Post Reply
Page 1 of 11  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Heaven as a higher dimension
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 10:14AM #1
stardustpilgrim
Posts: 5,280

In the 1800's Edwin Abbot wrote a book called Flatland. In it he described two-dimensional beings living in a two-dimensional world, and what it would be like for three-dimensional beings to enter their world, to them, a quite mysterious event.

Jesus said, variously interpreted, the kingdom of heaven is within you, the kingdom of heaven is in your midst. There are two characters in the OT, Enoch and Elijah, who, instead of dying, mysteriously vanished. Enoch walked with God, and was not, because God took him. Elijah went up in a chariot of fire. And we also have the case where Elisha and his servant were surrounded by the soldiers of the king of Aram, and the servant got pretty worried. But Elisha wasn't worried and asked God to open the servants eyes (see into a higher dimension). And the Lord opened the servants eyes and he saw that the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire, numbering more than the enemy. (2 Kings 6:11-19) 

In the NT we have the mysterious encounter of Jesus, Peter, James and John meeting Moses and Elijah, two "dead" guys. (Matt. 17:1-9, and in Mark 9 and Luke 9) And we can add that at the Ascension, Jesus, vanished. 

Why is it so difficult to accept scripture at face value, that these events actually occurred, and that there are realms beyond the physical (fifth and sixth dimensional realms) which are just as real as our world? Why can't we see that we are just tiny little creatures living in a three-dimensional spatial world and a fourth-dimensional space-time world, in a very similar manner as the two-dimensional beings of Abbot's novel? Why can't we accept the testimony of personal experience? Why can't we accept the testimony of Jesus, that he came down from a higher realm?


Why can't we see that when we die, it's the physical body that dies, and the information that actually constitutes self is saved in a different form, and merely steps into a higher dimension?


Why not agree with Wolfson (below) that, compared to the reality and life of the higher realms, our world is but a dream from which we may awaken?

stardustpilgrim      

The purpose of words is to convey ideas. When the ideas are grasped, the words are forgotten.
Where can I find a man who has forgotten words? He is the one I would like to talk to.
The Way of Chuang Tzu by Thomas Merton

A map is not the territory.                                                                 Alfred Korzybski

God is that function in the world by reason of which our purposes are directed to ends which in our own consciousness are impartial as to our own interests. He is that element in life in virtue of which judgment stretches beyond facts of existence to values of existence.      Alfred North Whitehead
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 10:48AM #2
Dostojevsky
Posts: 7,338

I think most people accept it as a  belief. There's a barrier between the two worlds and it is for our safety. Those with schitzophrenia  and other mental illness do experience those worlds but are terrified of them as they are not understood. Mystics who understand the symbology  will walk fearlessly among thoe other beings.


WE need to remember they are like here on earth. There's good and bad and you do not want to end up with the bad company on their own turf.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 10:54AM #3
Ed.W
Posts: 9,434

How far can you wake up?  Only to the point of lucid dreaming*?  I mean you can't really escape the dream until you die.



* Lucid dreaming is where you are aware that you are having a dream and you for example purposely stay asleep to see how it turns out.


Have you got anything I can sink my teeth into?
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 11:13AM #4
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

May 6, 2012 -- 10:54AM, Ed.W wrote:


How far can you wake up?  Only to the point of lucid dreaming*?  I mean you can't really escape the dream until you die.



* Lucid dreaming is where you are aware that you are having a dream and you for example purposely stay asleep to see how it turns out.





It also allows you to begin to control the dream since you are lucid.  Further, you can actually awaken, and hold on to the dream-being awake momentarily (eyes open, seeing the room) and holding the stage 4 (REM) state at the same time, and then going back into it, simply by closing your eyes. So it's more about control of the dream, than finding out the outcome; it's about creating the dream as you wish.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 11:14AM #5
Blü
Posts: 24,871

stardust


Why can't we accept the testimony of personal experience?


Because once you deem the testimony of personal experience sufficient to establish that a statement about reality is correct, you abandon reasoned enquiry, the requirement for corroboration, the obvious point that extraordinary claims require extraordinary demonstration and so on - and you have to accept each testimony of personal experience not only as true but as equally true as other testimonies that can't be reconciled with it.



Why can't we accept the testimony of Jesus, that he came down from a higher realm?


Same reason. 


Plus, the NT heaven is on the Genesis model, a flat earth with an inverted bowl over it to which the heavenly bodies are attached, above which is a perfectly physical heaven to which you can travel by chariot or by being lifted up or by angelic descent and ascent.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 11:59AM #6
JimRigas
Posts: 2,950

Our 3-dimensional lab equipment cannot investigate the existence of a 4-dimensional universe, so Blu will never be satisfied.  At best our current equipment can reveal physical discrepancies in our 3-dimensional universe, such as the EPR phenomenon, or the wave-to-particle transformation.    

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 12:07PM #7
Blü
Posts: 24,871

Jim


Our 3-dimensional lab equipment


Four, actually.


cannot investigate the existence of a 4-dimensional universe


I take it you mean five.



At best our current equipment can reveal physical discrepancies in our 3-dimensional universe, such as the EPR phenomenon, or the wave-to-particle transformation.


I'm not aware of any interpretation of EPR or of wave/particle ambiguity that requires extra dimensions.  How might extra dimensions resolve either question?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 3:04PM #8
JimRigas
Posts: 2,950

May 6, 2012 -- 12:07PM, Blü wrote:


Jim


Our 3-dimensional lab equipment


Four, actually.


cannot investigate the existence of a 4-dimensional universe


I take it you mean five.



At best our current equipment can reveal physical discrepancies in our 3-dimensional universe, such as the EPR phenomenon, or the wave-to-particle transformation.


I'm not aware of any interpretation of EPR or of wave/particle ambiguity that requires extra dimensions.  How might extra dimensions resolve either question?




I am referring to the three physical dimensions.  Time is like entropy; it changes continuously and you normally canot affect it.  The EPR problem  can be resolved by only one more dimension from which one can access everything in the other three simultaneously.   The wave-particle phenomenon is more difficult to fathom.  It is almost the reverse of touching with a stick a pool of water and watching a set of wave rings emanating from it.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 7:40PM #9
Blü
Posts: 24,871

Jim


I am referring to the three physical dimensions.


So your lab instruments don't move in time, can't measure change or process?



The EPR problem  can be resolved by only one more dimension from which one can access everything in the other three simultaneously.


Like the Flatland hypothesis?  Who has seriously proposed that since WW1?  How does it solve of itself the EPR problem?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 8:04PM #10
JimRigas
Posts: 2,950

May 6, 2012 -- 7:40PM, Blü wrote:


 


So your lab instruments don't move in time, can't measure change or process?



The EPR problem  can be resolved by only one more dimension from which one can access everything in the other three simultaneously.


Like the Flatland hypothesis?  Who has seriously proposed that since WW1?  How does it solve of itself the EPR problem?




I can move my instruments five feet in the x dimension, five in the y dimension and another five in the z dimension; and then move them back.  But I cannot move them five days ahead or five days behind.  They are attached to that dimension and are forced to move inexorably in one direction, and never in the reverse; and it is all beyond my control. 


True, the Flatland tale is old, but the point it makes remains valid. To some extent equations of state that describe fields, which describe space properties in three dimensions and time can yield similar results.  

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 11  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 11 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook