|
Author
|
Topic: I'm Ok, you're Ok!
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
"(I have saved many of the posts that I wrote.)"
Why?
--------------------
That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged | 
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
Heb 11:37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;
Heb 11:38 (Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
Yes, yes. Those happy guys are the ones who will rule the day in the hour of the Antichrist. the hour is approaching.
But: Gal 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
[Because Jesus knows!] You don't have to believe it! It will not change because you don't. Let it be published everywhere, what happens in the dark, so others may be warned how the gospel can be perverted by those who scorn the truth. It is an astonishing evil gotten away with, with clever words that match the real thing. Who should be surprised, since satan can masquerade as an angel of light.
(I have saved many of the posts that I wrote.)
Love has a definition. Love is God. By any other definition, some will be deceived - some. Here is where the millstone comes in if one of these little ones is hurt because they were deceived.]]
But cornfed, yew sed quote:
Hi, Michael Harrison. You said to Eden, and probably to becauseHElives too:
quote:I have to laugh. I am sorry that you are so insecure and fearful.
Insecure and fearful? There is an element wanting to protect the sacred enclosure of my mind and heart, and only let in at this point that which has zoe life. So if there is any fearfulness, it is "am I protecting it well?"
And as both the Old and New Testament Covenants say:
Psalm 36:1
The transgression of the wicked says within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes.
Romans 3:18
There is no fear of God before their eyes.
To repeat what you said, Michael Harrison:
quote:I have to laugh. I am sorry that you are so insecure and fearful.
The Bible also says to redeem the time:
Chapter)
Ephesians 5:16
Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
Genesis 19:26
And when his wife {Lot's wife} looked back from behind him, she became a pillar of salt.
I'm Ok, You're Ok, is a "look back" to where I came from, from Sodom. But I'm going to Zoar: it is a little place because few there be that find it.
Genesis 19
20 Behold now, this city is near to flee to, and it is a little one: Oh, let me escape there (is it not a little one?) and my soul shall live.
The Christian life flees from Sodom to Zoar. Is it not a little one?
Matthew 7:14
Because tight is the gate and narrow is the road that lead to life, and few there be that find it.
The book, I'm OK, You're OK, was written in Sodom.
Genesis 19:16
And while he {Lot} lingered, the men {the angel} laid hold upon his {Lot's} hand and upon the hand of his wife and upon the hand of his 2 daughters; the LORD being merciful to him: and they brought him forth and set him outside the city {of Sodom}.
They ain't got nothing with them. I'm OK, You're OK is going to burn back there in Sodom:
Luke 17
28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, and they builded;
29 But on the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all.
Lot is going to read a new book in Zoar, the [Bible]
with love, eden
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Harrison:
I have to laugh. I am sorry that you are so insecure and fearful. A house built upon the Rock is not threatened by every wind of doctrine. .
Yet a seed will wither and die. May all weed seed end up this way as chaff in the wind and those that sow it confounded.
You can sow all you want upon our rock~lol.
--------------------
That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
No! Don't read the book. The man who wrote it went insane.
Have you ever seen the witness tract, "This was your life?" I do believe that peoples lives are reviewed on judgment day. I don't feel like going any deeper. If the Lord will, and I endure to the end, mine will be under the blood. Don't know if that means that it won't be reviewed.
Yea! And I have seen Christians read the Koran, not because they believe it, but to know what it says. Perhaps one can speak to a Muslim better if they know it. Perhaps it isn't necessary to. But people do read it to be informed.
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Isaiah
Advanced Member
Member # 6699
|
posted
I just hope he OK'd it with the patients first ![[Confused]](confused.gif) !
We will certainly give account -and though this is interesting, and God's creation is awesome -I don't want noooobody probing my frontal or cerebral anything!
However -after all is said and done -God will NOT bring the former things to remembrance!
Isaiah 65:17
For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
Weird, huh? I liken this time to a scaffold which is removed from around a building after it is completed.
Yayyyyyy!! ![[hyper]](graemlins/hyper.gif)
I have not read the book -so I don't know if this applies, but some books are rather helpful -even ones dealing with psychology, relationships, etc... Simply because a book does not mention God does not mean it must be absolutely incorrect -though a perfect book you will not find apart from God's word -and man even messes that up sometimes! Many books are rubbish!
But... a book can contain correct factual knowledge about subjects the bible does not discuss at length -which can be coupled with Godly wisdom. People can also get things correct because they have seen them to be true in what was created -even if they do not know to honor God -even things of righteousness....
Romans 2:14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness....
The bible does not give specifics as to what foods, plants and herbs, etc... are good for certain ailments, etc... but I think any would read a book on the subject even if it didn't mention God -but when it comes to what goes on in your mind and in relationships, things get more complicated. Even so -this is not to say that one who does not believe in God can't know more about a certian subject -or aspects thereof -than one who does (Health, parenting, grief, unhealthy relationships, unhealthy thinking, etc...) -these are not curious arts such as witchcraft or the like.
That said, most of man's books are rubbish and would be better for warming the toes than reading. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Posts: 288 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
Hi, Michael Harrison. You said to Eden, and probably to becauseHElives too: quote:
I have to laugh. I am sorry that you are so insecure and fearful.
Insecure and fearful? There is an element wanting to protect the sacred enclosure of my mind and heart, and only let in at this point that which has zoe life. So if there is any fearfulness, it is "am I protecting it well?"
And as both the Old and New Testament Covenants say:
Psalm 36:1
The transgression of the wicked says within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes.
Romans 3:18
There is no fear of God before their eyes.
To repeat what you said, Michael Harrison: quote:
I have to laugh. I am sorry that you are so insecure and fearful.
The Bible also says to redeem the time:
Chapter)
Ephesians 5:16
Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
Genesis 19:26
And when his wife {Lot's wife} looked back from behind him, she became a pillar of salt.
I'm Ok, You're Ok, is a "look back" to where I came from, from Sodom. But I'm going to Zoar: it is a little place because few there be that find it.
Genesis 19
20 Behold now, this city is near to flee to, and it is a little one: Oh, let me escape there (is it not a little one?) and my soul shall live.
The Christian life flees from Sodom to Zoar. Is it not a little one?
Matthew 7:14
Because tight is the gate and narrow is the road that lead to life, and few there be that find it.
The book, I'm OK, You're OK, was written in Sodom.
Genesis 19:16
And while he {Lot} lingered, the men {the angel} laid hold upon his {Lot's} hand and upon the hand of his wife and upon the hand of his 2 daughters; the LORD being merciful to him: and they brought him forth and set him outside the city {of Sodom}.
They ain't got nothing with them. I'm OK, You're OK is going to burn back there in Sodom:
Luke 17
28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, and they builded;
29 But on the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all.
Lot is going to read a new book in Zoar, the ![[Bible]](graemlins/bible.gif)
with love, eden
IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
I have to laugh. I am sorry that you are so insecure and fearful. A house built upon the Rock is not threatened by every wind of doctrine. Neither can I conceive of the idea that the message that I bring of the Lord is flawed, such that anyone would judge my intent without having even read the message, apparently thinking me less than solid in conviction of the truth.
The way is narrow. Few there be that find it. But it is ok (play on words). I do not desire that you read something that you do not want to read. But how can you reprove me when you haven't even looked at what it said. Perhaps the wise thing would have been to simply not read it, and to not talk about it.
For what it is worth to any who read this part of this thread, there is no psychology in the passage that I have posted. It is the introduction of the book which sets up the discussion that the man who wrote it intended to relate. Rather, the passage describes literal experience that occurs on the operating table, when a brain surgeon stimulates the brain of someone, who then recalls in living color, with feelings, and thoughts, something that they experienced in their own life. It is literal recall of their actual life, which, if you are wondering about the significance thereof, every man shall give account of the deeds done in his or her body. All this passage does is verify the Bible. God's proofs are around us, even in the world so that no man will have an excuse for denying Jesus.
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
I'm with Eden on this, I want nothing to do with humanism....
http://www.jwelford.demon.co.uk/brainwaremap/transac.html
I will trust the leading of the Holy Spirit and the inspired words of scripture to know Truth and how to love my fellow man and love Yahweh.
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
Hi, Michael Harrison. You said to Eden quote:
I don't believe I will Eden. Sorry that you missed a blessing here. The topic is an eye opener for anyone who ignores the jugdment of God as something that will never happen. Your entire life is recorded in your own brain. It is a stunning read. Every sinner ought to read it, and Christians probably should too.
I had that book I'm OK, You're Ok for a long time, for years, before I became a bornagain Christian by believing that Jesus was the Son of God and that God had raised Jesus from the dead on the 3rd day (Romans 10:9-10).
After that, all worldly books that did not mention those 2 above truths had to be written either by Lucifer-Satan or by an associate of Lucifer-Satan so they are no longer worth reading, even if they represent Lucifer-Satan's very best attempt at writing.
Lucifer-Satan cannot tell me anything that will really help me and heal me. Lucifer-Satan doesn't mind at all if he can get people to think "I'm OK, you're OK". There are only 2 things that Lucifer-Satan does NOT want us to know, and that is that Jesus is the Son of God and that God raised Jesus from the dead on the 3rd day. But "I'm OK, you're OK? NO PROBLEM, let's break out the champagne and let's have Prologue readings in every city and nation!
But it will save nobody.
Acts 19:19
Many of them also who used curious arts brought their books together and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it to be 50,000 pieces of silver.
with love, eden
IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
I don't believe I will Eden. Sorry that you missed a blessing here. The topic is an eye opener for anyone who ignores the jugdment of God as something that will never happen. Your entire life is recorded in your own brain. It is a stunning read. Every sinner ought to read it, and Christians probably should too.
I am not above instruction, dear one. However I am an adult in the Kingdom of our God. Oddly, I am so by becoming as a child. And a yielded Christian can, as Trumbull states, "Learn even from the unregenerate." We must humble ourselves, for our Father may be speaking even through a dumass, and we may miss it. (IIPeter 2:16)
It is a long way down from our high horse to where He will meet us with His understanding.
"Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up." (Jas 4:10)
It is also worth noting that Shadrach, Meshac and Abindigo were schooled in the heathen teachings of Egypt. They had to go to school. Scripture literally says so.
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
Hi, Michael Harrison. You said quote:
... and check out the post on I'm Ok, you're Ok.
I don't read secular books anymore. Time to throw the book away, Michael Harrison. Should I now read 10 or more paragraphs (or whatever) of secular text from I'm OK, You're OK? That would be a digression, wouldn't it? I'm going in the OTHER direction. Time to throw the book into the trash, Michael Harrison.
with love, eden
IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
There is a witness booklet entitled, "This is your life." This would have fit nicely into one of those little books. What it says is that your entire life is recorded. It is something to think about.
From I'm Ok, You're Ok
Any hypothesis must depend for its verification on observable evidence. Until recently there has been little evidence about how the brain functions in cognition, precisely how and which of the 12 billion cells within the brain store memory. How much memory is retained? Can it disappear? Is memory generalized or specific? Why are some memories more available for recall than others?
One noted explorer in theis field is Dr. Wilder Penfield, a neurosurgeon from McGill University in Montreal, who in 1951 began to produce exciting evidence to confirm and modify theoretical concepts which had been formulatied in answer to these questions. During the course of brain surgery, in treating patients suffering from focal epilepsy, Penfield conducted a series of experiments during which he touched the temporal cortex of the brain of the patient with a weak electric current transmitted through a galvanic probe. His observations of the responses to these stimulations were accumulated over a period of several years. In each case the patient under local anesthesia was fully conscious during the exploration of the cerebral cortex and was able to talk with Penfield. In the course of these experiments he heard some amazing things.
(Inasmuch as this book is meant to be a practical guide to Transactional Analysis and not a technical scientific treatise, I wish to clarify that the following material from Penfield’s research – the only material in this book which might be seen as technical – is included in the first chapter because I believe it is essential to the establishment of the scientific basis of all that follows. The evidence seems to indicate that everything which has been in our conscious awareness is recorded in detail and stored in the brain and is capable of being “played back” in the present. The following material may warrant more than a single reading for a full appreciation of the implications of Penfield’s findings.)
Penfield found that the stimulating electrode could force recollections clearly derived from the patient’s memory. Penfield reported, “The psychical experience, thus produced, stops when the electrode is withdrawn and may repeat itself when the electrode is reapplied. “ He gave the following examples:
First is the case of S.B. Stimulation at Point 19 in the first convolution of the right temporal lobe caused him to say: “There was a piano there and someone was playing. I could hear the song, you know.” When the point was stimmulated again without warning, he said: Someone speaking to another,: and he mentioned a name, but I could not understand it… it was just like a dream. The point was stimulated a third time, also without warning. He then observed spontaneously, “Yes, Oh Marie, Oh Marie! – Someone is singing it.” When the point was stimulated a fourth time, he heard the same song and explained that it was the theme song of a certain radio program.
When, in another case, that of D.F., a point on the superior surface of the right temporal lobe was stimulated within the fissure of Sylvius, the patient heard a specific popular song being played as though by an orchestra. Repeated stimulations reproduced the same music. While the electrode was kept in place, she hummed the tune, chorus, and verse, thus accompanying the music she heard.
The patient, L.G., was caused to experience “something,” he said, that had happened to him before. Stimulation at another temporal point caused him to see a man and a dog walking along a road near his home in the country. Another woman heard a voice which she did not quite understand when the first temporal convolution was stimulated initially. When the electrode was reapplied to aproximately the same point, she heard a voice distinctly calling, “Jimmie, Jimmie” – Jimmie was the nickname of the young husband to whom she had been married recently.
One of Penfield’s significant conclusions was that the electrode evoked a single recollection, not a mixture of memories or a generalization.
Another of his conclusions was that the response to the electrode was involuntary:
Under the compelling influence of the probe a familiar experience appeared in the patient’s consciousness whether he desired to focus his attention upon it or not. A song went through his mind, probably as he had heard it on a certain occasion: he found himself a part of a specific situation that progressed and evolved just as the original situation did. It was, to him, the act of a familiar play, and he was himself both an actor, and the audience.
Perhaps the most significant discovery was that not only past events are recorded in detail but also the feelings that were associated with those events. An event and the feeling which was produced by the event are inextricably locked together in the brain so that one cannot be evoked without the other. Penfield reported:
The subject feels again the emotion which the situation originally produced in him, and he is aware of the same experience in the first place. Thus, evoked recollection is not the exact photographic or phonographic reproduction of past scenes or events. It is reproduction of what the patient saw and heard and felt and understood.
Recollections are evoked by the stimuli of day-to-day experience in much the same way that they were evoked artificially by Penfield’s probe. In either case the evoked recollection can be more accurately described as a reliving than a recalling. In response to a stimulus a person is momentarily displaced into the past. I am there! This reality may last only a fraction of a second, or it may last many days. Following the experience a person may then consciously remember he was there. The sequence in involuntary recollections is: (1) reliving (spontaneous, involuntary feeling), and (2) remembering (conscious, voluntary thinking about the past event thus relived). Much of what we relive we cannot remember!
The following reports of two patients illustrate the way in which stimulations in the present evoke past feelings.
A forty-year old female patient reported she was walking down the street one morning and, as she passed a music store, she heard a strain of music that produced an overwhelming melancholy. She felt herself in the grip of a sadness she could not understand, the intensity of which was “almost unbearable.” Nothing in her consicious thought could explain this. After she described the feeling to me, I asked her if there was anything in her early life that this song reminded her of. She said she could not make any connection between the song and her sadness. Later in the week she phoned to tell methat, as she continued to hum the song over and over, she suddenly had a flash of recollection in which she “saw her mother sitting at the piano and heard her playing this song.” The mother had died when the patient was five years old. At that time the mother’s death ad produced a severe depression, which had persisted over an extended period of time, despite all the efforts of the family to help her transfer her affection to an aunt who had assumed the mother role. She had never recalled hearing this song or remembering her mother’s playing it until the eay she walked by the music store. I asked her of the depression. She said it had changed the nature of her feelings; there was still a melancholy feeling in recalling the death of her mother, but it was not the initial overwhelming despair she felt at first. It would seem she was now consciously remembering a feeling which initially was the reliving of a feeling. In the second instance, she remembered how it was to feel that way; but in the first instance, the feeling was precisely the same feeling which was recorded when her mother died. She was at that moment five years old.
Good feelings are evoked in much the same way. We are all aware of how an odor, a sound, or a fleeting glimpse can produce an ineffable joy, sometimes so momentary it almost goes unnoticed. Unless we put our minds to it, we cannot remember where we had experienced the smell, sound, or sight before. But the feeling is real.
Another patient reported this incident. He was walking along L Street by Sacramento’s Capitol Park and, upon smelling the odor of lime and sulphur, generally thought to be putrid, being used as a spray for the tress, he was aware of a glorious carefree feeling of joy. Uncovering the original situation was easier for him since the feeling was a good one. This was the kind of spray that had been used in the early spring in his father’s apple orchard and, for the patient as a little boy, this smell was synchronous with the coming of spring, the “greening” of the trees, and all the joys experienced by a little boy emancipated to the patient, the conscious remembering of the feeling was slightly different from the burst of the original feeling that he experienced... he could not quite recapture the glorious, spontaneous transference into the past as he did for that fleeting moment. It was as if he now had a feeling about his feeling rather than the feeling itself.
This illustrates another of Penfield’s conclusions: the memory record continues intact even after the subjects ability to recall it disappears:
Recollection evoked from the temporal cortex retains the detailed character of the original experience. When it is thus introduced into the patient’s consciousness, the experience seems to be in the present, possibly because it forces itself so irrestibly upon his attention. Only when it is over can he recognize it as a vivid memory of the past.
Another conclusion we may make from these findings is that the brain functions as a high-fidelity recorder, putting on tape, as it were, every experience from the time of birth, possibly even before birth. (The process of information storage in the brain is undoubtedly a chemical process, involving data reduction and coding, which is not fully understood. Perhaps oversimple, the tape recorder nevertheless has proved useful in explaing the memory process. The important point is that, however the recording is done, the playback is high fidelity.)
Whenever a normal person is paying conscious attention to something [says Penfield], he simultaneously is recording it in the temporal cortex of each hemisphere.
These recordings are insequence and continuous:
When the electrode is applied to the memory cortex it may produce a picture, but the picture is not usually static. It changes, as it did when it was originally seen and the subject perhaps altered the direction of his gaze. It follows the originally observed events of succeeding seconds or minutes. The song produced by cortical stimulation progress slowly, from one phrase to another an from verse to chorus.
Penfield further concludes that the thread of continuity in evoked recollections seems to be time. The original pattern was laid down in temporal succession.
The thread of temporal succession seems to link the elements of evoked recollection together. It also appears that only those sensory elements to which the individual was paying attention are recorded, not all the sensory impulses which are forever bombarding the central nervous system.
The evoking of complicated memory sequences makes it seem plausible that each of the memories we can recall has a separate neurone pathway.
Particularly significant to our understanding of how the past influences the present is the observation that the temporal cortex is obviously utilized in the interpretation of current experience.
Illusions … may be produce by stimulation of the temporal cortex … and the disturbance produced is one of judgment in regard to present experience- a judgment that the experience is familiar, or strange, or absurd; that distances and sizes are altered, and even that the present situation is terrifying.
These are illusion s of perception, and a consideration of them leads one to believe that a new experience is somehow immediately classified together with records of former similar experience so that judgment of differences and similarities is possible. For example after a period of time it may be difficult for a man to conjure up an accurate detailed memory of an old friend as he appeared years ago, and yet when the friend is met, however unexpectedly, it is possible to perceive at once the change that time has wrought. One know it all too well- new lines in his face, change in hair, stoop of shoulder. [Italics mine.]
Penfield concludes:
The demonstration of the existence of cortical “patterns” that preserve the detail of current experience, as though in a library of many volumes, is one of the first steps toward a physiology of the mind. The nature of the pattern, the mechanism of its formation, the mechanism of its subsequent utilization, and the integrative processes that from the substratum of consciousness-these will one day be translated into physiological formulas.
Dr. Lawrence S. Kubie of Baltimore, one of the nation’s prominent psychoanalysts who was among the discussants of Penfield’s paper, said, at the conclusion of the presentation:
I am profoundly grateful for this opportunity to discuss Doctor Penfield’s paper… because of the enormous stimulation which the paper itself has given to my imagination. Indeed it has kept me in a stqte of erment for the last two weeks, watching pieces of a jigsaw puzzle fit into place and a picture emerge to throw some light on some of the work which I have been doing in recent years. I can sense the shades of Harvey Cushing and Sigmund Freud shaking hands over this long-defeerred meeting between pshchoanlysis and modern neuro-surgery through the experimental work which doctor Penfield has reported.
In summary we may conclude:
1) The brain functions as a high-fidelity tape recorder.
2) The feelings which were associated with past experiences also are recorded and are inextricably locked to those experiences.
3) Persons can exist in two states at the same time. The patient knew he was on te operating table talking with Penfield; he equally knew he was seeing the “Seven-Up Bottling company…. And Harrison Bakery.” He was dual in that he was at the same time in the experience and outside of it, observing it.
4) These recorded experiences and feelings associated with them are available for replay today in as vivid a form as when they happened and provide much of the data which determine the nature of today’s transactions. These experiences not only can be recalled but also relived. I not only remember how I felt. I feel the same way now.
![[Prayer]](graemlins/prayer.gif) So, we can therefore see, can we not, that even that which is reproved can be useful in ways not imagined to the humble servant of Christ our Lord!
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
