Thanks for exploring Ruth L Miller’s site!

Ruth L Miller is an eclectic scholar with degrees in many fields of science and the social sciences and is ordained as a New Thought minister - because she keeps on seeking answers to the fundamental questions that make it possible for the spiritual beings we call humanity to live well and in harmony on this planet for generations to come.

Categories

Was the word science thrown in Science of Mind in the 1920’s to add legitimacy to the belief system? There’s not that much science to it these days…

The term “Science of Mind” was applied by the Holmes brothers to their experience and understanding of how it is that the mind can be consistently used to heal the body and change life conditions. They encountered the use of the word “science” through 2 streams of thought and work.

One was a British judge, Thomas Troward, who found in the 1880s and ’90s that when he applied the scientific method to the phenomena he was experiencing, he could derive principles that were consistently applicable. The other was a clockmaker from Maine, holder of several US patents for a variety of technologies, named Phineas Parkhurst Quimby. He, after experiencing relief from symptoms his doctors had said were incurable, undertook a 20-year study of the mind and its abilities, basically from 1832 – 1852, finally developing a method that was consistent across thousands of cases. He called it the “science of Christ” partly in the belief that it must have been the method used by Jesus as described in the New Testament, and partly because that was the only model of mental or spiritual healing known at the time. A patient of his became a student and lectured on his method of “mental healing” for several years, then, about a decade after his passing, revised the method to more directly conform to biblical narrative and  formed what is now known as the Church of Christ Scientist.

The Holmes brothers had studied with her and knew that hers was a limited and not entirely accurate doctrine, rather than an application of science, and so looked elsewhere. Continue reading Was the word science thrown in Science of Mind in the 1920’s to add legitimacy to the belief system? There’s not that much science to it these days…

Share

How will we experience life after Ascension?

There’s a lot of talk these days about the ascension of humanity, and I’m one of the people participating in that conversation. It seems to be occurring at 2 levels: for the individual and for humanity as a whole.

If we consider the stories of spiritual leaders who have left their bodies and returned in new bodies, or who, like the Teachers in Baird Spaulding’s Life and Teaching of the Masters of the Far East, we can see that for them, there is no limit on where and when they can be experiencing life. Using the power of thought and intention, and in accordance with the dynamics of resonance, they move in and out of form in different spaces and times as those experiences resonate with their current intention. Then, when the form is no longer needed for the experience, they simply walk off into a domain of formlessness. Continue reading How will we experience life after Ascension?

Share

What are Doppelgangers?

An interesting website introduces the idea and provides some possible stories of doppelgangers:  http://paranormal.about.com/od/Doppelgangers/a/doppelgangers.htm

Unfortunately, it’s a little confusing in its examples, mixing bilocation, “shades” and visions, and astral projection all together.

Bilocation, 2 full material forms of the same person in 2 different places at the same time, has been documented many times over. Some examples include:

  • Paramahansa Yogananda’s guru and his father’s guru both bilocated as a way to bring them into the fold.
  • Padre Pio has many, many documented bilocations–some in hospitals in the US while he never left Italy
Astral projection is a more accurate term for the teacher occupying the chair and working in the garden at the same time in France, or the Parliamentarian in his seat and at home with the flu. My own students (at New West Seminary) were able to project a semi-material presence–a form that could be felt or seen–to each other as class projects, and I have several friends who do so on a fairly regular basis.
Seeing one’s self in the future is not the same… that’s more like an interdimensional “shade” or “shadow”, an “echo” of an intense emotional experience that cuts across dimensions of time & space. Richard Bach plays a lot with that one in both ONE and Bridge Across Forever.
To me, a true Doppelganger fits the stories of people seeing or hearing reports of themselves doing something in the same time but different space that is not what or where they’re experiencing themselves–and with no intention of doing so.

 

Share

Someone on NPR was saying that Jewish storytelling is genetic – can that be true?

The answer to this requires several lines of reasoning.

Regarding genetics: There are 2 main genetic groups of Jews, the Sephardic and the Ashkenazic. The former are basically the same as Arabs; the latter are light-skinned caucasians (Aryans, in truth!). So there can’t be a single genetic strand among even hereditary Jews–not to mention all the Ethiopians and converts.

Regarding storytelling: It’s a basic human trait that, up till the past 50 years, has been how humans have entertained themselves on a nightly basis, and so has been selected for in most human cultures. Today, the less technological media a culture uses; the more storytelling is revered as an art. In the European/American Jewish tradition storytelling is also a part of many religious rites and ceremonies, so the Storyteller is a licensed position in the religious community, and to be one is an honor.

 So, the tendency in the European/American Jewish community is to choose a Storyteller over other possible mates–genetic selection, if you will.

 And since the rest of the European/American community could care less about the ability to tell stories, then it may be possible to say that over the past 50 years Jewish people have been both culturally and genetically selecting for storytelling while the rest of us have not.

Share