I Know WHY The World Is So Sick

page: 1
79
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+59 more 
posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Something occured to me today, and frankly I'm amazed it's never crossed my mind before.

For the theory to stand, certain 'givens' must be accepted:

- The existence of an imperishable soul within each of us
- Reincarnation of the soul after death
- That the world is in a worse state, socially and spiritually, than it has ever been


Clearly, not everyone accepts these things as truth, but I don't intend to waste time debating the credibility of these beliefs. If you're unwilling to accept the possibility of the above, you'll take very little from this thread.


With that said...

If you're a firm believer, or able to reconcile the above, then you've probably arrived at the conclusion already that some souls are older than others. That is to say, some souls have been reincarnated countless times, since the beginning of existence, whilst some may only have experienced a few lifetimes.

But why?

Strange, but I've never asked that question before. Why are some souls old and some not? Well, the answer is: Because there are many times more human beings on Earth now than have ever been before. I believe that mankind acquired a soul around 50,000 BC, as this was roughly the point at which art, culture and religion sprung up 'over night'. This is something many archaeologists accept based upon the sudden appearance of cave art at this time - but that's for another thread
. Wikipedia estimates the world population at 50,000 BC to have been around 1 million.

So, I propose that there are approximately 1 million original Earth souls.

Since then, the world population has reached nearly 7 billion. Actually, Worldometer states 6,744,926,015 (and counting). So that means around 6,743,926,015 of Earth's living souls had to have been created/birthed (by a creator/architect/universe) since mankind was first given souls.

3.7 billion souls are only 50 years old. As 50 years roughly represents the middle of a lifetime, that means more than half of the world are new souls - not just NEW, but BRAND NEW! Half of the world's souls are experiencing their very first lifetime.

The connotations of this realisation are mindblowing!

If, like me, you believe that the meaning of existence is for the soul to learn, and that we're made to (or opt to) forget our previous life upon reincarnation, then you realise the magnitude of this notion. An old soul has a deep, spiritual memory of the experiences gained in previous lives. Whether they're consciously aware of this or not, they are guided by this gnosis and act with wisdom, compassion and fairness.

Only around half of us have one or more previous lives from which we've learned. The rest of us are here for the first time - making all of the mistakes that are to be expected from such inexperience. Furthermore, only around 1 million of us have been here since the beginning. 2000 years ago, 0.5% of souls were ancient. Now, only 0.015%!

For me, this goes an ENORMOUS way to explaining what I see in day to day reality. I've always felt like there are an elect few, worldwide, who genuinely understand compassion and responsibility, and a vast majority who are spiritually infantile. Our world is breaking apart - war, deceit, greed, murder, oppression, materialism, etc. I now know why. The world population has risen in leaps and bounds over the last few decades, resulting in a world populated by more inexperienced, self-serving souls THAN EVER BEFORE.


NOTE: It would be interesting to consider life on other planets too. If human(oid)s exist elsewhere, it could help to otherwise explain this conundrum. For example, our population on Earth might have increased dramatically at the same time that another planet's population was decimated. Then, those souls might have been sent to Earth - rather than new souls being created from scratch.



+2 more 
posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Yeah. I dont think you're that far off the mark. And you know what else I think? Fairly new souls wont have a clue of what you're talking about....


Oh and by the way: If you're considerations are fairly correct, the world is not that "sick" afterall. Its just a bit of a Kindergarden.

So you see the fights and chaos and mess the kids in pre-school have...its not necessarily "sick", its just immature.

[edit on 3-2-2009 by Skyfloating]


+5 more 
posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
I don't think Earth is the only place souls incarnate to.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Yeah. I dont think you're that far off the mark. And you know what else I think? Fairly new souls wont have a clue of what you're talking about....


Good point there!


Originally posted by Skyfloating
So you see the fights and chaos and mess the kids in pre-school have...its not necessarily "sick", its just immature.

You must understand the occassional need for a somewhat 'sensationalist' thread title Skyfloating
. Of course, you're right. "Sick" wouldn't have been my preferred description, but it seemed the most concise.


Originally posted by Reddupo
I don't think Earth is the only place souls incarnate to.

Thanks for your opinion on the concept. You may be correct. Spiritual immortality is something I'm certain of. Extra-terrestrial life is something I'm a little less confident of. I do believe in it, but I've invested fewer hours in its consideration. Hence why I decided, for the sake of my OP, to stick with the premise that Earth is the only home to physical human beings.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Wouldn't most, if not all, the ancient souls not be incarnating currently? i'd think 52000 years is long enough to safely say, most of them have hopped off the karma wheel by now.

If you subscribe to certain theories, and there's plenty to choose from, then there are a few things that can be said about this. Mind you, this isn't even a shallow breath, so to speak, let alone an exhaustive list.

A. Indigo children, if you think such exists, are the Oldest of human souls, say about 15,000,000 of the oldest souls around, and are indeed reincarnating now, to usher in the new age.


B. Indigo children, if you think such exists, are the youngest and newest souls, and are simply the product of the evolution of the creator, thus the creation as well has changed.

C. The oldest souls have joined in higher density memory complexes and are attempting to guide us here on Earth.

D. They've reached nirvana. If you believe in that.

E. i'm beginning to think that it would take many years to compile a real list, so, i'm just going to stop.

Anyway, seeing as how i relate with the so called "Indigo" kids,( i really really cannot stand that label) i'd like to think i'm an ancient soul, and am here to show all you young'ns the way
but, Truth is, this may be one of those things that we will never figure out in this physical existence.

Thus Spoke Misty Dawn, and All of ATS Heard.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Good post, well thought out, but I think it goes out the window if you take into account the possibility that many souls could have been reincarnated before, either as animals/plants or as things that live on another world.

It could be that there are always enough souls to go around, that some other world has much less souls than normal to even out our increase.

So every soul is old, but some are new to this world.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Great theory!

So, if true, does that morally justify the message of the Georgia Guidestones:


MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000
IN PERPETUAL BALANCE WITH NATURE
...
PRIZE TRUTH — BEAUTY — LOVE —
SEEKING HARMONY WITH THE
INFINITE

as an approach to creating a better world?



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reddupo
I don't think Earth is the only place souls incarnate to.


Completely agree.

Souls aren't created, they have always been and will always be, IMHO.

I look at it this way, we all come from the source, the source sends down parts of the source (ie. individual souls) to experience life in our reality, the source is infinite.

[edit on 2/3/2009 by Uniceft17]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


very interesting way to look at things indeed, with some excellent followup points by skyfloating.

one thing i'd add though is that there seems to me to be something else in the mix...i don't believe that immaturity or newness of souls or even the sheer numbers of new souls alone can account for some of what's been happening on this planet lately.

it would be interesting to discuss some of the manifestations of the immaturity or "sickness" of new souls...in other words what ARE the common signs and pitfalls. and of course what happens when the guf is empty.


[edit on 3-2-2009 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by M157yD4wn
Wouldn't most, if not all, the ancient souls not be incarnating currently?


Originally posted by asmeone2
Good post, well thought out, but I think it goes out the window if you take into account the possibility that many souls could have been reincarnated before, either as animals/plants or as things that live on another world.

Both welcome points, and examples of the depth that this theory can take us into. I wouldn't say either put my theory out of the window
, but they are definitely factors (and ones which I hoped would come up in the context of this thread).

I do tend to believe animals, plants and even minerals have a spirit. However, I don't beieve that it's quite as simple as a sould residing within a human shell being instantly compatible with a rock. Or rather, what reason would a human soul have to choose to reincarnate into the body of a rock. What would they learn from that? A complex detour, no doubt. Still, with regards to my original theory, I don't think it affects it soo much as although there are fewer animals today than 52,000 years ago, the difference doesn't account for the discrepancy in human souls during the same time period. Still, a very important consideration.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   
There are a lot of good guesses as to why we're in so much trouble. I ran into an article the other day which laid out a pretty good explanation, which I'm sure is very true for a lot of people.

It states that the culture we grow up in has an effect on how much physical human touch we receive growing up, and how much and what kind of touch is permitted during adolescence, marriage, and later life. This refers to strangers, relatives, friends, and sexual partners.

The premise is that those nations and cultures which have male nominator gods tend to have violent, warlike cultures that abuse drugs which reinforce thoughts of Ego, and are very restrictive on human physical contact. In the west, our babies sleep in cribs in rooms alone. They grow up to become teens whose only socially permitted form of sexual experimentation and contact happens in closet games played at parties where there is a lot of drinking going on. Remnants of ideas of religious morality are still very strong today, and restrict or place a moral stigma on premarital and extramarital sex, and public displays of affection are discouraged.

By contrast, cultures that have female gods are less prone to violence and warring with their neighboring countries, they use drugs that pacify and mellow out personalities, and are permissive of physical contact and sexual experimentation. They work in the fields carrying their young in slings on their backs, their children are allowed to play naked with each other in public, sexuality begins in the early teens and is not discouraged or threatened with punishment from god, marriage is less about finding a sex partner and more about being accepted in your mate's tribe, and physical contact, cuddling, touching, and sex occur without being coupled with ideas of shame or sinfulness.


I found it compelling and rather true, myself.

link:
www.violence.de...



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ian McLean
Great theory!

So, if true, does that morally justify the message of the Georgia Guidestones as an approach to creating a better world?

I can't help feeling that an incorrect balance of new and old souls could manifest itself as in imbalance in the nature and wellbeing of our Earthly lives.


Originally posted by ~Lucidity
it would be interesting to discuss some of the manifestations of the immaturity or "sickness" of new souls...in other words what ARE the common signs and pitfalls. and of course what happens when the guf is empty.

I agree. Hopefully that will be a biproduct of the thread, although I do believe there was a recent ATS thread about how to tell whether you're an old or new soul. I'll try and remember to link to it after I've eaten.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
So, OP, during your number-juggling you totally forgot that no soul is born and no soul will ever die.


So every soul had been at one place or the other. There can be no young or old.

IMHO you're completely off the track, for logic, especially quantitative logic, is an absolutely inappropriate tool to solve the riddles of eternity.


My approach is different: Just feel the earth as she is. Don't add anything nor put anything to it. Soon you realize, that you judging something "young" is like a drop of water judging the clouds "masterful" or "angry", or "wise" or whatever.

Got my point?



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
there's also the possibility that you are a time traveller, and as you make certain decisions, you hop timelines.

time is a nasty critter, methinks. it required a cascading shut off code in all DNA/RNA, be it human or animal or insect or vegetable or bacteria, etc. nasty bugger.

[edit on 3-2-2009 by undo]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by username371

There are a lot of good guesses as to why we're in so much trouble. ...


astrologically speaking, i've been reading that pluto has a lot to do with it. it's back for the first time in something like 240 years and it appears we're in for bumpy ride for the next 15 or so.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wachstum

So every soul had been at one place or the other. There can be no young or old.


isn't that just another opinion/theory? i think most people who believe in souls believe in young and old souls as in experience in this realm.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Young and Old does not relate to AGE! Sorry, but that's just not true. You call something young that is childish, not inexperienced

A young soul is a soul that did not learn their lessons...

So, IMHO, the fact that we are all on this planet after approx. half the time the universe exists, suggests that we are all terribly young


[edit on 3-2-2009 by Wachstum]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
As a poster above stated, a highly valid argument is that all souls originate from within the Source, therefore none are really "new" so to speak.

These same souls would be newly reincarnated, to give the Source/Creator more of an idea of physical existence, more situations, learn more things.

But this begs the question, if these Old Souls have dropped from the karmic loop and learned all that is necessary, wouldn't the Source/Creator only need the experiences of one soul? Therefore the rest of physical existence would simply cease to exist, because the purpose of the existence was already fulfilled, and the Source/Creator would then know all things possible in a physical existence?

But that seems highly illogical, for if that was indeed what would happen, then i'm sure at least one of the ancient souls would have reached that level already, and we would not be discussing this through these physical vessels of ours.

That brings the idea then, that we are here for more than simply learning from our experiences, because unless the combination of experiences is infinite, which is safe to say it probably isn't, but how would i know, then there is a purpose beyond just learning.

Love and Peace



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Actually, my thought was the opposite: This world is in such a trouble 'cause we do not love as much as we can, 'cause we learn not as fast as we should, 'cause we don't believe as strong as we must!!

It's not to blame the age, it's to blame the effort



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul
I Know WHY The World Is So Sick


You are only talking about one part of this «why». As you don't want to «waste time debating the credibility of these beliefs», I will not talk about it, although you could drop this first part entirely, without any problem (although the idea of reincarnation sure is interesting, it sure does not mean you would be more «wise», if you don't really remember your possible previous lives, and even then, the truth would not be that obvious, and these memories could very well crush you, if you do not understand this truth quickly, the problem now being that the truth probably was far more difficult to discover, before the past few centuries, decades, and even, years, considering the evolution of the human civilization, meaning «young», or «old», would not mean much anyway...).

... So the question is, what about the second part? Why is the world, *really*, so «sick»?

Do you consider yourself a «young soul», or an «old soul»? If the latter, what would you have learnt? Or is this «unconscious», and «you don't quite know how to explain it»?



Originally posted by Skyfloating
Oh and by the way: If you're considerations are fairly correct, the world is not that "sick" afterall. Its just a bit of a Kindergarden.

So you see the fights and chaos and mess the kids in pre-school have...its not necessarily "sick", its just immature.


You are putting *quite* a weight, on children.





top topics
 
79
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join