Forums are a great place to share information and ideas, especially about topics that may not come up often in our daily conversations, such as the afterlife.  An important role forums such as this play is to help others in their quest for truth.  However, I have been noticing that many posts here seem to be motivated by egoism, rather than altruism.  This is especially apparent in debates. 

Debates are basically when people with conflicting beliefs try to convince the others that their own beliefs are more valid.  Now the question that arrises is, what is the motivation?  Is it to help the others to see the light?  Or is it to attempt to solidify one's own belief system by trying to rebut the conflicting beliefs, while seeking agreement from others, so that one can remain confident that their own beliefs are the most superb.  Often times the latter seems to be the case. 

Altering a belief system can be a difficult thing to undergo.  It can be like loosing one's identity, or loosing the supporting structure of one's existence.  But it is even more difficult to change another's beliefs.  This is extremely apparent in debates that occur on this board.  I don't think I have witnessed a debate where someone successfully convinced another that the opponent's beliefs are right and their own beliefs are wrong.  It simply does not happen.  Anyone with eyes and reading capabilities can see this if they look.  So it seems that the debates are basically a waisted effort if one is trying to help another- they only serve oneself. 

I also believe it is wrong to try to change another's beliefs if the beliefs in question serve them in a positive way.  The whole point of finding an ideal belief structure is so that one can use it to grow and become a better person.  So if this is already taking place, it is simply selfish to attempt to block the flow of this, and it becomes obvious what the true intentions are of the debater.  When an individual is ready to move on to even more fulfilling beliefs, this tends to occur naturally, and by the choice of that individual.  Forcing beliefs down another's throat is ineffective and morally wrong.

So these are the conclusions I have made about debating, and I will most certainly keep them in mind in any future debates I decide to take part in.  Hopefully others will too.

Dude: Forums are a great place to share information and ideas, especially about topics that may not come up often in our daily conversations, such as the afterlife.  An important role forums such as this play is to help others in their quest for truth.  However, I have been noticing that many posts here seem to be motivated by egoism, rather than altruism.  This is especially apparent in debates. 

Recoverer: Don't assume somebody is motivated by ego because they have a different viewpoint than you have. I bet you don't tend to believe that people who believe as you and support what you say are motivated by ego.

In my case, I believe there are a number of souls who incarnated into this World in order to help it evolve, and unfortunately many of them have been taken hostage to varying degrees by the numerous fraudulent sources that exist.

Also, because of how I revere divine will and what it is trying to accomplish, I take exception when fraudulent sources of information stand in the way.

Dude: Debates are basically when people with conflicting beliefs try to convince the others that their own beliefs are more valid.  Now the question that arrises is, what is the motivation?  Is it to help the others to see the light?  Or is it to attempt to solidify one's own belief system by trying to rebut the conflicting beliefs, while seeking agreement from others, so that one can remain confident that their own beliefs are the most superb.  Often times the latter seems to be the case.

Recoverer: Same answer as before.   

Dude: Altering a belief system can be a difficult thing to undergo.  It can be like loosing one's identity, or loosing the supporting structure of one's existence.  But it is even more difficult to change another's beliefs.  This is extremely apparent in debates that occur on this board.  I don't think I have witnessed a debate where someone successfully convinced another that the opponent's beliefs are right and their own beliefs are wrong.  It simply does not happen.  Anyone with eyes and reading capabilities can see this if they look.  So it seems that the debates are basically a waisted effort if one is trying to help another- they only serve oneself. 

Recoverer: So what's your suggestion, that people just quit and allow the fraudulent sources of the World to have their way? Plus, are you certain about the effects? There are a lot of factors that determine what a person comes to understand.  In a way it's good that you have an emotional response to the posts of people such as myself, because it shows that you are responding on some level.

Dude: I also believe it is wrong to try to change another's beliefs if the beliefs in question serve them in a positive way.  The whole point of finding an ideal belief structure is so that one can use it to grow and become a better person.  So if this is already taking place, it is simply selfish to attempt to block the flow of this, and it becomes obvious what the true intentions are of the debater.  When an individual is ready to move on to even more fulfilling beliefs, this tends to occur naturally, and by the choice of that individual.  Forcing beliefs down another's throat is ineffective and morally wrong.

Recoverer: It is true that it is wrong to force something down a person's throat. I don't believe that I or any of the other people who speak against channeled sources have told people that they "have" to read our posts and believe what we say. Fraudelent channeled sources on the other hand come up with all kinds of hooks to entrap people, such as claiming that they are channeling a high level source when they aren't.

Perhaps people such as myself speak up so these fraudulent sources will have less success infringing upon the freewill of others. There is also the question of whether we actually need fraudulent sources to grow spiritually. Also, numerous people spend much of or all of their life misled by a false source. Perhaps if more people spoke up against false sources they wouldn't succeed as much as they do.

If a source is based upon impure intentions, it is bound to have negative effects to varying degrees. There is a lot of evidence which shows that they do.

Dude:  So these are the conclusions I have made about debating, and I will most certainly keep them in mind in any future debates I decide to take part in.  Hopefully others will too. 

Recoverer: Just remember, whenever you refer people to fraudulent sources as you do, you're not as silent of a factor as you suggest. Consider what took place with Bashar. You mentioned his name, I hoped you might be referring to a source that has good information, and I found what I found. If Bashar is fraudulent and misleading, and a person gets involved with him after seeing your reference, then your so-called innocent referencing of his name does become a significant event.

What do you think light beings in the spirit World do when it comes to the numerous fraudulent sources that exist? Do they say to each other the matter is too controversial to discuss and keep mum, or do they care enough to see if something can be done? Do they hope that somebody will speak up about the fraudulent sources that exist?

Saying what someone thinks is "rubish" is not debating. Even if you go on to make a point. I came here hoping to find people of like minds, and I have found some, but also I find some people who are the epitome of what I came here to get away from. It's no big deal. I'm no Pilgrim.  It does seem that most of the debate rests with one or two issues that are only cut and dry to those who feel there is nothing for them to learn here, only to teach their system. And we argue the same two or three lines of thought over and over. Still it beats surfing porn.

I personally try to make posts which relate to the logic of another's post and/or to tell about an experience of mine which, to me, seems to be related to the initial post.

When something seems to me quite unlogical (contradictory in itself) then "rubbish" won't be a wrong attributation.

Spooky

It's a bit of a perennial issue, and one that's well known in spiritual groups. Pardon me if it comes across as a bit of a statement.

In essence the spiritual path has little to do with intellectual understanding - it's rather about transcending our identification with the thinking mind and the body in favour of a state of beingness - a state where we rest simply in the moment, that frees us from identification with thought and the selective perception this causes.(we see only what we want to see) This leads to daft and unloving behaviours, and  is the root of all suffering.

This 'beingness' as a result opens us to assistance from spirit, grace, higher mind or whatever - and the resulting intuition eventually enables a true seeing, and is the source of joy.

The problem is not thought or use of the intellect to solve real life issues, the problem is the way thought becomes obsessive, and we become so attached to it. We think we are our thoughts.

The development of a more reality based and less dualistic view/understanding of existence can certainly help us to move in the right direction (but is not necessarily essential) - the resulting understanding can help show us that blocking fears are  irrational, that selfish beliefs and actions lead to suffering. i.e.  it can help us to shed blocking beliefs.

Structured debate too can have a place as a means of refining our insight and understanding.

It tends however to quickly get off the rails, and to degenerate into what in Buddhist terms is often called 'dharma babble'. The ego tendency loves this, it gets off on winning and losing, and in the meantime welcomes anything that deepens our identification with and involvement in the 'mad monkey' - the undisciplined and out of control thinking mind.

Which of course deepens our entrapment by it. As long as we're consumed by thinking - fretting about the past, fearing possible futures, building theoretical frameworks, winning this argument or whatever the mental noise blocks all possibility of our simply being - of our just resting in the moment.

This is why the spiritual traditions do not encourage loose chatter - it's genuinely unhelpful, and creates an environment which is not at all conducive to spiritual opening.

They instead emphasise spiritual work - meditation, reflection, prayer, whatever  - plus the study/receipt of structured teaching. 'Structure' is important, the reality is that we often don't and cannot 'get it' (a particular view) until we've progressed sufficiently.

This is why there is a lot to be said for working through one or other tradition - they represent internally consistent paths developed over many many years. Failing that a self sufficient path of self work and study can be a runner too.

While it can help with issues that bother us, a forum like this quite honestly cannot be a one stop stop for instant enlightenment, or for answers to any and every question that in truth is easily answered elsewhere.

When questions and topics get tabled out of a simple wish to participate, to be a part of the group, to be seen as an expert, to push a view, or to win an argument etc then we're on the road road to self indulgent, incoherent babble. When the group dynamic/prevailing cuture takes on this tone it can only go in one direction.

Most of the established traditions use different language, but in the end say more or less the same thing. So it's not that important which you follow.

But maybe there can be value to an established system of teaching and practice that hands down and takes steps to preserve an established view, and establishes clear lines of teaching authority - in that it short circuits most of the babble. Personal/non-curricular questions when they arise are handled off line.

The trouble is of course that systems/traditions of this sort can also very easily be hijacked by those in pursuit of power etc too, so one has to be quite careful and discriminating in how one relates to them too. You can never suspend your disbelief, at least not until you know the people you are committing to very well.

Coming back to this forum. What is it to be? Is it simply for social interaction, or for structured teaching (in which case the problem of what to teach, and by what structure immediately arises), or for sharing experience and insight. (in which case some of what gets posted may not be relevant/understandable to all)

Or do we let it degenerate into the usual cliques fighting to head the pecking order that you see on most forums? Followed by the need to show due deference to that pecking order, and to stay 'on message' once one becomes dominant?

I don't think there's anything wrong with presenting a body of teaching on a 'here it is for what it's worth basis', but it becomes a bit of a mess if it's is read as an attempt to dominate, or is pushed at others.

What bothers me most about the way the forum has headed is that somehow the sense that the spiritual path is mostly about personal work seems to have become buried underneath the chatter....

Quote:

So you think we haven't learned yet to see through that? I mean it's not just about the afterlife, but any experience whatsoever. We all know that every action seems different from our different points of view. This is what lets us combine religious NDEs with non-religious NDEs (for instance) and look at the essence in both of them instead of just dismissing one. Of course we each get our own interpretation out of that, but we know that, don't we? I think as long as we're aware of that, there shouldn't be unnecessary accusations. (May be misunderstandings though, in which case it needs clarification rather than fierce debates.)

Quote:

That really is a bad habit; there are lots of words in every language that have lost their meaning or cannot be used any more because they've been abused.

Quote:

So which words would you suggest? We do need words to be able to communicate.

good night or have a nice day,
Vagabound

I think debates are fine when people involved actually have done their research and know all sides of whatever they are debating. Usually something very positive can come from that. Unfortunately there are very few on this board that have the time or interest to do that so what we end up with is a bunch of differing personal views and people tend to think their view is the correct one and it probably is... for them personally. I think the reason for that is because it somehow helped them grow and learn something important to their being.

Problems seem to arise when people take something someone else says as a personal assault or they get tired of hearing the same thing from someone over and over and over... especially when the person repeatedly pontificates without taking into consideration another person's perspective. As Don mentions language use and interpretation mean a great deal when communicating with others. btw Don, you're right, there is a lot of good posts that have been made over the past four or so years. Newbies could get a lot of information by looking through some of those posts that go back to 2005 when the board had many more members participating.

Sorry I got sidetracked. My point of this post is that I don't think the people that seem to "push" their position have bad/wrong intent. To me it seems their intent is more like that of a loving parent trying to keep their child safe by telling them to look both ways before crossing the street.

The learning in this ELS preschool never stops and we all can learn much from our interactions with each other. Of course learning is always a lot more fun when children play nice with each other, share their toys rather than fight over them.

Kathy