(05-04-2019, 06:38 PM)flofrog Wrote: What do you feel intuitively Wolf ?  

(05-04-2019, 06:19 PM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: Is it possible that the Law of One may not be true?

"I" and "universe" are one, you ask, "So what? What is the next step, the practical application?" living in the present, Law of One i consider a guidepost just as many other sources of similar information...the more value your put on Law of One or any other source the more power you giive them over your oneself...

Is there a way to know what happens in the cosmos, and what happens after death?

you don't die because you were never born. You had just forgotten who you are.

There are Life after Life books that say the afterlife is pretty good.

All winners need losers; all saints need sinners; all sages need fools— that is, so long as the major kick in life is to "amount to something" or to "be someone" as a particular and separate godlet.

But we always seem to want to come back into incarnation.



That is if reincarnation is true.

In recent years, evidence has been collected and documented which confirms that rebirth is a fact. There have been cases of people who have been able to recollect their experience of previous lives. Their description of places and persons of the past were confirmed after thorough investigations.


The best known example of this is the case of Bridey Murphy. A Mrs. Ruth Simmons of the United States recollected a previous life in Ireland, more than 100 years ago. She said she had been Bridey Murphy in the year 1789 and gave full details of Bridey's life. The details were later checked and found to be quite accurate, although in her present life, Mrs. Simmons had never been outside America.


In another case in England, a woman called Mrs. Naomi Henry recollected two previous lives. In the first instance, she recalled her life as an Irishwoman living in a village called Greenhalgh in the seventeenth century. Research into her case was carried out which revealed that such a village did exist then. In the second instance, she remembered that in one of her previous lives, she was an Englishwoman who became a nurse to several children in an English town called Downham in 1902. A search into the official records kept in Downham proved that such a woman did exist.


Professor Ian Stevenson of the University of Virginia, U.S.A., has researched and published his findings on more than twenty cases of rebirth. These cases, which have been well documented and verified, are from various countries including France, Italy, India, Sri Lanka and Burma.


the point is live in the present and to perhaps seek a way of life avoiding rebirth ......



Maybe the atheists are true and there's no afterlife.

But what are we to do? The alternatives seem to  be two. The first is, somehow or other, to discover a  new myth, or convincingly resuscitate an old one. If  science cannot prove there is no God, we can try to  live and act on the bare chance that he may exist  after all. There seems to be nothing to lose in such a  gamble, for if death is the end, we shall never know  that we have lost.


How can we know?

The two forces or tendencies are mutually interdependent, and the game is a working game just so long as the angel is winning, but does not win, and the devil is losing, but is never lost. (The game doesn't work in reverse, just as the ocean doesn't work with wave-crests down and troughs up.)

And does it matter?



Should we live our lives so that we have a good afterlife, if there is one?

what is the good life,what is beauty, and what is pleasure ?

And is it certain that there is a harvest and densities are real?



hope this helps your quest for answers gemini .........

(05-04-2019, 06:19 PM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: Is it possible that the Law of One may not be true?

Is there a way to know what happens in the cosmos, and what happens after death?

There are Life after Life books that say the afterlife is pretty good.

But we always seem to want to come back into incarnation.

That is if reincarnation is true.

Maybe the atheists are true and there's no afterlife.

How can we know?

And does it matter?

Should we live our lives so that we have a good afterlife, if there is one?

And is it certain that there is a harvest and densities are real?

(05-05-2019, 03:38 AM)zvonimir Wrote:

(05-04-2019, 06:19 PM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: Is it possible that the Law of One may not be true?

"I" and "universe" are one, you ask, "So what? What is the next step, the practical application?" living in the present, Law of One i consider a guidepost just as many other sources of similar information...the more value your put on Law of One or any other source the more power you giive them over your oneself...

Is there a way to know what happens in the cosmos, and what happens after death?

you don't die because you were never born. You had just forgotten who you are.

There are Life after Life books that say the afterlife is pretty good.

All winners need losers; all saints need sinners; all sages need fools— that is, so long as the major kick in life is to "amount to something" or to "be someone" as a particular and separate godlet.

But we always seem to want to come back into incarnation.



That is if reincarnation is true.

In recent years, evidence has been collected and documented which confirms that rebirth is a fact. There have been cases of people who have been able to recollect their experience of previous lives. Their description of places and persons of the past were confirmed after thorough investigations.


The best known example of this is the case of Bridey Murphy. A Mrs. Ruth Simmons of the United States recollected a previous life in Ireland, more than 100 years ago. She said she had been Bridey Murphy in the year 1789 and gave full details of Bridey's life. The details were later checked and found to be quite accurate, although in her present life, Mrs. Simmons had never been outside America.


In another case in England, a woman called Mrs. Naomi Henry recollected two previous lives. In the first instance, she recalled her life as an Irishwoman living in a village called Greenhalgh in the seventeenth century. Research into her case was carried out which revealed that such a village did exist then. In the second instance, she remembered that in one of her previous lives, she was an Englishwoman who became a nurse to several children in an English town called Downham in 1902. A search into the official records kept in Downham proved that such a woman did exist.


Professor Ian Stevenson of the University of Virginia, U.S.A., has researched and published his findings on more than twenty cases of rebirth. These cases, which have been well documented and verified, are from various countries including France, Italy, India, Sri Lanka and Burma.


the point is live in the present and to perhaps seek a way of life avoiding rebirth ......



Maybe the atheists are true and there's no afterlife.

But what are we to do? The alternatives seem to  be two. The first is, somehow or other, to discover a  new myth, or convincingly resuscitate an old one. If  science cannot prove there is no God, we can try to  live and act on the bare chance that he may exist  after all. There seems to be nothing to lose in such a  gamble, for if death is the end, we shall never know  that we have lost.


How can we know?

The two forces or tendencies are mutually interdependent, and the game is a working game just so long as the angel is winning, but does not win, and the devil is losing, but is never lost. (The game doesn't work in reverse, just as the ocean doesn't work with wave-crests down and troughs up.)

And does it matter?



Should we live our lives so that we have a good afterlife, if there is one?

what is the good life,what is beauty, and what is pleasure ?

And is it certain that there is a harvest and densities are real?



hope this helps your quest for answers gemini .........

(05-04-2019, 06:19 PM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: Is it possible that the Law of One may not be true?
...

(05-06-2019, 11:28 AM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: Patrick, can you explain what you mean by Truth being subjective? I thought it was objective. Like there are a lot of scientific facts that are Truth, and those are all objective. That means that they are the same to everyone. Like gravity. It's an objective truth.

(05-06-2019, 11:28 AM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: Patrick, can you explain what you mean by Truth being subjective?...

Quote:61.9 ▶ Questioner: This brings out the point of the purpose for the physical incarnation, I believe. And that is to reach a conviction through your own thought processes as to a solution to problems and understandings in a totally unbiased or totally free situation with no proof at all or anything that you would consider proof, proof being a very poor word in itself. Can you expand on my concept?

Ra: I am Ra. Your opinion is an eloquent one although somewhat confused in its connections between the freedom expressed by subjective knowing and the freedom expressed by subjective acceptance. There is a significant distinction between the two.

This is not a dimension of knowing, even subjectively, due to the lack of overview of cosmic and other inpourings which affect each and every situation which produces catalyst. The subjective acceptance of that which is at the moment and the finding of love within that moment is the greater freedom.

That known as the subjective knowing without proof is, in some degree, a poor friend for there will be anomalies no matter how much information is garnered due to the distortions which form third density.

(05-06-2019, 11:28 AM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: ...Like there are a lot of scientific facts that are Truth, and those are all objective. That means that they are the same to everyone. Like gravity. It's an objective truth.

Quote:Philosophy of arithmetic


Popper's principle of falsifiability runs into prima facie difficulties when the epistemological status of mathematics is considered. It is difficult to conceive how simple statements of arithmetic, such as "2 + 2 = 4", could ever be shown to be false. If they are not open to falsification they can not be scientific. If they are not scientific, it needs to be explained how they can be informative about real world objects and events.
Popper's solution[sup][43][/sup] was an original contribution in the philosophy of mathematics. His idea was that a number statement such as "2 apples + 2 apples = 4 apples" can be taken in two senses. In one sense it is irrefutable and logically true, in the second sense it is factually true and falsifiable. Concisely, the pure mathematics "2 + 2 = 4" is always true, but, when the formula is applied to real-world apples, it is open to falsification.[sup][44][/sup]