Will science ever accept?

[little.nation]

Originally Posted by Petey

One reason science doesn't accept those things is that the explanations of those things do not follow the scientific method. So this would be like asking science to give up its identity. Even "proof" has to follow the scientific method for it to even be called proof. The scientific method provides objectivity; the phenomena science deems true are measurable and predictable. Reincarnation, medium communication, etc. cannot be objectively proven...yet?

Explain the phenomena accurately and there's the proof. The language itself is evidence.

John 1:1 in the beginning was the WORD and the word was with God and the word WAS God

God only SPOKE, and it was (power of the word)

Linguistics is the branch of science (synonym: knowledge) that deals with words. There are lots of branches of science for words, language, communication (semiotics).

Scripture is its own language (exactly like math is a language, law is a language, science is a language, poetry is a language).

Spiritual phenomena can easily be proven simply by using the right words and language.

[dmacfour]

Originally Posted by little.nation

It is very testable but not in such a way that it would lend itself to becoming the property of a college university class of people, if you understand what I'm saying.

God is "testable" through experience, and through prayer. That's why we have what's called Testimony.

One's Testimony is the evidence of God.

Testimony is itself a form of evidence. What one says is evidence that they have certain knowledge. Just look up the word testimony (it means evidence).

This is a great example of how science doesn't work. Part of science is making appropriate conclusions, given the evidence. There's a reason that self-report /testimonies are called "subjective measures". Given what we know about human perception and memory, it would be irresponsible use testimony as empirical evidence of anything more than what that person experienced (or what they believe they experienced). The internal validity of an experiment comes into question when you try to use it as evidence of something more than that.

We tend to believe that there is an independent reality that we are all experiencing, and it is science that can tell us what is true or false about that common reality. I tend to think that this is not accurate. Each point of consciousness, each observer, creates and experiences its own unique reality. Spacetime and the manifestation of matter are in fact individually created by and relative to each observer. It may be true that the information to create that reality is being sourced from the same universal consciousness, and therefore, we find that much of our individual realities are similar. However, I don’t think we can assume that all of the aspects of our unique realities are the same. We all tend to filter and spin that common information stream to meet our own needs and desires. Science then does not so much tell us what is universally true, but rather that which is most similar, or true in the greatest number of our unique realities. If I am not creating the same truths in my reality that you are in yours, then neither will consider the others truths to be scientific truths. We are all creators of independent universes, unique realities, science only points out the degree to which our universes overlap and move forward through time on parallel(ish) paths. Death then is simply a divergence of one created reality from that common parallel path to create a new reality (an afterlife) that is too different from our common experiences such that it can no longer interact as part of the same shared reality experience.

[EdmundJohnstone]

Hello Ketzer,

This actually makes a lot of sense. Are you saying that death is an illusion? Consciousness survives death, right? If we each create our own afterlife, does this mean that we won't meet other individuals, or if we will meet they will be our own creations? (Grandma won't be grandma anymore, but grandma created by my own mind) ? Science can point out to the intersection of the multiverses right? Everyone gets what they want in the end right? So the people that reject afterlife will cease to be?

How do you see the brain-mind relation ? What is the brain purpose? Do you see the brain as a tool for the mind?

Originally Posted by ketzer

We tend to believe that there is an independent reality that we are all experiencing, and it is science that can tell us what is true or false about that common reality. I tend to think that this is not accurate. Each point of consciousness, each observer, creates and experiences its own unique reality. Spacetime and the manifestation of matter are in fact individually created by and relative to each observer. It may be true that the information to create that reality is being sourced from the same universal consciousness, and therefore, we find that much of our individual realities are similar. However, I don’t think we can assume that all of the aspects of our unique realities are the same. We all tend to filter and spin that common information stream to meet our own needs and desires. Science then does not so much tell us what is universally true, but rather that which is most similar, or true in the greatest number of our unique realities. If I am not creating the same truths in my reality that you are in yours, then neither will consider the others truths to be scientific truths. We are all creators of independent universes, unique realities, science only points out the degree to which our universes overlap and move forward through time on parallel(ish) paths. Death then is simply a divergence of one created reality from that common parallel path to create a new reality (an afterlife) that is too different from our common experiences such that it can no longer interact as part of the same shared reality experience.

[little.nation]

Originally Posted by dmacfour

This is a great example of how science doesn't work. Part of science is making appropriate conclusions, given the evidence. There's a reason that self-report /testimonies are called "subjective measures". Given what we know about human perception and memory, it would be irresponsible use testimony as empirical evidence of anything more than what that person experienced (or what they believe they experienced). The internal validity of an experiment comes into question when you try to use it as evidence of something more than that.

Science is another word for knowledge. Science is all around us all the time and is not at odds with spirit / faith / religion / God. It's just that God isn't a carbohydrate, and faith isn't aluminum, and spirit isn't this cigarette I'm smoking (although...).

There's a science to how prayer works. Prayer can be known, taught, tried (tested) and the results experienced and observed. However, God is not subject to human authority. Humans are subject to God's authority. God would not permit human beings to lay claims or attempt to control. You understand that, right?

Humans are perverse. They would attempt to remove God from prayer and attribute all activity to the brain. They would not know that the primary organ involved in prayer is the heart.

Human science has ZERO "scientific" knowledge for heart-centered awareness. There is no "science" for what makes a heart have a second life other than beating blood through the body, yet that second life of the heart is more crucial to life than anything.

I love squirrels. You'll find nothing in my brain or DNA that explains why my HEART loves squirrels.

I have some spiritual science, though. Religious science. I'll teach you the sign of the cross ✝

In the name of the father (mind) - make the sign of the cross on your forehead
In the name of the son (heart) - make the sign of the cross on your chest
In the name of the holy spirit also called holy ghost (shoulders) - touch your shoulders

Jesus said: nobody comes to the father but through him.

Do you science what it means? In other words, do you have knowledge of what Jesus means when he said that? Do you understand what he meant?

Can you see what I'm showing you here about the science of life? Let's get back to the cross and keep in mind what Jesus said.

The sign of the cross means that the mind and the heart are united together as one to govern together as one over all that one should and should not do.

Test this science out: describe to me the nature and the life of somebody who wears an upside down cross. Google it if you do not know what an upside down cross is.

Certainly, there is plenty to be known and tested and measured if you had two people, one with a holy cross and one with an upside down cross, as subjects in a study.

We DO know that the shoulders are symbolic representative of "should" and "shouldn't".

Is there EVER anything that anybody should NOT do? Yes! Why? Because we have knowledge (science) of absolutes (outcomes). Same is true for the should.

Get the idea here? This knowledge is scientific but these aren't carbohydrates or aluminum or silk or suede or carrots we're talking about.

Jesus said: nobody comes to the father but through him...

You must TRULY love God, and true love in your HEART is the very first mechanism of prayer.

/spiritual science 101

[winter light]

Originally Posted by little.nation

Human science has ZERO "scientific" knowledge for heart-centered awareness. There is no "science" for what makes a heart have a second life other than beating blood through the body, yet that second life of the heart is more crucial to life than anything.

I love squirrels. You'll find nothing in my brain or DNA that explains why my HEART loves squirrels.

Good observation.

I have some spiritual science, though. Religious science. I'll teach you the sign of the cross ✝

In the name of the father (mind) - make the sign of the cross on your forehead
In the name of the son (heart) - make the sign of the cross on your chest
In the name of the holy spirit also called holy ghost (shoulders) - touch your shoulders

Jesus said: nobody comes to the father but through him.

Do you science what it means? In other words, do you have knowledge of what Jesus means when he said that? Do you understand what he meant?

Can you see what I'm showing you here about the science of life? Let's get back to the cross and keep in mind what Jesus said.

The sign of the cross means that the mind and the heart are united together as one to govern together as one over all that one should and should not do.

Thanks the sign of the cross just occurred to me like this:

Heaven
Earth
One
Another

Jesus said: nobody comes to the father but through him...

You must TRULY love God, and true love in your HEART is the very first mechanism of prayer.

/spiritual science 101

Peace

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

Hello Ketzer,

This actually makes a lot of sense. Are you saying that death is an illusion? Consciousness survives death, right? If we each create our own afterlife, does this mean that we won't meet other individuals, or if we will meet they will be our own creations? (Grandma won't be grandma anymore, but grandma created by my own mind) ? Science can point out to the intersection of the multiverses right? Everyone gets what they want in the end right? So the people that reject afterlife will cease to be?

How do you see the brain-mind relation ? What is the brain purpose? Do you see the brain as a tool for the mind?

Yes death is an illusion, but then so is life. All realities with forms are forms of virtual reality. Grandma has been countless forms, as have we all. Yet if I interact with grandma again, it may be we both assume the forms we knew each other as during a life experience. I don't suppose there would need to be a hard and fast rule about that. Ultimately we are formless so we can assume any form we wish, to participate in any reality we wish to experience. While our consciousness does create our own life and next life (or whatever) experiences, we are limited in that creation if we wish to share those experiences with other souls (points of consciousness). Grandma is always created by our own minds, but whether the information used to create her is entirely from within our own consciousness or "downloaded" from a higher universal consciousness determines the extent to which we have an experience with another soul, or just with another expression of our own. What we call scientific proof may be just where our individual universes intersect. No one ever ceases to be, just like the reader does not die when they get to the end of the book, even if the main character in the story does.

[EdmundJohnstone]

Hi ketzer,
Thanks for the reply.

I mostly agree with you except the part of life being an illusion, it's not like I came here I procreate have a child and he or she is an illusion, or someone blowing up the Planet with nukes, I referred to death as an illusion because it might be so, if life doesen't stop, only if there is for sure a non-material/non-physical medium out there, and consciousness does not depend just on the brain. Can we be sure of that?

I think I didn't made myself understood sorry for that. What I meant was: Will grandma really be grandma and not grandma just created by me in my own reality? I know this is a bit puzzling as now I perceive grandma by my own consciousness but I mean grandma being grandma with her free will not an imaginary one created just by my mind, because my current mind is perceiving grandma in a way, but she is alive and has her free will of her own. She is not created just by me, as being my puppet or as a creation in a dream.

If the Universe is just physical/material and life depends just on the brain as it would be the creator of consciousness, we might end up in void, "like before being born" I guess, despite whatever we believe and think, what do you say?

Will grandma after death really be herself as she is now and recognize me? Not just my entire creation as a puppet in my reality?
Yes she is perceived by me in a way so I create my reality but we coexist, our realities intersect, does this continue after death or it's just our own reality created just by us? It's not like I created her now as a puppet, I interpret her actions at the moment

Does this coexistence of realities survive death? How can we meet other people after death? Just thinking of them? Will we have memories of them as well?

Originally Posted by ketzer

Yes death is an illusion, but then so is life. All realities with forms are forms of virtual reality. Grandma has been countless forms, as have we all. Yet if I interact with grandma again, it may be we both assume the forms we knew each other as during a life experience. I don't suppose there would need to be a hard and fast rule about that. Ultimately we are formless so we can assume any form we wish, to participate in any reality we wish to experience. While our consciousness does create our own life and next life (or whatever) experiences, we are limited in that creation if we wish to share those experiences with other souls (points of consciousness). Grandma is always created by our own minds, but whether the information used to create her is entirely from within our own consciousness or "downloaded" from a higher universal consciousness determines the extent to which we have an experience with another soul, or just with another expression of our own. What we call scientific proof may be just where our individual universes intersect. No one ever ceases to be, just like the reader does not die when they get to the end of the book, even if the main character in the story does.

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

I mostly agree with you except the part of life being an illusion, it's not like I came here I procreate have a child and he or she is an illusion, I referred to death as an illusion because it might be so, if life doesen't stop, only if there is for sure a non-material/non-physical medium out there, and consciousness does not depend just on the brain. Can we be sure of that?

Often People use word 'illusion' to imply transcient , ephemeral or short-lived . And many times people understand illusion as unreal which is wrong. Life is transcient , ephemeral , short-live but not unreal . The ultimate spiritual reality is God .

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

How can we meet other people after death? Just thinking of them? Will we have memories of them as well?

Meeting dead after death physically is impossible . After death in next birth the soul will not have memories of past life. There may be gap between death and next life birth . We have lots of rituals in oriental world to be performed after death so that soul progresses his/her onward journey in harmonious way.

[EdmundJohnstone]

Originally Posted by HITESH SHAH

Meeting dead after death physically is impossible . After death in next birth the soul will not have memories of past life. There may be gap between death and next life birth . We have lots of rituals in oriental world to be performed after death so that soul progresses his/her onward journey in harmonious way.

I agree that memories from past lifetimes are supressed for the individual in order to focus on the current life.

I mean, both individuals being dead, and wanting to meet as spirits prior reincarnating, isn't that possible?