I am enjoying the site and feel that I will learn from it.

I am, however, confused by so many posts that are centered on the traditional concepts of heaven, hell, definitive singular after death experiences, etc.

My understanding is that Mr. Moen had similar experiences to Mr. Monroe and espouses a similar "universe view."

Such views are contradictory to established historical views of heaven, hell, Asgard, 1,000 virgins (or clusters of grapes), or whatever afterlife is promised-either reward or punishment.

I have just discovered this site and will read more posts and obtain Mr. Moen's published works. Regardless of his input or views, I am still befuddled by so many posters espousing traditional religious views.

I am viewing this site because I have firmly rejected the theological ideas of established religions.

To be redundant, and I don't mean to offend, but why are so many here rehashing the same old bits?

More confusing is that many posters seem to hold established views-especially Judeo-Christian, yet write extensively of views and experiences that are counter to those views if not wholly contradictory?

Monroe and the Toltec literature I am familiar with clearly state that there is no "God" in the form of a singular, judgemental deity.

If anything, from a Judeo-Christian perspective, Monroe, Toltec and OOBE works point at best to the demiurge and a muddled earthly creation described in Gnostic literature.

No benevolent  deity (Yahweh, Allah, etc.) with only two options for us: heaven or hell. No earthly similar afterlife as the Egyptians believed.

So why such consistent and pervasive focus on these established religions and their entrenched laws and tenets?

And, has no one else considered this:

Why has all this information been made available to the Western world recently? There have been cryptic Eastern texts and verbal practices in existence for centuries or millnia.

Only in the last few decades, however, have written works from Castaneda, Donner, Abelar, Tunnenshende, Monroe etc. been available.

Yes, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, etc. have much of the information, but not presented in the clear, consise, direct method described in the books of the last half century.

Even some modern music seems to touch on our past lives and celestial potential.

From "Parabol/Parabola" by "Tool"  "...we barely remember who or what came before this precious moment...   ....hold on, stay inside...      ...inside this body holding me...    ...realize that I am not alone...   ...here in this body...   ...bending, swirling with each new experience...   ...reaching up, reaching out...   ...for whatever will bewilder me...   ...hold on, stay inside"

To be clear. These works aren't like a bible where words were written thousands of years ago & have hopefully undergone a new understanding.

These words are new to mankind. Some one, some thing, some "they" are communicating in a very direct way, and it appears to be with some urgency.

It wasn't, in my understanding, until the latter part of the 20th century that these specific words and concepts were published.

Do any of you disagree?

Something cosmic concerning humans and/or the blue planet is pending. We are being made aware of celestial realities at an astonishing rate. This is not "business as usual" in my opinion.

This is not simply publication of experiences such as monks or mystics had but weren't widely known due to poor printing methods or illiteracy. We don't simply know more about "those nut jobs" because of the Internet or newspapers.

The INSPECs told Monroe that he "was part of it" but they didn't describe exactly what "it" was.

Yes, descriptions of potential scenarios and possibly mankind leaving earth are described.

But will this be a simple spiritual evolution or will the earth itself be destroyed or refuse to support human life?

I don't have a problem with the celestial beings not disclosing all they know. We humans probably aren't ready. It is similar to my attempting to explain a complicated technical concept to an infant-pointless.

My point, my complaint, my disappointment is that so many here want to compare baby photos rather than try to move as efficiently as possible to adulthood (ultimate human evolution).

Although I respect the experiences and views of the forum participants, I was, frankly, expecting more "celestial transcripts" and "energetic facts of the universe) (a Toltec term).

I find many of these personal suppositions and simple restating of the Bible, Koran, or other old texts (forum postings) to be of little or no value to my quest.

If one reads closely in the Monroe/Toltec literature, INSPECS or "inorganic beings" (the Toltec description) have actively been compelling humans to write of concepts and practices that have previously been closely guarded.

This disclosure is clearly for a purpose. Is it an imminent human evolution? A lifeline for those who will listen before the ship sinks (catastrophe on earth)?

I certainly don't know. But I do know that I am disappointed to peruse the forum and read of people still discussing Judas' motivation.

Am I in the wrong place here-seeking answers or some beneficial input-in this forum???

Thanks and, again, respect and appreciation for all who post here. I do understand that the forum participants mean well and are also seeking important answers.

Hello NMM:

The main reason is that people who have such beliefs decided to join this forum. None of these people are like Evangelical Christians.

I don't believe there is a reason to be concerned. Believe what you want to believe.

Also, you don't need to be afraid of God and Jesus, even though some people have made it seem as if you should be afraid of them. Beings of love and light aren't mindless ruthless dictators.

Hi. It's hard to know a site when reading a thread here and a thread there. This site has been a real journey for those who have been here a long time. People like to talk about their beliefs, traditions, and their evolving understanding of their own history. Even you bring your own readings and "human evolution" to the table. Mainly, people here are trying to understand those concepts which are meaningful to their own and others' afterlives. That covers a lot of ground.

I've learned a lot here about people's hearts, including my own. I am so grateful.

But, that's another story.... :) Enjoy.

I don't use the word "God" its such a loaded word, 
well to me it is, "Source of creation" or "
Source of the universe" rings true in my ears,
some of  the christian references posted here did make me ask the same question,
but each to their own I guess,
Paul.

Paulie:

I get what you're saying, but I don't mind using the word "God" because I don't think of the concepts of others when I do so.

Same with the word "love."



Paulie wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 4:07am:

I don't use the word "God" its such a loaded word,  well to me it is, "Source of creation" or " Source of the universe" rings true in my ears, some of  the christian references posted here did make me ask the same question, but each to their own I guess, Paul.

This site has had a lot of different posters over the years and seems to go through phases.  I personally like and don't mind all the diversity.  What I don't like is the repetitive debates that seem to never run their course no matter how much the same things get said over and over.  To me it just comes off as competition or someone trying to convince and change others to conform to their beliefs. 

I think the reason you see so much focus on religion is simply because there are a some posters here who persist in posting their views as much as possible, which can deter other people from even bothering to post anything at all for fear that they will just be "attacked".  But that's not to say that one type of belief overrules others.  Participation is key in keeping a site like this successful.  We need all kinds of input and sharing and experience in order to have a good community.

But the diversity in beliefs is what makes the topics of afterlife discussion so important and valuable to everyone.  No matter what your background and experience is, there's a lot of common ground as far as what we're all searching for inside of ourselves.  We are all on our own journey of experience, discovery, and belief, but we hopefully can learn from each other and help each other along the way.

Well good for you then recoverer, like I said each to their own.

Hello NMM and welcome,

I know where you're coming from. It's so cool finding others who understand and want to share similar beliefs and experiences.

Bruce has always fostered a free-for-all kinda website, with emphasis on learning to directly experience and share alternate states of consciousness...and love. When I discovered thirteen years ago that he had figured out what Bob Monroe had meant when he wrote of 'phasing', and he learned not only how to do it but how to teach it to others...it was bonanza time for me :).

Hope you stick around. There are a lotta good people here.

Much love,

Ginny

 

Greetings.

   I'm just your typical he/she wannabe co-worker with god and the spiritual minded kind of person you may find here from time to time. I've studied many beliefs and philosophies and find all of it as just tools to keep in my mental bag while I go adventuring wherever my consciousness will take me.

   I'm always open minded and always happy to learn more since there's so much to learn that I could spend an eternity learning if I wish, with occasional breaks for games and entertainment when needed.

   This website has been very beneficial for me in my quest in gaining an understanding of what the big picture has in store for us all. Good things are ahead.

Ralph / Ralphina

I wonder if the often mentioning of "God" means that certain
people want to convert atheists to some kind of religion?

   Is there a separate omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent being or god that made it all? Is everything that exists contained within this god's body, or is it a free universe where we are self sustaining balls of energy that don't have to be a part of any god?

   I believe the ladder to be the case, as in Jacob's ladder to Heaven which anyone can climb.

Ralph

PauliEffectt wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 1:13am:

I wonder if the often mentioning of "God" means that certain people want to convert atheists to some kind of religion?

Betson said some time ago that there are a lot of Christians is the US. So that alone makes it more likely that the word God is often used. Just a matter of statistics.


But if it would work to convert an atheist by using the word God..... :

God God God God God God God God God God God God God God
God God God God God God God God God God God God God God
God God God God God God God God God God God God God God
God God God God God God God God God God God God God God
God God God God God God God God God God God God God God
God God God God God God God God God God God God God God

So??????

you tell me

I love your post, NMM.  What you bring up is the very same reason I don’t care to post here anymore.  I love the works of Robert Monroe, Bruce Moen, William Buhlman, etc., but many times when I check into this forum, it feels like a christian site, and I want nothing to do with the belief system territories, unless it is to help someone escape from them, lol.  :)

SHSS wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 8:31pm:

I love your post, NMM.  What you bring up is the very same reason I don’t care to post here anymore.  I love the works of Robert Monroe, Bruce Moen, William Buhlman, etc., but many times when I check into this forum, it feels like a christian site, and I want nothing to do with the belief system territories, unless it is to help someone escape from them, lol.  :)

I haven't read much of William Buhlman, not for a while anyway.  Does he also write about retrievals??

I'm pretty sure I have a book of his on my shelf.  I'll have to dig it out and take a look at his work again. 

:)

Vicky wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 11:37pm:

I haven't read much of William Buhlman, not for a while anyway.  Does he also write about retrievals?? I'm pretty sure I have a book of his on my shelf.  I'll have to dig it out and take a look at his work again.  :)

I think William Buhlman is great!  Check out his YouTube Video’s, there are tons of them.  He still does talks at the Monroe Institute.  I don’t think he’s into retrievals, but he does refer people to Bruce Moen when the subject comes, and he talks about the same method that Bruce writes about.

Frank Kepple (now moved on) is one I’m really glad I found.  I can’t recommend his works highly enough.  Bruce Moen, though, is tops as far as retrievals.

http://www.astralpulse.com/frankkepple.html

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_permanent_astral_topics/the_frank_kepple_phasing_resource_is_now_available-t25809.0.html
:)

SHSS wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 12:16am:

Frank Kepple (now moved on) is one I’m really glad I found.  I can’t recommend his works highly enough.

I have to object. Since I've read almost everything Kepple wrote, I must
say, something is wrong. I even took the time to write two reviews on
the Kepple "PDF" and on his newsletters.

I would say that Kepple's writings raises so many question marks
that any reader of his material should think twice.

---


Also, as you know, the site name astralpulse is composed of Robert Bruce's concepts,
the Astral Wind and the Akashic Pulse.

Over the years I've seen comments from people, who have mentioned that
perhaps Kepple was there to function as an opposition to Robert Bruce,
who sort of was pushed out of the astralpulse site. You judge that.

Kepple was seen on some other forum, but mostly was an astralpulse guy.

Then some time passed, and Kepple disappeared.


It could be an idea to think twice.

Thank you PauliEffectt.  Interesting, I had no idea there was all this going on, hmm.  I’ll look these over tomorrow.   :-*

SHSS,
Thanks for the links.  This is absolutely crazy!  I know I have his book Adventures Beyond the Body.  After I posted to you I went to look for it on my shelf and then realized I'm "friends" on FB with him, ha ha, so of course I have his book.  But I can't find the gosh darn book anywhere.  This always happens.  The one thing you're looking for goes missing mysteriously.  Of course, my bedroom isn't the most organized of places.    ::)

Thanks for bringing him up though.  I'm back on my OBE kick and going to re-read all I can to stimulate the process. 

Perhaps this thread about Frank Kepple should be considered.

http://afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1290101682

Regarding there being a being like God, even Robert Monroe and Bruce Moen wrote about a creator. Here's something I wrote.  It isn't about God, but speaks about Source Being at the beginning.

http://nondualityisdualistic.com/articles-2012/why-we-go-through-a-creative-process-121212/

Vicky:

Are you confusing William Buhlman with Frank Kepple?

To PauliEffectt:  You appear to feel very strongly about the Frank Kepple material, and I respect your opinions, but I can honestly say that I resonate very strongly with Franks’ views.  My own experiences are very close.  Not exact, by any means, but probably closer than any other person I’ve read.

After having struggled for years to consciously leave my body the old fashioned way with no results what-so-ever, I discovered phasing while meditating, and presto!  So when I found Frank’s writings, they just reinforced what I had already been experiencing.

Apparently, many of us are different, which makes life interesting, but phasing during meditation and/or simply waking up, or becoming lucid during dreams has been right for me.  The old way of paying too much attention to the body held me back.

I don’t agree with everything anyone has to say, for I have my own experiences.  For example:  I’ve found that we use many different types of bodies for experience, and so what some may call aliens, and/or other very differently appearing beings are quite real for me.  Imagination is real.

Anyway, what anyone has to say is all a matter of personal opinion, and isn’t that what it’s all about?  The main reason I got into this in the first place was/is to find my own answers.  If someone else has something to share on the subject, I’m all ears, but I always keep in mind that it’s just their opinion.  I don’t really know anything until I experience it myself.

Vicky, you have the sweetest face.  I hope you find your books.  Yeah, I agree, reading and becoming totally absorbed in the OBE material seems to help some.  ;)

recoverer wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 1:30pm:

Vicky: Are you confusing William Buhlman with Frank Kepple?

Nope.  I googled William Buhlman and saw his book that I'm looking for that I know I have.  He's definitely who I remember reading years back.

I am not familiar with Kepple at all. 

SHSS wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 1:44pm:

Vicky, you have the sweetest face.  I hope you find your books.  Yeah, I agree, reading and becoming totally absorbed in the OBE material seems to help some.  ;)

Thanks for that compliment.   :)


PS--I just now found the book.  So happy to have it serendipitously in my hands again by way of this thread.  I've been wanting so badly to do more OBE work and writings.  I can see by the things I've underlined in his book that he has some things I was looking for, trying to remember, but couldn't remember where I'd read them.
;)

pauli,

I almost got frank kepples book that was on the internet but it came across like a real hard sell, like sites that sell work at home books. frank took a lot of peoples money and they never even got his book mailed or dwnloaded as he promised them.

mandy

Mandy wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 7:38pm:

I almost got frank kepples book that was on the internet but it came across like a real hard sell, like sites that sell work at home books.

No book. The information I have, is that there never was any book.

NMM wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 2:37pm:

...traditional concepts of heaven, hell, definitive singular after death experiences, etc.

Ancient Vedic texts of the Indus Pennisula also have demons and angels as good and evil devas. There are afterlife realms of good and evil. In ancient Sumer, Greece, and in all Semitic cultures and in Nordic and Celtic  cultures there were beliefs regarding afterlife realms separating the good and the evil spirits.


Quote:

My understanding is that Mr. Moen had similar experiences to Mr. Monroe and espouses a similar "universe view."

Bruce Moen can and might choose to speak for himself on this subject but on this site he has posted that he found OBE difficult. His experience is not the same as Monroe's who phased or internally projected into the microcosm rather than the macrocosm. Monroe on the other hand did not imply that he could do soul retrievals. I do not find their experiences parallel.

Frank Keppel from Astral Pulse took money and disappeared with it , after promising to teach courses. He and Aidan mutinied and banned Robert Bruce from his own site and Robert Bruce built Astral Dynamics. Aidan copied a chapter of Robert's AD into his "book" and asked Robert to agree to that as if Aidan had written it but of course the publisher would not agree to plagiarism. Frank bullied and ridiculed all those who wrote on AD about projection or clairvoyance and banned a large group of Bruce supporters after Aidan took over the site AP. Frank posted that he 'felt' experiences from internal phasing.

Frank debated with me concerning angels and afterlife realms and baited me asking me to prove it. We agreed to concurrently project. He was an anchor having little ability or light but we linked and I took him to the Gates of Death where he claimed he could see some angels and something of that realm.  However, he then posted that he could teach others to see and work with angels and how to fly to the Gates of Death, which was not the case.


Quote:

Such views are contradictory to established historical views of heaven, hell, Asgard, 1,000 virgins (or clusters of grapes), or whatever afterlife is promised-either reward or punishment.

Monroe was an atheist whom changed his mind at the end of his life regarding Godhead and wrote that he believed in God, then. As did Carl Jung who having survived NDEs wrote The Red Book professing an interest in all things mystical and a deep faith which he attempted to instil in his daughter.


Quote:

More confusing is that many posters seem to hold established views-especially Judeo-Christian, yet write extensively of views and experiences that are counter to those views if not wholly contradictoryI do not find it so contradictory. Within these religions there is a wide scope of beliefs. For example; reincarnation was a belief held by Gnostic Essene Jews. Christ in the Gnostic Apocrypha teaches regarding reincarnation and ascension. The Bible is a collection of books written by diverse authors some of whom contradict each other but within the Bible there is magick; The 3 Magis Biblical Emerald Tablet Three Fold Cord; Ida, Pingala, Sushumna Silver Cord and Golden Bowl Solomon's Ring of Exorcism Prognosticative Dreams , Revelations Visions Communication with Spirit et cetera. [quote]No benevolent  deity (Yahweh, Allah, etc.) with only two options for us: heaven or hell. No earthly similar afterlife as the Egyptians believed.

I do not care what Monroe or Toltec believed or changed their minds to include. Go and see for yourself. There are afterlife realms and these include Hels and Heavens. There are benevolent archangels and the Elohim and Avatars. Learn to see clairvoyantly and to fly in projection and then know.


Quote:

I find many of these personal suppositions and simple restating of the Bible, Koran, or other old texts (forum postings) to be of little or no value to my quest.

Mohammed spoke of flying in a merkabah like Ezekiel and Elijah spoke of and conversing with Gabriel the archangel as he toured the cosmology. There is magick in the Koran, too.

All of these ancient Sacred Texts are based upon mystic experiences of the very real afterlife realms and the other dimensions, of angels and demons of hels and heavens. These are not a Christian or Jewish or Islamic or Abrahamic in general construct. The Tree of Life is universal . It is the spine of each human and the scaffolding upon which the cosmology of the realms is decked. In the solar plexus there is the microcosm. Outside of the body there is the macrocosm. The 7 chakras of the Hindu Vedic texts became the 7 golden lampstands of the Jewish texts. et cetera.

Angels ,Demons,heavens and hels are part of Hinduism which lead to Buddhism and part of all the Abrahamic religions, too.

I am clairvoyant and I am a mystic. I have projected to afterlife realms with clairvoyant peers to tour them and learn and what I experienced there was confirmed by my peers who projected with me in circle. Until one flies to the Higher Planes, how can they be expected to accept the proof of another.

"To those who believe no proof is necessary, for those who do not no proof is possible"

Being religious is not such a bad thing. Study of the Sacred
Texts with discernment is enlightening. I suggest it to you.

Thank you Aunt Clair, for the clearest, most authoritative and empirical description of the construct that I have read in a long time!

Quote:

Aunt Claire, "I do not care what Monroe or Toltec believed or changed their minds to include. Go and see for yourself. There are afterlife realms and these include Hels and Heavens. There are benevolent archangels and the Elohim and Avatars. Learn to see clairvoyantly and to fly in projection and then know."

Projecting/phasing into a belief territory and having a chat with one's favourite saviour can be quite convincing, but an astral thought form is built by the love, care and energy of their believers. Sort of like dreaming about having the most fantastic kiss, only to wake up and find out you're smooching the plastic lips of a doll. Chucky.

I love the way you put that Bob.  Imagination is alive and well no matter where you might find yourself focusing, and sometimes all these archangels, ascended masters, saints, angels, and tooth fairies, can simply disperse and float away into nothing.

Are you really certain that is the case? Why do you give more credibility to the experiences of Moen and Monroe, than the experiences of others? With that way of thinking perhaps Moen hallucinated his experiences with Monroe.

Perhaps you are giving more credence to the experiences of some rather than others, because of your preferences. If that is the case, aren't you dabbling in your own belief system?







SHSS wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 1:39pm:

I love the way you put that Bob.  Imagination is alive and well no matter where you might find yourself focusing, and sometimes all these archangels, ascended masters, saints, angels, and tooth fairies, can simply disperse and float away into nothing.

I would like to expand upon my last post. There are some people who believe that Bruce Moen did in fact contact Robert Monroe after he died, but they don't believe that some people make contact with the spirit of Jesus. Rather, they experience a being such as an NDE light being as Jesus because that's how they interpret their experience.

It could be that some people have falsely concluded that a light being met during an NDE was Jesus. This doesn't mean that all people have concluded in such a false way. I've read of experiences where it was clear that a person did in fact meet Jesus.

My experiences with Jesus took place in a way where it was being made clear that I am experiencing more than what my beliefs are causing me to believe. They took place without my expecting them to take place.

Regarding demons, well, it's a big universe out there, so why couldn't there be unfriendly entities that don't have a human origin? Going by some of my experiences they do exist.

Regarding Angels, I don't know. Perhaps I experienced some without realizing that I was doing so.  Why couldn't there be divine helpers that never had a human experience?

Regarding the gates of hell, I don't know. What about the crystals Bruce wrote about? I've never experienced such a thing. The only person I know of who has written about such a thing is Bruce. Why do people have to hug crystals in order to receive spirit energy?

Is such hugging a symbolic way of receiving energy, or do astral crystals exist just as physical crystals exist? I don't know. If astral crystals can exist, then perhaps a gateway to hell can exist. Perhaps such gateways (and crystals?) are manifested not because they are needed in order for lower realms to exist (or acces to spirit energy), but so people can understand that there is a way to enter a lower realm (or receive spirit energy).

Or in otherwords, sometimes astral manifestations take place not because they are needlesly being hallucinated or because they are needed in order for something to exist, but rather so people can symbolically be told what does exist or is taking place.

Aunt Clair,

I appreciate your input, but I am a bit taken aback.

You seem to have missed my point. I clearly stated that the majority of "traditonal religious content" I referred to was predominantly Judeo-Christian.

You did read that, yes?

I am familiar with Eastern religions, at least at the overview level. Did you not notice my reference to Jainism?

I am not attempting to make detailed statements about Mr. Moen's views or beliefs. I haven't had time to read his work.

I did make it clear that it was my understanding that Moen shared a similar "universe view" with Mr. Monroe. I wrote "my understanding" in my original post.

The "universe view" Mr. Moen has-whatever it is-isn't necessarily directly related to the OBE experience and how easy or difficult it was.

For example, I have never had an OBE or NDE, yet I have embraced much of the content provided by Monroe and TMI.

Your verbosity seems to be inversely proportional to your understanding of my original posting.

Perhaps you should reread my original post.

How do your references to Vedic texts have anything to do with my core commentary?

Monroe clearly wrote that there is no singular God as described in the Judeo-Christian literature. Clearly there is a creator. Monroe's first two books spoke of a "creator who was created."

Whatever ultimate view Monroe assembled, I don't  think anyone on the forum who has read Monroe will contradict my assertion that Monroe repeatedly stated that western religions were wrong in view of heaven, hell, etc.

I am familiar with Jung. And Joseph Campbell and...

...I could go on. 


It seems you are trying to lecture to me or belittle me.

Why?

Please, stop with your description of the biblical origins. I am familiar with much of what you wrote, the council of Nicea and other sources.

You speak in glowing general terms about Judeo-Christian beliefs. The simple reality is that those belief systems, and Christianity in specific, are absolutely based on specfic religious tenets such as heaven and hell.

Do you somehow think you are the only one who has spent years reading various religious texts?

I am on a path to "go and see for myself." Isn't that obvious?

I find you to be judgemental, pretentious and, frankly, rather offensive.

Well, after 12 plus years on this board I don't expect to learn specific information on the afterlife.  Lots of quibbling for sure (some interesting but lately mostly tedious), but no one really knows.  12 more years or even 50 if we're still around won't shed any more light on what is really an ineffable subject.

Contradictions abound, even among supposedly enlightened entities who speak from beyond.  It's like a ship without a rudder, drifting into this port or that port but never having a clue as to where its going or how to get there.

To me what is far more important is how we live this life we have been given.  And in that regard, there are some good guidelines which are pretty consistent.  NDEs, for example, tell us what is important...not about the afterlife as such but how we can best prepare for the afterlife.

Recoverer posted an excellent NDE which I urge everyone to re-read.  Even though we can't agree on what the afterlife is like, I think most of us would agree that how we live this life is really what we should be focusing on.  And if we do the right things, the afterlife will take care of itself.


http://iands.org/experiences/nde-accounts/705-ascension.html

R

Rondele,

I appreciate your perspectives, but I disagree on a few key points.

I am looking to learn more about the afterlife or the "ultimate reality of it all."

I have learned much lately. I have a good understanding of Eastern religions and have spent a great deal of time studying Toltec literature and practices.

I have learned, from Monroe and TMI, that there are 46 perceivable levels. This is quite specific.

I have learned that the Christ is the herald of the earth's 4th evolution.

If anyone views the above as contradictory to my negative statements about Judeo-Christian beliefs, please understand that I have a strong view of the Christ, but that view has little to do with Judaism or Christianity.

Lujan Matus wrote a compelling description of his visit with Jesus. Jesus said, in the visit or vision; "Mankind will regret in remembering me this way."

I have cultivated a clear "universe view" after my Toltec studies. Although some Monroe/TMI concepts seem somewhat contradictory to Toltec writings, the parallels and consistencies are simply incredibe.

I hope to further enhance my awareness with sources such as this forum, TMI workshops, shamanic sojourns, etc.

Have you learned from the forum in general? I am confused if you state that you have learned little in general or little in the last x number of years.

I haven't learned anything definitive from the forum yet, but I am confident that I will gain from the perspectives and experiences of many posters here.

I listened to some TMI session transcripts last night. I learned of Miranon, Lumeria and further details about the Christ.

I will listen again tonight.

To Recoverer:  It doesn’t sound like you understand what I meant in my posts.  I will try to clarify.  I do not give anyone credibility.  I am interested in my own experiences, period.  The subject of death/life interests me and so I like to read what others share about their experiences, and if they match mine, I am intrigued.  That’s all.

Again:  I give credence to no one.  I may very well be dabbling in my own belief system.   Where else am I supposed to dabble?  There’s no reason to get defensive.  I‘m not attacking you or your beliefs.  All power to you.  I’m just sharing my own beliefs.  Take them or leave them.

NMM:

You mentioned Lujan Matus. I haven't heard of him before, just checked his site real quickly, and saw that he refers to Carlos Casteneda. Just in case it is relevant, if you do some research you'll find that Castaneda made up the stories that are in his books.

Below is what the site says.

"Lujan conveys his knowledge in ways that can be easily assimilated by the one who is learning. He employs the same methods of directness as Juan Matus did with Carlos Castaneda.  Lujan will uncover more than you will expect in a one or two week period. The lessons continue to unfold in daily life and are myriad in their applications."

If the person of Juan Matus actually did exist in the way that Casteneda described him, would he charge the fees that Lujan charges in order to teach a number of people? What happened to "omens" and all that Jazz?

SHSS:

You basically said bravo to BruceMoenroe's sarcastic way of putting down what Aunt Clair wrote. 

BruceMoenroe spoke to her basically in the same way that she said Frank Kepple spoke to her at Astralpulse.



SHSS wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 9:30pm:

To Recoverer:  It doesn’t sound like you understand what I meant in my posts.  I will try to clarify.  I do not give anyone credibility.  I am interested in my own experiences, period.  The subject of death/life interests me and so I like to read what others share about their experiences, and if they match mine, I am intrigued.  That’s all. Again:  I give credence to no one.  I may very well be dabbling in my own belief system.   Where else am I supposed to dabble?  There’s no reason to get defensive.  I‘m not attacking you or your beliefs.  All power to you.  I’m just sharing my own beliefs.  Take them or leave them.

Below is what you said on an earlier post. Your statements about Monroe, Moen and Buhlman. If one believes in their descriptions, then one has a belief system to some degree.

"I love your post, NMM.  What you bring up is the very same reason I don’t care to post here anymore.  I love the works of Robert Monroe, Bruce Moen, William Buhlman, etc., but many times when I check into this forum, it feels like a christian site, and I want nothing to do with the belief system territories, unless it is to help someone escape from them, lol."

I don't believe that beliefs can be completely avoided. However, it might be a mistake to conclude that a person experienced nothing more than hallucinations when he (or she) experienced something like an angel or demon, and then say that hallucinations don't apply to Moen and Monroe. In each case it is important to consider why an experiencer believes that he experienced something that actually exists.
 

RECOVERER

What leads you to believe that Carlos Castaneda (CC) made up his stories? Exposes and writings by others?

You suggest that I "do some research." Really?

I have spent years reading and rereading the work of CC and many of his critics. Years, literally.

I have done the research.

So if he is a fraud, then Tunnenshene, Donner, Abelar etc. are ALL telling the same lies then? Because they all tell the same fundamental story.

It is curious that the Castaneda critics haven't  risen up against the 2nd tier of "Juan Matus" authors like they did in their intellectual indictment of CC.

When CC was a lone voice, he was targeted. But now don Ruiz visits Oprah and America watches.

To be clear, I have great respect for Ruiz, I am simply commenting on how a Toltec author in the past was villified, but a subsequent author is embraced.

So was CC telling lies when he wrote of "the double" "the other" "the dreaming body?" CC is clearly describing the same phenomena and experiences as Monroe.

So when CC and the 2nd tier wrote of the OBE experiences-traveling at various levels and encountering various entitities, in various worlds, those consistencies with Monroe/TMI are just coincidences, then?

Many of CC critics focused on 2 areas:

1. Juan Matus exhibited knowledge inconsistent with the academic view of Yaqi indians.

Duh, boys and girls. Matus was becoming enlightened or something very close to it.

He was not a Yaqui. He was not an Indian. He was a human learning from whoever or whatever is out there.

2. Others saw CC in Los Angeles or elsewhere at the times he said he was in Mexico.

Well, now. One of the tenets of the Toltec belief system is, exactly like Monroe/TMI that time/space is not linear and sequential like most people think.

So, if CC was onto a universal reality that wasn't bound by time/space, the examination of his timing and whereabouts are irrelevant.

Secondly, CC may have done much of his work in dreaming. So his location and schedule viewed by others may have had no bearing on his dreaming excursions.

I really can't believe that someone interested in Monroe/TMI content would not be aware of Toltec literature in some detail.

The INSPEC (intelligent species, non physical) appear to be the "inorganic beings" CC and other Toltec writers describe interacting with.

I could go on-way on, but I won't. I won't turn this thread into a defense of CC of shamanic literature.

But again, I ask. What is your source for saying such a thing? Have you read all the Juan Matus literature?

The fact that you were unaware of Lujan Matus and his work is interesting.

So you did a quick online search and posted such a negative reply.

So here you are on a forum centered, in my understanding, on Monroe/TMI concepts and yet you write negatively about the only other modern author or communicator to express views and concepts largely consistent with Monroe.

I learned of Monroe after reading "The Path" by Esmerelda Arana. While I find her book to be the least helpful Toltec work so far, it did describe Monroe and TMI.

I had a negative view of OOBE and such based on drivel such as Shirley McClain and others espoused.

Crystals? They can be powerful, but not the junk bought at the flea market. They are best found by a practicioner or helper.

Crystals can be used as weapons. One work, I think from Donner or Abelar described the gift of crystals from Juan Matus. The recipient made her own armpit holster to carry the crystals unseen.

Are you aware of "the gait of power?" Were you aware of any of this? Do you really know of which you speak?

When I read Arana, I was open to learning about another description of the world (Monroe/TMI). You seem to have decided that the Toltec view has nothing to offer.

I am glad I did not dismiss Monroe's work. I have learned much from Monroe/TMI already.

I wish you well in your search, but I truly hope you take a little time to learn of Toltec views if you are interested in Monroe/TMI.

I wish to clarify my last post.

The carrying of crystals in the armpit was not for use as weaponry. The crystals were, like many items in the Toltec world, not intended for public view.

This is similar to the "medicine bag," but different in that one should be incredibly secretive and protective of the medicine bag.

I also regret the caustic tone of my reply to Recoverer. I apologize for being harsh.

NMM:

I don't want to spend a lot of time trying to convince you since in the end it's up to you to decide for yourself whether Castaneda was a fraud. Years ago I was really into his books, but then before I read that he's a fraud I figured that he was because some of the things he wrote no longer sounded correct to me.

I don't want to spend a lot of time searching for the articles I found about him several years ago, but here's one I just found.

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/article/the-fake-carlos-castaneda-24168

You might want to check out the below video of Castaneda. People who knew him speak of how he was a fraud, had a cult-like following, and had parties with some of his groupies that included the usage of drugs and alchohol.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0398835/


Some say Lynn Andrews is also a fraud. Of course this doesn't mean all shamans are frauds. I figure many are legit. We just need to be warry of the frauds. Would a genuine shaman have a site where he compares himself to the non-existent shaman Castaneda wrote about?

I believe it is also important to be warry of shamans that do what they do with the assistance of unfriendly beings. Even some shamans say that there are shamans that use such undesirable assistance.

Thank you for the apology, but no real need. I can understand about getting excited about topics such as this topic. :)

When I mentioned the crystals Bruce wrote about I didn't mean to imply that there is no validity to some of the things people say about crystals. I also didn't mean to imply that there is no validity to what Bruce said he experienced. I just used crystal talk as a way of comparision.

Recoverer,

Thank you for being kind and forgiving.

I had an incredibly bad day at work and I let my emotions take control of me. I really should be above such immature acts at my age.

I rarely send an emotional email without "letting it sit" for a while. I will do the same when I have an emotional response to a forum posting.

:)

No problem. I don't know anything about Toltec. How much what Castaneda wrote relates, I don't know. I haven't been to TMI. I've been able to have a lot of spiritual experiences without going.

I've read all of Bruce Moen's and Robert Monroe's books and like them.


NMM wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 12:35am:

Recoverer, Thank you for being kind and forgiving. I had an incredibly bad day at work and I let my emotions take control of me. I really should be above such immature acts at my age. I rarely send an emotional email without "letting it sit" for a while. I will do the same when I have an emotional response to a forum posting. :)

Good grief Recoverer.  Am I on trial?  lol.  I think the matter might be cleared up if you understood something about my beliefs.  According to SHSS’s beliefs, a very simple version:

This reality/unreality is one big hologram.  Each one of us is a hologram of the whole, choosing at this time (so-to-speak) to focus in only one direction.  As we enter into the dream of physical reality, we pick up our own set of beliefs.  Physical reality is a collection of beliefs, held strongly together, because so many of us believe in it.  Everything is imagination, and imagination has a reality of it’s own.

So, for example, if I were to choose to enter something like a Vahalla heaven, in the belief system territories, it would not hold up well for me because I do not believe in it to the same degree that the creators, or the ones who do believe in it, and lovingly hold it together do.

If I chose instead to enter into a park setting, or a library in focus 27, which I have been in several times, this would hold up for me, because I believe in it.  This particular spot in consciousness (focus 27) would probably not hold up, or even show up for someone expecting to die, and let’s say, go to a Catholic heaven.  I don’t mean to say that these are places that you could drive to, but focus’s of attention in consciousness.

As far as what Aunt Clair said, I did not read her post.  A simple glance showed me that her beliefs are so different from my own that I didn’t feel I could relate.  Not that she is wrong!!!, but that her beliefs do not in any way match my own, just as my beliefs may sound really strange to her.

BobMoenroe, on the other hand, sounds like he may be a little closer to my beliefs, and so I can identify with what he says.  Have you not found yourself in a dream at sometime that felt so strange to you that it snapped you awake?  What if you didn’t wake up, but got stuck, for a while, in this strange dream?  Would you yell out, help!  Get me the h--- out of here!  To me, this is comical, not sarcastic, because I am not saying anyone is wrong...just different.

I hope this makes sense, and doesn’t sound contradictory, for I have tried very hard to make it understandable for someone who probably doesn’t share my beliefs.  Thank you for taking the time to want to understand something of my world.   :)

SHSS:

Are you on trial? Well, since you're a dinosaur, "yes," because not everybody believes that dinosaurs existed. :)

Thank you for sharing your beliefs.

Quote:

NMM, I also regret the caustic tone of my reply to Recoverer. I apologize for being harsh.

No harm, no foul, Recoverer likes it rough. He's sitting by the keyboard with a collar around his neck looking for his dominant. He told me in a PM that he would like to ask you to become one of "your" dogs, but I told him heavens no, it's too early, you've only just met, besides you got enough on your plate with the dino trial.

BobMoenroe:

I think you went a bit far to suggest that I sent you the PM you mentioned below.  Somebody might take it seriously.

Perhaps Mogenblue is right about you.


wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 5:20am:

Quote: NMM, I also regret the caustic tone of my reply to Recoverer. I apologize for being harsh. No harm, no foul, Recoverer likes it rough. He's sitting by the keyboard with a collar around his neck looking for his dominant. He told me in a PM that he would like to ask you to become one of "your" dogs, but I told him heavens no, it's too early, you've only just met, besides you got enough on your plate with the dino trial.

Recoverer,
Somebody might take it seriously, and if that is not Doomsday, what is? Seriously. My condolences to you for being meek. But cheer up, someday you might inherit the earth.

Let us assume RedTango54 is right about you, but who really gives a slice of old pie about that.

Just make certain that you use your time wisely. You have a lot of potential.


wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:09pm:

Recoverer, Somebody might take it seriously, and if that is not Doomsday, what is? Seriously. My condolences to you for being meek. But cheer up, someday you might inherit the earth. Let us assume RedTango54 is right about you, but who really gives a slice of old pie about that.

Quote:

Recoverer, Just make certain that you use your time wisely. You have a lot of potential.

That's exactly what a helper said to one of my incarnations during a retrieval. The helper then smiled and sent her a purple ball covering her heart. But out of the blue, he froze and made a less than funny face. "What..?" my incarnation asked. "I'm sorry", he said, "but I thought you were somebody else", and then flickered out of view. But they all lived happily ever after.

Robert Monroe had close associates ( and a daughter ) who were involved with eastern religions but I know he also appreciated christianity.                                                                                                                 He was once asked "What is your view on cosmology?"                                                           Mr. Monroe turned to an associate, asking him to speak for him.      The fellow then gave a presentation on "the Course in Miracles".                                                                                                                                                I think that demonstrates that Robert Monroe admired christian practice too.      

Earlier on this thread I said that I had experiences with the spirit of Jesus. When I asked him if ACIM comes from him (on more than one occasion), in symbolic ways he answered "No."

Don't take my word for it. Ask him yourself. :)


Griffin wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 7:25pm:

Robert Monroe had close associates ( and a daughter ) who were involved with eastern religions but I know he also appreciated christianity.                                                                                                                 He was once asked "What is your view on cosmology?"                                                           Mr. Monroe turned to an associate, asking him to speak for him.      The fellow then gave a presentation on "the Course in Miracles".                                                                                                                                                I think that demonstrates that Robert Monroe admired christian practice too.

Not every post is about you Recoverer. I was just making the point that Robert Monroe had appreciation for christian practice and thought, as evidenced by his endorsement of "the Course in Miracles".                                                                              The post was about what Robert Monroe thought, not you.                                                               I don't know why you feel the need to respond like that.                                      The fellow who gave the presentation was Jose Gastanega. It was in '77 or '78, in Richmond VA. It was at a 10 day Gateway workshop that I attended.                                                                                             I can understand why you wouldn't like the Course. It conflicts with a belief in "demons". It's more about a shift in perception.... letting go of fear and limitation.                                                                             But it's not my intention to derail this thread. I'm just reporting what I heard when Robert Monroe was asked a question about cosmology.                                                                                                                                                                  

Griffin:

It is really sad that you twist somebody's effort to be helpful, into something negative. I won't keep quiet because somebody like you runs and hides under his bed everytime somebody mentions the name Jesus. He is not the boogie man and doesn't need a misleading source like a ACIM to clarify what he was/is about. 





Griffin wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 9:18pm:

Not every post is about you Recoverer. I was just making the point that Robert Monroe had appreciation for christian practice and thought, as evidenced by his endorsement of "the Course in Miracles".                                                                              The post was about what Robert Monroe thought, not you.                                                               I don't know why you feel the need to respond like that.                                      The fellow who gave the presentation was Jose Gastanega. It was in '77 or '78, in Richmond VA. It was at a 10 day Gateway workshop that I attended.                                                                                             I can understand why you wouldn't like the Course. It conflicts with a belief in "demons". It's more about a shift in perception.... letting go of fear and limitation.                                                                             But it's not my intention to derail this thread. I'm just reporting what I heard when Robert Monroe was asked a question about cosmology.

If anyone believes Jesus was the author of ACIM, then they also have to believe he wasn't the Jesus of the Bible.

Because what the biblical Jesus taught and what the ACIM Jesus taught are totally contradictory.

I used to accept ACIM.  No longer.  Yes, a lot of what's in it seems sensible and profound.  Just enough to lure people in.

For people who want to believe there are no consequences for their actions and that there is no such thing as sin because sinful acts are really just an illusion that never actually happened, ACIM is the book for them.

R

recoverer wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 8:38pm:

Earlier on this thread I said that I had experiences with the spirit of Jesus. When I asked him if ACIM comes from him (on more than one occasion), in symbolic ways he answered "No." Don't take my word for it. Ask him yourself. :)                                                                   Griffin wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 7:25pm: Robert Monroe had close associates ( and a daughter ) who were involved with eastern religions but I know he also appreciated christianity.                                                                                                                 He was once asked "What is your view on cosmology?"                                                           Mr. Monroe turned to an associate, asking him to speak for him.      The fellow then gave a presentation on "the Course in Miracles".                                                                                                                                                I think that demonstrates that Robert Monroe admired christian practice too.

                                                                                                                                                                                                No offense taken from your last post to me. Let me ask you a question about the quote here.                                                                                                 If someone did as you suggest and asks the spirit of Jesus whether the Course emanates from him..... and then got a different answer than you did ("Yes, the Course comes from me")....... would you accept that their own experience is valid for them? Or would you say "You're wrong! I'm right!"                                                                                      Would you let them have their own answer, from their own experience or would you try to invalidate ther experience?

Hey NMM,
When I went through the process of gradually leaving Christianity, (from about 2005-2011 or so, in really complete terms) I had to engage in a lot of research and a lot of thinking, in order to make sense of things, and get to a point where I no longer had any resentment or pain where Christians were concerned.  For the most part, I think I've resolved the issues I had now.

Christianity is a religion which has a very large amount of truth in it; as much as any other religion.  The problem is that almost all of said truth is distorted in some way.  Often the context has been changed, or the preoccupation is on the idea of a God who is going to send people to Hell for eternity, etc.  Bruce's own work, and a couple of experiences which I was able to have as a result of reading some of his material, was actually one of the main things that enabled me to understand that.

So if you see people mentioning Christianity a lot here, I think a big part of the point, is that people are comparing what they have been taught as Christians, with what their actual experiences in the Afterlife are.  By doing that, they can figure out what parts are true, what aren't, what maybe is true but is just distorted a little bit, and in that way, they can receive resolution and closure.

The other thing to understand, is that if you read some of Bruce's books, you'll find out that the idea of God sending you to Hell for eternity is a distortion.  Yes, the Hells exist, (and this is verifiable via your own experience, if you want to check it out for yourself) and yes, you can go to them, and yes, some of them can be very difficult to get out of.  That doesn't mean that you can not get out of them at all, however.  The reason why they are difficult to get out of, is because of the attitude of the individual themselves; not because of anything that any external God does.

Jesus was also an extremely positive person, who didn't have the intention of condemning anybody at all.  His purpose was actually completely the opposite.  I was afraid of him for quite a long time myself, until I realised that. 

It's important to remember that the only person who ever really judges or condemns us, is ourselves.  The system itself doesn't want to do that, because unlike us, it recognises that every individual is a necessary piece of the puzzle, and thus, condemnation is actually a form of blocking or impediment to universal optimisation.  In other words, the universe needs all of us in order to be perfect, and so it is not going to condemn any of us, because to do so, would prevent it from being what it wants.

Hi Rondele,                                                                                                                                                     Again, my intention is not to derail this thread into a discussion about the merits of the Course in Miracles.                                                                           I was simply reporting how Robert Monroe responded when asked a question about his view on cosmology.                                                                                                    That's all.

Griffin:

I don't believe it would make sense to tell people to trust the spirits I communicate with more than the spirits they communicate with, because they don't know whether or not I'm communicating with trustworthy spirits.

What a person needs to do is make certain that the spirits he (or she) communicates with are trustworthy. I've found that it can take some time to become really certain, even if you experience love and peace when you are in contact with a spirit.

I've also found that even though I communicate with friendly spirits, occasionally unfriendly spirits try to mislead me. Therefore, I always need to use my discrimination when I receive information from a spirit.


Griffin wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:

recoverer wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 8:38pm: Earlier on this thread I said that I had experiences with the spirit of Jesus. When I asked him if ACIM comes from him (on more than one occasion), in symbolic ways he answered "No." Don't take my word for it. Ask him yourself. :)                                                                   Griffin wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 7:25pm: Robert Monroe had close associates ( and a daughter ) who were involved with eastern religions but I know he also appreciated christianity.                                                                                                                 He was once asked "What is your view on cosmology?"                                                           Mr. Monroe turned to an associate, asking him to speak for him.      The fellow then gave a presentation on "the Course in Miracles".                                                                                                                                                I think that demonstrates that Robert Monroe admired christian practice too.                                                                                                                                                                                                       No offense taken from your last post to me. Let me ask you a question about the quote here.                                                                                                 If someone did as you suggest and asks the spirit of Jesus whether the Course emanates from him..... and then got a different answer than you did ("Yes, the Course comes from me")....... would you accept that their own experience is valid for them? Or would you say "You're wrong! I'm right!"                                                                                      Would you let them have their own answer, from their own experience or would you try to invalidate ther experience?

That makes sense to me. Just as it is, out and about in the physical world.                                                                                                                                                                      Good night & good dreams....

Petrus,

I appreciate your input, but we seem to have fundamentally different views on the tenets of organized religion.

You wrote:


Petrus wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 10:22pm:

Hey NMM, So if you see people mentioning Christianity a lot here, I think a big part of the point, is that people are comparing what they have been taught as Christians, with what their actual experiences in the Afterlife are.  By doing that, they can figure out what parts are true, what aren't, what maybe is true but is just distorted a little bit, and in that way, they can receive resolution and closure. .

I feel that you actually make my point for me.

One can't really believe in Christianity and still accept the possibility of the departed not going to heaven or hell.

Yes, I understand that someone raised with a specific belief system may encounter unassailable facts that contradict their upbringing-that is exactly what happened to me.

But one can't have both views. You either believe in a religion that says you go to heaven or hell or you don't. There really isn't any middle ground with organized religions.

There may be some leeway in modern discussions of which gospels were chosen or how individual or group agendas affected the resolutions of the Council of Nicea, but those are not fundamental issues.

The issue of absolute punishment or reward in many organized relgions-but Christianity foremost-is not debatable. It is a tenet.

So I must repectfully disagree with you.

It would really be helpful if people in general, and, specfically in these threads, would make a distinction as to exactly what god or gods they are referring to.

In Western monotheistic religions, "God" is context sensitive. "God" typically means either Allah (the Muslim deity) or Yahweh/Jehovah (the Jewish/Christian deity).

It is interesting in that Christianity is, in my experience the most "blurry" of the religions. Muslims often use the name Allah and Hindus might mention any of a number of gods or goddesses such as Shiva.

Christians, especially American Christians, somehow seem to think that everyone else shares their views and rarely address their deity by name.

There are occasions when Christians use a specific name: Emmanuel for Jesus and Jehovah for God.

It is interesting that Christianity, which is actually a "branch" of Judaism, rarely uses the name "Yahweh," a traditional Jewish name.

Here is something to think about...

...the Gnostics state that the physical world was created by a deity who thought he was the only god but wasn't.

This deity created a fundamentally flawed world (predation, death, suffering, etc.). His creation has been attributed to two main possibilites:

1. He meant well, but he wasn't really competent. He was a "partial god" and has thus been called the "demiurge."

2. He really wasn't all that cool. This viewpoint is often held by those who often refer to the "blind god" as "Samael."

The most basic concept in Gnosticism is this:

The physical world, the world of corruption, suffering and death could not possibly have been created solely by an omnipotent, all knowing, all caring, all powerful deity.

Many Christians state that there was no suffering, death or predation until "the fall." That is interesting. It would mean that no living being ever harmed another living being in the original existence.

So this view states that not only was animal predation nonexistent, that not one animal ever tore a leaf from a tree or a blade of grass from the ground.

That must have been quite a world-a world where all animals ate only dropping fruit or ripened grains-a world where nothing was ever harmed.

Here is something to think about...

...perhaps Jesus was really referring to the ultimate creator of the universe-the entire universe, physical and nonphisical.

If this was so, it was his presence in the Jewish community which caused people to believe he was addressing Jehovah when he was not.

Just a possiblity.

If any forum participants want to embrace Judeo-Christian views while investigating other possibilities, reading up on Gnosticism may be helpful.

There are excellent online resources about Gnosticism which one can find with a simple online search.

Two very interesting books on Gnosticism in general and "the lost gospels" in specific are:

"Beyond Belief  The Secret Gospel of Thomas"   by Elain Pagels

"The Gospel of Thomas  The Gnostic Wisdom of Jesus"  by Jean-Yves Leloup

The TV networks "A&E" and "History Channel" have had several excellent programs on Gnosticism and other topics such as the specific Christian evolution of the view of Satan.

Netflix has many good programs. Just search for "lost gospels" or go to the "Faith & Spirituality" genre.

Be prepared, however. These programs may cause you some real problems if you are a Christian but have an open mind.

One program describes how parts of the Judeo-Christian canon was partially assembled from other religions. For example, the bibical story of the flood was taken directly from earlier religious text(s), most likely "The Epic of Gilgamesh."

I wish everyone success in whatever peaceful path they may have embarked upon.

Quote:

Griffin, I was just making the point that Robert Monroe had appreciation for christian practice and thought, as evidenced by his endorsement of "the Course in Miracles". [...] The fellow who gave the presentation was Jose Gastanega. It was in '77 or '78, in Richmond VA. It was at a 10 day Gateway workshop that I attended. [...]"

Did your endorsements change during the period from 1977 to 1995? I gave breast milk two thumbs up in '77. The following year, cow milk in a bottle got two thumbs and one toe up.

Right. We also need to use our discrimination when dealing with people.


Griffin wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:00pm:

That makes sense to me. Just as it is, out and about in the physical world.                                                                                                                                                                      Good night & good dreams....

The mark of a genuine spiritual quest is a longing for awareness of all the relevant facts, barriers, and dangers of self-deception, so that the quest's legitimacy can be validated.  Some posters here are not up to this challenge and content themselves with cartoony caricatures of Christianity to abort their sensed obligation to experience the faith at its best.  So they ignore easily established facts that refute their superficial analysis.

Thus, they overlook the fact that the New Testament and early church provide the earliest literary evidence for a belief in soul retrievals from lower planes.  They overlook the biblical teaching that God's love never permanently abandons anyone after death.  In C. S. Lewis's words, "the gates of Hell are locked from the inside!" As in the Monroe-Moen model, so in Jesus' teaching the principle of like attracts like governs postmortem assignments, so that the possibility of universal salvation always looms large, even for those consigned to a so-called "eternal " Hell.  Actually, neither the Hebrew (olam) nor the Greek (aionios) terms translated Hell actually means "eternal."   But obviously the poster bigotry of this site further vouches for the principle that like attracts like on the internet.  Fortunately, this site also attracts a few open-minded souls who are willing to take new pictures with no predetermined assumptive lens and to take people one at a time.  That's why I still lurk here and occasionally post.

Don 

  I wasn't aware that there were so many traditional Christians and viewpoints here..??? 

  There are some of us here who are not interested in religion, but through "non physical" oriented experiences have a lot of respect for Yeshua (Jesus) and his example and basic teachings. 

   Re: Monroe and Christianity, his wife Nancy was bit of a Christian Mystic, but it seems to have taken Bob a good long time to be open minded to what Jesus was all about.  A number of his explorers talked about Jesus at some point in their sessions, and at some point Bob asked his then friend, remote viewer Joseph McMoneagle to remote view a target--which he later revealed was Jesus.  So whether or not the ACIM connection is true, it's seems true enough that he had some eventual interest in what and who this character was about. 

  Re: Monroe and ACIM, while i have A LOT of respect for R.A.M. and think he was generally a very perceptive person, i'm aware that even Bob could be "fooled", mislead, or just have mistaken perceptions or interpretations.  He was after all not a "He/She" type yet.  That doesn't take away from his accomplishments or general awareness, service, and perceptiveness. 

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 11:43pm:

The mark of a genuine spiritual quest is a longing for awareness of all the relevant facts, barriers, and dangers of self-deception, so that the quest's legitimacy can be validated.  Some posters here are not up to this challenge and content themselves with cartoony caricatures of Christianity to abort their sensed obligation to experience the faith at its best.  So they ignore easily established facts that refute their superficial analysis. Thus, they overlook the fact that the New Testament and early church provide the earliest literary evidence for a belief in soul retrievals from lower planes.  They overlook the biblical teaching that God's love never permanently abandons anyone after death.  In C. S. Lewis's words, "the gates of Hell are locked from the inside!" As in the Monroe-Moen model, so in Jesus' teaching the principle of like attracts like governs postmortem assignments, so that the possibility of universal salvation always looms large, even for those consigned to a so-called "eternal " Hell.  Actually, neither the Hebrew (olam) nor the Greek (aionios) terms translated Hell actually means "eternal."   But obviously the poster bigotry of this site further vouches for the principle that like attracts like on the internet.  Fortunately, this site also attracts a few open-minded souls who are willing to take new pictures with no predetermined assumptive lens and to take people one at a time.  That's why I still lurk here and occasionally post. Don

Thanks Don. Now that all those former posters are now filtering back after the 'Mayan Calender' end of the world scenario, and the 'New Age Ascension' to the 4th or 5th dimension for those 'White Robed Posters' on this forum didn't happen! Now they are voicing their frustrated opinions on this forum! Why me!? They might say?...Ego and bullshit people. Happy 2013 to 2020! Life on Earth goes on! Best Regards. Carl.       

Bless you Carl,  I couldn't have dished out such a steaming heap of self-rightous disdain any better! Yum! Now that all the posters I can't stand are whimpering back with all their questions and posts about their experiences..... because 2012 came and went you babies! And guess what? The rapture didn't happen! Jesus didn't come down in a flying saucer and hand out food-stamps! The Buddha didn't drive up in his Rolls-Royce and tell you how special you are! You're all losers, goldern New-Agers, every last one a you! Go back to what-ever rock you crawled outta, goldern heathens! This is a god-fearing forum and it ain't no place for ya! And you kids! Get off my lawn! And stop tracking mud across my clean kitchen floor! Yer all going to hell! ......... are you gone yet? Awful quiet here. Gee.... I'm kinda lonely....Wait! Come back! I wanna yell at ya some more! STUPID NEW-AGERS!  #*&%#!!!!!!!                                                          

I'd like to respond to the original post, and just make a couple points.


Quote:

I have just discovered this site and will read more posts and obtain Mr. Moen's published works. Regardless of his input or views, I am still befuddled by so many posters espousing traditional religious views. I am viewing this site because I have firmly rejected the theological ideas of established religions. To be redundant, and I don't mean to offend, but why are so many here rehashing the same old bits?

First off your premise that everyone has rejected all traditional concepts of Christianity or other religions is not necessarily the same premise that everyone else approaches this site with.  Some people (like myself) are both open minded to new ideas and also embrace many traditional spiritual truths, about the identity of Jesus for instance.


Quote:

Monroe and the Toltec literature I am familiar with clearly state that there is no "God" in the form of a singular, judgemental deity.

Which apparently you find to be more compelling than traditional texts.  Just because Monroe and the Toltec literature you're familiar with contradict the beliefs of some here doesn't make their beliefs automatically false and not worth airing.  It seems like you are arguing that because you have rejected traditional religious views, and moved on, and others have as well, you expect everyone else to do the same.  Remember I am not claiming your view is automatically wrong because it contradicts what I know about God and Jesus; if I was then you would have a right to think I was 'claiming intellectual territory and trying to exclude others' so to speak.


Quote:

So why such consistent and pervasive focus on these established religions and their entrenched laws and tenets?

Because things can be true regardless of the age in which they are written down.


Quote:

My point, my complaint, my disappointment is that so many here want to compare baby photos rather than try to move as efficiently as possible to adulthood (ultimate human evolution).

I'd say three things:
1/  your point is insulting.  Those of us who hold on to some traditional beliefs are babies, and the adults (including yourself) have moved on apparently.
2/  you make the mistake of assuming that later relevation is more correct or true or consise, and therefore worth hearing.  Muslims will say the Quran is automatically more valid because it is a later testament (and because its the literal word of God, and the Christian scriptures were corrupted).
  Some people make the opposite mistake, and argue that even more ancient texts than the New Testament are automatically more valid. 
  The philosophical reality is that these revelations, or truths, or world views, or whatever you want to call them are independently true or false; they are not necessarily dependent on how old they are. 
3/  my next criticism is a common one I find among new age thinkers, and that is they are very tolerant people of just about any concepts except for the Jesus found in the bible.  Jesus as an ascended master is fine; Jesus as a Buddha or a Bodhisattva is fine, Jesus as a failed revolutionary leader or a literary figment is fine; however Jesus as he is generally presented in the Christian New Testament is simply unacceptable. A lot of people who preach tolerance and detest the moral judgments of Christians absolutely abhor Christianity with their own moral judgments.


Quote:

I find many of these personal suppositions and simple restating of the Bible, Koran, or other old texts (forum postings) to be of little or no value to my quest.

So don't read them then.  Secondly, are you the only person who reads this website?  Does everyone else have exactly the same belief system as yourself?  Third, is it possible, just maybe, that there are other genuine spiritual seekers out there who hold on to traditional beliefs about Jesus, and should be treated as valid spiritual seekers?

Lastly, I'm curious about this judgmental view of traditional Christianity that you have - meaning it seems like you are beating a straw man here.  Have you read the gospels and thought deeply about them?  Have you ever noticed that Jesus has a huge emphasis on love and commands us to love others?  Or read in the gospel of Luke about his concern for the poor and social justice?  Or consider that the anger of God can come from witnessing the abuse of others and out of a love for others?  I think you may be fighting a version of Jesus that isn't accurate.

Well stated Pratekya!

If the path you follow leads you to spiritual growth as in becoming a more loving person, then you are on the right path.  Love defined includes respect and tolerance for the beliefs of others among many other attributes such as patience and caring.

I know your thoughts are directed towards the original poster and I hope she'll respond. I hope my thoughts don't intrude too much....   For me, it isn't the Being that went by the name of Jesus that is a problem. It's just how traditional Christianity has played out in contemporary society as the dominant western religion. On a smaller scale, Buddhist schools, non-dual schools, mystic schools of all stripes in the West have also not lived up to the healer's credo of "Do no harm" ....  and there ARE individuals and schools within Christianity and other forms of spirituality that are doing great work, that are living up to "Do no harm". Where I live ( the US ) Christianity as the dominant religion is something that is..... not my cup of tea. I have a friend who is a christian minister. We play music together. ( believe it or not I've been playing and singing gospel music for 40 years )  But I have no affection for organized religion in contemporary society. I personally think that ANY religion is something to eventually move through and out of. (I come out of Zen Buddhism ) That's just my personal opinion. To me, religion or any organized system is a vehicle that you eventually leave. Carrying the boat with you after you've used it to cross the water becomes a needless burden and limitation....  these are my opinions,  I speak for no one but myself and advocate no particular belief-system. I am selling nothing.

"If they had DNA testing and lie detectors back then, christianity wouldn't even exist" - Bus passenger

Back then, 'christian open mindedness - open for faith' and 'fear and biased' were the standards for journalistic integrity, which means fox news is somewhat older than they've let on, but none the wiser.

For those christians who still doesn't get it: why can't you pull the net over some new agers - the very same reason some christians shy away from O.T. - too dark.

To the original poster:
This site attracts beginners and those who like to argue intellectually about their beliefs. Some, after they progress in their spirituality, stay to try to help newbies. Others, finding that they no longer fit the resonance of this site, move on. It also attracts trolls because it is not moderated to any large extent, and some people really have fun being trolls.

Regarding what has "recently" been discussed, for the most part I believe it is important to listen to our heart and common sense. If a belief system interferes with this, it probably isn't the best path a person can take. Listening to our hearts doesn't include being ruled by fear.

I spoke to a lady at work recently. She is Catholic. She said her parents attended a Catholic conference and at the end of the conference they witnessed an exorcism. It really scarred them (seems like an odd conference event).

If the time comes when their souls need an approach that doesn't include the non-preferable dogma that Catholicism includes (I'm not saying it's all bad), the fear that was created when they watched the exoricsm might get in the way of their finding a perhaps more expansive approach.

Related to this, the lady I spoke to expressed the belief that only a Catholic priest can perform an exorcism. Of course this isn't true.

When it comes to Catholic dogma, whatever an exorcised spirit is, I figure it is inately divine. For whatever reasons it ended up developing in a negative way. It is best to try to inspire such a spirit to let go of its negative way and move towards a more positive approach. How can this be done if it is treated as evil demon that can never be redeemed?

Bruce wrote of Curiosity sending out probes that got lost. If this interpretation is true, then perhaps some of these lost probes are beings that are known as demons.  If so, perhaps they should be treated in such a way rather than as beings that don't deserve to be helped so they can progress to a positive way of being.

Yes Pratekya, excellent post!

Just to add my 2 cents, there's no question that Christianity is about the only organized religion these days that has the dubious distinction of being politically correct to attack. 

Islam, on the other hand, gets a pass no matter what kind of atrocities are committed in its name.

To repeat Pratekya: "what some I find among new age thinkers, and that is they are very tolerant people of just about any concepts except for the Jesus found in the bible.  A lot of people who preach tolerance and detest the moral judgments of Christians absolutely abhor Christianity with their own moral judgments."

One point here- it's not so much that the new agers dislike Jesus, it's more that they criticize organized Christian churches and esp certain preachers.  I have to wonder how many of them have actually read any of the Gospels before they spout off their politically correct criticisms.

And yes, just because something is 2,000 years old doesn't mean it's no longer true.  To me, nothing is more inspiring than the Gospels and Jesus' teachings.  To diminish or dismiss them because they are not "new age" shows a tremendous lack of historical knowledge and intellectual thought.

R

I believe what's important is "can a person think freely?" If a person can, will he or she find it necessary to be overly involved with any particular approach that has been defined by others?  It seems to me that every Religion has its shortcomings.

If a person wants to be involved with a particular religion that is his choice, but I don't feel the need to be overly protective of any thought system that has limitations and inaccuracies.

If Jesus lived today and was asked what religion or denomination to follow ("or denomination" since Christians often disagree with each other), he would probably answer, "follow your heart."

I once had a dream where I was in a classroom and people were talking about how can we change the World for the better. I sugggested that some Christian Fundamentalists be included in this meeting. Suddenly an angry Jesus said, "Impossible!" Perhaps this means that they don't represent what he was and is about.

I have posted on this site intermittently for many years and have gotten to know some posters quite well (e. g. Rondele, Kathy, Matthew, and recoverer).  They differ in perspectives and strength of belief, but are more open to change tjan most people, and have had fascinating paranormal experiences to share.   

Let's play a game. What's thr first word that comes to mind when I say...Evangelical?  Anti-gay!  Hindu?  Rapists India)!  Buddhists?  Persecutors of Christians (Nepal)!  Muslims?  Terrorist sympathizers!  Judaism?  Anti-Arab!  New Agers?  Gullible!  Atheists?  Close-minded! All of these stereotypes are commonplace and apply to a certain number of people in each group.  But we need to rise above such stereotyes and focus on each tradition at its best to see what we can learn.  For example, I encounter anti-Catholic bias among many Evangelicals and unchurched people.  But at its best, Catholicism provides spme the best attested evidence for the paranomral  (EVPs, bilocation, OBEs, genuine exorcisms) and methods of meditation.  Also, our local Catholic church does more to help poor and hurting unchurched people than any other ideological group I know. 

Afterlife research is greatly inhibited by the presuppositional network through which experiences are filtered.  The distinction between fact and interpretation will always be a barrier in any assessment of afterlife evidence.  Our best hope for filtering out bias is to discover shared insights that emerge from the paranormal experiences of those with widely different perspectives. 

Fon

Don (Berserk):

Since you're a part of a church that does a lot of good and know of other Churches that do the same, it must be annoying when people speak of Christiantiy in a blanket-statement-negative way.

When it comes to some people, I don't believe they do so because they are awful people.  Rather they are turned off by the negative things that "some,"  "not all" Christians do. 

I don't like it when "some" Christians make Jesus seem like a dictator that people can't be happy about when they hear his name.  I don't believe that a person can fully put his heart into his spiritual practice if he feels as if he better or else.  It's important to know what negative choices will lead to, but positive inspiration needs to be the main thing.

This being the case, people are bound to feel resistive and defensive, if they feel as if somebody is trying to force them to believe in a particular way, by saying "you better or else."

Perhaps John 3:16 and the verses that follow are more about what happens when people call out for Jesus' help after they die. They receive it! Examples we know about are NDEs such as Howard Storm's NDE.  I read and listened to the accounts of other NDEs where a person started out in a hell like realm, called for Jesus' help, and received it.

John 3:16 might've played a role in their thinking to ask for Jesus' help.  Perhaps it simply means that if you believe that Jesus will help you after you die, he will in some way do so.

It could be that I am being too liberal with what John 3:16 etc say. Nevertheless, I think Jesus is too reasonable for what Evangelicals say about John 3:16 to be true.

Hi, Fon!


Berserk2 wrote on Jan 9^th, 2013 at 8:10pm:

But at its best, Catholicism provides spme the best attested evidence for the paranomral  (EVPs, bilocation, OBEs, genuine exorcisms) and methods of meditation. Fon

Those "evidence" are not evidence at all. Religion and science are two different things.

For example, Catholicism found the "evidence", of Blacks being mere animals.
Thus Black people were slave traded from Africa to America.

The slave trade was not the work of the Devil. The slave trade of Black people,
was the work of Catholicism, by the use of Catholicism's "evidence".

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 9^th, 2013 at 8:10pm:

Afterlife research is greatly inhibited by the presuppositional network through which experiences are filtered.  The distinction between fact and interpretation will always be a barrier in any assessment of afterlife evidence.  Our best hope for filtering out bias is to discover shared insights that emerge from the paranormal experiences of those with widely different perspectives.

What Don states here gets to the crux of the matter.  All interpretation is subjectively based on our own personal ego, fears, beliefs that have accumilated in our personal consciousness throughout our life.  Holding onto these helps no one. 

Only by letting go of fear and belief and searching with an open, yet skeptical heart and mind can we improve our consciousness and therefore improve ourselves and how we relate to others.  It's only by being fearless that we can discover evidence for truth.

Rondele,
If the crux of all religion, and spirituality for that matter, is to love others as you would be loved and to reach out to help those in need, what is there to learn from the gospels (gnostic or canonical) beyond that most simple of rules? I ask in all sincerity. Every time I go to read the Bible, I come back to that question. What do you seek when you read the gospels?

Bardo-

Over the years I have repeatedly said that the Golden Rule and helping others is the bottom line we should all seek for.  And if we are true to that, to me it doesn't matter what organized religion or denomination to which we belong.

I just happen to be inspired by many of the things Jesus said.  One of my favorites is "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal."

"But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal.

"For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."

R

<<The slave trade was not the work of the Devil. The slave trade of Black people, was the work of Catholicism, by the use of Catholicism's "evidence">>

Pauli- slavery was going on way before the Catholic Church was founded.

R

Yes, and Pauli, to see how unfair your generalization really is, get the DVD of the movie that the British Film Academy rates as the greatest movie on a spiritual theme ever produced--Robert DeNiro in "The Mission."  I agree with that lofty assessment and would only add that it depicts the most moving spiritual conversion ever seen on the screen.  It didn't get such high rave reviews in the USA--too slow paced for shorter American attention spans.  But even the Hollywood Screen Actors Guild rated the musical score the 17th best ever--and it's not even a musical.  Based on a true story, the movie depicts the Jesuit efforts to convert Amazon Indians during the era of Spanish and Portuguese slave traders.  These Catholics give their lives to protect these Indians from slavery!  The movie also features Liam Neeson and Jerermy Irons. 

Don

rondele wrote on Jan 10^th, 2013 at 8:59pm:

<<The slave trade was not the work of the Devil. The slave trade of Black people, was the work of Catholicism, by the use of Catholicism's "evidence">> Pauli- slavery was going on way before the Catholic Church was founded. R

I don't think your statement changes anything, please prove me wrong.

In the early days, when the first American-Europeans settled, they
exterminated millions of native Americans. The American-Europeans also
enslaved native Indians. The unfair killings and enslavements caught the
attention of some Catholic priests, who went to Catholicism's center,
to at least stop the unfair capture & enslavement of free Indians.

I don't know what exact century this was, but after Catholicism had pondered
matters over, Catholicism came to the conclusion that Black people could be
considered animals, and thus be used for slave trade, while the fine stone
sculptures of the Indians (Toltec) proved them to at least too some degree
have human properties, thus being unsuitable for use as slaves.

It would have been so much simpler for the American-European field owners
and farmers to just capture native Indians as slaves. Instead they had to go
the bothersome and dangerous way of kidnapping women and children in Africa.
Then using expensive ships, they had to go over the Atlantic Ocean. Millions of
Africans died this way.


That's Catholicism's true face.

So yes, the slave trade of Black people from Africa to America was the
work of Catholicism.

Prove me wrong, please.

Pauli,

You are confusing matters of religion with matters of politics and man.  There is nothing in the gospels that mentions the right to enslave others.  Yet people who are members of any organization (religious or political) can find reasons to justify any earthly misdeeds that they want to rationalize.

What is more important is what is actually in the NT (gospels).  All the teachings of Jesus seem to point to being loving, non-judgmental, and not injuring another.  Paul, who founded the church, was living during the Roman empire, when slavery was a fact of life.  Slavery was never specifically supported, but if one was a slave, there was a way, according to the early church founders, to worship God and be a good person.

Man and societies have used whatever suited their interests over the years to justify ego-driven self satisfying actions.  So to talk about the church itself, the Inquisition, etc. speaks more to what did a group of self-appointed men do with the NT, not what do the gospels teach us. 

Just saying.

Matthew

DocM wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 7:56am:

You are confusing matters of religion with matters of politics and man.

Catholicism is Catholic people. Not aliens, not ETs, not angels from Heaven. People.


Catholicism started the slave trade of Blacks from Africa to America, in the Name of God.

Catholicism started the slave trade of Blacks from Africa to America, based on
the Words of the Bible. God's own Words, Hallelujha. The Lord, Praise His Words.




DocM wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 7:56am:

What is more important is what is actually in the NT (gospels).

All over the world in all Catholic churches, Catholic priests read from the OT,
God's Words. Catholicism doesn't give you the option to throw away one part.

Another point Pauli-

You focus on slave trade.  I wonder, however, if you are aware that the countries who were trading in slaves had slaves of their own even before sending any of them overseas?  It wasn't Catholics who initiated slavery.

Slavery is an ancient practice.  There is even evidence that Egyptians used slave labor to build the pyramids.  That was, I think you'll agree, before the time of the Catholic Church.

R

rondele wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 9:43am:

Another point Pauli- You focus on slave trade.  I wonder, however, if you are aware that the countries who were trading in slaves had slaves of their own even before sending any of them overseas?  It wasn't Catholics who initiated slavery.

Pointing fingers at others, doesn't make Catholicism stand out better.

It still doesn't make Catholicism "divine" or bear any proofs of a "god".
The opposite rather, it speaks against Catholicism.

Also, only 4 written texts of the Toltec Indians remain, all other documents were
burnt by Catholicism. The whole heritage of the Indians were destroyed by
Catholicism, in the Name of God. Praise His Words. Hallelujha. The Indians
who protested were killed by the order of Catholic priests.



rondele wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 9:43am:

Slavery is an ancient practice.  There is even evidence that Egyptians used slave labor to build the pyramids.  That was, I think you'll agree, before the time of the Catholic Church. R

That's possible that they used some slaves, but since the 1980ies the main idea
is that it was either paid workers or farmers also skilled in stone cutting, who
built the pyramids during the time when the Nile was flooded and they couldn't
work on their lands or crops. They worked of religious reasons and had quite
high craftmen skills many of them. Some of the workers' names and work
tasks are (poorly) documented. It would have been difficult to feed all
those slaves otherwise. The same goes for the many Egyptian
temples and regular buildings in stone.

But regardless of Egypt using forced slave labour or skilled stone cuttings workers,
nothing changes about Catholicism or the Bible.

In the Name of a non-existing god, Catholicism bears its blood on its hands.

Do Americans living today bear the blood of the slaves some Americans held in the past? Does the sin of the institution devolve to its descendents, even if they are pure themselves (as individuals)? If the institution today still carries the policies or prejudices that marked the ancestral entity, then those who willingly associate themselves with it bear the mark, I think.  However, if the current organization has changed, recognized the sin of their past behavior and is now "in the light", then should the current adherants be tarred with the same brush?

Bardo wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 11:22am:

However, if the current organization has changed, recognized the sin of their past behavior and is now "in the light", then should the current adherants be tarred with the same brush?

That's a question.

If Nazis in their swastika uniforms refrain from demanding extermination
of "weaker" people, and the Nazis only keep their ideals about Übermensch,
and shout Sieg Heil, but otherwise are not into racism, should they still be tarred?

Pauli-

Well, it's obvious you have lots of hostility toward Catholicism.  I'm not a Catholic nor am I even especially religious so it's not my intention to defend them.  Just trying to keep things in context.

But here are two recent articles re. Islam.  I'd really appreciate hearing your comments.

1.  Mob Kills Man Who Damaged Koran "Thousands of people dragged a man accused of desecrating Islam's holy book, beat him to death and then set his body on fire."

2. Girl in Blasphemy Case Released on Bail. "A Christian girl was released from a Pakistani jail three weeks after a mob threatened to set her on fire for allegedly desecrating the Koran.  The girl, said to be 14, could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted."

Just two examples.  How about women who are stoned to death for committing adultery?  Shariah law.....any problems with that?

Why focus on long-ago acts/beliefs of the Catholic Church when we have real time atrocities going on all the time involving other religions?

I mean, why the selective outrage?

R

rondele wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 11:33am:

Pauli- Well, it's obvious you have lots of hostility toward Catholicism.

I have not. I'm an atheist. I don't believe in a god.


rondele wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 11:33am:

But here are two recent articles re. Islam.  I'd really appreciate hearing your comments.

To me, both Islam and Catholicism are about as bad. In countries with deep
dictatorship, religions tend to worsen.

But very few on this forum have talked in favor of Islam.



rondele wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 11:33am:

Why focus on long-ago acts/beliefs of the Catholic Church when we have real time atrocities going on all the time involving other religions?

If I took an example where religious America having killed about 2200 Pakistani school
kids, through the use of military drones, Americans don't believe me. They say:

"Oh, no, those drones only kill terrorists. The detonations of 2 tons heavy explosives
inside densely populated villages only kill Taliban terrorists."


I'm not sure any religious Americans would believe me with a modern example.
So I picked a historical example (slave trade of Blacks) which I assume
Catholic people can have their facts clear about.

Before missions, American soldiers pray religious Christian prayers in groups,
which have their origin in Catholicism!

Belief in the non-existent god of Muhammed and Moses in military kills.

There are men from all religions that beat their wives. This doesn't necessarily mean that the religions are bad. It just means that saying "I'm a []" doesn't mean squat if you don't live in a positive way.

What's bad is when a religious leader isn't a good man, and he gets his followers to mindlessly do the negative things he advocates. For example, if he told the followers he controls (enslaves?) it is okay to own slaves, that is indeed a very bad thing. It is also a bit ironic. The moral of the story is, learn to think for yourselves.

Regarding slaves, I don't believe that animals should be slaves. Boy human beings are quite arrogant to believe that they can turn other living beings into slaves. I don't care what color their skin or fur is, it's wrong.

Pauli is simply wrong but can't admit it - so let it be.  Catholicism did not start the slave trade.  There were slaves in virtually every society all over the world.  But what do the words of Jesus say?  To love thy neighbor as thyself.  To judge not or you will be judged.  To turn the other cheek. 

The fact that men, born into a family that went to church co-opted their leaders and found some excuse for it does not mean that the actual teachings of the religion are to enslave others.  This distinction is so obvious that I hesitate to go any further.  Pauli, you are just off.

Judaism and Christianity have evolved over time.  Islam has yet to evolve but likely will.  It is universally agreed on that enslavement is wrong.  Man has evolved over time.  But teachings of love in the New Testament rise above the actions of men in their daily lives.  To demean the actual teachings of the gospels based on the corruption of men is misguided. 

Hey but guess what Pauli?  I bet Jesus would forgive you. 

The religious content in the Bible is equal to stupidity.

Having said all of that, The men who ran the Catholic church for  much of its history included a number that were living contrary to the teachings of Jesus, choosing power, sex, money and violence as their gods while paying lip service to Jesus.

Ok, you Christians...

Do you think that you will go to a Christian Heaven, meet Jesus, etc, when you die?

Or do you think that people who believe in Christian ideas, go to Focus 25?

Both and neither one of these. 

There are a lot more options than what you have thought of with your limited line of thought.

I don't really reply to the label of "Christian" but I think that it's quite possible that I will see Jesus and so many others after crossing over, and I would particularly like to find that place that some near death experiencers describe as one in which they experience all knowledge, all love, all things, all past, all present, all future. Regarding a place called "focus 25", I would assume that is part of all places, and if there is a reason for me to be there I will be. And, furthermore, I hope my life has served some good purposes here, despite my numerous mistakes and inadequacies, which I have every reason to think will be completely understood and put in perspective in a way that is impossible here during my human lifetime. I hope to see you there, wherever you are, however you are. I hope it's a wonderful ride that lasts forever.


PauliEffectt wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 4:41pm:

Ok, you Christians... Do you think that you will go to a Christian Heaven, meet Jesus, etc, when you die? Or do you think that people who believe in Christian ideas, go to Focus 25?