What about all the experiences that people have?Well that's kind of the point, do we as humans believe everything someone comes up with?
What about all the experiences that people have?Well that's kind of the point, do we as humans believe everything someone comes up with?
Well basically because Michael Newton seems to go a lot further than anyone else - I'd like to read something that corroborates his account.
David
I think some facts seem to have a lot of evidence behind them, but there is a lot of variability. The way I like to look at it is if you imagine some aliens who arrived at Earth and randomly sampled what is going on. They might encounter:
People making love.
People preparing nuclear weapons.
Buddhist monks wearing masks to avoid breathing in insects and killing them.
People in primitive societies in the Amazon.
Etc.
It would take a long time for them to build up a picture of what goes on on Earth.
I think the mistake is to imagine that the extended realm is in any way simple (like Christian Heaven or Hell would be).
David
I don't think the extended realm is simple bc we're not simple. It's our projection that creates what we see, so those realms are no different than our physical realm.I think some facts seem to have a lot of evidence behind them, but there is a lot of variability. The way I like to look at it is if you imagine some aliens who arrived at Earth and randomly sampled what is going on. They might encounter:
People making love.
People preparing nuclear weapons.
Buddhist monks wearing masks to avoid breathing in insects and killing them.
People in primitive societies in the Amazon.
Etc.
It would take a long time for them to build up a picture of what goes on on Earth.
I think the mistake is to imagine that the extended realm is in any way simple (like Christian Heaven or Hell would be).
David
I agree with Raimo add to that where do we draw the line when people get messages or channel Jesus or entities? You do know that if they told a licensed psychiatrist that, there is a high chance they would be labeled schizophrenic.
I find with channelling, the role of the person doing the channelling is significant, more than is often acknowledged. In general, after a while I hear the voice of the scribe more loudly. It is difficult to determine where is the boundary and assign weight to the contribution of the scribe versus any other source.Strangely, A Course in Miracles was channeled by a professor of medical psychology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Schucman
Her story is actually really interesting. She was a really troubled person and I think it adds a little bit of credence to the belief that it was channeled from "somewhere else". She struggled with the course basically as soon she dictated it and I think she was basically "mad" when she died. Anyone who reads it will see it is a beautifully written message with so much clarity and focus.I find with channelling, the role of the person doing the channelling is significant, more than is often acknowledged. In general, after a while I hear the voice of the scribe more loudly. It is difficult to determine where is the boundary and assign weight to the contribution of the scribe versus any other source.
What are evil's deceptions?I’m late getting into the conversation because I wanted to read one of Grant Cameron’s books. Honestly, the interview made me question where I should, because I really don’t think he came across well, but I ended up reading Tuned In - The Paranormal World of Music.
It’s a fascinating book, Grant documents all the spiritual and extra-terrestrial influences on musicians. I’d never thought before about how the music we’ve had has shaped the world over the past say fifty years. I wouldn’t know how to begin to quantify it, but would it be fair to claim that if we’d had loads of songs about nationalism and violence instead of love then the world would be in a different place?
The weak point of the book is the thing Alex’s interview highlighted, Grant is largely blind to evil and deception. He dismisses the idea of Satanism, or any dark occult or other unhealthy themes in music. I don’t know how it’s possible to write a book on spirituality and music and not see that. I personally found the book uplifting, as I probably see too much of the darkness, but Grant clearly can’t see it at all.
This phenomenon seems to be part of a larger archetypal pattern; of spiritual people, often producing very interesting work, but who really struggle to recognise evil’s deceptions. A lot of what Grant said about people’s positive experiences with E.T. could equally be said about people’s involvement in cults. The environmentalist movement is demonstrably a green mask covering a desire for resource control, it’s really not clear to me then that E.T.’s expressing concern for the environment are coming from any better place than Al Gore is.
Which facts have evidence behind them? Can you give some of these examples?I think some facts seem to have a lot of evidence behind them, but there is a lot of variability.
David
What are evil's deceptions?
I think sometimes those in the spiritual community just choose not to focus on negativity. It's really no different than here. I really don't understand the issue with trying to figure out if there are negative entities or not. Are there negative entities on this planet? Of course!!! The real issue for me is how to see the world in a loving way. Love for me is the answer (cliche, I know) Love is the ultimate reality and I interpret my reality based on that.I’m late getting into the conversation because I wanted to read one of Grant Cameron’s books. Honestly, the interview made me question where I should, because I really don’t think he came across well, but I ended up reading Tuned In - The Paranormal World of Music.
It’s a fascinating book, Grant documents all the spiritual and extra-terrestrial influences on musicians. I’d never thought before about how the music we’ve had has shaped the world over the past say fifty years. I wouldn’t know how to begin to quantify it, but would it be fair to claim that if we’d had loads of songs about nationalism and violence instead of love then the world would be in a different place?
The weak point of the book is the thing Alex’s interview highlighted, Grant is largely blind to evil and deception. He dismisses the idea of Satanism, or any dark occult or other unhealthy themes in music. I don’t know how it’s possible to write a book on spirituality and music and not see that. I personally found the book uplifting, as I probably see too much of the darkness, but Grant clearly can’t see it at all.
This phenomenon seems to be part of a larger archetypal pattern; of spiritual people, often producing very interesting work, but who really struggle to recognise evil’s deceptions. A lot of what Grant said about people’s positive experiences with E.T. could equally be said about people’s involvement in cults. The environmentalist movement is demonstrably a green mask covering a desire for resource control, it’s really not clear to me then that E.T.’s expressing concern for the environment are coming from any better place than Al Gore is.
Trying to bring sanity or good communication to a topic like this one really points out the limitations of language. Consciousness is a verb; separation is a noun kind of a thing. So, I'm right back to the Miguel Connor idea or focus on when did good come into the world? If you accept the idea that the physical world is a place ruled by Satan or whatever name you choose, then you can begin to find a way out of here by taking personal responsibility for your choices. "Life has no meaning except in terms of responsibility." Reinhold NiebuhrThis episode was so much fun I had to listen to it twice.
I am stuck in the same cul-de-sac that Alex found himself stuck in with Grant and I have no answers.
Very strange indeed that's I asked in my post where do we draw the line. I'm curious how his "rational" colleagues view him/herStrangely, A Course in Miracles was channeled by a professor of medical psychology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Schucman
Sure!Which facts have evidence behind them? Can you give some of these examples?
I think I'd be interested to know where you draw that line. Do you for example accept that it makes sense to label people who have MPD or related experiences, schizophrenic? To me that is utterly arbitrary - how much of what people tell us, do we dismiss as disease?I agree with Raimo add to that where do we draw the line when people get messages or channel Jesus or entities? You do know that if they told a licensed psychiatrist that, there is a high chance they would be labeled schizophrenic.
Where do we draw the line? Or is there a line is it blurred? I mean wouldn't most of the spiritual community fall under these categories?
Her and Bill Thetford(helped her edit) kept it pretty hush hush in the beginning...they never really advertised the Course...it's more word of mouth.Very strange indeed that's I asked in my post where do we draw the line. I'm curious how his "rational" colleagues view him/her
I thought that Grant Cameron had some interesting perspectives and I don't have too much disagreement with what he said. I just think that he is a poor listener and communicator. It seems he may be letting his ego get the best of him. If one believes in the nondual concept that everything is consciousness, then wouldn't developing the skill of listening to and understanding others be an important thing to learn? How else can you communicate with people and have a positive influence on them? It should have been very easy for Mr Cameron to understand what Alex was saying and respond to it in an intelligent manner, because they really don't have much disagreement. I think that intellect combined with some type of personal spiritual practice of self-reflection yields the best results.
I'd like to hear more as well...what makes so much of the openness to previously rejected interior experiences exciting is that we now have a much broader way to verify or reject what some people divulge. For instance, several writers about precognitive dreaming & clairvoyance have pointed out that this is a way for the Supreme Being to express his/her/its love & caring nature. To allow some people to foresee natural disasters, plane crashes, etc. before they happen is a loving way to help humanity to avoid suffering & death if they bother to heed it. I also view this greater acceptance of a person's internal experiences as valid as a welcome change from the authoritarian grip on what is real & true. ND experiencers were routinely threatened in the past w/ time in a mental institution or worse & some American astronauts were told that divulging stories about the artificial structures they saw on the Moon would cost them dearly. This is one reason I deplore the blatant disregard for truth in news media & politics today; it's nothing but a giant step backwards.I think I'd be interested to know where you draw that line. Do you for example accept that it makes sense to label people who have MPD or related experiences, schizophrenic? To me that is utterly arbitrary - how much of what people tell us, do we dismiss as disease?
I almost get the feeling that your ideas have evolved over time to encompass standard materialism. That is fine of course - you are still free to post here on Skeptiko - but it would be nice to read a slightly longer of explanation as to what you now believe.
David