The Varieties of ATS Religious Experience; or, Variations on a Theme

reply to post by logical7

hmm.. So does a fresh soul has pre knowledge or soul just has accuired knowledge from previous life? Accuired one maybe wrong too right?

I don't know what the second question means.

As for the first question, it's pretty clear to me that every baby born has SOME PROPENSITY to think about what we don't know, where we came from, etc. That is the common denominator - a universal awareness of "not knowing" but also, feeling like there IS SOMETHING MORE that we can't put our fingers on, nor to which we can put words, or create images. Still, across all cultures, someone has "wondered" and tried to make sense of it.

*** ATTENTION ***

KNOCK IT OFF.

GET ON TOPIC and BE CIVIL.

reply to post by wildtimes

look here-

You need to know, that everything in the spiritual world is about Power.

And power is about Rule.
and female is about being [but] an attribute.

Thats why spiritual powers will want to unite with female.

And if it are EVIL powers,
they will ' unite' with females,
just like the way wé would describe ' intercourse' .

And it is THIS what happens with you m'am.

Your words may seem lovely and sweet and true
But i wont describe to you, the being who is on top of you.

reply to post by elevatedone


i ám civil.

If im out of line though with phrases, do tell me.

see - all i want
is to show the way the other dimension operates.
And it operates with a different agenda,
hiding behind souls words and thoughts.

you want a conspiracy?
- i show you a conspiracy !

...which has *nothing* to do with rituals as 9/11
but is a War fought behind souls.

reply to post by wildtimes

As for the first question, it's pretty clear to me that every baby born has SOME PROPENSITY to think about what we don't know, where we came from, etc. That is the common denominator - a universal awareness of "not knowing" but also, feeling like there IS SOMETHING MORE that we can't put our fingers on, nor to which we can put words, or create images. Still, across all cultures, someone has "wondered" and tried to make sense of it.

i agree to that.

I don't know what the second question means.

i meant, what knowledge gets imprinted on the soul. Say if in previous life i thought zeus is god then in this life will my soul knowledge inspire me about zeus?
Or the soul after leaving contemplates like "hmm.. Zeus dint work, maybe i'l find in next try" and then i am born with that soul.
In former assumption the soul is doomed. In the latter soul finds a way each time that doesnt work and tries again.
Hope this helped.

reply to post by logical7

i meant, what knowledge gets imprinted on the soul. Say if in previous life i thought zeus is god then in this life will my soul knowledge inspire me about zeus?
Or the soul after leaving contemplates like "hmm.. Zeus dint work, maybe i'l find in next try" and then i am born with that soul.
In former assumption the soul is doomed. In the latter soul finds a way each time that doesnt work and tries again.
Hope this helped.

Okay, let me see if I got it straight....
First round thought Zeus was god.
Second round - will he remember the particular story and realize it no longer fits?

Wow, great question!! That's an interesting concept. Doesn't fit into my thinking, though, YET . I don't think of carried-over soul knowledge the way I think of recalling earlier "erroneous ideas". However......

I do think - here's an example - some people are born with talents and interests that they have developed over lifetimes. A gifted pianist, say, a little child like Mozart who at age 7 wrote his first symphony. Or a kid who's a prodigy at medicine or has a "natural" ability at sport that is difficult. It happens all the time. Could be that a natural musician, say a person with "perfect pitch" has honed their "musical" skills and that is the way they think and respond. Babies each have different interests. One likes to move and dance, another gets overstimulated by noise and light that doesn't bother others, a third likes to touch and run her fingertips over surfaces. Musical, Vision Sensitive, Kinetic.

I believe each soul (I'm thinking this through as I type) likewise has ways of learning that carry over. Thus we each have different talents, strengths, weaknesses, etc. Those probably stay true through each lifetime. But one life it's piano, next it's violin. Or one life sculpture, next life painter....

So, the accumulated skill carries over (in my scenario), yes. Would this apply to the subject of gods names? I don't think so, but I can see how it's a possibility. I don't know. .... I don't think it's a conscious "okay I was learning to play Beethoven but I kept missing that note, so I'm going to work on it again".....not that specific of a skill-building practice thing. But I think more that the soul who was (like us! ) intensely INTERESTED in the topic of god and the spiritual in general, would come back with an inborn curiosity or passion or talent for it.

I think the "mistakes" we work through are way more esoteric and overarching than a simple "detailed know-how".

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
I think that God is absolutely the funniest being in the whole universe, but I don't have time to explain precisely why that is at the moment.

Question: Has any humorous irony cropped up in this thread yet..?

reply to post by wildtimes

I believe each soul (I'm thinking this through as I type) likewise has ways of learning that carry over. Thus we each have different talents, strengths, weaknesses, etc. Those probably stay true through each lifetime. But one life it's piano, next it's violin. Or one life sculpture, next life painter....

all these talents would be random events depending on the surroundings where the soul was born in 1st round and the talents would be either improved or destroyed by later rounds.
The question that occured to me is, is this really random or a soul is already inclined to certain talent from the 1st round? Building on that, is the soul's surroundings deliberately and lovingly pre determined?

I think the "mistakes" we work through are way more esoteric and overarching than a simple "detailed know-how".

yes i agree but there is a big question about what the soul sees as 'mistake'.
The soul is basically learning through pain & pleasure(karma) but in the world, pain doesnt necessarily come to bad souls only. If i stood up against injustice and was beaten up to death, and my soul figure's out that i better avoid that next time then my soul is going the wrong way.
Unless the soul is created tweeked to learn the right things only, in other words, soul should have a pre knowledge of what are 'mistakes' and whats the right thing at least theoritically and the soul just comes to earth to apply it practically.
What do you say?

reply to post by NewAgeMan

Yeah, randy was here.

Oh, and one troll.

He led me into temptation, but elevatedone delivered me from evil, putting me back on the right path. After that I just ignored the troll, who was alarmingly, well.......
It was kinda funny, I guess.

But we all rallied and stayed afloat here! Amazing!

reply to post by logical7

Unless the soul is created tweeked to learn the right things only, in other words, soul should have a pre knowledge of what are 'mistakes' and whats the right thing at least theoritically and the soul just comes to earth to apply it practically.
What do you say?

Exactly that.
We have a pre-knowledge of what things we need to work on - and then agree to come and do it - not knowing when or where those opportunities will arise (and sometimes they are hard to recognize, and we slip up, repeatedly, even in each lifetime).

reply to post by wildtimes


In my personal opinion, I don't think there's any real point to right and wrong. There's only learning and not learning.

I can already hear it: "What if people just won't learn?"

Well then, obviously you're just not teaching them!

reply to post by logical7

all these talents would be random events depending on the surroundings where the soul was born in 1st round and the talents would be either improved or destroyed by later rounds.

Why do you say that?
A person born to an Amazonian jungle tribe might be fascinated with the buzzing sound of blowing across a leaf; or the rhythm of banging coconuts together, or the musicality of a river flowing or insect choruses or birdsong. Next life, born into a Chinese family, still fascinated with sound, music, etc. Where one lives has nothing to do with innate interests and particular talents. Some people are better at things than others. Doesn't have one thing to do with circumstances or surroundings.

I think each different set of events and surrounding will still see the soul having a "bent" for their passion - music, animals, astronomy, language, botany, aquatic life. One simply finds outlets for it in the given circumstances, whatever they are.

Originally posted by wildtimes
I think each different set of events and surrounding will still see the soul having a "bent" for their passion - music, animals, astronomy, language, botany, aquatic life. One simply finds outlets for it in the given circumstances, whatever they are.

Except...

... there is zero evidence of accumulated memory. Even claiming that a person's predilection for something cannot be demonstrated to be a result of anything which preceded their conception.

I love music. I'm fascinated by it, in fact, and it's rare that I don't have it playing, in almost any form (except rap, yuck, lol.) I've tried my whole life to learn to play an instrument, but my ambidextrousness presents a frustrating blockade. In partial response to that, I was for a number of years a professional music reviewer/writer. My parents, on the other hand, don't know from music -- neither of them can carry a tune in a bucket, have never expressed interest in playing an instrument, and they almost never listen to it.

So maybe my deep interest is a hold over from another life?

Well, I'll throw into the mix that I have two sisters, and both are as fascinated and immersed in music as I am. We all grew up in the same household, in the same neighbourhood, with many of the same friends, went to the same schools in the same school system, and went to the same church.

Now, which is more likely? That we all three have had some multiple lifetime obsession with music and just happened to wind up in the same family, with two parents who lack it? Or that the environment that we grew up in influenced that commonality?

reply to post by adjensen

Except...

... there is zero evidence of accumulated memory. Even claiming that a person's predilection for something cannot be demonstrated to be a result of anything which preceded their conception.

I love music. I'm fascinated by it, in fact, and it's rare that I don't have it playing, in almost any form (except rap, yuck, lol.)

Yeah, rap yuck....
Well, as for the rest of your thought here, adj, there is zero proof that it's NOT accumulated memory, either!
Perhaps you and your sisters received a gene that was not "prominent" in your parents' interests - but, to my thinking, the fact that all three of you love music is, well...
intriguing? Is it not?

Originally posted by wildtimes
Perhaps you and your sisters received a gene that was not "prominent" in your parents' interests - but, to my thinking, the fact that all three of you love music is, well...
intriguing? Is it not?

Not really -- like I said, we all grew up under similar circumstances (which included piano lessons for the three of us -- that was all the rage back then... I, of course, was terrible and asked not to return after the first or second year, lol) so it is clearly the product of our environment.

While there are obviously things that are affected by our "nature", I come down, rather heavily, on the "nurture" side of things, even considering things that happened to us in the womb (that could, in some measure, affect us.) I know that's a fairly unpopular perspective these days, but it makes sense to me.

reply to post by adjensen

While there are obviously things that are affected by our "nature", I come down, rather heavily, on the "nurture" side of things, even considering things that happened to us in the womb (that could, in some measure, affect us.) I know that's a fairly unpopular perspective these days, but it makes sense to me.

Acknowledged.
"Nurture" is profoundly important. But it doesn't take away a baby's innate "propensities" toward certain bents in style of learning.

reply to post by adjensen

I, of course, was terrible and asked not to return after the first or second year, lol) so it is clearly the product of our environment.

Okay, if you were "terrible" and asked not to return, but still retain interest in music, that's not the same as having "talent" for it..........is it?! (Answer: no, it's not.)

I am interested in physics, but I can't really grasp it that well. Same with computer science. Interesting, but I realize it's beyond my capacity to "get." I could try to study auto mechanics, and perhaps succeed beyond my current ability to fathom that all the parts are connected and have names and are held together with bolts, clamps, hoses, and hooked to computers....but I'm not really "interested." No talent at it.

Do you see what I mean?
I have musical talent, linguistic talent, critical thinking and problem-solving talent, spacial-relational talent......
my interests do not necessarily reflect my talents. You get me????