Endless fascination with the possibility of the "afterlife" ;

I must admit i have fascination about afterlife and as op states i do endlessly. Although, my rational mind thinks otherwise. But its quite fact that our rational mind has its own limitations to percieve and know all that it could. Its limited in its own nature to concieve matters and everything that sorrounds it. Its nature of reasoning is for and against, per se duality, and its truth for matter of fact is biased and inclined to simply put phycalist.

Whilst I concur to ever running parallel practical mind i defer to meet it anywhere along the line. It does what its obliged to do while i revere to transcend for good beyond death.

I like to think we become stars in afterlife and secure our place in universe no matter how childish it may sound. Twink.

A reincarnation perhaps????

Is this thread enjoying its own "afterlife"? I am seeing names of members long departed soontobe, granjura, GandTea , Alea(oops that was me!) ....

Not endlessly fascinating though

Anne58
Please post your shocking story!

Granjura, there was me thinking you were around in 1915 [Grin]

jinglbellsfrocks Thanks, I looked at it after and thought what happened there then thought needed the brackets but too late

Square brackets need for the emotis.

Your most welcome practical and you will meet some lovely posters here

Thank you for the posters who made me welcome it's much appreciated. Anniebach, FarNorth and GandTea. wink

Ooops, yes 2015, sorry.

Reply was with GandTea about time lapse between a post and the note re being dormant being flagged up.

Maybe someone from GN could clarify this?

Apologies have been given to practical.

101 years ago Granjura?

Practical you made a perfectly sensible on-topic post and I'm baffled why anyone would have a problem with that.

Granjura , you even said you were 'out of here' why question practical's post ?

It would be from the last time the thread was posted on. Prior to Practical posting it was on the 16th March 2016, not long enough ago for it to be flagged I suspect.

Oct 1915- I'm quite sure that was long enough to be flagged up.
Maybe GN could remind us, please?

Of course- it just seemed a bit strange to me to have several threads on the same theme re-opened out of the blue by a new poster. My reply was to the 'not noticing the date' - that old threads are flagged up as such. As GandTea says, often best to re-open a new one with one's own wording perhaps.

I do apologise to practical if she felt unwelcomed by my comment.

Hi practical, just post where you choose

I doubt this thread had been dormant long enough to be flagged.

hi Anniebach I have seen that where it says dormant thread on some threads but it didn't say it on this one so I thought it was OK. So thanks for understanding

Why jump on the poster? Seems some prefer to discuss a poster than the topic of the thread

The moderators will flag a thread as dormant. If you try to re-open it you will see :-

NOTE: This is/was a dormant thread. Are you sure you want to reanimate it?

Whilst this doesn't prevent any Gner from re-opening it, many threads morph so far from the OP's theme that it is better to start a new one, IMO of course.

And that this thread is experiencing renewed life.

Who decides when a thread is dead? Posters, moderators ? Can it be they are on the forum for anyone to post on when they choose to

Shall we take this to the argument thread?

Not at all- although the GN site would have flagged up that it was an old thread and asked if she truly wanted to re-open it- even if she didn't notice the date.

Alea feeling redundant then ;)

Perhaps practical is new here and is posting on threads she's interested in. Is that a problem?