General Chat

Em, for a psychologist, you don't half ramble! Who says we are imprisoned (justly or not)? Who says we have had past lives to sin in? Who says we committed evil in paradise? Who says we are from paradise? Perhaps we are involved in some sort of meaningless game (which I have already postulated, on another thread - though no-one rose to that bait!). You are over-complicating the issue; you are trying to understand the full workings of a car by looking at a wheel nut - it can't be done. Accept that there is more to find out about, but you can't do that - yet - and enjoy theorising about it all. Alternatively, of course, there is nothing more than a wheel nut... Rob

I think some people are Reincarnated as part of their journey through life (not just this life) and as part of the lessons that need to be learned. I agree that there must be a degree of choice - don't see how everybody can be reincarnated. It's an interesting debate and I'm really enjoying reading all the different views. Kaye x

Julie anne sorry I've just seen your post. I thought your spirit and soul were the same thing?

I've heard that when you pass to the world of spirit and you haven't learnt your 'lessons', you choose the next body to come back in and keep coming back untill you learn them. i don't like all this life is about learning lessons business. We have all that at school. I feel a 'meaning of life' thead coming on.

Lou, As you practise astrology, you'll know that the soul is supposed to evolve by working its way through every sign of the Zodiac in turn. It's all explained in the book 'The Round Art' by A T Mann. CB >|<

I beg your pardon Robert? exscuse me for having an opinion... even if you did not understand it! lol Oh, and if you have met many psychologists you would be aware that we all have degrees in rambling! ;))

Em C You state that you are a Christian who does not believe in reincarnation. Is that not denying your faith? Len

erm... no len... not according to the Bible...

If i may, Len, answer this in full tomorrow... i really do need to go to bed. (very tired) Will explain my reasoning properly in the morning.

Hi all Well I'm a psychologist and an atheist and a sceptic and do not beleive in reincarnation or split between mind and body, am a real sceptic. But I have been really intrigued by this debate and the great variety of views expressed, I would like to ask Len a few questions: What are the names of the cosmologists who do not think the universe can be explained by maths but a greater intelligence, just out of curiosity, and which professor at City University are you referring to (I know a few people there). Its a great thread and am enjoying reading it Cheers Kaz

Dr V.P Lommel and his team at Rijnstate Hospital in Holland have researched “Near Death Experience” at hundreds of patients at hospitals across the country. These patients had been resuscitated after being clinically brain-dead and interviewed as soon as they were well enough to be gently questioned. Many reported being “out of the body” and observing from a “higher” place in the theatre the medical activities to revive them. This would have been at a time when there had been no electrical activity whatsoever in the brain and they were clinically dead. The team reached conclusions that “pushed at the limit of medical ideas about the range of human consciousness and the mind/brain relationship”. Christopher French, of the Anomalistic Psychology Research Dept. of Goldsmith College. London, observed: “If researchers could prove that clinically dead patients with no electrical activity in their cortex can be aware of what went on round them and form memories, this would suggest that the brain does not generate consciousness”. Em C If brain and consciousness (mind) are separate entities and that mind can still function and have memories of when the brain is dead, what does this imply Len

Hi Thanks for that Len, 'clinically' dead and 'medical science' strike me as scientists who don't really know enough 'bout the brain and it's capabilities as yet (I'm sure they will one day) and 'Hope reserach can prove' means they haven't yet?! Cheers Kaz Ps is Prof Vommel a cosmologist?

Kaz.R I suppose that I am an atheist too; one that was brought up as a Christian but who later recognised the bible as an edited mythology. I may be verging towards agnosticism, though. I was quoting David Marks, Professor of Psychology at City University in June 2004 when he was outlining another theory based on 'morphogenetic' fields although directly referring to research by Dr Stephan Schmidt of Freiberg University. You probably know him . Professors French and Wiseman (Herts. U.) both pooh pooh the paranormal. I was a student at City of London College in the 1950s before it was given elevated status and lecturers became professors. I later went to LSE to do philosophy, logic and semantics. Don't ask for lecturers names as they have gone - with the rest of my mind. Len

Cor blimey Len we have had a similar journey tho' not got to agnostic stage yet!!! I do know David marks tho' he was my old boss and used to do Uri Geller tricks at student parties. I still keep in touch! I am also v interested in philosophy! Kaz By the way, feel as tho us two have hijacked the thread so apologies to Louise and the others

The only 'cosmologist' that comes to mind at the moment is the late Carl Sagan I wrote to him and had a very reasoned reply from his wife Pearl Druyan who, while accepting 'distant intentionality', explained that it 'could not be weighed and measured' and that, in any case, her husband was far too busy saving the world. Her job title was 'First Personal Assistant'. Professor S.Hawkins may be described as a leading cosmologist and he has more or less conceded the impossibility of explaining the cosmos mathematically and that there cannot be 'a theory of everything'. len

carry on please. Its interesting.

Hi Len But doesn't the very notion of 'impossible' now, might not be in the future? Kaz

The New`Age teaching of reincarnation is not only anti christian, it is an inversion of christianity. It substitutes God who became man for man who becomes god, an impersonal fusion with the 'Grand Tout, la Grande Energie océanique' after numerous painful reincarnations. [Le Figaro, 1st Nov 1990.]

Reincarnation cannot possibly be anti-Christian, as Jesus Christ himself rose from the dead and caused others (Lazarus, Jairus's daughter, etc) to be brought back to life. If you don't believe in the Resurrection - the most important event in Christian history - you cannot call yourself a Christian. I was told that during my teens by the Dean of an Anglican Cathedral. The teachings of the so-called 'New Age' have their roots in ancient religions. Look to India for explanations of reincarnation and development of the 'soul' (Karma). Personally, I've never understood why mathematics (which is all Greek to me) should be held to be the be-all and end-all of everything. Yes, it shows that there is some kind of order in existence, but it doesn't explain why or where it came from. Since I've learned more during my adulthood than the 'by rote' Christian teachings of churches and my CofE school, I've come to the conclusion that 'God' is not what I've been taught but a name for some kind of omnipotent entity far beyond the comprehension of mankind. What science can't explain, it denies. That is ridiculous. It doesn't matter how learned scientists are, they can't know everything and probably never will, and to reject as 'rubbish' theories that don't concord with your own shows not only a lack of foresight and understanding, but also something that I believe to be a very dangerous commodity - a closed, or at least very narrow, mind. I do wish people wouldn't expound theories and write misleading books about things they don't understand and know little about. CB >|<

Hi, I will try to explain my christian standpoint on reincarnation....... Reincarnationists that profess a Christian faith, are, forced to believe that Jesus Christ Himself accepted and promoted transmigration of souls, which He allegedly was taught in India during the eighteen 'silent years' of his adolescence and early adulthood. Most often cited in support of this claim, is the conversation between Christ and Nicodemus found in the third chapter of the Gospel of John: '(Nicodemus) came to Jesus at night and said, ‘Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.’ 'In reply, Jesus declared, ‘I tell you the truth, no one can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again (John 3:2-3).' Erroneously resorting to a literal method of interpretation of the above, reincarnationists insist that when Jesus spoke of being 'born again', He was actually implying cyclic rebirth. However, if this indeed was His implication, it unfortunately was entirely lost on Nicodemus: 'How can a man be born when he is old?... Surely, he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born (verse 4)!' Instead of rebuking the Jewish religious leader for his lack of understanding of the presumably wide-spread doctrine of reincarnation, Jesus then went on to explain the true meaning of His words: 'I tell you the truth, no one can enter the Kingdom of God unless He is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at My saying, you must be born again (verses 5-7).' In the above passage, Jesus made it quite clear that He was not speaking of a physical birth, or a series of them for that matter, but one of a spiritual nature. Actually, the correct rendering of this text from the original Greek should use 'born from above', for that is precisely what is involved. Mortal human beings mate and bring forth offspring that were mortal and subject to death like themselves ('flesh gives birth to flesh' - verse 6.) However, the 'birth' that Jesus spoke of was not achieved through natural reproductive means, but as an event initiated by God alone (John 1:13). When a person is 'born again' as a child of God through faith in Christ’s redemptive provision of Himself on the cross, the Holy Spirit imparts to him a new nature that is not physical and therefore perishable (I Peter 1:23). Continued rebirth does not necessitate itself, for the individual has already entered God’s Kingdom of eternal life (John 5:24)