What will be our fate [after we pass over] ???

Do you really believe that, your being, will 'end' when your physical body ends ?

When our body dies, is it just, 'lights out' ?             :(             ;D







Personally i do not believe i find it hard to believe that God will destroy the wicked soul [in 'hell'].

God is too efficient, to simply do that [imo].    [though of course, i do not know.]

I have said before;
We hear the atheists argue;
"Well if God exists, why doesn't God reveal himself ?"


I think that a better question [which we should ask ourselves] is;
"In our lives here [in this perceived 'reality'], who is it, that is being revealed ?"        ;)




THE FACTS ARE, THAT;
We [mankind] really do, know almost nothing about our true 'circumstances'.

Even man's science can concede that.

i.e.
It has been said by some, that the more that man comes to learn [about his circumstances], the more that man comes to realise, how little he knows.         :o







Job 4:17
Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker?
18  Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly:
19  How much less in them that dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, which are crushed before the moth?

Worms will eat you and die from formaldehyde poisoning and you wont know anything about it.

SOB

Yadda wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 12:13am:

What will be our fate [after we pass over] ??? Do you really believe that, your being, will 'end' when your physical body ends ? When our body dies, is it just, 'lights out' ?

Ask someone addled with Alzheimer's, 'Where have your memories gone?'.

Would it not be a meaningless question?

You should ask a 16yr old. They know everything.

We are already part of the great sea of atoms and molecules that makes up the Earth.

Our atoms and molecules will remain. Some will become part of other life forms. This happens as we live anyway. 


Quote:

Worms will eat you and die from formaldehyde poisoning and you wont know anything about it.

Parts of "you" is consumed by worms and bacteria as you live too. You leave parts of "what was you" everywhere you visit when you're alive.

It's just a different process. When you die, your atoms are molecules are just recycled in a smaller location and slowly disperse. The formaldehyde doesn't last long. It's broken down long inside the body long before the worms can get poisoned. Under these current climatic conditions, the formaldehyde doesn't last very long at all. 

Sounds like an interesting "fairy tale" you're telling.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 14^th, 2013 at 7:10am:

Yadda wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 12:13am: What will be our fate [after we pass over] ??? Do you really believe that, your being, will 'end' when your physical body ends ? When our body dies, is it just, 'lights out' ? Ask someone addled with Alzheimer's, 'Where have your memories gone?'. Would it not be a meaningless question?

So you believe that when a 'person' dies, he/she is totally destroyed, along with the body ?

And people who have dementia or Alzheimers, their memories are irretrievably lost - and especially after their body dies, right ?






You can believe whatever you want to believe.

I trust God.




Job 19:25
For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
26  And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27  Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.


Matthew 3:9
And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Amadd wrote on Jan 14^th, 2013 at 3:36pm:

You should ask a 16yr old. They know everything.

;D

When we die, our fate is death. That's fate enough I reckon.

I suppose it does no harm to believe whatever about where our soul goes etc., however, there's no control over stopping it happening one day, there's control over what (if anything) happens afterwards and there's nobody who can tell anybody else about it.

..except maybe the Christian church who has for centuries demanded that science not ask questions about the universe and our existence, yet they deem themselves worthy enough to tell you where you will go when you die and the rules (their rules) that you must live by in order to get to the chosen place  ;)

muso wrote on Jan 14^th, 2013 at 7:52pm:

We are already part of the great sea of atoms and molecules that makes up the Earth. Our atoms and molecules will remain. Some will become part of other life forms. This happens as we live anyway.  Quote: Worms will eat you and die from formaldehyde poisoning and you wont know anything about it. Parts of "you" is consumed by worms and bacteria as you live too. You leave parts of "what was you" everywhere you visit when you're alive. It's just a different process. When you die, your atoms are molecules are just recycled in a smaller location and slowly disperse. The formaldehyde doesn't last long. It's broken down long inside the body long before the worms can get poisoned. Under these current climatic conditions, the formaldehyde doesn't last very long at all.  Sounds like an interesting "fairy tale" you're telling.

Seriously? you couldn't tell that was tongue in cheek? you obviously have no sense of humour @ whatsoever.

When you die you are dead.

Besides the worms would die from lead poisoning from the coffin long before they get to the body.

SOB

Yadda wrote on Jan 14^th, 2013 at 8:33pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 14th, 2013 at 7:10am: Yadda wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 12:13am: What will be our fate [after we pass over] ??? Do you really believe that, your being, will 'end' when your physical body ends ? When our body dies, is it just, 'lights out' ? Ask someone addled with Alzheimer's, 'Where have your memories gone?'. Would it not be a meaningless question? So you believe that when a 'person' dies, he/she is totally destroyed, along with the body ? And people who have dementia or Alzheimers, their memories are irretrievably lost - and especially after their body dies, right ? You can believe whatever you want to believe. I trust God.

Yes, the issue of permanent memory loss does seem to send a chill up the spines of 'the faithful'...

Of course, its more easy to believe that the mind survives death when that mind is whole and intact and the dying person remains lucid until the end... Not so with Alzhiemer's / dementia sufferers who, after years of mental deterioration, have nothing left of themselves to persist after death.

Thoughts and memories aren't magical entities wafting around in the ether until we metaphysically summon them into our brains.... It's not hard to grasp the notion (and easily demonstrated) that to destroy the brain (or parts thereof) is to destroy memory / faculty / personality.

Memories are far from a reliable and accurate record of the past (or truth). They are perceptions, the quality of which is contingent upon a myriad of factors... They change over time (become golden) or get discarded altogether... What incontrovertible truth is there to survive death anyway?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 8:34am:

Yadda wrote on Jan 14th, 2013 at 8:33pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 14th, 2013 at 7:10am: Yadda wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 12:13am: What will be our fate [after we pass over] ??? Do you really believe that, your being, will 'end' when your physical body ends ? When our body dies, is it just, 'lights out' ? Ask someone addled with Alzheimer's, 'Where have your memories gone?'. Would it not be a meaningless question? So you believe that when a 'person' dies, he/she is totally destroyed, along with the body ? And people who have dementia or Alzheimers, their memories are irretrievably lost - and especially after their body dies, right ? You can believe whatever you want to believe. I trust God. Yes, the issue of permanent memory loss does seem to send a chill up the spines of 'the faithful'... Of course, its more easy to believe that the mind survives death when that mind is whole and intact and the dying person remains lucid until the end... Not so with Alzhiemer's / dementia sufferers who, after years of mental deterioration, have nothing left of themselves to persist after death.

And you know this,   ........how ?

John 6:63
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing:.....i



Quote:

Thoughts and memories aren't magical entities wafting around in the ether until we metaphysically summon them into our brains.... It's not hard to grasp the notion (and easily demonstrated) that to destroy the brain (or parts thereof) is to destroy memory / faculty / personality.

I told you that you can believe whatever you want to believe, but;

"It ain't necessarily so."i

Quote:

Memories are far from a reliable and accurate record of the past (or truth). They are perceptions, the quality of which is contingent upon a myriad of factors... They change over time (become golden) or get discarded altogether... What incontrovertible truth is there to survive death anyway?

God knows.           ;)

Yadda wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 9:12am:

Quote: Thoughts and memories aren't magical entities wafting around in the ether until we metaphysically summon them into our brains.... It's not hard to grasp the notion (and easily demonstrated) that to destroy the brain (or parts thereof) is to destroy memory / faculty / personality. I told you that you can believe whatever you want to believe, but; "It ain't necessarily so."

NoN....

Quote:

It's not hard to grasp the notion (and easily demonstrated) that to destroy the brain (or parts thereof) is to destroy memory / faculty / personality

That the flesh deteriorates and loses its 'facility' to function in this reality, cannot be doubted.

No argument.


But many people believe know, that the flesh is our only means to 'convey' the essence of the 'personality'.

And without the body, without 'our' body, we are nothing.

Correct ?         ;D          :D




Again, if you want to believe that.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 4:49am:

Seriously? you couldn't tell that was tongue in cheek? you obviously have no sense of humour @ whatsoever. When you die you are dead. Besides the worms would die from lead poisoning from the coffin long before they get to the body. SOB

You didn't realise that I was being tongue in cheek?

Yadda wrote on Jan 14^th, 2013 at 8:33pm:

So you believe that when a 'person' dies, he/she is totally destroyed, along with the body ? And people who have dementia or Alzheimers, their memories are irretrievably lost - and especially after their body dies, right ? You can believe whatever you want to believr. I trust God. Job 19:25 For I know that my redeemer liveth

I like that air from the Messiah.

Yes. It's interesting that you bring a non volatile memory into play. That is a belief that is not strictly scriptural by the way.

So do you believe that after death, we somehow remember absolutely every last detail that happened to us during life?

It's interesting that you should believe that. In reality, we remember very little of what we see and hear, even if we observe it intently.

So if you believe in a non-volatile non changing memory that is independent of the memory associated with our brain, do you believe that this memory can correspond with our brain memory during life?

The reality is that our memories are very imperfect, even for recent events, and that past memories are constantly being changed and embellished to some extent, regardless of how hard we try.

I'm with NoN, but you are free to believe whatever you want. I'm always interested in how you justify your beliefs.

Brilliant. All our cells change all the time but we remain ourselves. But if the mental landscape changes , that's somehow conclusive prove - or t least indication of - what?  I don't see things the same way as I saw them when I was 7 - and see other thing exactly the same way. 

More to the point, those who knew me at 7 and now, and if they survive me, at my death - will they think of me as one person or will they think of separate and different people, inhabiting my changing body but having different outlooks and memories at 7, at 25, 35, and now?
Of course not. Set up a fragmented, atomised way of seeing and you will see everything fragmented and atomised.

Soren wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 9:47pm:

Brilliant. All our cells change all the time but we remain ourselves. But if the mental landscape changes , that's somehow conclusive prove - or t least indication of - what?  I don't see things the same way as I saw them when I was 7 - and see other thing exactly the same way.  More to the point, those who knew me at 7 and now, and if they survive me, at my death - will they think of me as one person or will they think of separate and different people, inhabiting my changing body but having different outlooks and memories at 7, at 25, 35, and now? Of course not. Set up a fragmented, atomised way of seeing and you will see everything fragmented and atomised.

Trust you to get the wrong end of the stick.

Can the stuff that makes us, define us?

Is a wave on the ocean made of water? If the sea is calm, has the wave disappeared, or is it still there as water?


Quote:

The four catagories of existance, non-existance, both existance and non-existance, and neither existance nor non-existance, are spiderwebs among spiderwebs which can never take hold of the enormous bird of reality.

Quote:

Can the stuff that makes us, define us?

I think that to an extent, we are what we eat.
What we eat (or drink) will help shape our bodies and feeling of wellbeing. => hence thoughts => hence actions.

But as most of us know, our fibres are already programmed to react in a similar manner to familiar environmental conditions.
So I don't think that we should be too hard on ourselves if we can't seem to make the simplest of changes that we have consciously set for ourselves. And in the same vein, not too self-congratulatory of the better aspect of changes which may naturally occur with an aging body or changed environmental conditions.


Quote:

a wave on the ocean made of water? If the sea is calm, has the wave disappeared, or is it still there as water?

Like ice in liquid form, it's a wave in stationary form isn't it?  ;D

For a wave to appear, it requires some type of external energy. If there is an analogy between waves and the thoughts that define our actions, then there would be an external energy which precedes our thoughts. Food for thought I suppose.

muso wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 10:01pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 15th, 2013 at 9:47pm: Brilliant. All our cells change all the time but we remain ourselves. But if the mental landscape changes , that's somehow conclusive prove - or t least indication of - what?  I don't see things the same way as I saw them when I was 7 - and see other thing exactly the same way.  More to the point, those who knew me at 7 and now, and if they survive me, at my death - will they think of me as one person or will they think of separate and different people, inhabiting my changing body but having different outlooks and memories at 7, at 25, 35, and now? Of course not. Set up a fragmented, atomised way of seeing and you will see everything fragmented and atomised. Trust you to get the wrong end of the stick. Can the stuff that makes us, define us? Is a wave on the ocean made of water? If the sea is calm, has the wave disappeared, or is it still there as water? Quote: The four catagories of existance, non-existance, both existance and non-existance, and neither existance nor non-existance, are spiderwebs among spiderwebs which can never take hold of the enormous bird of reality.

response....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1358262216/0#0

Death and taxes are inevitable. You wont escape it by trying to believe in fairy tales.

SOB

Amadd wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 11:42pm:

Quote: Can the stuff that makes us, define us? I think that to an extent, we are what we eat. What we eat (or drink) will help shape our bodies and feeling of wellbeing. => hence thoughts => hence actions. But as most of us know, our fibres are already programmed to react in a similar manner to familiar environmental conditions. So I don't think that we should be too hard on ourselves if we can't seem to make the simplest of changes that we have consciously set for ourselves. And in the same vein, not too self-congratulatory of the better aspect of changes which may naturally occur with an aging body or changed environmental conditions. [quote]a wave on the ocean made of water? If the sea is calm, has the wave disappeared, or is it still there as water?

Like ice in liquid form, it's a wave in stationary form isn't it?  ;D

For a wave to appear, it requires some type of external energy. If there is an analogy between waves and the thoughts that define our actions, then there would be an external energy which precedes our thoughts. Food for thought I suppose.

[/quote]


I've often thought that from a material sense at least, we are more often like the waves in the water than the water itself. 

We continually recycle the matter that makes up our bodies, and the water that makes up to 60% of our body weight is the most transient of all. With each breath, we transfer part of our body to the atmosphere and at the same time exchange matter with the atmosphere and other living beings.    

At any given time we can perceive our physical reality, but it's a constantly changing reality, and over time, we share these atoms that at any given moment, make up our bodies.

We can define a living being in terms of processes more readily than a specific set of atoms that are unique to us.

The wave can't exist without water, but the water doesn't define the wave. You can't bottle a wave. As a wave travels, it leaves the water behind. The water itself doesn't travel forward with the wave. It mainly goes up and down, or travels in a circular motion.

Yadda wrote on Jan 15^th, 2013 at 9:25am:

NoN.... Quote: It's not hard to grasp the notion (and easily demonstrated) that to destroy the brain (or parts thereof) is to destroy memory / faculty / personality That the flesh deteriorates and loses its 'facility' to function in this reality, cannot be doubted. No argument. But many people believe know, that the flesh is our only means to 'convey' the essence of the 'personality'. And without the body, without 'our' body, we are nothing. Correct ?         ;D          :D Again, if you want to believe that.

Yes, the destruction of memory and personality from brain deterioration is the fly in the ointment for magical thinkers, who are forced to imagine that memories (which are, anyway, grossly imperfect and highly contingent), are somehow stored in a celestial vault and returned to us after death, such that we can be who we are (whatever that means) in the after world.

No one, I'm sure, would believe that an amputated limb survives death years after it has been detached... Not so with memories... To the magical thinker they (memories), of course, must somehow survive for there to be an 'I' in the afterlife.

For believers to accept that memories, too, pass away, and still maintain their belief in an afterlife, they would then need to imagine what, exactly, would or could survive death... But a surviving essence, devoid of an 'I' (the child of memory), is not 'me' and therefore the reward (and punishment) factor (which defines the primary reason for believing in an afterlife in the first place) is eliminated. They are then left with the prospect of (after)-living as 'celestial zombies' - no will, no self... no I... What would be the point to that existence?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 16^th, 2013 at 8:41am:

Yadda wrote on Jan 15th, 2013 at 9:25am: NoN.... Quote: It's not hard to grasp the notion (and easily demonstrated) that to destroy the brain (or parts thereof) is to destroy memory / faculty / personality That the flesh deteriorates and loses its 'facility' to function in this reality, cannot be doubted. No argument. But many people believe know, that the flesh is our only means to 'convey' the essence of the 'personality'. And without the body, without 'our' body, we are nothing. Correct ?         ;D          :D Again, if you want to believe that. Yes, the destruction of memory and personality from brain deterioration is the fly in the ointment for magical thinkers, who are forced to imagine that memories (which are, anyway, grossly imperfect and highly contingent), are somehow stored in a celestial vault and returned to us after death, such that we can be who we are (whatever that means) in the after world. No one, I'm sure, would believe that an amputated limb survives death years after it has been detached... Not so with memories... To the magical thinker they (memories), of course, must somehow survive for there to be an 'I' in the afterlife. For believers to accept that memories, too, pass away, and still maintain their belief in an afterlife, they would then need to imagine what, exactly, would or could survive death... But a surviving essence, devoid of an 'I' (the child of memory), is not 'me' and therefore the reward (and punishment) factor (which defines the primary reason for believing in an afterlife in the first place) is eliminated. They are then left with the prospect of (after)-living as 'celestial zombies' - no will, no self... no I... What would be the point to that existence?

NoN,

I agree, that if you are correct in this, then for believers, for 'us' believers, to hope in 'our' redemption, it is a futile hope.





So, where do i 'stand' then, is it on shifting sand beneath my feet ?

Certainly my belief is, that that, is where all of unbelieving mankind are standing.

My belief is that my God is much cleverer than men can imagine.     :P



In my experience, 'God' has certainly showed himself to be beyond my capacity to comprehend him, i.e. in his power/capability.

But i still keep trying to comprehend him [in mediation].

And his still keeps surprising me [from time to time].




Is my fate to be a 'celestial zombie' ?

I can't imagine that.        :P        :P

1 Corinthians 13:12
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.


1 John 3:1
Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
2  Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Quote:

For believers to accept that memories, too, pass away, and still maintain their belief in an afterlife, they would then need to imagine what, exactly, would or could survive death... But a surviving essence, devoid of an 'I' (the child of memory), is not 'me' and therefore the reward (and punishment) factor (which defines the primary reason for believing in an afterlife in the first place) is eliminated. They are then left with the prospect of (after)-living as 'celestial zombies' - no will, no self... no I... What would be the point to that existence?

I tend to believe that there exists some comprehensive cellular memory, and it is said that a single atom could one day be used to store memory.
http://uw.physics.wisc.edu/~himpsel/memory.html

In the case of alzheimer's sufferers, I tend to think that the memory still exists, but the normal method of access has been altered.

If it is the case that single atoms are able to store vast amounts of memory, then it may follow that atoms actually grow in propensity for wisdom......a wise old atom  ;D

So within the ever changing forms, ashes to ashes, shifting sands etc., we may be a very important part of an ever learning universe where our experiences and knowledge are not lost forever, but passed on to a developing universe.

It may be a way out theory, but it's better than thinking that our lives are totally pointless. :D

Yadda wrote on Jan 16^th, 2013 at 9:54am:

NoN, I agree, that if you are correct in this, then for believers, for 'us' believers, to hope in 'our' redemption, it is a futile hope.

Redemption from what?

The destruction of memory also includes those memories for which you would be damned.

Damnation is only just when one's actions can be recalled, as, similarly, awareness of good deeds done is a prerequisite for acceptance of one's apotheosis.

In the absence of memory, it must be left to living others (faculties intact)  to determine the value of our legacy with regard to its worth to the world we leave behind.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 16^th, 2013 at 8:34pm:

Yadda wrote on Jan 16th, 2013 at 9:54am: NoN, I agree, that if you are correct in this, then for believers, for 'us' believers, to hope in 'our' redemption, it is a futile hope. Redemption from what?

Principally, 1/ corruption [spiritual 'death'] and 2/ confusion.



I honestly do not know how to define the, spiritual 'death', that the lost/unredeemed will suffer, except to say that spiritual 'death' will involve their [permanent ?] separation from God.

But if most of mankind hate God, then they won't miss him, will they ?             :P





+++


2 Thessalonians 2:11
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Amadd wrote on Jan 16^th, 2013 at 4:53pm:

I tend to believe that there exists some comprehensive cellular memory, and it is said that a single atom could one day be used to store memory. http://uw.physics.wisc.edu/~himpsel/memory.html In the case of alzheimer's sufferers, I tend to think that the memory still exists, but the normal method of access has been altered. If it is the case that single atoms are able to store vast amounts of memory, then it may follow that atoms actually grow in propensity for wisdom......a wise old atom  ;D So within the ever changing forms, ashes to ashes, shifting sands etc., we may be a very important part of an ever learning universe where our experiences and knowledge are not lost forever, but passed on to a developing universe. It may be a way out theory, but it's better than thinking that our lives are totally pointless. :D

It is way out. For a memory to be formed requires the input (visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory etc.  If any of these sense are damaged, then clearly the data cannot be propagated.

Then, sensory input is propagated via the thalamous, and this is severely baud limited to about 50000 bits per second, where a bit per second is equated to a neural firing (from MRI studies).That in itself means that we can't physically process and take in everything that we sense.   

Yadda wrote on Jan 17^th, 2013 at 11:40pm:

But if most of mankind hate God, then they won't miss him, will they ?

If hate and love are at the opposite extremes of the same arc, then to hate 'god' (as with love) is to always be thinking of 'god' and, by that, to be united with 'god'... The fate of both the theist and the antitheist.

To lose the memories that constitute one's comprehension of 'god', however, is to not miss 'god'.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 8:00am:

Yadda wrote on Jan 17th, 2013 at 11:40pm: But if most of mankind hate God, then they won't miss him, will they ?        If hate and love are at the opposite extremes of the same arc, then to hate 'god' (as with love) is to always be thinking of 'god' and, by that, to be united with 'god'... The fate of both the theist and the antitheist. To lose the memories that constitute one's comprehension of 'god', however, is to not miss 'god'.

Not so.

In this physical realm good and evil can exist in very close proximity to each other.

Not so, in the spirit realm.

Luke 16:26
.....between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.



But in this place [in this physical realm], if goodness and evil are mingled, goodness is polluted, by the evil.

In this place [in this physical realm], if we join that which is precious with what is vile, we do not in that act of joining, 'improve' that which is vile.

We merely corrupt that which is precious.


In this physical realm light and darkness cannot co-exist [in the same place].
Though those who choose the darkness [as their 'sanctuary'], may be able to see a distant light [from within the midst of the darkness]....
It is impossible for those who have [chosen to] become a part of the darkness! to approach the fullness of the light, or to ever live in the light.


Good and evil, light and darkness.
It is our human purpose to choose one, and to reject the other.






Quote:

If we tolerate evil, and wickedness, in others, WE WILL BECOME EVIL AND WICKED OURSELVES. .....and today ppl just don't get that truth, IN FACT THEY SEEM TO STRENUOUSLY DENY THAT LOGIC. When we embrace the concept of 'tolerance', of what is clearly evil, ...we OURSELVES become the evil we tolerate. i.e. A good person, cannot tolerate evil, in his/her presence. i.e. NO PERSON CAN TOLERATE EVIL, ....UNLESS THAT PERSON IS EVIL. And our [so called!] 'tolerance' of evil, is not tolerance. Our 'tolerance' of evil, merely reveals the wickedness which is ALREADY within us!

When we choose to embrace, and to be 'tolerant', of those [in our midst] who are wicked,
...we OURSELVES, always become wicked.

We are always corrupted, by the wickedness which we [would] choose to tolerate.




2 Corinthians 6:16
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17  Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
18  And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.



A Holy people.
The Holy 'land'.
A Holy spirit [God's spirit].
...on a spiritual level these concepts are all connected with each other.



"I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people."

Leviticus 20:26
And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the LORD am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine.


Deuteronomy 7:6
For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.

Yes of course :)

I'll let you into a secret, friends. As Yeheshua said, "there are many rooms in my father's house." There are other worlds, and the substance of these worlds is mind. Some Quantum physicists are coming around to this idea (not all!), but it's something religions have been saying for years.

Once, I sort of believed in life after death, but it wasn't until I had actual experience of these other "worlds" that I really came to believe in them. I was curious. I read a lot, and I decided to experience things for myself.

I read a book on astral travel and decided to give it a go. I thought, if this works, it's proof that there are other worlds. Maybe. You never really know.

It took me some time. You have to prepare yourself mentally, and you have to practice regularly. For me, it took a good month of regular exercises until it finally worked. This was a real breakthrough. Until then, I had no real "proof", and sure, I could put it all down to a series of dreams, but it parallels with everything I read about this "world".

Everything the books describe is true. When you get to a certain stage of mental concentration, you hear a crack. Well, before this, you feel your body vibrating - exactly like low voltage electricity. If you're careful and you stay aware, you can then leave your body. If you lose focus, you fall asleep and nothing scary happens. This happened to me a number of times as well.

When I first left my body, everything was just like it is normally - everyday familiar things I had around my room - except there was a shimmering bottle green light everywhere. I knew I was in the astral plane. There, you hear things differently - almost a flanging, echoing effect, but this changes with your level of concentration. Everything in the astral depends on your focus.

You can fly. The book I read said to jump into the air and if you stay there you know you're in the astral. It's true. I jumped, stayed there, and checked out the ceiling. You can also pass through things. I went through my closed bedroom window and flew around the top floor of the flat I was living in, checking out the brickwork. It was night, but the sky had that strange green hue. Everything tends to shimmer and glow. Everything seems alive, even things like the bricks.

As the books say, a silver chord attaches you to your physical body. I didn't notice this at first, but later did. As I observed, you tend to lose your focus after a while, and the initial clarity breaks down. Things become dreamy, because that’s exactly what the astral is - the dream world. As you see things and meet people, your emotions take over and strange things happen. Your mind plays tricks with you, and you can find yourself back in your physical body very quickly.

I found that you can focus on a place and fly there really fast. I once asked to go to Mars and took off, speeding through space. I got scared after leaving Earth though, and snapped back to my body. I never did make it to Mars.

You can ask to meet people too, but I always found this confusing. They always seemed like projections of my own mind, which of course is exactly what they were. For some reason, I kept running into a lot of cats. They followed me. I wonder if this is why witches are always associated with cats.

Anyway, I’ve stopped now. If you don’t keep your practice up, you lose the ability. Also, the astral is just as confusing a place as this world - more confusing. It’s a fun place to visit - and I believe we all do when we sleep and die - but it’s hard to stay grounded there.

What was interesting though, is it’s just like they say in the books. The "bardo" state in the Tibetan Book of the Dead - the place you go after death - describes it perfectly. Because of that, I tend to believe in reincarnation, which is what Tibetan Buddhists believe and describe in great detail.

Obviously, I still don’t "know", and I’m no expert on these things. I would never tell someone what they should believe because I know people have to experience this sort of thing for themselves. But from my experience, these "worlds" are just what others have described. It’s just like looking at a picture of a place and then seeing it for yourself.

From what I experienced though, the astral world comprises solely of mind. It is purely phenomenological. There are certain "natural" laws there, but there are probably mental laws too. You can manifest things in the astral solely through fear or desire. You can think of things and they    appear, or you are taken to them.

If what the books say are true and our own world reflects the astral, then I can see how we’re propelled through life - lives? - by desire and intent. Still, it’s a very sloppy way of doing things, being propelled through time by fight and flight.

What I found in the astral world is the more focused you are - the more you simply observe things just as they are - the less you’re conveyed madly about the place by your own hopes and fears.

I don’t have the travel bug to go back anytime soon, but this is what that "place" 
showed me. If you’re going to believe something, I think it’s a good idea to check it out for yourself. Otherwise, I’d be skeptical.

Don’t believe me, friends! Try for yourself and see.

Yadda,

Have you done any Astral travel? It's very cheap.

Karnal - What happens to the projection when the globe goes out?

Sure. People have said that to me. Why travel across the world to visit someone or go to some place? Why not just astral travel there?

It’s a technical problem. The astral is tricky - our minds are tricky. Unless you’re extremely focused and aware, the astral plays games with you. Nothing is as it seems. The astral world is a child’s world. You see things like a child - or maybe like a cat.

As much as I’d like things to be otherwise, there’s no place like home.

muso wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 7:01am:

Amadd wrote on Jan 16th, 2013 at 4:53pm: I tend to believe that there exists some comprehensive cellular memory, and it is said that a single atom could one day be used to store memory. http://uw.physics.wisc.edu/~himpsel/memory.html In the case of alzheimer's sufferers, I tend to think that the memory still exists, but the normal method of access has been altered. If it is the case that single atoms are able to store vast amounts of memory, then it may follow that atoms actually grow in propensity for wisdom......a wise old atom  ;D So within the ever changing forms, ashes to ashes, shifting sands etc., we may be a very important part of an ever learning universe where our experiences and knowledge are not lost forever, but passed on to a developing universe. It may be a way out theory, but it's better than thinking that our lives are totally pointless. :D It is way out. For a memory to be formed requires the input (visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory etc.  If any of these sense are damaged, then clearly the data cannot be propagated. Then, sensory input is propagated via the thalamous, and this is severely baud limited to about 50000 bits per second, where a bit per second is equated to a neural firing (from MRI studies).That in itself means that we can't physically process and take in everything that we sense.

Oh well, it's just a feeling. So it doesn't require any scientific backup does it?
When it comes to a widespread belief in men who walk on water etc., there is for plenty of scope for the imagination to appear rational  ;D

Karnal wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 4:16pm:

I got scared after leaving Earth though, and snapped back to my body. I never did make it to Mars.

Makes sense. I've always pictured you as a kinda Venus-y gal with a hint of moustache and some Mediterranean follicle issues.

Is being self aware (a) proof that we exist, and a proof that we are experiencing some form of reality which we do not fully comprehend ?

[And who are you going to demonstrate this 'proof' to, so as to [absolutely] validate it ?]



Or is being self aware, proof that we are an entity which believes that it is self aware ?         :P

Yadda wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 10:07pm:

Is being self aware (a) proof that we exist, and a proof that we are experiencing some form of reality which we do not fully comprehend ? [And who are you going to demonstrate this 'proof' to, so as to [absolutely] validate it ?] Or is being self aware, proof that we are an entity which believes that it is self aware ?         :P

Life doesn't come packaged with proofs.  If it did, we wouldn't be having all these great conversations.

Soren wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 8:50pm:

Karnal wrote on Jan 18th, 2013 at 4:16pm: I got scared after leaving Earth though, and snapped back to my body. I never did make it to Mars. Makes sense. I've always pictured you as a kinda Venus-y gal with a hint of moustache and some Mediterranean follicle issues.

Quite. As that John Gray book title goes, Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus, And Children Are From Heaven.

Cats too, it would seem.

muso wrote on Jan 18^th, 2013 at 5:33pm:

Karnal - What happens to the projection when the globe goes out?

Ah, you ask a good, cunning question. I believe the astral world is exactly what Plato was describing with his notion of forms, who’s counterparts in the three dimensional world are mere reflections of what we call the astral world. That chair, bed, desk - all exist in thought form somewhere outside this world. People, places and things. Victory and failure, health problems, luck, even events. Neoplatonists in the 3rd century certainly held this view, and the early Christian church struggled between a pagan devotional style of religion and the more gnostic mystery tradition of the Platonists. No need to guess who won. If you read Plato’s metaphor of the cave as a literal description of reality, it makes a lot of sense in reference to the astral. Our world is a projection of much subtler worlds, and most of us spend our lives with no understanding of the worlds outside (within) our own.
 
A lot of Plato’s ideas have been reinterpreted - particularly by German idealists and 20th century phenomenologists. The trick, however, is how to get rid of metaphysics without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Plato’s cave can be useful in linguistics, but Plato wasn’t describing the problem of language and metaphysics. I think he was describing a view of cosmology, but one where forms - ideas - are critical.

The modern Western obsession with language became less important to me when I experienced thought transfer in the astral. Here, intention and meaning is conveyed between people/beings without words, but through thought and emotion. You just "know" what people mean - very problematic in this world, I realize.

I recommend a book, Betty Eadie’s Embraced by the Light. It’s the cheesiest New Age book cover you’ll ever see, but it’s an amazing book. Eadie had an accident and went into a coma. She describes what happened to her after she was momentarily declared clinically dead.

She saw the doctors working on her and later identified them. She left her body, flew over to see her family, and then met a being who showed her around "heaven". She met Jesus, although he was described as a projection of her own understanding of Oneness. According to the guide, Buddhists meet the Buddha, Catholics may meet favourite saints, etc, etc - I don’t know who Jews or atheists meet. Anyway, she spends what feels to her like 3 months in bliss, being taken around by this guide.

I’m not sure if I believe everything the guide says - he says there’s no reincarnation. Beings choose to be born into bodies on earth to learn things. This sounds way too nice to me. Anyway, Eadie is still  mormon, even though her experience went against much of what that church teaches. Apparently, her congregation shunned her for a time after she published the book. When she came back to life, she became very depressed. She wanted to die and go back, but she remembered what the guide said about destiny, etc, etc.

I believe Eadie’s experience happened because it’s backed up by other survivors of near-death experiences. It’s not always happy days though. I’ve read some people have a very confusing, fearful time. The Tibetan Book of the Dead describes the bardo as a confusing place for most. Yes, there are guides who can help you there, but there are also a lot of lost souls wandering around. The astral travel book I read gave gnostic incantations to dispel "negative" entities, and they seemed to work (for a short period, anyway). I believe you can meet people you’ve known when you die, but you can also meet a lot of deadbeats. One time I went to some place full of drunks. It was hard to get away from them - they brought me down. I could have fallen into an astral life of booze and drugs if I had stayed around. Still, the astral only reflects your own mind. Betty Eadie must be an extraordinarily aware person to have experienced what she did. The astral or bardo world is not like that for everyone.

I would much rather live in a world of ideas where people discussed their own experience of these matters rather than some book-learned priest, rabbi or imam’s secondhand interpretation. We all need an understanding of death, I think, or we never really come to terms with it. If you can live well with your corpse rotting - and that’s all - fine. Many great people have, including Mother Theresa if we believe her letters about her doubts.

Still, there’s no point getting all "spiritual" about these matters (whatever that word is meant to mean). Who you meet on the astral, the sort of places you can go, and how easily you’re able to focus and navigate yourself around, depends on your work in the physical world.

Plato was right - there is a world of pure forms, but it lives within the tiny holes of matter in this world. Thought - ideas, information, call it what you will - is the substance of all matter. Nothing is fixed or concrete, everything changes. What is physically possible within matter is only determined by bonds of attraction, or forces of rejection.

This is, I think, almost identical to the nature of mind.

I'm always interested in experiences derived from the power of the mind.  It's brave of you to talk about such things, and some will take advantage of this. All that we experience is due to our perceptions.

My own perception is that all these experiences will die with the mind, which I perceive as a manifestation of the operation of a very physical brain.

It's not really something that causes me any concern. I am quite at ease with the emptiness or suññatā that is property of everything we know, and what you say about the illusion of matter agrees with what I know from quantum theory.

The vast emptiness of space is something that is something that I find comforting, but is disconcerting to Abrahamist religions.


Quote:

If you can live well with your corpse rotting ...

I don't think that's possible.  That's my point.

muso wrote on Jan 19^th, 2013 at 8:34pm:

Quote: If you can live well with your corpse rotting ... I don't think that's possible.  That's my point.

That, I would find a little difficult too  :-?
It would be hard for me to believe (wihin my conscious mind) that there is a conscious self which exists for any length of time beyond the physical self.
I would imagine that the semblance of time would cease to exist.

Those who have experienced the physical self dying seem to have very similar memories of the event which are generally quite good ones and helpful to their continuation in the physical life.

Yes, it's our perceptions of a physical world that we can usually never escape, but that's not to say that there is nothing beyond it.

muso wrote on Jan 19^th, 2013 at 8:34pm:

I'm always interested in experiences derived from the power of the mind.  It's brave of you to talk about such things, and some will take advantage of this. All that we experience is due to our perceptions.

"To be immortal is commonplace, except for man. All creatures are immortal, being ignorant of death."

Few of us, I'm sure, could deny having been, at some time and to some degree, hopeful of the possibility of surviving death. Would we be fully human if we hadn't?

But our doubt in this matter (even for the most faithful) is subconsciously expressed in the almost universal use of past tense when we refer to the deceased, when imagining their response to a recent event.

Fear of death is fundamental to all sentient beings yet, as Yeats infers, humans are the only species who spend a lifetime angsting over whether we can cheat it (or whether it is cheatable).

And it is (in most human religious traditions), the primary reason for theistic religion's existence.

But does it matter if some (or many) persist with this most inane and irrational of hopes? Only if the line in that song is true... "It's the soul afraid of dying that never learns to live".

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 20^th, 2013 at 10:32am:

muso wrote on Jan 19th, 2013 at 8:34pm: I'm always interested in experiences derived from the power of the mind.  It's brave of you to talk about such things, and some will take advantage of this. All that we experience is due to our perceptions. "To be immortal is commonplace, except for man. All creatures are immortal, being ignorant of death." Few of us, I'm sure, could deny having been, at some time and to some degree, hopeful of the possibility of surviving death. Would we be fully human if we hadn't? But our doubt in this matter (even for the most faithful) is subconsciously expressed in the almost universal use of past tense when we refer to the deceased, when imagining their response to a recent event. Fear of death is fundamental to all sentient beings yet, as Yeats infers, humans are the only species who spend a lifetime angsting over whether we can cheat it (or whether it is cheatable). And it is (in most human religious traditions), the primary reason for theistic religion's existence. But does it matter if some (or many) persist with this most inane and irrational of hopes? Only if the line in that song is true... "It's the soul afraid of dying that never learns to live".

It is my firm belief that the man, Jesus the Christ [the redeemer], was executed, died, and rose again,
.....that Jesus did survive death.

But that is just me.            :P

Jesus, the man, is alive.

If Jesus is alive, can others be redeemed too ?

Why not ?







Luke 24:13
And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
14  And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
15  And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.
16  But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
17  And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?
18  And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
19  And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
20  And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
21  But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
22  Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;
23  And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
24  And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
25  Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26  Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27  And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
28  And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.
29  But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
30  And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
31  And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.




In numerous places in the NT, Jesus 'previewed' his death [and resurrection], to his disciples.

If we can believe the recorded Gospel story, then we are told that Jesus came to do a predestined 'work' on earth, for the 'Godhead'.

And recorded in the Gospel story, Jesus witnessed to his contemporaries, that he knew and understood what that work was.

Jesus testimony throughout the NT is the witness to his determination to complete the task that was assigned to him.


Of course, if a person believes that Jesus is his/her redeemer, he/she also believes in the veracity of the Gospel story.

Atheists do not.






Job 19:23
Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book!
24  That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever!
25  For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
26  And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:

If a person sincerely believes that Jesus is the redeemer of mankind, and sincerely believes that Jesus is alive, then that person is 'demonstrating' [to God] his/her belief, in the righteousness of God.

If a person believes in the righteousness of God, and demonstrates that belief 'in the world' [by his/her choices in the world], then that person will be redeemed.

That is the promise of God to us, i believe.



What, is 'surviving death' ?

To be 'redeemed', will be to live in the presence of God.






1 Corinthians 13:12
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.


1 John 3:2
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Seeing that the said "God's" truths have always been scientifically proven to be phony, it's extremely doubtful that religion can ever have any power over a natural being at all.

Yadda wrote on Jan 20^th, 2013 at 11:04am:

It is my firm belief that the man, Jesus the Christ [the redeemer], was executed, died, and rose again, .....that Jesus did survive death. But that is just me.            :P Jesus, the man, is alive. If Jesus is alive, can others be redeemed too ? Why not ?

That being the hole in the heart of common Christian faith that excludes the possibility of achieving the most complete of all faiths - Belief without hope of reward.

To paraphrase John 20:29 : "Is it because you hope for reward - to escape death - that you believe? How blessed are those who believe without hope of success nor fear of failure."

Amadd wrote on Jan 21^st, 2013 at 1:31am:

Seeing that the said "God's" truths have always been scientifically proven to be phony, it's extremely doubtful that your religion can ever have any power over a natural being at all Yadda. Give it a go if you wish mate, but you know that there is absolutely no sword to weild here. You are helpless when it comes to giving an option of heaven and hell. Don't even bother trying it on, 'cause everybody knows that you are full of shite.

This is a discussion about what people believe. Yadda isn’t being pushy about it. I think atheists have become the new prosletysers.

We don’t need more uniformity, we need less. Let a hundred flowers bloom, I say.

Still, no one’s going to read a list of Bible quotes. People need to discover truths for themselves. There is much truth and wisdom in the Bible, but in itself, it’s worthless.

Religion is merely potential. Its benefit comes only when all those texts are applied and lived.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 21^st, 2013 at 7:32am:

Yadda wrote on Jan 20th, 2013 at 11:04am: It is my firm belief that the man, Jesus the Christ [the redeemer], was executed, died, and rose again, .....that Jesus did survive death. But that is just me.            :P Jesus, the man, is alive. If Jesus is alive, can others be redeemed too ? Why not ? That being the hole in the heart of common Christian faith that excludes the possibility of achieving the most complete of all faiths - Belief without hope of reward. To paraphrase John 20:29 : "Is it because you hope for reward - to escape death - that you believe? How blessed are those who believe without hope of success nor fear of failure."

True, but that’s not what Yadda’s saying. He’s saying there’s testimony that a man called Jesus of Nazareth lived after death, so why shouldn’t we?

Jesus isn’t the only one. There are a number of stories about people escaping death, coming back from the dead, giving signs from the grave, etc.

Aunty Lorna once got in touch through a spirit medium. She said to get my hair cut, find a nice girl, and be nice to Mum.

I didn’t need to ask someone who has died, travelled through to the other side, met Jesus - met God. I could have got the same advice from any of the admin ladies at work.

Quote:

This is a discussion about what people believe. Yadda isn’t being pushy about it. I think atheists have become the new prosletysers.

I didn't mean to insult Yadda's faith, so I'm sorry if was insulting there Yadda. I don't want to be a pushy athiest either.

Unfortunately, personal beliefs can get in the way of good friendships. I used to have an uncle that I absolutely adored, however, he kept trying to push me down the religion path and I ended up avoiding him. 'twas a pity for both of us I reckon.

Don't ask me why I have to be more respectful of religious opinion than any other, but it seems that I do, and I feel that.

Karnal wrote on Jan 21^st, 2013 at 8:10am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 21st, 2013 at 7:32am: Yadda wrote on Jan 20th, 2013 at 11:04am: It is my firm belief that the man, Jesus the Christ [the redeemer], was executed, died, and rose again, .....that Jesus did survive death. But that is just me.            :P Jesus, the man, is alive. If Jesus is alive, can others be redeemed too ? Why not ? That being the hole in the heart of common Christian faith that excludes the possibility of achieving the most complete of all faiths - Belief without hope of reward. To paraphrase John 20:29 : "Is it because you hope for reward - to escape death - that you believe? How blessed are those who believe without hope of success nor fear of failure." True, but that’s not what Yadda’s saying. He’s saying there’s testimony that a man called Jesus of Nazareth lived after death, so why shouldn’t we? Jesus isn’t the only one. There are a number of stories about people escaping death, coming back from the dead, giving signs from the grave, etc. Aunty Lorna once got in touch through a spirit medium. She said to get my hair cut, find a nice girl, and be nice to Mum. I didn’t need to ask someone who has died, travelled through to the other side, met Jesus - met God. I could have got the same advice from any of the admin ladies at work.

What he said was that it was his 'firm belief' that etc, etc, etc...

What I'm saying is the greatest of faith lies in belief without reward.

What comes after passover? Counting the Omer, ending on Shavuot.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 21^st, 2013 at 9:43pm:

Karnal wrote on Jan 21st, 2013 at 8:10am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 21st, 2013 at 7:32am: Yadda wrote on Jan 20th, 2013 at 11:04am: It is my firm belief that the man, Jesus the Christ [the redeemer], was executed, died, and rose again, .....that Jesus did survive death. But that is just me.            :P Jesus, the man, is alive. If Jesus is alive, can others be redeemed too ? Why not ? That being the hole in the heart of common Christian faith that excludes the possibility of achieving the most complete of all faiths - Belief without hope of reward. To paraphrase John 20:29 : "Is it because you hope for reward - to escape death - that you believe? How blessed are those who believe without hope of success nor fear of failure." True, but that’s not what Yadda’s saying. He’s saying there’s testimony that a man called Jesus of Nazareth lived after death, so why shouldn’t we? Jesus isn’t the only one. There are a number of stories about people escaping death, coming back from the dead, giving signs from the grave, etc. Aunty Lorna once got in touch through a spirit medium. She said to get my hair cut, find a nice girl, and be nice to Mum. I didn’t need to ask someone who has died, travelled through to the other side, met Jesus - met God. I could have got the same advice from any of the admin ladies at work. What he said was that it was his 'firm belief' that etc, etc, etc... What I'm saying is the greatest of faith lies in belief without reward.

Maybe - I'm not sure why faith is so important for some. If you do something, you get certain results. I would never ask someone to do something they didn't understand merely because I believed there would be a payoff in some vague place after you die.

If that's what faith is, it's a crock.

As the Christian prophet Jesus of Nazareth said, the Kingdom of Heaven is within.

- and that's the immanent parallel with many Eastern religions - the Greco-Buddhist connection.

Karnal wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2013 at 9:25am:

Maybe - I'm not sure why faith is so important for some. If you do something, you get certain results. I would never ask someone to do something they didn't understand merely because I believed there would be a payoff in some vague place after you die. If that's what faith is, it's a crock. As the Christian prophet Jesus of Nazareth said, the Kingdom of Heaven is within.

I believe, at the "3:00AM of our soul", we all want to have faith... In something (maybe anything).

It seems the film 'Kumare' demonstrates that this very human desire can be evoked in many who, through this fundamental need to have faith, find 'the kingdom within' (in whatever form the 'kingdom' manifests within the individual).

It can be healthy, or sometimes dangerous... Imperatives arising from perceptions of the 'Kingdom', it appears, can transcend norms of good and evil and the believer finds he is capable of burning the village in order to save it (or, in other words, through best intentions, will destroy that which he sets out to save - 'Let me save you from drowning' said the monkey to the fish as he placed it carefully up the tree).

Maybe the need for faith is the need to believe one can transcend one's limitations, in the spirit of 'Possunt, quia posse videntur' - 'They can because they think they can'.

Maybe faith is one of the human faculties that makes greatness possible. Maybe it is the sine qua non of greatness.

Quote:

I believe, at the "3:00AM of our soul", we all want to have faith... In something (maybe anything).

Is that important enough to be a real factor during the healthy years?
When you're on your death bed, you're fvkced. Life is over.

It may be nice to have some loved ones around to see you off, but to me, that would not even matter.
Whatever hasn't been done will never be done.

Maybe I'll one day be in a position where I clutch at straws also, and maybe I will remember that I once said that I might be clutching at straws.


Quote:

- 'Let me save you from drowning' said the monkey to the fish as he placed it carefully up the tree

;D That's a great one.

Amadd wrote on Jan 26^th, 2013 at 5:00pm:

Quote: I believe, at the "3:00AM of our soul", we all want to have faith... In something (maybe anything). Is that important enough to be a real factor during the healthy years? When you're on your death bed, you're fvkced. Life is over.

I meant it as a metaphor to define those sudden moments of existential angst (clarity) - In the way Paul Simon intended with the lyrics of "Call Me Al".

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 26^th, 2013 at 5:22pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 26th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Quote: I believe, at the "3:00AM of our soul", we all want to have faith... In something (maybe anything). Is that important enough to be a real factor during the healthy years? When you're on your death bed, you're fvkced. Life is over. I meant it as a metaphor to define those sudden moments of existential angst (clarity) - In the way Paul Simon intended with the lyrics of "Call Me Al".

You mean like the sudden clarity of an alcoholic?
I understand that song to have been written for/about Chevy Chase where Betty is the Betty Ford clinic and Al is short for alcoholic.

The real "God" is "life" - the life that stirs within us. Life is mysterious, and with two separate brains, it's really not that hard to have internal conversations that we attribute to be external.

The phenomenon of life (and sentience) is a pretty special thing. You could say that it's divine.

Is it just so many neurochemicals? - or so many organised firings of neurons and synapses?

I believe it's that and more. The effects of the physical phenomenon are so much more special. I gave the example of a digital recording of an operatic aria. The sequence of 1's and 0's is the basis, but to describe it thus, is missing the point. The medium is not the message in this case.

The physical system of the human body is the medium. It's transient, in that it's continually changing.

Do we think because of the firings of neurons and synapses, or do neurons and synapses fire as a result of thinking?

Do we love as a result of changing levels of  testosterone, estrogen, dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, oxytocin, and vasopressin? or does our neurochemistry change as a result of love, or reinforcing thought patterns?

I believe that the mind is the "field" of the brain. It's an effect, but it's not deterministic, in that our mind can affect our brain and vice versa. The mind and the brain are also interdependent. If the brain dies, the mind does not survive - another story in the book of life must begin somewhere else. 

(- and before you state the obvious, I don't have to preface everything with "I believe that"...  any more than Yadda does.) 

the essence of a person.... the sole ,... the soul  ...  does it continue after death.?

Because  so little is known by US  about that... in fact NOTHING, if you want to be completely accurate.,  it is a question almost rhetorical..  no-one knows.

No answer can address it.
It is this very question which has been the grounding, the basis of ALL religion.

Because we have so many... plainly no one has the answer... so it seems a pointless question,  except for the fact that millennia of human generations have made their LIVING by pretending to know the answer.

So.. it is a question common to human civilisation. 
I'm not sure why tho...  unless it rests in the hubris of humans,  supreme in the world, and desperate for vindication for their actions..for meaning in this physical world.....
when it is all just the result of living organisms evolving.

Nothing more.

There is no answer  Muso... it is a logical impossibility. 
We die... there is no we thence... so no fate is attributable to a non-existent thing.... fate ends at death  in other words. :)

muso wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 12:03am:

The real "God" is "life" - the life that stirs within us. Life is mysterious, and with two separate brains, it's really not that hard to have internal conversations that we attribute to be external. The phenomenon of life (and sentience) is a pretty special thing. You could say that it's divine. Is it just so many neurochemicals? - or so many organised firings of neurons and synapses? I believe it's that and more. The effects of the physical phenomenon are so much more special. I gave the example of a digital recording of an operatic aria. The sequence of 1's and 0's is the basis, but to describe it thus, is missing the point. The medium is not the message in this case. The physical system of the human body is the medium. It's transient, in that it's continually changing. Do we think because of the firings of neurons and synapses, or do neurons and synapses fire as a result of thinking? Do we love as a result of changing levels of  testosterone, estrogen, dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, oxytocin, and vasopressin? or does our neurochemistry change as a result of love, or reinforcing thought patterns? I believe that the mind is the "field" of the brain. It's an effect, but it's not deterministic, in that our mind can affect our brain and vice versa. The mind and the brain are also interdependent. If the brain dies, the mind does not survive - another story in the book of life must begin somewhere else.  (- and before you state the obvious, I don't have to preface everything with "I believe that"...  any more than Yadda does.)

It's an interesting thought to think of what preceded the thunk thought  :D ie: What made that thought occur?

Is it to do with the environment? Is it to do with the genes? Is it to do with experience?

Maybe all of them, maybe some of them, maybe other factors as well?

I found a piece on the current Dawkins show to be extremely interesting where he had his DNA mapped and was told that he was more at risk of developing cancer via smoking because of his tendency to smoke the cigarette down to the butt, that's if he actually smoked, and he doesn't.

Even Dawkins was a bit wide-eyed with this diagnosis which essentially states that our behaviour is somewhat  predetermed.

Amadd wrote on Jan 26^th, 2013 at 11:32pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 26th, 2013 at 5:22pm: Amadd wrote on Jan 26th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Quote: I believe, at the "3:00AM of our soul", we all want to have faith... In something (maybe anything). Is that important enough to be a real factor during the healthy years? When you're on your death bed, you're fvkced. Life is over. I meant it as a metaphor to define those sudden moments of existential angst (clarity) - In the way Paul Simon intended with the lyrics of "Call Me Al". You mean like the sudden clarity of an alcoholic? I understand that song to have been written for/about Chevy Chase where Betty is the Betty Ford clinic and Al is short for alcoholic.

At the risk of going off-topic...

Like many of Simon's lyrics these ones are vignettes... a stream of thought... of experiences and ideas latched together without any necessary causal link... like the Beatles' 'A Day in the Life'. According to Simon, he arrived at a friend's house with a partner and was greeted by someone who did not recognise them and introduced them as 'Betty and Al'.

But, yes, you could say its similar to a sudden moment of insight of a drunk... Who, in that moment, realises he's fated to be, say, 'a cartoon in a cartoon graveyard'.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 12:51am:

Amadd wrote on Jan 26th, 2013 at 11:32pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 26th, 2013 at 5:22pm: Amadd wrote on Jan 26th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Quote: I believe, at the "3:00AM of our soul", we all want to have faith... In something (maybe anything). Is that important enough to be a real factor during the healthy years? When you're on your death bed, you're fvkced. Life is over. I meant it as a metaphor to define those sudden moments of existential angst (clarity) - In the way Paul Simon intended with the lyrics of "Call Me Al". You mean like the sudden clarity of an alcoholic? I understand that song to have been written for/about Chevy Chase where Betty is the Betty Ford clinic and Al is short for alcoholic. At the risk of going off-topic... Like many of Simon's lyrics these ones are vignettes... a stream of thought... of experiences and ideas latched together without any necessary causal link... like the Beatles' 'A Day in the Life'. According to Simon, he arrived at a friend's house with a partner and was greeted by someone who did not recognise them and introduced them as 'Betty and Al'. But, yes, you could say its similar to a sudden moment of insight of a drunk... Who, in that moment, realises he's fated to be, say, 'a cartoon in a cartoon graveyard'.

Nah..I think that you are misreading the lyrics there.

Chase was a fat Alcoholic and Betty became his bodygaurd. Look it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULjCSK0oOlI

I don't think our behaviour is predetermined in the same way as that of an eagle or a snake. (take your pick)

We have the ability to program our own behaviour at every single moment of our lives. We can all choose our own destiny.  Obviously we have an instinctive component in our behaviour, but our brains set us apart from any other species by that ability to self program and be aware of our own  sentience. We are as complex as we choose to be. 

I'm not usually up this late. The gales and torrential winds are keeping me awake.

muso wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 1:08am:

I don't think our behaviour is predetermined in the same way as that of an eagle or a snake. (take your pick) We have the ability to program our own behaviour at every single moment of our lives. We can all choose our own destiny.  Obviously we have an instinctive component in our behaviour, but our brains set us apart from any other species by that ability to self program and be aware of our own  sentience. We are as complex as we choose to be.  I'm not usually up this late. The gales and torrential winds are keeping me awake.

I don't think so to any great extent.
We have a better ability to enjoy our destiny  :)

Amadd wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 1:08am:

Nah..I think that you are misreading the lyrics there. Chase was a fat Alcoholic and Betty became his bodygaurd. Look it up.

I think we've stumbled onto a secular equivalent of biblical interpretation.

We read into lyrics exactly what we want to read. And usually with lyrics that are racey or metaphysical that means drugs or alcohol - whether the lyricist agrees or not. This is something that always amused John Lennon. Even when he explained his lyrics, the response he received was often something like 'Well, that's all very well, John, but what you really meant by semolina pilchard was....".

I see a parallel between our exchange and Yadda's biblical interpretations...

Take 'Call Me Al'...

I have counted nearly a dozen interpretations of this song's lyrics so far (and I'm sure there's more)... Mostly opinions, but also two (differing) that the respective authors claim are quoted from Simon, verbatim.

If the world can't agree on a singular meaning for a 3 stanza song (ironically even with the author 'in the house' alive and well)... What hope for agreement on the meaning of verses lifted from the great Talmudic, Biblical, Koranic, Buddhist, Hindu, [...] 'grand narratives'?

muso wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 1:08am:

We can all choose our own destiny.  Obviously we have an instinctive component in our behaviour, but our brains set us apart from any other species by that ability to self program and be aware of our own  sentience. We are as complex as we choose to be.

And nearly all the religious gurus of the world (living and dead) would, no doubt, agree with you. How to awaken to this (or, should I say, interpret this), then actualise its implications, however, is where they would all alight from the magic bus of concurrence at different stops.


muso wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 1:08am:

I'm not usually up this late. The gales and torrential winds are keeping me awake.

On behalf of the State of WA... Our thoughts are with you.

While there has always been the problem of getting an exact interpretation of a text, the postmodern deconstructionists took this to a new level.

Take this gem from Derrida:


Quote:

The hermeneutical project which postulates a true sense of the text is disqualified under this regime. Reading is freed from the horizon of the meaning or truth of being, liberated from the values of the product's production or the present's presence. Whereupon the question of style is immediately unloosed as a question of writing.

It's all about "style" eh.
Called me old fashioned, but the point of writing something is to communicate a set of thoughts or ideas.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 11:06am:

Called me old fashioned, but the point of writing something is to communicate a set of thoughts or ideas.

True. But what is said and what is heard?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 11:11am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 27th, 2013 at 11:06am: Called me old fashioned, but the point of writing something is to communicate a set of thoughts or ideas. True. But what is said and what is heard?

Often ideas and thoughts become "fixed" and therefore have a "strict" meaning. But, obviously, ideas and thoughts are always being reinterpreted and redefined. I think we just need to be aware of when someone uses the conventional use of a term and when someone is redefining it for another end.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 8:31am:

Amadd wrote on Jan 27th, 2013 at 1:08am: Nah..I think that you are misreading the lyrics there. Chase was a fat Alcoholic and Betty became his bodygaurd. Look it up. I think we've stumbled onto a secular equivalent of biblical interpretation. We read into lyrics exactly what we want to read. And usually with lyrics that are racey or metaphysical that means drugs or alcohol - whether the lyricist agrees or not. This is something that always amused John Lennon. Even when he explained his lyrics, the response he received was often something like 'Well, that's all very well, John, but what you really meant by semolina pilchard was....". I see a parallel between our exchange and Yadda's biblical interpretations... Take 'Call Me Al'... I have counted nearly a dozen interpretations of this song's lyrics so far (and I'm sure there's more)... Mostly opinions, but also two (differing) that the respective authors claim are quoted from Simon, verbatim. If the world can't agree on a singular meaning for a 3 stanza song (ironically even with the author 'in the house' alive and well)... What hope for agreement on the meaning of verses lifted from the great Talmudic, Biblical, Koranic, Buddhist, Hindu, [...] 'grand narratives'?

I wouldn't have much hope of decifering a metaphor stemming from the meaning of that song then    ;D


I suppose that's why Christianity has so many branches to it. If atheism were a religion (which of course it isn't), it would be the oldest and purest of all religions.

muso wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 1:08am:

I don't think our behaviour is predetermined in the same way as that of an eagle or a snake. (take your pick) We have the ability to program our own behaviour at every single moment of our lives. We can all choose our own destiny.  Obviously we have an instinctive component in our behaviour, but our brains set us apart from any other species by that ability to self program and be aware of our own  sentience. We are as complex as we choose to be.  I'm not usually up this late. The gales and torrential winds are keeping me awake.

I must admit that I was very surprised at the explanation of why Dawkins is more prone to cancer from smoking, but in reality, there aren't too many people I know (including myself) who change their behaviour to any great extent through conscious thought alone. And if we do, was that conscious thought also a part of a behavioural pattern?

Amadd wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 2:22pm:

I wouldn't have much hope of decifering a metaphor stemming from the meaning of that song then    ;D

"Where's my wife and family?, what if I die here?"...

Too esoteric?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 5:34pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 27th, 2013 at 2:22pm: I wouldn't have much hope of decifering a metaphor stemming from the meaning of that song then    ;D "Where's my wife and family?, what if I die here?"... Too esoteric?

:-/ Don't know. It depends on the context I suppose.

Amadd wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 7:08pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27th, 2013 at 5:34pm: Amadd wrote on Jan 27th, 2013 at 2:22pm: I wouldn't have much hope of decifering a metaphor stemming from the meaning of that song then    ;D "Where's my wife and family?, what if I die here?"... Too esoteric? :-/ Don't know. It depends on the context I suppose.

Doesn't evoke an image of anxiety, then?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 7:15pm:

Amadd wrote on Jan 27th, 2013 at 7:08pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 27th, 2013 at 5:34pm: Amadd wrote on Jan 27th, 2013 at 2:22pm: I wouldn't have much hope of decifering a metaphor stemming from the meaning of that song then    ;D "Where's my wife and family?, what if I die here?"... Too esoteric? :-/ Don't know. It depends on the context I suppose. Doesn't evoke an image of anxiety, then?

Maybe, but the line in that song which immediately comes to mind for me is "he ducked back down the alley way with some rolly polly little bat-faced girl". ;D
The song itself doesn't have an anxious feel to it.

Amadd wrote on Jan 27^th, 2013 at 7:18pm:

Maybe, but the line in that song which immediately comes to mind for me is "he ducked back down the alley way with some rolly polly little bat-faced girl". ;D The song itself doesn't have an anxious feel to it.

Yes, the anxiety is momentary... A 3:00AM of the subject's soul - although moments of angst recur throughout the song...

Quote:

Yes, the anxiety is momentary... A 3:00AM of the subject's soul - although moments of angst recur throughout the song...

OK, I probably took it as the hour before death as 4am is a common time to die.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 26^th, 2013 at 12:05pm:

Karnal wrote on Jan 22nd, 2013 at 9:25am: Maybe - I'm not sure why faith is so important for some. If you do something, you get certain results. I would never ask someone to do something they didn't understand merely because I believed there would be a payoff in some vague place after you die. If that's what faith is, it's a crock. As the Christian prophet Jesus of Nazareth said, the Kingdom of Heaven is within. I believe, at the "3:00AM of our soul", we all want to have faith... In something (maybe anything). It seems the film 'Kumare' demonstrates that this very human desire can be evoked in many who, through this fundamental need to have faith, find 'the kingdom within' (in whatever form the 'kingdom' manifests within the individual). It can be healthy, or sometimes dangerous... Imperatives arising from perceptions of the 'Kingdom', it appears, can transcend norms of good and evil and the believer finds he is capable of burning the village in order to save it (or, in other words, through best intentions, will destroy that which he sets out to save - 'Let me save you from drowning' said the monkey to the fish as he placed it carefully up the tree). Maybe the need for faith is the need to believe one can transcend one's limitations, in the spirit of 'Possunt, quia posse videntur' - 'They can because they think they can'. Maybe faith is one of the human faculties that makes greatness possible. Maybe it is the sine qua non of greatness.

What faith does is it takes the emphasis off yourself as the doer. The dissolution of the ego is essential for spiritual evolution.

Mind itself is not individual. The Kingdom might be within, but within leads to without. That Oneness people call God is in all things. It is the very nature of all things.

Journeying within is essentially a process of discovering who you truly are, which is not who you thought you were.

There is a lot of Western baggage we need to overcome to awaken. We’ve been taught to be individualistic, critical thinkers. We’ve been taught that the purpose of life is consumption, comfort and pleasure. We’ve been taught to go for our desires, not extinguish desire itself. Greed has been elevated to become a patriotic virtue that keeps ourselves and the economy going.

To evolve and awaken "spiritually", we need to critically unpack this baggage, and leave it behind. Undoing the imperative of luxury is one of the biggest obstacles Westerners face on the path. We are so used to creature comforts.

Understanding that this is not the purpose of life takes some doing, I have to say.

Karnal wrote on Feb 13^th, 2013 at 4:54pm:

Journeying within is essentially a process of discovering who you truly are, which is not who you thought you were.

What is a 'true self' and how would we recognise it from a 'false self'.

As far as I can tell the 'searching for true self' is what it always was and ever will be - the eternal introspective 'wild goose chase'.

Hehe. Claiming there is a true self alludes to fixed substances within the soul. Spiritual types often disdain the belief that we are fixed in anyway; so yeah, it's a wild goose chase for them.

If you're a believer in evolutionary theory on the other hand ...

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 14^th, 2013 at 7:31am:

Karnal wrote on Feb 13th, 2013 at 4:54pm: Journeying within is essentially a process of discovering who you truly are, which is not who you thought you were. What is a 'true self' and how would we recognise it from a 'false self'. As far as I can tell the 'searching for true self' is what it always was and ever will be - the eternal introspective 'wild goose chase'.

You're right. It sounds like a wank trying to find yourself.

Spiritual growth, I think, is more a process of discovering that there's no self at all.

I wouldn't know how to pick a true self, but I can spot a false one a mile away.

Karnal wrote on Feb 14^th, 2013 at 2:03pm:

I wouldn't know how to pick a true self, but I can spot a false one a mile away.

I guess that would stand to reason... As there can only be one true self, all the thousands of possible others must be false. You could therefore take it as most probable that the 'self' you spot is false!

Is there really a true self?

When a person is stressed there is a different self exhibited to a relaxed self.
When one tries to change certain behaviors for the better, a false self must be employed.

Amadd wrote on Feb 15^th, 2013 at 11:11am:

When one tries to change certain behaviors for the better, a false self must be employed.

Which begs the question, can a 'false self' morph itself into a 'true self'?

Is the true inherent in the false?

But, of course, what we usually mean by 'true self', I think, is really 'happier self', 'most well adjusted' or 'most content' self. Otherwise we'd have to accept that our 'true' self could possibly be an unhappier or a less well adjusted self than we currently are.

Quote:

Which begs the question, can a 'false self' morph itself into a 'true self'?

Depending on the changes required and how ingrained they are, yes I think that some minor changes are very possible to become part of the true self, however, I think that personalities are largely developed from a young age and genetics also plays a very large part.
The act of changing one's behavior may also be part of the true self in some circumstances.


Quote:

But, of course, what we usually mean by 'true self', I think, is really 'happier self', 'most well adjusted' or 'most content' self. Otherwise we'd have to accept that our 'true' self could possibly be an unhappier or a less well adjusted self than we currently are.

I suppose some people mould themselves to be contented enough to drive through bumper to bumper traffic every day so that they can stare at a computer screen and get told what to do, but for most, their true selves would probably be more at ease in a different environment doing different things.

yeah...you could be a pussycat...

bugger working....

be pampered and fed with no effort at all... 

just your ideal I'd think..pussy cat. :-* :-*

Emma wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 2:59am:

yeah...you could be a pussycat... bugger working.... be pampered and fed with no effort at all...  just your ideal I'd think..pussy cat. :-* :-*

Yes, I've always admired cats. The way that they suck in their owners with the promise of catching a mouse some day.
Us humans need to work for our position.

Once you've got position, you'd better hold onto it with a vice-like grip, 'cause there are many many assholes around who want to take it off you.

And we all share the same fate in the end.