Is There Really an Afterlife?

OBE's, NDE's, lucid dreams, and the like...

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby smiileyjen101 » Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:17 pm

Ego judges what is.

So millions suffered plagues to satisfy the "formless"? Good grief. Was't there another way the formless could pull it off? (encourage conscious expansion)?


So the formless doesn't really give a rat"s ass about humans.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com
User avatar
smiileyjen101
 
Posts: 3688
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby Webwanderer » Mon Oct 29, 2012 12:35 am

Being is eternal, does not desire to be what it already is. Ego desires to be eternal.


So Being, which is eternal, and exists in part as 'being human', is eternal regardless of its form, and therefore ego's interest in afterlife is irrelevant simply because 'after life' is a misnomer. There is no afterlife because there is only eternal life albeit in any number of unique forms. I like it. :D

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby Webwanderer » Thu Nov 22, 2012 8:35 pm

A good account of just some of the available research relating to evidence of after death consciousness.

The Evidence for Survival After Death

As far as we know, all cultures from the remotest past to the present believed in a life hereafter. In the last century and a half, however, whether individual identity survives the body has come under debate in the West. Before World War II, proving survival occupied some of the most prominent people of its day, including the English Prime Minister, Arthur Balfour, and several Nobel-Prize winning physicists. Since then, the respectability of this research, the respectability of exploring an issue that weighs on us all, has plummeted dramatically.

Nonetheless, the evidence for survival is mounting daily. Here I can only give you a short summary of what I cover in my book, The Last Frontier. Although the evidence may not yet constitute solid proof according to the standards set by science, the sheer amount of it, the variety of sources, the inner consistency would overwhelmingly stand up in any courtroom, as Victor Zammit, author of A Lawyer Presents the Case for the Afterlife, has pointed out.

As you probably already know, everything that seems to us to be matter is, in fact, almost entirely energy in the form of forces and oscillations. That means there’s not much difference from us and the energy bodies of our discarnate loved ones. We can and do communicate without the use of the physical brain, from one consciousness to another directly by telepathy. For that matter, a few neurobiologists are beginning to admit that the mind, the seat of consciousness, is independent from the brain. This has been demonstrated over and over in clinical experiments on telepathy, precognition and remote viewing, all of which occur outside the brain’s immediate domain. Quantum biology is now looking at highly efficient intelligence in organisms that lack both brains and nervous systems.

Near Death Experience studies have shown definitively that the mind, all that we hold as our identity, can and does operate when separated from the body. There are many documented cases in which people who are clinically dead, whose EEGs and EKGs have flat lined, continue to perceive and think while outside their own bodies. What they see and hear going on in operating rooms, on hospital rooftops and in waiting rooms has been confirmed by attending medical personnel. Yet most physicians involved in this research will still hedge the medically impossible by proposing that the brain is not really dead but continues to function at a level too low to track. What they fail to take into account is that during these experiences the congenitally blind can suddenly see for the first time in their lives and they see, like the normally sighted, with a supernormal accuracy. (For more, see Mindsight: Near-Death and Out-of-Body Experiences in the Blind, by Kenneth Ring and Sharon Cooper.) So far, no one has argued that their visual function was in dormancy only to come awake for those moments or hours out of the body. That a person can see without eyes, perceive without a brain and move around without a body is of enormous significance to the survival issue.

Another avenue for settling the question is reincarnation. The past-life accounts meticulously investigated by Dr. Ian Stevenson, founder of the Division of Perceptual Studies in the Department of Psychiatric Medicine at the University of Virginia, combined with past-life memories furnished by regression therapists represent many thousands of instances in which recall of an earlier life is lucid and demonstrably accurate. Most startling are the many incidences of xenoglossy, in which people spontaneously speak in a foreign language not known to them in their present lives.

The best source for survival research is obviously the dead themselves. Since the beginning of recorded history, individuals with developed mediumistic abilities have served as their spokespeople. Experiments with mediums performed under brutally controlled conditions before and during World War II yielded mind-bending results. Today, Gary Schwartz is successfully continuing that work at the University of Arizona.

As author Dianne Arcangel tells us, surveys estimate that up to 72% of today’s American population has had spontaneous encounters, primarily with deceased relatives. More testimony is collected daily from people who have no previous inclination toward the mystical. Nor are they misfits or dreamers, or prone to hallucinating. Instead they are people who effectively and responsibly operate in the “real world.” Spontaneous encounters are neither expected nor longed for. Nor do they bear the characteristics associated with hallucinations or wish-fulfillment fantasies. What happens during an encounter often takes a person by surprise. And in many cases, the living were not even aware that the appearing deceased had passed. Because of these encounters, lives have been saved, crimes forestalled, lost objects found and futures foretold.

All in all, there is an enormous body of evidence for survival after death. You can read about the problems and possibilities of scientific proof in this website by clicking here on: http://www.juliaassante.com/reflections ... ter-death/

Julia Assante
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby rideforever » Thu Nov 22, 2012 8:47 pm

Webwanderer wrote:..

But is there life before death ? !
I was proud, and I demanded the finest teacher
.. .. and when he appeared
.. .. .. .. I was so small
User avatar
rideforever
 
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: Hove

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby Leon » Fri Nov 23, 2012 2:21 am

Hold on! Let's strive for balance here.

The strong emotional need of believers in an afterlife to "prove" their point is understandable. They must believe in an afterlife. And they can cite reputable scientists to support the belief that the mind exists independently of the brain. This position is called dualism.

But other scientists disagree and make strong arguments. There is incontrovertiable evidence, for example, that physical alterations to the brain impact the operation of the mind. Researchers have been able to produce out-of-body experiences by electrical manipulation of the left temporal lobe.

I maintain that the question as to whether an afterlife -- in the sense of survival of the individual personality -- is open. Why can't we leave it at that?

Leon
Freed from religion
Leon
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: Brossard, Quebec, Canada

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby Webwanderer » Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:28 am

Leon wrote:There is incontrovertiable evidence, for example, that physical alterations to the brain impact the operation of the mind.

Physical alterations to a radio will impact its operation as well. It does nothing to the signal that creates sound through it. Incontrovertible information on the operation of a device - or a brain - does not prove origin of the energy running through it. People blind since birth, who had never even experienced visible dreams find they can see clearly during NDEs. Others are conscious of events away from their bodies that they could not possibly have witnessed from where their body lay. The evidence for consciousness independent of the brain is massive. Condescension toward those who are open to consciousness possibilities that many scientists have a near religious bias against will not change reality.

The strong emotional need of believers in an afterlife to "prove" their point is understandable. They must believe in an afterlife. And they can cite reputable scientists to support the belief that the mind exists independently of the brain. This position is called dualism.


The strong emotional need of believers in [materialism] to "prove" their point is understandable. They must believe in materialism. And they can cite reputable scientists to support the belief that the mind exists only in the brain. This position is called scientism.

I maintain that the question as to whether an afterlife -- in the sense of survival of the individual personality -- is open. Why can't we leave it at that?

You can. It's your choice. You speak only for yourself on the matter however. There is also the reality that an understanding of our true nature as eternal beings brings the concerns of physical life into a context that that frees us from the dualism that engenders most of the strife in this world. "The truth will set you free" is a quote of great wisdom and understanding and has comparatively little to do with scientific materialism. A genuine sense of oneness is unlikely to be found in scientific dogma.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby ashley72 » Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:44 am

Leon wrote:I maintain that the question as to whether an afterlife -- in the sense of survival of the individual personality -- is open. Why can't we leave it at that?

Leon


Sue Blackmore's First Law

People's desire to believe in the paranormal is stronger than all the evidence that it does not exist.

Dr Sue Blackmore - In an article in 2000, she again wrote of this:

It was just over thirty years ago that I had the dramatic out-of-body experience that convinced me of the reality of psychic phenomena and launched me on a crusade to show those closed-minded scientists that consciousness could reach beyond the body and that death was not the end. Just a few years of careful experiments changed all that. I found no psychic phenomena - only wishful thinking, self-deception, experimental error and, occasionally, fraud. I became a sceptic.
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby Webwanderer » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:14 am

No doubt the large screaming print makes a belief truer.

There's an old saying in playing rock music. "If ya can't play well, play loud." It would seem the message has transcended to other fields of expression. Attempts to shout down another's point of view does not change the underlying evidence. It's there for anyone to see. Those who come to it with an open mind and a genuine interest in the truth will find it. Look beyond 'all' biases - scientist's, spiritualist's, realist's.

Make your own decisions based on fair research of all the evidence. And all evidence is not found in a laboratory or in peer reviewed papers. Preaching to the choir happens in all venues - especially materialist science.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6280
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby ashley72 » Fri Nov 23, 2012 6:41 am

Webwanderer wrote:No doubt the large screaming print makes a belief truer.


Us mere mortals don't have the benefit of Universal consciousness... so we generally suffer from a condition called perceptual blindness, which is failure by a person to notice some stimulus that is in plain sight.

Image
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby abc123 » Fri Nov 23, 2012 7:10 am

ashley72 wrote:
Leon wrote:I maintain that the question as to whether an afterlife -- in the sense of survival of the individual personality -- is open. Why can't we leave it at that?

Leon


Sue Blackmore's First Law

People's desire to believe in the paranormal is stronger than all the evidence that it does not exist.

People can manipulate their reality as they wish. If you don't want to find paranormal events you won't . An ego will try and sustain itself as a separate identity, as with Sue Blackmore, and build a reputation as someone more important. What an opportunity she had when she realized it wasn't that easy to prove things hard and fast. It doesn't in any way make what she has experienced after her NDE the truth. Just an ego looking for more fame and perceiving itself to be with greater knowledge than others.Very limiting.

As I have learned intellectually from many sources and confirmed through direct experience the Afterlife and life are not separate. Life is life. You as a body don't fail to exist when you go to sleep at night (although you do forget you have one) and dream you just switch to another reality stream and interact there as you do here with different physics. Learning in a different way to here as pigs can fly there ;-) You can come back here because you use a 'tool' to perceive here ie human body. As human language and understanding goes we need to categorize different states of being so we call it sleep but really it is just a continuum of the same awareness. When that tool (body) fails to exist here you switch your awareness to another reality stream albeit more HD as you don't need to bring the memory back through the human metaphor filter any more.

We get great feedback here. If you yell at someone you can't just fly away or blink out you have to deal with the consequences. This universe being so buttoned down leads to fast learning . Being perceived good or bad has different consequences.We are geared towards being good as bad doesn't feel good. Doesn't mean everybody does good though, it is the lessons that we learn from. Why do we 'die'? We come in to varied cultures and bodies over many different lifetimes to give our own awareness the different experience so we can gain more noise free power of intent to use here and in different reality streams. To help people and ourselves evolve positively +
Everybody can experience themselves as more than a body without having an NDE but the vast majority don't try or want to deep down yet. Which is the way it is mean't to be.
Last edited by abc123 on Sun Nov 25, 2012 12:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Listen, smile, interact and grow. We are learning in a toddlers playground.
abc123
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 12:52 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby rideforever » Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:34 am

Leon wrote:Hold on! Let's strive for balance here.

The strong emotional need of believers in an afterlife to "prove" their point is understandable. They must believe in an afterlife. And they can cite reputable scientists to support the belief that the mind exists independently of the brain. This position is called dualism.

But other scientists disagree and make strong arguments. There is incontrovertiable evidence, for example, that physical alterations to the brain impact the operation of the mind. Researchers have been able to produce out-of-body experiences by electrical manipulation of the left temporal lobe.

I maintain that the question as to whether an afterlife -- in the sense of survival of the individual personality -- is open. Why can't we leave it at that?

Leon

Because we don't want to !

You are correct about the strong emotional need to believe in an afterlife, it fills the hole inside.

There is another way to fill the hole, and that is to believe that there is no afterlife ... you feel a sense of rightness ... a sense of "I know the answer". This also fills the hole.

You talk about evidence, like a scientific paper ... do you really think that one day you are going to read a piece of paper ... and you are going to be completely convinced ? Of course not, it's just a piece of paper. The whole thing is really quite stupid.

The HiggsBoson people the other month were all hugging each other because they thought their job was done, having "discovered" this particle. And then they go home to their real lives, with their relationship difficulties, fear of death, anxieties, problems with their kids, alcoholism etc...

The whole science thing is just a little mind game in the head that bears no relationship to your real life. It's like you go into a video game, and when you switch it off nothing has changed, you have all the same problems.

Within all these discussions, the lack of agreement is because everyone has a different level of experience with consciousness. Most 'scientists' have never actually looked into their own consciousness, so they are like workmen talking about art ... they just don't have any experience. But these workmen take pride in not looking, and so can't stop talking about their views of Picasso and Monet.

It does seem strange to me that 'scientific' people think that you can understand yourself by reading some paper, rather than looking inside. That's only brainwashing that has that affect - scientists indeed spend most of their time filling their minds with more and more scientific papers until there is little life left in the brain ... they take pride in brainwashing themselves.

It's like somebody gives you a present in wrapping paper, and instead of opening it ... you call up a friend on the phone and ask them to guess what's in it !

Why don't you just open it !


There used to be a time when a 'scientist' did investigate his own mind, did carry out his own research, was a scientist-musician-poet-warrior ... all at the same time. That time seems a long time ago.

Nowadays 'scientist' is equivalent to 'coward'.
I was proud, and I demanded the finest teacher
.. .. and when he appeared
.. .. .. .. I was so small
User avatar
rideforever
 
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: Hove

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby Leon » Fri Nov 23, 2012 4:04 pm

I believe we should all thank Ashley 72, a clear voice of reason, for introducing us to Susan Blackmore. Dr. Blackmore is considered an authority on consciousness and NDEs. Once a firm believer in NDEs as evidence for an afterlife, after extensive research she came to disbelief.

I find the rant I am seeing from some members against scientists as unfortunate. The scientific method is our only bulwark against religious unreason.

Leon
Freed from religion
Leon
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 5:17 pm
Location: Brossard, Quebec, Canada

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby rideforever » Fri Nov 23, 2012 6:32 pm

Spoken like a true 'scientist'.

A 'scientist' 's belief is such that one requires no evidence or consideration, you just believe your superiors like the good slave you have been trained to be by your education.

Your education has been spent reading other people's books, because nobody cares about you. Nobody cares about your ideas or life ... you just read other people's and write essays, like a well-behaved cog in the machine.

The truth is there is no difference between a 'scientist' and anyone else. Even a dog uses reason to find food, have you never seen this ? Anybody's kid sister uses reason to fix her hair in the morning. Big deal.

Science is basically learning + reason, qualities so ordinary that every creature on the planet carries them out without the need for a labcoat, doctorate or book launch.

But you seek to put yourself in a special 'category' because it reinforces your ego ... "I am Scientist and everybody else is an idiot, you should be grateful for people like me !!!!" What cheek.

This is exactly what ET is teaching against.

How did you arrive on this forum ? Are you the 5th column ?
I was proud, and I demanded the finest teacher
.. .. and when he appeared
.. .. .. .. I was so small
User avatar
rideforever
 
Posts: 1513
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:32 pm
Location: Hove

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby smiileyjen101 » Fri Nov 23, 2012 10:47 pm

But other scientists disagree and make strong arguments. There is incontrovertiable evidence, for example, that physical alterations to the brain impact the operation of the mind. Researchers have been able to produce out-of-body experiences by electrical manipulation of the left temporal lobe.

I maintain that the question as to whether an afterlife -- in the sense of survival of the individual personality -- is open. Why can't we leave it at that?

What scientists haven't been able to replicate, but have been able to quantifiably observe is the sort of information that flows through in mediumship / clair abilities - that is outside of the parameters of physical ranges of some, but not all.
The arguments against it have a couple of flawed premises - one that time and space are linear - and if we are honest we will notice how this has been used to control the 'masses', we 'sell' blocks of it, we 'conquer' and we treat it as enemy, obstacle or means to an end. The other, used for the same purpose is that we are all 'separate' and in reality we are part of a microcosm and macrocosm of energy in motion, the separation can be cut up any way you like - your liver is not your eye, your spleen is not your blood, and yet all of them are part of the body of 'you'. Humans are not elephants, plants are not lizards, but all ecosystems make up the planet. The sun is not Venus and Aries is not Neptune, but all of them are made up of the same elements in different densities creating energy in motion. No matter how minute or how majestic you go everything is a part of the entirety.

Time and space is not linear and not confined except in our minds as we have agreed to organise them in our societies, any more than we are 'individual' in our natures or our building blocks or our labelling.

For those who have learned to read and interpret energy in wider spheres and outside of the 'laws' of space and time, in the same way that we learn to read and interpret stimuli and information that is perceptible and accepted as here and now, there is wider access to the all of information, our capacity to process it is limited only by our willingness to pay attention and be honest about what it is we are perceiving.

It doesn't surprise me that Susan Blackmore using it as a means to an end failed to be able to replicate it. You can't 'trick' the universe, the energy of the universe is constantly 'now' constantly 'here' and constantly pure, collapsed, reality.

Like energies merge and disparate energies separate. Unlike in science you can't 'fudge' reality. What she actually might have concluded is this - not that eternal consciousness is not 'real', but that eternal consciousness is 'true' in the highest possible meaning of the word and cannot be fudged.

I have seen those with brilliant clair abilities 'lose it' under pressure of other stimuli in their midst. I've seen those who've been honest and simply said, sorry, I can't reach the vibration or frequency. I've seen others when instead of pure attention and delivery have 'fudged' drawing things from their brains by visual cues. The difference in frequency and quality of the information is huge. The difference is always whether pure love/openness has been shrunken by some degree of fear or unwillingness to be open to what 'is'.

Just like in the LOA you can't 'fudge' intention, you can't tune into abundance if you harbour a 'lack' of gratitude and generosity. If one is honest they know the frequency they are tuned into. Just as we learned to 'choose' the right word, or to sing the right note, or take up the right tool or put the exact right hue onto our paint brushes to faithfully paint something the quality of the energy frequency can be chosen. Those who say they cannot write well say so in fear and abdication of willingness to learn the energies of words, those who say they cannot sing do the same but we don't say that notes across the wide range of scales don't exist, we know it is unwillingness to learn and train the instrument - our voices, in the case of painting training our eyes... training our hearts and minds in honesty of the ability to absorb and interpret and communicate all energy levels takes guts, it takes effort in undoing all the falsities we've built up in fear.

This is where some areas of science steps back, not in capacity, but in courage. Not in inability but in unwillingness.
Einstein admitted as much when they excluded the 'weird, freaky stuff'. Freud admitted as much to Carl Jung when he refused to include synchronicity and precognition into his body of work in case it brought the rest of his work into ridicule.

We choose. We constantly choose that which we will 'allow' into our perceptions and if we live in the notion of separateness and linear time and space we constantly have to deny that which is true, building stories around it, projecting the denial onto others who refuse to tow the party line.

This is also where religions created enemies of those who refused to deny it - in both cases the root of it is money - commerce and power.

The oneness of everything favours no one and power over others cannot be had in that environment.

It's in science and religions' best interest to demonise the truth, our construct of civilised societies depends on it.

The irony is really funny if you think about it.

It's a bit like saying computers don't work.... and someone saying 'Umm, you have to turn it on first' and the other saying 'don't be silly, they don't work.... why would you turn it on, they don't work, don't you get that?' Meanwhile the other one secretly turns their computer on and goes about their work quietly, then they meet another who 'disobeyed' the 'logic' and they discuss it and they notice capacities they can't talk about openly for fear of ridicule or punishment for turning the computer on. Then someone gets brave and says 'seriously folks, turn your computers on, you'll be amazed!' and the backlash starts, pressuring those who have turned their computers on to turn them off immediately they are a danger to society, they're unreliable at best and the work of the devil at worst.... for centuries and centuries...

The sad thing is some of the brightest minds are tuned in to the wrong frequencies, yet to turn their computers on.

In terms of NDE it is undeniable that many have proof of information outside of space and time. This is the sticking point, not where or how the brain processes the information. The sticking point is some people's unwillingness to accept the proof of factors of access to the eternal 'now' wherein all knowledge is always free, unrestricted to the degree of attention.

No one can deny that I came out of a physical experience within which I had knowledge gained while supposedly unable to in time and space, that directly related to the absolute truth of the situation, beyond the knowledge of anyone else, beyond my own supposed 'capacity'. The proof was right there in the unfolding. That I could know the physical injuries of another before it was even imagined by others, that I could know the future and the past as if the present is simply irrefutable. If this is some aspect of our brain's capacity so be it - it still means that eternal consciousness is eternal and not linear and not confined in 'space'. There is no way I could have 'fudged' it. There was only willingness and courage on my part to explore it. Those that have sought to 'shut me down' do so in fear, in fear of loss of their power, in fear of what it means in terms of their response abilities in things that they deny they have abilities to respond and in fear of losing control of their egoic separateness.

While I understand this, while I can see their perspective and have empathy and compassion I will not retract the truth, while I will do all I can to help them to quantify or qualify their knowledge or understanding of it, I cannot be a party to the covering up of the truth. I am one of those saying.... seriously folks, turn your computer on, it's amazing!! But until one turns the computer on, until one gets out of their own way, the discussion about the abilities of the computer is mute.

The capacity to work outside of linear time and space has been replicated throughout history in those who use energy healing. It's not something I've worked towards, but I do 'notice' from time to time and I have been the synchronistic and willing recipient of it on numerous occasions from different practitioners. That my Granny and others I have known did open themselves - upload that 'program' into their computers willingly and in purity- is also irrefutable even if somewhat 'underground' now in most societies where medicine has become a part of the commercial & power over others world, so 'medicine' joins the chorus of those saying 'don't turn your computer on'.

In using clair abilities I did spend some time in learning to understand the frequencies and now I don't attend 'classes', I choose to live more in the 'lower' more earth bound frequencies because that's what I'm here for - this physical experience in form. That's not to say I don't open up sometimes, I do. That's also not to say that it's not possible to open up, you can. It's also not to say that I don't think everyone can if they choose, if they are willing and if they are pure about it. It's just, for me, I'm happy to live here and now. When 'external' energies interact with my energies I have learned to perceive and interpret them no differently to another person speaking to me, their energies are just as transparent, but there is a line in physicality - we have come into form to experience separation and physicality, so the 'line' needs to be respectfully recognised - but this is the role playing, this is the 'dreaming', not the other way around.

That animal species use their instincts without fear or favor is also irrefutable. That they use both past and future information in their life cycles is also irrefutable - we think its amazing, they've just turned their computers on.

Humans are the one species where the majority of them haven't turned the computer on, the rest of nature is all connected and networked.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com
User avatar
smiileyjen101
 
Posts: 3688
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: Is There Really an Afterlife?

Postby SandyJoy » Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:29 am

smiileyjen101 wrote:It's in science and religions' best interest to demonise the truth, our construct of civilised societies depends on it.


Yes, yes, exactly--I love that one line, it just about sums up the whole sad problem---the Truth is blocked in every way the "old man" can find a way to do so-- corruption in any form it can find--- just so the powers that be won't lose the grip on the power and control. The Light is a ripping damage to the darkness-- and a blazing fire that would take down the Pharisees and their false kingdoms, the jury rigged set up and social constructs build on sand---They are at the edge of their own crumbling cliff now and they know full well what the Power the Light does to the darkness and Truth to the lie. It's the end of death and the end of the lie and the end of the old world.

Well, soon, very soon-- not tomorrow, but the Truth will out and It is on the horizon now --I have a feeling all this cover up will be over very soon, as in looming ---

The Light Lives! the Immortal Soul, Eternal Love, Life Everlasting Is Here, closer than fingers and toes.

" and the first will be last--"

"Know that what is before Your face, and what is hidden from You will be revealed to You. For nothing hidden will fail to be revealed."

"The Pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge and hidden them. They have not entered, nor have they allowed those who wish so to enter. You, however, be as shrewd as serpents and as innocent as doves."

Thanks Jen---well said and invigorating!
You are not finished, until you play in that meadow and live there. You can, you know. But only you can take yourself there.
User avatar
SandyJoy
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:42 am

PreviousNext

Return to Beyond the Physical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest