While browsing for women in a crowded bookstore yesterday, I noticed this book which made me laugh out loud. It is all about the coming financial opportunities we will have after the rapture.According to the book, up to 1.5 billion people will instantly disappear. That leaves around 5 billion of us left to seize investment opportunities from the ensuing societal breakdown.
Question for the day- With 1.5 billion professed Christians suddenly leaving us, would that leave the earth more or less moral overall? Whatever you believe the answer is, notice how you had to stop and think about it a second? Truth is, a great percentage of Christians are people with all sorts of substance abuse and domestic problems who turn to Christ out of desperation. Would suddenly evacuating all these people really leave the planet in squalor?
The next popular book on everyone's shopping list this year, considered the "feel good read" of the winter and endorsed as a choice on Oprah's book club, by Dr. Phil, Betty Eadie, and Ken Wilber:
"The Accidental Mind: How Brain Evolution Has Given Us Love, Memory, Dreams, and God".
Currently, Linden is teaming up on book signings with Dannion Brinkley who is touring his new book entitled:
"I Was Kind of Wrong: Updated Prophecies From My NDE the Beings of Light Didn't Allow Me to Remember Until Now". The duo can be found at Barnes and Noble bookstores offering free book signings together and bundle pack discounts if you buy both.
Dannion has readily admitted that by sheer chance alone, at least one of the prophetic visions he offered in his 1990's book "Saved by the Light" should have at least become partly true, and since none did, that should be considered miraculous.
32 comments:
Aaron,
I don't know how you did it, but somehow you managed to write an interesting--if terribly brief--journal entry. Congratulations!
Now, then. Dannion Brinkley's prophecies are going to have you running scared in short order. Furthermore, if 1.5 billion Christians evaporated, clearly the Mohammadans would take over and go on a rampage. Would the world be more stable? No. Life would definitely be more sustainable ecologically, though (rampages notwithstanding).
I appreciated your humorous remark that you were browsing for females in a bookstore. It's the "fe" that I found ironically charming. As a great man once wrote, "Denial is a sure sign of guilt." Really, Aaron, without you, Stephenie Meyer, and the other Mormons, I don't know what on earth I'd do to entertain myself (besides experimenting with a vast array of psychotropic medications to try with increasing difficulty to not further destabilize my fragile sanity in an absurd world).
You really must read Caligula and The Plague again, and again and again.
I wrote to Sean in a public comment and mentioned that we were on-again, off-again friends, although I should have put "friends" in quotation marks.
Yours.
Aaron,
Was How to Profit From the Coming Rapture written by the reincarnation of L. Con Hubbard?
Aaron,
http://atheismblog.blogspot.com
You really should write like that! You're capable of it if you set your numerous and voluminous adipose-coated neurons to it.
The funny thing, however, is that after all of your drivel, you would survive death, and then be backhanded by Father for disbelieving the moment that you arrived on the other side (to show you once and for all time just who the boss is!).
PS You must admit that there is something rather intriguing about the vaporization of 1.5 billion Christianists, a la "War of the Worlds" starring the deeply and vastly dazed and confused Thomas C. Mapother IV.
Without natural enemies, what on earth would the Mohammadans do? At least Steve Jobs is a Buddhist, so he would be spared. So, in fact, would Thomas C. Mapother IV.
How charming.
Hey A.,
The first book sounds hilarious. Christ, it never occurred to me! Imagine the business opportunities!
AJ,
I just finished reading Stephenie Meyer's Twilight after a friend and I saw the movie, about which we knew nothing ahead of time. Despite myself, I somehow found the film captivating, so much so that I felt compelled to read the book. I read ravenously for several days and it was worth it. There are four books in the series, so three more to go. I anticipate beginning the next one tomorrow.
This is the first book that I've read for fun since I was twenty-five, right after my grandmother died. Ever since then, my reading has been deadly serious, consisting of the classics, whether I liked them or not.
In a great number of ways, it was a joyous experience to read something simply thrilling, with no deep moral messages or philosophical insights. It was simply fun! I enjoyed myself. I loved reading the endless descriptions of the god-like Edward.
Reflecting back on the movie, itself, I can only say that the director should be fired (which is, happily, in the process of happening), and the movie should be remade so as to be completely faithful to the book. Although the movie was close, it simply wasn't close enough.
Imagine being utterly and irresistibly alluring to others, immortal and young. Your senses are superb. Your cognition is lightning fast. You're excellent at everything that you try, and you have eternity to perfect whichever interests you develop.
In exchange for this, you must kill and drink the blood of humans.
Would you do it?
I'm Yours.
Aaron,
Since you mentioned Betty (there can only be one), I think that it's long past time, if for no other reason to entertain myself, since I have nothing better to do, that we consider her thus far futile attempt to turn her near-death experience into what appears to be a home-made movie:
http://www.embracedbythelightthemovie.com/movie/movieindex.htm
Notice that the first comment was posted on 4/1/05:
http://www.embracedbythelightthemovie.com/cgi-bin/guestbook/guestbook.cgi?start_number=50
Now, nearly four years later, we still don't have a movie, or even a screenplay as far as I'm aware, never mind a cast or a budget.
Why not?
Are the fundraising efforts falling short?
http://www.embracedbythelightthemovie.com/form.htm
Just how many years can it possibly take to make a movie, especially when based on a book with astronomical sales? Has the NDE fad--is it a fad?--passed? Has it been so thoroughly discredited that no one takes it seriously anymore (except, possibly, for me)?
Perhaps Dannion can find a way to build his "centers" such that they induce an NDE in customers. "Press 'A' for a 'Betty Eadie'. Press 'B' for a Dannion Brinkley. Insert credit card in the slot below."
I wonder how well Betty and Dannion get along. Do they complement each other's business ventures or cannibalize sales from the other?
How is Betty's publishing company faring?
http://www.onjinjinkta.com
I encourage you, Aaron, to e-mail Betty and ask her about these topics of burning interest to us all. You can contact her at:
betty@embracedbythelight.com
Yours.
The NDE story is too well played out to garner anything other than Hallmark movie attention anymore. There are more interesting NDEs than Eadie's. Dannion seemed to have pieced together his post-traumatic hallucinations into stunningly accurate retrospective "predictions". but none of his PROspective predictions came true in the time frames, or even out of the time frames he gave. Gee, how surprising.
I just want to see Dean Radin bend a spoon live on national television.
Aaron,
I believe that Pat once suggested that we weren't meant to know about an afterlife in this life. I'm not sure if there is an afterlife, or if his hypothesis is right, or if it's right but with exceptions. However, if there is an afterlife, the veracity of his hypothesis seems high. There is so little (if any) evidence.
We can only hope that the AWARE study produces results, but you know that behind closed doors, Sam Parnia is preparing rationalizations in the event that no effect is found. His explicit aim is not only to show out-of-body perception, but to PROVE that we survive bodily death!
Now, you know that he's not simply going to declare, "I was wrong; we're annihilated!" Under no circumstances is such a conclusion acceptable to him, so he will fight in favor of the survivalist interpretation to the death, a lack of evidence be damned.
I commend his awareness of the stakes and his feverish pursuit of answers. But one cannot hope that someone simultaneously backhands him for his foolishness in daring to test our Lord, our God.
:-)
Yours.
I am almost 100% certain the AWARE study will not show evidence of survival. And not because I am almost 100% certain that we don't survive, but because I feel quite sure that either one of these two things are true:
1.) We don't survive
2.) There is a controlling agency that ensures no solid evidence of survival to be found.
This leaves the AWARE study dead before it even starts.
I wanted to add that it is almost impossible to believe that after centuries of human record and experimentation that no solid evidence of survival has been found only for the AWARE project to suddenly find something. In the same sense I would be amazedif someone found a bigfoot alive or dead after decades of thousands of campers and hunters wandering around the pacific northwest. Occams razor .
Aaron,
Read Mike Gazzaniga's Human: The Science Behind What Makes Us Unique. It answers your questions about altruistic behavior (it's more nuanced than mere group selection) and "ties everything together," as Steve Pinker says.
As you know from taking that online test of religiosity that you had me take and comparing our scores, you are a fundamentalist religionist compared to me. I make Darwin look like a fulminating Baptist preacher. I explain everything through evolutionary theory, and am loathe to even consider non-evolutionary explanations of human behavior.
Nonetheless, as biased as I am in favor of the hardware of the human organism, I recognize (begrudgingly) that there is software there as well, and the hardware is to some degree self-modifying. Therefore, in my view, we must recognize the hardware as the foundation for human behavior, with software and ongoing adaptation to the environment accounting for the rest of it. Interestingly, the adaptation can involve external interventions, such as the administration of psychotropic (and other) drugs, the creation of coalitions and alliances in the form of institutions with shared values and goals, and so on.
In any case, it is of the utmost importance that we sweep superstition aside and look at the hardware (by studying biology and, especially, neuroscience) and software (cognitive psychology, sociology, anthropology, linguistics, and history). Only then can we even begin to understand ourselves well enough to know what we're dealing with.
Then, we must understand the world, or rather, our world--the small social niche that we occupy, and the niches that we hope to occupy. Assuming that we've set goals for ourselves (health, wealth, connectedness, learning, wisdom, finding a mate), we can combine our self-understanding (which will of course dovetail with our understanding of others, for our pursuit is the general understanding of human physiology, affect, and behavior) with our understanding of that portion of the world which comprises our current and desired future environments in order to take effective action towards achieving them.
Yes, that was a long sentence.
I think that most people fall prey to default modes of behavior without ever asking meta-questions, such as "Why, exactly, am I doing this?" or "Why do I really feel this way?" It's one thing to ask these questions, but quite another to do the heavy lifting necessary to disabuse ourselves of the distortions and outright lies that we're susceptible to without immersion in peer-reviewed scholarly research, but even that is no panacea; however, it's the best route that we've got. Most people react rather than "proact." There isn't such a verb, but there ought to be.
I want to proact. I want to set a course for my life that feels meaningful to me. I can't find satisfaction in following others' dreams, fears, and political and economic manipulation. I want to learn whether or not it's possible for me to achieve a high level of excellence in all that I do, or at least in the major areas of life. If not, then I'd at least know not to waste my time pursuing areas where I can never become a virtuoso. A knowledge of one's limitations is critical to achieving wisdom. If it is possible to achieve excellence in the areas I'm inclined to target, then I want to do so. That requires knowledge and practice.
I feel as if, to borrow from Dan Dennett, I'm awakening from a spell. You can call it a religious spell, or a mental fog, or a fugue state. It's one that has beclouded my judgment due to unbalanced emotion (neuroticism). Emotion is vital to being human, and it's a prerequisite for making value judgments and decisions. However, because the brain is composed of many modules and conflict occurs all the time, in those of us who are vulnerable, pathology can occur as well.
It may be ordinary. We all have cognitive biases, as attested to by the well-supported research of psychologists. But then there are more severe problems, such as the affective disorders. And then there are the "hardware" disorders over which we're currently largely powerless, such as Alzheimer's disease.
I'm emerging from my focus on the NDE and what happens after death (which are of course philosophical problems) to sit back inside of my body and feel what it's like to breathe, to stretch, to run, to yawn. It's as if I've treated my body as an unnecessary and irritating appendage to this point. What if, as Walt Whitman suggested in all of his poetry, our body and soul are one?
What we do in this life matters, because it may turn out to be the only one that we have. And even if it's not, what a terrible shame it would be to waste what we have, especially those of us who have been given many gifts and could do many different things. One of the most difficult responsibilities that we have to ourselves is to choose wisely. Some of us have benefited from having wise parents who have set us on the right course to independent thought. Others of us have had to overcome the superstition and folklore of the undifferentiated brand of Christianity trotted out in America every so often that, as Kai Nielsen (philosopher and author of Ethics Without God and Why Be Moral? says, gives us a collective sense for America's moral purpose, but vitiates the hard task of honest, autonomous thinking.
In any case, whatever the purpose of human life is, my two greatest values are these:
1. Survive; and
2. Make it count!
I don't want to come to the conclusion of my life with an ellipsis or even a period, but an exclamation mark.
My plan, then, is simple:
1. Get to know myself (and my species), encompassing the what and how (biology and psychology) and the why (values);
2. Get to know the world I live in (and want to live in);
3. Set meaningful goals;
4. Steer toward them, evaluate my success periodically, and make needed course corrections; and
5. Take risks, challenge my own assumptions, and add enough disequilibrium to the system to make it all a passionate adventure that celebrates consciousness and human existence. (Have fun!)
Philosophers ask questions. We don't usually answer them. But we do do something that seems like answering them, although technically it's not. We make assumptions. For instance, most of us don't assert that a particular aesthetic theory is "true." We pound an unverifiable metaphysical stake into the ground and then build on it. In fact, that's how science works; it makes an empiricist, naturalist assumption, and builds on it--quite successfully, if the goal is technological progress, which translates (at its best) into the alleviation of human suffering and (sometimes) even the promotion of joy.
I ask:
Who am I?
Where did I come from?
Where am I going? (Where do I want to go?)
They're deceptively simple and child-like questions whose answers grow increasingly complicated, mysterious, and even majestic as we develop intellectually. Different answers are possible. It excites me to see how those who have achieved excellence build on their assumptions to create meaningful lives. I hope to become one of those people.
I'm with Aristotle. Excellence is to be found in balance, in the Golden Mean (which is not an average state, by the way, but akin to consistently hitting a ball in the "sweet spot" of a tennis racquet). The best that we can do is to live, work, and love within our "sweet spots:" physiologically, psychologically, and environmentally. (I realize that many people believe the first two on my list to be identical. There is, however, no hard line among these three. All entities are but cognitive abstractions that I believe in reality are inseparably intertwined and that reciprocally influence each other in a mind-bogglingly complex web of life.)
And I'm with the artists, particularly the Romantics. Meaning is found in feeling, not only logic and rationality. We're more than mere robots, but strange and marvelous life forms rolling, leaping, and even flying along the frothy surface of planet Earth. The universe is vast and the possibilities are endless, but our time in these bodies is limited.
Our task is to seek out knowledge, achieve wisdom, have an adventure, do no harm, help others where we can, participate in creation, and bask in the joy of relationships that make us resonate with inspiration, admiration, and awe.
As you know, I'm both a philosopher and a writer. I've always wished that there were a single word to describe both, but now I'm rather glad that there's not. As a philosopher I think rationally and try to make valid arguments. The practice of philosophy takes a lot of creativity as well. It feeds on both imagination and and sometimes desperation.) As a writer, I'm not fettered by the constraints of the physical environment. I can create mythical stories with happy endings. I can imagine technology that doesn't exist. I can write about a hero who fashions wings for himself, ascends into the heavens, and kisses a cloud.
Ideas matter, as Ayn Rand said.
So does passion.
To me, philosophy is a burnt offering to the god of consciousness, and writing is that god's reply: "I love you."
Steve
Hey A.,
You write:
//
1.) We don't survive
2.) There is a controlling agency that ensures no solid evidence of survival to be found.
//
Yeah...
He's not going to be find anything. Maybe there's a third possibility, but I can't imagine what it would be.
The whole subject bores me. One accepts life as it is or one doesn't. I could hardly bring myself to write this much - I breath today. Tomorrow I won't. We had an ice storm pass through yesterday & by nightfall we had a full moon. I took the girls out and went sledding with moonlight glittering and sparkling from every branch, and limb and fleck of snow.
And that's my answer to this whole mystery.
Steve, tell us how you really feel. And before you complain about my blog being boring, realize that you contribute more digital ink than the authors themselves.
Anyways, group selection is a very unpopular explanation for anything nowadays, though some are trying to give it a comeback.
The more spiritual people I meet, the more Oprah I see, the more Christians and new agers and what have you I witness, the more assured I am that every inkling of human mind, body and spirit was constructed through natural selection and that the earth is just a big recycled graveyard.
Aaron,
I have two things to say to you.
First, if your conclusion is right, then why bother doing anything at all?
Second, you will appreciate, in support of your conclusion, that this prophet is an NDE'r:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-moment13-2008dec13,0,2231803.story
Yours.
PS Given your conclusion, do you feel sorry for us, Aaron? I really want to know. If I believed as you do (and I'm very close), I certainly would feel sorry for us. I already do. I do because there's so very much suffering in the world, and as I see it, all suffering is pointless. I can find little motivation to do anything beyond the bare necessities to survive if you're right. Is that what you're doing? If not, why not?
I think you are driven by a feeling that you are missing out on something. You have this imaginary idea that there is something you could do, some lifestyle change, that would solve this dilemma. But there is not. The plane is going to crash and you can either jump or stay inside. Having children is like a vicarious return to immortal youth. You don't have that option, but it is a powerful draw. Don't you want someone around to talk to on your death bed? If you were dying now, who would come?
My answer isn't any better.
Aaron,
I understand you.
Equally important, I recognize that you're living life in accord with your convictions. Your one great act of authenticity was to break from a lucrative career in chiropractic "medicine," after deciding that it was a sham, at incalculable financial cost to you that will harm you for decades to come, in all likelihood.
Your conclusions may be right or wrong. In this post, I'll refrain from expressing an opinion, but I do have another question.
Do you still believe that it would be better to choose to know and live in accordance with the truth rather than a comforting deception (that appears equally true but is, in fact, false)?
That is to say, is it better to live a noble lie or die of a brutal truth?
Yours,
Steve
I really don't think the truth hinges on whether there is LAD. Whether there is or is not does not change circumstances in our lives and what they are. Life is brutal. More brutal than can be fathomed. I find it impossible to believe that an abused puppy in a puppy mill (they keep busting them around here) caged up for years in its own excrement and suddenly released only to wander around limp legged and in an obvious state of mental derangement, that has to be put down and cannot function- is somehow learning spiritual lessons for it. I don't believe it. I don't believe it. I don't believe it.
I don't believe it. Nothing could make me. No piece of information could make me believe it. This world is precisely what it is before your mind starts to make excuses for it. LAD changes nothing.
If I am still conscious after death I would not be totally amazed. I would not be delighted either. There would be a tug of war between excitement that we are more than flesh and bone, and yet trepidation in wondering what forces would concoct the need for such an existence programmed by the "evil process". My fear then would be, "Is God just as fucked up as Steve?"
Scary.
Aaron,
I agree with you that this life is exactly as we experience it. It is exhausted by its examples (humans, which are constantly being produced and undergoing and creating new experiences and so on).
I strenuously agree with your powerful example of an abused puppy not learning moral lessons, although humans aren't dogs.
You're obviously angry about the human condition, and quite understandably so. So am I. I'm not at all surprised that you would feel conflicted and suspicious of surviving death and wondering about the presumably nefarious motives of "God."
However, while you believe that I'm "fucked up" and seem to hope that a deity wouldn't be "fucked up" similarly, is that really the case? Would you rather take your chances with me, or with the Judeo-Christian-Mohammadan Father?
Please explain in which ways you think that I'm "fucked up," as well as how you, by comparison, are not.
And while you're at it--you will thank me sooner rather than later--read Michael Gazzaniga's _Human: The Science Behind What Makes Us Unique_. It's a boring title for an electrifying book that only two people could have written: Mike Gazzaniga, and you.
Yours,
Steve
Yours,
Steve
On second thought, "God" could not be like you. This is because you have declared tirelessly that you would press the red button and exterminate life in the universe without a second thought.
If "God" exists in some form, then he cannot or would not do this, making him either inert, unaware, or unwilling.
As "fucked up" as you are, I can rest assured that were you God, you would not have designed this world. None of us would have. We would design a world of ceaseless ever expanding beauty and pleasure. Some think that there is something necessary about the human experience. I don't think so. There is nothing that suffering provides us which couldn't be completely overridden by a simple rule change. There is simply no reason that one must be made to suffer in order to evolve or to enjoy. So "God" must therefore be inert, unaware or incapable.
Haven't you heard, Aaron?
God is dead.
Hail, Vishnu!
You're quite right that any of us would have created a beautiful world, very much unlike this hostile, dangerous one that arose from the "evil process" of Darwinian evolution.
There is no moral purpose in suffering; therefore, the universe has no moral purpose. It simply exists.
Given what we know: that we are our bodies (at most or at least), that human beings are biologically impelled to drink, take drugs, dance, and fuck (when not sleeping), and so on, what ought we to do?
Ought we to pursue these activities? If not, how are we to rebel except through genetic engineering?
As an aside, you neglected to mention that I don't simply want to press the red button to blow the world up. You've completely ignored the context of my remarks. I first want to sterilize everyone, so that no more procreation can take place. Then, after the last sentient life form on planet Earth has died, I want to launch all of the world's nuclear missiles to break the planet apart once and for all, thereby concluding the human experiment not with a whimper, but with a BANG!
However, as you know, it is not at all impossible, or even unlikely, that humanoid life should arise elsewhere, and that the evil process should take hold to recapitulate almost exactly what happened here on Earth. Perhaps then, however, those creatures will be spared the likes of Buddha, Yeshua, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, Mark Prophet, Lafayette Hubbard, Jim Jones, Marion Robertson, and Toufik Hinn.
Can you imagine?
Yours,
Steve
Aaron,
Your quotation about puppy mills is extremely powerful. I intend to use it (with the appropriate attribution, of course) in defense of the atheistic argument. I am rather certain that it is the most powerful statement that you've ever written, and one of the most powerful that anyone could have written or will ever write. I congratulate you on the sheer force with which your example smashes itself into the consciousness and moral conscience of readers. It leads inevitably to a sentence from Hermann Hesse's _Steppenwolf_:
"See what monkeys we are!"
I'm Yours,
Steve
Aaron,
Were you aware that the Cult Awareness Network was sued in the aftermath of trying to forcibly deprogram a Presbyterian, after which it declared bankruptcy, and its assets were then purchased by a front group for the Church of Scientology? :-) Yes, the Church of Scientology owns the Cult Awareness Network.
What I simply cannot understand is how and why the fraud that is Scientology keeps going, especially with so much information available on the Net. Scientology doesn't work. It doesn't deliver on its claims, so why do people give away their net worth and lives to it?
The only good Scientologist, in my opinion, was bombshell homosexual Quentin Hubbard, who at twenty-three:
1. Said that he thought that his father was crazy; and
2. Committed suicide in the aftermath of being anally penetrated, fucked, and ejaculated into by another homosexual.
Apparently this really upset Mary Sue Hubbard, Lafayette Con Hubbard's third wife, who was later imprisoned for a felony (infiltrating the government with Scientologists).
It's remarkable that there are homosexual Scientologists.
Incidentally, the psychotic bitch Mary Sue Hubbard appears to have been annihilated in 2002.
Yours,
Steve
PS You are correct that my writings here dwarf Pat's and your combined output to the blog, but someone has to do something to keep what few readers there are entertained. Consider this a play within a play. The outer play is a shell, a veil that when parted, reveals a golden treasure.
Ayn Rand. Marion Robertson. Toufik Hinn. Joseph Smith. Mary Baker Eddie. (Not to mention Betty Eadie!) Elizabeth Clare Prophet and Sean Prophet. And Lafayette Con Hubbard and his bombshell homosexual son, Quentin. These are the people that we ought to be talking about. Instead, you waste (y)our time on Mohammadans and Occidental musicians.
If I could install you as a cult leader, you would be first on my list to lead the Church of Scientology. You would make a far better Lafayette Hubbard than Lafayette did! You're a better writer, too.
But without people like L. Ron and Hinn, we might easily be fooled into thinking that normal human beings were anything but completely incapable of thinking clearly about matters which threaten their continued survival at all.
Aaron,
Even without the confidence men and frauds (pious and otherwise), I think that human behavior would be rife with irrationality for psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, neuroscientists, historians, and others to study.
What the Toufik Hinn phenomenon shows is that culture produces an in-group identity such as "Christian," and Toufik combines an eviscerated version of it, peppered with entertainment and hope for healing (which appeals to the desperate supplicants) to make an unimaginable quantity of money.
What I find more interesting than this sociological phenomenon is the question: Why did Toufik Hinn become "Benny Hinn" rather than someone from his audiences? Was it random "luck?" Was there more than random luck there? How did it all come about? The same question must be asked of Marion Robertson, and the other sociopaths.
How?
I'm Yours,
Steve
Aaron,
This is sad:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-muslimgay17-2008dec17,0,1438523.story?page=1
But it is also all too common.
A Mohammadan lesbian is a contradiction in terms. At least she had the good sense to move to Arizona.
I simply cannot understand why parents abuse, reject, and discard their children. A child is not a robot, not a piece of property, not a possession. Of course, such propositions are irrelevant when staring down the barrel of a gun.
Nevertheless, the ostracism of children happens every single day! It is for this reason that training, licensure, and close monitoring are vitally necessary to qualify and ensure that would-be parents do what they're supposed to in raising a child. The future of the world depends on successfully doing so. (You will remember, of course, that I oppose procreation.)
Does it bother you that all of your time is occupied by pursuing activities determined by the structure and dynamics of your brain? Is there any "Aaron" left, or is "Aaron" merely a structural and chemical illusion that will be dissolved soon enough?
I'm Yours,
Steve
Aaron,
Incidentally, what is the name of that Mohammadan female author who rails against Mohammadism? You pointed her out to me many months ago, but I didn't follow up on her work at the time and would like to do so now.
I'm Yours,
Steve
AJ,
Read more about Lafayette Hubbard's NDE here:
http://www.xenu.net/archive/books/bfm/bfm08.htm
If this actually happened (keep in mind that Lafayette was a pathological liar), it would cast GRAVE doubt on the veracity of NDE's--very grave doubt, indeed.
Yours,
Steve
Aaron,
Behold:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081217/ap_on_fe_st/odd_hitler_cake;_ylt=AkUHfwHaAghabNGryRS3GLUDW7oF
It is this that you should be writing about.
Adolf Hitler Campbell, indeed!
At some point, as the boy grows up, he is going to be backhanded by someone, and backhanded hard--all because of the choices of his parents.
Insanity isn't limited to the individual, but appears to be culturally transmitted from generation to generation and visited upon the innocent.
Yours,
Steve
Aaron,
Are you ill?
Why have you not yet responded to my ARRAY of comments?
Yours,
Steve
Aaron,
In honor of the Church of Scientology's hostile takeover of the Cult Awareness Network, I'm thinking of simply taking over your blog by force. Upon doing so, I would delete all political posts, delete all of Pat's posts (and Pat), and delete all of your posts of which I disapprove.
I wonder in all seriousness if there would be any left.
Love and Light,
:-)
Steve
Post a Comment