So today I interviewed an Exorcist Bishop. Zazz Podcast.

a reply to: sled735

The memory of past lives through your blood line could be coded unto your DNA... Is a thought.
Id prefer it to be an eternal spirit though

originally posted by: ManyMasks
a reply to: sled735

The memory of past lives through your blood line could be coded unto your DNA... Is a thought.
Id prefer it to be an eternal spirit though

Maybe some is passed through DNA (I think there is scientific evidence of this), but I will refer you to a session that Brian L. Weiss M.D. told about in his book, Many Lives, Many Masters. He said he regressed a woman who in her past life could not have children, yet she remember many things about that life; names, buildings, events, etc., that were verified after her session.
So, if memory is only passed through DNA, then this woman couldn't have remembered what she did because there was no DNA (children) to pass it to.

So, there you go. You now have evidence to support that it IS the eternal spirit that comes back.

a reply to: sled735

Yeah that's a good one, thanks.

Double post deleted!

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Hey Zazz.

Although this particular topic isn't my cup of tea. I wish you the very best in your endeavours with your podcasts. It helps take ATS back to what, at least once upon a time, were the core subject matters here.

Please don't do a politics podcast

Regards MM

a reply to: sled735

Except the scientific community doesn't recognize the mere words of someone as fact.

100% anecdotal.

a reply to: mirageman

That's like getting an e-hug coming from you MM!

It's just a mini series, we'll see if we can prolong the pain by doing a longer run. lol.

originally posted by: reject
a reply to: sled735

Except the scientific community doesn't recognize the mere words of someone as fact.

100% anecdotal.

It wasn't just mere words. The names, places, and events she described while under hypnosis was researched afterwards and found to be real. The names existed, events happened. Read his book. I don't need science to tell me what's real/true. I have a brain to do that for me.

I finally got a chance to listen to the whole thing, and it's excellent all the way through.
I do like his delivery of information as well as your interviewing skills.

It's a fascinating topic, and I hope you do more of these.

Finally got around to listening to this tonight. Wow! I really enjoyed it! I've done quite a bit of research into the supernatural over the years but I heard some insights here which I had not heard before. This is the kind of intelligent discussion on the supernatural I really enjoy! He's a very interesting man for sure! Thanks so much for this, Zazz! I'm always looking for good things to listen to while I work and I love a good supernatural podcast like this so I hope you do more!

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

Thank you LCH!

At least 2 more, after that we'll see

a reply to: reject

Except the scientific community doesn't recognize the mere words of someone as fact.

100% anecdotal.

Law courts across the world recognise anecdotal evidence as actual evidence.

The science community is just a community. We also have a religious community and most folks don't believe them.

And with all the shenanigans of scientific proof surrounding global warming and climate change, perhaps most folks these days would trust the words of their neighbors before they would trust the science community?

I know I wouldn't trust Monsanto's scientific proof that glyphosate/ roundup (24D) is "safe".

Thanks for bringing this to us Zazz.

Little conflicted on the information dropped on us by the Bishop. He can only speak on what he's experienced which doesn't rule out what others have experienced. I would have preferred he gave us some examples of cases he's worked on, but understand there are privacy issues.

I think what bothered me the most was the four categories he outlined. I get that he is doing the best he can, but I disagree in that it's too simplistic altho I can see those are what he's familiar with. It's a point to consider as we all express our views, that the good Bishop isn't any more immune to "the Archetypal imagery" than any of us are so while I found his descriptives of the four types of Entities interesting I personally would have to also take into account his biases.

None of this is meant as a criticism, just me thinking out loud.
In my experience he was very correct in saying things will appear to you in a way you can comprehend, he very gently glossed over the fact that these Entities, for lack of a better descriptor, use what's already in your head to find a form you can accept. The less you are attached to any one thing, the easier it is for them to be more of what they actually are.

So it doesn't surprise me a Bishop is dealing with what he would think are Fallen Angels.
Or a UFOlogist is seeing UFO's.
Or a Squatcher is seeing Bigfoot.
It just makes it easier for these Entities whatever they are to communicate with us. Common ground, if you will?

The other thing he mentioned which I've found to be absolutely true is some places are off limits to humans. They should be. It's just we didn't get the memo. I'm loath to say either negative energy OR positive as I've found it just to be very different than what we're comfortable with. Neither good or bad, just different.

It'd be great if you'd consider getting more interviews with people who are doing "fieldwork" cause I think the spectrum of the paranormal is so huge we'd all learn something!

Checking in to see if there's a new podcast.

Nothing yet?

Is there anything an alleged "possessed" person does that an actor can't like levitate like Superman or stick to walls like spiderman or anything of the sort?

a reply to: reject

They can speak in foreign languages, an uneducated 15 yr old girl can display the intelligence of a well educated upper class man from another country.
See Jung's early work, i.e. psychology and the occult.