Do the entities sending us messages sometimes lie?

Traditionally, I'd say yes. Goetia explicitly speaks of lying spirits, and the fae aren't always honest.

A liar in this life could be a liar in the next, etc.
 
Traditionally, I'd say yes. Goetia explicitly speaks of lying spirits, and the fae aren't always honest.

A liar in this life could be a liar in the next, etc.
Yes, that too.
We just hope that we do not permit such people to have too much influence on our life. The best way for that, is for us to be more in the light of truth, so it is unpleasant for liars to be around you.
 
Sorry to post in an old thread however i am very interested in this. To recap i posted last week that my loved one had passed away in Jan 2014. Since that time i had feelings of presence in my home, problems with electricity and favorite old songs playing on my mobile even when it was flat. I reported that when i underwent the self guided afterlife connection procedure all the electrical problems in my home ceased and things were generally calmer. My loved one also told me during these 'visits" that he would contact me on a certain date by phone/music, and the phone certainly did play music at these times.

Since my last posting i have had more of the mobile phone/music playing and also information verified from the procedures. This includes name and details of a deceased relative of my loved one that i had no prior knowledge of. I have been communicating using the afterlife procedure and meditation for a month now and it certainly seems as it is my loved one.I have also had no evidence of any lies. It concerns me that it could be another entity posing as this person however i have had no feelings of anything untoward. I did however get message from my loved one to throw out any witchcraft or occult books from my home and there were lots left behind by a previous tenant. Any advice thanks.
 
Sorry to post in an old thread however i am very interested in this. To recap i posted last week that my loved one had passed away in Jan 2014. Since that time i had feelings of presence in my home, problems with electricity and favorite old songs playing on my mobile even when it was flat. I reported that when i underwent the self guided afterlife connection procedure all the electrical problems in my home ceased and things were generally calmer. My loved one also told me during these 'visits" that he would contact me on a certain date by phone/music, and the phone certainly did play music at these times.

Since my last posting i have had more of the mobile phone/music playing and also information verified from the procedures. This includes name and details of a deceased relative of my loved one that i had no prior knowledge of. I have been communicating using the afterlife procedure and meditation for a month now and it certainly seems as it is my loved one.I have also had no evidence of any lies. It concerns me that it could be another entity posing as this person however i have had no feelings of anything untoward. I did however get message from my loved one to throw out any witchcraft or occult books from my home and there were lots left behind by a previous tenant. Any advice thanks.

There is still activity here http://forum.mind-energy.net in this regard. There are couple of forums dedicated to practical help for such things.
 
Thanks i will check that forum out. Sounds like what i am looking for (practical help). Its easy to follow a procedure such as the guided afterlife communication however a whole set of other issues arise when you are successful in contact. Such as how to manage an ongoing relationship and frequency of contact. I often wonder whether my loved one will simply disappear one day or maybe move to a higher plane where contact is not possible. I wonder this as during the weeks i have been participating in the afterlife connections and meditation i have seen both my loved one and his surroundings both evolve and change quite dramatically. In any case i suppose there are no real answers to these questions and i am grateful for the help the afterlife connections have provided me in reducing my levels of grief.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K9!
Lots of great posts here with lots of valuable tidbits. Rumspringa, I especially like your post.

Here's one point which I think is perhaps relevant. It seems to me that ALL the entities are very careful to never cross the "line" of "plausible deniability." For example:

-If Spirits were souls passed on and were still loving their human relatives, then wouldn't some of them want their relatives to enjoy Earthly comfort? So, why aren't all lottery wins inspired by dreams with the winning numbers?
-If Spirits can be good/bad/indifferent then why don't we get some spirits who don't care about remaining mysterious? Why don't we have a Spirit on Oprah (via a Medium) rattling off a vast litany of specific facts of all sorts proving that it really is a Spirit.
-Similarly, why don't good Spirits help us with crimes? We have the example of Chris Robinson (http://www.dream-detective.com/) who is very, very interesting but he is given tentative information. He is not given the name, address, motive of the criminal along with the specific location of the murder weapon and the name/address of witnesses a, b, and c who can get the conviction.

If all entities were good, then we could hypothesize that they were cooperating with God and that God didn't want these things told.

However, if some entities are bad and are allowed (by God I guess) to get up to mischief then what stops them from going all the way? Why isn't there at least one who crosses the line of plausible deniability? It is true that our culture denies these things and so evidence is ignored but it is also true that that only goes so far. Overwhelming evidence would get the attention of the world. Who prevents the line of plausible deniability being crossed?

So, what I am saying is that there seems to be a regulator. The regulator has power over all these discarnate thingees and stops them crossing the line. The regulator also knows the future (see Chris Robinson) and knows EXACTLY where the line of plausible deniability is. This regulator also makes no mistakes. Who do we know who is omnipotent, omniscient and never makes mistakes? God would seem the only answer.

Not sure what I think of that. I guess it is demons licensed by God.

I got to this excellent thread because Alan posted a link to it in one of his latest posts in a different thread (http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threa...xperience-please-continue-to-ignore-308.3142/). Alan, I actually share 100% of your questions here as well as your conclusion (sadly), that is: "demons licensed by God". After all, even those who actually worship "God" (regardless of their religion) are not able to logically explain why, if there is a benevolent and omnipotent God, the world is so flawed in itself ("nature red in tooth and claw", disease, catastrophes etc) and why he allows not just bad things but even extreme evil to happen (holocaust, child murder etc etc). We need a new word to replace 'God' if we wish to try and understand each other better: as it is, the word GOD refers to a logical impossibility (a being who is omnipotent and good - there's no evidence that any such being exists, in fact there is overwhelming evidence that this is NOT the case). We must be able to say that we can believe in God/ a "source" (I'll call it "IT") without implying that there is necessarily a point (a plan, a meaning, an ethical purpose) in what it is doing or with what it is NOT doing - for example, giving "demons" licenses....and even if we don't believe in demons (unknown malevolent entities in some unknown dimension), "GOD" has been giving bad people licenses to get away with very bad things which we, ourselves, would not allow - that's why we have laws and judicial systems, for example (and I'm not going to dwell on the intrinsic flaws of this material world - the Gnostics in fact thought that it cannot be the creation of a perfect God but only of a "lesser God", the Demiurge, which, once again, somehow received a "license" to create it). There is a crucial difference between believing in 'God' (i.e., that there is something which has 'given rise' to this consensus reality that we appear to share, including even other somehow linked 'dimensions' that some have fleeting contact with, perhaps) and worshipping/approving of 'God' (i.e.: being a willing pawn in this mysterious game, perhaps created solely for its enjoyment)...this passage by Yogananda (see link below) is very interesting from this point of view. The strange thing, however, is that regardless of his insights, Yogananda still deeply loved this 'thing' behind reality, I have no idea how he could bring himself to do so! I guess in the same way that many battered wives develop a co-dependent relationship with their tormentors and think 'but he loves me really....' !

(excerpts are from Why God Permits Evil and How to Rise Above It by Paramahansa Yogananda)
http://www.theself.com/lifeisadream_yogananda.cfm

Rumspringa also wrote something similar in his excellent post (#21 in this same thread http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/do-the-entities-sending-us-messages-sometimes-lie.444/page-2) - and this also very relevant to the discussion in the UFO thread about whether UFOs are "demons" etc.: the concept of UFOs just a cultural thing, the phenomena behind it could very well be the same. I quote Rumspringa:

"I think this is probably the most plausible scenario. Disincarnate entities seem to predominate when we use Ouiji Boards, channeling or psychic readings. However, not all seem to be malevolent (e.g., John of God, Edgar Cayce, Silver Birch, etc.). Those who engage in abductions and paranormal encounters of the 3rd kind may not be completely disincarnate but Jinns/Archons of Islamic or gnostic lore. These are pretty powerful inorganic beings, with their ability to tailor their appearance to the fantasies, fears, and preoccuaptions of a particular era.

Vallee felt that these entities act as a "control system" to influence the course of history on earth. He feels many of the Catholic miracles and supernatural religious events that gave rise to sects and even mainstream religions may have been the result of this control system; indeed such miracles are very similar to UFO experiences. You examine every religion (save Buddhism) and there is a founding event that was supernatural. But why? For what? For vicarious entertainment? To see what humans might decide to do after supernatural events? To see if a new religion could impose new order in the world or lead to holy wars?

I'm seeing eery parallels in NDEs. In NDEs the being of light tailors itself to whatever religious figure the dying might find comfort in. A Muslim might see Muhammad, a Christian Jesus. Is this any different from how the fairies and elves shapeshift to become grey aliens, reptilians, and Nordics? In many joyful NDEs, we're told that we're actually pieces of God, we're Gods ourselves and that God wants to experience every possible existence through us vicariously. Gold loves us. But Gold also wants experience every nook and cranny of human suffering and cruelty, too. In Nancy Danilson's NDE, the Source was characterized as all-powerful but also playful and curious.

Raymond Moody is seen as being coy after having written umpteen books on NDEs. But I think that's exactly what he has in mind. When asked, what do you really think life is, he still says, he hasn't got a clue. But his wildest guess is that it's a form of entertainment by the creator; the creator is entertaining himself while we (or pieces of him) go through our travails with this veil of ignorance. Hmm, a form of entertainment. Doesn't this sound a lot like simulation? "
 
The strange thing, however, is that regardless of his insights, Yogananda still deeply loved this 'thing' behind reality, I have no idea how he could bring himself to do so! I guess in the same way that many battered wives develop a co-dependent relationship with their tormentors and think 'but he loves me really....' !

Interesting analogy. Still, it is my sincere belief that i) God exists ii) God is good iii) God has a plan for me and everyone iv) it is not necessary (or perhaps even possible) for me to understand this plan (though I am trying - probably time to stop trying so hard). An interesting book is this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Heaven-Back...UTF8&qid=1458383168&sr=8-1&keywords=mary+neal

In her NDE, she is told that her son would die and her son did die (car accident). She accepts this because she also knows that her son belongs to God and that her son has now returned to God.

Some interesting videos about her:
http://ndestories.org/dr-mary-neal/

The video is in two parts - they are the bottom of the group and say "CZ1" on them.

In the second video she says "Trust is a game changer. I don't need any more proof. I'm good. I commit." I think this is a great quote and is something I am trying to "live" - whatever that means (still not sure).

I have Yogananda but haven't read it. Time for me to read it!

I'm seeing eery parallels in NDEs. In NDEs the being of light tailors itself to whatever religious figure the dying might find comfort in. A Muslim might see Muhammad, a Christian Jesus. Is this any different from how the fairies and elves shapeshift to become grey aliens, reptilians, and Nordics? In many joyful NDEs, we're told that we're actually pieces of God, we're Gods ourselves and that God wants to experience every possible existence through us vicariously. Gold loves us. But Gold also wants experience every nook and cranny of human suffering and cruelty, too. In Nancy Danilson's NDE, the Source was characterized as all-powerful but also playful and curious.

Raymond Moody is seen as being coy after having written umpteen books on NDEs. But I think that's exactly what he has in mind. When asked, what do you really think life is, he still says, he hasn't got a clue. But his wildest guess is that it's a form of entertainment by the creator; the creator is entertaining himself while we (or pieces of him) go through our travails with this veil of ignorance. Hmm, a form of entertainment. Doesn't this sound a lot like simulation? "

Very interesting. An interesting paper: http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc461694/m2/1/high_res_d/28-2 6 Art 08 Kreps.pdf
 
Back
Top