End of summer 2012 and the "in" book for chicks, ladies, gals and such is some boring sad thing about 50 shades of going grey in Seattle. Yuck. ladies, please get a life! What to read?

Along comes my idea of a highly exciting book (yes there are things more exciting that sex or sheets with high thread counts or whatever attracts people to that book). Finally!

So how can I get so excited about a book in which a woman gets blown up in Iraq and lives to tell the story? Because she tells what happened in what she calls the blink between the explosion and her going forward in physical life. What a story!

It is like she is in the movie "The Matrix" and she gets behind the scenes to where things in physical reality are being created. Her NDE is unique, unlike any other I have read so far. A roadside bomb explodes, hitting the vehicle in which she is traveling, and in the blink of an eye she is ...elsewhere.

I will have to read and re-read, there is so much to think about here. But I am currently enjoying (?) and thinking about her description of deciding to come back to her body and deciding how damaged it will be when she comes back. A being or beings are helping her with this in what she calls the Healing Dimension. In Chapter &, "Healing and Assistance," she writes (page 76):

Quote:


Then she discusses why she can laugh from the perspective she has at that moment and how she takes responsibility for chosing the injuries that will best equip her to meet her next challenges. That can only be answered and understood from the perspective of what she calls the Whole Self and how difficult it can be , even when she recalls this, to fully accept all the injuries when she is back in the physical.

Maybe that is why she calls the book Application of Impossible Things.

I recently heard an old radio interview with William Buhlman, in which Bulhman clearly expresses the idea that true reality lies in moving inward. WHen I was a kid I thought getting to Heaven was like going to the moon in a rocket. Much of that kind of thinking underlies most of our thinking, in this culture anyway. Humanity has been duped into thinking the answers are on the outside. But true reality lies inward. The physical world is a temprary construct. You have to shift your awareness to the inner energy bodies and tune into other realities. Maybe this is why healing (among other things) is so difficult. We don't have a roadmap to that Healing Dimension. But it would be nice to go there without being blown up! But at least Sudman discusses her adventure, puts it out there to share with us all.

Has anyone else read this?

Sudman,Natalie (2012) Application of Impossible Things : My Near Death Experience in Iraq    Huntsville, AR: Ozark Mountain Publishing

Thanks Lucy. It does seem like a different and interesting story. Here's a link to the ebook/kindle version:

http://www.amazon.com/Application-Impossible-Things-Experience-ebook/dp/B007V4R6...

I picked up another book while at it, Caesar's Messiah:

http://www.amazon.com/Caesars-Messiah-Conspiracy-Signature-ebook/dp/B0059912OA/

"The Roman Emperor had many titles - one of them was Jesus Christ." - Joseph Atwill

Lucy/Kathy-

Thanks for heads-up.  Just ordered her book.

(Lucy- my wife just received her 50 Shades book yesterday.....interesting combination of reading material huh).

R

Berserk2 wrote on Sep 13^th, 2012 at 12:41am:


Don! For God sake man use spell check!...She lives in Benson, Arizona, just down the road south from Sedona. She gives psychic readings for US$100 an hour!..Check it out on her website. She also sells cremation urns, made by her, with cheap glazed clay for US$200+ dollars. Again, check it out on her website by clicking onto these urns. She sells her art also, not bad for a chick who had horrific injuries from that bomb attack! All I can see in a completely healed person?..She mentions personal horrific injuries in her spiel from that bomb. Look at her hands and her face/head in those youtube videos! I don't see any major damage, or that her brains were hanging out as a result of her bombing attack as was stated. She never shows any of her 'healed' injuries in any videos!? .... Her big toothy smile and pretentious laugh is her passport to cash!!!....Go Bitch!   

Hi Don,

Since Natalie's been involved with TMI recently, it's not surprising to me that she's adopted some of the same metaphors as others also involved with TMI.  It's been at least 30 years since I've read one of Bob Monroe's books and I no longer remember much of his descriptions to say whether or not her philosophy indicates a resemblance or not, but it was not my impression that she is trying to convey any philosophy, rather that she is attempting to describe her out of body experiences.  Since I base the validity of other's descriptions of their experience on my own experiences, I therefore don't usually get hung up on metaphors.  Instead I look for relative factors based on personal experience.

In the book Natalie calls her experience an OBE and I suspect she adopted "NDE" from others since there's no way to know if she was actually "physically/clinically dead" for any length of time.  She describes an "instantaneous movement blinking from one place to another."  And in the "blink environment" as she calls it, she finds herself standing in the mist of what she calls "personalities" in "a human form, wearing glowing white robes."  These beings she describes as not aspects of herself, but aspects of the ONE consciousness or what can be likened to individualized consciousnesses/beings/spirits/angels/personalities, etc., and indicates they are "equals" in that there is no hierarchy between herself and what she refers to as "the Gathering" or "personalities" meaning these other beings.  I know Bob referred to "The Gathering" but I'm not so sure what Natalie calls these beings are the same as Bob's as I vaguely recall Bob's experience was with extra-terrestrial beings interested in earth or something like that.  As I mentioned, I no longer remember details he described.

Anyway, this "gathering" of personalities resembles several of my own experiences of spiritual beings watching over me/us and having an interest in and may even intervene within activities on the earth plane.  I've spoken of my experience with these beings previously on this board so I won't relay them again here.  I'm also on daily basis aware of feedback between "others" and myself as constant and ongoing.  I liken this to Natalie's description of "downloading" information with these "personalities" she speaks about.  I see it as an exchange of consciousness between me and those I'm interacting with on a spiritual level, including what could be called a stream of consciousness between myself and my whole/total self/soul, whatever label you choose.

She does express time as being simultaneous as many others do, but I think of that as a misnomer because time does exist on other planes of consciousness.  It is simply difficult to see and understand time in the same way as we understand it from a physical perspective.  It only appears to be simultaneous to us because of the unconscious/subconscious assumptions we have.  The forward movement of time is all we know.  She attempts to describe what seems like time and space in the "Blink Environment" in that it "can be perceived in many ways, existing in what would appear to the physical mind as a dizzying complexity of length and depth, as well as width, and beyond three dimensions."  And, "within Time/Space [from the Blink Environment] resides the choice of limiting focus to our particular and familiar perception of time and space.  Our understanding and experience of time and space might be understood as one strand, a subset, of whole Time and Space."  She uses caps to indicate Time and Space from what she's describing as the "Blink Environment" in her book.

As Lucy mentions, this book is not really a classic NDE, but I have found Natalie's OBE descriptions of what we might call other planes of reality useful not only as verification of my own experience, but also in greater understanding.  If you're looking for classic NDE verifications you probably won't find them here.  But if you're looking for information in regards to what other realities are like as well as glimpses at the workings of consciousness, there may be something for you here.  I don't know you well enough to say if you'd find the book interesting or not.  As I mentioned, Natalie herself describes her experiences as OBE, rather than NDE.

She also doesn't discuss PUL in the same way other NDE'rs do.  However, toward the end of her book she states: "Love and joy: those words really are completely inadequate to the experience.  In order to be accurate, the words must be understood to be bottomlessly deep and thrillingly effortless, both heavy and feather-light, infinitely complex and stunningly simple.  They must be understood to be all-inclusive, not defined within belief systems..." of good and evil, etc.

Kathy

Kathy,

I have not yet checked out Natalie's website.  But as I heard her speak on the 2 Youtube interviews, the thought popped into my head. "This gal is not independently verifying TMI doctrine and jargon; rather, she is interpreting her NDE through a Robert Monroe lens.  Then you confirm her TMI connection.  Presumably she had read some of Robert Monroe.  I mention this because of the contradictory interpretations of the "theatre speech" motif in other NDEs.  Even Swedenborg interprets a similar experience in an anti-reincarnation way. 

But as I mentioned, I have not yet read her book or visited her website.  So please don't take my comments as well considered criticism.  Rather, I'm simply trying to elicit clarifications from those who have read her book to assist me in determining whether I will also buy it.  Until then, I'm very interested in hearing about unique insights from her NDE. 

By the way, I am still unclear of what can be learned about the afterlife from Robert Monroe.  But I do believe he has much to teach.

And Harvey, I am grateful for the spellcheck reference.  I have been distracted by others many times during these recent  posts, and neglected to proofread my post.  Bad mistake! But the mistakes have been corrected.

Don

Quote:


Don, could you tell me more about this?  I don't recall either the Monroe or Swedenborg discussions of this. 

Thanks!
Kathy

Kathy, lots of funerals to perform these days! I will try to track down exact references when I have time.  I'm trusting my memory here.  But I want to share a thought that flitted through my mind as I head Natalie talk about the "theater speech."  If this experience happened in a timeless dimension, as she suggests, and if the hundreds of thousands of onlookers are aspects of one's total self, then why not consider the possibility that this mulititude is a visual representation of our self at different stages of our current earth life and at different stages of our postmortem life?   After all, the notion of a visual of my astral body persisting over time would itself contradict the claim of being present in a timeless realm.  So if I see countless aspects of self existing simultaneously in a timeless realm, then my earth experience of sequential development of my selfhood might visually translate into countless simultaneous pictures of myself.  In that case, it would be unnecessary to postulate the notion of rencarnating selves or parallel incarnating selves.  It might also clarify Natalie's claims (1) that I can simultaneously have an earthly focus of consciousness, and yet, perceive countless aspects of self in a "Gathering" like she witneeses and (2) that I am "downloading" information about reality to a countless host and become aware of it only in this "theatre experience."  In other words, the "downloading" sensation would be my description outside time of the continuous information experiences that provide continuity of my identity conceived as countless simultaneous selves.  Sigh!  I hope that makes some sense.

Don

Don, no need to take time to find exact references.  Just an overview from your memory should be sufficient.  From the gist of your post I may already understand your meaning of "controversial" as in a reincarnation concept.  Or in other words, RAM and ES encountered a gathering of spiritual beings they interpreted as aspects of themselves and interpreted these beings to be past, present, future lives/personalities of themselves, thus making a case for reincarnation.  Though wasn't ES shown this was not the case?  Anyway, I could be reading you incorrectly, but I think the short answer to your question is yes, one could possibly encounter spiritual beings and view them as aspects of themselves at different stages of current life and interpret them as separate individuals and incorrectly view it as themselves in another lifetime. I think you're looking for a plausible explanation for misinterpretation of the reincarnation concept and I'll get back to this question.  On second thought, since it's been a few years, why don't we in the future as your time allows revisit the cases for/against reincarnation in another thread.  Don't you have one you started at one time?

In regards to your previously posted thoughts, Natalie doesn't consider the thousands of personalities to be aspects of herself, at least not in her book.  And she doesn't speak of time as being simultaneous, as in a timeless dimension either.  At least not in my understanding of what she's saying.  I may need to listen to her interviews again, but I wonder if you've misinterpreted what she said?

Regarding the thousands of personalities, in the book she indicates she is aware of them arrayed around her clothed in white robes, yet she's also aware of them as "energies, points of light or monsters" as she prefers because changing her visual perception of them is an allowance of the environment itself.  In other words, according to the rules/laws that construct the environment/dimension one is allowed to see the spiritual beings as whatever one chooses, which is usually the way that is most comfortable for them.  Yet, the environment allowing her the ability to change her visual perception of the personalities does not allow her to change the immediacy of their presence or their individuality and separateness from her.  The spiritual beings exist within this environment, but how she views them is her choice.  Initially the choice may be somewhat unconscious and based on cultural belief, however, after closer examination one realizes that only certain elements are fixed. 

Just a note, in my understanding it is also allowed for the spiritual beings themselves to determine how they present themselves to someone as well, however, that statement assumes what Natalie calls the "Blink Environment" is the same as what I refer to as a crossover reality, which may encompass multiple dimensions.  Natalie seems to be singling out and describing individual dimensions and I haven't really taken the time to try to do that.  Instead I've simply been aware of various interconnecting or overlapping dimensions.  Her attempt to single these out by individual description is one of the things that attracted me to her book.  And she goes into more detail than what I'm describing for the sake of brevity.  Ha!  Sometimes I wonder how brevity is even possible when discussing ineffable concepts from a human perspective.  I guess it isn't... there's always more to say.

In addition she says, "Their number is overwhelming to my conscious mind, yet I'm able to single out any one of them to fully recognize the personality of that individual, simultaneously and instantly perceiving and knowing each of the other thousands as unique individuals."  So in my understanding "simultaneously" is an artifact of expanded conscious awareness.  She goes on to say this "knowing" occurs as a gestalt that is available to her conscious mind instantaneously and that her conscious mind in this expanded awareness is capable of focusing on innumerable points at once with full consciousness.  The points including not only each personality/spiritual being present, but also includes the setting of this dimension along with other dimensions that overlap or interconnect with it either internally or externally.  Though she also mentions that some dimensions cannot interact or overlap with one another.  This description also fits with my experience of various dimensions or realities as I usually call them.

She also states: "... my understanding of the various dimensions-- or vibrations or worlds or focus levels-- of expanded consciousness is that they are aspects of one encompassing reality.  The one reality includes all beingness or consciousness.  It is the endlessly unknowable infinity of creativity and an apparent paradox of infinite numbers of unique individuals that are simultaneously one...  This 'All That Is' can be perceived simultaneously as a force and as an individual consciousness that exists within each consciousness and yet is separate from each consciousness or being... I understand them to be aspects of-- the unknowable totality of conscious and infinitely expanding creation."

She goes on with more insights that I find intriguing, but I'll stop here.

Kathy

Hi Kathy-

I couldn't find a reference in Van Dusen's book about ES concerning reincarnation, but did find this on the net:

The writings of 18th century Emanuel  Swedenborg who claimed to have seen into the other side for 27 years do not support reincarnation. He wrote that we have one life - eternal - and that we are born into this physical world to prepare us for our eternal life. In the book, Heaven and Hell, Swedenborg explained that these memories of what is now called "past lives' are the memories of those who have gone before us. Very often, we sense these past memories and believe them to be our own. Swedenborg's explanation does not discount the experience - this life was lived - but not by the person claiming more than one life. We have one life - eternal life - and we are ourselves throughout eternity.

R

Don, I did listen to both interviews on Bob Olson's site here: http://www.afterlifetv.com/ ; Are these the same as you listened to?  Or does she have others?

I can try to find time to listen to them again with this in mind, but I sure don't see it in her book.  Either that or I'm not understanding your meaning in regards to what you're saying here:
Quote:


Perhaps when you have time you could elaborate.  Sounds like you've had a busy day today.



Thanks Roger.  That's my understanding of what ES said, too.  And as far as I can see Natalie doesn't even imply anything in regards to reincarnation either.  And I'm not familiar with (or don't remember) Monroe's theater experience and his conclusions from that.  I do recall his philosophy being in support of reincarnation, however.  Just not any of the specifics as to how he made that assumption.

Kathy

(2) SWEDENBORGIAN CRITIQUE OF THE
NEW AGE CONCEPT OF THE GROUP SOUL

In reply #18 I outline the grounds of ES's rejection of reincarnation.  New Age reincarnation is often associated with the concept of a soul Disk or group soul comprised of many manifestations of one's soul throughout history.  ES would view this as a perversion of what actually happens:

"Kindred souls gravitate towards each other spontaneously...for with each other they feel as though they are with their own family (HH 44)," 

"There was a kind of angelic face that appeared to me, and this varied according to the qualities of affections...that were characteristic of the individuals in a particular community.  These variations lasted quite a while, and through it all I noticed that the same general face remained constant as a basis, with everything else being simply derivations and elaborations from it.  So there was shown me through this face the affections of the whole community...Not many individuals leave their own community to go to another because leaving their community is like leaving themselves or their life...(HH 47, 49)." 

"Sometimes a whole angelic community appears as a single entity in the form of an angel, a sight that the Lord has allowed me to see. . .Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael are nothing but angelic communities that are given these names because of their functions (HH 52)." 

Similary, in classical channeling, the group soul is not like the Monroe/Moen soul Disk composed of multiple selves of the same soul unit.  Rather, the group soul is composed of originally distinct kindred souls with the same purpose.  Yet this channeled conception might easily be confused with the soul Disk concept.  For example, consider this quote form Paul Beard, "Living On," p. 135:

"The group as a whole is in a real sense a soul also, a group soul, and [the discarnate person] is in very truth part of this soul.  The bond, the common purpose, will not all be seen in a flash....[but] will be carried out gradually, until the various parts are gathered together and made a whole." 

This alternative understanding may be the key to solving a significant contradiction between Bruce Moen and Robert Monroe.  Moen claims to be part of the same soul Disk as Monroe.  But Monroe is astrally informed that he has only one parallel incarnation--a female one.  He is also told that "she would seem like a long-lost sister (UJ 174)."  Moen reports no such intimacy in his earthly encounter with Monroe.  Perhaps, Moen, Monroe, and even this unknown female are distinct and separate souls destined to participate in a group soul in this Swedenborgian sense.  If so, there is no such thing as retrieving portions of one's self.

The group soul in the Swedenborgian sense gets rid of the the troubling notion of parallel incarnations from a timeless astral realm. 
Consider the contradictory nature of Seth's perspective on the timeless interval between lives.  In "Eternal Validity of the Soul" Seth says, "There is no time schedule, and yet it is very unusual for an individual to wait for anything over 3 centuries between lives, for this makes the orientation very difficult, and the emotional ties with the earth have become weak."  But Seth assumes that time is irrelevant for entities between lives.  The earth ties can only become gradually weakened if there is in fact a passage of time!  A real contradiction!

Don

Quote:

"I have an idea that there's another one being human here at this time — another one out of this I-There of ours." Your presentation of it has an obvious difference.

Quote:

What do you find troubling about it?

Yes, Focus27, Natalie comments that from the perspective of physical life, this does not make sense. And she does not wish to make pain for her friends who were also injured or for anyone else. It only makes sense from the larger perspective of the Whole Self. That's the point, or one of them. We don't quite understand the perspective of the whole self.

Harvey:

How did she get George W. Bush to pose with her if she has faked injuries?

http://rapidcityjournal.com/search/topic/?k=%22natalie%20sudman%22&d1=&d2=&s=sta...


harvey wrote on Sep 13^th, 2012 at 4:44am:

I agree, if someone calls themselves a medium that can bring messages from the dead they deserve to receive money for that service. I also have paid over 300.00 for such a service and some mediums literally cost a thousand or more for a session.

(Silvia Browne charges into the thousands for instance, but, if you do a Google search for her name and the words "fraud" or "Bad medium reading" you will find a plethora of people talking about how terrible she is, and, based upon what I have read I would have to agree.)

I do have an issue with mediums that don't produce any factual data during a reading and flutter around with complete misses and zero hits for a paid session. I have personally been to medium readings that were exactly that, complete failures. I don't think this means the medium is a fraud just because they failed to receive anything for a particular reading, but it definitely is not a good sign.

Personally, $100.00 sounds very reasonable for a medium IMO, based on what I have seen out there.

I have had more failed medium readings than positive hit readings. 2 out of 3 mediums seem to just flounder around giving information that appears to be pure guesses during a closed mouth sitter reading, where the sitter, me, only is permitted to give yes or no answers.

Because the existence of the afterlife can be scientifically tested through putting mediums to the test using verifiable data obtained through them from spirit.

If you can show me a better way I can achieve scientifically verifiable data regarding the afterlife without using a medium I am all ears. =)

I have tried the TMI binaural beats and meditation and achieved no scientifically verifiable data.

Testing mediums seems to be the easiest way for the typical Joe Schmoe to test the existence of the afterlife.

As a skeptic, I would need to recieve verifiable data from the afterlife in order to accept anything as evidence. For example, I close my eyes and contact my dead friend, and they tell me information I do not know but can later verify. Like a secret buried under a tree somewhere and when you get there it's a picture of them or something.

That is acceptable afterlife evidence, yes sir, nothing less will suffice for a true skeptic, heck, mediums claim to be able to provide facts and data this convincing so hey, is it too much to ask to show me the money? LOL!

Spirit guides are fine, all they need to do is provide verifiable data. I am all for spirit guides. Like I said, verifiable data is not that complicated and really should not be considered too much to ask modern, intelligent, mankind to require.

I tried but all I get is something about Mr green or green man. I don't understand it at all.

This is getting pretty off topic. Lucy and the others, I'm sorry for that, I hope you understand.

I just want to clarify a little more on how to communicate with spiritual guides. Perhaps it's better to start a new topic if you want to talk about it further.

---

Don't think guides are nuts or androids.
They are human beings just like you and me who have lived on Earth too but live only in the spiritual worlds at present.
They see things in a different perspective then you. As you have read earlier in this thread they have access to much more information in a much richer means then we here on Earth. They are just as intelligent as you and probably more evolved then you.

So don't put a pack of cookies on the table and wait for a demon to take possession of you to eat the cookies.

You don't have to be obedient to them. You can talk to them just as you do to me. The more relaxed you are the better the communication goes.
They don't always talk to you straight forward. It might well be that you are driving in your car, or riding on a bike, thinking about something and that the thoughts tumble over each other. Each demanding more attention then the other. I consider that as a sign that spirits are sharing their thoughts with you.
I have often had such experiences riding on my bike and it still happens to me. Being outside refreshes your mind, makes you think better. So that is a good opportunity for spirits to contact you.

It's ok to be reluctant about what they say or share, but don't get disrespectful. They have their dignity and they don't owe you anything. They are sharing their thougths with you to help you. So the least you can do is be respectful or behave as a normal being.

That should help you on the way.

I agree, Doc. That's what I experience. Guidance feels more outer directed, whereas intuition is a knowing. Knowing is a very centered feeling, and can verge on a deja vu kind of feeling, and is comforting. Guidance, to me, seems more "doing" oriented, while intuition is more "being" oriented, if that makes any sense whatsoever.

Wow, glowing review Rondele. Can't wait to continue with the book.

Rondelle:

I'd like to add something to my last post.

In his 3rd book Bruce Moen wrote that light beings cry when a soul that is helped out of a lower realm is energetically pulled back into a lower realm (I don't remember the exact words).

Why in heck do they cry if it's all just a big game for which it doesn't matter what happens?

Rondelle:

What about when we see somebody and share a friendly smile and say hello? It that pre-arranged, or is it simply a matter of living according to love?

If it is a matter of living according to love, then perhaps some people treat others in a negative way for reasons other than pre-arrangement.

There might be occasions when pre-arrangement does take place, but I believe it is a mistake to allow such a viewpoint to become an excuse and justification for negative behavior.

I believe it is a mistake to take on a way of thinking that limits how much we feel compassion for others.

I believe that we all have free will, it is just that some of us haven't learned to use it in a wise and loving way.


Quote:

isee-  You're right, a sociopath would not be affected one way or the other by what Sudman or anyone else says.  Bad example.

However, Sudman does acknowledge that one downside of knowing that there is no such thing as doing "bad" things is that it might encourage some people to do what they otherwise might not.

R

rondele wrote on Sep 18^th, 2012 at 11:51am:


Rondele,

I just reviewed Natalie's 2nd Youtube interview and 3 points struck me: (1) She struggles to find words for her NDE and seems highly influenced by the Sethian and Monroe jargon and perspective.  (2) She labels her guides as aspects of her higher self or her "core" and implies that this higher self embraces past lives, which she prefers to reimage as parallel lives.  It is my understanding that she did not display such a perspective in her book.  Is that true?  (3) Where is the common NDE experience of light brigher than the sun that does not hurt spirit eyes, the overwhelming sense of PUL, the common features of the Past Life Review: e. g. the participation in the hurt feelings of those harmed by our words and deeds, the feelings of remorse for selfish acts recalled, the support of a loving Being of Light that gives one the strength to endure these painful memories in an atmosphere of loving support?  If this is a genuine NDE, I consider it an example of an NDE displaying low-level spiritual development, despite the obvious intellect of the percipient.   

btw, I'm very wary of excliusivistic Christian NDEs in which Jesus supposedly condemns non-Christians to eternal damnation, regardless of their spiritual awareness and opportunities.  The Jesus (Being of Light) in  the NDEs of atheist Howard Storm and George Ritchie is far more inclusive.  I suspect the line between lucid dreams and NDEs is often blurred and that those on the threshold of death often fall prey to the deceptive spirits about whom Swedenborg warns.

Don

I believe that there is only so far we can be swayed by "lower spirits," if we stick to our inner nature.  That is because spirits of a lower nature (without love) find that they commiserate with others of their kind most easily.  We have to allow our minds to wander on their dark or hateful path to be "in tune" with them.  Otherwise, we are beyond their reach. 

Swedenborg notes that on the afterlife planes, if a person on a hellish plane were temporarily "raised up" to a heaven, they would see nothing, just darkness.  Their spiritual sight is open to the degree that love is expressed.  Indeed he goes on to say that if by grace they could experience a heaven such as Focus 27, they would be very uncomfortable and immediately seek to go back with others of the same thought and lack of love. 

With this in mind then, one can say that while alive (incarnate) we do have choice, and that while a spirit impersonator may play on our trust, our inner nature is whatever it is (loving or not).  So perhaps our decision making could be swayed temporarily in the physical world, but probably not more than than that.


Matthew

Doc-

Actually in Debates With Devils, ES says that a newcomer to the world of spirits was temporarily raised up to heaven by an angel.  The man was, by today's terms, a sex addict who bragged about his conquests but while alive was ethical and law abiding.

The man saw the reality of heaven with all of its wonders.  But then the angel opened his inner state and the man then saw a desolate landscape.

The angel explained that when a person's inner nature comes out, they see hellish things instead of heavenly ones.

Eventually he descended to join others who shared his lust.  Apparently our true inner state determines where we will end up.  It can't be hidden as it was while alive.

Don-

From what I can tell, Sudman doesn't specifically say her "Whole Self" contains other lives nor does she reference reincarnation.  However, she repeats what Seth says about parallel dimensions where every probability is played out when we make a decision in our lives.

If we marry A instead of B, there is a dimension where we did marry B.  My example but that's the point.  So in effect, yeah I guess she does reference parallel lives in that respect but doesn't go into it any further (to the best of my recollection).

R

R,

My point was that if we are able to express love, then the whisperings of low level entities are not likely to have as much effect. 

Also, I sense in your writings a holding of things as inviolate that we must follow our inner nature.  While that is true, to some extent, I don't think you pick up from ES that our inner nature can be "cultivated" while on earth.  Otherwise our choices, actions and karma would be meaningless.  If we have a nature bound for heaven and hell, then why do anything at all?  What would the purpose be in learning in a spiritual sense? 

So my take on ES and our inner nature is - yes that is ourself in our truest sense.  But nothing in the universe is unchanging, and while on earth, we can either indulge our baser nature and have it grow, or see the value in love, and cultivate it - allow it flow is more like it, instead.  I may be an eternal optimist, yet I rebel against anything implied in ES' writings that our inner self is forever written in stone!

M

Yes, Roger,

You see my take on ES is that he is correct - we have our own inner loves and nature, but the loves can still be used to allow love from God to flow, or to harm others and turn away from love.

So I may have an inner nature with a tendency toward    certain loves.  But if I follow it self indulgently and block off love that comes from God, I go down a path that might lead me toward a self indulgent hellish plane when I die.  If, on the other hand, I cultivate my life and thoughts to give service to others, or to follow the golden rule, perhaps that allows me to be open to whatever love I can express. 

So yes, ES says we must follow our inner callings.  But how have you cultivated your inner garden?  Did you allow weeds to grow in it while alive in the physical, or did you open yourself up to God's love?


M

recoverer wrote on Sep 20^th, 2012 at 12:41pm:


That is about the best argument to throw the old books away.
The conscious of people has evolved, so they are ready for new knowledge. You shouldn't stick with the old.
Just like eating old bread instead of fresh because it would be considered a sin to waste that.

Rondelle:

I'm not willing to rely on any book.

rondele wrote on Sep 20^th, 2012 at 1:51pm:

Don,

Ok, yes I do seem to recall Bob Olson going off in that direction and Natalie saying yes to what he was saying, but I'm not so sure she really meant to agree with him as I don't recall any mention of past lives, etc. in the book.  I have a meeting tonight and need to eat something since I missed lunch today.  I'll try to listen to the interview again in the morning.

She doesn't really discuss PUL in the same way as most NDEr's do, but yes, she does describe this in some ways.

There are things she says that I would disagree with.  Accountability in the afterlife is one of them.  There's a sense of it, as I recall, but you'd need to pay close attention to what's she's saying to understand it in that way.  That everything is planned is another.  She sort of touches on some of the above, but doesn't really get the point across in an obvious way.  I see agreements in much the same way Albert does.  Some things are planned... agreed upon, most is not.  Freedom of choice comes into play here.  I've never read any Seth or ACIM material and don't remember what all RAM said in his first book.  I think that's the only one I read years ago.  So when you and Roger talk about the concepts from those sources I really don't know what they are.  Now days there's so many people that have picked up "New Age" concepts from who knows where as one tends to repeat another over and over to the point that the original source of the concept is lost.

She could be using descriptions / metaphors from others to express her experience.  That's not surprising.  I'd say we all do that.  Some are more "correct" that others i suppose, but the ultimate question is: "Are our descriptions useful in the growth of our inner being towards love?"

Kathy

From a writer's perspective, I just want to say thanks to Lucy for the mention of the book.  I put it on my long to-get list of books.  And thanks to Rondele, Lucy, Kathy and others for their reviews and opinions of the book.  I don't know if I'll like it or not, but after reading all the thoughts and discussion here, I gotta check it out for myself.  My interest lies more with seeing how other people talk about and describe their spiritual experiences than with reading to make me believe their story.  Like from Rondele's description of her taking things from others she's read and heard....it makes me feel more appreciation for my own style of writing.  I still write very naively and straight forward most of the time, but the effect I'm going for is showing my raw honesty and awe of what I've experienced.  My effect is certainly not to impress anybody, nor to teach anyone anything for that matter. 

From a spiritual curiosity perspective....After reading all the reviews here, I have no idea what I'll think of the book or the writer's validity.  But you have all piqued my curiosity about it.

Vicky

Kathy-

She would make an excellent politician!

R

Made me chuckle.... cause it's true.

It's more like Afterlife Debate than Afterlife Knowledge most of the time, except for those that are on the same page and belief system.

Imagine yourself in a timeless realm sitting in a thearre with countless aspects of yourself who download your memory input.  How do you imagine these countless beings interacting with you and with each other?  If they converse or share thoughts,  that smacks of logical dialogue following a sequence of thought.  If, as Natalie suggests, clumps of thought seem to be simultanously downloaded, then the sequence of thought clumps also seem to imply linear time.  Somehow the notion of past, present, and future collapsing in an eternal Now seems static and ultimately suffocating to me.  But that may simply be due to my time-bound earthly perspective with its tendency to get bored if the event sequence lacks variety. Similarly, Broce's notion of a Soul Disk composed of parallel incarnations smacks of trapped balls of thought unable to move around meaningfully in a Disk.  This post is not meant as critique, but rather as an expression of puzzlement about what these images and experiences would, if valid, mean experientially. 

Swedenborg's account of timeless existence is easier for me to digest.  ES says that if you want to visit a friend in the astral plane, the "scenery" along the route might not vary, but the time it take to travel will be relative to how similar your core desires and values are.  If they are dissimilar enough, the "journey" will seem much longer because of the "resistance" to harmoniious engagement.  Sigh!

Lucy, I've been reading Anita's book this weekend.  She also speaks of life as meant to be lived with fun, joy and abandon... fearlessly.  I'm only about a third of the way through it, but I'm seeing some similarities with what Natalie says, too.

Don, you've mentioned "timeless realms" a few times, but I don't think any timeless realms exist.  Time in the non-physical is much different than what we experience... for example changing from one state of being to another state of being and noticing the difference indicates some form of time. 

I think what confuses a lot of people when they talk about their NDE is that their awareness is so expanded and not constrained by the brain that they are able to comprehend many things simultaneously as though the events/thoughts/feelings were occurring all at the same time.  There's a big difference of awareness in the non-physical, but we are capable right now in the physical of being aware of many things simultaneously.  That obviously doesn't mean we live in a timeless realm.

Natalie writes that many of these beings interact as a group performing specific tasks.  They all have their "uses" within their chosen dimension/society as ES calls them.  Natalie was able to know and interact with each of the beings just by their energetic signature.  I guess you could say they "downloaded" or communicated that to her, just as she did with them.  All this seemed to occur simultaneously.  Still that doesn't make the realm or dimension timeless.

Kathy

Roger, I think it is more that Natalie is accessing the stored memory of her experience, even though she talks about it as though she actually goes back there.  That is why she's only able to change certain things that pertain to her experience.  She can't change the free will choices of anyone or anything else.  An example would be seeing the beings in various ways... points of light, monsters, etc.  One way to describe it is she's accessing memory in a database of the actual event.  She can't really change the actual event itself, even the part she played, but she can in her mind change certain things for her own personal understanding using her own free will choice.  That doesn't change the memory of the actual event at the point in time that it occurred. 

Not sure if what I just said make sense or not.

K

Going by what I understand, being a member of a disk doesn't mean that you don't have any independence at all. From one perspective it is simply a way to learn.

Also, none of us is actually completely separate from each other.


Berserk2 wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2012 at 9:21pm:

Replying to some of the concepts:

On the blink environment, it's a neat term that I hope comes into standard usage. However, I remember RAM referring to a "skip" as an instantaneous change of scene, so to speak. But I like the term blink.

On the multitude of beings that she downloaded (i.e., sent a rote) to: this is similar to Frank DeMarco's information from his Guys Upstairs, in which they say that all possible lives occur simultaneously, based on every choice we make. Every choice results in versions of the self, each of which lives the path of one of the choices that could have been made. We are conscious of only one path (most of us!) but all paths are taking place, and the life when complete consists of all those paths (they use the example of a crystal, consisting of all the paths taken,) hence the multitude of selves that results. The "stadium" is representative of all the paths that were taken as choices were made during the individual life. Some people are theoretically able to jump paths when they end up in a situation where they are uncomfortable with the route being taken and want to jump to a more comfortable one.

On reincarnation: If an individual is "put together" (by the I There) as a set of traits and is then sent to have a physical life as that individual, that individual does not return "as such" to another life, although traits from that individual may be used to put together another one.

I think it's possible that Swedenborg spent a great deal of time in F25 in the Belief System Territories; hence the people staying where they are comfortable. It also resonates with Bruce Moen's visits to the various Hells, and the experiences of people being able to get out of a Hell with help, but only when they were ready to give up the conscious focus that kept them there. (example, the thief who was able to give up on the concept of thieving and being rescued by a Helper at that point.)

On planned experience vs free will: I think there are both; we plan to have certain experiences but must use free will to either bring them about or avoid them. I think a pretty good percentage of life is "stuff that happens," that we may or may not like. But it gives us opportunity for choice.

MA

I received my copy of “Application of Impossible Things.” I read through it quickly and found it a bit tedious partly because there wasn’t any new information and perspectives. For some people the information and perspectives might be new. I agree with Rondelle in that Natalie could’ve said what she had to say with fewer words.

As far as I can tell Natalie “wasn’t” misled by deceptive beings. I also believe that she experienced more than what her imagination came up with.

Nevertheless, I don’t agree with all of her interpretations. As I stated after watching her videos, I believe she takes the “everything is okay” and “everything is pre-arranged” business too far. I’ve found that it is possible to misinterpret things even after one has had a profound experience. Context and degrees of application of principles learned can be misapplied.

Below is an example of how I believe Natalie misinterprets what she experienced (from page 42 of her book):

“Whether it’s my physical mind or Whole Self creating experience, there is no victim status available. My actions, emotions, and thoughts are not a hopelessly blind product of parents, school, television, abuse, poverty, social prejudice, racism, sexism, or politics. I entered the physical world as a complete being, a full-blown personality, a consciousness with intentions and agreements. My being blown up by a roadside bomb in Iraq isn’t a fault of the person who built the bomb, the person who placed it, or the person who triggered it. It wasn’t bad luck or coincidence. It was an event that my Self cooperatively created and agreed to, and for my Self the event was and is meaningful, creative, and fun. It might have been unnecessary or avoided had I consciously developed different belief systems, but the value of the experiences is not diminished because of the fact.”

On the one hand I believe that the wisdom we bring with us when we incarnate into this World does play a role in what we become regardless of the circumstances we find ourselves in.  However, this doesn’t mean that our environment doesn’t affect us at all.  There is too much evidence that shows that people are influenced by their surroundings and other people in both negative and positive ways to conclude that environment plays no role at all. There is also the factor of their being some souls that haven’t developed to the point where they are good at overcoming the challenges that life presents. Chances are that this was true for the people that built, placed and triggered the bomb that injured Natalie.

When it comes to the parallel life issue, I believe as Kathy (Lights of Love) wrote on her last post. Free will is key factor when it comes to parallel lives, just as it is a factor when it comes to pre-arrangement. If we decide to respond to a situation in a positive and loving way, a parallel self doesn’t need to be created so a negative response can also take place. When we make positive love-based decisions “IT DOES” make a difference! Also, if we make a decision in this life that affects others in a positive way, this fact won’t be negated by what takes place one million years from now.

It could be that Natalie was referring to nothing more than alternative possibilities when she spoke of parallel lives. In fact, when she was asked about this during one of her interviews that can be found on youtube, she stated that it is possible that she became aware of probabilities rather than actual parallel lives (I don’t remember her exact words).

Lights & recoverer, is it possible that you are misinterpreting her experience using some or several misinterpreted experiences as your basis for further misinterpreting external events?

Time or no-time aside, being able to multi-task, carry out several actions simultaneously makes sense from a general physical and non-physical ponderment. Physical life would be very tedious if there were billboards saying 'don't think & drive' - with teasing nike billboards next to them.

Quote:

The non-physical self isn't just anyone, but taking above and below into account; my subjective view is that all plans don't pan out however well planned.  Having a plan is a good first step towards success though. So what if the plan was to become a healer in the Amazon?

Becoming a better person requires love, and more. What's the more part? Fun of the game. And a game is what it is because of it's rules, and I'll put out a safe bet that there are still rules about the game to be discovered.

Quote:


Hi Bob,

I think you may be misinterpreting what Albert and I stated.  Multi-tasking is completely different than creating parallel selves that follow the paths of other choices in a sea of consciousness.  Consciousness is much more organized than that.  We are a single individualized consciousness, not a conglomerate of self created selves spawning out everywhere.

Multi-tasking on the other hand is quite natural for all of us and I've heard it described as parallel processing or being aware of many things simultaneously.

Kathy

Quote:

Hehe, good one. The point I was trying to make: it is her direct experiences, and however she interprets them, us, the reading bystanders are also not holders of Objective Certificates, as far as I know.

Managing one extension compared to many extensions gets into multi-tasking territory. If experience is the bottom line, my spawned subjective making sense of this says the extensions could very well be bases for further branching variations, to maximize potentials.

Quote:

Note from the producer: not bad. Let's do one more take, with more emphasis on tone, harmony, melody, rhythm, composition, lyrics, musicianship, tempo and originality.

Performing perfection, and yet noticing that the sound is clinical and dull, and simultaneously (oh yes) remembering the golden tone of the classic records. Harmonics from valves, tubes and different tape formulas and speed. Ahh, perfection with a warm sound. Does a band have to have a lead singer? Four on the floor has lost it's mystery, how about 5/8? Use a recording of your friend playing the drums, chop it into smaller pieces and make a new groove. Add your own sounds into the groove. Ok, so before getting lost in the tango, where I'm going with this: there are possibilities and choices aplenty, even within the rules making up the framework for life as we know it.

Mogenblue:

That's a curious way for you to suggest that I can.

Since you brought it up  , here's a link to my site that includes information on my book "A Night in Heaven." There is a chapter that speaks about the parallel universe issue. There isn't a specific chapter that speaks about pre-arrangement. I do discuss it a little in more than one place. I don't know about writing an entire book about parallel universes and pre-arrangement.

http://nondualityisdualistic.com/

Mogenblue wrote on Oct 1^st, 2012 at 7:57pm:

  I wouldn't make her my "spiritual Teacher", but her somewhat materialistic lifestyle and approach doesn't necessarily automatically invalidate her near death experience.

  Seemingly miraculous healings can and do occur, but I do have to agree with Harvey some that she looks surprisingly good in her photo with G.W.B. for someone who got blown up enough to temporarily die. 

  However, that doesn't automatically mean she's making it all up.  Certainly is possible and i wouldn't rule that out either, but i'm also open minded to the other possibility as well--that some unusual healing was involved. 

Hi Harvey,

I recently watched both her youtube videos, and i have to be honest, something about her seemed really familiar, but i couldn't at first place my finger on it. Then i realized that her and her "vibe" reminded me a lot of an ex girlfriend.  It was kind of one of those intuitive-feeling a ha moments.

  Not too flattering in some ways, since i eventually found out that my ex was quite literally a pathological liar.  Very charming and quite likeable at times, yes, quite good and coherent at weaving tall tales, even more so. (even very similar, wide grinned very charming smile).   

  In some ways, she (the ex) has a good heart.  But, in some ways her woundedness and endless chasm of need for attention could make her do some pretty cruel things at times. 

  A quick example, when my Mom had cancer and was quite sick (when i was 18 or 19), my ex when we were still together let me know in a very dramatic way that she too had cancer and had to break up with me because she didn't want me to see her go through that and have me feel the need to be there for her (all was a big lie or rather story, though one she may have temporarily believed it herself). 

  Some mutual (and mostly female) friends who had known her longer than i had, eventually clued me into some of her attention games and woundedness after we broke up. 

  So, since this intuitive feeling and comparison did come up spontaneously, i am leaning to what you have said in a rather blunt and direct way, she may be more out for the attention and money than anything.  She also may be like my ex in that she is so habituated to lying, manipulating, and looking for attention that she doesn't herself half the time know the truth from fiction anymore, which oddly enough can lend an air of sincerity to people that far gone down the rabbit hole (such people in my experience are relatively rare, and my ex was the only person that i really liked, was attracted to and felt "close to" that was so far gone).

  Strange world we live in, and even the more intuitive and/or discriminating of us can get fooled temporarily.  You live, you learn.  The really high prices of some of her rather mundane work, her comments about desires for Porsche's or the distorted beliefs of religion re: wealth, etc. seem to speak for itself.  I will say that i still don't have any 100 percent firm conclusions about her. 

Lucy wrote on Oct 10^th, 2012 at 4:32am:


  From said article (the notes section):

"... as well as revealing some information about what many refer to as the “2012 Shift.”
They explained that The Shift is not a 2012 event; it has been underway for some time now and continues as a gradual creation. It doesn’t belong to earth physicality; it’s a dimensional shift that could be said to originate anywhere and everywhere at once since all is one."

  Since all is One, what happens within Consciousness, collective consciousness, will affect other levels aka the physical. 

  Many of Bob Monroe's explorers saw certain physical Earth changes occurring, and before them Edgar Cayce's guidance outlined some gradual trends and patterns related to global warming due to an internal shift in the Earth, etc.  Some of Bob's explorers were off on the timing and severity of it, but nonetheless the basic point is still true, if you change the inner noticeably, often the outer changes noticeably as well. 

   She is right that this shift is, or rather has been gradual and is not about just one specific 2012 date. 

   The Earth, on all levels is very much caught up in this "shift", for she is both an entity unto herself, yet also part of a Whole.   She is going through her own growing pangs and we are going through growing pangs, and both will intensify despite what so many "believe what you want to believe" new age type sources say because it's what they and we want to hear. 

   It feels like there is a possibility that things will be less severe than previously forecasted and was probable, but it still will be materially, emotionally, and spiritually challenging for many.  Many will still transition.  Electricity will still be shut off, mass starvation, etc.  It is right now, very probable that Israel and/or the U.S. will attack Iran in 2013.  If that happens, then will the Sun become extremely intense and will flare strong enough to knock out electrical grid systems around the world.  If you see red skies no matter where you live, you will know that this has started. 

  That Natalie has taken the usual New age approach to the changes (some pleasant, only dimensional shift wherein magical positive changes take place without material challenge and collective work/striving/growing on our parts), makes me more skeptical of her and her info. 

   We live in a world wherein it's mostly the false, full of half truths, and/or limiting sources that are most listened to by the majority.  We live in a world full of deception, greed, and believe what you want to believe is the rule.  Why, because Like attracts, begets, resonates with and likes Like.  The majority immature put the immature on pedestals.  Our political system and leaders are such a great reflection of that law and process in action.

  That world or more accurately-- society pattern-- is coming to an end, and for the new to make way, the old has to be torn down completely. 

Yes, I can see that you can see, isee, and though we see differently, maybe even agree to disagree, at the end of the day, it's good to see your thoughts.

The rotten lung example works the other way around too with people acting as you see as irresponsible, making grandiose statements about the future, threatening and fearmongering - waving 'this is better' in front of them.

'People hear: go stock up on food and ammunition' or 'get depressed' isee as guiltmongering, though it could be true too. It's soft but means to get people back on the subjective straight and narrow. Hearty control. Used to work on me, but now isee, which for the soul is some kinda green tea from the knowledge tree.

If everything ultimately leads to love, what's the problem? They're on individual paths too?

Lights of Love wrote on Sep 30^th, 2012 at 11:56am:


I will point out that what you have written is your belief system....what I wrote was my interpretation of information supplied by Frank DeMarco, as delivered by his Guys Upstairs. I find the concept interesting, as I do most concepts. Have you read any of Frank DeMarco's recent books?

MA

[Kathy:] If I in this life choose to marry Don when I could have chosen Doug does not mean another life is created where Doug and I married and are living a parallel life. 
______________________

Posing the marriage choice as between my only sibling (Doug) and myself makes me jealous.  OK, I know Doug's a good guy and a doctor with an office at the base of Plke's Peak.  But we never grew out of our sbiling rivalry!

btw. Kathy, Doug recently asked me if I'd be willing to join him in a 3rd world country like Mongolia where Christianity has just begun to make some inroads.  He would provide the free medical care and I would try to serve as a one-man Bible school for wannaba pastors!  This sounds very appealing until the issue of whether I or Doug would be married to you over there is raised!

Don

Matthew,

OK, I admit that my Mongol language skills are rather rusty.  But Doug had interpreters for hjis medical trips there.  btw, the sole church there had a soup kitchen for those made homeless by crop failures near the Gobi Desert. Each winter month, an average 4 of those newly homeless Mongolians died of exposure to the cold in the absence of a social safety network. The rest had their modest homes heated by a long running underground heated water pipe.  The homeless would try to dig down to the pipe to warm themslves, but were arrested if they got caught doing this.

Many New Age claims strike me as false interpretations.  But for me, the more interesting question is how one could even in principle verify claims like these: (1) We can rescue "lost aspects of self"  through retrievals.  (2) Choices not made by us in earth life are in fact made by levels of our consciousness on other planes.  (3) Fictional characters in novels have their own independent existence on spirit planes. Perhaps, a level of the novelist's mind simply dreams or inagines what his characters might have said or experienced instead.  Parhaps a level of mind imagines the consequences of making different choices and these imaginings are lodged somewhere in the unconscious rather than in some etheric plane.  Perhaps so-called lost aspects of self are merely unconscious contacts with the memories of undetected discarnate spirit entities, as Swedenborg claims.

But Matthew, your monist theory deserves more attention because it might be in principle verifiable at some levels.  There is clearly a profound truth behind Jung's evidence for a Collective Unconscious.  It seems likely that our minds are not separate units of consciousness, but interconnected "pockets" of consciousness that can draw on a host of shared mental archtypes.  Parapsychological research has proven that our minds can affect each other, whether or not we are willing partners (see David Fontana's book "Is there an Afterlife?").  And now Ray Moody's latest book demonstrates that family members can co-experience the NDEs of their parting loved ones in a parallel recreation of the room with a totally different geometry.  I wonder if this shared astral experience is possible without some notion of bonded minds in some sort of monistic unity. 

Don      

Matthew,

I would suggest two tantalizing starting points:
(1) Check out Sheldrake's latest book, " Science Set Free," in which he challenged 10 basic tenets of modern science and advocates the new research that is invited when these scientiific dogmas are turned into questions.  For Shledrake's 5 minute summary of these 10 questions see the youtube video on his website:   www.sheldrake.org

(2) His concept of "morphogenetic fields" arises from his research on animals and is potentially an intriguing way of challenging the notion that the mind is encased in the brain; and once the mind is relocated outside the space-time continuum as we know it,  a monistic view of the universe as an expression of universal consciousness seems to arise as a useful working premise.  "Morphogenetic fields" might prove to be another way to express the reality behind Jung's Collective Unconscious.

Don

Dr. Bob is juggling his jingle again.

Matthew,

You are so sweet. I hope the difficult questions wrapped in weird does not make you stray from your favourite topic, words about how important love is. It really is a kind advice to have the coffee before starting to type. Thank you very much. When really thinking about it, I'm sure it does not matter if people are well fed and living in houses to hear the word, and that it does not matter how the medicine is coated.

Frits,

Just because you can not see something does not mean it is not there. Touché and well played, sir. Matthew is the doctor btw.

Thank you for your kind reply, channel of your own spirit and your own beliefs... : )

No, I don't label Mr. Moen a fearmongerer. He has written his books and he goes about his business of helping others contact the world of the spirit. He graciously allows all of us to discuss and argue our way through years of speculation on the nature of beliefs/truth/reality/and whathaveyou. And he doesn't impose his own experiences or beliefs on us by repeating what we can easily find in his books and discuss among ourselves.

But, yes, I have little patience for the "doom and gloom" crowd at this junction. Must be said. Over and out.

Quote:


  What you call "doom and gloom", i call the understanding that it's challenge which is what most facilitates Consciousness growth (one of the reasons why we choose to experience Earth in general).  Also, right now, it's less about the average person and their choices, and more about the people and groups who have through technology, great material wealth and influence have tied an ever closing noose around the masses and the very overall system, which is why these changes have to and will take place. 

These above individuals and groups are trying to move us into a very, very, very dark and controlled reality and for the first time in a very long time since Atlantis, they have the sufficient kind of advanced technology and resources to really achieve this.  This is why electricity, the monetary systems, and the like must be taken out.  It's the only thing which will stop them and their plans--this is direct intervention of the Creative Forces on our behalf.  Besides this, there is the added benefit that many people that stay will grow a lot spiritually from helping each other out during these collectively difficult times.

  More personally, i have brought this subject more numerously lately, because my wife and i have been getting told more often lately that some of these changes are fast approaching (no, NOT 12/21/12).  While it's primarily the "regulars" who post here, i also know that many new people are weekly visiting this site and reading in the background.  I bring it up more for them. 

   I'm sorry that this kind of information is personally bothering to you, but when i post this kind of stuff, it's not about you at all. 

  What is actually far more doom and gloom is the way things are now and the way they are headed WITHOUT this strong intervention.  The probabilities of the future even just 25 years after the Solar Storms knock out electricity, etc is so, so, so more positive and joy filled for humanity in general than the way things are now and especially compared to how things would be if these individuals and groups plans are not interfered with by strong, outside forces. 

   I don't care about Porsche's, making money, being popular or well liked, and the like, i care about people and their spiritual growth and if i reach just one person and facilitate their seeking within about this issue, then i have not typed in vain.    

I just ignore all doom scenarios. Those are made by Earth people who were not able to let go of their earthbound ego and had some kind of projection of their own limitations. That's my interpretation.

From the knowledge that I have, from my "Belief System", the Earth will continue to shelter and feed us, etcetera, etcetera, for many millions of years to come.
I find the predictions of "my" Masters of Light much more reliable because they are detached of the Earthbound thinking and feeling.
They discussed this kind of nonsense briefly here and there.

Read The Origin of the Universe and lighten up your mind.

Quote:


Yesterday, radio show "On Point" had a show on new annotated Grimm's Faity Tales. The universal appeal of such dark stories makes me wonder if they are not in the same category here as the apocolyptic. Negative prophecies do seem to be like Grimm's fairy tales on a cultural level. Yes, it seems there is something here to be learned about the human psyche. I liked the comment on this radio show by a storyteller,, Laura Packer, who wrote

Quote:


We probably find our own truths in the apocalyptic also. Perhaps they are not meant to be taken literally.

Dr. Bob, have you been invited to pop up on Jay Leno's show already?
You are so outstanding.

Maybe you could be run over by some of his beautiful cars as well.

By accident of course.

"hahaha"