1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

BruceAdama's Thread

Discussion in 'General Afterlife Discussions' started by BruceAdama, Jan 9, 2013.

  1. BruceAdama

    BruceAdama Established Member


    I can actually understand what you're saying, based on the nature of being curious about what one doesn't know or understand. That aspect makes sense to me, and you will get no further argument from me on that front, because your argument makes sense. All I can do is repeat that I, myself, did not ever want to leave the realm of love to begin with, but that is something I have said often enough here. However... on the matter of the books of life, and reading them... remember that I said that the NDE reports I read stated that any soul reading such a book would also experience the life, as if they were living it... sort of like a holodeck on Star Trek, I guess, or a simulation. In any event, it's enough of the experience that they gain the knowledge they seek. I would NEVER wish to be born into a life of misery, or suffer from a crippling disease, or die a horrid death. Let me offer this example for an analogy:

    My father drinks coffee. I tried it once, and do not like the taste at all... in fact, I hate coffee... for this reason, I drink colas for my caffeine. I once asked of my father why he drinks coffee, when it tastes so bad. He offered to me that coffee is an acquired taste, and once you drink enough of it, you acquire the taste for it. My reply to him was to ask why I would wish to acquire a taste for something which to me does not taste good or desirable? He had to admit that my argument held a certain unavoidable logic... if I don't like something, why should I wish to subject myself to it? I use the coffee analogy, because my father is like someone who is actually LIVING the life in the book I am reading... he is HAVING the experience. I, on the other hand, merely had a small sampling of the experience... a shadow of it, in the form of a mere taste of coffee... and it was enough for me to know it was unpleasant to me, and not something I would wish to subject myself to any further.
  2. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    Firstly, allow me to discuss the time issue: The Greater Reality (i.e. God) is timeless, but the Summerland does have a type of time to it. I'm not sure how to explain it, but there is a certain loose sense of earth-like time - it's just endless. So, although there is more time there, you can learn more in less time here, speaking objectively. Also keep in mind that there are some lessons you simply cannot learn at all from the afterlife. (As a side note: this flexible time slowly goes away as we rise up to the higher levels of the afterlife - I have a hunch that it only exists to help accustom us to eternity.)

    I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to point out that your statements about time are, even from a mainstream scientific viewpoint, false. Scientists today recognize that time has not always existed - it was in fact created, along with space, in the Big Bang. No matter what caused the Big Bang, linear time could not have existed before it. Similarly, if the universe were to end by means of a "big crunch," which is a real possibility, then our time would cease to exist. This standardized time that we are familiar with can only exist inside our individual physical universe/dimension. Outside of it, all bets are off. In the spiritual dimensions, time is either extremely pliable or totally non-existent and, in the other physical realms, time would work differently as well.

    If you can resist, do not think of incarnations are being linear either, because they are not. Think of your soul as a large bucket of water. Every time you incarnate a little bit of water is scooped out of the bucket for a while, and then dropped back in when you die. Because objective time does not exist in the afterlife, one is living all of one's incarnations in the same instance really. In other words, nothing in the afterlife happens in a sequence.

    Now, allow me to use your fire example: Death by burning, whether accidental or induced, is perhaps the most terrible way to die that I am familiar with (and thanks to Criminal Minds, I am familiar with a fair few). One can understand that it is painful from the afterlife, yes, but one cannot fully experience the lesson.

    For example, it is one thing for a person to save that he will never betray his country, even under duress, but it another thing to remain faithful to that vow whilst on the rack. So it is with the afterlife - you can understand the lesson's content from the afterlife realms, but you cannot fully experience it from there and, so, you cannot fully develop and grow from there.

    What drives all spirits in this place though is an overwhelming desire to grow, learn, and advance spiritually. Everyone, even you, is desirous of spiritual growth. The reason is because, the higher you rise in the afterlife, the better it gets. Compared to our earth, the Third Level of the afterlife is heaven, but remember that there are still another four according to most literature and accounts. As you rise higher and higher up, there is exponentially more love and light. Love is perhaps the most addictive substance that exists, in this world and the next, so it will certainly entice you to advance.

    Think about it this way: Going to Disneyland (or wherever your dream vacation may be) is fun for a week, right? But what about if you had to spend 75 years on vacation? Don't you think it would get a little tiring? Having an eternity in the Summerland gets dull as well after a while, and people want to learn, so progression is inevitable.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2013
  3. Intbel

    Intbel New Member

    Pleased someone understands, thanks friend, 'tis a rarity! By the way, I don't seek argument, honest debate is all, and if I can not reasonably and logically support any statement I make then I know something ain't right. So I write, not only to share ideas but also to get feedback so's any fault in reasoning may be found and corrections made. Thank you for all your feedback to date.

    Interruption: I think our freewill is always respected and we are not forced to do anything.

    As it happens, I really like coffee. Was not allowed it as a child, loved the coffee aroma. Fortunately, the first cuppa coffee I tasted was of high quality and I loved it! Had it been some cheapo instant would probably have been put off coffee for life. I detest the colas, and don't touch alcohol. 'Tis tea for me during the day and some coffee in the evening.
    I guess it it all boils down to personal taste?

    I'm with you in that I also do not understand why one would persist in an activity one doesn't like, just in order to acquire a taste for it.

    Perhaps it could be that in observing the contentment/satisfaction that others seem to experience when doing these things, one may be seeking to experience that same contentment/satisfaction?
    I say that, 'cos I suspect that is one of the reasons why I began smoking.
    As to subjecting one's self to something one doesn't like, folks do this frequently. Observe how many folks daily stay in jobs they detest doing work which they don't like and is unsuited to their aptitudes.

    We frequently do things and experience thing we'd much prefer not to do because we perceive (often mistakenly) the sacrifice as being worth the reward.

    Thinking about it, it seems we are trapped in a form of insanity: we sacrifice our energy, physical and non physical, for the 'rewards' of material assets, as in amounts of cash. We then sacrifice that cash for material objects which we eventually discard as junk. We do this again and again.

    So what have we gained from the initial sacrifice? Nothing at all! Well, nothing except what we learn from the experience and what is learned is that what we do is insane.

    Not that we are insane, we just engage in insane behaviour. If we were insane, we'd not recognised the insanity of it.

    Viewed objectively, this living is a fun game to play!

  4. Bruce, Maybe this is exactly what you are doing right now, just reading a book of life, so engrossed in it that it seems real to you, as if you are living the life of the main character in the book. Maybe that's what is meant by our life (and death) being an illusion.

    That's one hell of a realistic book, huh?

    Okay, I know a few words won't change your mind. I am glad that you shared your worldview and took the time to explain it. I understand, respect and accept your worldview. I am sure that many people, including myself at times, feel exactly the same way you do; that this world and the god that created it is one big cosmic mistake. But whether it's a mistake or an illusion, the inescapable fact is that you (and i) are experiencing it. Short of suicide, what do we do now? My answer: We're here, might as well make the best of it.

    With Lovingkindness (metta),
    vic's myth
  5. A tangential point, but I think some of you misunderstand the concept of "an acquired taste." This does not mean, I tried it and it was horrible and it's still horrible but I do it anyway for some reason. I believe there are two reasons for disliking something at first:

    1. I suspect that we are inclined to dislike unfamiliar flavors as a way to avoid eating things that are dangerous. This seems likely to be some sort of evolutionary defense. However, we modern humans have ways other than instinct to determine whether something is dangerous to eat -- so we don't really need to be limited by this biological programming.

    2. Children have a different palate than adults, perhaps because they need more calories than adults do, per pound. So they tend to favor sweet and starchy foods much more strongly than adults. Also more flavors are unfamiliar to them than to adults, so #1 is more of a factor. This is why we insist that our children take at least a bite or two of their vegetables. Over time, the taste becomes more familiar and they find they like vegetables just fine.

    An acquired taste means that over time you actually enjoy the thing. I didn't like beer the first time I tasted it, but as I tried it a few times over a few years I have come to like it quite a bit. Same with most vegetables, fish, shellfish, Thai food, wine, beer, coffee, tea and several kinds of fruit. If I allowed my initial reflex to reject the unfamiliar to rule my eating habits, I would still be living on cold cereal and bananas, and I would have denied myself many great pleasures -- not to mention adequate nutrition.

    I'm not saying you should drink coffee or cola or alcohol if you don't want to. I'm just explaining my understanding of the value of acquired tastes.
  6. BruceAdama

    BruceAdama Established Member


    Well, again, I have to respectfully disagree, because people (and the scientific community) cling to this idea that time is somehow intimately linked to the fabric of our universe, as if it were something tangible, or even quasi-physical, dare I say. Time is not something tangible that is part of our universe. You cited the Big Bang and the Big Crunch. Just because our own universe did not exist before it existed, does not mean there was no time, or more properly, the passage of time. There was... it was simply a passage of time of which we were not a part. It's vaguely akin to the old question of if a tree falls in the woods, and nobody is there to hear it, does it still make a sound? The answer of course, is yes... it does make a sound. And no, we cannot hear it, for we are not there. Additionally, consider this... again, I have read a couple NDE accounts where people claim that God has not only created this world and this universe, but untold multitudes of others. Let us assume for the sake of this argument that such is indeed true. Now... let us assume that "today" at about 5:40pm, (our time) God decides to create a brand-spanking-new universe. Well, does this mean that time had never existed before the creation of this brand-new universe? No, of course not, because WE were here before it, and during it... thus, time has always been, is, and will always be... just like God. But for the occupants of this brand-new universe, for THEM their perception of time and what time is has just begun.

    As for your comment about an everlasting vacation... again, respectfully, I submit that that IS something I want, and have no desire to "work" if I don't have to. I admit freely that that makes me sound incredibly lazy, but it is honestly how I feel. I'm sorry, but it is.


    This is actually an extremely interesting thought, and I will admit that it blew my mind. The only thing I could argue about it, is that if this be the case, then how would you justify the whole process of "dying" and being reintroduced to the Summerland again, if you were already there just reading a book to begin with. But I have to admit... that is a very intriguing idea, and it's making me think, which I like. If it is true... that might mean that the Summerland and this plane are actually in a way one in the same. Let me ponder this, my friend.
  7. Have to quickly jump in here and use your coffee analogy - you did in fact experience the coffee to a degree prior to sipping it - you experienced the aroma and you experienced your fathers appreciation of it, but untill you tasted it, you didn't know what it was really like.
  8. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    What I'm saying is just my own interpretation of the evidence I am familiar with - you are of course free to see things another way. Let me ask you though, what makes you believe that time exists outside of our own universe? I am genuinely curious because I have never seen evidence supporting that assertion.

    Going back to your example about God creating another universe: Yes, that universe would probably have time, but it would be a different time than ours. Time and physical space seem to be invariably liked - one likely cannot exist without the other because they are interwoven into each other. Both time and space exist within a dimension/universe, before that universe is created they do not exist, and they thus exist only in that universe. So, if God created another universe right, its sense of time would start right now. Yes, other universes have existed before it, namely this one, but they have a separate sense of time. From the perspective of that new universe, time is just beginning.

    God, however, is simply energy. It has been and it always will be. That energy exists completely outside of both space and time, and is thus not subject to either force. Perhaps thinking about it this way will clarify what I am saying: All the "fake" areas of reality, including all the physical dimensions and the afterlife levels are simply thoughts in the Mind of God. Ideas such as time and space seem real only to those inside those thoughts. To those/Him outside that thought, it is just an concept that is not needed in the Greater Reality.
  9. Andrew

    Andrew Guest

    A very good point, dear Fasaga! So is it with life - you don't truly know until you try it!
  10. BruceAdama

    BruceAdama Established Member

    I knew someone was going to bring that up... I was waiting for it. My point was that unlike my father, who actually took the time and effort to develop the taste, thus learning to like coffee, I merely had but a glimpse of the experience, and chose NOT to devote the time and effort to learn to like it.

Share This Page