Dr. Mark Pitstick After Death Communication Shatters Materialism |468|
- Thread starter Alex
- Start date
So, I decided to tell my partner about the "spirit phone" and I said, "well, there is this guy who says he has a phone that will talk to the dead..." at this my partner looked at me sideways. So, I added, "all he needs is some money". That's when he said, "OH BROTHER!". I went on to tell him that the man was talking with Michael Jackson... now I got "the look". So I quickly added, "AND EINSTEIN!"
It was at this point I knew my argument was lost~~~~
It was at this point I knew my argument was lost~~~~
It seems to me, regardless of the existence of archons, or if our limited consciousness is trapped in a cycle of reincarnation, the best reasoning of science and philosophy conclude that this physical reality is an illusion. We can choose to trust, but we can never know because of the illusory nature of physical reality. Knowing does not require trust, and I do know a few things for certain. I am conscious, I feel, I think, my thoughts affect my feelings, with some practice I can choose my thoughts. I have a will with which to make choices. I know I have a memory. When I choose to trust in something, I may be disappointed, and often am.
That sounds like the edge between hynagogic & light sleep dreaming. I usually go through a short period of twitching & relaxing muscles, then a period of self-talk or chatter which can be quite interesting in an unrestrained fashion, like brainstorming, then I'm asleep. The 'place' I can only stick w/ briefly is usually in meditation; it's preceded by a sense of expansion, like my Cosmic Womb music recedes away, far away, then I'm sliding or traveling swiftly. When I'm 'there,' I often glimpse a hallway or most often a curving tunnel. Then I notice people in front of me smiling, some mouth words, gesture. Once, there was an ornate, high-backed armchair backed up to a wall & a man standing by it gestured toward it, like, 'Have a seat!' What is frustrating is that becoming aware of what is going on, like 'I am observing this now & not a part of it any more' ends the 'connection.'
If you're familiar w/ Edgar Cayce, he was a poor photographer & tried to make money by finding oil wells & calling horse races, but didn't have any luck. I remember one incident in which one unscrupulous person put him to 'sleep,' got some profitable information, & left Edgar w/ a severe headache. I think he earned a headache whenever he cooperated w/ someone to use his ability from gain, not service. It's been a very long time since I read any of that Cayce material, so forgive me if I'm inaccurate.
I agree that including Michael Jackson in their crew was unwise, but Dr. Pitstick appears unwaveringly honest about the experiments, so it would be the old 'sin of omission' to leave him out. Really, we aren't talking about 'Heaven' are we, if we give the post-material persons a residence, right? I therefore don't have a problem w/ a less than perfect person contributing. As the Dr. said, he'll let the A-team speak for themselves later on. Now, that should really be intriguing! Understandably, I am like most people & learning about this just now: this sounds so much like the Spiritual Medium craze of the late 18th century & early 19th century which Harry Houdini debunked & he & his wife were poisoned for doing so. Like Edgar Cayce, there was one man of that period whose name I cannot remember, like John Jamison something, who was a rare true example. He was so successful that he married into Russian nobility, but died of tuberculosis which I thought was odd. Why couldn't he heal himself? He was kicked out of his parent's house for tormenting his sister for chasing her around the apartment w/ a table that he powered w/ psychokinesis. He then had to make a living using his abilities. It was reported that he couldn't do demonstrations whenever he wished, but he had to 'recharge' after doing some. His most notable one involved floating himself out an open window in broad daylight & back inside again through a different window. The 'tricks' he did weren't very varied, but apparently someone convinced him to produce glowing, detached hands & other phenomena that were popular at the time. Except for extremely rare examples, until recently I had gave no credence to mediumship or psychics in general. I strongly believed most of them were frauds, talented tricksters, or great guessers.
I agree that including Michael Jackson in their crew was unwise, but Dr. Pitstick appears unwaveringly honest about the experiments, so it would be the old 'sin of omission' to leave him out. Really, we aren't talking about 'Heaven' are we, if we give the post-material persons a residence, right? I therefore don't have a problem w/ a less than perfect person contributing. As the Dr. said, he'll let the A-team speak for themselves later on. Now, that should really be intriguing! Understandably, I am like most people & learning about this just now: this sounds so much like the Spiritual Medium craze of the late 18th century & early 19th century which Harry Houdini debunked & he & his wife were poisoned for doing so. Like Edgar Cayce, there was one man of that period whose name I cannot remember, like John Jamison something, who was a rare true example. He was so successful that he married into Russian nobility, but died of tuberculosis which I thought was odd. Why couldn't he heal himself? He was kicked out of his parent's house for tormenting his sister for chasing her around the apartment w/ a table that he powered w/ psychokinesis. He then had to make a living using his abilities. It was reported that he couldn't do demonstrations whenever he wished, but he had to 'recharge' after doing some. His most notable one involved floating himself out an open window in broad daylight & back inside again through a different window. The 'tricks' he did weren't very varied, but apparently someone convinced him to produce glowing, detached hands & other phenomena that were popular at the time. Except for extremely rare examples, until recently I had gave no credence to mediumship or psychics in general. I strongly believed most of them were frauds, talented tricksters, or great guessers.
Well give me an example of how this would work in practice. You pick up your soul-phone (or get help from a medium) and the conversation proceeds:
Hi Mom, I'm so glad you are here, I have missed you so much!
Jane, I love you so much, though to be fair, you didn't come and see me very often while I was alive!
Oh Mom, that is true, but it is so nice that you are here!
etc.
Now how should Jane or a neutral participant evaluate that for its loving content? Wouldn't most people want something more concrete to make sure they were talking to their mother?
A trickster could obviously fake the above, and if he had sufficient psychic powers, he could answer any test question. This is basically the same problem as the super-psi argument against mediums. If you assume enough psychically gifted evil entities, you can dismiss any evidence.
That doesn't mean that it isn't reasonable to ask a few test questions. For example, Jane might ask, "Do you remember my 11th birthday?" knowing that it was special in some way - she was in hospital, or lost in a national park, or received a particularly exciting present. The reply would be very informative, I think - but would that count as testing the spirit in question?
David
Hi Mom, I'm so glad you are here, I have missed you so much!
Jane, I love you so much, though to be fair, you didn't come and see me very often while I was alive!
Oh Mom, that is true, but it is so nice that you are here!
etc.
Now how should Jane or a neutral participant evaluate that for its loving content? Wouldn't most people want something more concrete to make sure they were talking to their mother?
A trickster could obviously fake the above, and if he had sufficient psychic powers, he could answer any test question. This is basically the same problem as the super-psi argument against mediums. If you assume enough psychically gifted evil entities, you can dismiss any evidence.
That doesn't mean that it isn't reasonable to ask a few test questions. For example, Jane might ask, "Do you remember my 11th birthday?" knowing that it was special in some way - she was in hospital, or lost in a national park, or received a particularly exciting present. The reply would be very informative, I think - but would that count as testing the spirit in question?
David
I think that is a good point. I was really responding to the comment that archons could be completely manipulating us. That could be true but then, what would be the point of living at all. I choose to believe that Love is the only true reality...I guess when it comes to actual spirits, I think we can never truly know if that's the real spirit...but like I said, what's the point of faking it? If it makes us feel better, isn't that enough?
R
Right!! I had a family member who had a spirit attachment...at first he was enjoying the interaction but then he started to feel drained and realized the entity was stealing his energy. His intuition let him know something was wrong. I think the same thing with what we're talking about. If we meet a spirit, we'll know if it's them. I guess for the spirit box, it's more important to know but I guess I'm not convinced, that's very important.