Voil, you may be the best teacher I have ever had the priviledge to spar
with. With you there must be profundity in every answer. I tend to
glide over things, as those I normally have deep discussions with , are
not as interested in the ‘deep’ as I am. One learns to skim, in order
not to be ignored entirely.

I don’t give up easily, however. Let me begin first by defending my
‘honor’, lest I get a reputation for being one with a proclivity toward
certain paranormal accounts, such as predicators, clairvoyants and the
like, which includes prophets, holy or otherwise.

My quote was: [ “What my mission has been for many years, is to find a
way,
maybe even to develop a system of belief for those who do not find peace
within any set of rigid organized religious beliefs.”] I first ran
across Freud’s theories, regarding personality and the parts of the
‘mind’, at about the age of 16. I can’t say I understood it all, but it
was enough to give me a clue as to how the brain might function. There
were facets to the theory I picked apart and would stew over from time
to time. I had been fascinated with religion for many years already
and was intuitive enough to understand that there had to be something so
intrinsic to our nature that it would allow for that ‘lapse’ of logic in
people when it came to faith in their beliefs. I thought then, and
till just today, since reading your post, that it might be something
that could be replaced. Replaced with some other belief, that would be
benign, in other words, it would be simple, no rituals, no gods no
spirits. It would be one simple truth that would make everyone happy
and allow everyone to get on with “the future” without bias, prejudice,
hate, anger, fear, and judgemental behaviour that have roots in religion
and are typically the issues, and reasons that cause unrest within a
society and between societies. So, you see it was not that I was
trying to create a new god, just a new way to have faith with out all
the consequences that having faith has always come down to.
Ok, that’s the first thing I wanted to make clear.

Secondly [ I present here, one of those ideas, that I came across almost
30 years ago, they were so like my own that the creator of these words
became a new study for
me. Below is the basic info that I speak of. This is not to be viewed
as WHAT I believe, it was just a path that was so near my own and so
different from others beliefs that I had to peruse who this person was.
He is quite an interesting study. ] Note what I have underlined.
I was amazed that this man had broken down the personality with regards
to ‘religious belief’ as I had, or near what I had done. Naturally, I
read about his life, his history and his activities into the realm of
the paranormal. I stated that he was an interesting study, perhaps I
should have meantioned, on a psychological level, because on one hand
he professed his hard core Christian values and on the other, as the
clairvoyant he challenged his own beliefs by proclaiming truth in a
clairvoyant sleep, that contradicted what the waking personality claimed
to believe. Some things were so terribly disrespectful and so against
the dogmatic and staunch religious convictions he followed his whole
life. How could this not be interesting of many levels? Shheww
– OK is my reputation as a logistician, wanna be, safe now?

I will continue with a fuller explanation, as it relates to the fabulous
information you posted, with regards to the original topic question, but
first I need to be sure I’m cleared at this point to do so.
Have I clarified the position I was trying to achieve in the post you
have questioned? Shall I continue?

''...I don’t give up easily, however. Let me begin first by defending my
‘honor’...''


Your honor is safe with me 'Redykeulous'!

(as long as you don't ask me to attend a 'Cayce' seminar, or buy his
'tapes'!!! (just kidding)

I am still perplexed (in a very good way) about your mission:

“What my mission has been for many years, is to find a
way, maybe even to develop a system of belief for those who do not find
peace within any set of rigid organized religious beliefs.”

But it has no impact on your honor from my standpoint!!! :)

I'd have a lot to say as an automatic response to nature of the you
state above, but I'll save it for now.
I'm sure in a couple of threads of yours, replying to mine, I'll better
understand the context of that 'mission', and be able to appreciate it,
or question it more pertinently.

If you need clearance to continue, than just be clear that I'm
thoroughly enjoying these exchanges of ours.

I have read farther then you seem to think.

I do not own it.

But I do have dominion over it.

Therefore I must exercise due caution in the things I do.

Redykulous you ROCK GIRL!!!! I also believe what Edgar Cayce wrote of. I
learned much from him. He is my HERO!!!!

Ah Jezz Redykeulous,

Just when I thought we had turned the page on 'Cayce',
'Barbiesbigsister' had to throw gaz on the dying embers! :)

Onward I charge: Part two of defending my argument.

My theory though sketchy, at best, as I never wrote it down before, and
I was only about 18 at the time I envisioned it, was to determine or
create a composit of what made up the qualities of the human psyche.
Then to question these, how they got there, what purpose they serve, can
they be changed, and how. In time I came accross Edgar Casey, the read
Freud. I was interested that two people and myself from such distant
walks of life could theorize about this topic and have such similiar
views.

My theroy:

1. The Driving Force - pushes us to provide that which is necessary to
sustain life and continue the species.
[ I attributed this to instinct. What is intrinsic not learned that we
are not even really conscious of, eat when hungry, breathe without
thought and so on, these cannot be changed, they are hard wired]

2. Complexity of thought – ability to use creative thinking to
postulated theory and provided the means to prove these theories. To
solve a question by using logic to create intricate formulas.
[this could only be pure, undivided thought process without interference
from whatever else might be going on. The ability to focus and think in
the abstract, without ambivalence, without consideration, to or of any
power, aside from nature, that could, or might affect the theory being
formulated, or tested. This being the creative mind at work paying no
thought to a creator. We all have this power, at varying degrees. For
most it is a matter of applying themselves, having an interest, and
having the opportunity for such thought]

3. The Security Factor - Humans seem to have one other part of their
nature, a need to believe in a power, outside themselves, most commonly
in the form of a creator or overseer of the universe. It may be a
superstician hindging on an action, reaction theory. Whatever, it
involves some mysterious force to whom the laws of nature are no laws at
all. It seems to be a place to lay blame, to justify their ills, to
explain the mysterious, unexplainable, the questions we simply have no
answer for.
[this is the side of humans I could never justify, never understand as
it’s nature allowed otherwise logical thinking to be subdued, or masked
or just ignored. This, to me, was the dangerous side of mans nature
because it could take root so deeply that it affected the “driving
force” allowed more primitive emotions to control it’s actions apart and
above logic from complex thought.]

Now if you can bear to stay with me, my purpose in this next section is
to show how/why I realated my theory (as I became older and wiser, I
hope) to the theory of W. Freud and Edgar Casey.

1. ME: The Driving Force - pushes us to provide that which
is necessary to sustain life and continue the species.


FREUD: (on Personality Levels of Awareness) Sub Conscious Mind – thinks
and acts independently, we are unable to control its behavior. Controls
the automatic functions of the body as well as the emotions of pleasure
and fear

CASEY: (humans actually have three different dimensions of human
awareness)
the subconscious mind (soul) further review of this has Casey
presenting the soul as that which takes care of the needs of the body,
without any required thought by the personality.

2. ME: 2. Complexity of thought – ability to use creative thinking to
postulated theory and provided the means to prove these theories. To
solve a question by using logic to create intricate formulas.

FREUD: Consious and Pre conscious mind – Current awareness, as of the
thought process being addressed now. Includes the ability to conceive
of abstract thought and to use logic in problem solving. Pre-consious
- having awareness of other things, but are not currently paying
attention to.

CASEY: Personality – (forgive my condensing) The sum of all the
experiences, knowledge, and perceptions gained as it pertains to the
everyday. The awareness of place and self during the waking state.

3. ME: The Security Factor - Humans seem to have one other part of
their nature, a need to believe in a power, outside themselves, most
commonly in the form of a creator or overseer of the universe. It may be
a superstician hindging on an action, reaction theory. Whatever, it
involves some mysterious force to whom the laws of nature are no laws at
all. It seems to be a place to lay blame, to justify their ills, to
explain the mysterious, unexplainable, the questions we simply have no
answer for.

FREUD: The ID - refers to the raw, unorganized, inherited part of the
personality. Its main goal is to reduce tension created by our primitive
drives which are related to hunger, sex, aggression and irrational
impulses. The id operates according to the pleasure principle, in which
its goal is immediate gratification and reduction of tension. In most
people, reality prevents the id’s instant demands from being fulfilled.
We cannot always eat when we are hungry, and we can act on sexual drives
only in the right place and time.
A NOTE HERE: This actually deviates from “the levels of personality”
to “The Components of Personality”. But the ID, for my purpose on a
philosophical level of his theory when considered as a whole, was the
best fit here.

CASEY: The Superconscious Mind - is called by many names by many
religions in
many different cultures. Some of these names are: Buddha consciousness,
Christ consciousness, the Collective Mind, the Universal Mind, the
Collective Unconsciousness, the Holy Spirit, Brahman, God, the Clear
White Light, Allah, Higher Self, the Mind of Christ, etc.
NOTE TO THIS: You will see that Casey suggests that this consciousness
does not mean there is a creator or gods. Further information on Casey
thought indicates that this is simply the part of the mind that is
instinctually wired to believe in a conscious collective. (my
understanding being that because this collective conscousness is not
accessible to the waking mind, but the waking mind has an awareness of
it but can not access it, therefore we, the personality creates the
answer to understanding it, in the nature of a creator or a god.

I need a break. I’ll post the rest of this, hopefully with some logical
explanation as to why this is all linked to the topic at hand.

As anyone can truely see, all of the multiple choice answers are not on
the paper.
According to the book, These events were suppose to happen at a future
date. Figurative or otherwise.
Besides, if rev has already passed, then that would bring more truth
into the Jehovah's witnesses testominy. (Witch does make alot more sense
than other christian beliefs.)
Sorry (other)christians, I guess that if that's the case then that
means that that kills the 'rapture'.
So like I said no. 5.

Redykeulous,

No kidding 'take a break'!!! That's a piece and a half! Can't wait the
balance!


What do you say, in all fairness to 'MikeM....': post host, we move
this exciting but unrelated topic to a 'new' post?