1. Afterlife Forums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death.
    Dismiss Notice

born with severe disabilities

Discussion in 'General Afterlife Discussions' started by Storybud68, Jun 22, 2018.

  1. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    On that last, important point I wholly concur. One should never expect others to accept personal convictions as facts.

    I didn't think for one moment that was your intention but some individuals may feel the value of their experience is dimished by referring to it as a belief - or is that just me?


    But if - as you concede - it was indeed authentic communication with a discarnate loved one or someone else then it isn't a matter of belief at all.
    Certain words are tainted by their regular usage - belief is one such word. I personally hold belief about some issues about which I am still not fully persuaded. Where I have become fully persuaded I see them as my knowledge, my understanding; they are then very different from my belief. It doesn't change my persuasion just because others don't see it the same - why would they? All I hope is that others might respect my position and not refer to it as belief if they are unable to understand the difference.


    Agreed - everyone has an unchallenged right to believe whatever she/he chooses. How much and what quality of detail constitutes evidence is also for the individual to decide. But evidence is different from proof and that's implicit in those words.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2018
  2. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    Maybe some people do feel that the value of their experience is diminished by having it referred to as a belief, I don't know....but what else should it be called? It could be called an experience, of course, but it cannot accurately be called "proof" of an afterlife, at least not in a general sense (that is, it may very well constitute proof for the individual who had the experience, but it shouldn't be assumed to be considered proof to anyone else). To me, the word "belief" accurately conveys the way the experiencer feels about the experience.

    I do not concede that any particular experience was authentic communication with a discarnate loved one or whomever, as I have no way of knowing if it actually was such communication, or if it wasn't but the experiencer thought it was, or if the experiencer is simply mistaken or lying. What I do concede is that it is possible that a given experience may have been communication with a dead loved one.

    I think that perhaps you and I have different connotations for the word "belief". When I use that word in the context of these afterlife discussions, I mean that the particular experience being discussed cannot be proven to be a communication from a dead loved one, but I don't mean to say that it absolutely is not such a communication. In other words, it does not reach the level of proof or fact for people other than the experiencer (and maybe for some other people who find that person's experience to be sufficient proof for them), but that doesn't mean it doesn't have value. I don't view "belief" as a "dirty word" (for lack of a better phrase), and I don't use it as one.

    About "evidence" and "proof", I see them as very closely related in meaning, with a preponderance of verifiable evidence perhaps ending up as proof.
     
  3. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    I've adopted the word 'persuasion'. It may be a poor alternative but it's what I am using for now in a usually vain attempt at differentiation.

    I had already said similar but we're back to this word 'proof' again.

    Based on my personal experience, and those related by others, it doesn't for me ...

    The following is what you wrote in posting #20: "Perhaps their belief is correct, in that they did communicate with a dead loved one, or visit the afterlife, or whatever they say their experience may be..." Hence I saw those emphasised words as your concession. If, as you write, their belief is correct that they did communicate with a loved one then it ceased to be belief. It became fact.

    undoubtedly - words and their usage is important and changing how they're used is one way that language evolves.



    The verb 'prove' is as troublesome as the noun 'proof'. Evidence is a simpler principle although weight of evidence may remain contentious.

    But the word 'belief' carries unhelpful baggage from an association with the word 'faith', usually in connection with religions. A good reason to avoid it.

    Closely related still leaves them different although sufficient, verifiable evidence may indeed eventually be considered proof. But I still prefer to avoid the word in respect of matters spiritual. :)
     
  4. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree on much of this, then, but I thank you for the congenial and civil discussion. :)
     
  5. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Yes there will - I guess - always be differences in our outlooks. Thank you, too, for an interesting and friendly conversation. :)
     
    bluebird likes this.
  6. genewardsmith

    genewardsmith Active Member

    What I've heard is that they get an education, which includes history lessons. How much negativity this involves I don't know, but I suspect it's as little as possible.
     
  7. Storybud68

    Storybud68 Member

    some very interesting points made on this subject thank you all kindly for your thoughts.Its a tough question that I posted ,but I've heard and read of a lot if people having contact with there deceased children 10 or 20 years after they have passed and in this communication they are the same going age and mentality.so that would seem the opposite to what Roberta posted
     
  8. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    One possibility is that those children communicated with their parents in the way with which they thought their parents would be comfortable/familiar.
    Another possibility is that the communication was not real (was a different spirit, or a con by a false medium).
     
  9. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Your question is tough only in knowing how detailed to make a response. ;)

    The points you've raised have been asked before so they're not novel or difficult but to get the most out of answers ideally needs an enquirer with a broad undestanding of the afterlife picture.

    bluebird has made a very good point about children communicating in terms that would best suit the expectations of their parents. There's no way of knowing. What needs to be remembered is that spiritual development 'over there' isn't tied to apparent age - I say "apparent age" as there's no time there in the way experience it. What we mean by age doesn't apply 'over there'! :D

    Add to the picture the 'absolute' spiritual level a discarnate individual may enjoy and it should be seen that someone who passed as a child may still be at a 'spiritual status' far beyond anything we could imagine. But it may not be that case in every situation unless you're minded to accept what was written earlier. So not necessarily opposite to what Roberta wrote but an alternative. :)

    When this and indeed other matters are considered in isolation, without a broader spiritual context, it's easy to misunderstand.
     
  10. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Discarnates who remain as children after their passing do so of their own volition, for whatever reason they have. [Reflect, if you would, that before we incarnate for even the first incarnation (or the only one if you're not a reincarnation adherent) we have a certain spiritual 'status' - we don't just come-into-being as we are born into this world. We are not children.] If they choose, then, to remain as children for the 'longer term', something similar to the chidhood they would have had if they didn't die prematurely, they will have done it to experience childhood hence will be nurtured as chidren.

    With none of the negative issues 'over there', though, that might be encounter as incarnates they will not experience 'evil'. But neither will they be pampered. ;) That's a human term.
     
  11. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Dear Bluebird, again, we agree to disagree. But if others who might read what I have said consider it important to really discover the truth - at least to a level that they will find convincing - then please be assured that the evidence does exist, and it is persuasive.
     
  12. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    They are certainly free to do so. ;)
     
  13. Storybud68

    Storybud68 Member

    Thank you all kindly I know its a tough question and I value all your reply greatly.
     
  14. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    It's NOT a tough question at all - see posting #29 :D
     
  15. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Out of the blue I found myself recently watching on our BBC TV a programme about the life of Eric Clapton - 'Yardbirds', 'Cream', 'Derek and The Dominoes', an amazing blues guitarist - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Clapton - (interestingly, I found, from a town near where I live although I hadn't realised that.) Also interesting for folk my age who loved blues and Clapton's amazing guitar ability but of relevance on ALF because of what happened in his later years.

    His young son Conor died in 1991 after falling through a window that was left part open in Clapton's apartment situated on the 49th floor of a New York block. Conor's birth a few years earlier had begun to turn around Clapton's dysfunctional, drug-and-booze dominated life only to be followed by his seemingly-untimely death after a few joyous years of life with his dad, a time when Clapton found a reason to change his way of life.

    I went to bed thinking about what happened 27 years ago, events that affected me at the time and which still do even though I have no connection with Clapton. Was Conor's short time here on earth and his desperately sad death all planned as an experience chosen by, or for, his dad? The child animated by a highly spiritually-elevated individual who incarnated simply to turn round the chaotic life of his dad and to bring about changes Eric Clapton could never had anticipated? I'm minded to think the answers to those questions were 'yes'.

    And if that was the case, might the loss of our son also have been planned and executed to bring about life-altering events for me and my wife?
     
  16. jimrich

    jimrich Active Member

    Perhaps.....IMO.
    Read the book: GROWING UP IN HEAVEN by James Van Praagh to get some valuable answers to your questions. I just bought a copy at ebay for $3.73 - free shipping! IMO, everything in life is "pre-planned" and happens for a good, though rarely understood, REASON.
     
  17. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    No matter how many answers one may find the answer can never be totally certain because no-one can be certain of the answer for any specific individual. I'm past the point of reading now though, or looking for answers, but thanks for the suggestion.

    The real answer is as you've said - perhaps. If it was the case for us I'll never know for sure this side of the divide but I remain unpersuaded everything that happens in life was pre-planned. I am persuaded that certain, important issues may be but the converse isn't necessarily true - for me it isn't certain that even a life-altering event was pre-planned.
     
    bluebird likes this.
  18. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    I agree.
     

Share This Page