|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 21:22:35 GMT
You call it an out of body experience, a phenomenon for which there is no concrete evidence, Scottish Lassie. I call it a dream, a phenomenon which can at least be shown to exist in some form, by brain scan changes. Many people CLAIM to have found themselves looking down on a scene, then found themselves back in their body again. As far as I'm aware, no-one has yet proved it. Once again, we have only Paul Twitchell's report of what he claimed to have seen. That may be evidence of a kind, but it's certainly far from being proof of anything. In the specific case we're discussing, a temporary blackout could in fact be a reasonably logical explanation for the car righting itself. A car being driven at high speed, with the driver attempting too tight a turn, is bound to begin to turn over, but easing the steering wheel to allow a shallower rate of turn is likely to allow the car to stabilise itself. Releasing the steering wheel temporarily, as might happen in a brief blackout, perhaps caused by fear or panic, is one way that could happen, and could explain both the car righting itself, and the dream image of an out of body experience. I'm not saying that's the only possible explanation, but it's infinitely more likely than a giant arm appearing out of the sky and being seen by a disembodied soul, while it's having an out of body experience. I don't "try to ridicule everything just because I don't have any real understanding of what can happen in ECKANKAR". Quite honestly I'm fed up hearing about ECKANKAR, and having done quite a lot of research on the subject, I think I already have quite enough understanding of it to form my own opinion about it, which I will keep to myself. I simply don't automatically believe everything I'm told about anything, not just ECKANKAR, especially if what I'm being told appears to be totally illogical, impossible, or in some cases just plain silly. I'm a bit fed up as well, of trying to explain something that you are not ready for, so I guess we will leave it at that.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 21:46:56 GMT
I think there are a lot of things that though they're strange are possible. Certainly I've had a lot of strange experiences in my life and in particularly the hauntings which were also witnessed by other people and which continued even after we'd left the house. But ultimately it's one thing to say I know what I experienced and so do those who experienced it with me and others who've had the same experiences since. But it's basically a case where no amount of evidence will convince a sceptic any more than any lack of evidence will convince a believer. So what it is, Chris, is not that you believe what you believe but that you confuse your beliefs with knowledge. It's just not the same thing at all. Hi BigLin, a person has evidently got to be an ECKist in order to understand the difference between knowledge and spiritual enlightenment. It is the Holy Spirit that provides that enlightenment which has nothing to do with worldly knowledge. It is even mentioned in the Christian Bible that Spirit will always strive with the things of this physical dimension, so I guess that's the end of that topic.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 14, 2015 22:05:04 GMT
Scottish Lassie, no one (that I am aware of) is trying to change your beliefs, and your are correct that people who have never had such an experience will have a difficult time believing it (more likely impossible). So you can expect all sorts of reactions to your words short of belief. Making some descriptive statement followed by something like, “you just refuse to believe it” is, from the point of view of those living in the world of senses, comments of someone living in a world of make believe and refusing to accept reality. There are explanations from the temporal world for all that you have described relative to the world you believe in. I suspect that you reject that position but whether you do or don't reject it makes no difference. That you refuse to believe in the temporal world is your heavy load and not a challenge of those who live (successfully) in this temporal world. Hi Men an tol, I am not living in a world of make believe, but I am living in the physical world and the spirit world, as I have experiences in both. Sorry you can't enjoy both too, never mind, it might happen one day, you never know?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2015 10:25:18 GMT
Scottish Lassie, no one (that I am aware of) is trying to change your beliefs, and your are correct that people who have never had such an experience will have a difficult time believing it (more likely impossible). So you can expect all sorts of reactions to your words short of belief. Making some descriptive statement followed by something like, “you just refuse to believe it” is, from the point of view of those living in the world of senses, comments of someone living in a world of make believe and refusing to accept reality. There are explanations from the temporal world for all that you have described relative to the world you believe in. I suspect that you reject that position but whether you do or don't reject it makes no difference. That you refuse to believe in the temporal world is your heavy load and not a challenge of those who live (successfully) in this temporal world. Hi Men an tol, I am not living in a world of make believe, but I am living in the physical world and the spirit world, as I have experiences in both. Sorry you can't enjoy both too, never mind, it might happen one day, you never know? it's the same for any religion or belief , they are all pretty unbelievable unless you happen to believe it . no proof exists for any of them.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 16, 2015 13:50:57 GMT
Hi Men an tol, I am not living in a world of make believe, but I am living in the physical world and the spirit world, as I have experiences in both. Sorry you can't enjoy both too, never mind, it might happen one day, you never know? it's the same for any religion or belief , they are all pretty unbelievable unless you happen to believe it . no proof exists for any of them. Hi Gibby, It is not a case of ' unless you happen to believe it,' but rather ' unless you happen to experience it.' I along with you and others, have experiences in this physical plane, but not all of us have experiences in the spiritual planes and this is the problem. If everyone also had experiences in the spiritual dimensions, then there would be no disbelief of any kind. I don't know why some people are allowed to see into and visit other dimensions, I only know that it happens. All I can say is: that a person has earned whatever experience they are having and have had, and it has to do with Karma. As a person evolves spiritually they are given more advanced experiences which allows them to sense more of the different aspects of Creation. Nobody is trying to change anyone's belief, we are all just giving our viewpoints on what we have come to understand and therefore believe, because of the experiences that we have had.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Aug 16, 2015 15:50:45 GMT
it's the same for any religion or belief , they are all pretty unbelievable unless you happen to believe it . no proof exists for any of them. Hi Gibby, It is not a case of ' unless you happen to believe it,' but rather ' unless you happen to experience it.' I along with you and others, have experiences in this physical plane, but not all of us have experiences in the spiritual planes and this is the problem. If everyone also had experiences in the spiritual dimensions, then there would be no disbelief of any kind. I don't know why some people are allowed to see into and visit other dimensions, I only know that it happens. All I can say is: that a person has earned whatever experience they are having and have had, and it has to do with Karma. As a person evolves spiritually they are given more advanced experiences which allows them to sense more of the different aspects of Creation. Nobody is trying to change anyone's belief, we are all just giving our viewpoints on what we have come to understand and therefore believe, because of the experiences that we have had. I don't think that's the only problem, Chris. It's not just that not everyone has had spiritual experiences and therefore it's not reasonable to expect them to accept your claims simply on your say-so. It's also the fact that every spiritual experience is different and that different people have different types of spiritual experience. A psychoanalyist for example will find that their patients tend to have the type of dreams associated with the particular school of psychoanalysis to which they belong - so Freudian patients have Freudian dreams, Jungian ones have Jungian dreams, Adlerian ones Adlerian dreams and so on. Now I've had spiritual experiences that have led me to believe that the Church of England is the nearest thing to the true Christian religion that exists at present. You've had spiritual experiences that have convinced you it's Eckanckar. Others have had ones that convince them it's Islam, Catholicism, Mormonism, Hinduism, Buddhism and so on. Now the problem is that when these spiritual experiences lead people to such different conclusions about the world it's obvious that they can't be used as some kind of barometer of truth or some kind of basis on which to expect others to share your beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2015 15:57:15 GMT
Hi Men an tol, I am not living in a world of make believe, but I am living in the physical world and the spirit world, as I have experiences in both. Sorry you can't enjoy both too, never mind, it might happen one day, you never know? it's the same for any religion or belief , they are all pretty unbelievable unless you happen to believe it . no proof exists for any of them. Gibby, I believe that you have the right of it. There are, and have been,uncountable religious beliefs and those who have accepted those beliefs are firmly convinced of the reality of those beliefs, and so they should be. At the same time, in our societies where we are bumping into each other all of the time we must have someway to talk with each other, to address problems, to find solutions. All of the life challenges, small and large, must be definable in ways where we can exchange ideas. To do something as simple as constructing a roadway through a community, to bring water to the residents of the community and to take away the waste, are understood and solved because we can accept the reality (or lack thereof) of others in the community. Faith and belief can be very strongly held as individuals but they cannot contribute to solving these challenges. Even so, that doesn't mean that all that surrounds beliefs don't contribute to practical life. Some religious organizational structures have contributed significant concepts of how people can live together in ethical and moral relationships without beating each other in the head. Of course so have non-religious thought contributed to the same area. However, while faith and belief can be positive influences on the life of an individual, they do not contribute to defining and solving the day to day challenges of life. Of course none of this is new. Religious movements such as Scientology are strongly focused on personal faith and belief but far less focused on the practical world of life. More over, Scientology (as an example) borrow heavily from previous works of others such as Gnosticism and the Valentinians and both of these borrowed significantly from the works of Plato. Yes, I believe that you have the right of it Gibby.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 17, 2015 6:55:07 GMT
Hi Gibby, It is not a case of ' unless you happen to believe it,' but rather ' unless you happen to experience it.' I along with you and others, have experiences in this physical plane, but not all of us have experiences in the spiritual planes and this is the problem. If everyone also had experiences in the spiritual dimensions, then there would be no disbelief of any kind. I don't know why some people are allowed to see into and visit other dimensions, I only know that it happens. All I can say is: that a person has earned whatever experience they are having and have had, and it has to do with Karma. As a person evolves spiritually they are given more advanced experiences which allows them to sense more of the different aspects of Creation. Nobody is trying to change anyone's belief, we are all just giving our viewpoints on what we have come to understand and therefore believe, because of the experiences that we have had. I don't think that's the only problem, Chris. It's not just that not everyone has had spiritual experiences and therefore it's not reasonable to expect them to accept your claims simply on your say-so. It's also the fact that every spiritual experience is different and that different people have different types of spiritual experience. A psychoanalyist for example will find that their patients tend to have the type of dreams associated with the particular school of psychoanalysis to which they belong - so Freudian patients have Freudian dreams, Jungian ones have Jungian dreams, Adlerian ones Adlerian dreams and so on. Now I've had spiritual experiences that have led me to believe that the Church of England is the nearest thing to the true Christian religion that exists at present. You've had spiritual experiences that have convinced you it's Eckanckar. Others have had ones that convince them it's Islam, Catholicism, Mormonism, Hinduism, Buddhism and so on. Now the problem is that when these spiritual experiences lead people to such different conclusions about the world it's obvious that they can't be used as some kind of barometer of truth or some kind of basis on which to expect others to share your beliefs. Hi BigLin, This is where a mistake is being made, all I am doing is expressing my viewpont on the topic that we are discussing. I am having certain spiritual experiences that have been explained by the Religion Of Light and Sound known as ECKANKAR. With quite a few Religions, they believe by Faith not because they themselves have had spiritual experiences. As far as I know, ECKANKAR is the only Religion that explains what these experiences are all about, and they explain it in a logical, rational manner. And it all makes sense to me. Try asking any Religious Minister and usually you get the same answer, " Have faith my child"" the truth is that they don't know, and will often just say that it is the works of Satan. We in ECKANKAR, believe that everyone is in the situation that they have earned because they themselves have made the choices that has created it. I'm not responsible for what anyone else thinks or believes and vice versa. I am only relating the truth of my experiences. Whether anyone believes it to be the truth or not, is up to them, it is not my concern.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 17, 2015 7:28:29 GMT
it's the same for any religion or belief , they are all pretty unbelievable unless you happen to believe it . no proof exists for any of them. Gibby, I believe that you have the right of it. There are, and have been,uncountable religious beliefs and those who have accepted those beliefs are firmly convinced of the reality of those beliefs, and so they should be. At the same time, in our societies where we are bumping into each other all of the time we must have someway to talk with each other, to address problems, to find solutions. All of the life challenges, small and large, must be definable in ways where we can exchange ideas. To do something as simple as constructing a roadway through a community, to bring water to the residents of the community and to take away the waste, are understood and solved because we can accept the reality (or lack thereof) of others in the community. Faith and belief can be very strongly held as individuals but they cannot contribute to solving these challenges. Even so, that doesn't mean that all that surrounds beliefs don't contribute to practical life. Some religious organizational structures have contributed significant concepts of how people can live together in ethical and moral relationships without beating each other in the head. Of course so have non-religious thought contributed to the same area. However, while faith and belief can be positive influences on the life of an individual, they do not contribute to defining and solving the day to day challenges of life. Of course none of this is new. Religious movements such as Scientology are strongly focused on personal faith and belief but far less focused on the practical world of life. More over, Scientology (as an example) borrow heavily from previous works of others such as Gnosticism and the Valentinians and both of these borrowed significantly from the works of Plato. Yes, I believe that you have the right of it Gibby. I beg to differ Men an tol, we all live in this physical world and so attend to all that is physically required of us, so in no way are people who are spiritually inclined, focussing inordinately on spiritual matters. They go hand in hand!!! It is the Atheists who give 100% of their thoughts and time to physical matters, because they don't believe that there is a spiritual reality. We happen to believe and know that it does exist and therefore deserves our attention as well.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2015 15:11:46 GMT
Gibby, I believe that you have the right of it. There are, and have been,uncountable religious beliefs and those who have accepted those beliefs are firmly convinced of the reality of those beliefs, and so they should be. At the same time, in our societies where we are bumping into each other all of the time we must have someway to talk with each other, to address problems, to find solutions. All of the life challenges, small and large, must be definable in ways where we can exchange ideas. To do something as simple as constructing a roadway through a community, to bring water to the residents of the community and to take away the waste, are understood and solved because we can accept the reality (or lack thereof) of others in the community. Faith and belief can be very strongly held as individuals but they cannot contribute to solving these challenges. Even so, that doesn't mean that all that surrounds beliefs don't contribute to practical life. Some religious organizational structures have contributed significant concepts of how people can live together in ethical and moral relationships without beating each other in the head. Of course so have non-religious thought contributed to the same area. However, while faith and belief can be positive influences on the life of an individual, they do not contribute to defining and solving the day to day challenges of life. Of course none of this is new. Religious movements such as Scientology are strongly focused on personal faith and belief but far less focused on the practical world of life. More over, Scientology (as an example) borrow heavily from previous works of others such as Gnosticism and the Valentinians and both of these borrowed significantly from the works of Plato. Yes, I believe that you have the right of it Gibby. I beg to differ Men an tol, we all live in this physical world and so attend to all that is physically required of us, so in no way are people who are spiritually inclined, focussing inordinately on spiritual matters. They go hand in hand!!! It is the Atheists who give 100% of their thoughts and time to physical matters, because they don't believe that there is a spiritual reality. We happen to believe and know that it does exist and therefore deserves our attention as well. Scottish Lassie, you have (again) misconstrued what I stated and have gone to a different area. As I have in the past, I support your (as well as others) personal beliefs in the non-temporal concepts. In fact I think that it is most likely for you (and others) to do otherwise would at least make your lives more difficult. However, your assertion, “ . . . It is the Atheists who give 100% of their thoughts and time to physical matters, because they don't believe that there is a spiritual reality. . . . “ demonstrates a real misunderstanding of the world outside of your concepts of a 'spiritual world. First, as I have explained to you in the past, Atheists are not the same, but yes, in a general sense Atheists are involved in trying to understand the world, the people in it and their relations to one another. As part of that world, there are obviously people who are committed to their spiritual beliefs and that affects their relationships to others and therefore such is of interest to Atheists. Clearly, some committed to the spiritual world make assertions that they claim are involved in and caused by things not of the temporal world. Atheists are interested in such things and for those assertions have found other (from the temporal world) causes and incentives for the happenings and/or interpretations demonstrating no singular need for the spiritual world. It isn't that Atheists exclude these alleged spiritual world events but rather that they have temporal world reasons for the beliefs in them. That is unacceptable to those committed to their beliefs in that spiritual world so they simply reject that Atheist perspective. Then too, these attributes of those with beliefs in the spiritual world are not new. The leaders involved and the names and terminologies change but by and large the concepts remain the same ot at least similar. As I stated in my posting, “ . . . More over, Scientology (as an example) borrow heavily from previous works of others such as Gnosticism and the Valentinians and both of these borrowed significantly from the works of Plato. . . . “ This is true and provable. More over, these older forerunners of these belief systems developed well thought out ethical and moral concepts which are applicable to the relationships of people. To Atheists these are well worth the study.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 19, 2015 6:33:29 GMT
Scottish Lassie, you have (again) misconstrued what I stated and have gone to a different area. As I have in the past, I support your (as well as others) personal beliefs in the non-temporal concepts. In fact I think that it is most likely for you (and others) to do otherwise would at least make your lives more difficult. However, your assertion, “ . . . It is the Atheists who give 100% of their thoughts and time to physical matters, because they don't believe that there is a spiritual reality. . . . “ demonstrates a real misunderstanding of the world outside of your concepts of a 'spiritual world. First, as I have explained to you in the past, Atheists are not the same, but yes, in a general sense Atheists are involved in trying to understand the world, the people in it and their relations to one another. As part of that world, there are obviously people who are committed to their spiritual beliefs and that affects their relationships to others and therefore such is of interest to Atheists. Clearly, some committed to the spiritual world make assertions that they claim are involved in and caused by things not of the temporal world. Atheists are interested in such things and for those assertions have found other (from the temporal world) causes and incentives for the happenings and/or interpretations demonstrating no singular need for the spiritual world. It isn't that Atheists exclude these alleged spiritual world events but rather that they have temporal world reasons for the beliefs in them. That is unacceptable to those committed to their beliefs in that spiritual world so they simply reject that Atheist perspective. Then too, these attributes of those with beliefs in the spiritual world are not new. The leaders involved and the names and terminologies change but by and large the concepts remain the same or at least similar. As I stated in my posting, “ . . . More over, Scientology (as an example) borrow heavily from previous works of others such as Gnosticism and the Valentinians and both of these borrowed significantly from the works of Plato. . . . “ This is true and provable. More over, these older forerunners of these belief systems developed well thought out ethical and moral concepts which are applicable to the relationships of people. To Atheists these are well worth the study. Hi Men an tol, I live in this physical dimension, so am well aware of all the possibilities that can exist to explain unusual occurrences, but as Atheists have no spiritual experiences of their own, they cannot explain it. No doubt this will continue to be the case. I know that my senses are telling me that my spiritual experiences are real and therefore valid. I accept that it is an impossibility for anyone who has spiritual experiences to convince those who haven't had them, that they are real. Knowing this, I ask you, what is the point of continuing along these lines? It really serves no good purpose at all. I personally don't like going around in circles on any topic, where one person doesn't understand the other, and vice versa. Don't you agree?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2015 15:25:13 GMT
Hi Men an tol, I live in this physical dimension, so am well aware of all the possibilities that can exist to explain unusual occurrences, but as Atheists have no spiritual experiences of their own, they cannot explain it. No doubt this will continue to be the case. I know that my senses are telling me that my spiritual experiences are real and therefore valid. I accept that it is an impossibility for anyone who has spiritual experiences to convince those who haven't had them, that they are real. Knowing this, I ask you, what is the point of continuing along these lines? It really serves no good purpose at all. I personally don't like going around in circles on any topic, where one person doesn't understand the other, and vice versa. Don't you agree? If you do not want to enter such exchanges then the simple thing is to not do so, however I am only responding to your comments about my postings. Such as in this case, " . . . I beg to differ Men an tol, we . . . " is how you began the posting to which I responded. To now say that there is (in affect) no way for one to convince the other of their stated position, is certainly one way of getting out of an untenable position.
For me, I don't see exchanges in that way and instead see them as the only method of diverse peoples with diverse views to come to understand (if not accept) the position of others.
You're the one who provides your beliefs as absolutes and implied as unique and have used them as the basis to demonstrate their value relative to others. In that you focus on Atheism as a view of life that cannot understand simply demonstrates your lack of understanding of Atheism.
More over, and with all due respect, I do not think that you really understand your own belief system as it is not unique in our times nor in the past. Here I suggest that the study of such systems of belief (even by Atheists) have existed throughout the ages of humans. In this case, the tenants of your belief are not only similar to, but in some respects rooted within, Gnosticism.
Gnosticism had a major impact on the development of Christianity as well as offering well thought out concepts of the individual and realization of God in a spiritual reality separating that spiritual realm from the temporal world. I doubt that you would have the interest but if you wanted to, I suggest that you could reference the Gospel of Thomas which addresses the reunification of self with the God as well as the Secret Book According to John (considered the oldest and most complete wring of Christianity) and the book of Zostrianos which describes the contemplation of God and other spiritual realities and the rejecting of material things, and this as a program comprised of discipline, philosophical study, and teaching.
These things (as well as many others) have been studied by many, inclusive of Atheists. More over, these writings are not only reflective of much of what you have offered, but are also inclusive of philosophical practices of life in the temporal world (such as the Gospel of Thomas which is considered a book of the sayings of Jesus and as a book of wisdom).
While these are tied to the texts of Nag Hammadi (that is the place close to where they were found) they each stand alone. And it is obvious that the concepts of these texts (Gnosticism) are clearly affected by the works of Plato. I suggest that the roots of your belief are not new and have been well studied and written about by others who provide far more in depth understanding.
Again Scottish Lassie I suggest that you do continue to follow your beliefs and in that I as an Atheist support you, but please do not make the mistake of considering Atheists as lacking in the ability to understand.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2015 19:13:44 GMT
As something that you might find of interest Scottish Lassie (or anyone else for that matter) included herein is an address: The Gnostic Society Library gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl_thomas.htm Once you go to this site, on the left of the page is an index to subject matter, I suggest that you go to the Gnostic Archive and select “What is Gnosticism” as you should find it quite informative as well as (for the open mind) supportive of many of the concepts you have offered.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 19, 2015 21:56:42 GMT
If you do not want to enter such exchanges then the simple thing is to not do so, however I am only responding to your comments about my postings. Such as in this case, " . . . I beg to differ Men an tol, we . . . " is how you began the posting to which I responded. To now say that there is (in affect) no way for one to convince the other of their stated position, is certainly one way of getting out of an untenable position.
For me, I don't see exchanges in that way and instead see them as the only method of diverse peoples with diverse views to come to understand (if not accept) the position of others.
You're the one who provides your beliefs as absolutes and implied as unique and have used them as the basis to demonstrate their value relative to others. In that you focus on Atheism as a view of life that cannot understand simply demonstrates your lack of understanding of Atheism.
More over, and with all due respect, I do not think that you really understand your own belief system as it is not unique in our times nor in the past. Here I suggest that the study of such systems of belief (even by Atheists) have existed throughout the ages of humans. In this case, the tenants of your belief are not only similar to, but in some respects rooted within, Gnosticism.
Gnosticism had a major impact on the development of Christianity as well as offering well thought out concepts of the individual and realization of God in a spiritual reality separating that spiritual realm from the temporal world. I doubt that you would have the interest but if you wanted to, I suggest that you could reference the Gospel of Thomas which addresses the reunification of self with the God as well as the Secret Book According to John (considered the oldest and most complete wring of Christianity) and the book of Zostrianos which describes the contemplation of God and other spiritual realities and the rejecting of material things, and this as a program comprised of discipline, philosophical study, and teaching.
These things (as well as many others) have been studied by many, inclusive of Atheists. More over, these writings are not only reflective of much of what you have offered, but are also inclusive of philosophical practices of life in the temporal world (such as the Gospel of Thomas which is considered a book of the sayings of Jesus and as a book of wisdom).
While these are tied to the texts of Nag Hammadi (that is the place close to where they were found) they each stand alone. And it is obvious that the concepts of these texts (Gnosticism) are clearly affected by the works of Plato. I suggest that the roots of your belief are not new and have been well studied and written about by others who provide far more in depth understanding.
Again Scottish Lassie I suggest that you do continue to follow your beliefs and in that I as an Atheist support you, but please do not make the mistake of considering Atheists as lacking in the ability to understand.
Thankyou Men an tol, for giving me your permission to continue with my belief in ECKANKAR, that is very kind of you, but I have to say that we are in the same boat, in that we and everyone else, rely on our senses in order to guage anything. You believe in what your senses are presenting to you as I am also. Bearing in mind that some people appear to have extra senses,(the gifts of Spirit)? Clairvoyance, Clairaudience and Prophecy etc. How can I not understand the things of this world? I live here, but have the ability to visit other dimensions. Which you apparently cannot do, so don't have any real understanding of these dimensions. Reading about the probability of other dimensions is not the same as visiting them in reality, so you couldn't really understand what I am experiencing, which is why I am having so much trouble trying to explain. With you and others suggesting that I am suffering from the condition of schizophrenia, hallucinations or delusion. I have had all three directed towards me as have all ECKists who are brave enough to post their beliefs on these forums. There is however, a book on sale to the public of the experiences of an eminent Neurosurgeon Ethan Alexander entitled Proof of Heaven, which ofcourse is one of the dimensions that the Quantum Physicists believe exists besides this physical dimension.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2015 0:33:10 GMT
Scottish Lassie, I didn't give you permission to do anything, if anything I tried to demonstrate some respect on my part, for you following your beliefs. I don't see my attitude in this context as being any different than I would suggest to anyone else whatever their chosen life path. But if you would rather see yourself as being in some confrontational exchange, have at it as it makes no difference to me.
Your comment, “ . . . How can I not understand the things of this world? I live here. . . . “ has no relevance as any of us can give many instances of people having different interpretation of events in this temporal world, so one person's understanding may not relate to anyone else and their interpretation.
Obviously people can have a challenge when trying to explain an experience to another who has not had such a similar experience. That is common in people talking and debating ideas and is one reason that people have dialog with each other trying to exchange ideas. But in this instance, that doesn't work with me as I have had two different times when I have been declared dead and then brought back to the living. For me there was nothing during that supposed dead period either time. So I do have experience and that experience is nothing, nada, nyet, zero, nil. Even so I do not allow that to contribute to any conclusions of mine as there is not provable evidence that I did or didn't have experiences.
The Dr. Martin you mention is obviously known and the sales of his book demonstrate an interest in this subject by the public but that has always been so. While the public may consider him as significant his colleagues are far less enthusiastic. That is, (from an interview) former colleagues reached for comment were not convinced. Dr. Martin Samuels, chairman of the neurology department at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, a Harvard teaching affiliate, remembered Dr. Alexander as a competent neurosurgeon. But he said: “There is no way to know, in fact, that his neocortex was shut down. It sounds scientific, but it is an interpretation made after the fact.” That is, Dr. Martin's statement of his neocortex being shut down was nothing more than raw opinion.
In reference to your repeated reference to the positions of Mathematicians who work in the field of Quantum Physics and that believe in multiple dimensions has truth but not in the way you have offered that position. This encompasses the concept of String Theory and other mathematical ideas. In terms of multiple dimensions there are an entire range of beliefs of such mathematicians from not believing in any dimensions to an infinite number of dimensions. I have yet to read of any Mathematician who has seriously put forth the idea that not only are there multiple dimensions but that one of them is heaven. You can certainly believe as you wish, but to be perfectly frank this appears to be taking concepts (the possibility of multiple dimensions) and using it to try to justify your beliefs. This is mixing apples and oranges.
In terms, of supporting the concepts of your beliefs, I have provided a link to:
The Gnostic Society Library gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl_thomas.htm
Once you go to this site, on the left of the page is an index to subject matter, I suggest that you go to the Gnostic Archive and select “What is Gnosticism” as you should find it quite informative as well as (for the open mind) supportive of many of the concepts you have offered.
Here I am the Atheist and I have provided support for at least some of your beliefs in sites where not only a lot of work has been done, but where many of the root ideas of your religion (and others) are derived. So I would suggest that before you tear into Atheists that you might come to understand them better than you do today.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 20, 2015 3:46:22 GMT
Hi Gibby, It is not a case of ' unless you happen to believe it,' but rather ' unless you happen to experience it.' I along with you and others, have experiences in this physical plane, but not all of us have experiences in the spiritual planes and this is the problem. If everyone also had experiences in the spiritual dimensions, then there would be no disbelief of any kind. I don't know why some people are allowed to see into and visit other dimensions, I only know that it happens. All I can say is: that a person has earned whatever experience they are having and have had, and it has to do with Karma. As a person evolves spiritually they are given more advanced experiences which allows them to sense more of the different aspects of Creation. Nobody is trying to change anyone's belief, we are all just giving our viewpoints on what we have come to understand and therefore believe, because of the experiences that we have had. I don't think that's the only problem, Chris. It's not just that not everyone has had spiritual experiences and therefore it's not reasonable to expect them to accept your claims simply on your say-so. It's also the fact that every spiritual experience is different and that different people have different types of spiritual experience. A psychoanalyist for example will find that their patients tend to have the type of dreams associated with the particular school of psychoanalysis to which they belong - so Freudian patients have Freudian dreams, Jungian ones have Jungian dreams, Adlerian ones Adlerian dreams and so on. Now I've had spiritual experiences that have led me to believe that the Church of England is the nearest thing to the true Christian religion that exists at present. You've had spiritual experiences that have convinced you it's Eckanckar. Others have had ones that convince them it's Islam, Catholicism, Mormonism, Hinduism, Buddhism and so on. Now the problem is that when these spiritual experiences lead people to such different conclusions about the world it's obvious that they can't be used as some kind of barometer of truth or some kind of basis on which to expect others to share your beliefs. Hi Big Lin, How often do I have to say, that I'm not trying to get anyone to change what they believe, but I am expecting people to believe that I am telling the truth as to my experiences. From an ECKists point of view, we are all at different levels of spiritual understanding according to our choices, and taking into consideration through the law of Karma, what we need to learn. We all have different lessons to learn, so consequently we will have different experiences. No person can change a person's belief, only the Holy Spirit can do that with your consent. That will always be the case. It is the Holy Spirit that allows you to have the experiences that you, and everyone else has.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 20, 2015 4:20:07 GMT
Scottish Lassie, I didn't give you permission to do anything, if anything I tried to demonstrate some respect on my part, for you following your beliefs. I don't see my attitude in this context as being any different than I would suggest to anyone else whatever their chosen life path. But if you would rather see yourself as being in some confrontational exchange, have at it as it makes no difference to me. Your comment, “ . . . How can I not understand the things of this world? I live here. . . . “ has no relevance as any of us can give many instances of people having different interpretation of events in this temporal world, so one person's understanding may not relate to anyone else and their interpretation. Obviously people can have a challenge when trying to explain an experience to another who has not had such a similar experience. That is common in people talking and debating ideas and is one reason that people have dialog with each other trying to exchange ideas. But in this instance, that doesn't work with me as I have had two different times when I have been declared dead and then brought back to the living. For me there was nothing during that supposed dead period either time. So I do have experience and that experience is nothing, nada, nyet, zero, nil. Even so I do not allow that to contribute to any conclusions of mine as there is not provable evidence that I did or didn't have experiences. The Dr. Martin you mention is obviously known and the sales of his book demonstrate an interest in this subject by the public but that has always been so. While the public may consider him as significant his colleagues are far less enthusiastic. That is, (from an interview) former colleagues reached for comment were not convinced. Dr. Martin Samuels, chairman of the neurology department at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, a Harvard teaching affiliate, remembered Dr. Alexander as a competent neurosurgeon. But he said: “There is no way to know, in fact, that his neocortex was shut down. It sounds scientific, but it is an interpretation made after the fact.” That is, Dr. Martin's statement of his neocortex being shut down was nothing more than raw opinion. In reference to your repeated reference to the positions of Mathematicians who work in the field of Quantum Physics and that believe in multiple dimensions has truth but not in the way you have offered that position. This encompasses the concept of String Theory and other mathematical ideas. In terms of multiple dimensions there are an entire range of beliefs of such mathematicians from not believing in any dimensions to an infinite number of dimensions. I have yet to read of any Mathematician who has seriously put forth the idea that not only are there multiple dimensions but that one of them is heaven. You can certainly believe as you wish, but to be perfectly frank this appears to be taking concepts (the possibility of multiple dimensions) and using it to try to justify your beliefs. This is mixing apples and oranges. In terms, of supporting the concepts of your beliefs, I have provided a link to: The Gnostic Society Library gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl_thomas.htm Once you go to this site, on the left of the page is an index to subject matter, I suggest that you go to the Gnostic Archive and select “What is Gnosticism” as you should find it quite informative as well as (for the open mind) supportive of many of the concepts you have offered. Here I am the Atheist and I have provided support for at least some of your beliefs in sites where not only a lot of work has been done, but where many of the root ideas of your religion (and others) are derived. So I would suggest that before you tear into Atheists that you might come to understand them better than you do today. Hi Met an tol, You obviously weren't aware that I was teasing you, which I do on occasion. No matter, I'm not trying to tear into Atheists either, we are all at different stages of belief, and as far as I am concerned, we all believe whatever, according to our own choices from the beginning of time and according to the law of Karma. What strikes me, is the fact that you try to pooh-pooh every theory or fact that I provide as a reason to explain the truth of what I believe. Atheists are welcome to their belief as it is no skin off my nose whatever anyone believes.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Aug 20, 2015 4:28:16 GMT
Hi Men an tol, you seem to have mistakenly attributed the author of the book Proof of Heaven to Dr Martin instead of Dr Ethan Alexander.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2015 14:44:12 GMT
Hi Men an tol, you seem to have mistakenly attributed the author of the book Proof of Heaven to Dr Martin instead of Dr Ethan Alexander. You are correct that I used the wrong name in referring to the author of the “Proof of Heaven” in the beginning of that paragraph. However, reading the complete paragraph that mistake on my part is evident as Dr. Martin (for whom Dr. Alexander worked) is critiquing the book. More over, the inaccuracies in Dr. Alexander's book are made very clear by the article written in Esquire magazine on this entire incident, which in part states, “ . . . Alexander's book has been criticized by scientists, including Sam Harris who described Alexander's NDE account (chronicled in Newsweek, October 2012) as "alarmingly unscientific," and that "everything – absolutely everything – in Alexander's account rests on repeated assertions that his visions of heaven occurred while his cerebral cortex was 'shut down,' 'inactivated,' 'completely shut down,' 'totally offline,' and 'stunned to complete inactivity.' The evidence he provides for this claim is not only inadequate – it suggests that he doesn't know anything about the relevant brain science." "Even in cases where the brain is alleged to have shut down, its activity must return if the subject is to survive and describe the experience. In such cases, there is generally no way to establish that the NDE occurred while the brain was offline." Neurologist and writer Oliver Sacks agreed with Harris, saying that "to deny the possibility of any natural explanation for an NDE, as Dr. Alexander does, is more than unscientific – it is antiscientific."..."The one most plausible hypothesis in Dr. Alexander's case...is that his NDE occurred not during his coma, but as he was surfacing from the coma and his cortex was returning to full function. It is curious that he does not allow this obvious and natural explanation, but instead insists on a supernatural one." . . . “ Also in that same article there was additional investigation of Dr. Alexander's past with such as, “ . . . Esquire magazine reported (August 2013 issue) that before the publication of Proof of Heaven, Alexander had been terminated or suspended from multiple hospital positions, and had been the subject of several malpractice lawsuits, including at least two involving the alteration of medical records to cover up a medical error. The magazine also found what it claimed were discrepancies with regard to Alexander's version of events in the book. Among the discrepancies, according to an account of the Esquire article in Forbes, was that "Alexander writes that he slipped into the coma as a result of severe bacterial meningitis and had no higher brain activity, while a doctor who cared for him says the coma was medically induced and the patient was conscious, though hallucinating. . . . " The point Scottish Lassie is that Dr. Alexander's veracity is highly suspect at best and far from a 'best source' as evidence of support for you positions from the scientific community.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2015 15:26:20 GMT
Scottish Lassie, your comment, “ . . . What strikes me, is the fact that you try to pooh-pooh every theory or fact that I provide as a reason to explain the truth of what I believe. . . . “
While I understand that being the self declared victim is nice role to assume, that is really a misinterpretation of my postings. Apparently you seem to prefer that you make your comments and then the rest of us simply silently stand in awe of your comments, even if we do not agree with them. Rather than trying to 'pooh-pooh' every theory or fact you provide as a reason to explain the truth of what you believe, I have stated my opinion and in addition provided sources which provide the roots of the concepts you espouse.
Obviously I have a very different perspective, but not understanding is not a problem I have. On the other hand you disregard the questions posed by others (including myself) continually repeating your position. Almost as if you are part of a taped loop and cannot expand beyond the words learned. It is not a surprise that others find that frustrating, if not a turn off relative to what you offer.
The impression is that you have no desire to enter actual dialog about these subjects but only to continue to state and restate and restate, your words. That is perfectly okay for you but others (myself if no one else) prefer actual dialog and actual exchanges.
For example, you seem to place all on the spiritual experiences you have related. Then when others do not accept those, you say something as that 'if we had those experiences we'd understand.' Maybe so and maybe not. I related my personal experiences of being dead twice and that I had no such spiritual contact. Others have asked the questions as to your opinion of others who have also professed to have had spiritual experiences but relate very different details (such as Muhammad). However, no real response from you except another repeat of your self professed spiritual experiences.
I am sure that you understand the resistance of many to your beliefs, so comments are not (should not be) a surprise, but I do not believe anyone is trying to get you to change. Eckandkar has existed for a while now and has succeeded at least to a degree that others (and there are many) have not. For those who join it I suspect that they get something from that association and, in truth, others who join do not and some have apparently had a negative experience.
|
|