1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. AfterLifeForums is an online resource to help those seeking information about survival and the afterlife dimensions. We hope it will encourage you to research afterlife literature, ask questions and engage with other members.
Dismiss Notice
To get the most from this website please register for an account.

PM...Favorite Form Of Mediumship

Discussion in 'After-Death Communication' started by STEVEN LEVEE, Mar 2, 2018.

  1. mac

    mac Staff Member

    I don't want to sound rude but how much research have you carried out into this? This appears to be supposition, bb.....

    ditto the above - Again it's supposition and belief because you've heard/read certain stories which may indeed have involved frauds. But how much have you researched the phenomena that were widely accepted as authentic by experienced researchers?

    That's a single case, bb, and you may be right but even if you are right it's just one case. It doesn't automatically mean all the others are too.

    Again it's your belief without any understanding of mediumship. I'm not here to defend frauds and charlatans but you've thrown the baby out with the bathwater because you're not basing your ideas on research data.

    Again I don't want to be rude, bb, but you're always going to be hampered by your stance concerning survival. But please don't misrepresent the situation - I certainly haven't suggested all of those apparent materialisations were authentic. Without a broader understanding, or at least an acceptance, of survival, mediumship/channeling et al how are you able to judge a situation as uncommon as physical mediumship and phenomena? Physical mediumship has always been less common, often carried out in small circles and groups and not necessarily much known about. I know that from my NAS days.

    But it was a subject you hadn't studied and researched and you knew little of mediumship to boot. How could you expect to reach a balanced conclusion on a subject unusual even within my own speciality?

    If there weren't an afterlife, if survival isn't factual then ALL seances would have to be fakery. There could be no legitimate seances, no authentic communication, no spiritually-based phenomena. There couldn't be any such thing as mediumship, only psychism.

    And we're back to my earlier points....

    Not all physical phenomena are kosher - frauds and fakers do exist of course, just as they exist in every walk of life where's there's a buck to be made from a sucker or where someone just delights in making fools of others. But unless and until an individual is persuaded about the reality of survival et al then everything associated with 'matters-spiritual' (as I call 'em) is an unknown subject until that individual has done enough research; research may then help change someone's mind.

    Physical mediumship and physical phenomena attract some, perhaps many, more interested in getting a thrill than learning about survival and communication. Even some of those who are persuaded about survival may seek such excitement! Any of them may be too readily taken in but those with little knowledge have a lesser chance of telling genuine from fake. It's what frauds and charlatans rely on and why knowledgeable individuals have been excluded from the demonstrations by certain phenomenalists.
  2. bluebird

    bluebird Major Contributor

    To some extent you're right -- my views on this are based on what I've read and researched, but that covers both stuff that was accepted as authentic by researchers, and stuff that wasn't. I've read a lot about these things (in the past, not recently), but my reading was wide-ranging rather than discriminating. So yes, what I've said is largely my opinion, but I never said otherwise.

    As far as the photo in this thread, you're correct that even if I'm right about that instance being fraudulent, that doesn't mean all others are as well, but I'm not saying that all others are; I do think that many with similar photos are, though (those in which physical things, like the shadow and elbows in this one, can be pointed to).

    My stance concerning survival is not one of disbelief; rather, it is one of agnosticism, of not knowing. I am certainly open to the possibility of an afterlife; as you know, I fervently hope an afterlife does exist. I would be ecstatic to have the existence of a (loving, kind, pleasant, etc.) afterlife (in which we will be reunited with our dead loved ones) proven to me.

    I know you haven't suggested that all of the apparent materialisations were authentic; I know you are discerning when it comes to these things. I apologize if I came across as suggesting that you did believe all of the materialisations were authentic -- I certainly did not mean to.

    You said "If there weren't an afterlife, if survival isn't factual then ALL seances would have to be fakery. There could be no legitimate seances, no authentic communication, no spiritually-based phenomena. There couldn't be any such thing as mediumship, only psychism." You are correct -- if there is no afterlife, then all seances, communications, etc., are fake. I don't know if that's the case or not. I hope it isn't.

    I'm really not trying to argue with you about whether all mediumship is legit, or about who is and who isn't. I was just responding to your post in which you said that "physical mediumship as witnessed in the past just doesn't seem to happen nowadays", and was offering what I see as at least part of the reason why that may be the case.
  3. mac

    mac Staff Member

    Fair comment, bb. You did say it was your opinion and since you've researched extensively I acknowledge it's an opinion you've developed based on what you found.

    I do know you don't disbelieve the notion of survival. You say you're agnostic but for me that's not what I sense. Dictionary definitions of agnosticism describe the condition as not knowing whether there's a God or some kind of supreme being/entity etc. In connection with survival I prefer to say 'persuaded'. It seems to me one is either persuaded or not persuaded by personal experience (if any) or the huge numbers of accounts that have come from others. I don't see that situation as equivalent to not knowing if there's a supreme being or entity. Maybe that's just my different perspective?

    I should lay my cards on the table. I'm not especially big on physical mediumship but I acknowledge it's value in the way I do other forms of mediumship. It's real value to me is when mediums - not phenomenalists - use it to demonstrate survival - period, full-stop. I'm not much interested in anyone producing phenomena for the sake of producing phenomena. But I despise those who fake anything.
    Auras and bluebird like this.
  4. mac

    mac Staff Member

    Last edited: May 29, 2020

Share This Page