Are we all mediums?

Originally Posted by Katiecat

From what I understand, it's a communication exchange between a person on this plane and someone who has passed on to the spiritual plane...

And is this what you hope for yourself?

Originally Posted by mac

I can deal.. it makes the text formating more difficult though.. Then I'll continue in the same way - I'm sure you'll cope just fine....I believe were all equal.. I don't think I've said otherwise? And what evidence is sufficient? Equal? What does that mean? Numbers can be equal but I can't see how one human being can be equal to another - I see each as unique as hence not equal to any others, always variation...

Can we not be equal and yet individual sparks of the creator.. unique configurations of separateness?

I think we can.. do you recognize a game on earth called "unequal" where we tell murders there bad? Where we tell colored people there bad?

If you recognize this unequal game than.. good for you

Originally Posted by mac

That this channel and this channel said it.. what is the proof that will make you believe? You tell me.. it's you saying it's "not true" What would you like me to explain? I'd like you to show where your evidence came from - then I could assess its worth.

I have heard channels "Bashar" Darryl Anka and Steve Rother (his label for his channel is "the group" though they really don't want a label ) say this very thing.. I also am pretty sure I've heard other channels who's names I can't remember.. I'm pretty sure most channels have offered this info/idea many times..

Originally Posted by mac

Understand that "law of attraction" is a personal experience and pretty much can only be experimented and proved on a individual basis in my experience.. I have watched thoughts I was thinking attract in mere minutes to a half a hour.. the speed up between thought and attraction is there for me..Sorry I can't follow your point....

I'm going to let the point rest.. unless you require further information..?

Originally Posted by mac

Does that work? Is that sufficient? Ohh.. by all means please "define" mediumship for you than.. because this stuff above I really don't understand..And isn't that what I've been banging on about? We're speaking different languages yet using the same words....

Yet, I believe a commonality exists and we can reach it.. do you want to try or disengage?

Originally Posted by mac

To put it bluntly.. I think life is about living.. focusing on the "afterlife" well in my humble opinion is waste of perfectly good time for swinging on a swing.. You are, of course, fully entitled to the opinion you hold but some like to think in different ways and also feel they're living life too - I'm drinking a Bud, sitting in the sun, just back from a training run in the sunshine - it's great for me and yet I can still focus on what you call the afterlife....

There's no difference between enjoying a bud in the sun and exercise and/or "swinging on the swing set" to me.. same thing

When I refer to people focused on the "afterlife" I refer to people who might prescribe labels like "obsessive compulsive" just a unhealthy way of living/being..

I can personally think of many things I'd rather do, then compile up information on the afterlife.. where I'm from..?? it's like for me.. I'll know that.. when I'm back there.. knowing it here.. seems pointless.. to me..

Originally Posted by mac

But I digress.. to each their own.. if you have fun at all that thinking.. then have at it!
Yes, I think your idea is a waste of time.. It appears it's a waste of your time but why do you feel it's an empirical value - something that applies to everyone just 'cos it's right for you?

I do not think just cause it's "not right" for me everyone has to do it.. I just have a hard time understanding.. what the fun is in it?

You see I know there can be some fun in it.. but I know it's not fun if it reaches the level of being "unhealthy" negative.. do you understand?

It's like this.. have you ever gambled..??

The first time you usually win and it's fun and exciting makes you smile a bit.. but how people get into the habit of gambling all the time is they try to make that next time and that next time and that next time = the same fun/excitement they had the 1st time.. but it never does.. and that's how the casino's make a lot of money

And I'm saying this same cycle can apply to "Spiritual" information in a way..

Originally Posted by mac

you see every human has the right to have there own "definition" of what that words means.. and trying to force them to "converge" on the meaning you want will never happen.. better to explain your own.. then force this is mediumship and nothing else is!I have given you my definition and thoughts about it.. I leave you reflect what you will about that..I force no-one to do anything. I encourage the thinkers to consider points about which I welcome considered opinion. You have every right to use whatever words you wish for whatever purposes you wish but communication is far easier when most use similar meanings for the words they use to communicate.

Yah, but that's the problem.. you can't pigeon whole every human into sharing your definition?

So why even try?

Better to work around and through than force people to "behave" and see things your way..

I'm going to use a expression here maybe you'll understand..

Positive energy is integrative (it integrates)

Negative energy is segregative (it separates)

When you try and make people accept your definitions which energy are you producing?

Originally Posted by mac

However, my understanding of people and indeed some of the people I have talked to on this forum is.. that many seek a medium as a form of "Therapy" to let go of their problem.. I'm sure there are other uses but my guess is that is a primary one..And now my friend we move full circle to the very early point I made about what mediumship means. What you're describing in the paragraph bove sounds very much (to me) like counselling or psychic counselling - am I repeating myself!?

I guess, I'm saying the definition I buy into.. seems to be the "shared" reality definition..

Perhaps you should ask some *random* people on the street what does "medium" mean?

I think the answer provided is some of the ones we're talking about.. it seems to me that you have a SPECIALIZED definition that does not compare to the mass consensus definition and because of that you will find DIFFICULTY talking to anyone about it..

I mean if you won't talk to people.. just put the word "mediumship" into google.. and what does the pages that google bring up say about what people think a "mediumship" is..??

If you hold your special DEFINITION.. it is you who has the harder time communicating.. not people who hold the shared definition..

In fact let me offer what the "wiki" says..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediumship

Everything in this page here.. is what the mass shared definition of the word is.. does it match up with your definition or not?

Originally Posted by mac

I think we see things very differently. Like so many other members, you appear to feel I should conform to what you judge to be the right way to be, or to feel, in life. On that we'll have to differ because although I'm confident about what's right for me, it would never occur to me to think I know what's right for you....

Whatever is the mechanism for communication in the world of spirit, the world we live in is one of speech and text. The more effectively one communicates with that, the better the chance of being understood by others doing the same.

I'll leave it at that as I don't think we can continue our interchange beneficially.

If you say so.. as I said before I'm willing to try.. and I think we can reach a point of mutal understanding..

But that does take work or a lot of communicating.. I leave that to you..

Originally Posted by themaster

Can we not be equal and yet individual sparks of the creator.. unique configurations of separateness?

I think we can.. do you recognize a game on earth called "unequal" where we tell murders there bad? Where we tell colored people there bad?

If you recognize this unequal game than.. good for you I have heard channels "Bashar" Darryl Anka and Steve Rother (his label for his channel is "the group" though they really don't want a label ) say this very thing.. I also am pretty sure I've heard other channels who's names I can't remember.. I'm pretty sure most channels have offered this info/idea many times.. I'm going to let the point rest.. unless you require further information..? Yet, I believe a commonality exists and we can reach it.. do you want to try or disengage? There's no difference between enjoying a bud in the sun and exercise and/or "swinging on the swing set" to me.. same thing

When I refer to people focused on the "afterlife" I refer to people who might prescribe labels like "obsessive compulsive" just a unhealthy way of living/being..

I can personally think of many things I'd rather do, then compile up information on the afterlife.. where I'm from..?? it's like for me.. I'll know that.. when I'm back there.. knowing it here.. seems pointless.. to me.. I do not think just cause it's "not right" for me everyone has to do it.. I just have a hard time understanding.. what the fun is in it?

You see I know there can be some fun in it.. but I know it's not fun if it reaches the level of being "unhealthy" negative.. do you understand?

It's like this.. have you ever gambled..??

The first time you usually win and it's fun and exciting makes you smile a bit.. but how people get into the habit of gambling all the time is they try to make that next time and that next time and that next time = the same fun/excitement they had the 1st time.. but it never does.. and that's how the casino's make a lot of money

And I'm saying this same cycle can apply to "Spiritual" information in a way.. Yah, but that's the problem.. you can't pigeon whole every human into sharing your definition?

So why even try?

Better to work around and through than force people to "behave" and see things your way..

I'm going to use a expression here maybe you'll understand..

Positive energy is integrative (it integrates)

Negative energy is segregative (it separates)

When you try and make people accept your definitions which energy are you producing? I guess, I'm saying the definition I buy into.. seems to be the "shared" reality definition..

Perhaps you should ask some *random* people on the street what does "medium" mean?

I think the answer provided is some of the ones we're talking about.. it seems to me that you have a SPECIALIZED definition that does not compare to the mass consensus definition and because of that you will find DIFFICULTY talking to anyone about it..

I mean if you won't talk to people.. just put the word "mediumship" into google.. and what does the pages that google bring up say about what people think a "mediumship" is..??

If you hold your special DEFINITION.. it is you who has the harder time communicating.. not people who hold the shared definition..

In fact let me offer what the "wiki" says..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediumship

Everything in this page here.. is what the mass shared definition of the word is.. does it match up with your definition or not?

I'll leave things at that - too much work in going nowhere new....

I must be mad but here goes....Can we not be equal and yet individual sparks of the creator.. unique configurations of separateness? Of course we're equal in status but not in our personal abilities/attributes.

I think we can.. do you recognize a game on earth called "unequal" where we tell murders there bad? Where we tell colored people there bad? Not my way - I don't tell anyone any such thing about anything

If you recognize this unequal game than.. good for you I have heard channels "Bashar" Darryl Anka and Steve Rother (his label for his channel is "the group" though they really don't want a label ) say this very thing.. I also am pretty sure I've heard other channels who's names I can't remember.. I'm pretty sure most channels have offered this info/idea many times.. I don't know these individuals so I'll have to check 'em out....I'm going to let the point rest.. unless you require further information..? Yet, I believe a commonality exists and we can reach it.. do you want to try or disengage? There's no difference between enjoying a bud in the sun and exercise and/or "swinging on the swing set" to me.. same thing OK so you see I'm no obsessive, compulsive, just an enquirer with a scientific approach?

When I refer to people focused on the "afterlife" I refer to people who might prescribe labels like "obsessive compulsive" just a unhealthy way of living/being.. OK but it's better (I think) to say that at the oustset....

I can personally think of many things I'd rather do, then compile up information on the afterlife.. where I'm from..?? it's like for me.. I'll know that.. when I'm back there.. knowing it here.. seems pointless.. to me.. I do not think just cause it's "not right" for me everyone has to do it.. I just have a hard time understanding.. what the fun is in it? I can't make it fun for you - if you don't like doing it, then don't do it. I do like it.... so I do.

You see I know there can be some fun in it.. but I know it's not fun if it reaches the level of being "unhealthy" negative.. do you understand? I think I've answered that...I'll tell you when I don't understand. That's y way.....

It's like this.. have you ever gambled..?? No - it has no appeal.

The first time you usually win and it's fun and exciting makes you smile a bit.. but how people get into the habit of gambling all the time is they try to make that next time and that next time and that next time = the same fun/excitement they had the 1st time.. but it never does.. and that's how the casino's make a lot of money

And I'm saying this same cycle can apply to "Spiritual" information in a way.. Yah, but that's the problem.. you can't pigeon whole every human into sharing your definition?

So why even try? I thought I'd explained why I was seeking to standardise - that doesn't mean pigeon-holing or forcing anyone into doing anything. You don't want to go down that path, thenthat's fine by me - it's your choice and I have no desire to make you do anything. I offer only an invitation to join in - you don't want to? Then don't and that's fine....

Better to work around and through than force people to "behave" and see things your way.. force? Is that how you think of an invite?

I'm going to use a expression here maybe you'll understand..

Positive energy is integrative (it integrates)

Negative energy is segregative (it separates)

When you try and make people accept your definitions which energy are you producing? I guess, I'm saying the definition I buy into.. seems to be the "shared" reality definition.. I understand what you're saying but I don't subscribe to it - and that's OK too.

Perhaps you should ask some *random* people on the street what does "medium" mean? And that would achieve what? Like asking the man-in-the-street about astro-physics or quantum theory. Why should that person know? But ask a scientist and there might be more justification....

I think the answer provided is some of the ones we're talking about.. it seems to me that you have a SPECIALIZED definition that does not compare to the mass consensus definition and because of that you will find DIFFICULTY talking to anyone about it.. I disagree but I'm a Modern Spiritualist (that's specific-check it out online) by nature and by persuasion - does that mean anything to you? My difficulty is in getting anyone to listen....

I mean if you won't talk to people.. just put the word "mediumship" into google.. and what does the pages that google bring up say about what people think a "mediumship" is..?? So.....? What I'm looking for is what thinking folks think, not the masses who don't have any involvement with the topic, those who see only TV stuff and movies......

If you hold your special DEFINITION.. it is you who has the harder time communicating.. not people who hold the shared definition..You are missing my point - I'm asking that others say what they think mediumship is - I said my piece and I'm waiting to hear from others what they feel - I'm still waiting to hear from you.....

In fact let me offer what the "wiki" says.. Wiki, schmiki - are you not listening, not hearing what I said?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediumship

Everything in this page here.. is what the mass shared definition of the word is.. does it match up with your definition or not? Who knows? Do I care? Is it the definitive work? I think you already know the answer to that....

Originally Posted by deepsea

I do love the way you are straight to the point,Mac.
Just the way I like it.

J. x

I agree! Mac's a fire starter on this subject when some one poses a question on it. I believe that he makes you dig deep and truly look at what it is, what you claim to be and what your abilities are. No, he's not the most glamorous about it and continually asks WHY and what makes you think those things but it's a good thing. You go back and look at all (and there are many and were quite a few more before we crashed) of the posts on mediumship, channeling, psychics and he doesn't judge in the way some may think, but he does ask the same questions over and over. He's blunt and straight to the point but I would rather have that than someone "feathering" it for me.

Originally Posted by earthprowler

I agree! Mac's a fire starter on this subject when some one poses a question on it. I believe that he makes you dig deep and truly look at what it is, what you claim to be and what your abilities are. No, he's not the most glamorous about it and continually asks WHY and what makes you think those things but it's a good thing. You go back and look at all (and there are many and were quite a few more before we crashed) of the posts on mediumship, channeling, psychics and he doesn't judge in the way some may think, but he does ask the same questions over and over. He's blunt and straight to the point but I would rather have that than someone "feathering" it for me.

I say this because Mac is a good friend of mine and I have always found him straight forward and no frills attached.
Best kind of mate to have.
You know where you stand with a friend like that.
(are you blushing yet,Mac)?

Deepsea

Originally Posted by earthprowler

I agree! Mac's a fire starter on this subject when some one poses a question on it. I believe that he makes you dig deep and truly look at what it is, what you claim to be and what your abilities are. No, he's not the most glamorous about it and continually asks WHY and what makes you think those things but it's a good thing. You go back and look at all (and there are many and were quite a few more before we crashed) of the posts on mediumship, channeling, psychics and he doesn't judge in the way some may think, but he does ask the same questions over and over. He's blunt and straight to the point but I would rather have that than someone "feathering" it for me.

Thank you There are many who don't realise that when I ask questions it's not because I don't know the answer necessarily (at times though, I don't) but that it's rather to try to stimulate thought away from conventional patterns, away from accepting what's generally accepted without really having questioned if something's truly valid for them as individuals...

Not glamourous? awwww... But of course I am there not to pander to folks but to offer alternatives to 'stuff' - and sometimes I have to be blunt 'cos otherwise they just don't listen - or hear. There's a big difference and often evident in responses. Folks read what I say but do't necessarily hear what I say...

Sure I keep asking why and that's because so often folks don't have an answer. When they do I'll accept it when there's nothing left to debate or discuss. It may not be an answer which will do for me but I respect their position once I've heard why they hold that position.... But up to that I'll continue to challenge to try to find out if there's something that will benefit my understanding.

It's not all about altruism...

Originally Posted by deepsea

I say this because Mac is a good friend of mine and I have always found him straight forward and no frills attached.
Best kind of mate to have.
You know where you stand with a friend like that.
(are you blushing yet,Mac)?

Deepsea

Yes....but "i'm lovin' it" to pinch McDonald's slogan....

Originally Posted by mac

I thought I'd explained why I was seeking to standardise - that doesn't mean pigeon-holing or forcing anyone into doing anything. You don't want to go down that path, thenthat's fine by me - it's your choice and I have no desire to make you do anything. I offer only an invitation to join in - you don't want to? Then don't and that's fine....

I don't think I want to.. I prefer the shared consciousness version.. I mean..

Doesn't it bother you that every time you try and talk "mediumship" you have a communication problem because you are the one that has the different definition?

How many people do you know that actually share your "definition" of mediumship?

Originally Posted by mac

Better to work around and through than force people to "behave" and see things your way.. force? Is that how you think of an invite?

Yes, force.. some of your statements seem more like "my way or the highway" as I stated last time..

Originally Posted by mac

Perhaps you should ask some *random* people on the street what does "medium" mean? And that would achieve what? Like asking the man-in-the-street about astro-physics or quantum theory. Why should that person know? But ask a scientist and there might be more justification....

It would achieve a common dialog.. a common understanding.. helpful in communication of ideas.. that's all.. I mean if you find it fun to be cryptic.. then be cryptic! (or to always be explaining yourself and your definitions, than by all means!)

Originally Posted by mac

My difficulty is in getting anyone to listen....

Would not that difficulty arise.. in the fact you have different definitions of words then others?

What is it there supposed to "listen" to..?? I briefly researched the idea called "modern spiritualist" don't really like it.. it has lack in it

Originally Posted by mac

So.....? What I'm looking for is what thinking folks think, not the masses who don't have any involvement with the topic, those who see only TV stuff and movies......

What people who see tv and movies don't think?

And I have expressed what I think.. don't think you were that interested..??

What is it your interested in, in this thinking?

Originally Posted by mac

]You are missing my point - I'm asking that others say what they think mediumship is - I said my piece and I'm waiting to hear from others what they feel - I'm still waiting to hear from you.....

And I've already told you.. I prefer to share the mass consensus definition..

If you prefer.. verbatim what the wiki says now that you know what I think.. what is there to say about it?

I don't think arguing over labels or definitions (how to describe things) is a great or fun thing to do.. so the path of least resistance is to go with the flow..

This is why your definition being "custom or different" seems like hard work to me..

I have answered the question..

Are we all mediums?

With the simple answer yes..

My answer has not changed.. we all have the ability whether we use it or choose to use it is another matter..