Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles
Title: Document Recently Found Has Eyewitness Account of Jesus Performing Miracle (Hoax)
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://guardianlv.com/2014/10/docum ... t-of-jesus-performing-miracle/
Published: Oct 17, 2014
Author: Kimberly Ruble
Post Date: 2014-10-17 22:53:49 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 43438
Comments: 96
In Rome, a document recently found has an eyewitness account of Jesus performing a miracle. An Italian professional was examining the paper written in the first century by the Roman historian Marcus Paterculus. It has only been recently found inside the annals of the Vatican and on it there was written what appears to be the very first eyewitness account ever documented of one of the miracles performed by Jesus. The author told of a scene that he supposedly observed, in which a prophet who he named Isous de Nazarenus, revived a baby who had been stillborn and gave him back to his mother.
Historian Ignazio Perrucci was employed by authorities of the Vatican in 2012 to go through and analyze over 6,000 antique documents that had been found in massive archive crypts. Perrucci had already been excited when he detected that the writer of the text was the celebrated Roman historian Paterculus, but he was totally shocked after he read the content of the document.
Professor Perrucci discovered the text in the collections of the Vatican, while he was looking through a packet of personal letters and other minor documents that dated back to the Roman period. The writing, when looked at as a complete narrative tells of the writer’s departing journey from Parthia to Rome, which happened in 31 AD. It was recorded on four pieces of parchment. He speaks of various events happening during his journey, like an intense sandstorm in Mesopotamia and when he visits a temple in Melitta which is now called Mdina in modern day Malta.
Yet the piece of text that really got the historian’s attention was when he read about an event occurring in the town of Sebaste. That would be close to the city of Nablus in the modern day, which is in the West Bank. The writer talked about the coming of a great leader into the city with his assembly of disciples. He also had many followers and this meant that a lot of the lower class people from nearby villages were gathering around the group. Paterculus stated that the great man’s name was Isous de Nazarenus, which was a Greco Latin translation of Jesus’ Hebrew name, Yeshua haNotzri.
The document stated that when he entered the town, it was written that Jesus had gone to the home of a woman by the name of Elisheba. She had just had a stillborn baby. Jesus reportedly picked up the dead infant and said a prayer in Aramaic. The writer stated that it was “immensus”, which meant that it was unintelligible. Next, right in front of the crown, to their wonder and astonishment, the baby returned to life crying and fidgeting like a vigorous newborn.
Marcus Paterculus, was a Roman officer of Campanian heritage, and it appears that he saw Jesus as some sort of great man who could perform miracles. He did not appear to associate him with the Christian idea of him being the Messiah.
There have been numerous tests and examinations done in the past few weeks to try and determine the manuscripts authenticity. The make-up of the parchment and the ink used to write on it, the literary panache and even the handwriting have been cautiously inspected and are believed to legitimate. The dating investigation also showed that the parchment on which the text was penned, did date from the 1st century, precisely from between 20-40 AD.
This text written by an author, who has always been known for his dependability, has brought a new viewpoint on the life of Jesus of Nazareth. An official translation of the manuscript is planned to be released and made available online in numerous different languages over the next couple of months. However, the effect of the discovery has already been felt in the scientific community. Numerous researchers believe this to be one of the greatest developments ever found toward the study of the life of Jesus, while many others think it is nothing but a fraud and have uttered doubts about the conclusions of all the tests and want many more done before they declare this to be any sign of that Jesus really lived. They do not trust the document.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-55) not displayed.
.
.
.
#56. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter (#36)
Ping, can you clarify? "Explaining" what "better than Christian theology ever has "?
Newton and others' appear to exploit the wishes to be run through a spiritual car-wash. This seems to provide a "service" that presents an alternative solution of NOT having to account for moral shortcomings, past and present sins on behalf of a "Universal," non-judgmental "God" that bypasses both Biblical authority AND Judgment Day.
A supernatural explanation might be demons. My problem with that: Demons are always the scapegoat, brought up to explain any unknown that contradicts one's Christian beliefs. Seems to me a convenient way of ignoring things. Deception by demons and their power in this world is not a problem for me. Not that am ignoring strange, inexplicable coincidences as in this case. But IF one is a person of faith, this phenomena *may* weaken their faith and lead them away from THE truth. If one is ambiguous to begin with, the road away from The Truth is that much further away to eventually embrace. All in all, evidence like the above should be considered, not in a vacuum, but together with all other evidence, such as Newton's findings as well as those of many other authors on the subject. To me, shutting eyes to evidence that contradicts our beliefs is not an honest way to go about things. My eyes aren't shut to this kind of phenomena, but why can't demons be responsible in this case?...Or in the case of "ghosts" that masquerade as Aunt Mabel or Mommy? OR, in the case of all those Marian apparitions in the sky with witnesses who "hear" Mary speak? Seers who predict the future? UFO sightings and wild documented Ouija Board communication with the "other side"? There are only TWO metaphysical forces at work in this physical world: One has been given the power to promote malevolence and create deception (packaged as "love" and "enlightenment"; the other Angels, the Holy Spirit, and the benevolence of God. Do you believe in such a thing as "Black Magik"? Communication with incarnate spirits? Demon possession? Our faith is challenged often, and in so many subtle (and not so subtle ways.) The Bible addresses all of it. I should add though that reincarnation is not just a present day concept. It dates back thousands of years in many cultures, so some evidence the theory of reincarnation is based upon must also be very ancient. Satan is very old :-)
Yup. These past lives never reveal some common schlub, serf, or slave. Imagine someone "regressing" to a few different past lives -- ALL embarrassing examples. Garbage collector in Rome 200 A.D. Some hunchback in Greece in 250 A.D...then an African slave in 278 A.D. 99% of past lives were of that variety -- just common man survivors, struggling un-glamorously. Hypnosis Subject -- Executive-type, Mercedes parked outside the complex: "HUH?? I wuzn't no eunuch back in Egypt, 100 B.C! Or sheep herder in Nepal! I WANNA REFUND!! What BS!! I wuz a Alexander the Great!...then William Wallace...then Audie Murphy!!"
Or a youngster today claiming they were a Vietnam grunt who accidentally tripped off a booby trap killing half his platoon. Not a very heroic display there in a very unpopular war.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
You may be interested in the professed experiences of organ transplant recipients in this lengthy article featuring numerous examples. http://www.paulpearsall.com/info/press/3.html Organ Transplants and Cellular Memories According to this study of patients who have received transplanted organs, particularly hearts, it is not uncommon for memories, behaviours, preferences and habits associated with the donor to be transferred to the recipient. Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 12, Number 3 (April - May 2005) If you wish to upset the law that all crows are black…it is enough if you prove one single crow to be white. INTRODUCTION It is generally assumed that learning involves primarily the nervous system and secondarily the immune system. Hence, patients receiving peripheral organ transplants should not experience personality changes that parallel the personalities of donors they have never met. When personality changes have been observed following transplants, the kinds of explanations entertained include effects of the immunosuppressant drugs, psychosocial stress, and pre-existing psychopathology of the recipients. 1,2,3 However, living systems theory explicitly posits that all living cells possess "memory" and "decider" functional subsystems within them.4 Moreover, the recent integration of systems theory with the concept of energy (termed dynamical energy systems theory) provides compelling logic that leads to the prediction that all dynamical systems store information and energy to various degrees.5,6,7 The systemic memory mechanism provides a plausible explanation for the evolution of emergent (novel) systemic properties through recurrent feedback interactions (i.e., the nonlinear circulation of information and energy that reflects the ongoing interactions of the components in a complex, dynamic network). Recurrent feedback loops exist in all atomic, molecular and cellular systems. Hence, evidence for atomic systemic memory, molecular systemic memory and cellular systemic memory should be found in these systems. The systemic memory mechanism has been applied to a variety of controversial and seemingly anomalous observations in complementary and alternative medicine, including homoeopathy.8 It also makes new predictions. One prediction is that sensitive recipients of transplanted organs can experience aspects of the donor's personal history stored in the transplanted tissues. In 1997, a book titled A Change of Heart was published that described the apparent personality changes experienced by Claire Sylvia.9 Sylvia received a heart and lung transplant at Yale–New Haven Hospital in 1988. She reported noticing that various attitudes, habits and tastes changed following her surgery. She had inexplicable cravings for foods she had previously disliked. For example, though she was a health-conscious dancer and choreographer, upon leaving the hospital she had an uncontrollable urge to go to a Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet and order chicken nuggets, a food she never ate. Sylvia found herself drawn toward cool colours and no longer dressed in the bright reds and oranges she used to prefer. She began behaving in an aggressive and impetuous manner that was uncharacteristic of her but turned out to be similar to the personality of her donor. Interestingly, uneaten Kentucky Fried Chicken nuggets were found in the jacket of the young man (her donor) when he was killed. [...]
No problem. I was more amused than anything else! To clarify my response, I can't speak for how secular historians are regarding the bible or Christianity. I can only speak for myself. My comments were simply speculation on how such historians might be thinking.
This might conceivably explain some of the information he knew, though I'm quite skeptical that game makers would have included the challenge of landing an F-4 Corsair on a carrier deck without blowing out the tires. Even so, it would not explain his apparent knowledge about details of James Houston's family. The older sister or the portraits the mother made of the 3 kids. It also would not explain his ability to identify, in person, the crew mates of James Houston at the veterans reunion. Also, his apparent memories began at a very young age, probably before he would have had much interest in video games. I see no avenue for innocently implanting false memories by the parents. They claim they are generally not knowledgeable of aircraft. The father claims that when he finally got tired of the stories of little James flying in WWII, he sat down with him and took notes for the express purpose of proving the memories were false and putting the entire matter to rest, and was completely shocked when the memories of the ship name, captain etc. proved accurate. The parents are Christian so this went very much against their beliefs, so it would appear this would not be the result of wishful thinking by the parents.
I'm very much aware that doctrines do vary among Christians, and I'm certainly not intending to represent anything to the contrary, apart from the very basic doctrine that Jesus died for the atonement of sin for all humankind. Also, as I've mentioned a couple times there are many messages in the bible and in Christian theology I do agree with. The parable of the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son, 1st Corinthians 13 on love.... Those are all good things that fit perfectly with the theological model I now subscribe to. Some things don't fit, like the parable of the sheep and the goats, for example. Such things compel me to conclude the bible cannot be holy and infallible. Perhaps the original stories were, but if so, the message must have been altered with human input since then. As for the link, could I ask you to summarize it? What spare time I have I'm using to participate here. I did skim it, but it does seem to come from a perspective that's quite removed from where I am right now.
That is an excellent question! And I have no answer, because in the model I subscribe to, it does not exist. Why? It's a very problematic attribute. Either a soul has sin on it or it does not, so at what point is a young child capable of committing his first sin and getting tainted for all eternity? 3 years? That is, 3 years from birth? Or maybe 3 years, 9 months from conception is a better clock to go by, since some kids are born early and we don't want to penalized them for starting to breathe a mere 7 months after life truely started instead of the normal 9? Then again, some kids are not as bright as others, so maybe the slower ones should get 6 months or a year extra free time as a toddler before they are eligible to sin, so if they happen to die in that time, they go to heaven. (??) I'm being facetious on purpose, but only to illustrate the problem with the concept of sin. There are varying degrees of lucidity, of awareness of whether our actions are good or bad. Sometimes we are fully alert, and sometimes not, due to weariness, illness, drugs, or physical brain condition, either old with dementia or, in the case above, quite young with a newly developing mind. And while there are varying degrees of lucidity with regard to are actions, good or bad, there are not varying degrees of sin, is there? What we end up with is a litmus test on judgement day. Any sin on you, it's to hell. No sin, to heaven. So how does a litmus test for sin, in the case of a young child barely aware of his surroundings, work in a just and sound way? I'm talking about that moment in time, that instant, when that child goes from being completely innocent to a sinner destined for hell. Is it possible for anyone to identify that instant in time? In my view, it isn't. And in the world presented by Newton, it doesn't exist. At least not in the form of something that condemns us. So if you can define sin in some clear way that addresses the issue of varying degrees of lucidity, I'm all ears. The concept of sin and redemption do not apply to this model, so that's not an issue. That addresses a number of points you raise. There is no correcting of past sins, per se. There is learning of the harm we've done, and experiencing first hand the harm we've done to others. This is often done by choosing future lives that are destined to suffer the same harms we've inflicted. It's important to understand it's not about getting rid of a negative attribute like "sin", but rather growing in a positive ways by becoming wiser and more understanding. In my view, it scores poorly on the logic test. Newton's presentation scores much higher. Eyewitnesses & testimony? They aren't here to question. Fulfilled prophecies, in the form of a one ancient writing corroborating another? Newton's information, by contrast, has present day evidence in support, and no conflict with the current science field (i.e. evolution). With Newton's model, we have answers to tough questions, such as why God allows tragedy to occur, why some are rich and some poor. We have a real pragmatic purpose and mission on earth which we don't have with the biblical model. Thank you. You are assuming we would be totally lost without such a manual. If we don't need such a manual, then God would not need to provide us one. However, I guess I would answer that we do have such a manual. And it's you. And me. Each of us. We are souls, and at that soul level, we have our memories, our strengths and weaknesses. And we know, deep down, why we are here in this and every life, and know what we are supposed to do, even if we lack that conscious understanding. I would say it's not in any book, even the bible. Your mission and your purpose is already written inside of you. If you want a living message, that's where it would be. Not on ink and paper. If I recall correctly, Newton claims to have regressed about 7000 clients into past and/or between life states, and gotten a high degree of consistency. In addition to Orthodoxa's suggestion that he had influenced the clients reports, a satanic deception would be another possibility to consider. I concede that, though there are counters to both of those suggestions. You call it paradise and it is. But another name for it is simply, "home". And there's no reason we should be barred from returning to the home from which we came. Why would/should academic knowledge in one's physical brain, constructed of random (?) DNA determine the destiny of a supernatural soul? That's one of the logic points that weighs in Newton's favor. Thanks for your comments.
Under Newton's model, we have no conflict with the theory of evolution. Life can exist all through the universe, even intelligent life, and there's no issue about our importance or spiritual value above that of animals. So earth need not be the "center of the universe", so to speak. The "wrath of God" becomes non-existent. Fear goes away. The loved ones that have died before us are never, ever gone forever. Condemnation vanishes. We all have complete free will, but at the same time, we have a highly valued incentive to progress forward on our spiritual path. Contrary to what mom said, life IS in fact, very fair. No one is on earth who didn't choose to be here. We never have enemies, only friends that get really, really mad at us for a while. Everything just works like a smoothly oiled machine. Everything. I mean, if God had a choice in how to set up the universe and spirit world, why *WOULDN'T* he have chosen this model? How's that in a nutshell?
Logically, the existence of demons can never be ruled out. That would be proving a negative, afterall. But there are other factors to consider in deciding what is likely true. Black magic/k? I don't know. I do believe we as souls possess power. All souls are also unique, with varying strengths. It explains such things as empathy, premonitions and things of that sort. Communication with incarnate spirits... an incarnate spirit would be a soul NOT in a physical body. An angel would qualify, as that is what a soul without a body could be considered. Such communication does take place, so: Yes. Demon possession: I'm not convinced demons exist, so at this time: No. I have seen TV presentations claiming such a thing, so I'm open minded to it. But such things may be due to mental issues. And souls can have "damaged energy" of sorts. That phrase appears in Newton's books to describe souls that are in a very poor way. Possibly what is perceived as possession is instead a soul that is quite sick and in need of help. That's a thought.
Cited cases: 60 year old business man: regresses to life as a woman, killed in an indian attack on a wagon train, and while dying, laments the blood ruining her pretty blue dress. Woman regresses to life of a girl that's crippled in a carriage accident. Life as lifetime servant to wealthy family. Woman who's baby is killed in a tribal attack that wipes out her village and takes her as prize. Woman dies waiting for her love to return home after leaving on adventure to Africa. Heterosexual male regresses to life as a gold digging, prostitute female, including her death of syphilis while despised and neglected in a public hospital ward. Jewish woman recalls death as a 19 year old catholic french girl due to childbirth complications. Woman recalls death as Jew at the order of her soul-mate, who is a German soldier. Woman recalls death on 18th birthday due to her boyfriends drinking & driving. These are a few cases cited by both Newton and Weiss in their books. There are a few references to more glamorous roles, like a Viking warrior (same person as crippled child above) and an Egyptian temple priest, and a German fighter pilot killed by friendly fire, but for the most part, cases are not heroic types. Newton cites cases that make illustrative points he felt were significant. (As a guy, I can definitely attest to the distastefulness of the idea of once being a golddigging prostitute dying of syphilis!)
Cravings could be explained by nutritional needs. It could be that the foreign cells had slightly different nutritional dependencies, and those dependencies caused the woman to seek the same foods as those cells were already adopted to. I suppose that could be considered "cellular memory" of sorts. But pregnant women have cravings due to a new, foreign DNA based cells growing in them. Certainly cellular memory wouldn't apply but differing nutritional needs of the fetus would. Of course, getting a transplant like that would certainly screw up one's physiology. I imagine she had far more change in her life than her choice of foods. Doubtless her brain would change too, if not because of the new body parts in her, but the immune suppression drugs she'd need to be taking after the surgery to prevent organ rejection.
There are ten different specific cases reviewed after the case of Claire Sylvia cited in the introduction. I suppose it could be an elaborate hoax. Case 1 The donor was an 18-year-old boy killed in an automobile accident. The recipient was an 18-year old girl diagnosed with endocarditis and subsequent heart failure. The donor's father, a psychiatrist, said: "My son always wrote poetry. We had waited more than a year to clean out his room after he died. We found a book of poems he had never shown us, and we've never told anyone about them. One of them has left us shaken emotionally and spiritually. It spoke of his seeing his own sudden death. He was a musician, too, and we found a song he titled "Danny, My Heart Is Yours"—the words about how my son felt he was destined to die and give his heart to someone. He had decided to donate his organs when he was 12 years old. We thought it was quite strong, but we thought they were talking about it in school. When we met his recipient, we were so...we didn't know, like, what it was. We don't know now. We just don't know." The recipient reported: "When they showed me pictures of their son, I knew him directly. I would have picked him out anywhere. He's in me. I know he is in me and he is in love with me. He was always my lover, maybe in another time somewhere. How could he know years before he died that he would die and give his heart to me? How would he know my name is Danny? And then, when they played me some of his music, I could finish the phrases of his songs. I could never play before, but after my transplant I began to love music. I felt it in my heart. My heart had to play it. I told my mom I wanted to take guitar lessons—the same instrument Paul [the donor] had played. His song is in me. I feel it a lot at night and it's like Paul is serenading me." The recipient's father reported: "My daughter, she was what you say....a hell-raiser. Until she got sick—they say from a dentist, they think—she was the wild one. Then she became quite quiet. I think it was her illness, but she said she felt more energy, not less. She said she wanted to play an instrument and she wanted to sing. When she wrote her first song, she sang about her new heart as her lover's heart. She said her lover had come to save her life." Case 10 The donor was a 34-year-old police officer shot attempting to arrest a drug dealer. The recipient was a 56-year-old college professor diagnosed with atherosclerosis and ischaemic heart disease. The donor's wife reported: "When I met Ben [the recipient] and Casey [Ben's wife], I almost collapsed. First, it was a remarkable feeling seeing the man with my husband's heart in his chest. I think I could almost see Carl [the donor] in Ben's eyes. When I asked how Ben felt, I think I was really trying to ask Carl how he was. I wouldn't say that to them, but I wish I could have touched Ben's chest and talked to my husband's heart. "What really bothers me, though, is when Casey said offhandedly that the only real side-effect of Ben's surgery was flashes of light in his face. That's exactly how Carl died. The bastard shot him right in the face. The last thing he must have seen is a terrible flash. They never caught the guy, but they think they know who it is. I've seen the drawing of his face. The guy has long hair, deep eyes, a beard, and this real calm look. He looks sort of like some of the pictures of Jesus." The recipient reported: "If you promise you won't tell anyone my name, I'll tell you what I've not told any of my doctors. Only my wife knows. I only knew that my donor was a 34-year-old very healthy guy. A few weeks after I got my heart, I began to have dreams. I would see a flash of light right in my face and my face gets real, real hot. It actually burns. Just before that time, I would get a glimpse of Jesus. I've had these dreams and now daydreams ever since: Jesus and then a flash. That's the only thing I can say is something different, other than feeling really good for the first time in my life." The recipient's wife reported: "I'm very, very glad you asked him about his transplant. He is more bothered than he'll tell you about these flashes. He says he sees Jesus and then a blind flash. He told the doctors about the flashes but not Jesus. They said it's probably a side effect of the medications, but God we wish they would stop."
That is an excellent question! And I have no answer, because in the model I subscribe to, it does not exist. Why? It's a very problematic attribute. Either a soul has sin on it or it does not, so at what point is a young child capable of committing his first sin and getting tainted for all eternity? 3 years? That is, 3 years from birth? Or maybe 3 years, 9 months from conception is a better clock to go by, since some kids are born early and we don't want to penalized them for starting to breathe a mere 7 months after life truely started instead of the normal 9? Then again, some kids are not as bright as others, so maybe the slower ones should get 6 months or a year extra free time as a toddler before they are eligible to sin, so if they happen to die in that time, they go to heaven. (??) But even if we remove the act of "sin" as a moral violation of human behavior in your model of Reincarnation, aren't we also removing morality that Reincarnation hopes will be addressed and corrected in future lives? I think we can both agree that there obviously still exist "evil acts" being created and perpetrated upon others (as well upon our own flesh and spirit); Traits we as rational humans are hardwired to recognized (psychopaths/sociopaths excluded.) CRUCIAL QUESTION: Do you believe man is "hardwired" to recognize "right from wrong"? Further on the subject of "right and wrong," there are generally a "Seven Deadly Sins" as cited in the Bible (Proverbs 6:16-19): (Self explanatory) The spirit commands the body to commit these "sins," or evil acts consciously or even unconsciously -- albeit some not as egregious as others, yet can we agree that all are still violations of the human spirit? For argument's sake, let consider children are exempt from committing such sins. But as you suggest, at what age do children "know" they are doing wrong? For that answer, logic dictates some Universal "Judge" (or referee) who'll keep score. In the model of reincarnation, there's a big problem; No so much with say the one-year old who just died, but with the continued cycle of karma and a "account" of the toddler whose past tab and atonement for past "sins" still must be paid. Just how karma works to wipe it all out appears seems impossible, as the sins of past lives accrue for the next life to work off (amidst of creating his/her brand new sins of a lifetime.) In the Christian model, it has been suggested that one of the reasons the subject of infant mortality was not addressed by either the Apostles or Jesus was because it was understood in the culture at the time, that a person was not responsible to God or understanding the covenant until maturity (approximately 12 to 13 years of age.) Moreover, in the Christian model, we can rely on Perfect Judgment of our Soul at Death. We are told that we will be judged according to our deeds committed "in the body." [2 Corinthians 5:10] The judgment of sinners that will take place at the great white throne [Revelation 20:11-12] will be "according to their deeds." Have those who died in infancy committed such deeds? Highly unlikely since they haven't yet developed the capacity to know good from evil. And THAT is key: "Knowing." Might there be some exceptions to the "age-rule"? Presumably. God knows the heart and spirit. I'm being facetious on purpose, but only to illustrate the problem with the concept of sin. There are varying degrees of lucidity, of awareness of whether our actions are good or bad. Sometimes we are fully alert, and sometimes not, due to weariness, illness, drugs, or physical brain condition, either old with dementia or, in the case above, quite young with a newly developing mind. And while there are varying degrees of lucidity with regard to are actions, good or bad, there are not varying degrees of sin, is there? What we end up with is a litmus test on judgement day. Any sin on you, it's to hell. No sin, to heaven. So how does a litmus test for sin, in the case of a young child barely aware of his surroundings, work in a just and sound way? I'm talking about that moment in time, that instant, when that child goes from being completely innocent to a sinner destined for hell. Is it possible for anyone to identify that instant in time? In my view, it isn't. And in the world presented by Newton, it doesn't exist. At least not in the form of something that condemns us. So if you can define sin in some clear way that addresses the issue of varying degrees of lucidity, I'm all ears. Slightly ahead of you and addressing some of your questions regarding sin and its "litmus test" out of sequence -- sorry bout that. In the Christian model, we are ALL "Sinners." Small sins, big sin, HUGE sins. They are all stains of various degrees -- whether pinpoint blood stains OR floods. That presents an obvious problem -- not only for us, but for God. In his Kingdom lies a white, immaculate carpet; sin does not exist there. Not even the tiniest. ALL are guilty. NONE innocent. (until His Perfect Judgment, AND important, Jesus Christ stands in for our sin and "saves" us from separation from God's Kingdom. Through Jesus' blood we become clean and white as the snow. That's called "Grace." In the world presented by Newton, it [sin] doesn't exist. At least not in the form of something that condemns us. The concept of sin and redemption do not apply to this model [of reincarnation], so that's not an issue. The world presented by Newton and model of a sinless existence and unnecessary penance is a mirage. Only Satan would be the author of such simplistic "life rules." There is no correcting of past sins, per se. There is learning of the harm we've done, and experiencing first hand the harm we've done to others. This is often done by choosing future lives that are destined to suffer the same harms we've inflicted. It's important to understand it's not about getting rid of a negative attribute like "sin", but rather growing in a positive ways by becoming wiser and more understanding. Wait -- it DOES appear the concepts of "sin" and "redemption" ARE indeed "issues." Otherwise, why the never-ending "teachable moment" returns to this life of suffering and disappointment, spinning forever upon a never-ending “wheel of reincarnation”? When does the wheel stop? We're still left with further mysteries and gaps -- WHO does the "choosing" of lives (in the future), by which all such believers retain an acute sense of past transgressions so that lessons could be learned? Again -- by what universal law of "justice" does suffering the same pain in previous lives atone as penance for the past? And again -- to whom and what force decides at what point such penance (or tab) is finally paid for our soul? If our lives are devoid of "sin" within Newton's model, Pragmatically speaking, how is man better of in Newton's model of reincarnation and karma rather than replace the biblical declaration that it is “appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27)? And along with it, the Grace of believing in the Blood of Jesus as redemption of our life of sin and violations of the spirit (committed by the body?) Yes, tragedy and pain DOES exist, and has since the fall of Adam and Eve. The author and facilitator of that pain is...Satan. Fortunately, we have but one life to live on this planet, “appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27.) This world is a realm given full reign by Satan as man's free will is both a curse and blessing... hence the proliferation of sin and misery. But also in this world, we are also given gifts and blessing in between the pitfalls of sin -- love, happiness, brotherhood, hope, faith,and the Free Will to repel and reject deceptions of alternative destinations for our eternal soul...which as per Free Will is our respective personal responsibility. Newton's information, by contrast, has present day evidence in support, and no conflict with the current science field (i.e. evolution). With Newton's model, we have answers to tough questions, such as why God allows tragedy to occur, why some are rich and some poor. We have a real pragmatic purpose and mission on earth which we don't have with the biblical model. I'm still not understanding the foundation or genesis of Newton's field of "evidence" in support of reincarnation and Karma. Neither any definitive "answers" (other than the "evidence" provided by what appears to be the same deception depicting a vivid "Heaven" that also replicates a peace and love.) Odd that this "Heaven" requires NOTHING other than....passing on from this life onto the next (that one.) Since Satan is the Father of Lies, the Great Deceiver, and sly, obvious stealer of souls, why take Newton's research at face-value in the first place? Q: Is it in Satan's power to hijack his hypnotized subjects AND then implant these same glorious mirages of "Heaven"? Satan presented a similar vision of glory more or less in change for his soul. Satan's greatest lie is in convince some that he does exits. Which is exactly why my premise could be dismissed. Moreover, the "science" of evolution -- if anything -- is totally un-proven from A-Z (but that's obviously another story.) With all dues respect, Scripture DOES indeed explain out purpose and mission here on earth (see Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Psalms, the Gospel, Paul's letter to Romans, Corinthians, Revelation, etc.) I guess I would answer that we do have such a manual. And it's you. And me. Each of us. We are souls, and at that soul level, we have our memories, our strengths and weaknesses. And we know, deep down, why we are here in this and every life, and know what we are supposed to do, even if we lack that conscious understanding. I would say it's not in any book, even the bible. Your mission and your purpose is already written inside of you. If you want a living message, that's where it would be. Not on ink and paper. I disagree respectfully on several of your assertions -- but agree a bit, surprisingly. We are hardwired to know right from wrong. We are hardwired to know good from evil; love from hate; honor from dishonor. But our spirits are susceptible to deceptions which warp that Creator-implanted "hardwire" of morality and perception. That's when down becomes "up; evil becomes "good," and "morality" becomes relative. That hardwire of pre-loaded morality is prone to override, hijacked, misfiring. That said, as you asserted, we DO indeed have a mission and purpose that's been hardwired. To reach out to oyr Creator and Lord and listen to Him speak to us. But we need to keep open the channels of communication. The Bible IS our "Owner's Manual" that merely reinforces and further instruct and encourages. It can also be referred to as a "Soul Doctor's Manual" :-) If I recall correctly, Newton claims to have regressed about 7000 clients into past and/or between life states, and gotten a high degree of consistency. In addition to Orthodoxa's suggestion that he had influenced the clients reports, a satanic deception would be another possibility to consider. I concede that, though there are counters to both of those suggestions. I don't question the consistency of visions or "past life" memories as related by the subjects. Not for a moment. But given the channels of the unconscious state were open for Newton and other hypnotists, in theory, demons could have taken advantage of the breached "firewall" and implanted false memories (yes, using real people) while of course implanting a "Heavenly" scene in all its vivid, detailed minutiae -- including a peace of mind, no mention of God, and sense of non-fundamentalism. ALL key component noted by the subjects. MESSAGES TO ALL: "God is irrelevant. Judgement irrelevant. Morality irrelevant. EVERYONE arrives at the same place -- regardless of degree of moral observance, deed, faith during our mortal lives." The obvious question: Who or what force would present such a portrayal of the Afterlife? And is THIS depiction universally "hardwired" OR the result of a temporary "channel-switch"? You call it paradise and it is. But another name for it is simply, "home". And there's no reason we should be barred from returning to the home from which we came. Why would/should academic knowledge in one's physical brain, constructed of random (?) DNA determine the destiny of a supernatural soul? That's one of the logic points that weighs in Newton's favor. Yes, there IS a reason to be "barred" from God's house: The filth of unwashed "SIN" (explained early in the post.) Where is it written that DNA somehow controls the destiny of our eternal soul? Your premise presumes quite a bit without authority. If you are making a case for those who have not heard the Gospel for whatever reason, were young when they died, or have undergone extenuating circumstances in this life, as discussed earlier, God in His infinite justice shall judge accordingly and fairly. Well, what is "seen" and sensed by hypnosis subjects is admittedly more or less a perception or simulation of "Paradise," isn't it? Keep in mind that we possess finite imagination and senses in our current mortal state. Not so sure if this simulation IS our "Home." What is "Home" or Heaven" like according to the Bible? (Revelation 21:4): "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away." (1 Cor 2:9): The "eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man the things which God has prepared for those who love Him" . Doesn't this verse contradict whatever vision of "Heaven" is depicted under hypnosis? Our potential future eternal House as per God: A place prepared for us that is NOT seen, NOT heard, NOR "entered into the heart of man." For further verses of Heaven: http://www.openbible.info/topics/description_of_heaven I'd like to have asked the following poll question after the respective research of the subjects: Are you now MORE likely to believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or LESS?"
At 3 years old no one has reached the age of accountability. They would not be held accountable. Also the word of God found in the Bible provides a way for salvation for those who have never heard of the God of the Bible. I'll elaborate further when I have more time. It has something to do with those who naturally do the things found in the law. I can't remember at the moment where it is but I shall find it later.
Newton's Model seem to be quite liberal, allowing for a myriad of possibility, running atethetical to the Bible. Coincidence? It's only "conflict" seems to be in abiding in any definitive set of values, mores, rules, or law. The "wrath of God" becomes non-existent. Fear goes away. The loved ones that have died before us are never, ever gone forever. Condemnation vanishes. Please don't take this personally -- I'd admire your candor and honesty. But IF Satan were to write his Bible, he would preface with the above. Fear of the Lord is beginning of ALL wisdom. We all have complete free will, but at the same time, we have a highly valued incentive to progress forward on our spiritual path. I agree. But one must be careful with what direction our will takes us. 13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 14 Because[a] narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." ~ Matthew 7:13-14 NKJV Contrary to what mom said, life IS in fact, very fair. No one is on earth who didn't choose to be here. We never have enemies, only friends that get really, really mad at us for a while. Lol -- I agree with Mom. Life isn't "fair," but then no one ever promised that it would be "fair." We are entitled to neither fairness, happiness, nor riches. Our minds, our bodies, and spirits are challenged in this world. Strangely, those in this world who find it their personal candy store may find their spirit sorely lacking in seeking God. To dismiss and find irrelevant God's voice is potentially a curse and fatal in attaining next life. Matthew 19:24: "And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." As to lacking "enemies"? Come on, Ping. You can't be that naive or idealistic. Everything just works like a smoothly oiled machine. Everything. I mean, if God had a choice in how to set up the universe and spirit world, why *WOULDN'T* he have chosen this model? How's that in a nutshell? Nice nutshell. Wish I could reciprocate :-( We may not have chosen to be here, but God did. For Hisd reason and purpose. And God DID have a choice in exactly how this Universe works -- He created it, remember? :-) HIS, our world was designed to challenge the spirit of His Creation: MAN. To separate the wheat from the chaff; the good from evil; the humble from the vain; the loyal from disloyal; the wise from the foolish; the Godly from un-Godly; and to those those who persevere from those who surrender to the whims of flesh and weakness of spirit, THEY are rewarded most.
Of course not...Again, we must rely on the perfect Judgment of the Lord. And to exactly what age HE reads one's heart. There do exist "evil" heart and spirits in children. At what age God will judge them is in His hands. Also the word of God found in the Bible provides a way for salvation for those who have never heard of the God of the Bible. I'll elaborate further when I have more time. It has something to do with those who naturally do the things found in the law. I can't remember at the moment where it is but I shall find it later. I concur. All humanity's past and present heart and spirit are read and recorded. He knows who are "His."
The donor was an 18-year-old boy killed in an automobile accident. The recipient was an 18-year old girl diagnosed with endocarditis and subsequent heart failure. This could be explained by the two being soulmates, a subject not yet discussed here. And in the Newton model, we sometimes possess sub-conscious knowledge of significant events yet to come in life. There is the case of, Dr. Mary Neal who claims in an near death experience due to a kayaking accident of being told one of her son's would die, I think at a specific age (about 19). He eventually was killed at that age by a drunk driver. While gaining such info during NDE's is unusual (so far as I know), having a sense of one's destiny from birth is not. This could include not just "bad" things like medical problems, and also experiencing accidents like being in the "wrong place" at the "wrong time", but also for good things, such as meeting up with a soulmate at a particular place and time. Things we are just supposed to do. So the boy in this story may well have known of his eventual death in this life, and for some karmic reason, wanted to experience giving an extended life to his soulmate. It wouldn't need to be a soulmate, though. But in any event, my response is that this incident could be explained in the Newton model without needing anything physical involved like the transplanted body tissue itself.
If you believe demons exist, do you also believe in Satan's existence? How is a belief in the existence of demons "proving a negative"? Are you willing to concede the existence of both "good" AND "evil" in this world? If so, who or what is the author or catalyst of Evil in your opinion?
The donor was a 34-year-old police officer shot attempting to arrest a drug dealer. The recipient was a 56-year-old college professor diagnosed with atherosclerosis and ischaemic heart disease. This one I'd have a tougher time explaining. I do know that phobias do carry over from one life to the next. A drowning death, for example can make one fearful of swimming in a following life. Death by falling, a fear of heights. Being buried alive, in an earthquake or intentional due to a ritual, claustrophobia. Newton's first past life regression case (accidental) was a man complaining of a pain in his side which medical doctors finally concluded was all in his head. It was traced to a bayoneting in a WWI battle during his session with Newton, and successfully treated through standard hypnotic techniques. So according to Newton, psychosomatic pains, even instantaneous ones associated with near instant death, can be carried over at the soul level. But in this case, only body parts were xferred, presumably not the soul. I do believe that physical bodies are the most intimate things souls have, for obvious reasons. It takes time for souls to learn to connect to each new body. Indeed we spend the first few years of childhood getting good at the basics, and upwards of 20 or more perfecting control. The "marriage" of sorts between body and soul is not something done lightly. The connection is quite intimate. To me that explains the placebo effect, but that's another topic. If there's some complication that could somehow occur with at transplant related to that, to explain this case? I don't know, and can't give a full answer here. Can anyone else, with any other model? Thanks for the info, Nolu. Interesting.
Sorry...I didn't scroll down...
Yes, I agree; I also believe our spirits possess power or influence...And are varying degrees of unique. But subject to the ebb and flow of our degree of proximity to God. This power can be invoked...From within the original "hardwiring" of God's sense of benevolence, "in the name of God, Jesus," or..."in the name of Satan (and his agents -- his demons.) It's to what extent we are ourselves influenced by either God or Satan determines our moral senses, empathy, loyalty, hatred, love, etc....and journey toward the Truth. "Premonitions"? "sixth sense"? "Gut feeling"? Different realm, open to different discussion. Communication with incarnate spirits... an incarnate spirit would be a soul NOT in a physical body. An angel would qualify, as that is what a soul without a body could be considered. Such communication does take place, so: Yes. Well, an "incarnate" would/could convey a human form. An angel could be consider an incarnate spirit; Demons as well. All are able to communicate with the living. Could they do so within a dream state or even hypnosis state? That brings us to the next logical question: To whose realm belong either? Demon possession: I'm not convinced demons exist, so at this time: No. I have seen TV presentations claiming such a thing, so I'm open minded to it. But such things may be due to mental issues. And souls can have "damaged energy" of sorts. That phrase appears in Newton's books to describe souls that are in a very poor way. Possibly what is perceived as possession is instead a soul that is quite sick and in need of help. That's a thought. You have seen the Exorcist'?? ;-) Allow me this provocative premise: If one "sees" the transcended reality and realm of "Heaven" through hypnosis, IS it as "real" as the Dream State? Yes, I can concur with your premise of seeing demons in an altered/damaged state of consciousness. But by the same token could we presume that altered state of conscious is in fact damage to the spirit "energy" or pathway attributed to demon intrusion? Thus the standing joke, "The devil made me do it" holds some ironic truth. The question to Newton and his disciples (so to speak) is the attribution of such "sickness" and damage to the soul or "spirit." It obviously *my* believe that there is a spiritual battle waged daily for ALL of us. At stake is the destination of the eternal soul. There is a constant tug of war at the spiritual level -- of unbelievers, disbelievers, the indifferent, and even believers. It's often noted that the spirit of Believers is attacked more harshly and aggressively since it it they are considered the "Army of the Lord." I can tell you that I have "seen" and sensed evil demons in several dreams. It is indescribably off-the-chart creepy, an evil Twilight Zone eerie. It's all a wild subject that can be discussed and disseminated for a looong time. Ping, I appreciate your patience and sincerity. THOUGHT ON THE "HUMAN SOUL": The Bible is not perfectly clear as to the nature of the human soul. But from studying the way the word soul is used in Scripture, we can come to some conclusions. Simply stated, the human soul is the part of a person that is not physical. It is the part of every human being that lasts eternally after the body experiences death. Genesis 35:18 describes the death of Rachel, Jacob’s wife, saying she named her son “as her soul was departing.” From this we know that the soul is different from the body and that it continues to live after physical death. The human soul is central to the personhood of a human being. As C. S. Lewis said, “You don’t have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.” In other words, personhood is not based on having a body. A soul is what is required. Repeatedly in the Bible, people are referred to as “souls” (Exodus 31:14; Proverbs 11:30), especially in contexts that focus on the value of human life and personhood or on the concept of a “whole being” (Psalm 16:9-10; Ezekiel 18:4; Acts 2:41; Revelation 18:13). The human soul is distinct from the heart (Deuteronomy 26:16; 30:6) and the spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 4:12) and the mind (Matthew 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). The human soul is created by God (Jeremiah 38:16). It can be strong or unsteady (2 Peter 2:14); it can be lost or saved (James 1:21; Ezekiel 18:4). We know that the human soul needs atonement (Leviticus 17:11) and is the part of us that is purified and protected by the truth and the work of the Holy Spirit (1 Peter 1:22). Jesus is the great Shepherd of souls (1 Peter 2:25). Matthew 11:29 tells us that we can turn to Jesus Christ to find rest for our souls. Psalm 16:9-10 is a Messianic psalm that allows us to see that Jesus also had a soul. David wrote, “Therefore my heart is glad, and my whole being rejoices; my flesh also dwells secure. For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.” This cannot be speaking of David (as Paul points out in Acts 13:35-37) because David’s body did see corruption and decay when he died. But Jesus Christ’s body never saw corruption (He was resurrected), and His soul was not abandoned to Sheol. Jesus, as the Son of Man, has a soul. There is often confusion about the human spirit vs. the human soul. In places, Scripture seems to use the terms interchangeably, but there might be a subtle difference. Otherwise, how could the Word of God penetrate “even to dividing soul and spirit” (Hebrews 4:12)? When the Bible talks about man’s spirit, it is usually speaking of an inner force which animates a person in one direction or another. It is repeatedly shown as a mover, a dynamic force (e.g., Numbers 14:24). It has been said that there are only two things that last: the Word of God (Mark 13:31) and the souls of men. This is because, like God’s Word, the soul is an imperishable thing. That thought should be both sobering and awe-inspiring. Every person you meet is an eternal soul. Every human being who has ever lived has had a soul, and all of those souls are still in existence somewhere. The question is, where? The souls that reject God’s love are condemned to pay for their own sin, eternally, in hell (Romans 6:23). But the souls that accept their own sinfulness and God’s gracious gift of forgiveness will live forever beside still waters with their Shepherd, wanting for nothing (Psalm 23:2). http://www.gotquestions.org/human-soul.html Another thought-provoking definition: Question: "What is the human spirit?" http://www.gotquestions.org/human-spirit.html
No, we are not. This is a point I tried to make earlier, I guess unsuccessfully. We as souls have strengths and weaknesses. Our goal is to make those weaknesses strong, and our strong points stronger. Your perception, the Christian perception of sin is of a negative force, something that stains us, like dirt, which must be washed away, removed from us. But there is no dirt. There is only weakness, and weakness is not a negative force to wash away. Weakness, in whatever form, is instead the absence of strength, and it's treated by adding something that is good, not by taking something bad away like "sin". Much of your response alludes to the necessity of washing something bad off of us. But that's not applicable in this model. "Man" is not so hardwired, but souls are wired to recognize right from wrong, perhaps at the start only to varying degrees. But every soul is completely unique, and young souls have an enormous amount to learn, and one is an acute perception of how the things we do, good or bad, affect others. Yes, "knowing" is key. And yet the point I made in my prior post is that there are varying degrees of awareness, of lucidity. If you crash into someone in the kitchen causing them harm because you just crawled out of bed in a stupor, are you just as accountable as doing so when wide awake? A problem with the concept of sin is that it is a binary thing. At judgement day, you have it or you don't. And yet the knowledge, or lucidity, required to commit sin comes in varying degrees. The two simply do not mix so well. As we progress in our spiritual development, the benefits of earthly life diminish, and at some point, we stop incarnating on earth, so the wheel is not never-ending. At that point, we are still far from our ultimate goal. Souls become guides for other, lessor developed souls, and continue the path of spiritual development at that level. (We all have guides, perhaps otherwise referred to as guardian angels). How far the path of development goes, Newton says he does not know, as his only source of info are, of course, the clients who are still incarnating. Newton reports that our guides select candidate lives for us to live, perhaps 2 or 3. One is usually recommended, but the final decision is ours. Perfect free will is in play for all of us. No one is ever forced to live a life they do not want to live, or even forced to choose. A soul can decline to incarnate if it wishes, for as long as it wishes. But incarnation is the most rapid way to progress spiritually, so not coming to the gym called earth means you stay weak. Progression without incarnation is very, very, very slow. But this free will element is why it can be said that life is completely fair (another beautiful element of this model), because no one is dealt a hand of cards they did not freely choose. A candidate might have a choice of a beautiful body in a wealthly life, a less attractive body, or say, one that has a handicap or maybe an opportunity to excel in the music field, which a soul may be skilled with. Choosing the handicapped body might be the preferred/recommended option, as it can better impart patience to the soul, for example, whereas a beautiful body living a wealthy life would be a waste of time for the soul. In this way, we can see a practical benefit to being physically impaired, which the Christian model basically does not recognize. This question, as with much of your response, is not applicable to this model. I don't believe I'm taking it at face value. Newton's research creates the most logical explanation to fit the observations, (mine at least) I've ever encountered, and does so better than the bible does. It fits so much better on theological, scientific and philosophical fields. It explains alleged phenominon such as ghosts (one of Newton's clients claimed to be one after a prior life, though Newton nor the client appears to have used that word), empathy, senses of de ja vou, prodegy children, phobias, the placebo effect, and even the joy eminating from babies (they've just come from paradise). Everything fits so very, very well. Yes, that is a possible explanation. But in my opinion, Newton's explanation fits the observable world much better. Well, the beauty of it is that it doesn't matter in a Newton model. In the Christian model, it does. This is another example of how Newton's model fits better -- no conflict with evolutionary theory, regardless of whether that theory is right on wrong. In the Christian model, earth is the only place in the universe where souls can originate. That because Jesus died once for all time for the redemption of souls.... but did so in human form. Ergo, any souls in non-human, alien bodies on other worlds, can't see redemption. In the Newton model, that's not a problem. The universe could be full of life, even intelligent life. Another example of it making more logical sense. I say that's not an accurate description of Newton's model. Isn't belief in a doctrine a function of the physical brain? A brain created according to DNA coding, and destined to return to dust? Some here have sourced their faith in the bible because of fulfilled prophecy, have they not? Isn't such academic research and conclusions a function of the brain that's destined to perish? Why then would a soul's destiny be determined by the function of a physical brain? Not logical. Best...
So if not at 3 years, at what age? 4? 5? Maybe 5 is too much, so.... 4 years, 7 months and 5 days? My point is that there is no single age that can be marked as the absolute point of accountability for all kids. Lucidity grows gradually as we grow older. I recall "laying down one's life for his friends" as one method. Doing that, means he's died for Christ and is eligible for salvation, and appears to not require knowledge of the gospel. It's in one of the gospels. I think I'm recalling that right, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
You may be right. But that doesn't mean you are. We are here for a purpose not understood. Not clear, but understood and very clear in the Newton model. One area where the Newton model scores higher on the logic test.
I didn't say I believed in demons. I said ruling out their existence would be proving a negative. And it would.
Thanks for the reply. If you are ever interested in exploring, more in-depth, the accounts of hard nosed prosecuters as in Simon Greenleaf and a few others let me know. They entered skeptics before examination. After they were no longer skeptics. This is the point where someone offers a link to read a book. I won't given I have a long list of books others want me to read:) I am sure you do too.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Some children are more precocious than others. The Hebrew Faith and a few others place passing from a child to adult the age of 12-13 given how they count years and what calendar used. That is not to say 12-13 is set in stone when someone is conscious to morals, good, evil etc. And fully comprehend God's Grace. As I said it depends and a parent and even the child can tell. For example a very innocent situation which brought laughter to my family. As a 4 yr old, I was staying with my aunt and uncle and cousins for a weekend. My aunt said we could all have ice cream pops AFTER dinner from the extra fridge in the basement. Well after a summer afternoon of playing down by the creek, I convinced my cousins that we should have ice cream NOW and not after dinner (again I was 4). My cousins (who were older than me) told me that we could not because their parents said AFTER dinner not BEFORE. Well they caved once I showed them how easy it was to sneak in through the garage get in the basement and open the freezer and get the ice cream. We gorged ourselves on chocolate pops for a half hour. Then, you guessed it we were called for dinner. We came up from the basement trying to wipe as much chocolate off our hands and face to no avail. We were then asked "were you eating the ice cream from the fridge?" My cousins denied it which I thought was pretty stupid. Me? I gave a tall tale. I said "no aunt R we were eating ice cream but it wasn't YOUR ice cream from the fridge. An ice cream truck crashed into your basement and the ice cream man gave us ice cream to make up for the damages." The adult population erupted in laughter BEFORE justice was meted out later. The teens in the room gave us looks like "boy you are all screwed." So 4 yrs old, I consciously hatched a Dr. Evil plan. Was I, however, conscious of my actions as deserving hell fire and eternal punishment. No I was 4 and did what 4 yr olds do. I did understand I did something wrong and would be disciplined by my staunch Irish Catholic parents. But I had not a clue of what sin was or God's Grace. I did know even at 4 and was taught God is Love. When I was 8 I started to understand why I was being taught how to "color within the lines". Meaning why I was being taught the 10 commandments, Catholic catechism and the Bible (Bible reading was a family thing too not just church). So 8 was when I became conscious. It was also about the same time young Catholics make their first Act of Contrition. It was not until age 12 (how about that) after praying to God asking "is there more to this, please show me the way" that a few months later I was invited (by a kid I was never kind to) to attend a local vacation Bible School where I heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ and His Grace more clearly. Before this I really did not hear it. Much more after this age as in believers baptism, leading into the maturity of faith. Which means salvation is a Gift of God, and once in His sheep fold, we are to live holy lives and much is required of us. So sorry for the long post, but that is just one journey to consciousness. As you can see there were several intervention points. That is how it happened for me. IMHO there is no cookie cutter set age. It is when God convicts us. It can come earlier or much later and it is Holy Spirit initiated. Putting aside dogmas what does God say? "You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13. That pretty much sums it up. One addendum. My brother has a nephew through marriage who is over 25 but mentally as deemed by MDs to be of the mind of an 8 year old. He has an adult body but the mind of a child. My brother meets with him often, and the nephew accepts the Gospel of Grace as an 8 year old would. Such is the Kingdom of God.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
1) A proud look 2) A lying tongue 3) Hands that shed innocent blood 4) A heart that devises wicked plots 5) Feet that are swift to run into mischief 6) A deceitful witness that uttereth lies 7) Him that soweth discord among brethren Wow I violated 4 of 7 at age 4 but did not realize the ramifications of my actions until a few years later. Good discourse.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for mnot the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the nwork of the law written in their hearts, their oconscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 pin the day when God will judge the secrets of men qby Jesus Christ, raccording to my gospel.
hehe... thanks for the laugh! That's a great story! A few years ago, I remember walking down the street near my home, pondering, or perhaps lamenting is a better word, the mysteries of life. I knew a pastor some 10 years ago, an incredible guy. He just radiated something wonderous when he'd be talking about God, the bible and Jesus. He had such a joy, and only had a high school education. He took the bible literally, and he had healing power in his hands. I should say "has" as I'm sure he's still out and about. A man of simple minded faith. I thought many times how I wish I could have what he had, and what I'd give up for it, and I wasn't the only one who thought that way. But I am a scientist. Of sorts, anyway, if having a 4-year degree in computer science qualifies me for that label. And having no doubts that the universe was as old as it is big, I marvelled at how this man of simple but powerful faith, believing the earth is 6000 years old could both radiate the joy he did and heal sick people. And then there was the reincarnation account of little James, and so many other things in life that just didn't fit together -- didn't add up. And as I walked down that road, I prayed that I wanted to know the truth, whatever it was. Did we live one life and perish, have an eternal destiny in either heaven or hell, or something in between? However horrible or wonderful, I wanted to know. How was it possible that all the things I've seen and heard can fit together in life? Well, I since then encountered Newton's information, and for me it was an answer to that prayer. For me, it explains more than satisfactorily both how that pastor I knew had the radiant energy and healing he had, and how little James could have had a past life. And so much more. For the first time in my life, everything fell into place. We all have our paths to walk, and we should all stay true to our consciences. While I understand that you consider my path dangerous and even lost, I consider yours to be perfectly fine. It's not important whether you agree with me or not. You as a soul will be just fine either way. Your faith won't allow you to reciprocate and I understand that. But everyone sees things differently. That's how life is. I appreciate the discussion with you, Liberator and Orthodoxa. I'll see you around.
No, we are not. This is a point I tried to make earlier, I guess unsuccessfully. We as souls have strengths and weaknesses. Our goal is to make those weaknesses strong, and our strong points stronger. Your perception, the Christian perception of sin is of a negative force, something that stains us, like dirt, which must be washed away, removed from us. But there is no dirt. There is only weakness, and weakness is not a negative force to wash away. Weakness, in whatever form, is instead the absence of strength, and it's treated by adding something that is good, not by taking something bad away like "sin". Much of your response alludes to the necessity of washing something bad off of us. But that's not applicable in this model. Two points to address here: 1) Even in the Newton/Reincarnation/Karma Model -- IF the "goal is to make those weaknesses strong, and our strong points stronger," doesn't some remnant imperfection of morality still remain? With each and every "new" life which to "correct" past imperfections, aren't new imperfections/sin created in the meantime? How are past imperfections/sin remembered? Or am I still not getting your gist? 2) The Christian perception of "sin" is indeed based on a real "weakness" -- of moral discipline and fortitude. The bad news is, it is innate "Human Nature." Ergo, the need for a Perfect Redeemer. I understand that no "dirt" need be washed away in your model. But it seems counter-intuitive to discount moral accountability and "universal justice" in whatever model is chosen. In the Heaven model (as per "God's House Rules," yes, we must first be "de-contaminated" ;-) I don't believe I'm taking it at face value. Newton's research creates the most logical explanation to fit the observations, (mine at least) I've ever encountered, and does so better than the bible does. It fits so much better on theological, scientific and philosophical fields. It explains alleged phenominon such as ghosts (one of Newton's clients claimed to be one after a prior life, though Newton nor the client appears to have used that word), empathy, senses of de ja vou, prodegy children, phobias, the placebo effect, and even the joy eminating from babies (they've just come from paradise). Everything fits so very, very well. By "it," do you mean Newton's model of Reincarnation & Karma? Or the destination of the soul? Q: Is the metaphysical really explainable via "science"? Yes -- we've ALL had those senses of deja vu, familiarity, unexplained phobias, that shared "baby-high." Dunno how to explain it...other than as rare heightened hyper-empathetic sense as a result of hormonal/brain synapsical "eclipse" of sorts. "Perfect timing"? (Do winners at the track, lottery, and stocks/soul-mate choosing also fall under this catagory?) "Man" is not so hardwired, but souls are wired to recognize right from wrong, perhaps at the start only to varying degrees. But every soul is completely unique, and young souls have an enormous amount to learn, and one is an acute perception of how the things we do, good or bad, affect others. I concur that all souls are unique. AND need to "learn" much -- under fire and through adversity. But if we both agree that there IS a degree of "hardwired" sense of right & wrong," doesn't Newton's model need to explain that creative source? And WHY we imbued with that sense to begin with? (along with all the other fundamental discerning senses of beauty, honor, loyalty, etc?) IF Newton's NDE subjects provide the bulk of "evidence" in support of his model, your model, and the Reincarnation model, I again must express a deep cynicism for its "proof" given the existence of Satan and demons, and their power to invade, deceive and provide illusions. Our dream-state is evidence that our sense "reality" is prone to alteration (Many innocuous post-dream reactions: "DID THAT REALLY HAPPEN??") Yes, "knowing" is key. And yet the point I made in my prior post is that there are varying degrees of awareness, of lucidity. If you crash into someone in the kitchen causing them harm because you just crawled out of bed in a stupor, are you just as accountable as doing so when wide awake? A problem with the concept of sin is that it is a binary thing. At judgement day, you have it or you don't. And yet the knowledge, or lucidity, required to commit sin comes in varying degrees. The two simply do not mix so well. Good premises to consider. That's what intuitively leads man to believe in a final accountability of our lives and judgment. As we progress in our spiritual development, the benefits of earthly life diminish, and at some point, we stop incarnating on earth, so the wheel is not never-ending. At that point, we are still far from our ultimate goal. Souls become guides for other, lessor developed souls, and continue the path of spiritual development at that level. (We all have guides, perhaps otherwise referred to as guardian angels). How far the path of development goes, Newton says he does not know, as his only source of info are, of course, the clients who are still incarnating. I understand this theory of a "graduation" of sorts, and mentoring seems to make great sense for you, and quite logical. I can't help but question at face-value an entire theory of the Afterlife based on the similar NDE experiences of people whose subconscious firewall were breached and opened to the same power of suggestion scenarios from external forces. Newton reports that our guides select candidate lives for us to live, perhaps 2 or 3. One is usually recommended, but the final decision is ours. Perfect free will is in play for all of us. No one is ever forced to live a life they do not want to live, or even forced to choose. A soul can decline to incarnate if it wishes, for as long as it wishes. But incarnation is the most rapid way to progress spiritually, so not coming to the gym called earth means you stay weak. Progression without incarnation is very, very, very slow. But this free will element is why it can be said that life is completely fair (another beautiful element of this model), because no one is dealt a hand of cards they did not freely choose. Interesting -- and I'm trying to be objective here....But as cynical and taking seriously so important a philosophy as life and death. Observations: Newton appears to be taking on the role of guide and mentor himself, speaking from authority. Might it be possible that HE himself is chosen as a subject and vehicle of external powers of suggestion? Free will in play. +1 The possibility of a hijacked "free will" -- always a possibility of ANY one. Deception at work potentially in a weakened/damaged spiritual state. As to the "fairness" of life, hundreds of millions of Asian starving teens vs. Buffy in Beverly Hills may have slightly different views on those dealt cards. Rhyme or reason -- NOT seeing it in this model. Hard for the soul to progress spiritually when Priority One is the next meal and Karma 101 teaches that the current hopeless lot is the result of a past life's transgressions and the NEXT life most likely just a tick on the wheel better :-( This question, as with much of your response, is not applicable to this model. Is the spiritual step of "accountability and justice" for the soul eliminated totally in this model? Yes, that [Satan's power to hijack his hypnotized subjects AND then implant these same glorious mirages of "Heaven"] is a possible explanation. But in my opinion, Newton's explanation fits the observable world much better. Our "observable world" is often an illusion, a deception. Well, the beauty of it is that it doesn't matter in a Newton model. In the Christian model, it does. This is another example of how Newton's model fits better -- no conflict with evolutionary theory, regardless of whether that theory is right on wrong. In the Christian model, earth is the only place in the universe where souls can originate. That because Jesus died once for all time for the redemption of souls.... but did so in human form. Ergo, any souls in non-human, alien bodies on other worlds, can't see redemption. Newton's Model offers as its Centerpiece of Proof of Karmic progression of the soul one single "observable" anecdotal study that is admittedly prone to spiritual deception. The rest is pure speculation. Often, simple IS "beauty"; In this case it appears to be mask. I labor to find any "logic" or solid "observability" in his model that supersedes/displaces the Judeo-Christian of love/accountability, justice/reward. The Christian model relies on thousands of years actual "observability" and scrutiny. It presents a genealogy, historical persons, those who have literally "spoken" to God, their respective prophecies relaying His message and Laws, outlining His Plan for current living; Outlining moral/spiritual criteria for The Afterlife; recording physical eye-witness testimony and material evidence in support of Resurrection as the much larger Christian model of "basket" -- beginning at Point "A" and ends at Point "Z." The extensive volume of measurable evidence adds up to logic PLUS faith dwarfs the Newton Model by any standard. Just calling it as I see it. As to the consideration of being "inclusive" of potential ET souls, is it really relevant to our discussion of Man's soul? Or even the issue of "evolution"? (which is amoral in it's "survival of the fittest" premise even if it were a historical fact instead of a scientific impossibility -- another debate for another day :-) I say that's not an accurate description of Newton's model. Which specific assertions are not? Isn't belief in a doctrine a function of the physical brain? A brain created according to DNA coding, and destined to return to dust? Some here have sourced their faith in the bible because of fulfilled prophecy, have they not? Isn't such academic research and conclusions a function of the brain that's destined to perish? Why then would a soul's destiny be determined by the function of a physical brain? Not logical. Analyses to determine validity in beliefs or doctrines are indeed DNA attributes. The soul's destiny is determined by our inane hard-wired "logic" and knowledge that we are indeed finite, fragile, spiritual creatures who instinctively "know" we indeed have a Creator. Is it our "processor" -- our "brain" that determines the direction and destination of our soul, OR is it our spiritual "guide" which exists outside the realm of the brain? Can't it be both?
In *my* view, it appears you are not getting my gist, being unable to fully get away from the concept of imperfections as something to wash away. A weakness is not something that's remedied by taking anything away, but by adding. In this case, strength. One of Newton's case studies describes the birthing process of souls. The common term used for God is "the Source". I don't recall any real explanation for "why" we are the way we are though Newton usually queries hypnotized clients at length on topics of interest that are encountered. First, they are hypnotized subjects, not NDE subjects. On that note, this as an aside, there are many NDE's that relate overwhelmingly wonderful encounters with heavenly beings, but also many that talk about views of hell and demons. By contrast, Newton says he has never had a single client ever relate to him any view of demons, devils or hell. Newton's stated opinion about this, in at least one interview, is that NDE's often, if not almost always involve people who are suffering severe physical trauma. Hit by car, shot, severe pain and the sort, and that this psychological and physical input generates fear, which combined with preconditioning about the afterlife presents highly negative illusionary experiences. It takes some time for souls, after leaving the body to fully "awake" from the physical life experience and for the amnesia of our eternal existence and soulmates to wear off. By contrast, hypnotized subjects do not have the traumatic input factor that NDE subjects do. So Newton's opinion (and he objectively states it as his opinion, which is indicative of his approach being objective, which I like about him) is that the NDE's of hell and demons are illusionary only. It could be logically argued that anyone who is being hypnotized has obviously never been condemned to hell for all eternity after some prior life, and that could be the reason Newton never had any clients talk about demons and hell. But back to your point, no there's no "proof" that Newton's model is correct. I don't think we have proof any spiritual model. If we did, there'd be only one religion in the world, and it wouldn't be called a religion. We have evidence in support for both Christian and Newton models, and evidence is not proof. It comes down to faith to make the connection between that evidence and what we conclude as truth. That's how it is for both you and me. Other forces could also account for such concepts. Lifelong regret for deeds and negligences that result in severe harm to others, a desire for revenge on wrongdoers, envy of those living prosperously at the expense of some lower class and even a desire to control the behavior of others can be the source of such ideas. I can't cite any source for this but I was told or read somewhere Constantine declared reincarnation a heresy, possibly for the latter. Tell people they are here for one life only, and after that the judgement and you get more obedient people. True or not, that is a political motive for any authority to discard reincarnation. Then the subject of whether hypnosis involves any such "firewall breaching" would be a subject to investigate and agree upon. Could Newton be the subject of external manipulation? Sure, but we also have Brian Weiss, an author in the same profession has corroborated Newton on so many points, and without referencing Newton's work in the slightest way. I want to be extremely clear that Newton's never comes off as any "authority" in any of his books or interviews, saying things like *this* is the way things are and anyone or any religion that says otherwise is a lie and falsehood just subverting/deceiving people, etc, etc like members of traditional faiths like Christianity so often do. He comes off ONLY as a messenger of sorts, listening to what his clients say, truly interviewing them, relaying what they have told him. He does not pass judgement on concepts that are conveyed, such as the life selection depiction I mentioned above, which may well seem silly to you (given your "trying to be objective" phrase). If he did, he'd be telling his clients while they are under hypnosis, that what they are talking about is nonsense, and that he does not do, and no hypnotic therapist should ever be doing. He always talks with them in the context of what they are seeing *IS* real to them, saving analysis for another time. Two more points about this, also. 1) There is an element in hypnosis called "conscious interference" in which a hypnotic subject may relate things about the past that are influenced by the subjects conscious mind, such as desire to not believe that some past event really occurred the exact way it actually did. This could be tied to subjects not being as deeply hypnotized as they could be, and hypnosis is something that occurs at various degrees. Meditation, deep prayer, and the effects of fasting can all be considered a mild form of self-hypnosis. Times when you get out of your car after a routine trip to/from work, realizing that you have no conscious memory of the actual trip -- you were under very mild self-hypnosis. For this reason, no single memory uttered by a hypnotized client should be considered as necessarily factual. Only if many clients relate the same information would some aspect be considered as having some "authoritative" basis, and as I mentioned numerous times, with thousands of clients that standard has been met (at least for Newton) with the general concept of reincarnation and a spirit world complete with a "social structure" of sorts with soulmates, guides and a life selection process. A place that is central to our existence with earth being only the place away from home, instead of the reverse. 2) Relating views of the spirit world into English or any human language is problematic. Frequently people complain that words cannot describe what they see/perceive of this extra dimensional place, and that's quite reasonable as our language(s) evolved completely on earth for the purpose of living on earth. So it's appropriate to lend some slack to descriptions that may seem silly on the surface, much as we would listening to a first grader describe his field trip to a to a space launch facility. Also, hypothetically speaking, it's not unreasonable at all that future events on earth could be known well in advance if one has the advantage of an extra-dimensional view. A 3-dimentional view could offer enormous advantages in a 2-dimensional world. So why not a 5-dimensional view of our 4-dimensional world? I'm sorry, but I think I've already answer that more than sufficiently on this thread. But your source of faith, the bible, is part of this observable world. Not one, but thousands as per above. I see an enormous amount of logic to it. Enormous. Makes complete sense. We also both observe accounts of reincarnation. It's just that you discount them as lies of satan. Condemnation is simply not something God would do. That seems more likely a human attribute that was pinned on God in the early days, and carried forward into just about every major religion today. The #1 question taught in the unofficial "Atheism 101" classes is very valid: if God really loves everyone, why would he send people to hell? Christians answer with doctrine about God's nature saying he has no choice. The much better answer: He doesn't. My take: The bible is based on ancient documents claiming all you say, created by decent, artistic people, accumulating more respect as authority because of its antiquity with each passing generation. It does contain much truth and goodness which is a basis to claim all of it must be true. But also contains flaws, in the form of God being ascribed human attributes, painted as being angry, jealous and condemning. That in spite of such traits being an intrinsic sign of imperfection, insecurity and weakness when we see them in the people around us. Heck even the bible says we should rise above these shortcomings, and yet we're to believe it accurately describes God? To me it is, as the Christian theology precludes the existence of ET souls, and possibly even any form of life existing anywhere else in the universe depending on one's reading of Genesis. In the christian model, would an ET soul need to be saved (have sin)? and if so, could it be saved through Jesus's (human) death on the cross? Shouldn't Jesus incarnate on that ET world and die (again) as an ET for them? Repeat for every planet that has intelligent life seeking God? For that matter, do chimps have souls? If not, there has to be something holy and sacred about human DNA.... and then things get messy. Very messy. With Newton's model, everything here is squeaky, squeaky clean. But yes, ET ... discussion for another day.
Ok I'm not following this whole conversation. Is there evidence of this or is it just wishful thinking to make your beliefs jive?
It's a deep subject at times. That question pretty much summarizes what the thread attempts to answer. In a nutshell, there is evidence for both the Newton and Christian models, and doubtless wishful thinking for both as well, on the part of everyone here.
I was just wondering. Thanks.
I'm sorry for the delay in replying, my internet access was quite limited for a few days. Kalomiros began his essay putting forth similar objections to the ones that you listed upthread concerning things like a concept where God is somehow bound by necessity and similar issues. IMHO he overgeneralizes a bit and tends to paint all of Western Christendom as though it uniformly held the more extreme Calvinist views, but he does openly spell out what many people see as problems in some of the Christian theologies. He sums up with an description of the Orthodox view of heaven and hell -- which as you can see from the attached -- are not so much legalistic and judicial views of God but a recognition of our freedom to either love or hate God, and the logical consequences of that choice. "How are we to understand this judgment if we are to understand the divine words not in a human but in a divine manner'? What is God's judgment? God is Truth and Light. God's judgment is nothing else than our coming into contact with truth and light. In the day of the Great Judgment all men will appear naked before this penetrating light of truth. The "books" will be opened. What are these "books"? They are our hearts. Our hearts will be opened by the penetrating light of God, and what is in these hearts will be revealed. If in those hearts there is love for God, those hearts will rejoice seeing God's light. If, on the contrary, there is hatred for God in those hearts, these men will suffer by receiving on their opened hearts this penetrating light of truth which they detested all their life. So that which will differentiate between one man and another will not be a decision of God, a reward or a punishment from Him, but that which was in each one's heart; what was there during all our life will be revealed in the Day of Judgment. If there is a reward and a punishment in this revelation -- and there really is -- it does not come from God but from the love or hate which reigns in our heart. Love has bliss in it, hatred has despair, bitterness, grief, affliction, wickedness, agitation, confusion, darkness, and all the other interior conditions which compose hell (I Cor. 4:6). The Light of Truth, God's Energy, God's grace which will fall on men unhindered by corrupt conditions in the Day of Judgment, will be the same to all men. There will be no distinction whatever. All the difference lies in those who receive, not in Him Who gives. The sun shines on healthy and diseased eyes alike, without any distinction. Healthy eyes enjoy light and because of it see clearly the beauty which surrounds them. Diseased eyes feel pain, they hurt, suffer, and want to hide from this same light which brings such great happiness to those who have healthy eyes. But alas, there is no longer any possibility of escaping God's light. During this life there was. In the New Creation of the Resurrection, God will be everywhere and in everything. His light and love will embrace all. There will be no place hidden from God, as was the case during our corrupt life in the kingdom of the prince of this world. The devil's kingdom will be despoiled by the Common Resurrection and God will take possession again of His creation. Love will enrobe everything with its sacred Fire which will flow like a river from the throne of God and will irrigate paradise. But this same river of Love -- for those who have hate in their hearts -- will suffocate and burn. "For our God is a consuming fire", (Heb. 12:29). The very fire which purifies gold, also consumes wood. Precious metals shine in it like the sun, rubbish burns with black smoke. All are in the same fire of Love. Some shine and others become black and dark. In the same furnace steel shines like the sun, whereas clay turns dark and is hardened like stone. The difference is in man, not in God. The difference is conditioned by the free choice of man, which God respects absolutely. God's judgment is the revelation of the reality which is in man." ... "Now if anyone is perplexed and does not understand how it is possible for God's love to render anyone pitifully wretched and miserable and even burning as it were in flames, let him consider the elder brother of the prodigal son. Was he not in his father's estate? Did not everything in it belong to him? Did he not have his father's love? Did his father not come himself to entreat and beseech him to come and take part in the joyous banquet? What rendered him miserable and burned him with inner bitterness and hate? Who refused him anything? Why was he not joyous at his brother's return? Why did he not have love either toward his father or toward his brother? Was it not because of his wicked, inner disposition? Did he not remain in hell because of that? And what was this hell? Was it any separate place? Were there any instruments of torture? Did he not continue to live in his father's house? What separated him from all the joyous people in the house if not his own hate and his own bitterness? Did his father, or even his brother, stop loving him? Was it not precisely this very love which hardened his heart more and more? Was it not the joy that made him sad? Was not hatred burning in his heart, hatred for his father and his brother, hatred for the love of his father toward his brother and for the love of his brother toward his father? This is hell: the negation of love; the return of hate for love; bitterness at seeing innocent joy; to be surrounded by love and to have hate in one's heart. This is the eternal condition of all the damned. They are all dearly loved. They are all invited to the joyous banquet. They are all living in God's Kingdom, in the New Earth and the New Heavens. No one expels them. Even if they wanted to go away they could not flee from God's New Creation, nor hide from God's tenderly loving omnipresence... In the new eternal life, God will be everything to His creatures, not only to the good but also to the wicked, not only to those who love Him, but likewise to those who hate Him. But how will those who hate Him endure to have everything from the hands of Him Whom they detest? Oh, what an eternal torment is this, what an eternal fire, what a gnashing of teeth! Depart from Me, ye cursed, into the everlasting inner fire of hatred," saith the Lord, because I was thirsty for your love and you did not give it to Me, I was hungry for your blessedness and you did not offer it to Me, I was imprisoned in My human nature and you did not come to visit Me in My church; you are free to go where your wicked desire wishes, away from Me, in the torturing hatred of your hearts which is foreign to My loving heart which knows no hatred for anyone. Depart freely from love to the everlasting torture of hate, unknown and foreign to Me and to those who are with Me, but prepared by freedom for the devil, from the days I created My free, rational creatures. But wherever you go in the darkness of your hating hearts, My love will follow you like a river of fire, because no matter what your heart has chosen, you are and you will eternally continue to be, My children. Amen."
Hi Orthodoxa, That's for taking the time to post this. I would say this description of God is much more in line with my own thinking. Traits such as wrathfulness, jealousy, and a source of condemnation is, from where I'm sitting at least, human traits that are incorrectly ascribed to God. As I mentioned and maintain, such traits are indicative of weakness and insecurity when we see them in people around us, so why would God have them? Doesn't fit for me. In the spirit world portrayed by Newton (and this is a scene repeatedly conveyed by clients) there are elders with whom we review our lives. Such a scene would resemble a trial, except that the "elders" in this scene are never condemning. It's more of a extremely wise consultation administered with the utmost love. Any regrets or guilts felt are sourced solely in the person who is appearing before it, for harms inflicted and failures to do well in whatever manner. While there's still somewhat of a difference between this and the portrait of God you provided by Kalomiros, it seems there's agreement in God not possessing negative traits. Newton does write of a place where souls with significant "damaged energy" reside. As I recall it, the description seems to resemble somewhat of a halfway house of sorts, or perhaps something more like an insane asylum. Those who have committed particularly horrible acts could be found there. It's not for punishment, but a place where attempts are made to help them recover. The door does seem to be open to souls not recovering to choose annihilation -- complete free-will is a repeating theme so it seems that choice might be available, but it seems Newton's not had anyone ever say that. But those there are loved no less than anyone else. Not much information is given about this place, but it seems the closest thing to a spiritual hell that Newton mentions. But all of this does, in spirit (so to speak), loosely resemble the characteristics of the judgement described in your post. Thanks again, Orthodoxa.
And maybe I'd better address your above post this as well... (etal)
Michael Newton's findings do the best job I've ever found of explaining them, and does so better that Christian theology ever has.
#57. To: redleghunter, Pinguinite (#28)
He is offering 'an' answer which to people answers a lot of their questions without the trappings or concerns of a higher power. Newton is offering people in a post modern world exactly what they want and doing so through hypnosis.
#58. To: Pinguinite (#37)
How likely is it they would be willing to let a family defame the memory of this pilot for their own personal gain? I'd put it at near zero. So to me, fraud cannot explain it.
#59. To: Orthodoxa, Pinguinite, redleghunter (#42)
With hypnotically guided "past life regression", people gain things that they like. They get an explanation, a new world view. In many cases, they get to feel like that in the past they were someone heroic and powerful. The video featured a child "remembering" that he was a WWII fighter pilot! What young boy would not want to be able to believe that was their own history? I have yet to ever meet someone claiming to have remembered a past life where they remember being something like a garbage collector or a drug addict. They are almost always something exciting and glamorous, something that the average person in a humdrum life wishes they could be.
#60. To: Liberator (#59)
#61. To: Pinguinite (#47)
by Paul Pearsall, PhD
Gary E. Schwartz, PhD
Linda G. Russek, PhD
— William James, MD
#62. To: redleghunter (#48)
My humble and sincere apologies as I did sound like a prosecutor in my last post. I must have forgot this is LF and not LP or FR:)
#63. To: Orthodoxa (#49)
So again I would maintain that there is no need to believe that fraud was involved. A small child could do something as simple as play a game for a few months and absorb some incredibly detailed information that could amaze a veteran who had actually been in the conflict. Additionally, if you have interacted with small children of that age, you will know firsthand that they very often have great difficulty in distinguishing the difference between pretend fantasy and real life.
#64. To: Orthodoxa (#50)
I can understand your criticism of a theology where God is seemingly bound by necessity. But I would caution you that the viewpoint with which you disagree (as do I) is not a universally accepted viewpoint among Christians.
#65. To: Liberator (#54)
(Edited)
Btw, how do we define "sin"? As "evil acts"? "Spiritual filth"? "Violations of the spirit"?
In the reincarnation model, an eternity of lifetimes couldn't fully redeem man's nature -- which is to sin.
Which bring me to ask again -- to what authority or source of its validity as a redemptive solution can we trace "Reincarnation" and its partner, "Karma"? Have those who believe a memory of past transgressions and "mistakes"? Do YOU remember you past transgressions so that you may correct them? Since there is no "cheat-sheet" to this model, how does one ever hope to correct the sins of the past?
"Endless love with endless patience"? Yes, I do see it with God. But I see it in the context that despite our "nature" to be narcissistic, selfish, liars, hurtful, and abusive to ourselves and our fellow man, God has offered a simple Solution, but it DOES take faith. Why not accept instead the solution found in the Bible and God-in-the-Flesh -- a Messiah -- who picks up the entire tab IF we simply believe? It is backed by logic, history, eyewitnesses, testimony, fulfilled prophecies...and conclusive FINAL Destination based on man's Free Will. And yes, God own Word, shielded by an impenetrable firewall.
I appreciate you remarks and thoughts as well...
IF we can both admit that God the Almighty who created EVERYTHING from scratch, reason and purpose, how can we then rationalize that He wasn't capable of transcribing EXACTLY his Will and His "Onwer's Manual" into papyrus/paper/memory? To me it's illogical.
Reincarnation and Karma? Concepts -- though rational in some senses -- hasn't enough answers. IF the "eyewitnesses" of hypnotized subjects who've seen Heaven" -- regardless of degree of morality, faith, or religion -- ALL pretty much describe the same exact beautiful experience, IS there a possibility that the entire trip is Satanic Deception?
What common element is conveyed upon return? That essentially ALL who will leave this earth will enter Paradise -- regardless of ANY faith whatsoever.
#66. To: Liberator (#56)
Ping, can you clarify? "Explaining" what "better than Christian theology ever has "?
#67. To: Liberator (#58)
My eyes aren't shut to this kind of phenomena, but why can't demons be responsible in this case?
Do you believe in such a thing as "Black Magik"? Communication with incarnate spirits? Demon possession?
#68. To: Liberator (#59)
These past lives never reveal some common schlub, serf, or slave. Imagine someone "regressing" to a few different past lives -- ALL embarrassing examples.
#69. To: nolu chan (#61)
You may be interested in the professed experiences of organ transplant recipients in this lengthy article featuring numerous examples.
#70. To: Pinguinite (#69)
#71. To: Pinguinite, Orthodoxa, redleghunter, don (#65)
(Btw, how do we define "sin"? As "evil acts"? "Spiritual filth"? "Violations of the spirit"?
1) A proud look
7) Him that soweth discord among brethren
2) A lying tongue
3) Hands that shed innocent blood
4) A heart that devises wicked plots
5) Feet that are swift to run into mischief
6) A deceitful witness that uttereth lies
#72. To: Pinguinite, Liberator, Don, Orthodoxa (#65)
Either a soul has sin on it or it does not, so at what point is a young child capable of committing his first sin and getting tainted for all eternity? 3 years? That is, 3 years from birth? Or maybe 3 years, 9 months from conception is a better clock to go by, since some kids are born early and we don't want to penalized them for starting to breathe a mere 7 months after life truely started instead of the normal 9? Then again, some kids are not as bright as others, so maybe the slower ones should get 6 months or a year extra free time as a toddler before they are eligible to sin, so if they happen to die in that time, they go to heaven. (??)
#73. To: Pinguinite (#66)
Under Newton's model, we have no conflict with the theory of evolution. Life can exist all through the universe, even intelligent life, and there's no issue about our importance or spiritual value above that of animals. So earth need not be the "center of the universe", so to speak.
#74. To: A K A Stone, Pinguinite, redleghunter, Don, Orthodoxa (#72)
At 3 years old no one has reached the age of accountability. They would not be held accountable.
#75. To: nolu chan (#70)
#76. To: Pinguinite (#67)
Logically, the existence of demons can never be ruled out. That would be proving a negative, afterall. But there are other factors to consider in deciding what is likely true.
#77. To: nolu chan (#70)
#78. To: Pinguinite (#76)
#79. To: Pinguinite, LF (#67)
Black magic/k? I don't know. I do believe we as souls possess power. All souls are also unique, with varying strengths. It explains such things as empathy, premonitions and things of that sort.
#80. To: Liberator (#71)
But even if we remove the act of "sin" as a moral violation of human behavior in your model of Reincarnation, aren't we also removing morality that Reincarnation hopes will be addressed and corrected in future lives?
I think we can both agree that there obviously still exist "evil acts" being created and perpetrated upon others (as well upon our own flesh and spirit); Traits we as rational humans are hardwired to recognized (psychopaths/sociopaths excluded.) CRUCIAL QUESTION: Do you believe man is "hardwired" to recognize "right from wrong"?
Have those who died in infancy committed such deeds? Highly unlikely since they haven't yet developed the capacity to know good from evil. And THAT is key: "Knowing." Might there be some exceptions to the "age-rule"? Presumably. God knows the heart and spirit.
Wait -- it DOES appear the concepts of "sin" and "redemption" ARE indeed "issues." Otherwise, why the never-ending "teachable moment" returns to this life of suffering and disappointment, spinning forever upon a never-ending “wheel of reincarnation”? When does the wheel stop?
We're still left with further mysteries and gaps -- WHO does the "choosing" of lives (in the future), by which all such believers retain an acute sense of past transgressions so that lessons could be learned?
Again -- by what universal law of "justice" does suffering the same pain in previous lives atone as penance for the past? And again -- to whom and what force decides at what point such penance (or tab) is finally paid for our soul?
I'm still not understanding the foundation or genesis of Newton's field of "evidence" in support of reincarnation and Karma. Neither any definitive "answers" (other than the "evidence" provided by what appears to be the same deception depicting a vivid "Heaven" that also replicates a peace and love.) Odd that this "Heaven" requires NOTHING other than....passing on from this life onto the next (that one.) Since Satan is the Father of Lies, the Great Deceiver, and sly, obvious stealer of souls, why take Newton's research at face-value in the first place?
Q: Is it in Satan's power to hijack his hypnotized subjects AND then implant these same glorious mirages of "Heaven"? Satan presented a similar vision of glory more or less in change for his soul. Satan's greatest lie is in convince some that he does exits. Which is exactly why my premise could be dismissed.
Moreover, the "science" of evolution -- if anything -- is totally un-proven from A-Z (but that's obviously another story.)
MESSAGES TO ALL: "God is irrelevant. Judgement irrelevant. Morality irrelevant. EVERYONE arrives at the same place -- regardless of degree of moral observance, deed, faith during our mortal lives."
Where is it written that DNA somehow controls the destiny of our eternal soul? Your premise presumes quite a bit without authority.
#81. To: A K A Stone (#72)
At 3 years old no one has reached the age of accountability. They would not be held accountable.
Also the word of God found in the Bible provides a way for salvation for those who have never heard of the God of the Bible. I'll elaborate further when I have more time. It has something to do with those who naturally do the things found in the law. I can't remember at the moment where it is but I shall find it later.
#82. To: Liberator (#73)
Please don't take this personally -- I'd admire your candor and honesty. But IF Satan were to write his Bible, he would preface with the above. Fear of the Lord is beginning of ALL wisdom.
We may not have chosen to be here, but God did. For Hisd reason and purpose. And God DID have a choice in exactly how this Universe works -- He created it, remember? :-)
#83. To: Liberator (#76)
If you believe demons exist, do you also believe in Satan's existence?
How is a belief in the existence of demons "proving a negative"?
#84. To: Pinguinite (#62)
#85. To: Pinguinite, A K A Stone, liberator, CZ82 (#81)
So if not at 3 years, at what age? 4? 5? Maybe 5 is too much, so.... 4 years, 7 months and 5 days? My point is that there is no single age that can be marked as the absolute point of accountability for all kids. Lucidity grows gradually as we grow older.
#86. To: Liberator (#71)
Further on the subject of "right and wrong," there are generally a "Seven Deadly Sins" as cited in the Bible (Proverbs 6:16-19):
#87. To: Pinguinite (#81)
I recall "laying down one's life for his friends" as one method. Doing that, means he's died for Christ and is eligible for salvation, and appears to not require knowledge of the gospel. It's in one of the gospels. I think I'm recalling that right, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
#88. To: redleghunter, Liberator, Orthodoxa (#85)
"no aunt R we were eating ice cream but it wasn't YOUR ice cream from the fridge. An ice cream truck crashed into your basement and the ice cream man gave us ice cream to make up for the damages."
"You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13.
#89. To: Pinguinite (#80)
"But even if we remove the act of 'sin' as a moral violation of human behavior in your model of Reincarnation, aren't we also removing morality that Reincarnation hopes will be addressed and corrected in future lives?"
"Again -- by what universal law of "justice" does suffering the same pain in previous lives atone as penance for the past? And again -- to whom and what force decides at what point such penance (or tab) is finally paid for our soul?"
"MESSAGES TO ALL: "God is irrelevant. Judgement irrelevant. Morality irrelevant. EVERYONE arrives at the same place -- regardless of degree of moral observance, deed, faith during our mortal lives."
#90. To: Liberator (#89)
1) Even in the Newton/Reincarnation/Karma Model -- IF the "goal is to make those weaknesses strong, and our strong points stronger," doesn't some remnant imperfection of morality still remain? With each and every "new" life which to "correct" past imperfections, aren't new imperfections/sin created in the meantime? How are past imperfections/sin remembered? Or am I still not getting your gist?
I concur that all souls are unique. AND need to "learn" much -- under fire and through adversity. But if we both agree that there IS a degree of "hardwired" sense of right & wrong," doesn't Newton's model need to explain that creative source? And WHY we imbued with that sense to begin with? (along with all the other fundamental discerning senses of beauty, honor, loyalty, etc?)
IF Newton's NDE subjects provide the bulk of "evidence" in support of his model, your model, and the Reincarnation model, I again must express a deep cynicism for its "proof" given the existence of Satan and demons, and their power to invade, deceive and provide illusions. Our dream-state is evidence that our sense "reality" is prone to alteration (Many innocuous post-dream reactions: "DID THAT REALLY HAPPEN??")
Good premises to consider. That's what intuitively leads man to believe in a final accountability of our lives and judgment.
I understand this theory of a "graduation" of sorts, and mentoring seems to make great sense for you, and quite logical. I can't help but question at face-value an entire theory of the Afterlife based on the similar NDE experiences of people whose subconscious firewall were breached and opened to the same power of suggestion scenarios from external forces.
Newton reports that our guides select candidate lives for us to live, perhaps 2 or 3. One is usually recommended, but the final decision is ours. Perfect free will is in play for all of us. No one is ever forced to live a life they do not want to live, or even forced to choose. A soul can decline to incarnate if it wishes, for as long as it wishes. But incarnation is the most rapid way to progress spiritually, so not coming to the gym called earth means you stay weak. Progression without incarnation is very, very, very slow. But this free will element is why it can be said that life is completely fair (another beautiful element of this model), because no one is dealt a hand of cards they did not freely choose.
Interesting -- and I'm trying to be objective here....But as cynical and taking seriously so important a philosophy as life and death.
Observations: Newton appears to be taking on the role of guide and mentor himself, speaking from authority. Might it be possible that HE himself is chosen as a subject and vehicle of external powers of suggestion?
Is the spiritual step of "accountability and justice" for the soul eliminated totally in this model?
Our "observable world" is often an illusion, a deception.
Newton's Model offers as its Centerpiece of Proof of Karmic progression of the soul one single "observable" anecdotal study ....
I labor to find any "logic" or solid "observability" in his model that supersedes/displaces the Judeo-Christian of love/accountability, justice/reward.
The Christian model relies on thousands of years actual "observability" and scrutiny. It presents a genealogy, historical persons, those who have literally "spoken" to God, their respective prophecies relaying His message and Laws, outlining His Plan for current living; Outlining moral/spiritual criteria for The Afterlife; recording physical eye-witness testimony and material evidence in support of Resurrection as the much larger Christian model of "basket" -- beginning at Point "A" and ends at Point "Z." The extensive volume of measurable evidence adds up to logic PLUS faith dwarfs the Newton Model by any standard. Just calling it as I see it.
As to the consideration of being "inclusive" of potential ET souls, is it really relevant to our discussion of Man's soul? Or even the issue of "evolution"?
#91. To: Pinguinite (#90)
, but by adding. In this case, strength.
#92. To: A K A Stone (#91)
Ok I'm not following this whole conversation.
Is there evidence of this or is it just wishful thinking to make your beliefs jive?
#93. To: Pinguinite (#92)
#94. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter (#64)
As for the link, could I ask you to summarize it? What spare time I have I'm using to participate here. I did skim it, but it does seem to come from a perspective that's quite removed from where I am right now.
#95. To: Orthodoxa (#94)
The Light of Truth, God's Energy, God's grace which will fall on men unhindered by corrupt conditions in the Day of Judgment, will be the same to all men. There will be no distinction whatever. All the difference lies in those who receive, not in Him Who gives. The sun shines on healthy and diseased eyes alike, without any distinction. Healthy eyes enjoy light and because of it see clearly the beauty which surrounds them. Diseased eyes feel pain, they hurt, suffer, and want to hide from this same light which brings such great happiness to those who have healthy eyes.
#96. To: Pinguinite (#90)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]