what now?

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:17 pm

Originally I said “...all natural laws stand on their own merit – none is dependent on another.”

You responded: “Can't agree with that. Some may stand alone but many are interconnected.”

But I didn’t say they are not interconnected or must stand on their own, only that a law must stand on its own merit – you can’t have one law dependent on a second one if the second is inaccurate. In that connection I challenged your words “As an entity lowers its vibration it materializes in the physical plane. If this one Law demonstrates Spiritualism, then all Natural Laws would apply.” I’m still puzzled at the suggested linkage between the two statements. Which law states that an entity will materialise in the physical and how does this demonstrate Spiritualism?

The ‘Laws’ you mentioned appear simply to be the basic principles found throughout Spiritualist philosophy and teaching, but codified – is this so?

Your comparison: “A Spiritualist is one who believes, as the basis of his or her religion, in the communication between this and the Spirit World by means of mediumship and who endeavors to mold his or her character and conduct in accordance with the highest teachings derived from such communication. 2) A Spiritist is one who is more interested in phenomena and spirit communication than they are in practicing Spiritualism as a religion.” appears to be a case of a distinction without a difference.

The last section of the first paragraph.... “…and who endeavors to mold his or her character and conduct in accordance with the highest teachings derived from such communication.” is a puzzle. This was also quoted at me recently by another American, in another context. Such behaviour (in italics above) is not something I expect of any individual who calls herself/himself a Spiritualist. I’m just happy when anyone accepts the notion of survival et al and is comfortable calling themself a Spiritualist because of that. Why should we expect more of them?

Re guides I don’t think you actually said what ‘guide’ means to you. Would any of the descriptions I used feel right to you? When you look to help novices, will guide actually mean personal helper?

And what of reincarnation? A tricky subject especially so when linked with the notion of karma. Does your group actually link the two?

No reference, either, to my concern about fairies and elementals in connection with Spiritualism…. Do they have any relevance? How will your group see such matters?

Earlier you asked about my ideal Spiritualism. Simplicity is the watch-word. As a new group intent on spreading the word and deed of Spiritualism, my concern would be that the simplest of principle and practice should be maintained. Fairies, elementals and karma form no part of the Spiritualism I learned. Will they be in the Spiritualism your group promotes?

Again I hope this does not sound negative - more questions than answers as before. Wink


As a final point, in all situations and places, my constant concern is that mediumship truly is mediumship. Spiritualist mediumship is probably the easiest to define, based, as it is, on demonstrating survival by facilitating communication between incarnate and discarnate relatives and friends. Less easy are those situations where such evidence is not provided - many see this as mediumship too.

My time in the USA was spent, yet again Smile, in the pursuit of material pleasure, not in any spiritual endeavour. We're RVers and this time we were sight-seeing the mid, north and south western States.

mac

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Admin on Sat Oct 10, 2009 1:06 am

Hi Mac,

Lost a day there somehow just too busy and helping someone with a car problem (not I assure you mechanically my lack of handy man skills verges on the legendary)
Would it - do you think - improve my overall understanding of the subjects we discuss in this, and other, Spiritualism-based forums?

If so I could order a copy for delivery in the winter when we get back there....
Mac I started to answer you by looking back at their creation, however, I am going to put a thread up about them because I think they are so often quoted it has to be a worthwhile discussion. It may take a time because I won't post until I am happy the research provides the thread.

I note that they were originated in a purely Christian Context and they have been developed mostly by the NSAC. Like you many are I feel only an extension of our Principles. I note the Golden Rule often creeps in on the basis of Jesus Christs Love thy.. but of course the origin of this goes right back to Confucious on teh basis of my research. I have also read George Bernard Shaw's ultimate destruction of this as a concept with some amusement because on teh basis of humanity in the physical his points had validity.

I personally find them of interest but am not as committed to teh ideas as I am to our Princples.

Hi HH I am pretty certain that the Spiritist movement, the largest and most vibrant branch of Spiritualism currently in existence, would agree with that definition. Of course founded by Allan Kardec they believed in Reincarnation but said they were not a religion. His series of books the Spirits Book, The Gospels etc still form the underpinning cornerstone of their belief. Essentially these are core differences, as is the geographic location of what is now their heartland Brazil.

You will find some more details about them on this forum.

Jim
avatar
Admin
Admin


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Sat Oct 10, 2009 7:57 am

thanks for your reply, Jim. As always it will be interesting to read what you find out about these historical sources.

I'm going to search out Kardec's 'Spirits' Book' from the loft shortly. I studied it in my early years along with a host of other books and it will be interesting to see how relevant it feels to me nowadays.

I don't remember much, if anything, which felt out of line with what is taught in Spiritualism but it will be interesting to see if that's simply down to a selective or faulty memory. Razz

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:29 am

Curious how Happy Healer appeared briefly and has now disappeared - something I said? Wink

I found my copy of The Spirits' Book and was astonished just how much I had indeed forgotten about it. Perhaps appropriately because the way it's written makes me realise how little I could identify with it now....

It sounds so old-fashioned with constant references to 'God', almost like something written for mainstream religion adherents.

It came as quite a surprise to see how far away I've moved from certain of the notions taught there.

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by zerdini on Tue Oct 13, 2009 1:16 pm

Curious how Happy Healer appeared briefly and has now disappeared - something I said? Wink

HH last logged on - 11th October 3.00 am - but does not appear to have posted anything. Surprised

zerdini


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Tue Oct 13, 2009 1:42 pm

zerdini wrote:
Curious how Happy Healer appeared briefly and has now disappeared - something I said?

HH last logged on - 11th October 3.00 am - but does not appear to have posted anything. Surprised

curiouser and curiouser..... Neutral

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Admin on Tue Oct 13, 2009 10:58 pm

Hi HH

2) A Spiritist is one who is more interested in phenomena and spirit communication than they are in practicing Spiritualism as a religion.

Interestingly I believe that the founder of the Spiritists Allan Kardec left that body a very large body of philosophy in his varios works The Spirits Book, Gospels etc, however he was pro reincarnation but did not accept Spiritism was a religion. That movement flourishes in French, Portugese and Spanish speaking countries. It has now become a de facto religion and of course is the largest group of people gathered under the "Spiritualism" heading. There are possibly over 40 million just in Brazil. It is probably the most vibrant body and its writers continue to produce major works that are in tune with their founders philosophy.

I actually believe that the differences are rather subtle but caused by the fairly strict adherence to the doctrines laid down in their "bible" the works of Allan Kardec.

Jim
avatar
Admin
Admin


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Admin on Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:03 pm

Hi HH

IDV and DV with Trumpet sessions are always in the dark. I can't see what's going on. Recording devices and camera equipment are strictly forbidden. I am told to accept these sessions on faith and trust in the medium's ability.

Look around this forum and you will find most of us have a problem with this issue. Modern infra red thermographic recorders would cure any issues about proving materialisation, in terms of direct voice and trumpets in reality it is hard to see why they could not be done in dim red light.

Jim
avatar
Admin
Admin


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by obiwan on Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:11 am

Admin wrote:Hi HH

IDV and DV with Trumpet sessions are always in the dark. I can't see what's going on. Recording devices and camera equipment are strictly forbidden. I am told to accept these sessions on faith and trust in the medium's ability.

Look around this forum and you will find most of us have a problem with this issue. Modern infra red thermographic recorders would cure any issues about proving materialisation, in terms of direct voice and trumpets in reality it is hard to see why they could not be done in dim red light.

Jim
I really don't get the problem with IDV and the dark. Either you recognise who you are speaking to and they give evidence to support it or you don't. I don't see how IDV in a lit room will help at all. Maybe you would see an ectoplasmic voicebox flapping? LOL

obiwan


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Admin on Wed Oct 14, 2009 12:19 am

True Obi but we do have a basic problem that ever since the start of Spiritualism it is the extensive development of Dark Seances which has undermined the movement more than it has aided it. I know Lis is researching this subject in depth so I will leave it till she is in a position to publish. The movements leaders and leading lights have generally opposed this development.

Jim
avatar
Admin
Admin


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by hiorta on Sat Jan 30, 2010 3:06 pm

As was saiid, an entirely different group of minds are now experiencing a changing Spiritualism and no doubt it is 'right' for them. It will seem reduced to those who benefitted from earlier times.
What is on offer is more focused on personal experience and evidence, while great works like Silver Birch, for example, may miss todays mark completely.

Quality Mediumship on television - as from Gordon Smith - has a powerful impact, but 'poor' Mediumship has a lasting effect to the contrary.
I was struck by the lack of challenge to Gordon's TV work, until I realised that there seems to be a subtle diluting attempt to quietly downplay it.
He is usually referred to as a 'psychic' by presenters and reporters, giving the tacit impression of minor importance when compared with (real) Orthodox Religion., even a 'give them enough rope....' view that will swiftly place Spiritualism in the category of Entertainment along with 'Wild Bill Hickock's Travelling Circus.

However Religion in general is departing the scene, so who knows what shape tomorrow will see our 'ism' in?

There seems to be a rise in Atheism, perhaps as a rebound to paedophile clergy, or a general evolutionary step having been taken. So the 'Entertainment' route may be wholly appropriate for today, no matter what us auld yins think of it?

As SB pointed out, mass conversions that faded in tomorrows dawn was not his purpose, but every attempt to reach the distressed Soul in their hour of need was our task with Spirit backing.
Pehaps 'Simple is Best'?


Last edited by hiorta on Sat Jan 30, 2010 3:11 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : I find the poor contrast between print and background difficult to see, but that'll just be the cataracts.)
avatar
hiorta


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:50 pm

"Simple is Best"? Well, maybe on a one-to-one basis it can be successful but not through forums in my experience.

Over a protracted period I have tried to present the Modern Spiritualist perspective to as many as I could on various websites, various forums, some of 'em even entitled 'Spiritualism'!

As I responded to many strange and muddled postings, it became increasingly plain to me just how simple the message of Spiritualism actually is - and equally plain how many are only interested in fantasy and imagination.

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by hiorta on Sat Jan 30, 2010 5:11 pm

Exactly Mac. The message is straightforward: you will not die and your Life is in your own hands.
All else is ramifications of this core.
avatar
hiorta


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Zandorf on Sat Jan 30, 2010 5:17 pm

You are absolutely right mac, "Simple is Best".

Another problem too is that many of those who attend the spiritualist church, are ony interested in receiving messages. The philosophy for most, (When it is given and of any quality) are not interested or it is over their heads.

The medium who gives good philosophy often gets into too deeper ground for the average person to understand and this looses the interest of the congregation. It's no wonder that Spiritualism as a religion has deteriated so much.
avatar
Zandorf


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Sat Jan 30, 2010 5:19 pm

I've all but given up trying on certain forums I once frequented - either I was not the right messenger or the recipients weren't ready for the message I tried to pass on to them....

mac


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by hiorta on Sat Jan 30, 2010 5:36 pm

It seems sad Mac, but it is so. We can only do our best and who knows what seeds may germinate in future?

As far as platform philosoiphy goes, folk do not realise that by thinking on what was given - whether agreeing or not - development comes to the mind, which in turn, will be of extremely valuable help when the individual passes over. But if no development - no benefit.


Last edited by hiorta on Sun Jan 31, 2010 11:13 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
hiorta


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by Wes on Sun Jan 31, 2010 12:50 am

I recently finished a Community Services course and near the end we spent two or three hours talking about religion, faith and so on as an exercise in acceptance of people's beliefs.

What came through was a general disillusionment with mainstream/organised religion and a trend towards personal spiritual journeys that take inspiration from a variety of sources.

When someone mentioned spiritualism, there were two comments:

"Oh yeah they burn incense and stuff"

"Don't they speak in tongues?"

I had a go at explaining what spiritualism really is, which is hard to do in a few seconds, and I basicly said it's a belief in the eternal journey of the soul, where this life is just one step along the way, but I may as well have been talking in tongues Laughing

It shows what a small movement like spiritualism is up against, that where there is some awareness of it, it can be misrepresented by distortion and misunderstanding. And what really worries me is that there may actually be places claiming to be spiritual churches where the most memorable things they do is burn incense and talk in tongues. Living where I do, that is entirely possible.

It is a somewhat bleak picture..


Last edited by Wes on Sun Jan 31, 2010 12:51 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : spelling)
avatar
Wes


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by obiwan on Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:58 pm

I think there is probably a disconnect between spiritual and spiritualist in many people's minds.

If you mean Spiritualism the religion then you're probably right in your definition Wes. If you mean spiritualism as in the phenomena then this has nothing to do with journeys anywhere necessarily and doesn't need to have any philosophical of religious basis as far as I can see. It seems to me to be more of a search for evidence of survival.

There there is spiritism which as far as I can determine is based on the teachings of Kardec.

Of course there is also the general understanding of the word 'spiritual' which in some minds has nothing to do with any of the above.

Whichever way you look it seems to me there is plenty of room for confusion. Especially so when it seems to me a lot of Spiritualist Churches want to emulate Christian Churches.

obiwan


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by hiorta on Sun Jan 31, 2010 9:35 pm

[quote="obiwan" It seems to me to be more of a search for evidence of survival[/quote]

That is the whole point, the strength, the uniqueness, the opening of our inner doors to a vast universe.

Are the Mediums up to their task?
avatar
hiorta


Back to top Go down

Re: what now?

Post by mac on Sun Jan 31, 2010 9:56 pm

How many can accurately be called 'mediums' rather than 'psychics'....?

mac


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum