Hey there,

sometimes when reading through some topics, I am astonished after all. Not only because of the information that is given through them, but the "hidden" dislikes, between the lines.
To talk not of nebular stuff, the thing I am referring to is Don's Swedenborg post, it is really like the two sides gathering their kinsmen together to defend their believes.
Maybe Don has attitude, or a big ego, who cares, as long as the things that are provided fit into the scheme.
Everyone has his favourites, for him it is ES, I am trapped into scientific research, especially on the field of physics (but in spite of this, scepticism could be one of my names).
If he questions things like new age religions (I do as well, not because they are new, but as most of this attitudes are patchworks of different religions, what is obviously the first point that makes them an easy target, being open minded has nothing to do with saying "oh well we take a part of everything, because there is a bit of truth in here, and in there) it is his right to do so, because everyone has a free will and an onw point of view on life and how it should work. Maybe there are some harsh words, that can hurt, but this is also a matter to get over with, for what were discussions invented, if not for sth. like this.
I agree, this is of course Bruce Moens conversation board, supporting those who made effort through what he found out about the afterlife. If it violates the rules of this board to provide thoughts apart from tmi and its lecturers esp. Bruce, then Don is not the only one who did so (you seemed very offended by him expressing that Bruces methods are in his eyes not convincing enough, but what about the atheism thread I started (indeed via pm) , Nietzsches approach to create a world without any belief in divinity or an afterlife? This is in fact, leave the fact behind that I have not an agressive style of writing, more disrespectful to all the users around here, who really hold religious beliefs/afterlife beliefs.
So, to stay away from exhausting long writings, that waste too much of the time we do not have (or has anyone stolen his/hers), my idea was to create a section in the book club, maybe that could be an opportunity to share other lecturers beliefs, to compare them with the ideas most of you hold, might be a good way to push further?

But after all, to have a separation in ES and Bruce (maybe I am totally wrong, but I do not think that Bruce himself is into avoiding every type of critizism towards his approach) , seriously, is a path leading nowhere. Back to open mindness, an open mind is not interested in avoiding critizism (it is a personal experience that one can really learn something and grow personally out of critizism, as it makes you work harder, and do not misunderstand this one, I have not said that I think TMI/Bruce have to improve, as I have not done research for years on themes like the afterlife or supernaturality, I am the last one that is allowed to even think about saying something like that). So I think it is not helpful to tell others to stay away from this board, because they hold different believes. I cannot help myself, but if it had to be like that, I would have to leave as well, as I doubt more and more what I experienced concerning the afterlife, and I do not know anymore what to believe. Seems like old habits reappear, maybe I creep back into the atheistic/humanistic hole where I came from.

I think if respect is something that shall come across on this one, we have also to accept the critics, no, they are no negative energies, they have only different beliefs, there are two ways, to convince, or not, if the differences are too big, there would not be any consense at all. But at least for the time, even if there are critics, they also have to get the respect, that everyone wants to gain from them as well.

Seems like I found a load of confusing words again, it should have been a plea for acceptance and respect, even for critics, maybe I made the ones I got closer to hate me now, but you should know one thing about me, one thing that I hate more than myself are words like "why don't you gather your things and go"?. I mean, what is won with that?. If the critizism is moved to another webappearance it is still there. But one opportunity stays with us, if the critics stay: here are the people that are directly connected with the author, some of you already met him or visited his workshops (heard the next time he will be in Berlin, so maybe I should up my butt and go there, as first hand experience and personal contact, at least hearing his teachings live, will provide more insights than reading) , here we can handle this critizism open minded. If it is moved, the new place, where the critic decided to settle could may be something like a pure hate page against the approach presented here. Maybe we are not confronted with it directly, but have not the possibility to argue and discuss. If there is one point I learned, I had to say Don is one of the guys that reminds of checking your beliefs over and over again in order not to settle down to easy, but to get to the real deal. Nice, something to argue about...as noone knows what the real deal is, only what he/she claims  to be real, in order to his/her personal experience, his/her view on the world.
I have to say, whatever the methods are, if there is a rational person you should describe what this after-life experiences are like, and you come across only with personal/emotional approach, that would not convince him/her.


So enough said, before I find words that are a reason for a ban (but lucky as I am, I am sure I already found them) , I quit.

Yours sincerely,

pulsar

Hey bets,

of course not here, but just thought it is not the right way to just send the critics to hell, or to the next web appearance, if there is someone who really has an attitude against Bruces methods, will have the possibility to spread critizism, also in a way misinterpreting passages just for the cause to ridicule them.
I think after all, it must be at least possible to evaluate methods.

But great, I did it again, get involved in something that is this time really none of my business (but that is the curse of the one sitting between the chairs, or just an irrelevant harmony-attitude)
I think most of you know this discussion (as it seemed that it is nothing that arose in newer times) better than I do.
I know that after all, that what I wrote sounds on first sights also a lot like being against Bruce, seems like I found the wrong words again.
But again, it was not my intention to cut down anyones experiences, or to make them seem ridiculous, only to leave space for problems with ak-programme, maybe they can be solved.
Sure bets, I will read them, the idea of being able to do it -what BM experienced- on my own was something that made me to go through and try his methods, as long as I have not tried, I am not going to question the methods, I don't know what effects it will have in the end.

But one thing to clear the screen, it was not my intention to speak up for any of the two sides, just a plea that maybe both of you (critics/believers), try to get a long. If love does not work, try at least respect and don't get me wrong, it is not restricted to those of you who work with Bruces materials, also to the Swedeborg-fraction, harsh words do not verify or falsify, at first sight they convey the feeling of there is someone defending himself.

But not to go to far away from what I wanted to express, if I got it right, Bruce himself in the beginning had doubts wether his experiences are real or not, or if they were just made up in his mind.
So it is not astonishing if the reader goes through the same, doubting.
I am also doubting, in spite of the appearances, that seemed so to be vivid and real, I already thought about leaving, because I notice that I cannot keep up with the ideas that are presented here, I am just to stubborn to accept things, the only thing I am good at is to bring despair and doubts. I thought it might be wiser to leave, to show respect to everyone here, that welcomes his/her experiences with pleasure, or has spent years on revealing the truth of the afterlife.

It is my attitude, as I get more critizism than support because of the things I am interested in (I am sure that my parents would recommend to go to a psychiatrist, if they would know that I participate on this forum, but in spite of this, it is normal that most people (school, people that I tried to be friends with, but there are always people that accept you, even if you are a weirdoo) are offended with what I think, so critizism is like the air I breathe. And I learned that critics are not always out to harm, sometimes are just right about that you need to change in order not to be messed up again, or to reanimate the brain machinery, if you got too far into refusing to reflect what you are doing.
Growth comes from learning by trying and also failing, if something did not work at all, it is time for a change.

For sure it is unfair to say that, but everytime I read the topics here, just after the feeling of being amazed vanishes, one thought comes back: "Do they really believe in what they are practizing? Sure they do, but what have they found out that I cannot? I stick with questions like this, the more they last, the more I desire to leave, not being a pain in the ass for those who are sure about what they do.

Yours sincerely,

pulsar

Hey there,

sometimes I have trouble with this word filter used on this page, e.g. I used the word qu33r and it turned out "gay", but I meant it like I ever used and understood it, being weird, feeling weird.

@hawkeye

I rather tend to say the dog that barks, does no biting, to connect it with critizism using harsh words, so not everything that seems annoying or dangerous is in fact dangerous.

pulsar

The arguing is unpleasant....Do Americans argue more than peoplein other cultures? My kid did a paper on Edmond Ross one time; one person featured in "Profiles in Courage" (he voted to not impeach Andrew Johnson). In reading some material about Ross' era...that leading up to the Civil War (or rather, the unCivil War Between the States) was that between 1776 and 1860's, the members of the Congress did alot of arguing, sometimes violently, but what they were all passionately fighting about laid the foundation for what came later, for what defined the US in a more exuberant era...and the implication was that the passionate arguing was somehow necessary, ot at least gave more opportunity for choosing between nuances.

So what we argue about here is setting the definitions for how we define reality. Somehow the fire of argument forges the ideas. There's some process going on here that I don't quite understand (and I don't think anyone else does either). I don't like the unpleasantness but...

Hey bets and Lucy,

I read the Swedenborg thread, and also the arguments that other users, that are much longer on this board, made on this evidence contra experience issue. I got the impression that it is not something new,
but the first time I read a discussion on this board, where so much dislikes and "hate between the lines" were provided. I was just "mad" about, that this two views do not coexist equal, but fighting one another.
It is not the lack of curiosity, that makes me think that I do not belong here, it is more, I am just scared about reading the books, being amazed, and in the end, just crying out for the factual evidence, even if the experiences he shared are reliable (again, I do not want to doubt it before reading his words, but I really fear that it happens just like I explained, but then it is my fault)
That is one of my incapabilities towards what the topics here are about, but I think it won't be wrong to read Bruces' books, maybe I find something more than the factual addiction, that I learned in school and ever saw as evidence of the "ultimate earthbound reality", that leaves no room for afterlife and supernaturality.
I got Voyages into the Unknown and Voyages beyond doubt, and I am glad, that the written english is not hard to read (I sometimes need a dictionary to read english books, even after 9 years of learning english there are still words and phrases I do not understand).
If I stick glued to the book, maybe I am able to write something about Voyages into the unknown on Sunday evening, I try to. I really want to make progress, as people around here answered my posts and pms, and I won't let them down. On the other hand it is an opportunity to learn open mindness. But as I said, I try to make it until Sunday evening, to show that I am willing to participate, in spite of my (ridiculous) doubts.

Won't have within the next few weeks/months, because I have a lot to read about electronical installations, as most of the people at the factory I do my practical training have not that much time to explain what I cannot understand, but as I have to write reports on what I learned, I try to get insights, in order to make it easier for them and for me (the more insights I get the less  people there have to explain concerning the basics)  , to learn as much as possible before going to university, but again I am in a hurry, forgetting that this training lasts until the 31st july 2008.



Love,

pulsar

Hi Pulsar,
Your quest for knowledge will only be satisfied by the seeking of the information. Ergo your words: "I am trapped into scientific research, especially on the field of physics (but in spite of this, scepticism could be one of my names)."
Theres plenty of this to be found. Maybe you want to take a peek into the links section of this board. I just placed a lot of scientific proof there, interesting enough afterwards, I found your message.

I hope you don`t leave the board, as you have much to contribute to it.
Sending all of you warm and loving greetings,
Anja

pulsar wrote on Sep 1^st, 2007 at 4:54pm:


See what happens in this wonderful Conversation Board! We join in Harmony - just as Bets said!
Love ya`ll,
Anja