Re the term ghetto, what Don is talking about is a mindset, not a literal place as is usually thought when hearing the word ghetto.

For instance, when he says "new age ghetto", he is referring to a mindset that accepts almost anything and everything that is stated. 

Or to put it another way, he is just asking us to use discernment when we hear or read about various accounts or claims about the afterlife. 

Seems reasonable to me.

R

Hi Don, first of all, i really like hearing about the good works that you and your group has done and continues to do.  I really wish there was more emphasis on more material oriented service in the world (and speaking for myself as well), though at the same time i recognize the real work and lasting affects are on the belief system level.   Kind of like, it's better to teach a person to fish than to just keep giving them fish of your own.

  But, "preaching" to people rarely helps i've noticed.  I've done that too often, and people tend to turn a deaf ear i've noticed.  But there are other occasions wherein i just try to be an example, and this affects more positive change than anything else. 

A quick example, i practice vegetarianism and for various reasons, ethically, environmentally, personal health, etc.   But in my daily life, i pretty much and usually keep this to myself, unless it get's brought up somehow. (except for here a couple of times).   At work, it did get brought up and not by my conscious choosing, and a woman i work with seemed curious about the whole thing.   I just mentioned some brief stuff about why i do it, that i feel better on various levels after having done it for awhile, etc.    I never once told her that she herself should do it, nor did i speak negatively about people who do eat meat, (something i've should have refrained from doing here) etc.   I mostly only spoke for the positives, and mostly in relation to myself, though i did mention some larger environmental/health issues as well.

  So, once in awhile she would bring it up, and i would tell her in a down to earth, and non preachy way, some of the things about it.   I wasn't expecting, nor wanting her to follow this herself, so i was a bit surprised when i found out later that she decided that she too would practice it.  It wasn't so much what i told her via words, but i believe she was more touched by the compassion that i had for animals, for the environment (and thus for other people as well), and since she liked and respected my overall vibe, she probably thought to herself, "maybe there is something to this.  He seems pretty happy and whole."   

  So, positive change was affected more by presence and by example than anything.   On the other hand, sometimes its good to be more controversial and firm or "fiery", but only when the situation calls for it and not as a motto and typical way of interacting.  Too much fire and burning smoke, people tend to associate smoke with fire and stay away.  I like Jesus and his example, because therein is the best, consistent example one could look at.   Some times he was a gentle as a nursing mother, other times fiery and no nonsense, and oft exhibited a balance or was more moderate. 

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 11^th, 2008 at 9:04pm:


  Skeptics, on a whole, will not be convinced by other people's data and experiences, until they themselves have an experience which strongly and obviously contradicts their preconceived beliefs and perceptions.   Now, when it comes to people seeking for themselves, yes i do believe they should look for some verifications and not believe what ever comes their way. 

   Exploring the "afterlife", psychism, spirituality, etc, is not the same thing as a scientific discovery of some kind of material based or oriented phenomena, we're dealing with the intangible here.    In any event, even in those materially oriented cases, how many pioneer and "out of the box" type people who either stumbled or intuited their way onto a new discovery, was deemed by their peers as unstable, a kook, deluded, or what not?  How much was their beliefs scoffed at and for how long?   It's happened so many times, and that with stuff more easy to demonstrate to others. 

  At the same time, i'm not saying that science shouldn't investigate this, or for skeptics to try to investigate those like Syliva Browne or what not.   There is a balance, but with the important tipping to people having their own experiences which convince themselves first--along with verifications.

  As far as skepticism and hard core skeptics go, its extremely hard to change such beliefs and ways of perceiving.   I have a good friend is very skeptical of anything "psychic, spiritual," and the like.  Not only is he "skeptical" he just downright really dislikes hearing anything about that kind of stuff.   Yet, i've had numerous psychical experiences with him.    But when i point out the deeper meaning or larger context of a such an occurrence, he just shrugs and ignores it.    It doesn't fit into his box, and therefore he doesn't see it.   He won't begin to see it, until he desires to and has some kind of openness to begin with. 

Many people in the Earth, have to be brought to their knees in the deepest dregs of self suffering, before they cry aloud to God/Spirit to be shown a different way, before they admit they don't know it all and are open to a different interpretation.   Look at Robert A. Monroe and his earlier rather materialistic nature and close mindedness.   He had to come to a point where he thought he was losing his mind, going to die, or what not.   Those very difficult and suffering filled experiences, acted as a powerful catalyst towards seeking outside of Mammon's ways.   The Bible is replete with such a pattern and trend in relation to individuals.

It's somewhat rare for a person to come into this life, and to retain past their childhood, a strong belief and perception of the nonphysical and of Spirit, of just being open, receptive, and filled with wonder like a little child.  In some ways, this is challenging (because one is looked at as strange by their peers, and perhaps put down and degraded), but in other ways it's an easier experience than becoming a more hard core materialist and skeptic.   

Quote:


  My sense is that Jesus wants us to do what he did, and that wasn't sitting around reading books and intellectually masturbating a lot.  It was going out and losing self in service, along with prayer and mediation, that brought him that attunement to God.   He didn't tell us to keep it an intellectual or mind level, he said to make it a whole system thing.   He said, "If you seek first the Kingdom of Heaven, which is within, and then all else will be added unto you."

  Again, i'm not saying we shouldn't read any books, talk to others about beliefs or our expeirences, or anything like that, it's another issue of balance--the Mind or Head needs to come into balance with the Heart.   Sometimes a book, a teacher, or something outside of us will act as an important catalyst, but once we have the right ideals (love, Oneness, service, belief in some kind of Source consciousness, etc), it's a matter of practicing those and opening ourselves up to the Divine's Will, and not pontificating and mentally masturbating over ideas, beliefs, in our own minds or with others.   It then becomes a matter of doing/practicing, of being, and of becoming receptive. 

  There is something that Jesus once said, and i would like to loosely paraphrase him.  Blessed are those who do not need to constantly seek outer verifications, nor to prove to others their internal experiences and knowings, blessed are those who believe and have faith because they know or sense in their Hearts the truths of the Father.   

  I am reminded of the disciple Thomas, as compared to those who accepted Jesus's words because they rang of truth within their hearts, and did not need "proofs".   

  This may be hard to achieve and find in this world, but it is possible and it can be found.

Karma is what it is.  It is not a new age concept, nor is it part of any one religion.  For every action, there are consequences (or an equal and opposite reaction in physics).  At a more fundamental level, for every thought that is made with conviction, there are manifestations in our lives in terms of variables.  This universal principle is, quite obvious with the least bit of introspection - however, should anyone wish to debate on the existence of karma, I'd love to participate in a thread on it.

To get back to my comments.  I see that Don responded in typical fashion to me - sorry Don, I know the truth can hurt sometimes.  It is not enough to say that I will act lovingly in Temple or Church, yet on a website I may call people ignorant or "my whipping boys," to quote a friend we all know.  Whatever you project out in this reality comes back at you in one way, shape or form.  Is this a new age thought?  Certainly not - I can quote sources from most major religions in support of this premise.  The golden rule certainly has been around for thousands of years.

Don says that I impute unworthy motives to his negative remarks.  Hmmm....I reread my post, and I must be missing something.  Couched between my compliments toward Don's insight and passion, was a simple statement that I thought the insults were the wrong path and not justified as a teaching tool.  Were they not insults?  Were the people who took offense somehow misguided?  Do tell.

I have studied in an Ivy league institution and after four years of college, four years of medical school three years of residency and two years of fellowship, I'd say I've read more than a number of texts on human biology, psychology and neurology.  I have studied various theories of mind, separate from the pure biochemistry and physiology.  I have even published scientific reports in the peer reviewed medical literature in my specialty, using the scientific method we all refer to in terms of investigations.  As such, I do not appreciate being lectured to on my need to read more on these topics.

Those who talk of the ghetto mentality make the fatal mistake of lumping us all together in a great "unwashed herd."  I do not take Monroe and Moen's books to be the defacto afterlife manual or "authority;" perhaps others do (that is their choice).  Most of the new age explorers on this board don't say "this is the way it is..." They say  - "find out for yourself by exploring."  

My "dead end monism," dear Don is by no means an absolute philosophy in my mind.  It is an evolving process, and thus quite vibrant.  One is by definition either or a monist or a dualist.  You may fancy yourself a believer in dualism - you haven't said.  From my readings, one of your personal inspiratory figures, Swedenborg was ultimately a monist at heart.  I have written of my belief in the unity of all things, on the board, yes this is true.  Yet you feel you have me pigeon-holed and impute a mindset to me without really knowing me of speaking about it with me over coffee.  This I find to be sad - I'd rather flesh out ideas in a discussion than trade barbs here.

You once posted a challenge to obtain information about the figure of light in NDEs.  In that thread, in response on this message board, I brought in responses directly from an expert -  PMH Atwater, along with detailed research on NDEs in regarding other cultures.  True, we had even more questions than answers at the end of the thread, but the contribution of myself and others in terms of backing up our posts with facts has been there all along.  

The scientific method has evolved over time to be a formidable technique to describe our physical world and verify or refute many ideas or concepts.  It is always good to try to obtain verification in your explorations, so as not to simply indulge one's own fantasies.  Sometimes, in dealing with spiritual we may not get all the verifications that we'd like.  I agree that more effort is needed to verify.  Lets just stop with the ghetto talk.

Matthew

I don’t like the use of the ghetto analogy any more than anyone else. It simply degrades people and is not in my opinion displaying the fruits of the Spirit, which include patience, kindness, endurance and so forth.

Now having said that, in all fairness I must say that sometimes posters here have attacked Don before he has come back with the G analogy. It seems that grudges continue to be held and people take things personally. Creating resistance to something someone else says gets in the way of honest, open dialog because hurt feelings become involved. Grudges are held because we hold on to the hurt by covering it up with anger. Creating resistance is always my first clue that I need to look at myself. Not other people because I have no control over what someone else chooses to think, say or do. To try to control someone else is only to give away our own personal power and thereby creating chaos not only within our self, but in the collective and the world itself. The only person we truly have control of is our self.  

Every single person has value. What they have to say is an expression of their soul. If each of us truly is a spark of God, why do we not realize that the way we treat others is in all respects doing unto God?

To get back on topic:

Programs such as Criss Angel are not my cup of tea. I watched about 5 minutes of one and changed the channel. I wouldn’t be able to say what his or the program’s intentions are, however I do agree that probably some who claim to channel an entity are probably fake or gleaning some sort of information via ESP/intuition or their messages are from their own imagination/fantasies. Even so, can they be helpful to one who is in need of comfort. Of course. Why else would they be so popular and able to empty the pockets of their followers?

We all have the same basic needs. We all have the same basic fears. We all try to look outside of ourselves more often than not to find answers to our discomforts. Those of us who know that peace and feeling safe can only be found from the divine within have the responsibility to teach this to others and to do so according to the laws of God, which are the same as those of love… the golden rule.

I love you guys. Whether we like it or not, we are all brothers and sisters. And I guess we squabble like brothers and sisters as well, but it would be nice if we could throw in some love and understanding, too.

Kathy

Don,

With regard to Karma:

While the particular word can be traced back to India and defined a s a "cause and effect," relationship regarding actions and deeds, it is commonly generalized in modern discourse to include a universal law of cause and effect that transcends Indian concepts of reincarnation.   

In any event, other than my one comment regarding my dislike of derogatory comments such as ghetto or calling posters ignorant, I have not struck at you personally.  I do not know you and have not had in depth conversations with you in person.  As such, I would not pretend to say what you have learned over the past two years or make a value judgement.  Your assumption about my level of reading and my personal quest aside from being wrong is quite hurtful.  To say that you had comments to make on my Tree of LIfe thread, but witheld them because you perceived that my quest was unworthy - appears quite mean-spirited.  We are colleagues on a public forum - if you had something interesting to say, why not print it to stimulate the discussion?

I have never deliberately tried to hurt your feelings, and have in fact engaged you in several threads here.  The feedback that I've received has been overwhelmingly positive.  If you review my previous threads, and in general when I do comment, my points on average are usually quite germane to the topic of conversation.  I will chime in when I see deragatory terms being bandied about - it is my nature to defend against those (call me sanctimonious, as you've done) - so I do apologize for temporarily taking this conversation off track. 

Your last comments to me were geared toward maligning the validity of my spiritual quest.  How awful.  I have not and would not do the same to you.  I could respond and tell you about the insights I've made over the past two years which have had a profound impact in my life and how I approach others.  I have said in many threads how I have incorporated spiritual healing in my medical practice; how I disucss studies on the placebo effect and the power of intent.  How I mention studies on prayer groups and effects on patients who may be unaware they are being prayed for.  How I have directed numerous patients toward a meditative and prayer based approach to heal.  Surely, I have seen and experienced these and other changes.  However, since this is a personal quest for me, I would prefer to do it in detail in a private message to you.  If you are not truly interested in my quest or in hearing about it in that way, let me know.  Otherwise, please do not call my search and associated life's work unworthy.  It is hurtful.

My work schedule does not allow me to back up all of my posts with researched readings.  However, I have done so on many occasions on this forum.  Twice, in older threads, I described detailed studies which I thoroughly examined based on Princeton's now defunct P.E.A.R. laboratory, which demonstrated the power of human intent to influence seemingly random number generating machines.  The implications of this work toward understanding human consciousness and spirit are truly staggering.  These posts also were quite well researched and I have references available (in fact several forum members were given reading references on this topic by me at their request).

My purpose in mentioning these issues is not to appear grandiose, merely to directly refute your reports.  Are you certain I have not read Fontana?  Perhaps I have read more of these writings then you give me credit for; I should be clear though, I do not need the Brownie points from you.  I'd rather simply discuss the issues without someone saying that my opinions or those of others are from a ghetto or herd mentality, and not based on a true spiritual quest.

Don, I have always liked you, and defended your posts with the exception of the use of derogatory terms.  I assumed that there was a mutual respect between the two of us, and thought that a lot of good material came from our discussions.  Perhaps I was mistaken.  I wish you had or would have responded with any interesting ideas to my Tree of Life thread - I am certainly disappointed that you decided not to enter the discussion based on personal feelings against me.

Matthew

Don, Thank for the clarification. The church that you belong to, and many other are doing fantasticly good things. Foe myself and as agnostic in belief, I know of no church that meets my beliefs. Perhaps at some time I will find one. As for good deeds, it dosen't take a church to do them. Its all about the people involved. Although I do not belong to an organized religious identity, I still pray, give of myself, love God, etc. I find no need for thr group setting. In fact I look at is as groups of people really not being sure about God and therefor needing others to reaffirm a group belief or doctrine. Sort of like an "Am I getting it right?" sort of thing. I have no need for such affirmation. I allready believe without doupt. I am also deeply concerned with the "organization" its self. Has it not been found to harbour a rather large number of homosexual child molesters? Some church administrators going out of their way to hide the offenders and move them around. What was that all about? Now here in the West of Canada, our First Nations peoples are claiming that a number co churchs had systematically committed genocide up untill the late 50's at their residential schools. Nothing new for organised religions which have also been at the head of many similar actions. If Jesus had have been re-born a few hundred years later he most likely been burned at the stake. On another thread talk was about the Catholic church and their indifference to the Nazi's and their death camps. I wonder if you can buy a spot into heaven? Unless your a JW. Then there probably are not any spots open. Or then there are some of the Mormans...any body got a 12 year old that isn't married off yet?  And , and, and. Churchs and organized religions, no thanks, you can have them. I think I will stick to the Getto. There is just to much more to really believe in here.
Joe

Lars,

The context of Leah's disclosure of her "angelic" rescue was similar to that reported by Rondele [Roger] from this site.  I actually spent the day with Roger and his wife at their summer cottage.  Roger has done Bruce's workshop, but remains a skeptic and his skepticism is well thought out.  But his spiritual quest is fueled somewhat by the memory of a childhood experience which seems best interpreted as an angelic rescue from a potentially fatal attack.  [The question of whether an "angel" or "a discarnate human" is involved can be left open.]  Leah and her husband attended our group after being alienated from church by anti-scientific dogmatism.  I asked both she and Shane if they had ever experienced anything that might be construed as divine intervention.  Both shared a truly spectacular experience that has kept their spiritual quest alive.  I have not shared Shane's experience here.

Leah is a well educated and very bright speech therapist. She is an excellent young mother of two and she doesn't do drugs.  It was not snowing heavily at the time of her car mishap.  I will ask her again to confirm this detail. 

Your suggestion that New Agers might be lying can be an excuse to dismiss their valid experiences.  Perhaps, you resort to such a simple-minded ploy, but I always try to give posters the benefit of the doubt about their sincerity.  The issue is generally whether they are mistaken or deluded.  I can't recall an instance in which I thought a New Age poster on this site was simply lying about an experience.

Don

My take on the situation:

I, for one, know that channeling is a possibility. My sister and I use to play with the ouija board when we were younger. She was even younger - probably about 9, more vulnerable, and yet more curious than I was. When I asked the ouija what I got for Christmas, it replied, "screwdriver." It was actually a tool set which included a screwdriver, but close enough.

However, if we were to try this in a public area I don't think it would work. I really believe that these spirits have other purposes other than to convince the world that they, or the afterlife exists. That's why I don't see how someone can perform any kind of psychic experience on live television. I think that these celebrity psychics are just under a lot of pressure to perform due to their reputations being on the line and therefore turn to some kind of trickery.

BTW, I'm a skeptic myself but I'll never play with the ouija board again.

On that note of skepticism, there's one thing that boggles my mind the most about astral project and it's relation to the afterlife.

I would think that if astral projection was really possible to venture off in to the afterlife, then I would think this discussion board would be crawling with enthusiasm and stories of new experiences and plenty of encouragement to newcomers.

All I see most of the time are responses based on personal beliefs and what people think instead of actual experiences provided by explorations into the afterlife that supposedly could offer the truth.

I'm not trying to knock down the fact that astral projection exists, I'm just not sure that it is what it's cracked up to be. I've been tracking this for a long time and in conclusion, feel that it is just another form of dreaming.