Conception is the coming together or two gametes, haploid cells that form a diploid cell. That fertilized ovum may or may not become implanted in the uterus lining and develop into a viable infant human. It may be swept away with the dross. There is no human consciousness in or about either the gametes or the fertilized ovum. Kardac was wrong. That was HIS belief.
Various spirit sources of information tell that consciousness may enter the developing fetus at any time during development, however and even after birth, but I am assuming that is provided that the fertilized ovum is implanted in the uterus lining and is growing. Some reports tell of consciousness hovering around the mother and entering and leaving a developing fetus several times before birth. Others say that consciousness may leave as a result of a miscarriage or after birth depending upon various circumstances surrounding the development of the fetus and birth. Other cases tell of spirit entities possessing bodies of children or adults long after birth to exist there as a “multiple personality” or what is pathologically called today, Dissociative Identity Disorder. (See the classic Sally Beauchamp case of Dr. Morton Prince).
Amos Oliver Doyle, Wed 27 Jul, 17:47
One will have a better concept of human fetal development if one peruses a good text book on clinical embryology. Catastrophic errors of development are common so it seems to me that it would, at times, be a fruitless endeavor to be locked into a non-viable fetus at the moment of conception. And that is MY belief! - AOD
Hi Michael, you can find a similar description in Kardec “The Spirits’ Book” question 344. In Chapter VII there is a whole chapter about “Union of Body and Soul – Abortion”, but question 344 summarizes the issue as follows:
344. When does the soul unite with the body?
“This union begins at conception but it is only completed at birth. From the moment of conception, the spirit assigned to inhabit a specifc body joins that body by a fuid link, which will increasingly tighten up to the moment of birth. The cry produced by the infant announces that it has entered the number of the living and the servants of God.”
Here is a sample link for the citation above:
Ulysses, Tue 26 Jul, 19:55
Sociedad Espiritista Cubana
You have expanded my thinking, yet again. I picture us sitting around a boardroom table (my usual habit) and you have now introduced the factor of worth to my concept of believability.
I would then suggest that believability is the first step to convince a person and it is followed by the next step which is the evaluation of importance to knowledge = the worth function.
In your blog we have those with high worth functions.
I see that these steps are separate.
This is probably working with non believers. To convince them took proof. The worth of the teachings is a great (joint?) chapter (this is the weighting factor in selection techniques which is based on previous experience). I would look at the worth factor slightly different. I would look at the “worth to me” element. I feel that there are great teachings (I have had many trance conversations about general policies of love etc) but the specific policies are the ones which mean the most. It sounds ego-centric but my old teacher (a Franciscan monk who died in the 1990s) always said that the little steps are needed to achieve great progress.
What would be the next step beyond worth?
Bruce Williams, Thu 21 Jul, 03:19
Bruce Williams, Wed 20 Jul, 01:19
An excellent review of your three. Thank you for your trust. I suspect that my direction towards this group was to better understand believability.
I learned a hard lesson about proof of survival early on when the information provided did not match the version that the friend knew.
My version was the police chase of a stolen car. The family had said it was a simple car accident. The friend asked them and they were upset that the story had got out. They then instead of liking that their son was in communication suggested that he was a devil.
The friend believed in the communication. The family did not.
My point is that we all have different points at which we believe and this group is the most well informed group around. What makes us believe is interesting.
The problem with rankings is that it is difficult to rank those who have not been subject to much testing by credible researchers. Also, it is a matter of ranking them relative to evidential value or teachings. I’d go with Etta Wriedt on the evidential, with Piper second, and Gladys Osborne Leonard third. For the teachings, it would be Dr. George Dexter, Pearl Curran, and then Emily French and Stainton Moses in a tie for third. I know a strong argument can be made for Jane Roberts being #1 on the latter, but she’d be fifth on my list. Of course, the teaching type mediumship can be evidential to the extent that the teachings far exceed the knowledge of the medium, but that is difficult to prove.
Michael Tymn, Tue 19 Jul, 23:50
Ah, Bruce, so believability is the issue! And we are just going to lay the names on the table, right?
So,—- of course it will come as no surprise to anyone who has seen my comments over the past ten years. that my number one believable ‘medium’ is Pearl Curran/Patience Worth. This is perhaps an atypical mediumship and not one with trances, dark rooms and floating accordions playing “Dixie” but if one takes the time to carefully read and consider the case I think it provides irrefutable evidence of a source of information other than the medium, Pearl Curran. Fraud, ESP or Super-Psi are impossibilities. I have to use the much-quoted statement of Dr. Walter Franklin Prince after a year or so of investigation of Pearl Curran that, “Either our concept of what we call the subconscious mind must be radically altered, so as to include potencies of which we hitherto have had no knowledge, or else some cause operating through but not originating in the subconsciousness of Mrs. Curran must be acknowledged.”
Now, Leonora Piper would have to come next. Thanks to Michael Tymn, I have been prompted to read much of the documentation of the Piper ‘sittings” in the SPR Journal and the not-so-favorable analysis of Piper by Eleanor Sidgwick. Considering the years of observation and investigation of Piper by Hodgson and others I think the believability quotient is very high in this case for spirit involvement, perhaps not always the high-minded spirits of the Imperator Group of William Stainton Moses but the lack of preaching from Piper’s spirit contacts and common-place information from known people once alive provided credibility for me. Even though Leonora Piper exhibited at times quite bizarre behaviors in her trances the information she provided allegedly from spirit entities was information that Piper could not reasonably have known.
Next, and it is very difficult to limit my choices to three as there are so many extraordinary ones, but I would offer Chico Xavier for consideration. He was a man with a very limited education who had a very long career as a medium under observation by a large percentage of the population of Brasil. Brasil even issued a commemorative stamp in his honor after his death. Xavier spoke and wrote in Portuguese which makes it difficult for English speakers to find material about Chico Xavier but little-by-little more and more of his story is being translated into English. Here again, Xavier was not a medium of dark séances, floating trumpets or direct voices from the corner of the room but if one considers the legacy of dictations from the spirit world by Xavier and if one applies a “grain of salt” as far a believability goes then the Xavier case is in my opinion certainly worthy of being included as one of the top three mediums.
There are of course very many mediums who have provided outstanding information that is difficult to reconcile with any theory other than spirit involvement and I am thinking here of George Valientine and his contact with Confucius speaking ancient Chinese and although not strictly mediums I would have to consider the Bangs sisters and their precipitated paintings. There are so many—-selecting the top three is a seemingly impossible task but there you are, Curran, Piper and Xavier are the three I would lay on the table. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Tue 19 Jul, 14:46
I am indebted to you for releasing a train of thought. We all gather at this meeting place of sharing knowledge with different views. One hidden view is believability of the particular version of after life communication.
Some believe the medium if the spirit(s) displays more intelligence than the medium (your Patience Worth might be in this category) then it must be true and then we have debates on the Stanton Moses position as a learned man of the cloth being the smarter medium introducing his own training in to the writings. The spirit controls mentioned that old Stanton needed to attain a certain level of theology knowledge before they made contact.
So back to the flash of inspiration that our little exchange has conceived. Believability.
Given the plethora of communications each of us has a hidden index of those we choose to believe.
I believe those who provide proof (not just of survival) of facts. In A R Wallace’s words The facts beat me.
I would like to know if others would reveal their top three after-life versions.
I will start with Stanton Moses, Dr Richard Hodgson/Mrs Leonard Piper (this is ironic as she didn’t believe what she was bringing through) and A M Kaulback/Uvani (from her precise nature).
I would hope that this does not lead to team support - my three beat your three etc so just leave the names on the table and back away.
I would appreciate your viewpoints to assist in my writings.
Bruce Williams, Tue 19 Jul, 04:56
It will be called Who convinced me in the after-life the most? but as it is Michael’s blog I am happy to share credits with him. (That is Michael Tymm not Archangel Michael but that’s another story).
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 18 Jul, 13:59
The interesting thing about “All Cretins are liars.” doesn’t mean that everything Cretins say is a lie. (just like mediums) The logic is false to conclude that the statement itself is a lie because it might be true. A statement like “Everything Cretins say is a lie.” , provided that it was spoken by a Cretin, logically means that the statement itself is a lie. Sometimes logic cannot be applied to what people say, or it only applies in certain situations—-these days apparently. - AOD
I might correct any poor impression that might arise about my statement. When I said that I am good at lying this is due to having to come up with a believable reason how was it that I revealed information that was unknown to either myself and/or unknown to others.
This was the means to not reveal any hidden ability which would not be accepted. In my case I was able to say due to my high knowledge of the properties of explosives then that would happen. Others did not have that training. A cover story.
It is rare for me to announce this medium ability (it has upset so many people) but as you get older you take more risks.
I like the extension of your argument regarding all mediums. Remember the Epimenides paradox. Epimenides was a Cretan who made the immortal statement: “All Cretans are liars”.
As he was a Cretan has was therefore a liar which made his sentence a lie. A logical fallacy.
Not all mediums worked in the corporate world where lies are often told by governments. I would see if the story was believable. It was the spin doctors role. In cybersecurity we use paradoxes to train red teams.
The aim is to be like Dr Richard Hodgson who was able to discern trickery. I have used my skills to detect lies (the technique is to - no wait you would not believe me if I told you ).
I remember that the gift of discernment applies to spirits as well. I always check spirits for any lies, you never know a Cretan when you find one.
Bruce Williams, Mon 18 Jul, 03:02
I think Imperator best sums it up between pages 64 and 70 of “More Spirit Teachings.” Among other things, he says:
“We deliberate, we consult, and in many instances you receive the impression of our united thought.”
“Development in mediumistic power is accompanied by risk as well as by blessing. And when a strong band does not surround the medium the risk of invasion by undeveloped spirits is increased. Care and prayer are requisite.”
“We are not permitted to interfere in the chain of cause and effect; to save man from the consequences of his sin; to pander to idle curiosity; to changed the world from a state of probation. We are not permitted to discover to you what the All-Wise desires to keep hidden. We cannot force on you knowledge. We can but offer, and protect, and guide, and train, and prepare the willing mind for future progress.”
“It is a literal fact that the spirits who frequent circles from which the spiritual element on your side is absent are unprogressed or undeveloped spirits, attracted by the dominant temperament of the sitters—earthbound spirits who love to bewilder and perplex, or to lure to vice and sin.”
The bottom line, I think, is that discernment is always necessary and should be a welcome challenge. It wouldn’t be very interesting if we had all the answers and no doubts about them.
Michael Tymn, Sun 17 Jul, 23:06
Your recent comment of 7/16/22 hinted at a concern of mine that I have been reluctant to write about on this blog because it might seem to be a somewhat personal attack on the beliefs of individual posters. I never want to do that and so I have hesitated addressing this issue. But since you have opened the door I would like to comment in response to your insight regarding people who have different responses to the writings of Stainton Moses. Please understand that I am not criticizing any one particular person’s belief system or critical of any one person.
I agree with you that the thoughts of Stainton Moses and a spirit source are more likely to appeal to those people who have an education and occupation similar to Stainton Moses. That is, people who have devoted their life’s work to Judeo Christian theology as did Moses, may find his writings congruent with their own thoughts and may tend to support not only Moses but also the alleged source of Moses’ thoughts, the Imperator Group; while those, like myself who have little or no in-depth exposure to various theologies, Christian or otherwise, may be nonplussed by them and question the source of those “teachings”.
It has been a year or more since I read ‘Spirit Teachings’ by Moses and as I recall, without going back and re-reading it, I thought at the time that what Moses wrote made a lot of sense. I felt that I understood his frustration with Christian theology of his time, embedded as he was in the Anglican Church. And as an unmarried man, burdened with unknown illnesses, which at the time I supposed were of a great part psychological, he had a lot of quiet time to ruminate and consider the validity of what he had chosen as his life’s work. He had a “mid-life crisis’ so to speak. I find no fault with that. Many of us experience a ‘dark night of the soul’ at one or more times in our lives. But what I have in mind when I think about the Moses/Imperator case is that Moses wrote about what he intimately knew about—-Christian religion. He didn’t need a spirit source to trigger what I believe were his own thoughts about Christian theology. Without really knowing, I supposed that those ideas had been fermenting in the subconscious of Moses for years and years as he confronted Christian dogma and hierarchy of that time and he had to go through the motions of supporting it, burying his frustrations deep in his subconscious.
I understand that Moses might have had a need, maybe prompted by his subconscious, to write about his conflict with Christian theology but that he might have been afraid of the impact of his ‘heresy’ upon his standing in the Anglican Church. And therefore ‘Imperator” may have been a convenient ‘out’ for Moses, probably not one that he consciously thought up but an excuse for what he wrote nevertheless. I believe that the subconscious mind will speak to us if we make an effort to really listen to it.
Amos Oliver Doyle, Sun 17 Jul, 15:58
I have to respect Moses for his burgeoning thoughts about the questionable tenets of organized religion and the spirit world. What I do not accept without a doubt is that a spirit entity called “Imperator” provided all of the information written by Stainton Moses. If Moses had been say, a blacksmith from rural England then perhaps I would be more inclined to think that maybe what Moses wrote was provided to him by contact with the spirit world. I don’t reject the possibility that the writing of Moses might have been dictated by spirits as I accept that explanation in many other cases of so-called ‘automatic writing’. Let’s just leave it that I think there are far better examples of communication between earthlings and spirit entities. - AOD
Thanks for responding, AOD, always as one lover of Patience to another. While the Imperator of “Spirit Teachings” warns us against trying to figure out things about the afterlife which are inherently beyond our comprehension, and to stick with its existence and the crucial fact that what we do here impacts how we are there, I think I have an inkling of what’s off-putting in his teachings for people like you and Keith P (in England).
As I’ve mentioned before, some of us have had a positive or at least passable experience with religion, some (seemingly an increasing number) the opposite. The former group is comforted and edified—indeed, delighted—when they find expressions of spiritualism which affirm, though also correct and amplify, core elements of the faith which has nurtured them. Spiritualist theology speaks to them, preaches to them in the worthy sense.
The latter group, however, seeks in spiritualism an alternative to, a haven from, the pernicious or at least grossly inadequate form of religious faith to which they were exposed. Thus when they find Imperator talking Christianity with Stainton, for example, the emotional reaction is more of a cringe than a comfort. Spiritualist theology is a diversion or detraction, if not a distortion.
This is only a rough dichotomy, of course, given folks like Eric, who despite having endured a horribly repressive religious environment, still find it possible to discern some meaning and guidance in the theology of “Spirit Teachings,” that unorthodox and “progressive” form of the faith which Imperator admits has been fashioned by his group in the spirit world. The “Eric exception,” an admirable one which I doubt I could emulate, may only serve to prove the rule.
Interestingly, it is the doctrine of reincarnation, about which the spirit world speaks pro and can, which often triggers similar emotional reactions in these two groups, albeit flipped. How you feel about spiritualist teachings about religion/Christianity, I feel about teachings concerning reincarnation. Yet we both know, at least as much as it can be known, that what is best will be, regardless of how it happens to strike us right now.
Newton Finn, Sat 16 Jul, 16:33
Amos Oliver Doyle, Sat 16 Jul, 14:42
On the previous post Bruce Williams who claims to have mediumistic abilities wrote, “When you have strange events you get great at lying.” And that is precisely why my belief in information channeled by mediums is dwindling. - AOD
I don’t know, Newton but I suppose I am thinking about Imperator’s ‘teachings’ which differed from the current religious dogma at the time. I agree that probably I extended those ‘teachings” to include a description of the afterlife. They seem to me to be in the same category as descriptions of the spirit world, implying a certain superior wisdom and knowledge by the spirit communicators. I know, I shouldn’t have done that when I don’t remember all of Imperator’s comments in their entirety! I would have to go back and review Imperator’s teachings page by page to see if he described anything, so I rarely put that much effort into making a comment on a blog site. Unfortunately, memory becomes somewhat faulty with age. (As you know, I admittedly have a certain negative bias against Stainton Moses and the Imperator communications.)
I guess overall, I just think that all of the information, whatever it may be, from spirit communicators must be taken with a grain of salt as there are too many opportunities for interlopers to be involved in obtaining and documenting that information and there are too many communicators, all of which have their own slant on things. I just don’t know what to believe anymore since I have become acquainted with a very large amount of the relevant literature.
Here again, that is why the writing of Pearl Curran and Patience Worth to me seems to be more ‘pure’ and uncontaminated by people with unacknowledged ulterior motives to promote their own belief systems. I don’t believe that Pearl Curran could be criticized for that. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Fri 15 Jul, 19:01
I’m curious, AOD, where you find a detailed description of the afterlife in “Spirit Teachings,” as I have found none. To the contrary, I find within this unique and self-contained body of teaching (as per Stainton Moses) a caution against attempting to visualize and comprehend the afterlife much along the lines of your comment. Perhaps you’re referring to “More Spirit Teachings” and such which do not purport to come directly from Imperator but rather from reports or transcriptions of what he appeared to say.
Newton Finn, Fri 15 Jul, 14:42
Thank you for your support of my thoughts. What a service you have given us with your recently published ‘Spiritual Reality and the Afterlife’, a work if immense research and impressive organisation of evidence, a book the whole world needs to read.
Eric Franklin, Fri 15 Jul, 08:54
They are all ‘changes of being’ within All That Is. The fysical beings and the spiritual beings. Everything ‘is’ and changes, even the illusions and probabilities. Only the ‘Oneness’ ,the ‘being’ of All that Is itself and the ‘Law of Change’ never changed and will change. Bodies desintegrate but their material elements and energies will change in something other and their spiritual elements are changed too…they made or made not progress and in any case they had some experience what changed them anyway.That is my fundamental opinion on the matter.
Chris, Fri 15 Jul, 06:07
just to round off my quotes below, is another one from Seth.
(Seth:). If the consciousness picks a mother who wants to abort, then the consciousness is only here for a short trip. A look around. It is like the seed from an apple tree who travels into the next yard but does not mature. It looks around and tries again.
Any consciousness that wants to be born is born. And it picks a mother that wants to carry a child all the way.
—TPS5 Deleted Session December 2, 1978
Bruce Scott-Hill, Fri 15 Jul, 02:30
I have read a little bit of Kardec but it became obvious to me that Kardec’s so-called spirit- sourced information seemed to be just opinions of either Kardec or whichever medium he reportedly contacted, reflecting current spiritualistic thought at that time. I did not want to spend any more time or effort perusing through Kardec’s questions to the spirit world for possible answers.
I know this will rile some people here but I would place Kardec in the same category as Jane Roberts, William Stainton Moses and to a lesser extent Geraldine Cummins, maybe Cora Richman (Scott), Chico Xavier and several of the more recent authors who write books describing the afterlife in minute detail. It seems to me that these writers draw from their own subconscious mind or maybe from their oversoul, or possibly past life personalities. Maybe it is just wishful thinking on their part. But I am not convinced that they truly describe the afterlife in any detail as reported by spirits. Reportedly, Jesus said that,” In my father’s house there are many mansions.” and with that in mind, maybe all descriptions of the afterlife would fall short of being complete. Some would think that we create our own mansion in which we experience an afterlife. That seems reasonable to me and I can’t imagine that my heaven would be identical with the heaven of many of the other people I have to contend with every day.
Most or all of what they report is from dubious sources and is irrelevant to providing support or evidence for survival of consciousness after death of the body. On the other hand, I don’t think that all of this thought about spirits and survival over the past decades or century is a bad thing or something to be derided. Perhaps human consciousness is slowly advancing to an understanding of other realities and all of this hub-bub to describe it is just a floundering attempt of humans to become educated about something which is very difficult to understand from their perspective. People who report an NDE find a description of what they saw or experienced “ineffable”, that is, beyond words to describe.
One of the reasons that I value and appreciate the Pearl Curran/Patience Worth case is that Patience Worth as a spirit was very reluctant to provide a description of the after life but in response to multiple pleas from sitters at the ‘séance’, she did consent to open the door to the afterlife just a bit by saying it was a return to yester-year. Or a visit to a marketplace where old friends and acquaintances meet. She said that she would not mar God’s heaven by trying to describe it. Now maybe this is just a cop-out because Pearl Curran had absolutely no idea what an afterlife was like but nevertheless Patience Worth at the time seemed constrained or prohibited by something or someone to provide detailed descriptions of where she was currently existing.
I even question the source of Pearl Curran’s information at times voluminous, informative and erudite as it was. I have a very strong inclination to think that Patience Worth was one of the many past lives of Pearl Curran. Curran however was not even close to the intellectual capabilities of Kardec, Roberts, Cummins and others which places her separate from that group and for me, makes the information, such as it was, more believable.
For me, evidence that one or more alternate realities exist is more important at this time then a minute description of the levels, spheres, universes, etc. that may exist. Maybe I will find out about them when I get there—-or not! - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Thu 14 Jul, 19:51
An absolutely excellent response to a complainant whose entire mode of self-presentation leaves one with an arched eyebrow or two.
If I recall correctly (and apologies in advance if I’m misidentifying anyone in any way) “Lee” first showed up here several months ago with a number of seemingly honestly-felt questions about our subject area. A number of us—and you, Eric, may well have been among them—were most generous and forthcoming with information designed to help Lee get pointed in a fruitful direction. To the best of my knowledge, those efforts were never even acknowledged, let alone any thanks being offered.
Don Porteous, Thu 14 Jul, 18:31
This present communication, from out of the blue and with no reference whatsoever to previous conversation, would seem to be the first utterance from our complainant since that early interplay.
I don’t normally like to write missives of this nature, but under the circumstances it seemed called for…
Lee may be correct in all he says about Kardec, but that is irrelevant to the very point he wishes to make. He makes one very silly mistake of his own, and it utterly destroys his purported ‘argument’. He is assuming a fact that he has to prove, and he fails to prove it. He cites the well-known scientific demonstration that the popular idea, believed until less than two centuries ago, that life arises spontaneously, is false. But (and here is his blunder) he is speaking only of physical life, biological life, which we have firm evidence to believe is embodied life. Hence the OBE and the NDE, with their remembered EXPERIENCES. Life, a unit of livingness, a being, inhabits a vessel that is not itself living. We often see physical bodies that no longer show their former livingness. Many people are employed in the task of disposing of the physical remains, the vehicles of Earth-life. Life itself does not arise either spontaneously or otherwise in physical matter because it is not physical. It has its being independently of physical vessels that contain living Beings, eg us, and are accordingly perceptible by our physical sense organs. Life, and eventually Conscious life, is not a property of physical matter. It inhabits physical matter, temporarily, and then discards it when the machine no longer functions.
What a silly error. Is not the whole subject we are discussing the factuality of life that is NOT material? You prove nothing, Lee, by proving that life that is physical cannot come spontaneously into existence. Of course it can’t. Life IS NOT PHYSICAL and does not even come into being. It already IS, part of the Great Eternity, within that Great All. The physicalists and the monists (including even the Russellian Neutral Monists, who are really dualists, and more or less correct as such) are wrong. A living being is a tiny split-off from the LIFE that contains all, the Great All-Being Her/Himself, and, using its own tiny apportionment of will and power, makes its way slowly back into that unity eventually. What a silly error, Lee!
Eric Franklin, Thu 14 Jul, 15:10
Alan Kardec’s claims are based on complete nonsense. He claims to have asked 1000 questions of 8+ mediums and also received thousands of letters from mediums. Based on claimed replies to his 1000 questions to the medium and from letters received, he came up with his answers about the afterlife ( there is no written record of these 8000+ responses, only Kardec’s claims). One would need to be completely devoid of common sense to believe that he performed qualitative analysis on well over 8000 responses to his questions to assess or consistency of such answers across so many mediums 8n the short period of time between when he claimed to have asked the questions and when he wrote his book abut the afterlife. Most people who believe in Kardec’s claims don’t even have the slightest knowledge of the methodology he used to develop his “science” of the afterlife which is really a shame as it just shows how people tend to believe everything they read without giving much critical thought.
I asked a number of Spiritists to provide me with evidence of Kardec’s notes showing answers to 1000 questions from 8+ mediums he claims to have posed his questions to and not a single one could provide me with anything other than the story of how he sat with 2 sister mediums. Even then there is no recorded evidence from Kardec as to the 1000 responses to Kardec’s questions from these sisters.
Kardec went on to write that mediums told him that life originates spontaneously ( complete nonsense) just before Pasteur proved this to be a wrong belief that, until his work, had been held by many. People are so easily duped when it comes to claims of the afterlife it really is a shame.
Lee, Thu 14 Jul, 11:57
How about people who choose to live a stereotypical, or I should say an archetypal life. My favorite example is the life of Marilyn Monroe who perhaps chose to be the archetypal blond female movie star, sex symbol following others who also chose that role, for example Jean Harlow, Lana Turner, Mae West, Mamie Van Doren, Marilyn Maxwell, Jayne Mansfield, Anna Nicole Smith and many others. Are they all archetypes as theorized by Carl Jung, the notable Swiss psychiatrist?
Marilyn was a woman who started out in life under the most dire circumstances of abandonment, without a father present and a seriously mentally-ill mother. She was passed around from person to person in childhood. Marilyn, or I should say, Norma Jean was not the most beautiful or outstanding child or teenager in any way, in fact she was rather common place. (perhaps similar to Abraham Lincoln in that way). Who would have guessed that Norma Jean would become a world ‘sex symbol’, a “blond bombshell” so to speak? Whatever she became she accomplished that by a dogged act of will but perhaps also following her predetermined or chosen life plan. She was not distracted from her goal.
And how appropriate that most of these women do not live into old age; some do but those at the pinnacle of that archetype die relatively young before time destroys their beauty or they no longer are able to play the archetypal role. Is an early death part of their life plan? I can think of other ‘movie star’ archetypes who also die early, as if they have accomplished what they came to do and rather than allow their archetypal image to be degraded, choose to move on, e.g., Michael Jackson, James Dean, Prince, Anna Nicole Smith, Jayne Mansfield, John Kennedy and Marilyn etc.
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 11 Jul, 19:00
This whole life plan idea is interesting to contemplate in individual cases including our own. But I think it is for the most part, overlooked by our culture’s current understanding of what human life really is. Are we only physical machines controlled by a glob of tissue we call the brain or are we spirits inhabiting a physical form; a consciousness that can move from form to form in order to learn and grow toward God, but perhaps also to have fun playing archetypical roles? - AOD
The recent string of comments from Amos have been inspiring, to say the least. If I might add one brief follow-on to his thoughts about “life’s plan”—we should keep in mind that the single most important part of any plan is the goal at the end of it.
For a pre-existing spirit to enter into the life-development process, as Barrett, Imperator, and many others have told us, it is with a specific goal in mind for the continued progress of that very spirit. The details of the process—of the “life plan” involved in meeting that ultimate goal—can vary from situation to situation, and can change (sometimes drastically) along the way. The goal however (and it may not always be met) remains the true object in sight.
Don Porteous, Mon 11 Jul, 11:59
Bruce Williams, Mon 11 Jul, 05:45
Apart from the strange feeling that we should rename all people to be named Bruce (see Monty Python https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ojhtq51Ya8) I have also read Dr Newton’s books and appreciate that quote. I like the thinking behind the answer as the birth plans are known in advance.
Should there be a reading list for Bruce’s? I might set that one up.
The Youtube above has a visit by Michael - could this blog have been forseen?
I feel that I have to continue to comment about life plans. Perhaps it is rare that a life plan involves only one person—-the person whose life is being lived. I think that in most cases, one’s life plan is, from the beginning, integrated with one or more life plans of other conscious beings. (Not always human.) While there may be an over-riding purpose for a life plan, (for example Abraham Lincoln) it is almost unavoidable for that purpose to encounter diversions along the way where it interacts with life plans of others. And sometimes one’s life plan might seem to be more for the benefit of another person. This is not to say that a sacrifice is made for another person but it may be that, birthed by love, one chooses to help a struggling soul to fulfil their purpose on earth. The God within us, if allowed, freely gives love to everyone and everything and for that reason alone, a consciousness may agree to incarnate only for the reason to provide loving care for another person so that that soul may evolve and grow toward the Source of pure love in which they were truly conceived. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Sun 10 Jul, 17:35
AOD, let me return the compliment: excellent comment!
Newton Finn, Sun 10 Jul, 13:01
Further to my posting yesterday, I recalled overnight, the famous afterlife professional hypnotherapist researcher, Dr Michael Newton had something important to say in one of his books, following his regressive hypnotism of a woman client – where he investigated what happens in the case of abortion. I soon found I was correct. In view of this, here below is a short extract from his first book, Journey of Souls: Case Studies of Life Between Life. (see Ref, Case 29, Kindle Loc.3242.)
Dr Newton: As a soul, are you in distress if the baby is aborted from the mother’s womb for any reason before full term?
Subject: We know if a baby is going to full term or not. Not being born comes as no surprise to us. We may be around to just comfort the child.
Dr Newton: Well, if the child does not go to term, is your life assignment as a soul aborted as well”?
Subject: No, there never was a full life assignment as far as that child was concerned.
Dr Newton: Might some babies who are aborted never have souls?
Subject: That depends on how far along they are. The ones who die very early don’t need us.
Dr Michael Newton then goes on to advise that this particular subject/soul then said that waiting for birth can get pretty boring, so a soul might “Goof off somewhere else” for a while with friends [i.e. other souls], but return quickly if there is any sense the baby is in trouble. Also, that most souls have “melded” with the baby before birth, but some leave it until the last minute.
So the detail above provided by the famous and credible researcher Dr Michael Newton, not only aligns very closely with the highly regarded mediums such as Seth, Helen Wambach and Barrett, but positively affirms women’s right to abortion – as, according to Newton, a soul is always aware in advance of any intension to abort.
Which surely makes in my opinion, the whole issue of men attempting to prohibit women having an abortion, absurd.
Bruce Scott-Hill, Sun 10 Jul, 00:53
Another interview of my favorite New Testament scholar, Dr. Dale Allision, addressing paranormal experiences (which he and his family have had) and the difficulties in interpreting them—the doubt and ambiguity that surrounds them along with many other things, like the abortion issue we’re discussing or the forever allusive historical Jesus.
Newton Finn, Sat 9 Jul, 19:12
Amos, thank you for your reactions. I think that I understand it and I agree.
Chris, Sat 9 Jul, 18:26
I think that the logic of the soul or spirit existing outside of the physical form and therefore abortion may be irrelevant is taking us down a pathway where at its end one may find that taking a life is inconsequential whether that life is unborn or born. There is much more to this issue of abortion of the unborn. Being comfortable with the thought that, “Well, the spirit really exists in the etheric.” or that “killing the body does not destroy the soul”, or that the aborted soul will have a chance to be reincarnated in another body may be comforting but not well thought-out. While these may be possibilities, they ignore the sacredness of life itself, a gift given by ‘God’ to all of its living creations. To lose respect for life in all of its forms is truly the most unforgivable sin. It is God’s plan being thwarted by incomplete and ill-conceived philosophies of man.
I think Patience Worth said it best in the following poem. What more could we expect from a loving God? - AOD
Ah, God, I have drunk unto the dregs,
And flung the cup at Thee!
The dust of crumbled righteousness
Hath dried and soaked unto itself
E’en the drop I spilled to Bacchus—-
Whilst Thou, all-patient, sendest
Amos Oliver Doyle, Sat 9 Jul, 16:51
Purple vintage for a later harvest.
Stafford, as I was about to sign off for the night, I noticed your blog that was just posted relating to the Russia-Ukraine war. I look forward to reading it tomorrow.
Michael Tymn, Sat 9 Jul, 09:02
I forget who said that “truth comes in many shades of gray.” Nor can I remember what “advanced spirit” said that “truth is never an absolute black or white.” However, this subject seems to lend itself to both comments. Thanks to all for the comments so far.
Michael Tymn, Sat 9 Jul, 07:28
BRUCE SCOTT-HILL, Sat 9 Jul, 00:07
To add to the discussion and as further support of this Seth’s earlier quote re abortion, “The soul within the fetus cannot be destroyed by any kind of abortion” - Seth. I also recall Seth previously has said that “there is no such thing as sin, only wrong doing” which adds to my earlier quote below of St Stephen in the Rev Michael Cock’s quote below directly concerning abortion i.e., “You must understand completely that [due to abortion] you do not kill that soul. Also that destruction of that being in itself as an action does not constitute a sin. … you cannot murder a limb or part [i.e. soul] of that body.
Interestingly, Michael I found this quote in an earlier article of yours concerning the channelled Sir William Barrett who taken from this book, Personality Survives Death: After-Death Communication from Sir William Barrett, that “We cannot locate the seat of life in the physical because it is not there. How many have tried to find something in the physical organism – the seat of life – some spark, germ, cause of what is called life. It doesn’t lie in the physical body, it is useless looking for it there. It is in the etheric – or more correctly, the etheric is the true carrier of life.”
So in my view this is sufficient to accept that choice should best be left to women, as no sin is involved at all as confirmed by reputable mediums as above. Also, Barrett confirms the spirit/soul exists outside the physical. Which therefore indicates that at least as far as the fetus is concerned abortion may well be irrelevant, as is very much supported by Wambach Mike, in your original article which has initiated this discussion. Particularly, as women most often have a sound reason for taking making the decision to abort.
Your words of appreciation brought a bit of light into my spiritual life and I sincerely thank you for them.
Gaby Kessler, Fri 8 Jul, 19:13
I think that I need to add that Life Plans are implemented on a multidimensional level, that is, it is kind of like an ‘either/or’ situation where the plan allows for interaction with other life plans and circumstances as they occur. It is an ‘IF/Then’ situation. ‘If’ this happens ‘then’ another plan or direction comes into play and so on and so on as a life is lived. It’s not actually a different plan that is implemented as things change but that a multidimensional plan has unlimited opportunities for fulfillment.
This is a difficult concept to verbalize and one has to accept a much larger understanding of what an ultimate reality may be.
Amos Oliver Doyle, Fri 8 Jul, 19:03
Perhaps Eric can add to this idea of multi-dimensional realities and intersection of spheres of existence with the one currently experienced as reality on earth and how those intersections can affect one’s life plan. - AOD
Humans as well as other animals have free will but there may be consequences for exercising one’s free will. Humans and animals do not function as robots. One can kill another person and say “I have free will to do that!” but usually there are penalties for killing another person, (Unless one is in the military, then it is OK.) Humans encounter situations in life every day where they must make choices and they usually make those choices using their free will. One uses free will moment to moment, every day of one’s life. One chooses to get out of bed, chooses to bathe or not, chooses to eat or not, chooses to go to work or not, chooses to obey the laws or not. Every choice to act is an exercise of free will but every choice comes with some consequence of making that choice, some good and some not so good. If one chooses to stay in bed all day, the consequences of that choice may be destructive to a life’s plan.
If one is talking about predestination or a pre-planned or a foreordained life chosen prior to birth, then the question of free will becomes more murky. But a plan is just a plan and many plans are often changed as they are implemented. Again, God does not make robots.
I have experienced that when a life plan is not followed, perhaps due to free will or chance circumstances, that the life will not be as fruitful as it may have been if the plan was followed. Sometimes, other life circumstances will be encountered which bring the spirit back to its life plan. This is sometimes successful but at other times it is not successful. This is not to say that the life is always wasted as it goes off in another direction though in many cases it may seem that way and, in a very few cases, perhaps it is wasted. Reincarnation allows the spirit to try again however. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Fri 8 Jul, 17:09
When it comes to an intractable issue like abortion, with core moral principles on all sides (control of one’s body, right to make life-altering decisions, reverence for life, protection of the vulnerable, etc.), is it any wonder that even the spirit world seems divided and perplexed by the ambiguities, seeming contradictions, and uncertainties?
E.F. Schumacher, famous for writing “Small is Beautiful,” talked about life in this world being a straining and stretching apparatus, confronting us with crucial problems and conflicts that cannot be figured out logically, cannot really be solved, but can only be grappled with, endured, and eventually transcended by what he calls “inner work.”
For those who haven’t read it and might be interested, Schumacher’s “A Guide for the Perplexed” is a very short book that contains an immense amount of philosophical wisdom…including recognition of the kinds of paranormal experiences we explore on this blog. It’s one of those books that has helped to guide me over a lifetime and still sits on the table next to my favorite chair.
Newton Finn, Thu 7 Jul, 17:40
It seems that now we are getting to the ‘free will’ problem. Do we have a free will and if yes, on what level? The human level ,the spirit level or both?
Chris, Thu 7 Jul, 09:51
In case of abortion , do we respect the free will of the woman who is pregnant or is it a matter and right of the society to force their opinion on the subject in -I suppose- defending the rights of the silent unborn child . Not an easy thought.
Thank you. It is so soothing to be warmly appreciated. I must not gush, but the gratitude is sincere.
Eric Franklin, Thu 7 Jul, 09:48
Your selection of language has always impressed. As a medium I have often wondered about the communication process. I remember clarity of expression is the aim and an understanding of lexical ambiguity important. Your comments are the masterclass and very much appreciated.
Eric mentions “The explanation that communication is difficult on account of different rates of vibration between universes is likely to be part of the correct explanation of those difficulties”.
There is another problem in the communication process and that is the command of language by the medium. (It is like using the management term steakholders which is translated as forks by new students).
I have been looking at Seth’s technique and Jane mentions in The Coming of Seth that she received the message by thought prior to the Ouija Board. This is the access to the language capability of the medium.
The point is that Eric spends time in finding the most effective words to express his message. I find that the spirits who communicate are both careful and economical in their language. Precise language is prechosen by the spirits.
This may date me but this is similar to the time we used Defence Telex services which required careful use of words. In my case if the words caused confusion then explosions might occur.
I do like Eric’s blend of language, mixing both emotive (to get dumped down here) with the expressions of physics. It reminds me of Eistein’s phrase spooky at a distance to explain spin and entanglement.
Feda(Leonard’s spirit control) was selected as a young spirit’s language is basic.
Bruce Williams, Thu 7 Jul, 03:33
Hi Michael, My understanding is that the soul is ‘connected’ with the fetus via the “band of radiation” and slips into it from time to time as it grows. But the final and total attachment or connection to the baby body happens at the moment of birth. I have explained it in greater detail in my video on Life Before Birth https://youtu.be/qTZiddD_SM4
Hans Wilhelm, Wed 6 Jul, 21:32
Indeed how can we reconcile the abcsence of coincidence with free will? Maybe that on important moments in life (the moments of tests in life) we have a free will, that has to make choices. After the choice is made, cause and effect will do there job again and he absence of coincidence is again respected. The goal is known, but we decide how the path will be. That’s my opinion and so new experiences will arise.
Chris, Wed 6 Jul, 17:18
Amos Oliver Doylea, Wed 6 Jul, 15:53
Excellent comment! - AOD
It may well be true in a certain sense, but I and many others are uncomfortable with the blanket assertion that everything in this life is planned out ahead of time for the best. Sharing discomfort with such a view is Imperator, who, for example, states that Jesus was not intended to have his life violently aborted, but that this was instead a tragedy, an interruption of God’s plan, caused by willful human sin.
From the perspective of “Spirit Teachings,” our world is a true battle between good and evil, and human beings thus help to shape their own future, to create history as God would have it shaped or otherwise. Accordingly, I much prefer the apostle’s statement that, given God’s existence, all things work together for the good, as opposed to the position that everything is good and has always been good from square one.
It’s interesting and instructive—isn’t it?—that spiritualism has differing schools of thought similar to traditional religions, and that various “verses” from various teachers are cited or juxtaposed to support a particular position that intuitively appeals to us. Such is the religious game we can’t help but play but is best played, as spiritualists know, with eyes wide open.
Newton Finn, Wed 6 Jul, 14:24
I would like to be allowed to exress appreciation to Gaby Kessler, who seems to understand perfectly what my blood-sweating choices of words struggle to express with precision and without ambiguity. It is a personal joy, a gratification, to have that appreciation, that empathy with my thought. Not many seem to agree with my little “theories”.
I missed out Bruce in acknowledging the recent comments of a day or two before (I am very busy at 81), and apologise, but appreciate his comment too, though with one brief but meaningful modifying remark. The explanation that communication is difficult on account of different rates of vibration between universes is likely to be part of the correct explanation of those difficulties, but the elucidation of the STRUCTURE of a whole system of interpenetrating universes not normally in communication with each other is a simple matter of the ‘Special’ sub-theory (may I call it that?) of that other main component of physics, Relativity. Think it out.
Eric Franklin, Wed 6 Jul, 10:14
Great blog. My study of the afterworld suggests that opinions vary on many subjects. How about the war in Ukraine? Even that. I’ll be posting a blog on that very subject.
Stafford Betty, Wed 6 Jul, 07:06
Hans, thank you for the link to your interesting video. Personally, I prefer your explanation to all others, but, unless I missed it, you didn’t address the issue of soul attachment. The implication is that the soul attaches to the fetus at the time of conception. That seems to be the primary issue here and even spirits coming through seemingly credible mediums don’t agree. Some say it attaches during the latter part of the pregnancy and others that it attaches at the time of birth. You mentioned all the planning that goes on beforehand, suggesting that the soul pre-exists the fetus. Maybe “attachment” isn’t the right word here. Any thoughts on that aspect of it?
Michael Tymn, Wed 6 Jul, 07:01
Bruce Scott-Hill, Wed 6 Jul, 00:58
Apologies I was a bit rushed yesterday when I quoted Seth directly word for word by giving you this quote (now posted below) on abortion. i.e.
“The soul within the foetus cannot be destroyed by any kind of abortion” - Seth.
I should have posted this further Seth quote - which also has relevance. Namely, “The soul portion of you resides in other dimensions beyond the physical level.”
For those passionate about science as myself, by “dimensions”, as stated here by Seth, he most likely refers to a different vibrational level perhaps occupying the same space as earth – as often stated in metaphysical literature.) Also, In quantum states, communication is instantaneous as a holographic property independent of distance, so that our mind/consciousness location could be located anywhere, even remote from one’s foetus and linked by the zero-point field which surrounds all matter. Summing up:
All of which supports the view earlier stated by both Seth, and the comments I provided earlier which were the channelled words by St. Stephen as stated by the vicar the Rev. Michael Cock’s in his book, (also actually tape recorded by him) and referred to below in my earlier posting, that,
Destroying a foetus has nil effect on the soul, which survives regardless.
thank you so much for this blog and for your thoughts.
Our Swiss Medium Pascal Voggenhuber wrote in his book “Kinder in der Geistigen Welt” (Children in the Spirit World), CH-Altendorf, 2013, a chapter about abortion and his spirit communication with aborted children. I cite the clue sentence here, words of a soul/spirit whose body was aborted: “I knew I would never be born and I came to have just that experience.” (page 57).
From other previous reading, I remember the sentence that a family may consist of born and unborn family members. I read and personally experience that unborn family members belong to the family and wish to be heard, by whatever way. They also assist the family, from the spirit world. (I have an unborn twin-sister).
Pascal Voggenhuber (born 1980) also writes that a soul enters the body of the foetus at different times, from conception to birth.
These my patches of information are meant to be part of the “Whole, within that Great Consciousness that is ALL”, citing Eric Franclin`s (in my opinion) perfect comment of Tue 5 Jul.
Gaby Kessler, Switzerland
Gaby Kessler, Tue 5 Jul, 21:24
As a Spiritist, where reincarnation is a large factor, I would like to mention the following considerations:
- an abortion stops a spirit reincarnating and the lack of fulfillment of the life pre-planned for that particular existence
- it can be a trial/test for a spirit in the spirit world to get ready to reincarnate, but then at the last minute be stopped, via the mother’s freewill in having an abortion
- for a spirit where it is necessary to be reincarnated, abortion only delays the inevitable…until eventually a decision will finally allow the spirit to reincarnate (the mother decides to have the child) in a future existence…no matter how long that may take. In these cases the two spirits are linked and have unfinished business.
- mitigating factors and especially INTENT of the person having an abortion are ALWAYS taken into account regarding the level of responsibility.
- there is no Divine judgement, only the reaping of the consequences of the law of cause and effect; freewill is involved as well as reincarnation are part of the natural Divine process of soul progression and evolution
Yvonne Limoges, Tue 5 Jul, 21:20
As it happens, my previous comment was the first, to Mike’s latest blog. Now, as more comments are published, I find myself wanting to urge all to see that ALL the other comments, Michael Smicker’s, Amos’s, Newton’s, Chris’s, Hans Wilhelm’s (I hope I haven’t missed anyone) are all wholly true, and see the SYNTHESIS, the whole living truth that they all point to, the ALL that is the Being Who contains ALL, we being the not-separate-but-limited early stages within that Whole, within that Great Consciousness that is ALL, each of us climbing, maybe slowly, up towards that infinite number of conscious dimensions, and as we rise to each higher stage transmuting a dimension of time to a dimension of timeLESS space, ie climbing towards the ETERNITY of the Great Being that is ALL and in all. (Words are no good, but this attempts to unfurl an understanding that is a wordless concept-percept we should “just see”.)
Eric Franklin, Tue 5 Jul, 07:06
Bruce Williams, Tue 5 Jul, 03:23
Michael presents the difficult issues well. My view is that the soul is attached to the fetus but does not fully transfer until a later stage. I would use a metaphor of souls parachuting down, some make it others don’t. The concept of the soul selecting possible parents/situations in which land is in keeping with the metaphor. I know that a soul, if the fetus miscarries waits for another time, having a first priority on the parent/life situation.
I see that abortion is free will to choose if the baby will be welcome in the situation. Sometimes there are factors which require abortion and I worry about the mothers mental position being catered for in a better way. Ethics are strange things. I taught ethics for a short time until my boss said that it was too difficult. I gave a scenario which had different responses, much the same as complex questions like this.
On a lighter note I get inspired with the responses of the group and this has expanded my interests. Bill Michael S and others with Seth has me reading The Coming of Seth (I like origin stories).
Eric always impresses me with his turn of phrase.
“The soul within the fetus cannot be destroyed by any kind of abortion” - Seth.
Bruce Scott-Hill, Mon 4 Jul, 23:48
My words follow i.e. those of Bruce Scott-Hill, “For those that might be skeptical about this, it is pointed out that any idea that abortion is unacceptable, is only a human viewpoint held strongly by some in today’s world, but it is of interest that despite such a viewpoint abortion is not even mentioned in the Bible. Not only that, but in the St. Stephen channeled book, written by the Rev. Michael Cocks, St. Stephen completely supports Seth by saying the following, “…you must understand completely that [due to abortion] you do not kill that soul. Also that destruction of that being in itself as an action does not constitute a sin. … you cannot murder a limb or part [i.e. soul] of that body. Ref. “Afterlife Teaching from Stephen the Martyr” – the Rev. Michael Cocks, Pg. 131.
Michael Schmicker, Mon 4 Jul, 19:54
A most timelyandi Teresita g blog. Great job.
IfI remember rightly, the Seth position is somewhat like this:
1) All matter is conscious to some degree — including a born human, a fetus, a fingernail, a door nail, a molecule, an atom. Matter itself is conscious.
2) human personality or spirit or soul can enter a fetus at any point from conception until the moment of birth. So it’s possible a fetus can respond and have a heartbeat etc and still not be what we would call a person.
3) No multidimensional entity ( Seth’s term for our greater self composed of many lifetimes/reincarnations) cannot be stopped from exploring physical lives if it so chooses. So if a personality is thwarted from an existence by an abortion, it is simply a temporary set back.
If my memory of my Seth reading is correct, then, it would seem like an abortion is not a huge moral failing per se.
we are all eternal, and a fragment of All That Is (God), and abortion, like any other experience we have in this physical reality, is a learning and growth experience on our eternal road of exploration.
In addition to my earlier quote. Was it not Jesus who gave his disciples, who were fishermen(!) a miraculous catch of fish, and didn’t he multiplied the two fishes…if it isn’t a good thing to eat them?
Chris, Mon 4 Jul, 19:05
Dear Hans, I saw three of your video’s. They are clearly explained, but I have some questions: how do you reconcile the first part of your video of ‘the Law of attraction’ with the abortion video. If we choose our parents and already in the spiritworld connect with each other, how do you explain the abortion? And about the animal video: do you ignore the existance of carnivore dinosaurs long before the existance of men, because you say that we are the cause of existance of carnivore animals? And I ask myself…does a carrot like to be killed and eaten? And I even can get further: if you eat a nut, isn’t that the killing of the foetus of a nuttree? Why may we kill and eat plants and not the animals? Aren’t the plants our brothers and sisters, or is it because they are less divine? Can anything be less divine? I think you are divine or not…everything is one. And in my opinion , it is all about the ‘respect’, you know you have to eat to live on Earth, you know you have to kill plants and/or animals to survive, you even killed many insects, bacteria, virusses and fungae just breathing air! So I think that we must learn to have respect for all that exists, because overall, if you believe in a God as All that is , then All what surrounds us is divine.
Chris, Mon 4 Jul, 18:53
Give it Love and Respect at the same way as the divine creator gives us love and respect and never forget that we all are One.
Michael’s concluding thoughts on this difficult and divisive subject, to the effect that the spirit world seems to know little more about it (or at least to agree little more about it) than we in the carnal world, applies to so many crucial aspects of spirit teaching.
A close reading of Imperator’s words, for example, reveals that the theology he is imparting to Stainton Moses, as a corrective to conservative Christian doctrine, is merely a more accurate and adequate theology devised by a group of spirits and makes no claim to come directly from God.
We who take seriously spirit teaching must, as Michael implies, be as careful to avoid literalism and fundamentalism as those of a more traditional Christian (or other religious) bent. Apparently, both down here AND up there, we see through a glass darkly, until we enter those sublime realms of divine contemplation where all words and concepts evaporate.
Newton Finn, Mon 4 Jul, 16:36
A very challenging subject and I am glad you listed several different sources. A few years ago I made a short video on this subject - which basically covers most of the points you mentioned. Thank you for doing that. If you are interested here is the short video: https://youtu.be/9LiVYYqh1YY
Hans Wilhelm, Mon 4 Jul, 16:04
Like almost everything else in life, abortion can be looked at from two opposing perspectives—-materialism and spiritualism or more appropriately spiritism. Spiritism includes a belief in reincarnation in addition to a belief in a spirit world. If one is truly a Spiritist, then the issue of when a spirit enters the body of a developing embryo or fetus is of little importance as it will have many opportunities to enter another body if the attempt is not successful, As I recall there have been reports from the spirit world that a spirit may enter the developing body at any time during development and even after birth of the body. Sometimes during a pregnancy it has been reported that the spirit consciousness hovers around the developing fetus and its mother , entering, leaving and then reentering the fetus many times, like one would try on a pair of shoes several times before making a purchase.
The problem is that most people really do not believe in a spirit reality, even those who strongly profess a religion and its dogmas. Sometimes I think that many or most of those who say they are Spiritualists or Spiritists don’t fully understand the ramifications of what they say they believe. Consciousness is eternal and cannot be destroyed by breaking the vessel in which it may be contained. And, if the pot is breaked, the potter will create another one.
(Wasn’t it Jesus who said to not fear those who can destroy the body but those who destroy the soul?)
Spirit possession is a documented phenomenon (see the Lurancy Vennum case and others) where spirits enter and leave a body usually of an adult but perhaps as portrayed in the movies, also of children so why not of a developing fetus? Materialists believe that “You only go around once in life.” so, you have to make the most of it. But Spiritists believe that consciousness has many opportunities to experience a physical existence. And the whole process of birth and death, waxing and waning , yin and yang are all part of a natural process of experience of connected opposites that consciousness (or God) plays with during many lifetimes.
There is a video on YouTube of Matt Fraser providing a reading for a woman who had an abortion at a very early age of 12 years old. Although not highly informative, it is nevertheless interesting. - AOD
Amos Oliver Doyle, Mon 4 Jul, 15:13
Very interesting subject. Here is another opinion: Vicent Guillem Primo in ‘Spiritual Laws’ channeling or speaking to Jesaia in out of the body experiences says that abortion is only should be permitted when the life of the mother is in danger or in case of raping.But after all it is a difficult matter: we know that the aborted souls will be welcomed back in the afterlife and can grow up there of get the chance to enter other concieved lifes. I read that it is even possible that the aborted soul can enter the next concieved foetus of the same mother . But what about the mother? Did she missed a test? There will be others coming in that case. Is it a crime or not? Is it something we must judge, or is it something that she will judge during her life of lifereview?
Chris, Mon 4 Jul, 10:09
How will the unwanted child grow up when it is not wanted, or in the case of rape if itself is the result of a crime? Shall it get , when spared, the ‘normal’ love and chances than when it was a product of love? What is the best option for that soul: getting aborted or have ‘a hell’ of a life by the unloving parents ? Maybe we have to consider it case by case and let the decision to the mother, it is she who will have to bear the consequences ...a big question and test of conscience and love. If we are trying to learn ’ unconditional love’ on Earth…the answer is obvious,is it not?
As a personal very quick response to just one reading of Mike’s latest, very interesting and very welcome, blog I would say that I do not see incompatibility between the expressed views of those in the spirit world. In fact, I see that most of what has been said explains what was told me about my own birth in this miserable world, 81 years ago. (I apparently did not want to get dumped down here, at least not in a Christadelphian family with an ever-present yet ever sullenly-absent father - not a good situation - and refused to breathe for ten minutes. The various implications of this scenario seem to be well-explained by one oir anther of the range of comment made by the spirits themselves. Perhaps I had better read it again, to see if I can find some inconsistencies among the spirits . . .
Eric Franklin, Mon 4 Jul, 09:54
Add your comment