hunny797:

contradiction 1: one verse says that war was throughout their reigns while the other states that after the 36th year of Asa war started, before that there was peace.

Contradiction 2: Asa became King in the 20^th year(let’s call this year X)..Baasha became king 3 years later. (23^rd year X)

Asa’s rule was for 41years. 20+41 = 61(yearX). So in the 61^st yearX Asa’s rule had ended. While Baasha who became king in 23^rd yearX ruled for 24years. 23+24=47^th yearX his rule ended. According to the 1^st contradiction the war mentioned above started in the 36^th year of Asa’s rule. Remember Asa became king in the 20^th yearX?? So that means war started 20+36=56^th yearX. But if you are following correctly Baasha’s rule already ended on the 47^th yearX since it is mentioned that his rule was for 24years.

xinyuren:

Did you read the chapters in question? You seemed to have summarized them well enough. The historical account of Asa says that he had wars with Basha. There was a time of peace. His 15th yr to 35th yr. appears to be one of those times. There was a time when wars were fought. The important wars (the ones that served the Bible narrative) were recorded in detail. Others weren't recorded at all in the Bible but there appears to be another book of record kept by their historians that recorded these wars in more detail, but not part of the Bible text (for obvious reasons). As far as what the Bible account reveals, one sentence says there was war throughout Asa's reign with Basha. One encounter is recorded. But this is all written in the scriptures you cited. What's your point?

hunny797:

Are you not getting my point or are you trying to deviate from it?

The bible says 15th to 35th year of Asa’s reign was of peace. Baasha’s reign was in between 3-27yrs of Asa’s rule (started on the 3rd year of Asa’s rule ended on the 27th year of Asa’s rule).

So..

(1)why is it said at one place that throughout the reign there was war while another place states 15-36th year was not war. And it clearly states “there was no more war”. It doesn’t say there was not a high level or low level war. No more war.

If you still don't get the point please choose from the following options which describes the best to the period of 15-36th year of Asa's rule between these two .

Was it... (a) state of war?

(b) state of peace?

(c) occasional wars?

(2) And secondly how did all that happen on the 36th year of Asa’s rule? 36th year of Asa’s rule means 33rd year of Baasha’s rule while his rule had ended almost 9 years ago.

While replying please state number 1 and 2 for the contradiction you are replying to. otherwise it seems all mixed up

xinyuren:

Oh! It seems we were writing at the same time and I didnt see your comment about the apparent contradictions. Some Bible commentators believe this to be a scribal error (humans are fallible, they can make mistakes). But other Bible scholars such as Jewish commentator, Seder Olam suggests the 36th year was reckoned from the existence of the separate kingdom of Judah (997 B.C.E.) and corresponded to the 16th year of Asa (Rehoboam ruling 17 years, Abijah 3 years, and Asa now in his 16th year). (Soncino Books of the Bible) There are other scholars who agree with that assessment. I don't put much faith in scholars without thinking out the matter on my own. Its been quite awhile since I viewed all the material regarding this, but I do remember that the scripture you cited at 1Kings 15:32 stuck as very important. That Asa and Baasha had conflict throughout their reigns was stated no less than 3 times between 1Kings and 2 Chr. This led me to the conclusion that the latter case is more likely to be true rather than a scribal error. But honestly, even if it was a scribal error, do you think these kind of human copying errors are the topic of our discussion? This is desperate nit-picking! Of course people make mistakes. Maybe there are more such minor errors of translation or transcribing (I have found very few), but this has no bearing on this topic and if that is all you can find to argue with, then I have been successful in my defense.

xinyuren:

Again writing at the same time. A direct answer to your questions would be, when ths scriptures say there was peace, there was peace. Otherwise there must have been at least occasional wars. The point of conflict is the dates which I believe I have elaborated on.

hunny797:

Of course I agree with you. These are human errors and there are many more mistakes similar to these. Since I believe in God and I do believe in the authenticity of the Bible I will never claim that God made these mistakes in His book. But what I am implying that these mistakes and errors themselves are sufficient proof that people have mixed up many things in the Bible. Can you tell me how many versions and types of Bible in English language one can find today? A version is defined as "a ​particular ​form of something that is ​slightly different from other ​forms of the same thing" Why is the need of so many versions of the same book? there is KJ version and there is another NKJ version. there is IS version and then again NI version. A book of God does not need to have so many versions. Commentaries can be made but they have to be kept separated. I claim to believe in "the Bible" but I won't believe in such a Bible which has errors in numerous instances. One narrator says a person came to Jesus and said his daughter is dead while about the same person other narrators say the daughter is about to die. Regarding the death of Judas Iscariot I am sure you must be aware of the contradictions. these types of contradictions (even if caused by humans) seriously hurt the authenticity of the book. what other than these things do you consider a contradiction?

hunny797:

you say "when ths scriptures say there was peace, there was peace. Otherwise there must have been at least occasional wars"

Regarding the time between 15-35 the scripture at one place says "there was no more war". And about the same time it also says it was "war was throughout their reigns" (which includes 15-35)

xinyuren:

First, I dont believe scribal errors have any bearing on the truth in the Bible. They are too few and minor. The example you cite above about the dead girl isn't an example of an error. Its just a different way of expressing the same thing by two different observers! Thats the reason there are multiple accounts of the same events in the Bible. Each observer has a different point of view based on his profession, background, etc... I've heard many instances where someone pronounced a person dead when death was imminent. Does that make their point of view invalid? Did they lie? No. It's just another way of saying the same thing. I know of no contradictions regarding Judas. As for your other point, the Bible is the most widely read and published book in the history of literature. This is to be expected from a Book authored by our Creator. If it weren't so, I would seriously question its claim of authorship. So then, as a book having such a wide distribution over the centuries, logically you would expect there to be many translations, since the original scribes were in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. As language changes, there is a need to update these translation to adapt to new ways of speaking. The King James Version (it wasn't a translation) was just one of many updated (for it's day) Bibles. This is both logical and inevitible. Herein also lies a special test: If this really is a book authored by God, certainly he would have the power to preserve the authenticy of His text thru the ages with a minimal of errors. Has the Bible passed this test? When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, scholars had a unique opportunity to confirm that the Bible passed this test. Only a very few scribal errors were found to be the difference between those ancient scrolls (200B.C.?) and modern Bibles. I'm surprised at your comments. You believe the Bible to be a Holy book of God, yet you think it is outdated? Those two statements are completely incongruent in my eyes. But once again, I put the onus on you to bring forth proof of this claim.

xinyuren:

"Regarding the time between 15-35 the scripture at one place says "there was no more war". And about the same time it also says it was "war was throughout their reigns" (which includes 15-35)" The fact that there was war "throughout" does not mean there was continuous war. The statement allows for a time of peace. For example, I can say that I have battled cancer throught my life, but there were times when my body was cancer-free. There is no contradiction in that statement.

xinyuren:

If you dont want me to explain, why did you present it? It is not good form to ask questions without wanting the answers. That is a dishonest form of debate. It is also dishonest to pretend that you dont know how old the Bible is, thus asking me where you can find the original. If you want to examine the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient fragments, visit the museums and churches where such texts are kept. I heard that they even scanned the Scrolls into digital form. But dont play games like presenting objections and telling me I dont need to answer. That's schoolyard child's bicker and I won't participate in that. This should be an honest, intellectual discussion.

hunny797:

Oh now you are looking for intellectual discussion? I thought we were just playing like school children who is the most stubborn. How are you gonna explain the contradictions? the writer had not meant to write Michal and instead Merab or the other excuse that this does not mean giving birth, it just means bringing up others children. Indeed the criteria you have set up for a book to be from God is similar to a child's toy house. I am sorry but the God I believe in and the books I believe in are not what you believe in. Indeed the Bible from God was not meant to stay error free forever. It was for guidance to a limited time, thus there was no mention that the book will forever remain error free. Had God promised such a claim I would have been one of the first to reply to the non-believers. the fact is that a book is indeed questionable when it is "presumed" to be dictated by God to numerous people over a long period of time. There have been gospels written by numerous christians. what was the criteria of selecting only 4 and rejecting others. Again, I am aware of all the historical details of selection. So don't bother. The concept of Biblical inerrancy is not lost on me. It is just that I find it hard to digest that despite accepting the errors and inaccuracies in the bible how can one claim it to be 100% correct word by word

xinyuren:

Because of the presence of other readers, I will answer your "contradictions". I dont know why you even Posted them, because it is so obvious you are grasping at straws. In the first case, you cited Jesus speaking on two entirely different occasions! In the first instance, he was preaching to others. He was merely saying that other people's testimony about his works is more powerful than just his own? Is that not true? Thats quite reasonable. In the second instance, Jesus is standing in the Sanhedren, a court of law! Jesus knew very well Jewish law and he was stating that his testimony was valid under law. Later on, he elaborates on his statement (strangely, you dont cite that scripture). Why dont you cite the scripture that answers your question?

xinyuren:

It seems that, when faced with futility in proving your claim, you have gone hostile. Dont worry, this is a common reaction to futility. If you aimed to prove to me not every single word is accurate, I give you that claim. That claim is little and meaningless. I am not defending such useless attacks. Of course there are small errors over the millenia. But the thoughts therein have been preserved. They have not changed. It seems we have been debating over entirely different things. Your concern seems to be about contradiction in words. I am more concerned about the thoughts and ideas those words represent. In that sense, there are no inaccuracies or contradictions.

hunny797:

no worries..let's put this space into use..

please explain about the sabbath

Old test. says "but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day."

while in Jesus' time his enemies criticized him that he works on Sabbath's day and to this Jesus replied yes I work because God is also working till this day he has not had rest so there is no reason for me to rest on a particular day.

I do not have the exact reference but I am fully sure it was just as I said. I am sure you must have some explanation since it is not something only I would have discovered after so many years. Indeed this question must have made earlier. can you please explain briefly

xinyuren:

I appreciate your change of tone here. It facilitates a more relaxed form of debate. The key word here is rest? Rest from what? The context in Genesis is clear. He had just completed creating the "heavens and earth". Afterward he stopped creating, or rested. This is not to say he stopped doing everything! That would be an illogical conclusion. After all He performed miracles after that and one must assume God has other activities other than nannying humans. Now about the Law given to the Jews regarding the seventh day, Jesus knew full well that the religious leaders had distorted that law (the same as they did all the others) in order to exploit the common people. The proper application of that law insured that the Jews took time to restore themselves and reflect on spiritual things. It had little to do with the matters the religious leaders were concerned with. So Jesus word's reflected reality, but also carefully designed to draw attention to some talking points (very clever). They seem to be contradictions but they are talking about two different aspects of God's purpose. God had rested from creation, but not from the many other works he was performing, sometimes beyond human notice.

xinyuren:

There is another, common rendering of that verse (again, i wonder why you didn't cite the other common rendering) that says "when one" instead of "and he". This rendering agrees with the original Hebrew as well as the translations into Greek and Latin. In light of the more accurate rendering (IMO), it is easier to see who influenced David (incite does not mean ask). At any rate, there is a collaborating testimony at 1Chr. 21:1 that implicates Satan or some unknown threat (Satan means resister) in the matter. Of course, this is the purpose of collaborating testimony: So that the truth of a matter can be uncovered.

xinyuren:

The "contradictions" you raise are easily explained in other parts of the Bible or by referencing clearer translations. In no way do they diminish the integrity or contradict other thoughts in the Bible. I have to ask you, what is your aim here? I dont like to engage in meaningless battles over words. You seem to be attacking an invisible opponent. This kind of discussion does nothing to forward the real issues and unless you bring more substantial points to this debate, I am going to opt out. I dont see a real point here. You say the Bible is out of date? You have done nothing thus far to prove your claim.

hunny797:

Do not worry.. I am not trying to prove to you about the contradictions present in Bible.

I am presenting this for the neutral people. Since you have numerous versions and every version was revised to save Christianity from the alleged contradictions.. I can understand your stand. 

xinyuren:

Now this statement is funny. Are you proposing that the Bible should have continued, untranslated with no updates to the modern dialect until this day? Thats really funny. So you think we should be all speaking in ancient Hebrew as to understand the original scrolls? Did you know that even dictionaries get updated to reflect the changes in common language? Is that bad too? Are they inaccurate or contradicting themselves. All classic literature gets updated so as to be accessible to the masses. The Bible happens to be the oldest Holy book in common distribution so it has been updated the most times. This is not a problem, but rather quite logical! Anyone using a Bible using outdated language (without comparing it to a modern translation) is doing themselves a great disservice.

hunny797:

yes literature and other books get outdated. No doubt. But then their authors are human. a divine book does not need updates such as changing the names of characters. clarification of pronouns etc. I don't mean everyone should use Hebrew but I must say Hebrew  and original text must be present during such discussions. You have to show in original this word was used. It means so and so in English. Prior translations were wrong due to so and so reasons. New translation is supported by such and such claims. If you can provide this I will be forever grateful to you. But let me remind you. the more older texts you go through, the more errors you will find. regardless of the translation you are looking. Been there, done that. I remember a time when the bible I was reading (in my native language) one of the gospels did not mention any theif crucified with Jesus, one or two mentioned one thief and one or two mentioned 2 thiefs. But now all four of them clearly state 2 thieves one on the right one on the left. That's just one small example of update which you claim is necessary with the passage of time and I strongly disagree.

See ya tomorrow

xinyuren:

Again, your point is meaningless. Prior translations were suitable for the time when that usage of the language was contemporary. Revisions (for the most part)weren't made to cover up mistakes but rather to clarify meanings in the modern tongue. Parallel translations of the same text only serve to enhance the meaning (Havent you ever heard two different people explain the same concept, but somehow one was easier for you to grasp?) This is not a problem with the text. This is just the reality that comes from the diversity of humans. Apparently my reference to the Dead Sea Scrolls went right over your head. In those scrolls is material proof that very few mistakes have crept in after hundreds of years. Evidence speaks for itself. Compare those scrolls with modern text and you will see, little has changed. I dont know what your native language is, but any translations problems couldn't have affected the correct understanding of the Bible message. Your example of a name being changed is really a grasp at straws. You can pick a Bible in most any language in the world (including Hebrew and Greek) and they will read the same. Your idea that God's book is somehow immune to the effects of lingual evolution is not logical. Its a book containing words. They aren't magical words. They need to be updated from time to time so we can understand them better. This is really elementary. I really hope not to see you tomorrow. You are tiresome.

xinyuren:

Ok, now you are either being fecitious or lazy. The Bible says that no man can see God. This statement stands up to logic. A being that created the Universe obviously would be difficult to be in the presence of. We cant even look at our sun directly without being blinded. But why not ask yourself: can the scripture I'm citing be understood in a different, more logical way? your answer would be yes. If I said, "I saw the sun", my statement would not be contradictory. In fact there are many ways to "see" someone. I can go to the hospital and see my grandmother without actually looking at her. This is getting ridiculous and you know it. I'm out. Whatever point you are trying to make, it has nothing to do with my point.

hunny797:

I can understand your situation. you will say and do anything just so that you don't have to agree that there is something wrong with the bible. your claims are worthless. You can say you saw your granny without actually seeing her. you can say you have had cancer throughout your life even if in between you had a reasonable time free of cancer.. you distort the pronouns and try to bind them with nouns not remotely present in the context.. you claim people did make various mistakes in writing, interpreting, narrating, translating the Bible yet it is 100% accurate, every word direct from the mouth of God. Indeed I can understand. I have been facing a lot of muslims with similar views all my life. you are not the first one of this type..have a nice day fella

xinyuren:

You are the one who is twisting words. Let me reiterate my claim: The Bible is completely accurate (in the ideas and concepts it communicates). Its ideas and teachings have no contradictions. The Bible is not a book "directly from the mouth of God" (I never said that!) but was penned by human assistants. Humans make mistakes and if that is your small point, I have already acknowledged that, but any minor human errors have in no way changed the thoughts, principles, and teachings in the Bible. Thus the contents are neither outdated or inaccurate. Nor are there any "problems". It has retained its internal harmony and the impact of its truth remains as strong and relevant as when it was first penned. Whatever point you presume to make is insignificant and has no meaning. Perhaps your time is of so little value that you can waste it debating over some words that don't contribute to any meaningful discussion but mine isn't.

hunny797:

If it is not directly from God rather penned by humans and also has some errors then what is the reason for it being called a heavenly or divine book?? why are the other various gospels not included in the Bible? who was instructed by God on what to include and what not to

xinyuren:

Are you trying make another point now? Please make it clear from the outset what your point is so as not to waste my time. Have you ever heard of a secretary dictating the boss's letters? Whose letter is it, the secretary's? Whose name goes on that letter? I assume that the Creator of the Universe knows how to edit the book he has authored. Please dont let that be your point. Please.

Shining_brow:

@Hunny -

"I can understand your situation. you will say and do anything just so that you don't have to agree that there is something wrong with the bible. your claims are worthless. You can say you saw your granny without actually seeing her. you can say you have had cancer throughout your life even if in between you had a reasonable time free of cancer.. you distort the pronouns and try to bind them with nouns not remotely present in the context.. you claim people did make various mistakes in writing, interpreting, narrating, translating the Bible yet it is 100% accurate, every word direct from the mouth of God. Indeed I can understand. I have been facing a lot of muslims with similar views all my life. you are not the first one of this type..have a nice day fella"

Yep! I was going to tell you to stop wasting your time, but it seems you've now discovered this for yourself.

But it makes me wonder... such people - the extremists - actually turn people away from that belief (book, person, being - whatever). So with such an attitude, they are doing long-term damage to the beliefs (and, if you do actually believe in that 'god' 0 whichever one we're talking about), people are less likely to follow him/her/it/they.

Given your stance on Satan (mentioned previously), do you think it's possible that said being has infiltrated their minds, and corrupted them to be like this - for the long game?

It makes sense to me... in Islam, it's quite obvious that one should not kill another person. Doing so is murder (dependent on circumstances - yeah, different debate). And so, there are those who have decided that non-Muslims are no longer considered 'people', and so killing them is ok. (doesn't actually make sense - if they're not people, then why care what they think or say??)

So, Satan (playing the long game) fills someone with such fervent belief, that it turns others away from 'God/s'... lose one, gain a whole heap more! (the amount of people not going to be sitting by Allah's side because of the actions of ISIS may be a clear example of what I'm referring to).

in a way, this is especially true when it comes to Islam,, as I'm quite sure that the Quran actually states that belief needs to be fairly rational, and should be questioned and discussed - not blindly adhered to. Heart, soul AND mind!

hunny797:

Yes. There is no doubt in your theory. Rather it is already warned in the teachings that satan will attack you from such sides as you wouldn't have imagined that he would come from that side. This is exactly what we are experiencing. I would like to give a very small eg. You must be aware muslims have to pray 5 times a day. Now the 5th prayer's time is usually 7 to 9pm at night but we have an option to post pone one part of this night prayer. And if we wakeup at about say 3 or 4am at night to offer this last part of prayer (along with some other non-obligatory prayers) we will be rewarded many times more than if we offer the complete prayer in the original time. It happens everyday with me that when at night i am offering the prayers I skip the last part bcoz the voice in my head says we will get up tomorrow morning and get more rewards. But it never happens. Neither do i offer the last part at night nor in the morning :-p

And your ISIS example is another very accurate example. these aholes think of themselves as worthy of God's happiness and rewards, while the fact is that these are at loss much more than the mere unbelievers.

the saddest irony of all this is that whatever they are doing was very clearly prophesied earlier that "a group would kill people in the name of God and they will think they are getting His happiness but on the contrary they would be the worst creatures on the face of earth." Hundreds of clear cut prophecies are present but these people are ignorant fools.

xinyuren:

Two defeated opponents crying, "boo hoo hoo! It's no use". Nzteacher should be joining in soon. This is what the losers always say when they are defeated with logic (I didn't really need the Bible to refute those old tired attacks). If there were any real weaknesses in my claim, you should have easily found them. But instead, all you found were trivial words that could logically and reasonably be understood another way. It is you who refuse to admit that the Bible stands up to the test. On the other hand, when I have attacked ideas such as the theory of Evolution, I used compelling, irrefutable logic that noone could give an answer to because they couldn't defend it! The best they could say is that they think scientists one day can solve the contradictions. Do you see the contrast? Evolutional theory has real contradictions and problems. The Bible doesn't (in spite of the talking snake and the sperm-spewing God).

cub:

nessquick is this recent study based on a study done over 70 years ago or more? If so i mentioned about it some posts ago Unless its a new study or new tests that have been done in the last few years or 10 20 years ago!

Shining_brow:

The 'experiment' was also shown to be invalid. 6 subjects were weighed, only 1 showed the 21g difference that remained consistent.

One gained weight; others lost weight and then put it back on; and one kept losing weight...

Nessquick:

yea, I am not sure when and where it took place this experiment. I just saw it about week or so ago at some online news from my country. just went trough first few articles and click to next one.

Btw, for my own opinion, I am more convinced about our consciousness is having human body experience, past now and future probably exist together and this kind of stuff. on the other hand, it sounds crazy as it is, but really, what was before big bang ? where are the boundaries of universe ? if there are boundaries of universe, what is beyond them ? another universes ? really ? how big that all could be ?

Really, consciousness and souls and this kind of stuff really works, more for someone sensitive, less for someone uncaring about this. Just about a 10 days ago,  I had a dream. I met a man, unknown to me, on some edge of rocky mountain or so. He looked at me and said he want to jump. i told him don't do it. He said again, that he really want to jump. I remember i was thinking if go back to help him or just leave him. i replied then, it's up to you. and moved and continued my way on some small road or stairs down. I saw him jump. he was falling down, a bit flying and floating, even a bit back up, like if the wind stream was too strong and pull him a bit back up. than he touched the grounds. then my dream fast forwarded, i was on the hill bottom, saw the body on rocks, did't see blood yet. tried to sharpen my sight and saw him still breathing a bit. I took my cellphone and called ambulance. I remember they asked me if he was foreign, and that they said it will be difficult and asked me if I'm willing to help. I didn't know what place it is, so I looked around and saw bus station with plate and station name, so I told to the women on phone. call ended, cut and I was with some medical staff beside the body, already covered with white fabric, blood under the body and some kind of mechanism beside. Dream ended there , and I woke up later with this whole image in mind. On my way to work, i was reading news , and what .. 1 hr old story about young man in his 30ies jump of a building in Prague at famous sight place. I stopped  breathing for a second, start to calculate about the time difference and the incident time, and it may really coincide at time. I may have stopped the man from jumping and save his life.

cub:

shining yes, i know because i asked this same question and u answered me All i was saying to nessquick i had mentioned this some time ago in a previous post and if it was the same study i had read thats all

Shining_brow:

@Cub - you also failed to mention that it was invalid - which is a pretty important point to make! (just as you failed to acknowledge it when it was first mentioned in this thread!)

@NessQuick - welcome to the thread :)

So, your thinking is that we do have a soul? Or that the brain operates in such a way as to give us consciousness? Because, obviously (I think) the former leads to the other questions!

There was a website which was dedicated to exploring the different types of 'psychic' phenomenon that humans have experienced, and they had come up with over 50 unique experiences - including what you just mentioned. (others include various types of telepathy, clairvoyance, telekinesis, healing etc etc). Unfortunately, whenever I've tried to get to that site, I seem to be blocked, or something... (this is outside of China that I tried!!)

As for your other questions - this is part of why I started the thread!!! :D

Researchers have become aware that animals do seem to know when an earthquake is going to happen - they become jittery, start acting out of character, etc. Since this observation was made (scientifically), investigations have been done... and some results have been coming in. This includes the possibility that there are changes in the electro-magnetic field that the animals are able to detect. Is this 'ESP" - or is it 'just another sense organ'?

HappyExpat has a thread on Mind-to-mind, which includes theories on brainwave frequencies and the ability to detect them, and to influence them (and thus, our thoughts). Again, is this a form of 'ESP"? Or, do human bodies give off 'energies' that other humans have the ability to sense (if they chose to)?

(FTR, it's because of research into these things that I think we WILL have proof of the existence of souls etc - we're heading in that direction... step by step...).

At this moment in time, I suspect only one thing will give us answers to other universes, pre-Big Bang, etc Sufficient evidence to suggest that we do have 'past' lives (time may not be linear to a soul), and then the statements that come from that. IE - if a person/s is able to give precise details about certain things, that there is no way they could have gained by 'conventional' means, and they say it's because they remember those things from previous lives, then it would make sense to listen to them if they say they have 'memories' of a similar nature of alternate universes, etc... no??

cub:

shining yes, u are correct i didnt mention to nessquick the tests were valid, because nessquick can look up and read my and your previous posts ok? No, i didnt look up the u gave i couldnt access this info Also maybe nessquick had discovered a newer different test done in this area and thats why i asked!

Nessquick:

shining, 

 what I have understood since my young age, soul is some kind of mater which is leaving body after death of human or animal. Plus the seeing of light on the tunnel end and so on, in fact I do not believe this too much. some suspicion there is , for sure. And I would rather really believe it, as much as I am affraid of death itself. Of the knowing that I am not here anymore, not farting, not seeing the beauty or ugly around, you know what I mean. This feel make me really uncomfortable.

 That may be a reason, because it's for many people same, why do we come up with such a reasoning as soul or multiple life experiences just to conform our mind and, as we say, "to have piece in soul". It's old saying, and many old sayings and stories originate from real life. 

 To take it purely technically,  how the body works ? It is a machine, filled with pumps, fluid pipes, muscles , protective coating, covered with millions sensors of many types, with vision and voice sensors... This all sends millions and millions of data - electrical signals - in each and every moment, to the main processor, control unit. Imagine yourself to be a programmer and write a code for your body, to type a letter " R ". just this simple thing. it has to coordinate eyes, movements of hand get feedback if already touched the keyboard, adjust the position of finger, read the screen for result... This goes for every other animal on this planet. they just some don't read this forum. yet. :-D

 From this view, it's hard to implement the idea of "soul" as kind of media or mater or how to call it. Exactly as the initial question. What is Soul ? But it has to be something in it. Because as a machine type of body, described above. when you are alive, or death, the body or especially facial expressions shall remain same. But look at photo of someone alive and after his death, if it wasn't violent and destroying way. There is missing something on the picture. and something more on picture of living people. There is a energy in it. forever trapped in that piece of glossy paper. for thousands of years there still will be.

  That energy. Where it comes from and how is that possible to stay there. as the theory of relativity, and also some another thoughts, even old chinese ying and yang, there has to be a balance, plus the rule of "conserving energy" ( you push the ball - giving the energy to the ball and the ball spread the energy trough ground air molecules so the particles are still moving or transferring energy to elsewhere. But could this energy exist forever, could be than the universe overloaded with lot of energies and particles ? Maybe, that's the reason why scientist discovered that universe in fact is expanding at faster and faster rate, as previously they thought it shall slow down in it's pace.

  Or it's just a circle ? you have to generate that energy to push the ball. it comes from the food you ate, and it has to use a sun energy for example as a plant. sun is made of gas, small atoms, particles which are able to generate such a great and powerful energy. that small nothing. you can't touch it, but still is so powerful while combined and colliding with others.

 so there was Just one single particle, and than bang and it copied itself and as a human cells with DNA coding changing function due time as desired, designed by the great architect ? where the great architect came from ? who or what is he/she ? Or is just big bang after match of universe collapse, caused by the weight of mater itself - rule of gravity - and collapsed in one tiny and extremely heavy bunch of energy which exploded again. and circle of life is here ?  

 So what is our mission here ? Is there some prize when we solve this puzzle ? Will that unlock next level in our experience or will that help us solve the climate change or do we meet other intelligent beings from other worlds who have already knew this and wait for us ? Oh my, more questions than answers. As one teacher told us at primary school :

" The more you know, you'll find that you know not enough yet. ".

Shining_brow:

I was going to point that out to you... why are you asking MORE questions, when the first lot haven't been answered :p

There's a certain logic I might go with... if we do have a soul, then I will posit that it is not impossible to know this (through personal experience). There are no 'rules' or anything similar to stop us from gaining this knowledge (I am presuming here that the soul is not something that didn't come about merely through an evolution as bodies have - even allowing for the possibility that such bodies were 'designed' or 'directed').

IFF the soul is so closely connected to the body, then we should have access to all the memories of the soul (this does rely on a certain conception of the soul).

That being the case, we should be able to access those soul's memories... somehow. At the very least, we should have a memory of when we first entered into this current body. (can the soul forget? I will posit 'no').

Nessquick:

Yes, I can agree with this concept of soul. As I am concerned about Yoga techniques as example, there are various ways to enter our consciousness, or "soul" in this case, and recall previous memories, or to be connected to other network, higher "information highway". As that was the case with Nikola Tesla as prime example, in some circumstances, his mind entered information highway and took snapshots, writing in his own memory the things he saw and when he came he did his work on earth. 

 I made a plan for myself to start meditate in order to try it, to try to see outside of the body. There was also some study with students or so, one group in Australia and in second group UK. they were given something hard to solve. After some time one of the group received help from those behind this test. it was somehow proven that the other group on other side of planet than "telepathically" received that help too. It sounds crazy, and It may have been disregarded in some ways. But it may work.

  Sure, I will let you know once I do some own research with own results :-)

  There was native americans with their coca, marihuana, acidic frogs and magic mushrooms ,  performing conversations with the Gods in state of mind which is this age outlawed. maybe it is outlawed to keep us out of reach the information, the happiness. Those people were preparing way for their souls after the death of body, not for the body itself. In Tibet or himalaya, there is culture which fed theirs own bodies to eagle kind of birds ( don't wanna google the exact name now ) . This are just few examples, that some cultures know there is something higher than living body. That soul is more important and may have many lives, or one endless continuous.  

I hope we can find what is soul and the true meaning. It has to be something so beautiful , nothing compare to heaven or Eden. Maybe. May be. 

 But then, why some people have a bad personality, bad soul, while other are beautiful people, and others are just ordinary people you meat daily with no effect on you. Are this souls of some forever devils incarnated in this current body and continue to harm the other half of angles ? But why and how ?

Shining_brow:

This idea - telepathy for new ideas - is not new. The real question is - how? Many breakthroughs have been 'achieved' at similar times in history, where there were no connections between the individuals (directly or indirectly).

A scientific approach is needed - and to be re-duplicated MANY times! Same with Dr Bengstrom's experiments... while he's the only one doing such things, it's only 1 person with therefore dubious experiments... when you get them reproduced by different researchers.. then it becomes 'fact'.

Shining_brow:

Not quite...

There have been 2 mass extinction events in this planet's history.

The significance of that being... what would we be like, and where would we be, if those hadn't happened? Were they essential in the forming of humanity as it is now? Or were they setbacks?

If they were setbacks, then it would indicate (possibly) that if we hadn't had our ancestors wiped out, we could have developed a few hundred million years earlier.

We didn't.

Perhaps on another planet, they did....

hunny797:

after we are dead we do not know we ever existed.

We are here on this planet by chance.

There probably is no other life within 1400 light years.

God did not create the earth in six days.

Most people believe in a god of some kind. But god is as rear as life in the universe.

All baseless claims. 

Shining_brow:

I wouldn't agree with 'baseless'. Unproven -  yes. But clearly based on experience (for some of them).

1400 light years without any other life forms... that's based on current thinking about what life is - so probably inaccurate.

Nessquick:

As Shining pointed out, There may be no life as we know it. But there may be a lot of life, but we can't see it with our eyes. Our eyes , ears and other senses receive just a small fraction of waves going around us. Everything in the universe is working on kind of waves. As your cellphone or hospital X-ray or ultrasound sensor detect only certain frequency, so does your eyes and ears. There maybe a form of life which we are just unable to see or detect. As Niels Bohr believed some years ago " reality does not exist until you observe or measure it " with which Albert Einstein disgreed saying " I want to live with that there is Moon even I don't watch at him now "

 So yes, the universe is incredibly, beyond our imagination huge in size. there are billions of billions of galaxies with another billions of stars with billions of planet. And just because we can not measure it, can not reach that far yet, we assume there is no other life ? That we are here by chance ?

 It's not by chance. The missing link between apes and humans. monkey see monkey do ? why didn't copy others and not came down off trees ? 

Nessquick:

Soul is not only for immortal. like me.

mArtiAn:

"Today, a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration—that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather." - Bill Hicks

Shining_brow:

I have to agree with mArtiAn's assessment... well, Bill Hicks' assessment...

And, I'm actually reminded of the Mormons, when they came knocking and wanting to give me a copy of their Watchtower magazine... The woman actually said to me "look at this picture... there are lions and tigers and other animals all living in harmony with humans".  Umm...  yeah, anyone can draw a picture... it proves nothing!

Don't get me wrong Nessquick - I was first introduced to such concepts... lifetimes ago :p But just drawing a picture, and giving a theory isn't going to really do much.

If you do a search for Dr William Bengston's page and interests... he is focussed on healing. Instead of just saying "look, it works", he is using the scientific approach - double-blinds, data, correlation, hypothesis testing, etc etc. AND... without 'believing'. (ie, he says 'this is what we found" - not "this is what it means")

Baby steps!!

Nessquick:

Martian, I wish I have a few small beautiful paper cuts soaked in acid again :-)

That was beautiful experiences.

 I don't deny death of our physical bodies. I don't suggest life is an illusion. But from the natural or better quantum point of view, all experiences are just chemical reaction and electro magnetic impulses , like the frog on a table of Mr. Galvani. There are still piles of unanswered questions about life waiting for it's conqueror. 

And some people may believe that they were created by some smoky dusty persona , which they don't know and don't even question how that persona or invisible power emerged and got the free will and power and mind to do such things as creating universe and all that is in. Why he did it ? Was he boring?

Was God created by the time of Big Bang from the particles ? Or just something imaginable, non-physical is creating physical mater, humans animal and flowers, plus of course the earth itself ? Is that even possible ?

The same way we don't know yet how everything around us was created, how it all started. But for me it is more rational explanation. In this way, the invisible power may exist. As a part of quantum world. That way will still collide with the question of existence of our bodies. We know we have body, because we can feel it when we touch ourselves. so we activate the sensor which send electrical impulse to the brain which "decode" it same as we decode the words on this screen.

 This so too deep to be taken on light scale, but some people rather not bother with it because they have something more important to think about ... That's perfectly fine, no problem with that. But we are destined to find the answer to life. Maybe not our generation of living bodies, maybe our kids. I do believe that human race was partially guided trough the times to their achievement. And I do believe that we are guided by no-one else but ourselves from future.

 We humans are doing big steps in completing the creation of artificial mind for robotic bodies, artificial life in some extend. But why we do so ? Do we want to be the Gods ?  To some extend we can read our mind  and transfer it to machines - like the guns at jet fighter controlled from helmet of pilot by reading , again, electrical impulses and chemical reactions.

In a bible, there was stated that Lord have created the human to the image of his own. which means to look like him. and what are we doing on the field of robotics and nano-technology ? trying to give a life to machine which looks like a person and can think on it's own. The old saying that History repeat itself must be in this case, mind boggling.

 That may explain why some people remember the distant past or future of their previous/future lifes. I did experienced that too. I have seen places in my dreams which i visited later by "coincident" or "unplanned mission", in person and was really stoned for few seconds when that happen. I am not kidding about it. That wasn't Gods will :-)

Nessquick:

Shining, i will sure read some of his work, I love knowledge ;)

Nessquick:

ok, the topic which Mr. Bengston  is about, not uknown to me. For few years I have really almost extincted the usage of any medicine pills unless it was "necesary" and it do works. help with right food and the mind set, you can heal yourself. I will try to get his book, somewhere over internet and read it.

Please, more sources to my hungry brain ? "Stephany, more input please" :-)

mArtiAn:

Brow, I was actually showing agreement with Ness by posting that Hicks quote, and Ness, I don't believe in God, or at least not in the conventional concept of God, I also don't believe we will ever discover any ultimate truth, just an infinite series of relative truths.

Nessquick:

Infinite series of relative truths, sounds legit

 I know also many of the theories I talk about sounds crazy too, and offer more questions as result, but so do also other theories.

 I never know, Martian, when you are only sarcastic or just yourself or mix of all, but I like it :-) I know from other posts that your are not christian or this kind of believer, the talk about God came as example and following the discussion on this topic by other posters. Quite interesting reading. I hope I do not sound as biased a Xinyuren in his way. I do not say that bible is fictional book, this book is describing a whole lot of events that took place at time and space. The "problem" is in interpretation of words, and for sure, the translation of transcription of 4987th transcription from person to person. :-)

Going home now, eat some brownies which my son made yesterday, with the guidance of his master :-)

Shining_brow:

@mArtiAn - sorry, I read it as satire on the subject (and not that you necessarily disagreed).

There seems to be this idea that 'god' must me some sort of super-duper awesome being. However, logically, while we might have a problem understanding such a thing, perhaps it's just another 'being' amongst many... and this universe is merely an experiment. If by doing experiments in the Hadron Collider, we smash some particles together in the right way, and it creates a divergent universe - would that make us 'gods'? (one theory of multiple universes posits this sort of scenario).

(I thought of something which relates to something you wrote here, but I'll post in a new reply...)

Nessquick:

Hi Brow, this direction seems to be the right one. I think that soul is what makes our personality. Some people say about others that they have beautiful soul. That's what I have questioned above. Why some souls are bad and some good. Maybe we have more than one soul, as persons with split identity. What else we can imagine behind mental illness ? From scientific view it's lowered functionality and ability of creating stable connection between cells in brain, creating wrong connection and confusion. From the other , it may be that the soul in this body is not happy or wrongly incarnated. Man trapped in woman body ? Very beautifully showed how the personality may works have been projected in the Pixars' movie Inside Out. With this concept our mind is controlled or directed by different entities , which may correspond with our daily experiences. This may be those souls of ours. So to reply the question how much of us the souls take for itself, I should say that physically it can be 0% as till now we assume that soul have no mass on its own. Spiritualism may take this number to somewhere high as 100% because soul is what makes the person a person. Quantum theory account may fluctuate anywhere above 0% because it's physically observable as form of energy or waves. So we are still where we was before. Does souls exists and they are ? They probably do but theirs state is still mystery. :-)

mArtiAn:

I still believe that a definitive answer to this question is ultimately unattainable but one naturally exercises faith to some degree about such things and again I'm gonna have to quote Hicks when he said "All matter is energy reduced to a slow vibration." I also read somewhere that on a subatomic level the matter we consider as our own bodies is constantly interacting with that of everything around us, suggesting that a divide between one thing and another is only an illusion we invest in and all things are indeed one. So where does the individuality of spirit we seek in this question come into it? Maybe there is none anymore than there is any notable individuality between each neuron that sparks and connects with another in our brain to send the message to inform us each time we need a shit. I heard that a nest of ants performs in the like of one single being. Maybe there is only the one great soul that we call God, and that we can be no more separate from it than an ant can be from the nest.

Nessquick:

There may be absolutely no soul at all, as it may be only a scapegoat for our constantly scared mind. The scare of death make us think about something above all this physical life. As Brow suggested in the questions, how God did create all the souls when he firstly made just Adam and Eva ? Hard work, to recycle the old, obsolete souls, or find them the right fresh bodies. Does the soul enter body right when the cells start duplicating in the womb or just when the baby catch the first breath of life  and suck in the soul ?

 Dunno. Someone said, that anything in universe is heading to just even greater disorder. there was only once an perfect state, prior to big bang. since than, everything is imperfect and disordered. and also beautiful.

to have just one universal soul, that would very confusing and coliding, or not ? why would try to destroy each other when we all are one ?

Shining_brow:

Hey NessQuick.

Yeah, I'd heard of that theory - that all those lights etc that are UFO's (by definition - Unidentified) may actually be 'angels' rather than 'aliens' (of the physical variety). (quote marks for - well.. what's the actual definition?).

I know of the book of Enoch, and have glanced through it. I've also read something on some of the things Enoch had to say, and the interpretations of that. In particular, one bit about being in a place with 12 windows or something.. and being able to see different things through different windows, and stars, or something?? The interpretation of that was he was taken to Stonehenge. Also, another bit about a shining bright house and stuff... Bru na Boinne in Ireland.

Shining_brow:

To answer your first Q - statistics. There are more religious Christians on this forum than any other actual religion (and by 'actual', I'm referring to the number of agnostics and atheists that are here).

Part of my beliefs are more animist, so the concept of soul is different. So too is the idea that we can recall previous lives. THAT makes a difference!

Janosik:

I was always wondering what can persuade adult, reasonable, educated person to become (or sty) Christian ...

Apparently Europe is really different from North America and Oceania.

Not many 'real' Christians in Europe nowadays (with exception of few countries where Christianity is still part of their daily life).

Shining_brow:

Well obviously - they all have the word 'thread'!