Believers in after life, do you really think reincarnation takes place, why or why not?

I see no good reason to invoke religion in discussing the possibility of reincarnation. Perhaps that is the only way some people can parse it out and give it meaning, since it is a difficult subject to pin down, but it needn't be. It just may be that the nature of reality includes it the same way it includes mathematics and physics.

In other words, it's scientifically explainable; it's just that science hasn't gotten around to explaining it yet.

I don't blame scientists for refusing to deal with it and calling it religious mumbo jumbo nonsense. That's what the Renaissance was all about--repudiating dogma (and some nice art work, too!), but I prefer to look upon it this way:

Reality, i.e.; Capital-R Reality, includes survival of death by the soul, reincarnation, and other realms we cannot easily see from our standpoint. This has nothing really to with God or any religious teachings. It just IS. But Religions have seen some of this Reality and interpreted it within a religious standpoint by adding sin, karma, and lots of religious gingerbread. That's not Reality's fault.

Science, for its part, sees the gingerbread, the sin and karma, and proceeeds to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Once in a great while we get something that tries to bridge the gap, such as Ian Stevenson's "20 Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation," still good after 40 years in print.

Science, of course, frowns on subjective evidence, which is really all we have. Still, for me, it's enough. But throwing the religious mumbo jumbo on top of it ruins it for me. It hijacks the subject.

The human "spirit" is synonymous with consciousness as it is what constitutes your perception, experiences, emotions and being. Consciousness emits measurable frequencies, even specific thoughts have their own signature frequencies. That's science.
Energy cannot be destroyed or created, it's only converted - the law of conservation of energy.

So, we have consciousness, we have it as a measurable force that extends beyond the human body, and we have energy (e.g. human consciousness frequencies) that's eternal.

So your consciousness exists forever, somewhere in the universe after death, and on a deeper level there would be a universal consciousness grid (God?). What prevents that energy from simply utilizing a new vessel, like fuel into a car?

I have a thesis paper about this subject...somewhere in my mountain of files....

Originally posted by MasonicFantom
The human "spirit" is synonymous with consciousness as it is what constitutes your perception, experiences, emotions and being. Consciousness emits measurable frequencies, even specific thoughts have their own signature frequencies. That's science.
Energy cannot be destroyed or created, it's only converted - the law of conservation of energy.

So, we have consciousness, we have it as a measurable force that extends beyond the human body, and we have energy (e.g. human consciousness frequencies) that's eternal.

So your consciousness exists forever, somewhere in the universe after death, and on a deeper level there would be a universal consciousness grid (God?). What prevents that energy from simply utilizing a new vessel, like fuel into a car?

I have a thesis paper about this subject...somewhere in my mountain of files....

edit on 4-10-2012 by MasonicFantom because: (no reason given)

I do love the idea of this and i hope it to be true but more and more of late im thinking this belief system was just indoctrination for the freemasons and ultimately another control method to buy into.

If you think about it the footsoldiers have to be controled on a psychological level too in order to keep the structure of authority intact.

Steven Hawking smashed the idea of this, in his opinion obviously, but it sort of makes you wonder....

Originally posted by Zecharia
Steven Hawking smashed the idea of this, in his opinion obviously, but it sort of makes you wonder....

Of course he did. He signed all the papers to become a scientific rationalist. In his world, the hext realm simply cannot exist. He's done a lot of cool stuff, and he's a celebrity scientist, like Carl Sagan was, who held similar views. They both spoke to the masses with popular books. You want a control mechanism? These two are part of it. As scientists, both these guys are making the case for a Catholic point of view. YOU, common people, cannot possibly understand Reality. You need people like us scientist-priests to interpret it for you. Our language, mathematics, is anathema to you, so we'll use it just like we once used Latin to keep the liturgy from your direct understanding.

Gnosticism, on the other hand, taught that the individual was in control, and this is why it was wiped out. You can't have the common people being on control of their own destiny because it tends to subvert the power structure. One Gnostic interpretation of the teachings of Jesus, for example, was that if you personally followed Jesus' teachings, you could get out of this constant cycle of reincarnations that slowed down your advancement. The actual issue is not as important as the idea that the issue is personal. We're in the same position today with Science as we were with the Catholic Church 500-1000 years ago. We need another Renaissance.

And this New Renaissance would show science the way to realms otherwise considered superstitious religious mumbo jumbo. In essence, religion and science would merge as the real Reality became apparent. I don't know how to get there, but I beleieve this is where we need to go if we are ever to advance our understanding beyond the mundane physical realm.

reply to post by schuyler


Thanks for taking the time to write that,

Myself im having some personal struggles and trying to come to terms with my own reality. Sometimes i feel so lost in all the disinfo im critical of everything to the point ive lost all rationality.

I understand what your saying up to the part about catholicism, Hawkings basically said there is no god, no creator, no afterlife. We have one lifetime to appreciate the wonders of the universe and for that he is greatfull so does that not contradict the religion side? I dont doubt your insight on the matter i just dont understand how this would make a case for the catholic point of view i must be missing 90% of the puzzle like always

The one thing thats keeping me positive at the moment is the fact that TPTB are putting so much effort into suppressing the human spirit that there must be something more to it which they are well aware of.

In the mindset of the reincarnation deal i was lead to think that the secret is we are god our own god that is, able to control and create our own reality, eventually to an enlightened state of a 5 dimensional being.

Im rambling a bit now and im not sure what im trying to say but its nice to hear opinions from others and how they are dealing with things and their take on the whole deal. One thing i am certain of is whatever comes after death does not scare me anymore and in a strange sort of way im excited and truely ready for it.

When this happens ill haunt my partner till the point she posts a paranormal video about the afterlife for you all to debunk

Originally posted by Zecharia
reply to post by schuyler

 

I understand what your saying up to the part about catholicism, Hawkings basically said there is no god, no creator, no afterlife. We have one lifetime to appreciate the wonders of the universe and for that he is greatfull so does that not contradict the religion side? I dont doubt your insight on the matter i just dont understand how this would make a case for the catholic point of view i must be missing 90% of the puzzle like always

My problem for not being clear, not yours. I should have defined my terms better. I perhaps should have used "catholic" with a small "c" or perhaps "catholic-like." My contention is that (big-S) Science and the Catholic Church are very much alike in their approach. They are both dogmatic, both very conservative, and both have a priesthood that uses esoteric language to retain power. They are both "the Establishment."

On the Catholic side the Church insists its interpretation of Christianity is absolutely correct, infallible, even. Though they will tell you Jesus is coming back, they reject reincarnation "for the rest of us," and interpret the afterlife in terms of Heaven, Hell, sin, and guilt. They manage expectations and have amassed vast wealth and power over 2,000 years. Indeed, you can make a case that the Catholic Church IS the Roman Empire. Their use of Latin is not what it was after Vatican II, but you still must go to the priest for an absolving of sins. The idea that Jesus might have been married, especially to Mary Magdalene, send them into tissy fits.

On the Science side you have people who insist their version of Reality is absolutely correct as well, proven even. They reject ANY notion of an afterlife or reincarnation, God, etc. out of hand and have a tissy fit if you bring it up. Their language of mathematics is esoteric, not understandable to most of us, and thus they maintain a priesthood via PhDs and academic appointments. They manage expectations. After all, they are "smarter" than us.

On the one hand I don't blame Science for rejecting many religious beliefs. Their stance is that if you can't see it, then it does not exist. The problem is, because they are so steeped in a physical world, they won't even look for anything else. They expect us to take the eleven dimensions of Super String Theory on faith (sound familiar?), because the math works out, but consider an afterlife impossible simply because they have not yet discovered it.

The evidence we have for reincarnation and an afterlife is overwhelming. There are tens of thousands of cases of people reporting what they have seen, or reporting communication between realms, but it's all anecdotal and subject to fraud and religious interpretation as they co-opt the issue. Science gleefully points out the fraud and explains more mundane cases away with vague allusions of "DMZ affecting the brain" as answers to why people see what they do.

These two interpretations need to merge. We need to develop communication with the afterlife--reliable technical communication, not through human mediums, which attracts the Sylvia Browne's of the world. I built a modern version of Spiricom myself. Either it did not work or I did not have the patience to make it work. Nevertheless, I believe we will have to have a breakthrough along those lines to move forward. It may be that the barriers in place are intentional, and that we are not meant to break through them, but if that is true then we are condemned to more of the same, and the Universe is cruel indeed,

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by MamaJ

 

I feel like an old soul, but I have a baby face and my ideas are radical, and since I think in "impressions" (what I call concepts without names) I have a difficult time vocalizing my thoughts a lot of the time, so no one takes me seriously. It makes for a lonely existence.

edit on 1-10-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

I couldnt have explained it better myself. I feel just like that.

As I see it, do an evil deed today and you might benefit in the short term, materially. In the longterm perspective the Universe will balance everything and you accumulate black karma while doing an evil deed. That black karma has to be paid back by suffering in the future(and more suffering the longer you wait to pay back). So wisdom means haveing a lonterm perspective, realizing that it is ok if I don´t get anything in this lifetime since I will receive my due rewards afterwards.

reply to post by Gaussq


I agree..... Karmic debt is always paid. It's evident.... How the reward is played out is all about perspective, one can say.

If I take something that does not belong to me I have received a reward that is not rightly mine to receive in the first place. Karma says that I reap what I sow....

Wisdom does come from a Knowing.. (Nous)

My actions today has an effect. Which do I choose?

The way I think of it is like this....

Our bodies are like a robot. And our soul/spirit is an electrical charge or perhaps a battery that powers that robot. Although, we drive the body, the body is not fully who we are, if that makes any sense.

When we die, our energy (soul/spirit) is left and goes elsewhere. You can think of this energy as conscious thinking, perhaps...we are lost into another realm of consciousness filled with others of the same vibration, level of consciousness. We then choose to return to another body if we wish. Or we can continue in a spiritual form.

reply to post by resuwen


That's my same line of thought on the subject. Maybe the reason we don't understand the soul is because we don't understand energy yet.