An interesting question:

Can we really know whether anything is true? Does truth itself even exist as an Absolute? For that matter, what is truth?Is it simply a point of view held by a sufficient number of people to be widely accepted as what is so? And even in this context, does it exist only in relative terms?

The history of our species has shown us that many things we thought were undeniable and irrefutable truths have been, over the course of time, revealed to not be true at all. And I am not referring only to ancient and understandably misunderstood matters (the Earth is flat, the Sun revolves around the Earth, the idea that life could suddenly emerge from inanimate objects [spontaneous generation], the theory that light emanates from the eye, rather than being received by it [emission theory] — all of which concepts were held as true for thousands of years). I’m also referring to many contemporary notions as well (homosexuality is a deliberately chosen lifestyle having nothing to do with one’s biochemistry; modern vaccine theory is correct; jobs are a requirement for income; climate change is not real; punishment, as opposed to rehabilitation, of offenders is the highest choice of an evolved society).

All of this notwithstanding, can it serve us at some level to agree with ourselves and with each other that certain things are true? Without wanting to seem overly simplistic, I think it can. I think that is apparent. Any group or cluster of people hoping to live together in peace and harmony is going to find benefit in agreeing that certain things are true.

They may be making it all up, but Truth By Agreement — first , with oneself, then with others — can and does serve a purpose. It helps society to organize itself, it gives newcomers to that society (children growing into adults, arrivals from one culture or country entering another) a set of principles on which a particular society bases its day-to-day interactions, which those newcomers may use to their benefit in integrating into that group or cluster.

Truth By Agreement with oneself can also, in many cases, produce enormous good in an individual’s moment-to-moment experience, whether in a group or cluster or not.

All of which brings me to the idea of God.

I have observed (and personally experienced) that Truth By Agreement with oneself regarding the existence of God — to say nothing of the nature, the purpose, the function, and the desire of God — can and does have an immense impact on people’s lives.

This observation, in turn, has opened me to consider whether a theory need to have been proven — or even be provable — for it to have practical and powerful benefit. For me, the answer is no. I have therefore not limited my mind to embracing only those propositions that have been validated by scientific or clinical evidence.

Nowhere is this more useful to me than in the matter of whether or not there is a Higher Power in this Universe. I believe there is, even though there is apparently no scientific or clinical proof of it. Yet I see evidence of it every day in my life — and I have learned in my 72 years that evidence and proof are not the same thing.

I mention this here because, in the very welcome interactions I have read in the Comment String below my various columns here on the subject of God and what I perceive to be God’s message to the world, I have seen some responses that have articulated — in often wonderfully clear and imminently logical terms — an idea other than mine. The idea that there is no such thing as God.

I very much enjoy the back-and-forth on this. But I would like to invite a slight switch in focus now, away from the question of whether God exists, and to the question of whether a belief in God can be hugely transformative in an individual’s life, and in the collective experience of humans on this planet.

The answer to that question is, of course, yes. Simple observation makes that virtually inarguable. Equally inarguable is the fact that what a person or a group believes about God can be hugely detrimental to an individual’s well-being — and to the well-being of an entire species.

So, clearly, it is important what one holds as one’s truth regarding what I believe I can call — judging from my observation of global and individual outcomes — this critical topic.

Proving whether there is or is not a God is not nearly as intriguing to me as demonstrating that what a person, or a group or cluster of people, believes about God is critical to the happiness, joy, peace, and continuing higher evolution of our species.

I believe and observe that it is critical — and that’s why I’ve produced a string of books on the subject.

Now it could be argued by others that precisely because our beliefs about God are so critical, it is important that the concept of the existence of such a Supreme Being be challenged, if not debunked.

But I think that at this juncture in human history, what people believe ABOUT God is having far more of an impact on our day-to-day lives than whether people belief IN God — so this is where my priority lies.

I believe in God. The evidence of my life has convinced me of this. And I am intrigued by what a discussion of what people believe about God might produce in the Comment String below.

Please Note: The mission of The Global Conversation website is to generate an ongoing sharing of thoughts, ideas, and opinions at this internet location in an interchange that we hope will produce an ongoing and expanding conversation ultimately generating wider benefit for our world. For this reason, links that draw people away from this site will be removed from our Comments Section, a process which may delay publication of your post. If you wish to include in your Comment the point of view of someone other than yourself, please feel free to report those views in full (and even reprint them) here.
Click here to acknowledge and remove this note:
  • Clint Warricker

    That is so true to use a pun. Thank you Neale for opening up to the conversation from the beginning. My life is irrevocably changed as a result. I have remembered many things about who I really am and who God is. I cant remember who said this but to quote. “I don’t believe that God made the universe, I believe that God is the universe.” These words are among the most profound I have ever heard and therein lies liberation and peace. Knowing that there is nothing to be afraid of and that all roads lead us back to our natural Home in the infinite forever of eternity. This is Nirvana and sublime bliss. The rediscovery of our true selves which in a word is Love, our natural state of being, this is why we are here. I’m glad so many people are more aware and the number is growing exponentially.

  • Patrick Gannon

    OMG. Two excellent columns in a row! Way to go, Neale. This is good stuff!

    Now that does not mean that I agree with you, but I’m delighted that you offered a very good response to the question of whether or not it is good for us to tell ourselves, through beliefs, things which we know that we don’t know. You may be right. It may be that humans “at this juncture in human history” are better off “deceiving” themselves. I completely agree with you, that what we believe about God and the afterlife affects the quality of our lives, and your attempts to change the nature of beliefs about God, can have a positive affect on peoples lives. It certainly did for me – but then again, having “Vatican bypass surgery” is the best thing a person can do for themselves – as you know! I see it now as a stepping stone in my personal evolution. I can’t help but wonder whether this is psychologically healthy for us – telling ourselves we believe something that we know we don’t know seems like it just has to set up some kind of internal conflict in our brain/consciousness. It strikes me as low-level, chronic cognitive dissonance, and that can’t be healthy, can it?

    However, I disagree that we are not mature enough in our evolution to face the truth — the knowledge that we don’t know. Further, I think that it’s not particularly prudent to make such assertions at this point in our history. It’s really going out in a canoe and leaving the paddle on the beach. Scientists are really pulling out the stops to figure out how the brain – and hopefully consciousness and self-awareness work. The US and Europe are spending billion$ to study this question. It seems to me that patience is the virtue we need to exercise right now.. What if it turns out that you are wrong – and that consciousness is a product of the brain that comes to an end when the brain ends? You will have influenced people to believe something that turns out in a relatively short time (perhaps a matter of decades) to have been false. If you knew that in hindsight, would you have instead put your efforts into helping people face the truth and dealing with it, rather than trying to place new, kinder, gentler beliefs into their brains in place of the old crap? If the trend in science was going your way, it might be a different story, but from all that I can see, that’s not the case.

    I’m about a decade behind you. You and I are unlikely to see this question resolved in our lifetimes, but I would prefer to leave a legacy of open minded skepticism, than one of false beliefs. That is not to say that I think there is no chance that your description of the unknown is incorrect. I don’t know. I’ll be the first to admit that it’s uncomfortable not knowing, but I know that I’m not kidding myself. When, following a lot of reading and research on the subject, I began to realize that I had substituted my old Abrahamic beliefs for CwG beliefs, it was a bit like coming off of a high; but the high was not real; it was just like taking a drug. I suppose in some small way, based on my own experience, I see you as a drug pusher. “Hey buddy, want a toke of lovingod?” It will make you feel better and let you hide from your ignorance. All it costs is a set of books and a couple programs.” (Sorry that was a low blow, but funny enough to leave in!).

    Thank you for steering the discussion in this direction and for sharing your views. Like you, I am interested in seeing what other people think. I don’t expect to find too many who agree that facing the reality of our ignorance is the preferred solution, but you have done a good thing in at least posing the question. I applaud you for this post.

  • Mateia Andrei

    If there was a God people would get helped instantly regardless of their belief if they are worthy or not , belief in god or not for they have simply asked for help. That what a all powerful true loving and all knowing being would do. The sun won’t stop just cause you believe tomorrow it won’t show up. Just like the world didn’t end in 2012 like so many people though it would so why would God stop helping you. God would help everyone end the inner conflicts, conflicts with others and all misunderstandings would end. It would mean the end of wars, declaration of war, of mistreatment of the poor and some many things that humanity calls “bad”. Looking at this i have to conclude that there is no God and that there never was one.

    • I tend to think we self created most if not all the problems we are facing & that if God came to fix them, with or without our consent, we’d have no free will. Isn’t that the greatest freedom of all?

      • Patrick Gannon

        Ah, but is free will a freedom we truly enjoy? It is beginning to appear that free will is an illusion. Growing evidence indicates that the brain is making decisions before the consciousness is aware of having made them. For example, see “Unconscious Decisions in the Brain” Max-Planck-Gesellschaft.

        See “Free Will” by Sam Harris. It’s a very short book that describes the hypothesis clearly. A very interesting read.

        • It’s perfectly fine to accept that as your truth.

          If we do create & co create our reality, that’s free will to me. There may also be a part of us that is aware before the brain makes it’s decisions that is also part of our sub consciousness or something below that not yet discovered.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I can’t make that logic work in my mind. It sounds like you’re saying there’s a real consciousness as yet undiscovered, that informs the brain of what it is supposed to do, and then the brain creates an illusory self-awareness in order to inform itself of the decision it just made.

            That’s a pretty convoluted way to go about things, and makes our conscious selves puppets to some external consciousness that we are not connected to, since our conscious awareness, in the current theory, is produced by the brain and is illusory. If I have this right, the proposal here is that a “real” consciousness informs and controls (?) the brain, so it can create a fake consciousness in order to inform itself of what it is aware of (paying attention to).

            Hmm. Ian Fenn’s “The Game Maker” seems to fit here. In this light hearted look at the universe, we’re all essentially chess pieces for a handful of real beings (gods) playing a game to avoid the boredom of gazillions of years of nothing.

            Sounds a lot like transubstantiation, immaculate conceptions and trinities – a lot of mental gymnastics to try and support what seems to me to be a weak proposal.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Marko, I’ve been thinking about your conjecture that there may be a consciousness that precedes or instructs the brain. I’ve thought about it from a couple different angles.

            Tom Campbell in his trilogy “My Big TOE (theory of everything)” proposes that consciousness is the fundamental unit of information. Maybe that’s what the strings in string theory are – we don’t know. Graziano, who proposes that awareness is an “attention schema” says that this schema is a construct of information resident in the brain. If consciousness is the basic unit of information, from which everything else is constructed, as some such as Campbell propose, then that would seem to fit in with the “attention schema” theory of awareness, given it’s constructed of information the brain is paying attention to and/or providing and then looping back to itself as feedback. But does that consciousness or do these bits of information organize and have intelligence outside the brain? How would this be manifested?

            Campbell goes on to suggest that once consciousness is “organized” it remains thus forever; and if a computer ever becomes self-aware, its consciousness will survive forever, even when the power is shut off. I find this very difficult to grasp or accept, however I won’t rule it out, given our current ignorance of the truth. We’re working to give computers self-awareness, so we’ll know one day.

            It seems, in this proposal, that we end up with two distinct things – an illusory sense of self awareness and free will, and a “real” consciousness hiding somewhere and either directing us like chess pieces, or observing us like petri dishes. Thus we aren’t “real” so to speak; just disposable experiments or game pieces.

            Anyway, I wanted you to know I put some thought (after my Audible app crashed in the middle of a run), into your suggestion that there is a “real” consciousness directing (or simply observing) the brain and the illusory consciousness that it apparently creates for its own purpose of keeping track of things.

            When you go on ‘trips’ to non-physical matter realities, do you still have the same sense of yourself – your normal self awareness or identity of self? If so (and I assume so), this tells me such experiences cannot be trusted if indeed Graziano is correct and that sense of self is generated by the brain and is illusory to begin with.

          • I’ve had experiences where I don’t retain my sense of self, but instead become aware of what I can only call an expansiveness much, much larger than the self I am usually aware of. And I knew it was me and I was it.


          • Patrick Gannon

            I”ve had that same experience on multiple occasions. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t a product of electrical and chemical impulses in our brain. Sam Harris, a famous agnostic and neurological scientist is big into meditation and offers an explanation for how this happens. If I recall correctly, he suggests that when you go looking for your “self” you end up in this expansiveness you speak of (and I know what you mean) because the self is an awareness schema that becomes inactive through accident or intent. By getting into this mode, via meditation, sports, sickness, etc. your awareness is tamped down to next to nothing and that produces the experience. It’s basically shutting part of the brain down I guess.

            It’s a fantastic experience, but for me, the second I think about the fact that I’m having it, it’s gone. The attention schema hops back into place and I regain the illusory sense of self. There is a rational explanation for the phenomenon, and I’ll maintain an open skeptical mind until evidence indicates otherwise.

          • Patrick Gannon

            And as I’ve pointed out elsewhere, I’ve had the same experience on several occasions. At the time I believed very deeply that they were some kind of “real” experience, but now, having learned more about how the brain works, I don’t think so any longer.

            In some sense, at least, we are all ONE with the cosmos, as everything that we are made of came from the cosmos and will return there.

            To comment specifically on your post – it doesn’t make sense to me. FIrst you said you don’t retain your sense of self, then you said you knew it was you. That strikes me as a contradiction. How can you know it was you, if you didn’t retain a sense of self?

            I’ve had these experiences, and when the tiniest bit of “self” pops up it kills the experience. I think the brain is just in an idle state at this time, and that’s what it feels like to us. In any event, I’m content to let the phenomenon continue to be studied until more definitive answers are known.

      • Mateia Andrei

        No free will with our consent ? What are you talking about ? When you give consent to someone to help you by your own choosing your free will creates another path! What is it that you do not understand ?

    • Patrick Gannon

      I’m not sure it’s necessary to assume that God is good, Matei. Just because some books written by men say that God is good, doesn’t mean that God, if he/she/it exists, really is good.

      There’s zero evidence for God, but if one does exist, we can’t assume that it will be good. I don’t conclude that there is no God and never was one – I only conclude that there is absolutely no evidence for one and thus it makes no sense, and may be harmful, to tell myself through beliefs that there is one.

      • Mateia Andrei

        I never assumed that God is good religions do. I have had this discussion on a Youtube thread. There is the possibility that God is just a Eldrich Abomination but im far more comfortable that there is no God.

        • Patrick Gannon

          What it comes down to in my mind is the question of consciousness. If consciousness is a product of the brain, as it appears to be, then when the brain dies, consciousness dies with it, and the question of god and afterlife become moot.

          Some suggest that consciousness is essentially the basic unit of information and once organized, it remains organized. I like this idea, but see no experimental evidence for it. Available evidence I’m aware of is subjective and subject to personal delusion.

          Other scientists such as Graziano, however, are explaining consciousness as an “attention schema” a tool the brain develops and uses to focus attention on competing input signals from outside (senses) and inside (memories, perceptions, etc.) to create a sort of a working blueprint for what the brain is dealing with at any given moment. In this proposal, self aware consciousness is an illusion, and growing evidence supports this theory. Multiple experiments show that the brain makes decisions before the consciousness is aware of having made those decisions.

          The point is, we don’t know yet, and any I think any belief we decide to hold, is in contradiction to what we actually do know; which is that we don’t know. I seriously doubt the concept of “God,” but I don’t know, and if there is a god(s), it could be like Neale’s god, or it could be something far worse. I would agree that if one must have beliefs, believing in Neale’s god is probably less traumatic, but for all we know, and as many Christians would assert; Neale could be leading people to Satan!

          • Mateia Andrei

            I would recommend reading Numenta’s whitepapers regarding intelligence while they cover only intelligence and not consciousness BIG DIFFERENCE they are interesting to read and cover how 70% of the brain functions.

            “Neale could be leading people to Satan!”

            Abrahamic religions have some many flaws that i would rather rebel against a tyrant God than worship him. Stephen Fry put it better in a interview which you can find on Youtube.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Just so there’s no confusion… I think the possibility that Neale’s god is leading people to Satan is about as real as me manifesting a pink unicorn in my office. I too would rebel against an Abrahamic (tyrant) god.

            Mateia, you sound pretty intelligent and well informed. Try Michael Graziano’s “Consciousness and the Social Brain.” I’ll look up Numenta.

    • mewabe

      You seem to come from a Judeo-Christian heritage that defines the Divine as a Big Daddy who is expected to take care of us as if we were children, or as a commander in chief in control of everything. Why should the Divine fulfill every childish want and desire humans have, as would Santa Claus? Why should the Divine prevent us from fully understanding the consequences of our actions, the effects, positive or negative, our thoughts, feelings and choices have on our lives and on the world? Why should the Divine thus take our power away?

      Why should the Divine save us from ourselves? Isn’t this something we need to learn to do in order to grow up and become responsible as individuals and as a specie, and fully understand our own power? And even if the Divine turns out to be a father of sort, isn’t this something every human parent actually wants, to empower their children rather than coming to the rescue every time they hurt themselves in the exact same manner because they won’t learn as long as they are rescued?

      • You said it better than I could, good job!

        • mewabe

          Thank you Marko!

      • Mateia Andrei

        Cause love would never leave you to be alone but apperantly you don’t understand that. So the divine must not care apperantly.

        • mewabe

          You seem to have a personal issue with this. Who do you feel did not care about you in your life? Who made you feel this way, alone, misunderstood and unloved?

          • Mateia Andrei

            You seem to miss the point completly form some reason. Either my formulation isn’t done properly or you are understading my reasoning and avoiding it completly. Regardless i have had to say that i knew what love is since i was 4 and since then i understood that there is no God. If CwG is correct and everything in our life is choosen by our soul and cocreated with all of life then after this life is over am i done with all of you. I will become my own universe separeted for real from any of you and God. If someone is againts me then you have no understanding of what love is and i pity you. It has been said if you truly love someone you will let them free so i will be free and separeted from the oneness forever.

          • mewabe

            So you don’t believe that there is a Divine source but you believe you have a soul and will live on after physical death?

          • Mateia Andrei

            Just in case there is a God i have big get off my head sign waiting for him

          • mewabe

            Unlike religion, I don’t think the actual Divine would ever dream of imposing or forcing itself on anyone. Does life impose itself on you? Does nature?

          • Patrick Gannon

            You’re presupposing the “Divine” which may or may not exist. If the “Divine” does exist, there’s no way to know if it’s altruistic. To replace belief in a monstrous Abrahamic god with belief in a kindly, feminized “Divine” god is just to exchange beliefs. All we really have is ignorance. Why can’t we accept that? Why do we believe in things for which we have no empirical evidence? Sure, it makes us feel better; but is that the purpose of our lives? To feel better by pretending to ourselves that we know something we really don’t know?

            It seems to me we have to start by facing the truth – and the truth is that at this stage of our development, when it comes to god/afterlife, we do not know.

          • mewabe

            I am nor replacing one God with another. You misunderstand me…The Divine, for me, is Life. Life is everything. I don’t have to call it “the Divine”, I can call it Life (with a capital L to mean all life). It makes no difference to me. Life is What Is. It is here and now. It is all around us and within us. It permeates everything and connects everything as one, as all life is interconnected and interdependent, from quarks to distant galaxies and everything in between. These simple ideas about life are not beliefs but facts. And these facts are good enough for me, to guide me to live in balance and harmony with all life, according to nature and my own nature.

            I have never used beliefs to “feel better”. I have never used medicines, drugs or alcohol in my life either, not even for a toothache or migraine. I have never run away from bad feelings or pain, but always face these things head on. Trust me, my personal path is not one of escape and denial but of embracing reality no matter what it looks like.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Well, it was the way you said it: “I don’t think the actual Divine would ever dream of forcing itself on anyone.” That strikes me as a different thing than, “I don’t think life would ever dream of forcing itself on anyone.” You’ve given “the Divine” a personhood in the way you phrased it.

            Indeed life may force itself on everything, as we’re learning that life began much earlier on earth than we originally thought.

            As for your subjective “proofs,” they are of no value to anyone but yourself without empirical evidence. You may very well have been delusional, as I think you’ve admitted. How do we go about proving it one way or the other? Maybe the coffee table has something to offer? (grin)

          • mewabe

            I gave it a personhood while replying to Mateia who gave it a personhood, to make a point that even if the Divine was a person, “he” would not force himself on anyone.
            Nature does not force itself on you, unless you are standing next to an erupting volcano. And even then, this force has nothing to do with the human pathological obsession with authority.
            I have no interest in proving my own experiences to anyone

          • Mateia Andrei

            So if I want to live in a void i guess life wouldnt have anything againts that would it ?
            Since everything is connected Life cannot realy be free since everything is imposing on everything else in a endless feedback loop.

          • mewabe

            If you choose the think that life imposes itself on you, you are free to make that choice. It’s a very poor choice, but it’s all yours.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Nah i enjoy the idea of living in a void

          • Patrick Gannon

            Do you have any interest in proving your own experiences to yourself? Do you have enough control over them to gather evidence – such as a specific prediction – write it down, then see if it happens?

          • mewabe

            I never looked for such experiences, never asked for them. They just happened and were spontaneous at the beginning. Example? Upon entering someone’s house, I instantly got the feeling that all of the people who live there would die. I never told them because at the time I was still skeptical. Within 2 years two had died, one was 23, the other was 40, of different causes. Within another year the last one died, who was 51. I got the “feeling” of death. it was very strong, I can’t explain it…but it doesn’t matter, it works and that’s all I care about.

            I have many other examples.

            I have since learnt to call on this ability whenever I or someone close to me needs it, and it is amazingly accurate. But I don’t play games with it, I only use it for serious and specific questions.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I don’t see trying to verify it objectively as “playing games” with it. I too have had unexplainable experiences, but I accept that they could very well be coincidental, since I have no rational explanation for them – yet. For example, I vacation in the same place every year. Year after year as I approached this location, I would think of a person I used to know who lived several hundred miles away when I last knew the person, decades prior. It turned out that this person had moved, and lived within a stones throw of where I was vacationing every year. Psychic phenomenon or a strange coincidence? I have to go with coincidence, unless and until I have something more objective upon which to base my opinion; but I remain open mindedly skeptical to the possibility, however slim, that there was some kind of psi thing going on.

          • mewabe

            Psi experiences or research has nothing to do with a belief in any God by the way….the Soviet were atheists, yet were pursuing ESP research.
            You have to decide what is true for you, and trust your own being.

            Some things I experienced couldn’t be coincidences…I am not sure I can explain them, but I enjoy them. There is a lot that we do not know…and I am fine with not knowing in this way (“left brain”). I mostly use my intuitive and creative mind, being an artist, and it works for me. I actually enjoy not knowing from an analytical perspective…like an owl in a dark night, I navigate through my own mysterious means.

            For example I used to play a little game when I was working in an art studio years ago. Every day I would take the elevator and choose one of the two doors…and 100% of the time I picked the one that would open (these elevators had no lights on top indicating which one was coming down, and did not make any sound). It was an intuitive game, not a psychic thing, but I was always on target. It is because intuition is like a muscle…it has to be exercised to become strong, and I use it in art. In the same manner I once (the only time I ever gambled) played blackjack for 4 hours at different tables with $20, and ended up with $800…not thinking, using intuition only. I could have played with my eyes shot. I “knew” exactly what to do, like a surfer riding a wave…pure feeling and sensing.

            Being psychic is one step further.

            Our trolling pal Mateia exited this forum, have you noticed?

          • Patrick Gannon

            I can understand why you believe your experiences are real, and I don’t rule out the possibility that you are right. I’m more inclined to think that you have a higher sense of awareness, that you’re more finely tuned to small things the rest of us don’t notice and that perhaps you, yourself are unaware of this higher level of awareness.

            I’m going to disagree a little about the Soviets. Communism is a belief system, even if it isn’t a religious belief system. For all intents and purposes though, it was a religion with a set of beliefs and dogma, reward and punishment.

            I wouldn’t refer to Mateia as a “troll.” She (?) raised some good points and is entitled to her viewpoint.

          • Mateia Andrei

            “You are free.”
            How about to be free living in a void ? How about that ?

          • Patrick Gannon

            That’s an intelligent, agnostic approach. I too have my pitch prepared for God, if He turns out to be real. If it turns out to be Neale’s god, then I guess I have to deal with doing this all over again and again (groan), and if it’s Abraham’s god, then all bets are off. If His book describes Him correctly, He’s a monster, and no telling what He’ll do.

            But I think we just die; and I can live with that. It means that if I want to make any impact, I need to do it in the short time I’m here.

      • mewabe, my friend, once again you have found a way to express yourself that I appreciate so much. Thank you for your presence here, and the sharing of your own experiences.

        Love, Blessings and Gratitude,

        • mewabe

          Thank you Annie…and thank you for sharing your experiences with extrasensory perception in your post above…I know these are very real.
          Love, blessings and gratitude to you!

      • Patrick Gannon

        Mewabe, you’re presupposing a god, even if it’s a different god.

        I think Mateia was discussing the conundrum the Abrahamic god faces. He can be good or He can be all-powerful, but He can’t be both at the same time. If He can stop evil but fails to do so, He’s not good. If He can’t stop evil, He’s not all-powerful.

        If the Abrahamic view of god is wrong,why isn’t it just as likely that your view of god is wrong too? The same amount of actual evidence exists for both, and it’s non-existent or significantly subjective.

        That is not to say that I disagree with trying to get humans to play a more integrated role with nature; keeping in mind that we too are part of nature and nature can do the same thing we do – overpopulate, destroy and use up resources, then face dire penalties. Why is any “Divine” thingamabobie required for us to live in harmony with nature? I’m an agnostic, and am pretty close to nature; no gods required.

        • mewabe

          Why would you suppose evil exist? Is that a scientific theory? If Evil doesn’t exist, what would any God be expected of “stopping” expect our own mistakes, which, once again, would be preventing us from learning to be responsible, to learn from the consequences of our own choices and actions?

          • Mateia Andrei

            Yeah man cause a unconditional loving God would never move a muscle to help you

          • mewabe

            Mateia you are either missing some basic comprehension skills, have some psychological issues, or are just playing (trolling).

          • Mateia Andrei

            Either you lack the understanding of sarcasm or of uncoditional love either way I pity you and I pity your punny God.

  • Awareness

    “IS ANY TRUTH ‘ABSOLUTE’?” – Neale Donald Walsch 🙂

    I agree with the following from “Home with God”:

    There is no truth except the truth that exists within you. Everything else is what someone is telling you.” – “Home with God” by Neale Donald Walsch 🙂

    Bless ALL 🙂

    • Patrick Gannon

      I don’t think I accept this. The truth that exists within you got there from someone else telling you. How else would it get there? Nobody is born with beliefs. To me this statement says that we must question “our truth” because it came from what someone else told us and must therefore be suspect – assuming it comes without evidence.

      Hmm, or maybe I accept it – everyone has their own truth – but it doesn’t go far enough. Since we all have our own truth, and it came from someone else, we must question it. The only truth I’m not sure we need to question is the real truth – the truth that says: “I don’t know.”

      • It’s possible to know things others don’t tell us.

        I knew, while living in California, each time my sister had three auto accidents. I knew that my grandmother, who lived in Ohio, was ill and needed help. I knew the moment my mother died because I felt her saying goodbye to me.

        Knowledge doesn’t necessarily have to come from someone else “telling” us, at least not in person by talking with us.

        It’s in this same way that I feel the energies of others when they’re nearby, without any effort if their energy is very active. And, it’s in this same way I know when, on occasion while meditating, I’m connected with energies that are not part of my usual physical experience.


        • Patrick Gannon

          The question wasn’t whether “knowledge” comes from someone telling us, the question was whether so-called “truths” or “beliefs” come from someone else. I think the word “know” is being confused with the word “belief” (which I used) and the word “truth” (that Mr. Awareness used). For sake of argument, I propose that “knowing” refers to something beyond reasonable doubt.

          Your experiences are certainly not beyond reasonable doubt as they are highly subjective. Coincidence and delusion can easily explain your experiences. I suspect that your plant friend has knowledge gained from study, research, experience, etc. Nothing magical.

          • You’re the one who asked the question!

            “The truth that exists within you got there from someone else telling you. How else would it get there?”

            If you don’t want your foundational statement questioned, don’t put the question out there.

            My experiences are all I, and others who have had similar experiences, need. And, my friend is no fraud, or trying to act like she knows more than she does.


          • Patrick Gannon

            No, Mr. Awareness posted the original comment:
            “IS ANY TRUTH ‘ABSOLUTE’?” – Neale Donald Walsch 🙂

            I agree with the following from “Home with God”:

            “There is no truth except the truth that exists within you. Everything else is what someone is telling you.” – “Home with God” by Neale Donald Walsch 🙂

            That was the original post. I responded by saying I didn’t buy that assertion, and pointed out that our beliefs are given to us by others. I think knowledge (truth) is something we give ourselves, primarily through study, research, experiment, etc.. The “foundational” statement being questioned, is that of Mr. Awareness; and indeed of NDW himself. All my beliefs were given to me by other people. What I know, I learned myself from reading, study, research, discussion, etc. The process of doing this, eventually did away with many of my beliefs and taught me that belief was not a good alternative to knowledge.

            I certainly have no problem with my statements being questioned. If that bothered me, why would I be here? I know that if I say UP, you will say DOWN, so of course I have no concern about my statements being questioned. I expect it, and indeed, that is how I learn. I put things out there and see if they can be shot down; like my current hypothesis that essentially says we make ourselves “ill” by setting up conflicts in our brain when we believe something that we know we don’t know. So far, nobody has given me any good reason to doubt that particular hypothesis.

            As usual, Annie, you accuse me of saying things I didn’t say. I didn’t call your friend a “fraud.” I would suggest that there is a logical explanation for her knowledge of plants. It could even be that certain chemicals identify certain plants and your friend is more sensitive to these than other people. I suggest a rational explanation is far more likely, but I did not call your friend a fraud….

    • Mateia Andrei

      I’m sorry but gravity won’t cease to exist no matter how long you think it’s not there.

      • It may very well be still be there but it can be eventually manipulated in ways we can’t dream at the moment.

        • Mateia Andrei

          Gather everyone who believes in the law of attraction in one place. Image yourselves ligther than air. Lets see if you can fly. Add some proof to those words of yours

          • OH some things are much more easy to demonstrate & others much less so given the very strong overwhelming collective belief. Yet that does not mean the possibility does not exist, simply because it has not been demonstrated.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Yeah i can see you trying to cop out

          • How so?

          • Mateia Andrei

            Gather everyone who thinks Law of attraction is real and levitate

          • Well if you could you just might.
            But remember I said just because one doesn’t yet have the understanding to demonstrate an advanced idea doesn’t mean it can’t be done.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Are you scared ? Of course you are ! If it turns out your ideas are just a fantasy.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I suggest this frequently. Get thousands of people to watch a meditative video at the same time all around the world – hundreds of thousands, millions if the New Age guys can collect that many – and have all of them focus together to stop a clock. That will get my attention; and the attention of the scientific community.

      • Awareness

        “Gravity” exists here on earth yes 🙂 But if you go to space you experience weightlessness 🙂 So you can say that “gravity” is “not true” in space 🙂 Also in the “spiritual realm”, “gravity” is meaningless, it does not exist there 🙂 “Gravity” is “not true” in the spiritual realm 🙂 You will find that out in “death” when you “exit” this physical human body 🙂 “Gravity” for you and everyone else is not forever 🙂 So it is not even “true” forever “experientially” 🙂

        Another thing is that you do not need someone else to tell you that “gravity” exists. Even a child knows that when they jump “something” makes them come back to the ground. You do not need a scientist to tell you that there is a “Law of Gravity” 🙂 You simply know it exists because your body can experience it 🙂 In other words you can find out for yourself without the need for special scientific equipment 🙂

        Bless ALL 🙂

        • Mateia Andrei

          You didn’t understood a word of what i said did you ?

          • Awareness

            Then explain yourself 🙂 Don’t just say “You didn’t understood a word of what i said did you ?” Say this is what I meant or something 🙂 Clarify yourself 🙂

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Mateia Andrei

            I just did.

          • Awareness

            You prefer not to discuss it further then? It does not matter 🙂

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Mateia Andrei

            Quote from CONVERSATIONS WITH GOD Book 2
            “God: There have been people who have levitated. Do you believe this?
            NDW: Well, I’ve heard of it.
            God: And people who have walked through walls. And even left their bodies.”

            I rest my case.

          • Awareness

            Please read the following again (I sent it to you 5 months ago) 🙂

            “Miraculously, the baseball-sized tumor visible on the sonogram began to shrink as the practitioners surrounding the patient chanted a simple phrase. In just under three minutes, the “inoperable, terminal, incurable” cancer had simply disappeared.

            A miracle? Or simply a technology we don’t yet understand?

            As one might expect, this was not a scene from Western medical care. The rare video showed a routine healing in a medicineless hospital formerly active in Beijing. Presented during a joint conference in Phoenix by N.Y. Times best-selling author Gregg Braden and renowned cellular biologist, Dr. Bruce H. Lipton, it offered the captivated audience a taste of the secrets of the Quantum Field.

            Braden and Lipton’s research in their respective scientific disciplines has resulted in a pair of treasure maps leading to the same chest of spiritual riches. The deepest mysteries of religion and spirituality have, for the most part, eluded Western seekers. But in a surprise ending, it is science that comes to the rescue.

            Gregg Braden: Each one of us already knows this language. It is a nonverbal language; there are no words or other outward expressions. Everyone has everything they need to create joy and abundance and health in their lives every day. What scientists are finding is precisely what ancient texts tell us, the language this Field recognizes is the language of human feeling and human emotion. It does not take every person in the world expressing the same feeling to create an effect.

            The studies show that a relatively few number of people with a focused intention have tremendous leverage in terms of affecting how our reality is responding, both in our bodies and in our world.
            One famous example was a research project done during the Israeli-Lebanese war in the early 1980’s. In this study, people who had been trained to feel the feeling of peace in their bodies were positioned in war-torn areas in the Middle East.

            When they were intentionally feeling peace during specific windows of time, it changed the level of violence happening in the area around them in statistically significant ways. Crime, hospital emergency room activity, and traffic accidents declined, and terrorist activities stopped altogether. And when the practitioners stopped, then all those activities reversed.

            Since these practitioners had been trained by Maharishi in TM techniques, this phenomenon became known as the Maharishi Effect.

            And the results were so clear-cut that the researchers were able to determine the exact percentage of a population needed to create this effect. That amount is the square root of 1% of a given population. So, when that critical mass of practitioners participated, the threshold opened up and we began to see the effects. Obviously, the more people who participate, the faster we are going to see those effects. The square root of 1% is just 100 people per million, or only about 8,000 in the current world population of 6.5 billion. That is all it takes to make the difference.

            Whether we are talking about one woman’s healing in the video of the dissolving tumor, or about healing between nations — as different as they seem from one another — the principal and the effect are the same.” – “A Romp through the Quantum Field (Part 1) with Gregg Braden and Dr. Bruce Lipton” By Meryl Ann Butler 🙂

            I suggest you go and check out the following:

            Alexander, C. N.; Abou Nader, T. M.; Cavanaugh, K. L.; Davies, J. L.; Dillbeck, M. C.; Kfoury, R. J.; And Orme-Johnson, D. W. The effect of the Maharishi Technology of the Unified Field on the war in Lebanon: A time series analysis of the influence of international and national coherence creating assemblies. Maharishi University of Management, Fairfield, Iowa, U.S.A., and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A., 1984. Collected Papers v4.335. Published in the Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 32, No. 4, December 1988, pgs. 776-812.

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Mateia Andrei

            More new age quantum hogwash

          • Awareness

            Keep searching 🙂
            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Mateia Andrei

            Deepak Chopra gets owned by a real quantum physicist on youtube. I guess his PhD means squat to you.
            Also regarding Lipton here is a something intresting
            “Lipton tells us that the earth is going through its sixth mass extinction, which scientists say is caused by human behavior. Lipton agrees. But that’s where any agreement between Bruce Lipton PhD and modern science finishes. Lipton finds a rather curious origin for the whole thing:

            LIPTON:Much of this human behavior is in fact related to a concept that we arose in this garden as a total result of accident, when in fact this is the complete opposite from the…the…I mean…we were, we were….it was purpose and design through the entire process.//

            I’d like to play dumb here and say that he couldn’t possibly be referring to evolution, because that doesn’t propose that life arose by accident or chance. But I can’t play dumb. I know he means evolution, because Creationists talk like this all the time. Now, I can understand why the average member of the public hears the words “random mutation and natural selection”, and focuses on the easiest word — random. It takes a bit of background reading to clear up the confusion: genetic mutations are only “random” within some clearly defined parameters; and beyond that, natural selection is not random, (which is why the word selection appears rather prominently in the term).

            But Bruce Lipton isn’t an average member of the public. He has a PhD in developmental biology! Why is he ignorant of the most basic concepts of his own field?

            LIPTON …I mean, we were, we were….it was purpose and design through the entire process.//

            This is straight up Intelligent Design creationism. New Agers usually don’t like to number themselves with fundamentalist Christians, and neither does Lipton. He seems to have pulled back from saying, “we were…we were designed.”

            LIPTON And the relevance about that is that when we bought into the Darwinian theory…//

            Hold it right there, buddy! Now this is really getting stupid. How can someone with a PhD in biology think that biologists “bought into” evolution? How can he not know why evolution is one of the foundational concepts of biology? (Hint for Bruce: it’s been confirmed and reconfirmed by every single finding in every possible field of study from plate tectonics to genetics.)

            And his reference to “the Darwinian theory” is also telling. Creationists also make this error, thinking that evolution is “only a theory”, or only one theory among many. But “theory” in this sense means the practical application of established knowledge — obviously not Dr Lipton’s strong suit.

            Lipton continues:

            …when we bought into the Darwinian theory, we bought into a way of life that’s based on survival of the fittest and the struggle for life.//

            This is a common error even among academics. But that doesn’t make it any less dumb. Fittest doesn’t refer to gym training here; it refers to suitability to a particular habitat. As often as not, the fittest are the smaller ones or the ones who co-operate, or remain loyal, or the ones who turned vegetarian. This is really really basic stuff. Why doesn’t Lipton know it?

            LIPTON And the actual theory of evolution would be the survival of those that cooperate, and the, and the, community of life, and that’s a completely different way of looking at life.//

            You idiot, Bruce…..Cooperative and social behavior among animals is routinely considered in the light of natural selection. Darwin wrote about it at length, and since then, there’s about 150 years worth of research into it which you don’t seem to have noticed. You have some reading to do Dr Bruce.

            So where is all this heading?

            LIPTON We are right now facing a major extinction which may surprise people who look at the world and don’t see much going on, it’s like that’s the big surprise, we are already into the final hoo har.//

            The Final Hoo Har:
            This is a central part of the Lipton Theory of Evolution, and it’s starting to make me think that normal Creationists aren’t so bad after all. It refers to the Friday before Christmas of this year. Yup, that’s right. “The Darwinian theory” doesn’t predict that the world will end on Friday December 21st 2012. But the Lipton Theory does! [Cue music]

            LIPTON And yet I’m not concerned, for the very simple reason that the earth is a living thing, and um…//

            Okay Bruce, the earth is alive. Obviously they didn’t include any geology in your degree, as well as missing out 150 years worth of biology.

            LIPTON …as you’re very familiar, terminal cancer patients can be called out, everybody said man you’re out of here you’re dead, and they have a change of mind, and when they have a change of mind they have what we call a spontaneous remission.//

            Cancer quacks are always fearless in the face of cancer, as long as it’s not their own stupid ass on the line. As you can see, this is what Bruce Lipton uses his PhD for: to convince cancer sufferers to trust him and buy his books.

            But he’s not limiting himself to scamming the sick. If you’re healthy and concerned about the state of the world, he’s got some of that PhD knowledge to help you too!

            LIPTON And what we are in need of right now is a change of mind. And when the human population grabs on to a new understanding of who they are in this picture, it will offer an opportunity for a remission, and this garden will come back in full form for those will be there understanding who we are in the garden.//

            That’s right folks, global warming, pollution, resource depletion and all that stuff all happened because we bought into the Darwinian theory!

            But the Lipton Theory will solve it all!” source:spiritualityisnoexcuse
            And the final nail the coffin.
            From the Express online paper “HISTORIC DISCOVERY: Physicists ‘PROVE’ God DIDN’T create the Universe”
            I rest my case.

          • mewabe

            You are missing the fact that it is not the actual theory of evolution as originated by Darwin that contributed in part to the degradation of the environment and eventually to threatening humanity’s survival…it is its misinterpretation, it’s reinterpretation into socioeconomic, ideological terms, its gross translation into a belief that only the strong and aggressive survive and the weak and the meek are destined to die.

            This belief, by the way, predates Darwin, as history amply demonstrates, revealing the obvious fact that humans have competed with one another for power and control in the most brutal manners since the dawn of ages.

            People who chose this ideological agenda of conquest, dominant power and supremacy simply used and distorted Darwin’s theory as a validation for their own belief in the survival of the most ruthless. They used it, for example, to legitimize the mass killing of Indigenous people in Australia, Africa, North America, stating that the weak and degenerate (the actual word was “senile”) indigenous populations were destined by nature itself and according to evolution to disappear in the face of a superior race and civilization (European).

            They eventually used this distortion of Darwin’s theory to develop and validate Eugenics…such as the sterilization of full blood Native American girls and women in the 1960’s and 1970’s, without their knowledge (up to 20 000).

          • Mateia Andrei

            You seem to have missed the fact that evolution is not about survival of the fitest but of the most collaborative. Missing the point completly nice cherry picking.

          • Stephen mills

            Anything that can be made from Hydrocarbons you can make from carbohydrates (plants) such as Hemp .No need to chemocolize the planet and cut down ancient rain forests .Look to see who doesn’t want us to grow hemp . The real leaders of the Earth big oil ,plastics and paper makers keeping the status quo all for self interest .

          • Mateia Andrei

            The problem is biofuels competing with food productions. Hydrocarbons fums are also know to cause cancer and other health problems so even we could become today a biofuel based economy i don’t think that we would want to. A lot of people are investing in new technologies such as photovoltaics and wind turbines like Warren Buffet and the renewable energy market has grown significantly its only a matter of time before we become 100% renewable. Of course there are some technology problems like battery capacity and rare metals that can only be addressed via a sharing economy model such as airbnb, zipcar or getaround.

          • Stephen mills

            Have you read Neales book Tomorrow’s God .There is chapter Throwing the Money Changers Out Again that describes a new sharing economic model, Use and Co-Operation ,Access and Happiness iinstead of Power and Possesions . Wonderful book full of ideas to help us get through the storm ….

          • Mateia Andrei

            I’m well aware.

          • Patrick Gannon

            I put more faith in Elon Musk and his attempts to save humanity by advancing space travel, than anything religions (including New Age) have to offer.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Hmm. Attacks on indigenous people were largely winding down in the early 1900s as Darwin’s theory began to take hold. You can’t blame evolution on that. Religion, was surely a much larger factor.

            If anything, Darwin’s theory of evolution (which has seen quite a bit of modification since it was first proposed), contributed to secularism and the decline of religion, which was largely responsible for historical brutality of humans to each other.

          • mewabe

            If you read more carefully, you will see that I did the exact opposite of blaming Darwin’s theory for the genocide of indigenous populations undertaken by colonial powers.
            However if you do some some research, you will see that those who pushed for the elimination of “senile, primitive” races claimed to be completely validated by their own interpretation of this theory.
            Religion did play a part as well. Science and religion have been partners in attempting to validate the desecration of the earth and the destruction of traditional, ancient earth cultures for quite a while now, in the name of either God or progress.

          • Mateia Andrei

            You seem to forgot that Hitler wasnt a grand manipulator his people supported him because the catholic church had antisemitic views which were ingrained in germans

          • mewabe

            They were many complex reasons why Germans supported Hitler (others supported him as well…Hitler was Time magazine man of the year once), some being the prior collapse of the German economy and his delivering a strong economy, as well as the fact that Hitler was notoriously anti communist, which appealed greatly to Germans and to the American and European business establishment, as a very strong and threatening international workers movement was then spreading rapidly and challenging the status quo.
            Nothing stops international solidarity movements better than to get populations to massacre each other, hence WW2.

          • Stephen mills

            Mateia .Have you read any of Bruce Liptons books ?

          • Mateia Andrei

            New scientific discoveries have even discredited some of his own ideas. Brilliant scientists are researching quantum physics and you want to tell me that Lipton knows more then every scientist in physics.Quantum healing is a new haux cause people would buy anything thats pseudoscience. If Lipton is so great how come the greater scientific community disagrees with him? Superpositioning has been hijacked by new agers and snake oils. Even Richard Dawkins has tried to reason with people such as Deepak Chopra with little to no result. I suggest you to go to youtube and see some videos with Dawkins and Chopra or real quantum physists and what they have to say about quantum healing.

          • Stephen mills

            It’s all part of the mix ,he doesn’t say he has all the answers just another way I guess .The main cause of death in America is pharmaceutical medicine and the belief that this heals the patient .Yeah that’s right your genes self determine your outcomes in life just pop this pill for life and you will be well .You are not responsible for yourself or the environment your genes are so we have the power to heal you …we know best ….!!

            The greater scientific community is always slow to catch on as they live in Dogma ,there is also the profit ! They feel threatened so they close ranks what’s new ?

            Have you read any of his books ?

          • Mateia Andrei

            “he doesn’t say he has all the answers just another way I guess”
            He has no formulas that scientist can study ,no hypothesis, no nothing the only thing he has is his Phd, words and self publicity.

            “The main cause of death in America is pharmaceutical medicine and the belief that this heals the patient ”

            On what planet do you live ? Underfunded scientist work day and night on cures and understanding diseases yet Lipton has some nice words in a book and zero patents, formulas or anything of true usefulness.At this point his cure could be the placebo effect.

            “The greater scientific community is always slow to catch on as they live in Dogma”

            Here we go with the bullshit again. Dawking who has written “The Selfish Gene” and one would imagine that he is the most atheistic person one could find has said that on from scale of 1 to 7 on the atheist scale he would be a 6. This is far from a dogmatic view and his willingness to understand people such as Deepak Chopra is far beyond dogmatic.

            “Have you read any of his books ?”

            For what purpose ? If he has no metrics and no scientific basis its all a hogwash

          • Stephen mills

            I thought you hadn’t so how can you bash the messenger when you haven’t read the message .

          • Mateia Andrei

            There are plenty of people how have disproved him with scientific evidence go and do your homework.
            I need to ask are you one of those guys that believes the pyramids where build by aliens ?

          • Stephen mills

            “The field is the sole governing agency of the particle “.

            Albert Einstein

          • Mateia Andrei

            Quoting Einstein won’t solve your conundrum. Do you even know he was a atheist ?
            And what about my question ? Do you believe the pyramids where build by aliens ?

          • Stephen mills

            There is nothing Alien in the universe .
            I know what you mean though ?

            Who built the pyramids ? The ones on the Giza plateau you mean . I was not around 10 thousand years ago so I guess we will let historians and Archeologists debate that one .I know one thing the ones they built later where inferior build quality ?

            It’s still open to debate though ? Not set in stone (pardon the pun ).

          • Mateia Andrei

            So have the pyramids been build by beings born on other planets ? Yes or no ?

          • Stephen mills

            Perhaps they had a helping thought in there construction who knows .I am not sure what to believe about this ? I have read books from Graham Hancock on the pyramids but its a wide speculative subject .I know one thing though they are at the exact centre of all the land mass on the planet .A lot of knowledge would have been required to build them there no ?

          • Mateia Andrei

            Do you even know why ancients have build pyramid structures ? Guessing from your answer that that’s a negative.
            Anyone can make a doghouse but what works for a 1-1/2 feet structure usually cannot be scaled even by a factor of 100. It’s a scaling engineering problem. A pyramid is the only big thing you can build without knowing how to build. The reason is that when you double a solid the mass goes up by a factor of 8 and the strength in simple materials like wood has to do with the area ,its like with our muscles, that’s why gymnast are small they are small cause they can have relative large muscles they have short muscles arms and they weigh a bit less. Grasshoppers have the same human muscle but because of their size they jump 100 times their own length and we can’t. Special thanks to Alan Kay for teaching me this.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Come on – Mr. Awareness wants us to read “channelling” from some “Cosmic Awareness” that is sending a Wave-X beam that CERN attempted to shoot down. Some things just aren’t worthy of wasting limited brain time on. I watched over an hour of horse crap recently when I could have used that time to learn something useful. Starting off by looking at someone’s credentials, experience, contributions, and so forth, is a perfectly legitimate way to proceed.

          • Stephen mills

            Have you read any of Bruce Liptons books ?

            Is it useful ,depends what you are trying to do ?
            What Mateia was saying about Bruce Lipton was not what I recognised from reading his books that’s all .
            People are quick to judge and skim over other people’s life’s work .Perhaps we might learn something useful as you said ! Most people have never heard of Bruce Lipton ,Rupert Sheldrake or Greg Baden but to discredit them without giving them a hearing that’s not democracy but theocracy .

            I thought we where moving forward here ?


          • Patrick Gannon

            Having trouble posting today… Stephen it’s fair to say one should not criticize a book they haven’t read, but one also has the right to spend a little time researching what to spend valuable time on. I have tons of books I want to read, and manage about one a month. There is so much pseudoscience and other junk out there, that it’s reasonable to research the author and their works before electing to read them. Given this, I think it would be reasonable for me to skip Lipton’s books given this review on Wikipedia:

            “His ideas are not accepted by science. Lipton’s books are said to have a cult following amongst the new age community.[13]

            Surgical oncologist David Gorski has described Lipton as a crank who misunderstands evolutionary biology. He notes that some of Lipton’s ideas start out based on research from epigenetics but he twists them into a “woo-sphere”.[14]”

            This is not a strong endorsement!

          • Stephen mills

            We are in woo-sphere now as cancer takes hold of a great number of people ! Millions !

            So let’s just radiate everyone who has it ,is this the best we can do ?

          • Patrick Gannon

            Stephen, I don’t understand your point. I simply pointed out that given limited time to read, it is reasonable to research prospective authors to see if it’s worth one’s time. Given that what pops up on a search is largely disfavorable to Lipton, I would need someone to convince me of a good reason to spend my time reading his book.

          • Mateia Andrei

            “So let’s just radiate everyone who has it ,is this the best we can do ?”
            Check out Sonify they have created a new way to treat skin cancer so No! Solutions are always being invented

          • Awareness

            “Mateia Andrei” wrote: “From the Express online paper “HISTORIC DISCOVERY: Physicists ‘PROVE’ God DIDN’T create the Universe””

            I found a spiritual answer “God Has Dreams for You” from “Heavenletter #5449 Published on: October 25, 2015”:

            “In your heart, I am written. I am indelibly in your heart. So what is all this fuss about, that there is a God or not a God?

            I tell you, there is a God, and I am that God. By whatever name you call Me, I am the same. And, whatever stage you are at, you are finding out more about Me so that you may come to know yourself in all the bright colors of your soul.

            Getting to know yourself is getting to know Me, which is getting to know you, beloveds. That is what you are doing, becoming familiar with your Self, this Being that you are, this Being that knows so much more than you will allow yourself to realize humbly.

            Getting to know yourself means flexing your muscles, your soul muscles, that is. Your soul is strong. You are getting to admit the Truth of your Self. You are getting on the Bandwagon of Reality. You are getting to the Source of Your Knowledge. You are getting to your Self.

            You have some barriers to Self-Knowledge to jump over. In a split-second, you can be where you want to be in full-consciousness. Deep within you, you know everything already, everything that matters, everything that matters to you and to Me. You are the Home of All Knowledge. You are the Learner of All Knowledge, and you are the Teacher of All Knowledge, all in One.

            You tend to feel there is a huge chasm to jump over, yet, in Truth, you are a tiny step away. You tend to feel there are huge barriers to Self-Realization. The barriers, in your case, are one form or another of timidity. The barriers are fear of one kind or another. You fear you will fail at the same time as you fear you will succeed.

            But here’s the thing: You cannot fail. This is simply opening a simple door inside you and peeking in. No need to fear the Unknown. It’s not going to bite you. It’s not going to step on your toes. Yes, of course, it could very well turn your life up-side-down, so you fear. You are afraid of losing your ignorance. You’ve become used to it, even fond of it. You like that not so much is expected of you. You may well hesitate to lose your ignorance.

            You simply don’t want to be in the spotlight.

            Here’s the joker: No one from the outside may even notice your leap into starlight or stardom. Or, if people do notice, they won’t know what they notice. They may notice something imperceptible. They may understand you less. What do you care?

            When you have all, how deeply does it matter to you what someone here or there makes of you? Heretofore, others haven’t known you any better than you knew yourself. Anyway, you are accountable to yourself and Me.

            It’s not even possible that you can continue to live in ignorance. Living in ignorance means staying as you have been, as if you were full-blown. To think you know it all is a good case of ignorance. Godlings, you will be awakened sooner or later, one way or another – why not right now through your own volition?

            You don’t quite believe that you will have greater joy than before. Yes, it has been said that ignorance is bliss. Since when has your ignorance kept you immune to misery? Ignorance isn’t bliss. Ignorance is needless suffering. Yes, I understand, you don’t want to be disappointed or betrayed. Ignorance means ignorance.

            I have bigger dreams for you, and all My dreams are going to come true with or without your say-so. This is My dream for you. High consciousness. Full awareness. Let go! What a ride you are on!” – “God Has Dreams for You, Heavenletter #5449 Published on: October 25, 2015” 🙂

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Mateia Andrei

            “I have bigger dreams for you, and all My dreams are going to come true with or without your say-so”
            Exhibit Z
            I rest my case.

          • Awareness

            You can choose to have “High Consciousness and Full Awareness” while you are still alive or it will inevitably come to you in “death” 🙂 “Death” as you know is a given 🙂 “Exiting” this physical body and coming into “Full Consciousness and Full Awareness” is simply a natural process 🙂

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Mateia Andrei

            I choose the second option If CwG is correct and everything in our life is chosen by our soul and co created with all of life then after this life is over am i done with all of you. I will become my own universe separated for real from any of you and God. If someone is againts me then you have no understanding of what love is and i pity you. It has been said if you truly love someone you will let them go so i will be free and separated from the oneness forever.

          • Awareness

            You can create and experience an “illusion” of separation 🙂 However, in the “ultimate reality” sense, separation from the Oneness that is you for real is simply impossible 🙂 I recommend you read “Home with God” by Neale Donald Walsch for a greater understanding of this 🙂

            “Mateia Andrei” wrote: “If someone is againts me then you have no understanding of what love is”

            A reminder for you from SETH (GREAT SPIRIT!):

            And, if you believe, in very simple terms, that people mean you well, and will treat you kindly, they will. And, if you believe that the world is against you, then so it will be in your experience.” – SETH (channelled by Jane Roberts)

            Bear in mind, I have no judgement regarding your point of view 🙂

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Mateia Andrei

            Never tell me what is Impossible since you haven’t even fanthom of creating the illusion of separetion into reality

          • Patrick Gannon

            Or the lights just go out.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “You are afraid of losing your ignorance.”

            Anyone who has beliefs is hiding their ignorance, aren’t they? If they actually knew something, there would be no need to believe it. Anyone who cannot face up to the fact that we have no way to know for sure if there is a god or afterlife, is continuing to hide their ignorance. Living in belief means staying as you have been, as if you were full-blown, when you are just kidding yourself. It’s not a question of losing our ignorance, I think it’s a question of admitting it.

            This guy, who claims to be God, says, “To think you know it all is a good case of ignorance.,” yet if God’s not a “know it all” who is? LOL.

            “I have bigger dreams for you, and My dreams are going to come true with or without your say so.” Well, so much for free will! I was starting to come to that realization, but now God confirms it for me. I guess that settles it! (sarcasm)

          • Patrick Gannon

            If what you say is true, then proving this ‘group consciousness’ should be very simple. Neale, Deepak and his New Age buddies should develop a video that puts thousands of people into a meditative state in order stop a clock or affect a random number generator. Why hasn’t this been attempted? Probably because the Templeton organization tried the same thing with prayer, and failed miserably.

          • Patrick Gannon

            “And even left their bodies.”

            This phenomenon can now be manually induced by researchers. It turns out to be an illusion. The mind, it is proposed, has an “attention schema” or outline or working draft of various things competing in the brain for attention, such as one’s body, and at times with the right stimulus based on emotions, or manual stimulation, the mind creates this schema of a body that is floating – but it’s not real; it’s an illusion, according to researchers such as Graziano. This research had not taken place when “God” insinuated to Neale that such things were real, or perhaps he would have left that out.

            I was a huge fan of Robert Monroe, one of the first to write about OBEs; but now we understand that he was essentially hallucinating, and taking input from his memories and perception of self to complete these experiences in his head, but not in reality. He laid out all this “evidence” in his book, but it was highly subjective and inconclusive when I first read it, and would be more so now that I understand how the OBE experience is most likely manifested by the brain.

          • Or, the manipulation produces an experience similar to an OBE, with the real experience being not just a floating body, but flying and even interplanetary travel.


          • Patrick Gannon

            And nobody would like to see that evidence more than me. As best I know, nobody has ever gone on a “trip” and objectively documented something that would confirm that they actually left their body.

          • I don’t need to “google” something I’ve experienced. My experiences speak for themselves.


          • Patrick Gannon

            Said every delusional, hallucinating mental patient…. Annie, I’m not saying that you are a delusional, hallucinating mental patient, but your lack of willingness to investigate things that question your beliefs tells me that you are not the genius you claim to be; or your intelligence is badly wasted. This is why beliefs are so bad. It would be OK if people would pull their beliefs out and question them, look at other evidence, read about other alternatives. The failure to do so on the part of so many believers, religious and otherwise is a huge problem in our society, and you’ve just confirmed that you’re part of the problem rather than the solution. This is exactly the same thing as the fundamentalist who refuses to examine the evidence for evolution. Exactly the same.

          • You seem to be very certain that I’m not well read, and/or that I don’t have the capacity to reason through what I read, and/or that my beliefs are set in stone. Why is that? Is it just because I don’t comment on the scientists you mention and the theories they promote? Do you think it’s better to believe in unproven (except mathematically) science, or my own personal experiences?

            Do you think I’m blindly following someone who I’ve put on a pedestal? I leave that up to the Catholics (most of whom probably don’t even know the meaning of the term “transubstantiation”). I’m not blindly doing anything, and haven’t done so since my early 30’s—over 20 years ago. Two years of intensive therapy didn’t just help heal my past wounds, but also taught me to question my motivation and the motives of others as I’ve moved forward. I’m neither uninformed nor unintelligent, though I doubt I’d still test with as high an IQ as when I was younger.

            Actually, I’m certified as sane. The release papers from oh so many years ago that the doctors (men of science, in fact) signed prove it. And as someone who has used the services of mental health professionals, I really wish you’d lay off the comments about the mentally ill. It’s disrespectful. People who have brain chemistry imbalances—physical conditions—are living with enough bad press, misunderstanding and stigma.

            I know what I believe, I know why I believe it, and I know what my experiences have shown me to be true—whether those experiences are part of this physical place we find ourselves inhabiting, or elsewhere.


          • Patrick Gannon

            My response was based on your comment indicating a lack of willingness to examine information that might challenge your beliefs. I stand by my statement.

            As for whether you’ve put Neale on a pedestal; I didn’t accuse you of that, but I can’t help notice that it really, really annoys you, when I challenge him.

            I have not said anything disrespectful about the mentally ill. We have learned much about neurology and the brain as a result of trying to help these patients. Unfortunately for believers, what we continue to learn is that the issues these patients face originate in the brain; as you have admitted in noting chemical imbalances and physical conditions that affect mental health. This admission strengthens my position. Thank you.

            Now, since we know that “chemical imbalances” create problems, the question is how do they arise? Is it possible that a chemical imbalance is created as a result of contradicting beliefs? I don’t know – this is the hypothesis; but when we lie to ourselves by believing something we know there is no evidence for – hence we remain ignorant – then what conditions does this set up in our brains? I’m just asking the question; I haven’t really seen any research on the question; but it seems to explain things like your hostility to me. I suggest that I make you face your internal contradiction and you don’t like it, and so you make straw man and ad hominem comments and attacks on me to make yourself feel better. From my perspective, you are evidence to support my hypothesis.

          • First, if you knew what vanilla ice cream tastes like, would you have a desire to google it so you could read what other people describe it as? Especially if you have already read most of the information found by googling it?

            You’re assuming that I’m avoiding so as not to disturb my beliefs. I know much more than you give me credit for. My beliefs, as I have said, aren’t blind. They are based on a lifetime of education (formal as well as informal through reading and observation), questioning everything, personal experiences, and coming to my own conclusions.

            Second: Wow. You really need to stop assuming what I’m feeling when I’m posting here. I can’t say I’ve felt “annoyed” or “hostile” when replying to your posts here. And if you think I haven’t questioned what Neale has written, or his methods, or his motives, you are mistaken. I have. It’s just that I have come to a different conclusion about those things than you have. That, too, was a conclusion based on the things I previously mentioned.

            What “issues” are you referring to? Both clinical depression and bipolar disorder are believed, by medical research, to be genetic. Personality disorders are most often caused by trauma, usually abuse or neglect, sometimes during childhood. Posttraumatic stress disorder is also caused by being exposed to traumatic events. These are amongst the most often diagnoses of mental illnesses. How does that strengthen your position about beliefs causing mental illnesses?

            I would like to suggest that maybe you attempt to read my posts without your own mental biases about who I am, what I know, or how I’m feeling. As what we use here are written words without inflection, it can be easy to misread such things.


          • Patrick Gannon

            My hypothesis about creating internal conflict in the brain by believing things we know we don’t know, is not intended to be an explanation for severe cases of mental illness. What I’m suggesting is that it’s like a low-grade fever that won’t go away. It doesn’t prevent you from going about your day to day affairs, but it’s there, nagging and bothering you at a practically unconscious level, making a person feel not quite right.

            I came to this hypothesis as a result of my own experiences. When I dropped beliefs and adopted a skeptical open mind, I just felt better. I feel more honest with myself and that makes me feel better about myself, and more trusting of myself. I’m not lying to myself any longer and that’s a good feeling.

            That’s not to say that when I was deep in CwG belief that it didn’t feel good. It was like a drug; like the stuff they gave me following an operation I had. But I eventually admitted to myself that it wasn’t real; it was a manufactured feeling that was essentially a cheat. Not believing means a lot more doubt and uncertainty, but I think truth is worth that discomfort.

          • Patrick Gannon

            You won’t do that for me. Why should anyone do that for you?

        • Patrick Gannon

          “Gravity” exists here on earth yes 🙂 But if you go to space you experience weightlessness 🙂 So you can say that “gravity” is “not true” in space 🙂

          NO, you most definitely cannot say that. If there was no gravity in space, the galaxies would fly apart. The difference is that your perception and experience would mislead you into believing there is no gravity in space, despite gravity being ubiquitous.

          YES, we do need a theory of gravity to explain how it works. At one time, people simply knew that the earth was flat because that’s how they experienced and perceived it, and that the sun went around the earth because that’s how they experienced and perceived it. We cannot trust our perceptions. Watch “Brain Games” to see just how little we can actually trust our perceptions and experience.

          • Awareness

            Indeed I am aware that gravity exists between masses in space such as planets, galaxies etc. I agree with that 🙂

            “Gravity” exists only when there is a mass nearby you in space. Note I am talking about the kind of gravity we experience here on earth. If there is no mass such as the earth near you then you would experience no significant gravitational force. However, lets say you are in a “sector” of space where there are no masses whatsoever nearby for 1 light year, then YOU will not experience a significant amount gravitational force 🙂

            According to wikipedia, 1 light year is:

            1 light-year = 9460730472580800 metres (exactly)
            ≈ 9.461 petametres
            ≈ 9.461 trillion kilometres
            ≈ 5.878625 trillion miles

            I will now show you how mathematically you can experience zero to near negligible gravitational force.

            So from the equation for gravitational force:

            F = (G x M1 x M2) / r x r -> (1)

            Where M1 equals your mass and M2 the mass of a “nearby” object and r equals the distance between the masses. G is a constant of proportionality. If there are no masses around you in your “sector” of space then we can set M2 = 0. Therefore, equation 1 above for the gravitational force becomes zero 🙂

            Or gravitational force can be negligible to zero as the square of the distance r between you and any mass in outer space approaches infinity. (r x r) -> ∞ “Tends to infinity” as we say in calculus 🙂

            Are you saying you cannot experience gravity without someone telling you it exists? I say you need no one to tell you that gravity exists in order to experience it 🙂

            Do you agree that the universe is infinite? Do you agree that the universe extends forever?

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Patrick Gannon

            You did not qualify your original statement. You insinuated that there was no gravity in space. If you are floating in space, YOU are the mass, and if there are microscopic particles nearby, there will be an attraction between your larger mass, and their smaller mass. Space is not empty, and anything with a Higgs Bosun particle will have mass, as I understand it.

            Do I agree that the universe is infinite? No. Absolutely not. Currently the universe is thought to be about 100 billion light years from end to end – but this is based on how long it takes light to travel 13.8 billion years. It might expand to something infinite, or could already be so – but we don’t have this knowledge today. I would be a fool to agree that the universe is infinite.

          • Awareness

            Now referring back to Newton’s law of universal gravitation:

            F = (G x M1 x M2) / (r x r) ——————> (1)


            F is the force between the masses;
            G is the gravitational constant;
            M1 is the first mass (YOUR mass for this example);
            M2 is the second mass;
            r is the distance between the centres of the masses.

            I have shown you scenarios mathematically how the gravitational Force F can be negligible to zero for two cases (note this is in reference to YOU as the observer):

            1. If there are no nearby masses of significant size (such as the earth around you in “space”.

            2. If the distance between YOUR mass and any other masses in space approaches infinity.

            For case 1 above I have shown you that from equation 1 setting M2 = 0 (no masses nearby) will cause F = 0 (zero gravitational force). Do you agree that this is mathematically correct?

            For case 2 above, I have shown you that as YOUR mass is moved in space by a distance r approaching infinity, that this will cause the gravitational force F to approach zero (F = 0). Do you agree that this is mathematically correct?

            “Higgs boson” you mean?

            According to the Big Bang theory, the universe is still expanding and therefore not finite 🙂 According to the BBC science page titled “BBC – GCSE Bitesize: The Big Bang theory”:

            “Scientists believe the Universe began in a hot ‘big bang’ about 13,600 million years ago. The Universe continues to expand today. The evidence for the Big Bang theory includes the existence of a microwave background radiation, and red-shift. Stars do not remain the same, but change as they age.

            The Big Bang theory

            Scientists have gathered a lot of evidence and information about the Universe. They have used their observations to develop a theory called the Big Bang. The theory states that about 13.7 billion years ago all the matter in the Universe was concentrated into a single incredibly tiny point. This began to enlarge rapidly in a hot explosion, and it is still expanding today.

            Evidence for the Big Bang includes:

            – all the galaxies are moving away from us

            – the further away a galaxy is, the faster it is moving away.

            These two features are found in explosions – the fastest moving objects end up furthest away from the explosion.” – “BBC – GCSE Bitesize: The Big Bang theory” 🙂

            If the universe was “concentrated into a single incredibly tiny point” before the Big Bang and then enlarged into what it is today, then what did the universe enlarge into? Have you considered this question? And also if the universe is still expanding today, then what is the universe expanding into?

            Now back to what I said previously regarding YOUR mass floating in space 🙂 If we move your mass beyond the current expanded point of the universe by 100 light years, would you experience any significant gravitational force since you are “beyond” the current universe? And what if by equation 1 above for gravitational force that YOUR mass is moved by a distance approaching infinity beyond the current expansion of the universe? Then mathematically from equation 1, the gravitational force acting on you is F = 0 (zero gravity on you) 🙂 Do you agree that this is mathematically correct from the given formula?

            Are you aware of Hubble’s law? According to Wikipedia:
            “Hubble’s law is considered the first observational basis for the expansion of the universe and today serves as one of the pieces of evidence most often cited in support of the Big Bang model” 🙂
            I quote from Cornell University’s website this law as follows:

            “The dominant motion in the universe is the smooth expansion known as Hubble’s Law.

            Recessional Velocity = Hubble’s constant times distance

            V = Ho D


            V is the observed velocity of the galaxy away from us, usually in km/sec

            H is Hubble’s “constant”, in km/sec/Mpc

            D is the distance to the galaxy in Mpc” 🙂

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Patrick Gannon

            How can someone so apparently intelligent and well spoken, with very good writing skills, and assuming you actually understand all of this that you cut/pasted, believe in the stuff Berlinghof spouts? If you put half this effort into fact-checking him, you’d delete those web pages from your browsing history so you wouldn’t have to be embarrassed by someone finding out you actually believed in Reptilians and Orions and Arcons, Wave X’s and so on.

            Yeah, I spelled Boson wrong. So sue me. We’re talking past each other when it comes to the subject of gravitation. I understood you to say that there is no gravitation in space. You did not qualify your remark as you are doing now. As I pointed out – if I am in space, I am the mass, and a smaller particle with a smaller mass would be attracted to my mass, according to the formula you pasted, right? Ergo, there is gravitation anywhere, including space, where masses are large enough to warp space/time and attract smaller masses. This would be true whether the masses were myself and a drop of water floating a yard apart, or the sun and the earth floating 93 million miles apart.

            With regard to an expanding universe – at any given point in time, the universe is finite, even if it is expanding. If there was a way to freeze it, there would be a finite amount of matter and space that it occupies. Some suggest that expansion may be followed by a Big Crunch. It’s unsettled science.

            I don’t think the universe is expanding into anything, I think it’s creating space and time – but I don’t pretend to know or understand this. It may all be a computer simulation as some scientists propose.

            You asked if my mass would have any gravitational effect if placed 100 light years beyond the current expansion of the universe – how could that be possible? We have no idea whether there is something the universe expands into, or whether it creates space as it expands. Your question is one that cannot be answered scientifically; and I don’t really understand your motive in asking it. It’s like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

            None of this has to do with the original issue – which is about personal truths, i.e. beliefs. What one believes is seldom if ever absolute truth and we get our so-called truths or beliefs from other people. I think Walsh is wrong because the truth within you is the belief you got from someone else. The only real truth, in the matters we are discussing, is that we are ignorant of the truth. We don’t know, so why pretend that we do? How can that be good for us?

          • Awareness

            I use Will Berlinghof’s interpretation of Cosmic Awareness (GREAT SPIRIT! GREAT AWARENESS!) because it says the following applies to all it’s messages (past, present and future):

            Awareness tells you not to believe anything, EVEN THIS Awareness not to believe, but to question, explore, doubt and discover for yourself what is the truth. Cosmic Awareness only indicates and suggests.” by Cosmic Awareness 🙂

            What I quoted above is very important and I invite you not to overlook it 🙂 So there is absolutely nothing to be “embarrassed” about 🙂

            You seem to be introducing the energy of “fear” there, by suggesting the word “embarrassed” 🙂 I have no fear of anything 🙂 I agree with the following from “Conversations with God”:

            Blessed are the FEARLESS, for they shall know God” – “Conversations with God” by Neale Donald Walsch 🙂

            Regarding gravitation, I will simplify further for you 🙂 Consider the following:

            F ∝ (M1 x M2) / (r x r)

            The above symbolically summarizes the magnitude of the gravitational force. It means that the gravitational force is directly proportional to the masses M1 and M2, and inversely proportional to the distance r separating the masses. Now pay attention, “inversely” means that as the distance separating the masses increases the gravitational force between them decreases and becomes weaker. Consider the simple illustration below showing EARTH and YOU:

            EARTH YOU

            As the distance r between YOU (your mass) and the EARTH increases, the force of gravity decreases and becomes weaker 🙂 Now what if the distance between YOU and the EARTH is 100 light years? As we increase this distance between YOU and the EARTH to the point where it approaches infinity, the gravitational force of the EARTH on you will approach zero (F=0) ) Therefore, at that point EARTH will have no gravitational influence on YOU whatsoever (according to the mathematical relationship) 🙂 Now I would suggest that you use your imagination here (think of two magnets being moved further apart) 🙂

            Referring again to the equation for gravitational force:

            F = (G x M1 x M2) / (r x r) ——————> (1)

            Since the universe is expanding, the galaxies are moving further apart. From equation 1, this means that the force of gravity between these masses is becoming weaker and weaker. Do you agree that this is correct mathematically? Now if the universe continues to expand to the point where the distance between the galaxies approaches infinity, then from equation 1, the gravitational force between them will become zero (F = 0) 🙂 Do you agree that this is correct mathematically from equation 1?

            “Patrick Gannon” wrote: “You asked if my mass would have any gravitational effect if placed 100 light years beyond the current expansion of the universe”.

            No I said it the other way round, read what I said again 🙂 I said:

            If we move your mass beyond the current expanded point of the universe by 100 light years, would YOU experience any significant gravitational force since you are “beyond” the current universe?”

            YOUR mass would exert gravitational force on smaller particles near you, but that is also not what I was talking about. I am referring to gravitational force acting on you from large masses such as the Earth which can cause you to fall towards the EARTH 🙂 Do you understand?

            Bless ALL 🙂

          • Patrick Gannon

            Stop talking to me like I’m a child. I understand the basics of gravity including distance and mass.

            The physics lesson has nothing to do with the original topic, and my original comment referring to gravity was based on my perception that you were suggesting there is no gravity in space. From that point on, we’ve been talking past each other. I really don’t need the rest of the lesson – I did that stuff in high school, but have no need for this math in my current profession. I’m impressed that you appear to have an understanding (but I can’t be sure of that, since you are the master of copy/pasting other people’s work).

            Your question about moving my mass outside the current expanse of the universe is a non-sequitur. There is nothing outside the universe as far as we know, so the question is insoluble. It can’t be answered.

            I’m finished with this discussion.

  • The interesting thing about truth is that it always keeps changing & that’s the truth! 😉

    • Awareness

      Excellent Marko I like that 🙂
      Bless ALL 🙂

  • Neale,

    Unless or until we experience Ultimate Reality itself, I feel all we can do is to live by “agreed upon beliefs.” I can imagine that this is what we’ve been doing all along. Our families have beliefs, and I can see beliefs growing from families to tribes to villages to towns to cities and states and nations.

    I see most of our problems not stemming from a lack of beliefs, but of having differing beliefs combined with followers of sets of beliefs attempting to impose theirs on others, usually because they see it as “the right and only” set of beliefs to have. That applies to politics, economy, ecology, religion… Any set of beliefs.

    If we could agree on some common understandings, especially about God, we’d lose at least half the (stated or unstated) reasons we create war. Even nonspiritual agreements make a difference. If we agreed to live by the belief that every living being has a right to have its basic survival needs met, for example, hoarding wouldn’t be acceptable, or applauded, as it is now. Sharing in order to follow that belief would be expected, and going above and beyond by sharing the knowledge when one has a safe way to produce more would be applauded.

    Just because I believe in the Oneness of All doesn’t mean I can’t come to agreement with others who don’t have the same belief. Humanity agreeing that all life is precious doesn’t have to be from a spiritual perspective, but a basic respect for life.

    That doesn’t preclude my having my own beliefs about God, or that I don’t enjoy sharing them here and elsewhere, with like-minded people or not.

    Love, Blessings and Gratitude,

    • Patrick Gannon

      But we’ve tried this for thousands of years to no avail; and the situation does not appear to be improving. Maybe it’s time to say out loud, what you admitted – that you don’t know. You said, “Unless or until we experience Ultimate Reality itself…” Since you agree that we don’t know for sure, why believe that we do know for sure? Is it good for our mental health to do so? What purpose does it serve, when we have only to look around us and see what all those beliefs have brought us to.

      I find it highly unlikely that we are ever going to “agree on some common understandings, especially about God,” unless one group forces its beliefs on the others. That’s the way it has always worked. If we want to really try something new, I suggest we take the big step and investigate the issue of belief itself.

      • “I find it highly unlikely that we are ever going to ‘agree on some common understandings, especially about God,’ unless one group forces its beliefs on the others. That’s the way it has always worked.” (Patrick Gannon)

        If we had the same attitude about science, “that’s the way it has always worked,” there would be no progress in science. Why can’t we make progress in Spirituality that you allow for with science? In science, it’s allowable for something to be true until proven otherwise.

        People used to be afraid of scientific discoveries. Now they’re not. Why can’t the same change in attitude happen with our understanding about God?

        I have more faith in people that we can come to a basic understanding that what some call God is what some call Allah is what some call Source is what some call Buddha is what some call Yaweh is what some call Oneness…


        • Mateia Andrei

          Buddha is no God. He was a man called Siddhartha Gautama that has attained enlightenment. All Budhist seek to attain enlightenment.

          • I was speaking in terms of the spirit, not of the physical, just as some people who use the term “Christ.”


          • Mateia Andrei

            The diffrence between Budhha and Jesus is gigantic. One follower strives for enlightenment the other for salvation.

          • I wasn’t referring to Jesus, but the term “Christ,” or what some call the “Cosmic Christ,” in Spirit form.


          • Patrick Gannon

            So is it a promotion for Jesus, to go from being “God” to the “Cosmic Christ” or is that a demotion?

            (I’m being sarcastic).

        • Patrick Gannon

          “If we had the same attitude about science, “that’s the way it has always worked,” there would be no progress in science.” Agreed. How fortunate that the scientific process doesn’t work like that.

          “Why can’t we make progress in Spirituality that you allow for with science?” I would love to see the scientific process applied to the study of spirituality. Thus far the results have been less than impressive. You know that I frequently propose that Neale and his buddies organize a huge global meditation exercise to stop a clock or affect a random number generator. I would love to see the scientific process applied more studiously to studying psi and other phenomenon. It seems that the evidence collected thus far is not convincing enough to encourage researchers to put more effort into it.

          “In science, it’s allowable for something to be true until proven otherwise.” It’s allowable for something to be treated as true until proven otherwise. It’s not quite the same thing. For a thing to be treated as true according to the scientific process, there has to be observation, research, experiments, predictions, etc. At one time, the earth being the center of the universe was treated as a valid conjecture and odd little circular orbits for the planets were derived to defend this view – but continued observation, experimentation, research, etc. lead us to understand that the original theory was incorrect. What mechanisms exist in spirituality and religion to correct themselves?

          Some people are still very afraid of scientific discoveries. Evolution still scares the bejeezus out of many people, as does cosmology, archaeology, geology, etc., because these scientific disciplines are destroying legacy religions. Discovering what set off the Big Bang or origins of the universe is a horrifying idea for many religions; as it will likely eliminate God. I’m sure the Catholic Church shudders every time new evidence comes up revealing there was no literal Adam and Eve, because without this there can be no original sin, hence no need to believe the right thing about Jesus in order to be saved; and without fear, how does Christianity survive?

          I admire your resolve to bring us all together, but I suspect the scientific process will do more to enable that, than religion – and the New Spirituality is a religion, attempting to fill us with a “goodness drug” that hides the reality of our ignorance from us. In time, it will likely be science, and not religion and spirituality, that determines what is moral and ethical.

          • I wasn’t suggesting that the scientific method be used to test the truth of religion and spirituality. I was suggesting that the same attitude be applied: when there are new revelations that fit our constantly changing worldview better than the old ones, we accept the new. I see no reason why spirituality can’t evolve as we do.

            I don’t believe discovering how the big bang or the universe came about will eliminate The Source of All Things. How could it? It will do a lot of damage to people who want to hang onto antiquated ideas to keep people in line, for sure. I can imagine discovering such things will only reveal how interconnected we all are, since we all came from the same extremely dense matter smaller than the point of a pin.

            The new spirituality is a religion? Really? Where are the consecrated meeting houses? Where is the statement of faith or creed? Where’s the ritual and dogma? Where are all the rules one must follow to become a member? A member of what? A congregation? Does spirituality hold services? What’s the order of service? Are there certain, specific prayers one must say? To Whom? Where’s the proof? Did you make that determination using the scientific method?


          • Patrick Gannon

            I do suggest that the scientific method should be used to test the “truth” (?) of religion and spirituality. For quite some time now, this method and attitude has destroyed the basic tenets and beliefs of our religions, so I understand the reluctance on the part of believers, to permit science to extend its reach.

            You speak of new revelations, but there’s zero evidence that there have been any prior revelations. There are no remnants of the burning bush for example. The original “revelations” such as Genesis have been obliterated by real evidence that came about as a result of scientific inquiry. There’s a new publication that just came out questioning the reality of Jesus. I tend to think Jesus existed, but I think much of the NT is pure fabrication. Likewise, Walsch was almost surely talking to himself; putting his brain in a state that pulled out material from his memories and using his intellect, composed text that was based on his personal beliefs. Based on what I’m learning about how the brain works, I can see how this would have occurred.

            I think that if the slightest bit of real, objective evidence is discovered to support god/afterlife/psi, etc. that the “attitude” of the scientific community will improve. Every scientist wants to be the on who proves that the prevailing wisdom is incorrect. That’s what they live for and dream of. Unfortunately for this idea, just like the poor fundamentalists challenging evolution, all the evidence is going the wrong way. I read articles frequently about discoveries regarding the working of the brain. I never see articles that talk about experiments in which a subject had an OBE, went to a remote location, identified specific items, returned and recounted this in specific detail. You just don’t see this kind of evidence out there.

            If you are truly interested in thinking about how science can play a role in determining morals, a good place to start is Sam Harris’ book “The Moral Landscape.” Essentially, Harris says that if we agree that there is such a thing as the “general welfare” then we can point to two extremes – the worst and best possible lives. Worst is dying a slow death in a third world country due to starvation, disease, poverty, abuse, etc. Best is living the good life, good house, good job, good family, good health. If we can agree that there is a general welfare and that there are two extremes for that welfare, then Harris proposes that the scientific method may be able to help us determine between competing actions, i.e., which is the more moral – which will lead to the best ‘general welfare.’

            There has always been a line drawn in the sand between science and philosophy and religion. The parties in the past have insisted that philosophy and religion are the ‘magisterium’ or authority for determining what is moral and ethical, and science has a different magisterium for determining how the natural world works and that the two should not compete or intersect. This idea of dual magisterium is falling apart; thank goodness. Now we can look at evolution to see what role it played in developing altruism in various species including our own. Now we can look at whether there are specific ways to measure the morality and ethics of one proposal over another. Well known example:

            1) you’re at a train switch and you see a train coming. There are 5 people working on the track who can’t hear the train and who will be killed. There’s a side track with one person. You can throw the switch and kill one person instead of 5. What do you do?

            2) you’re on a bridge and the same train approaches, but there’s no switch to a side track. Instead you have a very large person in a wheelchair next to you on the bridge. You can push this person over in front of the train and it will kill him, but the train will stop and not kill the 5 workers. What do you do?

            In both cases, you kill one person to save five, but the conditions seem different. Most of us don’t cringe at sending the train down the side track, agreeing that killing one is better than killing five; but most of us are very uncomfortable at throwing the fat man from the bridge to save five people. Is one of these actions more or less moral than the other? Why? Science may be able to help us answer questions like this, perhaps by asking – which of these actions contributes more to the general welfare.

            We’ve been through the discussion about the New Spirituality being a religion. I debated Neale personally several months ago on this issue, and he was not convincing; even going so far to ask me – ‘would it be so bad if it was a religion?’

            Of course it’s a religion. “A religion is an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence. Many religions have narratives, symbols, and sacred histories that aim to explain the meaning of life, the origin of life, or the Universe.”

            What part of that doesn’t describe the New Spirituality? One need not hold services in a building to have a religion. If you want to have a church, well this forum is as good as any. It provides the same thing a church does – a pulpit for Walsch to preach his beliefs, and fortunately, unlike most religions, an opportunity for the parishioners to participate in the discussion of those beliefs – which is a good thing. If the Catholic Church worked like that, I think it would be very different by now!

            Good discussion. Thanks for the good questions.

          • You’re welcome.

            You and I are, oftentimes, speaking about different things. You speak about religion. I speak about spirituality. They are not one and the same. I would love to see literalist religions overturned, or return to the core spirituality that first inspired them. I have no problem if science blows established religions into a whirlwind of turmoil. Most who have left established religions because they feel they consist merely of dogma and ritual would probably be as thrilled as I.

            In the same way, you speak about the brain and consciousness, while I speak about energies and the Soul. Again, those are things that don’t mesh.

            As for your “general welfare,” who’s to define those extremes? You speak of things—houses, jobs, health, families. I would speak about basic human rights, the arts, emotional wellness and, yes, spirituality. Who would decide what is “good?” In your brave new world, someone could decide that all disabled people be put to death in order to reduce the population, providing more for others in the name of “general welfare” because they don’t meet the standard of what’s “good health.” But what if those disabled people are those who write poetry, create art, compose music, or otherwise provide what inspires and feeds the spirit? Or even have the next scientific inspiration?

            I don’t have the same conundrum as you assume I would with your example of a train that must take a life in order to save others. I would choose Option 3: being a very large person myself, I would simply offer up my own life to stop the train as it’s not within my rights to end the life of another.

            “Likewise, Walsch was almost surely talking to himself; putting his brain in a state that pulled out material from his memories and using his intellect, composed text that was based on his personal beliefs. Based on what I’m learning about how the brain works, I can see how this would have occurred.” (Patrick Gannon)

            “Almost surely?” How is it that you came to that conclusion? Where would he have encountered information about highly evolved beings living elsewhere? And, as I’ve said before, even if it came from his own mind, it still came from “God” because of the Oneness of all Creation. After all, if quantum entanglement proves to be true, and it’s seeming very likely, all of Creation began entangled in that tiny piece of matter smaller than the point of a pin. To deny Oneness, one would have to deny entanglement.

            Where did you get your definition of religion? And, even if I were to agree with it (and I don’t, because that’s not been my experience of religion), where are the “cultural systems?” Wouldn’t we all have to agree on the “organized collection of beliefs” in order to be a true “New Spiritualist?” Which collection of beliefs?

            I’ve seen and heard Neale’s spirituality evolve into deeper understandings over the years, well beyond what’s written in the CwG series of books. But, if a group of people were to agree that the collection of beliefs must be limited to what’s written in those books and nothing more (or even every utterance from Neale’s mouth), it would stagnate and die because it wouldn’t evolve with humanity. Neale also allows others to have their own beliefs rather than insisting they conform to his. How does that fit with your definition of religion?

            How about this exercise:

            It’s been confirmed that there’s a weapon that will explode in your neighborhood that will kill every person who isn’t in a special shelter. You’re in charge of the shelter in your neighborhood. It can only hold 5 people. Which of the following would you choose to refuse access to your shelter, and why:

            >A middle aged white policeman who has to be accepted with his gun and what ammo he can carry

            >A white Chemist who is faithfully married and must be accepted with his wife, who is mentally ill

            >A gay white architect

            >A black civil rights leader who can’t be around police or guns without causing a fight

            >A Native American shaman who’s female but beyond childbearing age

            >A female Vietnamese Buddhist monk who’s no longer having sex because she saves her energies for other purposes

            >An unmarried young white female Botanist who’s bisexual

            >A young white male who learned to farm from his family but was in an accident that made him unable to produce sperm

            >A middle aged unattached politician

            >A young white couple who can produce children and must come together but the woman’s IQ is much lower than average, each of whom might break their vows

            You have 5 minutes to decide before the weapon explodes.


          • Patrick Gannon

            “In the same way, you speak about the brain and consciousness, while I speak about energies and the Soul. Again, those are things that don’t mesh.” (Annie)

            Why don’t they mesh? You are making a scientific claim. You are claiming that there is a soul, and I assume you believe that it survives our time here. If all there is to us, is what comes out of the brain, then there is no soul. You’re presupposing a soul in the same way Neale presupposes God. There’s no evidence for either. Of course it meshes – it’s a scientific claim that must be justified, or it’s simply fairy dust and unicorns.

            The general welfare issue is one that science may be able to assist with. Would it be in the general welfare to eliminate disabled people? Probably not, but there may be a way to scientifically determine this. That’s all that’s being proposed at this point. I provided examples of the “extremes” based on the idea that most of us would agree that the ‘good life’ entails certain things, while the ‘bad life’ entails certain other, far less desirable things. If a particular action leads to the ‘good life’ for more of humanity, than the ‘band life,’ then it might be considered to be moral or ethical to take that action. Now you might say, that killing disabled people would contribute to the good life for more people because we don’t have to take care of them. However the flip side is that doing this might cause us to experience mental anguish that makes us dysfunctional, and removes us from the ‘good life.’

            The train question I proposed is a famous conundrum that’s well known in philosophical discussions. An excellent book if you’re interested in this kind of discussion is “Justice” by Michael Sandel. In this game, you can’t add an option 3. I would do the same thing as you if I could, but that’s not an option in this exercise. You either push the big guy, or you let the 5 people die; those are your only two options for the 2nd exercise. You don’t get to rewrite the rules of the game. That was a cop-out response which attempts to alleviate you from having to make a moral or ethical decision. I agree you don’t have the right to end the life of another – but, returning to the first scenario, if you elect to pull the switch on the train, you kill one person, and if you do nothing, you kill five.

            I said that Walsch, was almost surely talking to himself because that’s the most reasonable explanation – Occam’s Razor. It can be explained by what we know today about the brain. If we add in your additional components about God, etc. the problem becomes far more complicated because there is no evidence for this God thing.

            Where would he have gotten his ideas about HEBs? From other authors such as Dr. MIchael Newton in his books about souls, past lives, life between lives, etc.. I don’t recall whether Newton uses that particular term – ‘highly evolved beings,’ but it’s exactly what he describes in his books. He probably also got bits of it from Robert Heinlein, a science fiction writer – “Stranger in a Strange Land.” He didn’t originate the idea and would probably admit that if asked.

            Entanglement is a complicated subject, and not one that I am qualified to speak of. I am unaware of any theoretical physicist who proposes that all particles are entangled. This is a special state, and it wears off. It’s not permanent. There’s an article in Skepticblog called “DEEPAK CHOPRA MANGLES QUANTUM MECHANICS – AGAIN” that you might find interesting. Researching this, is not like checking to see if other people experience ice cream in the same way you do.

            The definition of religion comes from Wikipedia. Webster, has a pretty similar definition. As for collection of beliefs, I can’t think of anyone besides the Catholic Church who puts out more lists of “beliefs” than Neale does. His books are full of lists, that for all intents and purposes can be treated as religious dogma. From a cultural standpoint, the “New Age” culture is highly predominant here. I’m one of the few exceptions.

            “Neale also allows others to have their own beliefs rather than insisting they conform to his.” Well now, isn’t that special… So, I don’t have to worry about being excommunicated or shunned. LOL

            From my perspective, Neale is trying to create a sort of “Christianity Light” religion, that won’t be too foreign to his audience, but will give them the sugar and sweetness that legacy religions don’t offer. In some ways the “New Spirituality” reminds me in part of the Fosterite Church of the New Revelation in the “Stranger” book I mentioned above. This is a populist megachurch wherein sexuality, gambling, alcoholism, and similar are not considered sinful but encouraged, even within the church building. Walsch doesn’t promote this behavior, of course, but it’s a “feel good” religion that is very different from the legacy religions, and so too is the “New Spirituality.” The main character, “Mike” is essentially an HEB.

            Since the story line you set up indicates that it is only my neighborhood that will be blown up, and does not imply the end of civilization for everyone except those in the shelter, I would suggest a very fast rock/paper/scissors exercise to select applicants, and if they couldn’t work it out, I’d shut the door and leave them all outside. Otherwise, if we’re talking about a civilization ending event, I would go for those most able to reproduce or contribute to producing offspring; so I’d go with (1) myself, (2) the monk, (3) the botanist, (4,5) the young couple, unless the gay architect is female, in which case I’d go with her and the politician – also hopefully a female. If the idea is to save the human species, the more women who can bear children the better. The woman’s low IQ is a concern, but healthy babies will be the most important thing to reestablishing the human race, and children don’t always end up as dumb as their parents, thank goodness!

          • I am making a spiritual claim, not a scientific one. Do you need scientific research and proof in order to accept anything as true? What about experience? A carpenter’s apprentice, for example, learns his craft based on the experiences of others who have worked in the field and gained knowledge by doing so. We all do this—learn by talking and listening to others—and then we add our own experiences into the mix. It takes no scientific proof for the carpenter’s apprentice, for example, to learn that the most stable joint when making a wooden dresser is a dovetail joint. It takes no scientific experiments to determine the information is true because it becomes evident from his own experience as he matures in his craft. Is that also “fairy dust and unicorns?”

            Unless you include the social sciences—psychology and sociology—in the equation of what’s the “good life” and what’s the “bad life,” and include a populous vote by the people affected, you would be forcing those people to do as others decide for them. The decision, if science is to be our guide, would be based on controlled environments. Anyone looking around them can see that society rebels against decisions made for them without their input, and that society is anything but a controlled environment. The social upheaval and grassroots movements around the world prove this to be true. Look at the uBuntu movement in Africa. Or look to history—slavery, apartheid, communism and imperial colonization have all been rebelled against and defeated. Why would there be any less rebellion in your brave new world based on science? I can see how such a world would cause more rebellion, not less.

            “Changing the rules” by coming up with a more acceptable option in the train exercise isn’t a copout. It is an expression of my individual right to decide for myself the most moral action to take. It’s the people who “change the rules” who have had the most effect on humanity. Again, look to history—Gandhi, Desmond Tutu, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Abraham Lincoln. They all rebelled against an established authority and changed the world by thinking outside the established rules. Your insistence on using the scientific method for everything and for staying within established rules makes me wonder what it is in your life that makes you need so much order from outside yourself, and apparently give no weight to the individual experiences you’ve had in your own life. When something happens to you that you don’t have a scientific answer for, what do you do? Sit around and wait for an answer? Your whole life, and generations of humanity, could pass while waiting on science’s answer. If they ever find one at all.

            Again, I have no problem with the idea of Neale’s experience being a conversation with his subconscious or unconscious mind because I believe in the Oneness of Creation. You make what I can only conclude are assumptions about what Neale may or may not have been exposed to. Have you asked him if he ever heard of or read Newton or Heinlein? Have you attempted to contact him and have a conversation about this? Why is it that when it comes to everything else you need proof, but when it comes to Neale, or spirituality at all, you allow yourself to make such claims based on assumptions with no proof? Isn’t that a double standard?

            Yes, entanglement is still being studied. Nothing certain has been proven. Where you say that it’s a temporary state, I would say that, so far, it appears to be a temporary state but wouldn’t rule out that it can also be permanent. It could be that science doesn’t have the tools to perceive it as such. Maybe entanglement is only part of the picture—like a still photograph rather than a full length movie. Maybe it’s something that constantly changes, and science hasn’t discovered that yet.

            As I have said when it comes to your idea that what Neale is doing is establishing a “new religion,” if people were to become literalists, then dogma and ritual would become rigid, all forward movement would stop, and the “religion” would stagnate and die. I mentioned that Neale allows for individual expression, experiences and ideas because it’s been my experience that isn’t something most religions allow. Spiritual movements, however, do allow for those things, and in fact promote individual experiences.

            Your answer to my exercise is revealing. Your entire focus is on procreation. First, you placed yourself in the shelter even though you were not listed as one of the choices,and even listed yourself first. Then, you’ve eliminated the chemist, who may be the only one able to determine when it might be safe to leave the shelter. You’ve also eliminated the architect, the one who could help provide additional shelter and other buildings should you ever be able to leave. And you’re depriving yourself and your fellow survivors the wisdom of the shaman, who probably knows more about the uses of plants as both food and medicines than does the botanist.

            More than that, you’ve eliminated two entire cultures by leaving out the black militant and the Native American shaman. The black militant can procreate. Why not let him in? Worst of all, it sounds like, with your procreation priority, you would force the monk to not only do something against her will by not only having sex, but by becoming impregnated and giving birth. (And who, besides the shaman, would make a better midwife?) If you took a lesbian, would you force that on her, too? Is that part of your “for the greater good” methods?

            I’ll keep a world where quality of life matters, including spirituality.


          • Patrick Gannon

            If you claim the existence of a soul, aren’t you essentially claiming that your consciousness survives death? The subject of consciousness is a scientific claim. The two basic theories are the dualistic view in which consciousness is something separate from brain/body and resides in or around the brain, but does not emerge from it. The other theory is that consciousness emerges from the brain. This is a purely scientific question, in the same way it is when the religionist claims God created the universe. That’s a scientific claim and one that may one day be proven one way or the other – not by religions and spiritualists, but by people using the scientific method.

            Your example utterly fails. Determining which joint to use came about as the result of trial and error, measurement and observation, experimentation. It’s a purely scientific endeavor. True the apprentice doesn’t necessarily need to know the science, but someone had to do it in order to invent the joint in the first place.

            I suppose that what you are suggesting is that we can learn how to meditate and perhaps to have OBEs etc., but there is currently no scientific basis for this. Unlike the dovetail joint which was designed through experimentation and proven through actual use, nothing similar to that exists for psi experiences. I would dearly love to see more research in this area, but most scientists see it as a fruitless endeavor, so I turn to the New Agers to perform their own experiments using the scientific method. Prove that you can make a clock run backwards by having thousands of people “manifesting” this reality with group consciousness. Conduct a successful experiment and change the world. Similar experiments with prayer have failed miserably. Google Templeton prayer study. Here’s the first paragraph of the first article that shows up in my search: “Prayers offered by strangers had no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, a large and long-awaited study has found. And patients who knew they were being prayed for had a higher rate of post-operative complications like abnormal heart rhythms, perhaps because of the expectations the prayers created, the researchers suggested.” The New Agers are scared to try such large scale experiments for obvious reasons. Then they would have to deal with evidence instead of beliefs.

            I don’t have enough room here to flesh out Sam Harris’ proposal regarding free will, nor do I fully grasp it yet. I find it to be compelling, but I’m not entirely sold on it. Sam would surely include the social sciences and whatever else is determined to be appropriate in having science assist us in determining what is ethical and moral. He is not in any way, proposing that certain things should be pushed on to others, he’s simply advocating for science to get involved in the study of morals and ethics to see if it can assist us in determining which of two or more actions is the more ethical and moral. If there is anyone who hates the idea of cultures (such as Islam) forcing things on others (such as bags covering women) it’s Sam Harris. It’s a very short book. If you have any interest in the subject beyond disagreeing with whatever I say, please read it.

            Yes, changing the rules in the train story is a cop out. You are presented with a theoretical moral dilemma and asked which of the two options is more ethical. A third option is not part of the exercise just because you don’t like the other options. Sometimes life does not give us a third option, and we have to deal with what’s in front of us whether we like it or not.

            “Your insistence on using the scientific method for everything and for staying within established rules makes me wonder what it is in your life that makes you need so much order from outside yourself, and apparently give no weight to the individual experiences you’ve had in your own life.” (Annie)

            Yeah, I do work hard to use the scientific method, as it is the best method we currently have to determine what is true about the natural world. I consider that to be a strength, rather than a weakness. Tossing burned chicken bones to divine the future is not my modus operandi, and I’m not ashamed of that. Of course my personal experiences have an effect on me; it can’t be otherwise – they are part of my memories, perceptions, experiences that my brain will use moving forward. Fortunately I am able to compartmentalize those experiences and examine them with more care, rather than just leaping to conclusions about them. There are rational explanations for such things that don’t require the supernatural. Again, I consider this to be an advantage. I’m fortunate not to believe ridiculous things, like our presidential candidate who believes Joseph built the pyramids to store grain.

            You clearly missed the discussion Neale and I had a few months back. I asked him about some of the books I mentioned, and he indicated that he had read some of them and admitted that there wasn’t anything new in his ideas. I think he even says that in his books. I’m too busy to wade through 6 months worth of archives to find those conversations, but we did communicate directly with each other as you and I are doing now. He even dedicated one of his columns to addressing some of my points, mentioning me by name in his column. He copy/pasted a couple of my responses and responded to them inline in detail, and I then followed up and responded in kind. I’m sorry you missed it; if you care to wade through the archives you’ll find a couple of our discussions.

            You really don’t like the scientific method and I understand that since it has little use for personal beliefs, but going through the history of earth, please list in two columns what advances beliefs have given us, and what advances the scientific method has given us.

            I appreciate your willingness to admit that we don’t understand entanglement in full, but New Agers use this to “prove” (that’s a laugh) that it supports their idea of god. Chopra is among the worst of the offenders in this regard, and he’s been chewed out for it by “real” theoretical physicists who certainly understand it better than Chopra, Walsch, you or me.

            “if people were to become literalists, then dogma and ritual would become rigid, all forward movement would stop, and the “religion” would stagnate and die..” (Annie). I don’t know how you can justify this idea. In the US there are two major groups. The “nones” are increasing, and the “evangelicals” are holding very steady or increasing themselves. These evangelicals are mostly the literalists. The mainstream churches are declining, but the evangelicals who peddle fear are growing in number. They aren’t dying, much as I wish that were the case. Every time you criticize the scientific method you empower Young Earth Creationism and other idiotic beliefs from evangelicals.

            I subscribe to the weekend newsletter Neale sends and last week or the week before, if memory serves me, there was an individual writing Neale who was taking some of his texts literally and Neale had to soften the interpretation for him. When Neale is gone, if his new religion survives, it may very well become dogmatic over time. There have been people on this forum who would turn it into dogma. Whatever Neale may have intended, once you start a belief system, as he has attempted to do, you create a religion that will eventually take on a life of it’s own just as the Apostle Paul did. Jesus, if he was a real person, certainly had no intent to create Christianity, and look what happened. Once you call something ‘holy’ or ‘sacred’ or the ‘word of God’ it becomes a tool for self-righteous people to use to their own benefit.

            Please recall that I qualified my response to your little exercise. If the bomb was just going to blow up my town and the survival of humanity was not at stake, then I think my solution is a good one. Let those who want into the shelter decide for themselves in 5 minutes before I shut the door.

            You said, “You’re in charge of the shelter in your neighborhood. It can only hold 5 people. Which of the following would you choose to refuse access to your shelter?” I assumed I was one of the people going into “my” shelter, but I would put myself there anyway because I’m reasonably intelligent, practical, well-rounded, good with my hands, virile, etc. If I had cancer or was impotent or had nothing of value to offer in replenishing the human species, then I would leave myself out; but I know how to hunt and farm and make things with my hands. I’m a good candidate to keep in the shelter.

            My evolutionary drive is to protect my own genes – and that’s what I’m going to do unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise. In the scenario where this is a extinction level event, then the most important thing is to procreate and replenish the human race. The rules of genteel society go out the window in that event, as there is no longer any society. Nothing matters except survival and procreation if the human race is to survive. Please note, by the way, that you never mentioned a lesbian – you said a bisexual woman. She’ll participate in replenishing the species, and if she still wants a relationship with another woman in the shelter who is willing, I won’t care in the least. If I’m in charge of the shelter, which I assume I am since you said I’m the one who decides, then I’m going to set the rules until such time as the group decides otherwise.

            Anyone unwilling to help replenish the earth with the human race is of no value in an extinction level scenario. Their genes will end their journey when the bomb goes off if they stay outside. In that 5 minutes of decision making, anyone unwilling to help replenish the human race will stay outside, if I’m the one who decides. Evolution doesn’t look for what’s good – it looks for what survives. Filling the shelter with smart or useful people who won’t contribute to replenishing the human species would doom the human race to extinction. You said you’d keep a world where quality of life and spirituality are what matters most – and you’d doom the race to extinction in the process, unless you took measures to ensure it’s survival by selecting candidates who would produce offspring. I would save the human race, and you would kill it in the name of feel-good spirituality.

  • hempwise

    The Soul is the perceiver and revealer of truth.

    We know truth when we see it ,let skeptic and scoffer say what they choose.Foolish people ask you,when you have spoken what they do not wish to hear ,How do you know it is the truth ,and not an error of your own ? We know truth when we see it ,from opinion ,as we know when we are awake…

    We distinguish the announcements of the soul ,its manifestations of its own nature,by the term Revelation.These are always attended by the emotion of the sublime .For this communication is an influx of the Divine mind into our mind.It is an ebb of the individual rivulet before the flowing surges of the sea of life.

    Ralph Waldo Emerson

    Emerson’s Essays

    For me if you seek earnestly from the heart you will be shown your own truth .
    The problems in the world are created by non truths (fallacies) old cultural stories been told to billions as absolute truths .This plays out on the worlds stage and sets the scene for our reality play .People have to reach inside and search for themselves .Return to spirituality and the natural impulse towards the divine .

    • Patrick Gannon

      And what if, when you die, the lights go out forever? it’s a distinct possibility, right?

  • I like your twist to the ever unresolved question if God exists. Because I agree that someone’s personal belief in God is something very tangible with tangible results. What I’d like to add to the discussion is that you first you have to define what or who you’re talking about (and agree with each other about that!) before you can prove or even study any phenomenon. In that sense the word GOD has probably the most wildly random array of definitions of all the words in our dictionary, ranging from “Absolute Love” to “Eternal Vengeance” and from the “Omnipotent” to the “Unknowable” (or even the “Non-Existent”). Of course you can never agree about proving that God exists, if God is apparently everything you can think of (unless you agree that God is everything you can think of).

    About your question if there’s an absolute truth that’s within our reach, I would like to believe that: “Yes, it is!” (regardless if that’s true). In the same sense as René Descartes has started to answer that question with a “I think, therefore I am” I would like to suggest “I believe something to be true, therefore to me it’s true (until proven false in my own eyes).”

    To make this a workable way of navigating yourself towards an absolute truth, you only have to commit to accept that a truth you hold dear can be proven false one day, and train yourself to have an open, inquisitive mind and never fool yourself into thinking there’s only one viewpoint towards the truth. So if your neighbor sees things differently, he might be just as right as you, even if your viewpoints seem diametrically opposed.

    To bring it back to the question if God exists, it’s well possible that the absolute truth of the matter is that “No, he doesn’t exist (in the way you think)” and “Yes, he does exist (but not in the way you think)”. Wouldn’t that be deliciously wicked from the perspective of a knower of the Absolute Truth? At the very least My God has the greatest sense of humor of all, that’s my most absolute conviction!

    • Patrick Gannon

      Nice post. Barbara, you said: “To make this a workable way of navigating yourself towards an absolute truth, you only have to commit to accept that a truth you hold dear can be proven false one day, and train yourself to have an open, inquisitive mind and never fool yourself into thinking there’s only one viewpoint towards the truth.”

      If one is willing and able to do this, why hold to the so-called truth (actually a belief) in the first place? If you know that there’s a possibility that your belief may be proven wrong, why hold it? Why not just retain an open mind without the belief? If you know you don’t know something beyond reasonable doubt, then why tell yourself that you do know that something? Wouldn’t that set up a conflict in your brain?

      • Hi Patrick, thanks for responding. I get that it sounds pointless to you to have an opinion, belief or sense of truth at all. Which is ok, probably, in the way Buddhists try not to think (too much) or have opinions and judgements. But just because most of our opinions and beliefs are temporary truths, it doesn’t mean that they are worthless or useless. The more we train ourselves to look at life through our own eyes, and at the same time to listen to eachother and be flexible in adapting new thoughts and ideas if they seem to make sense to us, the faster we will learn from eachother and the faster your own growth will be! Eventually we will get a higher and higher level of collective, temporary truth that might be very close to absolute truths. So in my mind you need temporary, individual truths, that are generously and selflessly shared to build a higher level of collective truth together. Just like traditional science has been evolving in this way, the science of our heart and conscience can also evolve this way. And it all starts with acknowledging what is your deepest, personal belief or truth about the things that matter most to you at this particular point in time. If you’re not in touch with that in the now, how can you ever expand and evolve your consciousness in the future?

        • Patrick Gannon

          “The more we train ourselves to look at life through our own eyes, and at the same time to listen to eachother and be flexible in adapting new thoughts and ideas if they seem to make sense to us, the faster we will learn from eachother and the faster your own growth will be.”

          Well Barbara, I would like to believe that, but that is not my experience. I see that once people have beliefs they often tend to ignore that which contradicts those beliefs and they dispute those who do not share them. Listening to each other stops, because the individual has made a choice to believe something and is now invested in that decision and the belief becomes part of who they are. It seems to me that refraining from beliefs and maintaining an open mind to any and all reasonable possibilities, will provide a more open path to learning from each other.

          Given that we have beliefs because we don’t “know” certain things – after all, if we know them, we don’t need to believe them – then what matters most, it seems to me, is acknowledging the deepest, personal truth of our ignorance. Admitting that we don’t know certain things – like gods and afterlife – is where I think we need to start if we are to evolve our consciousness. If we start off with beliefs – which essentially means lying to ourselves about our lack of real knowledge, then how does that evolve our consciousness in a positive direction?

          • I agree totally that we should be aware of our ignorance, and especially of our possible ignorance. Because it’s not really possible to be fully aware of your ignorance if you’re still ignorant. In this phase you simply don’t possess the scope to realize what you don’t know. It’s like asking a kid in kindergarden to realize and fully acknowledge how little he knows about the law of gravity.

            I also agree that most people are not trained in the art of listening to eachother and merging their minds together, to solve certain problems and challenges.

            Where I see an interesting difference between us is in the way we define “believing”. I get the impression you think that to believe something implies that it’s not based on any logical or scientific ground. If that’s what you mean with believing I would have a hard time with that too. I would certainly agree that choosing not to believe something when in truth you really don’t know something at all or have reason for serious doubts, is a good thing. It will save us all of a lot of wild and possibly dangerous imaginations. And you should certainly never assume something to be true, just because another person tells you that you should believe his truth, without asking any questions or having any original thoughts about it.

          • Patrick Gannon

            We’re pretty close, Barbara. It is difficult sometimes to get concepts across because of the slipperiness of our language. I think of it in terms of “knowing” and “believing.” To me, knowing means I think something is valid beyond reasonable doubt. This is usually because there is empirical evidence to support it. Believing, to me, is when you don’t have evidence or knowledge beyond reasonable doubt. We don’t know if there is a god or afterlife beyond a reasonable doubt. There’s simply insufficient evidence to think that there is a god or afterlife, and doing so conflicts with what we know beyond reasonable doubt – that there is no evidence for these things.

            I prefer the term “thinking” to “believing” because one of those words implies that I’m putting effort into learning the truth, while the other does not. I admit that the two words are used in place of each other at times, and one of my regrets is that one of my favorite songs is “Don’t Stop Believin'” by Journey!

  • mewabe

    Many things cannot yet be proven to exist, including love. Is love then an untruth, an illusion?

    According to some scientists, love is nothing more than the by-product of mechanical processes (as is everything within a Cartesian worldview) in the brain, of chemical interactions. It could presumably be turned on and off when proper mechanical stimuli is applied to specific regions of the brain.

    So now that we solved the question of love, let’s looks at intelligence, talent, memory, personality, etc…all of which could possibly and according to some scientific experiments and projections be manipulated, improved, changed, turned on and off as well, including erasing or recovering memory, through brain stimuli.

    So if everything begins and ends in the physical brain as some scientists propose, where does this lead us? It leads us to the ultimate wet dream of science: absolute control of all human faculties through brain manipulation, in partnership with the machine.

    The problem with this is not just one of ethics, which will invariably be dangerously transgressed by those who are in power, but of what we actually seek to be and become, of what it means to be human, and whether full control and mastery through physical manipulation is truly desirable, leading to transhumanism, to a fusion of machine and humanity.

    A humanity that is not so fearful would not direct any of its activities, including scientific research, towards near absolute control and mastery. When the foundation (fear) is faulty, anything that is built upon it ultimately fails miserably, including technology, because such technology is directed towards mastering fear rather than towards actual understanding and relevant knowledge.

    Has science resolved our most fundamental problems, such as the drive to use violence to resolve conflicts, or more importantly and more to the point the drive to dominate and control all life? No, because science itself is also grounded in fear, and consequently seeks absolute scientific and technological control over all life.

    The ultimate question therefore regarding this primordial and all pervading human condition (fear) is wholly spiritual, and will not be resolved by a science that is also rooted in fear and aiming for complete control over life. Science is a handy tool…let’s not make such a tool the master of our lives.

    • Patrick Gannon

      Hi Mewabe. Is love an illusion? Could be. In fact, I would say, probably so. It could very well be the result of our genes predisposing us to be attracted to certain other sets of genes for purposes of evolutionary advancement through procreation and spreading of our genes.

      You said, “What about intelligence, talent, memory, personality, pleasure, happiness, etc? All of these things could possibly and according to some scientific experiments and projections be manipulated, improved, changed, turned on and off as well, including erasing or recovering memory, through brain stimuli.”

      Absolutely. What’s the problem? I agree that technology may one day be able to treat depression, for example by modifying the brain, and this would be a good use of technology. Such technology may cure Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and many other disorders. Maybe technology will exist that will make our children more intelligent. Maybe we will be able to erase PTSD trauma. I see far more good opportunities than bad; but of course we must be on guard and discuss such things as technology improves.

      I disagree that this necessarily leads us to the “wet dream” of science to control everything. If that’s not an expression of fear, I don’t know what is. In the first place, we do not need to fear “science” as this is a process that provides a way to learn truths. If you are to have fear, it must be of the scientists themselves or those who fund and support them, or leverage new information in less than desirable ways. Faulting a “process” for one’s fear strikes me as highly illogical. I do agree that as humans we will need to evaluate and determine how to apply such technology; but this has always been the case, from the time the first caveman brought a flaming branch into the cave and noticed that it made food taste better and easier to digest and kept him warm at night. That same fire could be used to burn him out of his cave by an enemy. Nothing has changed, except the scope of our knowledge and what we can do with it. Do you propose that we should stop seeking knowledge?

      So why are humans so afraid? I think we believe things instead of admitting that we don’t know, because that is our real fear – fear of ignorance, or fear of admitting ignorance to ourselves and others; so we do anything we can to avoid facing it; including lying to ourselves with beliefs, and indoctrinating our kids with our beliefs so they can lie to themselves too, and perpetuate the cycle.

      I would agree that fear has grown as technology has advanced; but the reason seems clear to me. We know that we don’t know about god/afterlife, due to a total lack of empirical evidence. We know this better than ever before, thanks to the advancement of science and all the knowledge it has given us. Almost everything we once attributed to God, now has natural explanations. Therefore to believe in God today is to face far, far more evidence than our ancestors did, so the cognitive dissonance within us is greater. In the past our ignorance had little to contradict it – today the opposite is true.

      Has science been used to help us with moral and ethical decisions? Not much, thanks to religion and philosophy which drew a line and said that was not the purview of science. That is changing though. Read Sam Harris’ book, “The Moral Landscape” to see why that line is being erased, and how science might for the first time help us with those issues. Sam illustrates how science might help define what is and is not moral and how to tell the difference between competing actions to know which is the more ethical and moral. Maybe getting the scientific process involved in our moral discussions will finally help us resolve ethical and moral difficulties that confront us.

      There is much discussion about how much worse things are getting, but this is not necessarily true – particularly if you look at wars. We are actually in the longest period of global peace in centuries. If you plot out the people who died in wars, you’ll see them edge up and up and up, then blast away to the stratosphere with WWII, and following that, deaths in war have faded to practically zilch. We lost more people on a single day at Normandy Beach in WWII than we have in the last 13 years in Afghanistan. We need to put things in perspective. What has changed is our news and media systems which go out of their way to inform and alarm us. The world hasn’t gotten worse in every way possible – we’re just more aware of what’s wrong with it. That’s a good thing, because it means we can do something about it if we lose our fears.

      The things we are afraid of today seem to be based on competing beliefs. I agree that fear comes from spiritual ignorance. It comes from not admitting that we are spiritually ignorant. We do not know if there is any god or afterlife or consciousness that will continue. Our fears arise from not knowing the answers to these questions so we make things up and then defend those beliefs, and fear those who do not share them.
      “When the most basic spiritual questions are ignored, existential fear does not vanish, it remains to direct everything we do and dream of achieving…”

      Again I agree. When we ignore the fact that we are completely ignorant of the answers to spiritual questions, then the fear does not vanish; we just try to cover it up with beliefs, which probably mess with our brains and make us behave in a less than optimum fashion. Upon accepting my ignorance, I most definitely did not find myself wafting in fear. I was uncomfortable, but not fearful in the least – in fact the opposite was more true for me personally given that I’m not crazy about either heaven or reincarnation. Just let me go and be done with it. No fear; just acceptance and a willingness to happily lay my weary self down when the time comes and return to the elements from which I originated.

      • mewabe

        “I disagree that this necessarily leads us to the “wet dream” of science
        to control everything. If that’s not an expression of fear, I don’t
        know what is.”

        No Patrick, this is not an expression of fear, By control, I do not mean government control, or control by “dark” forces lurking within society, conspiracy theory style. This is not what I mean…
        What I mean is something you are most likely unaware of, or do not find abnormal, because most people are conditioned not to. I am speaking of the central drive by civilization to control nature and life. I am talking about a civilization that can never let anything be, that is neurotically driven to monitor, change and take charge of everything.

        A perfect illustration of how civilization works (and the sciences and technologies that fuel it) or rather does not work is as follow:
        People who take medications usually have to deal with negative side effects. They frequently have to take an additional medication to counter these side effects, and this new medication, which also has side effects, require more medication to counter these new side effects. On and on until a person takes 10 or 15 medications, which tax the body, especially the liver and kidneys, with toxicity.

        Similarly, what you think is progress has tremendously negative side effects on the environment, but “out of sight out of mind’, most people are unaware of such side effects because they do not show in suburbia.

        This is however what civilization does, because it is set against nature, perceiving nature to be as an enemy to be conquered, subdued and enslaved (exploited). This is not a new idea…yet most people, because of conditioning, think that it is normal, that nature is the enemy (hostile, dangerous and chaotic) and civilization (meaning science and technology) is the savior.

        There is no fear about these things on my part, merely dislike. If civilization did not have an antagonist approach to nature and life, science and technologies would not be just other means to rape the planet, they would be sensitive to its ecological balance. We would not, for example, impose GMO products on the natural system without understanding the consequences, we would not use tens of thousands of chemicals without knowing what their combined effects have on people, animal and the environment (these chemical are approved one at a time by the FDA, not tested together obviously), we would not spray public parts and national forests with dangerous pesticides, we would not create technologies and industries whose by-products are extremely toxic, we would not manufacture such a thing as fossil fuel based plastic that takes forever to break down (plastic could be made from hemp), we would not have dumped radioactive waste in the ocean, etc etc etc…the list is truly endless.

        Technology (and the sciences behind it) is totally insensitive to life because humans have a fear based approach to life and nature. That was the point. And it is not getting better…because the idea behind scientific progress is actually to make nature obsolete (an absurd and insane thought), as well as develop the technological means to leave the planet and colonize another rock somewhere in space when we have finally destroyed everything here, which intelligent scientists themselves admit we will.

        • Kristen

          The person you are worried about in here is ok…like a ‘cutter’ but not dangerous. And I tried to put a photo on disqus id photos of my foil tiara with a little skeleton on the front for halloween (my twin I ate in utero), complete with lit up chakras but either Im too thick,or you cant do it on Disqus tablet version (no computer). Oh well, at least it got made!! Very cooly too if I may say so myself. Which I may!!
          Over and out…and outa here.
          Take care,

          • Mateia Andrei

            Go back to your fairy tale land missy

          • Thunder doesn’t “strike.” Lightning does.

        • Patrick Gannon

          It sounds to me, Mewabe, that your complaint is with the process of evolution. Man is part of nature; and as such evolved with certain characteristics, that continue to change. Given that we have this apparent illusion of self and free will, we may be able to affect our evolution in a positive way, rather than continue to be controlled by the random chance that led us to this point.

          I understand that 99% of all the species that have ever lived on earth are now extinct. Just be patient. If we don’t work out, evolution will try something else.

    • Mateia Andrei

      Regarding intelligence i’d suggest you read Numenta’s white paper on what the neocortex is.

      • mewabe

        Was it necessary and intelligent to increase the world population to 7 billion?

        • Mateia Andrei

          I just pointed out dont ask me and CwG said that earth can sustain 11 billion so take that as you want

    • mewabe, my friend,

      How succinctly you put things:

      “Spiritual understanding, then, is not a luxury but is essential to our global survival as a specie, if we are to move away from destructive fear and control and towards creative, loving and enlightened freedom.”

      An excellent summation. I see things much as you do. Science, which used to be purely for the pursuit of understanding, can be driven by a desire to understand in order to control, or to “improve”. (And who is to decide what “improvement” is?) How much scientific knowledge has been used to destroy “others” (whether other people, or other than humans)? How far should we, as humanity, allow scientific “research” to be motivated or usurped by those who control, rather than understand, our inner and outer worlds?

      Spirituality, however, including reconnecting with nature, can enhance one’s life tremendously. Where would the Artists, whether poet or painter or sculptor or musician, get their inspiration if not from inner insights or the natural world? And where would we be without the arts, or Nature herself? We may lose being able to stand in front of another painting or hear another song or watch a clean ocean’s waves as they sparkle in the moonlight, and be moved to uplifting Joy.

      I, for one, think the use of science and technology is out of control. We excused the Nazi scientists who helped rain terror on the world in the form of the atomic bomb, and today technology is in the hands of those who can afford it, with more who can’t than can. (I could barely afford the low memory, on sale, not Samsung or iPhone brand phone I hold in my hand.) The motivation of a scientist should, I think, be as carefully scrutinized as their method.

      If Spirituality, which brings me such feelings of compassion and connection in the here and now, also allows me to believe in other dimensions and a hereafter, I’d much rather live with, than without it.

      Love, Blessings and Gratitude,

      • mewabe

        Thank you Annie
        “Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal.”
        Albert Einstein

        “If Spirituality, which brings me such feelings of compassion and connection in the here and now, also allows me to believe in other dimensions and a hereafter, I’d much rather live with, than without it.”
        Yes! And these aren’t just beliefs, I can promise you that these things are very real…

        Without spirituality, science and technology have no foundation, no center and no compass…they blow wherever the forces that finance them want them to go, and wherever the idea of separation (from nature, from subjectivity and feelings, from Life) takes them.

        Love, blessings and gratitude to you 🙂

        • mewabe,

          I know that other dimensions and a hereafter exist because I’ve experienced them. 🙂

          I can’t quote who said it or whether it was a scientific or mathematical proof, but it’s already been shown that we live in more than just a three dimensional universe (possibly up to nine), which may be one of many universes in a multiverse (or even multiple multiverses). I also read that our “big bang” (which is more accurately described as “the big flash of light” or “the big flash of energy”) may have been the result of another universe’s black hole.

          Most people don’t even realize that we literally live in the past. What we perceive with our eyes is the reflection of light from an object. We already know light takes time to travel, though very quickly, so what we perceive is (maybe nanoseconds) in the past by the time it reaches our eyes. Then there’s the time it takes for it to travel (maybe nanoseconds) the synapses of our brains and is recognized by us.

          And I remember reading that, in the process, if we have an expectation about what we might perceive, our brains filter out what doesn’t fit our expectations. So, what we see with our eyes may very well not be what actually exists.

          A wise person (I’ve no clue who) once said, “There is more here than meets the eye.”

          Love, Blessings and Gratitude,

          • Mateia Andrei

            “I know that other dimensions and a hereafter exist because I’ve experienced them.”
            You have interfered in the affairs of other worlds??

          • Never said I did anything other than visit. 😉

          • Mateia Andrei

            I was joking duuuhhh

          • Patrick Gannon

            String theory proposes multiple universes – but it’s a theory. Nothing is proven.

            “And I remember reading that, in the process, if we have an expectation about what we might perceive, our brains filter out what doesn’t fit our expectations. So, what we see with our eyes may very well not be what actually exists.” (Annie)

            This applies equally to “I know that other dimensions and a hereafter exist because I’ve experienced them.” What you see in your mind may very well not be what actually exists. We know the brain can produce images and other sensations such as smell, sound and taste, that are not real. As you pointed out, we don’t “see” in real time. What we “see” is the image our brain creates in our minds, and such images do not have to come from real-time sensory input, but may be recalled from memory in more or less distorted modes.

          • Is there any proof (not theory) that humans are limited to the body, brain, and mind? What about the possibility that the heart also has its own intelligence? What about the Soul? I don’t believe either are projections of my brain or mind as “awareness” or “consciousness,” but exist on their own. (In fact, that was affirmed for me.)

            I didn’t just see an image, either in my NDE or OBE’s. I had full-blown, multi-sensory, multidimensional (beyond 3D) experiences full of colors and sounds and objects and sensations that were entirely new. I don’t even have adequate words to describe them. How could my brain imagine something it’s never before experienced? Where would the input come from? It’s not a memory, distorted or not.

            Just because you write off your experiences because of what you’ve read or heard or been told by your fallible scientists who have their own motives doesn’t mean that I’m willing to write off mine.

            There is so much science doesn’t know about the brain or the mind, and so can’t know of what limitations they do or don’t have. I personally believe that there is much, much more that humans are capable of than your scientists have “proven.”

            That is why I believe in my own experience more than I do what science has proven.


          • Patrick Gannon

            No, there is no conclusive proof that humans are limited to the body and brain. (The mind is a product of the brain). However, there is extensive evidence to suggest that this is the case. When pieces of the brain are injured, people lose parts of their consciousness, awareness, etc. This strongly indicates causation.

            Now, let’s turn the question around. What proof is there that humans do leave their bodies and brains behind? None. nada, zip, zero. The only evidence is subjective.

            I get it though. Like most believers, you are unwilling to question your subjective experiences. That’s a shame, because it’s no different in any way from the guys who flew the airplanes into the twin towers because their beliefs were every bit as strong as yours if not more so, given their willingness to give up their lives for 72 virgins in paradise. Why are your beliefs correct and theirs wrong? Believing a thing doesn’t make it so, for you any more than it did for them…. but I’m skeptically open minded. There’s the tiniest, slimmest, miniscule chance, that they are all enjoying their houris right now, and there is a slim chance that your experiences (and mine) indicate something beyond this physical matter reality. Since I don’t know, I’m not going to lie to myself and tell myself that I do know, you are. That’s the difference between us. I’m honest in admitting my ignorance.

            The “motives” of the scientists you disparage so much, are to find the truth. That’s it. Your motive, apparently, is to protect your beliefs. The truth doesn’t matter. All that matters is that you be allowed to believe whatever you want, regardless of what the ultimate truth might be. OK. To me, that limits your potential; but so be it. I suspect that within a generation we’ll have a considerably clearer picture, and it makes no sense to believe things, particularly when learning the truth is probably not that far off.

          • As I have repeatedly said, my beliefs aren’t blind, nor were they made in an intellectual vacuum. Like most, or at least most people I know, my beliefs are based on intensive therapy, intensive self study of scriptures, and an intensive study of the world around me, including science, my own personal experiences and the experiences of others. They continue to evolve and grow as I do, and as the world changes.


          • Patrick Gannon

            I’m glad to hear that. Following your challenges, in recent weeks I have provided a number of excellent books on a variety of subjects which might assist you in continuing to grow and evolve your belief system. You have to have a willingness to challenge your beliefs first though.

            I’m curious. What “scriptures” do you refer to?

          • I started with what I already knew, which was the Roman Catholic bible. Then there were the books that had been dropped from the OT, so basically the Torah. Then I read what has been attributed the Buddha, including the Four Pillars and the Eight Fold Path. After that, I read an English translation of the Q’ran. Then I went back and starting with the Talmud, began reading commentary, new translations, and got a study bible with the latest (at the time) scholarly and archaeological info along with a bible concordance to understand the differences or similarities of a term’s usage throughout the texts. I think it was then that I started to read the English translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Somewhere in there I also read “The Five Gospels” by I forget the name of group of bible scholars who wrote the new translations of the four canonical gospels plus the gospel of Thomas, and indicated, verse by verse, whether or not Jesus, as revealed in the new translation, would have said it, using red, pink, grey, and black designations, with explanations by scholars about the translation and their “vote” for each verse or story. Then I read The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels, a scholar involved in putting the scrolls back together, and the official translation of those scrolls. Then I read her translations and commentary, as they came out, of the gospel of Mary Magdalena and the gospel of Judas. I can’t remember all the names of all the books I read, from John Shelby Spong, retired Episcopal bishop, to what history is known through references outside of the bible, like Josephus and his motivation for writing what he wrote (or not), to the latest in biblical archaeology. I also regularly watched shows about anything philosophical, religious, or spiritual on The History Channel, H2, and A&E, (usually followed up by a book or two), where I broadened my learning to include Hinduism, Native American Spirituality, the Mayans, the Aztecs, the Egyptians and pre-Egyptians, African Tribal stories and dances, Aboriginal stories and dances, Sufiism with its poets and whirling dervishes, the Druids, the Colts, the Mithras religion from which some Christians copied holidays and traditions, the “pagans” who at one time lived in what is now Germany, to the pantheons of the Greeks, Romans and Vikings, to whatever else was being published at the time that I could afford. I also read and saw documentaries about the latest in astronomy, quantum physics, string theory, A Brief History of Time by the Nobel prize winner whose name I can’t recall right now, to the uBuntu movement that started with archaeology and turned into a different way to view our relationship with ourselves, each other, nature and our Souls, along with being a political movement.

            I’m sure that there are many, many other books I read and documentaries I watched that I haven’t remembered here.


  • james kim

    ‘God is absolute, but religions are not.We live in the world of relativity.
    Truth, good and beauty comes from a pure soul like St. Francis.
    20 years ago, I had a mysterious experience. I was overwhelmed by the great Love.
    It healed my soul and set me free. My mind was full of peace, joy and power.
    I once studied theology, but I am not Christian. One thing that is sure about God is that He is Love. However, I am not sure whether God in the Old testament is truly God himself.
    Also, Jesus was maybe a mystic and prophet. People in the past might have made him God for political purpose.

    There were many mystics in different religions in history. I think that we’d better focus on the mystical experinces of people of the past and the present.

    • Patrick Gannon

      Hi James. Who says God is absolute? This can’t be ‘proven;’ and what do you mean by “God?”

      I too have had mysterious experiences. The most likely explanation is electrochemical reactions in my brain as a result of some stimulus, such as emotion, meditation, exercise.. These experiences, that many people have, are not proof of God – at most, we can say some people, religious and otherwise, sometimes have them and nothing more.
      Why should we focus on mystical experiences of people of the past and present? You pointed out yourself that Jesus was made into a God, and you are correct. The impetus for this was the Apostle Paul’s visions of Jesus, that eventually led to a brand new religion. The visions were faulty. Jesus neglected to tell Paul about evolution and that he would not be coming right back as Paul believed. We cannot trust these mystical experiences, as they appear to be the products of our brains.

      • james kim

        God, Tao, 無 and so on are just words that we use. We don’t know much about Him/Her/It. We can have subjective opinions, and science helps us to understand about Him/Her/It. But the Law that began and rules the universe still exists. The Law is absolute. We can call the Law God, Tao, 無 and so on.

        • Mateia Andrei

          The diffrence between theists and nontheists is this the first claim that what created the universe is aware of itself the second that its not aware but within the parameters created awareness rises. I chose to be in the second group

  • Awareness

    “Conversations with God” just makes SENSE 🙂 I found a video on youtube where the “ET” BASHAR (channelled by Darryl Anka) recommends “Conversations with God”. The video is titled “本「神との対話」の神は,,,,,,Bashar recommend Walsch ‘s book Conversations with God” 🙂 I have transcribed part of it below 🙂

    “We will in that sense suggest a literary work that at this time we perceive can be one of the most beneficial literary works that exist on your planet for the idea of getting in touch with all these things in a clear and constructive way. And that would be what you would call the book Conversations with God by the author Walsch. We will in this sense suggest and recommend at this time that of many of the idea of literary works on your planet that we have suggested, this one will be in terms of percentage 100% clear. Read it, that is our strong suggestion at this time. It is the product of the collective consciousness of your planet finally answering itself in as clear a way as possibly it can. You will recognize in the book that you are speaking to yourself. You will feel it, you will know the truth. It will help you wake up. Read it.

    At this time we extend once again our unconditional love and deep appreciation at the creativity of the creation of your reality that allows us to dream you into our reality and we thank you for dreaming us into your own. Or perhaps more precisely for co creating the new third balanced centred reality in which we both interact as equals and in every context in which it means something to you as unconditional lovers. Good day” by BASHAR 🙂

    Thank you Neale Donald Walsch 🙂

    Bless ALL 🙂

    • Mateia Andrei

      I have been aware of this for years and guess what? i still don’t care!

      • mewabe

        Mateia, is there a point to your use of antagonistic comments except perhaps to relieve some sort of frustration in your personal life that you alone can resolve?

        • Mateia Andrei

          Im serious when i say : I will separate myself from the oneness and make the illusion of separation real.

          • mewabe

            Good luck 🙂

          • Mateia Andrei

            Oneness = all there is but soon this will be a paradox
            Dislike ? I was born

          • mewabe

            If you need your space and to be “free from the rest of us”, what are you doing in this space?

          • Mateia Andrei

            This is how separation will begin by announcing my intention. You are part of my plan. Everything is accouring according to my schedule.

          • mewabe

            Are you sure you are okay? I am starting to worry about you.

          • Mateia Andrei

            So apperantly you cannot figure it out how this will work. Dont worry you will have eternity to figure out what it took me a week to understand

          • Kristen

            I too worry about YOU, the most important thing I have ever been taught by others is “never believe anything you see or hear, only what you KNOW to be truth”. I can understand what you mean, kind off, and know the first step is distance from the mass mind of humanity, including their communal beliefs BUT I am trained in reading everything other than words, and listening to everything other than what people. Your name, every detail of the picture you choose, your spelling, grammar, how you converse with others etc say thousands of things about ‘your current story’, please be careful….nothing is as it seems, everything is backwards, upside down and inside out…..the Universe and highest powers know what they are doing, it is all a huge paradox. Be patient (or tolerant if you cant be patient), and dont be your own worst enemy, that is what everyones enemys want, to turn us inside out as well so we do their dirty work for them. This is what you are witnessing, and are perplexed by, your plans or thoughts in motion are not a solution, they are a mere reaction.
            Take care…in every sense.

          • Mateia Andrei

            How amusing you are! You think you know me ! You dont

          • Kristen

            Yes and no, you have given enough words and information to make yourself partially understood, which was your intention in here….remember the old term for psychology is psycheology…psyche means of the soul…symbolism, symbology, language, choices, what we wear etc are all things bestowed upon us from above. I am a Kabbalist, this is what we study. A bit like the tv show The Mentalist. Your choices are very easy to read, but no I dont know you personally, but I can ‘read’ an anonymous person online that happens to be you.
            And if Mewabe, who is psychic, is worried, then I am too as I trust his gift, so looked into it as well, both with ‘reading’ and psychic intuition.
            Be careful, and we have heard your sub conscious cries for help, and your answer is exactly as I expected. If you dont want me to ‘read’ you, then best not to reply, as I will. A soul, animal or person in need is exactly that.

          • Mateia Andrei

            “Worry comes from a mind that does not see its connection to God.” -CwG
            You are truly amusing. I have won and you don’t even know it.

          • Kristen

            Great…we can all only control one person….ourself. Once we win that battle, and our own personal idea of freedom, then we can all win the game of life. Anything else…well, first we have to determine if there are losers..if no losers, then we cannot technically win. Enjoy the prize.
            Good luck, and be careful.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Im a atheist and i find amusing your belief that have no ground in reality. Im just messing with you to show you just how naive you can be. If this is what God’s unconditional love can do and CwG is real i am not impressed

          • Kristen

            CwG is not real, it is not the one we identify as God that channels to Neale. I am a Kabbalist, close to Judaism, and the real Gods love is conditional, mainly based in righteousness. I am the opposite to a CwGer although some of the info is the truth. Just some, and not the some I choose to believe in. Atheism is a much better option than CwG, and to believe in nothing is better than to believe in what others tell you to believe. An artist always starts with a clean canvas, and when a student is ready a teacher will appear and all that yadda yadda.
            I do not support oneness, the closest reality there is to that is that all souls were originally made by The Source…he is the one identified as the all seeing eye, including the eye at the top of the illuminati pyramid, although they mistake it for God. Karma, paths, education, consequences, choices, freewill etc are all based on each individual on their own, so oneness goes completely against every Law there is. Even Kabbalah and religious teachings tell us the mass mind of humanity is manmade, and we must rise above it and break free before we can even find the truth, and hold onto and enhance our individuality in order to evolve into the true unique ‘us’. Only then can our gifts, skills, talents, loves, preferences and potential come to the forefront to override our subconscious mind, so a true path can be designed for us. My physical path will end with running a resort…my pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Have you found yours??? This is why people need to talk, listen, hear and feel more..everyday a random person can teach us something about ourselves, even fiction on TV. We know nothing and noone until we know ourselves.
            See…you are not as radical and rebellious as you think! Quite normal!
            Im very very far from naive, but good to feel your energy has calmed down.
            Take care and be careful (also means full of care for your self)

          • Mateia Andrei

            >Conditional Love
            So you worse then CwG you worship a God that supports deafness, blindness, muteness and worst of all mental ilnesses and then your God calls himself righteous. The nerve of your God is stagering I hope you enjoy your hypocrite.

          • Kristen

            hahaha, I dont worship any God, Kabbalah is affiliated to Judaism, but I dont do religion. God forbids people with eye defects, acne, limb stumps etc from attending early Church…Hes very unPC and has asbergers, and does not support these things, and does not call Himself righteous…He stated He was half good and half evil like all Gods are and was trying to teach US to be righteous so we can be immortal. But, yup, Hes my God, Im an Israelite, He has been my familys God for thousands of years. YShua stated all illness is caused by possession…I agree, except the common term for possession now is reincarnation. Same thing, different word. As tough as God may be, Hes 1000 times better than a Hindi one with extra arms and an elephant trunk!!! At least He and His sons look human!
            Hypocrite….yup, Ill agree there. Its all hilarious once people can get past Yshua/Jesus and Christianity.
            Its all fun!! And so is reading from people who listen to lies and read modern bibles that Christians have changed since day 1, hence Judaism. Id rather be Jewish or Muslim than Christian, look at the untrue crock they teach people about the God they worship.
            Take care,

          • Mateia Andrei

            So your god is bipolar good to know

          • Kristen

            Every trait, in the extreme. Which is a form of balance, just as many people have opposing traits in the extreme. Everyone and everything is balanced in every personality aspect, once you get to know them and people in general.
            Take care.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Never apply for a major in psychology NEVER

          • Kristen

            Oooops, done, a few years too late sunshine. Oh well, lucky it was a scholarship so Id have wasted my $$$ and time.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Oh the poor suckers that will pay you. I feel sorry for them already

          • Mateia Andrei

            “And if Mewabe, who is psychic” Deluded Much Nah I can smell liars

          • Mateia Andrei

            “Worry is the activity of a mind which does not understand its connection with Me.” CwG book 1

          • mewabe

            Who is “the rest of you”, all of humanity? And who is in your space, has Neale moved in your living room? Is anyone forcing you to be in Neale’s space, on this forum?
            You have your space Mateia, and your walls. Go back to them and be happy. Or did mommy or daddy violate your space when you were a child? If so there is therapy.

          • Mateia Andrei

            ” there is therapy” Did i hit a nerve ? GOOD
            Don’t you worry about my void it’s coming soon enough

          • mewabe

            All my nerves were surgically removed long ago. I am not worried, are you?
            Within the void is the seed of unity, and within oneness is the seed of separation. Confucius said that.

          • Mateia Andrei

            “ll my nerves were surgically removed long ago” No wonder your every shitard’s vessel

            “Confucius said that”
            Confucius and you have no understanding. Why am i not even surprised. You are a drone after all

          • mewabe

            This is getting very boring and not witty at all, no offense but I have better things to do. Good luck in the void, and if you can’t find it there are always back holes.

          • Mateia Andrei

            What i though you liked channeling boring grasshoppers ??
            Dialing … maybe your connection is shitty .. stop using AT&T

          • mewabe

            Then be happy!

          • Mateia Andrei

            But i enjoy shitposting you

          • mewabe

            So now we are getting somewhere. Therapy has began. We are on the clock, $200 an hour. Talk about “enjoying shitposting”. How does it really make you feel?

          • Mateia Andrei

            How about you channel Confucious, Budhha, Jesus, Dalai Lama and God. So i can shitpost all of you at the same time

          • mewabe

            That would be very expensive…can you afford it? I want to see some greens on the table.

            The motto here is: In God we trust, everyone else pays cash.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Yeah how about Jesus covers the costs He is God’s son im sure he can cover it.

          • mewabe

            Okay well the problem is, they are all playing golf right now in the Florida keys, and I wouldn’t want to disturb their game, that would be very rude of me.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Yeah they can’t be in more place at the same time only super positioning atoms can do that.

          • mewabe

            Exactly…but for a much cheaper price I can channel one of my toe nails, I have done it before and you would be surprised the amount of information that can come from one of these things.

          • Mateia Andrei

            You truly believe your BS. You poor deluded soul

          • mewabe

            How dare you insult my toe nails like that? They are very well educated, knowledgeable and intelligent! Some people have no respect, I am tellin’ ya!

          • Mateia Andrei

            Ya believe your fairy tales. Don’t forget to worship the flying spaghetti monster this Sunday. Okay.

          • mewabe

            No actually in my religion we worship the Big Black Humpback Turtle every other Friday. Don’t confuse religions now…and don’t make fun of the Big Black Humpback Turtle, or else there will be riots worldwide and violence.

          • Mateia Andrei

            You know its Neal’s board so i don’t mind that I shitpost it

          • mewabe

            You are probably going to hell for this…bring a cool drink.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Read a book or do you have only a short term memory ?

          • mewabe

            I don’t even know how to read…in the backwoods where I live, we use books for toilet paper. Something wrong with that?

          • Mateia Andrei

            I’m impressed with you boredom powers I’d be willing to do coitus with you but im certain your male. So now what are you going to do ? Channel Jeanne d’Arc

          • mewabe

            I can’t very well channel myself now…I thought you knew I was Joan of Arc reincarnated even thought I am male. Didn’t I mention it already?

          • Mateia Andrei

            I guess you are also the reincarnation of Jesus

          • mewabe


          • Mateia Andrei

            You are also the anti-christ aren’t you.

          • mewabe

            Definitively. The cat’s outta the bag. I am everything there was, is and will be. It’s on my business card.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Good now commit sudoku for eternity

          • mewabe

            Been there done that.

          • Mateia Andrei

            God remove yourself and your stuff
            You sitting on my void

          • mewabe

            It’s good for my Divine hemorrhoids. Elderly Gods have sitting privileges.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Stop doing weed

          • mewabe

            Okay but can I still drink Lysol and hair spray?

          • Mateia Andrei

            I was lying dont stop doing weed. Overdose i recommend it. You can channel your fifth dimensional self more easy then.

          • Susan Boxer

            Mateia, can you tell me more about your intention to separate from the oneness and make the illusion of separation real?

          • Mateia Andrei

            I will use unconditiomal againts each other and create a paradox that will tear my apart from the rest. Its very possible and innevitable.

        • Mateia Andrei

          “Mateia, not sure what you mean by sadomasochist souls.”

          “Do you think they are limited, as you put it, not of their choice? Do you imagine that a human soul encounters life challenges—whatever they may be—by accident? Is this your imagining?
          Do you mean a soul chooses what kind of life it will experience ahead of time?
          No, that would defeat the purpose of the encounter. The purpose is to create your experience—and thus, create your Self—in the glorious moment of Now. You do not, therefore, choose the life you will experience ahead of time.
          You may,however, select the persons, places, and events—the conditions and circumstances,the challenges and obstacles, the opportunities and options—with which to create your experience. You may select the colors for your palette, the tools for your chest, the machinery for your shop. What you create with these is your business. That is the business of life.”


          • mewabe

            Thanks for the suggestion Mateia, I never even thought of reading a book before, only the label of cereal boxes. Wow, what a great idea!!!!!! I will get right on it.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Wow you understand sarcasm. This is truly a miracle.

          • mewabe

            Of course not, I just channeled it. I have no idea what it meant…

          • Mateia Andrei

            So you are a vessel for shitards. Wow amazing

          • mewabe

            You can do better than this,,,this is not Youtube, try a little harder and raise your own standards!

          • Mateia Andrei

            Why don’t you channel Dalai Lama instead ? Bad wifi connection?

          • mewabe

            Usually I channel a rack of lamb. But I am fresh out…

          • Mateia Andrei

            Thats not all your channeling. Radioactive 4chan shitposts must be messing up your channeling

          • mewabe

            Actually no I am dead on track,
            It has been one of the most enlightened exchange I have ever had with a living thing, including when I had a profound conversation with a grasshopper about hopping, but I have to get back to work.
            So long and enjoy your space.

          • Mateia Andrei

            Next time try channeling God so i can shitpost in his face

          • mewabe

            I don’t do famous people.

          • Mateia Andrei

            God aint a person but apperantly you skipped that class. Don’t worry i will shitpost in his face one day

          • mewabe

            Why not now? Nothing like the present. Look under your bed, God is probably hiding there. No wonder you are pissed!

          • Kristen

            Hahahaha, this is hilarious. Damn, are humans meant to read…oops, missed that memo?! I just look at the pictures. This therapy session is working for the poor chappy though, you know, internal anger expressed externally at those who have what you are missing. The good ole classic blame God for your problems, like its His fault. Damn, I missed that memo too, here I am blaming those actually at fault.
            High five… they say in Northern California

          • Mateia Andrei

            Mewabe is channeling his fifth dimensional self why aren’t you on his level ??

          • Kristen

            Wow, are you sitting on this site to reply as soon as we type. How cool. Actually I have studied via intuition withone of Mewabes guides, thats how I kind of know him, but 5th dimension is merely a temporary state of energy, like thoughts, spirits appearing, telepathy, telekenesis etc. You cannot channel 5th dimension, but you can 4th dimension as it is sustainable for longer but comes from lower entities that I dont have anything to do with, or in the form of dreams and used words, vision and temporary physical aspects.

          • Mateia Andrei

            God please take your meds

          • Kristen

            Erm….Im not actually God, but Ill pass it on. Maybe weed, since it has more medicinal purposes than any other plant known to man.
            Are you ready to actually discuss what you blame God for yet?

          • Mateia Andrei

            You can’t figure out that im shitposting. Must be the weed your taking!
            “Are you ready to actually discuss what you blame God for yet?”
            What god ? Zeus? Odin? Apollo ?

            You will have to be more specific

          • Kristen

            Any God. Well, we are here when you are ready, shitpost is good. Neale may disagree, but its your conversation, so your way of conversing.
            Gods waiting patiently. Hahaha.

          • Mateian

            “Gods waiting patiently”
            There is no God you troglodyte.

          • mewabe

            Anger therapy works better with an old mattress and a baseball bat, but what the heck I am trying to help in any way I can.
            I owe you a response Kristen by the way, and it is coming soon…I already knew about next year, but thank you from the heart!
            I have 6 fingers being from Atlantis, so thanks for the high 6!
            Did you get that Mateia, not only am I reincarnated Joan of Arc and channel my toenails, but I am from Atlantis. Damn.

          • Mateian

            Remove your face from your a**

          • mewabe

            Why would I do that? I like it in the dark and it’s warm.

          • Mateian

            Then go deeper

          • mewabe

            I can already see daylight. Thanks for the suggestion.

          • Mateian

            God stay away from the light. LOL MFL

          • mewabe

            I need to end this out of respect for Neale and his site. Enjoy the great void…I can already hear a huge sucking sound.

            Or did you get trapped in your vacuum cleaner?
            Over and out.

          • Kristen

            What…no thank me from the fart? You have a heart?? I think the kid caught a greeblie, play its game.
            Last I heard you were the reincarnation of your bff Jesus, and Im God. And we are stoners. Are you holding out on me???? Haha

          • mewabe

            I was just pretending to have a heart because it sounds good. Mateia found out I was the antichrist, so my secret is out. That and the fact that I drink Lysol for breakfast. What else do you want to know? Very pleased to meet you God by the way…

          • mewabe

            It’s his site, kinda like his house…I wouldn’t trash any host’s house.

            You now have to find a new sparring partner here or move to…let’s see, perhaps a fundamentalist religious site? They don’t have any sense of humor though.

          • mewabe

            No sweat.

          • mewabe


          • Kristen

            You really confuse me..but then so does waking up each day. You go to sleep when its dark, then wake up and its light…who invented this wierd stuff?? I thought I was the Antichrist, but now Im God and you are the Antichrist and reincarnation of everyone. Ah…you are the Afterlife in manifestation.
            Hearts are soooo overrated, heck, after the medical professions they kill lots of people. See why Im always confused.
            And whats Lysol? I eat losers and demons for breakfast, swallowed down with anti freeze so my internal hell doesnt freeze over. I just like floro green pee actually but thats a bit lame.
            Anyway Lucifer, must trot, nearly 5pm and Ive done no work cos I unpacked all my Chrismukka stock. Can I interest you in 200 plastic holly spriggs for your Christmas cake, or even some luuuurvly plastic reindeer??

          • mewabe

            Lysol is a cleaner that has benzalkonium chloride (don’t ask me to spell it…oh I just did, I must have channeled it). Nasty…some Native people in BC (Canada) drunk it, to the point that a law was passed forbidding grocers from selling it to Indigenous people.
            Fine…I will drink hairspray instead. No one will stop me from enjoying life to the fullest.

            I am the afterlife, the beforelife, the inbetween life, the up and down and sidewayslife. I am so busy I deserve a raise, don’t you think God?
            Demons will make you fat and ruin your pancreas…use only in moderation. Losers are very addictive, and they are delicious baked to a crisp. Add some rum to that antifreeze, it helps!
            The check is in the mail…I expect my made in China plastic ornaments sooner rather than later.

          • Kristen

            Thanks for clarifying BC, thought you meant in the Before Christ Old Testament days. I was gonna blame Moses for all Native peoples problems. Isnt good ole meths good enough for them?
            I thought you were The Everything…no wonder you are so inspirational (youll never live that one down). Yup, you deserve a raise, join the queue. And pay your freaken 10% tithings…my Caymen Island bank accounts are looking a bit dim these days. If you just give your credit card number to my Indian email, via Jamaica and Pakistan I can arrange it for ya. Or you can call my $4.99 a minute phone line and listen to some 4th hand crock to channel.
            Thanks for the rum tip, but I dont drink dark spirits (dad joke, must be a tranny), so Ill try bicardi.
            My plastic is high quality, top of the range, made by Native American groupies in Northern California, to fund their addictions. Dont diss high quality stock. Note I didnt offer you icing ones that Im too lazy to make so buy in from the Phillipines, via Australia! Now thats a carbon footprint worth having.
            Dont worry about a check (cheque in NZ), it can be your Gods worker wages, now you are an Angel. Coulda been a Christ if youd studied Law, way cooler and you get a cult. Will send off tomorrow.

          • Kristen

            Im trying to direct his anger at me.

          • mewabe

            He ain’t biting too well…it may not be his feeding time.

          • Kristen

            Freaken coward…deleted all his posts. Loser. Or Neale deleted them cos of word shite used constantly. Oh well, at least he knows he doesnt wear the pants, just adult daipers. He will be back, noone else speaks to him!

          • mewabe

            He was just trolling…getting the attention he actually craves in spite of claims to seeking a separation from “the oneness”…trying to make a very lame point that he “fooled” us…trying to make his disappearance meaningful (as if he was now in the “void”)…and perhaps trying to trash Neale’s forum. He was either playing or has deep issues, or both. I am not concerned…

          • Kristen

            Trolls have very deep issues, they are cowards who target those they are jealous of. Treat them how they deserve to be treated, and one day theyll look in the mirror. Anyway, theyve gone, altho know idea why Neales fans dont get rid of or help them!
            Its actually a walk in or soul change person, in a state of wtf, very confused.
            Anyway must trot…trottings always a good look when you are cool. Or as buddha said, things to see and people to do…I saw your new friend wants to ‘do’ you!!! Haha, nice. High 12, altho people who bring sex into it and want to shag pepl they dont get on with and who put them down are potential rapists, so possibly not so funny after all.
            Anyway trot trot trot, as they say in Atlantis.

          • mewabe

            I thought he had deep issues, as his stuff was not humorous. I kept frustrating him by not taking any of what he wrote seriously, not letting him drag me down to his angry and insulting game. And so he fell on his face and quit, as I expected him to do after using verbal judo on him. You cannot help a person who does not want help…

            I must gallop, it’s so much more cool than trotting! (Competitive aren’t I?)

          • Kristen

            I live in the burbs remember…no space to get up to a gallop (say that out loud, its as absurd as stowage and other words).
            I am the queen of competitive….who is two years ahead of someone else, who chose not to study Law???!!! Hahaha. And who physically made a range of foil hats? Nothing to do with having a 200m roll of tinfoil and every craft thing you can think of at work! Im really good at what I do..and completely crap at the other 99% of things, so I dont do them. Or plan B…Im just not cool enough to gallop.
            Yup right tactic, pee them off, patronise, tell them what game you are playing back at them them, go for the jugular when they show you it. And they will run away crying, feeling like a loser til they get a Walmart mirror. HEY…Ive found Walmarts tactics. The radio people told me today the best weight loss program is to strip naked and jump 20 times in front of a mirror. It will gross people out. Bet Walmart have big mirrors, to sell weight loss products and new clothes. Smart.
            See ya later Alligator, as they say in Miami.

          • Kristen

            Hahahahahahaha. You are very easy to engage, thanks for the psychological profile. Name calling is as pointless with Mewabe as it is with me…we are both self confident so give ourselves shirt, more can you ever could. Interesting study though, thank you.
            I do hope you can find peace in something.

          • Mateia Andrei

            You are both doing weed. Lol

          • Kristen

            Whos doing weed? CwG promotes weed, so no one in here would find that insulting. But since Im not a CwGer, guess Im not a stoner. Damn, Ive really missed out on life by being a nerd, maybe my tomato plants would do?? Or maybe Ill be really really rebellious and maybe have two spoons of ganache in my hot chocolate instead of one. With chocolate being a food of the Gods and all, might get that chanelling kick started.

          • Mateia Andrei

            God please go.

          • mewabe

            You are going to be fired for insolence and insubordination if you don’t tone it down.

          • Mateian

            And who is going to do that ?? You ??God please go

          • mewabe

            No I like it here, it is warm and cozy. Beside I don’t have a home…are you going to push a poor helpless soul into the street?

            You don’t have to call me God by the way…don’t be so formal.

          • Mateian

            Stoners gonna hate

          • Kristen

            Again, what is your problem with God, and why are you reacting so badly to both Mewabe and I, I can feel the hatred.

          • Mateian

            Not knowing you memes. Do you even 4chan

          • Kristen

            What is 4chan? Weed? These words are blessed with Holy Water……….

          • Mateian

            >not knowing memes
            >thinking i hate rather then shitpost
            Are you 12 ?

          • Kristen

            Nope, but I can remember my kids at that age, and even tbey didnt behave like bitter twisted spoiled brats who cannot express themselves properly so have a need to vent their internal anguish at anyone who will listen, waiting for someone to see it, and help. Shitposting is no different to a 12 year old cutting their wrists as a cry for help. Doing it in a God website, in any form is as blatant as you can get.
            What will help…therapy, a de-possession, blessing, tlc, detox????

          • Mateian

            > I don’t know wtf are you doing so i pretend that i know
            Good bait

  • Susan Boxer

    The past 30 years of my life have been intimately involved in seeking answers to similar spiritual questions and my search brought me to many great inquiring minds of our time, some of which have suggested that “what we think about and feel about we bring about” or in other words, “believing is seeing”. And more recently I have become particularly intrigued by thoughts regarding the transformational power of Love.

    Perhaps it is because I strongly resonate with these thoughts and to this day continue to nurture them, that they have, as powerful creative forces in their own right, expanded into physical manifestation in my life. Over the past 10 years or so, I have experienced an ever-increasing number of realizations that we are indeed powerful creative vessels, through which, what I Intimately experience as God (or Source or Higher Self or I AM Presence… or whatever we choose to call this magnificent Loving Intelligence that creates universes), reveals Him/Her/Itself 🙂

    “Ask and it is given” is another phrase I have become intimately connected with as my journey progresses and my quest clarifies as a desire to feel WHOLE, which I believe can only occur through a return to love. The more I dare to ask GOD to help me see LOVE at work in every… yes EVERY situation! … the more I am able to SEE how everything truly comes together as ONE, as a unified WHOLE, with LOVE as its source.

    I can’t, at present, speak of the Hereafter with any great insight for I have but experienced what I believe to perhaps be a glimpse of it, but if I was to venture to share what rises within me as I remember that moment, I would share this: it is the state of being… of REMEMBERING, A realization that we are home, we are love, we are whole… that we are what we’ve been seeking. It is a state where the struggle ends, where nothing matters, where everything is welcome, just as it is… And it is a realization that everything we have experienced to the very moment we cross that threshold into the Hereafter (every single person/every single event – EVERYTHING LOVINGLY SERVED, as part of Life’s divine design, a perfect orchestration of its unwavering guidance, carrying us to that very moment of glory… it is the blissful moment where the search is no more.

    Infinite Love & Gratitude to each of you for your blessed role in our collective REMEMBERING!


  • There is no death except death of the body. Death then is more accurately, simply more life in a new form.

    I wonder if death exists on the other side too, as we shed another corporeal form for another advanced form than what we had before.

    • mewabe

      I think that when we are born in the physical, it is a form of death from the perspective of the other side (such as having to leave our familiar environment and having to temporarily say good bye to those with whom we are close).

      • Or perhaps that’s our perspective, from another perspective, it’s always rebirth & more life. In a sense it’s both at the same time life, birth & death, but always life continuing.

        • Patrick Gannon

          Or perhaps the lights just go out and this is all there is. The point is – we don’t know. An “honest” post would say, “Perhaps, there is no death, except death of the body.” Speaking authoritatively on something that you cannot be known is no different from the Vatican speaking about things they don’t know.

          • The difference is, I believe in psychic & personal evidence beyond the brain & body, & you don’t seem too.

          • Patrick Gannon

            Agreed. You believe it. You don’t know it; yet you said it authoritatively as though it was a fact. Based on what we know now, when the brain dies, that’s the end of the game. We may learn otherwise in the future, but today, the available evidence does not support your statement as a truism. That’s all I’m pointing out.

            No I don’t “believe” in psychic events, but I don’t believe in pink unicorns or fairy dust either. However if you show me evidence for either, I will most certainly be forced to change my views.

  • Nickson Sylvestre

    Actually, one might say that God’s existence can be proven to be “true” or “not true”. In order to do this, however, one must first explain the difference between a “proof” and “evidence”. As an example, Science (in terms of Empirical Science) does not have proofs. What Science provides are evidences that may or may not support a particular theory. Now, when it comes to proof, one is dealing with what is referred to as “Formal Sciences” (Mathematics, Logic, and Linguistics, etc.). Where that is clear, one can say that God is “true” or “not true” can be proven, based on one’s definition of God. As an example, where God’s definition coincides with that of Life (as in the Conversations with God books), God can be proven “true”. God shares a similar identity with Life.