Question about the Afterlife (Physicality etc.)

Inspired by that "Afterlife Experiment" thread i am right now reading this book

The Afterlife Experiments which is pretty interesting, but I have some questions.

Let's for the sake of it assume that mediums like John Edward etc. are genuine, I myself am still torn between my healthy skepticism and some of the accounts in the book. Let's, for the time being, assume there is indeed an afterlife.

Our classic understanding is that we, every being, has a "true soul" or "self" which is separate from our physical body. This true self is then what survives our physical death and would then continue to exist in the other plane, Trying to cite from the book "and continue to grow" similar as in our physical world.

However, one thing we all know is that everything connected with our physicality will be gone upon death.

Even if our understanding is that our "true self" is independent from our physical appearance, I think that many things which make us an individual are INDEED tied to our physical appearance. A person/animal etc..has so many characteristics which are a result of the physical body, like, size, shape, the sound of their voice etc. just to name a few.

Now, those accounts about contact with the deceased always include that the deceased in the afterlife do in fact appear as they were in the physical world.

"I see a rather big woman, has some problems with their legs. Gray hair. Is this your mother?"
or
"I sense a pet, it's a small dog. It has 'wire hair'." "Your brother is there [in the afterlife] too. He lets you know that he is with your dog."
etc.etc.

So, obviously, even after death and with the physical body gone, the deceased still have an appearance. They still seem to exist as those beings they were when they were still alive.

Why is that? Has any being which resides in the afterlife a choice to appear as they wish, eg. they choose to appear that way so it's easier to communicate with them? The "small white dog" is still the small white dog....grandma still has her gray hair etc....

What happens if a human, say, undergoes a terrible disease and in the last years of their life gets old, blind, fragile, or say, loses a limb....then in the afterlife still appears as if before they got sick?

Why does grandma not choose to appear as a young girl in the 20s - rather, the medium "sees" grandma being the "old, big lady with the gray hair" etc.

What I am saying....theoretically I dont have a problem with the idea that our "true self" would survive in the afterlife and then continue as an entity there....but I have a problem with the fact that our physical bodies vanish...but the deceased in the afterlife STILL have (sort of) the physical bodies and characterisitcs they had when they were alive...I just want some insight there.

We're parting from a false premise here. Mediums and channelers are frauds. If you start with a bs premise, you'll inevitably reach a bs conclusion. Why waste time on bs?

Your true self is that which is not separate from anything.

If there is an afterlife, it's much like what rafiki said in lion King. "He lives in you". "You follow rafiki, he'll show you the way".

If there is an afterlife, it is because all is one self.

According to my metaphysical studies, your "soul" actually informs your appearance. Basically you pre-date your own body. Your soul was around long before your body was, the body is just an expression of your REAL SELF (your soul). Think about how happiness and stress can affect your physical health, non-physical things can become your physiology!

As for my opinion on mediums/people who channel spirits....those sorts of people do exist, and their discipline is real. The problem is that the western world is very misinformed about spirituality and produces very few genuine mediums. Some mediums are complete frauds, but I think that most of them are just UNSKILLED and UNINFORMED. They end up chatting with mischievous beings caught in between dimensions, but they think they're talking to a dead human.

Let's take Pac-Man for example....when you play Pac-Man, you can see all the fruits and ghosts hiding around the corners. Pac-Man can't see around corners. You can see more than Pac-Man because your are 3-dimensional and Pac-Man is only 2-dimensional. You are in a higher dimension than Pac-Man!

Even though these are spatial dimensions, the same analogy applies to spiritual dimensions. Beings in higher dimensions can tell us things to make us believe they are really our dead relatives (like details about appearance, life events, what their middle name is), when really they just have a better vantage point than us.

I hope I cleared some stuff up!

reply to post by flexy123


My own personal belief teaches that the ancestral spirits (which include even our most recently deceased loved ones) mold their spectral appearance based on us (the living). They manifest through us, and as such we see them the way in which we wish to remember them. A lost love would appear as you most fondly remember them; a mother will look as she did when you were closest to her, etc.

This is because ghosts, spirits, or specters are only emotional echoes, not physical apparitions. We do not see them, but their emotional residue, if you will. They themselves, are somewhere out and beyond our ability to communicate (whether that is non-existence, a oneness, or in some Heaven/Underworld realm is not necessarily knowable by us).

That is our "Truth" ; that this plane of existence is inhabited by fleshy exteriors, or residual emotional memories of those who have shed such. There are no real essences, or souls, left here who have departed their bodily form.

Just one theory among many; caveat emptor.

~ Wandering Scribe

Originally posted by Wandering Scribe

My own personal belief teaches that the ancestral spirits (which include even our most recently deceased loved ones) mold their spectral appearance based on us (the living). They manifest through us, and as such we see them the way in which we wish to remember them. A lost love would appear as you most fondly remember them; a mother will look as she did when you were closest to her, etc.

Their manifestations appear to be directly related to their reason for appearance and/or their capabilities. Some manifest as younger, some as the last age we know them, some manifest faces only, etc. If for instance they want to impress the evidence of the survival of death and the potentials in the afterlife, knowing that they will be recognized, they could manifest as a much younger version of themselves than they were when they transitioned.

This is because ghosts, spirits, or specters are only emotional echoes, not physical apparitions. We do not see them, but their emotional residue, if you will. They themselves, are somewhere out and beyond our ability to communicate (whether that is non-existence, a oneness, or in some Heaven/Underworld realm is not necessarily knowable by us).

The spirits would differ.

Harry Price, Master Ghost Hunter, Speaks About The Truth Regarding Them

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
We're parting from a false premise here. Mediums and channelers are frauds. If you start with a bs premise, you'll inevitably reach a bs conclusion. Why waste time on bs?

The 'premise' should be balanced, otherwise the BS premise that all mediums and channellers are frauds is a bias from the start...conclusion already reached...

A99

Not sure how your going to get any insight on a subject that in no way can ever be proven while your alive. Its basically just what people think.

You'd have to find someone who died and actually experienced the after-life for quite awhile, not just some light in a tunnel, to receive the answer your looking for.

reply to post by Snoopy1978


Channelers and Mediums are fake? Where's your proof? Because then all metaphysics would then be fake. And the thought of anything of higher power would also them become fake. And so on and so forth.

Seriously? And i'm not saying I believe in John Edwards or any Channeler, Medium for that matter. Just support your statement. Please and thank you.

reply to post by MUness


I have my belief, and you have your own.

There has never been any verifiable evidence for the legitimacy of séances, or any application of Spiritualism for that matter. In fact, each and every time that a psychic, a medium, or a spiritualist has tried to demonstrate their abilities under controlled conditions, they failed. Last time I checked, James Randi and his foundation still had a prize waiting for anyone who could do so.

Now, you're entirely welcome to accept the "truth" revealed through a séance, Ouija board, medium, pendulum, automatic writing, remote viewing, or any other profession of Spiritualism. That is your right. It does not mean that they are correct though. I would hope you at least acknowledge the existence of charlatans, con-men, scam-artists, and the skill known as cold-reading.

Again, as with all things claiming "spiritual truth" : caveat emptor.

~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by sulaw

Channelers and Mediums are fake? Where's your proof? Because then all metaphysics would then be fake. And the thought of anything of higher power would also them become fake. And so on and so forth.

Seriously? And i'm not saying I believe in John Edwards or any Channeler, Medium for that matter. Just support your statement. Please and thank you.

You're making some giant leaps here. Try not to do that, it's very unscientific, and dishonest.

All of metaphysics does not hinge upon the words of mediums and psychics. Neither, for that matter, does the existence, or non-existence, of a Higher Power, a perfected self, a Creator, or deities. You're mixing your professions, crossing wires which should not be crossed.

Mediums, psychics, and people who channel the dead have been exposed as frauds numerous times. This does not mean that they are all frauds though, only that there exists an undercurrent of opportunistic people who are more than willing to prey upon the solace and loneliness of people who are grieving.

As for evidence, here's an episode of Penn and Teller's TV show "Bull#!" where they debunk a medium on the show itself:



Other popular Mediums, like James van Praagh, John Edwards, Sylvia Brown, and Theresa Caputo have also been sued for not being legitimate. For example, here's a video on van Praagh's fraudulent trade:



A number of websites, journals, articles, and more are devoted to dispelling the illusion of faulty Mediums as well. But again, Mediums and psychics do not necessarily imply anything about an afterlife, a Creator, or metaphysics.

~ Wandering Scribe

James Randi?

Why would anyone leave his reputation in the hands of a proven liar in Randi?

The Joke of the James Randi Challenge

Originally posted by Wandering Scribe
reply to post by MUness

 

I have my belief, and you have your own.

True this.

There has never been any verifiable evidence for the legitimacy of séances,

But some of science's biggest names have not only dabbled in, but been entirely convinced by the world of the seance.

Article

Huh?

Add Lodge and more recently Braude.

or any application of Spiritualism for that matter.

Spiritualism is a religion. It would greatly help our discourse if you would first understand your own terminology

In fact,

No facts so far and the following isn't even remotely close to being factual...

each and every time that a psychic, a medium, or a spiritualist has tried to demonstrate their abilities under controlled conditions, they failed.

Thank you for your time "Scribe" but you will have no more of mine. I am well past trying to educate pseudoskeptics who fail to provide valid information and purposefully attempt to distort and falsify physical and mental mediumship history.

G'd life, sir!

Originally posted by akushla99

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
We're parting from a false premise here. Mediums and channelers are frauds. If you start with a bs premise, you'll inevitably reach a bs conclusion. Why waste time on bs?

The 'premise' should be balanced, otherwise the BS premise that all mediums and channellers are frauds is a bias from the start...conclusion already reached...

A99

Okay, basing ourselves on the scientific method, mediums and channelers are frauds. If we dont part from a serious premise, we may as well talk about Bertrand Russel's intergalactic teacup as if it was a totally plausible concept. Now, if the point of the OP is to shoot the breeze talking about ridiculous crap as if it were real (but not really) then he should state it as such, imo. Deny ignorance and all that, y'know?

Originally posted by sulaw
reply to post by Snoopy1978

 

Channelers and Mediums are fake? Where's your proof? Because then all metaphysics would then be fake. And the thought of anything of higher power would also them become fake. And so on and so forth.

Seriously? And i'm not saying I believe in John Edwards or any Channeler, Medium for that matter. Just support your statement. Please and thank you.

No. The proof needs to come from the mediums and channelers. All they have proven through the ages is that they are charlatans. How dishonest would it be to ask for you to prove there's not an obese unicorn orbiting neptune? The one with the outlandish claims must provide conclusive evidence before asking anyone to accept their trade as factual.

Originally posted by Snoopy1978

Okay, basing ourselves on the scientific method, mediums and channelers are frauds.

Some are.

Many are not.

His report on this research in 1874, concluded that these phenomena could not be explained as conjuring, and that further research would be useful. Crookes was not alone in his views. Fellow scientists who came to believe in spiritualism included Alfred Russel Wallace, Oliver Lodge, Lord Rayleigh.

From that time until his death in 1919, letters and interviews show that Crookes was a believer in spiritualism.

Crookes

I have a few hundred more including the full citations and peer reviewed reports in scientific journals, would you like me to post them?

Only if you read 'em!