Have any of you gone to a meduim?  Was it a good or bad experience?  Did you think they had really connected?  Have you been able to find out information on your own going to focus levels?

Thanks for any input.

EileenY

I will be interested in hearing answers to this myself.  I saw an ABC news special once on George Anderson.  I had always been somewhat sceptical of people like John Edwards, who gave vague things like "letter L!"  "the number 3!"

On this special, three celebrity stars were chosen without his knowledge.  According to ABC TV there was no way he could have investigated them or planned anything.  Anyway, he sat across from one, a wreslter whose brother died, and proceeded to tell him specific information as if the brother were right there.  He was doodling mindlessly on a paper as he talked.   He related messages in complete sentences from this dead brother.  Overall, I found it to be amazing.  His readings were "as if" he were holding a conversation.  Not vague impressions from the beyond.  

I kept thinking - this must be a fraud, or he's reading their mind or something.  Then the thought - hmmmmm if its real, this guy is the best of the best.

I'd be interested in other peoples' experiences.

Matthew

There are true mediums and fake ones as there is with everything, human nature being what it is.

A very good medium is Linn at
http://www.spiritlinnusa.com/linns_forum/Index.php

Namaste,
Mairlyn ;-)

I've been fortunate to know many outstanding Mediums for some 30 years and received excellent evidence from those I've had a sitting with.

As in all walks of life, experience and practice are necessary to hone innate abilities, so as these vary, the results vary.

I also 'book' the Mediums to demonstrate at our Association and know what to look for in assessing abilities. Most Mediums are genuine and do deliver verifiable information to so many.

Currently, Gordon Smith, a fellow Glaswegian, is delivering first class, concrete evidence to folk all over the globe, often in their own language not understood by himself.

I count four mediums in my life, most 40 years ago, (whoops, now u know I'm old)

anyhoo they were all right on the money..do believe I had inner guidance to go to them. if you want a medium's counsel, then I would suggest that you offer a little prayer to be led to the right one for you, then u can be sure it will happen, to keep your eyes open to the next opportunity, as there are no coincidences to my way of thinking and to my experience. love, alysia

99.9% of mediums are hussling skum bags.

i went to see one, and i could pick her to peices, she was merely expanding on info i was giving her.

the best and only medium i have ever seen whos infomation was so accurate it could'nt have come from any other source is gordon smith, and is well work reading his books.

The VERITAS Research Program of the Human Energy Systems Laboratory in the Department of Psychology at the University of Arizona.

Look to the left of this web page:

http://veritas.arizona.edu/

From their FAQ page:

Q: Are you guys for real?

A: Yes. Our studies are conducted within a University of Arizona laboratory and have been approved by the University of Arizona Human Subjects Protection Program and an academic advisory board.  Each protocol strictly follows the scientific method and controls for alternative explanations in every possible manner.

Q: Are mediums for real?

A: Our research supports the hypothesis that individuals survive physical death (survival of consciousness) and that certain mediums can receive and convey accurate information from them.  Our research also eliminates several paranormal and non-paranormal explanations for the information mediums convey including fraud, cold-reading, general information, and telepathy.  However, to date, the research also supports other less plausible paranormal hypotheses, such as super-psi (discussed in several essays on our recommended information page).  

Q: I'd like to receive a private reading from a medium. Can you recommend one?

A: The Program cannot recommend specific mediums for readings outside of the laboratory, but a list of mediums who have successfully participated in studies within the Mediumship Communication Research Project and are willing to provide readings for private clients are listed on the Research Mediums link.

I believe (I didn't look again) that their research reveals an 80% accuracy rate for the legitimate mediums tested. My experience is that this is about right.

I would be careful about who you choose. I would also avoid dependency.

Rob

Actually, we are all our own mediums. We have all knowledge inside of us.

Namaste,
Mairlyn

I should have mentioned that Mediumship varies enormously in its manifestations.
Gordon is a 'mental' medium, relaying retrospective information, that is currently understood by the sitter.

This is Mediumship as it is generally understood.

There are also several types of physical Mediumship, in which deceased friends and relatives try, with varying success - conditions again - to reproduce something of their former body, e.g. voice, as 'evidence' of their continuing existence.

This type of Mediumship is a wee bit rarer due to the much stricter conditions required for it and is seldom open to inexperienced sitters, because of the need to safeguard the Medium's wellbeing.

The best known example of this type is termed 'Transfiguration', a specialised type of sitting during which  deceased folk are able to (with help from the Higher Realms) reproduce their former facial appearance.
Conditions again determine the quality of the outcome. (I have seen spectacles and moustaches 'appear' to clinch identification, when these were ideal).

'Direct Voice' Mediumship is regarded as the ultimate.
This involves Spirit personnel constructing a temporary 'voice box' which is utilised by deceased folk to speak to their loved ones, replicating tone, accent, language, etc., exactly as they formerly spoke.
Very, very rare, I've not had the pleasure of this experience, nor do I know of such a Medium. working in this way, although I hear of them.

Spiritual Healing is another specialised type of Mediumship, attempting to bring comfort and betterment to those who seek it. Spiritual Healing Mediums often can combine it with 'inspirational speaking', which is another form of 'mental mediumship', in which illumined thought is relayed via the Medium, as a help or to offer guidance to an individual currently in need of an understanding of some aspect of Life. The degree of temporary control varies with the qualities of mind, education and general knowledge of the Medium.

There is also another kind of Mediumship which does not lend itself to public display, but which has a deep, long-term impact.
This kind works in advance of our present time (demonstrating that 'time', as we understand it, does not exist universally, perhaps?)
I know folk who have had such a 'future' sitting who were told of the greatest, unlikeliest, impossible turns of events in their lives - which did in fact, occur in the sequence and way it was stated they would.
The Medium experiences tomorrow as if it were yesterday - while they are working.
They may not know how far ahead they are seeing - in the case I refer to, it was 18 years ahead.

All Mediumship is aimed at offering evidence that Life is deathless and every human individual survives it intact - enhanced in most cases - and retain their individual knowledge, memory, abilities, etc., in their fuller, next chapter of their same lifel

There is much all around us that so many do not have the merest inkling of.

I don't know if many of you are familiar with Harry Houdini, the famous magician.

He was very close to his mother and at her death he went to great lenght to find a medium that could give him information from his mother. He had a special question that only him and his mother knew which he asked all the known mediums around.

He proved that all of them where fraud.

When he died, he made an agreement with his wife.  That if it was possible to contact her from the other world he would do it. And they had agreed upon a sign to confirm this.

No one ever was able to do this.

"A sucker is born every minutes!" Let's try not to be one!

I'm giving this example because it is, in my view, the starting point for an honest discussion. Let's start with the premisses that almost all of them are fraud and are in it for the money.

That leaves us with a very limited possibility of legitimate mediums (channeled etc...).

I think we can agree that Edgar Cayce was one, there was another one called Ian Borts. The later was taken to court for medical malpractice...which he WON. He was a Cayce type of channel. He called it "The Speakers" with which he exchanged. You could say like an energy exchange...whatever.

There's probably a few others that are well documented.

An honest medium, channel, should accept to be chalenged.

Cayce was, as Borts and as Seth.  

Bruce Moen here said to prove it to YOURSELF. And everyone here knows that he himself had a difficult time to accept his own experiences.

Otherwise we are accepting information with "blind faith".  We HAVE TO QUESTION before considering if the person is legitimate, credible.

We also accept what resonate with US. Why?  Because we are the only one in charge of OUR life, and we have to follow ourself. What resonate within us is what we are to follow and accept. No one else knows what we need better than ourselves. TRUST!

And that means that it's OK to question the ideas of others. Like I said...there's no wrong or right in this. Only your own awareness, your own consciousness...your own freedom.

It's rather peculiar isn't it that so many channellers flowerished after Jane Roberts' death ?  And they are all surfing on the Seth information. Granted, they had a little touch of themselves, but the core is Seth's.

To be well understood here, let me say that I am NOT trying to convince anyone about Seth. I am also NOT saying that all the others are fraud.

But it is healthy to ask legitimate questions.

We expand our awareness through experiences. And thus, ALL sources of information are valuable. Even from a fraud. Because information comes to us from everywhere, casual conversation, books, discussions...everywhere!

We get answers to our questions this way. Some call it synchronicity!  

You can read a medium's transcript and learn something. An explanation that resonate with you, that makes sense to YOU, the answer you were looking for.

We just have to be aware that not all information is to be accepted blindly.  

My two cents!

I agree and have no experience of the afterlife as yet. As far as OBE's I do believe in them purly because I have done them and gotten some proof so its conencted somehow. Does make you think why can a medium not be spot on with very private stuff al the time, or something that means something, but I have seen some stuff which makes you think twice, mainly from John Edwards.

But I do believe in an afterlife as much as I can without proof, I do think some people can communicate over there, I don't think its just a question of talking, so many external influences, why is communication so hard, thats my question. And Like the Houdini incident, makes you think twice about not believing, I don't honestly think we are meant to be in contact yet for many years, not on a very open scale anyway. not sure where I read it someone gave an example about communication being like a radio frequency, and I spologize to this person It was very late and I can't remember who posted, (must go check) but I loved that, that said it all for me.

Ryan

I have never been to a medium, but have been thinking about it just out of curiosity.   There's a quite famous one not far from me (she's on TV all the time), but she just raised her rates so I'm not sure if I can afford it now.  It used to be $80 and now it's $110.  Not sure I want to spend that much money on something I'm not sure I even believe in.

The real question is not whether mediums sometimes channel paranormal information from the deceased or about the sitters.   More important is the issue of whether mediums gain this information via ESP or via genuine contact with discarnate spirits.    Two cases favor the ESP interpretation:  (1) the Gordon Davis case; (2) the Phinuit spirit control case.

(1) I've posted on the Gordon Davis case before.   Dr. Sam Soal went to a famous British medium Blanche Cooper to contact his deceased brother.  Instead, an old school buddie, Gordon Davis manifested through her.   Davis seemingly proved his identity by offering intimate details of their school life together, by using characteristic jargon (e.g. "old chap" and "confab"), and by accurately describing his house.  But in fact Davis was alive all the time and knew nothing about his channeled persona which claimed to be dead.  

Why isn't channeling discredited in this way more often?   Well, Soal had been mistakenly told that Davis was dead before he met with the medium.  Blanche Cooper apparently tapped into Soal's belief in Davis's death and used it to reconstruct Davis's persona via ESP.   If she can pull that off, how can any channeling be trusted?  I say that despite the fact that I cling to the belief that some channeling is genuine.  I'm not sure my continuing belief is well founded.

(2) Sometimes the medium's spirit control gives enough information about his past incarnation to make his claims falsifiable.   A famous British medium named Leonore Piper used a discarnate French doctor named Jean Scliville de Phinuit as her spirit control.   Phinuit eventually made enough claims about his earthly life to allow them to be decisively disproven.  Yet Piper apparently channeled deceased loved ones in a very convincing manner to the sitters, especially to investigator Richard Hodgson.    But if Phinuit never existed, why should we believe that Piper really channeled the alleged loved ones, despite the many parnormally accurate details?  It seems that Piper either gleaned this information by ESP or she was victimized by spirit impersonators.

Don

Don,

I see what you're saying.  I often think mediums are really just mind readers or are tapping into some type of energy that the deceased leave behind, but aren't really communicating with them in the afterlife.

But I have decided I have enough curiosity about this that I should do a little research myself, so I've made an appointment with a local psychic and I'll report back on what happens.

wrote on Dec 26^th, 2005 at 4:45pm:

Don, I see what you're saying.  I often think mediums are really just mind readers or are tapping into some type of energy that the deceased leave behind, but aren't really communicating with them in the afterlife. But I have decided I have enough curiosity about this that I should do a little research myself, so I've made an appointment with a local psychic and I'll report back on what happens.

try to squeeze in some specific questions, about the person you want to hear from, i think you will find you wont be able to get a word in edge ways.

anyway, good luck you may get to see one of the 0.1% with actual abilitys, and i hope you do.

good luck

                 

                  I am not here to defend Mediumship, perhaps to relate some of my own personal experiences. I practice Mediumship as I am a Psychic Medium. Let me stress that not all Psychics are mediums. Mediums are not fortune tellers either. Yes, one can perhaps read or tune into another's thoughts, but when one is alone and a spirit comes through and visits one thats not picking up discarded energy from a person who once occupied earth , but can you pick up discarded energy?,  , yes you can for its left behind in many places . I have many many personal experiences that I could tell you and again I cant make you or anyone else belive if you yourself do not have experiences such as these  of spirit communication so I can understand why folks want to belive this is all make belive or trickery. Let me relate a recent happening.  I received a phone call from a past client who was wanting to visit me  again and she said she might bring along someone but was not sure but if she did would it be ok.  I replied it would be fine. About two hours before she was due to show up, I got the familar warm spirit feeling come round me, I took notice and saw a large letter J dancing around the room, I tuned in and heard part of a first name, then saw faintly the outline of a young man in spirit , I knew for sure he had dark hair and a round face.  I spoke to this spirit and told him to please come back when my guest  arrived as I knew he was for the guest coming.  My guest arrived and brought a friend with her, I looked at her friend for I felt a strong pull towards her and asked , do you know anyone in spirit who is a male with J ( for first name) and described him to her, yes she said that is why I am here as I felt strongly moved to come here about him. We went back to my office and this young man in spirit was chomping at the bit to speak to her ( he was a good friend of hers who had passed suddenly the previous year), he told her things she did not know nor found out till later on  <<<( not reading her mind thank you. ) I have many many experiences like this to know that we do not die and that they on spirit side are so close its like a breath away from us, we can see them and they can see us. Again, I understand that its hard for folks who have not had these kind of personal experiences to belive or understand Spirit world. linn http://www.spiritlinnusa.com

Thanks Linn,

I needed this reminder tonight.

Love, and keep up the good work, Jean :-*

Quote:

try to squeeze in some specific questions, about the person you want to hear from, i think you will find you wont be able to get a word in edge ways.

Spit man why do you distrust these mediums man?! Has one fake medium offended you in the past!

I have thoroughly researched a wide range of different  "styles" of mediumship both in person and through videos, recordings and literature.  I have trully come accross some absolute bullcrap sittings where at one point some old bat claimed that she was excreting ectoplasm when in reality it was a bloody table-cloth on some fishing wire!  Does this shake my belief in mediumship? not one bit!

I think that this cold-reading bollocks is a false lie that was created by hardcore skeptics to try and shame the mediums into quiting their proffession and as with all haters of the paranormal at the slightest hint of fraud these people will jump on any "misgivings" that they may or in many cases may not find.

Most skeptics fly on the "accuracy" ratings of these mediums.  in Prof Schwartz's and the Scole Experiments the meduims that were tested always scored a rating of 80% accuracy or more.  Schwartz added later in this study that the chances of these folk cold=reading and guessing these answers ar trillions to one.  Frauds spitfire?! I dont think so man!  As with anything on this earth (apart from me lol) nothing can be 100% perfect all of the time I believe the same applies to mediums.  Like you or me, they can have their "off-days" and to a suspicous person this may seem like fraud and that is absolutely justified.

My mum used to often visit a british medium called Mr Gary Dakin, I do not know if he is still using mediumship for a profit as my mum has not seen him for 6 years.  When my mum visited him for the 1st ever time I went with her to the initial reading and a cassette tape was made.  Being very suspicous at the time both me and my mum gave next to NO information to this medium and nobody from our family or friends had passed away recently.
Mr Dakin was able to "get" my dead grandfather spot on, even summarising that he had a slight limp with his left leg! Which was true for the 8 months up until his passing because of a major stroke.
Dakin also nailed information about my dead grandmother at the same tame, again I swear on my wee nieces life that he recieved the information straight away with no guessing whatsoever.  Later on in the reading he also managed to give immaculate portayals of some of my mum's dead cousins and relatives, even discribing a letter which my mum has from my great auntie!

Now I know as everyone else knows on this forum that as in every human profession there are corrupt sheisters who are out to cream as much moolah as possible whilst conning innocent people out of their money, but you need to experience GENUINE clairaudience mediumship that is done 100% free at a spiritualist church.  What you will witness is nothing short of incredible.

Now if he is a fraud Spitfire, and it is a BIG if, How is  he one?

wrote on Dec 26^th, 2005 at 8:09pm:

My mum used to often visit a british medium called Mr Gary Dakin, I do not know if he is still using mediumship for a profit as my mum has not seen him for 6 years.  When my mum visited him for the 1st ever time I went with her to the initial reading and a cassette tape was made.  Being very suspicous at the time both me and my mum gave next to NO information to this medium and nobody from our family or friends had passed away recently. Mr Dakin was able to "get" my dead grandfather spot on, even summarising that he had a slight limp with his left leg! Which was true for the 8 months up until his passing because of a major stroke. Dakin also nailed information about my dead grandmother at the same tame, again I swear on my wee nieces life that he recieved the information straight away with no guessing whatsoever.  Later on in the reading he also managed to give immaculate portayals of some of my mum's dead cousins and relatives, even discribing a letter which my mum has from my great auntie!

cold readings are as good as most mediums. Ive seen it done.

the psychic medium i saw, got my grandfather coming through, she said he was standing next to her, she said he liked fish and chips, he was a good man, well respected, and that he was watching over me. i was very drawn in, but i played the tape back later, and i could have placed the infomation she gave me about any old person. She said about me, that she could see the police at my door in a few days, no doubt because i was only 17, and she thought i was there becuase i was in trouble with the law.

think about your grand father. bad leg? every old person gets ailments and they slow down, joints get stiff and almost all get problems at the end with moving about.

about the scole experiments, ive read that book from start to finish, and i loved it, until the last few pages, when people from the "future" were tapping into the experiment, and so they had to shut it down.......really put a dampner on it. Just sounds to convienent.

theres only 1 medium, ive ever seen who ive total and without doubt believed, and that is gordon smith. He makes any other mediums look like first year students. He's well work looking up.

Yes you have a point but he also gave other information to me and my mum that could not of been guess work.  If he was fraudulent then he must of got a PI to follow my mum and my family and research them.  I can honestly say he idnt becuase we arranged to meet him with an hour to spare.  He was able to give very very accurate details that he could not of possibly even attempted to guess at.

Im goin to hunt down the tape (if my bro hasnt rubbed it off) and listen to it very carefully and apply the technique that u said in your last post and will see if it makes sense

Linn, thank you for this. I don't understand why so many here on this forum have to argue about so many things. I guess they have lonely lives and nothing else to do. If only they realized that doing service to others will open them up so much to LOVE.

I want to be like you Linn when I grow up.  ;D

Much Love,
Mairlyn   ;D

I have attended scientific experimental meetings organised by the Scottish Society for Psychical Research (SSPR)... www.sspr.org.uk/

Each member of the voluntary audience is seated randomly. This is all decided and carried out by the SSPR folk.
The Medium for the evening's event is chosen by the SSPR and not announced by name, nor are they ever within sight of the audience.

An occupied seat is randomly pre-chosen by the SSPR folk, is not announced and indicated by gesture.

The person in this seat is the object of the reading.

The Medium cannot know who they are reading for, eliminating 'cold-reading'.

The Medium is then asked to link with the higher side and state what evidence is apparently coming forward for the occupant in the chosen seat.

The recipient responds only by nodding - the SSPR folk verbally informing the Medium only if the response is affirmative or negative. The Medium works 'blind'  throughout.

The information offered - statements, no questions allowed - is usually about 20-25 pieces of information, is recorded along with the responses.

Next, a copy of the statements is photocopied and each person present given a copy and asked to write their own response to the statements.

At the end of these proceedings, an informal show of hands (if time allows) show that only a few of the Mediums statements apply to only a few folk, but some 80 plus % apply to the recipient.

This type of test has been carried out in various countries  among various people at different times.

The number crunching is also carried out by different specialised groups and is coded to preserve the triple-blind element.

Over many years the Mediumistic 'hit' rate is consistently in excess of 80%.

The Society is run under the direction of Professor Archie Roy, Emeritus Professor of Astronomy, Glasgow University.

wrote on Dec 26^th, 2005 at 11:11pm:

Linn, thank you for this. I don't understand why so many here on this forum have to argue about so many things. I guess they have lonely lives and nothing else to do. If only they realized that doing service to others will open them up so much to LOVE. I want to be like you Linn when I grow up.  ;D Much Love, Mairlyn   ;D

Mairlyn, you must be totally devoid of "LOVE" since ive never seen you peform a service for anyone other then yourself or those who fit into your way of thinking.

You believe everything, you would probley put your hand in a fire if someone told you.

To ask questions, is to stop false hope, tragic incidents and bad actions, to many times has "i was told so", "i was following orders" been used to justify acts which have ultimatly lead to the pain of yourself and others.

Those who dont question, are merely fools.

On the contrary, Spitfire, she absolutely does NOT believe everything.

It will be difficult for you to fully appreciate this until you are much older, but she did not arrive at her conclusions lightly or without experience, often painful. This is better understood by those who have such experience and accordingly are less inclined to judge by appearances.

Profound things pregnant with meaning do not have to be stated academically or otherwise at length. Often they can be stated very simply by those who have enough experience to do this, and appreciated by those who have eyes that see.

Rob

wrote on Dec 27^th, 2005 at 9:01am:

On the contrary, Spitfire, she absolutely does NOT believe everything. It will be difficult for you to fully appreciate this until you are much older, but she did not arrive at her conclusions lightly or without experience, often painful. This is better understood by those who have such experience and accordingly are less inclined to judge by appearances. Profound things pregnant with meaning do not have to be stated academically or otherwise at length. Often they can be stated very simply by those who have enough experience to do this, and appreciated by those who have eyes that see. Rob

Age does'nt make you wise, and about painful experiences, ive probley had more of those then anyone on this board, is likely to ever have. so therefore does that make me qualified to tell you how you should live your life?.

I have had many readings over the years from Various Mediums. 99% of them have Robbed me and gave me Readings which I consider Cold Reading....

However, I have been lucky enough to find One Medium who was The Real Deal and it cost me NOTHING. This Wonderful Woman gave me a free reading while I was attending a Seminar for Direct Voice at My first Seance.

The things I was told left me in no doubt that My Mother,Father and Sister were relaying messages to me. The things that were said were so significant that it could not be dismissed.

Names were given and were all correct. The medium even named my father by his first name when he came through. Lucky Guess??? No way!! She even sang a small song what my father was famous for in the family.

I am off to another seance in March where there have been Spirits materialise. I would love to share this experience with any of you who may be interested when I have witnessed it. I am also attending another one May.

Once you have been to one...You get quite addicted!! ;D It is so fascinating.
Val xxx

After the loss of my daughter and not knowing really having much in the way of any beliefs. My family has had about 5 readings in the past 4 years. One with George Anderson, that was awesome. We had one with Suzane Northrop, and that was amazing. Another with Robert Brown, again just mindblowing, Went to see John Edwards at a seminar, we didn't get read, but my friend did in a crowd of over 3,000 people and it was very good. We had 2 readings from an unknown medium and she was fantastic. After each one of these readings, I came away with something to believe in. There were so many validations and none of them could have known anything beforehand.
Hope this helps!
Aras =)

Spitfire,

Since I have spent most of my adult life in my nation's military, I have spent most of it with people in the 17- 25 age group. I tend to be defensive on their behalf towards their elders because I have seen what they can do and are doing every single day. However, I have learned that experience does contribute mightily towards wisdom, that mature people don't necessarily come straight out and tell you everything they've been through, and they tend not to waste much of their time on those who refuse to listen. Paying attention and truly listening are two very different things, btw.

As for who had been through what, I hardly think you have been through more than I have, even if we were to stop at when I turned 19 years old. Few have. I stopped describing my non-childhood to others long ago because they often accused me of making it up. Suffice to say that statistically I should be dead or in prison, and that's just for starters. I discern that there are others on this board who could say the same.

While being far from perfect, I have, mostly, learned not to be so rebellious against authority, not to make sweeping assumptions of those I hardly know, and to appreciate the subtlety of the wisdom of my elders. Most of the time, anyway.

Experience doesn't, by itself, make you wise. However, I have yet to see someone who is wise who lacks it. I have never encountered a very young person who is truely wise. Some who were wise for their age, yes, but not wise amoung muture adults.

Marilyn's wisdom is shown by her patience. She refuses to respond to your gross insults to her integrity and sanity. She refuses to try to 'straighten you out' because she readily recognizes that you are not one who listens very well. Me, being a younger fool than she is, am not so sure. You, being an even younger fool, no doubt will prove me wrong.

Rob

Paying attention and listening, are two different things, the only difference is by truely listening it means you care about whats being said.

i would like to know what you have been through upto 19, in terms of physical pain.

the reason you dont rebel against authourity, is because the army has programmed you that way.
you dont make sweeping assumptions? yet you compare me to 17-25 year olds form the army?
everyone makes assumptions all of the time, most just dont voice them as to not upset anyone.

Experience can make you wise, i said age does'nt, thinking just because your older then i am, does'nt give you a card indicating your right.

if a young person has mass's of experience does'nt that make them wise? if you played a 14 year old kid on a game console who do you think would win? would'nt that make the younger person wise in the area of video games?

Marilyn likes to make statements against others, without saying it to them directly, based on her own beliefs of what makes the world tick.

Gross insults? did i swear or call her names? no, i simply stated a fact and the consequences of it. Nothing more nothingless.

While i admire you sticking up for her, i dont think she needs it, shes a big girl, she should be able to handle a few negative comments from a young whipper snapper.

Spitfire,

Programmed by the army? What experience do you have in any army to make such an assertion?

Aside from the obvious insult, please explain the factual basis of the following statement you made to Marilyn:

"You believe everything, you would probley put your hand in a fire if someone told you."

Rob

I'm sure Marilyn will let me know if she doesn't want me to engage you on this matter, being the 'big girl' you say she is, not having looked at her pic and failing to be sensitive to a woman about her weight, all-knowing man that you are, knowing all about what to say to and about a woman and so forth. Good choice of words, old boy. But then reckless choices of words seems to be your forte.

wrote on Dec 27^th, 2005 at 4:02pm:

Spitfire, Programmed by the army? What experience do you have in any army to make such an assertion? Aside from the obvious insult, please explain the factual basis of the following statement you made to Marilyn: "You believe everything, you would probley put your hand in a fire if someone told you." Rob I'm sure Marilyn will let me know if she doesn't want me to engage you on this matter, being the 'big girl' you say she is, not having looked at her pic and failing to be sensitive to a woman about her weight, all-knowing man that you are, knowing all about what to say to and about a woman and so forth. Good choice of words, old boy. But then reckless choices of words seems to be your forte.

Ive spent the past year in a TA commando unit, so i have a small glimpse into the way army molds people into soldiers, nothing on your calibor most likely, but still a i ahve a simple understanding of what the process makes you into.

that statement i said, is accurate.

and you took the words "big girl" as me having a pop about her weight, i find that quite laughable. as it was a quote to meen shes fully grown, and can defend herself without the need of a body guard.

Since you failed to answer my questions about wisdom and age, i will assume that you cannot counter it.

Anymore constructive coments are welcome, but dont accuse me of things which i did not do.

My goodness, all this going on and I was unaware of it.  My grandchildren were here today so I was with them.

I won't try to defend myself as I know that nothing I say will make spitfire think any differently of me. To each his own. I AM THAT I AM, a spark of God. So is everyone, but so many don't realize this.

Bob, thank you dear soul for defending me. It's very endearing to me.

One thing...................I am still learning too. The search for knowledge never stops.

In Spirit of ONE,
Mairlyn ;-)

  Hi there Spitifire,

 You seem angry at life, and it seems you have much good cause and have experienced much pain because of life.

 I can relate to that, probably not to the degree you have experienced...

 But can you relate to letting this anger, frustration, and pain go?  

 Its a heavy load to bare, and in the long run you're only really hurting yourself.

 Look at it from a purely physical standpoint...

 Stress, anger, frustration, sadness all are known to have a negative affect on the body, and when someone feels one of these negative emotions strongly, toxins are created and released into the body's system (like adrenalin is actually somewhat toxic to a body).

 This eventually weakens your body, and/or your mind.  My guess is that you want to keep both both strong, for as long as possible?

 Because you enjoy the physical, and don't think there is much beyond it?

 Well, for your own health, why not get a little more harmonious?  

 It may sound like lip service, but i truly care about you, and i've had a similar life pattern i.e. bad experiences with doctors, and health, etc.

 And some people here, do really practice and believe in what they preach like Blink for instance...and who cares if it is just a comforting mechanism...again even science is beginning to see the benefits behind the comforting mechanisms of believing in "Love", in meditating and stilling the mind and emotions.

 If you meditate daily, you can eventuallly become Super Spit Fire!   Seriously from one misfit to another.  

 Just try it out for awhile, what have you got to lose, your body and mind only have strength to gain from it.

 I wish you well on your journey, and while some people are a bit hypocritical sometimes, how much good does it do to point it out constantly in such a harsh manner?  

 I fell into this trap for a bit, and i certainly had a lot more reason then you...there was a lot more deeper emotions involved, but either way, it didn't do any good on either side.

 Again, positive emotions=strong body and mind, and negative emotions=developing weaknesses in both.   You seem like a smart guy, do the math, and make the common sense, more practical choice.

Take care S. F.

While i apprecaite you trying to help me, i am only harsh with some people on this board, because there beliefs dont match there actions.

Im not angry at life itself, but purely with a few people who intend to seek revenge on, an eye for an eye etc.

Anger you will find to be a wonderful motivator, it gives you drive.

Blink is great, for she is the only person on this board who i know lives by her beliefs.

I dont believe in love, for when the brain is damaged all sense of love goes with it.

well im glad someone else said people are hypocritical, they do it all the time. And you are right i probley should'nt give them such a pasting, but it gets on my wick.

Humankind is not perfect - we can only improve ourselves.

[quote author=gerald link=board=afterlife_knowledge;num=1135369614;start=0#9 date=12/26/05 at 07:24:26]I don't know if many of you are familiar with Harry Houdini, the famous magician.

He was very close to his mother and at her death he went to great lenght to find a medium that could give him information from his mother. He had a special question that only him and his mother knew which he asked all the known mediums around.

He proved that all of them where fraud.

When he died, he made an agreement with his wife.  That if it was possible to contact her from the other world he would do it. And they had agreed upon a sign to confirm this.

No one ever was able to do this.

"A sucker is born every minutes!" Let's try not to be one!

I'm giving this example because it is, in my view, the starting point for an honest discussion. Let's start with the premisses that almost all of them are fraud and are in it for the money.

That leaves us with a very limited possibility of legitimate mediums (channeled etc...)....
--------------------------------------------------------
Greetings,
Maybe it depends on the motives of the sender?
Some spiritual contacts need a connection:
A friend of mine and I heard about the Houdini attempt and agreed that we would attempt the same contact when one of us died. We were about 12 YO at the time and kept in touch for 10 years. When I was in my 50s another friend with the same first name died. One afternoon I was deep in thought about her (Nancy 2). My thoughts turned into a dialogue which Nancy said we'd planned to do, but I didn't recall such a plan with Nancy 2.  Nancy insisted she had been fatally hit by a truck. I decided to humor the idea, thinking Nancy 2's injuries from a brain tumor might have seemed like getting hit by a truck. Nancy became irritated with my attitude of disbelief and abruptly pulled away, ending our visit. --Later I heard from a childhood friend that Nancy 1 had been killed by a truck abit previous to that 'dialogue.'
I interpret all that as a visit from a friend who was recently deceased, who I hadn't seen in decades but who was holding me to the Houdini promise---?

wrote on Dec 28^th, 2005 at 4:38am:

While i apprecaite you trying to help me, i am only harsh with some people on this board, because there beliefs dont match there actions.

Can I just say Spitfire fair enough if this is your belief let them people go on about it and don't let it get to you, have the last laugh to yourself knowing that they are doing this.

I'm saying this because its not just directed at you but topics here are turning into who can throw more insults. you know, people have been pushed away from here, some really good people who helped make this board what it once was, a loving community. That doesn't mean we can't disagree and everyone has to project PUL, but just a place where we can talk, share, laugh and make some friends. instead its a place where every topic by the time you get to the end of it and become a slagging match.

I'd just like to point one thing out... this topic started because EileenY ask about our past experiences of mediums and were they any good, and I must admit some of this has been answered....but it got personal so look where it is now....my point exactly.

Ryan

wrote on Dec 28^th, 2005 at 9:17pm:

Can I just say Spitfire fair enough if this is your belief let them people go on about it and don't let it get to you, have the last laugh to yourself knowing that they are doing this.

I hear yea, i wont "point" out anything anymore, but can we have a rule saying that every post must contain 90% proof?

When you described that you were deep in thought, you are giving an example of the method Bruce calls the imagination technique or "pretending".

I'm not saying that all mediums, channellers, and what have you, are frauds. But I'm convinced that the vast majority of them are.

Houdini knew all the tricks, and he exposed all of the well know mediums of the time after many years of investigating. He didn't find ONE that was legitimate

He made the front page of many newspapers with the results of his investigations.

The problem is for the people who believe and follow the advices given from frauds.  

Just look at all the supposed mediums, channellers around today and the money involved.

Just before Jane Roberts died, (Seth) she and her husband were afraid that this would happen. All sort of "Seth-clones"  rushing in. Same with Cayce and others. They smell the money. Isn't it suspicious that so many "Seths" flowerishes right after Jane's departure?

We are all, myself included, gullible when we search for life's answers. We are hungry to know and willing to listen.  Which exposes us to be abused.

Isn't it odd that we shop before buying a TV or a car and we accept so rapidly a channeller?

It is legitimate to challenge, to question those who place themselves as mediums, channellers etc.  Discriminate !

All of them should be chalenged and have to prove their say. Why should we accept on faith alone? And if they refuse, get out of there!  

This is why I have mentionned that TRUST is the most important thing we have.  Trust in ourselves, always be on guard with theses entities supposedly here to enlightened us.  Especially when there's money involved.

Some asks 250$ US for a session. At four sessions a day this is a nice sum of 260,000$ per year. ;D  


Some people develop cult-like attitude. They will defend, justify, any mistake the medium, channeller (etc.) will do. They will find answers and explanations for everything.  Because, of course, the Entity "KNOWS" why he did this and that, and we shouldn't question this.

I know what this is all about...I've been there!


--------------------------------------------------------
Greetings,
Maybe it depends on the motives of the sender?
Some spiritual contacts need a connection:
A friend of mine and I heard about the Houdini attempt and agreed that we would attempt the same contact when one of us died. We were about 12 YO at the time and kept in touch for 10 years. When I was in my 50s another friend with the same first name died. One afternoon I was deep in thought about her (Nancy 2). My thoughts turned into a dialogue which Nancy said we'd planned to do, but I didn't recall such a plan with Nancy 2.  Nancy insisted she had been fatally hit by a truck. I decided to humor the idea, thinking Nancy 2's injuries from a brain tumor might have seemed like getting hit by a truck. Nancy became irritated with my attitude of disbelief and abruptly pulled away, ending our visit. --Later I heard from a childhood friend that Nancy 1 had been killed by a truck abit previous to that 'dialogue.'
I interpret all that as a visit from a friend who was recently deceased, who I hadn't seen in decades but who was holding me to the Houdini promise---?


[/quote]

I accept your view Gerald but there are some very famous past and present mediums who are not money making frauds.

Some like Spitfire's favourite and many other less-known mediums such as the late Doris Stokes from the UK have been proven to be 100% genuine in their ability.

Stokes even would not accept any money or donations whgen she toured England FOR FREE!  Money grabbing? I ne think so mate

Permit me to correct you. I have never stated that every single medium is a fraud.

quote from my post:
I'm not saying that all mediums, channellers, and what have you, are frauds. But I'm convinced that the vast majority of them are.

Problem is that most people are so impressed that they will not challenge them with very personal question for example. What I'm saying is that we should not accept them so easily. If they are here to help us, then they should be able to face solid questions.

For example, Jane Roberts who channeled Seth accepted to have a session with a famous psychologist who asked many difficults questions to Seth in his specialized "jargon". He wrote an affidavit afterward stating that he had been doudfoulded by Seth and he signed with his real name.

It is the least one can do when looking for a medium, a channeller or else. PUT HIM TO THE TEST.
If he is legitimate you will know.

Edgar Cayce faced that for 40 years.



wrote on Dec 29^th, 2005 at 11:49am:

Gerald thats a very pessimistic view of mediums. You can't generalize the phenomena too much as you cannot state that every single person who claims to have mediumship abilties is a fraud.

Yes I agree, but I honestly believe the mediums should be regulated in some form, perhaps with these tests implemented to stop the conartist, charlatan scum that ruin their good work and name.   In my experience with mediums the true 100% honest mediums who Ive met hate taking money off people for sittings,  my elderly neighbour is a bonafide medium and she never charges a penny for her "services"

The problem with that idea is who would enforce it, the government? not bloody likely, they're too busy scrounging oil off Iraq

Last night Larry King hosted a debate between two skeptics and 3 mediums (James Van Praagh, Char Margolis, and Svlvia Browne).  In my view, none of the combatants were convincing, but what particularly struck me was this: the mediums might have channeled deceased acquaintances of the skeptics and provided verification of their identity.  But they were too intimidated by the skeptics to submit to such a test.  They were apparently too afraid of being discredited in such a public forum.  I imagine the mediums would claim that negative vibes would prevent their gift from working in that atmosphere.   To me that excuse is unconvincing.  I think less of the mediums' alleged gifts as a result of that program.

Don

Don,

I saw the Larry King show last night as well and had the same impression.   The show was really a waste of time because all they did was yell back and forth and talk over each other.  Nothing was accomplished.  I agree it would have been interesting if at least one of the psychics had stepped up and offered to do a reading for the skeptics.   But I think King had too many guests on to speak about such a hot topic and it wasn't possible to do it in that atmosphere.  I'm not talking about negative vibes, but just that there was too much going on and it wouldn't have worked out in that setting.  He should have one psychic come back and do a reading for one of the skeptics and see what happens, but I doubt any of the psychics would agree to it.  

I agree with Gerald and the rest of you skeptics, to some extent. Believing that spiritual contact is possible shouldn't force us to accept ALL claims of spiritual contact. If we like brocolli, do we like all recipes with brocolli? :P   ?
Do we know what all the conditions are for good reception? When Mrs. Houdini missed getting HH's message from beyond, lots of blockages could happen--- maybe it was just because she was busy then. Or maybe he got busy 'up there'?
Just because we want to make contact doesn't mean the other person/soul is available at that time, does it?  But 'bad vibes' certainly dont help--how many successful contacts are made under aggravated, demanding, even violent, conditions? Has anybody heard of any?

There's one thing I would like to add to this subject.

I do not want to imply that one has to become a hard skeptic and reject everything. There has to be an openmindness, otherwise we would stay in a standoff. Evolution, expanding one's consciousness necessitate that we explore also.

In that sense, the inner signal is to trust oneself. Really.

Feel what resonate winthin you. Then go at it!

What matters is to learn and expand our consciousness, our awareness.

Don't become stagnant.

I am a new member and i find this thread very interesting. Just about two months ago i began reading Seth, i thought it was very good, but now I don't know what to think.

I read what Seth said about his Papal reincarnation, Plotinus Meglemanious, but I have been unable to find this pope.

Now, I am questioning if Seth was real or not.
Thank you for your input

*freesoul*

I understand you very well.

Here's my own two cents worth.

The ONLY criteria that you should consider is YOU.  Trust yourself in what you feel, that knowingness inside that will tell you if this is a road you can get on.

Life's experience is about expanding our awareness, our consciousness. There is not a good or a bad way to do this...only YOUR OWN. Why?  Because your experience is uniquely yours.

Trust your inner feeling. IF IT RESONATE WITHIN YOU...go for it.  If not...IT'S OK!

This is why there's so many different views, opinion, BELIEFS.  

Trust yourself!  Accept what feels right for you, this is your inner awareness (the inner-self) answering you.

Seth is mindbuggling information, quite something to digest.  It shatters a lot of beliefs.

Hope this helps you.



wrote on Dec 30^th, 2005 at 11:00am:

I am a new member and i find this thread very interesting. Just about two months ago i began reading Seth, i thought it was very good, but now I don't know what to think. I read what Seth said about his Papal reincarnation, Plotinus Meglemanious, but I have been unable to find this pope. Now, I am questioning if Seth was real or not. Thank you for your input *freesoul*

"Trust your inner feeling. IF IT RESONATE WITHIN YOU...go for it.  If not...IT'S OK!"
Greetings, freesoul,
I'm new too---this is a wonderful place!
I used to think comments like Gerald's (excuse me, Gerald) were a dodge, but I found it's what gets us on the right path. The destination is out of sight. Next year you may look back and say ' I can no longer accept this or that,' but it's because we've grown in our understanding. It's the beginning of a fantastic journey!

Thanks both of you, for your great advices...but as you said in your other posts....about testing to see if the mediums are real....how seth can be real if there was no  pope with that name?

Trust is one thing, proof is other no?

*freesoul*

No offense believe me!

You are right:  "It's the beginning of a fantastic journey!"

It's YOUR JOURNEY!



wrote on Dec 30^th, 2005 at 11:31am:

"Trust your inner feeling. IF IT RESONATE WITHIN YOU...go for it.  If not...IT'S OK!" Greetings, freesoul, I'm new too---this is a wonderful place! I used to think comments like Gerald's (excuse me, Gerald) were a dodge, but I found it's what gets us on the right path. The destination is out of sight. Next year you may look back and say ' I can no longer accept this or that,' but it's because we've grown in our understanding. It's the beginning of a fantastic journey!

That's a question YOU have to answer freesoul.  You will find that everywhere you may venture,
there will always be questions unanswered. You will have doubts.

This is where you have to trust your inner-self.

And, it is legitimate to question before KNOWING.

Remember that I said to TRUST YOURSELF



wrote on Dec 30^th, 2005 at 11:37am:

Thanks both of you, for your great advices...but as you said in your other posts....about testing to see if the mediums are real....how seth can be real if there was no  pope with that name? Trust is one thing, proof is other no? *freesoul*

Gerald,

Maybe i'm wrong but there is some indication that you know about seth material?

Do you trust that he was real even if you find contradictions like the unsearchable pope?

If you do trust seth, what makes you to trust him?

What you mean "trust yourself" if the material cannot be proven? How can I trust something what maybe a lie?

I can agree with what I read, it can make sense to me but other thing, I have read that even he was
"tested" most of the time he wasn't correct.

So then what to trust?

I'm just searching for some answers i don't like to be deceived.

*freesoul*

Yes I do know about Seth. For many reasons, that would take too long here to explain, I trust the information. Let me say that many thing he said, I had problems with, sure!

For one thing there are many other sources that I found that corroborated some of Seth's informations.

What I mean by trusting myself is just that. Suppose you are a teenager and haven't made up your mind as to what you want to be, career wise. What will you do?  You are going to look at different options, different careers that interest you. Then one will be more appealing to you and this is what you will decide to study and eventually do. What are the element involve in your choice, your decision?

This is the same.

If I would have told you then to do something else, and you had accepted, probably at one point you would still be thinking about the other career and be disapointed in having followed someone elses choice.

Since it's your life, your experience that you are living, shouldn't you do it your way?

It's the same here.  This is what I mean with : "if it resonate within you"

I felt like I had finaly found what I had searched all my life with Seth. Sort of finaly putting everything together.

Then this is MY choice. Yours can very well be different. One can choose to be a mechanic another a medical doctor, none are "wrong" or "better".

I could evolve to something else later. We are always expanding our consciousness, we are always learning, "growing".

As for your pope. Honestly I haven't even considered to look it up.

I've been "deceived" myself.  Although I consider today that no one can deceive me except myself, hence to trust myself.  It's not wether you take the "right" decision or the "right" choice that's important, it's the learning that results.

Being "deceived" doesn't matter, YOU ALWAYS LEARN.  

Trust yourself!




wrote on Dec 30^th, 2005 at 12:34pm:

Gerald, Maybe i'm wrong but there is some indication that you know about seth material? Do you trust that he was real even if you find contradictions like the unsearchable pope? If you do trust seth, what makes you to trust him? What you mean "trust yourself" if the material cannot be proven? How can I trust something what maybe a lie? I can agree with what I read, it can make sense to me but other thing, I have read that even he was "tested" most of the time he wasn't correct. So then what to trust? I'm just searching for some answers i don't like to be deceived. *freesoul*

Gerald,

Thank you for your thoughful answer and advise, i think you're more advanced then myself, you seems like have more knowledge about this things, and I think somewhat I understand you but still i have some problem with what you saying.

As I said I'm new to seth and new to this board also, but i have read this thread and something i just have to ask, not because of you, but because my own understanding, since just as anyone else i'm looking for the right path.

Trying to decide as you pointed out if I can trust some information or not...

you said

" I trust the information. Let me say that many thing he said, I had problems with, sure! "


See I have problem too, and my question to myself and for you how can you trust information what you/i have problem with?

You also said

"The problem is for the people who believe and follow the advices given from frauds."

So if you and I have a problem with the information how do you know that you/i not trusting a fraud?
i.e. if there is no pope with that name then the whole thing maybe a fraud.

You said

"  We are all, myself included, gullible when we search for life's answers. We are hungry to know and willing to listen.  Which exposes us to be abused. "


So if you trust yourself/myself how can You/I can be gullible?

You said

"All of them should be chalenged and have to prove their say. Why should we accept on faith alone? And if they refuse, get out of there!  "

That is my question about seth if he lied about the pope, then if i/you still believe it then we're gullible?

What makes you think that other people is gullible and you are not?


See just so many questions


*freesoul*

Hi Freesoul,

I don't mind answering your questions.  

But often answering questions brings up even more questions. So I sent you an email and if you want to I will answer all the questions that you want through email. If this is OK with you.

I will post a few remarks here though.

First, no one is more "advance" than another. We just are experimenting different things.

You are trying to decide if you can trust the information. I am saying to TRUST YOURSELF

As far as being gullible, deceived.  In life you go through events that you consider you where gullible and/or deceived.  Since you are the only one that "control-the-buttons"  no one can deceive you...See?  You are always the only one that can act, move, be sad, be happy...

In that sense, when I say I was gullible, its in that context. Then after many years you realize that you were the only one in "charge". You always take the decision, thus you cannot be deceived per-se.

I know today that all my experiences lead me to this point in time, and nothing was a waste of time.

You could say it was MY path.

There are frauds and peoples willing to follow. But if you trust yourself, you will either go there and learn something, or not go there because it does not "resonate" in you, you have no interest for it etc.

When you question the information from Seth with the Pope, you are doing what you have to do. Check it out, investigate and take your own decision. This is trusting yourself.  At one point you will still want to pursue OR not...then trust yourself in that choice. Because there's probably something for you to LEARN there...See?




wrote on Dec 30^th, 2005 at 2:27pm:

Gerald, Thank you for your thoughful answer and advise, i think you're more advanced then myself, you seems like have more knowledge about this things, and I think somewhat I understand you but still i have some problem with what you saying. As I said I'm new to seth and new to this board also, but i have read this thread and something i just have to ask, not because of you, but because my own understanding, since just as anyone else i'm looking for the right path. Trying to decide as you pointed out if I can trust some information or not... you said " I trust the information. Let me say that many thing he said, I had problems with, sure! " See I have problem too, and my question to myself and for you how can you trust information what you/i have problem with? You also said "The problem is for the people who believe and follow the advices given from frauds." So if you and I have a problem with the information how do you know that you/i not trusting a fraud? i.e. if there is no pope with that name then the whole thing maybe a fraud. You said "  We are all, myself included, gullible when we search for life's answers. We are hungry to know and willing to listen.  Which exposes us to be abused. " So if you trust yourself/myself how can You/I can be gullible? You said "All of them should be chalenged and have to prove their say. Why should we accept on faith alone? And if they refuse, get out of there!  " That is my question about seth if he lied about the pope, then if i/you still believe it then we're gullible? What makes you think that other people is gullible and you are not? See just so many questions *freesoul*

Gerald,

That is very kind of you, but the thing of it is, where I'm at now I would love to hear others opinion also.

Trust yourself is a very nice idea but I have a question righ now, and one of is your previous post

"All of them should be chalenged and have to prove their say."

My question is that if you trust yourself, what is it need to be tested?


I really would like to get imput from others too, then as you said I would have to decide,  because what you saying now,  make no sense to me.

Right now what i want to know if seth is real or not
can i trust the information even if there is a problem with it. or not?


*freesoul*

 moved to the Seth thread

PhoenixRa

Thank you for your informative post!  

you said:

" I am not a Seth expect by any means, have only read one entire book and skimmed other parts of other books. "

As I posted I just started reading a short while ago, but in this short time I have read about 6-7  cover to cover.

So your opinion is based on one book and the skimmed parts? What was it in one book what you didn't believe?

My complain is simple, which is that I cannot find that pope anywhere what was suppose to be seth reincarnational self, so before I go place trust in him, even i'm still reading the books, i need to know if he is real or not.


Many thing what seth provide somewhat resonate with me, but the simple question how do i know if seth lied about the pope, he doesnt lie about everything else?

Gerald said if you trust yourself then doesn't need proof, but he also said that every channeler has to be tested before you believe in it

so which is it trust or prove?  

  You mean specific info that can be verfied?  

 Its been awhile and i remember more general concepts from those books.

 Mainly my point is that there are two "channels" to compare in my example and belief systems, one has been verified from many angles from health info, to specific prophecies, to specific historical info not known but found later, to many odd bits of verfied info like during a reading making a comment on what someone was specifically doing, and then having this confirmed later.

 The other one's "verifications" are pretty sketchy and one dimensional, and some of this source's info very strongly contradicts some of the former ones most important and centrally held concepts.

 One that we all are using our Freewill to develop to a God awareness again, and that out of the thousand of Teachers to come to Earth to help in this process, Yeshua (Jesus) was one who realized the inner God self to an amazing degree and did "rise from the dead", perform instant and seemingly miraculous healings, etc.

 Jesus's pattern, life, example, is very important to the Cayce readings philosophy, and they put this Consciousness right dab in the middle as the "leader" of sorts of Soul Retrievals.

 Seth really undermines Jesus, and the depth of his life and example, and says that he was just a pretty psychic guy, and even was either part of, or aware of a plot to drugg up another Messiah like figure to take his place cause "Jesus knew that he didn't have to die"

 Seth talks about Jesus's life in at least a couple books that i'm aware of and restates these claims about him.

 I don't have more historically verifed info for you.  But when you consider the Shroud of Turin, and how accurate Cayce was and for how long, and then our historical sources which though edited and filtered are still left with a fairly accurate sketch of Jesus's life, then it might make someone wonder?

 The Shroud of Turin is the closest possible thing that we have to evidence of such an energy reaction haven taken place within a physical body.  

 Many of the strong arguments against the authenticity of the Shroud have been refuted, like the carbon dating date or the iron oxide "paint theory".  

 It seems that the consensus amongst the scientific and art world is that it is definitely not a fake or man made, but most seem to scratch their heads when asked how it was actually created.

 The Los Alamos Laboratory in New Mexico did some interesting research on the Shroud, and the physicists there could only come to the conclusion that the image was formed by a very high energy reaction, not unlike a nuclear reaction which throws off much radiation to "burn" a shadow image into physical material.

But i suppose the controversy will still rage, because in the end people believe in what they want to believe, and logic generally doesn't play such an influential role as most would like to believe.

 Me too! ;)

Hi,

The ultimate TRUTH doesn't exist anywhere, you will never find it in one place. All your search, reading etc. will get you to a point and you will change to others. Life, awareness isn't static.

You never stay in the same grade at school.

You will learn through many means, all of them will leave questions open. But you WILL LEARN.

Test a medium before going there. You will learn things that you will have to get rid of afterwards,  if he isn't legitimate.

Then, EVEN if you go there you will LEARN SOMETHING.  There's no contradiction there.

In all of this TRUST YOURSELF. This will guide you towards what YOU NEED, what resonate within you is the way to know.

We never loose our time, we learn.

If the pope information about Seth gives you a STOP sign, that's OK.  Follow YOURSELF.




wrote on Dec 30^th, 2005 at 5:57pm:

PhoenixRa Thank you for your informative post!   you said: " I am not a Seth expect by any means, have only read one entire book and skimmed other parts of other books. " As I posted I just started reading a short while ago, but in this short time I have read about 6-7  cover to cover. So your opinion is based on one book and the skimmed parts? What was it in one book what you didn't believe? My complain is simple, which is that I cannot find that pope anywhere what was suppose to be seth reincarnational self, so before I go place trust in him, even i'm still reading the books, i need to know if he is real or not. Many thing what seth provide somewhat resonate with me, but the simple question how do i know if seth lied about the pope, he doesnt lie about everything else? Gerald said if you trust yourself then doesn't need proof, but he also said that every channeler has to be tested before you believe in it so which is it trust or prove?

Gerald, i understand what you say, and i see how you speak like Elias, i have reading  Elias transcripts too, and for what i see Seth doesn't speaks about trust and those things like Elias does, and i like Elias very much too, but my question was not about trusting myself, but about how to trust the Seth material when  he so obviouisly lied.

Thank you for your advices, but already Don answered what I wanted to know, he proved that Seth lied, which i was not sure, now i know.




*freesoul*

Just a note...I do not believe Elias is legitimate.

Keep trusting yourself.




wrote on Dec 31^st, 2005 at 10:46am:

Gerald, i understand what you say, and i see how you speak like Elias, i have reading  Elias transcripts too, and for what i see Seth doesn't speaks about trust and those things like Elias does, and i like Elias very much too, but my question was not about trusting myself, but about how to trust the Seth material when  he so obviouisly lied. Thank you for your advices, but already Don answered what I wanted to know, he proved that Seth lied, which i was not sure, now i know. *freesoul*

Gerald,

I didn't ask  if you believe that elias is legitimate or not, i'm just saying that i recognize that you post as elias speaks and not how seth speaks. So far I have read 7 book from seth and yet I have not find  where he talks about  "trust"and "resonate"
what you refering too, but i find the same principles and same words in the several elias transcript what i have read in the elias site.

ELIAS: “Trust yourself. Listen to your impulses and intuition. You shall not betray yourself! Another may view that you shall betray them, within their perception; but you shall not betray yourself!” [session 101, June 24, 1996]

ELIAS: “You shall not betray you! You know within you which direction you wish to proceed within. You allow yourselves, as you do not trust yourselves, to be swayed by other individuals and circumstances and belief systems. It is quite difficult within physical focus to be trusting of self, and knowing that you shall not betray you. Individuals express, ‘Trust within the universe, and it shall provide for you.’ I shall express to you, this is not quite so far off. Trust self, and you shall provide for you.” [session 165, April 19, 1997]


I don't know what is your base to say that elias is not legitimate but  based on what Don explained  for me seth who isn't legitimate. He clearly lied.

*freesoul*

Like I said, its YOUR journey my friend.  Always follow yourself like you are doing here.

Best wishes.





wrote on Dec 31^st, 2005 at 1:15pm:

Gerald, I didn't ask  if you believe that elias is legitimate or not, i'm just saying that i recognize that you post as elias speaks and not how seth speaks. So far I have read 7 book from seth and yet I have not find  where he talks about  "trust"and "resonate" what you refering too, but i find the same principles and same words in the several elias transcript what i have read in the elias site. ELIAS: “Trust yourself. Listen to your impulses and intuition. You shall not betray yourself! Another may view that you shall betray them, within their perception; but you shall not betray yourself!” [session 101, June 24, 1996] ELIAS: “You shall not betray you! You know within you which direction you wish to proceed within. You allow yourselves, as you do not trust yourselves, to be swayed by other individuals and circumstances and belief systems. It is quite difficult within physical focus to be trusting of self, and knowing that you shall not betray you. Individuals express, ‘Trust within the universe, and it shall provide for you.’ I shall express to you, this is not quite so far off. Trust self, and you shall provide for you.” [session 165, April 19, 1997] I don't know what is your base to say that elias is not legitimate but  based on what Don explained  for me seth who isn't legitimate. He clearly lied. *freesoul*

I want to say goodbye to everyone here, and my best wishes for 2006.

I will not return here, my road leads me elsewhere.

Best wishes to all.

I've enjoyed reading your posts Gerald.

Best wishes, much love and blessings to you in your journey.

Kathy

Bon voyage, Gerald,
I regret for selfish reasons that your journey requires you to move on. I very much appreciate your comments. They sound like Truth to me. Perhaps if you came here  to talk with some of the long-time members you'd find that their conversations could keep you here.
I am new to expressing thoughts and experiences about spiritual life. I apologize if my awkward expressions soured you to this website. Everyone here seems very earnest to me (except maybe Spitfire, who is such a perfect gadfly perhaps it is just a role? ;)  ).
Have a great journey!  Bets

Gerald

" Always follow yourself like you are doing here. "

Thank you again for your valuable advise but seems like "my friend" you are the one who cannot handle a simple question,  why you talk like elias, and not seth if he is the real one to you,  but you seems like talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

good luck on your journey




*freesoul*

Thanks for the nice comments. I am not leaving because of the people here. But  to look for places who have  discussions on the concept of "You create your reality", which most of you know already, is from Seth/Jane Roberts.

This is where I am, at the moment, on my "journey".

Ah!  My friend freesoul!  I am talking as myself.

What appeals to you from Elias is what Seth first laid out.  The information was given by Seth and a crop of others are surfing on this information, Elias, Abraham, Kriss...etc.

The messager isn't that important, it's the communication that is, and if it resonate in you.

I may think Elias isn't legitimate for reasons similar to yours towards Seth. But it really doesn't matter because it's the information that's important.

You can learns from anyone.  When your "intent" is in learning, getting answers, this will bring in your life, books, people etc. answering your plea. You just have to be attentive.

But our awareness is ever expanding, so we are not stagnant. Yesterday was the Rosicrucians, before that Edgar Cayce, Robert Monroe......Tomorrow ?

When you trust yourself, you can dwelve anywhere.

Of course some of the things I accept are like Elias', because they are the same concepts that Seth first explained.

When I talk about "intent" you could say I'm talkin as Bruce Moen...and so on.

If we had a discussion, face to face, I would certainly learn from you, although we might disagree with many...see?

And my friend freesoul, I am not trying to convince anyone. I am only laying out my personal beliefs. As everyone is. I wrote about this on another thread. Yours to accept and yours to reject.

Only follow YOURSELF.

Best wishes on your journey again.

This concludes my visit here, sincere wishes to everyone.

Bye!





wrote on Jan 1^st, 2006 at 10:09am:

Gerald " Always follow yourself like you are doing here. " Thank you again for your valuable advise but seems like "my friend" you are the one who cannot handle a simple question,  why you talk like elias, and not seth if he is the real one to you,  but you seems like talk the talk but don't walk the walk. good luck on your journey *freesoul*

Gerald,

If you wish to read about intent, and thought creating reality, do not overlook Ernest Holmes, who wrote many decades before Jane Roberts and Mary.  A book entitled Science of Mind is tough reading, but worthwhile.  Also, a short book entitled "As a Man thinketh" by James Allen (asamanthinketh.net), is worth a short read.

What I have found that I don't like in the philosophy of our own thoughts creating reality is the lack of bonding with the divine, or truth.  One almost gets the idea that we are little godlings, without a moral imperative/code whose every thought becomes real, no matter what.  There is more to it than that.

This is where I disagree with some of the post-Jane Roberts ideas.  That we are not here to learn.  That we are here to experience only and to simply be and express ourselves.  I don't believe that at the present moment.  

Best wishes on your quest, Gerald.  You can PM me if you need any help finding sources on thought creating reality.  Jane Roberts may have been sincere, but if you look at Holmes and Allen who lived a century before her, you can see that if she were well read, the concepts from Seth and his subsequent spinoffs could easily have come from these great writings, and not be original.

I suppose the question then is, can we learn through direct exploration, such as Bruce describes, or do we need a channeled entity, whose every word we hang onto because we think they are an enlightened angelic being?  Its clear, I guess just by the way I have phrased that question, my friends here will know where I stand on the matter.

Best to you,

Matthew