Ever Been Mistaken for Someone Older?

Greetings all - I accept and understand all that is being said and certainly respect your choices. May I say that the comments you've all made are comments that should be made when confronted with change. You should be sceptical. But I hasten to add that your 'afterlife' ideals are not at risk by anything I'm suggesting as they are automatically yours as a part of God's over all plan. How do I know? Well, stand aside from Man made religious views and apply a bit of logic. They are not something to be dispensed by any religious authority here on Earth, and so as long as you are sincerely concerned about your fellow Man, acknowledge God and observe the morals of living,then you are fulfilling your human responsibilities. Why worry about an afterlife - its there waiting anyway and we'll all find out about it in good time. Why has it been put about that God would bother to assume human characteristics such as jealousy, revenge, etc. - would God be that trite ? Really ? Come on - think about it a little. Could be a method of earthly 'crowd control' though. As my God is not a vengeful God do you think I'll be at risk for daring to try to simplify Man's pathway through life? I know the answer but you might like to give it a bit of thought. My approach assumed you are concerned enough about your present situation that you might be ready to look afresh at your life philosophy. In my view (and I think most peoples views) the basic requirement is that you can accept that there is a God and then build on that in a reasoned way and so relate to your fellow Man accordingly. This is my approach too. Apart from cutting out the middle man and going direct and not having to conform to local Man made religious rules, there is no alteration to your basic existing belief and you are continuing in your duty to God. Do you think that God will say no can't accept you because you didn't observe XYZ local rules? Like all other ideals the "What ifs" are hopes/dreams/aims until they can become realities - maybe not this year or next year but aims worth while achieving - I'm describing a future ideal basis for living. Anyway that's about it. I appreciate your comments so thanks for allowing me to 'borrow' your attention for a while. I'll look in to the page occasionally but won't be involved unless invited. stay well, Rob R.

What if money grew on trees? What if all animals/creatures could talk? What if we could all paint like Michelangelo? Think like Einstein? Play classical piano by ear? Dance like Fred Astair? Fly like Superman? Be spiritual like Billy Graham? Heal the sick? Make the blind see/the deaf hear? Grow new teeth like sharks when one comes out? Grow new parts like lizards when one is amputated? Etc etc etc. I think all these things "should be so." And it is all about as likely as the Utopia you envision. Some things just aren't for us to know..beyond our comprehension like the massive size and edge of the universe. The eons of time behind us, and after us. We could be just like Mayflys..to be, reproduce, expire... just a speck. Or not. Who really knows? Who will ever know? No one. I intend to live my life with the HOPE that goodness pays off in an afterlife. I'd like to have wings, reunite with loved ones and pets, and a Mansion over the Hilltop. :) !!!! The only thing I know for sure is that there ARE positive and negative forces/energies...good and evil...and they begat the same. I can draw either to me.

I agree with this completely, thanks for the post.

Rob, you are certainly a thinker of deep thoughts and I am not minimizing your assumptions but I just don't see what you see. Your very first "What If" gave me a problem. To live in harmony with all races of Man would be a dream come true for me because I do believe if there is a God, that supreme being would want all races of Man to live in peace and love. All of this God's races of Man would intermarry and strengthen the human race as a whole, but Man does not and cannot live in harmony with all species of life. We use animals for labor and food, this may be harmonious for us but not for the animals. You have a lot of "What Ifs" that would sure make for a beautiful world, but such a world could never include one element, one element that kills for no reason, poisons it's environment and does some unspeakable things Man. We are both the problem and the answer. Rob, all that really matters is that your research, contemplations and assumptions have given you some answers to help make sense of your life and the world you've lived in. Take care.

Frank all ok,I understand it can be a 'touchy' subject.Let's move on. I've given this whole exercise a lot of thought over the weekend and offer the following comments and suggestions. 1. This subject is too involved and important for 'bit by bit' bites as we are now doing. 2. I've had to make extensive notes over the years and have now got it into book form (200p) but aren't sure if I want to publish it or not. Probably not. 3. I detail below my "What if" and a couple of pages of the Preface. If anyone feels it might be of interest, on receipt of their email address, I'll send the whole 8p Preface. 4. If anyone then feels that the subject matter might be of interest, I'll email the whole book (200p) on the understanding that, on receipt, they'll forward say $15 by some means or other to be agreed (perhaps International Postal Order or similar). I'll rely on everyone's honesty but if it doesn't happen then its my tough luck. WHAT IF….. *What if our task in life is to develop a spiritual understanding of our place in the Universe, and the ability to relate harmoniously to all other species on Earth is a part of this development. *What if each of us is already complete with an Inner Self, so that, given the right opportunity and conditions, we are sufficient within ourselves to carry out this task of spiritual development? *What if each of us is already a spiritual being and, as such, has an indestructible relationship with God, regardless of any man made religious overlays? *What if God really has no interest in our physical welfare, as this is largely, within Man’s capabilities? Doesn’t history suggest that this is so? (Wars,Holocaust,natural disasters,etc) *What if Science and Philosophy are two ends of the same stick using different languages? *What if death is simply a change into another form of reality? *What if each of us leaves this world as a single spiritual entity–as we arrived–and then at death, proceeds on to another stage of spiritual development appropriate to our level of understanding? *What if all of this is so and we really have no need for competing religious systems of personal, spiritual salvation, with attendant religious guilt, domination, bigotry, and so on? Think about each of these for a minute or two and tell yourself, truthfully, why they aren’t so…....shouldn’t they be so? BOOK TITLE. THERE IS ANOTHER WAY - A BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES PREFACE Mankind is born with an inbuilt problem - we need to know! We need to know who and what we are - we need to know about our relationships with other species in our world and with the universe. This ‘need to know’ is the continuing spur that has resulted in Mankind’s progress from Stone Age to the present time and without it Mankind will become an extinct species. A brief look at our world today shows that the leaders of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions, with their over riding competitive and restrictive creeds, have failed in their endeavours to satisfy this need to know, and our world is going through a critical stage of upheaval as a result. Science acknowledges those matters it can and can’t prove, and is in a continuing state of flux in its efforts to widen its boundaries. This is as it should be, but many of the concepts which guide our way of life just can`t be established in the same way and are, therefore, a matter of opinion. It is very reasonable to say, that this need to know is being held back because just about all of our philosophical beliefs are based on opinions, centuries old, that have been given the unassailable ‘mantle of Truth’. So the question arises - is there an approach that encompasses all of these aspirations but allows a better understanding of our world and its place in the universe? This book suggests that there is another way but that, as always, it requires the willingness of Man to put aside his need to dominate others and realize that we all gain from such a mutual understanding. These writings started as a journey of self discovery but became a need to try to establish some other basis to explain Man’s relationship with his world and his Creator. In so doing a bridge between science and philosophy was explored and it is hoped that this may be an acceptable starting point for others. This is the ‘need to know’ in action. An initial look at the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions shows that they insist on the reliance on historical records and precedent for the revealed Truth, as the core basis of their religions. Then, despite evidence to the contrary, mainly restricting their points of view and activities to those aspects that support their interpretation of what those records mean. Their efforts are restricted by their backward looking approach to the present and the future. This is not restricted to any particular religion but seems to be a general malaise which has existed for centuries. For example, in the early 1600s Galileo’s demonstration that the earth revolves around the sun was in direct contradiction to religious teaching of the day, leading to his temporary excommunication and his work was restricted for many years as a result. Other examples are the religious approval of the Crusades with attendant atrocities, the terrible tortures of the Spanish Inquisition, the Roundhead activities in Britain and the more recent atrocities in the Middle East and Europe. All in the name of God and religion. Interpretations of religious texts written for those times, many years after the events took place, are now questionable. That these were often subject to translation errors also adds to the uncertainty factor. Of course, the problem with revealed truths is what to do when, later it is found that a particular truth was not so infallible after all and it seems irrefutable that any religion, founded on truths which are not true, has to be in danger of irrelevancy. This leads me to four observations: etc etc -- end of p2----- I hope this doesn't stretch the Blog page priviledge too much Frank, please take it slowly - is this approach of interest? Rob R.

Rob, you did not disturb me at all. I'm sorry if my responses seemed too agressive. I've been trying to sort out my own beliefs for years and it seems that it's almost impossible to have a real exchange on this subject because most people need to defend their beliefs or risk losing their chance to some eternal bliss in the hereafter. No one is suggesting you go or trying to insult you into leaving. Please post all you want, just be open to responses that challenge your thoughts. Best of health and resolve in your quest to sort things out.

Jude, I wasn't going to write again but I appreciated your kind comments and thought I shouild say so. Yes, I can understand the emotions involved in such a discussion. It`s often the case where logic and reason seemingly clash with emotionally held beliefs, but there's room for all sorts of viewpoints providing respect for others is maintained. Certainly, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Voltaire et al thought so. As I'm pushing 80, my primary concern is to sort out my own beliefs - it's that time of life when these assume a greater importance. Hence the initiation of the discussion among seniors who I hoped might have interesting viewpoints. But I have no time for confrontation of this sort, so I'll just fold up the tent and move on with a bit of regret. Apologies to all if I've disturbed their Blog page. Stay well, Rob R.

We don't talk much about religion or politics around here, Rob. Now and then something comes up, but we seldom promote/encourage it into intense discussions. You can understand why, of course.

Jude and Frank, WOW, slow down a bit - I've spent some years in trying to sort out what my beliefs should be and conversation with others is often helpful whether they agree with me or not. Sometimes traditional values ought to be questioned otherwise it is difficult to sort out which path to follow. I certainly don't expect everyone to share my views but progress can only be made by all parties being open to differing points of view and, in my case, to perhaps help establish my viewpoints. This seemed another opportunity to firm up various philosophical points but obviously I'm mistaken. Apologies if you felt uncomfortable - we'll close it all down right now. Stay Well Rob Rowe - Melbourne Australia

Rob, you are assuming God is one being, not several and that God is male. How do you know you and your beliefs are not born of confusion? All you are really doing is trying to promote you personal beliefs. I also disagree strongly that no physical act can affect the soul. Physical acts which either cause hurt, pain or harm or result in something good all impact one's soul. Physical acts are the animated manifestations of one's thoughts both good and bad (evil). Unless you discount the history of the written word, the soul's status can be changed by many things. If you are happy with your beliefs fine, but they are not shared by all. Good luck.

So, Rob, what are you promoting here? A new religionless religion? lol Do you have a name for it, yet? After all, "religion" is simply the belief and worship of God. How you go about it, and the various codes of ethics are what make up the doctrines. Are you creating a new one?

Frank, I had no intention of moving away from my original question but felt that while your reply was relevant it tried to provide a complex answer that I couldn’t tie down to anything specific. It seems to me that God would be aware that Man is capable of imagining all sorts of combinations of beliefs and practices and might be prepared to go along with a lot of what was put forward but surely there must be limits to what is acceptable. For example, there can be no place for instances of cruelty as a part of a religious practice, regardless of whether somebody believed this was a valid part of a ceremony or not. All religions are born of a mixture of all of the emotions you mentioned – fear – hope, plus ignorance – misunderstanding – misplaced zeal and discipline et al. So I regarded your comment as emphasizing the magnitude of the confused thinking that Man brings to bear on this subject. Yes, I agree that God has no need of religion and, indirectly is the root of all religious beliefs because his creation, Man, has developed them. Religions are a collection of practices that a particular individual(s) thought was the right way to approach their maker, and have been amended and altered down the centuries according to what subsequent men thought was a better way. It doesn’t matter how sincere these efforts were/are, if they are just someone’s point of view then they are just that and have that much value. Hence the confusion down the centuries. In my view, the possibility of the existence of God can be taught, but a real belief that it is so has to be the result of an inner sense, based on a personal consideration of all facets of Man’s existence and relationships. It seems to me that people can be kept on the straight and narrow path without fictitious promises, by developing an acceptable code of conduct and moral practices as you obviously have done. God has allowed Mankind the wit to control his own destiny on Earth and Man is, therefore, responsible for all “good” and “bad” things that he causes to happen on the Earth and has to accept the plaudits or blame himself. If unforseen happenings occur then that’s just a part of living on an unpredictable planet – you just have to regroup and move on. The soul’s status is unchangeable but I think it combines with the individual’s intellect at death to move on. Its value is in that it provides us with a constant moral reference point (conscience?) on occasion when we allow it to surface. This leads into your comment about behaviour. No physical action on Earth can affect the soul as it isn’t a physical entity. Regds Rob R

To get back to the original blog, my response to you Susan is maybe it has nothing to do with your face or your body or the way you walk. Maybe it's the way you dress or your hairstyle (not knowing what either look like as far as you're concerned). I know women that are younger then I am but look 10 yrs older just because of the way they dress and their hairstyles. Not that I'm saying this is your case at all, I'm just making a point that it may be something minor that's causing this reaction. Some women tend to dress more "comfortably" as they age, sometimes that means at the ripe old age of childbearing years. Why is it that once some women start having children, they chop their hair off and wear frumpy clothes and stop wearing makeup? (that's a whole different blog) Another way to look older then you are is hairstyles. Women that have been wearing the same 70's or 80's hairstyles ages women. Which is such a huge mistake and so easily corrected. People get stuck in era's probably because they knew they once looked good in those styles and think they still do. Or maybe the style just isn't flattering on that particular person. The bottom line is that your hairstyle does affect how old you appear. With all of that said, if none of this applies to you Susan, I'm stumped. You made references that in the wrinkle department you were fairing pretty well. And if you don't dress frumpy or dress like an older women and your hairstyle is somewhat contemporary and you don't walk as if you have osteoporosis, then those people must need glasses.

Rob, you're going off from your original questions but I'll play along. I don't know if it's human confusion, fear, hope or any number of emotions or reasons that sparked the establishment and evolution of the various religions around the world. Different peoples interpreted God in their own way much the same as we developed different languages and customs. That part seems easily explained for obvious reasons. If and I say IF there is a supreme being we call God, that being would be all knowing and all powerful. If you agree with that then God is both without religion, but at the same time God is the root of all religions as seen by man. Regarding souls, communicating with God, evil and madness, the fear of God's wrath and the hope of a paradise in the after life has kept a lot of people on the straight and narrow and allowed the advancement of societies in place of the wide spread problems present in the absence of a belief in God. I answer to my own code of conduct and moral compass. I do not refrain from violence, infidelity, or any other social ill because my soul is in jeopardy. You may say subconsciously my soul is either good or striving to be good in the presence of evil, but I think behavior is the result of many things, environment, genetics, health and education to name a few. If religion and the "soul" were key to good behavior then certainly priests would be free from the madness of evil which has caused some of them to do horrible things. I'd like to add that if you are not going to off load blame for bad things on a mythical being then you really can't credit God for good things. This may be too deep a topic for discussion, but it's fun to touch on.

Jude - yes can go along with that view too - another thought for you - traditionally "Evil" has been personified as a being - I have the view that evil is actually a form of madness of the individual rather than the religious view - think about it a little,you might agree that this makes more sense and makes the individual fully responsible for his attitudes. No off loading of responsibility to a mythical being. Regardless - stay well Rob R

I believe that our life force energy (soul, if you will) is connected into the GREAT energy of the universe. That is our connection to "God." And when our body dies, the energy goes on..thus the trip to the white light. The energy never dies. Therefore "god" is within me always. I can call on it when I need it to reinforce me... by prayer..or meditation as you call it. I believe that evil is the negative energy. And attracts negative energy. You can leave the light of the positive, and walk in the dark of the negative.

Thanks Jude and Frank for your comments and I must say that I agree with Jude's thinking, and to extend it a bit further, you may like the thought that the soul is God's "on site repredentative" which can't be affected by any earthly isms or religious influences. However you can be aided by meditation to indicate to your soul that you need guidance when this is needed. Frank, I accept that what you say is a very valid comment but if you follow your thinking a bit further you may agree that you are really describing the human state of confusion. It might be much simpler to first accept that you are a part of God's works and that this shows up in the individual by his/her acceptance that they possess a soul - a kind of spiritual you (if you like) which, if you will allow it, can communicate with God indirectly on your behalf. Hope this is of interest. Rob R.

The religion God would favor would of course be which ever one the person posting believes in. I believe if there truly is a God, he/she, or it would be represented by all religions and none. Each faith would have interpreted God in their own way and yet none would be able to adequately grasp such a powerful being.

Rob..My concept of God has no religion. My God is the positive energy, power, goodness of the universe. The light.

Greetings Bloggers, I'm a bit uncertain if I can start a new subject line on this page or whether I'm required to only offer a comment on the existing subject. Perhaps someone will move me on to the right area and advise if I am out of line here. I was scrolling through 'old' Third Age emails and came across Jill Fallon's comments on Sept 29th 2006 concerning Reason and Faith and find myself largely in agreement with them. My view is that Philosophy and Science are the two ends of the same stick each using its own terminology while reluctantly edging towards the middle. So with this as background I have a couple of questions : Can anyone tell me which religion God would favour and why? Are there any comments on the concept of a religionless God? regds Rob R

My son's (I was 42 when he was born) first grade teacher told he she was as old as dirt when he asked her age. He said,"My Mom is 100,000 years old." LOL I told her, when she told me about it, that I sure hold my age well. Smoking and stress were my greatest enemies. I don't let other people define who I am. Sincerely, Linda

You are SO right, Craig! I can remember my grandmother absolutely insisting that I stand up straight. "You'll thank me someday!" And I do. That is also one of the good things about dancing...like even ballroom...posture very important! Nothing says, "OLD!" like the bent over shuffle. In dance, we teach, "pretend someone has a string right in the center of your lower breast bone...pulling it." Your spine, your shoulders all fall into proper place. Thanks for bringing it up.

Susan-- Great stuff. Though I've just received my AARP card, I've been there. This is a bit off-point, but one thing I've noticed is how much the appearance of youth or age is affected by posture. I play a "how-old?" game by watching people walk from a distance, like across a parking lot or from an office window. From that distance it's posture and gait that most affect how "young" a person projects (and by young I mean healthy, unbothered by the grind of age). I always find that those who hold themselves in good form--shoulders back, head forward, chest out, walking with some force--fool me the most by being younger than I discover they appear to be when I see them up close. Here's some good stuff on posture: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/04/16/ GR2007041600761.html {Interest revealed: I'm former editor of The Washington Post health section.) Anyhow, thanks for the story. Craig

I know how you feel. I'm always being mistaken for my sister's mother. And, yes, she gets a big kick out of it and goes on about it. I have also been mistaken for my husband's mother, twice. Those hurt. But the icing on the cake was when I ordered lunch at one of those fast food places and they gave me a senior citizens discount. I was only 45 at the time. My sister fell out of her chair laughing when I told her and wanted to know if I kept the receipt so she could save it. I too remember a day when I could turn heads. Now all I turn is a hand to help me across the street. Geez, I'm only 47.

Getting older is only a number. Do not allow others to influence how you feel about yourself. Be careful that you do not buy into the notion that we must remain perfect in our appearances. You do not want to miss what is really important in life!!

LOL, Susan....perhaps your brother looks REALlY REALLY young for his age? I suppose HE got a kick out of that as Siblings like to do! There's nothing wrong with a little nip & tuck should it bother you too much. I had a neck/jaw line lift. Love it! My husband is 12 yrs younger than me, and I was NOT going to start looking like HIS mother! Whoa!