Discussion in 'Carol and Mikey Q&A 'follow-on-discussions'' started by mac, Jan 6, 2020.
lol, no worries.
Of course the earth is not flat, as has been proven scientifically. It is round (well, round-ish).
That is what we have been educated.
Yes, and with good reason -- because there is no doubt. The ancient Greeks proved it mathematically a couple of thousand years ago; Ferdinand Magellan circumnavigated the planet 500 years ago (as have others since then); we can actually see the earth's curvature when we are able to see a large enough portion of horizon, as when flying in a plane; every other planet we have observed is also a sphere; and astronauts have seen the earth and its roundness from space and from the moon.
It is a sphere, period.
Mikey will offer his thoughts in due course but in the meantime I've been impressed to comment on these quoted postings.
As administrator I check all postings to make sure they're relevant to the thread they're in and not breaking rules. Those above are fine from that perspective but from my own, that of a general member, they're not.
So, strictly as a member, I think it's inappropriate to raise a 'flat-earth' question on a website focusing on afterlife matters. I think it's especially unacceptable expecting Carol to spend her time and effort asking Mikey to respond to this daft notion, one long dismissed by serious-minded individuals.
The two points raised by Ben are interesting but complex and scientific. Providing detailed answers would require any communicator to be skilled in aspects of both subjects; providing them via mediumship would be demanding of time and effort. Add to that picture the aspect that neither subject is really the province of an afterlife-focused website.
I'm continuing the conversation about exit points.
Carol wrote: "First of all, I typed the word permitted (which also means allowed from my knowledge) because that was the word used by Bluebird in her post. I intentionally did that as I felt that made it clear." With the greatest of respect to Carol, for me it had the opposite effect.
We frequently encounter differences over the meaning of a particular word but "allowed" and "permitted" to me imply external factors are applying that allow or permit but there's also the connotation that something might not be allowed in different circumstances. Being permitted or allowed could also be seen as a concession, one that might be withdrawn.
Freewill - for me - is never the same as being allowed. Freewill is one's right rather than it being allowed by somebody or something. For example we exercise freewill in believing whatever we wish - it's not that we are being allowed. Nobody and nothing can prevent it.
She goes on: "Yes it is allowed according to Mikey. It is a choice. If Mikey wanted to stay he could have." To that I would say that Mikey would be exercising freewill. If not then something or someone would in effect have allowed him to stay. Is that truly what was meant?
In that posting # 924 it says "Again, Mikey tells me when the soul can no longer sustain the body, we leave." My response to that is of course we leave when that's the situation because we no longer have choice.
"Mikey tells me when a soul continues to hang on here, it can add misery to that soul (depending on the illness, etc. ) and it can change life lessons not only for them but others as well."
"We have guides that try to keep us on track with our general life plan. From Mikey's perspective, it is not common for souls to hang on long after a last planned exit point because of this." To those points I must ask if lives of misery are therefore the outcome of 'hanging on' beyond an intended final exit point? It appears to me there is a great number of folk in such circumstances! If that is Mikey's perspective, if it's the way he sees it, then in effect it's his view or opinion. Mine is different.
What we have heard about exit points is that they are chosen by an individual before incarnation. But the Devil is in the detail. Without adequate or appropriate detail a principle may not make sense and if we are to make progress in our spiritual understanding detail is important.
My limited understanding of matters spiritual has come from the guidance of those widely acknowledged as spiritually advanced but I can not recall hearing about this notion of so-called exit points from them. That doesn't mean it's wrong but I am left with searching questions.
I try to be open-minded to unfamiliar notions but I've been taught it's unwise to accept without question. I follow guide and teacher Silver Birch's words and only accept what appeals to my reason.
Separate names with a comma.