Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Guyver

A Life Without Religion

413 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Crazy Horse
15 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

Talking about mathematics is like talking about Chinese, without understanding or speaking a word of it. “Singularity” is descriptive of a point where the laws of physics don't apply, anymore. Relativity and Black Hole physics are incompatible with quantum mechanics and Planck scales. We have no theory, as yet, that reconciles conventional physics with quantum theory, so a singularity is just a point, where the rules of physics as we presently understand them, don't work. 

Sounds a lot like Atonement with GOD.

Although I am not sure that the idea of the Singularity, takes into account human consciousness?

But perhaps they do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy Horse
9 hours ago, psyche101 said:

You're just not big on comprehension are you.

Please forgive this bluntness people. I know a couple of you are touchy.

I consider you just another zealous crackpot with an extremely tenuous grasp on reality. You might as well be telling me how you have backyard chats with your god. None of your zealous BS impresses or interests me. You're just another religious kook who doesn't want to learn anything because you already know it all. IMHO you need mental help. If dementia takes me down the road you are on, I hope my kids pull the plug.

As I mentioned. We know what you believe. Everyone who posts in the threads you do knows. I don't need to hear it again. It's just childish and silly. I have absolutely zero interest in your zealous outlook. 

What I did ask you to do is a description of your god. You say 'everything' but then say bad things aren't gods fault. Bad things fit nicely in the everything category. Honestly, everything is a rubbish answer. 

What I'm thinking is the place where Cormac and I really differ is on the definition of god. I don't feel that ascribing a title of a man made omnipotent entity to a process that occurs in nature is a fair definition or a good idea. I think that only created problems and convolutes the pursuit of real knowledge and makes science harder to understand.

Ok mate, have it your way..

All the best.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy Horse
7 hours ago, DieChecker said:

 

(Correct me if I am misremembering) Psyche grew up in a religious home, but was so scarred by abuse that he's more then just atheist. He's actively anti-religion. 

Problem with condemning all religion, because someone had a bad experience with one, is they're making a judgment based off one data point. 

Some people do experiment with multiple religions, or are super close with multiple people of multiple religions. But again, this is still limited data points.

I dont blame them. I pray they learn the Truth before they pass on. Christianity is the only religion that has love sacrifice, and forgiveness at its root. IMHO there's a very real reason its the world's premiere religion. 

Are they limited data points though?

Or are those people, the Awake Ones, are their data points still limited like ours are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy Horse
3 hours ago, eight bits said:

Hi, DC. Good to see you've recovered.

It's fairly well woven into Judaism. For example, Sirach 28:2 almost matches Jesus's reported instruction at the cursing of the fig tree and suggests the relevant provision of the prayer attributed to him:

Of course, the loving your neighbor is Leviticus 19:18

3 hours ago, eight bits said:

But it similarly teaches to love and forgive each other. Something im not sure other religions teach as their bedrock.

 

I would say that the Buddhist and Vedic religions, philosophies, don't really teach that one should forgiver the other.

They teach, demonstrate, the idea that there is no other, and therefore no-one to forgive.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
5 hours ago, eight bits said:

Hi, DC. Good to see you've recovered.

It's fairly well woven into Judaism. For example, Sirach 28:2 almost matches Jesus's reported instruction at the cursing of the fig tree and suggests the relevant provision of the prayer attributed to him:

Of course, the loving your neighbor is Leviticus 19:18

Yes, there has been an expansion over time in the sense of who is one's neighbor. (I am unsure that the ideal of universal brotherhood and sisterhood is fully accepted within any world religion even now, although that it is a worthy ideal is widely recognized, IMO).

I am not posting this to put Christianity down, just to say that there seem to be few good ideas that are unique to any religious grouping. The history of Christianity is much like the history of everybody else: encounter a good idea? Incorporate it into your own teaching and practice. Of course, Christianity was especially well placed to mine Judaism for its good ideas, just as Judaism had benefitted mightily from its historical opportunity to mine Perisan and Greek ideas. And so on back through the mists of time.

I suppose that is true. Judaism is very similar to Christianity in teachings and values. But where Christianity says, "Yes, come on in and join us.", Judaism says, "Who was your father? Not Jewish? Maybe try down the street?".

Christianity did incorporate the "best" of other religions. Wouldnt that then mean its the "best"? :innocent: :devil:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
2 hours ago, Crazy Horse said:

Are they limited data points though?

Or are those people, the Awake Ones, are their data points still limited like ours are?

Id say near everyone's data points are limited. Usually on just about everything, not just religion.

However, if you say hated cereal, because you ate raisin bran for two years, and tried no other cereals, then is that a reasonable judgement? What if the person ate miniwheats and was floored by how good they found them? Yet they continue a campaign against cereal never having tried the mini miniwheats, only relying on 3rd party accounts to bolster their opinion.

My point is dont knock it till you've tried it. 

If people are former Muslims, say what you will about Islam. If you're a former LDS, or Scientology, or Catholic, or Buddhist, or 7th Day Adventist... say what you will based on experience, but for a Catholic to dismiss Buddhism, or a Evangelical Christian to deride Islam, shouldn't be their place. 

Christians are told to evangelize true. But that doesn't mean being a @ick about it. It needs to be done with consent and love. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

I suppose that is true. Judaism is very similar to Christianity in teachings and values. But where Christianity says, "Yes, come on in and join us.", Judaism says, "Who was your father? Not Jewish? Maybe try down the street?".

Christianity did incorporate the "best" of other religions. Wouldnt that then mean its the "best"? :innocent: :devil:

Sammy Davis jr.  is one example of a gentile that became a Jew and there are many others

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
2 hours ago, DieChecker said:

I suppose that is true. Judaism is very similar to Christianity in teachings and values. But where Christianity says, "Yes, come on in and join us.", Judaism says, "Who was your father? Not Jewish? Maybe try down the street?".

Christianity did incorporate the "best" of other religions. Wouldnt that then mean its the "best"? :innocent: :devil:

Actually, most mainstream Jewish denominations accept converts. That "Who's your Momma" thing is mainly a Zionist Israeli schtick.

Conversion to Judaism: denomination by denomination - Jewish Telegraphic Agency (jta.org)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
On 5/31/2021 at 3:17 AM, Crazy Horse said:

All you have are opinions concerning GOD.

So therefore, your knowledge is not just limited, but non-existent, concerning GOD. (At least consciously, subconsciously you know everything, as we all do).

All any of us have are opinions about God CH.  How else could we know anything about God?  He doesn’t make himself available for interviews, so no one really knows anything about God, IMO.  I think people think they know things about God, but thinking something is true and having it actually be true are two different things.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
On 5/31/2021 at 4:18 AM, Crazy Horse said:

But I don't think, or at least as little as possible....:P

And its in that silence, and stillness, that one may know THAT.

I understand that part of your faith/believing is based upon that sense you get when you are meditating.  And maybe you are tapping into something spiritual, or maybe you are actually connecting with God, or maybe you are not.  It’s not for me to say.  I would just say that it is possible that what you perceive as God may not actually be.  I say this because I too have practiced meditation and not had the same experiences that you have.  So, like everyone else, your experiences are unique to yourself.  That’s not to say that no one else has experiences like you do, but since everyone else is not you, your are unique.  FWIW.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
15 hours ago, psyche101 said:

You're just not big on comprehension are you.

Please forgive this bluntness people. I know a couple of you are touchy.

I consider you just another zealous crackpot with an extremely tenuous grasp on reality. You might as well be telling me how you have backyard chats with your god. None of your zealous BS impresses or interests me. You're just another religious kook who doesn't want to learn anything because you already know it all. IMHO you need mental help. If dementia takes me down the road you are on, I hope my kids pull the plug.

As I mentioned. We know what you believe. Everyone who posts in the threads you do knows. I don't need to hear it again. It's just childish and silly. I have absolutely zero interest in your zealous outlook. 

What I did ask you to do is a description of your god. You say 'everything' but then say bad things aren't gods fault. Bad things fit nicely in the everything category. Honestly, everything is a rubbish answer. 

What I'm thinking is the place where Cormac and I really differ is on the definition of god. I don't feel that ascribing a title of a man made omnipotent entity to a process that occurs in nature is a fair definition or a good idea. I think that only created problems and convolutes the pursuit of real knowledge and makes science harder to understand.

Personally, I don’t think he is very zealous, or that he is a crack pot.  He believes what he believes, just the same way that you believe what you believe and I believe what I believe.  It is experience that shapes us and our opinions and beliefs.

Anyway, since everyone is different and generally has different opinions about things, I don’t really understand why you feel the need to post negative opinions about other people’s beliefs. That’s on you though.

Anyway, regarding the existence of God, you don’t believe there is such a thing.  In your mind, you are right.  But, you could very well be incorrect.  I think you do a great job presenting arguments and information from the atheist perspective, and from science, but that doesn’t mean that you speak factually about things all the time, especially when they are not knowable.

Since you claim to have never had any experience that gives you any reason to believe anything outside of material existence, I think you may just be assuming that everyone else or most everyone except for crackpots as you call them, thinks just as you do.  I don’t.  I don’t know if there is a God, or what God is like, but I have had experiences that are different from you and I do believe in something.  I don’t know what it is, but since I have had experiences that I consider beyond the scope of material existence, I keep the door open on my opinions about it.  I may not believe in religion for myself, but I certainly believe that there are plenty of people out there who are probably helped by religion in some way.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy Horse
3 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Id say near everyone's data points are limited. Usually on just about everything, not just religion.

However, if you say hated cereal, because you ate raisin bran for two years, and tried no other cereals, then is that a reasonable judgement? What if the person ate miniwheats and was floored by how good they found them? Yet they continue a campaign against cereal never having tried the mini miniwheats, only relying on 3rd party accounts to bolster their opinion.

My point is dont knock it till you've tried it. 

If people are former Muslims, say what you will about Islam. If you're a former LDS, or Scientology, or Catholic, or Buddhist, or 7th Day Adventist... say what you will based on experience, but for a Catholic to dismiss Buddhism, or a Evangelical Christian to deride Islam, shouldn't be their place. 

Christians are told to evangelize true. But that doesn't mean being a @ick about it. It needs to be done with consent and love. 

Who's knocking anything?

I just pointed out the difference between a relative truth, and an ultimate truth.

That there is no need for forgiveness when one sees everything as coming from the Absolute.

There is no personal insult here.

Only - ONE.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crazy Horse
1 hour ago, Guyver said:

All any of us have are opinions about God CH.  How else could we know anything about God?  He doesn’t make himself available for interviews, so no one really knows anything about God, IMO.  I think people think they know things about God, but thinking something is true and having it actually be true are two different things.

Opinions are not necessary once one has experienced THAT.

All thoughts without exception, all notions, ideas, and concepts are completely redundant.

Do not seek the Silence, be the Silence.

Do not seek Peace, but be Peace actualised.

And there is no reason to seek GOD either.

Just be THAT.

Now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
3 hours ago, DieChecker said:

My point is dont knock it till you've tried it. 

And try it, and this, and that, and still no holy revelation, no "wow" experience. Nothing that really says "yes this **** is real!!!". Unless my standards at way to high. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
1 hour ago, Crazy Horse said:

Opinions are not necessary once one has experienced THAT.

All thoughts without exception, all notions, ideas, and concepts are completely redundant.

Do not seek the Silence, be the Silence.

Do not seek Peace, but be Peace actualised.

And there is no reason to seek GOD either.

Just be THAT.

Now.

If it were as easy as you suggest, wouldn’t everyone just do it?  I like what you’re saying because it sounds kind of spiritual and for sure possible, I just don’t think I believe it.  I want to, but right now, I don’t.  Maybe if I had the same experiences you have I would.  
 

I worked the twelve step program and gave up alcohol for three years.  At that time I believed in a “Higher Power” as God is called there, and I did believe it and practice the principles.  Yet, when you really get down to it, a case could be made that I made myself quit drinking with the power of my mind and a higher power had nothing to do with it, though it did in fact seem like it to me at the time.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnGP

Can someone tell me how to reply to a specific post? 

I stated in a previous post that I put aside religion over 20 years ago .

I was asked by I believe in "gods" and also a "god" 

 

I think it is most likely because of my belief in Buddhism and the notion that there are many realms of existence and that in one realm of existence there is the realm of "the Gods" , 

On the notion of "god" , my belief has to do with the notion that I believe that the universe itself is conscious and that consciousness pervades every place and every time. I honestly believe that this can be experienced. I have no evidence to suggest that this consciousness is "god" . I am still collecting data and have not arrived at any conclusions. I  believe that "everything is connected" is literally true.  I believe that all consciousness is "entangled at a quantum level"  and that it is possible to experience such entanglement.  I believe that current quantum physics is just beginning to describe reality as it is - arising and passing away and subject to our perception of such things rising and passing away. I find this to be a fascinating topic. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
10 minutes ago, JohnGP said:

Can someone tell me how to reply to a specific post? 

I stated in a previous post that I put aside religion over 20 years ago .

I was asked by I believe in "gods" and also a "god" 

 

I think it is most likely because of my belief in Buddhism and the notion that there are many realms of existence and that in one realm of existence there is the realm of "the Gods" , 

On the notion of "god" , my belief has to do with the notion that I believe that the universe itself is conscious and that consciousness pervades every place and every time. I honestly believe that this can be experienced. I have no evidence to suggest that this consciousness is "god" . I am still collecting data and have not arrived at any conclusions. I  believe that "everything is connected" is literally true.  I believe that all consciousness is "entangled at a quantum level"  and that it is possible to experience such entanglement.  I believe that current quantum physics is just beginning to describe reality as it is - arising and passing away and subject to our perception of such things rising and passing away. I find this to be a fascinating topic. 

You tap the button that says Quote on it and a frame appears with the quote you wish to respond to.  At the bottom of that frame your cursor should appear and ready to input text.  If not, just tap the bottom of the frame under the quote.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver

When your done typing hit submit reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
20 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

No, it’s solely because of the fact that there is no way to test that hypothesis, which is what science does. 

But that's because God isn't a hypothesis isn't it? God is philosophy. There's nothing to test, nothing to hypothesise, just some popular ideas and stories. God couldn't be investigated any more than any fictional character. 

Quote

Depends on how one defines God and just because you prefer to stick with the popular definition in no way means that the popular definition is the only definition. Far from it. If you want to say the popular version of God has been disproven you’re extremely late to the game as God/Yahweh was never originally a creator deity to begin with. But God, the concept of a Creator deity, neither you nor science has disproven and in at least the case of science it doesn’t even attempt to for the very reason in the previous point. 
 

Thing is I'm quite sure it's not just me. I'd go so far as to say the majority of the world that do subscribe to the god idea view god as a specific entity. The dictionary even calls god a supreme being. While it's true we have created gods of many flavours, the entity part is normally a solid foundation for a description of God. In fact I'd go so far as to say that most organised religions would take offence at the idea if reducing the omnipotent being know as god to a Giga Hertz equation. And really, to my mind they own the god idea. Many did don't like the term 'God particle' for the same reason. It's a straight path to confusion and just doesn't help in any way to insist on retaining that title. Taking the p*** if you will.

As such, I don't think I'm late to the game, I'm just acknowledging the vast majority. I don't think mixing religious terms and science terms is a good idea in any way. I recognise that Yaweh is just a constant rehash to keep an original idea alive, but that's not what most of the people on the planet identify with. 

Quote

They support virtual particles as a hypothetical as even the existence of virtual particles cannot be tested any more than an infinitely dense, infinitely small singularity can.

But we can't even test an infinitely small singularity via its effects. 

Why I'm going on about this aspect is that nearly everything I have read considers them beyond theory 

Are Virtual Particles Less Real?

Several reasons are then provided for considering virtual particles real, such as their descriptive, explanatory, and predictive value, and a clearer characterization of virtuality—one in terms of intermediate states—that also applies beyond perturbation theory is provided. It is also pointed out that in the role of force mediators, they serve to preclude action-at-a-distance between interacting particles. For these reasons, it is concluded that virtual particles are as real as other quantum particles.

Aren't they simply sitting where the Higgs used to sit? It took half a century to verify, but it wasn't really in doubt. 

Quote

They both look good on paper but realistically that’s about as far as it goes. And as far as hypotheticals go the effects of a black hole would be essentially indistinguishable from those of a planck star which actually doesn’t require infinite “anything” to operate. It’s also questionable as to a black hole having any “infinite” qualities as any black hole singularity of less size than 22 micrograms, the Planck Mass, would have already evaporated into nothing already. 
 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2021/03/31/some-black-holes-are-impossible-in-our-universe/?sh=5d31af5d7c43

cormac

Now that is fascinating. Thank you very much for the link. I remember people getting unecessarily concerned over the LHC saying it would create a black hole, but at that time it was also pointed out that if the LHC was used to make a micro blank hole that if would evaporate pretty much immediately after formation. I think it's been known for a while that a singularity of that size and density is problematic. But that's being rationalised through current theories like a bouncing universe. It might yet still be correct, just with some tweaks. But that's why we have so many models of the BBT isn't it? Any one of them, or a combination of several of them are likely to be right because we are simply following a trail.

Maybe I'm just stubborn, but I can't consider any of that, or variations of it as God. God was conceived by humans. Humans owe existance to nature. I just don't see how God and nature aren't polar opposites. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnGP
13 minutes ago, Guyver said:

You tap the button that says Quote on it and a frame appears with the quote you wish to respond to.  At the bottom of that frame your cursor should appear and ready to input text.  If not, just tap the bottom of the frame under the quote.

Thank you ! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
20 hours ago, DieChecker said:

(Correct me if I am misremembering) Psyche grew up in a religious home, but was so scarred by abuse that he's more then just atheist. He's actively anti-religion. 

I think your confusing me with Will a bit. Didn't suffer physical abuse. I saw my family unit manipulated and torn apart by religious authorities and I watched religion destroy my mother's mind pretty much altogether.

20 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Problem with condemning all religion, because someone had a bad experience with one, is they're making a judgment based off one data point. 

Some people do experiment with multiple religions, or are super close with multiple people of multiple religions. But again, this is still limited data points.

I disagree. I did experience several religions and views of spirituality. I actually found the Catholic church the most impressive organisation. It's very business like about how it fleeces and manipulates it's audience. Most of the others are more messy and have less accountability regarding the bad they bring into the world. I do feel that's why Catholics are held as public examples more often, because they have greater accountability. Every religion has dark and dubious stories, they just hide them better. 

20 hours ago, DieChecker said:

I dont blame them. I pray they learn the Truth before they pass on. Christianity is the only religion that has love sacrifice, and forgiveness at its root. IMHO there's a very real reason its the world's premiere religion. 

The reason is an appeal to authority. With all due respect, I have no desire to allow religion to pollute my existance again. In the same vein, I hope religious people see religion for the farce it is before wasting too much life on it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
20 hours ago, DieChecker said:

A life without religion us completely possible. Just as a life without love, joy, or hope, is possible. Just as a life living alone is possible. Or a life without speaking. Or a life without any human contact.

But living without those things reduces the experience. Adding religion, one that truely works for you, also adds to your experience of life.

Christianity for example provides unending love and forgiveness... Given from a distant sky father... But it similarly teaches to love and forgive each other. Something im not sure other religions teach as their bedrock.

But if love from an imaginary sky father is all you have, its better then no one loving you at all. The human psyche has needs after all.

I would say it's more like sugar.

Gives an instant feelgood hit, but is empty and offers no nutrition, all the while rotting what is in your head from the inside out while one smiles.

Imaginary love is just self delusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
51 minutes ago, JohnGP said:

Can someone tell me how to reply to a specific post? 

I stated in a previous post that I put aside religion over 20 years ago .

I was asked by I believe in "gods" and also a "god" 

 

I think it is most likely because of my belief in Buddhism and the notion that there are many realms of existence and that in one realm of existence there is the realm of "the Gods" , 

On the notion of "god" , my belief has to do with the notion that I believe that the universe itself is conscious and that consciousness pervades every place and every time. I honestly believe that this can be experienced. I have no evidence to suggest that this consciousness is "god" . I am still collecting data and have not arrived at any conclusions. I  believe that "everything is connected" is literally true.  I believe that all consciousness is "entangled at a quantum level"  and that it is possible to experience such entanglement.  I believe that current quantum physics is just beginning to describe reality as it is - arising and passing away and subject to our perception of such things rising and passing away. I find this to be a fascinating topic. 

I think there could be something to your beliefs, and I have explored that notion myself.  For some people who believe it, and refer to it as the Universe, it actually works as a means of faith, and really a kind of spiritual non-religious type of believing.  I don’t know if there’s a name for it or if it’s new age or whatever, but I knew a Baha’i practitioner who practiced it and I thought it was right on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
1 minute ago, Guyver said:

I think there could be something to your beliefs, and I have explored that notion myself.  For some people who believe it, and refer to it as the Universe, it actually works as a means of faith, and really a kind of spiritual non-religious type of believing.  I don’t know if there’s a name for it or if it’s new age or whatever, but I knew a Baha’i practitioner who practiced it and I thought it was right on.

 

What name is used to describe it isn't important but it certainly is slowly becoming more and more recognized as true religion. The religion of spiritual experience.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
7 hours ago, Guyver said:

Personally, I don’t think he is very zealous, or that he is a crack pot.  He believes what he believes, just the same way that you believe what you believe and I believe what I believe.  It is experience that shapes us and our opinions and beliefs.

I don't know how you can say that to be honest. Almost ever post rants on about how god is love. How you don't get sick of reading the same forum filler all the time is bewildering. 

7 hours ago, Guyver said:

Anyway, since everyone is different and generally has different opinions about things, I don’t really understand why you feel the need to post negative opinions about other people’s beliefs. That’s on you though.

Honestly, an I wrong? 

It's like a JW coming to your door every Sunday and repeating the same thing. Eventually you would just sksn the four or yell them to f off. At least I'm honest. 

7 hours ago, Guyver said:

Anyway, regarding the existence of God, you don’t believe there is such a thing.  In your mind, you are right.  But, you could very well be incorrect.  I think you do a great job presenting arguments and information from the atheist perspective, and from science, but that doesn’t mean that you speak factually about things all the time, especially when they are not knowable.

That's a bit the case though. So many things are knowable, but because off a vested interest, some refuse to know them. Take our discussions for example. Physics outright refutes and afterlife, yet you insist there has to be unknowable aspects. That's view simply dismisses what we do know for some invented reason not to accept it.

7 hours ago, Guyver said:

Since you claim to have never had any experience that gives you any reason to believe anything outside of material existence, I think you may just be assuming that everyone else or most everyone except for crackpots as you call them, thinks just as you do.  I don’t.  I don’t know if there is a God, or what God is like, but I have had experiences that are different from you and I do believe in something.  I don’t know what it is, but since I have had experiences that I consider beyond the scope of material existence, I keep the door open on my opinions about it.  I may not believe in religion for myself, but I certainly believe that there are plenty of people out there who are probably helped by religion in some way.

Have you ever considered that I simply have a much higher standard for evidence? What's to say you and I have not had the exact same experience that I have rationalised, but you call supernatural. 

What you are referring to is an unfamiliar experience. Because an old myth seems to explain what you have experienced doesn't by any means mean it's at all related. Considering the origins of these myths I just don't see them as viable. I don't think many go past that initial perceived correlation. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.