Was "I" created?

[QuestioningMind]

When you say "I", what does that mean?

How did you come into being?

What makes you able to speak?

Where do your thoughts come from?

Is your human body like an avatar you play in a simulation game or is it the real deal?

What is controlling your human body when you're not aware that you're alive which is the time you're sleeping or unconscious for some reason?

Is your mind more important than your body?

When you say "I", what does that mean?

It means ME... the individual who is providing this response.

How did you come into being?

I am the product of a sexual union between my parents.

What makes you able to speak?

A sufficiently developed brain and vocal cords.

Where do your thoughts come from?

They are the result of neurons firing within my physical brain.

Is your human body like an avatar you play in a simulation game or is it the real deal?

No, it's as real as it gets.

What is controlling your human body when you're not aware that you're alive which is the time you're sleeping or unconscious for some reason?

The exact same physical brain that is in control when I'm awake.

Is your mind more important than your body?

They are of equal importance... neither would exist without the other.

 

[MNoBody]

Don't believe those liars of the visible world you're observing within your own created part of the MAIN consciousness. When you experience the death of your body, you will instantly awaken on a new earth which means the information that changed this earth the last thousands of years will be deleted from the program. You and your created partner of the opposite sex will enjoy an eternity of personal dreams together. It will be like going to the movies but not just observing them, playing in them as a 3D experience. It is impossible to observe any image in 3D but because of motion, it appears we're in a 3D world.

been there and back again, which makes this round very surreal...
And my experience does not match with your conjecture.
just saying

 

[blü 2]

So why should I believe your theories with absolutely no proof whatsoever?

I take it you don't read the science news, or so much of it as relates to evolution, biochemistry, medicine, and brain research? One good place to start might be Mariano Sigman's The Secret Life of the Mind which has the subtitle, How our brain thinks feels and decides. If you do, it may occur to you that there's abundant evidence-based research out there, and you can follow it in the science news. (I like Science Daily.)

I know exactly what I AM

I take it you're a fellow example of H sap sap. Many but not all of us are interested in the question, what's true in reality? And for that you need reasoned enquiry, of which scientific method is perhaps the most famous subset.

and I can use an analogy to help you understand it but only if you believe. Belief is what it takes to understand something that is completely invisible like our MINDS.

The mind is not 'completely invisible'. It's an imprecise but socially useful word meaning some or other particular set of our brain functions, generally including consciousness, memory, speech and comprehension. The study of the human brain is, as I said, a work in progress, but it's far more advanced than you seem to think.

It has taken me ever since the beginning to learn what I AM and now since I know, there will be an end to this part of the program.

What did you have in mind to achieve when you started this thread, then?

 

[Brian2]

So again, im not sure how one would study it, I mean they have tried the experiment with OBEs where they put a note on top of something which can only be seen if you would have an OBE and as far as I know, no one have been able to do this yet.

There are verified stories however of NDE ers being able to tell verifiable things, even out events in adjacent rooms.

You also have people telling similar stories of how they have left their body and in great details can describe what they have seen, but when they check the actually things they were describing it weren't even close.

It is interesting that some are spot on and others aren't. imo the spot on ones verify consciousness and thought without a body however. Sounds like spiritual existence to me, and that also leaves the door open for spiritual deception.

But as I see it, if consciousness or beings/souls or whatever is flying around out there, I don't know how one would prove it.

I don't know that it has to be proven. There is evidence for it however and maybe as time goes by the idea might become more firmly established in science just as the idea of dark matter etc has. Personally I don't see the need for such things as souls, spirit etc to be scientifically proven, but it is a bonus that at least there is the evidence for them.

Also at the time of pregnancy, at which time does this consciousness enter the egg or is it the fetus stage or during birth?

If we get life from our parents then the obvious answer is at conception, but of course it would be a completely different sort of consciousness I imagine because we do not know what things are nor do we have language to itentify things and we probably would not be able to differentiate where one thing stops and another thing begins.
I guess a human soul may begin just as a life force and gradually develop as the body develops and data and feelings are seen and gradually recognised and organised.

 

[Nimos]

I don't know that it has to be proven. There is evidence for it however and maybe as time goes by the idea might become more firmly established in science just as the idea of dark matter etc has. Personally I don't see the need for such things as souls, spirit etc to be scientifically proven, but it is a bonus that at least there is the evidence for them.

We need proof, because even if all the stories that people are telling is true and close to 100% accurate, we have to be able to eliminate the wrong interpretations of what it is.

If we just jump to the conclusion that it is evidence for souls or spirits without being able to verify it. We have not correctly removed all other explanations. It might simply turn out that our understanding of these events is due to a lack of understanding of brain and consciousness, which have a natural explanation. I wouldn't go as far as to say that this is evidence for souls or spirits, because these terms are extremely poorly defined, to the point where one could argue that they ain't defined at all.

Also one have to remember that not all people experience these things, if I recall correctly, I think he say that around 80% of the cases they examined, do not have any memories or recollection of such thing. Which one could then wrongly interpret as meaning that they don't have a soul or spirit. Not only would that be to draw wrong conclusions, but for certain people, if they are religious and believe in such thing, might have a devastating psychological effect.

Certain religious ideas already fill people's head with a lot of assumptions about hell etc. for which there is no proof, so we don't need more of these.

These events should be studied and approached as any other topic, for which we do not have a clear understanding. But it has to follow the rules of science and simply not be people drawing random conclusions.

If we get life from our parents then the obvious answer is at conception, but of course it would be a completely different sort of consciousness I imagine because we do not know what things are nor do we have language to itentify things and we probably would not be able to differentiate where one thing stops and another thing begins.
I guess a human soul may begin just as a life force and gradually develop as the body develops and data and feelings are seen and gradually recognised and organised.

This is very important as I see it, if we assume that we are talking about a soul/spirit thing and it can enter a human during conception, it would mean that in fact empty souls are flying around out there and is ready to possess a humans. Alternatively it could mean that it is created during conception, which would also means that such thing must exist in either the egg or the sperm cell, or a mixture of both. Which one would assume would be possible to examine.

It also raises some questions in regards to why a human body is needed in the first place for these souls to possess and why they only really seem to express themselves during NDEs, I do think he mention that people which meditate etc. can have sort of similar experiences. But one could wonder why souls are not more interested in expressing themselves as they currently seem to be, meaning that all people ought to meditate at a much higher rate than they are. But rather people seem a lot more interested in mundane things, like spending most of their time going to work, which seems rather pointless in regards to a soul or spirit. It also raises the question of who or what is actually using the brain, since it seems to not really be needed for anything in regards to thinking or doing things, like the people telling they communicated with relatives, flew above the hospital, color blind people suddenly seeing colors and so forth. If the brain or our senses are not needed to experience the physical world, then life as we know it seems rather pointless. Also who is it that get sad, when we lose a relative? The soul must know that it is not really the one dying, yet most people react to the loss of a loved one, so maybe the soul is suppressed, but then again it makes little sense, if that is the one that survive and have to continue "living" on, while the body dies. This whole setup, between soul and body seems very disconnected from each, to the point where it makes little sense.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

When you say "I", what does that mean?

The self. My being. My body.

How did you come into being?

My parents had sex.

What makes you able to speak?

The cognitive faculties the brian provides and the use of vocal chords and breathing. And some network of muscles etc. In short: a biological process.

Where do your thoughts come from?

My physical brain.

Is your human body like an avatar you play in a simulation game or is it the real deal?

All evidence ovewhelmingly suggests it is the real deal.
No evidence suggests otherwise.

I have no reason to doubt that evidence, which is what we collectively refer to as "reality".

What is controlling your human body when you're not aware that you're alive which is the time you're sleeping or unconscious for some reason?

My human body does not require "controlling" to keep still.
Having said that, the same thing that controls the body while awake: the brain.

Is your mind more important than your body?

To an extent.
Some body parts are vital. Too much damage to the body would kill the mind. It's called dying.

 

[Brian2]

We need proof, because even if all the stories that people are telling is true and close to 100% accurate, we have to be able to eliminate the wrong interpretations of what it is.

If we just jump to the conclusion that it is evidence for souls or spirits without being able to verify it. We have not correctly removed all other explanations. It might simply turn out that our understanding of these events is due to a lack of understanding of brain and consciousness, which have a natural explanation. I wouldn't go as far as to say that this is evidence for souls or spirits, because these terms are extremely poorly defined, to the point where one could argue that they ain't defined at all.

Also one have to remember that not all people experience these things, if I recall correctly, I think he say that around 80% of the cases they examined, do not have any memories or recollection of such thing. Which one could then wrongly interpret as meaning that they don't have a soul or spirit. Not only would that be to draw wrong conclusions, but for certain people, if they are religious and believe in such thing, might have a devastating psychological effect.

Certain religious ideas already fill people's head with a lot of assumptions about hell etc. for which there is no proof, so we don't need more of these.

These events should be studied and approached as any other topic, for which we do not have a clear understanding. But it has to follow the rules of science and simply not be people drawing random conclusions.

If you think science will automatically get it right OK. To my way of thinking NDEs certainly show consciousness outside the human body, as evidence in many of the cases studied. Science will/has come up with hypotheses to deny or approve of this idea and these will be accepted and/or rejects on the basis of the current scientific paradigms. If not other evidence of spirit exists then that one will and has been automatically rejected by many scientists,,,,,,,,,,,who no doubt may have their own biases for doing that also.
People like me will make of the evidence what they will and many will of course be wrong, that is the nature of humanity.

This is very important as I see it, if we assume that we are talking about a soul/spirit thing and it can enter a human during conception, it would mean that in fact empty souls are flying around out there and is ready to possess a humans. Alternatively it could mean that it is created during conception, which would also means that such thing must exist in either the egg or the sperm cell, or a mixture of both. Which one would assume would be possible to examine.

I see our human life as coming from our parents and from conception, what is there is an undeveloped human. I don't know if this could be examined by science. Then again I guess it already has been examined and science agrees with it but science has a materialistic bias and so everything is examined in this light and even consciousness is seen as an emergent property of what science is actually able to study.

It also raises some questions in regards to why a human body is needed in the first place for these souls to possess and why they only really seem to express themselves during NDEs, I do think he mention that people which meditate etc. can have sort of similar experiences. But one could wonder why souls are not more interested in expressing themselves as they currently seem to be, meaning that all people ought to meditate at a much higher rate than they are. But rather people seem a lot more interested in mundane things, like spending most of their time going to work, which seems rather pointless in regards to a soul or spirit. It also raises the question of who or what is actually using the brain, since it seems to not really be needed for anything in regards to thinking or doing things, like the people telling they communicated with relatives, flew above the hospital, color blind people suddenly seeing colors and so forth. If the brain or our senses are not needed to experience the physical world, then life as we know it seems rather pointless. Also who is it that get sad, when we lose a relative? The soul must know that it is not really the one dying, yet most people react to the loss of a loved one, so maybe the soul is suppressed, but then again it makes little sense, if that is the one that survive and have to continue "living" on, while the body dies. This whole setup, between soul and body seems very disconnected from each, to the point where it makes little sense.

We certainly are material based and that material has life, is alive. All we know is that we are material based until we find out otherwise somehow that this is not so. This may be through faith, meditation, thinking about it, NDE etc. Some people are taught that spiritual things are rubbish and that everything is based on the physical and that science is the only way to find things out, so they may never find out otherwise.
We are a whole being and our spirit, the life that is connected to our body and develops into a proper soul, experiences the world through the body and develops through that experience imo. Maybe a spirit without having the initial experience in a body would be less able in some ways and more able in others. It seems to me that it is not our computer (brain) or our feelings which for example keep an overview of things and make choices even if we follow advice from these other aspects of our being.

 

[night912]

How can '' I '' be wrong once I fully understand what '' I AM ''?

How can you be right when you don't fully understand what "I AM"? Until you fully understand what "I AM," you are wrong.

I can use an analogy of a human built AI system that speaks. You can hear Apple siri, but you will never ever see her face unless of course they build a robot and it appears her voice is being spoken through it's mouth. Then you can look at the face of the robot and believe the robot is actually speaking to you.

You are wrong because you don't fully understand what "I AM."

 

[Nimos]

All we know is that we are material based until we find out otherwise somehow that this is not so. This may be through faith, meditation, thinking about it, NDE etc. Some people are taught that spiritual things are rubbish and that everything is based on the physical and that science is the only way to find things out, so they may never find out otherwise.

Science have nothing to do with what people have been taught about spiritual things and therefore it doesn't matter. Even a person, which is religious will have to do science the same way as everyone else.

Can there be other ways of determining truth than science? Sure, why not.

But it is definitely not faith as that is the opposite of seeking knowledge. But science work with the natural world and is capable of examining NDEs, but as with many other things, it takes time to figure out and as I said, our knowledge of how the brain works might not be at that level yet. But science doesn't prevent you or anyone else to find other methods of dealing with truth. But the fact is that we do not have any way of dealing with the supernatural. And don't get me wrong people try... Look at this:

The Ghost Meter has been calibrated to ignore the extremely subtle EMF emissions surrounding the human body, yet is still sensitive enough to detect the small, distinct, erratic EMF energy fluctuations frequently found at reputed haunted locations. The Ghost Meter provides three corroborating indicators of EMF emission strength. A needle based display, LED lights, and an adjustable audio signal. The response time of this meter is excellent, easily outperforming more expensive EMF meters. It can also be operated in silent mode so it doesn't interfere with EVP (Electronic Voice Phenomenon) recordings or distract other investigators during an investigation. Compare the value this meter offers compared to other brands. There is no other offer that comes close to providing these levels of features and performance for the price. You've seen television ghost hunters use similar detectors. Now you can get your own and start investigating the unknown.

Please note: this product is intended to measure electric fields, and does not detect nuclear radiation.

You can buy that on Amazon and it is apparently some advance thing, even though it can't detect nuclear radiation, it can still detect ghosts. Im pretty sure this device capabilities of detecting ghosts is not based on a scientific study. And out of 1300+ people, this got a rating of 4.4 stars out of 5... that is freaking impressive for a ghost detection device, if you ask me.

Do you think a device like this is a good way to study the supernatural? And why do you think science think that it is not. Because if it did we would stumble around in devices like these, claiming to be able to do stuff, for which there is no evidence.

We are a whole being and our spirit, the life that is connected to our body and develops into a proper soul, experiences the world through the body and develops through that experience imo. Maybe a spirit without having the initial experience in a body would be less able in some ways and more able in others. It seems to me that it is not our computer (brain) or our feelings which for example keep an overview of things and make choices even if we follow advice from these other aspects of our being.

What is a spirit?
What is a soul?

These are not well defined terms and therefore impossible to examine.

Lets say, im willing to help you study what these are, despite my lack of knowledge about them. So what are the current definitions of a spirit?

Spirit definition
the non-physical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul.

1. We can probably examine the emotions of a person, and then we have the soul....

Soul definition
the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal.

1. So we have to study that which is immortal... and spiritual..

Spiritual definition
relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

1. So something that affect the human spirit (emotion) and soul which is something that is immortal.

So here we have a place to start... "So how do we demonstrate that something about humans is immortal?"

Personally, I have no clue... but maybe that device from Amazon can help?

So you see the issue, how is science going to approach something like that, we have nothing to examine or to even get us started. And its fine that we can say what we believe a spirit or soul is, but unless we can demonstrate it, it is useless.

 

[Brian2]

Science have nothing to do with what people have been taught about spiritual things and therefore it doesn't matter. Even a person, which is religious will have to do science the same way as everyone else.

Science has something to do with what many people believe about spiritual things because science according to many is the only way to find things out and science says it cannot find a God or spirit. This no doubt is a misunderstanding of science and it's capabilities by many people and is a justification for their lack of belief by others.

Can there be other ways of determining truth than science? Sure, why not.
But it is definitely not faith as that is the opposite of seeking knowledge. But science work with the natural world and is capable of examining NDEs, but as with many other things, it takes time to figure out and as I said, our knowledge of how the brain works might not be at that level yet. But science doesn't prevent you or anyone else to find other methods of dealing with truth. But the fact is that we do not have any way of dealing with the supernatural.

It's true that science does not have a way of dealing with the supernatural but "science" has a way of telling things to the public which look like a denial of the supernatural. No doubt this "knowledge" that many in science claim is no more than "faith" in a materialist view of the world, since science, as we agree, does not speak to the rightness or wrongness of the supernatural.
Faith therefore can have something to do with what we call our own knowledge, world view, but what we put our faith in is not always correct of course.

You can buy that on Amazon and it is apparently some advance thing, even though it can't detect nuclear radiation, it can still detect ghosts. Im pretty sure this device capabilities of detecting ghosts is not based on a scientific study. And out of 1300+ people, this got a rating of 4.4 stars out of 5... that is freaking impressive for a ghost detection device, if you ask me.

I wonder what the rating related to.
The add stays just clear of telling outright lies about what the product actually can detect. It's a gimmick product but no doubt people get sucked in. I have a couple of those in my garage for checking if the electrical power is connected to wires.

What is a spirit?
What is a soul?
These are not well defined terms and therefore impossible to examine.
Lets say, im willing to help you study what these are, despite my lack of knowledge about them. So what are the current definitions of a spirit?

We don't know what spirit or soul really is in physical terms, because it is not physical. Jesus said that His words were spirit and life. This shows the non material nature of it.
Science does come up with materialist ideas about consciousness and life however based on a materialist viewpoint. It does not mean that science knows what the hell it is talking about but that does not stop people from believing the products of science without realising they are just believing the products of a materialist worldview.
When I write this sort of stuff sometimes I feel like the people who said that nothing heavier than air would be able to fly. (I guess they had not checked the weight of birds).

So you see the issue, how is science going to approach something like that, we have nothing to examine or to even get us started. And its fine that we can say what we believe a spirit or soul is, but unless we can demonstrate it, it is useless.

That is true but it does not stop scientists from speaking as if the supernatural and God has been shown not to be real. They end up deceiving people into thinking that science knows all this in this modern age.
However regarding NDEs, they certainly show consciousness and so life that can float around outside the human body and report verifiable things from even the next door room. If this shows something about how the brain works ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,wow, what a wonderful brain we have. It is almost as if the existence of spirit is real. But of course some scientists will never say this.

 

[Nimos]

Science has something to do with what many people believe about spiritual things because science according to many is the only way to find things out and science says it cannot find a God or spirit. This no doubt is a misunderstanding of science and it's capabilities by many people and is a justification for their lack of belief by others.

Well then people misunderstand what science is.

Science is the best method we have for finding out things about the natural world from an as objective point of view as possible. The very idea of including God or the supernatural into science would ruin it. Because we do not know what it is supposed to be. The biblical God is capable of anything according to those that believe in him. Yet they have not demonstrated this to be true... so how could you expect a person, which might believe in another God to accept that? And how would you expect me to accept it as an atheist?

How would you even address an experiment, if you have no clue if God is fiddling with it? That is why God or the supernatural is not part of science. It doesn't care about God or the supernatural and is not meant to address it in any way, shape or form.

Religions have existed for thousands of years and absolutely no method for testing or verifying the supernatural have ever been produced. People got sick and tired of not knowing things and not being able to get any answers. Which ultimately led to science emerging, because some people, figured out that just guessing left right and centre didn't produce any answers in regards to what people experienced and observed in their daily lives.

Science is a method of dealing with how things are, for which we have no explanation, it doesn't care about believing in people or feeling sorry for anyone. It is evidently and undeniable that humans make mistakes and draw wrong conclusions, if nothing requires them to verify what they are saying is true.

I have no issue understanding why some people think that science is "against" God and the supernatural, but it is not an issue with science, its a problem with people, trying to make science do something for which it have nothing to do with.

And again, where do you suggest that science should start examine the supernatural?

It's true that science does not have a way of dealing with the supernatural but "science" has a way of telling things to the public which look like a denial of the supernatural.

What do you expect? We haven't seen anyone rise from the dead? We haven't seen anyone fly to something call heaven of a winged creature? We haven't seen anyone driving a cart in the skies drawn by goats and causing lightning?

What should a scientist or any person, looking at these story go tell people... "We haven't observed any of these things, and have no clue how to examine them.... but don't worry they are probably as likely to be true as not, have a nice day."

That would be insane, if you could read such conclusion in scientific journals constantly.

Again, you have that person that have offered people a million dollars if they can demonstrate any form of supernatural abilities under controlled environment and yet not a single person have been able to do it. That would be a very good start to get science interested to begin with. But constantly and time after time, people have been shown to be frauds with no abilities whatsoever.

I wonder what the rating related to.
The add stays just clear of telling outright lies about what the product actually can detect. It's a gimmick product but no doubt people get sucked in. I have a couple of those in my garage for checking if the electrical power is connected to wires.

This is about people believing in things for which there is no logical reasons for. It is not a way to demonstrate truth and its fine, if people are not interested in truth and enjoy finding ghosts and believe in them.... but the moment they claim that these are real and argue that others should as well, then they better damn demonstrate it, it is not to much for any human to demand of someone else

We don't know what spirit or soul really is in physical terms, because it is not physical. Jesus said that His words were spirit and life.

And how do you know that Jesus is right? and not the ancient Norse:

The vættir (Old Norse; singular vættr) are spirits in Norse mythology. The term can be used to refer to the full cosmos of supernatural beings, including the álfar (elves), dvergar (dwarves), jötnar (giants), and gods (the Æsir and Vanir).

That is the whole issue here, how do you demonstrate that Jesus is right and not the Norse, or any of the other old religions that claim something else about what a spirit is, because im pretty sure, that Jesus did not mean that a spirit was a Giant or a dwarf?

When I write this sort of stuff sometimes I feel like the people who said that nothing heavier than air would be able to fly. (I guess they had not checked the weight of birds).

You are correct, but the difference is, that we can test that. And some did and they made a flying machine

That is true but it does not stop scientists from speaking as if the supernatural and God has been shown not to be real.

Most scientists are atheists, that is no secret... and most will also say that they do not see any evidence for a God or the supernatural.

However regarding NDEs, they certainly show consciousness and so life that can float around outside the human body and report verifiable things from even the next door room. If this shows something about how the brain works ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,wow, what a wonderful brain we have. It is almost as if the existence of spirit is real. But of course some scientists will never say this.

I have no clue, how this works, I haven't studied it. But for instance, people that are blind are also reported to dream in pictures with colors and being able to draw fuzzy images afterwards. How on earth is that possible? Yet we simply can't jump to the conclusion that this is then spirits or souls, until we have enough evidence to draw such conclusions.

 

[rational experiences]

O God the stone planet, once a hot dense state of burning mass/gases.

Space, the discussed male thesis/scientist quotes cooled the mass....as mass burning became less and less present. So more and more space opened. Opening of space, or spatial expansion he quotes cooled.

For space is empty first. Space owns burning hot dense mass within it. How does/did space cool unless it opened into more space. Science quotes this as expansion or increase of space. But also quote expansion is the hot dense state.

Words therefore misquoted teach falsifications, actual relative self human quoted teaching.

O God one, stone ended/complete and owned its self image. O a planet.

How do we know this relative God image O planet is real? We have seen it in machine communicated feed back. We are not there in God O the one stone themes about relative self owned highest body/form. Image of God first O a planet.

Then that O stone mass, erupted as it cooled outside, but still owned hot dense state within.

Males in science the inventor of it, quote, how the heavenly gas/spirit got conceived, from the God O stone entity/Creator into the womb of space. Space cooling continually as mass is removed, space expanded and became bigger. A greater larger space owned increased cold conditions, gases changed.

Quotes and taught us all....how the Immaculate highest gas/spirit non burning body existed. Quotes as a living human, that existence of highest gas state keeps us all safe. EVENing sky he quotes.

Then he also quotes...but the sacrifice of the Immaculate gases gives us life he quotes, so he said the day was the dies. The day dying owns our living history as a sacrificed gas/light body.

But we live in a Holy water microbial life, in a water mass. Our Heavenly spirit body, is not the Immaculate history, for that history or looking back story is quoted to belong to the body of the stone O entity as One God.

As a matter of fact.

History O God the Earth stone...was Sun blasted big banged attacked. Why our sun is smaller than other suns. Blasted all the natural planets and converted their forms.

Origin GONE. First relative science advice to self.

Second science advice, the crystalline Earth mass fusion with a non burning gas atmosphere Earth O origins, melted and fusion and holes opened in earth. Science quote as recorded in AI male human messages says....I told everyone that water owning the microbes as a water mass ownership had to seal off the irradiation opening of the Earth stone fusion.

So the stone O God body had microbes put inside of its mass. Water then evaporated off the face and only remained in deep hollows on the Earth face.

Growth from the God O stone as a history, microbes into the ground organics.

Still the same form today as it always has been.

Our human form/image is not in the image of God O the stone planet.

So you would ask what proof do we come from spirit?

Because we are not God as the proof.

Ask science of the occult, how come religious science brothers you always believed in spirit, as astute reasonable scientific enquired life minds and experiences?

Because when they held an unnatural and artificial machine constant. Seeing melt is where a machine comes from...and they artificially had to use water to cool it.

Why it is not owner God. It is human designed only for human thoughts.

Due to one fact......I saw and witnessed evil spirits manifest in a machine held constant reaction/condition. Which proves that the creation historically came from a place of spirit.

What other conditions prove that thesis?

Space is an empty separation, so what did it separate itself from?

Burning proves it owns the continuance of separation.

Gases released out of a sealed O ended body, refilled back in space, where once the origin body, not owning any space once existed in its mass. Space became the place of separation from the origin spirit form.

Why do humans quote the thesis worded thought eternal term? Because we came out, were released by the spirit being, in whose image spirit self separated living body already existed. Seeing the spirit self who we copy as a lower form, human caused the status separation by research.

Gases filled back in the empty space. Eternal then space as the hole the separation. Gases filled back in space, contacted the eternal. O God the planet history therefore forced the natural eternal spirit to release more of its spirit and the conclusion is karmic.

The spirit self who originally researched change to its body inherited its life. Humans who learnt their own lesson, never apply conversion or else you inherit a lowered life form. And still to this day has not stopped what the original eternal spirit caused...CHANGE.

Therefore when science by machine caused the ground fission, seeing today prove in science to use the ground fission machine condition in a new controlled science form.....knew that they changed O God Earth stone radiation and it recorded a higher natural original human bio life into owning a fission ground Image.

Why machine to machine can use image and recorded image and voice and sound from machine to machine. Whilst all natural bodies already own natural formed self physical or mass physical presence.

O image of planet Earth stone....owns its own transmitted image.

Human male science machine inventor encoded the atmosphere to form his image also....by machine conditions.

Human thesis I once was a living eternal natural spirit. The larger bodied eternal spirit being is the body I came out of. Already owned and living. I simply converted my body into a lowered organic life form. As I live inside of water mass. I freely move around, proving that I moved into the atmosphere as a pre owned spiritual life form.

Science argument, occult argument versus spiritual science argument actually.

Occult argument in science quotes O God the stone mass created our spirit life form.
Spiritual science quotes, we came out as a pre owned spirit from the eternal body. Did not evolve through a burning history.

Proof, science owns and built a machine that uses and converts into the burning history. It produces a nuclear fuel in conversion as proof we did not come from a ground/dust fission reaction of the stone.

Other proof of spirit came about by occult machine causes, who conjured a spirit presence out of mass, by a constant fixed state. Which proved that it came from the eternal body mass that was using it originally as its own language. Why humans quote conscious ideals that speaking caused God to be released from its origins O as mass bodies.

 

[Tambourine]

When you say "I", what does that mean?

A focal point of internal and external processes, energy, and matter both living and dead, encapsulated in the notion of personal, subjective identity; an attempt to fix what is constantly changing in a manner that delineates a distinction between an internal self and the rest of the world; a subject; myself.

How did you come into being?

I made myself up, just like all the other things I talk about.

What makes you able to speak?

Other people.

Where do your thoughts come from?

A combination of electrical signals reacting to external and internal stimuli in a complex nonlinear fashion and is still only barely understood.

Is your human body like an avatar you play in a simulation game or is it the real deal?

What is controlling your human body when you're not aware that you're alive which is the time you're sleeping or unconscious for some reason?

My body is "controlling" itself.

Is your mind more important than your body?

I don't think the two are separable.

 

[Brian2]

I have no clue, how this works, I haven't studied it. But for instance, people that are blind are also reported to dream in pictures with colors and being able to draw fuzzy images afterwards. How on earth is that possible? Yet we simply can't jump to the conclusion that this is then spirits or souls, until we have enough evidence to draw such conclusions.

I get a bit overwhelmed by posts and lack of time to answer them so have decided to answer this part of your post about NDEs, which seems to be a place where science and the supernatural can be seen to overlap and would be a good place for science to allow the supernatural in.
The thing imo which shows consciousness outside the human body is the Out of Body Experiences with verifiable reports from those experiencing them.
It is certainly not just the way the brain works, it has to be some invisible living thing outside the body that was able to experience these things and report about them in their verifiable reports. To me this is plain common sense.
Just an acceptable of the evidence for what it is should be enough after a while to convince the most hard nosed skeptic of the reality of spirits even if that is not acceptable at the moment in the science we have.

 

[Nimos]

It is certainly not just the way the brain works, it has to be some invisible living thing outside the body that was able to experience these things and report about them in their verifiable reports. To me this is plain common sense.

Yes, but common sense is not something that is very useful in science to draw conclusions, if that were the case, we would still think that Earth were the centre of the Universe.

 

[Brian2]

Yes, but common sense is not something that is very useful in science to draw conclusions, if that were the case, we would still think that Earth were the centre of the Universe.

Surely common sense is rational thinking about the evidence at hand.
If someone is in one room unconscious and with a brain that is not functioning but is able to say on waking, what happened in another room, is there any rational thinking about human consciousness that explains that event without saying that the consciousness at some point was in the other room while the body was not?
I hear that nothing science has come up with so far is able to explain all the NDE experiences, yet of course there is resistance to the idea of consciousness outside a physical body/spirit. I guess "science" wants to keep thinking about it and doing more tests even if rational thinking of the evidence tells us we won't get a different answer than consciousness existing outside the physical body. Breaking the basic rules of science, materialist answers, should take more time than accepting other things. I wonder if it will take as long as the Church took to accept that the scriptures were speaking about the earth being the most important place in the universe instead of the centre of it physically. Actually I don't even think the Bible tells us that the earth is the centre of the universe in any way. That was a matter of interpretation just as the materialist paradigm is also just a matter of human interpretation.

 

[Nimos]

Surely common sense is rational thinking about the evidence at hand.
If someone is in one room unconscious and with a brain that is not functioning but is able to say on waking, what happened in another room, is there any rational thinking about human consciousness that explains that event without saying that the consciousness at some point was in the other room while the body was not?
I hear that nothing science has come up with so far is able to explain all the NDE experiences, yet of course there is resistance to the idea of consciousness outside a physical body/spirit. I guess "science" wants to keep thinking about it and doing more tests even if rational thinking of the evidence tells us we won't get a different answer than consciousness existing outside the physical body. Breaking the basic rules of science, materialist answers, should take more time than accepting other things. I wonder if it will take as long as the Church took to accept that the scriptures were speaking about the earth being the most important place in the universe instead of the centre of it physically. Actually I don't even think the Bible tells us that the earth is the centre of the universe in any way. That was a matter of interpretation just as the materialist paradigm is also just a matter of human interpretation.

But I don't get why it is so important to jump to conclusions? let's say that "science" said... "We can't explain it, but whoever feels like it, are free to conclude that NDE's are a spirit/soul experience, and should be allowed to publish it wherever they feel like it. Have a good day."

So now you are here, then what?
It doesn't make us any wiser or knowledgeable about what they are or how to study them? At best, you would have the same scientists studying it as you have now... that is the best case scenario. The worse case would be that you would have religious motivated "science" claiming how NDE's were prove for their specific religious view. And while these people fight back and forth, throwing claims in each others faces. No, scientists would dare getting back into in this field, doing actual science, because it would be so contaminated with people not following any rules whatsoever about how to study things, but merely what they think they should be.

Honestly, I have no clue why you can't simply accept that science doesn't know the answer, and that it is in fact what the conclusion currently is.

 

[Brian2]

But I don't get why it is so important to jump to conclusions? let's say that "science" said... "We can't explain it, but whoever feels like it, are free to conclude that NDE's are a spirit/soul experience, and should be allowed to publish it wherever they feel like it. Have a good day."

So now you are here, then what?
It doesn't make us any wiser or knowledgeable about what they are or how to study them? At best, you would have the same scientists studying it as you have now... that is the best case scenario. The worse case would be that you would have religious motivated "science" claiming how NDE's were prove for their specific religious view. And while these people fight back and forth, throwing claims in each others faces. No, scientists would dare getting back into in this field, doing actual science, because it would be so contaminated with people not following any rules whatsoever about how to study things, but merely what they think they should be.

Honestly, I have no clue why you can't simply accept that science doesn't know the answer, and that it is in fact what the conclusion currently is.

I accept what the conclusion currently is. How can I do otherwise.
I don't think that the acceptance of consciousness outside the human body, the obvious answer to the observations, is going to means that science would be overrun by religious nuts however. All it might do is open science up a bit to new areas of research. Religious nuts would continue to fight as per usual, but outside of science.
It could be a threat to the world view of materialist naturalist however, or at least broaden the ideas or definition of that world view.
NDEs have been studied for a while now, or data has been collecting for a while, 50 years at least if Pim Van Lomel is anyone to go by. There are millions of observations and science has not yet even come to a point of accepting the evidence, that consciousness can exist outside the physical body.
Maybe it's time to at least to do that. I of course realise that it is a slow moving area because of the world view of scientists who might be studying NDEs and may be unwilling to change world view and just say we don't know, or worse, say we have theories about brain activity or human psychology, which is all it could be. The truth imo is that neuroscience and psychology are areas of research which or course have to be looked into, and no doubt have been, but which rationally cannot give an answer to observations from clinically dead people of events that happened while they were clinically dead and even in other rooms etc.

 

[Nimos]

All it might do is open science up a bit to new areas of research.

The point im trying to get across is, that there is nothing to open up for in regards to science. If we don't have any way of measuring consciousness outside a body, then there is simply no way to examine such claim. So it doesn't matter, if some of them or you and me can agree that it is the absolutely most logical explanation.

Science can be expanded into new fields and have been for a long time, so that is no issue. But if there is no method, theory or anything to support it, then it simply won't work. Otherwise it would just be a new astrology.

NDEs have been studied for a while now, or data has been collecting for a while, 50 years at least if Pim Van Lomel is anyone to go by. There are millions of observations and science has not yet even come to a point of accepting the evidence, that consciousness can exist outside the physical body.

You have probably had dreams that you can remember when you wake up, right?

And in some cases they can be extremely real to the point where you might have to double check something just to be sure that it was not real. I have had dreams taking places in areas and houses, which I have never been in and most likely doesn't even exist, yet these places were created as if they were real. Other times its areas, which I know very well and know that some of the things which appear in the dream doesn't exist. Yet the people I might be with in the dream exists in real life, but it's not like during the dream, the people appear real and the other things doesn't.

Obviously, this is not like NDE, but the mere fact, that our brain can construct imaginary things during sleep, basically out of the blue, which you at least would think should require a bit of conscious thinking or effort/concentration to come up with when you are awake, is no issue during a dream. But I wouldn't draw the conclusion that my consciousness were outside my brain, looking up all the details somewhere and constructing these areas, so I can dream about them.

My point is, that a person might believe they see the roof of a hospital, because the brain is capable of constructing something which appears to be accurate. But I don't know how precise and how many details people that report NDE is capable of giving and how well they actually match reality when they are doubled checked.

And all these things need to be as precise and documented as possible. At least, that would be a good start.

The NDERF website has received additional case reports of near-death experiences among those legally blind. For illustration, the following NDE happened to Marta, a five-year-old blind girl who walked into a lake:

“I slowly breathed in the water and became unconscious. A beautiful lady dressed in bright white light pulled me out. The lady looked into my eyes asked me what I wanted. I was unable to think of anything until it occurred to me to travel around the lake. As I did so, I saw detail that I would not have seen in “real” life. I could go anywhere, even to the tops of trees, simply by my intending to go there. I was legally blind. For the first time I was able to see leaves on trees, bird’s feathers, bird’s eyes, details on telephone poles and what was in people’s back yards. I was seeing far better than 20/20 vision. (This is not her original explanation and get an error when I try to open it.)

The issue for me with these explanations, is the lack of verifiable details. Im not saying she is lying and it is obviously not easy for a 5 year old to explain. But what leafs are we talking about? from what trees? What color were the feather? What did she see in people's backyard? Did the lady have a name, what did she sound like, maybe try to recreate her voice? etc. And how does that match up with what is actually near the lake. Because if she said, the birds feathers were all bright and white and no such birds live in that area, then something doesn't match. But right now, there is a very non detailed description and nothing telling whether or not the information were verified or how well they matched.

And it were basically the same in the lecture you posted earlier. A lot of example, but nothing tangible in regards to how well it actually matched reality.

To me, these things should be as well documented as humanly possible, especially because, we have no other way of approaching this topic. Therefore in my opinion, any story those that study this area post, should be followed, with a very detailed explanation or transcript of the interview with the NDE person. And not just a story about what people saw or experienced. It is not very useful in my opinion.