The big question..

[Exposed]

I've heard this question all through my life, and I have asked it many times. I have recieved answers from a complete religious perspective, and I have also recieved answers from a non-religous perspective. The question is "What happens to us after we die?"

When you answer, I want you to think about how your physical body is not you. So if your visualization of you going to heaven lets say, it isn't your actual body going there, but the 'essence' of you. I view the human body as a shell just as we drive in a car. You are in the car, but the car isn't 'you'. The car may be damaged, just as you may damage your body, but your 'essence' isn't effected by anything physical. Although, I believe there are exceptions.

Another thing to focus on when you answer is that, know you have no previous memory of any life, so how could we continue? Were we just born and we are all in a state of mind that we think we have a 'soul'. Are we not just a working body?

[xexon]

Check my posts in the thread: http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=290025


x

[Exposed]

Alright, I read them all. I still have a numerous amount of questions that will be spread out. First off, I'm not too knowledgable on anything to do with karma, but everything has a begining and an end. I could see how you would think it doesn't and say that everything just is, but it isn't. Someday, this Earth will not be here. Wether something happens here or if somehow the Earth makes it to the end of the Sun's life. Everything on Earth will cease to exist. Since this is so, do you believe in multiple places for the souls to occupy? Also, do see a governing force over ruling everything? A "God"?

[neodude1212]

EVERYTHING has a beginning and an end?

even infinity?

[Exposed]

I was actually just pondering "Beginning and end". I realize what I stated in my previous post is false (at least according to my beliefs). I realize that time does not exist. Everything... is.

[xexon]

Already in place?

It's just a matter of discovering it a piece at a time.

x

[liquidlight]

My own death as i remember it was an ego death, but perhaps a temporary physical death also. I'm not sure because i lost awareness of my body for those moments... yes it's selfless, you've stopped judging and naming because you've risen above peoples personalitys, egos, deeds and words. You've seen that nobody is who they think they are and they're all innocent and blameless in forgetting. Letting go of ego is to let go of separation and form and in so doing, return to a spiritual state beyond earthly personality, lower thinking and beyond emotion into a 'witness state' of pure conciousness and awareness.I was fearful and it felt like dying and it took a huge ammount of love and trust.. and indeed courage to admit to myself and potentially everyone that i wasn't anything, that i wasn't real ... and who i thought they were wasn't real either. Everyone was holy and my beloved sister or brother. This was the real me. This state is love, but not an emotion like we thing of love but an awareness and oneness. Love is oneness and not judging and naming and separating. It is awareness.

Perhaps i'd agree that 'death' only lasts moments because it did for me before realising i had to return and start a new, better life ... of oneness and happiness and peace. I would take up my self abused and 'knackered but repairable' body again and look after it because it was my precious temple in this world. I would make it new again. Did i? ... No ... somehow i just couldn't believe it and negative ego and thought returned, but twelve years on i feel like i've come full circle to a place where i can honour my life and the lives of others and act from a higher will.
I'd like to add that although my ego had been dissolving, snowball fashion for a year and a half, and that great awareness and love was already growing in me in the couple of months prior to the experience, that last leap of faith required the use of Ecstacy for me, to get me into a state where i was ready to 'DO IT'. That moment i'd (in hindsight) been waiting my whole life for had finally come and everything converged in that moment. Somehow in my higher will i needed to be shown, before it was too late, what was really there, so i could live in love without fear. Drugs like that 'can' help you realease blocks in your psyche and 'can' heighten your conciousness and awareness and bring your presence to the moment... very healing in this sense and the way i was using the E (as a psychological healing agent) Somehow in the state i was already in, and considering my needs and my commitment it was deemed ok for this to happen. It was grace.
But if i had not returned to my body and died in a very physical sense? Would i have lost the memory of my previous life? Would i have had a 'concious blackout' (kind of , 'bang on the head' ..amnesia type thing), perhaps a trip into the void before reagaining some faint conciousness in the small form of a baby? Like having a little sleep?

.......?

[neodude1212]

sounds like my salvia trip.

[Exposed]

First off, ex.... I don't understand your post.

Now, liquidlight. Just yesterday, I believe I was enlightened and blessed with and answer than I had never seen before. It was staring me right in the face, but I had never noticed it. How you ask, did I lose my memory in my previous life? No..... NO YOU DIDNT! People's image of their sould or 'essence' is that of a human with the limitation of the human abilities. Our minds when we are born are so undeveloped that we can't remember our birth. We are trapped in this body, and this body hinders our senses to remember anything.

I believe this to be the truth. I did not read it, but was blessed with it.

[OlderWaterBrother]

I think the musical group Blood Sweat and Tears said it best when they sang;
I say there ain’t no Heaven
and I pray there ain’t no hell
but I’ll never know by living
only my dying will tell

The only problem with that is that it seems to be a one way street. Once you walk though that door you’re kind of stuck with what you get, Heaven or Hell or maybe you just cease exist. I think I’ll wait a while for the definitive answer to that question!

So the real Big Question is what to do with the life you have right now.

[liquidlight]

I find it interesting that you said:

... but your 'essence' isn't effected by anything physical In light of the fact that i used Ecstacy to make that 'leap of faith' and experience myself as the 'essense' of who i was, i would agree that having let go of form, .. of my body, ... the Ecstasy was no longer a factor affecting my conciousness for those moments. I had gone beyond it. And in the preceding days and also right before and in that moment i 'knew' that nothing physical could harm 'ME'. Yes, physical things could harm my body, but couldn't harm me, because i had been identifying with my spirit.

How you ask, did I lose my memory in my previous life? No..... NO YOU DIDNT! Did i ask that? :) Your right i didn't lose memory of my previous life after the experience. It was all there just as it was before.
It's got me thinking though ... What is memory and where does memory reside? In the body or conciousness? I have read that the body has it's own separate intelligence that it uses to function and breath ect ... it's own autonomic intelligence. Some bodyworkers would say that memories are stored in our body tissues and that deep work releases deep memories.
- While i was in that state ... memories were not a factor, ..i didn't have any. But on 'coming down' or out of that state i regained awareness of my body, personality, memory and ego. So is memory connected to the body or ego somehow?

[xexon]

First off, ex.... I don't understand your post.

Now, liquidlight. Just yesterday, I believe I was enlightened and blessed with and answer than I had never seen before. It was staring me right in the face, but I had never noticed it. How you ask, did I lose my memory in my previous life? No..... NO YOU DIDNT! People's image of their sould or 'essence' is that of a human with the limitation of the human abilities. Our minds when we are born are so undeveloped that we can't remember our birth. We are trapped in this body, and this body hinders our senses to remember anything.

I believe this to be the truth. I did not read it, but was blessed with it.


Thats not a bad observation for one so young, but careful of thinking yourself enlightened. Ego will gladly take you by the hand as easily as a glimpse of the truth will. Its going to be a while before you can tell them apart.

Your soul wears bodies just like you wear a shirt. It keeps it on until it wears out and then aqquires another to continue with. Your soul is not from this world, so it is not subject to any of the physical laws here like your body is.

The mind is your onboard computer for the body. It takes care of bodily functions and processes information from the senses. The ego, your personal idea of who you think you are, is the interface between your inner world and the outside. In most people, they cannot see any further than the ego. That identity makes people selfish because of the inability to see beyond it.

The ego is a wonderful tool, but its also the main cause of trouble. It likes stimulation and interaction with the world. It likes it so much, it pushes your true nature (the soul) away from the control panel and hogs it all for itself.

Reincarnation happens because of this addiction to sensation. When you can regain your senses from the total control that the ego has over it, the ego knows the jig is up and will then sit in the co-pilot's seat where it belongs.

At that point, you can start cleaning up the mess it's made of your world. When you've paid off those karmic debts, the door you entered this world swings open, you're free to go. The cycle is broken.



x

[liquidlight]

but careful of thinking yourself enlightened. Ego will gladly take you by the hand as easily as a glimpse of the truth will. Its going to be a while before you can tell them apart
... and ain't that the truth! I have only in the last few months began learning mutch more about ego despite being aware of it for years. It's just that after doing some good reading about it i am now mutch more aware of it than i was before. I am noticing that i am mutch more often being aware of my thoughts as they arise and questioning them (sometimes laughing at them). But in any case ego seems to be ever present and always undermining the truth.
I have thought of the ego as a necessary 'interface' before ... we need it to experience duality but like xexon says,... it thinks it's the first pilot and is hogging the controls. The real first pilot shakes his head is gently and lovingly whispering in the guy's ear trying to talk him out of this madness so he'll get back in the second pilot assistants seat and stick to the contract of employment.
So i think ego is there, as a fact of creation and duality to serve but not take over. It surely doesn't want to die and fears annihilation but will do so under the right circumstances. Eventually that 2nd pilot, after a few near dear death rolls and plummets (scaring everyone onboard to hell i might add) will realise he's not the clever guy he thought he was and realise what a genius the 1st pilot is and hand back the controls.

Heh, i did enjoy that analogy :)

[neodude1212]

Thats not a bad observation for one so young, but careful of thinking yourself enlightened. Ego will gladly take you by the hand as easily as a glimpse of the truth will. Its going to be a while before you can tell them apart.

Your soul wears bodies just like you wear a shirt. It keeps it on until it wears out and then aqquires another to continue with. Your soul is not from this world, so it is not subject to any of the physical laws here like your body is.

The mind is your onboard computer for the body. It takes care of bodily functions and processes information from the senses. The ego, your personal idea of who you think you are, is the interface between your inner world and the outside. In most people, they cannot see any further than the ego. That identity makes people selfish because of the inability to see beyond it.

The ego is a wonderful tool, but its also the main cause of trouble. It likes stimulation and interaction with the world. It likes it so much, it pushes your true nature (the soul) away from the control panel and hogs it all for itself.

Reincarnation happens because of this addiction to sensation. When you can regain your senses from the total control that the ego has over it, the ego knows the jig is up and will then sit in the co-pilot's seat where it belongs.

At that point, you can start cleaning up the mess it's made of your world. When you've paid off those karmic debts, the door you entered this world swings open, you're free to go. The cycle is broken.



xI've got a question. Once that door is open, do you necessarily HAVE to go. Or do some people choose to stay behind for the sake of everyone else?
Are those the enlightened people throughout the ages that have helped everyone else out so much?

[Exposed]

I find it interesting that you said:

In light of the fact that i used Ecstacy to make that 'leap of faith' and experience myself as the 'essense' of who i was, i would agree that having let go of form, .. of my body, ... the Ecstasy was no longer a factor affecting my conciousness for those moments. I had gone beyond it. And in the preceding days and also right before and in that moment i 'knew' that nothing physical could harm 'ME'. Yes, physical things could harm my body, but couldn't harm me, because i had been identifying with my spirit.

Did i ask that? :) Your right i didn't lose memory of my previous life after the experience. It was all there just as it was before.
It's got me thinking though ... What is memory and where does memory reside? In the body or conciousness? I have read that the body has it's own separate intelligence that it uses to function and breath ect ... it's own autonomic intelligence. Some bodyworkers would say that memories are stored in our body tissues and that deep work releases deep memories.
- While i was in that state ... memories were not a factor, ..i didn't have any. But on 'coming down' or out of that state i regained awareness of my body, personality, memory and ego. So is memory connected to the body or ego somehow?Well, science says that memory is stored in your brain. Specific areas are designed for memory. In my opinion, I don't think your spirit thinks of time as existing. I think on Earth we make up 'time'. So our souls are always living in present and thinking in present and the need for memory ceases.

[xexon]

I've got a question. Once that door is open, do you necessarily HAVE to go. Or do some people choose to stay behind for the sake of everyone else?
Are those the enlightened people throughout the ages that have helped everyone else out so much?


No, you don't. But once your normal lifespan is spent, you have to reincarnate for a new body if you wish to continue. There are exceptions, but generally, this is the way of things.

Yes. The idea of the virgin birth is actually representative of such people. They return by their own choice rather than being obligated by karmic debt.


x

[Exposed]

I understand completely what you are saying xenon. I read the post over and realized it was quite conceited. Sorry, but at the time when I came to the realization, I was just overwhelmed by the possibility that I found one answer to the infinite number of questions I have on life. Also, I see that you have quite a bit of faith in karma and many of its apects. Why is this?

[xexon]

The Hindus are the closest to the mechanics of how things actually work down here. Karma is a centerpiece of their system. As is reincarnation.

I follow no religion, but I use their points to make my own. If MY words appear conceited, its because they're from me rather than from a book. Many have difficulty with this because religion has convinced them that only in the distant past have there been people like me.

You're doing fine by asking the questions that you do.



x

[Exposed]

I totally agree with that. The same goes for me. I don't disregard any religion, nor do I believe in the full version of it. I guess it all depends on perspective. To each his own, eh?

I'll be posting some more questions tomorrow http://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif, I need rest for now.

[FreakerSoup]

The Hindus are the closest to the mechanics of how things actually work down here.

What makes you think that?

I follow no religion, but I use their points to make my own.
It seems to me that you just have your own religion. It's not organized, but you believe you hold the truth in your hand just as much as pat robertson does.


If MY words appear conceited, its because they're from me rather than from a book. Many have difficulty with this because religion has convinced them that only in the distant past have there been people like me.
People like you are all over the place, I think. People that present whimsical gibberish as truth with enough confidence to make people believe you know what you are talking about. No offense or anything, but I don't think that there is any reason to believe what you do.




My answer to the initial question:
You die. Your body decomposes, you lose consciousness, you lose unconsciousness, you no longer have anything. I think it is most likely that whatever energy you have within you simply diffuses to your environment as time goes by. I don't think your consciousness, your soul, your "essence," or whatever else you want to call it, exists after you die.

I am willing to accept the possibility that I am wrong, that reincarnation happens, that heaven exists, or something like that. I am more willing to think that there is some print we may leave behind, in some type of medium that we cannot sense, but that is still merely speculation.

[FreakerSoup]

Ooh, also...
Xenon. What makes you think books aren't conceited?

[xexon]

I don't want you to believe me. I want to to reach the point where you experience it for yourself.

Once you do, you'll understand the difficulty in trying to bring it to the outside world.

A book is only as good as the person who wrote it. But it's static, and cannot answer your questions.


x

[neodude1212]

What makes you think that?


It seems to me that you just have your own religion. It's not organized, but you believe you hold the truth in your hand just as much as pat robertson does.



People like you are all over the place, I think. People that present whimsical gibberish as truth with enough confidence to make people believe you know what you are talking about. No offense or anything, but I don't think that there is any reason to believe what you do.




My answer to the initial question:
You die. Your body decomposes, you lose consciousness, you lose unconsciousness, you no longer have anything. I think it is most likely that whatever energy you have within you simply diffuses to your environment as time goes by. I don't think your consciousness, your soul, your "essence," or whatever else you want to call it, exists after you die.

I am willing to accept the possibility that I am wrong, that reincarnation happens, that heaven exists, or something like that. I am more willing to think that there is some print we may leave behind, in some type of medium that we cannot sense, but that is still merely speculation.
wow when did you come out of the woodworks?

notice no one gives a fuck about convincing you out of your beliefs, but yet you feel the need to attack his.

isn't that just odd.

[Okiefreak]

My answer to the initial question:
You die. Your body decomposes, you lose consciousness, you lose unconsciousness, you no longer have anything. I think it is most likely that whatever energy you have within you simply diffuses to your environment as time goes by. I don't think your consciousness, your soul, your "essence," or whatever else you want to call it, exists after you die.

I am willing to accept the possibility that I am wrong, that reincarnation happens, that heaven exists, or something like that. I am more willing to think that there is some print we may leave behind, in some type of medium that we cannot sense, but that is still merely speculation.My sentiments exactly. I may be wrong, but those are my operating beliefs and expectations.

[FreakerSoup]

wow when did you come out of the woodworks?

notice no one gives a fuck about convincing you out of your beliefs, but yet you feel the need to attack his.

isn't that just odd.
I come when things interest me, and go when they don't.

But anyways, it's a discussion. It's not about who's right and who is wrong, it's about thinking about what is possible and finding what is true. Or most likely true. I do indeed think Xexon's ideas and confidence in them are a bit silly (sorry Xexon), and I do indeed find it a little conceited that he places himself on a sort of prophet's pedestal of "people like me."

What do you think, Neodude? You have said that you regard only god as true, and only god as possible. Does that mean that you don't accept the possibility of my view on death?

Would that perhaps explain your eagerness for a counter-attack?

[neodude1212]

Im not really eager about anything on this site anymore. I think anything is possible, but some things seem more possible than others. Studies of the physical makeup of the brain make the existence of the soul less possible, but more probable simply by the nature of the search. I think science is never really going to get down to the bottom of anything. nothing supernatural that is.

So when you say this,

People like you are all over the place, I think. People that present whimsical gibberish as truth with enough confidence to make people believe you know what you are talking about. No offense or anything, but I don't think that there is any reason to believe what you do.

and then go on to say this,

You die. Your body decomposes, you lose consciousness, you lose unconsciousness, you no longer have anything. I think it is most likely that whatever energy you have within you simply diffuses to your environment as time goes by. I don't think your consciousness, your soul, your "essence," or whatever else you want to call it, exists after you die.

makes me feel that you had absolutely no point to post other than to insult xexon. Then again im probably wrong.

But evaluating your two very different opinions on death, I dont see what the criteria is that makes something "whimsical gibberish".

If his opinion is whimsical gibberish, then so is yours. Then so is all of ours.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

I don't want you to believe me. I want to to reach the point where you experience it for yourself.

Once you do, you'll understand the difficulty in trying to bring it to the outside world.

A book is only as good as the person who wrote it. But it's static, and cannot answer your questions.


x

This is why those who have chosen to come back and help this world, face the most difficult task of them all. It is a lifelong uphill battle.

This is why I've learned to help others in subtle ways, pushing them to discover truth themselves, and to help develop their personal qualities.

When you try to spread the truth headon, you'll meet opposition.

[xexon]

Insult me? None of you have the ability.

Emotion is what clouds critical thinking. If you're going to chase after the divine, it will poison the journey.


x

[FreakerSoup]

I don't want you to believe me. I want to to reach the point where you experience it for yourself.

Once you do, you'll understand the difficulty in trying to bring it to the outside world.

Do you mind if I ask what experiences led you to this point of view? What gives you this ultimate understanding of the nature of life, reality, and the souls of human beings?

A book is only as good as the person who wrote it. But it's static, and cannot answer your questions.
Oh, I agree. But you seemed to be saying before that your words may seem conceited because they aren't from a book, as if books are not conceited.

[FreakerSoup]

I think science is never really going to get down to the bottom of anything. nothing supernatural that is.
Science regularly gets to the bottom of things, it's just that new channels and segues keep popping up from the bottom. Maybe science will never find anything about the supernatural. But what if...and this is purely a what if...what if none of those things that are described as "supernatural" actually exist, and every single person professing that experience was mistaken, hallucinating, or otherwise just wrong? If people still claim to have those experiences (and I assure you they would), then it would be impossible to get to the bottom of it, since the only reason for having any belief about it other than a question or a no would be wrong.



makes me feel that you had absolutely no point to post other than to insult xexon. Then again im probably wrong.

But evaluating your two very different opinions on death, I dont see what the criteria is that makes something "whimsical gibberish".

If his opinion is whimsical gibberish, then so is yours. Then so is all of ours.
Insulting Xexon was not my intent. I think it is whimsical gibberish because it is outlandish, because it is unlikely (from a pure probability standpoint), and because it is presented as being from a position of absolute knowledge. As if divine knowledge was handed down. There is no question, no reservation, just "this is the way it is."

I am willing to accept that I do not know for sure. But I haven't seen any evidence to say that the supernatural is real.

Also, the human mind explains a LOT of what one might use as evidence. It is so incredibly complex it's amazing. Did you know that if you apply an electric impulse to a certain part of your brain you can stimulate an out-of-body-experience?

[xexon]

I can only describe it as having additional senses. I've watched it grow and unfold over a period of decades. My own path was one of yoga, hence my close identifcation with it in the way I present things.

What I talk about is what I see. Life has become a waking meditation. I still see like you do, but I no longer identify with it as reality. Life for me is still the same, but with a profound abilty to percieve the depths rather than just the surface.

It requires no concentration on my behalf. Its just there. When someone asks me a question, the answer just appears. I spend more time trying to construct it into sentences than I do analyzing it. It often comes out in torrents, so I have to edit it down into something that makes sense to someone reading it.

Much of this is inline with eastern thought, and I'm certainly more understood by them than by people of the Judeo/Christian traditions.

I don't see duality except when I use the old me to communicate with. Nice place to visit, but I don't live there anymore.


x

[neodude1212]

But what if...and this is purely a what if...what if none of those things that are described as "supernatural" actually exist, and every single person professing that experience was mistaken, hallucinating, or otherwise just wrong?
and what if they do exist.




Insulting Xexon was not my intent. I think it is whimsical gibberish because it is outlandish, because it is unlikely (from a pure probability standpoint), and because it is presented as being from a position of absolute knowledge. As if divine knowledge was handed down. There is no question, no reservation, just "this is the way it is."
im still having trouble discerning what the average atheist considers "likely". This is death we are talking about. There is no way to know. So how can something be probable.



Did you know that if you apply an electric impulse to a certain part of your brain you can stimulate an out-of-body-experience?
So why does this happen, and what does it prove? Does the electricity stimulate the OOBE itself, or just the beginning step in some sort of process?

[Exposed]

First off, I'd like to welcome you to the discussion FreakerSoup.

Second, where do your alls perspective lie on the beginning and end? Do you believe time exists or is it merely a counting system?

[Okiefreak]

Science regularly gets to the bottom of things, it's just that new channels and segues keep popping up from the bottom. Maybe science will never find anything about the supernatural. But what if...and this is purely a what if...what if none of those things that are described as "supernatural" actually exist, and every single person professing that experience was mistaken, hallucinating, or otherwise just wrong? If people still claim to have those experiences (and I assure you they would), then it would be impossible to get to the bottom of it, since the only reason for having any belief about it other than a question or a no would be wrong.
Science regularly gets to the bottom of some useful things, but some really basic ones like the origin of life, the nature of consciousness, and the origin of the universe continue to elude us. These are things that have been central to religious explanations of reality. If you say science will get to the bottom of these things, too, because it always comes through, you are not talking science anymore--you're talking faith. When I read some of the leading atheists talking matter-of-factly about how there's nothing very mysterious about these things--life began when a small supply of nucleotides somehow came together in the waters of early earth; consciousness is just neurons firing; most of the universe consists of dark matter that no one has ever seen or measured; all matter, energy, time, and space originated from loops resonating in ten dimensions; fine tuning of the universe isn't so impressive because there might be other universes we don't know about that are really messed up, etc.-- I wonder if scientism isn't just another set of myths in which quarks, dark matter and superstring fill the role once occupied by ghosts, demons and deities. Because there's no empirical proof for any of this.

[neodude1212]

amen brother okie.


lol.

[FreakerSoup]

and what if they do exist.
Then I think that science will eventually be able to account for them. But do you see my point? If they aren't real, then the best science can do is to show that certain cases were false, that such experiences can be produced just by the brain, etc.


im still having trouble discerning what the average atheist considers "likely". This is death we are talking about. There is no way to know. So how can something be probable.
Here's how I see it: Start from a point of no knowledge. You don't have a belief, opinion, or even a thought about what happens after you die. What's the best way to find out?

People have many different thoughts on death, so if you are listening for who can give the most complete explanation, you will be very confused. You will be relying on other people's unsubstantiated beliefs, and you will unable to give different theories more credence than another. On the other hand, if you decide to analyze evidence logically and reasonably, some ways are more likely than others. I.E. if something is really out there and has no evidence, it more like just someone's outlandish idea. The most likely solution is the one that isn't supernatural.

So why does this happen, and what does it prove? Does the electricity stimulate the OOBE itself, or just the beginning step in some sort of process?
Well it appears that the OOBE is an event involved with death. It may not come into play in sudden death, but it is either the soul deciding to leave a dying body or the brain shutting down. In ancient egypt, a Pharaoh could not be Pharaoh until they had this mystical experience. The priests locked him in a coffin for a precise amount of time, and when they let him out he would have had an OOBE. Could you really screw with a soul like that?

Second, where do your alls perspective lie on the beginning and end? Do you believe time exists or is it merely a counting system?
Both. Time exists in the same way length exists. It's a manmade system, but it measure something tangible. I don't think there was a time when time didn't exist. It's still there, even if there's nothing to measure it by. What do you mean with the first question?

Okiefreak - I agree, atheists and scientists have to be careful to avoid stepping in the same holes. There are some thing we can never be completely sure of, because they happened long ago and/or aren't a repeating or ongoing process. But if this supernatural world exists, I think we will eventually have the tools and the means with which to detect it and know that it is there.

[johnnyl108]

dude their is not only 1 for shure ansewr everyone has diffrent views. i mean in dont know for shure their isnt anyone that knows execpt god and goddess. but you can belive what you choose and the only way to do so is reaserch spirituality,metaphysics and religion. and yes your body is just a shell your true self is formless shapeless. we are all bondless nothingness and everythng is connested. we have three parts the mind,the body, and the soul. your true self is your soul and the rest are all just manifestations of it. i dont stick to one confining belief system i am more metaphysical then anything i dont want to push any belifes on anyone everyone has their own ansewr i just pray u find a true one thats nt doggma. peace and love

[Bl4ck3n3D]

Freaker Soup, I remember watching the show that scienfitically induced an OOBE, and let me tell you, it is NOTHING like a real OOBE.

[neodude1212]

Then I think that science will eventually be able to account for them. But do you see my point? If they aren't real, then the best science can do is to show that certain cases were false, that such experiences can be produced just by the brain, etc.
that's quite a lot of faith in science you have their.



. The most likely solution is the one that isn't supernatural.
I just dont agree with this. I would say that each solution would have to be just as likely as the next, in the case of no evidence. What evidence do you have that when you die that is it?


Well it appears that the OOBE is an event involved with death. It may not come into play in sudden death, but it is either the soul deciding to leave a dying body or the brain shutting down. In ancient egypt, a Pharaoh could not be Pharaoh until they had this mystical experience. The priests locked him in a coffin for a precise amount of time, and when they let him out he would have had an OOBE. Could you really screw with a soul like that?

I dont see why not.

[FreakerSoup]

that's quite a lot of faith in science you have their.
http://www.sworddragon.com/passions/images/montoya2.jpg
You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

It's not faith to say I think this will probably happen, it's faith to say this will happen, I'm right you're wrong, etc. Not that I don't have faith in science. More logic and reason, I think, but they're all pretty close. Here's why!

Logic and reason (and science) have proven themselves to be reliable, and continuously repeat that proof. Using logic and reason, you have more knowledge of the world than you would otherwise. So it's not blind faith, it's EVIDENCE...and then a little bit o' faith. E.G. the sun has not failed to come up every twenty four hours or so for my entire life. I have faith that it'll come up tomorrow. This is a much safer, more logical, rational, and sound type of faith than saying that the human population started when aliens bred with monkeys. One is based on logic and reason, the other on an idea someone just came up with. Ya know?

Also, if I say to you "Prove that the supernatural exists." And you take it upon yourself to do that, how do you do it? You don't compile ghost stories, you look for solid objective evidence. If it were to be shown that what we consider to be supernatural does indeed exist, I think science would then be able to study it. Simple as that.



I just dont agree with this. I would say that each solution would have to be just as likely as the next, in the case of no evidence. What evidence do you have that when you die that is it? I think that is why you and many others get caught up in supernatural explanations for natural occurrences. You might say absence of proof is not proof of absence, which is true. But isn't absence of evidence evidence of absence? If you search every centimeter of a forest for bear poop, tracks, etc and don't find any, it doesn't mean there are no bears in those woods. You can't prove a universal negative. But it means that it is very unlikely that there is a bear in that forest.

But do you get the rest of my point on that?

I dont see why not.
You're saying your soul is something immortal, lives forever, uses a human body. Not bound by physical laws. Why would your soul or consciousness be forced out of a body just because your brain isn't getting enough oxygen? You aren't dead, so why would that happen? And so reliably that they timed it and did it to pharaohs?

Another interesting (to me) thought about the soul: What happens to people born with mental retardation, barely able to function? Is their soul similarly crippled, or just trapped in a non-working body? What about when a person becomes a vegetable, in a coma, no notable brain activity. Is their soul still in there? Or does it only leave when the brain cells die?

[xexon]

People with disabilities are bound by karma just like everyone else. Their present lives are a result of it.

You might ask why?

The first reason is their own karmic debt. Its possible to burn through it faster when one accepts handicaps in life, just like you use handicaps in gameplay, it helps things to balance.

The second reason is in the teaching of lessons to others. Of compassion, and charity. Noble qualities. The multitude of suffering around the world are a blend of these two elements, but each participant has different reasons for taking it on in life.



x

[Okiefreak]

http://www.sworddragon.com/passions/images/montoya2.jpg

I think that is why you and many others get caught up in supernatural explanations for natural occurrences. You might say absence of proof is not proof of absence, which is true. But isn't absence of evidence evidence of absence? If you search every centimeter of a forest for bear poop, tracks, etc and don't find any, it doesn't mean there are no bears in those woods. You can't prove a universal negative. But it means that it is very unlikely that there is a bear in that forest.

But do you get the rest of my point on that?

"The kingdom of Heaven is spread out everywhere upon the earth and you do not see it." Jesus, Gospel of Thomas
Suppose you are looking for bear shit and find yourself in a large deep pile of smelly brown goop, but you have no instruments to measure it, so you can't prove for sure that it's bear doo doo instead of beaver doo doo or just smelley mud. Do you say, I have no proof there are any bears in these woods, because it hasn't been scientifically determined? Or do you run like hell?

Descartes is famous for the saying "I think, therefore I am." It's open to two different interpretations. The first, which may well be what he had in mind, is strictly logical:The process of thinking entails a thinker. The second, a position taken later by Sartre, which conflates thought with consciousness, is that awareness of our own subjective inner self is the most immediately self-evident truth we know. And yet I had a psych professor who denied there was such a thing as consciousness. He was of the behaviorist (rat psychology) school which was once quite the rage as being the height of scientific rigor for taking the position "If you can't measure it, it doesn't exist" and since the inner lives of rats and people are fuzzy, messy and subjective they don't exist. I think he provided a classic illustration of the behaviorist principle of conditioning--learned incapacity aquired through his professional training. Jesus (Gospel of Thomas) had a point.

[neodude1212]

I've got a few questions for some ppl.

-xexon-

are souls gender specific? or do people cycle through the two sexes when they reincarnate? and why?

-freakersoup and okie-

how would an asexually reproducing organism ever evolve, according to natural selection?

[tikoo]

could be that the dying moment for you lasts forever . there-in , conciousness takes all the time in the universe as it goes to nothingness . go ahead and reincarnate if that's what you want to do with your ozo time . make a good vibe . sing your last beautiful song . once you die , it's the song we will hear .

[FreakerSoup]

"The kingdom of Heaven is spread out everywhere upon the earth and you do not see it." Jesus, Gospel of Thomas
Suppose you are looking for bear shit and find yourself in a large deep pile of smelly brown goop, but you have no instruments to measure it, so you can't prove for sure that it's bear doo doo instead of beaver doo doo or just smelley mud. Do you say, I have no proof there are any bears in these woods, because it hasn't been scientifically determined? Or do you run like hell?

Descartes is famous for the saying "I think, therefore I am." It's open to two different interpretations. The first, which may well be what he had in mind, is strictly logical:The process of thinking entails a thinker. The second, a position taken later by Sartre, which conflates thought with consciousness, is that awareness of our own subjective inner self is the most immediately self-evident truth we know. And yet I had a psych professor who denied there was such a thing as consciousness. He was of the behaviorist (rat psychology) school which was once quite the rage as being the height of scientific rigor for taking the position "If you can't measure it, it doesn't exist" and since the inner lives of rats and people are fuzzy, messy and subjective they don't exist. I think he provided a classic illustration of the behaviorist principle of conditioning--learned incapacity aquired through his professional training. Jesus (Gospel of Thomas) had a point.

If you're standing in a big pile of poo, you would say "what makes such big poo?" and try to find out. If it turns out to be a super-bear, so be it. But if there is poo, you will know that there is poo.

As for this professor, it sounds like he didn't actually think through this particular opinion. Consciousness is just a word for a particular phenomenon, a sort of realization of self. Whether you believe it is the result of something neurological or spiritual, it seems a bit ridiculous to deny that people have this.


Neodude - Sexual reproduction is only one small contributor to evolution. Most changes in genetic code come from mutation. If you take a single e. Coli cell and plate it so you end up with 5 million identical ones, you can then put it under a UV light for a minute or two and get all sorts of cool mutations! This could mean certain metabolism, certain resistance, certain survivability in certain environments, etc.

[xexon]

I've got a few questions for some ppl.

-xexon-

are souls gender specific? or do people cycle through the two sexes when they reincarnate? and why?

-freakersoup and okie-

how would an asexually reproducing organism ever evolve, according to natural selection?



Souls don't have gender. Its something they assume upon incarnation just as an actor assumes a role.

There is no distinction other than what karma sets up for you to grow by. You'll go through many roles while here. Rich. Poor. Male. Female.
Child or elder. It all makes you a well rounded soul.


x

[liquidlight]

Here's a definition of karma i read the other day:

"Also, it was then I knew that if time is NOW, and everything is happening in the now, karma is simply guilt. It was then I decided that karma doesn't exist, as guilt shouldn't/doesn't exist because we're all the perfect beings in the NOW because time doesn't exist. We are at once at the beginning and the end, without any effort on our part. You see? If we are One, we are totally free, sinless and without karma. Forget the guilt!."

.... i can't help agree with the guy in light of my own experience, ie. Realising you are the actor,... meaning the percieved karma is within the role you were caught in playing and a product of judgement and guilt.

[xexon]

There is no guilt in karma. No emotion at all.

It's cold and clinical and precise. Just like the IRS tries to be.

Sin and guilt are products of religious belief, and thats where they need to stay.



x

[liquidlight]

Sin and guilt are products of religious belief, and thats where they need to stay
Well i'd agree with that, but could you explain your own definition of karma?

[Okiefreak]

I've got a few questions for some ppl.

-xexon-

are souls gender specific? or do people cycle through the two sexes when they reincarnate? and why?

-freakersoup and okie-

how would an asexually reproducing organism ever evolve, according to natural selection?Sex was one of the greatest all-time inventions in evolution. Before that, life was more stable but dull. Bacteria and amoebae reproduced by cell division, with changes resulting from genetic mutations. Sex, like other evolutionary milestones, developed because it gave definite survival advantages to organisms that used it: pooling of advantageous mutations (and disadvantageous ones, too, so that the offspring would be really messed up and eliminated from the gene pool); combining genetic material in novel ways, to increase chances of adaptation to different environments; masking of disadvantageous recessive genes by advantageous dominant ones, etc. For a good article on the subject, see
http://www.dorak.info/evolution/sreprod.html (http://www.dorak.info/evolution/sreprod.html)

[xexon]

Karma is just the way the score is kept here. An accounting of your life.

Your actions, both positive and negative, wind up on a kind of report card. Your judgement day is at the end of each life. You're graded by your higher self on how well you've done.

There are 3 types of karma. The first is instant karma. I slap you, you slap me back. The account is balanced right then. The second type has a slight delay to it. You break a dish, then "wait till you father gets home." Payment is made, the account balances once again.

The third type is the biggy. Karma that accumulates over the many lifetimes. It is a huge burden with a dragging effect on your ability to have a happy life. Its also the reason why bad things sometimes happen to good people. Old debts.

This is the normal way things operate, but there is an old saying in the east that goes "mysterious are the ways of karma".

Because life can be complex, the karma associated with it can also be complex. Most people will pay off their debts in the regular way, however, for some people, karma can be payed off quicker by taking a handicap in life.

For a spiritual seeker fortunate enough to meet a spiritual master, karmic debt can be reduced or even forgiven because you now have a kind of tutor in your life which will help you navigate it.



x

[neodude1212]

Neodude - Sexual reproduction is only one small contributor to evolution. Most changes in genetic code come from mutation. If you take a single e. Coli cell and plate it so you end up with 5 million identical ones, you can then put it under a UV light for a minute or two and get all sorts of cool mutations! This could mean certain metabolism, certain resistance, certain survivability in certain environments, etc.
Well, it seems to me that such drastic and instantaneous mutations would pretty much destroy them on the spot. Also, even if they were to survive wouldn't their genetic CODE be pretty fucked up, for lack of a better term. I dont see how things subjected to this would be able to reproduce.

This is mutation coming from an external enviornment. I dont think any organism would benefit in the long run, and would be able to fare better than a control group ( organisms not exposed to radiation) and evolve based on the principals of natural selection.

We did a lab on this in the first quarter. 4 groups of marigold seeds were exposed to different levels of gamma radiation (50k, 150k, 500k, 4mil), and then of course we had our control group. What we saw is that when you increase the amount of radiation, what happens is that the germination time for the seeds go way down. Now, this would obviously be a huge advantage concerning survival and reproduction, if it wasn't for the fact that after germination the seeds had little to no growth and pretty much just bought the farm.

I dont imagine one would see drastically different results for unicellular organisms.

[neodude1212]

Sex was one of the greatest all-time inventions in evolution. Before that, life was more stable but dull. Bacteria and amoebae reproduced by cell division, with changes resulting from genetic mutations. Sex, like other evolutionary milestones, developed because it gave definite survival advantages to organisms that used it: pooling of advantageous mutations (and disadvantageous ones, too, so that the offspring would be really messed up and eliminated from the gene pool); combining genetic material in novel ways, to increase chances of adaptation to different environments; masking of disadvantageous recessive genes by advantageous dominant ones, etc. For a good article on the subject, see


http://www.dorak.info/evolution/sreprod.html (http://www.dorak.info/evolution/sreprod.html)
hmm..

i understand the implications of crossing - over, and random assortment.

But I think what my question really goes back to is abiogenesis. In the atheist side of my brain, i've always imagined that however the first organism came to be, it would have to be understandably simply. Simple, but however it got the complex code of DNA and life in general we will save for a nother day. but, i would also assume that it would reproduce asexually. Asexuall organisms must only be able to produce exact carbon copies of themselves, so evolution would never take place.

It seems like the only plausible answers are if A) freakersoup's theory of severe changes in the environment, but i dont find that plausible, or B) these first organisms would have had to come equipped with sex pili.

but even if they had sex pili, which would be very odd if they were created by accident, there would still had to have been more than one organism instantaneously created by accident, and these (at least) two organims would have be have variations in their genetic code.

or maybe i dont get it. but that is my understanding of it.

[Exposed]

So do we all agree that time is non-existant?

Also, what is your alls opinions on ghosts we see in this world? Since people claim to see "people", I think it has to do with a crossing in dimensions... What do you all think?

[xexon]

http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=268882


x

[Okiefreak]

Well, it seems to me that such drastic and instantaneous mutations would pretty much destroy them on the spot. Also, even if they were to survive wouldn't their genetic CODE be pretty fucked up, for lack of a better term. I dont see how things subjected to this would be able to reproduce.

This is mutation coming from an external enviornment. I dont think any organism would benefit in the long run, and would be able to fare better than a control group ( organisms not exposed to radiation) and evolve based on the principals of natural selection.

We did a lab on this in the first quarter. 4 groups of marigold seeds were exposed to different levels of gamma radiation (50k, 150k, 500k, 4mil), and then of course we had our control group. What we saw is that when you increase the amount of radiation, what happens is that the germination time for the seeds go way down. Now, this would obviously be a huge advantage concerning survival and reproduction, if it wasn't for the fact that after germination the seeds had little to no growth and pretty much just bought the farm.

I dont imagine one would see drastically different results for unicellular organisms.Most mutations are harmful or neutral, but some are helpful in giving adaptive advantages, and those are the ones that are selected. Mutations come about for a variety of reasons, radiation being only one of them.

[Okiefreak]

hmm..

i understand the implications of crossing - over, and random assortment.

But I think what my question really goes back to is abiogenesis. In the atheist side of my brain, i've always imagined that however the first organism came to be, it would have to be understandably simply. Simple, but however it got the complex code of DNA and life in general we will save for a nother day. but, i would also assume that it would reproduce asexually. Asexuall organisms must only be able to produce exact carbon copies of themselves, so evolution would never take place.

It seems like the only plausible answers are if A) freakersoup's theory of severe changes in the environment, but i dont find that plausible, or B) these first organisms would have had to come equipped with sex pili.

but even if they had sex pili, which would be very odd if they were created by accident, there would still had to have been more than one organism instantaneously created by accident, and these (at least) two organims would have be have variations in their genetic code.

or maybe i dont get it. but that is my understanding of it.I think I'm with Freaker on the mutations and severe changes in the environment. You're correct that asexual organisms produce exact copies of themselves. The evolution that took place would result from mutation, and would be relativley slow. Sex speeded things up considerably. But there were other mechanisms at work besides natural selection. Remeber Margulis' serial endosymbiosis we talked about before in the evolution from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, genetic drift, geographic migration, etc. All of those can go on without sex.
The definitive book on the evolution of single-celled organisms (by no means easy reading) is Margulis and Sagan, Microcosms: Four Billion Years of Microbial Evolution.

[gib_0101]

When you answer, I want you to think about how your physical body is not you.Well, then I can't answer because I believe we are our bodies (well, certain parts of the brain). But I don't mean to say that we are nothing more than cold dead lifeless matter. I believe we are a mind and a soul, but I don't believe these things are separate things from the physical body. I believe physicality and mentality (or spirituality) are two sides of the same coin. I believe that when we die, our mind/soul will continue to parallel our body through the process of decay and reabsorption into nature (like the coin falling to pieces yet each piece still having two sides). I believe the experience will be so drastically different from what we are familiar with in terms of our ordinary everyday experiences with consciousness that it will not be describable in terms of anything we are familiar with (like memories, thoughts, feelings, sensations, etc.). It will be totally new and unique experiences. Think about how altered our minds can get by a simple alteration in chemistry (i.e. when we take drugs). Now think about how altered it will get when the brain (and body) go through the process of decay? I think this process ends with the disolving of "ego" or "self" and we re-experience our one-ness with nature (or the universe), just as all the material components of our bodies disolve and become one with nature again (from dust to dust). In effect, there is no more "I" or "you", there is no more individual that experiences him/herself as distinct from the world.
Another thing to focus on when you answer is that, know you have no previous memory of any life, so how could we continue? Were we just born and we are all in a state of mind that we think we have a 'soul'. Are we not just a working body?Well, it's like I said - our experiences change so drastically that we would not experience anything like "memory" - we would have a whole new set of unimaginable experience. It might have been the same way before our birth. It might have been that as the sperm and egg came together to form a zygot, and then a fetus, and then a baby, and so on, the original experience was nothing like memories, thoughts, emotions, sensations, etc., but as we developped into infant human beings, whatever experiences we were having original changed and morphed until they became memories, thoughts, emotions, sensations, etc.

Also, I'm not sure if there could be any meaningful sense in which this could be construed as "reincarnation", but I do believe that our conscious experiences never end. It's just that we come from, and go to (after we die), a mind-state of one-ness with nature or the universe, in which case, there is no "self" per se, so it's hard to trace a line of continuation between a previous self and current self, but at the same time, the self you are now never really began from nothing (a non-conscious state) and won't ever go into nothing.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

So do we all agree that time is non-existant?

Also, what is your alls opinions on ghosts we see in this world? Since people claim to see "people", I think it has to do with a crossing in dimensions... What do you all think?

Pretty much. Ghosts are just shadows of those in the 4th dimension, just like we in the 3rd cast a 2d shadow, they cast a 3d shadow.

[FreakerSoup]

Well, it seems to me that such drastic and instantaneous mutations would pretty much destroy them on the spot. Also, even if they were to survive wouldn't their genetic CODE be pretty fucked up, for lack of a better term. I dont see how things subjected to this would be able to reproduce.

This is mutation coming from an external enviornment. I dont think any organism would benefit in the long run, and would be able to fare better than a control group ( organisms not exposed to radiation) and evolve based on the principals of natural selection.

We did a lab on this in the first quarter. 4 groups of marigold seeds were exposed to different levels of gamma radiation (50k, 150k, 500k, 4mil), and then of course we had our control group. What we saw is that when you increase the amount of radiation, what happens is that the germination time for the seeds go way down. Now, this would obviously be a huge advantage concerning survival and reproduction, if it wasn't for the fact that after germination the seeds had little to no growth and pretty much just bought the farm.

I dont imagine one would see drastically different results for unicellular organisms.
Well first, you are correct. As Okie said, most mutations are harmful, so most of the e. coli effected would die, or at least be less hardy. But you have to remember, when you use bacteria, you can work with huge numbers. So even if 99.9% of them die, you'll have plenty of interesting and non-lethal mutations left. Mutations that change a cell need not be drastic. X-rays just insert little dimers of Thymine, but they can give you cancer without much trouble. Little mutations in the right place can change a lot.

The thing with seeds is that it is made up of a lot of cells, so if you expose it to radiation and half of them die, the plant won't do as well. With unicellular stuff like e. coli, you can kill all but one and still have one perfectly functioning organism. It's all about scale. Well, it's a lot about scale, at least. If you did it with 2 million marigold seeds, I imagine you would see some interesting results over at the edge of the bell curve.

[liquidlight]

Your actions, both positive and negative, wind up on a kind of report card. Your judgement day is at the end of each life
Well i think actions are seen as positive or negative only according to ego, and rather than 'judgement day' at the end of each life (the end of an ego state of judgement and separation), instead it is 'non-judgement day'.

This is my experience.

[xexon]

Actually, its the ego that is judged because most people are unable to see any other reality other than what they see through the ego. Its what gives you the sense of I, me, and mine.

Therefore its the doer of deeds in life, and deeds are what you're graded on.

The ego is like a child of the higher self, except this child is totally responsible for it's own actions.


x

[liquidlight]

Ok we're at an impasse here. I can't see how the ego can be judged by something that doesn't judge. By it's very nature, the ego IS irresponsible, so why expect anything otherwise?

[Exposed]

Yes, this goes right along with the previous post... Xenon, I always read how you post about your karmaic debt..... Who/what power exactly judges it in you thought?

[xexon]

That part of you elected to play the game when it came here. And it is a kind of game. The ego is just the gamepiece that moves around the board.

This whole world is nothing more than an entertainment park. The tallying part of this creation in built into this world. It doesn't take place outside of it. Karma, and the accounting process itself belongs to this world.


x

[xexon]

Ok we're at an impasse here. I can't see how the ego can be judged by something that doesn't judge. By it's very nature, the ego IS irresponsible, so why expect anything otherwise?

Maybe you're hanging up on the word "judge". Let's try adding machine.

Its an impartial thing, with no ability to do anything other than count. You get the bill at the end of your life. Karma then hands you a payment plan.


x

[BlackBillBlake]

This whole world is nothing more than an entertainment park.
x
It's a question of seeing for whose entertainment.........

[xexon]

Love, ultimately. But in this case, the individual soul.

You love the power of creation. You love all the things that you create. They are your children. You love them as you love yourself. Because they ARE you. Just an extension of yourself.

Thats what creation is. A trail of extension that leads all the way back to the singular creator most would call God. You're aware that in Hinduism this has been compared with a spider casting it's web and then taking it back inside itself. Same principal.



x

[liquidlight]

And i was begining to think the word 'love' was missing from this thread :)

[BlackBillBlake]

Love, ultimately. But in this case, the individual soul.

You love the power of creation. You love all the things that you create. They are your children. You love them as you love yourself. Because they ARE you. Just an extension of yourself.

Thats what creation is. A trail of extension that leads all the way back to the singular creator most would call God. You're aware that in Hinduism this has been compared with a spider casting it's web and then taking it back inside itself. Same principal.



x
It's God's Lila. His play. His amusement park.
I'm sure you know that the individual is not what we think it is....:)

[neodude1212]

I think I'm with Freaker on the mutations and severe changes in the environment. You're correct that asexual organisms produce exact copies of themselves. The evolution that took place would result from mutation, and would be relativley slow. Sex speeded things up considerably. But there were other mechanisms at work besides natural selection. Remeber Margulis' serial endosymbiosis we talked about before in the evolution from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, genetic drift, geographic migration, etc. All of those can go on without sex.
The definitive book on the evolution of single-celled organisms (by no means easy reading) is Margulis and Sagan, Microcosms: Four Billion Years of Microbial Evolution.Endosymbiosis seems extremely far-fetched, in my opinion. If mitochondrion and chloroplast are present only because they used to be their own organisms, then how did they come into the cell in the first place?
Phagocytosis? wouldn't either the host cell or the mitochondrion be destroyed? it doesn't make sense that they would immediately begin to function together.



Sometimes I think the alternatives to theism are even more hard to sell. Actually a lot of the times.

Just like the origins of the universe. Have you two heard of the dark energy term?
It basically states that if the big bang had caused to universe to expand a little faster, we would have a gazillion particles of dust that would speed into infinity and never produce a single star. If it had expanded too slowly, then gravity would have caused everything to clump back into itself.
To achieve a perfect balance between too fast and too slow, the force of expansion had to be absolutly perfect. the figure is

0.000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000001

there is no way all of this is an accident.
but the common rebuttal of there has been an infinite number of universes so it was bound to happen sooner or later makes no more sense than "who done it"
that's like saying not only is everything possible, but everything has actually happened.
not satisfying at all.

[xexon]

I'm just a leaf on the God tree.


x

[Okiefreak]

Endosymbiosis seems extremely far-fetched, in my opinion. If mitochondrion and chloroplast are present only because they used to be their own organisms, then how did they come into the cell in the first place?
Phagocytosis? wouldn't either the host cell or the mitochondrion be destroyed? it doesn't make sense that they would immediately begin to function together. I have the feeling we covered some of this ground before in a previous goaround:
I'm a bit rusty on this in particular concept, but the bacteria has a plasmid for DNA. It is a ring. It contains part of the bacteria genome. Some bacteria assume the DNA of other bacteria/virii they come in contact with. Sometimes bacteria exchange DNA, sort of like sexual reproduction. But different. I think the ones that assume the DNA of others do so in the situation of viral attack. In response, they release restriction enzymes, which cut the injected viral DNA into pieces. Sometimes those pieces become part of the plasmid, and the bacteria then has slightly different qualities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasmid

I believe the plasmid can be incorporated into the rest of the genome as well. I also found these on endosymbiosis that seems to get at the process.
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/E/Endosymbiosis.html
http://www.msu.edu/course/lbs/145/luckie/margulis.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Margulis
http://www.isepp.org/Pages/San%20Jose%2004-05/MargulisSaganSJ.html

In sum (San Jose Science, Technology & Society Lectures), above:
"Along these lines Margulis has argued that bacteria have the ability to exchange genes very easily and quickly, even between different species, by conjugation or through plasmids. For these reasons, the genetic material of bacteria is much more versatile than that of the eukaryote (see Primary nutritional groups for more on the extent of bacterial ability in terms of nutrition). Margulis claims that versatility is the process which enabled life to evolve so quickly, as bacteria were able to adapt to initial conditions of environment and to new changes by other bacteria."Do these answer your question? Of course, it's "just a theory" because nobody was around at the time observing the process, but it seems plausible to me (and apparently convinced a skeptical bunch of scientific peers).

You didn't ask the hard questions: how did living material form from non-living chemicals? how could a small number of nucleotides hook up in the waters of early earth to form self-replicating chains of nucleic acids? and where did the enzymes come from for this process? Freaker?

Recently, one of Britain's leading atheist scientists, Anthony Flew, converted to Deism because of his conclusion that it was impossible to provide a naturalistic theory of how the first reproducing organisms got their DNA.


Just like the origins of the universe. Have you two heard of the dark energy term?
It basically states that if the big bang had caused to universe to expand a little faster, we would have a gazillion particles of dust that would speed into infinity and never produce a single star. If it had expanded too slowly, then gravity would have caused everything to clump back into itself.
To achieve a perfect balance between too fast and too slow, the force of expansion had to be absolutly perfect. the figure is

0.000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000001

there is no way all of this is an accident.
but the common rebuttal of there has been an infinite number of universes so it was bound to happen sooner or later makes no more sense than "who done it"
that's like saying not only is everything possible, but everything has actually happened.
not satisfying at all.I've not only heard of this argument, but have brought it up more than once with Freaker. There are lots of other similar relationships that make our universe seem "too good to be true". The basic parameters of the universe seem remarkably "fine tuned" to produce recurring harmonic ratios and statistically improbable conditions. Dawkins says these arguments for "fine tuning" are the most powerful supporting theism, but his replies, as I understand them, are : (1) there may be naturalistic principles or forces at work we don't know about that account for this; in particular, the parameters may not be as independent as they seem;(2) other universes may be really messed up so that our coherent one is just one out of numerous coin flips; (3) the "weak anthropic argument": "of course the characteristics of our universe favor intelligent life, because if they didn't, we wouldn't be here having this discussion, but so what?" (my paraphrase). To me, the first of these arguments is the most plausible. There are lots of regularities we couldn't explain 200 years ago that we can explain now. The "other universes" argument is less persuasive. We don't know of a single universe other than ours, so invoking them to explain the unexplainable is convenient but lame. The weak anthropic argument is weak in more ways than one; it seems to be saying that something fantastically improbable must have "just happened", because otherwise it wouldn't--or am I missing something? As I see it, we're either here by design or incredilby good luck--in either case, pretty cool!

[neodude1212]

Some people believe in God with a capital G.
Some people believe in Chance with a capital C.

[neodude1212]

are you guys familiar with the argument of information is proof of God?

I'll post what I read and you can comment on what you think.


Messages are not energy even though they can be carried
by energy (like the sound of my voice.)

Messages are immaterial. Information is itself a unique
kind of entity. It can be stored and transmitted and copied
in many forms, but the meaning still stays the same.

Messages can be in English, French or Chinese.
Or Morse Code. Or mating calls of birds. Or the Internet.
Or radio or television. Or computer programs or architect
blueprints or stone carvings. Every cell in your body
contains a message encoded in DNA, representing a complete
plan for you.

OK, so what does this have to do with God?

It's very simple. Messages, languages, and coded
information ONLY come from a mind. A mind that
agrees on an alphabet and a meaning of words and
sentences. A mind that expresses both desire and
intent.

Whether I use the simplest possible explanation,
such as the one I'm giving you here, or if we analyze
language with advanced mathematics and engineering
communication theory, we can say this with total
confidence:

"Messages, languages and coded information never,
ever come from anything else besides a mind.
No one has ever produced a single example of a message
that did not come from a mind."

Nature can create fascinating patterns - snowflakes,
sand dunes, crystals, stalagmites and stalactites. Tornados
and turbulence and cloud formations.

But non-living things cannot create language. They
*cannot* create codes. Rocks cannot think and they
cannot talk. And they cannot create information.

It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose
accidentally from the "primordial soup," the early ocean which
produced enzymes and eventually RNA, DNA, and primitive cells.

But there is still a problem with this theory: It fails to
answer the question, 'Where did the information come from?'

DNA is not merely a molecule. Nor is it simply a "pattern."
Yes, it contains chemicals and proteins, but those chemicals
are arranged to form an intricate language, in the exact same way
that English and Chinese and HTML are languages.

DNA has a four-letter alphabet, and structures very similar
to words, sentences and paragraphs. With very precise
instructions and systems that check for errors and correct them.

To the person who says that life arose naturally,
you need only ask: "Where did the information come from?
Show me just ONE example of a language that didn't come
from a mind."

[FreakerSoup]

Doesn't that argument beg the question? In order for me to be able to say "this 'message' did not come from a mind," you have to be unable to say "God is responsible for that." I think that by definition it is an impossible task.

Who is to decide what constitutes a message or information? Some examples are straightforward (a letter, a sculpture), but some are less so, like DNA, which is really nothing like English or Chinese or HTML. If DNA is a language, what are all the introns for? It would be like static while you talk or scribbling behind a note. Does it really code for who you are? Only sort of. Me born in the US is quite different from the me that would result if I were born in the Philippines. So no, it is not a complete plan for you. AND, in order to make any sense of it, it must be interpreted. And isn't a message really just a pattern that can be interpreted?

Here is an inorganic message: pi. As Cliff Pickover says, you are immortal in pi, and can have anything you want. Explanation? Pi has infinite and patternless digits. If you were to plug these into a decoder to make pictures, movies, scenarios for the entire universe, or really any decoder you like, probability has it that somewhere within pi you are whatever you could possibly dream of. All you need to do is decode it and find the scenario.

Why does there need to be a producer of information? Especially if it is immaterial. Where is the point at which non-information becomes information?

[codeye]

interesting logic above by neodude

[codeye]

Why does there need to be a producer of information? Especially if it is immaterial. Where is the point at which non-information becomes information?somtimes i ask myself "where did this stuff came fromhttp://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/newsmilies/3/set12_b/stunned.gif(ie; the universe)?" there has to be some kind of a producer or creator.http://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/newsmilies/1/set1_b/1eye.gif and it seems like non-info becomes info when one applies order or direction to chaos.:sunny:

[FreakerSoup]

somtimes i ask myself "where did this stuff came fromhttp://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/newsmilies/3/set12_b/stunned.gif(ie; the universe)?" there has to be some kind of a producer or creator.http://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/newsmilies/1/set1_b/1eye.gif and it seems like non-info becomes info when one applies order or direction to chaos.:sunny:
Why does there have to be a creator? There doesn't seem to be a reason for that assertion, just a feeling that people tend to have.

Does it become info, or does it become a pattern? Chaos is only chaos if you look at it right. Or wrong. If you look differently, there is plenty of order in chaos.

[Exposed]

I have 2 views on how matter/all things exist.

1. There is very interenting information on parrallel universes, how they were created, etc. Modern physicists have proven that it it certainly possible.

2. Everything is. There was no creator, we are here, and it will continue for all eternity.

....or maybe I'm only brought up to believe I am 'soul'. Maybe I'm a heap of skin and will rot away in the sands of time...

[xexon]

"2. Everything is. There was no creator, we are here, and it will continue for all eternity."

No creator? You've short circuited your own logic.

"....or maybe I'm only brought up to believe I am 'soul'. Maybe I'm a heap of skin and will rot away in the sands of time..."

True, true, and true.

Good fortune though, the soul survives the part it plays.


x

[Okiefreak]

are you guys familiar with the argument of information is proof of God?

I'll post what I read and you can comment on what you think.


It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose
accidentally from the "primordial soup," the early ocean which
produced enzymes and eventually RNA, DNA, and primitive cells.

But there is still a problem with this theory: It fails to
answer the question, 'Where did the information come from?'

DNA is not merely a molecule. Nor is it simply a "pattern."
Yes, it contains chemicals and proteins, but those chemicals
are arranged to form an intricate language, in the exact same way
that English and Chinese and HTML are languages.

DNA has a four-letter alphabet, and structures very similar
to words, sentences and paragraphs. With very precise
instructions and systems that check for errors and correct them.

To the person who says that life arose naturally,
you need only ask: "Where did the information come from?
Show me just ONE example of a language that didn't come
from a mind."A "message", by definition, must have an intelligent sender. On the other hand, I don't think this is necessarily true of information per se , depending on how we define information. In the case of DNA, the "code" is a pattern of data that contains genomic sequences leading to organisms that survive. As Freaker says, it "begs the question" to assume that this data is "information" in the semantic sense of message conveying meaning, so the analogy to human languages may be limited.

There seems to be growing agreement that information may be at least co-equal to matter and energy as one of the "Trinity" of fundamental quantities or constituents of the universe. Wheeler considers information more fundamental in the universe than energy, while Apollo astronaut, Edgar Mitchell, views it as part of a dyad, of which the other part is energy. He believed that meditation could bring us in tune with "holgraphically embedded information in the quantum zero-point energy field". But this is possibly pseudoscience. Shannon views information as inversely related to entropy, a highly ordered, low-entropy system being described as high in level of information that can be encoded with bits (binary digits). Laszlow claims that there is an information field called the Akashic field, consisting of wavefields generated by the oscillations at varying frequencies from the various objects in the universe. He thinks that this creates a collective information pool that living things can tap, and that it possibly accounts for some of the coherence we've been talking about in our finely tuned universe. In New Mexico, Zurek, Gell-Mann, and Hartle use the concept of information to resolve some of the paradoxes of quantum mechanics. A quantum particle contains a huge complex of information, the wave function describing every possible state that it might assume, until it is measured and takes on one of these states to the exclusion of others. The extra information is absorbed or "recorded" by the environment, thereby avoiding the radical idealist interpretation of QM theory that the observer defines reality.

You mention information as a proof of God. A writer who's developed the DNA argument as "proof" of God is Professor Werner Gitt, a Young Earth Creationist and expert on information systems in his book In the Beginning Was Information. He argues that the DNA code has all the essential characteristics of information and must be the result of superior intelligence since the density and complexity of the DNA information is millions of times greater than man's present technology. All attempts to generate or simulate the generation of the information have failed. Also,since the sender must have encoded (stored) the information into the DNA molecule and constructed the molecular biomachines to encode, decode and run the cells, Gitt argues, the sender must be purposeful and powerful. Since information is nonmaterial, the sender must have a nonmaterial component (spirit).

Possibly you're also thinking of the formulation by Intelligent Design advocate William Dembski that ID=Complex Specified Information. Information reduces uncertainty regarding multiple possible outcomes. Information is complex when it involves a large number of bits and "specified" when it reflects a distinctive pattern that is difficult to account for by random or natural processes. Your DNA example would probably fit the bill nicely. ID fan and biophysicist Lee Spencer has also argued that mutations can't explain the increase in genetic information postulated by evolution. Scientists have great difficulty sythesizing the components of a single nucleotide in the laboratory, and to get them to assemble into the chains of RNA and DNA that direct the construction of proteins and enzymes. Recently, there's been speculation that RNA & DNA were preceded by simpler but related chainlike molecules called PNA (peptide nucleic acid). Scientists have been able to sythesize purines and pyrimidines, that form the backbone of these molecules. Various theories have been put forward involving pre-PNA "autocatalysis" (Farmer and Bagley; Calvin; Rossler; Eigen; Kaufman) and how hypercycles of nucleic acids might have given rise to life. Morowitz has shown how cell vesicles of lipids may have provided the havens in which primitive metabolisms later evolved. So it's not as improbable as Hoyle' "tornado in a junkyard" assembling a 747, but it's still remarkable enough that we can understand why Anthony Flew converted to deism over it. Of course, it could also have been created by aliens from Outer Space.

I personally find these arguments persuasive, if not conclusive, for involvement of intelligence in evolution (not conclusive because they still leave open the possibility that science will come along some day with and explanation. But maybe not in my lifetime).

[Okiefreak]

Nobody replied yet to my last post. Did I win, or was it just too long to read? My left brain has regained control and would like to express some reservations and qualifiers to this notion of information as proof of Intelligent Design. First, the people who are pushing this idea have legitimate scientific credentials but also axes to grind. There are, on the one hand, the Creationists and ID folks, who are out to disprove evolution. They have science degrees, but are really more into Christian apologetics than science, meaning they start with the conclusions and spend their time finding evidence to support them. Their positive evidence for ID is thin, and they rely mainly on pointing out problems and deficiencies in evolutionary theory, such as its inability to explain DNA. On the other hand, we have scientists, especially physicists, who have gone over the edge to New Age in grappling with the paradoxes of quantum mechanics, relativity, and cosmology. I mentioned former astraunaut, Edgar Mitchell, who has a Doctor of Science (Sc.D)degree from MIT, but has founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences to seek scientific proof of spiritual and scientific phenomena. I'd put Laszlo's Akashic Field in that category, as well. The empirical basis for it is weak, consisting mostly of handwaving. So while DNA and information remain problems for evolutionary theory, the alternatives are also not without problems.

[neodude1212]

I've realized that the existence of a higher power is so obvious that it is ridiculous to even argue.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

I've realized that the existence of a higher power is so obvious that it is ridiculous to even argue.

This is true.

[Exposed]

I must say, I actually didn't read it at first because of the length, but since you posted again I thought I might as well, heehee.

When you said "Since information is nonmaterial, the sender must have a nonmaterial component (spirit)." I think I have come to a realization. I believe this partly explains the a part of the Tao Te Ching. It states, "The name that can be named is not the eternal name." When applying to this it would represent that the 'info' doesn't matter. I believe we already have an imprint in our souls of everything, and experiencing it is only the process of remembering. Since what we call a certain piece of info now will difer later on in time, we just use words to describe it, but "IT" really isn't those words.

[codeye]

I have 2 views on how matter/all things exist.

1. There is very interenting information on parrallel universes, how they were created, etc. Modern physicists have proven that it it certainly possible.

2. Everything is. There was no creator, we are here, and it will continue for all eternity.

hey brother, do u have any links to wherever u got or read this stuff about how parallel universes were created?----id like to read about it---maybe ill google it---dont u ever wonder who or what causes these parallel universes to exist?---i guess maybe one could say: i am that i am and the point at which i am not, then i am no longer i am...u know, i suppose if everything is and all of a sudden it is not, then it is not and ,logically, we are not here anymore...guess i answered my own question---lol:)

[Exposed]

codeye, thanks for asking, I've been waiting for someone. These videos are one of the most interesting theories I have ever heard. The info seems infinite yet logical. There are 5 different videos... I recommend watching either one or two at a time, then pondering over them. Good luck to all who watch...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gWIyam5cAko&feature=related

[It Has Been Said]

I've heard this question all through my life, and I have asked it many times. I have recieved answers from a complete religious perspective, and I have also recieved answers from a non-religous perspective. The question is "What happens to us after we die?"

When you answer, I want you to think about how your physical body is not you. So if your visualization of you going to heaven lets say, it isn't your actual body going there, but the 'essence' of you. I view the human body as a shell just as we drive in a car. You are in the car, but the car isn't 'you'. The car may be damaged, just as you may damage your body, but your 'essence' isn't effected by anything physical. Although, I believe there are exceptions.

Another thing to focus on when you answer is that, know you have no previous memory of any life, so how could we continue? Were we just born and we are all in a state of mind that we think we have a 'soul'. Are we not just a working body?
Hello..
Your body is just a shell. Humans have a distinct disire for sprituality..a need, if you will and Jehovah god has put that in us, another great thing in the creation of us.

[Okiefreak]

Hello..
Your body is just a shell. Humans have a distinct disire for sprituality..a need, if you will and Jehovah god has put that in us, another great thing in the creation of us.misfeed

[Exposed]

I agree with you on the part that we have a need for spirituality. I think we need it for feeling comfort in knowing we are not alone.

[Okiefreak]

Hello..
Your body is just a shell. Humans have a distinct disire for sprituality..a need, if you will and Jehovah god has put that in us, another great thing in the creation of us.I agree on the desire for spirituality. But body "just a shell"? Our bodies and brains are important, integral parts of our material existence--not just accidents or mistakes, but integral parts of the divine process.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

Spirituality is rooted in our DNA, it is not just a need for comfort to know that we aren't alone, it is there to TELL US who we really are. It is there to help us remember where we really came from, it's there to let us know.

[FreakerSoup]

Spirituality is rooted in our DNA, it is not just a need for comfort to know that we aren't alone, it is there to TELL US who we really are. It is there to help us remember where we really came from, it's there to let us know.

Maybe you just think that because you are comforted by believing we aren't alone.

I think spirituality has more to do with supplying a comfortable answer to unanswerable questions. Not only that, but I am quite content, and will continue right on living my life, without any knowledge or belief in a spiritual friend.

[Exposed]

Spirituality is rooted in our DNA, it is not just a need for comfort to know that we aren't alone, it is there to TELL US who we really are. It is there to help us remember where we really came from, it's there to let us know.How is it rooted in our DNA? DNA... I believe doesn't make up our thought process... or anything else except our physical being...

[Bl4ck3n3D]

Maybe you just think that because you are comforted by believing we aren't alone.

I think spirituality has more to do with supplying a comfortable answer to unanswerable questions. Not only that, but I am quite content, and will continue right on living my life, without any knowledge or belief in a spiritual friend.

I do not believe, I know.

[FreakerSoup]

I do not believe, I know.
...Or so you believe.

Would you accept that your human senses and mind can interpret reality incorrectly? If so, you do not KNOW. If not, you still do not know, and your belief is blind.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

Hah, I've had way too many experiences to think otherwise.

Sorry, I don't really like the idea of "belief" or faith. I know. It's as simple as that. Yes I accept that my human senses can be wrong, but I know not through my 5 senses.

[FreakerSoup]

Regardless, you have only a human mind. Everything must enter and be interpreted. There is always (always) the possibility that something entered and was interpreted incorrectly.

[Exposed]

So in actuality.... do we know anything?........... Wait, what's actuality?

[FreakerSoup]

We can, but with qualification. We can know that we have thought, because if we didn't, nothing we do would even be possible. We can know that by our logic, 1+1=2. We can know that we perceive certain impulses. We can't can't know if we always interpret it correctly. Especially complex signs that might seem like signals from the divine.

When I was little, my grandfather went out for a walk on this road through the woods and over a hill. I cleaned my room (parental prerequisite) and followed him, running after him until I finally saw him on the path and yelled. He turned and waved, smiling, and kept walking, and I kept running, getting no closer. I yelled again, and he turned and waved and kept walking, and this happened a couple more times. Then I got discouraged and walked home crying, only to find my grandfather, who said "What? I didn't go anywhere!"

I don't think there was a ghost or angel that looked like my grandfather trying to get me alone in the woods. I think that for some reason I saw something that was not there.

[Exposed]

We can know that by our logic, 1+1=2. All depends on what you are adding!

1 sperm + 1 egg = 1 baby. http://www.hipforums.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Bl4ck3n3D]

Genetic memory and the complexity of cells to form a cellular network within our bodies. DNA/cells read off of eachother, every person you come into contact with, you are exchanging information via the cellular network, it interacts with reality and the world around you.

This is how telepathy also takes place.

[themnax]

my dad gave me an honest answer to that one when i was quite young. i didn't like it at that time and i still don't entirely. but it is an honest answer, and that is simply that we do not know.

like so many things people cling emotionally to to try and fill the gaps. i like to dream and speculate as much as anybody, but i'm at least willing to understand that is what i'm doing when i do.

another thing he said was ask somebody who'se been there and come back.

well people have flatlined and been brought back. most of them haven't described anything very interesting. a sense of calm and peace. that's good. undifferentiated white light on all sides. that doesn't do me much for scenery.

but there IS something else. there were dreams i had BEFORE i was born. and the were of living on a tangable material world that wasn't this one.

so i have this idea of something like serial mortality. a little like reincarnation but not exactly the way that's usually taken. and possibly with some kind of rest and relaxation bardo between lives.

and the next MORTAL life could by on any world, because they all begin with being born, just like this one did. born most likely, into whatever life form on that world is analagous to our level of sentience on this one. rather then some other life form ON THIS one.

another kind of universe entirely is possible too.

maybe one where forest and mountains extend forever in all directions, so you can walk or ride trains without oceans getting in the way, or too quickly having come back on yourself.

but fantasies are fantasies, though all are possible. those of dominant beliefs though, no more so then any you or i might arrive at ourselves.

i've had a lot of dreams that could be in someplace like that. but it does still come back to that we DON'T REALLY know.

=^^=
.../\...

[Exposed]

I don't agree with you saying we don't know. I believe we do know, but we can't remember because of this body we're in. It is our greatest gift, yet its our greatest restraint.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

I have to agree with Exposed, we really do know.

[Passionate1]

GOOD Question well as for me this is what is going to happen to me hopely:

After a person dies their soul is led into a hall of judgment in Duat by Anubis (god of mummification) and the deceased's heart, which was the record of the morality of the owner, is weighed against a single feather representing Ma'at (the concept of truth and order). If the outcome is favorable, the deceased is taken to Osiris, god of the afterlife, in Aaru, but the demon Ammit (Eater of Hearts) – part crocodile, part lion, and part hippopotamus – destroys those hearts whom the verdict is against, leaving the owner to remain in Duat. A heart that weighed less than the feather was considered a pure heart, not weighed down by the guilt or sins of one's actions in life, resulting in a favorable verdict; a heart heavy with guilt and sin from one's life weighed more than the feather, and so the heart would be eaten by Ammit. An individual without a heart in the afterlife in essence, did not exist

[Exposed]

GOOD Question well as for me this is what is going to happen to me hopely:

After a person dies their soul is led into a hall of judgment in Duat by Anubis (god of mummification) and the deceased's heart, which was the record of the morality of the owner, is weighed against a single feather representing Ma'at (the concept of truth and order). If the outcome is favorable, the deceased is taken to Osiris, god of the afterlife, in Aaru, but the demon Ammit (Eater of Hearts) – part crocodile, part lion, and part hippopotamus – destroys those hearts whom the verdict is against, leaving the owner to remain in Duat. A heart that weighed less than the feather was considered a pure heart, not weighed down by the guilt or sins of one's actions in life, resulting in a favorable verdict; a heart heavy with guilt and sin from one's life weighed more than the feather, and so the heart would be eaten by Ammit. An individual without a heart in the afterlife in essence, did not exist...and outside of this room is going to be a long ass line of souls? No disrespect to your beliefs, but what happens to the other soulds "waiting in line"?

[kaminoishiki]

I'm going to express my opinion on 'life after death.' I'm still learning about these things so if I dont make much sense or if you think i'm insane then I apologise. okay!


You don't have to worry about death :) no heaven, no hell, no nothing, no death. Death is an illusion. We've never died, not us. Death is a process that animals go through, when their bodies die they change, degrade and feed the earth. The human body is like a shell, upon it's physical death the body is abandoned. We are consciousness, self awareness that resides inside the head, but not of it. Consciousness and the human body are both tied to each other,without one, the other will not be ( A human without consciousness is no different than an ape or a dog, and yet without a human body for consciousness to anchor to, reality as we know it would not exist.)

It's quite a challenge to know yourself as who you really are (by stripping away the identity I assumed since birth - since it's never been real ) I came to the realisation that the body i'm in is completely random, there was no particular special reason that this body was born on X day in X country to X parents - it was simply a product of reproduction. Upon realising this I took away that feeling of destiny, the feeling that X was at the center of the universe and that his life was full of destiny and deeper meaning. If X is a product of reproduction and nothing more, then so is every other human, it is not down to fate, it is a random chance. This helped me to realise that I am not a part of the body, I simply reside inside it, and this body is random. With that understanding , i strip away yet another layer - the memories and beliefs I held when I thought I was human, I willingly started from the beginning again ,without the constraints and beliefs that were a part of the identity i'd falsely believed to be me.

What did this leave me with? Consciousness and the feeling of being self aware of my true nature, - that of being simply the feeling of existing inside of a physical body. We are all this awareness of being, every human shares this awareness, because it is us. When humans are very young children , the brain still hasn't fully developed yet, therefore consciousness can not manifest properly, I believe this is why we do not remember much of being young children ( and , obviously, of being 'born' since it was only the body that was born,not consciousness which manifests afterwards.)

With the knowledge that we are all one thing, one stream of super consciousness that has manifested into billions of human heads after they are born- We can erase the ties we have held to our false selves - personality, individuality and separation, and explore our true nature fully. Death, and the fear of it, become simply an illusion, a belief held by consciousness that is not aware of it's own true nature because it has separated itself from super consciousness and become the human body that it inhabits.

As long as humans exist consciousness will too. Past lives aren't really relevant at all, because all that connects body to body is the feeling of consciousness, no aspects of personality or individuality are carried on because they never existed in the first place, they are illusions that consciousness creates when it is unaware of it's own nature ( and so separates itself and assumes humanity.)

I feel wide awake now, nothing at all worries me anymore. I have unlocked the full potential of this body that I am in. I hope you can make sense of what I've said - If not, then don't worry, we all come to our own truths in time.

[Okiefreak]

I'm going to express my opinion on 'life after death.' I'm still learning about these things so if I dont make much sense or if you think i'm insane then I apologise. okay!


You don't have to worry about death :) no heaven, no hell, no nothing, no death. Death is an illusion. We've never died, not us. Death is a process that animals go through, when their bodies die they change, degrade and feed the earth. The human body is like a shell, upon it's physical death the body is abandoned. We are consciousness, self awareness that resides inside the head, but not of it. Consciousness and the human body are both tied to each other,without one, the other will not be ( A human without consciousness is no different than an ape or a dog, and yet without a human body for consciousness to anchor to, reality as we know it would not exist.)

It's quite a challenge to know yourself as who you really are (by stripping away the identity I assumed since birth - since it's never been real ) I came to the realisation that the body i'm in is completely random, there was no particular special reason that this body was born on X day in X country to X parents - it was simply a product of reproduction. Upon realising this I took away that feeling of destiny, the feeling that X was at the center of the universe and that his life was full of destiny and deeper meaning. If X is a product of reproduction and nothing more, then so is every other human, it is not down to fate, it is a random chance. This helped me to realise that I am not a part of the body, I simply reside inside it, and this body is random. With that understanding , i strip away yet another layer - the memories and beliefs I held when I thought I was human, I willingly started from the beginning again ,without the constraints and beliefs that were a part of the identity i'd falsely believed to be me.

What did this leave me with? Consciousness and the feeling of being self aware of my true nature, - that of being simply the feeling of existing inside of a physical body. We are all this awareness of being, every human shares this awareness, because it is us. When humans are very young children , the brain still hasn't fully developed yet, therefore consciousness can not manifest properly, I believe this is why we do not remember much of being young children ( and , obviously, of being 'born' since it was only the body that was born,not consciousness which manifests afterwards.)

With the knowledge that we are all one thing, one stream of super consciousness that has manifested into billions of human heads after they are born- We can erase the ties we have held to our false selves - personality, individuality and separation, and explore our true nature fully. Death, and the fear of it, become simply an illusion, a belief held by consciousness that is not aware of it's own true nature because it has separated itself from super consciousness and become the human body that it inhabits.

As long as humans exist consciousness will too. Past lives aren't really relevant at all, because all that connects body to body is the feeling of consciousness, no aspects of personality or individuality are carried on because they never existed in the first place, they are illusions that consciousness creates when it is unaware of it's own nature ( and so separates itself and assumes humanity.)

I feel wide awake now, nothing at all worries me anymore. I have unlocked the full potential of this body that I am in. I hope you can make sense of what I've said - If not, then don't worry, we all come to our own truths in time.Watch out for that cliff!

[Aldousage]

Embrace the freeing power of humility!

There are literally hundreds of different and distinct religions and cults on Earth today (and many, many varying personal spiritual beliefs that fit no specific frame). Nearly ever one of these claim unique knowledge of a reality beyond the realms of science. To accept any one of them as absolute truth is to have no humility. The same can be said of insisting that any one of these religious/spiritual theories are impossible. I don't think we can KNOW these things.

I'm not saying there's no need to fear death. All sane people do, and should. However, I find the alternative of pretending to have superpowers an irresponsible position for adults to take.

My answer to the big question is:

"I dunno. Let's talk about something else"

Peacelove,
Aldousage

[kaminoishiki]

Embrace the freeing power of humility!

There are literally hundreds of different and distinct religions and cults on Earth today (and many, many varying personal spiritual beliefs that fit no specific frame). Nearly ever one of these claim unique knowledge of a reality beyond the realms of science. To accept any one of them as absolute truth is to have no humility. The same can be said of insisting that any one of these religious/spiritual theories are impossible. I don't think we can KNOW these things.

I'm not saying there's no need to fear death. All sane people do, and should. However, I find the alternative of pretending to have superpowers an irresponsible position for adults to take.

My answer to the big question is:

"I dunno. Let's talk about something else"

Peacelove,
Aldousage
I don't fear death, death is an illusion. Am I insane? Would I be considered insane by an expert? I doubt it. I'm completely aware of the nature of reality.

[Aldousage]

I don't like to call anyone insane. Who knows? Maybe I'm the nut here. I accept that.

However, it does seem irrational to ME to suggest that death is illusury. Is life an illusion also? Could not your (mis)perceptions be the illusion/delusion? Which seems more likely?

If I crush a bug beneath my foot, are my senses revealing truth in their adding to my perception of the insect's subsequent death? Or is it more reasonable to assume that the crushed bug is "faking it"?

I feel near-certain that death is not make believe, but I can appreciate the poetic charm of your statement.

Respectfully,
Aldousage

[kaminoishiki]

I don't like to call anyone insane. Who knows? Maybe I'm the nut here. I accept that.

However, it does seem irrational to ME to suggest that death is illusury. Is life an illusion also? Could not your (mis)perceptions be the illusion/delusion? Which seems more likely?

If I crush a bug beneath my foot, are my senses revealing truth in their adding to my perception of the insect's subsequent death? Or is it more reasonable to assume that the crushed bug is "faking it"?

I feel near-certain that death is not make believe, but I can appreciate the poetic charm of your statement.

Respectfully,
AldousageWell if one is to believe (as I do) that we are the consciousness that resides inside the human body, but not a part of it, then yes, death is an illusion based upon the belief that we are all mortal beings. It is a false 'self' where we assume an identity based upon reality that we perceive to be true ( that we are the body, rather than metaphysical consciousness), therefore we have a name, an identity, a job, likes ,dislikes, selfishness and desire. From this, stereotyping, sexism, racism, homophobia, greed and war are then created also , because we have seperated ourselves from universal consciousness. This identification of the false self increases unconsciousness and unawareness of our true self (the oneness of universal consciousness) and so the dream continues, as does the fear of death.

And I understand about the insane thing, truthfully before I was awake I thought I might have been crazy, because I thought (and still do) think about things so deeply that it's very difficult to relate to others around me. This is all a part of awakening though, I can only become more 'insane' as I progress further.

[Exposed]

kaminoishiki, how can you believe this with the question of the universe? Where was it created? A mere illusion? Maybe, but then how do I not have the ability to end the illusion. Often I close my eyes and tell myself to wake up, yet I am always in the same place. How did this place come to be if all that exists is conciousness?

[kaminoishiki]

kaminoishiki, how can you believe this with the question of the universe? Where was it created? A mere illusion? Maybe, but then how do I not have the ability to end the illusion. Often I close my eyes and tell myself to wake up, yet I am always in the same place. How did this place come to be if all that exists is conciousness?My beliefs don't oppose anything already proven by science. I'm not a religious person who believes the universe came from a guy called God. Ask a scientist how the universe came to be,his answer is probably the most logical and reasonable one to assume. However, logically, the universe as humans know it would not exist if humans were not conscious, as humans are the only animal evolved enough to even conceive of something so vast as the universe. Take away consciousness, and there is no knowledge of universe, no knowledge of anything outside of the basic animal instincts, thus 'reality' as is currently being perceived by humans would not exist. So , in essesence, it is because of consciousness that humans are able to be aware of the universe.

When I use the term awakening, I am not refering to the universe being an illusion. I was referring to the fact that I have become aware that I am consciousness itself , not Mr X born on X day of X year who likes such and such a thing and who works in such and such an occupation, this is the self built around objective consciousness, that I am this body, rather than the awareness that resides inside it, this is the false reality.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

Than consciousness would be seperate. So why would consciousness die with the body?

Doesn't make sense to me. Sounds like our bodies are just vehicles for consciousness to experience reality.

GASP, COULD IT BE?

A SOUL?

OH NOOO

[kaminoishiki]

Than consciousness would be seperate. So why would consciousness die with the body?

Doesn't make sense to me. Sounds like our bodies are just vehicles for consciousness to experience reality.

GASP, COULD IT BE?

A SOUL?

OH NOOO
Bl4ck3n3D, you already know truth, what's with the sarcasm?
Do you like to use the word soul? I don't use that word, it has too many different meanings, I just use the word awareness.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

I like throwing in some humour once in awhile, I don't know, I see it as humour but it might not seem like that to others.

Sometimes being serious isn't always the best way of communicating, haha, idk, I'm just trying to add flavor I guess?

[kaminoishiki]

I like throwing in some humour once in awhile, I don't know, I see it as humour but it might not seem like that to others.

Sometimes being serious isn't always the best way of communicating, haha, idk, I'm just trying to add flavor I guess?lol okay :) I'd like to talk with you some more, you seem interesting and your body is a similar age to mine too!

[Exposed]

I COMPLETELY disagree with your statement about percieving the universe. That doesn't say anything. We previously had no knowledge nor did we care about gaining knowledge of the universe. Actually, it doesn't even matter if we new their was something past the blue sky.

[kaminoishiki]

I COMPLETELY disagree with your statement about percieving the universe. That doesn't say anything. We previously had no knowledge nor did we care about gaining knowledge of the universe. Actually, it doesn't even matter if we new their was something past the blue sky.That's fine :) You'll come to realise one day, nothing I can say can persuade you to believe me because what I say is objective, you can only find the truth from inside your self. Only you can wake yourself up from this dream :)

be happy.

[liquidlight]

Hey kaminoishiki,

Can i ask, was it painful coming to this awareness, emotionally i mean ... in terms of letting go of your soley human life that once was or could have been?

If your body was to die, would you, as conciousness still exist without a body?

What kind of relationship do you now have with your body? I mean do you see it as something to be cherished and looked after?

How has your personality changed? Do you still seek human love and relationships in a physical sense?

Thanks :)

[kaminoishiki]

Hey kaminoishiki,

Can i ask, was it painful coming to this awareness, emotionally i mean ... in terms of letting go of your soley human life that once was or could have been?

If your body was to die, would you, as conciousness still exist without a body?

What kind of relationship do you now have with your body? I mean do you see it as something to be cherished and looked after?

How has your personality changed? Do you still seek human love and relationships in a physical sense?

Thanks :)I'll be happy to answer your questions :)
I wouldn't say it was painful, coming to this awareness, it's quite exciting actually.The 9/10s of the life that my false self could not have been have been unlocked for me to explore. There is a feeling of loss inside, the feeling that ive wasted quite alot of this life going down one singular path, it's something that i'm going to make up for though.

As consciousness, we all exist as oneness, there is no feeling of the singular 'I am' anymore, because it's now 'We are.' Consciousness exists in every human, so as long as humans exist consciousness can manifest in this form too, therefore we are (potentially)infinite.

I think this body can be stretched to it's limits now, because there is no fear of death, there are no worries, the material world of the false self is dissolving. I am still going through this process, still learning.

I see love in every human, there is a huge feeling of well - being and happiness inside, I seem to be feeling this every day now, I see everybody as oneness, so you could say that my love for others in a physical sense is dissolving too, and being replaced by an overall love for everybody. My feelings of needing to be attatched to one other person , to bring about happiness are also dissapearing (because we are all universally attatched). The personality of the false self is truly dissolving, my friends have noticed, and this has happened quickly. I don't know how those friends will treat me when I have fully shed the false self, they may alienate me, but it truly doesn't matter, because I'd love them anyway.

I feel so incredibly happy, just a feeling of pure happiness inside of me, all of the walls that separate people from each other have been removed in my eyes, because they never truly existed in the first place. I can see each and every person as one and the same, all human traits of separation (gender, race, creed, age, stereotype) are dissapearing, it's an amazing feeling.

I feel like I want to show others how to come to this realisation, however, I'm refraining from doing this until I have come to total oneness, I have to have taught myself in order to teach others, so to speak.

By dissolving the false self there is only selflessness , I'm urged to love everybody and help them out, both physically and spiritually. I feel euphoric, I think it really has to be experienced to be understood. I hope you can understand a little bit though :) if not, it doesn't matter. I believe everybody will eventually start looking for themselves on their ride through life, so just enjoy it and be happy :)

[liquidlight]

Thanks for your answers, ...and i have a smile on my face because you've said pretty mutch what i thought you'd say.
It's heart warming, it really is. Whan i was 27 i was pretty mutch where you are at now ...such a universal understanding of what is and who we all are, but as you may have gathered from ganja princes thread, i had a really traumatic time back then and ultimately with the use of ecstacy, i feel i 'went up' or expanded in awareness too fast and that had it's own problems in that i wasn't able to maintain that awareness ... lingering self doubt, lets say. However i know i need not fear whatever happens.

You are so blessed (for want of a better word) to be so young and to have had a fairly smooth ride with it all .... I can only hope that with all my highs and lows (mainly lows) that i can glean some wisdom from it all ultimately. There's alot going on with me right now and i sit it out trying not to resist whatever comes my way. Things ARE, however a little difficult right now.

;)

Oh, P.S. ...trust me, your friends won't desert you! ...although they may simply move on to other things.

[Exposed]

That's fine :) You'll come to realise one day, nothing I can say can persuade you to believe me because what I say is objective, you can only find the truth from inside your self. Only you can wake yourself up from this dream :)

be happy.I don't understand what makes you right and me wrong...

I mean, you have a chance of being right, just like we all do, but the odds are against you my friend.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

I COMPLETELY disagree with your statement about percieving the universe. That doesn't say anything. We previously had no knowledge nor did we care about gaining knowledge of the universe. Actually, it doesn't even matter if we new their was something past the blue sky.

This statement is utterly rediculous, how can you make sense of what you say?

Oh how flip sided reality is on this world, how the fuck did this happen.

[kaminoishiki]

I don't understand what makes you right and me wrong...

I mean, you have a chance of being right, just like we all do, but the odds are against you my friend.Think of perception as a light bulb on a circuit. The light bulb illuminates the world around us, allows us to interpret the things we see , therefore our 'reality' is created. However, there is a switch in the circuit, consciousness. Consciousness needs to be switched on in order for us to be able to perceive things, if consciousness is switched off, the circuit is broken, so 'reality' cannot exist either. I don't dispute the likelihood that the universe was created over billions and billions of years ago, probably in the big bang, however, we can't perceive the universe if we are not conscious of it..

I hope you can understand a little more.

[Aldousage]

I think it's important to remember that there are/have been, throughout history, many billions of humans who feel/have felt they can perceive reality beyond the physical world. Much more often than not, their concepts contradict one another. Some of these people are curious and humble in their search for truth and meaning, while others give off an air of smugness - devoid of humility.

My main concern (I have several) is that it seems the more passionate and absolute the person's belief are, the more willing they are to harm others in response to what they might perceive as messages from magical sources.

This is fact, not speculation. Look into the history of assault and murder perpetrated by psychotic assailants. If you aren't already aware, you may find it chilling that a majority of these neurologically-impaired attackers felt they held some truth from other-worldly sources.

I am NOT saying that kaminoishiki necessarily has the potential of fitting into this category. As an agnostic, I accept that he may be one of the ones who REALLY found the spiritual/mystical truths of human life on Earth. However, at this point, I remain undecided (and skeptical) on the matter.

With love and respect,
Aldousage

[kaminoishiki]

I think it's important to remember that there are/have been, throughout history, many billions of humans who feel/have felt they can perceive reality beyond the physical world. Much more often than not, their concepts contradict one another. Some of these people are curious and humble in their search for truth and meaning, while others give off an air of smugness - devoid of humility.

My main concern (I have several) is that it seems the more passionate and absolute the person's belief are, the more willing they are to harm others in response to what they might perceive as messages from magical sources.

This is fact, not speculation. Look into the history of assault and murder perpetrated by psychotic assailants. If you aren't already aware, you may find it chilling that a majority of these neurologically-impaired attackers felt they held some truth from other-worldly sources.

I am NOT saying that kaminoishiki necessarily has the potential of fitting into this category. As an agnostic, I accept that he may be one of the ones who REALLY found the spiritual/mystical truths of human life on Earth. However, at this point, I remain undecided (and skeptical) on the matter.

With love and respect,
AldousageI do understand what you are saying. If i appear to be arrogant or smug in anyway then please forgive this because it is an error I am making, i'm still in the process of dissovling the false self, my views are as a collective whole- everyone of us as consciousness, I removed the feeling of destiny and importance of the individual false self, and only refer to I as universal consciousness, therefore there is no ego inflation involved. I don't receive messages from magical sources, only from inside which I perceived to be higher consciousness trying to break through the veil, which is why I was seeking the question to 'who am I?' in the first place.
I would never hurt anybody intentionally with my beliefs, all forms of negativity within have dissapeared, I only feel love for others ,because everybody is connected. The awareness of the false self is dissolving now because it was never there to begin with, so my attatchments to the material world too are dissolving. I haven't grasped this feeling and claimed it as my own, i'm simply experienceing it, I believe everyone will experience it in some form or another at some point in their lives.

I'm a little tired so If I don't make much sense I apologise.

[Exposed]

This statement is utterly rediculous, how can you make sense of what you say?

Oh how flip sided reality is on this world, how the fuck did this happen.I don't understand how you don't...

[Bl4ck3n3D]

You're saying in the beginning there was no knowledge and no one cared or even knew. This is simply not true as knowledge wouldn't be in existence today, if this was so.

[Exposed]

Well, what I know about cavemen is little, but I've never heard of them ever having anything to do with astronomy. Which if that is true, kamin's statement is wrong.

[i_was_in_shroom_land]

the answer to your question: nothing.

our brains control everything, and once that is dead, so is our life. we dont live anymore after that. simple as that...

any of that religious crap just seems like total bull. lol. not logical enough for me to believe...

[kaminoishiki]

Well, what I know about cavemen is little, but I've never heard of them ever having anything to do with astronomy. Which if that is true, kamin's statement is wrong.You're not reading what i'm saying properly. Consciousness and the universe act in unison. Without one the other would not 'exist' in reality. Without the universe Earth could never have become, life would never have existed and man would never have evolved from apes into what they are today. However, without Consciousness, the universe could not be perceived. The awareness of consciousness allows us to see the world and know it as the world, without that there is simply no perception. Think of consciousness as a switch that allows the universe to flow through it. Your consciousness (that is, you) and the world around you are acting in perfect unison in order to create the reality that you currently exist in. The universe is (probably) infinite, as is consciousness in each body that it manifests into.

I aplogise if it doesnt quite make much sense , my mind's a bit cloudy just right now. Disregard anything I say if it doesn't resonate with you.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

the answer to your question: nothing.

our brains control everything, and once that is dead, so is our life. we dont live anymore after that. simple as that...

any of that religious crap just seems like total bull. lol. not logical enough for me to believe...

Except, No, it really isn't as simple as that. It's not religious crap, it's spiritual, it's YOUR OWN CRAP.

[i_was_in_shroom_land]

spiritual crap equals just as much nonsense as religious crap.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

spiritual crap equals just as much nonsense as religious crap.

So are you going to tell me all the experiences I've had that have proved "god" to me, is bullshit?

[Exposed]

Consciousness and the universe act in unison. Without one the other would not 'exist' in reality. Without the universe Earth could never have become, life would never have existed and man would never have evolved from apes into what they are today. However, without Consciousness, the universe could not be perceived. The awareness of consciousness allows us to see the world and know it as the world, without that there is simply no perception. So you're pretty much saying if a tree falls in the woods no one can hear it....

[i_was_in_shroom_land]

So are you going to tell me all the experiences I've had that have proved "god" to me, is bullshit?i'm going to have to say you're delusional.
or take it easy with them drugs.

[xexon]

the answer to your question: nothing.

our brains control everything, and once that is dead, so is our life. we dont live anymore after that. simple as that...

any of that religious crap just seems like total bull. lol. not logical enough for me to believe...


You are a sweet flower that has not yet opened.

You know nothing of the world outside just yet. You've been sound asleep within your envelope of soft petals. Dreaming.

When you finally wake and push aside those petals, the world you see will make the one you knew fade away.

Your comfort zone is gone, but so are the restrictions upon you.

You're free to fly wherever you want.

How's that for logic?



x

[Bl4ck3n3D]

I find it quite funny how people like to use the term logic like it's pure truth and reasonsing lol, yet 99% of the people on earth have no clue of what real logic is.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

i'm going to have to say you're delusional.
or take it easy with them drugs.

So is everyone else I speak of about these topics in this forum?

Are you going to tell me everything I've experience is an illusion? What about those who've gone through it with me, we are all delusional? What about my experience with the 4th density, is that also an illusion? Please, get off your high horse.

Who are you to tell me I am wrong, who are you to tell me I am delusional, who are you to decide that there is nothing spiritual in this Universe? How can you truly think you live life and die, and that's it? How is that logical at all? Obviously if you have never had the pleasure of an enlightening experience, you would not know. So don't tell me I'm delusional just because you do not yet know.

Physical death is an illusion, it is just a cycle, change. There is no true death.

[Exposed]

First off, you all cannot spell worth a shit. Second, you can't necessarily give a definition of logic. It all depends on perspective.

[neodude1212]

So is everyone else I speak of about these topics in this forum?

Are you going to tell me everything I've experience is an illusion? What about those who've gone through it with me, we are all delusional? What about my experience with the 4th density, is that also an illusion? Please, get off your high horse.

Who are you to tell me I am wrong, who are you to tell me I am delusional, who are you to decide that there is nothing spiritual in this Universe? How can you truly think you live life and die, and that's it? How is that logical at all? Obviously if you have never had the pleasure of an enlightening experience, you would not know. So don't tell me I'm delusional just because you do not yet know.

Physical death is an illusion, it is just a cycle, change. There is no true death.
I know you made a thread about it, but I didn't really get it.

I still dont understand the whole 4th density thing. What is it?

[Bl4ck3n3D]

First off, you all cannot spell worth a shit. Second, you can't necessarily give a definition of logic. It all depends on perspective.

Excuse me? How can I not spell? Please, point this out to me.

[Bl4ck3n3D]

I know you made a thread about it, but I didn't really get it.

I still dont understand the whole 4th density thing. What is it?

It is what this world will be moving into after 2012, the 4th and 5th densities. The 4th density can be called the "other side".

[Exposed]

...delusional....\


lol

[yosep]

God make human with His breath.

that make human eternal.


just think where is His breath on our body.

[Exposed]

God make human with His breath.

that make human eternal.


just think where is His breath on our body.That is something that kills me. When people view 'god', they view him as a human being. I mean, this "could" be, but I honestly doubt god is some white bearded old guy controling everything. If the "god" is in existence, how could he be a human?

[Bl4ck3n3D]

God ain't too far away from us.

God is actually seperate from the creator, the creator was first, god came second. Now, they are one and the same, yeah, confusing.

It's called co-creation.

[yosep]

That is something that kills me. When people view 'god', they view him as a human being. I mean, this "could" be, but I honestly doubt god is some white bearded old guy controling everything. If the "god" is in existence, how could he be a human?


your doubt is right.

God is God. Alfa and Omega.

if i'm not mistaken. God is spirit being.

what make human have common with God, is only Heart.

to pagan, their god is statue. ridiculous and primitive.
similiar with catholic.

[themnax]

this is completely wierd yet completely obvious. theres a big universe out there and people on different worlds look completely different from what people on one world think of that people can look like, breathe different air and everything on another, and yet god is the same god to, and on and for, all of them.

i think it's pretty obvious physical appearance can have nothing to do with what this is talking about.

=^^=
.../\...

[Nikalaus]

I've heard this question all through my life, and I have asked it many times. I have recieved answers from a complete religious perspective, and I have also recieved answers from a non-religous perspective. The question is "What happens to us after we die?"

When you answer, I want you to think about how your physical body is not you. So if your visualization of you going to heaven lets say, it isn't your actual body going there, but the 'essence' of you. I view the human body as a shell just as we drive in a car. You are in the car, but the car isn't 'you'. The car may be damaged, just as you may damage your body, but your 'essence' isn't effected by anything physical. Although, I believe there are exceptions.

Another thing to focus on when you answer is that, know you have no previous memory of any life, so how could we continue? Were we just born and we are all in a state of mind that we think we have a 'soul'. Are we not just a working body?Hey...

I posted this in another thread looks like it might awnser your concerrns... I have simplified this and dumbed this down to something I can understand and I'm happy with it...

PHYLOSPHICAL EVIDENCE OF THE SOUL

As you go through your day you do many things...

Doing/Acting/behaving/talking...

Comes from what?

It is an energy that is a result of thought.

If all that you do is an extension of what is going on in your conscious thought.

Then why are we equipped with a mind that can conceive ideas that are beyond what the material world will allow us to do?

For example walking through a wall? Some will attribute such notions to imagination... but I will pose the question again... why are we equipped with the ability to THINK and imagine walking through a wall in our conscious thought... if it is impossible in the material world?

The awnser is simple... there is something driving our consciousness that is beyond the matrial world.

That right there is your soul.

[Nikalaus]

Something else to ponder with the above mentioned thoughts... is what quantum mechanics reveal of the material world apparently there is NEVER contact between any material.

For example throwing a ball against a wall the ball never hits the wall on the subatomic level the quarks and particles of the ball and the wall repel one another violently without ever making contact! All is left is the perception of a collision as deciphered/perceived by the 5 senses.

Now i'm no expert on quantum mecanics... but even more interesting thought to ponder... if the particles were to NOT repel one another ... is it possible that the two diffrent types of matter would merge into one!?

[Nikalaus]

And Finally all that being said if you come to the conclusion that your living in some type of Holographic Deck... Yes your on the right track :P

[Exposed]

Thanks a lot for those posts nikalus... very interesting. They add like another deepness to this discussion.