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: 46668
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 (1-39) not displayed.
.
.
.
#40. To: Liberator (#33)
Actually it doesn't. All 3 of those elements are covered in this model. Morality, being kind and fair, not to mention loving others is an offshoot of spiritual development and progress. (I should add that Newton claims that souls which progress far enough eventually stop incarnating, and continue their progress in the spirit world, so that is our goal). On justice and accountability, Newton reports that those who live a life harming others will voluntarily choose future lives in which they will suffer just as they have made others to suffer. This for the purpose of understanding and empathizing with those whom they have harmed. The lives we live were chosen by us from the spirit world, knowing in advance what difficulties, if any, we would face. So the points you list are indeed covered. We are here to develop and advance spiritually. The earth is a spiritual gymnasium. You go to the gym to work out and sweat, and when you return, you are stronger and healthier, and you keep taking trips to the gym to get better and better. Well, the earth is a spiritual gymnasium where we come to work out spiritually, and we do so by suffering hardships, difficulty and even tragedy, and the test of our strength is how we respond. Do we hurt others, flee and wallow in self-pity, or do we rise up and continue loving and helping others charitably? So here again, Newton presents an extremely practical explanation not just for life and it's hardships but for the existence of the entire universe. This as opposed to the Christian/biblical explanation which is, quite obtusely, "the glory of God". And then I ask, wouldn't Newton's explanation glorify God much more than the Christian explanation?
Might I add that you are giving Newton and his case studies the benefit of the doubt where you and many others hold the testimony of Jesus Christ and His apostles to a much higher if not unreasonable standard? For example most atheists and agnostics throw out the historical evidence for Christ because Christians are doing most of the writing. However Roman historians are taken at face value without flinching. Jesus Christ needs contemporaneous historical accounts about Him but Caesar, Homer, and Plato do not according to the relativistic standards of atheists today. They trust the copying of Julius Caesar's Gaulic Wars from 1st Century fragments in the 10th century by Catholic monks in a monastery, but not the Christian manuscripts of Matthew and 7 other separate authors. Everything we know of the early Caesars is lost to papyrus decaying. In fact the earliest and most copied manuscripts from the 1st century are from NT scriptures. So do you see the double standard? Newton comes no where close to the truth claims of Christianity. He or one of his therapists sits in a room with one person at a time. Newton collects the information, controls access to the data and concludes all the experiences are similar if not identical, and done with the aid of hypnosis. If Christians claimed such one on one experiences they would be laughed out of a room. Jesus did miracles in public in front of hundreds and in some cases thousands. Even doing miracles some rejected Him because they did not like what He had to say. They did not want to submit to The Son of God who came not only in the flesh, in the word but with power. Jesus Christ confirmed His truth claims with the Power of God. That is why people today deny the historicity of Scriptures. Because if they admit they are historical, they can't deny the attested to truth claims. And therefore will have to admit they are rejecting the Son of God as did those who denied Him no matter how many miracles they witnessed. So frankly Newton does not come close to validating his truth claims. Infomercial type testimonials may be convincing enough for Pharaohs magicians who could match some of Moses' miracles but not all of them. When Newton or any of those under his hypnosis can feed 5,000 with a few fish and a loaf of bread, calm a raging sea with a command, raise a man dead for four days to vibrant life (no walking dead zombie there) and after dying rise from the dead three days later the same person in a glorified body...let me know. It is up to us to figure these issues out. Do we put our trust in a fellow flawed human being or the Man from Galilee who proclaimed He was the Son of God and One with The Father? Your posts show me you are a seeker of truth with a kind heart. The very same type of heart Jesus plucked up to follow Him on earth.
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)
One alternate explanation could be Carl Jung's theory of a collective unconscious, among many. And you do not strike me as a zealous sort at all, but the conversation reminds me of a humorous event years ago. I was attending a lecture by an Indian Orthodox Bishop, who in part of his discourse stated that much of what happens to us after death is a Mystery. A New Ager approached him after the lecture, and stated that surely since he was from India that he believed in reincarnation. He again restated that much of what happens to us is a mystery, and she went hysterical -- shouting that reincarnation is a "fact" and that Christians don't accept it because of their dogmatism. ;P Anyway, Jung's model is just one example of an alternate explanation for experiences such as featured in the video or the phenomena of "idiot savants" -- people with severe mental disabilities who display some amazing gift and knowledge of a very specialized sort. On the subject of hypnosis, while I would agree with you that it is not some dangerous Svengali type of mind-control, studies have shown that it has some inherent limitations for scientific use. You are correct that people cannot be compelled to do something that they would object to doing in normal consciousness. In my youth I took several years of psychology courses in college and one of the demonstrations bolsters you in this but also presents a weakness too. The professor was trying to demonstrate the above -- that hypnotized people will not do something that they morally object to -- so after he hypnotized a number of student volunteers, he asked them to do a few minor silly things -- which they all did. Then he asked them to completely undress in front of the class, and almost all of them froze and took no action. One girl, however, began to comply with his request. Of course, he immediately told her to stop, and after bringing them all out of hypnosis it was learned from her that she was paying her way through college by working as a stripper. So in your own examples, if people do not have a moral objection to the idea of reincarnation, they can "remember" things even if it was not really the case. In part of our classes, the professor discussed some of the benefits and drawbacks to hypnosis for information gathering. In police work, hypnosis is normally only allowed if other avenues for gathering leads has been exhausted. One valid use has been to use it to try to help a crime victim remember something like a briefly glimpsed car license plate. If they remember a number, that hypnotically gathered evidence would not be admissible in court -- the only benefit would be if police trace the license number and discover other evidence when investigating the owner of the car. A key problem with using hypnosis for information gathering is that one of the main traits of someone under hypnosis is that they are highly suggestible. One example of where this can lead to horrible results was the hysteria over "Satanic Ritual Abuse" during the 1980's. With that phenomena, we had the unusual pairing of fundamentalist Christians with psychotherapists. Children taken in for therapy would "remember" being subjected to horrible abuse at the hands of an organized and widespread conspiracy of Satanists. The only problem was that further investigation showed that the overwhelming majority of the accusations were false, and innocent people had been accused of horrible things based upon hypnotically gathered "evidence" that when the physical evidence was investigated proved that the allegations were false. As a result, psychology even now has a term for the phenomena -- false memory syndrome. www.britannica.com/EBchec...171/false-memory-syndrome In terms of Mr. Newton's studies and many of the people who "remember past lives", it is entirely possible that the overwhelming majority of them have no negative ulterior motive for their experiences. But just as with the SRA cases, sometimes people are drawn to fantastic scenarios when under hypnotic suggestion. In the SRA cases, "secular" therapists were no longer treating people for mundane things like eating disorders or sexual disfunction -- no, they were saving society from a band of crazed Satanists sacrificing babies right under our unknowing noses! And likewise 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. Anyway, thank you for thought-provoking discussion, I've enjoyed it and I enjoy reading your posts.
Thanks for sharing your experiences and education on the topic discussion. I went to college with a guy who would complain of shooting pain in his back in twelve spots. He figured he was Caesar in a past life. Of course none of us believed him as in ROTC he failed miserably in tactics 101.
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)
Here's a video of a researcher on the subject of false memories.
I went to college with a guy who would complain of shooting pain in his back in twelve spots. He figured he was Caesar in a past life. Of course none of us believed him as in ROTC he failed miserably in tactics 101. Indeed, LOL. And to expand my earlier response. It would be entirely plausible to me for the other people involved in the interactions with that child in that video to innocently plant false memories. Why? For the parents, their child is no longer just an average kid. Nope, he is now extra special! For the child himself, well as said above, now he is transformed into a WWII fighter pilot, a hero! For the family and friends of the dead airman: Their loved one is with them once again, they feel confirmation that death is just a phase and that someday they will be with the folks that they love again. If anything, the friends and family have the strongest motivation to inadvertently ask leading questions that could guide the child into giving "amazing" answers. I'm sorry, but the mom trying to suggest that a young boy would have no knowledge of WWII just because he was homeschooled is ridiculous. WWII was a major event in our nation and the world's history. Tons of movies, television programs, and even kids cartoons and video games (such as the one which the child was shown playing) show things about it. So at least in my view, it is entirely possible that folks inadvertently provided guiding questions -- or even if the child really did have supernatural knowledge of past events, models like Jung's can provide alternative explanations without it necessarily having to have been reincarnation.
Hello Orthodoxa, Thanks for your contributions and good words. I appreciate reading your comments as well. I've watched the video. I'm quite aware myself, I think, of my own limitations in accurately recalling events. I suspect if I'm ever called as a witness in a trial I'm probably going to disappoint just about anyone who asks me any questions about things I saw only one time. In the case of James Leininger, who recalled being a WWII pilot, many details of what he claimed to recall were accurate. There are a number of other videos on youtube that go into more detail in his case. The name of the ship James Houston (the pilot's name) served on (and there were hundreds of light carriers in service in the Pacific by war's end), the ship commander, the names of crewmates who died in the war. As a child he knew the difference between a drop tank and a bomb which his parents did not. (A drop tank looks like a bomb but is an external fuel tank dropped from the plane when empty). He also knew the F-4 Corsair had a problem with getting flat tires, which turned out to be accurate which is something I never new even though I was always had an interest in WWII aircraft, so that is a WWII detail the modern public isn't even aware of. There is even a claim of him recognizing by face and identifying by name the veterans Huston served with at a reunion for the crew of the carrier Huston served on. It would seem to me facial recognition is something that goes beyond what false memory implantation could explain. I'm confident all of these things would at least rule out *innocent* false memory implant by the parents of James Leininger, making fraud in the case of the family the next candidate explanation, with the sister and crewmates of Houston being the victims of deception, and acting on false memories. My view: This would involve the parents setting up their 6-7 year old kid to carry out the deception. Granted the kid would be innocent, but even so it is a real stretch to suggest, not that there are parents out there that would attempt such a thing as regrettably I'm sure there are, but that such an effort would actually succeed, and not only with a single person, but with 2 and probably at least a half dozen more. I can't imagine strangers, including WWII vets who've seen combat, upon being told that a 7 year old kid remembers them from many decades ago, not putting the kid to the test by asking open ended questions for the chance to be amazed by an accurate answer. With all of this... no, I can't see false memory implant being a reasonable explanation for James Leininger. At best I'd say theoretically possible but in reality nigh impossible.
Okay, now you're putting me on trial! :^) First, am I doing this? As opposed to accepting what the bible claims Jesus said as (quite literally) gospel without applying any critical review? I understand and accept that you have come to this table totally convinced that is the case, but the bible doesn't even claim to contain any of his direct writings. The gospels are, as I know you must concede, claimed to be "according to" Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, not Jesus himself. There are minor inconsistencies between them, such as whether Jesus served the bread or the wine first at the last supper. Matthew and Luke list them in opposite orders. Is not such a detail significant in considering today's bible divinely accurate? We're obviously starting from a different set of conceded facts. That may make discussion fruitless. A difference may be that no one considers alleged writings of Ceasar and other ancient non-Christians to be divinely inspired. It's accepted "as is", as a personal perception of things from an ancient time. Studying them exposes not just what may have happened but also bias on the part of the writer. I'm confident the ancient gospel versions, such as the dead sea scrolls, are given the same weight and considered for their historical value in the same way. They are just not considered divine by secular historians. What test or corroboration can we apply or find today to verify the events that took place back then, and/or the theology presented? Is there any, or is it correct to base faith only on the results of studying these documents, because one ancient writing corroborates the prophecies of a more ancient writing (frankly without knowing if the later writer was already aware of the more ancient writings when the more recent document was penned)? Honestly, not much beyond the writings themselves, in my view. And what test or corroboration applies to Newton's work? We have the video above of little James claim of reincarnation. We have people with unexplained phobias, which Newton (and other independent authors such as Brian Weiss) claim often stem from traumatic past-life events (and treatable in that context). We have accounts of child prodigies, young children who have remarkable, advanced abilities to play golf, shoot pool and play piano. And of course we have accounts of past life recall that are verified as accurate, granted to various degrees, not just by Newton but by numerous others. Weiss even cites a case of two independent clients corroborating each other's past life accounts dating back to the Roman empire age. So what we have is evidence that corroborates Newton's claims. And the reason I cite Newton more than others is because Newton's (claimed) speciality is not so much past life recall, but between life recall, which presents a spiritual/theological model that makes an incredible and in my view an ingenius amount of sense, quite frankly more sense (to me) than the bible does. It does that because we are loved MORE in this model. Because life and the universe now has a practical purpose beyond "glorifying God" through something akin to a wonderful divine painting, because people are not condemned to an eternity of indescribable suffering because they never heard of the gospel, or committed a single sin such as in the hypothetical example I gave earlier of a 3 or 4-year old girl who disobeys her mom by taking a cookie from a cookie jar 5 minutes before dying in a earthquake. This is God we're talking about! God for whom you even say there is nothing that is impossible. Except of course saving a soul who dies with sin. That is the one and only thing even the Almighty God cannot do!! That in spite of the fact that he loves this soul even more than the entire universe and he knew from the beginning what would happen?!?! So he arranged all this so that so many souls he loves dearly would not just perish but suffer? Wouldn't that mean that he really doesn't love the soul as much as he loves his own plan? Redleg, tell me where the logic is in this? The portrait of the spirit world given to us by Newton is *superior* than that given to us in the bible, by every logical reasoning, because everything falls into place so much better. I'm sure that's a hard thing for you and any devout Christian to consider. It was hard for me. But if we are indeed called to be strong in our honesty, which I believe we are regardless of whether the biblical or Newton model is correct, then it's something no honest man or woman can shirk from, even if its from fear of eternal damnation. Why? Because fear is NEVER a valid reason for faith. If it were, then converting to Islam when a knife is put to your throat would be acceptable. Even the bible calls us children, but what do children do? They GROW UP. And under Newton's model, that's what we are doing. Is that not more beautiful than the one life/one chance/no need to grow presentation given in the bible? As I mentioned in my first post on this thread, Newton's model does not mean supernatural events cannot occur, such as those cited in the bible. To the contrary, we as souls will develop supernatural powers (powers natural to the soul) as we develop and grow stronger, according to Newton. There are people with various strengths walking the earth today just as long ago, though generally, anyone walking the the earth is pretty dang weak or we wouldn't be here. Thank you! I do appreciate your taking the time to converse and consider my views. I am enjoying this challenging discussion.
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:)
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)
Thanks for the friendly and thought-provoking discussion. I would still maintain that in my view it would be entirely possible for the child to unconsciously absorb quite a lot of trivia about WWII without any sort of attempts at fraud by his parents or anyone else. WWII is not an obscure subject. A large portion of the American populace had members of their families involved in it. It is an extremely popular subject in television, movies, cartoons, books, and video games. I'll give just one example from my own childhood. My dad fought in WWII. He was badly wounded in the Battle of the Bulge. My brothers and I kidded him during our teenage years because it was extremely common for us to encounter him watching yet another WWII documentary or other program on TV. It was cathartic for him, which we understood later. But anyway, just for one example of very detailed information in an unlikely source -- one time I picked up a WWII FPS video game -- Medal of Honor: European Assault. I saw that it had a level in it that was at the exact location where my dad had fought, so I waited until he was home from work to play it. An amazing thing happened. Electronic Arts, the maker of the game, had digitally mapped out the Belgian city of Krinkelt so that it was an extremely accurate depiction of the village at the time of the German attack. My dad was literally able to tell me in advance which way to go to reach various landmarks in the game, such as the American HQ. As you can see, the game makers also intersperse actual WWII news footage in the game as well. So a child who had that particular game would be able to amaze a veteran of WWII, who had fought in the Battle of the Bulge, by accurately describing a pretty obscure little village in Belgium. He would "know" many trivial things about that battle. In the video that you posted, we literally see the child playing a WWII flight simulator. As mentioned above, a lot of these games are packed with very accurate information -- after all, the game makers were aware that many of their customers would likely have had a family member that would know first hand what things were like, and I'm sure that it helps them sell more games if they make them accurate in many details (aside from the genre fiction of a video game where you can get magically healed from injuries and just keep on fighting. ;) ) A HUGE part of my personal enjoyment of the game that I played was a result of it being so accurate in it's digital environment. Before that event playing it with my dad, like most vets of that era, he had not discussed hardly anything about his wartime experiences. When he was watching the game with wide eyes and guiding me toward the next landmark that I needed to go to, he opened up and long after I had put the game down talked for a long time about what it had been like. And that is from just a single video game! Like I said earlier, there is a wealth of information out there about WWII, it does not surprise me in the least that a young boy fascinated by the subject would learn a lot of minor details about it. I know many kids in my family and family friends who have learned amazing things about it themselves. One darling little family friend was taken by her dad to a flight history museum in Colorado that had a display about the Flying Tigers. She had the amazing experience while there of an elderly veteran pointing to one of the photographs in the display and showing his own face from back then. He spent a good amount of time telling her many details about his experience. 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. So is it possible that the little boy remembered a "past life"? Yes, that is one possibility. But it is also possible that he just developed false memories that were reinforced by adults who quite innocently very much wanted the "past life" scenario to be true.
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. Here is an article by Alexander Kalomiros concerning the very issue which you raise. In my view, his preface is perhaps overly broad in that he tends to paint most Protestants with the more extreme views of die-hard Calvinists, but his exposition of the Orthodox view of God and sin are quite good, IMHO. Orthodox believe in original sin, not original guilt. If an ancestor of yours poisoned the well that provides the water for you to drink, you are not guilty of his crime at all. But nevertheless you are left with the tragic consequences of the train of events that he set in motion. That water will eventually kill you too... unless of course you make use of the antidote freely given by Christ.
Thanks I will read it.
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)
Good stuff to discuss....been follow the convo. I'll weigh in tomorrow.... FWIW, for some reason, my brother claimed he's fought (and died) at Iwo Jima....(about a half hour after watching the movie, 'Sands of Iwo Jima' when we were kids) lol
That's about it in a nutshell.
But through faith the redemptive Blood of Jesus Christ, hasn't that "ability to save someone who has died with sin" already been realized? The Christian answer is that God, capable of all things, is nonetheless bound by his own nature of not tolerating sin in his presence. Or perhaps stated more accurately, sin cannot tolerate God in its presence. In essence then it is not God whom is almighty, but God's nature, because God is bound by his nature... i.e. unable to act upon his own love for all of us because he cannot help himself. Is that not a contradiction? In the theological model derived from Newton's observations, this contradiction does not exist. You've presented some ethereal concepts... I honestly don't see any contradictions. In fact I see clear-cut rules an open field of vision, and a goal line that is ours for the taking. God IS "bound" to His contract with us.... God loves us so much that He is willing to tolerate the sin (which is man's "nature" here on earth) -- just as long as that sin is repented here while in this mortal world. Those are the terms of his "nature" -- Forgiveness. But it is conditional, isn't it? Moreover, his terms apply ONLY as long as one has been washed in the Blood of Jesus Christ. In that case, the Sin is erased before entering His Kingdom...Now, true, sin is NOT tolerated in His presence, hence Judgment Day, and alternative destinations for those who reject His gift of Grace. Btw, how do we define "sin"? As "evil acts"? "Spiritual filth"? "Violations of the spirit"? Yes, God DOES indeed love us all. Including the "sinner" (a catagory for which we ALL fall inevitably into.) God's love is simply demonstrated in the grace of redemption for all who willfully accept His Free Gift of Grace for sinners in the next Life. As for the bible, yes one can have faith that God would simply not allow it to become corrupted. But what would this faith be based upon? The bible itself? That's circular logic. "Circular logic" -- isn't that exactly what reincarnation is about? An eternal circular return to a different "scene of the crime" -- until we "get it right"? An "incorruptible" Bible would be based on the Power of God to forge His Will upon man...and create a firewall around its truth, integrity, and word. Now I do understand that this is counter-intuitive considering we all know man is corrupt and evil abounds. Your answer, OUR answer, is Faith. Faith that the Almighty has no limitations when it comes to HIS Will, HIS Law, HIS Instructions (aka our 'Owner's Manual' to loving if you will :-) I can agree we are created in God's image. I've no problem with that description, but our human bodies are NOT that image. We as souls are that image. Does that not make more sense? I can concur with that assertion to a large degree. Souls and spirits within a celestial body. But consider: a shadow can be an "image"; A caricature; A one-dimensional cut-out. All are "images," but can't fully describe to what extent our "image" resembles God's. I agree with you that reincarnation is not compatible with the core of Christian theology. That is why I did not arrive at my present conclusions lightly. Still, I am not rejecting all aspects of the bible, as I hope I made clear in prior posts. The love Christianity teaches IS real. It's just that it's even better than what Christianity teaches because God never gives up on us even when we (our bodies) die. Also, we are indeed called to love and develop spiritually toward perfection, as the bible states.... You've got a good heart, seeking God is wisdom. I probably speak for most Christians here, who at one time most likely weighed all the "evidence" and logic for the Afterlife as well as the redemptive concept of Jesus Christ, Messiah who took on our sins. Some later rather than soon, but better late than never. That faith is a blessing my friend, but it must be fed and de-weeded. ... But with reincarnation, that opportunity becomes endless, as a single lifetime is hardly enough time to overcome a single vice, not to mention many. Is this not a more beautiful setup? Endless love with endless patience? If God is capable of all things as we agree, why would he not have thought of this model and used it? Well, I believe he did! Of course the Almighty is capable of all things -- including dictating our own Genesis, wisdom for living, and our "Get Out Of Hell" Card. In the reincarnation model, an eternity of lifetimes couldn't fully redeem man's nature -- which is to sin. But even that one single sin after a thousand lives of reincarnation and "Karmic justice" left on that "tab" would not make that person clean enough to step foot in Heaven. And THAT is the point and conditions of dwelling in His Kingdom, and blessed with indescribable rewards and treasure. Forever. Moreover, what happens though the eternal circle of reincarnation when the "tab" of sins keeps on piling up? I can't see the logic to that model. To me it seems like a sentence...hellish in indeed; An eternity of suffering and hopelessness. What kind of God would sentence His Children to that futility? IMHO, that is cruel and usual punishment IF it were God's way. 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. The only thing true about your description: "Either one must embrace Scripture and the Word of God as a matter of faith, OR reject ALL of it." is the notion of whether or not it is, in its present form, the infallible "Word of God". But just because it may not be that does not mean it doesn't possess much truth. It certainly does --I recognize that-- or it would not have survived through the ages. But given my present view of things, I cannot consider it a divinely infallible document. Thank you for your response. I appreciate you remarks and thoughts as well... Look Ping -- as shared earlier, fully I understand the reticence in accepting an "infallible" Word of God, aka the Holy Bible. Man -- even many believers -- intuitively believes at SOME point in time, the Bible and its words and meaning were corrupted, over-exaggerated, or merely allegories. 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. When I was younger, how many of us actually believed the story of Adam and Eve was actually that -- just a "story," an allegory? Noah and the Ark? Jonah and the Whale? Moses and the Parting of the Red Sea? The miracles and Resurrection of Jesus Christ? I think we can both agree that this world, its laws of physics, the infinitely intricacies of design, and the cycles of life and death are miraculous. But it is all explained in the Good Book. And so is the dynamic of One God, evil in the real existence of Satan, deception that derails that one road (and challenge) to our personal Damascus, and the responsibility for the one-time consequences of our actions and faith in this life. 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. "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour. Resist him, steadfast in the faith..." (1 Peter 5:8-9 NKJV)
He might. Doesn't mean they are correct. For at least this type of hypnosis, one cannot be unwillingly hypnotised, and even under hypnosis, cannot be made to do things they would not do in everyday life. A hypnotised subject is always aware of what's going on and in control. That's the message I get, at least. Surrendering of consciousness is akin to opening the vault to our spirit and allowing the possibilities of malevolent intruders in. That includes unscrupulous hypnotists. The power of suggestion in this altered state of consciousness may be repelled in many cases...but not so much in others. If a subject is oblivious to existence of demons, of course that is an imminent danger.
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...
Comments (81 - 96) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest On its surface it's the easiest and most beautiful way to help create a happy ending for everyone. But it conveniently omits the issues justice, accountability, and morality.
How does it explain why we are here and to what reason and purpose? By whose authority? By whose rationale? It then leads to questions -- BIG questions about our creation AND creator.
#41. To: Pinguinite, liberator, A K A Stone (#36)
First, according to his books, Newton's "beliefs" stem from the things his clients have told him while under hypnosis. His first 2 books are written as "case studies" in which he has transcripts of discussions he's had with his clients while they are hypnotised. His approach is very scientific and that's one of the things I really like about him. His books are not simply musings about life that came to him while meditating on a mountaintop or whatever.
#42. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter, Liberator (#37)
But here is a video that presents the most compelling case I know of in favor of reincarnation. If one is to honestly NOT believe in reincarnation, one must have an alternate explanation for this account. What is it?
#43. To: Orthodoxa (#42)
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.
#44. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter, Liberator (#42)
#45. To: redleghunter, Pinguinite, Liberator (#43)
Thanks for sharing your experiences and education on the topic discussion.
#46. To: Orthodoxa (#44)
#47. To: redleghunter (#41)
Might I add that you are giving Newton and his case studies the benefit of the doubt where you and many others hold the testimony of Jesus Christ and His apostles to a much higher if not unreasonable standard?
For example most atheists and agnostics throw out the historical evidence for Christ because Christians are doing most of the writing. However Roman historians are taken at face value without flinching. Jesus Christ needs contemporaneous historical accounts about Him but Caesar, Homer, and Plato do not according to the relativistic standards of atheists today. They trust the copying of Julius Caesar's Gaulic Wars from 1st Century fragments in the 10th century by Catholic monks in a monastery, but not the Christian manuscripts of Matthew and 7 other separate authors. Everything we know of the early Caesars is lost to papyrus decaying. In fact the earliest and most copied manuscripts from the 1st century are from NT scriptures.
So do you see the double standard? Newton comes no where close to the truth claims of Christianity. He or one of his therapists sits in a room with one person at a time. Newton collects the information, controls access to the data and concludes all the experiences are similar if not identical, and done with the aid of hypnosis. If Christians claimed such one on one experiences they would be laughed out of a room. Jesus did miracles in public in front of hundreds and in some cases thousands. Even doing miracles some rejected Him because they did not like what He had to say. They did not want to submit to The Son of God who came not only in the flesh, in the word but with power. Jesus Christ confirmed His truth claims with the Power of God.
That is why people today deny the historicity of Scriptures. Because if they admit they are historical, they can't deny the attested to truth claims. And therefore will have to admit they are rejecting the Son of God as did those who denied Him no matter how many miracles they witnessed.
So frankly Newton does not come close to validating his truth claims. Infomercial type testimonials may be convincing enough for Pharaohs magicians who could match some of Moses' miracles but not all of them. When Newton or any of those under his hypnosis can feed 5,000 with a few fish and a loaf of bread, calm a raging sea with a command, raise a man dead for four days to vibrant life (no walking dead zombie there) and after dying rise from the dead three days later the same person in a glorified body...let me know.
Your posts show me you are a seeker of truth with a kind heart. The very same type of heart Jesus plucked up to follow Him on earth.
#48. To: Pinguinite (#47)
#49. To: Pinguinite (#46)
#50. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter (#47)
#51. To: Orthodoxa (#50)
#52. To: Orthodoxa, redleghunter, Pinguinite (#45)
#53. To: redleghunter, Pinguinite (#29)
You believe reincarnation is real. Jesus Christ and Paul say no, you have one mortal life and then after you either await the resurrection unto life eternal or eternal punishment. So it's Newton's word against Yeshua of Nazareth. At least as you have presented above.
#54. To: Pinguinite (#34)
If we are willing to concede that God is capable of all things as you say, why does that NOT include the ability to save someone who has died with sin?
#55. To: Pinguinite (#35)
I believe Newton and most therapeutic hypnotists, if not all of them, would disagree with this ["firewall" of consciousness is breached.]
#56. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter (#36)
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.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]