anyone read his latest experiences at a seance.....very interesting.

Any chance of a link to whatever your referring to, im not familier with 'victor zammit' Thanks :)

www.victorzammit.com   Friday Report June 30th.

It is very interesting. Thanks for the link.

Love, Mairlyn

Thank you for bringing that up, evolver!
It's more than I expected.
I thought we returned to a more ideal form; the first voice seemed a bit addled--why would he not be better prepared for such a meeting?
They sounded aged--? I can rationalise that the aged sounds of their voices came because of the artificial esophagus, and that some air comes thru, not connecting with vocal chords. I would like to hear the medium's natural voice too to compare; does anyone know of recordings of this David Thompson's voice?
The concepts for afterlife possibilities fit with Bruce and RAMs, etc.
Thanks, bets

I downloaded it. It was great!

The voice of the etherean Arthur Conan Doyle probably sounds aged because he wants to seem identifiable as his earth bound personality, a well known author and personality in spiritualism who lived to age 71.

Like in the Leslie Flint Direct Voice Tapes which I've also listened to many of them, the spirit entities want to use a voice which is familiar to those back on earth so they are more easily recognisable. So Arthur Conan Doyle wouldn't want to speak like a young man because it wouldn't carry the credibility to prove he is who he says he is.

I have a little concern. I'm sure there's an explanation.

Why does the Arthur Conan Doyle on the Leslie Flint Direct Voice Tapes sound so different to the Arthur Conan Doyle that came through the materialisation medium David Thompson?

It puzzles me a bit. I'm not going to say there's faking going on because I think it is affected by the different ectoplasm of the mediums.

Zammit indeed has done an extraurdinary work in compiling so many evidence and more importantly, distributing them FREE..This is most important as it shows that he really wants to pass the message.

As for the voices now, there are many things one can say, one for instance is the breathing, if they are ethereal there should be no breathing sounds, unless the ethereals  wanted to make the voices more real. In addition there is the word friends, my friends, that seem to be repeated by the Etherial guide Whiliam and by Sir arthur conan doyle....and their voices are somehow similar too. I don't say anything I just observe these two facts....

All and all the guy seem to be really honest about all these things and his site gives tons of info.....a real must read :)

There are 'wooshing' sounds and these are part of the process of the spirit beginning and finishing their talk as they use the ectoplasm to come through and then make a loud sound upon departure.

Very interesting although i could hardly make out what he was saying .. i just caught the a few words here and there.  Sir Arthur Conan Doyle .. what a character he is - never gives up trying to contact the physical realm (i say this because he clairaudiently dictated a book to his wife Mrs C called the Return of Arthur Conan Doyle) and in this book there is a spiritual photograph of him standing next to his wife (he looks like a ghost) ..

mmm i do believe that this is genuine my question though is; how does he make his voice travel? Bets you said .. artifical esophagus, not connected with the vocal chords.  i'm not sure what this means but if it means there is a way of making the vocal chords travel i'm stuck on the point that sound does not travel beyond our atmosphere so that means he must have come down into our sphere ... crossed back over the barrier .. wow.

The points i caught .. over population (true) non-belief in afterlife = long sleep (ow) and he didn't directly answer the re-incarnation question although he said sort of yes but he saw himself has having one life and has not found out about his past lives .. odd that .. because from what i have learnt the past and present become knowing to us.  Is he purposely staying below our shield?
my thoughts;

May Sir Arthur Conan Doyle be doing exactly what he wants to be doing.

He said he lowers his vibrations to our rate of vibration so he can talk to us. He uses the ectoplasm of the medium to enter our atmosphere because he is combining his energy with an earthly entity (the medium's) basically as far as I understand it.

Oh so it was the medium's voice? .. sorry missed that point.  Then that does make sense yes especially lowering his vibrations .. so he's not staying under the shield.  Wow.

I'm confused.

This is what it says on Victor Zammit's site:

"Often the entities would begin speaking using direct voice- an artificial larynx constructed from ectoplasm- the sound coming from close to the medium. Then they would materialise and start to move around the room."

The zammit site is fascinating, with alot of compelling information.

additionally, I am going to have a little fun and take a stab at the Arthur Findlay questions regarding Christianity.  I have responses for every question listed and there are a few of the questions that presume suppositions that I found to be potentially inaccurate in nature.  I wonder if Victor will print my response, though I do not presume to be a theologian.

I do like the site alot, though, and thanks for the link.

I'm going to be honost, I'm not believing this.  A 14 minute WMV sound clip is not going to change what 17 years of life has inforced, but, this:

" There is a good chance David Thompson, the medium will be visiting the United States next year sometime. Leading television stars – such as Oprah Winfrey will be invited to a materialization session "

Makes me very excited.

This, would be somthing that could really shake me, and everyone, to their spiritual core.

I hope for somthing like this to happen.

The 'Matter, that has always existed in one form or another, simply by chance, has transformed itself into us" world view isn't holding up too well, this could be world changing.

;)

Greetings Indiglio,
What were your beliefs before the last 17, if you don't mind me asking? You seem pretty 'right on' this path, using your healthy  skepticism and astute questions.
bets

Not everyone is going to believe these things because of their 'world view' or programming' and you can't hold that against them because we in the physical state cannot see the whole picture like if you were an advanced spirit in the spirit realm.

Gut feelings are not acceptable yet as evidence or logic to most but I just get a good feeling about this website. I think the information is very thorough and genuine and the intent and committment in what he is putting forward can be felt through the emotion of the words. I doubt he'd go to all this trouble if he was not genuine and besides if he backs up what he says he could prove afterlife communication to Oprah Winfrey and if she saw it and was in no doubt what she saw was real then a big celebrity like her will influence people. No doubt about it.

betson wrote on Jul 13^th, 2006 at 10:22am:

Greetings Indiglio, What were your beliefs before the last 17, if you don't mind me asking? You seem pretty 'right on' this path, using your healthy  skepticism and astute questions. bets

What were my beliefes during the 17 years?  Or what were they, say 20 years ago?

If you're asking the first question, and my current outlook, I see a lot of evidence in the afterlife and such, there's just the physical hurdle I can't seem to get over.  The whole 'too good to be true' thing I can't get past, and it's easier for me to believe in nothing.  

If you're asking the second question, well, I'm only 17.   :D

Nicely phrased Indiglo .. theres a piece of graffti i saw once ..

Death is the highest of highs thats why it's left till last  ;D

Earth is matter and matter matters all the time here - it is this matter that makes us grow strong; if we didn't have to matter we would be rather useless, i think.

more i think about it the more i do say that is Sir Arthur because it seems keeping with his character to do something like that.

:)

newwayknight you wrote:

additionally, I am going to have a little fun and take a stab at the Arthur Findlay questions regarding Christianity.  I have responses for every question listed and there are a few of the questions that presume suppositions that I found to be potentially inaccurate in nature.  I wonder if Victor will print my response, though I do not presume to be a theologian.

.. go for it!  you will have a lot of support.  :)

Basically the way I understand it; Victor clearly states that he was raised Catholic but rejects the teachings of the church because they conflict his empirical afterlife research which does not match up with organised religious beliefs. Its closest match is to religion of spiritualism which provides evidence for the afterlife through direct experience and contact through psychics and mediums. Direct Voice Mediums, Materialisation Mediums have teamed up with empiricists and scientists in the past in an attempt to prove the existence of the afterlife. They say they have done it for themselves but when attempting to share the proof with the community at large, they face blockades from organised religion and mainstream science which by large disbelieves in the possibility of afterlife communication and therefore either looks to deny freedom of speech or tries to debunk everything through so called 'scepticism'.

Victor comes from the standpoint that his research is not done on behalf of any faith, it is empirical in nature.

I'm not about targeting the Christians on this board by the way. My honest opinions will be shared though and all I can say is through researching and discovering things for myself, I find that the Christian view of the afterlife is far too simplified and based on subjective material where the original biblical texts no longer exist.

I don't pretend to know all the answers, I am a knowledge seeker and like Victor can't accept things based on faith alone. That doesn't mean that I think Jesus is irrelevant. I believe he was one a highly evolved soul sent to earth incarnate to raise consciousness and awareness. Unfortunately I think the monotheistic religions of Christianity, Islam and Judaism have lost touch with the true spiritual meanings of human kind and the universe in general.

I'm Never Say Die and that's just my view of things. It can be hard conversing with others who have differing views but not so hard if you remember what we're hopefully all here for. TO MAKE KNOWN THE UNKNOWN!

For whatever reason, spirit gave me his name three times last night. I was also shown the word "hell."  Here's an interesting bit of information from his site, from FAQ.


Q4. You said there is no such thing as eternal hellfire - you're wrong. The Bible says there is.

Answer: You will find the English translation talking about 'eternal hellfire' but NOT the original Greek version. Deal with the original not the translations. For too many centuries Christians were deliberately misled about eternal damnation. Some devious Church writer deliberately and intentionally mistranslated a critical word- 'eon.' You will find that whenever 'eon' immediately preceded punishment in the Bible such as hell, this Church translator erroneously and knowingly mistranslated eon to mean 'eternal.' And elsewhere, whenever the same word eon was used, the translator used eon to mean what it truly means, 'a period of time' - in the time of Jesus it was 100 years. Check for yourself. This wilful mistranslation was a deliberate policy by the Church to create unnecessary fear - see a very detailed explanation of this and other deliberate Biblical mistranslations in Communication with the Spirit World of God by J Greber p.377.

Yes I have read his Q and A. Thanks for publishing it on this site.

The way I see it the Bible is only one of many texts from religions and belief systems across the world. I'm interested in finding all I can about the 'true spirituality'.

But still maybe an eon would feel like eternal for a soul with plenty of karmic debt to pay off.  :-/

As many people on this forum say 'fear is not real' or 'fear is the absence of love'. So a loving god in a just universe surely could not condemn a soul to eternal hell where love is the real vitality of the universe.

On the other hand, a hundred years down here might feel like a few days to a spirit.  The key thing is that an eon is quite a different thing than all of eternity. Only an unloving an unwise God would sentence a soul to hell for all of eternity. I for one, can't think of God in such an unloving, blasphemous way.



Never say die wrote on Jul 14^th, 2006 at 12:12pm:

Yes I have read his Q and A. Thanks for publishing it on this site. The way I see it the Bible is only one of many texts from religions and belief systems across the world. I'm interested in finding all I can about the 'true spirituality'. But still maybe an eon would feel like eternal for a soul with plenty of karmic debt to pay off.  :-/ As many people on this forum say 'fear is not real' or 'fear is the absence of love'. So a loving god in a just universe surely could not condemn a soul to eternal hell where love is the real vitality of the universe.

Yes of course time moves differently on the other side for there is no real 'time'

Spiritualist belief speaks of the 'Law of Progress'. To condemn a soul to hell for all eternity would clearly violate this law.

Never say die wrote on Jul 14^th, 2006 at 11:42am:

I don't pretend to know all the answers, I am a knowledge seeker and like Victor can't accept things based on faith alone. That doesn't mean that I think Jesus is irrelevant. I believe he was one a highly evolved soul sent to earth incarnate to raise consciousness and awareness. Unfortunately I think the monotheistic religions of Christianity, Islam and Judaism have lost touch with the true spiritual meanings of human kind and the universe in general. I'm Never Say Die and that's just my view of things. It can be hard conversing with others who have differing views but not so hard if you remember what we're hopefully all here for. TO MAKE KNOWN THE UNKNOWN!

Never Say Die, I am all for free discourse, so do not worry about discussing various beliefs as this is an open forum.  I went through a long period of searching before I became more secure in my own faith.

I would suggest that it is not the religions of Christianity, etc. that have lost touch with true spiritual meanings, but rather many of their followers.  As in my post to Baby Duck on maintaining your faith, she was in a discussion with Catholics who obviously did not have an understanding of the basic Catechism of the Catholic Church. People too often confuse the individual follower with the essence of the faith itself, and people are not infallible and are prone to error.  

If I were to ever talk to Victor, and I am going to email him my responses to Arthur Findlay's questions which I have been working on (and am pretty content with my answers), I would also suggest that the Church also has evolved over the years and its members are still in a process of understanding faith.  The Church is not a static entity, and revelation is occurring all the time and past mistakes are always in the process of being corrected.  This is where I would differ with Victor...he may have been raised in the Catholic Church, but I would be curious as to what his understanding is of the Church and what he had been taught, etc. versus what I've come to discover and learn within the same faith (and bear in mind that I once walked away from the Church for much the same reasons as most people do in frustration with narrow minded individuals and others who did not live what they preached.)  I would also suggest to Victor to not ignore the wealth of empirical evidence that at least validates a genuine nature to the Catholic faith in the world of spiritual development.

From what I've seen on his site regarding "empirical" evidence, I have not seen anything major that heavily contradicts the Catholic faith.  There may be some points which have some different interpretations, but the overall gist seems to be pretty consistent.  Remember that the Catholic Catechism allows fully for members of all religions and faiths to go to heaven if they have led a Christ-like life and been true to their God (I.E. Lived a life of love).  Things such as life-reviews, continued development in the afterlife, coming into understanding of creation and God, etc. have their parrallels with the concepts of purgatory, a judgement (where your own actions judge yourself), and coming face to face (I.E. clarity of God) with God.  

The Catholic Church has experienced moments when its members have gone amiss, but it has evolved to the point where it is a major force for non-violence, peace, and justice in the world today.  Catholic charities are one of the purest charity organizations around in terms of aid dollars going to what they were intended to go for.  This reflects a spirit of love that is inside a good majority of its members, and as most here would agree, a person of love DOES go upward in spiritual development.  It is also a faith that experiences a swarm of validations in miracles, Marian apparitions, and much more that is within the mystical realm.  As mentioned before, I would suggest to Victor (as a man who rests largley on empirical evidence) that the Catholic world also has a host of "empirical evidence" that would validate it as a good path for a person to come to fullness in their life development.