Talk:Astral projection

Sources

Anyone who would like to edit this article and perhaps add a source can quote me if they want. First things first, defining Astral Projection properly. Astral projection is the seperation of the "mind" or the "spirit body" from the phsyical form, by inducing states relative to sleep. In order to "project" oneself onto the "astral plane", a "trance" or very relaxed mindset and physical body is very important. I myself have projected before and you may use me as a source if you want. (Not trying to be cocky just helping) Astral projection is not lucid dreaming, therefore you probably wont see a silver cord (unless you dream about those sort of things). "- It took me a good deal of mental control to stop the constant flow of thoughts to my mind, but once I gained enough control over my mind I could quiet the thoughts of my surroundings and began to relax. That is always the hardest part for me, after relaxing my whole body I could concentrate on falling out of my average mindset and become entranced. I always think about falling down a mineshaft or an elevator well, and then everything goes quiet and it all gets heavy. It feels like someone put an even weight on all of your limbs and your body, and your head always feels heavy and numb, almost lethargic. You feel like your vibrating while your physical body is actually sleeping, and you are in total conscious control. Then, it's all about concentrating on lifting your arm out of your body, without moving a muscle. The separation is entirely surreal, everything seems to whir, and yet you are aware of everything. It's entirely frightening at first... I myself have never seen any sort of umbillical cord of silver coming from my navel, but I can say things are eerie, you can see everything that happens, but cannot move or talk to anyone of them. People hold conversations and you actually hear them, you can see the cars moving around you and people in thier houses. If you try and notice something while you have seperated from your body and remember it, you can prove that its real by looking the next day. I have never seen any spirits, but I have heard voices, especially in the sky. They are kind, and always tell me to go back where I am safest." I know its not much but you can use it if you want. Average Joe - William Torelli a.k.a Somewilliepete 17:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We really need a quote from a verified expert on the subject or a published book. Some people think lucid dreaming and astral projection are the same, and AFAIK there's no scientific evidence to the contrary. ··gracefool |☺ 20:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AFAIK there's no scientific evidence supporting this theory either. --Zoz (t) 17:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Horrible article

I've made this {{npov}} and {{cleanup}} as this article a) is badly written and b) quotes biased sources as verbatim fact. Ceejayoz 21:29, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Probable copyvio

Astral Travel section removed: apparently lifted straight from here. Tearlach 22:13, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RE: NPOV

I don't see any instances of one paradigm as "verbatim fact," if you ask me, so I for one am against the "complete rewrite" of this (majority of) neutral information, some of which I contributed to.

The article, at the very least, needs a criticisms section. As is, it presents a lot of very disputed and anti-science concepts as near-factual. As a side note, please sign your entries using four tildes (~~~~) — ceejayoz ^★ 20:37, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

proof

Hi, Can someone post some links to prove that atral projection exists? It would help. Without any proof this article looks a little mad if you get what I mean.

In my opinion, there are no proofs, it's only a known phenomena which does not seem to be definitely linked to an illness (i.e. not associated with schizophrenia psychosis). The experience happens to some individuals without any known reason and their personal beleif system only seems to affect their own interpretations of it. Reading my own lines, it reminds me of the alien abduction phenomena, which might have more in common than we suspect with astral projection :)

I don't think the article seems mad personally, but I agree it's controversial like many psychology (and para-psychology) related topics. --66.11.179.30 21:43, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Half of this article discusses astral projection as though it is undisputed fact. I think it should receive a neutrality dispute tag until it's been cleaned up. Jredwards 21:13, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but then again the article in wikipedia starts by saying it is a controversial interpretation... Bragador 17:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I set out to discover if AP was a real phenomena some years ago, and after having read many accounts from regular APers I concluded that the only way to know for sure if it was real or not was to learn to do it myself. After a month of following readily availible training instructions I projected for the first time, and a year later I started doing so regularly. Today I still don't have a proper repeatable technique, but I do find that I can usually project about once a week on average. Repeatability is important for scientific experimentation, but I have proven to myself that the phenomena does indeed exist. Mine is however just one account amongst many. If you like me demand undisputable proof, you might want to try learning this for yourself. - Setting about doing this is what separates the agnostic from the sceptic. --Nosforit 62.72.248.134 22:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Supernatural phenomenon are based on personal experiences so there can't be any proof that they exist and it is not possible to prove that they doesn't exist. I had some experiences but not very bright and it is my own personal experience. Igor Skoglund

Astral Body

I've researched the subject out of curiosity for many years yet I never believed that people who astral project put their counsciousness in an astral body. I thought the proponents were saying it was all about your counsciousness leaving the body, and the other "astral" body was in fact just a visualisation made from your imagination. Care to discuss ?Bragador 00:40, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since I found the question interesting but can't answer them scientifically I thought I would just share some of my own subjective sensations about it:

Having experienced two distinct types of similar experiences, the disembodiment sensation is indeed only observed as a sensation, but I couldn't by any means come up with any scientific data proving that this actually happens. Consciousness being used to feel focused from a certain point of view might be what causes the body sensation.

In some of my personal experiences (especially astral ones which aren't happening on the physical plane, more on a mental plane), sometimes I actually didn't feel I had a body, while at other occasions I felt having a fluid body which easily could change shape, so it really seems subjective more than anything else... As for the apparently popular silver cord, it's interesting that I never could observe such a link, and I tend to believe that it is also highly subjective. In this kind of experience the environment also doesn't feel as stable as the physical one, and interestingly the perception is expanded over that of the eyes (i.e. virtual 360 degrees view is common for some reason, also it's possible to get a view of our perceived body shape as seen from the outside).

As for etheral experiences which are definitely more intense and stable, I feel like if I am in my physical body which I can't change shape, and this accompanies most physical sensations (these experiences can include elements of gravity, magnetism, high molecule-like vibrations rate, even velocity, and although levitation works and physical objects can be penetrated there is a sensation of resistence or wind of sorts, and I can't effect voluntary changes in the surroundings). Since these seem to happen in the actual physical reality (this kind of experience is often refered as real-time projection), but that there is no popular scientific data to corroborate it, I'm really unsure of what's exactly happening, the physical sensations could still be subjective, although the projector does not experience it as virtual...

So the questions you raised are very adequate and interesting, and there's no evidence to back any of the "body" theory other than personal subjective experience. If this matters, my own experiences were always spontaneous, although I remember previously trying to trigger them using various means, it was impossible for me to project at will (anxieties caused by vibration sensations and perception of the four heart valves perceived as my heartrate caused me to stop the experience all the time). My experiences usually occur in the morning on the weekends when I decide to sleep an hour or two over what I'm used to (I have theories why such times raise the odds of a projection, but won't get into these now). --66.11.179.30 21:22, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Research

The research section needs to be cleaned up. The book reference should be at the bottom with the other references and less emphasis on Robert monroe should be put. Make an article on him instead and put a link. Also we need more scientific and serious studies on this. I know remote viewing is more studied by science since there is interesting empirical evidence but we I'm sure a couple of scientific papers have been written. As Gary Shwartz done anything on that subject or not ?Bragador 00:54, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adjectives in Wikipedia

(copy pasted so that everyone could discuss)

I've reverted your change to astral projection as there is certainly no policy against adjectives on Wikipedia. Hell, the first sentence of today's featured article uses "important". — ceejayoz talk .com 04:02, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I reverted it back since the adjective "controversial" tends to remove the neutrality of the current article. Bragador 13:30, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Also about the fact that there is no policy against it. I'll remind you that articles must adopt the neutral point of view. I invite you to read any good encyclopedia or dictionary to notice that no adjectives are used unless absolutely necessary since it tends to change the ideas of the reader. The fact that something is controversial or not is a conclusion that the reader must get by himself. This is something they teach in every introductory science class. Afterall, isn't everything controversial ? I also checked today's article and it doesn't contain it in the article, only on the main page of wiki for the short description.Bragador 14:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Again, that there is a controversy is a state of fact. Wikipedia's neutrality policy isn't an idiocy pact, either - see pseudoscience, for example. Pseudoscience is any body of knowledge, methodology, or practice that is erroneously regarded as scientific. Here are some selected quotes off other Wikipedia articles that use controversial in their text. If you revert again, I'll have to open a RfC.

Full disclosure - The issue of full disclosure is controversial, but not new: locksmiths were discussing full disclosure over a century ago.

List of controversial non-fiction books

Scientology controversy

Controversial science

Holy Blood, Holy Grail - Holy Blood, Holy Grail is a controversial New York Times bestselling book by authors Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln, which was published in 1982 by Dell (ISBN 055212138). The book followed on from a BBC TV documentary. The Messianic Legacy is the 1987 sequel to Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

Yasukuni Shrine - Yasukuni Shrine (literally "peaceful nation shrine") is a controversial Shinto shrine located in Tokyo, Japan dedicated to the spirits of soldiers who died fighting on behalf of the Japanese emperor.

And those are all right off the first page of Google results. I can quote the rest of the 300,000 uses if you like. Now, are you going to go through and fix them all, or will you finally admit that there's obviously a precedent of use of the word on Wikipedia? — ceejayoz ^talk

13:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Again it depends of the context. If you think I said nobody must use the word "controversial", then you got me wrong. I said nobody should use it unless it is absolutely necessary since it tends to influence the reader's opinion depending on how you insert it in a sentence. In the current case, since we can do without the word "controversial", I don't understand why you really want to point out a useless fact. Even more to make it a link. Bragador 16:21, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Controversial" in this case is not a judgement on Astral projection, it is a statment on the current consensus of general opinion in this matter. As such it states fact. I don't think the NPOV policy should be invoked to suppress a fact just because it might affect a readers opinion. DV8 2XL 20:28, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am responding to the RFC placed on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Maths, natural science, and technology. "Controversial" means essentially "marked by controversy" and "controversy" is defined as "A dispute, especially a public one, between sides holding opposing views." In this context, I think it is accurate to state that astral projection is controversial, and that omitting the word influences the reader's opinion to a non-neutral POV by passively implying that there is no debate about the concept. Edwardian 20:35, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - omission is potentially just as POV as a blatant opinion. In this case, use of 'controversial' seems reasonable. -ericg ✈ 20:55, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am also responding from the RfC. The use of "controversial" is prosaic in context, and I think reasonable and appropriate given the status of the subject. The word is used exactly once (granted, that use is prominent in the introduction, though it is nowhere harped upon) and I think places no undue burden on the topic that wouldn't be present in any balanced presentation of the subject (which, BTW, this article emphatically is not). It would be helpful in the extreme as well if the article were better sourced overall; while I'm here, I'll see if I can clean up a bit. --Kgf0 23:20, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So the word shall stay. I humbly bow down. But then I strongly suggest we explain WHY the subject is controversial.Bragador 23:23, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can certainly get behind that. Thanks. — ceejayoz ^talk

01:14, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Facts and Weasel words

A lot of claims are not backed by people but only by "specialists, proponents, etc.". When i read it, I see opinions here and there that are not linked to any sources. There are no references at the end of the page (only external links that go here and there) and this make this article not valid. We'll have to work on that people ! Right at the start with the drugs there is a problem since not reference is given !Bragador 23:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The language is better now, I've removed the {{weasel}} tag. Of course it still needs much improvement in the way of specific references. ··gracefool |☺ 23:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it got better and you are right it needs specific references. These sentences still contain weasel words :

Some travellers claim to leave their mortal body and "float", and be able to travel to a destination by thought. If the traveller visits somewhere that other people are involved in daily life, the traveller is unable to contact those people and can only observe.
In some instances, astral projectors have described details of the outside world whilst in projection that they could not have known beforehand, known as remote viewing.
Some projectors claim that during an astral voyage, communication with other projectors or spirits is possible.
[...]laboratory experiments have shown that a sleeping person can be aware that [...]
Many projectors, clairvoyants and spiritualists describe the seventh, or crown chakra as a golden bowl, which is said to shatter at death, especially in a rare form of death caused by a kundalini surge.

Bragador 00:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to clean the text. Such vague comments should not be in an article so see the "cleaning" discussion for more info at the end of the discusison page. Bragador 20:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Argue the Adverse

What this article really needs is an opposing view, such as can be found in the Neon Genesis: Evangelion article, where multiple views as to the symbolism of the topic are mentioned, though not necessarily cited. All opinions are not verifiable, yet are agreeable. The topic of this article is both proven/disproven by opinion alone, as psychology was so many centuries ago.

Would it be appropriate to have a speculation section? I'm interested in the similarities between the OBE state and a psychedelic dose Dimethyltryptamine experience. I would be willing to write a section with references regarding this. Looking at the article on Dimethyltryptamine they have a similar section speculating DMT production by the pineal gland. This might offer an alternative viewpoint on the origin of these experiences. Misterjingo 02 Feb 2006 02:43 (GMT)

Wikipedia does not allow original work. So no, you cannot make a speculation section. If you find papers backing yor claims you could add the info in the critics section. Bragador 18:01, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although there are papers and books on Dimethyltryptamine being the possible cause of mystical experiences, and there are many reports from users of Dimethyltryptamine which match near exactly OBE experiences, I don't think anyone has made the link. Dr Rick Strassman made a link between Dimethyltryptamine and nead death experiences in his research though. misterjingo 10:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References

By wikipedia's standards, we shouldn't put the external links with the references. So this section should be cleaned. Also, make sure you put something in the text so people know which reference backs your point. Bragador 17:15, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links are fine if they are references. However they should use a cite template like {{cite book}} or {{cite journal}}. ··gracefool |☺ 22:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it make more sense (and be more helpful to someone with an awakening interest in the subject) to have Monroe's first book - Journeys Out of the Body - referenced, rather than his second? Huwie 15:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning unsourced text

Please clarify the bold parts and cite sources for :

Some projectors claim that during an astral voyage, communication with other projectors or spirits is possible. Pets have been said to react in a frightened manner when encountering a projector, and some people claim to have seen an astrally projecting person's spirit as a colored beam or shot of light darting around the room. (See also ghost.)

In addition to anecdotal evidence, laboratory experiments have shown that a sleeping person can be aware that they are dreaming (often referred to as lucid dreaming), and some of these subjects claim to have had out-of-body experiences. Modern science generally interprets this as a purely physiological occurrence within the human body, explained by subconscious ideas that have been inflated by an imaginative retelling. Astral projectors find their firsthand experiences compelling enough to validate the dualism of body and spirit, and believe they have visited another world.
Many projectors, clairvoyants and spiritualists describe the seventh, or crown chakra as a golden bowl, which is said to shatter at death, especially in a rare form of death caused by a kundalini surge.
This cord mainly appears to a novice projector as assurance they will not become lost. However, even experienced projectors find it useful, claiming it is a fast way to return to the body. Some claim the silver cord can be severed during life, as a rare form of suicide or naturally by death, and that when this happens, one returns to the astral plane as one of eight phases of death, ending either in one's shard of spirit being returned to God or by rebirth.
Another popular term to refer to this kind of OOBE consists of "etheral projection" as opposed to "astral projection". People who claim to have experienced both say they can clearly observe the distinction between these two states. Some claim that the sensations of real-time projection are usually as vivid as the ones of the physical body, which can be a source of serious anxiety when it unexpectedly happens. Sensations of strong vibrations in the whole body can also accompany this experience.
Some travellers claim to leave their mortal body and "float", and be able to travel to a destination by thought. If the traveller visits somewhere that other people are involved in daily life, the traveller is unable to contact those people and can only observe. The traveller claims to return to their body by "wishing to return", whereupon they descend into their body smoothly until finally the back of the head jolts back into position after some vibration.
Remote viewing

In some instances, astral projectors have described details of the outside world whilst in projection that they could not have known beforehand, known as remote viewing. In remote viewing, however, the viewer does not leave his or her body, but claims to see remote sites by other means. Note that this was in the "other types of projection" chapter and since it is specified that nobody actually projects, it seems to be a useless comment. Bragador 20:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So this is it folks. If anyone wants to put back any of this, they need to specify WHO says what specifically and make sure there is a credible source. Note that the article is already a mess since what is in the article can't always be easily linked to their source, except for the bible part which is really explicit to its sources.

Bragador 20:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One line was from myself, although it was altered (more common grammar was replaced by "claim", etc, like it was done to a number of sentences of the article by someone who probably thought that OOBEs are a myth). That line was the one about "etheral projection", and this is from personal experience followed by a few years of personal research on the subject (reading books) in an attempt to relate myself to some of the others and find terms to classify two forms of distinct experiences which I could differenciate.

Some people want to relate to books as a reliable source. From my experience, half of the books I found on the subject either seemed to be written for money by an author claiming to know about it, and putting together a bunch of references and of pseudoscientific theories or mysticism. Some others seemed to be written by people who experienced it themselves who describe their own experiments as they can. In both cases, all you'll find are still personal views and interpretations of some phenomenon which a number of people live but is hard to describe. At least, some people and groups have agreed on a few terms, such as the difference between "etheral" and "astral" projection. Some others will use other terms to describe the same thing, but it appears that most authors made up the terms themselves, so you'll find a lot of controversy when attempting to classify those experiences properly.

What do you know about the phenomenon, other than varying claims and descriptions from all over the world by people of different beliefs? Other than the few scientific (or at least, scientific attempts) of Monroe and a few other institutes who merely allowed to establish a link between a few brain wave or resonance patterns and a particular dream-like state of mind observed by experiencers? The only other scientific data I know attempts to link this phenomenon with a few other frightening states which some people live (i.e. some being sightings).

I wouldn't be so prone to discount most of the available information, which are invididual testimonials filtered through an attempt to intellectualize the phenomenon.

--66.11.179.30 11:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point and feel you are right. On the other hand Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and it tries to get all the knowledge in the world in one place except for original research and personnal opinions... So sadly your own experience doesn't count unless you publish a book and cite it as a source while mentionning it is the author's opinion. It's the only "loophole" I can think of. Also, if many groups have different opinions, it is still interesting to write them down in seperate sections while mentioning their publications or, if you really need to, their website. The main goal of wikipedia is to be able to track down each written sentence to a published work afterall... Bragador 20:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links

I've removed the external links section, as there was nothing in it that matched the guideline. If there is a particular link that someone feels does match the guideline, pop it here and we can discuss it. - brenneman ^{L} 03:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that most of these links don't belong in Wikipedia, but I think that quite a few of them are of good quality and ought to stay. I'm not sure how you feel that some of these sites violate WP:EL. The ones I think have definite value are:

http://englishatheist.org/cross/astralworship.html, which although I've only skimmed it, seems to be a a historical text on the subject.
http://obebibliography.info/, which has a very extensive list of information sources for those interested in the phenomenon.
http://www.astralweb.org/ is mostly forums, however, it seems to me that it qualifies for the exception concerning sites that are closely related to the article in question. It also has good information on the topic, both in the forums and in articles. I would suggest that forums might be a more useful resource for astral projection than for many topics since astral projection is such a subjective experience.
http://www.skepdic.com/astralpr.html is valuable as a skeptical voice, and ought to be included to keep the list NPOV.
http://www.spiritualtravel.org/ has a wealth of practical information.
http://www.spiritual.com.au/astral.html has a lot of ads, but also has many good articles on astral projection.
http://www.astraldynamics.com/tutorials/?BoardID=65 is the origianl version of an extensive article that is copied on many othe astral projection sites.
http://www.lucidcrossroads.co.uk/astral.htm is a quality astral projection site.
The forums vary in quality, but for the reasons I stated above, I think one or two of them ought to be included.

The section definitely needs to be cleaner and have more context, but I think the site above are worthy of inclusion. -Zorblek (talk) 07:43, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I wouldn't present the sites in the above order; they just happened to be that way in the original list. -Zorblek (talk) 07:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would add that sites making commercial publicity (e.g courses, seminars, free or paid) should not be accepted at this article. From my point of view, this article (and other related articles) - which tries to bring the most accurate data and perspectives on themes not common and also not easily understood in current-day society - should include only selected external links to articles, studies, research and forums who may bring some indepth value to the present article; otherwise, it may misguide users leading them into no end illusions and more or less serious "disappointments" (being the less harmful ones 'money exploitation' and 'power submission to individual(s) or organization(s)'). Regards, --88.214.143.49 18:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. However, a number of these links would seem to meet that standard. -Zorblek (talk) 07:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cut back the external link section - removing those sites which exist to promote seminars, books etc, leaving those which seem to offer a little more. StopItTidyUp 20:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you really want to know astral projection, find this man "Sapphire"

There are so mistakes and assumption in this section, I do not even know where to begin. There is only one man presently a live person and true master of astral projection.

You can invite him over to write over here, he wrote lots of books including the best selling Successful Astral Projection to the Space and Universe. You just google Sapphire/astral projection, and you will find him. His articles are all over the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147590 (talk • contribs)

What a load of crap. -999 (Talk) 21:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Awaiting sources

This section cite Bible verse, but does not cite where the interpretation of those verses is from... Most likely original research... -999 (Talk) 14:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Astral projection and the Bible

The Bible describes people as being "in the spirit" while receiving prophecy (eg. Ezekiel 37:1, 1 Chronicles 12:18, Revelation 1:10, 4:7, 17:3, 21:10). Many biblical scholars attribute this to being in a dream-like state or trance. The terminology of the mystical model of astral projection is also found in Ecclesiastes 12:6–12:7:

"Remember [your Creator] — before the silver cord is severed,

or the golden bowl is broken;

before the pitcher is shattered at the spring,

or the wheel broken at the well,

and the dust returns to the ground it came from,

and the spirit returns to God who gave it."

In the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (2Cor 12:2-3, KJV), Paul of Tarsus makes a direct reference to the existence of an "out of the body" state:

"I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)"

In the First Epistle to the Corinthians (1Cor 15:40-41, KJV) Paul introduces comparisons and metaphorical images that seem as a clear reference to the existence of different subtle bodies in the human constitution:

"There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory."

Similar conceptions were employed by mediaeval alchemists in their treatises related to the Great Work, and can be also found, by those who are more perceptive or aware to the esoteric teachings, in the Rosicrucian literature known as "Western Wisdom Teachings".

What's this doing on Wikipedia???

This doesn't belong on Wikipedia. It might get some people into the subject if they happen to find it (e.g. Random article), and I, for one, don't want that to happen. This is just wrong! If the writers want to burn in Hell, that's fine. But I don't want people, especially kids who use Wikipedia, to know what this is. -XD375 15:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go away, you stupid person. Huwie 21:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not stupid. It actually says that this is witchcraft, right in the bible. Here is a forum post. Read it:

Hello everyone, i'm not going to take course in October for Christian purposes. It's been fun, but i see the truth now.

In the book of Samuel, Saul seeks Samuel after he dies through a medium (todays version of a clairvoyant séance). Anyway, the clairvoyant managed to summon Samuel back from the dead. However he was a bit miffed about being disturbed from his sleep. 1 Samuel 28:11 (read about it)

There are a few instances that took place in the book of Acts: 8:39-40 39. And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; and the eunuch saw him no more, but went on his way rejoicing. 40. But Philip found himself at Azotus; and as he passed through he kept preaching the gospel to all the cities, until he came to Caesarea. There were also numerous examples from Jesus visiting on a mountain with Moses and some angels, while the disciples sat there gasping. Then finally Jesus leaving his body at the cross and coming back 3 days later to only leave again to be with his Father in Heaven. Also, angels escorted some of the disciples out of the local jails without anyone ever seeing them- isn’t that a neat trick. Ok, now that you have seen these examples in the Bible, lets see what God said about practicing such things: Deut 18: 9. "When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, you shall not learn to imitate the detestable things of those nations. 10. "There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11. or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. 12. "For whoever does these things is detestable to the LORD; and because of these detestable things the LORD your God will drive them out before you. 13. "You shall be blameless before the LORD your God. Now wait a moment! Why is the Lord condoning these practices in the Old Testament and yet it is being practiced with some of the Bible characters you ask? Simple, you have to put it into context to properly understand God's laws. God told Moses he did not want his people to even associate with witches and those who practice such things as astral traveling (spiritist) and yet Saul did it? Yes, but Saul was also very disobedient to God’s law and he ended getting the shaft (literally) in the end.

Then what about the disciples and Jesus? Who can question this? Jesus and the disciples only did this through the Holy Spirit as mentioned in Acts 8 and as mentioned in Mark 16:

19. So then, when the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God.

Ok, my point is this. God created the physical and spiritual realms, but not really for us to be wondering around in. The astral planes are really meant for his angels to use. Of course, the devil and his angels are also using the astral planes and that can be a bad encounter with one of his cohorts (demons). There are those who insist on going out there and wandering around looking for fun stuff to do, but sooner or later, they will run into some problems and may not have anyone to help. Happens more than you think. After all, who is watching out for your unattended body if your spirit man is out wandering around? What happens if you run into a demon with strong powers that wants to sever your cord and inhabit your body? What about spirits that may follow you back to your body and hang around to torment you? What happens if your body won’t let you back in or dies while your out wondering around? Books and people who encourage these practices don’t really discuss this much, do they? Because these points don’t sell books. You say, Ok, I will just cast them all out in the NAME OF JESUS! This only works if your where God wants you to be. If your not obeying his Word, your not under His protection.

This is why God does not like his people practicing such things. To call this a gift is incorrect because God has placed a spirit in each one of us, that is quite capable of Astral traveling. But He has put us in our bodies for one purpose. To use our body to fulfill God’s plans while we are here on earth! Not to be wandering around the spirit world. Unless it is under the direct supervision of the Holy Spirit, this should not be practiced. To answer your first question about going to hell, I will let the Word of God speak for itself: Rev 21:

5. And He who sits on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new." And He said, "Write, for these words are faithful and true." 6. And He said to me, "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. 7. "He who overcomes shall inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son. 8. "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part [will be] in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." 9. And one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues, came and spoke with me, saying, "Come here, I shall show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb." 10. And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the holy city, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God,

Astral traveling would fall under a form of sorcery as most of the New Age Practices. Interestingly enough, notice the last verse mentions that John is doing a little astral-time travel himself, but ONLY UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT AND JESUS, WHO IS REVEALING THESE THINGS TO HIM IN THE BOOK OF REVELATIONS. He is not just out there wandering around by himself without any divine supervision asking Jesus questions.

And that is my new view on the topic of astral projection. Goodbye everyone. Turn to Jesus while you can.

It is true, Astral travel is wrong. Now quit calling people stupid. I don't call you stupid, do I? XD375 15:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]