Messages

quote:Originally posted by jc84corvette

I think going into a BH is harmfull. BH's do not allow light to escape. Your astral body is made up of light along with other things. Right?

Good question. Furthermore, since energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed forms, thinking an astral self being lost in a black hole would seem to indicate that whatever is responsible for its projection would not be returned to its original "state".

There's much that exists in theory, even relativity does break down upon approaching a BH's naked singularity. Quantum mechanics, which directly contradicts relativity at some points, also proves to be true. The only assumption that seems safe to make is that there are unknown variables in what we're discussing. Science is far from perfect and many of the theories we hold as facts today may be disproven tomorrow. A complete science of physics would be absolute without any exceptions from the calculations.

Personally, I'd be more interested seeking other intelligent life forms ... perhaps acquiring knowledge that would actually be more useful than the incomprehensibility of exacting what I tend to believe is beyond the grasp of a human brain. Meta-physics (beyond physics),the term, itself, refers to laws that cannot be extrapolated through known physics. If we could equate it, it would no longer be considered metaphysical.

quote:Originally posted by LogoRat

Kinda funny, the energy that the blackhole produces while spinning around.....
Wouldnt that kill itself, if the blackhole swallow everything, then it would swallow that energy too and collaps.

Black holes are quite interesting creatures. I believe you may find the concept intriguing if you research. They can't collapse because they are already collapsed. They don't generate energy (at least nothing that is measurable on the outside of it). The only thing that could be considered as energy comes in the form of a vacuum and gravitational attraction (based on its mass/density). Their existence isn't exactly proven, but rather logically deduced by the orbits of the bodies surrounding them, spiraling inwards. What we call a black hole is actually a phenomena that must exist in some manner but breaks down the very principles which *prove* their existence as one approaches its naked singularity. I might also add that physics also breaks down upon trying to understand the big bang; everything can be calculated up until the moment of the big bang.

Perhaps this is because time (which is not a constant) occurs at different rates, contingent upon the gravitational attraction of the "space" its being measured in. Gravity requires mass to exist. Hence, before the big bang there was no mass, thus, no time.

I've read on this board that someone re-entered the self at a different time. My best advice is, if possible, to master time travel and understand it before embarking on a journey that defies everything we know about physics. I can tell from your words that your understanding of black holes is rather incomplete. Would it not be wise to understand the beast you wish to challenge? To equate this with the afore mentioned analogy of cliffs ... before jumping off a cliff, one could at least peer over it to see what's below. There is a fine line between being bold and reckless.

I'm NOT telling you what you should do, merely stating my approach to reasoning about two fascinating concepts. After all, that is why we are all reading this discussion.

good luck no matter what you choose.

LogoRat, maybe there is a good reason why there's a lack of responses to people who actually projected to a black hole ... like, umm, because they can't. I don't know anyone who fell into a lava pit and lived to tell their tale, either. The benefit of discy=ussion theories in a forum is to arrive to a logical colclusion based on what is known or deduced. The bottom line is every choice you make is your decision, and the consequences, if any, will reveal themselves upon your endeavours.

I once had a cat that refused to acknowledge the dangers of on-coming vehicles habitually. One day she choose to test fate. I miss her.

I'm inclined to agree with Hephaestus, and fail to see what part of the presented statements could cause you to question intellect.

The one question I do have is regarding the effect of a black hole stretching over a significant distance with a graduating attraction. Perhaps if one were to approach it within a safe distance, they could notice an impact on the self without it being a point of no return. then again, maybe not.

I'd also like to mention that the person who intended to try it had someone else use his account to post a message saying he was in a coma-like state. I find that (using the same account) incredibly suspicious, but the turn of events also makes the thought of an attempt slightly less promising.

hello, goingslow,
To focus on our common ground, I think sharing blood as a recreational pass-time is silly. Then again, I think dancing is sillier and watching sports is the silliest of all things.

You are more than entitled to think it stupid (as others are entitled to judge the things you do). Bringing opinion to a public forum is more than mere opinion, but can be somewhat demeaning ... not to me, personally, but others who take it more seriously.

For those who partake in the blood-letting for the fad of it, that's fine by me, as long as they don't impose their rituals on others who aren't interested. The same goes for genital piercings and body art. Not everything needs an excuse, lest we'd all be proven to be pretty silly more often than we'd like to admit.

I look forward to future potential debates, goingslow, thanks for the indulgence. []

Hello, Fenris,
I have an extreme attraction to the arts of debate, and my stances often wreak of my own ego. I apologise for my somewhat aggressive manner of arguing. Reading my last post, I see myself as coming off in what seems to be a very defensive manner. This is a fault of mine, for I am not feeling the least bit slighted as much as an opportunity to indulge in something I enjoy ... debate. I have quite a bit of "the devil's advocate" in me and just like to reason for the oppsition (whoever it may be). I would also say that I'm prone to tailor my suppositions in a manner that would appeal to another's ego, hence, the art of debate.

So I apologise to anyone who I may have unwittingly antagonised with my articulation. I am somewhat ego-driven in some areas. We all are human, and fallable as such.

I've enjoyed this, and if different perspectivees on this matter help make us (both sides) more empathetic, then all is well that ends well. []

quote:Originally posted by goingslow

whats different about dressing like all your friends?  If not your friends then 1000 other people?

You tell me, you ARE one who slammed a group of people because of their choice of clothing. I was hoping you'd explain it. I see a horrible lack of creativity in looking like everyone else. There IS something wrong with it when YOU confuse your preference with what is "supposed" to be.

quote:
I personally dont care what people wear.. I dont wear a tie etc but I dont go out of my way to dress in a trend that is "different".  I dont think clothes really define a person, but in a big way the goth people use clothes to define how "different" they are.

You're right clothes don't define a people, so please refrain from derogating people because of the clothes they choose to wear.

quote:
It just doesnt make sense to me.. if clothes are no big deal why take the time out to look so different.

 

Umm, the same reason people get dressed up for weddings, or put on cologne to go out ... because, well, we like it (I use the word "we" grudgingly because I am not truly "goth"). Do you shampoo, condition, tan, diet, etc.? We each do things to look a caertain way, just because someone does things in a manner that is not common does NOT make it wrong.

quote:You're not different because of how you dress its your ideas and personality.  I dont believe in focusing so much on the physical in order to show how unique you are.  And I think that is what a lot of these people are doing.

Well, your argument is against many centuries of uniforms (see the schooling system, military, police, security, nurses, etc.), even what is considered "fashionable" is, in a sense, a uniform with a little variety. I agree with you, but I like Halloween too mcuh to have to wait til its annual arrival to be "allowed" to dress in a way that appeals to my preference/vanity.

quote:
However, the topic was about the vampire thing which is stupid.  NO matter how many historical cases you can state where it has significance that has nothing to do with the scene the original post was talking about.

It has EVERYTHING to do with why the vampire folk lore began to begin with. It's not my fault today's society leanrs much of its values from hollywood themes derived thereafter. Just as there is historical value in why men traditionally keep their hair shorter than women. EVERYTHING has roots in history.  

quote:I dont think the whole vampire thing is worse than any other "sub culture" or mainstream society.

Yet, only one was insulted by you in this thread. Hmmm

quote:I just dont think they can claim to be so different.  Its all the same whether you chose to try to fit in with mainstream society or some underground one you're still just trying to fit.  Just call it what it is instead of trying to make it into some big statement (not aimed at you but some of the documentaries I have seen where the kids talk about how they are unique and different and want to show that.)

Note that I initially alluded to the fact that a sub-culture should not be judged upon its fanatics. That was pre-emptive, lol.

quote:No need to get defensive.

There was no need to be offensive in the early portion of this thread, either. But ...
My friend, I am not defensive, but I often get that. I love to argue intelligently, and will always defend someone who is being bashed merely because others don't agree with their choices. You have your rituals, we all do, and you prefer some looks to others, and will adhere to your preferences. Great, may you always do that, but may you not so hastily demean others who do the same, just to a different fashion than you prefer.

quote:Even though we enjoy interacting about Astral projection doesn't mean people here are not going to have opinions.

Very true, and this is mine. []

Oh yeah, two other notes. If some goths truly thought they were vampires, they wouldn't need to purchase fake fangs (mine are natural, lol). And I'd also like to stress that Anne Rice did NOT invent vampirism, and I, personally, think she is a horribly over-rated author whose profession was piggy-backed off of her husband ... and I live in the same city as she (New Orleans). At least Brian Warner (a.k.a. Marilyn Manson) moved to L.A.

Hey, clandestino,
My agitation caused by some comments in this thread was not caused by you. I actually agree that slitting wrists for the sake of sharing blood to be a bit much, at least for me. I know others who have done that and it just doesn't appeal to me. The only blood I've ever tasted and liked is my own, and I never took part in a ritual for
blood-letting, then again, there are a lot of rituals I think are silly, from a variety of religions.

As for religious cannibalism, I may not remember the exact names of the civilisations, but many of these people inhabited what is called
South America today. The strange thing is that these people were not dependent upon hunting, but vegetation, which led to their beliefs that tended to be morbid or violent/ The thought was that since the life of a plant ended upon the approaching winter, and was replaced by a new one come the spring, that one had to offer its life for the other to be born. As if, there were a certain amount of energies that would inhabit one body each. They also tended to sacrifice people at altars to gain favour from the ghods. One tribe I read about in history practiced feeding on their dead, which was reported by a European explorer at the time. The problem is that the explorers brought foreign diseases that the natives' bodies were not prepared for since immunity develops through heredity and environment. Well, needless to say, after one body died from fever and was consumed, the whole lot of them acquired the same sickness and all died.

The existence of diseases such as AIDS could very well do the same thing to people practicing drinking the bodily fluids today. Then again, it can also happen through another exchange of fluids called sex.

Just to get back to the original topic, people who share my appeal for goth styles mostly do it because they like the way it looks, period, the same reason so many people wear those horrible khaki pants and god-awful ties. Just because most people opt to be less creative and follow trends set by the mainstream does not give them the right to ridicule those who crave something a little different. The worst comment I've seen (for me) in this thread was reducing "goths" to attention-seekers. I don't know about the others, but one benefit to dressing goth is that a lot of people leave me alone, lol. Everyone seeks attention, that's natural. After all, why would anyone post to a forum if they didn't want some attention? Furthermore, the reason people conform to what is considered normal fashion is also for reasons of attention, not wanting to be seen as different, but a "team player" ... to be accepted.

Well, thanks for the exchange. It was not your curiosity that bugged me (curiosity is always a good thing) but the following slams that came afterwards from a couple different people regarding others derogatively just because they are a little "different" than what's considered normal.

It's called "goth" and VERY few people who are goth think themselves vampires. I like the fashion, music, and demeanor of the style.
I thnk it's downright sad that some people, especially here, speak condescendingly about a sub-culture. Remember, believers in what is freely spoken of here would once have gotten people burned for witchcraft.

For the record, I wear black clothing, will wear makeup when clubbing, and am similar to what is considered gothic when I go to certain places. Basing some of the opinions I've read here reminds me that prejudices aren't merely linked to skin, nationality, or theology, but also upon a person's attire. Sheesh.

PS ... as with any group of people, in "goth" ... there are fanatics, don't base an opinion of a group upon its extreme. Normal is boring.
BTW, the Catholics have a little ritual where they symbolically eat the body and drink the blood of Christ!? Many beleif structures incorporated the consumption of a body to immortalise its energy. However, many of these civilisations died out from disease ... because they consumed an infected body.

quote:Originally posted by Mirador

You are an anarchist, a subversive element. Your kind should be unmasked. And if I have to traverse the Astral from end to end, from Brighton to Melborne, I will find you. I recommend you gather all your ki weapons and whatever you are ready to confront me with, I'll search for you and I will stamp you out.

Mirador

Please try stamp me out as well, I could use the exercise. [}:)]

quote:Originally posted by Nay


I have found that if I just acknowledge negative things like that and then just as quickly ignore them...they go away.

I wonder if that tactic would work on Mirador. I hate to insult someone but I have only seen that name attached to counter-productive postings. I've only been here a short time but it takes him/her very little time to make a negative impression. It's actually sad.

Tippa, that must have been devastating. I have ideas on what to say/suggest, but my better self thinks I should keep quiet while someone more familiar with such an experience can offer insight/advice.

I don't know how much attention that will get in this thread, since the subject and your post's content don't exactly match.

May I humbly suggest that if not many people see your post, if you could copy and paste it in a new thread entitled likewise?

Welcome to the forum.
... and I feel for you, for whatever little that is worth.

Heh, I'm going to try and edit this response to where the forum can tell who said what. Since it's really a quote-to-quote discussion it could be hard to follow otherwise.

quote:Originally posted by Mustardseed
Answer :Well thats OK then, as your interpretation is set as being a hostile act you then "retaliate" as you do. I dont count it agression but rather enjoy listening to someone who has it "all figured out" it dosnt bother me and I personally like to ask questions and debate and so on so ...to each his own. The problem that started the thread was that the "victim" was not really sure what he was feeling and though leaning towards it as being an intrusion he still felt strangely attracted

.

Mustardseed,
This answer of yours marks our difference. I don't enjoy someone who confuses ignorance with wisdom. If a conversation on such a topic were to happen by accident or circumstance then it wouldn't strike me as having it pushed on me. I actually have a friend who has turned to christianity and likes to discuss it with me, but he also constantly gets offended whenever I mention the abuses throughout history. He's not pushy, but a friend, so he gets sincere conversation/debate.

quote:Answer :Well I do apologise english is not my first language the consequences I was talking about was more along the line of exess stomach acid stress irritation or whatever. It seems that the times I get upset at people and being a Scorpio that does happen with a alarming frequency I tend to get myself all ....out of sorts. Thats the consequences to me.

There's no need for an apology. Your english is far better than many people who speak it as their native tongue. I just answered the only interpretation I could make of the "consequences". Now that you've clarified what you meant, I'd say that I'm more prone to getting stomach acid if I were to tolerate what strikes me as someone being pushy. My assertiveness is actually brought about from not wanting those consequences. My current method has no such consequence. []

quote:Answer: Really ....I met plenty of people of all ages (incl. some hot to trot boyscouts ha )who did not want to take no for an answer. Actually I find they all go away if I yell at them as well as when I treat them with respect. Maybe allowing them to save face so to speak.

I actually thought of this sub-topic before reading your response. There could be pushy boy/girl scouts that I feel would warrant less courtesy in reactions. I never encountered such, but if I did, I would likely handle it the same manner as I do telemarketers. I'd say that I don't accept these types of calls/visits and hang up the phone or close the door. Another reason why I don't consider them as intrusive as a preacher intent on converting is, well, because cookies aren't personal, my beliefs, are. Preaching to me is an attack on my beliefs because of 1) the condescension of the presentation and 2) people were never burned at the stake or drowned because of the type of cookies they prefer. Religion is a fanatical political construct when organised, and history has proven such organisation to be fatal to countless people. More people were killed in the name of another person's god than any other thing. Heh, it's still happening.

quote:Answer : Well either you are not married or newly married or married to a very nice person. I have been there more than once and I will tell you a secret......sometimes I do not see it as a welcome intrusion but wish she would ..go fish [] Dont tell my wife

You got me, lol. I'm not married, though had a 10 year relationship with an extremely negative person (and tons of short-term flings before that). I do know how exhausting it can be to try and be the good lover/spouse when things are at their worst. I lived up to my role very well (better than the situations deserved), but not living with her and knowing I could walk away at any time may make all the difference in our perceptions of marriage. You see, I never felt trapped and refuse to share my residence with another person ... that's why I have cats instead of kids. They're intrusive but never once asked to borrow the car or for me to run errands. BTW, the fish might find a dangling hook from your wife a bit intrusive is she did "go fish". []

quote:Answer: Well to each his own hoever there are ways equally effective and a firm no I am really not the least bit interested with a smile will in my opinion work as well . I have brought up 8 kids through teenage years and found firmness and respect kindness without being a sissy to work well and I think we can agree that a teenager who wants to borrow the car to go on a date is as intrusive as it gets ..!

Teenage kids wanting something from me ... now that's down right scary to imagine, lol.

quote:Answer: Well I cant say I dont know what you are talking about I live in Miami and a certain firmness is a help at times ha I guess it is a matter of a balance.

Balance is always the key. []
I still don't consider what I do to be the least bit hostile, though. Trust me, certain reactions that I do consider hostile pass through my mind at times, so my choice is merely what I consider to be assertive with a mild form of entertainment to make it worthwhile.

quote:Answer: Well thanks if it was a compliment being nicer though I doubt it ha anyway I dont feel nicer at all but rather in this thread tried to set an ideal that I would like to adhere to but often fail in. More along a philosofical discussion with an ethical suggestion. I do have an explosive temprament and have spent a lifetime trying to get it under control.

Calling you "nicer" was, indeed, a compliment. I am unsure (within myself) how nice I can be without becoming prey to someone not so nice. I see others in this forum even nicer than I consider you, signing off with words of love to strangers. I don't wish to be that nice, but, if sincere, it does strike my curiosity.

It's ironic, your nicer and say you have an explosive temper. I'm not as nice and don't really ever lose my temper. Hmmm.

quote:Well yea you do seem a bit sensitive but I am not offended in a way I think we may be more alike that we think. Thats just my intuition. I did enjoy your post and it has given me some things to think over, so thanks for that. Agree to disagree sounds fine to me.

I don't consider myself so sensitive, but I do admit enjoying debate a little too much. The problem with debate is that I sometimes end up unintentionally offending the person because they've failed to win me over (convert) or my words come across as a bit cold. I have a very cold-logic (without emotions) in the Stoic sense, that I try to keep completely separate from my emotions. The two are opposites, after all.

As for us being more alike than we think ... perhaps. We are both Scorpios, lol.
Seriously, I know my past experiences have a lot to do with why I choose to react as I do, and that may make all the difference in our disagreement. These incidents of my pre-adult life are nothing I wish to display on a public forum, but they result in who I am and what I will and will not tolerate from what feels like parasites trying to feed on me.

I also enjoyed this rapport, thus marking my weakness, my tendency to love to debate with a challenging opponent. Preachers aren't very challenging and definitely not open-minded in their conceited view of divinity. As for the two of us, Mustardseed, I think we may find ourselves in a few more enjoyable debates in the future. Perhaps I should make a trip to Miami, dress up like a preacher, and ring your door-bell in this disguise. []

A group of people who try to feed their egos by preaching derogation of another ethnicity (there's only one human race, scientifically) is the epitomé of pathetic. Ones who think themselves superior would sensibly focus on their own abilities, not persecute others.

The KKK is what you get when you take a bunch of idiots with one common factor who have absolutely no reddemable quality. Hence, they use their common trait as if it actually made them better.

ALL men (people) are created equal, but some of us "become" better than others, not born tha way.

If there is a superior race, my bet is that it isn't human at all.

quote:Originally posted by beavis
Theoretically, it doesnt matter how much force you use, the result will always be a velocity less than light, because as you get close to the speed of light, time slows down and your force has less effect. If you want to make a physical object go faster than light, you will have to bend the spacetime directly instead of using einsteins laws.

Not to mention the space occupied by a mass increases the faster it travels. If I recall correctly, a solid object moving at the speed of light is theoretically impossible because the space required to do this would occupy the entire universe.

It is important to note that the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics both hold true, but contradict each other. A workable solution cannot have any contradictions with other facts. Hence, our understanding of physics is extremely incomplete, at least until a theory can be invented that unifies the two.

quote:"As for a definition of a black hole I found an excerpt that gave an interesting description:

The interiors of black holes are so infinitely dense"

Wrong. Black holes have finite mass.

Agreed. A black hole is supposed to grow as it absorbs matter.
Furthermore, it is said that the mass of two individual black holes increases to a size greater than the sum of their mass once they combine. Logically, this means that the universe will some day be one massive black hole. (shrugs)

quote:Originally posted by chill

Hey Frère, I believe in God too. I don't ever talk about it though, because there is nothing I can say to support my belief, because my belief is just a belief, it's faith-based. Nothing more, nothing less. I can readily admit that it's based on  NOTHING but faith. Maybe it's a just another form of mental insanity

Those words are the absolute best encounter I've had in reading theological arguments as of late. Faith IS a personal thing, period, not a political structure or dogmatic mandate. If you find your faith in an external entity, or other representation to instill the same, more power to ya, just don't impose it on other people's beliefs and THAT IS PEACE to not have to feed the ego with conversions.

FYI, I believe Jesus existed and was enlightened, yet, I am not christian. I believe in a concept of a collective god, yet, am not religious. The bible (whatever bible it may be) represents, to me, an interpretation. This interpretation may or may not be yours, it isn't mine, though my personal belief shares many of its principles.

My quote regarding religion is that I have nothing against it, but nothing for it, either. Faith is either personal or does not exist. And, I must say this, the bible is a book with no special powers in it. If it serves as a conduit to what you seek, that is its importance. It is a subjective issue, not objective, and should not be presented as something it simply cannot be. Forcing it as if it were objective is why it has left such a sour taste in many people's minds (including mine).

BTW, I also wonder about my sanity, but, well, I've concluded it's my reality and isn't contingent upon social acceptance to exist. I just know the difference between what is subjective (my interpretation of reality) and what is objective (the narrow scope of what can be agreed upon by most within the limits of common abilities). Faith ... it was never meant to be objective, lest it would be called "fact" instead.

PS ... and don't any of you biblers "bless" me ... I take that as insulting as you would if I said "may the icons on your desktop lead you to divinity" ... it insults my intellect. Thank you ... long live the icons' pixels. []

quote:Originally posted by Mustardseed

Well then maybe we should define this guys behaviour first. You call it "pushing" his beliefs, I would call it sharing his experiences. others call it other things.

An unwelcomed "sharing" in a manner that is intimidating (the exact behaviour discussed initially) is "pushing" one's beliefs. I honestly fail to see any other interpretation, but I'll take you on your word.

quote: Maybe it is your inate stubbornness and you have every right to behave in any way you choose but I think that you will also admit that you will have to pay the price and suffer the consequences.

That was an odd statement. Yes, I have every right to maintain my peace of mind, and no one should try to assume the right to deprive me of that. I'm uncertain of the "consequences" of which you speak. Since, to me, peace of mind and light entertainment are good things and have no downside ... do you mean "damnation" or something as a consequence? If that's the case, then, no, I fear no consequences. I turned away from such mythology based on my beliefs.

quote:How about a child who is trying hard to sell cookies or something, is it also permitted to "swat" such pests.

Not at all, for the said child will go away when you say "no thank you", pushy preachers don't. (Note I keep using the word "push" because non aggressive disciples don't intrude on people.)

quote: In my world the two are very alike. How about marriges where one feels unjustly agressed against by a mate "pushing" his/her trip .

A marriage is not an unwelcomed intrusion, there is that little ritual where both parties say "I do".

quote:Where does it stop. Is it our right to swat anyone we "in our infinite wisdom" precieve to be pushy , or is it better to be patient loving kind and ofcourse straight talk.

I don't question the courtesy of your preference, but I fail to see the mentioned examples as even comparable to the pushy converter. So, it stops at people forcing themselves upon another and pester. Patience with such strikes me as passive, for I would not be enjoying the company nor pleased to reward that behaviour with an open ear. The last thing I wish to do is encourage such behaviour.

quote:
I think that those who choose the path of agression an eye for an eye will suffer for it themselves.

Since this primarily seems as a rebuttal to my comment, I'll take it you infer my "kissing of my pentacle" or telling someone I worship the Great Clock Spider to be aggression. I'm sorry you see what I believe is clear-cut assertiveness as aggression. I'm not the nicest person in this forum, nor do I wish to be. I treat people on the basis of intention and effect. I live in New Orleans (U.S. ... though my profile says Canada) and would waste a significant portion of my daily life if I were to coddle every fanatic/scam artist/aggressor I encounter. It's a constant nuisance and I could either get frustrated or handle it as I do. I choose the latter.

quote:
This is in my opinion true in life, in love ,and in any human relation even in traffic. A soft answer turns away wrath and who knows maybe that person can be helped guided or loved through it and realise that his approach is not well recieved.

You're one of those "nicer" than am I. Throughout history people were slaughtered in the name of one man's god or another. Sound reasoning of a fanatical mind is a possibility, as is lightning striking me before I post this message (but neither are likely). I treat all things according to my spectrum of feasible possibilities. This is why I treat pushy people as I do, and I don't talk to chairs or discuss calculus with a newborn child.

I sincerely hope not to come across in this message as being abrasive, for that is most definitely not my intention. I still adhere to my choice and principles completley. In conclusion, I think we may just have to agree to disagree.

Tayesin, I only halfway consider myself a member here, so I guess my opinion only halfway counts, lol. As mentioned, I'm aware that there have always been doomsday prophets. I also must state that I don't consider myself psychic in any developed sense. Yet, I have that gut feeling. Beavis feels like he should do something about it. I, on the other hand, think that there will be a time when I will do something, but it's not called for now. I don't normally share prophetic beliefs with known sages, but this one has had my attention for a few years.
And no, I didn't think the years 1999 or 2000 had any significance, as so many others spoke of in prophecies.

For me, I believe it will happen, but can't prove or disprove anything, so I'll let time tell her tale.

I've come across a philosophical concept involving "gyres", and every 2000 years or so something significant is supposed to happen to be rather chaotic. I don't know what to make of that either. My gut, though, something definitely feels portentous.

quote:Originally posted by pod3

Complain to AOL that their service is being abused,

Who said anything about AOL?
(looks at pod3 suspiciously)[]

In my opinion, the lessons are important, the teachers merely relay the lessons. I wouldn't care who is instructing, I judge knowledge upon its own merit.

As for "satan", the name strikes me as an Occidental invention, and I'm not a believer of the Christian or Jewish theologies. I have no fear of demons or angels, perhaps one day I'll regret my cockiness, but I see little concern for who someone claims to be. Names are irrelevant in my scheme of things, intention is everything. A course is just a course, if you make it out to be more of a conversion to the teacher of it, that's your personal decision.

Seeing other threads on this, I just wanted to state my opinion that the identity in question seems rather moot.

My interpretation of "god" is much like Shorty's (in fact, I usually spell it as "ghod" to mark a distinction with the common name riddles in dogma that I don't support). To me, there are two extremes, some may call this good and evil, but I call it creation and destruction. Those who aspire to create or unite with a collective existence is becoming as ghod, and those seeking the opposite are catering to the urges of the organic or ego-driven, catering to the "beast" within us all.

I was a Catholic, but have left that political religion long ago because made no scientific sense and the interpretations seems so narrowly fashioned. However, I will never again be a "christian" in the normal sense (though I believe Jesus existed as a spiritualist) but, I read The Bible again after my change (using my own translation for words pertaining to the heroes and villains of the book). As a book, not using it for scientific or historical value, it actually instills very good lessons within its context (not literal quotes). Hey, it's a good book if read as a book, but there are better books, IMHO.

I have nothing against "religion", but nor do I have anything for it. It helps some people, there's no harm in that. The harm that exists from religion is what humans have done with it, and do with it even today. Faith is meant to be a personal philosophy and belief structure, not politics, and nevr used to impose on another's rights and liberties.

I do still have a problem with the book of Genesis, it seems that wanting enlightenment is, well, a sin. If that's how it was meant to be, then we're all doomed, lol.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but many people tend to look for things when they encounter info, this can be like a witch-hunt. A quote I use is "if you look for anything hard enough you'll find it, whether it's there or not". I am not a disciple of any particular set of beliefs but my own constructs, but I doubt that someone you lust entering your mind through your ambitions would be classified as a succubus. As for what you may or may not be doing in a state of existence, others are far more qualified to answer than am I.

One other note ... such an encounter with a succubus allegedly leads to an orgasm, and that you'd surely realise. []

good luck

The close relation between the two sometimes makes me wonder how difficult it is to interpret one from the other. I won't be a charlatan and pretend that I've had any of the relatively advanced experiences as I've read about here. Perhaps if I make progress I'll find a more definite distinction between the two. I've had countless strange experiences, but none that I would consider OBE, but definitely altered states of consciousness.

I don't know what you had, Shadow, but my advice is to keep trying and see if anything more conclusive develops. Good luck.

Whilst I can't offer "metaphysical" defenses, I have had a dance or ten with night-terrors in the past. The best suggestion is to realise it is a dream (easier said than done) but if you can, you become the master of the dream's scape, which can be quite fun. Secondly, psychological association. We have something that represents fear, demons in this case. Well, make an association with something that seems to empower you ... a crystal shield visualised around you, a symbol, almost anything. After you have settled with this association, (can be acquired by actively thinking of the association throughout your conscious time), start to include the demons in this association. An example would be to picture the demons, then the protection, then visualise the protection fending off the demons.

I don't know if this will aid you, but it's worked for me. Good luck.

I "feel" where Mustardseed is coming from and agree proper etiquette would be a good solution to a problem. However, perhaps out of my innate stubborness, the path to hell is paved with good intentions. The intention of the preacher may be to "help" but is doing the contrary. Pushing your beliefs on another isn't helpful, it is the epitome of selfishness and narrow-minded-ness. Furthermore, if someone where to harmlessly put such a person in his/her place, maybe there wouldn't have been the subsequent issue that made it to this thread, which obviously played on the poster's comfort.

I hate to say it, but pests are too plentiful in this world to spend time coddling each encountered. I use a mosquito analogy in my reactions to an obvious pest. You can slap it and it bothers no one again or you can trap and move it to another location. The latter leaves it free to bite you again as well as others, and even transmit some diseases (I tend to equate forced conversion as a disease), and breed more of its kind. May the Fates forgive me, but I opt to slap.

What I perceive as a folly in trying to handle such situations with reason is due to the fact that someone with an apparent "delusion of grandeur" is already beyond the grasp of sound reasoning (as all fanatics are), hence, would benefit to learn boundaries of respect through negative conditioning/results. After all, no former method seems to have worked in aiding this preacher to know the difference between a welcomed entrance and a blatant intrusion.

Risu, there is no better choice of a spider to be the Great Spider than the one you linked to. []

(in response to starfox's comment) As for being courteous to a preacher who took the liberty of misusing his freedom of speech to impose on me and my beliefs with the infection/conversion of his own .... my preference is a little harmless entertainment at such a person's expense. Having a faith based philosophy is completely fine, force-feeding it to others is not.
That's just my humble opinion.