Merged Questioning the existence or non-existence of spirits/Pseudo-skeptics

As opposed to making it up as one goes along when the subject is spirits and reincarnation.
reading the books ... will answer your questions ... especially the book of mediums by Allan Kardec! in 3 days you can read ..474 pages reading the books ... ..after you read your Objection it will be well founded!
 
Did you come to this forum to discuss something, or just to sell books? If you have something to say, please say it.
I want you to read ... because without knowing your objection .. there will be no foundation
 
Did you come to this forum to discuss something, or just to sell books? If you have something to say, please say it.
do you want to debate ... about spiritist doctrine? ... but you know nothing about her ...want to debate without knowing is pseudo-skeptical attitude!
 
Wrong ... The vulgar sciences rest on the properties of matter which one can experiment and manipulate at will; Spiritist phenomena rest on the action of intelligences that have their own will and prove to us at any moment that they are not available to our whims. Observations, therefore, cannot be made in the same way; they require special conditions and another starting point; To want to subject them to our ordinary investigative processes is to establish analogies that do not exist. Science itself, as a science, therefore, is incompetent to pronounce on the question of Spiritism: it does not have to concern itself with it and its judgment, whatever it may be, whether favorable or not, could not have any importance.

Can spirits affect the real world or not? Can they move objects or speak to you or affect your actions? Yes or no?
 
do you want to debate ... about spiritist doctrine? ... but you know nothing about her ...want to debate without knowing is pseudo-skeptical attitude!

I am not interested in debate at all. I would be interested in hearing what you believe, and why you believe it, stated in your own words.
 
The theory is that we evolve to an enlightened state over many lifetimes, and eventually we reach a state where we can gain nothing from further incarnation so we continue to evolve as immortal spirits. At the time of the end of our cycle of reincarnations we remember all our past lives in perfect detail. Also the spirit mind is not limited by the constraints of a physical brain and our consciousness expands.

I have experiences a slight expansion of consciousness in meditation, and after death that state of greater expanded mental power becomes the norm.

It is not our finite tiny human selves that live for eternity, it is as growing spiritually enlightened beings that continue to expand mentally.

So once fully enlightened and in this final state, where next? What is the mission or purpose?

Once all spirits are fully developed and no need for finite beings at all, what is the next phase?
 
wrong again ... allan kardec ... was the coder of the spiritist doctrine or spiritualism ... will read the books on the spiritist doctrine ... be a real skeptic ...

It is quite sad that you are incapable of forming coherent thoughts of your own, and rely entirely on someone else to do your thinking for you. Enjoy your religious beliefs, entirely devoid of evidence.
 
Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So once fully enlightened and in this final state, where next? What is the mission or purpose?

Once all spirits are fully developed and no need for finite beings at all, what is the next phase?

The spirits evolve to higher planes of existence, and in the end it is said we merge back into the God mind and become a part of the ocean of divine consciousness, thereby loosing our individuality.

But it is impossible to say for sure what happens to such highly advanced souls, because they never come back to tell us. They pass beyond human experience. Spirit communications come from spirits in lower planes closer to the earth.
 
Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.

I didn't make this stuff up, I filtered it down into my language from the countless messages I have heard through trance mediums at the spiritualist association in London. I do not remember the exact words of many of the lectures I attended, just the general overview of things.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The spirits evolve to higher planes of existence, and in the end it is said we merge back into the God mind and become a part of the ocean of divine consciousness, thereby loosing our individuality.

But it is impossible to say for sure what happens to such highly advanced souls, because they never come back to tell us. They pass beyond human experience. Spirit communications come from spirits in lower planes closer to the earth.

Thanks for answering. I do appreciate that.

So the authors of spiritual stuff over time did do some follow up and in the process took it far beyond what we as finite beings can ever know, even if we have a hint at what could come. Quite clever indeed to take it to the greatest power, the forbidden levels for those not ready yet.
 
do you want to debate ... about spiritist doctrine? ... but you know nothing about her ...want to debate without knowing is pseudo-skeptical attitude!


So this is what it boils down too.

You want folk here to read these books so they know enough about the subject of spiritualism, before you will engage them in in debate on the subject. If they don't you just dismiss them as pseudo skeptics.

What a steaming pile of BS. I'm out of here!
 
No. YOU make your OWN arguments.
this kind of question ... proves that you ... do not know the Spiritist Doctrine ... It is of elemental logic that the critic knows, not superficially, but, deep down, what he speaks about, without which, his opinion does not. has value.
 
So this is what it boils down too.

You want folk here to read these books so they know enough about the subject of spiritualism, before you will engage them in in debate on the subject. If they don't you just dismiss them as pseudo skeptics.

What a steaming pile of BS. I'm out of here!
The critic should not simply say that such a thing is good or bad, but must justify the opinion by a clear and categorical demonstration based on the principles of art or science to which the object of criticism belongs. when do you not know these principles?
 
It is quite sad that you are incapable of forming coherent thoughts of your own, and rely entirely on someone else to do your thinking for you. Enjoy your religious beliefs, entirely devoid of evidence.
Having no idea of mechanics, can you appreciate the qualities, or the defects of a particular machine? Well, your judgment about Spiritism, which you do not know, can be of no greater value than what, under the above conditions, you have issued on the aforementioned machine. At every step you will be caught in the blatant offense of ignorance, for those who have studied matter will soon know it;
 
Edited by zooterkin: 
<SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.
What judgment would you make of a man who, without knowledge of literature, without having studied painting, was a censor of a literary work or a painting?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Having no idea of mechanics, can you appreciate the qualities, or the defects of a particular machine? Well, your judgment about Spiritism, which you do not know, can be of no greater value than what, under the above conditions, you have issued on the aforementioned machine. At every step you will be caught in the blatant offense of ignorance, for those who have studied matter will soon know it;

It is not necessary to study mechanics to observe that a machine functions. You can see that a car moves under it's own power, without understanding internal combustion engines.

First, present evidence that any supernatural thing exists, then we can go on to a discussion of how it works.
 
It is not necessary to study mechanics to observe that a machine functions. You can see that a car moves under it's own power, without understanding internal combustion engines.

First, present evidence that any supernatural thing exists, then we can go on to a discussion of how it works.
True skeptics or open-minded skeptics. They ask questions and research and study to try to understand new things and are open to learning about them. http://ssbaltimore.org/e-books/
 
I want to debate skeptics ... not pseudo-skeptics! pseudo skeptics are worse than fanatical believers!

I want to debate spiritits... not pseudo-spiritists ! Pseudo-spritists are worse than fanatical non-believers !

Do you know any true spiritist?
 
Can spirits affect the real world or not? Can they move objects or speak to you or affect your actions? Yes or no?

Pseudo-skeptics have a bias towards certain kinds of subjects, which they consider so absurd that they would not even "waste their time" reading about it!
 
Pseudo-skeptics have a bias towards certain kinds of subjects, which they consider so absurd that they would not even "waste their time" reading about it!

Have you checked out other beliefs yet, it won't be a waste of your time.
 
So to qualify we first must study the substance of steam. We must know of something you cannot provide an example as a believer.

The claim is yours. Show us what we cannot refute.
 
The pseudo-skeptic attempts to rationalize his own personal beliefs and will attempt to foul, denigrate, discard, and destroy the new information that causes the pseudo-skeptic much distress. This pseudo-skeptic cannot allow his deeply cherished lifelong beliefs to be refuted or challenged.
 
Last edited:
Well, I for one would like to hear your views about spiritualism.

I have said spirits told me we reincarnate many times, and face karma before eventually reaching a state of grace or enlightenment, after which we continue on evolving in the spirit world as immortals.

I have said until we reach such a state of grace we reincarnate and spend time in the spirit world between incarnations, and during that time we assimilate the experiences of our recent lifetime.

Is this what you believe?

Should I take your word about spirits over Mohammad's?
He also claimed that spirits talked to him. But never mentioned re-incarnation or karma.
Who should I believe and why ?
 
True skeptics or open-minded skeptics. They ask questions and research and study to try to understand new things and are open to learning about them. http://ssbaltimore.org/e-books/

You have yet to show there is any new thing to study. So far you have presented no information, claim, or positive assertion, other that identifying yourself as a 'spiritist', and referencing a particular spiritualist. What is it that you wish to debate?
 
thank you ! friend

I would be embarrassed to be called "friend" by you. (Even Scorpion must be uncomfortable by this.)
You're all over the place.
You don't know what you believe in.
Answer my questions, like, did you research other beliefs yet ?
 
Last edited:
The pseudo-skeptic attempts to rationalize his own personal beliefs and will attempt to foul, denigrate, discard, and destroy the new information that causes the pseudo-skeptic much distress. This pseudo-skeptic cannot allow his deeply cherished lifelong beliefs to be refuted or challenged.

Show us the new information. - without - making me read any books by your spiritual leader. I am interested in new information.

I have no religious beliefs to be refuted. You have shown nothing. Its hard to foul, denigrate and destroy nothing. There is nothing to discard.
 
Marcus Aurelius. He addressed this question some time ago:

“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

Little late but thanks for that quote. Closely matches my thinking but with much more eloquent wording. Probably not distinguished largely from other quotes related to living a moral life I like it non the less.
 
so ... don't say ... that there is no empirical evidence of the existence of spirits! If I had read, I would have known it ... but you know nothing about Spiritist doctrine or spiritualism!


Doctrine is not evidence of anything. It isn’t relevant to the question of whether spirits exist.
 
I want you to read these books ... debating without knowing anything about Spiritist doctrine is a pseudo-skeptical attitude ... a question do you know what perispirit is? don't google it ok!

Read them, they are baloney.

Next?

ETA: Oh and a perispirit is a lame rationalisation to explain the connection between a spirit and a physical body. Just when you can't explain anything, why not add more inexplicable spirits that mediate the connection between the physical and the spiritual? After all, it's fantasy. One can make up whatever one wants.
 
Last edited:
Should I take your word about spirits over Mohammad's?
He also claimed that spirits talked to him. But never mentioned re-incarnation or karma.
Who should I believe and why ?

I have written a great deal about Muhammad and the Quran, the summary of which is he was a liar not a prophet.

One reason I knew this from my first reading of the Quran is the horrible verses about hellfire and the torture of unbelievers for all eternity.
I had been quite sure that hellfire does not exist for a long time before reading the Quran. It is obvious that Muhammad stole the idea of scaring people with hell from the bible, which is also largely bunk. The spirit world teaches there is no hellfire, and no Satan, and there will be no judgement day.

The Quran also says the sun has an orbit, and it Is certain it means the sun orbits the earth. Imams lie and say it means the sun orbits the galaxy, but there is a hadith that explains what Muhammad thought about the sun, and it is clear from this hadith he thought it orbits the earth.

There are also clear falsehoods in the Quran that have been stolen from other sources. Such as the story of Jesus bringing a clay bird to life when he was a boy. This story appears twice in the Quran, but its source is a known book of fables called 'the infancy gospels'. Muhammad stole this story even though it is not from the bible but a book of myths.
 
I have written a great deal about Muhammad and the Quran, the summary of which is he was a liar not a prophet.

One reason I knew this from my first reading of the Quran is the horrible verses about hellfire and the torture of unbelievers for all eternity.
I had been quite sure that hellfire does not exist for a long time before reading the Quran. It is obvious that Muhammad stole the idea of scaring people with hell from the bible, which is also largely bunk. The spirit world teaches there is no hellfire, and no Satan, and there will be no judgement day.

The Quran also says the sun has an orbit, and it Is certain it means the sun orbits the earth. Imams lie and say it means the sun orbits the galaxy, but there is a hadith that explains what Muhammad thought about the sun, and it is clear from this hadith he thought it orbits the earth.

There are also clear falsehoods in the Quran that have been stolen from other sources. Such as the story of Jesus bringing a clay bird to life when he was a boy. This story appears twice in the Quran, but its source is a known book of fables called 'the infancy gospels'. Muhammad stole this story even though it is not from the bible but a book of myths.

Yes, and nothing particularly unusual in borrowing stories from other religions, myths and fables - much as biblical stories retold Babylonian and other mythologies...
 

Back
Top Bottom