Now we've entered the Twilight Zone. If you cannot explain your own arguments in terms that the rest of us non-enlightened, non-universe communicators can understand, how can we begin to debate. To say that the "universe (a mass of particles and energy, devoid of consciousness except for those beings which reside within it) communicated with (you)" is thus on par with saying my "apartment building (a mass of particles and energy, devoid of consciousness except for those beings which reside within it) communicated with me". Oh, and by the way, my apartment building doesn't communicate with anyone else the way it does me, and so we'll never see eye-to-eye on the issue.

Seriously? Has no one ever heard of "coincidences", "imperceptable consciousness", or "dreams"? I'll start looking to your books, and that evidence better be damned convincing, because what I have read of these "past lives" is nothing more than simple hypnotic suggestion and outright fabrication.

The Bible contradicts itself, just as Jesus contradicts the earlier teachings.

Yet consider that it is possible to be both the creator and the created. That is in fact what God is, and what we are.

By the way, the Genesis translation was changed. It originally read "we created man in our image". You won't find this in any official document. I 'just know it', and it has come up in various discussions of the Bible. I just share it to give you a little food for thought. What if?

Because most peoples' understandings of their religions is shallow.

You've been there your whole life. You're just becoming more aware.

You can't. You might consider other points of view, however, and that can be very valuable. Stretches the mind to encompass new possibilities.

As you said, we can't prove anything. So why try? How about exploring?

Correct, except that nothing is "devoid of consciousness". The entire universe is consciousness itself.

What you call an "apartment building" isn't really 'out there' somewhere. Your mind creates that illusion. It is really 'in there' somewhere - it is a part of yourself, the universe. The universe communicates with itself. This is called love.

In a sense that's right - all communication is unique. But there are similarities.

Many people talk to their vehicles. They get to know them. They fall in love with them. They get intuitions when they are about to break down. They cry when they lose them. Communication with what you think of as 'physical objects' is really quite common.

Perhaps it will be blessed convincing. You act as if I want or need you to see this or be convinced. It is not for me you are doing this. It is for yourself. You are missing a big part of life and its possibilities. I hope you open a bit more and enjoy the process.

There is nothing stranger or more exciting than the truth.

Voice - I'm just wondering, when your enlightenment/communicating with the universe occurred, was it something that you actively sought, or was it a spontaneous dawning of realization? If it's the former, have you ever considered that maybe you are just believing what you want to believe as much as the rest of us close-minded skeptics who don't believe anything that isn't peer-reviewed?

My communication is an ongoing thing, continuous. It's not as if one event occurred and that was that. It was more like waking up from a sleep, gradually becoming aware of someone standing there. This 'person' had been standing there all along, and even speaking. But my awareness grew to where I began to communicate.

And this communication doesn't just take the form of words... The universe communicates all ways (always).

Am I making it all up? The surprising answer is yes, because we create everything we experience. We are the universe creating and experiencing itself. As I said elsewhere, God will appear as you see God.

Those who only believe what appears in peer-reviewed journals believe in those journals and that process. The universe will never violate your beliefs about it. It will always be what you believe it to be. Not just what you SAY you believe, but what you REALLY believe. How does the universe know what you REALLY believe? It is you, and you are it.

I realize this is hard to 'get'. I was once a very hard-headed person. In college I finally told God, "I'm sorry, but I can't believe in you anymore." I just needed to go on FACT. Then I started delving into my own mind, and there in its depths I found... "God". Suddenly all the esoteric teachings, things Jesus had said, etc. became very clear to me, because I had had a direct experience of them.

You can discuss things all you want, but eventually the 'proof' is in the direct experience of Life. When you "communicate with the universe", it is not only as real, but far more real than human life. You are tapping into the source of being itself. This is not something that can be conveyed well in words. It's something that people eventually go and experience for themselves.

You don't have to go into it believing, though. You merely need to suspend disbelief. You need to be open to what may be there - faith (the willingness to walk into the darkness without knowing).

Close your eyes and say "hello" to the universe. Don't be surprised if you get a reply. And don't be discouraged if you can't yet hear the reply. Say "hello", from your heart, and mean it. FEEL it. Feel the universe as you say hello, then BE quiet for a moment. See how that feels.

It was either the 1988 or 1992 republican convention that Ronald Reagan gave an eloquent speech.

He started the speech with a line something like; 'When you find yourself in darkness, do not be afraid, turn on a light,' That line caught me and I thought, 'gee, isn't that so Ronald Reagan like'. I realized at that point that we had such a different philosophy because when I find myself in darkness I need not turn on a light to not be afraid, rather I familiarize myself with the darkness and become comfortable with it.

I think most americans are like Ronald Reagan.

This is what I began to think yesterday as I left the office, only I had a number of scenarios. Are you sure it's not an undiagnosed tumor communicating with you? Do you "hear" this communication, or does it just "appear" as a part of your thought? There are a number of possibilities to explain your "communication", but you have not named one, so please do.

The main problem I've having is that you (Voice) claim I am close-minded, whereas I believe myself to be very open-minded, but that is dependent upon reason. If there was any reason to what you are claiming, I would be very much in support. But the claim that the universe communicates with you in a way that cannot be explained, is, well, unreasonable; any number of arguments can be ended this way (circular logic). To say that my apartment building has consciousness is unreasonable; concrete and metal and plaster do not live, think, or feel. This lack of reason is why I cannot put much credence in what you say. Please impart some manner of it to this.

We cannot prove anything, but we can disprove things. Why try? Because the excitement in life is derived from learning new things and expanding our horizons. However, I do not believe this carries over to the "immaterial", something which, as I said before, is devoid of reason.

No, this is called lunacy.

To "communicate", the car must talk back (that's what COmmunication is).


I agree, but the truth is not in dreams or fantasy. It is out there, and it EXISTS. It is. It does not have to be communicated with, it needs to be discovered and understood. All this philosophising and supernatural communication is what blinds many from the truth right around them.

Haven't you learned by now that this dependence on reason is clouding your thoughts, closing your mind, and infringing on your ability to grow in your understanding of the world? These things you call "logic" and "reason" and "valid arguments" are the very things holding you back from ever reaching enlightenment and elevating you beyond the status of a primitive human.

If I didn't know you so well I'd think you were serious.

I think voice was speaking in the abstract.

It is true that people become emotionally attached to objects as well as 'living things'. Anything is living if the communication is there, even if it exists in one way, it may be percieved as two way. The emotional payoff some may receive from such a relationship may be perceived as communication, and in a sense, it is.

Perception and reality are two ver different things. I have two dogs, and I talk to them like they're people. They do not understand what I say, and thus I am not communicating with them. If I believed they were, it still does not make it so. I would also be insane. Talking to a car is even worse, as it does not possess two essential elements: life or thought.

Your definition of what is living lacks a number of criteria, as well. I know some hate to bring "science" into discussion, but according to biological definition, life:
1. Undergoes metabolism
2. Possesses a capacity to grow
3. Can respond to stimuli
4. Is able to reproduce and, through natural selection, adapt to their environment in successive generations

Thus, we cannot, and will not communicate with cars, planes, pens, shoehorns, or any other inanimate object any time soon.

I agree. Yet it is you who is making that claim, not I. I said it could not be proven. I never said my (and others') communication with the universe cannot be explained. It can be explained, very clearly in fact, but perhaps not in terms you understand.

You are seeking to understand and dismiss something which you do not have the context to understand. You lack experience. You have never engaged these dimensions of mind and spirit.

Words merely point to objects. If you are unfamiliar with the objects, then the word combinations will not be of much use to you. Eventually you have to go and experience the objects for yourself if you are to understand what is being said.

It is like describing color to a blind person, or really even more difficult than that. But I am not attempting to give you my experience. That is not possible.

I was merely sharing with you a point of view. Dismiss it as 'merely fantasy' if you wish. For me and others who have explored the depths of consciousness, it is quite real.

Tell me, did you try saying hello to the universe as I suggested, with genuine feeling, genuinely listening for a response? Or did you merely dismiss it as foolishness without making the attempt?

I completely understand. I would argue however that perception is reality to some. If you believe you get something in return from anything, that is a form of communication.

BTW - the dog analogy is not the best one because dogs do understand based on voice tone and body language. If everything must be on your terms then you are missing much of what others try to communicate to you. Receiving and understanding is esential in the communication process between humans.

You are mistaken. Disproving something is proving something (that the thing is untrue). It is not possible to prove (or disprove) anything. If you are as logical as you say, surely this logic is clear to you.

The reason for this lies in the illusion of causality - the belief that one event or condition in the universe causes another. Causality does not exist. Merely the illusion, the appearance of causality exists. Quantum physicists are venturing into this territory. Even your peer-reviewed journals contain much that is amazing. For example, at the quantum level particles are not seen to move, but are seen to disappear from one location and appear in another.

Proof/disproof relies on causality, and as such is itself an illusion. Another way of saying this is the universe is free. Like the Big Bang, First Cause will never be found by looking into the past, but by looking at the Now. Time is an illusion. The only time or moment that exists is Now. As such, causality is an illusion.

(I am not attempting to prove that to you with what I said. I was merely explaining it.)

You believe only what you can see and hear. You do not believe in the "immaterial", in the spiritual dimension of energy and life. You lack perception of it. Thus you view it as empty (void). From my perspective, this is just a lack of awareness in you.

Indeed, that is why I said the person receives an intuition when the car is about to break down. Receives. You did not hear me say that, because your mind was closed.

"Your vision will become clear only when you look into your heart. Who looks outside, dreams. Who looks inside, awakens." - Carl Jung

Actually, it needs nothing. As you say, it simply is. YOU may need to discover and seek to understand it. Yet it needs nothing.

My communication does not make me blind to what is around me. It helps me to see what is around me in a very clear light.

What you call a delusional person is merely someone who perceives a different reality than you. You are convinced you perceive THE reality, and so you believe they are deluded. Yet who is to say whose reality is REAL, or whether one is more real than another? Perhaps they are merely different windows upon a larger reality.

bullshit. One experiment can prove something wrong but not a million+ experiments can prove something right. Never heard of maths, do you?

I think that perception is only reality to the person perceiving it. If I, say, eat some mushrooms and hallucinate that the walls are closing in on me, that is quite real to me, and pretty scary at that. That is my own experience. If Voice perceives the experience of communicating with the universe, that's fine, but that doesn't make it a reality for everyone. Someone watching me trip out on shrooms might tell me that the walls are not actually falling over, and no matter how adamant I am that they are, because that is what I perceive, it is still not the case.

It's all a myth, MRiGnS.

I am familiar with that construct. I suspect I've had far more science and math courses than you, my friend. It is not ignorance of conventional scientific method that causes me to state that nothing can be proven or disproven.

Many things have been "proven" which have later been unproven. You never know what you do not know, thus you can truly KNOW nothing. You merely form working conclusions, and they (like everything which exists) are subject to change.

This is called impermanence.

You had it right until the end, where you say "it is still not the case". Who is to say that? And by what authority? How do you know that the walls you perceive are not merely an illusion, and the shrooms are allowing the other guy to see what REALLY is?

In fact, there is no one official reality. All realities exist in infinite spacetime (all possibilities and outcomes exist, as QM would say). The way we create our reality is through filtering out most of those possibilities, and 'collapsing the waveform' to create our local and personal universe. We do this by choosing perspectives. Perspective creates perception (experience).

Your belief that there is some common reality to which most people subscribe is an illusion. All realities are unique. As some people choose similar perspectives, their experienced realities are similar... until they diverge again. That is not to say they are the same, and it is not to say that this makes it THE official reality. There is no absolute reality, except the entire quantum soup of possibilities, and even that is but a small piece of a larger context. (Even God has a God.)