Contact with Spirits, Deamons, Ghosts, Etc.

[davedes]

Quote by: Simonius How do you induce it?

Most of the time it's just a matter of staying aware and conscious while you drift off to sleep. Some say it's easier to wake up a couple hours earlier than usual, as to disrupt your sleep patterns.

Once you feel comfortable in the hypnagogic and sleep paralysis state, you can explore it. There are a lot of claims that the "mind awake, body asleep" state makes it easier to step into a lucid dream and/or out-of-body experience.

[Maryjane]

[quote]

Quote by: Radarlove Maryjane, First, I am confused about who you really are.

I don't know why you are confused?

By chance, I came across your profile page where a picture of what appears to be a strong, good-looking, muscular man, wearing shorts and T-shirt, as if he has just returned from a strenuous work-out in the gym, is placed under the profile name Maryjane. Is this actually you and you're pretending to be a woman? or is it an image of your husband who has died? Or were you involved in a gay marriage?

Oh, I know who intentionally looks at my profile. Funny how their name pops up shortly after we've shared a differing opinion. It says right in my profile that the photograph is that of my late husband. He was a good looking fellow and no, he didn't go to the gym, he worked construction and played ice hockey. I have no reason to "lie" about who or what I am.Two members of Volconvo can vouch for me. One I interact with on a daily basis and the other I've met twice in real life. FYI, My name really is Maryjane.

Why would it matter if it was a homosexual relationship?

My comment has nothing to do with attitude. I am merely making a subjective point. I could just as easily turn your argument around and state many atheists I meet have a serious attitude about anyone who doesn't agree with them. Offering an opposite opinion is healthy, in my view. Without this, there might not be debates. How boring life would be then.

Stop back peddling. I didn't ask for your credentials nor do I care. Your snarky comments on this thread and the other scream attitude. You keep dissing people for being atheists like it's the only reason they won't take your word for things. If you want to try to impress people, offer up some kind of proof. Any fool can take someone elses opinions and turn it into their own. What I'm offering is a different perspective. My own. I'm not asking you to agree with me.

I have spoken to many who have lost loved ones. Only a few weeks ago I conversed with a 70 year-old woman who had recently lost her husband. After the funeral and wake, she came back home alone, to find her husband, looking alive and well, sitting on the lounge sofa. They had a 10 minute conversation before he suddenly disappeared. Is this what you mean by a lucid dream? If so, I would not.

No, I'd say she was delusional. Reminds me of the story I read the other day about eldery lady. Her husband had a heart attack and died. His body weight trapped her legs so she had to sit under him for a couple of days till help arrived. She believed he was asleep.

Some might say the woman had a chat with the ghost or spirit of her husband. The atheists might say, the woman was so grief-stricken that the mind had created this imaginary scenario as a sense of comfort and a way of denying his death.

Careful, there you go with the atheist thing again. Many of my widowed christian friends would say the same.

My understanding of a lucid dream is that while asleep, the dream seems so real, you believe it is actually occurring. i.e it is not the mind simply enjoying some mental masturbation of random events.

I've already given you my anedotal evidence of a lucid dream. Here's another. After my husband died, his partner tried to take advantage of me financially. I was up to my eyeballs in lawyers and CPA's. If ever there was a time I "needed" to communicate with him, this was it. I needed to know the ins and outs of their working relationship so I could make a decision whether nor not to "kick over the bees nest." I was ready to let it all go, I was mentally exhausted from fighting and trying to grieve at the same time. He never did answer my questions but at one point in our "conversation" he smiled at me like he always did when he knew I could handle things. That's when I became aware that I was in a dream and there's no way I would let his partner steal my husband's legacy from my boys and I. So no, these were not random events or mental masturbation, it was my minds own way of sorting out what actions to take.

Now, it is all down to your beliefs. The atheists might say, this was your mind finding a way of coming to terms with her death. Others might say you were actually with her in spirit whilst asleep and because of the emotional power involved, you remembered the event whilst it was occurring and then afterwards on awaking.

It's how your mind copes. Most of the religious people I know believe in psychics, finding coins, cell phones going off ...in other words... signs from beyond. If that brings them comfort...so? Makes me wonder if they find another love is their deceased spouse watching them in the bedroom too?

You come over as someone who has genuinely researched this area with some care. And I accept your views may have little to do with atheism although I do note you are a group member of Atheists and Agnostics.

I find your obsession disturbing....

I agree with davedes. You do not have to be religious to be spiritual. I go to the grave site. I know he's not there. For some odd reason it's comforting to sit next to him. I'm having a garage built with the inheritence from his parent's recent death. It's what he always dreamed of and he's going to get it. Silly and irrational of me to think that way I know...Most of all, I try to be more like him in my every day life. His legacy isn't in physical things, it's in the ways he enriched our lives.

In Britain, we have a well-known former TV news presenter called John Humphreys. He now works on BBC radio. In the twilight of his years, he wanted to research the afterlife and his experiences led to a book, published last September, called In God We Doubt. As the headline screams, He went looking for God and ended up an angry agnostic. While one part of him wanted to 'believe', another part was unable to after looking at the religious evidence. In God we doubt -Times Online

Yea? So? People are always searching for answers. Some find it in religion, other's don't.

My suggestion would be to keep God well and truly out of it. I am not religious and don't accept there is a benevolent God. Like you, I have studied the evidence thoroughly BUT unlike you, come to the opposite conclusion that there is an afterlife - although it has nothing to do with the religious viewpoint. I am happy and comfortable with my own conclusions. There is little more I can say.

Losing a parent isn't like losing a spouse. There's an intimacy shared that is beyond compare. I'll always be connected to him even if it's in my minds eye. I know all I need to know. I'm happy with my conclusions as well. Now that you know all you need to know about me, can we leave the personal's out of debate?

[Radarlove]

Davedes,

I hadn't thought about that. You can be an atheist and still be spiritual. So, you can be an atheist and still accept there is an afterlife. Interesting... but would the majority of atheists agree with you? :o)


Atheism: Definitions of atheism

[davedes]

I hadn't thought about that. You can be an atheist and still be spiritual. So, you can be an atheist and still accept there is an afterlife. Interesting... but would the majority of atheists agree with you? :o)

The most accepted definition of atheism tends to be along the lines of: a lack of belief in god(s).[1]

Entire religions have revolved around the idea of spiritual atheism -- take, for example, Theradava Buddhism.

I personally do not see God as a necessary item of spirituality.

Many atheists would not agree with me, though. There are many individuals who believe spirituality can only exist with the notion of god(s).

I feel that the separation of these notions is crucial before exploring them (in the same way that you separate religion and the afterlife).

[Radarlove]

Maryjane,

I appear to have hit a nerve with you.

"It says right in my profile that the photograph is that of my late husband."

I didn't see this profile comment otherwise I wouldn't have asked. So, my second assumption was correct.

"Why would it matter if it was a homosexual relationship?"

I agree, why would it have mattered? If you are hinting that I may be homophobic, I am not.

"Stop back peddling. I didn't ask for your credentials nor do I care. Your snarky comments on this thread and the other scream attitude."

Are you looking at yourself in a mirror? :o)

"Careful, there you go with the atheist thing again."

Are you suggesting that the word atheist shouldn't be used? Is there another word that you suggest? One which wouldn't make you feel uncomfortable?

"at one point in our "conversation" he smiled at me like he always did when he knew I could handle things."

I sense that a part of you, the spiritual part, wants to accept that the conversations with your deceased husband actually occur and are real. I use the word "accept" and not "believe" as often they are intuitive feelings BUT the cold, clinical intellectual part of you; the part that screams for evidence; the 'don't be so silly' critical woman part of you, who thinks you are being weak and woosy for even considering such nonsense...

Therefore, the conflict between your intuitive more spiritual side - the side that 'knows" rather than "believes" - is being suppressed by the clinical and highly critical 'I need evidence, evidence, evidence' intellectual side.

There is a major difference between 'knowing' and 'believing', in my view. One is emotional, the other intellectual. Feelings are real if you genuinely feel them. The intellect is not. The only thing that is real, in my view, are your feelings and intuition.

Makes me wonder if they find another love is their deceased spouse watching them in the bedroom too?

Interesting point. I have read stories where deceased peeping toms stalk bedrooms but most people are too busy in their next life to even bother.

I'll always be connected to him even if it's in my minds eye.

So, why not put your critical intellectual part away and explore your intuitive side. What have you got to lose? You have a strong connection with your deceased husband so why not explore this further?

For example, quite a number of people visit the Monroe Institute with the specific desire to contact deceased loved ones. They want to know and learn the techniques required to achieve this. They wish to create and then be in control of their OOBES.

Already, you have experienced lucid dreams. Why not attempt the next step? Perhaps, your husband is even gently pushing you towards that next adventure?

[Maryjane]

I appear to have hit a nerve with you.

You mean when you accused me of lying? Meh..think what you want. I know who I am.

I didn't see this profile comment otherwise I wouldn't have asked. So, my second assumption was correct.

It was there. Down near where it says I'm in the atheist/agonostic group..other side of the page.

I agree, why would it have mattered? If you are hinting that I may be homophobic, I am not.

Then why did you ask? I'm not hinting at anything. I'm just curious if we are debating a topic or my sexuality?

Are you looking at yourself in a mirror? :o)

Just dishing it back out.

Are you suggesting that the word atheist shouldn't be used? Is there another word that you suggest? One which wouldn't make you feel uncomfortable?

Allow me to repeat myself.... you keep harping on atheists like it's the reason we disagree with your belief there are spirits or an after life. I'm not uncomfortable, I just find your responses anal.

I sense that a part of you, the spiritual part, wants to accept that the conversations with your deceased husband actually occur and are real. I use the word "accept" and not "believe" as often they are intuitive feelings BUT the cold, clinical intellectual part of you; the part that screams for evidence; the 'don't be so silly' critical woman part of you, who thinks you are being weak and woosy for even considering such nonsense...

Your senses are off. Stick with what you know. Woosy and weak aren't in my vocabulary.

Therefore, the conflict between your intuitive more spiritual side - the side that 'knows" rather than "believes" - is being suppressed by the clinical and highly critical 'I need evidence, evidence, evidence' intellectual side.

All of a sudden you know me? You couldn't even figure out that I'm a female. That's kinda like waiting for the rapture don't ya think? I could waste all my time wishing for something to come true. In the end...all I'd have done was wasted my time on useless nonsense. Believe if you want..I have better things to do. You might want to brush up on your psychology.

There is a major difference between 'knowing' and 'believing', in my view. One is emotional, the other intellectual. Feelings are real if you genuinely feel them. The intellect is not. The only thing that is real, in my view, are your feelings and intuition.

Come back and haunt me when you are dead and offer up some proof. Until then, you know nothing.

Interesting point. I have read stories where deceased peeping toms stalk bedrooms but most people are too busy in their next life to even bother.

Busy doing what? Where's your proof?

So, why not put your critical intellectual part away and explore your intuitive side. What have you got to lose? You have a strong connection with your deceased husband so why not explore this further?

Been there done that. I told you I've studied up on all this supernatural stuff. Besides, I've already lost the most important thing to me. I'm tired of loss. Life is for the living.

For example, quite a number of people visit the Monroe Institute with the specific desire to contact deceased loved ones. They want to know and learn the techniques required to achieve this. They wish to create and then be in control of their OOBES.

Yea, I'll be sure to call them. They probablly charge a nice fee to help out those poor desperate souls in search of contacting a loved ones...just like everyone else in the "death" business.

Already, you have experienced lucid dreams. Why not attempt the next step? Perhaps, your husband is even gently pushing you towards that next adventure?

Perhaps you should concentrate on debating and not worry about my personal life so much? It seems you can't after I've already requested you to, so I'll withdraw from this debate untill you offer up a real argument.

[Jack]

I personally do not see God as a necessary item of spirituality.

Nor do I. Nor do I see in the premise of atheism any reason why an atheist couldn't accept the idea of an afterlife. I'm sure there are many "naturalistic" suppositions regarding an afterlife. They may be less scientifically explorable, but the definition of atheism says nothing about it requiring a dependency on science. Some do, some don't. Obviously they'd object to a supernatural or theological concept of the afterlife. But to believe that one exists in a physical way that we just haven't advanced far enough to detect yet doesn't require any gods in the equations.

[Anmon]

Quote by: Simonius Why is it that you believe this is an evil spirit and not just a natural quirk?

Because I can feel its coming from outside of me, when the attacks happen.

[Piscean]

Let's see, you experience something that would usually considered impossible, logically, it's a dream or halllucination. You're the one who has to prove that something unknown to science exists.

You expect people to deny what they have experienced because science hasn't caught up yet? Saying. Logic only has to do with the left side of your brain which you are only using 10% of to start with. It's what this society teachers and drills into your analytical calculating little head. But half of %10 of the human brain doesn't get to define reality for those who have experienced something more than current human science efforts can explain!

[Radarlove]

Maryjane,

"so I'll withdraw from this debate..."

I wish you every success with the journey called life.

[Radarlove]

Jack,

"Nor do I see in the premise of atheism any reason why an atheist couldn't accept the idea of an afterlife.... the definition of atheism says nothing about it requiring a dependency on science."

I am a little confused by your comment. It appears that we are coming from the same page, so why the previous disagreements?

The evidence I have uncovered suggests, while an afterlife exists, there is no such God, deity, spiritual beings involved that religion states. It is simply another dimension in time and space. In some ways similar to Earth - in other ways quite different.

There is a fascinating book called Voyages into the Unknown written by Bruce Moen, an OOBE traveller, who explains that this next dimension is divided into different territories of belief systems, rather like Earth is broken up by different continents and countries.

One area is known as the religious belief system territory. This is where those who worship a particular God end up. So, the delicious irony is Christians, for example, who believe in Jesus, will have these beliefs mirrored back to them, thus confirming their religious creed all along. And further along there will be the territory for Muslims, Buddhists and so on.

Matter in this next dimension immediately creates and then mirror's back each person's belief systems at the time of their physical death. And why some atheists (oops, there's that word again) have difficulty initially embracing this new world, as their ego stops them from accepting it is real.

[Derek Wolff]

I've had many "paranormal" experiences most of which are completely explainable such as the sleep paraylsis and out of body experiences. The ones that are the least explainable are the ones I have experienced during meditation. I have experienced multiple hulacinations most regurlarly audio hulacinations where it sounds as though some one is whispering in your ear. It sounds very realistic but once I put my attention to it during a deep meditation it disapears. I have a feeling these hallucinations have some thing to do with my subconcious running rampant whilst my focus is else where. Maybe its always there but our minds are always to murky to hear it? The sensations I experience in my body is also a very unusual one. Pressure coming down on my stomach most common. It feels not quite like some one is pushing on it, more like my muscles are in constant state of flexing, but they aren't. My stomach will literally cave inward yet my body is completely relaxed. I have more sensations but this is the most unusual. I believe most of them have to do with the fact my body may be falling asleep and I am just awake for the ride.

[Maryjane]

Quote by: Radarlove Jack, "Nor do I see in the premise of atheism any reason why an atheist couldn't accept the idea of an afterlife.... the definition of atheism says nothing about it requiring a dependency on science." I am a little confused by your comment. It appears that we are coming from the same page, so why the previous disagreements? The evidence I have uncovered suggests, while an afterlife exists, there is no such God, deity, spiritual beings involved that religion states. It is simply another dimension in time and space. In some ways similar to Earth - in other ways quite different. There is a fascinating book called Voyages into the Unknown written by Bruce Moen, an OOBE traveller, who explains that this next dimension is divided into different territories of belief systems, rather like Earth is broken up by different continents and countries. One area is known as the religious belief system territory. This is where those who worship a particular God end up. So, the delicious irony is Christians, for example, who believe in Jesus, will have these beliefs mirrored back to them, thus confirming their religious creed all along. And further along there will be the territory for Muslims, Buddhists and so on. Matter in this next dimension immediately creates and then mirror's back each person's belief systems at the time of their physical death. And why some atheists (oops, there's that word again) have difficulty initially embracing this new world, as their ego stops them from accepting it is real.

Brue Moen... from Wiki

Bruce Moen from Colorado, USA is an author and international lecturer as well as an engineering consultant in his own firm. He claims to be able to explore the afterlife and to do 'retrievals'. Doing retrievals means making contact with people who are lost or 'stuck' after death with the purpose of helping them out of their isolation and back into the 'heavens'. This technique is based on the Lifeline program at The Monroe Institute. He has written several books about this subject and leads 10 to 15 workshops annually, teaching participants how to perform those retrievals. Moen has also stated that he is working on an "Afterlife Communication Device," like a "telephone" which will enable direct communication with the deceased without the need for special esoteric knowledge or techniques. [1]

Part of being an atheist is being skeptical so I did a little digging into Moen and the Monroe Institute. To attend a week long seminar is $2 grand. Their membership fees start at $50 and progress up to $10,000 (or beyond) They even have a program called Intuitave Investing. Attendance to that is $1000 and keep your check book open...

I have little "faith" in those that profit from people in mourning. It's bad enough the funeral business and the government does it. Seems everyone wants a piece of the pie.

[Radarlove]

Maryjane,

I thought you said you were withdrawing from this debate? Anyway, welcome back.

I agree with you, I never feel comfortable when so-called "human potential experts" charge large amounts of money for workshops and study programmes - particularly when the people attracted to them are often vulnerable and in crisis. But people, in the West at least, can do what they want with their money... surely? Out of curiosity, I wondered what the super-rich did with theirs. Here are some examples.

A man recently paid $502,400 to have lunch, yes lunch, with the world's leading investor and billionaire businessman Warren Buffet. All the money went to charity.

In 2005, an art collector paid $104m for Picasso's 1905 painting Boy with a Pipe.

In the same year the Bugatti Veyron, the world's fastest legal on-road sports car, went on sale for $1.7m.

The most expensive yacht is owned by Oracle founder Larry Ellison - cost $68m.

A toy collector recently paid $60,000 for a pre-war Dinky box of 6 type 1 vans.

So, $2,000 for a week long seminar. The obvious question, what do you get for this money.

: The opportunity of overcoming your fear of death.
: The opportunity of learning how to meet and converse with deceased loved ones.
: The opportunity of dramatically expanding one's knowledge and awareness of life.
: The opportunity of learning how to travel in the many different dimensions of time and space away from the physical.

Therefore, I would suggest this is good value for money when compared to the cost of expensive material objects. You have a choice. Follow the creeds ignorance is bliss and shallow is good, or, choose the more challenging but far more gratifying exploration of other worlds and your inner self.

[SoylentGreen]

Radarlove So, $2,000 for a week long seminar. The obvious question, what do you get for this money

Ripped off would be the obvious answer.

The opportunity of overcoming your fear of death.

Denying death is a fear of death not overcoming it.

The opportunity of learning how to meet and converse with deceased loved ones.

For 2 grand they had better be able to do more than just talk.

The opportunity of dramatically expanding one's knowledge and awareness of life.

That only works if you do that with knowledge not gullibility.

The opportunity of learning how to travel in the many different dimensions of time and space away from the physical.

It's called psychodelic drugs and can be done at $10 a pop. At $2,000 your obviously paying to much.

Therefore, I would suggest this is good value for money when compared to the cost of expensive material objects. You have a choice. Follow the creeds ignorance is bliss and shallow is good, or, choose the more challenging but far more gratifying exploration of other worlds and your inner self.

I would rather spend my money on material goods than waste it on imaginary goods.
The last bit is straight out of a cheap advertising block in some woman's magazine. There is nothing gratifying in been conned out of money by charlatans .

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Radarlove Maryjane, I thought you said you were withdrawing from this debate? Anyway, welcome back. I agree with you, I never feel comfortable when so-called "human potential experts" charge large amounts of money for workshops and study programmes - particularly when the people attracted to them are often vulnerable and in crisis. But people, in the West at least, can do what they want with their money... surely? Out of curiosity, I wondered what the super-rich did with theirs. Here are some examples. A man recently paid $502,400 to have lunch, yes lunch, with the world's leading investor and billionaire businessman Warren Buffet. All the money went to charity. In 2005, an art collector paid $104m for Picasso's 1905 painting Boy with a Pipe. In the same year the Bugatti Veyron, the world's fastest legal on-road sports car, went on sale for $1.7m. The most expensive yacht is owned by Oracle founder Larry Ellison - cost $68m. A toy collector recently paid $60,000 for a pre-war Dinky box of 6 type 1 vans. So, $2,000 for a week long seminar. The obvious question, what do you get for this money. : The opportunity of overcoming your fear of death. : The opportunity of learning how to meet and converse with deceased loved ones. : The opportunity of dramatically expanding one's knowledge and awareness of life. : The opportunity of learning how to travel in the many different dimensions of time and space away from the physical. Therefore, I would suggest this is good value for money when compared to the cost of expensive material objects. You have a choice. Follow the creeds ignorance is bliss and shallow is good, or, choose the more challenging but far more gratifying exploration of other worlds and your inner self.

The dude who runs that is my hero, so many rich saps to rip off, so little time.

[Radarlove]

Ah, the Dawkin's rottweilers are now hunting in packs. :o)

Soylent Green,

"I would rather spend my money on material goods than waste it on imaginary goods"

Thanks for telling us that your are a superficial, shallow, closed and narrow minded, materialistic, naive, deceived and manipulated consumer.

So, you would rather spend $2,000 on some meaningless commodity like a pair of crocodile made shoes than a week long seminar that could actually challenge, change and perhaps even give some substance to your shallow materialistic life? :o)

God's Mercenary,

"so many rich saps to rip off, so little time."

I couldn't agree more. Welcome to your life. :o)

[Maryjane]

I thought you said you were withdrawing from this debate?

Let's not make this personal. My observations weren't directed at you.

I agree with you, I never feel comfortable when so-called "human potential experts" charge large amounts of money for workshops and study programmes - particularly when the people attracted to them are often vulnerable and in crisis.

I didn't see how the Monroe Institute's programs are any different than PTL, the 700 Club, or any other religious programing that flash their "promises" in exchange for "donations."

But people, in the West at least, can do what they want with their money... surely?

People can do what they want with their money, I'm not saying they can't make a donation of a few hundred dollars for a fabric swatch prayer cloth. What I am saying is if Moen and the institute are capitalizing from someone's misfortune by insinuating they can and do communicate with the dead and present that as FACT and yet have no proof, then they are indeed not an organization I would hold in high esteem.

Out of curiosity, I wondered what the super-rich did with theirs. Here are some examples. A man recently paid $502,400 to have lunch, yes lunch, with the world's leading investor and businessman billionaire Warren Buffet. All the money went to charity. In 2005, an art collector paid $104m for Picasso's 1905 painting Boy with a Pipe. In the same year the Bugatti Veyron, the world's fastest legal on-road sports car, went on sale for $1.7m. The most expensive yacht is owned by Oracle founder Larry Ellison - cost $68m. A toy collector recently paid $60,000 for a pre-war Dinky box of 6 type 1 vans.

You are comparing apples to oranges. The super rich have it to give, not to mention they received something tangible for their money. Hopefully the charity that benefited will do great things with that money.


I'm concerned with the people and organizations waiting in the wings to capitaize on a person's emotional vunnerability. The only thing the institute offers is a memory. Amusing the literature states that if you are a $10,000 member you get 4 books "free." Ahem...that's not free. Maybe they don't understand that receiving a death benefit is often one of the most painful moments for a survivor. It's tangible evidence that your loved one is no longer alive. You get the same feeling in the pit of your stomach when they hand you a death certificate.

So, $2,000 for a week long seminar. The obvious question, what do you get for this money.

I was curious too. What kind of bang are these people getting for their buck other than an expensive getaway. It's like going to a psychic and being told...I'm sorry, they didn't come thru. An opportunity with no guarantees.

Therefore, I would suggest this is good value for money when compared to the cost of expensive material objects. You have a choice. Follow the creeds ignorance is bliss and shallow is good, or, choose the more challenging but far more gratifying exploration of other worlds and your inner self.

Never under estimate the power of material objects. Spirituality can be tied to them. Many people get memorial tattoos or purchase something their loved one dreamed of having but could never afford.
So after the week long seminar, those that still don't believe are ignorant and shallow thinkers? Or did the institute fail to deliver? It's quite cocernining that people have to follow anyone's thinking other than their own. Dealing with grief is very personal. One size does not fit all.

I do have one question...Are you affiliated with the institute or it's members in any way?

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Radarlove Ah, the Dawkin's rottweilers are now hunting in packs. :o) Soylent Green, "I would rather spend my money on material goods than waste it on imaginary goods" Thanks for telling us that your are a superficial, shallow, closed and narrow minded, materialistic, naive, deceived and manipulated consumer. So, you would rather spend $2,000 on some meaningless commodity like a pair of crocodile made shoes than a week long seminar that could actually challenge, change and perhaps even give some substance to your shallow materialistic life? :o) God's Me