The Afterlife

bee · Post by **bee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:03 am

What is your opinion of Joan of Arc?

Dear Paula-that is the sweetest question I was longing for-Joan 'Ark is much more than any of us will ever know. I think she was a second Christ-just in different place and different gender. There were so many wars after Christ, at that particular time of Joan-the hundred year war between England and France, so much of the innocent blood has been shed, that the sacrificial blood of Christ could not cover the sin and crime of the humankind. Joan was the chosen one-she was the one-the Lamb again. The sacrifice of Christ was in a sense renewed. She was given the rear (but not as rear as one might think) gift by Holy Spirit-her heart was opened by HS and it was embodied there, in her heart. Through this connection she had access to the Holiest of Holy secrets, one never talks about, ever. She told only what she was aloud to speak of. She knew her destiny and she accepted it, just as Christ did. She is in most high place in all hierarchy, besides Christ. Women should be more devoted to her, because in a sense that was Joan who opened more freedom for us. I sometimes wonder why there are not more people seriously devoted to Joan d'Ark, there is so much more-one can have a revelation just by meditating about her.
I agree with you-that also there are many gifted people, but the question is-where the gift is coming from, and what kind of gift it is really, and how it has been used. That is a very complex question. No doubt, that many gifted people who are excerssizing the gift, they don't have it as a connection to the spiritual world at all, because there is no connection. However-the gift is such-that they can read your mind. There are no tricks or charlatanism in that, the charlatanism is that they are proposing as being connected to the spirits beyond. In Fact they see you inside and feel what you feel and they can respond to that. But surely there are people who are connected, but they do not work for money or gifts or for no gain at all. There are people who would have the message to somebody and then they do it. There is much more to that, but for now I just wanted to answer your question.

tom.d.stiller · Post by **tom.d.stiller** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:08 am

bee wrote:Einstein had plenty of exercise and depth in intellect, but pretty much close to 0 in spiritual experience. Sad, but true. Hawkings is as confused as a spiritual being as my poor student Camille, in spite of his intellectual power.

Oh bee, how I envy you. Really. You seem to have had a chance to discuss spiritual issues with Einstein and Hawking.

Less lucky people, like this humble pie eating writer, can only confess that they don't have any deeper knowledge about the "spiritual competence" of Albert and Stephen.

Just talking about Einstein, however, in the light of what Insanitor quoted, I'd say that that man of "exercise and depth in intellect" had spent more time thinking about religious and spiritual topics than some posters who act as if they were the ultimate authority, the "High Commissioner for Spiritual Competence".

I'd love to get in contact with your "poor Camille", however. Maybe she's as confused in her thoughts about quantum physics as Stephen Hawking as well.

Sure, it's silly to believe that someone, a "celebrity", who excelled in one field of craft or art or thought or science must be as brilliant in other realms. But it isn't less silly to exclude this possibility.

I feel we shouldn't call someone "pretty much close to 0" in spirituality just because we don't know better. And, most people still believe Einstein must have been a complete idiot (in physics, hark!), when they look at his "theory of relativity" - because this theory still contradicts to all our everyday experience and to all our common sense. (You gotta do a lot of math, and ponder about quite a number of experimental physics, to even understand what he's talking about.)

Probably most of those standing in awe before Einstein's picture do so because his personality impressed them, even though they don't know what his professional work is about. Of course I'm sure you, dear bee, won't be among them. You know exactly the reason why Einstein was a great physicist. As you know the reason why he was "close to 0 in spiritual experience".

People like you, bee, are exactly those that - come Judgment Day - will be much needed, because they will be the only source the High Court of Apocalypsis can really rely upon.

I bow my poor unfashionable head.

tom

tom.d.stiller · Post by **tom.d.stiller** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:11 am

bee - I just saw that you're the leading experts on the Life and Spirits of Jeanne D'Arc as well.

Tell me more! What did Jesus exactly feel when they pushed a nail through his feet? Whom did his spirit address?

bee · Post by **bee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:15 am

[quote]bee I'm interested - on what basis do you say that Einstein had "pretty much close to 0 in spiritual experience?" [/quote
-Surely, there no more basis for saying that Einstein had 0 spiritual expierenece-than to say that he had many, because of neither we can be sure. He has not written about "spiritual experience." He has written about his assumptions or beliefs, but spiritual belief is quite a difference to compare with spiritual experience, isn't it?

bee · Post by **bee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:34 am

Dear Tom-you have written banalities-which are intended to be very sarcastic, however they are what they just represent,-( If i did not see your name above that, I woul've said)-banalities of a sleeping spirit and limping intellect.

tom.d.stiller · Post by **tom.d.stiller** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:36 am

Linda,

I, too, prefer boards that connect me to living people.

Of course, like in everything that's real, there are some disadvantages as well. (I resist the temptation of quoting the "crack - light" line...) We, contributors to this board, don't really know each other. Some we know better than others, of course, we can infer from their posts what kind of fool they are, get a better impression after a few PMs and / or emails and / or encounters in the chat room.

Some are less wordy than others, some try to touch on more serious issues, while others give a light-hearted touch to the virtual community. People are different, posters are different. Those I came to know better are different from what can be inferred by reading their posts.

But is this really much different from everyday life in the offices, and clubs, and public places? The people we come to know when getting closer are different from the personae we superficially encountered.

It's just that face-to-face situations force us into a higher consistency than this forum does. We all know there are posters who today are very gentle, nice, sensitive and sensible, and start stinging and bashing tomorrow. In real life situations this would be perceived as mental disintegration, while around here it can, and should, be explained by us not seeing what happened to the person in the time between. (Insanitor observed something similar.)

We can only try to create a consistent public persona that is honest in that it doesn't differ more from our self than does our everyday personae. And hope...

See you around soon.

tom

tom.d.stiller · Post by **tom.d.stiller** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:38 am

bee I'm interested - on what basis do you say that Einstein had "pretty much close to 0 in spiritual experience?" [/quote
-Surely, there no more basis for saying that Einstein had 0 spiritual expierenece-than to say that he had many, because of neither we can be sure. He has not written about "spiritual experience." He has written about his assumptions or beliefs, but spiritual belief is quite a difference to compare with spiritual experience, isn't it?

But you judged him that way, and that's the point. Your fault, I fear...

bee · Post by **bee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 9:02 am

]
Now, we know more, but we're still afraid, in need of comfort. There seems to be so much lacking in our own personal lives, things that frighten us that we have no control over, that at times, it seems so right to look for comfort in the old familiar

Linda, it is very true, but same time-as much as knowledge has grown, the intellect expanding, the spiritual acknowledgment seemed to be stagnant if to be compared, especially when compared the victories and achievements of intellect. Thus the spiritual achievements many times become like laughing matter, because of it's delicate nature.
The common mistake what people tend to make, as we can read above is-to equal the intellect and the spirit, which in harmonious cases is the harmony itself, but those are very rear. Why we admire so much the antiquity and the heroes of the antique world? Plus the Beauty. Because that was the goal there-to reach that harmony-intellect and spirit, it has more moved to the art world and less to human beings.

Insanitor · Post by **Insanitor** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 9:17 am

0 spiritual experience, max spiritual experience, 0 intellect, max intellect

As Einstein-baby might have said, it's all relative. Einstein was famous as a physicist (in some circles) but for me he was just a pure thinker, and for me you can't be truly spiritual unless you really think and question, try on different points of view, reject some adopt others and arrive at what is right for you, without the need to slap others in the face with it. Of course, I don't always abide by my principles.

Here is a fun site (for thinkers and players only!!)

http://www.integralscience.org/einsteinbuddha/

Tom, be my guru man!

Hey, I hope there is an afterlife now, so we can clear up some of the assertions made in this thread. I hope eternity is enough time to make an appointment with the Ghosts of Einstein, Hawking, Buddha, Tarantino or whoever....

bee · Post by **bee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 10:40 am

Hawkings is as confused as a spiritual being as my poor student Camille, in spite of his intellectual power.
Tom- this is what I said- Camille has not intellectual power, she can hardly read. Her spirit is confused. Hawking's spirit is also confused, even with his great intellectual power.

this is what you said

I'd love to get in contact with your "poor Camille", however. Maybe she's as confused in her thoughts about quantum physics as Stephen Hawking as well.

Did my sentence express the idea that Hawking is confused in his thoughts about quantum phisics? Of course not, it was just what you wanted to read there, not what was actually written.

bee · Post by **bee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:01 am

but for me he was just a pure thinker, and for me you can't be truly spiritual unless you really think and question, try on different points of view, reject some adopt others and arrive at what is right for you,

- Insinator, you would go right into the trap,

tell me- who can help you? You think Tom will, as your guru? I don't think so, my darling

But listen- as they said long time ago in the Good Book
- what happens when the blind guy is leading de other guy? they both fall down from the cliff

Insinator- the whole smear was about it that it is not the same

.
Joan d'Ark was a peasant girl, with no education, knowledge or intellectual training- but she turned the world around. She knew things trough spiritual revelation, when her spirit was able to connect with the higher spirit. reject some adopt others and arrive at what is right for you- there was no calculation, what is good for me or what is not, - there was no such a misery present- Insinator!

bee · Post by **bee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:27 am

TOM

Tell me more! What did Jesus exactly feel when they pushed a nail through his feet? Whom did his spirit address?

Tom- mockery of this kind is no good for your own sake.
It will get back to you hauntingly.

Jonnie Falafel · Post by **Jonnie Falafel** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:20 pm

It's very easy to say someone's gets 0 in "spiritual experience" because it's like knitting fog.... you can never grasp what someone means by it, and it's meaning is usually peculiar to them. Thanks for your posts Tom... a beacon of rationality (guess Bee would disapprove of that too). Check out http://www.csicop.org when it comes to mediums .....

tom.d.stiller · Post by **tom.d.stiller** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:41 pm

bee wrote:Did my sentence express the idea that Hawking is confused in his thoughts about quantum phisics? Of course not, it was just what you wanted to read there, not what was actually written.

Irony, bee, I told you not so long ago, is an art.

An art, by the way, which you, when you have one of your self-righteous days, don't seem to know.

bee · Post by **bee** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:41 pm

Jonnie Falafel- you remind me of dogs barking at the stranger just passing by, for reasons unknown to themselves. Because of their beastly nature which they are not aware of.