Evolution

[Little Rik]

So much BS and so much confusion yog.  

When you experience an NDE all the past and all your previous state of consciousness means absolutely nothing.

Given that you previously said that a person's prior beliefs condition what they see in an NDE, you're simply contradicting yourself here.

Not at all yog.
You are confusing    all this with the NDE welcome.
Read again what I did write.  

God can lift up to the very top your awareness as he wishes taking into due account of course your free will as already been demonstrated in Cathleen NDE.

You didn't demonstrate anything with the Cathleen NDE other than that you can make unwarranted assumptions.  That Cathleen perceived the same as what you believe to be true is not evidence that she was perceiving the reality accurately.  You have no way of knowing what her free will wanted nor what God wants based solely on the NDE itself.  You're smuggling in those assumptions from elsewhere and that invalidates any conclusion you've made.

Idiot.
If you read properly her NDE it clearly stated that she come back into her body BECAUSE she still had feelings for her parents.
That is the fee will in action.

High intellect to God means nothing so even a simple person can understand God 100%.
If however a person put his free will in between himself and God then obviously God can not be perceived in full.

"Can" and "do" are worlds apart.  I could give a rat's ass what you believe God "can" do as opposed to what he has actually done.  You cannot show that God was revealing an accurate picture of the afterlife to Cathleen, and that is what you need to do to claim that her account of reincarnation and karma is correct.  You have no way of determining the "state" of someone's free will in relation to the truth if you cannot first demonstrate the truth without relation to their will.  You don't know the truth independent  of an NDE, so you can't claim that this or that exercise of will hurt or helped determine the accuracy of their NDE.  These are rather obvious epistemological problems, yet you appear to be completely unaware that they even are problems.

Of course if you do not believe that God exist then for you is all BS.
No need to go any further then.
That is quite bizarre because on one hand you say that you never said that NDEs are BS but on the other hand you dismiss NDEs at every step and God reality at the same time.
It look like you are in the middle of the great ocean not knowing where to go.
Make up your mind yog.  

That doesn't mean that whatever is perceived is wrong.
Why God would waste his time in letting people perceive something wrong.

In George Ritchie's NDE, he met Jesus and Jesus showed him that the afterlife consists of four kingdoms to which the person will go.  There is no reincarnation in his NDE and so if what you claim about reincarnation is right, then what Ritchie perceived is wrong or inaccurate.  The definition of accurate is "correct in all details," so any difference from the actual reality in any detail is therefore inaccurate.  You don't get around this point by claiming unsupported things about God's motives.  You claimed that what people perceive in the afterlife is a reflection of what they believed before death.  If they perceive Jesus God and no reincarnation, and there is reincarnation, then their perception is NOT correct in all details.  Ritchie says in the video that Jesus said that "if you've seen me [then] you've seen what follows," so unless no reincarnation follows death, then Ritchie's perceptions were wrong.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with his NDE.
It is you that didn't get it.
Go through again yog and you will get it if of course you stop being a total nonsense.
Reincarnation is there.
In fact God shown as Jesus explain clearly what the afterlife is all about.
Kingdoms are dimensions which reflect each being awareness so according each individual awareness they will end up in a particular dimension.
This is about reincarnation yog.
In his NDE God doesn't say that these kingdom are final yet you deduce that they are.
How stupid can you be yog?  

NDEs are about learning in order to progress spiritually so God give to each particular individual what is useful for him-her.
Nothing more nothing less.
Whether the person who experience the NDE perceive God 1 or 100% that is not the issue.
The issue is that what God give to the person is 100% of what the person need.
All the rest is meaningless.

No, the issue is whether the content of an NDE can be relied upon as an accurate representation of the underlying reality.  According to you, George Ritchie's NDE was not accurate.  You don't get around this point by muttering a bunch of mumbo jumbo about what you think God wants or what you think God is doing for the person in an NDE as those are all just guesses on your part, they are not evidence of anything.  You have no evidence that what you are saying is true about NDEs, and I can equally assert something otherwise with just as much justification.  Whether or not NDE content is accurate is the central issue in your being able to demonstrate the existence of karma and reincarnation with them.  All this idle speculation about God and the purpose of NDEs is meaningless and quite beside the point.

You keep on deducing things that never existed.
Your imagination is way way out of control yog.
Look after your health yog.    

One thing for sure is that I never said that my awareness in consciousness is huge so avoid to say things that I never said.
All I said is that I practice the best system to progress in spiritual awareness which is the real yoga.
That's all.
As far as to know the degree in awareness that only the supreme mastermind can tell.
If however you feel more peace and happiness within then you know that you are on the correct path.

First, it doesn't follow that because one experiences peace and happiness within that it necessarily follows that they are on the correct path.  Accomplished Buddhists feel peace and happiness within, yet according to you, their path does not lead to spiritual extinction as they believe.  So obviously peace and happiness mean squat.  Nazis in world war II felt a sense of peace and happiness and feeling of meaning as a consequence of being members of a fascist state, that doesn't in any way indicate that they were on the "correct" path.  To know something is to have justified true belief about the thing.  Nothing about a feeling of peace and happiness justifies your belief that you are on the correct path, so you do not in fact "know" any such thing.  Some studies show that meditation by itself  leads to peace and happiness, regardless of the path that the person is on.  That you believe there is a link between the two is just more evidence of your foolishness.

It really depend on temporary peace which can be achieved with a glass of wine or a drug or any other artificial way or permanent peace of mind which can only be achieved with hard spiritual work.
Obviously my case is the latter but I guess you never thought about that yog, did you?

And you still did not answer  the question of how a person knows that the welcome is over in an NDE.  Given that you were the one who brought up this welcome nonsense, it's odd that you continue avoiding answering the question.  I could care less what you think your feelings of peace and happiness mean as you're a deluded twat.  You have no actual evidence for your belief about what it means.

Wrong once again yog.
Your problem (actually one of your many problem ) relate to the fact that you fail to understand what I and other people did write.
What I did write is that each individual has his own free will more or less pronounced so obviously his her relation with God may vary.
A welcome is only the first part of any NDE and means very very little in term of acquiring knowledge from God.
If a particular person is very strong in believing that Jesus is the real God then God will show in Jesus image during all the NDE.
If on the other hand a person did not have any previous belief than God may show as pure light during all the NDE.
All this is pure and simple futility.
It is the knowledge that God give the only important thing.
All the rest mean very little.

What garbage are you talking about?
Who cease to exist?  

I was simply pointing out that the expression "leave the body" was ambiguous in that it could mean either consciousness ceasing to exist, or, that consciousness has physically gone elsewhere.

A bit like moving the calm water for no reason, isn't it yog?

1) Who said that..........clairvoyance is possible in the absence of blood and life?
2) There is enough evidence to say that an NDE happen when the consciousness leave a dead body but there is zero evidence to say that OBE may happen when the consciousness is still in the alive body it is therefore up to you that propose this topic to demonstrate that clairvoyance can create an OBE.  

You're trying to reverse the burden of proof again.  You made the claim that OBEs demonstrate that consciousness leaves the body.  It's up to you to demonstrate that alternative explanations like clairvoyance are impossible.  I don't have to prove that it is possible.  As long as it's consistent with the evidence, you have to rule it out.  You haven't done so, and so your claim that the evidence necessarily shows that consciousness leaves the body has not been demonstrated.  Until you demonstrate that clairvoyance is not possible, then your claim that there is enough evidence to show that consciousness leaves the body is false, because every scrap of evidence for that is fully compatible with clairvoyance.

You are the one who brought up the clairvoyance topic not me so is up to you to demonstrate your point not me.

FOOL.

Even your country is sending satellites to other planets to better study those planets.
Yoga does the same thing although doesn't send satellites to God.
Yoga is all about reducing the distance that separate you from God in order to fully understand God beside the fact that the other main reason is to merge into Him and become one with it so the accuracy about God must be obtained by reducing the distance that separate us from Him.  

None of this is evidence of reincarnation or karma.  That you have beliefs about what you are accomplishing through you practice of yoga is a fact of which I have no doubt.  However your beliefs are not themselves evidence of anything other than that you hold such beliefs. They are not evidence that yoga brings you closer to God.  Again, as with the question of will discussed above, you have to be in possession of the truth first before you can show that this or that practice correlates with discovering the truth.  You keep omitting the step of first determining truth independent of yoga before you can determine that yoga is associated with truth.  You have not done any such thing.  This entire paragraph about "what yoga does" is just a digression which means nothing.

Practice give you the evidence that yoga bring you close to God.
We are made of consciousness-energy.
God also.
How do I know?
By practicing yoga more and more awareness come to the surface and more is within waiting to come to the surface.
The total amount of consciousness is God so when you are able to bring to the surface all the consciousness within you are God.
Of course this awareness will come in you in some next reincarnation considering that at the moment as I already said you put a strong negative free will between yourself and God.

Sure, you.........don't think anyone believes the universe pop up as per magic.........but at the same time atheists keep on believing that the universe doesn't need a God because entropy can keep the universe alive beside the fact that atheists have no idea how the universe got there in the first place.

You are full of garbage yog yet you keep on argue with people that at least use logic in their thinking.  

Your irrational opinion is noted.  I also note that despite the bold claims in your last post  about what math and so on show about god, you haven't bothered to present any of that evidence.  Put up or shut up.  This thread is not about what atheists believe, it's all about you and your claims that you have evidence of god, karma, and reincarnation.   Pony up or admit defeat.

Me irrational.

Atheists say that there is no need for God because entropy can do the job instead.
Are you kidding me?
And what about all the rosary of atheists dogmas?

Getting lost once again yog?  
Being aware about 1% of God nature doesn't mean that your NDE is only 1% accurate.

No, but the evidence from NDEs as well as your prior claims do mean that.

Garbage yog.
An NDE can be accurate without the need to understand 100% of God nature.
NDE are there to give spiritual guidance not to elevate you to God level.

 It is a punishment according karma laws but is not if that imply to change body in order to evolve.
Clearly you should have understood that my reply imply the topic of karma.

I really could give a shit about what you believe to be the laws of karma, so far you haven't shown that there even are any.

As the consciousness is evidence that energy is there and the other way around also reincarnation is evidence that karma is there.

A teacher fail those students that haven't learn the lesson.
This has absolutely nothing to do with being a sadist.
The karma law does the same so God has nothing to do with sadism.   

More analogies you can't substantiate and assertions you can't justify.  You say God is like a teacher, I say that God is like a BDSM Dominatrix.  Your asserting that God is like this or that is not evidence that God is like this or that, it is only your opinion that he is. Opinions are like assholes, everone's got one.  And your opinion that "karma law" is like that is equally summarily dismissed.
Do you have any actual evidence for your opinions or is this going to become a game where you assert things without evidence and I dismiss them for lack of evidence?  Ten days ago you claimed that NDEs "obviously" entail reincarnation, and what has followed is your complete inability to provide evidence for reincarnation that unambiguously entails reincarnation.  You're not making any headway at all and seem content to tread water, addressing irrelevant side issues and digression to the omission of any actual evidence.

Cathleen NDE is one of the many NDE that clearly prove reincarnation.
Read it again (when you are awake of course).  

More blah, blah, blah.
Bring an example or SU.

I already have.  That you're a deluded twat who mistakenly believes that he is not under the influence of dogma is not a secret that you've managed to keep under your hat.

So no example, isn't it yog?  

The God of yoga is also yogini God.
Unfortunately you have put your strong free will in between you and God which make impossible for you to perceive Him.

And you know what my free will has done by what method?  That I disagree with you about the nature of reality is not evidence that my free will has handicapped my perception in any way.  Your claim is entirely dependent upon your being correct in your beliefs about what reality actually is, and we have no indication that this is the case.  Quite the contrary, despite my patient tutelage and interrogation, you haven't managed to provide any clear evidence of your beliefs about reincarnation and karma.  As cornerstones of your belief, that doesn't bode well for the rest of your beliefs.

Cathleen NDE clearly talk about reincarnation.
Read it again.

Without order and justice the system would collapse.
In every country there is the police and a justice system.
Why?
You are so gullible that you never ask yourself why.
If a system of justice wouldn't be there there would be total chaos.
The universe follow the same system that is why it last and last and will last possibly for ever.

Even if I accepted your analogy at face value, that doesn't entail that a God for whom the universe is a mental projection is the only way to achieve order.  There are primitive Indians in the Amazon who have no system of law and justice, yet they seem to manage fine without descending into chaos.  This is accomplished largely through habit and convention.  If the universe has such habits and convention in the form of natural laws, then the imposition of a universal law giver is not needed.  

Regardless, the universe isn't necessarily like a country which needs laws and such to maintain order, and the chaos which results from the lack of them is a social and moral chaos, not a literal one.  You have no evidence that we do not exist in a universe in which "moral chaos" is the reality; you only want the universe to demonstrate a moral order.  Your desire for justice does not demonstrate that universal justice exists.  So your analogy is more a wish on your part than anything.  Your beliefs about what would result in a universe without justice are unfounded.  Chaos, in the sense of randomness, is not a natural consequence of a universe without moral order.
Again, you're falling off the path in your attempt to prove karma and reincarnation.

Sure, I can not bring you any evidence but you can find tons of evidence when you see people starving or being killed or born with disabilities.
There are millions and millions of them.
All around the planet but you are so so stupid to think that all this is due to bad luck.