Communication With The Creator...

Chat viewable by general public

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Communication With The Creator...

Post #1

Post by William »

William: There is a thread in the C&A forum asking "Why is communication with God one way?" and is focused the idea that a Creator - whichever idea about that one adopts as belief - is specifically a silent observer in the affairs of humanity, and does not commune with the individual.

The focus of that thread is, of course, to do with the general Christian idea of a Creator...that one normally going by the name/title of "God".

In that, the dependency is on The Bible, as this set of stories is normally believed by most Christians to be "The Word of God" and therein, the God of The Christians communicates to the individual through said books - bound as they are into one overall book.

The book therefore becomes the 'steering mechanism' of the individual Christian 'ship' sailing through their life experience, who believes it to be so.

Which is to say, even if the individual might think that they are in a two-way communion with the God, anything which contradicts The Bible, has to be discarded as a devilish deception, for the simplistic reason that 'it is not in The Bible' because The Bible is taught to Christians as being "the Word of their God".

Therefore, all Christians who are captured under the influence of this belief, are effectively unable to have and build upon any actual relationship with The Creator, because they depend upon the Medium of The Bible and this effectively cuts them off from a two-way communication with any actual intelligent entity, including The Father.

While some might argue that they do indeed have a two way communion with The Father through The Son, their communion with The Son is also achieved through the medium of The Bible...first and foremost, so their dependency upon having a connection at all, amounts to dependency upon The Bible.

This amounts to having a relationship with a book which cannot truthfully be said to be the same thing as having a relationship with The Father.

Indeed, much of the confusion has to derive from the fact that within said book, are written words attributed to Jesus...who among other things states that HE is "The Word of God" - a big clue right there as to what Christians are doing incorrectly when they refer to The Bible as 'The Word Of God' - and this misleading idea that The Bible can bring an individual closer to The Creator becomes the substitute, as they mistakenly think that The Bible is the medium between The Father and the individual.

And all that is achieved is that those who practice such, are not really having a relationship with any living entity. They are simply having relationship with a book and claiming this as the same thing as having a Relationship with The Creator.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #11

Post by William »

[Replying to post 10 ]

William: Before I decided that this signified that it is reason to believe that the idea of a Creator who is capable of communicating, but doesn't - therefore requires some kind of Judgement from me - I decided to test out other ways, which Jesus is attributed with advising.

I was further enabled to do this by the idea that it is Jesus who is attributed with saying that he is "The Word of God" - as is written in The Bible - so thought perhaps that by not confusing the two mediums as being one and the same, I should look deeper into it...and not even refer at all to The Bible as being "The Word of God".

That allowed for a different - and as it proved to be for me - far more rewarding trajectory...


Divine Insight: But how did this change anything? You would still need to go by the Bible as being the "Words of Jesus". I don't see where anything has changed. It would still be just a 1-way communication and you would still need to place your faith in the idea that words attributed to Jesus were words that Jesus had actually spoken at some point.

William: I used to do Bible Study with a guy named Noel.
He was a Jehovah's witness.
The idea of The Kingdom of God on Earth appealed to me.
I didn't understand how we all had to wait for Jesus to come back and do it all for us, since we had the tools to do it for ourselves.

The realization then was that I had been putting my faith into what Christendom taught me through its various branches - filtered through The Bible.

I had never really just put my faith in the Entity Jesus and effectively tested those words attributed to being from his mouth - certain words which demanded greater faith that The Church demands.

The expression "going out on a limb' springs to mind.

As far as the 'faith' aspect goes, if it hadn't of worked out for me, the faith would have proven to be wrongly placed.

Long Story Short - It lead to a lively Connection with The Creator Mind. I call It that, just to keep It all gender neutral.
Point being, that is the trajectory and that was the result.Once something has been proved, wherein is there any more need for faith? That was just a means to an end.


Divine Insight: So I don't see where this is any different from accepting that the OT are the words of God. It sounds to me like all you've done is decide that you would rather believer that the NT are the words of Jesus. It also implies that the words attributed to the God of the OT were not the least bit compelling.

William: None of that is an issue with me personally. I have no issue with any ideas of The Creator. I simply integrate.

Divine Insight: I would never think to question your sincerity.

William: You are too sweet.

Flutters Eyelashes

Divine Insight: So are you then saying that you do indeed feel that you are in communication with a Creator Mind?

William: Absolutely. It is more than just a feeling though. If anything the emotion is produced from the knowing, but I have learned that it pays to be in control of one's emotions...

Divine Insight: I don't see a problem with that. But I also haven't seen any evidence offered up to be peer reviewed. It's quite difficult to review evidence that has never been presented.

William: That is understandable. For my part, I don't see any point in presenting evidence in a serious manner, until I find others who are willing to make the sincere effort to invest the time to do the science.

The science itself is not costly in terms of money.

Also - at this stage of my story - what I did is not something many would consider doing, so they are unlikely to be able to peer review that aspect of the evidence - and that was the part that lead me to other things which at least can be peer reviewed from the comfort of ones own armchair.

But anyway's what little I do share here on this internet message board, is better than nothing.
There is no quick and simply way to show and explain The Complex.


Divine Insight: Ok, so you now claim that you have had communication with supernatural entities. How can you be certain that this isn't your own imagination?

William: I predicted to myself that you would question imagination. Does that make me psychic or just evidence that I am paying attention.
My answer is to ask you what you mean by 'imagination' - and that I do not discard it as one of the means in which a Creator might install as a Communications Device.
Anyone who built this Universe, IMHO, could easily do that.

Part of The Game is to find out what is hidden.


Divine Insight: Why would there need to be many creators? Why not a single creator who simply has many different facets?

William: I agree. But why would I ignore the facets, especially if I knew that they could only all trace back to The One?

Divine Insight: Also, what would be wrong with there being many creators? If a single creator could exist, why not infinitely many of them?

William: My thoughts exactly!

That is part of The Game. The Battle. I tend to look at it simply as The Game cannot be won until - like The Dark Crystal Story - The balance is restored and the two 'sides' merge and become Whole again.


Divine Insight: These aren't meant to challenge your way of thinking. I'm simply curious about how you would answer these questions.

William: I did not receive them with any judgement. Now I am thinking perhaps I will appreciate that you asked the questions. Those are my answers.

Divine Insight: Again, no one is questioning your sincerity. There is however, the open question of whether you actually communicated with any actual supernatural entities, or whether you have simply imagined to do so. Keep in mind that if your experiences were due to imagination that you had experiences as real events, this wouldn't bring into question your sincerity.

William: Again, until you explain what you mean by 'imagination', I cannot really engage you there.

I have skimmed the rest of your post and feel that until you can explain in more detail this 'it's just the imagination' theme, it is probably prudent to leave the rest of what you wrote, to one side for now.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #12

Post by Divine Insight »

William wrote: William: That is understandable. For my part, I don't see any point in presenting evidence in a serious manner, until I find others who are willing to make the sincere effort to invest the time to do the science.
Finding others who are willing to do the science should be absolutely no problem at all.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that James Randy would be more than happy to take a look at whatever scientific evidence you believe you have.

If there's anything to it you would most likely become world famous and rich. :D

And if there's nothing to it, James Randy will be more than happy to explain why this is the case.

So the excuse that you can't find anyone who is willing to do the science simply isn't compelling. You may as well just confess up front that you simply don't have any scientific evidence to present.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #13

Post by William »

[Replying to post 12]

Divine Insight: Finding others who are willing to do the science should be absolutely no problem at all.

William: Why do you assume that?

It is not simply a matter of 'taking a look' at what I have. It is a matter of testing it for oneself by doing the same, to see if there is anything in it.


Divine Insight: You may as well just confess up front that you simply don't have any scientific evidence to present.

William: There is no reason for me to do so.
Have you thought any more on why you brought imagination into the discussion and what it means for you? That would be helpful with any ongoing discussion we might have as it appears to be a major difference in the way we each approached the subject of 2-way communion with Creator and might be a key explanation as to why we went on different trajectories, you finding nothing and me finding something.

Also, your mention of James Randi doesn't appear overly relevant or realistic. If you believe that Scientists have shown that we do not exist within a Creation and therefore there is no Creator Mind which the individual can connect with, I am happy to review your evidence regarding that. I myself have not encountered such evidence, nor seen anyone become rich and famous due to presenting the world with such evidence.
Perhaps James Randy has this evidence and you can ask him to share it with you?

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #14

Post by Divine Insight »

William wrote: Divine Insight: Finding others who are willing to do the science should be absolutely no problem at all.

William: Why do you assume that?
It's not an assumption, it's a fact. If you think you have scientific evidence for something there are plenty of credible scientists who would be more than willing to take a look at what you have. But you better actually have something for them to look at because they aren't going to fall for your endless evasion tactics.
William wrote: It is not simply a matter of 'taking a look' at what I have. It is a matter of testing it for oneself by doing the same, to see if there is anything in it.
Well, there you go. Write up whatever it is you do so others can test it. You can do that. It's not a problem, especially today when you can just publish what you want others to test on the Internet.

William wrote: Divine Insight: You may as well just confess up front that you simply don't have any scientific evidence to present.

William: There is no reason for me to do so.
Have you thought any more on why you brought imagination into the discussion and what it means for you? That would be helpful with any ongoing discussion we might have as it appears to be a major difference in the way we each approached the subject of 2-way communion with Creator and might be a key explanation as to why we went on different trajectories, you finding nothing and me finding something.


Write a book on it. :D

Trying to discuss anything with you in a meaningful way has already proven to be impossible. All you ever do is offer excuses and find every possible way to avoid having any meaningful discussion. You and I have been through this same thing many times in the past. You had nothing to offer then, and you clearly still don't.

All you have ever come up with is excuses for why you refuse to present any evidence. How long do you think you can keep that up?

William wrote:
Also, your mention of James Randi doesn't appear overly relevant or realistic. If you believe that Scientists have shown that we do not exist within a Creation and therefore there is no Creator Mind which the individual can connect with, I am happy to review your evidence regarding that.


I don't need to do that. I never claimed that was the case.

In fact, you have just committed the classic fallacy of trying to push your burden of proof onto someone else.

I never claimed that is no "Creator Mind". All I've done is state that I see no evidence for one. You are the one who continually claims to have evidence but then refuses to produce it when asked. Clearly you have no evidence or you would be more than anxious to produce it and prove your claims.

William wrote:
I myself have not encountered such evidence, nor seen anyone become rich and famous due to presenting the world with such evidence.


Well duh? Did it ever occur to you that this is because no such evidence exists? :roll:


William wrote:
Perhaps James Randy has this evidence and you can ask him to share it with you?


James Randy never claimed to have evidence for the existence of a "Creator Mind". :roll:

Exactly how ignorant do you think people are that you can claim to have evidence for the existence of a "Creator Mind" and when they ask you for this evidence you then come back and accuse them of NOT having evidence for a "Creator Mind"? :roll:

I don't know who you are used to talking to, but no one I know would fall for such obvious nonsense.

You don't have evidence for a Creator Mind, and neither does anyone else.

So now that we have that cleared up is there anything you'd like to talk about that actually makes sense :?:
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #15

Post by William »

[Replying to post 14]

Divine Insight: Trying to discuss anything with you in a meaningful way has already proven to be impossible. All you ever do is offer excuses and find every possible way to avoid having any meaningful discussion.

William: I know this is a chat forum, but if you could keep your personal comments to yourself, that would be good of you.

Divine Insight: If you think you have scientific evidence for something there are plenty of credible scientists who would be more than willing to take a look at what you have.

William: There is no need to limit it only to scientists. Anyone can check it out for themselves, even you could.

Also, your mention of James Randi doesn't appear overly relevant or realistic. If you believe that Scientists have shown that we do not exist within a Creation and therefore there is no Creator Mind which the individual can connect with, I am happy to review your evidence regarding that.


Divine Insight: I don't need to do that. I never claimed that was the case.

William: It isn't about what you claimed or exclaimed really.
so much as it is about what you implied when your wrote that as far as you are concerned any creator who could create the entire universe including you should be able to communicate with you in a direct and unambiguous way, leaving no doubt in your mind that you have been communicated to by a Creator and that since this has never happened in your entire life,you see no reason to believe that any Creator - who is capable of communicating with humans - exists.

The implication therein is that you may have access to scientific evidence which supports we are not living in a Creation and there is therefore no Creator Mind one can communicate with.

You have also yet to even explain why you believe that a Creator would have to choose to communicate with you in a direct and unambiguous way, leaving no doubt in your mind that you have been communicated to by a Creator.

You have also yet to explain what such communication would involve, so your whole statement itself is ambiguous :roll:


Divine Insight: I never claimed that is no "Creator Mind". All I've done is state that I see no evidence for one.

William: Yet you remain tight-lipped in regard to what you would accept as constituting evidence. What I accept as evidence might not be good enough for your personal standards. No point in my wasting time and effort if you will not communicate in a direct and unambiguous way, what you mean by "Creator" and "Imagination" and "Evidence".

Divine Insight: You are the one who continually claims to have evidence but then refuses to produce it when asked.

William: I haven't as yet begun to write of the evidence in this particular thread, because I created it to chat about exploring different aspects which might come up in conversation, such as your exclamation points out.
So if you won't answer my questions put to you, how am I expected to get into the details of this with you.
We will simply talk past each other.
Already you have stooped to personal comments. How are we supposed simply chat about this if your whole approach is simply reactionary?
All that is achieved is a derail. Is that your purpose in getting involved with this thread? To derail it?


Divine Insight: Well duh? Did it ever occur to you that this is because no such evidence exists?

William: See? There was no need for you to start off with 'well duh'. How is such expression going to help build any platform where intelligent thoughtful conversation can take place in a chat environment?
If "no such evidence exists" for there not being a Creator and us not existing within a Creation, then - I myself - find it reasonable to approach the whole subject with an open mind. That is what placed me on the particular trajectory I am on, so obviously different from your own.


Divine Insight: James Randy never claimed to have evidence for the existence of a "Creator Mind".

William: I think you have confused yourself. I was speaking about any evidence which can be shown us, which shows that there is no Creator and that we are not existing within a Creation.

If none exists, then none exists. That is what we can agree to, yes?


Divine Insight: You don't have evidence for a Creator Mind, and neither does anyone else.

William: So you believe. But you do not know this is actually fact.
When you want to actually chat about this without all the unnecessary fluff and personal comments about what I do or do not have or do, that will be great.

Otherwise, please stop posting in this thread as I did not create it for that purpose.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #16

Post by Divine Insight »

If you don't have any evidence it's ok. You're in the same boat with the rest of us.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #17

Post by William »

[Replying to post 16 by ]

Divine Insight: If you don't have any evidence it's ok. You're in the same boat with the rest of us.

William: Different trajectories. I row my own boat, Creator Navigates.

I do not assume that The Creator of this Creation would make it easy for all to discover The Creator. Thus I am not looking in Creation for The Obvious - for what you referred to as the expectation of "in a direct and unambiguous way."

Nor do I see imagination as something requiring my distrust.

Whereas you appear to distrust such experience; - At least that is how your words on the subject come across. You wrote;


Divine Insight: One time I had a very convincing Shamanic Journey where I was taken into "heaven". It was a very realistic experience. I felt as though I was actually there conversing with other human spirits. They explained to me many things about heaven. The only problem is that when I came back from that Shamanic Journey I have no way to verify that anything I saw in that vision was real or trustworthy.

William: I don't discard personal experience on the grounds that I cannot verify for others that anything I personally experience is real. Such does not determine for me what is "trustworthy" and what is not.
Spiraling into self doubt is not the trajectory I chose to take on such matters.


Divine Insight: The problem is that information about a place such as heaven can never be verified to even exist, much less be shown to be solid and dependable. Therefore a far more reasonable conclusion is that I simply imagined the whole thing myself.

William: Whereas I do not accept that one's imagination - especially in relation to realistic experience - is something I should distrust, simply on the grounds that I cannot 'verify'.
The fact of the experience itself is verification, especially if I asked for it and it presented itself.
I do not cast to one side my experiences simply because I am the one having them, and thus cannot show them to others, that they too might verify them as real.
As well as that, if I were to experience what you say you experienced, I would take account of what I was told - in your case - about heaven - and add this to any other data about the subject that I might come across, and from that build a picture.
But I would not cast it to the lowly delegation of "it was only my imagination' - delegating said imagination as some type of non-truth because it is not 'solid and dependable'.


Divine Insight: The art of "Shamanic Journeying" or any other technique to enter into this state of mind, is basically the art of learning how to get your brain to enter into a dream state while remaining in a wakened state. In this way you can experience the dream as if it's actually happening for real.

William: That is not the only explanation. One would have to accept that, if it could be shown that what we call "reality" - that belief that "it is actually happening for real" is not a Creation.
Otherwise, as an explanation, it assumes that what is being experienced as "actually happening for real solid and dependable" is not itself, a Creation.

Where is one's evidence that this is the case?

You don't have that evidence, but assume anyway. Different trajectories are the result.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #18

Post by Divine Insight »

William wrote: I do not assume that The Creator of this Creation would make it easy for all to discover The Creator.
Why not? Especially if they are sincere? :-k

Do you think you work harder than other people?

Do you think you have any special status with The Creator?
William wrote: I don't discard personal experience on the grounds that I cannot verify for others that anything I personally experience is real.
Me neither. I simply don't accept that every dream I have represents reality when I cannot even verify this for myself. I think it's rational to make a distinction between what I imagine and what is real. Of course you are free to do whatever you like. But that's hardly "evidence" for the existence of a Creator Mind.
William wrote: Spiraling into self doubt is not the trajectory I chose to take on such matters.
I don't personally see the ability to distinguish between imagination and reality to be "self-doubt". In fact, most professionals in the field of psychology hold that an inability to separate reality from fantasy can be a serious problem. I tend to agree with their assessment.
William wrote: Whereas I do not accept that one's imagination - especially in relation to realistic experience - is something I should distrust, simply on the grounds that I cannot 'verify'.
You are free to live your life however you like. Your position simply isn't compelling in terms of representing any good reasons for others to embrace your worldview. I think this is all that any skeptic should need to say.
William wrote: The fact of the experience itself is verification, especially if I asked for it and it presented itself.
The fact that we can imagine is verification that we can imagine. Taking it beyond that is hardly a compelling argument.
William wrote: I do not cast to one side my experiences simply because I am the one having them, and thus cannot show them to others, that they too might verify them as real.
It's a free world. Or at least parts of the world are still free. So you are more than welcome to think however you like. :D
William wrote: As well as that, if I were to experience what you say you experienced, I would take account of what I was told - in your case - about heaven - and add this to any other data about the subject that I might come across, and from that build a picture.
But I would not cast it to the lowly delegation of "it was only my imagination' - delegating said imagination as some type of non-truth because it is not 'solid and dependable'.
Once again, you aren't even having a conversation with me. Instead you are having a conversation with an imaginary person of your own imagination.

I never said that I discarded those experiences as being "not true". All I ever said is that there is no evidence that they represent truth. Big difference.

From our discussions it appears that you often jump to illogical conclusions. Just because I don't accept something as verified truth, doesn't mean that I need to dismiss it entirely. To the contrary, I actually have theological reasons to believe that any "heaven" that might exist may very well be open to anything I imagine it to be. If that's the case then however I imagine heaven to be will indeed be how it will be for me.

But should I take this idea to the bank and try to cash it in as a verified truth for which I supposedly have evidence for simply because I experienced the vision?

Of course not. That would be utterly ridiculous.
William wrote:
Divine Insight: The art of "Shamanic Journeying" or any other technique to enter into this state of mind, is basically the art of learning how to get your brain to enter into a dream state while remaining in a wakened state. In this way you can experience the dream as if it's actually happening for real.
William: That is not the only explanation. One would have to accept that, if it could be shown that what we call "reality" - that belief that "it is actually happening for real" is not a Creation.
Otherwise, as an explanation, it assumes that what is being experienced as "actually happening for real solid and dependable" is not itself, a Creation.

Where is one's evidence that this is the case?

You don't have that evidence, but assume anyway. Different trajectories are the result.
I disagree. We do have that evidence.

I'm not going to try to educate you on what is scientifically understood about how the human brain works, but I have enough knowledge from watching lectures on these topics to understand that the evidence is already in.

Obviously we'll never agree on much of anything when we are coming from such different backgrounds of knowledge.

You seem to think that anything you can philosophically dream up is a viable option for explaining reality. But those days have long since past.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25089
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #19

Post by Zzyzx »

.
Divine Insight wrote: I simply don't accept that every dream I have represents reality when I cannot even verify this for myself. I think it's rational to make a distinction between what I imagine and what is real.

I don't personally see the ability to distinguish between imagination and reality to be "self-doubt". In fact, most professionals in the field of psychology hold that an inability to separate reality from fantasy can be a serious problem. I tend to agree with their assessment.

I never said that I discarded those experiences as being "not true". All I ever said is that there is no evidence that they represent truth. Big difference.
Inability to distinguish between reality and fantasy / imagination can be an indication of a psychological condition known as Fantasy prone personality disorder, or in extreme cases schizophrenia.

Perhaps exceptions are made for religious fantasy / imagination (provided it is one of the more popular religions)?
.
Non-Theist

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14000
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Communication With The Creator...

Post #20

Post by William »

[Replying to post 18]

William: I do not assume that The Creator of this Creation would make it easy for all to discover The Creator.

Divine Insight: Why not?

William: Because it isn't obvious.
What is obvious is that we exist in something we call 'Real' and we learn from scratch. We are not consciously instilled with the knowledge. We have to work it out.

Therefore there is no need or particular point in assuming otherwise. This particular Reality Simulation Creation is not designed to be an obvious Creation of a Creator.
One has to dig deeper to uncover the clues.

That is the nature of this particular Game-Play.

  • I don't discard personal experience on the grounds that I cannot verify for others that anything I personally experience is real.


Divine Insight: Me neither. I simply don't accept that every dream I have represents reality when I cannot even verify this for myself.

William: What I have come to understand is that it is not the experience which is having the experience.
It is not what is being experienced which I have to accept as 'real'. It is my self which I have to accept as real.
This outlook allows for me to understand that whatever I experience as real, is only real because I am experiencing it.


Divine Insight: I think it's rational to make a distinction between what I imagine and what is real. Of course you are free to do whatever you like. But that's hardly "evidence" for the existence of a Creator Mind.


William: What do you base your understanding of rationality on? The one dominant reality experience that you are currently undergoing?
What exactly is rational about being alive on a huge water-covered stone planet floating around like a tiny grain of dust in a seemingly infinite place. Where there are no apparent other species from other planets? And what about that dominant experience makes any other alternate experience somehow 'irrational'?

Why would anything one experiences, even alternate realities, be irrational?

  • Spiraling into self doubt is not the trajectory I chose to take on such matters.


Divine Insight: I don't personally see the ability to distinguish between imagination and reality to be "self-doubt".

William: Doubt is doubt. You doubt that what you experienced is real. The doubt contributes in doubt of ones own self in relation to alternate experiences.

Divine Insight: In fact, most professionals in the field of psychology hold that an inability to separate reality from fantasy can be a serious problem. I tend to agree with their assessment.

William: There is no reason to allow alternate experiences to become a serious problem in relation to the dominant reality presently experienced.
Perhaps for you, the idea of thinking what you experienced with the 'heavenly entities' might interfere with the practicalities imposed upon us in this dominant reality. I myself have not felt the need to delegate 'real' as opposed to 'fantasy' in order to function within the dominant.


Divine Insight: The fact that we can imagine is verification that we can imagine. Taking it beyond that is hardly a compelling argument.

William: The point I am making is that there isn't the need to delegate experience as 'real' and 'not real' - specifically in relation to what you wrote you experienced with the heavenly entities you met.
There is no reason given by you, as to why that experience should be thought of by you as 'non real'.

  • I do not cast to one side my experiences simply because I am the one having them, and thus cannot show them to others, that they too might verify them as real.

    As well as that, if I were to experience what you say you experienced, I would take account of what I was told - in your case - about heaven - and add this to any other data about the subject that I might come across, and from that build a picture.
    But I would not cast it to the lowly delegation of "it was only my imagination' - delegating said imagination as some type of non-truth because it is not 'solid and dependable'.


Divine Insight: I never said that I discarded those experiences as being "not true". All I ever said is that there is no evidence that they represent truth. Big difference.

William: You imply that there is something you experience as 'real' and something you experience as 'not-real' as you regard the latter as a product of 'imagination' - perhaps even 'over-active imagination'.

If you are now clarifying that your experience was real, just say so. Otherwise there is nothing wrong with me understanding what you have so far written, in the way I have so far done.


Divine Insight: Just because I don't accept something as verified truth, doesn't mean that I need to dismiss it entirely. To the contrary, I actually have theological reasons to believe that any "heaven" that might exist may very well be open to anything I imagine it to be. If that's the case then however I imagine heaven to be will indeed be how it will be for me.


William: Is that a conclusion you have come to or did your experience with the heavenly entities somehow help you to understand it that way?

Divine Insight: But should I take this idea to the bank and try to cash it in as a verified truth for which I supposedly have evidence for simply because I experienced the vision?

William: Who is arguing otherwise?
It would seem to me that any truth verified, could only occur once you have finished with this dominant reality and shift into the next one, and experience that one as the new dominant one.


Divine Insight: The art of "Shamanic Journeying" or any other technique to enter into this state of mind, is basically the art of learning how to get your brain to enter into a dream state while remaining in a wakened state. In this way you can experience the dream as if it's actually happening for real.

William: That is not the only explanation. One would have to accept that, if it could be shown that what we call "reality" - that belief that "it is actually happening for real" is not - in fact - a Creation.
Otherwise, as an explanation, it assumes that what is being experienced as "actually happening for real solid and dependable" is not itself, a Creation.

Where is one's evidence that this is the case?

You don't have that evidence, but assume anyway. Different trajectories are the result.


Divine Insight: I disagree. We do have that evidence.

William: Well if you have the evidence, share it with us.

Divine Insight: I'm not going to try to educate you on what is scientifically understood about how the human brain works, but I have enough knowledge from watching lectures on these topics to understand that the evidence is already in.

William: If you are now trying to say that evidence = "what is scientifically understood" about anything, you are simply conflating evidence with opinion about evidence, which is no different than anyone who has a contrary opinion on said evidence.

The human brain would act as an interface, if we are indeed experiencing a Creation.
Obviously observing how the interface works doesn't of itself give us clear evidence that we are NOT existing within a Creation.

It can only be said that those who have the opinion that we are not existing within a Creation, are interpreting the evidence available, with that outcome in mind.


Divine Insight: Obviously we'll never agree on much of anything when we are coming from such different backgrounds of knowledge.

William: Different trajectories. You interpret the evidence differently, because the premise is that we are not experiencing a Creation.

Divine Insight: You seem to think that anything you can philosophically dream up is a viable option for explaining reality.

William: I am more interested in examining hard evidence which is being missed by people in general - those who find it necessary to believe that we are not existing within a Creation and attempt to tell me that it is all simply a product of a mindless accident, don't appear able to integrate such evidence.

Post Reply