I've browsed here for about a week and decided to post the reason I stumbled onto this site.

Unlike many who get here, I did not recently lose a family member.  What happened was that last Monday, I let my mind wander and felt like what it would feel to not exist in ANY capacity after I die (I know it sounds a bit oxymoronic).  I have been unable to get that thought out of my head and I've let it dominate my thoughts since then, leaving me in a consistent state of depression.
I've resigned myself to three solutions:
-Stop thinking about it (which has been really hard)
-Come to terms with the fact that this may be true, that when you die, that's it (which is really hard to do).
-Find proof of the afterlife (seemingly impossible).

I was just wondering if there was anyone else out there in the same boat as me, who has (or had at anytime) the same mindset as me.
Do you feel the techniques mentioned on this site will help at least relax me a little (I've had pretty consistent anxiety for a while)?

I've seen people here are pretty supportive... I would appreciate any help anyone can offer.

Cookies,nice to have you aboard.I can answer your question about if we live after death.I am able to go into the spirit world.A woman asked me to try to find her husband who had died of a heart attact,I did not know the man,and when I found him,he was crying.I asked him why and he said he cheated on his wife.He also told about a savings accound he had that she did not know about.2 weeks later I met his wife and asked her if her husband ever cheated on her.She told me yes,right up to the day he died.She also found the savings accound that she did not know about.Hope that answers your questions about is there life after death.Love George

Cookies,

Your fear is actually a not uncommon reason people join this forum. And you've come to a good place.

I used to have the same fear of death. It drove
me crazy. What got rid of the fear for me at first
was reading some good literature on the topic.

One place you can start is Victor Zammit's site.
http://www.victorzammit.com
He covers a wide range of proofs of the afterlife
from near-death experiences to mediums.

Bruce Moen's site specializes in the "Find out for yourself" method which is important because you can never be completely sure about what you read. The find out for yourself method may take some time. But it is definitely worth it and a lot of fun.

-mike

I wouldn't say that most people started at this message board because of recent loss. I didn't.

You situation is normal and nothing to worry about. You are having these feelings for a reason.

You have taken the first step towards KNOWLEDGE, not just belief, and for that you should take comfort in the fact that you are willing to step forward, ask for help and learn, which, not so surprisingly, most people can't or won't do.

The study of these matters is best done thru personal experience, looking for a preponderance of the evidence, and developing your intuition. As you learn more you will stay within the bounds of reality, but your understanding of reality will widen.    

Right now I will ask you to proceed with simple trust and let things unfold. Don't rush. This not a cult or religious group and there are no requirements or anything to prove. Nobody here is going to try to convert you to anything.

For a good second step, I'm asking you to take a leap of faith and imagine you really do have guides (or guardian angels if that is easier for you) and ask for their assistance. Don't worry if you feel you don't believe with a deep conviction. It doesn't matter. Either you will get help or you won't. But you will, and you will notice it at some point. But first you have to ask, and be patient and observant.

The next step I would suggest is to gather as much material for study as you can. Robert Monroe and Bruce Moen's books are a good place to start.

Like learning anything new, you will be confused for a while as you assimilate new concepts and vocabulary, and form your own constantly changing conclusions. That's ok.

Another thing I would ask you to do in another leap of faith to assist with learning is to focus on love, the most pure and unconditonal love you are capable of imagining. Don't worry if it doesn't seem pure or unconditional enough. It doesn't matter. Along with that and equally necessary, is to banish fear. Fear and love cannot coexist in the same place at the same time. That doesn't mean let your guard down; love isn't stupid or gullible. But we are taught fear from birth and in order to understand the highest form of love we need to control and get rid of our fear. Don't worry if your efforts are not good enough. Nothing about this is a test and you are not going to burn in hell if you don't do any of this correctly. The reasons I ask you to focus on love is something you will come to the full realization of as you proceed.

Another thing I would keep in mind is that life is not all about the Afterlife. If that were so you would not be here. You would have stayed there. There are other things to worry about so maintain your balance and don't get too caught up in this. Yes, it's about life and death so it's important, but so is living.

Ask your guides for help, focus on love, banish fear, and proceed with simple trust and let things unfold.

with Love,
Bob

Dear Cookies,

The tough standards exemplified by your despairing questions illustrate the heart-breaking ruthless honesty required to find the elusive truth.
It is a quest well worth pursuing, but,sadly,  not one for which that you will find fulfilment on this site.   The gullibility manifested on this site is all-too-human, but an irreparable barrier to honest inquiry.  Here you will find a reincarnation of St. Peter himself, a grandiose illusion paralleled by mass past life regressions which, in studies, have produced several Napoleons.  Here you will find stolid devotees of descredited New Age kooks like Robert Monroe and Edgar Cayce, astral explorers who have produced some occasionally impressive results and technologies that deflect censure away from their ultimately discrediting absurdities.  

So what is the way out of this depressing array of naive New Age wishful thinking?  I would suggest three mind-boggling trail-blazers that at least hold real promise: (1) David Fontana's book, "Is There an Afterlife?  A Comprehensive Survey of the Evidence": (2) Howard Storm's "My Descent into Death,"  the most impressive NDE of all time, rich with subtle insights that can be historically verified in impressive ways.  (3) William Van Dusen's "The Presence of Other Worlds," a survey of the unparalleled astral discoveries and astounding verifications of Emanuel Swedenborg, the father of spiritualism and modern astral projection.  On these and other insights I encourage private messages.

Don

Oh Donald, you're so funny. ROFLOL

And so frickin' wrong, but you'll find out someday.

St. Peter at your service Cookie. ;-)

With Love,
Mairlyn

Hi Cookies-

Sounds like you've just opened the door to spirituality.

Might I suggest a slightly different phrasing of your question?

Is it possible for you to cease totally to exist, and if so, how?

This kind of thinking requires consideration of such issues as everything youve done that has affected the world in which you live, the people with whom you interact, and the forces for chage that you have set in motion. If you carry through with the questioning and discovery that your initial question suggested, especially with a slightly wider scope, I suspect that it will take you to a new place in which the bother will cease, and you'll get something valuable back.

dave

Thank you for all your responses, including the brutally honest ones ;)

If I can, I'll keep you posted on my progress.

There may be some kookie people on this site, but so what?  There are people with experience and good intentions here.  Too many to name, although some of my favorites - you know who you are.  People who have explored and traveled and used their consciousness.

I am one of the first to say I don't trust someone else's experience or a channeled entity.  Or Cayce - Jeez everyone during his day was giving enemas, and everyone was hypothesizing in the news about Atlantis (Cayce no doubt was aware of this) - and that is what we hear from him.  Enemas and Atlantis.  Jeez.  Justin, that is NOT directed at you.

However, I am interested in consciousness, the ultimate expression of our being.  The "I am" in all of us.  In the old testament and Hebrew, when God called out to man, his answer was henaynee (in hebrew).  Here "I" am.  This is what it is about.  This is what makes us who we are.  If consciousness (awareness) were a fluke, created by a physical set of neurons in our brain, it might cease to be when the brain died.  If, however, consciousness exists on its own, but uses our bodies as vehicles of expression in this reality, then dying is like a snake shedding skin - the consciousness existed within the body - then without.  

Near death and out of body experiences are among the best verification one can get.  So are healings by intention, prayer or faith.  But nothing will satisfy your thirst for information but experience.  Intellectual understanding may come first, but it is not the same as knowing.  If George or Bob on this site has had experience with someone passed on - they know.  They don't have to wonder.

I have not had verification from the dead as yet, and I suppose that is because I have not been looking for it in particulr.  But I have seen my consciousness have an impact on the day to day world that would seem impossible to cause without having a deeper connection to everything.  I plan to post more about this.  

So read on at this site, explore for yourself, and take your time doing it.  Try on new ideas like they were clothes, and discard the ones that don't fit.
You will get where you want to be.

Matthew

Hey cookies.

Just wanted to offer my support and wishing you good luck on your new journey. It is sad to think that we may not exsist after death, and i know how depressing that can be, but maybe im just in a happy mood but if this is the case, we ain't gonna know right so better make the most of it!

However I have and many others here, in fact most of the board and had proof, experiences which has prooven otherwise, and like people have said here sadly (but not really in the long run) you have to find these out for yourselfs.

I didn't come here from a recent loss either but somehow managed to get hooked and starting walking down this road and what a long way I have relised i have come and have seen others come as well, some i can see are already so far down this path they seem like ants! we have a good mixture here and all here for everyone to help and to joke and to discuss so good luck and ask anything you want and please share your journey!

Ryan

Hello Cookies:

I echo much of what Rob Roy said.  Once you've worked with you're guidance for a while, it's hard to doubt the existence of the afterlife. Ask your higher self to set you up, and enjoy the ride. I've done so, and now have absolutely no reason to fear death, even though I used to fear it.

I sought experience as opposed to a belief system (been there, done that), and I am very happy with what I've found.

Don't let Beserk bug you. He's like a guy who has "never" tried eating cookies and milk,  commenting that it sucks to do so.

Or you could believe that he's right, and everybody else on this forum is just a confused and perhaps beguiled cult member.

Probably the best thing to do is to find out for yourself. Just give it a little time, and you'll be pleasantly surprised with what you find. But watch out for the fearmongers who try to runaway from their fears, by passing them on to others. "Oh," if only they'd humble themselves for a moment, so they could see how much they harm people.

I appreciate all responses, even Berserk's.

I haven't been able to function in the last week, I hope I can get up the motivation to start trying some techniques, for no other reason than to make myself feel better.

Recoverer,

Clairvoyance once prompted me to announce to a group of Education professors that their colleague, Elie, had just been contacted by  her dead husband Joe.   An investigator present confirmed the fulfilment of my prediction.  Elie saw a vivid apparition of Joe while she was riding in her son's car.  The apparition occurred during the first time since the funeral that the family had been able to erupt in laughter.  Joe was laughing too and said, "I'm just fine.  That's the way I like to see you all."  I have discerned such communication on various occasions and asked the loved one about it to help confirm the genuineness of the contact.  

I've publicly predicted an impending supernatural experience that turned out to be the independent materialization and dematerialization of two mothers' rings to their sons.  The two mothers had been dead for several years.  So this fulfilled prophecy profoundly inspired all who heard it.

I've experienced an audible voice warning me not to drive through a green light when my view of the intersecting street was obstructed by parked trucks.  A huge truck barrelled through the red light and would have crashed into me, if "the voice" had not warned me.  An angelic warning?

My death premonitions have always proved true.  For example, one Friday, I suddenly knew that someone would die and that his death would require me to change my summer vacation plans.  That Monday, I was about to leave my apartment when an inner voice shouted, "Sit down!  You're going to hear about the death right now!"   The split second I sat down, the phone rang and I was informed of a professor's sudden death.   The caller told me that I was the only faculty around who could teach his course off the cuff.   My prior psychic preparation inspired me to promptly change my plans and accept this assignment.  

These are just some of the many examples of contact with spiritual dimensions that I could share.  So Recoverer, don't make ignorant assumptions about people you don't know who threaten your New Age views.   I have probably had as many well-verified contacts with spiritual dimensions as anyone on this site.  On the other hand, the meaning of my paranormal experiences must be subjected to critical scrutiny, especially given the gullibility of so many New Agers.  I believe my contacts are genuine, but am always open to attempts to explain them away naturally.  Honesty requires that, since the stakes are so high.   And I'd like experience a genuine OBE to measure against my bogus OBE experiences.

Don

wrote on Dec 4^th, 2005 at 9:06pm:

I've browsed here for about a week and decided to post the reason I stumbled onto this site. Unlike many who get here, I did not recently lose a family member.  What happened was that last Monday, I let my mind wander and felt like what it would feel to not exist in ANY capacity after I die (I know it sounds a bit oxymoronic).  I have been unable to get that thought out of my head and I've let it dominate my thoughts since then, leaving me in a consistent state of depression. I've resigned myself to three solutions: -Stop thinking about it (which has been really hard) -Come to terms with the fact that this may be true, that when you die, that's it (which is really hard to do). -Find proof of the afterlife (seemingly impossible). I was just wondering if there was anyone else out there in the same boat as me, who has (or had at anytime) the same mindset as me. Do you feel the techniques mentioned on this site will help at least relax me a little (I've had pretty consistent anxiety for a while)? I've seen people here are pretty supportive... I would appreciate any help anyone can offer.

Hi cookies,.....................perhaps the most important aspect of 'being' is being itself - your own self-existence as it now is. Your existence now is its own testimony to intelligence, a living awareness or consciousness - this being-ness or 'mind' cannot end with the death of the physical body if it can be proved that the souls existence or spiritual self-hood exists independent of the physical body, even having pre-eixstence before incarnation and continuation in the after-life. From my research there is more evidence that life continues after death than that it ends at that point. 'Death' is just a transition of the spirit, the shedding of the mortal/matter-ial body. The soul in its spiritual form is released into the spirit-world there to continue its eternal progression.

When you see death as nothing but a change of residence and a 'transition' of the soul into the next dimension, also knowing that the nature of God is only Pure Unconditional Love....your fears will begin to fade as you rest in the sure foundation of divine Reality which is the Eternal Soul of the Living God(The ONE). This 'God-Presence' is the Only Life, Light, Love, Spirit that Exists....and the real 'you' is born of this LIFE as the very spirit and mind of the Eternal dwells in you and is the very reason you have existence and consciousness! Therefore your very 'being' has in it the divine potential for infinite and eternal life. Since God is Love.....there is nothing at all to fear.


Besides Victor Zammits site (awesome!) is another mega-resource - http://www.near-death.com/

Both these sites are the bomb.

At last....your own soul as it is honest and diligent to seek out truth and spiritual reality...thru research, prayer and open-ness to the LIGHT will only naturally awaken your own true self-hood as that eternal creation or part of God in your own being and this will bear witness with all other supporting proofs that you have within you the potential and seed of eternal life and a future that has no end.....for that which is infinite is just that!
Your very being is rooted, sourced, origined and upheld by divine BEING as there is no other source existing besides the ONE. Consider the wonder, majesty, beauty of your own existence as a unique creation/son of this Infinite Life who fathers/mothers you from moment to moment. As you surrender to Truth, Reality, 'God'.....there is only Love, Light, Life, Eternity, All, Abundance, Infinity.



paul

The only to be sure about that, Damla is to have personal experience or knowledge of that.  For those who do, there is no other proof or logic that they need.


Matthew

Don-

Yes, you are correct in pointing out how many people, when they are regressed into so-called past lives, come up with such characters as Napoleon or Cleopatra or Abraham Lincoln.  The reason for this, as any clinical psychologist knows, is that our ego demands that we have lived as someone famous or even infamous.  Far more rewarding to our ego to be Napoleon himself than to be Napoleon's janitor.

Of course, it's just not those folks with large egos who tend to believe they were famous folks in past lives.  It's also those with egos which have been beaten down in this life who are vulnerable to this delusion.  Someone whose self esteem is low, or whose self worth has suffered, is far more likely to see him or herself as an important historical figure than someone who is psychologically and emotionally healthy.

The bottom line is to be extremely skeptical of anyone who claims to be someone famous in a past life.  Chances are almost 100% that it's really an attempt by their ego to make themselves something they have never been in their present life.

Damla,

I actually never used the general phrase "god is love."  That being said, I don't think of it in those terms.  I believe we all have a spark or essence of divinity within us.  We all are, in a sense him looking out, and gathering experiences in conscious awareness.  

If one can encounter the sum total of the little consciousnesses out there is a totality, that would be God.  I believe that no one could comprehend such an entity, but I have heard it said that people had encounters in NDEs with white light and the lord......I just don't know.

I definitely think you are right if you are talking of a being with a long flowing beard who is responsible for every decision that is made.  There you will never find justice, or love.  But that is not my idea of him.

Peace

Matthew

If you didn't have such a cute smile on the photo you posted, I might be insulted.  No, I do think that topics such as "god is love," can only be approached through personal experience.  And, no I have not met the almighty personally.  Likewise, I don't think he/she exists as a single human-like entity.

My idea is that we all have a spark of divinity in us, and that our being/essence/soul is part of god.  I think that when we realize that we share a common unity of spirit, that there is a desire to help each other.  I don't think life in this plane of existence is fair, but I don't think that disproves the idea that love may be what ties us together and would also be what god is about.

You are trying to make judgements and sense based on societal norms of "good and evil," and that is natural for us to do.   We may see whether these judgements have merit only when we have reached the next plane of existence or have sufficient contact with it.  Some on this board claim that they do/have had this contact.  For them, they have argued on these boards, that the seemingly awful experiences on earth have a purpose and merit, and that through the suffering, these souls advance.  

Matthew

So, that is why we and others are here.  That is why people go to the Monroe institute, and meditate.  To explore and try to understand more about our true nature and perhaps love.

Doc,

Not all of us can afford to go to TMI. Some of us can't even afford the CD's. It's very frustrating.

Bob

I merely used TMI as an example.  We are all here to explore one way or another.  Knowledge of God's love can only come from exploring and experience.

One can gain knowledge from books, quiet meditation, and interactions with others.  It doesn't have to be TMI.

Matthew

Beserk:

There are plenty of people who have psychic ability, but don't have wisdom.

On the other hand, there are plenty of people who don't have psychic ability,   but do have lots of wisdom.

Anybody who has wisdom and a clear eye, could easilly see this.

Therefore, if you predicted who is going to win the World Series and Super Bowl for the next 20 years, I wouldn't be impressed.

I go by the things that you say on you're posts. They sing out loud and clear where you're coming from.

P.S. I'm not impressed with Swendenborg's alleged psychic ability. I am unimpressed with his silly notion that people have two negative spirits assigned to them. What a bunch of hooey. I can't imagine why any clear thinking person would choose to believe such a thing.

Beserk:

One other thing. Why is it that you don't seem to trust that people who choose to visit this site, have the ability to determine for themselves whether or not it is for them? You seem to give them very little credit.

Do you really believe that they need you to come here and play the role of their savior?

Recoverer,

Kindly season your penchant for bluster with a modicium of rigor.  You insinuated that I lack experience with spiritual dimensions.   I exposed your crass presumption with several personal experiences and now your feelings are bruised.   So to save face, you only make matters worse and extend your need to caricature challenging alternatives that you apparently find threatening.  

But you are wrong.  Swedenborg never claimed that we are all "assigned" two negative and two positive spirits.   He learned something far more profound: that the principle of like attracts like is not postponed till the afterlife.  Our drives, likes, and dislikes are multi-faceted and evolving.  "ES learned by direct astral experience that the identity and quality of our "outflows" from discarnate spirits vary as our moods expand and change and as they become more selfish or more loving.  With this evolution, the number and quality of connected spirits also changes.  This insight is independently supported by OBE adept Robert Bruce, a New Ager  far more gifted and insightful than Robert Monroe.

True wisdom gives investigative priority to positions supported by the best verifications.   ES repeatedly demonstrated an unmatched skill at contacting the dead and bringing back astounding verifications.  No one even comes close to him in this gift.  Does that mean that his insights are infallible?  Of course not!   And as I mentioned in the last post on my ES thread, I will soon  post my critique of ES.

But if you compare ES to a modern adept like Robert Monroe, you are shifting your focus from a spiritual giant to a New Age kook.   Monroe does not even anticipate that any rational person would be aghast at his alleged past life recall: e.g. his past life as an ancient pilot flying a machine while being forced to dodge the spears of primitive cave men; his past life with his wife Nancy in which Catholic priests supposedly order him to ritually rape her in an initiation test.   Anyone who would peddle that science-fiction swill can be dismissed as a New Age kook.  Granted that Monroe sometimes registers some impressive "hits" when his OBE abilities are tested.  But his more significant "misses" call into question the genuineness of his contacts with higher entities.    Still, I recognize that even Monroe might have something to teach me.  So I practice with his Gateway CDs, though I would not recommend them to anyone else.   Truth must seek to build a secure foundation on the best verified evidence, and in this regard, critical engagement with ES and the best of NDEs is a far better starting point than immersion in mindless New AGe orthodoxy.  

Don

wrote on Dec 6^th, 2005 at 9:58am:

i am doomed!..i am gonna live here for ages and take a look at this board once in a while and see nothing ever changes and will die asking the same questions ???  :'(  this is soooo sad.. i cant even say and believe"god is love!" i rather believe that the whole thing is like game of some sort. (i am gonna go and cry and mourn and find many other nice reasons to feel pathetic)   see you soon   :)

Hi Damla,

The statement that 'God is Love, Light, Spirit, Truth, etc.' are indeed words - these have been used from the beginning of time and written history(scripture, mans experience that could be written down) and in his own experience with God as being the essence of these very things and more. It comes down to coming to discover/know/intuit the very nature of God for ourselves in subjective experience of the all-pervading truth of divine Reality, the Absolute, the One, the All. This Truth is ever-present albiet obscured only by the barriers of mortal sense/ego. One can carry misperceptions in his own limited human, finite, mortal senses about 'God' if he/she is viewing 'God' or trying to find him in the realm of the 5 physical senses - that which is limited only to the matter-ial realm(seen thru physical eyes)....because God is more than this relative matter-ial realm...being the Invisible, Eternal, Infinite ONE who upholds, sustains the very fabric of Existence Itself, the Totality of All That Is. Since Deity is All,.......he is greater than what our mortal perception could ever fathom or imagine...and such glimpse/experience of this all-pervading Love which is the source/origin of our own being must be spiritually realized and revealed to the heart/soul of one who is open to the unfolding of Truth. Gods Being IS. It is Absolute. That God is Love....is attested to by many who have experienced this reality and such has been witnessed by those who have received the Holy Spirit of God....which is the Spirit of Truth and Love which awakens the soul to the supremacy/ultimacy of divinity. This spiritual reality of who/what God is is Self-evident for those whose eyes/hearts have been opened to It....primarily in my experience of what Christ taught and how this living Christ-presence-wisdom has touched and transformed thousands of lives since His Incarnation. - Of course other religious traditions, scriptures and the seal of human experience proves that Love is at the heart of all creation and all beings as that sacred light-presence which we know in our souls as it is shared with others - which empowers, enlightens, encourages, renews, refreshes the human spirit and inspires the virtures of holy concern, giving, sharing, helping, doing good to others, compassion, integrity and so many other endowments that can only come from the Core-Light of who/what God Is.....as this light/love is shared amongst us as the only thing holy, good, true and beautiful.

These are of course all lovely words as this soul tries to articulate them in his own fashion relative to his own perception/knowledge and experience. I can only share what comes thru at any given time and let truth be truth and allow such to be discerned by the heart/soul, as to what is true and what is false or mere fantasy. Let each discern, discover and explore for himself the Reality of Truth(God) which is the Primal Love and Original Beauty that is the One and Only Source of all goodness. This presence is here.....Now....and pervades the entirety of the Universe...worlds without end.

The Light, Love, Truth and Spirit of the ONE, the All shall be revealed in time to those who are awakened to the Source of all being and beauty.
Perception may be more or less perfect or clear of our vision of 'God' as we progress along the path of our unfoldment....but such will turn to purer knowledge as we grow in grace and Light of the One becomes more clear to our souls as to its very nature and Will.....which transcends the phenomenas and apparent 'evils' of this relative, finite existence including all in its infinite embrace. Sure there may be many 'holes' to fill as you point,......but shall not these holes be filled as one comes to understand and see the reasons, purposes, and even the mysteries of why God the Whole allows the anomolies of evil, tragedy and suffering on earth to transpire? - with surrender to the Light will not these questions be answered in their own time as one seeks after the Heart-Will of the ONE and allows His answers to come to the searching soul in the timing of divine Providence? I hold to the words of the Master who said, 'ask, seek and knock......and you will be ultimately satisfied if you are diligent/serious in your quest for knowledge, love, truth, wisdom - whatever God has for you to come into as your own divine inheritance.

Finally we see that without the revelation of Gods Love revealed thru the Christ (the universal light/logos/word/wisdom) on this planet and Love being at the heart and purpose of our very beings....this life will indeed be without the supporting helps and inspiration of grace - but you do see that Love(and it integrity) is the only thing that keeps this crazy world sane and wholesome...inspiring hope and the revelation of 'God' in the hearts of men and in all the world...sustaining what is good and worthy in our lives. Without Love....existence would be bleak, barren, hopeless. But since Love is at the Heart of Existence....because the Creator-Source is 'Love'....Love is our only salvation and the Only Way which is eternal Life, peace, harmony and perpetual joy as long as one has existence. So....it comes down to Love. You can choose to ignore, defend a different picture of God that you see with your limited vision, but ultimately the Reality of 'God' cannot be dismissed or forever obscured for what is Absolute is undeniable, irrefutable and eternally victorious.

So I'm an optimist! Love is our only sanity. (before you fall back to the egos defense mechanisms and mortal protests to all that seems unloving and cruel in the world....stop for a few moment and simply reflect on the majesty of Love as Supreme. Let God be God....in the silent sanctuary of your own heart.) - I know there are many metaphysical quirks and 'why's about this and that - all the turmoil and problems of humanity round about....but these are mans own miscreations and imperfections. The Perfection of Gods Love is untainted, pristine and eternally True.





paul

Beserk:

You didn't answer my question. Are people capable of deciding for themselves if this site has something to offer, or do they need you to save them from the alleged quackery "YOU" see here? If you avoid this question again, it says a lot about where you're coming from.

Even if Swedenborg did contact the dead, this in no way proves that he had wisdom.

In the end only a person's experience proves anything. And a lot of my experience matches up with what Moen and Monroe have found. What they say doesn't become untrue, simply because "YOU" haven't  found what they've found.

News bulletin:
"Hey everybody, Beserk hasn't found what Moen, Monroe and others have found, so they must be wrong."

No recoverer, everyone, except you, first consults me to see if their insights past muster.   Then after my critique, they  go ahead and post, but do so in fear and trembling that I may disapprove.   I forbid all posters to think for themselves, and when I die, no one will ever again glimpse the truth.   ???  Recoverer once again, your insinuation is psychotic and betrays a spiritual quest gone amuck and utterly devoid of the love you pretend.

  Hey Recoverer,

             Don often says interesting things and sometimes displays real kindness. He also often likes to bait people. We all post here for a variety of reasons. I guess variety is the spice of life...

                     Tim

I like Don's posts too.  I think they show real intelligence.  I'll debate anyone on the issues, as long as they stick to the issues.

Matthew

What's calling people a bunch of culties, and continually putting down Moen and Monroe so you can pedal your own gurus instead, got to do with intelligent/on course conversation (not to suggest that Moen and Monroe are/were gurus)?

To me doing the above is more about being disrespectfull than intelligent. If Beserk was really intelligent, he'd find a way around the psychological conditioning that prevents him from seeing what Moen and Monroe did, and he'd learn a thing or two about being respectful.

Some people might suggest that it's good to be tolerant, but how long can you entertain a person who clearly doesn't care about anybody's views but his own, and is so ARROGANT, he continually believes that he can be disrespectful over and over again. What if a guy wanted to walk into your church everyday and take a dump? Would you tolerate it?

I say not.




wrote on Dec 6^th, 2005 at 2:46pm:

I like Don's posts too.  I think they show real intelligence.  I'll debate anyone on the issues, as long as they stick to the issues. Matthew

Recoverer,  you presumed to assure cookies not to be upset by my direct posts.  What you overlooked is his assurance that he enjoys the parry and thrust of various perspectives, including my own.   We have even embarked on a friendly exchange of private messages.  I have delayed my response to him only because I'm unsure of what she might find interesting and helpful, and so, I want to meditate longer on how I should reply.  For me, it's always a delight to engage an honest seeker like him.  Your paranoia is unwarranted.  

My critiques of Moen and Monroe have been specific and argued in detail.  So you have no right to impugn my motives or my openness to their perspectives.  I'll say it again: I regularly practice with Monroe's Gateway CDs.  I even use some of Moen's methods posted online, though I have not yet bought his latest manual.  I am honestly trying to decide if I deem it worthwhile.  You on the other hand show no evidence of having explored contrary perspectives in depth and that's OK with me.  But don't impugn the motives of someone you don't know.  

I recommended that cookies read Howard Storm, "My Descent into Death" and David Fontana, "Is There an Afterlife?"   Both books threaten my current perspective in important ways.  I recommended them because they are both rich in verifications and experiences that can help one shape the afterlife  questions one wants to pursue.   Fontana's book can actually be deemed solidly New Age.   Not all New Agers are dogmatic and gullible.  But when they are, I think it is loving and appropriate to point that out too.  I do so with a clear conscience and could care less that you find that threatening.  If you object, then FINALLY engage some of my arguments head on rather than merely launch ad hominem attacks.

Don  

One other thing about Beserk.

He doesn't come here to have open conversations. He comes here with the intent of swaying people away from Moen, Monroe etc., so that they'll believe in what he believes in instead.

He actually believes that people need him to set them straight.

Beserk:

You're arguments aren't the key thing that catch my attention. It's your disrespectful approach, and attempts to convert people to your way of thinking.

People come here to visit Bruce Moen's site, not "your" site.

Considering your lack of respect and humility, I can't see much point in reading your posts.

[quote author=Berserk   If you object, then FINALLY engage some of my arguments head on rather than merely launch ad hominem attacks.

Don  [/quote]

One more thought.

It isn't necessary to study every teaching there is and make comparisons, in order to find truth.

What's essential is to find a way that will enable you to gain experiential understanding.

One thing about Don that I really like is that he thinks deeply with a critiquing ability that is second to none.  While I may not always agree with everything he says, I value his opinions for this reason.  I don’t see him as being closed minded either, just the opposite. His search for truth has to make sense to him and in that respect he’s just like me and many others on this board.  He can be outspoken, sometimes direct to the point I’d consider harsh and of course he could out talk me any ol’ day, but that doesn’t stop me from finding value and agreeing with many of the things he says.

I am always learning something new from everyone here.  That’s the fun part of this board.  When threads turn into disagreements they always get a lot of read hits… I never have figured out why people enjoy a fight.  Maybe someone could enlighten me.

Love you all even when there's disagreements.  ;D ;D ;D
Kathy

Quote:

What's calling people a bunch of culties, and continually putting down Moen and Monroe so you can pedal your own gurus instead, got to do with intelligent/on course conversation (not to suggest that Moen and Monroe are/were gurus)?   To me doing the above is more about being disrespectfull than intelligent. If Beserk was really intelligent, he'd find a way around the psychological conditioning that prevents him from seeing what Moen and Monroe did, and he'd learn a thing or two about being respectful. Some people might suggest that it's good to be tolerant, but how long can you entertain a person who clearly doesn't care about anybody's views but his own, and is so ARROGANT, he continually believes that he can be disrespectful over and over again. What if a guy wanted to walk into your church everyday and take a dump? Would you tolerate it? I say not.

I completely agree Albert and he used to really bother me. But after a few years and especially this last year, I've learned to be TOLERANT of him hoping that perhaps he'll also learn to be tolerant of what he calls cultists, new age, etc.  I don't consider myself any of those. I am spiritual.

What he's doing is mirroring. What he sees in 'us' is what he sees in himself and it scares him that he might become like us. And I believe that we also mirror him with what we see in him that we don't like about ourselves. So it's a learning experience for all of us.  :o

With Love,
Mairlyn ;-)

Kathy, I totally agree with you too.  Thanks for always being here with your calm wisdom and love. ;-)

Much Love,
Mairlyn ;-)

I use the word 'cultist" because it seems the most accurate word to describe a New Age orthodoxy bereft of any respect for the verifiability criterion of meaningfulness.   If a New Age position is unfalsifiable even in principle, then it is finally meaningless since it will be maintained regardless of how decisive the objections arrayed against it.  

No matter how absurd Monroe's claims become, the mainstays of this site seem undaunted in their loyalty to his overview.  No matter that he claims to have encountered aliens who come here for the express purpose of collecting jokes.   No matter that he claims a prior life as a pilot of a flying machine that must dodge angry cave men hurling spears.   If Monroe paused to wonder if such claims might demonstrate the illusory character of some of his OBE experiences, he would prove that he has some semblance of rationality.   But his naivite is beyond belief.   Any neutral observer exposed to such claims would gasp at his blind credulity, the most apt term for which is "cultic."  

The same can be said for those who postulate advanced civilizations on the Moon and Mars and solve the verification question by alleging government cover-ups of these "momentous" discoveries.   As if our government were not really serious about discovering extraterrestrial life after all!  Labels like "kook" are sometimes needed to get people to wake up and smell the coffee.  Only a cultic mentality spares Monroe from the critical scrutiny to which worthy fields of inquiry are subjected to advance knowledge in ways that can be replicated by a neutral observer.  

Instead of engaging my arguments head on, the cultic mainstays of this site huddle up and hurl invectives to mask their close-minded quests and reassert their mindless New Age orthodoxy.   Any sustained hint of critical reflection would have prompted a much more sensitive response from me.  

By the way, Marilyn,  I am a specialist on the life and times of Jesus.  I can set up several tests to check your claim to be Peter's reincarnation.   My tests would include Aramaic conceptions, cultural practices, and the history of Peter's life.   Let me start with something simple.  Can you fill us in on the circumstances that prompted your composition of the New Testament letters known as 1 and 2 Peter?    Why do I know that you have no ability or desire to test your claim?

If you simply lack the relevant memories, is that not already an argument against the legitimacy of your claim?   If I had vivid memories of a prior life as, say, Alexander the Great, I would be eager to measure my memories against little known facts about his life and times.   One of the reasons I recommend Howard Storm's book so highly is that his Jesus impressively passes a few such linguistic tests.  My aim here is not to embarrass you, but to point the way to methods and insights that truly advance our knowledge.

Don

Not sure exactly why I bother replying to this but anyway.

Yes Berserk it seems like a cult but these people believe in their experiences, not in the experiences of others only.

Also if you consider out of body experiences to be part of the cult, you should know that it is actually a studied topic and many other places talk of it.

So in my opinion, saying that this place is like a cult is like saying schools are cults since students take facts for granted and then make up their own opinions.

Is this really wrong ?

I also feel that I'd like to respond to Don.  Because, I feel he is correct.  I have seen postings about the Monroe institute, where they have suggested that their hemisync states have had extensive scientific study.  Then, when I went to the references, they were, anything but extensive.  Many focus levels and such were likely invented by a "consensus," and while the hemisync sounds may be as advertised, I have my doubts.

Flying an ancient craft, aliens collecting jokes, etc., are a bit goofy - and I believe may simply be over interpretations of the OOB state.  Such as our imaginations combining with the true experience.  This is not to justify the kookiness, but to say don't throw out the baby with the bath water.  

I'll be the first to say that I am not a drone of TMI or Bruce.  Anyone who has read my posts must know of that.  I also don't take for granted reincarnation, guides, or many "new age," ideas.  I am still exploring these things on my own.  

I respect the explorations that M and M (Monroe and Moen), have done - pure and simple.  They have realized for themselves that:

1.  The human mind is not as limited as society would have us believe - we are more than our bodies.

and

2.  That conscious awareness does not require a physical body.

For those two observations alone, there is much worth in at least familiarizing oneself with their systems.  Taking from them what one will.  

Tell me, Don, do you feel that you wasted your time in reading those books, or did you take away something useful from them?

Matthew

I totally agree about Don, I would much rather read one skeptical post than 100 cheerleading posts that this board seems to attract.  For one thing, it makes me think.  Even RAM extolled the virtues of left brain thinking.

I would like to add what I consider to be a big new age conundrum, namely the oft-repeated phrase "we create our own reality."

Here is my question- if it's really true that we create our own reality, how do we know we are really retrieving some lost soul?  We might instead just be doing something that reflects our own belief system.

I have yet to read any retrieval account that stands up to rigorous verification.  There are several accounts posted elsewhere on this website, and even tho they are intriguing, they most certainly fall short of verification.

The new agers seem to want it both ways.  On the one hand they all proclaim we are creating our own reality, but on the other hand steadfastly deny that their "retrievals" might be nothing more than a reality that they themselves have created.

Rondele,

I like your post.  I have never done a retrieval and I think that the imagination method, is frought with the possibility of deception.

As far as creating your own reality - this is something I very much believe in, and am still learning about.  I believe that even in the "real world," our thought creates our reality in tangible ways.  To me, the reason it seems to so many of us that we are "acted on" instead of doing the creating is that we think that way.  We say things like "I wish to succeed, but I probably won't:.....and we don't.  We mix true intention with hope and doubt.  I believe that makes things quite complex.

I like to think of retrievals as possibly being real, possibly being fantasy, but done in order to both help others and explore at the same time.  Thus, there is merit in it for some.  

Others will tell you that they have their own verification for some of their imagined retrievals.  So we continue to explore and will see.

Good post.
Matthew

I should also add, having re-read your post that you imply "creating your own reality," means that you and I live in different worlds.  We don't we share a common reality that we both agree on, governed by physical laws.

When I use that phrase, I mean that our conscious awareness may cause real effects to manifest that can be seen/verified.  Not that we each create our own little bubbles of reality separate from each other.

M

Matthew,

I agree with your post.  No, I don't regret reading Moen and Monroe.  I have had a few OBEs myself, and have only reluctantly come to the conclusion that they were just lucid dreams about OBEs.  I need to critique Moen and Monroe precisely because I want such exploration to succeed.   Even delusory failures can be instructive on how easy it is to be fooled.   Yet to some extent, it really does seem that both Moen and Monroe have explored other dimensions or at least other important states of consciousness.    

My key issue is the line between genuine astral knowledge and sheer fantasy.   Mediums have long claimed that lower astral planes can be realms of sheer illusion.   Similarly, OBE adepts on RB's site have claimed to enter the fictional worlds of novelists via OBE and to interact with the characters as if they were real.   Such claims force me to ask if all contacts with discarnate spirits are ultimately just figments of our imagination.    That is why Swedenborg's verifications are so impressive to me.    But even he sometimes seems to be the victim of either self-deception or deceptive spirits.  

I am looking for secure anchors to serve as a foundation for astral knowledge.  For example, I am impressed by independent reports of soul statues, sex piles, and apparent shredding of attacked spirit bodies.   Contrary to Recoverer's charge, I neither am nor have a guru.  I wish I was or did.  It would make my quest much more comfortable.

I do expect to become an astral player some day, whether through my Gateway CDs or through the Robert Bruce--Brian Mercer book, "Mastering Astral Projection."  But I also want to be part of a growing New Age community whose critical insights I can respect and learn from.   So blind acceptance of ludicrous astral claims upsets me because it raises the question of whether this kind of research is normally fueled by psychopathology.  

Like mediums, astral adepts contradict each other on basic questions like the reality of reincarnation and the basic "structure" of the astral territories.   As I've repeatedly said, academic conferences need to be developed which explore the tough questions neglected till now by a cultic mentality that resents competing claims from other adepts.  Robert Bruce told me that he never attends astral conferences because weak egos prevent adepts from exploring their differences and seeking methods of achieving consensus.   How sad!

Don

wrote on Dec 7^th, 2005 at 1:06am:

ok. i wont. but may i go on a little bit more with what is still on my mind? what i observe is that the people from the origin of christianity tends to say " god  is love" for some reason..this is what i have first heard when people with the origin of chritianity talk. actually love is just a human emotion and my love isnt anything like your love..and from my point of view, if god is love it has to demonstrate a higher version of love than i myself (as a small pathetic human) can. ((assuming that there is a god who can say "i am the god"..perhaps there is no such god? this could be, right?..perhaps there is a god who says "i was the god of this creation and doesnt anymore inetrested with what we are doing? (if this of course has also anything to do with love- create and dismiss)

Hi Damla,

In the New Testament it does tell of the story of God sending Jesus to us to perform a wonderful ministry and teaching work among us. He gave his life for us, his whole soul he poured into his work ...and this was a monumental demonstration of divine Love. Surely Gods Love is greater than any one persons love for Gods omnipresence is greater than any part of the Whole....for Omnipresence pervades the Whole as the ONE, the All. Christians believe Gods Love was expressed thru Jesus in a special way that brings salvation to the world and each soul that is open to His person and message. (see New Testament, the gospels). This love is shed abroad the whole world and in every heart who opens to Christ thru the Holy Spirit.


The scenario you speak of as if God the Creator made everything at the Beginning but then left creation to do its own thing sounds a little like Deism. - like God wound up a clock and then set it on a desk and and let it tick on its own. However God is not only transcendent of his creation but immanent within it as well. Also if God is omnipresent...then there is nowhere where He is not......as He fills the immensity of heaven and earth. If Love is everpresent and is only being obscured by our own limited filters, ego-blinders, finite/mortal senses...then evidently the process of us awakening/opening to this Love takes an act of grace and our own cooperation with Truth to allow the revelation of God/Love to come into view and be realized.

If God is Love and is Creator...then all that he truly created out of His pure Mind and Heart is born of Love and forever sustained by Love.


Could it be that any belief that God has dismissed us is only a misperception entertained by our own seperated ego and is not 'true'.....the truth really being that we are pure, perfect creations of God (in our innermost core and spiritual being-ness) and that Love is the Only True Reality existing. Perhaps we have forgotten or do not know who/what we are as creations/sons of God(Love)...and therefore our perceptions are imperfect by being dominated by our little egos and not receptive to the Spirit or divinity of God within us. If this is the case......then let us be open to allow God to reveal His reality/presence to us.

If one is not interested in 'God' (divine Truth/Reality/Love/Light/Spirit/Wisdom/Enlightenment)....then the issue cannot be forced....but Truth in its glory and ultimacy MUST eventually be revealed in its fullness because Truth is what is Actual and Absolute. - why wait and continue to doubt Love when one can enter into Loves domain NOW by surender to divine grace.




paul

Ah!  We create our own reality...

What a subject!

I have looked around all my life for answers. During that time I've accumulated a lot of information, some good, some not worthy.

Accepted some for some years and learned it was wrong...but that's all in the learning process.

Eckankar, Rosicrucians, TM, different meditations, Cayce, Monroe, Moen and many, many others. Then I found Jane Roberts' books and Seth.

To my knowledge Seth was the first one to openly and fully explain this...we create our own reality.

All my previous searches finaly came together. Some astral travellers' experiences, Monroe, Moen etc. started to give the whole picture and corroborate the information from Seth.  Different sources, using their own vocabulary saying, basicely the same thing. But Seth was taking this way, way further.

I recently saw the movie "What the Bleep do we Know?". I was amazed to hear quantic scientists and others talking about things Seth had said about 30 years ago.  Electrons being in two places at the same time, that they blink in and out all the time etc.

So now it's not only Seth and others. Even scientists are noticing these things.

After Seth/Jane Roberts, many others started to say they were "channelling" also.  Now this is where I am of the opinion that we should be VERY careful in who we trust and pay!

I have posted a thread on Princeton's Pear laboratory here, in which random number generators were found to deviate from expected values, simply by volunteers trying to make the numbers change.

There is clear medical evidence that prayer groups may help some people get better.

In western medicine, it is common knowledge that the placebo effect will make about 25% of people taking a sham sugar pill better for whatever ails them in almost any parameter studied.

What do these things have in common?  Our conscious aware mind creating measurable phenomenon in the physical world.  Sure as Brenden mentioned we can't wish to fly like superman or win the lottery and get our wishes.  There are certain "rules" and "laws."

However, I am pursuing this concept of conscious intention and directing it in many directions.  

I agree about channeled entities.

Matthew

Beserk, DocM and Rondelle: you can't say that what some of us have experienced isn't true, simply because you haven't opened up and experienced the same thing.

You might think that Beserk is really rational, but he typifies what happens when a person gets lost in his or her rational processes. If you can't see this, then you must be lost.

I'd take anyone of my experiences over all of your intellectual rationalizations combined.

Recoverer,

I have always advocated personal experience as the only way to go - within reason.  If you are defending channelers, I would say you have nothing to defend.  I am not attacking any one person/channeler, but a healthy dose of skepticism will not prevent anyone from gaining their own experience or exploring.

M

wrote on Dec 6^th, 2005 at 9:46pm:

I should also add, having re-read your post that you imply "creating your own reality," means that you and I live in different worlds.  We don't we share a common reality that we both agree on, governed by physical laws. When I use that phrase, I mean that our conscious awareness may cause real effects to manifest that can be seen/verified.  Not that we each create our own little bubbles of reality separate from each other. M

Evidently there is only One primal Reality or Existence which is rooted in the Being of God, the Matrix if you will where all sentience, consciousness, awareness, intelligence, potentiality exists. It would appear that there is some truth to the phrase 'we create our own reality' but this is only true as far as our own personal power of creation goes or are allowed to extend within the parameters of divine Providence (again there are certain constraints/limitations established by already settled prinicples or laws of existence which inhere in the greater Body of Reality - the Being of God.)

We can believe that fantasy is 'reality' and certain parts of our psyche will believe this, but all our faith in a fantasy can never be true 'reality' but only to our own 'misperception'. - therefore such a fantasy believed as being 'true' is egoic and really 'unreal' compared to the underlying reality which is divine and eternally being. We can create or allow certain conditions to exist or come into being working with laws of divine reality or allowance...but if they are only in the realm of fantasy and 'unreal' our believing them to be 'real' is of no avail...and sooner or later the charade must be dismissed....as being our own miscreation. This View allows then certain liberties in which we can create false creations with our ego or create true creations with the Holy Spirit or that pure creative spirit which is of God within us. The ego's realm is more or less illusionary while the Spirit of God in us only inspires us with true creations born of Light.

So its evident as you note that there are parameters to our ability to 'create' within the Field of potentiality that already exists...but even then....we recognize that there might exist that which is 'unreal' and what is 'real'.....so our best sentiments and aspirations will be to abide in the laws that foster only the truest creations aligned with divine Will or 'God'(Love) for these creations are real, eternal, ultimately satisfying, fruitful, bounteous. The egoic creations which are more or less born from misperceptions and fantasy will never be able to attain their imaginations...for such can never be transformed into 'reality' in the divine sense as 'God' recognizes reality. So these 'personal creations of the ego' which may be perceived as 'reality' are the egos own creation and while they appear to exist as real 'to the ego'...they do not in fact exist in Truth at all! But yes,....the mind has the potential to 'create' if you will.....only within the field of its own powers.

I've been reading ACIM(A Course in Miracles) lately...so my theosophy will no doubt be flavoured thereby  ;)  - so some of the aspects/principles above reflect an ACIM perspective.




paul

Speaking just for myself and not Beserk (sic), I never said the experiences that are reported here are not true.

All I am saying is that I have yet to see solid verifications of the experiences.  This is not an "intellectual rationalization".  Far from it.  

In fact, I'd say that anyone who accepts whatever is posted on this website without critical thinking is the one who is rationalizing.  

A cooperative effort to set up some rigorous standards to help ensure that the experiences are in fact genuine would be a far more productive enterprise.

Rondele:

I agree that critical thinking plays a role. But how far can you go with it if you don't also have experience? I can't say for certain whether everything Bruce Moen says is true. But I've found, through experience that much of what he says is true.

The fact that Beserk is so determined to put Moen and others down, shows that he hasn't experienced much of what they experienced. For if he had, he wouldn't be so quick to judge.

You can't determine whether something is true, simply by applying logic in the manner he applies it. Especially not if your logic is based on non-experiential and non-intuitive understanding.

Anybody who decides to follow a person such as Beserk, is just going to limit his or her self with the type of psychological conditioning he limits himself with.

If a person truly wants to find out what's true, he or she should forget about reading a bunch of books and coming up with a supposedly all encompasing theory, and instead look within and find out through experience.

It seems to me this is what people like Bruce Moen and Robert Monroe have done. Chances are that they haven't read half of what Beserk has read. But one moment of experience speaks volumes.

What's more trustworthy. A person's own experience, or Beserk's intellect?

I know that Beserk claims to have experience. If he actually did have substantial experience that he paid attention to, he wouldn't take the intellect based positions he takes.
 


wrote on Dec 7^th, 2005 at 11:34am:

Speaking just for myself and not Beserk (sic), I never said the experiences that are reported here are not true. All I am saying is that I have yet to see solid verifications of the experiences.  This is not an "intellectual rationalization".  Far from it.   In fact, I'd say that anyone who accepts whatever is posted on this website without critical thinking is the one who is rationalizing.   A cooperative effort to set up some rigorous standards to help ensure that the experiences are in fact genuine would be a far more productive enterprise.

I would like all who don't have experience to sit down for 20 minutes without any interruptions and have yourself an experience.
I'm sure we are all aware of experiments to undertake along these lines. tons of methods for inner exploration purposes including obe, or just meditation can blow your mind. its so easy to get off topic here. why are not more people exploring for themselves what it's like after you're dead?
try this: sit around for a solid 20 minutes just thinking "what does it feel like to be dead?" see if you don't blow your own mind, have a dream, hear a voice, or whatever...what you concentrate on you pull into you those experiences where you get your knowings because you can. all it takes is concentration. forget channellers...forget intellect and arguments..none of that matters. take a whole month if you want, to think about what it's like to be dead. where would you go, what would you do, who would you talk to? what would u look like? would u be happy? sad?
if you get nothing after a month from concentrating on this subject, then give up and conclude we must be programmed robots after all, and there is no hope.then come back here and ask others to prove it to you, that there is hope. of course they won't prove nothing to you. but at least you'll be able to imagine yourself quite popular for awhile while you do all the intellectual diaherrea. people are attracted to negative energy which says it has the answer. just don't be fooled.
u can never go wrong if you listen to your heart.

Matthew,

I'm convinced that the elusive line between supernatural intervention and the latent potential of the mind should be a top priority for academic research.  Let me give you 4 examples.

(1) When I was in my 20s, I would sometimes seek a "sign" of impending romance by trying to draw 4 consecutive hearts out of a shuffled deck.  This odd method actually seemed to work in the beginning!   (2) I also found that an old method used by St. Francis also initially worked for me--bibliomancy.   I would meditate on a question and then randomly open a Bible and react to the first verse as if it were divine guidance.   For example, I would blindly place my finger on a verse that promised intense romance and then experience an all-electric encounter not long after.

After a while, I became skeptical that these methods truly were effective.  So I practiced countless repetitions.   To my dismay, I found I could quite consistently draw 4 consecutive hearts from a shuffled deck.  But the "sign" that this method was supposed to prefigure no longer occurred.  Similarly, I could instantly place my finger at random on a Bible verse and find one that mirrored my exact thought (e.g. a grain).  I even demonstrated these odd abilities publicly--to my dismay as well the audience.  

Once a gorgeous female friend at Harvard used bibliomancy to determine whether she should divorce her hopelessly unfaithful husband.   In her mind it worked.  The verse she touched prohibited divorce.   I smiled and insisted, "Give me that Bible!"  I then instantly "fingered" a verse that encouraged her divorce.  She was stunned.  She smiled and asked, "Don, are you saying your divine guidance trumps mine?"  I replied, "No, Linda, I'm saying that I can do this at will and it means nothing in terms of divine guidance.   Follow instead your own heart and rational judgment in your decision about divorce."  

I know missionaries who felt called to Kenya because of bibliomancy.  Their finger fell on a biblical reference to "the Lion of Judah," a symbol of Kenya.  A real trap!  The big issue for me is the question of how these amusing psychic talents might be transformed into something truly useful for people.  

(3) When I conduct prayer meetings, I try to create a state of group consciousness that both maximizes the placebo effect and satisifies the biblical criteria for generating healing faith.  Occasionally, the results seem clearly supernatural.  But more often, I suspect, I've simply helped mobilize the sick person's immune system in ways that eliminate painful symptoms without eradicating the illness.

Even that can be a blessing.    But it leaves me frustrated.  I want to learn more about how to be a channel for complete divine healing!  The Bible hints that a vital partnership exists between the physician's craft and faith healing, but does not make it clear exactly how this works and can be enhanced (so Eccleasiasticus).  

(4) The most interesting case of possible confusion between psychic talent and genuine contact with spiritual dimensions is the Gordon Davis case in the 1920s.   Dr. Sam Soal visited a famous British medium, Blanche Cooper, in the hope of contacting his recently deceased brother.  Instead, Cooper channeled an unexpected drop-in communicator, Gordon Davis.  Davis was a casual high school friend of Sam's.  Sam had been told that Davis was killed in action in France during WW1.   Davis seemingly proved his identity by describing his house in detail, by using characteristic jargon (e.g. "old chap" and "confab"), and by recounting shared schoolboy experiences.  Davis lamented, "I nnly care about my wife now--and my kiddie!"  

A few months later, Soal discovered that Davis had not died after all and knew nothing about the seance.  Why is channeling not discredited in this way more often?  Well, ask yourself how often you are mistakenly told that an old friend has been killed.  it seems that the medium was somehow able to exploit Soal's mistaken belief in Davis's death to recreate Davis's persona via ESP.   If that can be done, how can any verifications through channeling be accepted as genuine?  

On the other hand, a few channeling cases do seem convincing to me.  Despite this, I have no answer for the Gordon Davis case and get angry when New Agers summarily dismiss it simply because it challenges their rigid belief system.  
The Gordon Davis case also poses a challenge to verifications allegedly gained through astral exploration.  I admit I prefer to embrace Swedenborg's verified contacts with the dead as genuine.  But I must also recognize my need to believe in Swedenborg rather than in the negative implications of the Gordon Davis case.  More and better research is needed on this difficult question.

Don

 

DocM:

I'm confused about your comment regarding defending channelers. I didn't say anything about them, and know very little about them.

I've read a little Seth, but determined that it isn't my path to get into his teachings.




wrote on Dec 7^th, 2005 at 11:27am:

Recoverer, I have always advocated personal experience as the only way to go - within reason.  If you are defending channelers, I would say you have nothing to defend.  I am not attacking any one person/channeler, but a healthy dose of skepticism will not prevent anyone from gaining their own experience or exploring. M

Don-

Intellectual diarrhea?  Gee if that's what it is, bring it on!  So much better than the hoo-haa of new age babble that promises much but delivers next to nothing.

R

Thanks Rondele, but New Agers really know how to get to me.  I take great pride in my descent from a long line of pillaging Viking warriors.  "Berserk" preserves this implication quite nicely.  By referring to me as "Beserk", they make me feel intellectually emasculated. ::)

Don

Hehe Rondelle,

but some cases are quite astonishing.

Allison Dubois is one of those that really inspire me. I heard about her a few months ago and I'll probably buy her book to learn more about her life.

Also I'm quite... uhm... ashamed to say I heard voices lately. actually twice. Once was this week end in the morning. A voice said "you can try it now" referring to out of body practicing and yesterday morning a voice said "you're about to get a cold".

I didn't thought of these things... wierd stuff but ... anyway for now I'm just making sure that "cold" doesn't get out of hand lol

...

Yup I sound like a new ager after re reading that but anyway I can look like that here  I guess ;D

Raphael, try sitting next to someone you don't know at a bar and suddenly ask with a concerned expression on your face, "Does the voice in my head bother you?"   ???

Seriously, that's interesting--kinda like my hypnagogic voices as I wake up in the morning.  Have you ever tried asking, "WHO ARE YOU?"   :'(

Don

P.S. What's your reaction to the Gordon Davis case I described above?

I listen to my Rice Krispies. They tell me everything I need to know each morning.  ;)

Bob

Quickly: How many of you think I'm joking? Mu ha ha ha!

ROFLMAO

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v330/mairlynmaitreya/frogs003.gif

Mmmmn, rice krispies....
Bob, that's what I call spiritual and intellectual nourishment.

It seems to me that there are a lot of "worriers" and "warriers" among us....I like Alysia's idea. Sit for 20 minutes and see what happens.

No attempt at "partnered exploration" or anything planned.  It would be interesting if all of us, every member of this board did that for the same time one day and just came back and reported exactly what happened for them in their own minds and hearts.

Might be an interesting thread.

blink

Very interesting discussion. The clashing of reason versus faith.

I'm more of the opinion that you should start of by trusting YOURSELF. This is my first criteria.

You can then read anything, listen to anyone...but discriminate.  Trust yourself. Why ?

Because no one possesses the ULTIMATE TRUTH...NO ONE!

Being right OR wrong isn't the issue. IT IS TO LEARN!  So weither you took the "right" decision or the "bad" one...you will learn from it.

But we should always discriminate.  You wouldn't buy a house without inspecting it, or buy a car. Why should I trust someone who for money is going to tell me about myself ????

I resonate with Seth, not because of Seth per se. But many other sources corroborate what he said. And even then I will discriminate, accepting certain concept when I can validate them. Watch the movie "What the Bleep do we Know".

There are many exercices that Seth gave. So why not try them and find out for yourselves. Direct personal experience...Yep!

There is no such thing as a "path", there's only your own consciousness, your own experience, your own reality.  Play with it, it's all a game!
LOL

Games are for fun and play.  So lots of humour.

All I can say is that this year has been the most wonderful year in my life, because I did open up to experience and my guidance.

Reading a bunch of books and coming up with theories will get you no where, when it comes to truly discovering what wonders await us.

It is really sad that people who out of fear limit themselves, try to limit others.

Recoverer,

I guess I misread you when you said "I say that what some of you say is untrue."  I thought you meant the channelers.  Actually, in none of my posts did I say any single personal experience is untrue.  I wouldn't say that.

What Don and I and others have said is that we should look for evidence, keep an open mind and a healthy dose of scepticism.  

Personal experience is where its at - I agree.  Only, everyone's experiences can't be right.  This politically correct stuff about - there is your truth and my truth and we should realize that we are all one so we have our own truths, rings hollow to me.

If someone says they were Oscar Wilde in a past life, or claims they have proof of the fate of our souls, they should be able to back it up with verifiable evidence.  Otherwise the sham flim flam artists get mixed in with real adepts who may have something to offer.

Peace,

Matthew

DocM:

Just because I rely on experience, this doesn't mean that I don't allow myself to be sceptical at times. In fact, it is because of my sceptical nature that I decided to stop relying on what others have to say, and instead figure things out through my own experience.

The thing is, I've been a spiritual searcher for a long time, and don't want to be taken in like I was before.

It is definitely possible to have experiences that lead you to certain conclusions. This is because when you seek experience, you open yourself to intuitive knowledge. Intuitive knowledge isn't the result of using thought to create an opinion. Intuitive knowledge is a direct cognition of what actually is true. I've had understandings that I couldn't possibly come up with by putting an assortment of thoughts together.

On the other hand, there are lots of people who have used thought in a supposedly critical way, yet they don't agree with each other when it comes to what's true. Each person will say, "I'm certain that MY viewpoint is correct, because I've done my best to be honest about it, and all the pieces fit together."

Real knowledge comes when instead of looking for ways to build up one's thought creating machine, one looks for ways to gain some freedom from it, so one can open up and see how things really are.

Recoverer,

I agree with all you said.  The only reason for the intellectual discusisons and framework is to know tht we are talking about the same thing.  

I read what someone here wrote about the sights and feelings of Focus 27 and other focus levels.  Totally different than the experience has been described.  Was that person in the same state of consciousness even though he/she saw and experienced it vastly differently?

This is why experience is what we all seek, but in a reproducible framework that we can try to talk about and agree on.  

Matthew

wrote on Dec 8^th, 2005 at 12:35pm:

DocM: Just because I rely on experience, this doesn't mean that I don't allow myself to be sceptical at times. In fact, it is because of my sceptical nature that I decided to stop relying on what others have to say, and instead figure things out through my own experience. The thing is, I've been a spiritual searcher for a long time, and don't want to be taken in like I was before. It is definitely possible to have experiences that lead you to certain conclusions. This is because when you seek experience, you open yourself to intuitive knowledge. Intuitive knowledge isn't the result of using thought to create an opinion. Intuitive knowledge is a direct cognition of what actually is true. I've had understandings that I couldn't possibly come up with by putting an assortment of thoughts together. On the other hand, there are lots of people who have used thought in a supposedly critical way, yet they don't agree with each other when it comes to what's true. Each person will say, "I'm certain that MY viewpoint is correct, because I've done my best to be honest about it, and all the pieces fit together." Real knowledge comes when instead of looking for ways to build up one's thought creating machine, one looks for ways to gain some freedom from it, so one can open up and see how things really are.

To rely on your own experience is good.

As for being a searcher for so long...I know, I've been there. Its funny but I started to find the answers when I started to trust myself. It's like placing an INTENT. Once its there, the answer will come, just be aware.

Real knowledge doesn't exist... we become AWARE with a KNOWING.  You are the only one who can acheive this, no one else can do it for you.

Your life will evolve as your INTENT and BELIEFS.  The information will come to you and YOU will know it, because it will resonate in you.

Awareness isn't stagnant, it is action. Always evolving, always expanding.

No need to worry... its a game!  Just play, have fun.

Isn't it neat?

Quote:

To rely on your own experience is good. As for being a searcher for so long...I know, I've been there. Its funny but I started to find the answers when I started to trust myself. It's like placing an INTENT. Once its there, the answer will come, just be aware. Real knowledge doesn't exist... we become AWARE with a KNOWING.  You are the only one who can acheive this, no one else can do it for you. Your life will evolve as your INTENT and BELIEFS.  The information will come to you and YOU will know it, because it will resonate in you. Awareness isn't stagnant, it is action. Always evolving, always expanding. No need to worry... its a game!  Just play, have fun. Isn't it neat?

Exactly.  ;D  And yes, it's very neat.

With Love, Mairlyn ;-)

DocM:

I don't know the answer to the specific situation indicated.

I'm not currently involved with trying to map out the different realms. Rather, I'm trying to get over the limitations within my mind, and to become more in touch with my higher self and God.

I don't feel like I need to reconcile everybody else's experiences in order to do so. Occasionally I'll pick up on something by considering the experience of others. But the most important thing for me to do is to look within, and get rid of the thought patterns that get in my way of my seeing what is already the case. I've found that the more I do so, the more expansive, clear, and tuned in my experience becomes.

Perhaps after I finish more of my inner journey, I'll take a more comprehensive look at what other people find.


wrote on Dec 8^th, 2005 at 12:55pm:

Recoverer, I agree with all you said.  The only reason for the intellectual discusisons and framework is to know tht we are talking about the same thing.   I read what someone here wrote about the sights and feelings of Focus 27 and other focus levels.  Totally different than the experience has been described.  Was that person in the same state of consciousness even though he/she saw and experienced it vastly differently? This is why experience is what we all seek, but in a reproducible framework that we can try to talk about and agree on.   Matthew

Gerald:

Ditto what Marilyn said. Especially the "isn't it neat" part.  :)  

Good luck in your search, Recoverer.  I am on the same search, as are many here.  We may get to the same place eventually.


Doc M

Thank you Doc, and good luck to you.

I believe that we will get to the same place eventually.  Even if it takes a lot of time that's okay, because we'll still have lots of time on our hands after we do so.


wrote on Dec 8^th, 2005 at 2:07pm:

Good luck in your search, Recoverer.  I am on the same search, as are many here.  We may get to the same place eventually. Doc M

Matthew and I may disagree on certain esoteric insights.  But the orientation of his quest is clearly honest and well suited to pursuing the truth.   I do not dispute Recoverer's stress on personal experience.   We all need to transcend 2nd-hand spirituality.   But personal experience of the astral planes has yielded so many contradictory claims.  
Reason is essential to sort out the line between self-delusion and genuine insight.   Reason is also necessary to conceive future experiments that might solve some of the key impasses.  

As some of you know, I object to Seth because his reincarnational claims can be discredited where they can be historically  examined.   ACIM is more difficult to assess.   The ACIM course has been very helpful in some ways to those who have taken it.   But I have satisfied myself that its source is not who he claims to be--Jesus.   Given that deception, I'm suspicious of the rest of "His" metaphysical claims, especially its claims about our illusion of evil.   Like Seth, ACIM fails tests of historical verification.   By contrast, Howard Storm's NDE Jesus passes such tests in very subtle and impressive ways.   Critics might imagine that I simply find Storm more ideologically compatible.  In fact, Storm disturbs me too, especially his revelation that, though the doctrine of reincarnation is false, some souls DO nevertheless reincarnate on this earth.   But I am open to this  claim from Storm precisely because of the credibility established by verifications.  

I want to reprint my earlier post in the hope of gaining a considered response, especially to the Gordon Davis case summarized below.  I'm convinced that the elusive line between supernatural intervention and the latent potential of the mind should be a top priority for academic research.  Let me give 4 examples.

(1) When I was in my 20s, I would sometimes seek a "sign" of impending romance by trying to draw 4 consecutive hearts out of a shuffled deck.  This odd method actually seemed to work in the beginning!   (2) I also found that an old method used by St. Francis also initially worked for me--bibliomancy.   I would meditate on a question and then randomly open a Bible and react to the first verse as if it were divine guidance.   For example, I would blindly place my finger on a verse that promised intense romance and then experience an all-electric encounter not long after.

After a while, I became skeptical that these methods truly were effective.  So I practiced countless repetitions.   To my dismay, I found I could quite consistently draw 4 consecutive hearts from a shuffled deck.  But the "sign" that this method was supposed to prefigure no longer occurred.  Similarly, I could instantly place my finger at random on a Bible verse and find one that mirrored my exact thought (e.g. a grain).  I even demonstrated these odd abilities publicly--to my dismay as well the audience.  

Once a gorgeous female friend at Harvard used bibliomancy to determine whether she should divorce her hopelessly unfaithful husband.   In her mind it worked.  The verse she touched prohibited divorce.   I smiled and insisted, "Give me that Bible!"  I then instantly "fingered" a verse that encouraged her divorce.  She was stunned.  She smiled and asked, "Don, are you saying your divine guidance trumps mine?"  I replied, "No, Linda, I'm saying that I can do this at will and it means nothing in terms of divine guidance.   Follow instead your own heart and rational judgment in your decision about divorce."  

I know missionaries who felt called to Kenya because of bibliomancy.  Their finger fell on a biblical reference to "the Lion of Judah," a symbol of Kenya.  A real trap!  The big issue for me is the question of how these amusing psychic talents might be transformed into something truly useful for people.  

(3) When I conduct prayer meetings, I try to create a state of group consciousness that both maximizes the placebo effect and satisifies the biblical criteria for generating healing faith.  Occasionally, the results seem clearly supernatural.  But more often, I suspect, I've simply helped mobilize the sick person's immune system in ways that eliminate painful symptoms without eradicating the illness.

Even that can be a blessing.    But it leaves me frustrated.  I want to learn more about how to be a channel for complete divine healing!  The Bible hints that a vital partnership exists between the physician's craft and faith healing, but does not make it clear exactly how this works and can be enhanced (so Eccleasiasticus).  

(4) The most interesting case of possible confusion between psychic talent and genuine contact with spiritual dimensions is the Gordon Davis case in the 1920s.   Dr. Sam Soal visited a famous British medium, Blanche Cooper, in the hope of contacting his recently deceased brother.  Instead, Cooper channeled an unexpected drop-in communicator, Gordon Davis.  Davis was a casual high school friend of Sam's.  Sam had been told that Davis was killed in action in France during WW1.   Davis seemingly proved his identity by describing his house in detail, by using characteristic jargon (e.g. "old chap" and "confab"), and by recounting shared schoolboy experiences.  Davis lamented, "I nnly care about my wife now--and my kiddie!"  

A few months later, Soal discovered that Davis had not died after all and knew nothing about the seance.  Why is channeling not discredited in this way more often?  Well, ask yourself how often you are mistakenly told that an old friend has been killed.  it seems that the medium was somehow able to exploit Soal's mistaken belief in Davis's death to recreate Davis's persona via ESP.   If that can be done, how can any verifications through channeling be accepted as genuine?  

On the other hand, a few channeling cases do seem convincing to me.  Despite this, I have no answer for the Gordon Davis case and take exception when New Agers summarily dismiss it simply because it challenges their rigid belief system.  The Gordon Davis case also poses a challenge to verifications allegedly gained through astral exploration.  I admit I prefer to embrace Swedenborg's verified contacts with the dead as genuine.  But I must also recognize my need to believe in Swedenborg rather than in the negative implications of the Gordon Davis case.  More and better research is needed on this difficult question.

Don

Don,

I think your post was very insightful.  How about I play devil's advocate here?  Let's say the psychic saw this guy's friend, spoke like him, said he missed his wife and daughter - but the gentleman was not dead.  Might not a psychic connect through the great subconscious to this other person, and simply be misinterpreting the fact that he had crossed over?  Remote viewers do this all the time, supposedly "seeing" out of their subject's eyes.  

This is the problem that I have with many things such as guides and past lives.  I think, it is possible to meet with people "out there," and believe either that you were them in another life, or that something else is going on.

Of course, your psychic could have dragged up a PI and been a complete fake who had been exposed by this slip up.  Just something to ponder...


Matthew

Beserk:

Since you agreed with me about something, I'll agree with you about something. People shouldn't just assume that a channeled source is genuine.

Regarding near death experiences, I find the below NDE's more inspiring than Howard Storm's NDE. My first impression when I read him is that he's a Christian fundamentalist who is trying to refute what other NDE experiencers have experienced.

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation03.html

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/reincarnation04.html

I also like this experience from another site. It sounds like Richard contacted his soul group/disc.

http://www.nderf.org/richard_l's_nde.html

Recoverer,

No, Storm is far from a Christian fundamentalist.   But that only becomes obvious from the greatly expanded version of his NDE in his book, "My Descent into Death."   For example, Jesus tells him that the best religion is the one that draws you closest to God.  He receives much teaching about intelligent life on other planets and in other dimensions.   He is told that reincarnation on our earth is infrequent, but commonplace if you include a fresh life on other planets or in other dimensions.
Sometime, I should create a new thread just on Storm's book, so readers can understand why I consider it by far the best book of its kind.

Don

 The thing is Don...

Nobody really cares about anyone elses beliefs, not one drop though some try to appear openminded....

 We are so much more close minded than we realize, ALL of US...

 Sometimes i wonder if its even worth sharing, but in the end, it seems the sharing is mostly for ourselves... Self therapy ;D...

 We resonate with what we resonate with, and damn logic all to Hell...

Logic has no place amongst humans who have imagined the most illogical realities for themselves...

If we don't pull ourselves together a bit...and actually start waking up more collectively...then this Golden Age that so many major belief systems see as a potential...just won't happen...

And then this race of humans..will eventually be left by the various helpful E.T.'s and will turn into half apes again, and our Souls will move onto the "next" planet, to try again...

 Here's a good question; how many planets/dimensions does it take for a stubborn Soul to go through before it actually wakes up and smells the reality Coffee?

 Guess it depends on the Soul, but Earth seems to have a lot of very stubborn and willful ones...its a pretty high percentage..compared to a lot of places....  I've been to some of these other places...now there are so logical but deeply empathic Souls...

 Yet i'm still optimistic...i think there will have to be some very big "wake up calls" from mother Nature, and our own soon to be crashing systems of gov. and economy. etc.   But i'm fairly optimistic that with these extreme changes...we will roll with them and change...well...extremely...

Quote:

To rely on your own experience is good. As for being a searcher for so long...I know, I've been there. Its funny but I started to find the answers when I started to trust myself. It's like placing an INTENT. Once its there, the answer will come, just be aware. Real knowledge doesn't exist... we become AWARE with a KNOWING.  You are the only one who can acheive this, no one else can do it for you. Your life will evolve as your INTENT and BELIEFS.  The information will come to you and YOU will know it, because it will resonate in you. Awareness isn't stagnant, it is action. Always evolving, always expanding. No need to worry... its a game!  Just play, have fun. Isn't it neat?

Huh? to..Gerald, What are you going on about?
Im trying to figure it out..., i know you said you like seth ...and i have read some elias too...actually i have read them both and the same stuff you are talking about is all within their sytem of information and 'catch phrases'...
but lets be honest,basically its a fraud, mind tricks, and suggestions as a way to make money and prey on the powerless...  You even sound like a watered down elias disciple, if you'll excuse my saying so, but afterall, it is a game.
But what you are saying is like holding.... no ...substance?  you seem to be throwing out affirmations of somesort and calling that awareness?
"its about action", "its about having fun", or "a game" awareness, knowing , trust,....how naive, you have been brainwashed by someone else, they tell you the way it is and you believe them.

wrote on Dec 9^th, 2005 at 2:05am:

Huh? to..Gerald, What are you going on about? Im trying to figure it out..., i know you said you like seth ...and i have read some elias too...actually i have read them both and the same stuff you are talking about is all within their sytem of information and 'catch phrases'... but lets be honest,basically its a fraud, mind tricks, and suggestions as a way to make money and prey on the powerless...  You even sound like a watered down elias disciple, if you'll excuse my saying so, but afterall, it is a game. But what you are saying is like holding.... no ...substance?  you seem to be throwing out affirmations of somesort and calling that awareness? "its about action", "its about having fun", or "a game" awareness, knowing , trust,....how naive, you have been brainwashed by someone else, they tell you the way it is and you believe them.

I've been around a lot, and in a lot of places. Read, studied, tried many things. What I stick to now is based on my own AWARENESS, no one elses. TRUST

In reading the posts here, all opinions are right. I'm not arguing with anyone. It's all about defending one's BELIEFS. You are doing exactly that, defending your own truth and beliefs in responding to my post. And that's fine.

Who am I to say you are wrong?  

I have read, and still read Seth. Read a lot of transcripts of Elias, Monroe's books, Bruce's books, Cayce's etc...etc...

Real knowledge doesn't exist per se. Because what is real to me today will change tomorrow. What you believe today will be transformed tomorrow. AWARENESS is personal. You are aware of yourself, your beliefs. As I am.

how naive, you have been brainwashed by someone else, they tell you the way it is and you believe them.

Are you aware that you are doing exactly the same thing? All that you believe, you have experienced, make up what you are today, and transpire in your opinion.

Beliefs against beliefs! No one is wrong here.

I have been there. The difference NOW is that I only accept what "resonate" with me. And what resonate with me today may change tomorrow. This is what I mean by action.

All of this is determine by OUR intent. The acceptance depends on our inner knowing.

So your phrase (they tell you the way it is and you believe them.)  should be :  they tell you the way it is and I DECIDE WHAT I ACCEPT.

If you take the time to read my few posts here, you will find that I am very suspicious of all the channels around, for the same reasons that you mentionned, and that includes Elias.

When we argue, we are only defending our own beliefs.

Just a quick morsel of food for thought for any out there who feel that there is too much discussion, and that all one needs is one's own experiences - not analysis or logic.

I was just thinking this morning; many accept what Bruce calls the "hollow heavens," as being a place some go after death because they believe as they were raised.  These heavens are "hollow," because they have self imposed restrictions on awareness.  However, if you take your average christian in the christian hollow heaven, he/she would say: it is my personal experience, my personal connection with God that has led me here.

You see what I'm getting at?  Ultimately, we seek our own experience and awareness.  The christian in a hollow heaven may eventually figure at that something is "not quite right," begin to question his/her perceptions and beliefs, and then move to an expanded awareness in Focus 27.  However, before he/she becomes aware of this, he/she would argue quite strongly that his/her personal experience has guided him/her with absolute certainty.

So yes, let us seek our own awareness through experience, but let Don, myself and others analyze what we can.  The combination of experience and analysis is the only way to go to not be fooled.


Matthew

wrote on Dec 9^th, 2005 at 8:30am:

You see what I'm getting at?  Ultimately, we seek our own experience and awareness.  The christian in a hollow heaven may eventually figure at that something is "not quite right," begin to question his/her perceptions and beliefs, and then move to an expanded awareness in Focus 27.  However, before he/she becomes aware of this, he/she would argue quite strongly that his/her personal experience has guided him/her with absolute certainty. So yes, let us seek our own awareness through experience, but let Don, myself and others analyze what we can.  The combination of experience and analysis is the only way to go to not be fooled. Matthew

That's it Mathew!!

Our awareness expands continously. This is what I mean by action and not being stagnant. We "evolve" and so do our beliefs along the way. There is no right or bad way. Only OUR way.

I am aware of certain things that you are not and vice-versa. Normal that we have different beliefs...different point of views.

NO ONE IS RIGHT OR WRONG.

Even being fooled isn't important. Taking the right or wrong decision either. The result is that we learn and thus our awareness expands.

Hence to TRUST ourself is what's important. Because we each know inside us what we need. And this determine the experiences we will have, which may well be to be fooled so as to eliminate certain concepts and ideas. Learning!

No Gerald.  I respectfully disagree.  "No one is right or wrong."  Sorry.  This provides an intolerable mediocrity of mindlessness.  This is liberalism gone astray.  You may say, in a sense that those in a belief system are trusting their experience until they leave.  Those that committ violence are trusting what they think are their beliefs.  The Hitlers, Arafats, Mussolinis.  You may say that when their souls are ready, they too will see the folly of their ways and expand, progress.

I disagree.  Learning is important and fine - but we must have a context to learn and a guide other than what we "think" is right.  Take a school child.  He or she may say "algebra is dumb."  I don't feel it is right for me.  He is following his intuition, is he not?  Yet he should go to school and learn things he doesn't want to learn.  We assume that the adults know better.  We assume that there is a right and a wrong path.  It is well and good to say we all should just make mistakes and find the right path on our own, but there should be a right way and a wrong way.

I am not a christian.  However, I believe that the new pope spoke of a danger of a "moral relativism."  And for at least this one phrase, I agree with him.  Everything isn't ok, as long as you think it is.  Whether or not you can recover from a wrong turn is not the point.

Matthew

"NO ONE IS RIGHT OR WRONG."

hmmm, really? Then how come we live in a society with laws.....
Or better yet, i am not allowed to think your wrong? or right? then what?

Lets face it, there is a right and a wrong , you cant just eliminate judgement and say there is no such thing when, if you look around, and even notice yourself, you hold judgement.  
If what you say is wrong, would you say it?
Maybe you already are saying something wrong but think its right.

There is no right or wrong...lmao

Could I suggest both of you to go back and read my post again.

..."""I am aware of certain things that you are not and vice-versa. Normal that we have different beliefs...different point of views.

NO ONE IS RIGHT OR WRONG...."""

Your beliefs, my beliefs; my opinion, your opinion etc... NO ONE IS RIGHT OR WRONG.  We react, act, think, based on our consciousness, awareness,  by what we know. And all of that is conditionned by our personal beliefs.

So who can say I'm wrong, and who am I to say you are wrong?  

wrote on Dec 9^th, 2005 at 12:34pm:

"NO ONE IS RIGHT OR WRONG." hmmm, really? Then how come we live in a society with laws..... Or better yet, i am not allowed to think your wrong? or right? then what? Lets face it, there is a right and a wrong , you cant just eliminate judgement and say there is no such thing when, if you look around, and even notice yourself, you hold judgement.   If what you say is wrong, would you say it? Maybe you already are saying something wrong but think its right. There is no right or wrong...lmao

That's exactly right!  

I found out I was "wrong" more often than I would like to. Refusing to recognize I am "wrong" would be pointless. Think on this:  we all make decision in our life. We can say that this was a "good" decision and this was a "bad" one.

My opinion is that it doesn't matter. It's what we learn that's important. The right or wrong doesn't matter, either way we learn.

Awareness expands, it is never stagnant.

I will change, of course!  So will my view, my thoughts my consciousness. You could then say I was wrong TODAY.  I would say that I have grown into a more learned person.

As far as holding judgement, I try very hard not to. I never intended to give the impression I was perfect. What you call judgement I call beliefs.

A clash of opinions,  is only people fighting to convince that their beliefs are better than those of the others.  NO ONE IS RIGHT NO ONE IS WRONG.

Beliefs are personal things that we have acquired during our whole life. Religious, cultural...you name it.

Don't you think that this discussion does look like a game ?  Its not important to win, its fun to play.

Remember the book "I'm OK, you're OK!"

I read his NDE a while ago. I just re-read some of it, and it isn't quite what I thought.  However, here's a sentence that stood out.

"God will ultimately judge every individual. And God will allow people to be dragged into darkness with like-minded creatures. "

I question the above. It seems more reasonable that if a person goes to an afterlife realm that seems hellish, it is because his or her thought/energy essence matches up with such a vibrational rate. Because God won't force people to change, sometimes they get stuck in hell like realms for a while, until they chose a better way.

His NDE account also states that everything in the Bible is true. I believe that there is a strong possibility that men decided which portions become a part of the Bible, and which portions didn't. Sometimes truth found its way in, sometimes it didn't.

The fact of how mankind translates the Bible in so many different ways today, shows that he is free to represent what is ultimately true either falsely or truthfully.

Why would things be different when the Bible was compiled, than they are today?




wrote on Dec 8^th, 2005 at 6:38pm:

Recoverer, No, Storm is far from a Christian fundamentalist.   But that only becomes obvious from the greatly expanded version of his NDE in his book, "My Descent into Death."   For example, Jesus tells him that the best religion is the one that draws you closest to God.  He receives much teaching about intelligent life on other planets and in other dimensions.   He is told that reincarnation on our earth is infrequent, but commonplace if you include a fresh life on other planets or in other dimensions. Sometime, I should create a new thread just on Storm's book, so readers can understand why I consider it by far the best book of its kind. Don

Let us not confuse tolerance of others with saying there is no right and there is no wrong.  I am open to the opinion of others.  I hope we all are.  Some opinions seem silly to me.  For instance when I hear of someone recommending enemas or bowel cleansings for medical conditions which I, as a physician know to be ineffective.  That is wrong.  But what if the person believes in the bowel cleansing?  Should we not live and let live?  Maybe its right for them?  No.  The "I'm ok, you're ok" notion leaves everyone feeling good, but loses our society and meaning.

I asked my stepson, who gets into trouble regularly why his friend stole a pair of jeans from a shopping mall.  "Everyone does it.  Its ok if you don't get caught."  I couldn't believe what I was hearing.  This kid had a good upbringing.  But the notion of right or wrong, good or evil had not gotten through.

Either there are things that are true, and valid, or there are not.  If there is no truth, no right or wrong, then all is pure chaos.  In a universe like that, we would all go mad.  

I still go by my last posting.  Life is about experience and learning, but within certain laws, truths and parameters to guide you.  The golden rule (do unto others), is perhaps one of the best known rules out there.  It assumes that someone is right and someone is wrong.

Matthew

You have just expressed some of your beliefs Matthew.

The kamikase terrorists are doing what they are doing because of their beliefs.  You can say they are wrong, and bad. But if you where also sharing their beliefs, what would you say?

They are wrong because you have different beliefs.

If you would argue with one of them, you would both believe you are right and the other is wrong. It's because of the beliefs held.

That's just what I'm saying. Its all about beliefs!

It is about beliefs, but there is a set of divine laws which govern right action.  

The islamic terrorist who hacks off the head of a charity worker in Iraq is not acting on the basis of faith, no matter what is said.  Scholars of Islam do not condone this.  He is wrong in the most pure and simple way possible.  It is not just that he holds a different belief than I do.  Many times, there is a complete disregard for life, right, wrong, truth, and beauty.  You can not then claim that there is no right or wrong.

The holocaust was wrong.  Apartheid in South Africa was wrong.  Ethnic cleansings and killings are wrong.  They do not stem from differences in religious beliefs but they do arise from sick and twisted minds filled with hate.

As much as anyone on this board says that love is all there is, so should they say hate is wrong.  When you start with those initial definitions, you can extrapolate from there.

We can agree to disagree on the board about this, Gerald.  I still say in a world with no right or wrong, there is no accountability for action, there is chaos, and no spiritual advancement.

Matthew

One of Bruce's greatest contributions is his exploration of "hollow heavens."   I like to remind people that St. Paul identifies Paradise (= Focus 27) as the preferred point of access to the heavenly journey.  But Paul locates Paradise in the third heaven (2 Corinthians 12), and this implies two "lower" heavens that are less desirable.   I have researched these two lower heavens in early  Jewish thought and have concluded that they correspond to Focus 25-26 in the Moen-Monroe scheme.  I regard this as impressive independent corroboration of an important afterlife insight.  

A related important insight is Bruce's discovery of how one can get "stuck" in a belief system territory.   In the case of Christianity, one reason for this trap is the mistaken belief that when we die, we suddenly become omniscient and spiritually perfect.   This non-biblical notion trivializes the various levels of spiritual progress achieved during earthly existence.   More importantly, it ignores the bibical teaching of postmortem soul progression and its corollory that, after death, we will continually need to upgrade our overview as we explore deeper levels of consciousness.  

In my view, we must not become permanent fence sitters in our spiritual quest.  We must embrace our belief systems passionately but provisionally--passionately because otherwise our beliefs will not nurture our spiritual progress and provisionally because we must never allow ourselves to close our minds to new spiritual insights from God.   It is useful to remind ourselves that God cares little about how we would fill in a postmortem multiple choice quizz on theological doctrine.  God cares more about how our beliefs shape the quality of our consciousness and facilitate our progress towards union with "Him."  

Over the years, I have critiqued some of the Moen-Monroe claims.  But this critique does not nullify the whole enterprise.  Ultimately, the only decisive test is to devote time to a full exploration of Monroe's Hemi-Sync technology or to take Bruce's course or, at least, to explore the methods taught in his latest book.  

By the same token, the only proper way to explore Christianity is to focus on the mystical experiences taught by its principles of faith and prayer--in other words to initially focus on the life-changing experiences that Christianity potentially offers.  A restricted focus on Christian doctrine will give you just enough spirituality to inoculate you against the real thing.  

So when posters here asks me to recommend a church, I advise them to initially ignore the question of which church seems the most doctrinally astute.   Instead, i advise them to explore which church best creates an atmosphere and programs that facilitate direct experience of God's grace and love and demonstrable experiences of the power of prayer.

Don

From my perspective, who and what we are is based on our individual beliefs.  Our experiences create these beliefs within each of us.  Each person is free to believe as they so choose.  This has to do with their own consciousness and in this respect their beliefs are neither right, nor wrong… they simply exist.  

From a moral evolutionary standpoint the creation of right and wrong, good and evil was necessary or we would not be able to become individualized consciousness.

Thank you for your very informative post Don.  I also appreciate the change in subject matter.

Kathy

Warm greetings to DocM, Gerald, and all,



Quote:

The holocaust was wrong.  Apartheid in South Africa was wrong.  Ethnic cleansings and killings are wrong.  They do not stem from differences in religious beliefs but they do arise from sick and twisted minds filled with hate.

To be precise :

The holocaust was anti-cosmoethical.  Apartheid in South Africa was anti-cosmoethical.  Ethnic cleansings and killings are anti-cosmoethical.

(for a deeper look at cosmoethics, see here).

As such, they can be viewed as 'wrong', 'incorrect' or inappropriate (ie. not accordance to will) for individuals who choose to align themselves with cosmoethics, with positive evolution, assistantiality, compassion, guides & helpers, light and love.

But they are not 'wrong', 'incorrect' or inappropriate for individuals who choose 'darkness', difficulty, or to create negative karma for themselves, for whatever reason that might be perceived from a higher viewpoint as 'misguideness' (not 'wrong').

Thusly, from a more enlightened perspective, there is no objective or static 'right' or 'wrong', but only (what can be understood as) 'appropriate' or 'inapporpriate', 'helpful' or 'unhelpful', 'cosmoethical' or 'anti-cosmoethical'. But these again, can and does vary, from individual/perspective to individual/perspective, and correctly so.

However, as we move up the evolutionary ladder, in terms of intelligence, wisdom, widening of perspective, light and love,  it is recognized that the more advanced beings, guides & helpers, and all beings of higher vibration, begin to come to a general consensus (due to contribution and inter-networking of perspectives amongst them) as to what is cosmoethical, what is helpful, and so on.

An analogy might be a dozen 10 yr old kids that arrive at 10 different answers to a complex engineering problem. But a dozen learned professors, would mostly agree on the same way as to interpret, approach and solve the problem, and hence come closer to a general consensus for a similar solution.

Such a solution, might be argued to be the 'right' solution, and the 10 yr old kids' ideas to be 'wrong'; but compared to a thousand years into the future, the solution offered by today's professors, would likely pale in comparison to the (more 'correct'?) solutions offered by the professors of the future.

This is why, from the perspective of the guides & helpers, there is no 'right' or 'wrong', only actions/intentions/thosenses/karma, that is perceived, understood or recognized (general consensus of the guides & helpers) as being helpful or unhelpful, cosmoethical or anti-cosmoethical.

Of course, even such, is not absolute or objective, naturally. The individual guides & helpers of any level, will naturally ('rightly!') unique perspectives amongst themselves (the beauty of God's exploration of Itself via free will of infinite consciousnesses), and of course, evolution is endless and infinite.

As we go up the evolutionary ladder (the guides & helpers of the guides & helpers of the guides & helpers, ad infinitum), what is cosmoethical or helpful, will tend to get clearer. But cosmoethics is never objective, absolute, static or inflexible. Nor should it be.

One then, might say it's a matter of playing with words, but it is important that words like 'right' and 'wrong', which usually convey limiting, dogmatic ideas similar to 'sin' and religious notions of judgement, be recognized as limiting and unhelpful, especially when they fuel fear and judgement.

Thus, one can only judge what is right or correct, for himself and himself only. One cannot judge another to say, "What he did was wrong". By the Law of Reflection and the Clarification process, you can only (correctly) say, "What he did (as I understand it), would be wrong for *me* to do, because it is not in accordance to my will to be of positive service to others (as I understand it)".



Quote:

As much as anyone on this board says that love is all there is, so should they say hate is wrong.  When you start with those initial definitions, you can extrapolate from there.

Hate is not wrong. Hate is based on fear, which is the absence of Love. Love is correct, but only for those who choose Love. You decide what you choose.

What you choose for yourself, determines what is 'right' or 'wrong', 'correct' or 'incorrect' for you, but only for you, yourself (and never for others).

This is self-responsibility and clarity, which is much more helpful (for one's personal evolution) than attempting to project judgement upon others (which is not 'incorrect', but ultimately your judgement is only relevant to yourself).



Quote:

We can agree to disagree on the board about this, Gerald.  I still say in a world with no right or wrong, there is no accountability for action, there is chaos, and no spiritual advancement.

Everyone is always accountable for himself. Not accountable to others for himself, but accountable to himself for himself. No one is accountable to you, and you are not accountable to anyone else.

This is from the perspectives of the guides, helpers, teachers and evolutionary orientors. They do not pass judgement upon you, even during the Life Review which occurs after death. During discussions with the soul, including the Life Review in the intermissive period, they, acting out of empathy, compassion and with intention to assist (the best that they at their various levels understand how), will guide the individual soul by gently sharing their insights (eg. by asking relevant, impactful questions targetting various contexts of the life just lived), sharing of their suggestions and their perspectives, from their greater evolutionary experience and wisdom.

And yes, we can (and correctly so) agree to disagree, have unique perspectives or varying ways of seeing issues, taking stands, and so on. This is only correct, because if every consciousness, every individual, every soul group, every Disc/Disk, every race, every lifestream, every world, every universe, etc, has come into existence to explore a somewhat unique perspective. Which is the very reason for free will.

Finally, we stand by our very words, no double standards here. If you should disagree with what we have just posted here, then it is certainly 'wrong' or 'incorrect' for you, very simply because you disagree with it. But it's not 'wrong' or 'incorrect' for those who agree, quite obviously.

The International Academy of Consciousness, and beings of higher vibration such as Hilarion, recognize that there is only what can be termed as "relative leading edge truths", and this refers to, for instance, what the guides & helpers largely agree on, as cosmoethical, as valid, as helpful, etc; as well as the knowledge, teachings, concepts, laws, understanding or wisdom. But they're always open to evolution, of ideas and of self.


So, what *is* right for you? *You* are.


Therefore, choose well.

I will leave this as my last post on the subject of right and wrong, good and evil as I don't think the debate will be solved.  I agree with Kathy that morality probably evolved as a tool for consciousness over time, however, I think we must separate life in this C1/physical plane from the higher planes of existence when discussing these concepts.  In terms of God and the universe, good and evil, right and wrong are yin and yang, both part of the whole, and as such, may be seen from a greater distance as part of a unity of the all that is.  

We, living here must be cognizant of divine law and right and wrong in order to exist in society and nurture each other.  Perhaps one day we will transcend these concepts.  However, if one is witness to an evil act or atrocity, and stands by and does nothing thinking in terms "this anti-cosmoethical act truly isn't wrong, but the poor butcher perpertrating it will have a slow spiritual progress," then one is truly crazy.

In the larger overall picture, advanced souls, those who are close to God may see the big picture, and may not have need for concepts of right and wrong.  They are very useful concepts/truths here in our physical plane of existence.  They have been spoken of in every major religious text for eons. The wishy-washy response of those who deny their existence, is difficult for me.  

Thanks for listening.

Matthew

Matthew,

I have to say I'm with you on this. If I'm in someone's stew pot and they are cooking me for dinner tonight then that is definitely wrong in my book.  

And if you're in there too, well, that is just doubly wrong.

blink :)

Matthew, in general I agree with you, but want to add this unique illustration of the issues.   In my view, the best and most powerful movie of all time is "Schindler's List," the true story of a Nazi who saved 1,500-2,000 Jews from extermination.   It can be obscene both in its language and in its protrayal of Nazi atrocities, but I still deemed it appropriate to show and discuss with my youthful confirmation class.   The kids found it deeply moving and instructive.

During the Nazi occupation of Poland, Oscar Schindler was a womanizer and a selfish  materialist--an unlikely candidate to be the most helpful person to Jews during WW2 (next to Raul Wallenberg).  After the war, his marriage and business ventures all failed.  Yet in the mid-1960s, he was brought to Israel with a tumultuous rock star's welcome.   A wife of one of Schindler's Jews complained that such honor should not be paid to such a morally flawed man.  Her husband poignantly replied, "I would not wish too hard that he was different than the way he was. If he was a more moral man, he would not have done what he did."  From a micro-perspective, one could unearth innumerable sins and flaws in Schindler's life.   From a macro-perspective his shortcomings were precisely the means by which he clandestinely achieved his courageous acts of deliverance.   Had he been a conventional saint, his Nazi cohorts would never have trusted him and he would never have rescued all those Jews.  

I showed this movie to my young confirmands because I consider it the best example I've ever seen of a neglected biblical principle--that God delights in perfecting and displaying "His" strength through our weaknesses (2 Corinthian 12:8).

Don

Quote:

A clash of opinions,  is only people fighting to convince that their beliefs are better than those of the others.  NO ONE IS RIGHT NO ONE IS WRONG.

Yea, thats why you believe what channeled stuff says,  

So.  Why are you even expressing your opinion if you dont think that this statement:

"NO ONE IS RIGHT NO ONE IS WRONG."

is right, or true, or ABSOLUTE?

Are you going to save us all from judgement by telling us there is no such thing when its part of the reason that you even tell us there is no right and wrong?
YOU ARE STILL MAKING A JUDGEMENT ABOUT JUDGEMENT.  you just see the surface illusion you want to see, but in actuality you judge that there is judgement and think its right that there shouldnt be any judgement.

lol
thats NOT ACCEPTANCE of judgement.

THATS DENIAL in a fancy disguse.  You deny judgement, you judge judgement itself as wrong, therefore making a state of no judgement RIGHT.
still an underlying judgement. if you look a bit deeper ,... to the core. The bigger image that you reflect is denial.
Though your affirmations seem to you to be benificial and peacefull and  right, your running from the acceptance of judgement itself.  

wrote on Dec 9^th, 2005 at 3:49pm:

From my perspective, who and what we are is based on our individual beliefs.  Our experiences create these beliefs within each of us.  Each person is free to believe as they so choose.  This has to do with their own consciousness and in this respect their beliefs are neither right, nor wrong… they simply exist.   From a moral evolutionary standpoint the creation of right and wrong, good and evil was necessary or we would not be able to become individualized consciousness. Thank you for your very informative post Don.  I also appreciate the change in subject matter. Kathy

I agree Kathy!

Very nicely written Kyo Kusanagi.

wrote on Dec 9^th, 2005 at 8:27pm:

I will leave this as my last post on the subject of right and wrong, good and evil as I don't think the debate will be solved. It doesn't need to be resolve Matthew. My beliefs aren't better or worse than yours. We all have beliefs.  I agree with Kathy that morality probably evolved as a tool for consciousness over time, however, I think we must separate life in this C1/physical plane from the higher planes of existence when discussing these concepts.  In terms of God and the universe, good and evil, right and wrong are yin and yang, both part of the whole, and as such, may be seen from a greater distance as part of a unity of the all that is.   We, living here must be cognizant of divine law and right and wrong in order to exist in society and nurture each other.  Perhaps one day we will transcend these concepts.  However, if one is witness to an evil act or atrocity, and stands by and does nothing thinking in terms "this anti-cosmoethical act truly isn't wrong, but the poor butcher perpertrating it will have a slow spiritual progress," then one is truly crazy. Our conception of Higher evolved beings, could it be that they have sheed many beliefs ? In the larger overall picture, advanced souls, those who are close to God may see the big picture, and may not have need for concepts of right and wrong.  They are very useful concepts/truths here in our physical plane of existence.  They have been spoken of in every major religious text for eons. The wishy-washy response of those who deny their existence, is difficult for me.   Thanks for listening. Matthew

When you write: They are very useful concepts/truths here in our physical plane of existence.

You are talking about beliefs. They are necessary HERE. Otherwise what would be the point in coming here. What would be learn ? Without beliefs we would be an empty shell.  

"""The wishy-washy response of those who deny their existence, is difficult for me."""

I am not denying their existence, just saying that they are there. They determine what we are, what we think, what we do, how we react...

wrote on Dec 9^th, 2005 at 11:53pm:

Yea, thats why you believe what channeled stuff says,   So.  Why are you even expressing your opinion if you dont think that this statement: "NO ONE IS RIGHT NO ONE IS WRONG." is right, or true, or ABSOLUTE? Are you going to save us all from judgement by telling us there is no such thing when its part of the reason that you even tell us there is no right and wrong? YOU ARE STILL MAKING A JUDGEMENT ABOUT JUDGEMENT.  you just see the surface illusion you want to see, but in actuality you judge that there is judgement and think its right that there shouldnt be any judgement. lol thats NOT ACCEPTANCE of judgement. THATS DENIAL in a fancy disguse.  You deny judgement, you judge judgement itself as wrong, therefore making a state of no judgement RIGHT. still an underlying judgement. if you look a bit deeper ,... to the core. The bigger image that you reflect is denial. Though your affirmations seem to you to be benificial and peacefull and  right, your running from the acceptance of judgement itself.

Amen!

Hi,

"The integrety of any intuitive information dependes upon the INNER INTEGRETY of the person who receives it.
Expansion of consciousness (awareness), therefore, requires honest self-appraisal, an awareness (knowledge) of one's own beliefs and prejudices.
It brings a gift and a RESPONSIBILITY. All who wish to look WITHIN themselves, to find their own answers, to encounter their own "appointment with the universe", should therefore become well acquainted with the intimate workings of their OWN personality".

SETH


LOVE
Marta

Right on Marta.

Love, Mairlyn ;-)

Using right and wrong as our starting point and extrapolating from there is a flawed idea.

There is Love, and the absence of Love. Hate, which is rooted in fear, doesn't have an objective existence. Neither does evil. Both are the absence of Love. But Love does exist. So we can choose it.

Again, we either choose Love, or not choose it. We cannot choose hate or evil because these things don't really exist. There is only Love and the absence of Love (darkness, separation from God/All There Is/PUL). Since absence of Love is really nothing, then there is only Love. We either choose it or we don't.

The more spiritually evolved we are the more clarity we have and the better our choices.

Terrorists. et el. don't kill anyone. No one can be killed because no one dies. There is no death, there is only emergence and reemergence. Terrorists cause suffering. They fight against Love. They separate themselves from God (All There Is/PUL). They live in spiritual darkeness and so their choices reflect that. They believe they are right because they lack clarity.

There is no right or wrong. There is only Love. Anything else is the absence of Love. We either choose to be in Love or not.

Bob

wrote on Dec 10^th, 2005 at 3:40pm:

Using right and wrong as our starting point and extrapolating from there is a flawed idea. There is Love, and the absence of Love. Hate, which is rooted in fear, doesn't have an objective existence. Neither does evil. Both are the absence of Love. But Love does exist. So we can choose it. Again, we either choose Love, or not choose it. We cannot choose hate or evil because these things don't really exist. There is only Love and the absence of Love (darkness, separation from God/All There Is/PUL). Since absence of Love is really nothing, then there is only Love. We either choose it or we don't. The more spiritually evolved we are the more clarity we have and the better our choices. Terrorists. et el. don't kill anyone. No one can be killed because no one dies. There is no death, there is only emergence and reemergence. Terrorists cause suffering. They fight against Love. They separate themselves from God (All There Is/PUL). They live in spiritual darkeness and so their choices reflect that. They believe they are right because they lack clarity. There is no right or wrong. There is only Love. Anything else is the absence of Love. We either choose to be in Love or not. Bob

 Wow, pretty darn concise Bob!  Sounds like it came right from your Higher/Total self and the balanced Heart and Mind...

Very, very much resonate with this and would add that in a sense there is right and wrong (or choice of Love or unlove)...for the individual according to their Consciousness, since every individual has its own unique vibratory patterns and its relative relationship to both all other individualized Consciousnesses, and to the Whole.... (meaning ones energies affect and is affected by all others energies in a this great flux and balancing act..)

 Now, when one consciousness can match frequencies to a very high degree with another Consciousness (i lable it merging and only those of or near White Light consciousness/frequency can do this very deeply and well), then it can "see" whats right or wrong for that individual, but there are no ultimate rights or wrongs...but there is Reality and unreality...which always comes back to that whole Love---unlove choice eh....  This is exactly what the Elders of our Council do, being Realized Beings, they can get inside our heads, hearts, and very Consciousness, and they have the deepest compassion for us, yet want to see us grow, and evolve to Source realization too....  Much like Yeshua beckoned those who would listen, to come follow his ways...not for his little self, but rather to be happy, and to lift up the collective a bit...its all about the Collective, and the very Planning Intelligence itself suffers deeply when one of its Children chooses unlove to such a degreee as to destroy its very own gift...  This is not desirable to the P.I., the Elders, the Council, or to me, and when very little i use to think a bit about "Satan"..and first i was mad at him, and then i felt compassion for "him", and i figured "he" must be suffering big time to be so cut off from God...  

Much appreciation for your wisdom and balancedness.

Justin,

I was debating whether or not to keep using right or wrong as categories, but right (Love) exists but wrong (hate/evil) doesn't really. But putting them together, even in opposition, implies equal existence which isn't true.

Also, by using these terms together we are encouraging a black/white, either/or mentality. We should be focused on rising above duality into Love itSelf (God/All There Is/PUL). The continuous focus on Love (doing so is the Holy Grail of spiritual progression) banishes hate/evil/darkness automatically. No need for two categories. Love is the answer.

Bob

 I also believe that in an ultimate sense that unlove doesn't exist...

 But maybe their are two simultaneus realities co-existing...?

 I call it the relativistic and the absolute...the absolute is that ultimate reality you're talking about, where are all in the Still, completely One, Heart of the Creator...  This was the Creator during its passive State...

But it moved, and became active, and so our Souls and worlds came into Being...and these, because of Freewill can choose to imagine and temporarily create unlove...  Its not a God thing, so its temporal...

 But that unlove and suffering is a reality, is self evident to any who choose that path, isn't it?

  The Relativistic reality revolves around Choice and Freewill, growth, continual expansion, ever active, and fluctuating...in relation to its relative relationship to the Whole...

See what i mean?  Holding both these Realities together, these polarities of Mind--Heart, Masculine--Feminine, Active charge and Passive balance...

 When these merge within the Self...then you know the Reality, which is beyond both individually.

 Such a person becomes like He/She in Monroe's Ultimate Journeys...  This is not knowledge of my own, no way Jose, but rather the Elders who whisper to any who will make themselves a channel.

  But you're completly right, Pure Impersonal Love is the energy which merges these realities...because love is an energy, a state of being, of synthesis, of coherence, of matching wave patterns with disparate "parts"...

Much like Bruce's analogy when communing with the Planning Intelligence, and is shown a vision of the beginning, and he compares Love to the water which binds the individual particles of the dry cake mix...

 Love is the great harmonizer, but sometimes Love has to destroy the inharmony before creating true Harmony...

This is what we are seeing, and will be seeing with the Changes...

And the individual development is a microcosm of this larger macro process....  

 This is why those like Yeshua occasionally blasted through the false self of others...besides, he knew he could never harm the Real self of another..

Thats one of the biggest illusions of them all...and a core teaching in ACIM (though i don't fully resonate with this teaching).

 

Quote:

Using right and wrong as our starting point and extrapolating from there is a flawed idea. There is Love, and the absence of Love. Hate, which is rooted in fear, doesn't have an objective existence. Neither does evil. Both are the absence of Love. But Love does exist. So we can choose it.

Rob Roy, you express this same denial as Gerald in a way... What your saying is that Love does exist, but hate and evil dont, this is a denial of the ideas and their objective existance as ideas of hate and evil  which they do exist, are a reality, or else you wouldnt be comparing them to love.

and, hate and evil are not absent of love, actually, they way you describe it they seem quite dependant on love.

what you describe seems to be a means of comparing your Positive with your Negative. Which is judgement.
Its a right or wrong issue even still,... and though you dont want to have a starting point of right and wrong, you already have that starting point before you started. by comparing love(positive) with hate(negative).
Two opposing sides.  So it very much a discussion with the foundation as judgement.

So, can you discuss a duality without opposition?  love or hate as being different, though one is not better than another?  probably not, because you think love is right, or better than hate or evil.
But dont get me wrong, i agree with that, just want to point out that its a judgement, and there is nothing wrong with judgement.

I for one am not going around all day thinking no one is right or wrong.  I make judgements, i have guidelines about what i will accept as right or wrong.  In fact i use it to navigate through this maze...

Rax,

You need to read more carefully. I don't compare hate/fear to Love, not really. I was working within their framework, using that vocabulary. Just because I work with something as an idea doesn't mean I believe or I'm really saying it really exists. That is your imagination and NOT what I was saying or doing.

Hate is based on fear. Fear is not REALLY the opposite of Love (although it is practical to say so) because Love is all-encompassing. Fear is the artificial barrier we have to overcome in order to experience the reality of Love in a pure and unconditional way. As Kyo is fond of pointing out: FEAR is False Evidence Appearing as Real.

Hypothetically, if I had the power, I could remove everything from reality except Love and still have something real, because Love is real, it really exists in and of itself, it's not continguent upon anything else for its existence. Actually, I couldn't, because Love is All There Is, but you get the idea.

Fear on the other hand would not survive this hypothetical test because it doesn't really exist. If I tried to remove everything but fear I would be left with nothing. Ultimately fear is just an idea used to describe an absence of Love.  

I don't accept duality as Reality. But that is the vocabulary of C1 existence and how we understand reality up to a certain point. In fact, I don't accept C1 existence as Reality. I liken it to a hologram. Alysia compares it to a movie. The real Reality is  spiritual existence, the Afterlife. Duality is an artificial construct within an artificial reality.

I said hate/evil are nothing, they don't really exist, and that Love does.  I can also affirm that there are no such things as unicorns but there are horses. It's an observation. I certainly am not saying unicorns real just because I mention them or I compare them to horses.

I'd be more careful about saying people are in denial. You are the one who says ideas are real because they are ideas. You can have an idea of a unicorn, even draw a picture of one that most people would agree looks like a unicorn. That doesn't mean unicorns actually exist, no matter how well developed the idea.

And actually, I do distinguish right and wrong in people's actions, and I do make provisional judgements.  I do because it's practical on a day-to-day basis to do so. But I also have a different overview that informs me on a higher level that duality isn't really real, that hate/fear don't really exist, and the Love is ultimately All There Is/God, in other words, real Reality. What you failed to do was perceive that difference, even after Justin pointed it out. He understood EXACTLY what I was saying. He even named the source. Read more carefully, and avoid the temptations of premature judgement and a somewhat sanctimonious attitude.

Just the same, thanks for responding. It furthers learning for both of us.

Bob

To me it is either meaningless or wrong to say that hate does not exist, but is rather the absence of love.  It is meaningless because acts of hate (e.g. torturing Jews or Blacks) cannot simply be explained by the absence of something.  Acts of hate are very real acts that cause intense pain and even death.  More importantly, it is wrong because of what Malachi Martin has discovered as the decisive factor that  convinces the skeptic of  the reality of demonic possession in a major exorcism. (See his analysis of several major exorcisms in "Hostage to the Devil".)

It is not the bizarre lowering of room temperature as the entity sucks up heat energy to manifest itself.  It is not the psychokinetic effects (objects being teleported around the room, etc.).  It is not the serpentine expression on the face of the possessed that psychiatrist Scott Peck, for example, tried without success for hours to imitate in a mirror.   It is not the fact that the entity knows you better than you know yourself and reveals some of your most embarrassing life moments to humiliate you at key junctures during the exorcism.  
For example, one saintly priest was greeted by the demoniac with the snide comment, "Well, if it isn't Peter the Eater."  The other priests gazed curiously at this priest's ashen face.   That expression was a dirty nickname his girlfriend had given him in his misspent youth.  The gross revelation temporarily put the demon in charge of the exorcism.

All of these symptoms can be present in a major exorcism.   So what convinces even the skeptic of the reality of demonic possession?   The searing energy of pure hatred, says Martin, an energy that sears the soul like a hot iron with effects that continue after the exorcism.  This energy is every bit as real as love.   Martin describes one case in which the energy of hate instantly killed one young athletic priest the moment he approached the bed of the possessed.  Conversely , it can be questioned whether love is properly viewed as an energy at all.   In my view, love is more properly regarded as a way of being, which may or may not be experienced as energy.

Martin is a Catholic priest. But his key observations find independent corroboration from New Age OBE adept, Robert Bruce.  Robert has confirmed the reality of hate and evil by direct experience. I quote from one of his online articles at "Astral Dynamics:"

"I have seen babies as young as nine-months-old under strong, direct psychic attack from unquestionably evil spirits.   I have seen toddlers attacked, overshadowed, possessed, and tormented.  I have stood in nurseries and seen manifestations (visible to the naked eye) that would make normal person's hair turn gray...."

"I once became possessed myself and was almost killed, while trying to exorcise a powerful entity from a five-year old boy.   I have also seen animals attacked, even possessed and driven mad by negs".

"The popular New Age model states that everyone has spirit guides and/or spirit protectors attached to them from birth to death.  But if this were true, how can babies of pre-language age and very young children be attacked and tormented, even possessed?  Where is their protection and guidance when they need it most?"
 
Don

wrote on Dec 10^th, 2005 at 12:20pm:

Hi, "The integrety of any intuitive information dependes upon the INNER INTEGRETY of the person who receives it. Expansion of consciousness (awareness), therefore, requires honest self-appraisal, an awareness (knowledge) of one's own beliefs and prejudices. It brings a gift and a RESPONSIBILITY. All who wish to look WITHIN themselves, to find their own answers, to encounter their own "appointment with the universe", should therefore become well acquainted with the intimate workings of their OWN personality". SETH LOVE Marta

Hi Marta,

Nice to hear from you!

I fully agree with the above quote.

The starting point is a complete trust in self.

Love  Gerald

wrote on Dec 11^th, 2005 at 1:55am:

Rax, You need to read more carefully. I don't compare hate/fear to Love, not really. I was working within their framework, using that vocabulary. Just because I work with something as an idea doesn't mean I believe or I'm really saying it really exists. That is your imagination and NOT what I was saying or doing. Hate is based on fear. Fear is not REALLY the opposite of Love (although it is practical to say so) because Love is all-encompassing. Fear is the artificial barrier we have to overcome in order to experience the reality of Love in a pure and unconditional way. As Kyo is fond of pointing out: FEAR is False Evidence Appearing as Real. Hypothetically, if I had the power, I could remove everything from reality except Love and still have something real, because Love is real, it really exists in and of itself, it's not continguent upon anything else for its existence. Actually, I couldn't, because Love is All There Is, but you get the idea. Fear on the other hand would not survive this hypothetical test because it doesn't really exist. If I tried to remove everything but fear I would be left with nothing. Ultimately fear is just an idea used to describe an absence of Love.   I don't accept duality as Reality. But that is the vocabulary of C1 existence and how we understand reality up to a certain point. In fact, I don't accept C1 existence as Reality. I liken it to a hologram. Alysia compares it to a movie. The real Reality is  spiritual existence, the Afterlife. Duality is an artificial construct within an artificial reality. I said hate/evil are nothing, they don't really exist, and that Love does.  I can also affirm that there are no such things as unicorns but there are horses. It's an observation. I certainly am not saying unicorns real just because I mention them or I compare them to horses. I'd be more careful about saying people are in denial. You are the one who says ideas are real because they are ideas. You can have an idea of a unicorn, even draw a picture of one that most people would agree looks like a unicorn. That doesn't mean unicorns actually exist, no matter how well developed the idea. And actually, I do distinguish right and wrong in people's actions, and I do make provisional judgements.  I do because it's practical on a day-to-day basis to do so. But I also have a different overview that informs me on a higher level that duality isn't really real, that hate/fear don't really exist, and the Love is ultimately All There Is/God, in other words, real Reality. What you failed to do was perceive that difference, even after Justin pointed it out. He understood EXACTLY what I was saying. He even named the source. Read more carefully, and avoid the temptations of premature judgement and a somewhat sanctimonious attitude. Just the same, thanks for responding. It furthers learning for both of us. Bob

Bob, I think you make your point very well.

To me love is the energy of our creative essence deep within each of us. It is consciousness in movement of creativity. As this creative energy moves from the spiritual downward human physical manifestation of belief comes into existence and our beliefs, as a collective becomes the ‘real’ world as consciousness experiences this.

I think quantum physics explains this in saying that consciousness is the foundation of both matter and mind, which are both possibilities of consciousness and when consciousness changes possibilities into an event of actual experience, some of the possibilities are collapsed as physical and some as mental.  Mental possibilities are nonmaterial. They are possibilities of meaning and when consciousness collapses these meaning possibilities in conjunction with the brain possibilities, the collapsed brain actuality makes a representation of the collapsed mental meaning of the experienced thought. This is called downward causation, which to me is the energy of our essence moving from the spiritual downward.

As spiritual energy moves through us we either experience pleasure (love) or pain (fear) according to the beliefs consciousness chooses. The creation of fear came about as the beliefs consciousness chose brought about physical pain. Everything that we consider to be hateful, bad, negative, etc. is the result of fear. Everything that we are and all that we create is based on belief. Essentially we are belief created by consciousness.

The shift in consciousness to me is the recognition of this from a higher perspective of our being, or the creation of belief that supports this recognition of our being. It’s not only a personal shift in consciousness, but also becomes a collective shift in consciousness as more and more people solidify their beliefs. It’s the falling away of the old paradigm and incorporating a new paradigm within our belief systems. Great creative power exists within individualized consciousness coming together as a collective. The choice of what we create truly is ours.

As the shedding of belief within consciousness occurs we progressively change our ‘real’ world. As we begin to understand that Consciousness is God and that God Consciousness is without belief, we begin to understand ourselves as being the creators of our own universe. We begin to see where we have been and where we are going in that we started out as God Consciousness (without belief) in movement becoming individualized (creating belief) coming full circle or back to God Consciousness containing knowledge of Creativity.

To choose love is to choose to release fear, thereby shedding our belief in fear, which is the direct cause of all human pain and suffering. We created it therefore we can release it. It all begins by releasing the fear within us. The only one responsible for the pain one feels is their own self. Only one’s own consciousness chooses from among the possibilities. This is individual free will to the fullest extent that I know it to be.

As we create our new world, many blessings await us.

Love, Kathy :-)

Beserk,

One, you are describing acts, not intention.  Hate (based on fear) is a motivation not an act.

Two, you and Rax both are ignoring one word: OBJECTIVE. I said that hate (fear)/evil has no OBJECTIVE existence.

Three, pointing out extreme examples shows nothing other than how far something can go. It does not address the underlying problem, regardless of whether the acts are mild or henious.

The problem of possessions/demons has already been addressed on this board. Also addressed was the underlying reality of the entities who commit those acts and what can be done to help them. Since you are operating within a different paradigm, I'm not going to address your specific concerns because others have tried to show you the shortcomings of your way of thinking to no avail. That's not an insult. You are trying your best, as we all are.

Also, the ability to move/use energy doesn't address the underlying motivation, either. Hate/Fear/Evil (absence of Love) are motivations. Manipulating energy is a means to carry out desires based on these motivations. Hate is not energy. Hate doesn't exist except in our minds.

I know I have guides because my direct experience, repeated, tested, and verified, shows me this. This is not belief, it is knowledge. If you lack the same experience don't expect me to argue with you because my experience is subjective. I can't reproduce it for you, esp. on a message board. All I can do is debate, which won't help you.


Bob

Hi Kathy,

Very nice post.  I agree with most of it.  I'm not sure I agree that we are each soley responsible for our own pain and suffering, because we voluntarily hold the fear/pain.  It is hard for a woman in one of Saddam Hussein's notorious "rape rooms," to be personally responsible for her fear.  She is, but as you know it is a shared responsibility.  True, her spirit is in no true danger, and if there is no death, then transient torture will pass.  However she may not be able to keep perspective, as pain and fear from real life circumstances tend to overwhelm one's mind.

So I agree with the theory about releasing fear - I have asked myself to release certain fears and visualized it, and then the next day felt confident and unafraid.  To me that was quite remarkable.  However, it was done in a relaxed setting without real-life hounds on my heels.  

I believe that individuals perpetrating horrific acts, feed their negative energy with a person's fear, and may be in part responsible for the fear/hate/ lack of love.  They will carry that burden and have to overcome it in order to improve/progress.

I have met indivduals, so bent on creating these negative emotions, it makes me wonder if we are all destined for spiritual advancement.  Do we all truly return to God, after releasing beliefs and embracing love?  Or, are some people/souls destined to revolving indefinitely around these negative emotions?  The easy answer is that it may take the "cruel" souls longer, but they will get their too.   Still, I'm not yet sure about that.


Matthew

Kathy,

That was elegant. I especially appreciate the feminine aspect of your way of expression. It lends a pleasing balance to what you say.

I have been curious about Quantum Mechanics for some years now, but I haven't gotton around to studying it and its implications with respect to wider Reality. Thanks for the explanation. I suspected there was a connection there.

with Love,
Bob

Hi Matthew,

I see what you are getting at in regards to torture of another human. For me to understand this I need to look at this from the perspective of individual consciousness projecting down into the earth plane from the beginning of that entity’s experience say perhaps thousands of years ago? That entity’s individual consciousness created fear within itself ever building in magnitude creating distortions of its energy.

The person who would torture does so out of his or her own fear of powerlessness. It’s fear that causes people to behave in horrendous ways sometimes. In groups of people who have like fears, a group consciousness evolves creating say a group consciousness fear of powerlessness.  The greater the consciousness of fear is within individuals, the greater the fear of the collective group, the more horrendous ways in which this group may act. It is an attempt to not feel the pain of their own fears of powerlessness by essentially using shear force to take power away from others. It’s really a concept on so grand of a scale that it is difficult for us to grasp.  And if we try to grasp it from a human perspective only it’s nearly impossible to comprehend.  For me it’s one of those things that you almost have to feel it, rather than think it.

I think as consciousness expands it is always giving understanding and meaning to itself by experiencing the choices it makes. So why would consciousness choose to experience torture? I’m not sure I have a good grasp on this except to say that it must have been beneficial to consciousness in some way.

I think Dave’s reply on this thread speaks to this subject from a human perspective and perhaps practical resolutions to this kind of thing.

The thread is located here:
http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-afterlife-knowledge/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=afterlife_knowledge;action=display;num=1133598631;start=

Thanks, Kathy.  I always like to hear your point of view, as well as Dave's.  I understand your picture now, and it certainly may be correct.  Like attracts like, and if my greater personality had evolved fears that I still carry, then situations in this earth life may, by necessity thrust me toward these situations....

However someone else on this board who seems to have similar experience and thinking to myself, Bob (I believe he mentioned Aikido, the martial art I also practice, based on redirecting an opponent's energy- or centering yourself) also mentioned the Bhagavad Gita.  In the Gita, Arjuna a warrior from a proud family is overcome with sorrow, when he realizes what will come of the battle he is about to engage in with carnage.  He is told, in essence, by the deity Krishna, that to try to escape earthly assignments, family honor, and the like will not lead him to heaven.

A synopsis is:

"The Bhagavad gita teaches how to escape from this predicament, not by mere escape from the burdens of the worldly life, or avoidance of responsibilities, but by remaining amidst the humdrum of life and facing them squarely with a sense of fearlessness, detachment and stability of mind accepting God as the Doer.

According to the Bhagavad gita, salvation is not possible for those who want to escape from life and activity. Those who remain amidst society, unafraid of the burdens of life, and live a life of sacrifice fully surrendering to God are in fact more qualified for it.

Those who are prepared to go through the battles of life, through self-discipline, stability of mind, detachment, surrendering to God with full devotion, wisdom , right discrimination and knowledge, are qualified to attain liberation and union with the Supreme."

The Gita, an ancient text of wisdom thus encourages action in daily life, and in battles of the mundane type be they love, war, study, so long as one can do it in a detached way, with devotion to God.  Fear/wrong should be eliminated if one follows what is called "right action," but this implies that we should play the game down here on the planet.  In a sense, in order to have the golden rule, and right action, there are (as a previous poster noted), definitions of good/bad, right/wrong.  I suppose that is what started me on these posts.  Because I feel that in a cosmic sense, in the highest plane of existence, there is only love and good.  I think we need the labels the "beliefs" you mentioned as we interact down here with each other.  

Can we transcend the beliefs while incarnate?  I suppose so.  But then, we are still obliged to interact with humanity as a whole, and to relate to each on his/her level for a time.

Best to you,


Matthew

Quote:

Two, you and Rax both are ignoring one word: OBJECTIVE. I said that hate (fear)/evil has no OBJECTIVE existence.

You havent read my previous post then, it seems.  I have said basically you are in denial of the objective existence of these. You say they dont exist, and i have said you deny their existence, which you do.

Quote:

I don't accept duality as Reality. But that is the vocabulary of C1 existence and how we understand reality up to a certain point. In fact, I don't accept C1 existence as Reality. I liken it to a hologram. Alysia compares it to a movie. The real Reality is  spiritual existence, the Afterlife. Duality is an artificial construct within an artificial reality.

I dont see why, in what you say...
C1 is objective physical reality, yes?
Ok, then you go on to say its artificial though the real reality is spiritual existence.  Which is an inner outer split, coorect?  the true better reality being the subjective , better than the artificial objective reality??
You my friend also deny, and fail to Love, objective reality. you fail to understand and appreciate that the real reality is the reality of both subjective and objective experience. Or else you wouldnt be here experiencing your "spirituality"
What you have is...an inner/outer duality in opposition where one is focused on as better than or 'more real' than the other."(whatever 'more real' means...) (Or what ever it means how one could be more or less artificial then another.)

Suppose your objective perception of your 'real' 'spirituality' is artificial itself. heh

The spiritual pursuit in this way is officially artificial imo. A system of denial and judgement itself that holds a 'better way'. Where good is  equated with spirituality, bad associated with any persuit not in accordance with the  guidelines of spirituality. And the breaking of those guidelines a basis for guilt and regret and punishment.

Oh, but what i would say also, is that is hate and evil or fear dont exist, then neither do guilt, regret, punishment, torture, soccer balls, the walls of my room, earth, objective reality. beliefs, ideas, feelings, expressions....

And how can you deny the  reality of duality, of inner outer.. of good and evil, right and wrong, hot cold, dark light....please.  You just label it differently as 'love or absence of love,' and other such metaphorrs of the dual concept.

Hi Gerald,


Quote:

The starting point is a complete trust in self.

Are you telling ME this?.....LOL.

YES, and I'm glad to see that finally you have seeing the importance of TRUST.

LOVE
Marta

Raz,

I'm tired of your fallacious responses. I'm also sick of your patronizing tone.

You are free to declare victory. I sense that this is important to you, although I'm sure you'll deny that. I'm no longer responding to your posts in this thread

Bob

lmao   :-X

The better man wins, right rob roy?  Its bad that i would want to win, but you cant win, your right.
So since you cant win its bad that I should want to, right?  
Since you cant win, you will still remain better than me by saying that only an a$$ would want to win or think thats important?. therefore I win, but am still a loser because i want to win.
Nice judgement, resulting from you 'needing' a way to deal with my opinions.

Is that why you run from my presence and attitude?
Either way, someones wrong here.  Again showing there is right and wrong.  Again showing you the existence of 'things'

Venting a bit, are we? More fallaciousness, more arrogance. All I had to do was push one little button and Wham! out came more.

How old are you, anyway? Don't lie.

Tell me, how many times have you faced the enemy in combat? As many as I have? Not at all? Then don't suggest I'm a coward.  You really have no idea what you are taking about. Run from you? The only reason you can get away with saying that is because you aren't standing in front of me. But you know that and that makes you oh sooo brave.

Your "presence"? What presence? Just who in the hell do you think you are?

Your attitude? Therein lies the problem. I don't want to deal with your arrogance.

Apologize and we can continue our discussion. I don't fault you for having weaknesses; I have many of my own. But I will not discuss right and wrong with someone who insults me while he is addressing me with his ideas.

Bob

How many times have i faced the enemy in combat? ::).
How old am i ?

 Dont worry, your older, and much more superior in understanding than me because of your larger number of years, right?

Bingo! A juvenile. I knew it.  ::)

Now that I understand you a bit better I am willing to continue, but please be more careful about you tone and attitude.

So you believe then that age is superiority. Now that thats established.  I am then coming to you from an angle in which you should be able to adapt to without comparison of age or combat experience.
though
Since you have lost and admitted defeat already, you have to save face in some way, i understand,...if you will be outwitted by a juvenile than surely you will be superior in some other ways to compensate the ego.  
So lets see, im juvenile and arrogant and you are old and wise, then?  does that bring it up to date?

OK, you *win*. Bye.

wrote on Dec 11^th, 2005 at 8:50pm:

Hi Gerald, Are you telling ME this?.....LOL. YES, and I'm glad to see that finally you have seeing the importance of TRUST. LOVE Marta

I had to go through some upheaval to learn this LOL

In retrospect, my INTENT was answered. Its your own awareness, your own knowing that is important all the rest is excess baguage.

Your INTENT IS answered.  You have to be attentive and follow through.  No right or wrong.

Love Gerald

I can't believe my post started all this!!!

Right now I'm trying to deal with my own psychological issues and be OK with myself living today (I haven't been eating, been very depressed, etc).

I know I've opened up a can of worms in my head that will probably never go away (like those people in Russell Crowe's head at the end of "A Beautiful Mind"), but I hope to deal with it the best way I can.

I need to start some serious meditation to relax myself and open myself up to whatever is out there.

Quote:

In retrospect, my INTENT was answered. Its your own awareness, your own knowing that is important all the rest is excess baguage.   Your INTENT IS answered.  You have to be attentive and follow through.  No right or wrong.

What does that even mean?  That is neither logical or clear or understandable.  Are you ad- libbing?

wrote on Dec 12^th, 2005 at 12:56pm:

What does that even mean?  That is neither logical or clear or understandable.  Are you ad- libbing?

Well you see Raz...this is a riddle.  Marta understand very well. Maybe, if you work at it you will come to understand.

But you are smart, and since you know much more than all the people here,  maybe there's a chance that you will come to solve this riddle. LOL!

You have no idea what your talking about, do you?

Thats not even close to a riddle.  Thats an incoherent statement you want others to think makes  sense? Or i should figure that out? you mine as well be talking in chinese, gerald. And call the translation of your chinese into english the riddle.

Woah! Cut the crap! :(

Seriously, there is not a single reason for degrading into personal attacks in this forum, especially since we as humans have no right to judge each other when we're basically nothing more than fellow journeymen.

Also, "Raz," c'mon, guy. You're probably a gamer, aren't you? That, plus your linguistics puts you at around my age, give or take five years or so. Since we're younger, we have to work harder to prove ourselves here, so...let's just take it easy, okay? Right? Thanks.

Where are the personal attacks?  Have i stuck a knife in anyone here?  Have i put cyanide in your glass of wine?  I am attacking no one. No one is being harmed.  How many times do i have to say that?
Ill call you a name, but does that name harm you? or do i harm you? no, you harm yourself according to YOUR beliefs.  Personal attack from words? from me,...please.

wrote on Dec 12^th, 2005 at 12:32pm:

I can't believe my post started all this!!! Right now I'm trying to deal with my own psychological issues and be OK with myself living today (I haven't been eating, been very depressed, etc). I know I've opened up a can of worms in my head that will probably never go away (like those people in Russell Crowe's head at the end of "A Beautiful Mind"), but I hope to deal with it the best way I can. I need to start some serious meditation to relax myself and open myself up to whatever is out there.

Cookies..u didn't do anything wrong by starting this thread and I hope we can get back to whatever topic you started; you might have to guide us on that, but wouldn't blame you if you vacated the area; I see a lot of land mines myself here. anyhoo, theres not a whole lot of answers on this forum right now, not in a personal way, so just don't take the blame for it is all I want to say. lets face it, this forum is just like life itself and heres what some of us do...
http://images.bravenet.com/common/images/smilies/badair.gif

I'm so nice, thats the first time I got to use that icon, so thanks whoever inspired me..

Alysia,

Are you now a rootin', tootin' cowgirl?  ;D

Bob

Bob, I love the cowboy days truly I do, only they didn't have long lives, but guess that was ok..I really don't know how to answer your question without seeming to have a large selfish ego and get sued for slander of my own self... :-*

wrote on Dec 14^th, 2005 at 12:13pm:

Where are the personal attacks?  Have i stuck a knife in anyone here?  Have i put cyanide in your glass of wine?  I am attacking no one. No one is being harmed.  How many times do i have to say that? Ill call you a name, but does that name harm you? or do i harm you? no, you harm yourself according to YOUR beliefs.  Personal attack from words? from me,...please.

Well, y'know, you haven't been exactly, er, polite. And to quote Billy Shakestick, "If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?"

In a roundabout way, I'm kind of saying that maybe even if you're not physically hurting somebody, you're not being very accomodating towards them, right? Right?

Alysia,

It was a rhetorical question, a joking question, playing off the farting smilie you used.  ;D


Bob

Quote:

Well, y'know, you haven't been exactly, er, polite. And to quote Billy Shakestick, "If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?"   In a roundabout way, I'm kind of saying that maybe even if you're not physically hurting somebody, you're not being very accomodating towards them, right? Right?

Sasuke, Im not running a hotel here, ok?
As long as you admit there is no harm being done you can stuff your claims of personal attack.  Unless i should feel guilty for being less than polite, in your eyes?, sorry, i dont.

wrote on Dec 14^th, 2005 at 10:40pm:

Alysia, It was a rhetorical question, a joking question, playing off the farting smilie you used.  ;D Bob

oh, I didn't get the connection between cowgirls and farts. sorry! is there a connection? :P

Raz, it's an attack. u have diaherra. u need to take your own cure. Susuke is very perceptive. lets talk about genuine experiences here and get back on track and stop exploring your diaherra, go see a counselor, go see your mom, just go see somebody.

This is a genuine expereince.

 Though it doesnt meet your spiritual criteria, this I understand. :)

and why the need to defend Susake. she is not a victim of me.

wrote on Dec 15^th, 2005 at 12:20am:

and why the need to defend Susake. she is not a victim of me.

I'd be exceptionally pleased if you could at least try to spell my name right. =\ It's Sasuke.

You're not running a hotel, no. I've never said so. However, you are in an online community where people are supposed to feel safe sharing their thoughts and experiences, and you're not really, y'know, contributing to that too much. I admit you're getting a little picked on back, but that's sort of a reflexive thing when somebody else feels offended, right?

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing, it's just how you go about doing it. Try being a little bit less rough, okay?

Sasuke-

Yes, folks can get a little rough on this board.  Especially those folks who always profess having so much PUL.  Strange how their PUL vanishes faster than an ice cube on the equator as soon as someone posts something that they don't like.

Gee I guess all that pure love isn't so unconditional after all, huh?

Bruce,

If you are reading, I would close this thread, or edit out all extraneous comments and cut it down to two pages.  It has gone too far off the discussion path


Matthew

Quote:

I'd be exceptionally pleased if you could at least try to spell my name right. =\ It's Sasuke.

Sasuke, there i spelt your name right this time, as im sure having your name mispelt or mispronounced brings you such harm, and you will no doubt think thats an attack too.


Quote:

However, you are in an online community where people are supposed to feel safe sharing their thoughts and experiences, and you're not really, y'know, contributing to that too much.

go figure, this is what i am sharing.  is how individuals are prone to think they are being harmed or not safe.  I understand you have a community here where pul is the absolute, and this is (for all who suscribe to pul here) a safety mechanism.  Though its something i disagree with and its something i will argue


Quote:

I admit you're getting a little picked on back, but that's sort of a reflexive thing when somebody else feels offended, right?

Yes, but i dont reinforce them as a personal attack or percieving insults to be harmful to my person.

And besides,
Are you making an excuse of how laffingrain strayed from pull to insult me?  So what, i half expect pul'ers to be hypocrites, and as i have been saying from the get go, the penchant  of pul'ers to want to deny and negate anger or unsavory sentiments.
Actually i was a little surprised by laffingrain's comments because they arent nearly as light and loving as her pul should be.
Thats what i have been testing here is this claim of pul, for one.


Rondele has the idea, anyway, and he said it well.

wrote on Dec 15^th, 2005 at 9:52am:

Gee I guess all that pure love isn't so unconditional after all, huh?

Pure Unconditional Love does not excuse inappropriate behavior.


Quote:

Bruce, If you are reading, I would close this thread, or edit out all extraneous comments and cut it down to two pages.  It has gone too far off the discussion path Matthew

I agree with Matthew.

This is no excuse, but

if one could sit in PUL, wouldn't one not be hurt-able? Like you wouldn't feel the pain?

If I could experience good PUL, wouldn't that protect me? Certainly from something as minor as a web-site "diss"-ing.

If I could sit in PUL, would I care what anyone said to me?

wrote on Dec 15^th, 2005 at 12:15am:

This is a genuine expereince.  Though it doesnt meet your spiritual criteria, this I understand. :)

_____
ok, I'll give you that. but still I'm trying to figure out what this thread has to do with remaining on topic?
maybe we could try to start a new topic with the title "what is unconditional love energy exactly?"
so maybe I'll go do that unless another would do the honor. for now, I would agree with Kathy and Mathew, to move this thread to off topic-we have hit another stalemate insofar as staying on topic and maybe we should not talk about personal subject matter unless it relates to the whole of the board in some way. I do not wish to attack anybody's viewpoint but we are in need of healing. Bruce, if you are out there, it would be a suggestion that we could have a room set up for "Healing" purposes only. then when a member seems to be hurting really badly about something we don't understand too well, we could all gather there for that purpose only and maybe we could see some miracles take place? I'm up for it. we could call it The Closet Healer, or just The Closet? because the closet suggests a reference to prayer, and prayer is very productive, I think we can agree on that point about prayer, although I know many of you are not religious...then we could come up with another term perhaps..maybe this: The waiting room.  you know, just before giving birth, you go into the waiting room. something like that. I thought about the complaint room, but then we might get too many complaints! :o well, I don't know, it's like up to all of us what kind of board we generate here. love, alysia

wrote on Dec 15^th, 2005 at 12:34pm:

This is no excuse, but if one could sit in PUL, wouldn't one not be hurt-able? Like you wouldn't feel the pain? If I could experience good PUL, wouldn't that protect me? Certainly from something as minor as a web-site "diss"-ing. If I could sit in PUL, would I care what anyone said to me?

Hi Lucy,

I'm short on time to write a post today.  I will try to post on Alysia's PUL thread she just started tomorrow. My blog has an article that might interest you.

The link is here:
http://lightsoflove.blogspot.com/2005/10/to-judge-or-not-to-judge.html

Quote:

ok, I'll give you that. but still I'm trying to figure out what this thread has to do with remaining on topic?

With pure unconditional love, who cares?  I mean isnt that the point, to unconditionally love this thread regardless of its conditions? Or unconditionally love my negative comments to you?  Or my disagreement with the fluff new age suggestions of unconditional love? Arent you supposed to be purely unconditionally loving these things?

Anyway, Donald berserk has started another thread branching off from this one dealing with metaphysical values which i am challenging there, as well.



And did everyone notice DocM's attempt at negation of this thread?, though pages ago he claimed he wouldnt be back to reply in this thread?

Maybe he feels he's being attacked too....

Good grief, enough is enough. It really saddens me to see so much chaos here.

Just because someone professes PUL doesn't mean that they are perfect at it, or even good at it. Most people would agree that lying is not good, but how many of us can say we have never lied?

Those who expect others to be perfect before saying anything are those who will not listen to anyone who is not perfect, thereby relieving themselves of the respnsibility of listening because they know no one is perfect.

I agree this thread should be closed.

Bob

Alysia,

I was JOKING? I was referring to the rootin', toontin' part, not the cowgirl part, whatever. You seem quite serious so I think I may have offended you so for that I apologize.

Bob

Raz, you baited me well.  

Look at my post.  I said that I had said all I had to say on the topic of "right or wrong," and that I wouldn't post again on that topic (which the thread lost track of anyway).

I am not certain why you felt the need to mention that, but you must have something better to do with your time than spam up this board.

Discussion is fine about ideas.  When it gets personal, it may be fine in an off topic area if both sides agree to pursue it.  

DocM

wrote on Dec 15^th, 2005 at 4:33pm:

Alysia, I was JOKING? I was referring to the rootin', toontin' part, not the cowgirl part, whatever. You seem quite serious so I think I may have offended you so for that I apologize. Bob

no offense..honest! later, after I asked u about it..I did get the tootin part..I got that in my head like mental telepathy..so now I think I'm connected to you. well, I always did feel a strong connection with a number of folk here, so anyway..for what its worth, there go TOOT! TOOT! carry on mate!

Quote:

Look at my post.  I said that I had said all I had to say on the topic of "right or wrong," and that I wouldn't post again on that topic (which the thread lost track of anyway).

No, it didnt lose track., i mentioned before this thread was about right and wrong before it even started.  And again notice how the judgement of right and wrong is being expressed throughout.

You dont even need a topic specifically about judgement though, it permeates all topics!..lol

Raz said: With pure unconditional love, who cares?  I mean isnt that the point, to unconditionally love this thread regardless of its conditions? Or unconditionally love my negative comments to you?  Or my disagreement with the fluff new age suggestions of unconditional love? Arent you supposed to be purely unconditionally loving these things?
____


Raz, please join us on the other thread about PUL. I think this one is about ready to bomb...

Alysia,

We are connected.  Since you did see me over there (I have no memory of it), we must have made this connection stronger while we were together, since you are now picking up on me like that.

Bob

well Bob, I am facinated with whats going on these days...I know, I feel very certain we are a group that meets while we sleep. we will remember more as time goes on, or only what we need to remember we will. yes, I agree its much easier to connect with certain people than others. I think its neat!
my vocabulary could use some work though!

Alysia,

You don't need to worry about your vocabulary. You are wise and well understood.

Love,
Bob

I got you confused with Marilyn, who said that she saw me at the Humor Center. Sorry. Even so, I know we are connected so I don't doubt that we do see each other over there.

http://images.bravenet.com/common/images/smilies/bouncer.gif http://images.bravenet.com/common/images/smilies/bouncer.gif http://images.bravenet.com/common/images/smilies/bouncer.gif

thanks Bob. this is the real me in case anybody sees me out there. really sorry if I insult anybody's intelligence. I just need to get on my trampoline once in a while. thanks again...

How could you possibly be insulting anyone's intelligence? Are you feeling down right now? Or am I totally off base.

Projecting PUL to you, even though you are asleep.

Love,
Bob

wrote on Dec 15^th, 2005 at 10:55pm:

http://images.bravenet.com/common/images/smilies/bouncer.gif http://images.bravenet.com/common/images/smilies/bouncer.gif http://images.bravenet.com/common/images/smilies/bouncer.gif thanks Bob. this is the real me in case anybody sees me out there. really sorry if I insult anybody's intelligence. I just need to get on my trampoline once in a while. thanks again...

Nope, no worries, chickadee. You're good to have around.

wrote on Dec 16^th, 2005 at 2:11am:

How could you possibly be insulting anyone's intelligence? Are you feeling down right now? Or am I totally off base. Projecting PUL to you, even though you are asleep. Love, Bob

___

recognizing your young strong energy here Sasuke and thanking you dear.

oh, Bob, u are too perceptive. really, its nothing :-X B-man said he didn't need clown energy so I took it personally. I should know better. love, alysia