DWQA QuestionsTag: extraterrestrial interlopers
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
In the book, An Atheist in Heaven, Paul Davids writes about interviewing “arch skeptic” Dr. Michael Shermer, executive director of The Skeptics Society, and founding publisher of Skeptic magazine. Dr. Gary Schwartz, in the same book, characterized Dr. Shermer as a “Type II skeptic.” He writes, “Sadly, there are individuals who claim to be ‘skeptics’ who are not open minded. They do not engage in careful questioning. They are not discerning in their evaluation of evidence. Though they may claim – often insistently – that they are undecided and seek the truth, in practice they are disbelievers or ‘unbelievers.’ They hold strong beliefs about what must be impossible. Furthermore, they often engage in irresponsible and unjustified evaluation of theories, methods, findings, and conclusions which challenge their convictions about what is possible in nature and the cosmos. This is pseudo-skepticism. I call this ‘Type II Skepticism.'” During his interview with Paul Davids, Dr. Michael Shermer certainly came off as a “Type II Skeptic.” However, later in the book, and just before it was published, Dr. Shermer ended up having his own very “mysterious” experience that he confessed “shook his skepticism.” He was getting married and his bride had an old transistor radio that belonged to her deceased grandfather that hadn’t worked in decades. New batteries didn’t help – the radio was dead. On their wedding day, his bride said she wanted to say something to him alone, so they went to the back of the house where they heard music playing in the bedroom. They opened a drawer and found her grandfather’s radio playing a romantic love song. Other family members reported the music started playing just as the wedding was to begin. The next day, the radio went silent and never worked again. Dr. Shermer’s bride was reportedly a skeptic as well, so how could this happen within the rules of engagement, especially since we know the divine realm will go to great lengths to protect the beliefs of skeptics? So much so that just the presence of James Randi, for example, could literally temporarily disable the intuitive abilities of those around him? What can Creator tell us about this radio at the wedding event and how it all fits within the rules of engagement? Was the bride’s grandfather still in limbo?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
132 views0 answers0 votes
Dr. Gary Schwarz reported in the book, An Atheist in Heaven, that even after decades of research and seven books he wrote on the topic, he still struggled believing it all! He wrote, “In my case, being a well-trained skeptical thinker and well-educated disbeliever in the possibility of an afterlife, I had this strong, uncontrollable emotional reactive habit of automatically assuming that anyone who believed in life after death was naive, ignorant, stupid, brainwashed, prejudiced, delusional and/or crazy. This emotional reaction was clearly inconsistent with the emerging theory … and research. I experienced increasing conflict between what the emerging theory and research were teaching me versus my growing fear that if I accepted the theory and research, that maybe I was becoming ‘brainwashed’ by the theory and evidence, and I was even ‘losing my mind.’ I came to realize that I was like one of Pavlov’s classically conditioned dogs who automatically salivated to the sound of a bell. Dogs do not automatically salivate when they hear a bell ringing, and neither do we.” This confession by Dr. Schwartz is both revealing and disturbing. How could it possibly be that decades of research and validation could not successfully alter his emotions? How could he still harbor fear? Is all Type II Skepticism ultimately a FEAR reaction? Was the origin of Dr. Schwartz’s inexplicable emotions, even after decades, wholly originating with his deep subconscious? If so, it certainly reinforces Creator’s assertions that there is little short of divine intervention, via the Lightworker Healing Protocol and Deep Subconscious Mind Reset, that we can do to alter beliefs in the deep subconscious. What can Creator tell us about Dr. Schwartz’s struggle, and what lessons can we draw from it?
ClosedNicola asked 2 months ago • 
68 views0 answers0 votes
The widespread narrative is, of course, that the Romans crucified an innocent man. But innocent of what? Because, if anything, Jesus was extraordinarily politically incorrect. Dr. Pagels wrote, “The astonished crowds recognize that Jesus possesses a special authority, direct access to God’s power. … the scribes immediately took offense at what they considered his usurpation of divine authority. By pronouncing forgiveness, Jesus claims the right to speak for God – a claim that, Mark says, angers the scribes: ‘Why does this man speak this way? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone? Instead of fasting, like other devout Jews, Jesus ate and drank freely. And instead of scrupulously observing Sabbath laws, Jesus excused his disciples when they broke them. Claiming divine and royal power while simultaneously violating the purity laws, Jesus, at the beginning of his public activity, outrages virtually every party among his contemporaries, from the disciples of John the Baptist to the scribes and Pharisees.'” We are faced with the conundrum of Jesus “speaking truth to power.” The hazards of which are so visibly and starkly apparent from human history, that his eventual crucifixion was not only NOT a surprise but, in fact, an almost near certainty. Anyone wishing to follow his example and engage in speaking “truth to power,” as he did, is not likely to avoid a similar life-threatening fate. What lessons are we to best derive from this? What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 3 months ago • 
226 views0 answers0 votes