Is Reincarnation Linear in Time??

[Frisky]

If I reincarnate from this life into my next (for example), does my next reincarnation have to be in time-frame after my death?? Or can it be well before, like sometime in the middle-ages or during time of dinosaurs??

Or better put, if I die in year 2020, will it only be possible to reincarnate after that date, or can I can I also reincarnate and go back to 1900's for example??

[Anagogy]

Nope. Not linear. Unless that is what works best for you.

[alphamind]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Nope. Not linear.

Am I the only one who thinks this sucks?

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by alphamind

Am I the only one who thinks this sucks?

Why does it suck?

[alphamind]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Why does it suck?

It somewhat beats the purpose of our spiritual evolution. I don't wanna spend all my energy in this lifetime trying to 'ascend' or raise my consciousness to a level of greater understanding, then end up incarnating as a vampire in the next life.

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by alphamind

It somewhat beats the purpose of our spiritual evolution. I don't wanna spend all my energy in this lifetime trying to 'ascend' or raise my consciousness to a level of greater understanding, then end up incarnating as a vampire in the next life.

Oh, don't worry, it's not like that. All these life experiences you get through incarnation are expanding your in-between lives persona. But even if you did incarnate in a past probable time period, what you are would reflect or express itself through that body, albeit unconsciously. Essentially, you would be more in touch with yourself than previous lives (even if they were, in Earth time, chronologically in the future), presuming you didn't move in retrograde in the previous incarnation.

Also, it's a choice! Don't forget. There is no have to go back in the past. It's just what you decide is appropriate for your spiritual development. Many souls are going to be moving out of this "incarnating without your spiritual memories" phase soon anyhow.

The game will be changing [play twilight zone music here].

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Oh, don't worry, it's not like that. All these life experiences you get through incarnation are expanding your in-between lives persona. But even if you did incarnate in a past probable time period, what you are would reflect or express itself through that body, albeit unconsciously. Essentially, you would be more in touch with yourself than previous lives (even if they were, in Earth time, chronologically in the future), presuming you didn't move in retrograde in the previous incarnation.

Also, it's a choice! Don't forget. There is no have to go back in the past. It's just what you decide is appropriate for your spiritual development. Many souls are going to be moving out of this "incarnating without your spiritual memories" phase soon anyhow.

The game will be changing [play twilight zone music here].

I apologise if this questions appears somewhat trite, yet I'm wondering how anyone can possibly know all this for certain? I mean, to me it simply sounds like a reasonably complex belief system based on little more than imagination.

[seeds]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

I apologise if this questions appears somewhat trite, yet I'm wondering how anyone can possibly know all this for certain? I mean, to me it simply sounds like a reasonably complex belief system based on little more than imagination.

Exactly! (But who am I to talk? )

This reincarnating back into the past business was discussed a while ago in an alternate thread.

The concept of reincarnation suggests that there is an “outer dimension” where unincarnate souls reside in-between incarnations; a dimension where they can reflect upon and assimilate any lessons garnered from their latest “dip” into matter.

With that in mind, any person who thinks it is actually possible to reincarnate into the past is failing to recognize an extremely blatant flaw in their reasoning.

All of the souls who once occupied the bodies during past eras (say, the seventeenth century for example) have all entered the “in-between” zone where perhaps all of them are completely satisfied to stay there indefinitely.

So the question is, if you think you can incarnate into the past, then “who” or “what” do you think you will encounter as you mingle with the populace, when the actual souls that once animated that populace are utterly content with their current status in the “outer dimension”?

From my perspective, anyone who believes that you can reincarnate into the past and actually interact with “real souls,” should have no problem believing that you could interpolate yourself into a theatrical DVD of the movie “Gone with the Wind,” and literally encounter the real Clark Gable.


seeds

[MiBeloved]

Originally Posted by Frisky

If I reincarnate from this life into my next (for example), does my next reincarnation have to be in time-frame after my death?? Or can it be well before, like sometime in the middle-ages or during time of dinosaurs??

Or better put, if I die in year 2020, will it only be possible to reincarnate after that date, or can I can I also reincarnate and go back to 1900's for example??

There is no reverse gear in the reincarnation machinery. There are several forward motion gears however.

If however you are a first class psychic you can surely go back in time as a neutral observer, with absolutely zero interference rights.

[Frisky]

Originally Posted by MiBeloved

There is no reverse gear in the reincarnation machinery. There are several forward motion gears however

So Anagogy says yes, you can reincarnate back in time. And you say no, you can only go forward.


HHhmm.....you cant both be right, so one of youz is wrong

[MiBeloved]

I am saying that you can go back but you cannot adjust anything, and to do so you have to be an advanced mystic or psychic.

We want the universe to be our toy-house which we purchased at Toy-"R"-Us but that is very funny considering that most of us are only aware of this recent life in this recent body. Suddenly after billions of years, we have become aware and we are gods? Very funny!

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by seeds

From my perspective, anyone who believes that you can reincarnate into the past and actually interact with “real souls,” should have no problem believing that you could interpolate yourself into a theatrical DVD of the movie “Gone with the Wind,” and literally encounter the real Clark Gable.


seeds

The other aspect of this is a reality that even most scientists fail to recognise as they continue to work on such nonsense as 'time travel'. It would seem to me that H. G. Wells over a hundred years ago has managed to send our appreciation of reality hurtling into sheer fantasyland, with the result that most of us now can't so much as recognise the truth when it's explained to us.

So what is this truth we've lost over this period? Well, time in itself does NOT exist in any dimension outside man's imagination. The past ceased to exist the very moment it eventuated, so is therefore impossible to travel or reincarnate into, for it is surely as dead and gone as it can possibly be - now entirely history. So if it is non-existent, any 'travel' into it (if it were possible) would find the person instantly, as likewise non-existent.

The same can be said for the future, which has not yet entered into existence.

So without the three dimensions; past, present and future co-existing, which indeed is a sheer impossibility, anything like time travel simply cannot eventuate.

So both time travel and reincarnation into alternate time 'zones', still remains for mine, another of those dreams that people like to hang onto in attempt to make some sense of their perplexity.

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

I apologise if this questions appears somewhat trite, yet I'm wondering how anyone can possibly know all this for certain?

No one knows anything for certain.

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

I mean, to me it simply sounds like a reasonably complex belief system based on little more than imagination.

It's understandable that you would see it this way. It's just where my personal truth, my personal experiences, have led me thus far. I'm not out to win converts or anything like that. I see your personal truth has led you elsewhere. Some people might see your belief system as nothing more than a complex of ideas based on little more than imagination. Who am I to judge? Who is to say you are wrong, or that I am right?

Time is the judge I suppose. Time is the fire in which we burn.

Originally Posted by seeds

Exactly! (But who am I to talk? )

This reincarnating back into the past business was discussed a while ago in an alternate thread.

The concept of reincarnation suggests that there is an “outer dimension” where unincarnate souls reside in-between incarnations; a dimension where they can reflect upon and assimilate any lessons garnered from their latest “dip” into matter.

With that in mind, any person who thinks it is actually possible to reincarnate into the past is failing to recognize an extremely blatant flaw in their reasoning.

All of the souls who once occupied the bodies during past eras (say, the seventeenth century for example) have all entered the “in-between” zone where perhaps all of them are completely satisfied to stay there indefinitely.

So the question is, if you think you can incarnate into the past, then “who” or “what” do you think you will encounter as you mingle with the populace, when the actual souls that once animated that populace are utterly content with their current status in the “outer dimension”

Yes, that would be a flaw, if it worked the way you're thinking it does. But you are still thinking linearly. The seeming contradictions of free will and determinism dissolve when you accept that all time is truly simultaneous. If you chose to incarnate in the past, then you were that soul in the past. The "actual soul" *was* you. Things aren't over and done with, they are always existing. The souls aren't there, and then not there. They are in that time period. We exist in every time period. Past, present, and future. Your soul exists at all points of development, simultaneously. But not all souls are choosing the same lessons in every life time. Thus time periods get mixed and matched up for whatever beings need. What a soul calls "now" is just the current focus. No time period is more "now" than another, except relative to the soul.

And it all fits together seamlessly in a way that is difficult for a mind to fully comprehend. It's seamless because there is no real separation. It's not a bunch of souls, its just one soul.

And this isn't even taking into account alternate probable offshoots. I know you aren't fond of the parallel reality concept either . Each to their own I suppose.

[seeds]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Yes, that would be a flaw, if it worked the way you're thinking it does. But you are still thinking linearly.

Probably so.

However...

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Time is the judge I suppose. Time is the fire in which we burn.

...it appears as though you too can resort to linear thinking when it helps to make a point.

Originally Posted by Anagogy

The seeming contradictions of free will and determinism dissolve when you accept that all time is truly simultaneous. If you chose to incarnate in the past, then you were that soul in the past. The "actual soul" *was* you.

So then, if I am residing in the realm "in-between" incarnations and I "choose" to reincarnate back into the era of say, "Joan of Arc, indeed, incarnating as Joan of Arc herself, I will not (according to you) be displacing a pre-existing soul (Joan's soul), but instead, I simply am the soul that existed in Joan's body?

Am I therefore destined to make the exact same decisions as Joan, as presented in our historical records of her life?

Where is the "original" Joan’s soul relative to this decision?

Is she in the “in-between” zone, laughing about the day she stepped in a giant cow pie that I will now step in? Or wincing at the thought of the pain I will endure at being burned at the stake?

This is nonsense!

Let’s look at this from another angle.

It took approximately until the year 1804 for the human population on earth to reach 1 billion.

In only 207 years since that time it has ballooned up to 7 billion.

In an “unthinkable” thought experiment, let’s assume that in less than 24 hours, all 7 billion humans are wiped-out in a global nuclear war.

In which case, 7 billion un-incarnate souls will have just returned to the "in-between" realm where they will either still exist as separate individualizations of self-aware consciousness who themselves can each individually “choose” to incarnate into the past as “Joan of Arc”...

(or)

...they all will have merged into one “Singular Soul” (as you later suggest) where “individuals” choosing to do something, makes no sense.

Which is it?

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Things aren't over and done with, they are always existing. The souls aren't there, and then not there. They are in that time period. We exist in every time period. Past, present, and future. Your soul exists at all points of development, simultaneously. But not all souls are choosing the same lessons in every life time. Thus time periods get mixed and matched up for whatever beings need. What a soul calls "now" is just the current focus. No time period is more "now" than another, except relative to the soul.

And it all fits together seamlessly in a way that is difficult for a mind to fully comprehend. It's seamless because there is no real separation. It's not a bunch of souls, its just one soul.

And this isn't even taking into account alternate probable offshoots. I know you aren't fond of the parallel reality concept either . Each to their own I suppose.

When you say “parallel reality concept,” I assume you are suggesting a situation where all 7 billion of the souls mentioned earlier could each indeed become Joan of Arc, only in separate universes paralleling this one, right?

If so, then you are correct.

I am as un-fond of parallel reality concepts such as the one above in the same way that those who promote such concepts are un-fond of explaining how the unfathomable order of just this one universe came into being, let alone the infinity of “duplicates.”

When we have to start bending and torturing reality in order to make it fit our fantastic and illogical visions, then it is time to find some better visions.

(Anagogy, I have always respected your intelligent and well thought-out ideas and opinions regarding reality. This one changes nothing . As you said, “each to their own” )


seeds

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by seeds

Probably so.

However...



...it appears as though you too can resort to linear thinking when it helps to make a point.

Linear thinking is not a bad thing. In fact, it is quite useful for life in the body. So of course everybody will resort to linear colloquialisms from time to time. It's only natural.

Originally Posted by seeds

So then, if I am residing in the realm "in-between" incarnations and I "choose" to reincarnate back into the era of say, "Joan of Arc, indeed, incarnating as Joan of Arc herself, I will not (according to you) be displacing a pre-existing soul (Joan's soul), but instead, I simply am the soul that existed in Joan's body?

That is one possibility.

Originally Posted by seeds

Am I therefore destined to make the exact same decisions as Joan, as presented in our historical records of her life?

Yes. Those would have been your choices if that was your incarnation.

Originally Posted by seeds

Where is the "original" Joan’s soul relative to this decision?

If it was your incarnation, then you were/are/will be the original soul and occupant of said body. I'm not suggesting you can possess a body that already has an occupant.

Originally Posted by seeds

Is she in the “in-between” zone, laughing about the day she stepped in a giant cow pie that I will now step in? Or wincing at the thought of the pain I will endure at being burned at the stake?

If it truly was one of your incarnations, your future self could conceivably do such a thing.

Originally Posted by seeds

This is nonsense!

Well, it's your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to. I'm sure there are a lot of people who think your view of how things are is also nonsense. Many people believe different things for different reasons. I'm sure you would probably assume that such people didn't truly understand your theory, and consequentially, they don't see the beauty in it.

Originally Posted by seeds

Let’s look at this from another angle.

It took approximately until the year 1804 for the human population on earth to reach 1 billion.

In only 207 years since that time it has ballooned up to 7 billion.

In an “unthinkable” thought experiment, let’s assume that in less than 24 hours, all 7 billion humans are wiped-out in a global nuclear war.

In which case, 7 billion un-incarnate souls will have just returned to the "in-between" realm where they will either still exist as separate individualizations of self-aware consciousness who themselves can each individually “choose” to incarnate into the past as “Joan of Arc”...

(or)

...they all will have merged into one “Singular Soul” (as you later suggest) where “individuals” choosing to do something, makes no sense.

Which is it?

You seem to be operating under the presumption that these options are mutually exclusive. It's a matter of perspective. Truly there is only one soul, but it is having an experience of multiplicity. The experience does not mean there is actual separation, but the simulation is quite convincing. God can do more than one thing at a "time" .

Originally Posted by seeds

When you say “parallel reality concept,” I assume you are suggesting a situation where all 7 billion of the souls mentioned earlier could each indeed become Joan of Arc, only in separate universes paralleling this one, right?

If so, then you are correct.

I am as un-fond of parallel reality concepts such as the one above in the same way that those who promote such concepts are un-fond of explaining how the unfathomable order of just this one universe came into being, let alone the infinity of “duplicates.”

I'm neither fond nor not fond of explaining the order we see. In an infinity of probable universes, there are automatically realities which have a great deal of order to them, conducive to all sorts of forms. There are also a whole bunch of realities that are complete chaos. Which ones are utilized is a matter of what the intention is, and what best facilitates the fulfillment of that intention.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Originally Posted by seeds

When we have to start bending and torturing reality in order to make it fit our fantastic and illogical visions, then it is time to find some better visions.

As an example: quantum physics often seems complex, and people often consider parts of it to be strange and illogical and counter-intuitive to how they are accustomed to thinking, but it doesn't mean there is no truth in it. Just because one doesn't presently understand something, doesn't mean it's not true.

But I don't have any physical evidence to convince you with, just my personal "pseeing" and research into this arena, and the body of channeled works that corroborate it, and hypnotically obtained information derived from individuals regressed into the "in-between" lives state (quite interesting stuff imo).

But whatever you want to believe is cool with me.

[Rimuel]

@Anagogy:

Please answer these questions:

1. Are all souls in fact one soul?
2. Are we simply different parts of the whole soul?
3. Does each soul have its own personality, or is personality tied to the character we play in the physical world?
4. Does a soul have the same amount of ethereal matter, just like the mass of physical objects?

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by Rimuel

@Anagogy:

Please answer these questions:


1. Are all souls in fact one soul?

Yup.

Originally Posted by Rimuel

2. Are we simply different parts of the whole soul?

Yup.

Originally Posted by Rimuel

3. Does each soul have its own personality, or is personality tied to the character we play in the physical world?

Each perspective, or soul, is a unique vantage point, and has it's own unique characteristics or personality you might say. No two souls are exactly alike. Personality is influenced by the body you join with in the physical world though. All souls are eyes of the creator and they all see slightly differently.

Originally Posted by Rimuel

4. Does a soul have the same amount of ethereal matter, just like the mass of physical objects?

The soul is not made of any kind of matter, only consciousness, which is unquantifiable in any physically comparable way. However, we have many bodies or vehicles within that consciousness which are composed of finer and finer spectrums of what we might interpret as matter (albeit less dense expressions of matter).

[Qwuakeup]

Time isn't linear as time is only an experience, so how can anything be linear?

[Frisky]

Originally Posted by Qwuakeup

Time isn't linear as time is only an experience, so how can anything be linear?

Well, time is linear in a sense. What if I reincarnated back to the 1960's, and accidently killed my dad in a car accident. I would never be born

[Qwuakeup]

Originally Posted by Frisky

Well, time is linear in a sense. What if I reincarnated back to the 1960's, and accidently killed my dad in a car accident. I would never be born

I wouldn't do that if I were you, 60's prison isn't the best I hear. ..


But yes you would be born, just in another universe/dimension/reality.

[theuprising]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Nope. Not linear. Unless that is what works best for you.

How could u possibly know this. And to OP, how could you expect a legitimate answer from anyone here... or anyone on this planet in fact.

[Frisky]

Originally Posted by theuprising

How could u possibly know this. And to OP, how could you expect a legitimate answer from anyone here... or anyone on this planet in fact

I thought thats what these types of forums were for.

I dont automatically believe everything thats posted here, I take what I think is the best argument(s) and store them in my brain for later download

[seeds]

____________

Hi Anagogy,

Just for fun, I want to analyze a few of your statements.

In regards to my proposed "choosing" to reincarnate into the past as "Joan of Arc" (which you seem to imply is quite plausible), I asked you the following...

Originally Posted by seeds

Where is the "original" Joan’s soul relative to this decision?

To which you responded...

Originally Posted by Anagogy

If it was your incarnation, then you were/are/will be the original soul and occupant of said body. I'm not suggesting you can possess a body that already has an occupant.

I also asked...

Originally Posted by seeds

Is she in the “in-between” zone, laughing about the day she stepped in a giant cow pie that I will now step in? Or wincing at the thought of the pain I will endure at being burned at the stake?

And you said...

Originally Posted by Anagogy

If it truly was one of your incarnations, your future self could conceivably do such a thing.

However, prior to that you said...

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Also, it's a choice! Don't forget. There is no have to go back in the past. It's just what you decide is appropriate for your spiritual development.

(Why in heaven's name would my future self "choose" to re-experience one of my own prior incarnations? Haven't I already been there, done that? )

Anyway...

... the real point I am leading to is suppose that the souls of you and I, along with Frisky, Rimuel, theuprising, alphamind, Apopohis R., Qwuakeup, and MiBeloved, have all left our bodies (in the aforementioned nuclear holocaust) and are conversing in the "in-between" realm.

Then, lo and behold, who should join us but none other than the soul of Joan of Arc.

You have implied that in the "in-between" realm, we all have a "choice" (with respect to whatever "...is appropriate for your spiritual development...") to reincarnate into any era in the past, pretty much as anyone who ever existed.

Yet here is the "original" Joan's soul right there with you (along with the souls of some of her good friends - Genghis Khan, Cleopatra, George Washington, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Moms Mabley and Elvis Presley ).

Remember, you said - "...If it was your incarnation, then you were/are/will be the original soul and occupant of said body..."

Therefore, does the literal existence of these souls (Joan, Khan, Cleo, Geo, Leo, Mike, Moms and Elvis) limit your "choices" when it comes to incarnating into the past?

Or are you going to pull that lazy thinker's () "wild card" on me of there being "parallel realities" where anything is possible?

(And I know that I can believe anything I want, and you can believe anything you want, and it's all good. However, we should at least be willing to field and answer questions in defense of the statements we make, right? Again, all for the fun of it. )


seeds

[gene2009]

Damn, i'd like to be one those who believe in this. It's something like believing in Santa. Sorry guys.

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by theuprising

How could u possibly know this. And to OP, how could you expect a legitimate answer from anyone here... or anyone on this planet in fact.

Let's just say I got on the "inner-net" and downloaded it.

Do you believe that it is impossible to know such things? Thankfully, I'm not similarly confined by such a belief.

Originally Posted by seeds

(Why in heaven's name would my future self "choose" to re-experience one of my own prior incarnations? Haven't I already been there, done that? )

Your "future" self doesn't choose to "re-experience" it. It has already experienced it. I was talking about your past self, who still has the necessity of experiencing it. There is a portion of your consciousness that is the end result of all this "time". Some people call it the "higher self". It offers itself as a guiding resource to its past selves. So when they ask for guidance, this is what they talk to -- their inner being.

Originally Posted by seeds

... the real point I am leading to is suppose that the souls of you and I, along with Frisky, Rimuel, theuprising, alphamind, Apopohis R., Qwuakeup, and MiBeloved, have all left our bodies (in the aforementioned nuclear holocaust) and are conversing in the "in-between" realm.

Then, lo and behold, who should join us but none other than the soul of Joan of Arc.

You have implied that in the "in-between" realm, we all have a "choice" (with respect to whatever "...is appropriate for your spiritual development...") to reincarnate into any era in the past, pretty much as anyone who ever existed.

"Appropriate for your spiritual development" is quite the modifier, keep in mind. It's not a toy for play time. And I never said you could be anyone, you jumped to that conclusion. But then, what is impossible for god? Who am I to say? It has been revealed to me that souls may imprint the life experiences of other souls onto their soul pattern. Many souls have the life imprint of Jesus and other famous souls. That's kind of like "living their life", if one really wanted that, I suppose.

Originally Posted by seeds

Yet here is the "original" Joan's soul right there with you (along with the souls of some of her good friends - Genghis Khan, Cleopatra, George Washington, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Moms Mabley and Elvis Presley ).

What we are calling "souls" are more like streams of consciousness which exist in every single time period, no exceptions. The only thing that moves through time is your identification with a portion of that time stream. After an experience has been had, your identity expands as a result of that. The "now" is just your present identification. All prior states of identification still exist. They have not withdrawn from anything.

Originally Posted by seeds

Remember, you said - "...If it was your incarnation, then you were/are/will be the original soul and occupant of said body..."

Therefore, does the literal existence of these souls (Joan, Khan, Cleo, Geo, Leo, Mike, Moms and Elvis) limit your "choices" when it comes to incarnating into the past?

I may be misunderstanding you, but what you choose is a function of who you are, and if you are destined (through your choice) to incarnate in the past as one of these famous people, then you will. If it is not your destiny to, then you wont. Again, I must repeat, it is not a toy used for experimentation. In the spirit world, all times are simultaneous in the same way that right now all cities are functioning simultaneously. Everything is happening right now. Our present is someone else's past, yet we do whatever we feel like here.

Originally Posted by seeds

Or are you going to pull that lazy thinker's () "wild card" on me of there being "parallel realities" where anything is possible?

You don't believe anything is possible? Not even for god? I think if god is not all powerful, then he is not much of a god. And I prefer to call that card the "not confined to linear belief systems card" ().

Originally Posted by seeds

(And I know that I can believe anything I want, and you can believe anything you want, and it's all good. However, we should at least be willing to field and answer questions in defense of the statements we make, right? Again, all for the fun of it. )

Of course.

Originally Posted by gene2009

Damn, i'd like to be one those who believe in this. It's something like believing in Santa. Sorry guys.

The Earth is also round too. And not on an infinite stack of tortoise shells. And it's not the center of the universe.

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Let's just say I got on the "inner-net" and downloaded it.

That's cute.

[seeds]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

What we are calling "souls" are more like streams of consciousness which exist in every single time period, no exceptions.

That may be what you are calling souls, but it is not what I am calling souls.

Originally Posted by Anagogy

The only thing that moves through time is your identification with a portion of that time stream. After an experience has been had, your identity expands as a result of that.

In the context of eternity, what end and purpose lies in the "expansion" of your identity as you are stating it here?

In other words, why are you (why is your identity) "expanding"? To what end?

Originally Posted by Anagogy

The "now" is just your present identification. All prior states of identification still exist. They have not withdrawn from anything.

You say that the "now" is where the identification of 7 billion streams of consciousness are presently expressing themselves on this one planet alone.

Furthermore, you seem to be implying that each of the 7 billion has its own "prior states of identification" that still exist and are still expressing themselves (in the "full measure of their being") as if their identities had never left or "...not withdrawn..." from their prior bodies.

(I apologize if I am misunderstanding you, but I am merely reading your words.)

With the preceding in mind, if one could account for the sum total of these infinite streams of consciousness and view them as extensions of the "One God" (as you seem to do)...

...then which aspect of the "One" is responsible for the creation of the earth, the sun, the hundred billion suns of the Milky Way Galaxy, and the hundred billion galaxies of the universe?

This universe, more specifically, this planet is the stage upon which these "streams of consciousness" are expressing their "current identities" through physical bodies, right?

In the context of your beliefs, how then was this "stage" created, and upon what is its reality founded?

And trust me, I understand that what we call "physical reality" is founded upon consciousness.

The question is, "who's consciousness"?

(And please, I beg of you, don't hand me anything that resembles the "Borg Collective" , I ain't buyin' it.)

Originally Posted by Anagogy

You don't believe anything is possible? Not even for god? I think if god is not all powerful, then he is not much of a god. And I prefer to call that card the "not confined to linear belief systems card" ().

I believe that within the context of "imagination," anything is possible. Hence the existence of the somewhat bizarre concepts concerning "reality" that some of us have concocted. (I know, look who's talkin' )

However, when it comes to a "working" and "viable" universe of suns, planets, and DNA constructed manifestations of reality (our bodies), all underpinned and guided by the "laws of physics," then even God must adhere to certain "limited processes" that ensure the perpetuation of the amazing order he has established.


seeds

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by seeds

That may be what you are calling souls, but it is not what I am calling souls.

Well, that's all well and fine, but if we are using the same words to talk about completely different things, not much understanding will be conveyed about our respective perspectives.

Originally Posted by seeds

In the context of eternity, what end and purpose lies in the "expansion" of your identity as you are stating it here?

In other words, why are you (why is your identity) "expanding"? To what end?

Not for the end, but for the journey. You can't experience growth in omniscience, so we forgot omnisicience in order to have an experience of growth. It was an extension of the creator's omniscience. To learn something, you first have to not know *everything*.

Originally Posted by seeds

You say that the "now" is where the identification of 7 billion streams of consciousness are presently expressing themselves on this one planet alone.

Furthermore, you seem to be implying that each of the 7 billion has its own "prior states of identification" that still exist and are still expressing themselves (in the "full measure of their being") as if their identities had never left or "...not withdrawn..." from their prior bodies.

(I apologize if I am misunderstanding you, but I am merely reading your words.)

No apology is necessary. This is actually why I rarely talk about this sort of thing, because no matter what words I use, the words will not be sufficient for conveying what I'm trying to convey.

Originally Posted by seeds

With the preceding in mind, if one could account for the sum total of these infinite streams of consciousness and view them as extensions of the "One God" (as you seem to do)...

...then which aspect of the "One" is responsible for the creation of the earth, the sun, the hundred billion suns of the Milky Way Galaxy, and the hundred billion galaxies of the universe?

There really isn't a satisfying answer to this question, because it would net no real understanding. If I said it was the "Logos" portion, or the sixth density level of consciousness, most everybody would just scratch their heads wondering what the heck that means.

Technically, we were all involved with that. Technically, oneness doesn't have "aspects" except in appearance. There only appear to be parts to the consciousness looking through a structured sensory system like a "body" or lens or filter some kind or another (and many of our bodies are not "physical").

It's all illusion though.

Originally Posted by seeds

This universe, more specifically, this planet is the stage upon which these "streams of consciousness" are expressing their "current identities" through physical bodies, right?

Sounds about right. Except don't fall into the trap of thinking they have to keep reincarnating on Earth. The universe is teeming with planets at different stages of evolution. Earth is not the only school.

Originally Posted by seeds

In the context of your beliefs, how then was this "stage" created, and upon what is its reality founded?

Well, it depends how you want to look at it. I could just say the creator dreams everything up. Or I could say we all collectively agreed that this exists, and so it does. Those would both be accurate from my perspective. All realities are focused into being. Everything is consciousness.

Originally Posted by seeds

And trust me, I understand that what we call "physical reality" is founded upon consciousness.

Yes, I would expect you would, given your belief system and it's many dreamers/creators.

Originally Posted by seeds

The question is, "who's consciousness"?

Ultimately, there's only one dreamer, from my perspective. The dreamer dreams there are multiple dreamers who dream up other dreams and so on, etc.

Originally Posted by seeds

(And please, I beg of you, don't hand me anything that resembles the "Borg Collective" , I ain't buyin' it.)

Sorry.

But somehow I doubt you would have "bought" anything else I'd said either.

Originally Posted by seeds

I believe that within the context of "imagination," anything is possible. Hence the existence of the somewhat bizarre concepts concerning "reality" that some of us have concocted. (I know, look who's talkin' )

Well, if we can't laugh at ourselves, we are taking ourselves WAY too seriously in the first place right?

Originally Posted by seeds

However, when it comes to a "working" and "viable" universe of suns, planets, and DNA constructed manifestations of reality (our bodies), all underpinned and guided by the "laws of physics," then even God must adhere to certain "limited processes" that ensure the perpetuation of the amazing order he has established.

From my perspective, the guiding "rules" are just whatever parameters are necessary for whatever experience is intended to be experienced.

[joelr]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

So what is this truth we've lost over this period? Well, time in itself does NOT exist in any dimension outside man's imagination. The past ceased to exist the very moment it eventuated, so is therefore impossible to travel or reincarnate into, for it is surely as dead and gone as it can possibly be - now entirely history. So if it is non-existent, any 'travel' into it (if it were possible) would find the person instantly, as likewise non-existent.

We don't know exactly what time is but it certainly does exist in it's own dimension. It's the 4th vector in the Lorentz transformations, which basically means it's at least as real as the other 3 vectors (which represent the 3D space WE live in). Special Relativity isn't wrong, at least not currently.
In physics equations stand for things that are considered "real". For example Paul Dirac once noticed some math from quantum mechanics said there had to be a twin partner of opposite charge for every type of particle (except photons) and that's how he discovered antimatter. It was later found in the lab.

It's also hard to define the "past" as a definite thing that stops existing because SR shows that there is no one single past but only relative pasts.
So your past could still be the present for someone else moving at a different velocity. If your past can still be experienced by someone in a different frame of reference then it can't have ceased to exist.

Special relativity isn't intuitive but it's been proven correct beyond any doubt.
It's more like past-present-future is always existing rather than the alternative.