The Secret: The Truth Behind the Lie

[Volunteer]

What are you thoughts of this article? Where do you think he is missing the idea behind IMing?


The Secret...The Truth Behind the Lie

[Mitch]

Sounds to me like he is a skeptic which will try anyway to debunk something. I know from my own life that if I worry about something than it seems to come true. So if negative thoughts can come true than that must mean positive thoughts should be able to come true. Humans are still along ways off of knowing what consciousness is and where it comes from. From some of the new findings in biology, it seems that consciousness is not in the body at all but it seems that our consciousness is downloaded into our bodies. Why should I listen to this guy when there are scientists who are doing incredible work that seems to suggest that our thoughts are more powerful than most people think.

[judge45]

I think the real issue with this article is that it's referencing God like ability. That if the LoA is real, anyone can click their fingers and hey presto, you can have it all, but that is not the point, that would mean you're like a god if not indeed god and again, that's not the point.

Being able to manifest everything at will, would make your entire physical reality meaningless, you might as well be floating in the ether doing that.

Why bother?

Many people who doubt the power of LoA, simply don't understand it.

It's a natural law, but it's not magic.

We are all one, one consciousness (even christen faith covers this as we are all from Adam, from god himself in his image) and if we come from a power that is greater than physical reality, to experience physical reality, we must give up some of that power.

I'm god, you're god, we're all god, we're all collective consciousness, existing by choice in a physical reality that has rules, some can be bent, some broken, but there are rules.

I think the author is searching for a 'claim to fame' by opposing and at the same time not understanding the LoA.

My Godly Opinion

[Mitch]

Also it is not easy to throw out your subconscious beliefs. I've believed in LOA for 2 years now and my subconscious still holds beliefs that can block me from manifesting what I want.

[Lychee]

He is not wrong, IMO.

The LoA is not the only law operating in the universe. Aside from that, if everyone was able to manifest whatever they wanted whenever they wanted, there would be chaos. There is definitely control over this world. We cannot control what we want, when we want it, or how we want it.

The law of attraction is real but it is not the only law at work. God is the absolute law since He is in control of all things He is the one who has created the law. We cannot go above law or alter it - we can only use it - thus I believe we are not God. We cannot create natural law, we cannot change natural law. We are not the power, we cannot be the power, we are simply users of the power.

Letting go of your blocks in your mind and truly believing is important. But just because you believe and you've taken some action, that doesn't mean you are going to get whatever you want.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Volunteer

What are you thoughts of this article? Where do you think he is missing the idea behind IMing?[/url]

I think that he's missing a lot, but 90% of what he's missing is stuff which has already been extensively discussed many times in this forum. So I'll just focus on the remaining 10%.

He has this burning issue - he thinks that it's cruel to teach LOA. His reason is that it gives people false hope. These are people facing some personal tragedy or disaster - they turn to LOA, but it doesn't work, and they are devastated.

Well, it all depends on how you look at it. If you were an atheist, you'd say the same thing about Jesus or Allah. In other words, you'd say that religion gives people false hope. These are people facing some personal tragedy or disaster - they turn to Jesus or Allah, some saviour in the sky brimming with love and imbued with divine power to help, if only they had faith. But it doesn't work, and they are devastated.

The author, of course, is working from his own subjective perspective. In his reality, LOA is fake, and if it is taught, cruel consequences can result. Similarly, an atheist may well hold the view that Jesus/Allah is fake, and if the religion is propagated, cruel consequences can result.

The starting point, of course, is whether LOA is for real or not. Similarly in the God analogy, the starting point is whether Jesus/Allah is for real or not. Christians believe that Jesus is for real - they wouldn't think it's cruel to teach about Jesus. Muslims believe that Allah is for real - they wouldn't think it's cruel to teach about Allah.

And If the author believed that LOA is for real, then he wouldn't think that it's cruel to teach LOA. But he already believes that it's not for real, you see.

Whether LOA is or is not for real, is an eminently testable hypothesis at the personal level. You don't have to take my word for it. You wouldn't have to take the word of Abraham-Hicks for it, or Steve Pavlina, or Rhonda Byrne, or Jack Caulfield, or James Ray, or anyone else.

The laboratory is your brain. The experiment is your life. Everything you need is right there. All you have to do, is take the ideas of LOA/IM, and try it for yourself, for a few weeks.

If it doesn't work for you, and you really feel it doesn't work, well, drop it and move on. Some may say, "See? Told ya. It's all rubbish." Others may say, "Oh, you didn't think hard enough. Maybe you used the wrong technique." Etc.

So what. In the end, it's your life. The only person who you need to convince - one way or the other - is yourself.

If it works for you, well, it works for you. Congratulations. You just made one of the most important discoveries of your life. Once again, bear in mind that the only person who you need to convince is yourself. Me, I'm convinced. And yes, my life is proceeding brilliantly well, thank you.

Btw, contrary to popular belief, I don't just sit around thinking all day. Actually once you've planted the intention into the universe (takes about 20 minutes, I'd say), you kinda just get up and move on with your everyday life and do what you can. The universe will unfold, and deliver the rest.

[judge45]

"God is the absolute law since He is in control of all things He is the one who has created the law. We cannot go above law or alter it - we can only use it - thus I believe we are not God. We cannot create natural law, we cannot change natural law. We are not the power, we cannot be the power, we are simply users of the power."


There is the difference in opinion, you seem to believe there is something greater than you, that will help you when it feels like it.

Therefore you subscribe to the theory of a omnipresent being that rules over you and you are in it's control

Then why even bother believing in anything?

This is where religion is completely flawed. It takes away responsiblity and any form of control, you might as well die and return to God's presence, because God has most of the control, why bother beiing in his control?

I suppose you get to enjoy all his bounty and ask him for stuff, but that means you're a type of slave.

Want money? Pray to God What happiness? Pray to God. Get anything you prayed for and God blessed you.

The whole premise sounds like your a puppet of God and he pulls the strings.

That would seem pointless indeed.

Jeff

[Lil Chris]

There's alot of limiting beliefs in this thread...

[Lychee]

Originally Posted by judge45

"God is the absolute law since He is in control of all things He is the one who has created the law. We cannot go above law or alter it - we can only use it - thus I believe we are not God. We cannot create natural law, we cannot change natural law. We are not the power, we cannot be the power, we are simply users of the power."


There is the difference in opinion, you seem to believe there is something greater than you, that will help you when it feels like it.

Therefore you subscribe to the theory of a omnipresent being that rules over you and you are in it's control

Then why even bother believing in anything?

This is where religion is completely flawed. It takes away responsiblity and any form of control, you might as well die and return to God's presence, because God has most of the control, why bother beiing in his control?

I suppose you get to enjoy all his bounty and ask him for stuff, but that means you're a type of slave.

Want money? Pray to God What happiness? Pray to God. Get anything you prayed for and God blessed you.

The whole premise sounds like your a puppet of God and he pulls the strings.

That would seem pointless indeed.

Jeff

One idea cannot be boiled down to a single statement without restricting explanation and analysis. Religion is not 1+1=2, just as much as life is not 1+1=2.

[Chris_Stretten]

Didn't the Son of God say that God was within us? That we were Gods? That if we believed something to be true, that it was so? I'm not a Christian... but I believe that Jesus was one of the great teachers in our history. I find it interesting that what he says is possible, matches what so many others have said, and also matches what the current teachers are saying is possible with LoA. Is it the only law? Obviously not... I think it's a major aspect of our universe. It HAS been proven scientifically that thoughts leave our physical brains in the form of electro-magnetic waves and can affect things, matter, biology etc. Do we understand it fully? Of course not... right now we have to have "faith" until science can offer us further explaination.

Once the earth was believed flat, and it was absolute truth as held by the greatest minds and societies on the planet - and which speaking otherwise could have you ridiculed at best and killed under the charge of Heresy at worst...

Cheers,
Chris

[renie408]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

If you were an atheist, you'd say the same thing about Jesus or Allah. In other words, you'd say that religion gives people false hope. These are people facing some personal tragedy or disaster - they turn to Jesus or Allah, some saviour in the sky brimming with love and imbued with divine power to help, if only they had faith. But it doesn't work, and they are devastated.

Ding ding ding, we have ourselves a winner.

I AM an atheist. I think that religion is much WORSE than the LOA, even if somehow they could prove that the LOA doesn't work (which I don't expect). Everything I have read about the LOA and manifestation encourages a person to take responsibility for their perception of their world, their attitude and I haven't seen anybody trying to control people through the LOA.

Religion?? Not so much....

I do not refer to 'Jesus' or 'Allah' because I consider them separate from religion. In fact, most of the time you have a hard time finding the essence of either of these prophets in the religions that stemmed from their teachings. I have also not found anything in the actual words of Jesus, at least, which signficantly contradicts the LOA and much that supports it.

[renie408]

Originally Posted by Lychee

One idea cannot be boiled down to a single statement without restricting explanation and analysis. Religion is not 1+1=2, just as much as life is not 1+1=2.

I am sorry. I seriously do not understand what this is supposed to mean. One idea can most certainly be boiled down to a single statement. I mean, that's the goal of language, right? And nobody restricted anybody to one statement. You wrote a lot of statements. My interpretation of which mirrored Judge's.

Originally Posted by Lychee

He is not wrong, IMO.

The LoA is not the only law operating in the universe. Aside from that, if everyone was able to manifest whatever they wanted whenever they wanted, there would be chaos. There is definitely control over this world. We cannot control what we want, when we want it, or how we want it.

The law of attraction is real but it is not the only law at work. God is the absolute law since He is in control of all things He is the one who has created the law. We cannot go above law or alter it - we can only use it - thus I believe we are not God. We cannot create natural law, we cannot change natural law. We are not the power, we cannot be the power, we are simply users of the power.

Letting go of your blocks in your mind and truly believing is important. But just because you believe and you've taken some action, that doesn't mean you are going to get whatever you want.

How is Judge's interpretation wrong? You are clearly stating that there is a superior being ruling over us all and separate from us. "I believe we are NOT god." That part, there. That's the part that led me to believe that you thought we are separate from god and "God is the absolute law since He is in control of all things" led me to believe that you thought we are subject to the rule of this separate god. What I got out of your post was that god lends us his LOA powers to a limited extent, but that he retains the right to veto any of our choices that don't work with his master plan.

If that isn't right, what did you mean?

[OldTex]

In many ways, when someone goes about their task of disproving something like the LoA, they also tend to *prove* the LoA by achieving in their subjective reality that things such as LoA are "false".

To this end, and many skeptics tend to ignore this, quantum physics works with them in disproving such ideas. My first encounter with indention manifesting was a professor who taught quantum physics. His axiom was "If you place in your mind what you wish to prove, or disprove, the results will always be what you had imagined... this is how the quantum worlds operates."

[renie408]

Originally Posted by OldTex

To this end, and many skeptics tend to ignore this, quantum physics works with them in disproving such ideas. My first encounter with indention manifesting was a professor who taught quantum physics. His axiom was "If you place in your mind what you wish to prove, or disprove, the results will always be what you had imagined... this is how the quantum worlds operates."

That is the flaw in so much of 'science'. When the scientist goes in with an agenda, he is usually going to prove himself right. I know I have heard or read that good science means going in without any preconceived notions, but how is that possible?

[Dani]

Why are we still talking about this?

If you support LoA, just stay out of this thread. All you are doing is giving power and intention to this guy.

Pushing against = intending to have that thing exist so that you can push against it..

Let the guy scream his lungs out about how LoA gives false hope and only His particular church gives real hope. But only as long as you feel guilty enough about your sins and realise that a very moody old guy in a chair is deciding your fate for eternity based on how you act over a 60-80 year period!

If we all stop crowding around to give him an audience he is preaching to nobody...

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by renie408

Ding ding ding, we have ourselves a winner.

I AM an atheist.

That's good to know. You must be one of those "I believe in science" types. So you will appreciate that:

1. Energy cannot be destroyed. It can only be converted from one form to another.

2. When you think, electrical impulses are generated in your brain.

3. Electrical impulses are energy.

Where did your brain-generated impulses go? Remember - they cannot be destroyed.

If you are 45 years old today, you have been thinking for 45 years. That must add up to a lot of energy. Where did it all go? It can't all still be in your head, can it? Or you'd be sizzling with volts by now.

[renie408]

I do believe in science and am unsure why you are offering me all the other information. I do not dispute any of it. I never offered anything that would lead you to believe I would dispute it. The definition of atheism isisbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. I am an atheist because I believe that the energy that people call 'god' exists IN all of us. Not seperate, not 'supreme' or superior. Not a sentient entity. Not on a cloud directing our lives. Not apart from us. Not a diety. That is why I am an atheist.

[eternomi]

Originally Posted by Mitch

I know from my own life that if I worry about something than it seems to come true.

I just want to interject something. Correlation does not imply causality! The correlation between your worrying and something bad happening does not imply that your worrying caused the bad events. The bad events could have already been coming your way, and you might have simply picked up on that vibration! In fact, we already know that the brain experiences stimulus after it has already occured!

What we know about IM could very well be incomplete, insufficient or just plain wrong.

[renie408]

Originally Posted by outback

!

What we know about IM could very well be incomplete, insufficient or just plain wrong.

Or it could be right.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by renie408

I am an atheist because I believe that the energy that people call 'god' exists IN all of us. Not seperate, not 'supreme' or superior. Not a sentient entity. Not on a cloud directing our lives. Not apart from us. Not a diety. That is why I am an atheist.

Oh, you sound like a Jainist. Maybe even a Buddhist.

[renie408]

No, I pretty much sound like an atheist. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a diety. I have been one for a pretty long time and have invested some time in trying to figure out my spiritual leanings, so I am pretty sure I am just your garden variety atheist.

I am not Buddhist, though I have studied it. Buddhism has many interesting concepts and I can agree with a lot of it. I learned a lot from buddhism and appreciate the time I spent looking into it. But there is a denial of desire central to buddhism that I am either too venal or too American (is that the same thing?) to embrace wholeheartedly. I also find that whole "it is through the desire to be happy that the path to misery lies" doesn't resonate for me. I don't think I am a Jainist because I am not convinced that we are necessarily here to work toward enlightenment, though I agree with many of the tenets of that belief system. It comes very close to how I feel about things. But then there is all that pesky reincarnation.

I kind of think we are here and then we die and that's about it. I think that there is a unifying energy that threads through all of life. We may rejoin the energy, but ME as an entity with an conciousness is not preserved. It just doesn't make sense to me. I have heard all the stuff about past life regression and in fact have a couple of good friends who believe very firmly in their past lives and can tell you all about it. It just doesn't work for me. I believe in some combination of subjective and objective reality that is just the way we are equipped to deal with the universe. The unifying energy is like gravity, a facet of how the universe works. It is the same as what I keep saying about the LOA...it just 'is'.

I am redefining my spirituality all the time, but I feel like I have already moved through the phase where I need an organized religion or a god. Been there, done that. I don't *think* I will wind up there again.

[thawk1]

another belief

[Dani]

Completely off topic, but thawk1, are you really from Albuquerque?

I didn't think that place really existed.

[ellykay17]

I don't think that Hogan is against the law of attraction. He just wanted to sell his own slightly altered version called 'attraction principle.' His wording was a little too on the negative side for me. While he used his attraction principle to help with his cancer, he still seemed skeptical of the results. I understand that the LOA is not a quick fix for any problem. But in reading his article, I felt a sense of hostility that was not beneficial in conveying his ideas, but rather stood between his truth and me. But then again, in subjective reality, it's really not about him at all is it. Perhaps it reflects my own negativity with regards to intention/manifestation. Hmmm...