Rosemary Ellen Guiley 12.07.29

[SPX]

My experience involved me and another person seeing the figure of an old lady in a place late at night where no old lady should have been. It was so out of the ordinary my friend and I ran to where she was as she headed up a lane that was a dead-end. She went into the shadows at the end of the lane and when we caught up she was not there.

That's a trippy story. Thanks for sharing. And I do believe that it happened like you say.

Of course we run into the questions like, what does it mean? How did it happen? Was it really a ghost or was it perhaps psychic residue of some past event? Were you MEANT to see this or was it purely coincidental, an accident?

I really wish I knew. Or at least had some hope that there was a way to figure it out but I'm not even sure we have that.

BTW, considering your experience, I REALLY think you might be interested in the Ghost Hunters book that I linked to above. (No, it has nothing to do with the show, and nothing to do with modern "ghost hunting.")

 

[SPX]

No need to argue, you've made my point for me beautifully.

Now now, no need to be mean. . .

 

[SPX]

I think the vast majority of people who believe in the bible do so because they were brought up to believe in it.

I think this much at least is undeniable. Even if one day the Bible were proven to in fact be what it is claimed to be, there's no denying that most people believe in it because they are culturally conditioned to do so and not because they have done a serious study of the evidence both in favor of it and against it.

I think we all believe a lot of things because of cultural conditioning, though. In most of the Western world most people don't question the belief in free will, or the superiority of democracy or capitalism either. That's not to say that these things aren't superior--though I'd argue that there's no such thing as "objectively superior" when it comes to these kinds of things--but it is to say that most people never stop to really think about them in an unbiased way.

 

[trainedobserver]

I think this much at least is undeniable. Even if one day the Bible were proven to in fact be what it is claimed to be, there's no denying that most people believe in it because they are culturally conditioned to do so and not because they have done a serious study of the evidence both in favor of it and against it.

If the culture doesn't equip or allow you to even formulate the correct questions to ask about objects of worship like these enshrined texts that are considered to be sacred, then you are doomed to accept nonsense as established fact. The obfuscation of reality is so complete that most do not realize that it is the texts themselves that are being worshiped and obeyed rather than an entity or entities who they believe inspired their creation.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Yeah, I hate hearing people say things like 'it tells us X in the bible...' or 'well, in the bible it tells us...' and there seems to be this automatic acceptance that if it is in the bible it must be true. But how can that be so if it is not the only 'holy' book in the world and millions upon millions of people do not revere it in any way?
It does often seem that people use whatever is in the bible as their guide, instead of maybe thinking 'well what is the right thing to do' and maybe just having faith in god directly, skipping this book that for most of it's existence, was only in the hands of the educated and the rich. Most people could not even read the bible themselves and had to rely on what a priest or whatever told them from the bible. And there is the translation problem too...

 

[starise]

trainedobserver- I'm not sure where you are trying to go with this. When it comes to evil entities I am on the offensive. I stand by my statements and they do not contradict .

goggsmackay- Christianity is experiential based on knowledge first and then acceptance and a kind of enlightenment ensues. So any person from the outside will always question the reality of it because they are not in it. I'm not saying that a light bulb all of a sudden goes on in your head , but a person starts to move away from the old world view based on personal revelations.You really do see the world differently and more accurately. One train of thought has a Christian becoming a Christian simply by accepting a set of beliefs. No different than any other religion if that were true Christianity. True Christianity sees the inner man changed aside from any rules. The rules are only secondary and few. Men made up and added hundreds of rules that never were part of Christianity.The steps involved are first knowledge,desire, acceptance and finally illumination. Some people have the knowledge but not the desire to know more. Some people have the desire but refuse to accept. God won't force Himself on anyone. Getting from the outside to the inside is all the difference.

Are all non-Christians in the world wrong? Both Christians and non-Christians are wrong . The Christians are Christians because they are forgiven.

There are plenty of Christians in other countries who believe in the Bible in places where no Christianity exists. In many cases it was the sheer emptiness and vaccum that caused them to cross over.I know what empty is and I know what full is when I see it/know it and alternatives are sedatives to reality at best.
I agree that many people raised in homes that call themselves Christian are merely doing lipservice. This has been one of the great confusions of the 20th century. That the term Christian is us used and abused so widely. The original term was given to us by the early Romans as a kind of derogatory term. The term still doesn't sit well mainly because of the meanings ascribed to it by others and the individuals given that name that were surely not Christians. Protestant/Catholic religious is what I would classify most people who are called that and any of those can be blatantly non-Christian.Christianity is about the individual not the group whatever it might be.Many people want the best trappings of the name and refuse the rest of what is involved.In that sense a half Christian is no Christian at all.

 

[SPX]

I've long used what I call the "communicational efficiency" argument in explaining why I think that the very idea of an all-powerful god entrusting the very secrets of eternal life and death to a book is kind of silly. It goes thusly:

It is logical to utilize the most efficient means of communication to impart a message to another person. After all, you want your message and thoughts to be understood as accurately as possible, and you want to get it to them as quickly and easily as possible.

For instance, if you want a friend to know something important, you go and speak to them directly in a two-way conversation that allows for follow-up feedback and clarifications. Only if this is impossible do you ask someone else to pass the message along, or send them a letter or an e-mail or a text message, or use smoke signals.

If wanting to transmit a message to a large number of people, then we might use the radio or television, or write a book, or a mass mailing campaign.

Unless there is some good reason not to, we always use the most efficient means of communication and only fall back to a less efficient means if there is no other option.

In all things, we use words, whether written or spoken, instead of gestures and pantomiming, once again because the use of words is more efficient. If telepathy, on the other hand, were an ability that we all possessed and could transmit the very thought and emotion that we wanted to convey then surely we would do that instead of using words.

Basically, we do the best we can to communicate within the limitations that are imposed upon us. But God has no limitations. So if he wanted all people to know something--something that supposedly is essential for a relationship with him and to enjoy enternal life in heaven--then why would he use such an inefficient transmission system as missionaries and a book? Why would he not use the most direct method of communication, which is personal, direct, undeniable revelation? Since he's God, after all, this should be no problem and then there we be no question as to who he is and what he requires of us.

 

[SPX]

.
goggsmackay- Christianity is experiential based on knowledge first and then acceptance and a kind of enlightenment ensues. So any person from the outside will always question the reality of it because they are not in it. I'm not saying that a light bulb all of a sudden goes on in your head , but a person starts to move away from the old world view based on personal revelations.You really do see the world differently and more accurately.

You see though, everyone who is a dedicated believer says the same thing about their own faith. I have heard Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, Muslims, Jehovas Witnesses, Hindus and Buddhists speak so passionately about how theirs is the true path and how they are totally convinced that they have found the truth in a sea of lies. They can't all be right . . . right? But I bet you think you're special. YOU have perceived the true way of things. YOU cannot be deceived or even simply mistaken. YOU have found the light and have no doubt whatsoever about that.

Well okay. You certainly have a right to believe what you believe. But for someone who has been there, done that, and had just as much conviction as you do, your sense of certainty comes off more as naivete.

 

[trainedobserver]

trainedobserver- I'm not sure where you are trying to go with this. When it comes to evil entities I am on the offensive. I stand by my statements and they do not contradict .

I am saying there are no "evil entities" other than human beings for us to fight and that those who think they are fighting such things are actually shadow boxing.

... Christianity is experiential based on knowledge first and then acceptance and a kind of enlightenment ensues. So any person from the outside will always question the reality of it because they are not in it. I'm not saying that a light bulb all of a sudden goes on in your head , but a person starts to move away from the old world view based on personal revelations.You really do see the world differently and more accurately.

As a former believer of some years myself I can attest to the absolute fallacious nature of the above statements. Furthermore, there is simply no way someone entrenched in the superstitious and irrational world-view of any flavor of Christianity I am aware of, could be considered as seeing the world "more accurately."

In my extensive experience with the practice, what actually happens is an emotional appeal is made to the prospect where eternal life is offered or a way to avoid eternal damnation presented (the welcoming of a human sacrifice in their stead) through acceptance by faith (a belief not based on evidence and often in spite of it) of events, circumstances, and personalities beyond the prospects ability to reasonably confirm as true at the time the invitation is made. It is usually only after this initial emotional experience that the initiate gains knowledge of what he has gotten himself into.

Key to all of this is the prospect's acceptance of whatever text is being presented as the word of the one true god thereby enshrining the text (which he is most often largely ignorant of at this point) as a surrogate for the divinity allegedly being worshiped and followed, enduing the text with an irrevocable authority.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Eloquently said Rick. Of course, you could equally have said it is indeed a pile of shite.

For me the simple fact is this: either the bible is the word of god, the true and only word of god. Or, it is not. I choose not and by doing so I put the bible in with many other books in the class called fiction.

All the religious texts worldwide are by their nature mutually exclusive. The only circumstances then that even can make sense are that either one of these books and only one is correct or alternatively, none of them are correct.

Many people will say on this forum that we should all run a mile from anyone claiming to have all the answers or 'the truth'. None of us being omnipotent so none of us can know all the answers. For me the exact same thing goes for religion. I don't have any problem with people believing certain things and having faith. All of that is fine. It is only when someone claims their religion or holy book is 'the answer' or 'the truth' , then that is what riles me up no end.

So as much as I dislike all religions, I have zero problems with someone's choice to practice. Just please, please don't try tell me you know you are right.

 

[trainedobserver]

All the religious texts worldwide are by their nature mutually exclusive. The only circumstances then that even can make sense are that either one of these books and only one is correct or alternatively, none of them are correct.

I don't think that is necessarily true about all them mutually exclusive, but it might be safe to say most are.

Whether the alleged communication comes in the form of a message spelled out on a Ouija Board, automatic handwriting, channeling, materialized documents like the Urantia book, or divinely inspired writings or utterances of prophets, they are all most likely, in all probability products of the human imagination rather than evidence of mysterious invisible entities.

 

[starise]

Sorry guys you obviously have not really experienced what I have or you would not feel the way you do. You missed a step somewhere. I can just as easily say that you are naive for believing that there is no exclusive true path. Just because you haven't found it does not mean it doesn't exist.

Trainedobserver salvation should not be offered as a way to avoid damnation as it sometimes is. It is first and foremost a cure for our condition called sin and sent through love.

Let the Bible defend itself. Here are few quotes. " The fool has said in his heart there is no God". I'm not calling you a fool. If you don't believe in a God the Bible calls you one. Jesus said, " I am the way the truth and the life, noone comes to the Father but by me." He didn't say he is A way or A truth or A life. He is THE way. Noone can come to God almighty but through Him. Again if you choose to deny this you choose to deny God. Here is another Biblical quote- " Because they chose not to include God in their knowledge He gave them over to a reprobate mind". In other words you have chosen to have blinders on your eyes.

It isn't about contention and hate. " For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

Goggsmackay-" So as much as I dislike all religions, I have zero problems with someone's choice to practice. Just please, please don't try tell me you know you are right."

Why not? I'm right and I know it.

 

[Brad]

Related to this Zozo stuff mentioned in this episode, I have a question hopefully someone may have an idea about. Specifically, is there a similar situation present in whatever non-English language Ouija-equivalents there may be?

 

[trainedobserver]

I'm right and I know it.

Not-knowing is true knowledge.
Presuming to know is a disease.
First realize that you are sick;
then you can move toward health.
Lao-tzu

You have for whatever reason (culture, family, chance) chosen one god to worship from the thousands available. I would challenge you to examine how you arrived at that god's temple rather than some other.

The various paths to the gods or "enlightenment" are all dead-ends. There is no path to take; we are all already there.

 

[starise]

Trained observer- I really hope you don't believe that. It is a popular train of thought in our culture.I'm sure you will find a lot of buds to agree with you on it.
Unfortunately it is wrong. The real God is plural."let US make man in OUR" image". I worship God Almighty who is composed of the Father,Son,and Holy Spirit. So I worship the "godhead" or all of those.
He has said, "I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end".
Of those who choose other paths it is said that they have" given themselves over to DOCTRINES of DEMONS " because they would not accept the truth.
The truth will set you free but if you continue to follow lies you will never find it.
Back on the subject of the ouija. I have a direct spiritual communication any time I want it called prayer, and I know who I'm talking to.

 

[Konrad Hartmann]

Related to this Zozo stuff mentioned in this episode, I have a question hopefully someone may have an idea about. Specifically, is there a similar situation present in whatever non-English language Ouija-equivalents there may be?

I suppose one could use a ouija board for any language provided that words in that language may be rendered with the "English" alphabet. Wiki does mention Chinese Fuji (planchette writing) (Fuji (planchette writing) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

As an aside, I am sometimes curious that alleged EVPs in the U.S. always seem to be in English, and never in other immigrant or native languages. Unless I just don't know about other non-English EVPs.

 

[wwkirk]

Probably EVPs occur in the language of the country they are heard in. In Sweden they would be Swedish, America English, etc.

I found this: "Most EVP sounds are in short, abrupt segments, usually the length of a word or phrase; sentences are uncommon, but not unheard of. The segments are frequently heard in the language of the listener."--I admit that is peculiar. Its as though its a partly psychic phenomenon.

Read More: http://ghosts.monstrous.com/electronic_voice_phenomena.htm#ixzz23zZsAfA0 ​

 

[Brad]

That Chinese method seems pretty interesting. That said, it seems the run of the mill Ouija board would work for plenty of languages without needing modification, and only a few additions/subtractions for plenty of others. Just here in the US there are plenty of Spanish speakers - it seems there should be some anecdotes related to Spanish language results. I think looking at differences, if any, could shed a lot of light on if there is something to Ouija results. And then, if there is a constant "zozo" entity, how does it come across in other languages - is it a different name? Does it approximate its name in appropriate sounds (or is it doing that in English)?

As for EVPs, it could just be that English speakers don't notice any non-English that comes across.