Why The Afterlife is a Fact.

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by Xaberz

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by Xaberz

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by Xaberz

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Its simple.

Before you were born, you were dead, and now you are alive. So when you die again, it makes perfect logic sense that you will have another opprotunity for life.

Now, that doesn't mean that there is a heaven or hell, it simply means there is definitely life after death as before this life, you were dead, or not alive (same thing), and now you're alive. Life after death.

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

To put it another way using different words:
There is non-existence before and after life. The fact that non-existence preceded life implies the FACT that life can arise from non-existence. Since this is the case, then the period of non-existence after this life has the opportunity for another life arising. It's simple and it's obvious.

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

I get what you're saying, and it does make sense. And once we identify the algorithms for the genetic code that form us into being. It seems very likely that humans will be able to write their own genetic code that will allow humans to create new forms of life out of non-existence. That is kind of a scary thought, but judging by this logic it seems like that can happen.

Life does kNot exist without a Soul being involved, so humans cannot "create new forms of life out of non-existence" for the Soul already exists and it's the Soul that gives the "entity" life.

So all humans can dew is create a vessel for a Soul to exist within but those vessels will never host a Soul if it isn't allowed.

It's no different than a child. Humans create that vessel to host a Soul and the reason that child has a Soul, is it's allowed but that vessel wasn't designed by humans, it was designed by God/Source, so that vessel was pre-ordained to house a Soul.

So the gist is, if humans create a lifeform vessel and God/Source doesn't agree to give it a Soul, it will never be life so it will never live.

Ribbit

I see what you're saying, but I can see a soul living inside a creature humans created. After all, from what you said life does not exist without a soul in it. And scientists have already created a new form of bacteria using synthetic DNA. www.msnbc.msn.com...-0 And the bacteria was alive as it was able to reproduce. Thus that bacteria with synthetic DNA must have a soul.

edit on 10/17/2011 by Xaberz because: (no reason given)

Single-celled lifeforms are powered by the Collective of Souls (WE the Souls), as is all Vegetation, so the reason it "lives" is it has been ordained to live.

Ribbit

I see. Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see if the lifeform vessel will accept a soul if and whenever it is created.

It's kNot whether it will accept a Soul, it's whether WE the Souls will accept it to hold a Soul, to then give it a Soul or "attach" it to the Collective of Souls.

Ribbit

Wow! You really love semantics. Good for you, haha.

Originally posted by Xaberz

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by Xaberz

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by Xaberz

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by Xaberz

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Its simple.

Before you were born, you were dead, and now you are alive. So when you die again, it makes perfect logic sense that you will have another opprotunity for life.

Now, that doesn't mean that there is a heaven or hell, it simply means there is definitely life after death as before this life, you were dead, or not alive (same thing), and now you're alive. Life after death.

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

To put it another way using different words:
There is non-existence before and after life. The fact that non-existence preceded life implies the FACT that life can arise from non-existence. Since this is the case, then the period of non-existence after this life has the opportunity for another life arising. It's simple and it's obvious.

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

I get what you're saying, and it does make sense. And once we identify the algorithms for the genetic code that form us into being. It seems very likely that humans will be able to write their own genetic code that will allow humans to create new forms of life out of non-existence. That is kind of a scary thought, but judging by this logic it seems like that can happen.

Life does kNot exist without a Soul being involved, so humans cannot "create new forms of life out of non-existence" for the Soul already exists and it's the Soul that gives the "entity" life.

So all humans can dew is create a vessel for a Soul to exist within but those vessels will never host a Soul if it isn't allowed.

It's no different than a child. Humans create that vessel to host a Soul and the reason that child has a Soul, is it's allowed but that vessel wasn't designed by humans, it was designed by God/Source, so that vessel was pre-ordained to house a Soul.

So the gist is, if humans create a lifeform vessel and God/Source doesn't agree to give it a Soul, it will never be life so it will never live.

Ribbit

I see what you're saying, but I can see a soul living inside a creature humans created. After all, from what you said life does not exist without a soul in it. And scientists have already created a new form of bacteria using synthetic DNA. www.msnbc.msn.com...-0 And the bacteria was alive as it was able to reproduce. Thus that bacteria with synthetic DNA must have a soul.

edit on 10/17/2011 by Xaberz because: (no reason given)

Single-celled lifeforms are powered by the Collective of Souls (WE the Souls), as is all Vegetation, so the reason it "lives" is it has been ordained to live.

Ribbit

I see. Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see if the lifeform vessel will accept a soul if and whenever it is created.

It's kNot whether it will accept a Soul, it's whether WE the Souls will accept it to hold a Soul, to then give it a Soul or "attach" it to the Collective of Souls.

Ribbit

Wow! You really love semantics. Good for you, haha.

Isn't semantics the study of meaning? If so, then the Meaning of Life would qualify, correct?

Semantics of Life, the Universe/God/Source, is what I live for!

What would life be like without seeking the answer to the meaning/purpose of this thing you call Life?

Answer: Baa-Baa

Ribbit

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


semantics is fine as long as you don't get the map mixed up with the territory It's not that relevant it's just such a good line i had to use it somewhere

Originally posted by Hopeforeveryone
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

semantics is fine as long as you don't get the map mixed up with the territory

It's not that relevant it's just such a good line i had to use it somewhere

Map? What map?

I say all the time that I wish I came with an instruction manual.

Ribbit

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by akushla99
Necessity is driven by need. If there is no 'need' to prove, one way or the other...it is a moot discussion...which is where these discussions end up...half agreeing, half disagreeing...and all configurations in between.
They describe the gamut of probabilities and possibilities...the truth can never be a straight line through all these...as you so succinctly put it... (they are fallible, in thier own way)...
But, for me, this does not translate as, totally wrong.

When you "mix" the math, that statement is true and what I mean by mix, is when you mix Negative Math and Positive Math, the answers are all over the graph, including all 4 sides of the graph.

But what if the math is purely Positive? Would that kNot create a straight line? What if your conceptual & perceptual portions of Reality are illusions, thus, you are seeing Negative Math where it doesn't exist, thus, you are creating that wavy line that goes all over the graph

Once you can see a straight line with Everything, that's when you will know the Truth.

Ribbit

Oh ButtUglyToad...we were having a fine conversation and all, until you threw in the...'that's when I'll know the truth' ...i'll spell this is as clearly as I can...

You and I seem to be in possession of something which we both are assuming as 'The Truth'.
I'll bet (as I've mentioned in passing before) that we are agreeing more than we are disagreeing.

There really is no need to resort to the strategy of feigned superiority in matters that we are discussing. I have 40 odd years of dedicated 'journey', and a life which mirrors exactly what I say...i will also not go anywhere near describing the many personal and 'unshared' experiences I continue to have on a daily basis, perhaps as a result of NDE's.

The truth is far stranger than fiction, yet is (as you say) fairly straight forward...it is supposed intellect, that gets in the way...intellectualising that which cannot be intellectualised...so, mathematics, straight lines, graphs, et al, are moot descriptions of what is happening.

Keep safe,
Don't get fooled at the wrong moment.

Akushla

reply to post by vjr1113


Principles of Biology 1 my friend , the study of organics (Living things).

Energy can be manipulated , but it can never be destroyed.

Before you were born you didn't exist, you weren't dead! If you were dead then your skeleton would still be on the planet somewhere.

Originally posted by akushla99

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by akushla99
Necessity is driven by need. If there is no 'need' to prove, one way or the other...it is a moot discussion...which is where these discussions end up...half agreeing, half disagreeing...and all configurations in between.
They describe the gamut of probabilities and possibilities...the truth can never be a straight line through all these...as you so succinctly put it... (they are fallible, in thier own way)...
But, for me, this does not translate as, totally wrong.

When you "mix" the math, that statement is true and what I mean by mix, is when you mix Negative Math and Positive Math, the answers are all over the graph, including all 4 sides of the graph.

But what if the math is purely Positive? Would that kNot create a straight line? What if your conceptual & perceptual portions of Reality are illusions, thus, you are seeing Negative Math where it doesn't exist, thus, you are creating that wavy line that goes all over the graph

Once you can see a straight line with Everything, that's when you will know the Truth.

Ribbit

Oh ButtUglyToad...we were having a fine conversation and all, until you threw in the...'that's when I'll know the truth' ...i'll spell this is as clearly as I can...

You and I seem to be in possession of something which we both are assuming as 'The Truth'.
I'll bet (as I've mentioned in passing before) that we are agreeing more than we are disagreeing.

There really is no need to resort to the strategy of feigned superiority in matters that we are discussing. I have 40 odd years of dedicated 'journey', and a life which mirrors exactly what I say...i will also not go anywhere near describing the many personal and 'unshared' experiences I continue to have on a daily basis, perhaps as a result of NDE's.

The truth is far stranger than fiction, yet is (as you say) fairly straight forward...it is supposed intellect, that gets in the way...intellectualising that which cannot be intellectualised...so, mathematics, straight lines, graphs, et al, are moot descriptions of what is happening.

Keep safe,
Don't get fooled at the wrong moment.

Akushla

Your problem is, you don't kNow WHO the Joker is on the Tarot Cards!

The Joker is WHO controls this Matrix, the Children of God, kNot God Herself, so you have been played but you won't ever realize that until you are reconnected to the Collective Consciousness, because the more you kNow, the more you kNow wrong! I kNow very little but I'm open to all truth.

"When Wrong is the Teacher, Wrong is the Student and Two Wrongs don't make a Right." - Old Toad Proverb

NDE's cannot be trusted because the "ones" putting on the show the NDE's experience, are the "ones" behind this show you call Life. So if the same Source is behind EVERYTHING here, and you kNow just how screwed up here is, and since the same Source gave ALL of us Closed Minds, what is this all about?

There is kNOw sPoon!

There is kNOw rIght!

There is kNOw wRong!

There only IS!

Ribbit

Originally posted by vjr1113
who says energy can never die? a battery can die, when your body stops functioning, there is no more energy being produced for your cells.

if everything is energy in our reality, then why even make the statement?

I don't think it dies, I think it fluctuates between space/time and time/space. It could be that it behaves like non-local entanglement and each individual brain picks up a certain frequency that permeates the universe like the connections in our brain cells. Have you seen the picture comparing both structures? Our brains could be designed or tuned to a specific frequency that is ubiquitous or maybe it has to do with the resonant frequencies of the Earth Sun and planets vibrating our dna as cymatic forms within the morphogenetic field?

edit to ask if energy=electricity does electricity=life? are we talking about a conscious afterlife or one where our nebulous soul blends back in to the background static of the universe until another brain, with enough power and ability as yours and will be able to receive the same frequency signal as you are doing now in this conscious reality of ours, is born?

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by akushla99

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by akushla99
Necessity is driven by need. If there is no 'need' to prove, one way or the other...it is a moot discussion...which is where these discussions end up...half agreeing, half disagreeing...and all configurations in between.
They describe the gamut of probabilities and possibilities...the truth can never be a straight line through all these...as you so succinctly put it... (they are fallible, in thier own way)...
But, for me, this does not translate as, totally wrong.

When you "mix" the math, that statement is true and what I mean by mix, is when you mix Negative Math and Positive Math, the answers are all over the graph, including all 4 sides of the graph.

But what if the math is purely Positive? Would that kNot create a straight line? What if your conceptual & perceptual portions of Reality are illusions, thus, you are seeing Negative Math where it doesn't exist, thus, you are creating that wavy line that goes all over the graph

Once you can see a straight line with Everything, that's when you will know the Truth.

Ribbit

Oh ButtUglyToad...we were having a fine conversation and all, until you threw in the...'that's when I'll know the truth' ...i'll spell this is as clearly as I can...

You and I seem to be in possession of something which we both are assuming as 'The Truth'.
I'll bet (as I've mentioned in passing before) that we are agreeing more than we are disagreeing.

There really is no need to resort to the strategy of feigned superiority in matters that we are discussing. I have 40 odd years of dedicated 'journey', and a life which mirrors exactly what I say...i will also not go anywhere near describing the many personal and 'unshared' experiences I continue to have on a daily basis, perhaps as a result of NDE's.

The truth is far stranger than fiction, yet is (as you say) fairly straight forward...it is supposed intellect, that gets in the way...intellectualising that which cannot be intellectualised...so, mathematics, straight lines, graphs, et al, are moot descriptions of what is happening.

Keep safe,
Don't get fooled at the wrong moment.

Akushla

Your problem is, you don't kNow WHO the Joker is on the Tarot Cards!

The Joker is WHO controls this Matrix, the Children of God, kNot God Herself, so you have been played but you won't ever realize that until you are reconnected to the Collective Consciousness, because the more you kNow, the more you kNow wrong! I kNow very little but I'm open to all truth.

"When Wrong is the Teacher, Wrong is the Student and Two Wrongs don't make a Right." - Old Toad Proverb

NDE's cannot be trusted because the "ones" putting on the show the NDE's experience, are the "ones" behind this show you call Life. So if the same Source is behind EVERYTHING here, and you kNow just how screwed up here is, and since the same Source gave ALL of us Closed Minds, what is this all about?

There is kNOw sPoon!

There is kNOw rIght!

There is kNOw wRong!

There only IS!

Ribbit

Monologue over, my friend...
Good luck...
Akushla

Originally posted by Time2Think
reply to post by Tetrarch42

 

Non-existence does not precede life. All the raw materials needed for the creation of a human exist in the universe before being "refined" though successive stages. i.e- molecules come together to form the genetic code which is enclosed within the sperm and egg, which join and develop into a foetus, which in time matures into an infant and so on. Sure, it's possible that some of the molecules which were once part of a T. Rex femur went on to be included in a human body, but I'd hardly call this an afterlife, just energy/mass transfer.

If your mother ate a steak while she was pregnant with you and the proteins from the steak were used as raw materials by you while you were developing in the womb, would that constitute reincarnation? Because that's pretty much the argument you're using.

Who's to say that "mass energy transfer" is NOT "reincarnation?" It's the idea, not the words.

For me, energy is infinite and eternal - no matter *pun intented* how small we break something down, it's still energy... so then we're back to the real question, was there always energy, or wasn't there? This seems more like the "which came first the chicken or the egg" question.

It's not reincarnation, reincarnation involves the transfer of some essence from one body to another. So far it's failed pretty badly under scientific scrutiny. Let's say that 10,000,000 millions years ago some crocodile feces, a rock, a plant and a bat all broke down and their atoms entered the earth's energy transfer system, over time some of those atoms all ended up in you. Where is the reincarnation, would you argue that you carry the essence of crocodile poo, a rock, a plant and bat corpse? Does that sound logical to you at all?

I agree(along with modern scientific thought) that energy is eternal and infinite, but how do you go from there to posit that reincarnation or an afterlife exists, the first proposition doesn't support the second in any way, shape or form.

The only way you could argue reincarnation is if you consider the afterlife just containing atoms that used to belong to an organism or object from the past, which is such a broad definition it's useless.

Originally posted by smithjustinb
Its simple.

Before you were born, you were dead, and now you are alive. So when you die again, it makes perfect logic sense that you will have another opprotunity for life.

Now, that doesn't mean that there is a heaven or hell, it simply means there is definitely life after death as before this life, you were dead, or not alive (same thing), and now you're alive. Life after death.

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

To put it another way using different words:
There is non-existence before and after life. The fact that non-existence preceded life implies the FACT that life can arise from non-existence. Since this is the case, then the period of non-existence after this life has the opportunity for another life arising. It's simple and it's obvious.

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-10-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

FACT: We don't know.
FACT: We cannot prove anything paranormal.
FACT: There is no documented proof.
FACT: This is just YOUR opinion and view.

The above are all 'fact', everything you write is not. Thats your view and opinion on the subject, nothing more. There is nothing wrong with having a opinion or discussing it, but don't try to write them off as 'facts' because there not.

When i read here people make a lot of common mistakes, like thinking that every UFO is alien related not even understanding what UFO stands for. Same is with using FACT, i think people who use that word like you do have no clue as to what it means.

Personal opinions are not facts, there just that personal opinions.

Originally posted by Tetrarch42

Originally posted by Time2Think
reply to post by Tetrarch42

 

Non-existence does not precede life. All the raw materials needed for the creation of a human exist in the universe before being "refined" though successive stages. i.e- molecules come together to form the genetic code which is enclosed within the sperm and egg, which join and develop into a foetus, which in time matures into an infant and so on. Sure, it's possible that some of the molecules which were once part of a T. Rex femur went on to be included in a human body, but I'd hardly call this an afterlife, just energy/mass transfer.

If your mother ate a steak while she was pregnant with you and the proteins from the steak were used as raw materials by you while you were developing in the womb, would that constitute reincarnation? Because that's pretty much the argument you're using.

Who's to say that "mass energy transfer" is NOT "reincarnation?" It's the idea, not the words.

For me, energy is infinite and eternal - no matter *pun intented* how small we break something down, it's still energy... so then we're back to the real question, was there always energy, or wasn't there? This seems more like the "which came first the chicken or the egg" question.

It's not reincarnation, reincarnation involves the transfer of some essence from one body to another.

kNOw it doesn't! It requires the Soul being relinked to another avatar, kNot transferred to it.

That's a misconception of reincarnation. Your Soul is not within you, it's only connected to you. Without that connection, you would kNot be alive, if you want to call it life.

Ribbit

There are no separate souls, we are all seeing from the same place.
Afterlife is not after death. Death is a myth, there is only life.
What is life?
There is only one thing you can be sure of and that there is a knowing of experience.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
There are no separate souls, we are all seeing from the same place.
Afterlife is not after death. Death is a myth, there is only life.
What is life?
There is only one thing you can be sure of and that there is a knowing of experience.

And dew you kNow how many times your person has experienced that kNowing?

I dew want to say that We dew agree that death is an illusion.

Ribbit

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


So is life!!

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

So is life!!

This life, yes, the real life, no!

Ribbit

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


Speaking of afterlife....I thought I saw yesterday in one of your posts a link to Tesla. I am assuming you are aware of Schumann Resonance. What are your thoughts (or anyones) on this theory of the Earth's heartbeat/breathing and when time hits zero? I am only now learning about it and what it means. Any information given is appreciated.

reply to post by smithjustinb

Somehow I think your argument is an example of circular reasoning or is fallacious another way.

? -> non-existence A -> existence A -> non-existence B -> ?

You're saying that non-existence A and B are the same. It's like if I normally hit the target on the bullseye' but then, one day, miss altogether and blurt out, "But I always hit the bullseye! It wasn't my fault!" In other words, you're saying, "There is life after this one because we were dead before this life!" You're not supplying any conclusive evidence.

It's kind of like saying "I'm the best man for the job because I was top of the class." This statement is simply restating "I am the best man for the job." in a different way.

We're talking about CERTAINTY, not likelihood.

It's more correct, if you say, "I'm a candidate for the job because I was top of my class."

You need to prove that A and B are the SAME before you can make any conclusions.

Or maybe just rephrase and say that life MIGHT follow after this one.

You could also say that life MIGHT NEVER follow after this one.

Originally posted by MamaJ
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

Speaking of afterlife....I thought I saw yesterday in one of your posts a link to Tesla. I am assuming you are aware of Schumann Resonance. What are your thoughts (or anyones) on this theory of the Earth's heartbeat/breathing and when time hits zero? I am only now learning about it and what it means. Any information given is appreciated.

Whoa!

I wasn't privy to that!

I find it interesting the wavelengths are in the same range as the human transmitter and receptors.

I just got through telling someone that the ringing in the 'ears' that's happening to many, is them picking up on frequencies being transmitted by the earth, so it's kNot the ears ringing, i'ts their mind.

Thanks for the edumacation.

Ribbit