(2017-10-10, 09:26 PM)nbtruthman Wrote: [ -> ]My impression is that the vast majority of mediums and channelers are very limited in their ability to genuinely communicate with spiritual existence. Much of the material is always generated by their subconscious minds from their own previously developed belief systems and information retained during their lives. But, there certainly are rare "superstars".
Since it would seem to be unlikely that obtaining such esoteric knowledge as the actual mechanism of the brain/spirit interface would ever be relevant to a person's primary life purposes, I guess that means it is very unlikely that investigators will ever discover and understand it. Actually, that seems reasonable and not surprising to me. Such a "system rule" requiring relevance to a person's life plan may perhaps be one of the reasons why dramatic and unequivocal paranormal phenomena give the impression of deliberately avoiding being duplicated and recorded in a scientific and repeatable manner in the laboratory. They seem to insist on happening only spontaneously in ordinary life experience.
Another reason could be that the soul actually doesn't want the human self to discover such deep truths, because from the soul perspective he/she is supposed to struggle with doubt as part of some sort of learning process. After all, 99.999...9% of life experience is convincingly rooted in the physical exactly as if it is all that is. It certainly looks like this is intended. An unpleasant possibility.
That's not to say some phenomena haven't been experimentally duplicated, but this is mostly as low level statistical anomalies in large numbers of trials.
I know you believe what you have written, however from the perspective of anyone whom does not share your perspective it all sounds nonsensical. In other words it reads like you cobbled together ideas that only appear to be related. Step outside of yourself an examine it from a completely different point of reference.
(2017-10-11, 12:48 AM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]I know you believe what you have written, however from the perspective of anyone whom does not share your perspective it all sounds nonsensical. In other words it reads like you cobbled together ideas that only appear to be related. Step outside of yourself an examine it from a completely different point of reference.
Does it ever occur to you that in repeating this kind of arrogant criticism you are actually opening yourself up to the same charge and that you should take your own advice? I guess not because you keep doing it.
(2017-10-11, 12:48 AM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]I know you believe what you have written, however from the perspective of anyone whom does not share your perspective it all sounds nonsensical. In other words it reads like you cobbled together ideas that only appear to be related. Step outside of yourself an examine it from a completely different point of reference.
You may wonder if this forum is for you.
(2017-10-10, 06:57 PM)nbtruthman Wrote: [ -> ]We just don't know, or even have a clue as to what the mechanism is (assuming it is a mechanism). It just looks very much like this is functionally what happens. I can imagine several kinds of possible answers. Perhaps the brain mechanism that enables the brain to manifest and house ultimately nonlocal consciousness has a "back door" that can unlock the temporary binding of consciousness to the physical brain structure. This "back door" module would have been built in at some very early time to allow spirit to disengage at will. As humans developed and human spirits became more and more earthbound and locked into the brain during physical life, this feature became mostly nonfunctional, dormant. Today, this "unlocking" only happens on the rare occasions when either the soul decides the human self needs the NDE experience, or when the unlock module happens to be triggered by injury or drugs. Just a hypothesis to play around with.
We could certainly ask such a question through a good psychic medium, but I wouldn't expect too much. The "channel" of communication could be too noisy and distorted to transmit such detailed information (usually mediumistic communication is very unreliable), or the communicated-with entity could be at too low a level to know, or as you suggest no longer be interested in such "trivia". Another possibility would be that the "powers that be" have decreed that we are not supposed to penetrate such mysteries. Or maybe I'm being too pessimistic.
I'm reminded of the reports of people involved in accidents or violent - potentially fatal - incidents. Often these reports speak of the spirit jumping free of the imperiled body and avoiding the horrendous shock and pain about to happen. I can easily imagine why that "mechanism" is available and would certainly hope it to be the case were I ever faced with such a situation.
Another thought springs to mind of various wild life documentaries where the zebra or deer in the jaws of the predator seems to have a look of peaceful resignation after a fearful struggle. From personal experience, I still remember vividly being pushed into the deep end of a public swimming pool by some idiot kids chasing each other around the perimeter. Nobody was aware that I couldn't swim and I was convinced that I was drowning, flailing about in a panic under the water while those crowded into the pool noticed nothing. What remains with me to this day is the feeling of peace and tranquility that overcame me once I accepted my fate. It was like a switch moving me from abject panic to serenity in a moment. Thankfully, after another moment, a friend came to my rescue so I'm here to tell the tale.
(2017-10-11, 01:44 AM)Kamarling Wrote: [ -> ]Does it ever occur to you that in repeating this kind of arrogant criticism you are actually opening yourself up to the same charge and that you should take your own advice? I guess not because you keep doing it.
(2017-10-11, 01:46 AM)chuck Wrote: [ -> ]You may wonder if this forum is for you.
What separates me from most of the members is I'm not satisfied to believe things are true. On every forum almost without exception people seek confirmation through the affirmation from others. I do not. Without empirical evidence all that leaves is belief. That has been my practical experience with the people I've known too. That I think explains why these thoughts people verbalize remain the same through out time. On the other hand I find such folks intriguing because they know somehow certain things are not just personal truths but are objective truths something I've not seen; perhaps they are right. Tell will tell (but I'm not counting on it).
(2017-10-11, 12:48 AM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]I know you believe what you have written, however from the perspective of anyone whom does not share your perspective it all sounds nonsensical. In other words it reads like you cobbled together ideas that only appear to be related. Step outside of yourself an examine it from a completely different point of reference.
From
Closed-Minded, by Michael Schreiner, at
https://evolutioncounseling.com/close-minded/.
Quote:"What’s the main psychological benefit derived from being close-minded? Certainty. If you immediately discount any and all inputs that differ from your particular way of seeing the world you retain a powerful buffer against existential anxiety.
Sure, your particular way of seeing the world will be hopelessly biased, your one-sided arguments will frustrate those with educated opinions to the point where they throw up their hands in consternation. But what’s that to you? You can’t know what you don’t know, it’s not like you can exchange brains with these people to see yourself from their points of view. You simply shrug them off, telling yourself they’re wrong, that there’s obviously some biased agenda behind what they’re saying, that you’re actually on a higher knowledge plane than they are. You remain within your comforting cocoon of close minded certainty."
As I explained in a post on a previous thread (
here), I have studied and thought through these issues fairly thoroughly and come to certain tentative conclusions. Not 100% but maybe 99%. From the position of those conclusions I can enjoy a certain amount of free speculation. Not being a closed minded "true believer" I still have my doubts, which means maintaining a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. I guess you're not comfortable with such a condition.
(2017-10-11, 03:01 AM)nbtruthman Wrote: [ -> ]From Closed-Minded, by Michael Schreiner, at https://evolutioncounseling.com/close-minded/.
You really should read that, Steve. It is short but right on message. The reason the link was posted is because that's how others here see you. Perhaps you should ask yourself why, and then read the article again?
(2017-10-10, 07:48 PM)Pssst Wrote: [ -> ]I would consider the experience of an NDE to be "a major theme" being explored in a Life so, Yes. The Life Plan always includes the major themes ("being married, son dying, friends befriended, business failure/success, etc.) and there are no mistakes. There are no "missing themes".
Are saying that even in the case of a suicide bomber, his fate is of his own choosing?
There appears to be at least two quite different ideas about this. Am I correct in saying that yours seems to be the 'love & light' path, where it is all OK, nothing is 'bad' - surely nothing can be, if we plan it in advance? At least from the 'big picture' point of view, as opposed to the limited view we have living the incarnation.
The other viewpoint seems to be the one of Jurgen Ziewe and others. Where there are indeed consequences to evil deeds. Ziewe has written about suicide bombers stuck in a hellish scene that I don't think anyone in their right minds would volunteer for. At the same time, I remember him saying that his own mother found herself in a cocoon of misery after she passed. This, he wrote, was because of the dark depressed state she was in at the time of her passing. However, the good news, is that these unfortunate states are of a temporary nature. Even the suicide bomber 'does his time' (whatever that may be in that reality?) and the light 'eventually' comes to them. ( Or do they move to the light?)
Once again, I turn to the words of 'The Prophet' by Kahlil Gibran, they appear to support Ziewe's view?
It is when your spirit goes wandering upon the wind,
That you, alone and unguarded, commit a wrong unto others and therefore unto yourself.
And for that wrong committed must you knock and wait a while unheeded at the gate of the blessed.
(2017-10-11, 01:44 AM)Kamarling Wrote: [ -> ]Does it ever occur to you that in repeating this kind of arrogant criticism you are actually opening yourself up to the same charge and that you should take your own advice? I guess not because you keep doing it.
(2017-10-11, 03:01 AM)nbtruthman Wrote: [ -> ]From Closed-Minded, by Michael Schreiner, at https://evolutioncounseling.com/close-minded/.
As I explained in a post on a previous thread (here), I have studied and thought through these issues fairly thoroughly and come to certain tentative conclusions. Not 100% but maybe 99%. From the position of those conclusions I can enjoy a certain amount of free speculation. Not being a closed minded "true believer" I still have my doubts, which means maintaining a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. I guess you're not comfortable with such a condition.
(2017-10-11, 03:21 AM)Kamarling Wrote: [ -> ]You really should read that, Steve. It is short but right on message. The reason the link was posted is because that's how others here see you. Perhaps you should ask yourself why, and then read the article again?
I read it. What's odd is none of "you" recognize this is applicable to yourselves. Everytime someone argues "you" are mistaken it's rare to hear agreement. Instead I hear a chorus of we aren't wrong because of these reasons... . So when pointing the finger of closed mindeness ask "yourselves" am I just as culpable of that charge as my opponent? Honestly I think "you" are more closed minded than you'll ever admit. And if I am wrong I extend an open invitation for anyone to categorically say why not.
(2017-10-11, 12:08 PM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]I read it. What's odd is none of "you" recognize this is applicable to yourselves. Everytime someone argues "you" are mistaken it's rare to hear aggreement. Instead I hear a chorus of we aren't wrong because of these reasons... . So when pointing the finger of closed mindeness ask "yourselves" am I just as culpable of that charge as my opponent? Honestly I think "you" are more closed minded than you'll ever admit. And if I am wrong I extend an open invitation for anyone to categorically say why not.
I think you generalize too much when you refer to the forum members in that way. There are some of us who recognize that it is nearly impossible to overcome bias--psychological, cultural, conditional, etc. (Well at least one of us.)
Plus a lot of us have already come from backgrounds of atheistic materialism. I'm not sure how much more I need to entertain the idea of atheistic materialism since I maintained that approach for decades.
Personally, I'm not set on any one answer. I'm entertaining narratives. I take in an idea and see how it plays with the narratives. Does it jive with this or that? Some narratives become more interesting than others and fit more neatly the overall big picture. Doesn't meant they are the answer, it just means they are a narrative of interest.
You've joined a community of people who have largely moved beyond materialism. Most of us probably "believe" that consciousness is an ontological primitive. We aren't alone in that. Lot's of smart folks are also pointing in that direction. Your belief in matter is the same, it's just a belief. The big bang. Something from nothing.
You are right that there are some very closed minded folks on this forum on both sides. Most of us would probably say that you are one of the most closed minded. You've never given us any reason to think otherwise.
But there are open-minded folks here. The problem is everyone thinks they are open-minded.