, it will be pretty much the same thing as the aliens have discovered. Talk about a meeting of the minds... Fascinating stuff, no?

Very fascinating stuff indeed, I personally believe that there definitely IS a creator of the universe.. A  "God" if you will, that is THE supreme being.

Why and when the universe was created is still a mystery... ???

Another thing is that I seriously doubt that all other intelligent life out there is life as we know it..
(Human form)

wrote on Apr 19^th, 2005 at 12:00pm:

Brendan, they are already here. Contact has been made. You need to study Ufology.

Boris, a question....

I know that it has been asked countless times before, but why don't they (aliens) make themselves known to Earths' masses if they're here..?

They are going to and soon, most likely sometime this year. Our space brothers are out there waiting for certain thing to happen before they make their appearance.

These links should get you started reading and will lead you other places.

http://www.eceti.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eceti/?yguid=216414294
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exopolitics/?yguid=216414294
http://www.exopolitics.org

Love,
Mairlyn ;-)

ThirdEyeBlind,

you said:


Quote:

Very fascinating stuff indeed, I personally believe that there definitely IS a creator of the universe.. A  "God" if you will, that is THE supreme being.

please define "supreme being"

I was reading your message and  it reminded me of a post in the Retrieval Archive on this site, so i looked it up and the link to it is below
http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/ret-arch/29157.html

Read it for yourself, but according to the Retrieval post, it's sure proof of aliens out there.

Boris and Marilyn...
I suppose we COULD be being visited by E.T.'s
and some people may have seen them...
But I strongly doubt that even if they WERE here,
they would attempt contact.
Here's why...
Presumably, these aliens would be quite a bit
WISER than we are, with respect to the implications
of contact.
They are probably aware of our prejudices, superstitions, and religious beliefs (the last two being interchangeable, as far as most humans are concerned.)
Just imagine how the Religious Right (which happens to be in power here in America) would react to aliens "revealing themselves to the masses"... they would say it was Satanic, or a demonic ruse or something like that.
Not to mention, at least one of the more powerful governments here on Earth (if not America, then perhaps Russia or China) would get its panties in a bunch over the issue of "sovereignty" or who knows what else...
In short, it wouldn't be pretty.
So, I'll stand by what I said... we won't be contacting aliens anytime soon... because even if they ARE here already, we are NOT ready for them...
and they KNOW it. Sad but true.
Heck, I'd love to meet an alien, myself. Too bad I never will.

Brendan,

I won't try to dissuade you in your beliefs.  We'll just wait and see. ;-)

Peace, Mairlyn  ;D

I suppose 'World Religions' have considered this item, ThirdEyeBlind and must be in a great quandry as what, if anything, they might do, in the eventuality.

First, try to convince everyone that they 'knew about it all along'.
Next, try to have us believe that they control the whole position.
Lastly, they, themselves are likely to disappear to the sound of raucous laughter.

The funny thing is that the people in Vatican with their long white dresses are probably more frightening than the small green men...come on,do you really think that a world that created Benny Hill could be the most evolved of the universe? ???

Also, aliens could have different moral values than us. So they could be "evil".

Look at what we do with our animals (lab testing, violence, food, etc)

But the Bible might... In my house there is many different mansions (John something) Also more so in John it stated about "having sheep of a different flock" that verse is belevied by Christians that it could mean ET.

Hi,

Every now and then, I still "lurk" on this site.  At present, I don't want to intrude myself into the theological debates simmering on this site, suffice to say that I think I can disprove almost everything that critics of the Bible have recently said.  If you want me to elaborate this claim, communicate with me via a "private message."   Many posters from here now communicate with me via E-mail and I'm grateful to the site for many new friends.  But I want to keep my promise to assume a low profile until summer and to plunge into these debates now would force me to develop long threads.
But I thought you'd be interested in three points about this particular post:

(1) The Bible does not explicitly address the question of other life in our universe, though the Hebrew term "elohim" often means not "God" or "angels", but "heavenly beings," the identity of which is a mystery.    

(2) Belief in extraterrestrial life is not unprecedented in early Christianity.  For example,
Origen, an early church father, (late 2nd-early 3rd century) taught that the universe teems with other worlds populated by intelligent life that requires bodies appropriate to that world.  Contrary to the New Age consensus that Origen taught  earthly reincarnation, he often ridicules that idea.  But Origen does teach that in the afterlife many will incarnate in new bodies in these other worlds.

(3) Then there is Jesus' teaching in NDEs as opposed to the Bible.  For example, consider what  "Jesus and the angels" tell Howard Storm during his NDE about God's nature and extraterrestrial life.  Jesus dominates the conversation, but the proximity of angels sometimes makes it unclear to Storm whether it is Jesus or one of His angels that is communicating telepathically with him.  As an academic specialist in life of Jesus research, I am certain this really is Jesus and not some archetype or masquerading helper, despite His controversial claims that are sure to alienate some fundamentalists.  Here is a sample quote:

"The angels refer to God in many ways, but the term most often used is The One.  God is the One because God is the source of everything.  There is NO THING other than God.  Everything came from God and everything returns to God.

They explained to me in a way I could understand that God is like an artist who creates for the sheer pleasure of creating.  One of our attributes that is in the image and likeness of God is our desire to create.  We are creative not only as artists, musicians, writers, and performers, but as parents, workers, healers, lovers, and learners.

God creates universes which in turn become procreative.  There are countless intelligent beings in the universe we inhabit and infinitely more in universes that occupy othe dimensions.

The Creation is entirely in the NOW to God.  God's consciousness is the entire creation.  Everything that was, and everything that will be, is this moment to God (pages 68-69)."

One pet peeve of mine is that New Agers commonly conceive of God as "All That Is" and act as if this conception is novel or anti-Scriptural.  In fact, it is quite consistent with biblical teaching, just more inane and simple-minded because it is less nuanced.  For example, it overlooks the distinction between ways God is transcendent and ways God is immanent in creation.  

I want to recommend two books that many of my new friends from this site hav already read or will be reading and disussing with me.  In my view, both books are the best of their kind ever written.  Not surprisingly, the first is Howard Storm's "My Descent into Death."

His NDE in Paris is as dramatic as any ever recorded.  But what makes his book so riveting is the role of angels (discarnate helpers?) in saving him from certain death and guiding his spiritual path.  Storm was a militant atheist at the time of his NDE, but is now a United Church of Christ pastor in Cincinnati.  What makes it especially important for me are all the subtle nuances of Jesus' postmortem teaching to Howard, nuances often not widely recognized.  In fact, Storm's Jesus has changed my mind on a few theological issues.
 
IMHO, the second book is also the best book of its kind ever written: David Fontana, "Is There an Afterife: A Comprehensive View of the Evidence."
If you read Fontana, you will know what you're missing from standard discussions on this site.  When I return to the site this summer, I will be discussing many of the issues raised by him.  To give you an idea, here are his chapter titles:

1. Survival of Death: Questions and Beliefs
2. Evidence from Modern Parapsychology
3. Evidence from Apparitions
4. Hauntings
5. Mediumship: History and Background
6. Mental Mediumship
7. Three Outstanding Mental Mediums
8. Drop-in Communicators
9. Proxy Cases
10. Are Statements by Mediums Too General and
     Too Trivial? (a discussion of Schwartz & others)
11. Physical Mediumship: Independent Voice
     Phenomena
12. Physical Mediumship: Materializations and Other
     Phenomena
13. Physical Mediumship: More Recent Examples
     and the Question of Fraud
14. Instrumental Transcommunication (If you're
     interested in that communication device Bruce
    was trying to make, you'll love this chapter.)
15. Near-Death Experiences
16. Out-of-Body Experiences
17. Reincarnation
18.  The Nature of an Afterlife

OK, back off my soapbox and back into obscurity until summer.

Don

P.S. And no, Marilyn, I don't know JD, but I do admire his courage and grace under fire.

Quote:

One pet peeve of mine is that New Agers commonly conceive of God as "All That Is" and act as if this conception is novel or anti-Scriptural.  In fact, it is quite consistent with biblical teaching, just more inane and simple-minded because it is less nuanced.  For example, it overlooks the distinction between ways God is transcendent and ways God is immanent in creation.

That, is an heresy.

Those who believe god as a universal spirit or as "All That Is" don't see him as a unique and independant entity. Especially not an entity that is outside creation like Christians are teaching.

As for Jesus in NDE, those teachings are a matter of personnal faith. When it comes to the afterlife, you usually see and get what you expect. So unless many people verify it you can't start considering believing it just like that.

Also I would like to point to you that the christian God created man in his image... so they have a problem with E.T.

Dear Raphael,

New Agers pay a terrible price for their incestuous and cultic orientation that typically prevents them from critiquing their view from the perspective of a broad range of academic disciplines.  Your comments are a case in point and illustrate the New Age penchant to create a cartoon  caricature of views they can't be bothered to study in depth.

"Especially not an entity that is outside creation like Christians are teaching."
________________________

Wrong!  Christians believe that God will ultimately prove to be "All in All", an expression equvalent to "All That Is "(1 Corinthians 15:29).  But no, I do not vouch for the New Age distortion of this concept. Thus, "Jesus and the angels" rightly tell Storm, "There is NO THING other than God.  Everything came from God and everything returns to God." This insight is hardly "heretical" as you suggest: e. g. "For from Him and through Him and back to Him are all things (Romans 11:36)."  

"When it comes to the afterlife, you usually see and get what you expect."
__________________________

Another New Age caricature that ignores the actual research evidence.  There is no correlation between belief in God and the likelihood of an encounter with the Being of Light during a NDE (s0 Kenneth Ring).  So to their great dismay, atheists often encounter Jesus during their NDE.  The conversation typically goes something like this: "But I don't even believe in you."  Jesus: "But I DO believe in you."  This point was recently reaffirmed on George Noory's "Coast to Coast" by a secular NDE expert who has examined thousands of cases.   This researcher made another interesting point: he said that in thousands of Buddhist NDEs examined, not one claims to have met the Buddha.  Instead, they sometimes claim to meet minor figures from Buddhist tradition.  

Osis and Haraldsson compared the NDEs of 500 Americans with those of 500 people from India.  Among their findings, contrary to expectations, there was no mention of reincarnation in the Indian NDEs.  In general, the American and Indian samples significantly overlapped and contradicted the expectations from religious upbringing in both cultures.  Al this is shocking because there are many kooks out there and many bogus NDEs.   So you might expect every imaginable type of encounter to be frequently alleged.

"Also, I would like to point to you that the Christian God created man in his image...so they have a problem with E.T."
_______________

No more than anyone else. Again, you opt for a simple-minded caricature.  Peter tells us we are destined to "participate in the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4)", i.e. reunion with God  The Bible never rules out the possibility that other intelligent species from other worlds might not be permitted to do the same.  Remember, everything comes from God and is reunited with God--that is basic Christian teaching.

Don

First of all I thank you for your aswer. I hate it when people talks without have anything to back them up. So I was kinda disapointed by you at first. But now I'm happy since you answered properly  ;D

It seems you are wrong about the figures seen in the afterlife.


Quote:

Deathbed visions involving religious figures were observed predominantly among the Indian patients while American patients most frequently reported seeing dead people (Osis & Haraldsson, 1977). The Indian patients reported seeing predominantly male apparitions, while female apparitions predominated Americans’ visions. “While the frequency of survival-related apparitions [apparitions of the dead and of religious figures] is the same in both samples, the characteristics of these apparitions are strongly molded by cultural forces” (Osis & Haraldsson, p. 245). The religious being is, understandably, dependent on the individual’s religion. For example, Christians have reported seeing Jesus and angels, and Muslims have reported seeing Allah (Morse, 1994b).

source : http://www.cancersourcern.com/Nursing/CE/CECourse.cfm?courseid=165&contentid=30614

So this is in contradiction with what you said :

Quote:

Osis and Haraldsson compared the NDEs of 500 Americans with those of 500 people from India.  Among their findings, contrary to expectations, there was no mention of reincarnation in the Indian NDEs.  In general, the American and Indian samples significantly overlapped and contradicted the expectations from religious upbringing in both cultures.

Also I would like to know who is this great researcher that talked on the radio.

Raphael,

The website you give is irrelevant to my point.  I didn't say there weren't cultural differences between the USA and India. And prior expectations can affect the NDE in certain ways. I said there were similar core experiences.  In stressing the similarites and contrdictions with prior expectations, Osis and Haralsson add that the Being of Light did not normally identify itself.  People projected a presumed identity onto it.  Given this pattern, it is all the more remarkable that Noory's researcher whose name escapes me) found that Buddist never meet Buddha (Siddartha Gautama).  For that matter, find me even one example of a Muslim meeting Muhammad.  Meeting Allah doesn't count because "Allah" is just an Aranic word for "God."  

You don't respond to any of my other points.

Don

Of course, the Being of LIght often does identify itself in other NDEs and studies.   This is particularly striking when atheists often encounter Jesus during their OBEs.

I didn't respond to your other points because I think you are most probably right about them. They are based on what the faith is about though, not what is realy happening. Also I was raised as a catholic so I was wondering if you received the same teachings as me.

as for:

Quote:

Of course, the Being of LIght often does identify itself in other NDEs and studies.   This is particularly striking when atheists often encounter Jesus during their OBEs.

I would reply that this comes down to perspective.

1) We can't prove there is ONE being of light. There could be many more. Heck, the one you presume is Jesus could be someone in need of attention lying to us !
2)Even though you preach that :
Quote:

As an academic specialist in life of Jesus research, I am certain this really is Jesus and not some archetype or masquerading helper, despite His controversial claims that are sure to alienate some fundamentalists.

, it comes down to nothing more than a matter of beliefs. Like the "irrelevant" sources I gave you pointed out, some saw minor bhuddist divinities and others Allah. Who can really state Jesus would be the ultimate spirit of goodness ?

3)Also many people are dying at the same time, that poor Jesus fellow couldn't be there for everyone... Indeed, I could simply say: "it is reported that the helpers will masquerade in order to help the transition". Of course this is not a fact but a belief, but this belief is, sadly, as good as yours.

So it comes down to this :
-you can't prove your perspective of god is true.
-evidence and logic point out that Jesus (if he exists) couldn't be the only one greeting the dead
so
-following a faith is not mandatory for salvation

conclusion: We don't need christianity, or any other religion for that matter.
:-/

Raphael,

The Bible clearly teaches that God reveals Himself through a variety of other myths and symbols to peoples of other cultures and faith traditions.  And the earliest church understood Jesus as the Word or "the Logos," a Greek term that just means the rational self-expression of God as opposed to God in His unknowability.  So my prior expectation would be that Christ or God would manifest in terms that seem rational to the deceased righteous souls who may never has heard of Him.  

My real interest here is this: in NDEs and in so many other spiritual areas people make untested assumptions.  For example, it is often claimed that in NDEs the Being of Light appears as Jesus to Christians, as Buddha to Buddhists, and as Muhammad to Muslims.  That's why Noory's NDE expert, apparently not a Christian, got my sleepy  attention when he cited his Asian colleague who had investigated thousands of Asian NDEs and found no examples of Buddha appearing to Buddhists.  I myself have searched for examples of Muhammad appearing to Muslims in NDEs, but so far have found none.  I'm not an expert in this area and so may soon find some exceptions.  But as I said, the overall pattern is what's important.  You can find some kooks to say anything and NDEs are sometimes confused with other psychologically dissociative experiences.

Don

P.S. Please read Fontana.  I think you'll love it.  You might not be ready for Storm's book.

Quote:

The Bible clearly teaches that God reveals Himself through a variety of other myths and symbols to peoples of other cultures and faith traditions.

Are you SURE ?!?  :o If that's the case then the bible would attack itself in the process.

See if "The Being of Light", or God, comes to us in many forms, myths and symbols, then what's the point of having a religion or following christianity and the bible ?

Being of light or no being of light, no religion would be required then. See my point ?

As for Fontana, is he the guy that published ghost stories ?

I've also always wondered what happens to all of the souls of people who lived and died in ancient/cavemen times before there even was a Jesus/Moses/Mohammed/Buddha etc...

Will they not be allowed into the afterlife/"heaven" simply because they worshiped ancient "Fire Gods", "Sun Gods", "Moon Gods" etc...?

wrote on Apr 21^st, 2005 at 6:00pm:

I've also always wondered what happens to all of the souls of people who lived and died in ancient/cavemen times before there even was a Jesus/Moses/Mohammed/Buddha etc... Will they not be allowed into the afterlife/"heaven" simply because they worshiped ancient "Fire Gods", "Sun Gods", "Moon Gods" etc...?

And going back even further, what about when early man first came down from the trees, stood upright and "became" more human than primate? Since Jesus wouldn't be making an appearance for another several million years, and since it's probably safe to assume that early man was more focused on finding food and shelter than in finding something to worship, where'd they go when they died? Did they sin in the conventional sense of that word? Did God just get tired of millions of years of letting bad people into heaven, so he created the whole Jesus thing so everyone would be clear on the rules?

God: "That's IT! I've had it!"
**POOF**
Jesus: "What the hell?"
God: "Hi. You're my son. Go explain the rules to everyone. Tell you what...let them kill you and we'll see what happens."
Jesus: "You can't do that. I'm in the union."

I realize this doesn't have anything to do with aliens, but how does contemporary religion explain early man and his relationship to what organized religion considers "God" and "salvation" and all the other catch phrases?

ROTFLMAO !!!!!

Dan you're too good !

Make a play out of this  ;D

GOD'S SELF-DISCLOSURE THROUGH THE RELIGIONS AND MYTHS OF NON-CHRISTIAN CULTURES:

Here I need to build on a nice discussion I had with Alysia.  The ancient exodus of Hebrew slaves through the sea is a major catalyst for the rise of Judaism.  As a young man Moses is a real hothead and discredits his leadership aspirations in the minds of his own people.  A depressed Moses is forced to flee into exile.  But as he matures, he is ultimately ready to receive his rescue mission at the Burning Bush epiphany.  

Aghast, Moses wryly asks how he should identify God by name to his enslaved people.  In this defining moment for Judaism God declines to give a name and instead offers this phrase: "Tell them I will be whatever I will be has sent you (Exodus 3:14)."  On two other occasions when God is asked for His name, He declines, even refusing to offer this phrase (Genesis 32:29; Judges 13:18). God explains that His reluctance is motivated by that fact that He "is beyond understanding."  

The phrase should not be translated "I am that I am" (see Bernhard Anderson's discussion of the relevant Hebrew etymology in "Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed., pp. 61-63).  But the phrase can also be rendered "I am who I am," if this is taken in the same sense as "I will be whatever I will be."  

There are at least 3 reasons for God's evasiveness.
(1) God wants to be primarily known not through abstractions, but through His relationship with us and His gracious redemptive acts in our behalf.  

(2) In the ancient New East, theological reflection is very primitive in every religion.  People believe that God or the gods can  be adequately understood through a series of symbolic names.  But the true God makes it clear that it is a mistake to put Him into a narrowly circumscribed box.

(3) The phrase "I will be whatever I will be" implies that God reserves the right to communicate under different symbols and myths to other people of other cultures and religions.  Through grace (not merit), the Jewish people may be the primary recipients of His fullest revelation.  But God will not tolerate the view that He has left other religions without a divine witness.  

God's evasiveness helps explain these 3 points:
(a) God warns Israel about trying to lock Him within an excessively anthropomorphic framework and insists that all valid theological reflection (e.g. about evil) must keep in mind that His ways and thoughts are very different than our ways and thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9).

(b) The Ten Commandments begin this way: "I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery (Exodus 20:2)."  We might expect God to continue: "There is no other God besides me."  But instead God says, "You shall have no other gods before me."  Does this implicity deny monotheism?  Not at all.  "Other gods" may contain SOME divine truth mediated to other peoples through general revelation, but Israel is commanded to stick to her own revelations.

(c) The prophet Amos has been called the father of social justice.  In his day the Jewish religious establishment was oppressing the poor (widows, orphans, etc.) and defeating the spiritual purpose for which God called Israel to be a people in the first place.  So God lifts the veil of secrecy, reminds them that He has been guiding the lives of pagan peoples too, and implicitly threatens to abandon Israel in favor of these other peoples:  
 
"Are not you and the Cushites (= Ethiopians) all the same to me, children of Israel?--declares Yahweh.  Did I not bring Israel up from Egypt and the Philistines from Caphtor (= Crete), and the Arameans from Kir (Amos 9:7--NEB translation)."

This chilling divine word implies that God has been guiding these pagan peoples through their myths and primitive conceptions of the divine.  It also serves as an important counterweight to Christians who are so enamoured of Promised Land theology that they are indifferent to the legitimate claims of modern Palestinians to a homeland in Israel. Through  Amos, God reveals that He has brought many pagan peoples into Israel from elsewhere.

Your question about whether this perspective stands in tension with Christian exclusivism is a good one, a question not easily disposed of.  I commend you for it and deem it so important that I will temporarily abandon my promise to vacate this site until summer and post a rather comprehensive thread entitled "A Fresh Look at Heaven."  I hope this thread will answer your legitimate questions about Christian exclusivism and, at the same time, bring Christianity into more meaningful dialogue with Moen/Monroe claims about the structure and nature of various astral dimensions.

Don

Sorry.  "Cufesceses" is an inexplicable typo. I meant to type "Cushites." (not that it matters).  Typos are on the increase for me lately.  I recently E-mailed Roger and signed off "God" when I meant to type "Don".  I was kinda pontificating about something to him.  So it might have been witty if I'd done it deliberately.  But it was an accident and so perhaps a Freudian slip?  Yech, I guess I'd better read the new post on Ego.