HI everyone! Im new here, so I will try to ask a quick question...Do you know anything about the channeled spirit "Elias"? I have read some things and it sounds very interesting! What are your views about it? At the same time, a session costs lots of money, then i was wondering whether it was genune or not... thanks! :) :-*

Good question.  Truth is, no one knows.  Yes, there are people who believe that he, like Seth, is some sort of highly evolved spiritual entity who tells us, via channeling, the so-called "truth" about the afterlife, not to mention God, Jesus, and a plate full of other things.

The best advice I can give is to be careful.  Always ask yourself this question when reading these sorts of materials: what is the agenda of the author?  Doesn't matter who the author is.  One thing this stuff has in common is that it always and consistently downplays God and diminishes His importance.  Same thing regarding Jesus.  

In fact, this is a good thing to do no matter what the circumstances.  Like most everything else in life, it's a case of caveat emptor.

There are several wisened entities being channeled to the faithful (usually for a profit - not prophet).  Ramtha, Seth (used to be), and others.  Often there are thousands of sessions, so these entities or their channelers really do like to talk.  Some will give readings for a fee (hey those channeling have to eat too).

As to Elias, I can not speak about him or Mary the one who exchanges energies (channels).  All, I can say is that I, myself got a bad vibe from the website (watching a video of the channeling), and from occasional Elias disciples who inflicted their venomous stings on me a year or so ago in this forum.  

The thing about taking down everything that a channeled entity might say is that it is decidedly different than exploring on your own.  You end up being able to quote chapter and verse about the cosmos, our purpose in being, etc....but you don't necessarily FEEL it or have your own personal transcendant epiphany.


Matthew

If he's anything like Seth, forget it.

On the one hand you have fundamentalists who believe that anything new agey is satan.

On the other hand you have people who consider anything new agey a joke without really knowing.

On the other hand you have people who assume just about any new age source is legit simply because a few interesting things are said, and Kumbaya, and the likes of Jane Roberts/Seth prey on such people.

In one session, Elias actually claims that Jesus was never crucified, but rather died in Macedonia in his 40s!   Hey, that means St  Paul might have had a beer with Jesus when he arrived in Philippi in Macedonia.  I wonder why Paul never mentions this since he implies that he never met Jesus in the fliesh.  Duh!  Elias's channel, Mary, is either a con lady or  a deluded New Ager who might serve as the perfect guru for gullible historical illiterates.

Don

Berserk wrote on Apr 16^th, 2007 at 4:37pm:

In one session, Elias actually claims that Jesus was never crucified, but rather died in Macedonia in his 40s!   Hey, that means St  Paul might have had a beer with Jesus when he arrived in Philippi in Macedonia.  I wonder why Paul never mentions this since he implies that he never met Jesus in the fliesh.  Duh!  Elias's channel, Mary, is either a con lady or  a deluded New Ager who might serve as the perfect guru for gullible historical illiterates. Don

Yeah, Don is right for once.. LOL j/k..

Regarding Seth/Jane Roberts and their denial of the crucifixion, here's what they had to say. They used the gospels to feebly attempt  to prove their point, so there in no need for people who don't believe in the gospels to remove them from the argument. I'm far from being a Biblical expert, yet I could see the inconsistencies.

They claim that Jesus wasn't crucified, but instead Judas arranged to have a mentally disabled person drugged so he could be crucified instead of Jesus. This was done without Jesus knowing about it.

a. If this is the case, why did Jesus tell his disciples during the last supper that somebody would betray him and then referred to Judas?
b. If he could know about a betrayel, couldn't he know about a plan to have an imposter crucified in his place? Would he allow such a thing to take place?
c. Wouldn't some key people realize that somebody other than Jesus was being crucified?
d. What kind of wonder drug did Judas find that enabled him to convince a mentally disturbed man that he was Christ?

Jane Roberts/Seth claim that Jesus was a great psychic and had wounds appear on his hands so that when he returned to his disciples they would know it was him. Wouldn't they know if he had left their presence?  And again, if Jesus was a great psychic, wouldn't he know about the hoax?

The above is from Seth Speaks. In another Jane Roberts/Seth book, the one with the photos, they completely contradict themselves by stating that the crucifixion wasn't a physical event but something that happened at the "dream level."

If Seth/Jane Roberts attacked the reputation of Christ directly people might be detered to read what they have to say. So instead they speak as if Christ is the Mesiah, but state insulting things about him.  In the books "Seth speaks" and "A nature of a personal reality; in addition to the denial of his crucifixion, they attack his reputation by completely twisting the meaning of three of his most famous sayings. For example, when it comes to the saying love your neighbor as yourself, they said that Jesus was just making a joke because nobody loved their neighbor as themselves at the time. If the obviousness of the true interpretation isn't clear, all one has to do is read the other verses that surround the verse in question, and it is very clear that he meant love your neighbor as yourself. The below is from the Sermon of the Mount.

 43 "You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
 44But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.


Some people say the Elias is a Seth copycat. If he does things like deny the crucifixion he certainly sounds like one. When you deny the crucifixion you deny the faith of so many people.

What I find odd is that some people like channelled sources that afirm the crucifixion, plus they like channeled sources that deny it. It doesn't even matter if deniers contradict each other. For example the Matthew readings (the lady who supposedly channels her deceased son) says that Jesus was whipped and then allowed to go, and Jane Roberst/Seth say their substitution nonsense.





Berserk wrote on Apr 16^th, 2007 at 4:37pm:

In one session, Elias actually claims that Jesus was never crucified, but rather died in Macedonia in his 40s!   Hey, that means St  Paul might have had a beer with Jesus when he arrived in Philippi in Macedonia.  I wonder why Paul never mentions this since he implies that he never met Jesus in the fliesh.  Duh!  Elias's channel, Mary, is either a con lady or  a deluded New Ager who might serve as the perfect guru for gullible historical illiterates. Don

Their was a funny Seinfeld episode I believe, where they were talking about mentors.  Being a mentor or being mentored.  In some ways, those who need a channeled source and hang on every word, are looking for this mentor relationship.  They may remember the dictated material better than the channelers.  It is difficut, Albert to have a conversation with one who follows a channeler, for often, rather than engage in a meaningful exchange, they quote chapter and verse from Seth or Elias back at you.  I remember this vividly, when I spoke with one of the Elias followers here, who objected to my use of the word "channeling," and insulted me saying it was clear that I didn't understand a thing about "essence."  I begged to differ, but then was quoted Elias' statements on essence.  Ah, I see.  Refer to the 656th session paragraph 7.  So I didn't really understand the concept of essence if it wasn't as Elias meant it.  

I still believe in listening, taking of it what you will, but maintaining your own spiritual quest.  There is no "instant karma" (thanks to John Lennon for inventing that) to be had from listening to a channeled entity.  Life is our own journey, not just to eat popcorn and hear a channeled entities take on reality.


Matthew

Just to add one comment to the discussion.....it never ceases to amaze me that the same people who disregard the Bible or the teachings of Jesus have absolutely no hesitation in believing that everything a channeled entity says is the absolute truth.  Also, people who believe both ACIM and Seth apparently don't read them with a critical mindset, because there are stark contradictions between (and within) both of those materials.

By the way, I would add the same caution regarding the many accounts of retrievals we read about.  This is only my own belief, but I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of retrieval accounts are bogus.  I'm not saying the people who post the accounts are deliberately trying to deceive.  It's just that they are unable to separate the real from the imaginary.

recoverer wrote on Apr 16^th, 2007 at 6:01pm:

Regarding Seth/Jane Roberts and their denial of the crucifixion, here's what they had to say. They used the gospels to feebly attempt  to prove their point, so there in no need for people who don't believe in the gospels to remove them from the argument. I'm far from being a Biblical expert, yet I could see the inconsistencies. They claim that Jesus wasn't crucified, but instead Judas arranged to have a mentally disabled person drugged so he could be crucified instead of Jesus. This was done without Jesus knowing about it. a. If this is the case, why did Jesus tell his disciples during the last supper that somebody would betray him and then referred to Judas? b. If he could know about a betrayel, couldn't he know about a plan to have an imposter crucified in his place? Would he allow such a thing to take place? c. Wouldn't some key people realize that somebody other than Jesus was being crucified? d. What kind of wonder drug did Judas find that enabled him to convince a mentally disturbed man that he was Christ? Jane Roberts/Seth claim that Jesus was a great psychic and had wounds appear on his hands so that when he returned to his disciples they would know it was him. Wouldn't they know if he had left their presence?  And again, if Jesus was a great psychic, wouldn't he know about the hoax? The above is from Seth Speaks. In another Jane Roberts/Seth book, the one with the photos, they completely contradict themselves by stating that the crucifixion wasn't a physical event but something that happened at the "dream level." If Seth/Jane Roberts attacked the reputation of Christ directly people might be detered to read what they have to say. So instead they speak as if Christ is the Mesiah, but state insulting things about him.  In the books "Seth speaks" and "A nature of a personal reality; in addition to the denial of his crucifixion, they attack his reputation by completely twisting the meaning of three of his most famous sayings. For example, when it comes to the saying love your neighbor as yourself, they said that Jesus was just making a joke because nobody loved their neighbor as themselves at the time. If the obviousness of the true interpretation isn't clear, all one has to do is read the other verses that surround the verse in question, and it is very clear that he meant love your neighbor as yourself. The below is from the Sermon of the Mount.  43 "You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'  44But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? 48Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect. Some people say the Elias is a Seth copycat. If he does things like deny the crucifixion he certainly sounds like one. When you deny the crucifixion you deny the faith of so many people. What I find odd is that some people like channelled sources that afirm the crucifixion, plus they like channeled sources that deny it. It doesn't even matter if deniers contradict each other. For example the Matthew readings (the lady who supposedly channels her deceased son) says that Jesus was whipped and then allowed to go, and Jane Roberst/Seth say their substitution nonsense. Berserk wrote on Apr 16th, 2007 at 4:37pm: In one session, Elias actually claims that Jesus was never crucified, but rather died in Macedonia in his 40s!   Hey, that means St  Paul might have had a beer with Jesus when he arrived in Philippi in Macedonia.  I wonder why Paul never mentions this since he implies that he never met Jesus in the fliesh.  Duh!  Elias's channel, Mary, is either a con lady or  a deluded New Ager who might serve as the perfect guru for gullible historical illiterates. Don

Denying the crucifixion, to me that is total blasphemy..

Hey, thanks for your messages! First of all, I would like to say that I am horrified by what happened yesterday In Virginia, and I send all my love to the victims and their families.

  I would like to say that I know a bit about Seth, but Elias is kinda new for me. Elias says that money is meaningless, and that it doesn't buy freedom. But at the same time, Mary Ennis (the channeler) charges $250 per session. Does it mean that she doesn't believe in what Elias says?

 I have always been careful with those who charge money for such things, because when it becomes a business, it loses all credibility.

Gemini-

I agree with you.  Like the saying goes "follow the money."

Also, why not forget about Elias/Seth and just follow the easy to understand biblical admonition of the Golden Rule?  If you can do that, you will soon find that the rest of the stuff is just background noise and static.  

Your life will be much fuller and richer as a result.

Hi Gemini,

One of the nice things about this conversation board is that we can have disagreements, while maintaining a dialog because we’re primarily interested in exploring the afterlife and consciousness.  The appeal of this site is that Bruce’s books and most people here maintain that the best way to discover and explore these areas is by experiencing them and making your own judgments.

The criticisms so far of Elias and Jane Roberts/Seth fall into two categories.  One is that some readers treat their understanding of whatever Elias or Seth said as absolute infallible truth and can be quite irritating as a result.  The other category is that Seth and evidently Elias contradict some central aspects of Christian doctrine.  Both criticisms are correct.

I’ve read most of the Jane Roberts books and as a whole found them to be credible and quite helpful to me.  The fact that Roberts could go into a trance and dictate entire books over a period of time with a well formed structure and coherent content strikes me as adding to her credibility and Seth’s.

The Elias transcripts are very difficult to wade through and much less coherent because of the sheer volume of material.  There’s a book, The Shift, compiled by David Tate that takes excerpts of the Elias transcripts and puts them into a coherent form.  I’ve only read about 20% of it, so my opinion is still out.  I would say that it has made some good points that are worth thinking about.

You’ve indicated some curiosity about Elias.  I’d suggest that you get the book and read it and see what you think.  We usually don’t agree with everything a book says, but we sometimes gain information and insight from reading them.  Some books are more helpful than others but which ones depend on you, your needs, and your own curiosity.  One thing that both Seth and Elias maintain is that we should chart our own courses.

If you haven’t read them you might consider Bruce’s and Monroe’s books.  My course right now is to go to the TMI Gateway Voyage and keep working with Bruce’s exercises in the Afterlife Knowledge Guidebook.  It’s time for me to explore and experience things on my own, rather than just read.

Happy Exploring,
Rob

Rob:

Does the below mean that you believe Jane Roberts/Seth when they say that Jesus was just making a joke when he said to love your neighbor as yourself?

If not, I don't understand how you can accept a source that has such a misleading statement.  Seth speaks and a nature of a personal reality refer to three of Christ's most famous statements, and they completely de spiritualize the meaning of each statement. What is the purpose of doing such a thing?

If a source wanted to mislead people, wouldn't it try to say some things that are true and sound interesting, with the hope that people would use some combination of denial, justification and rationalization, to gloss over the really questionable statements?


[quote author=Rob Calkins link=1176719814/0#12 date=1176826999]Hi Gemini,


I’ve read most of the Jane Roberts books and as a whole found them to be credible and quite helpful to me.  The fact that Roberts could go into a trance and dictate entire books over a period of time with a well formed structure and coherent content strikes me as adding to her credibility and Seth’s.

Hi Gemini  I subscribe to get free transcripts of the channelled material of Elias.

The lady who channells him is quite busy due to the demand for the readings. She does not have much time to herself. I have spoken to her. A lovely lady.
you can google in to the site, Elias and get these transcripts once or twice a week. that way you can read them and make a better decision whether to get a personal reading.

entirely free are the transcripts and you can learn as much that way as getting a personal reading and paying all that money.

as you can tell, I never felt the need for a personal reading. the one thing I learned from reading the transcripts (I just slide over personal concepts and go to the meat)

the one thing I learned was that I should always feel free to be myself and express myself as life is too short as Dave says, to drink sour wine...lol...

Elias is a loving and jolly soul who once had a projection here as Oscar Wilde.

he is of good humor, which is hard to find in this world, so I hope you enjoy studying him as much as I have and can feel the loving vibes. as with any study of seriousness, there is no fast food drive thru enlightenment process, but it is worth it to have a look at everything without preconceived bias.

love, alysia

Gemini wrote on Apr 17^th, 2007 at 5:24am:

Hey, thanks for your messages! First of all, I would like to say that I am horrified by what happened yesterday In Virginia, and I send all my love to the victims and their families.   I would like to say that I know a bit about Seth, but Elias is kinda new for me. Elias says that money is meaningless, and that it doesn't buy freedom. But at the same time, Mary Ennis (the channeler) charges $250 per session. Does it mean that she doesn't believe in what Elias says?  I have always been careful with those who charge money for such things, because when it becomes a business, it loses all credibility.

I have a question for you:

What should she do to make a living?  I mean, an artist uses his gifts/skills to bring a painting/sculpture/etc to life, then sells it, often for outrageous amounts of money.  Does that make it less artful?  Should you not then be careful of the artist who charges "for such things?"  And by that, I mean using their gifts/talents/skills to earn a living..

Shirley wrote on Apr 17^th, 2007 at 8:51pm:

Gemini wrote on Apr 17th, 2007 at 5:24am: Hey, thanks for your messages! First of all, I would like to say that I am horrified by what happened yesterday In Virginia, and I send all my love to the victims and their families.   I would like to say that I know a bit about Seth, but Elias is kinda new for me. Elias says that money is meaningless, and that it doesn't buy freedom. But at the same time, Mary Ennis (the channeler) charges $250 per session. Does it mean that she doesn't believe in what Elias says?  I have always been careful with those who charge money for such things, because when it becomes a business, it loses all credibility. I have a question for you: What should she do to make a living?  I mean, an artist uses his gifts/skills to bring a painting/sculpture/etc to life, then sells it, often for outrageous amounts of money.  Does that make it less artful?  Should you not then be careful of the artist who charges "for such things?"  And by that, I mean using their gifts/talents/skills to earn a living..

Yeah, people need to earn a living somehow.. I would do the same thing, if I was a psychic..

Shirley wrote on Apr 17^th, 2007 at 8:51pm:

Gemini wrote on Apr 17th, 2007 at 5:24am: Hey, thanks for your messages! First of all, I would like to say that I am horrified by what happened yesterday In Virginia, and I send all my love to the victims and their families.   I would like to say that I know a bit about Seth, but Elias is kinda new for me. Elias says that money is meaningless, and that it doesn't buy freedom. But at the same time, Mary Ennis (the channeler) charges $250 per session. Does it mean that she doesn't believe in what Elias says?  I have always been careful with those who charge money for such things, because when it becomes a business, it loses all credibility. I have a question for you: What should she do to make a living?  I mean, an artist uses his gifts/skills to bring a painting/sculpture/etc to life, then sells it, often for outrageous amounts of money.  Does that make it less artful?  Should you not then be careful of the artist who charges "for such things?"  And by that, I mean using their gifts/talents/skills to earn a living..

When a painter paints, when an actor acts, you can see them doing it. I would never look at a Picasso and say "oh, it doesn't exist, although I can see it"

 You can not compare artists with channelers. I am not saying that all channeled spirits are "unreal", but Can you see Elias when he speaks? I can't, maybe I need to change my glasses. Where as, if you stand in front of a nice painting, you can not say you can't see it.    You just can not compare.

  By the way, I am not saying that Elias doesn't exist. How'ever, what I'm saying is that there are lots of channeled spirits who say different things, and I am sure that lots of them are not real. That is all. I am judging those who make lots of money by deceiving people. I could give one or two names, but no, I prefer not.

Gemini-

I suggest that you consider this quote from one of the posters, and carefully think through its implications.  It really tells you all you need to know about the new age mindset.

<<<Elias is a loving and jolly soul who once had a projection here as Oscar Wilde.>>>

It's a vivid reminder that new agers will accept anything a so-called channeled entity says.  The quality of discernment, which is important to apply no matter what the subject matter, seems to be lacking.  

Truth is, Elias may or may not be a channeled entity, and may or may not have been Oscar Wilde.  No one knows either way, they are just repeating what they read as if it were chiseled in stone.

After you've been on this website for a while, you'll notice that this is a common characteristic of many (thankfully not all) of the posters.

As I said before, caveat emptor.

I found last week another one called "Kris". It is amazing because he doesn't seem to have the same "knowledge" as Elias. What saddens me the most is how hard it is to find genuine people with whom you can talk about the afterlife. Anyway I hope I will find here what I am looking for :)

I didn't want to do this because I don't like to be a spreader of fear, but before people start believing every channeled source that exists, they might want to check out this book. Joe Fisher took the time to investigate the stories that channeled spirits shared, and found that they weren't true. The spirits he exposed ended up haunting him until he commited suicide.

I do want to add this. He had the power and freedom to travel around and investigate their bogus stories, challenge them while they were channeled, and a write a book that exposed them. Other people were also free to end their association with the spirits channeled, even though the spirits made some threats. Therefore, it is possible that he had the same power and freedom when it came to his choice of committing suicide. It is hard to say, because that part of the story isn't included in his book.

If you read his book it is clear that the channeled sources he ran into weren't beings of love and light.

http://www.amazon.com/Siren-Call-Hungry-Ghosts-Investigation/dp/1931044023

http://www.paraview.com/fisher/index.htm

http://www.anomalist.com/milestones/fisher.html

Recoverer,

I can’t recall any books dealing with consciousness, spirituality, religion or psychic phenomena where I agree with everything that is said in them.  I think any book coming from a psychic or trance state needs to be read with caution and a critical eye.  That said, I found the Jane Roberts/Seth books more credible than most.  As I recall, even Jane Roberts was skeptical about where Seth was coming from.

All in all the Seth books present a coherent and comprehensive view.  They cover many topics.  I know they helped me recognize the importance of understanding consciousness, got me to glimpse beyond space and time, broadened my conception of the divine and encouraged me to understand that my existence extends well beyond my physical body.  I know I’m glad I read them even though I may not agree with or understand everything that was said.

The purpose of my post was to encourage Gemini to read the Elias book, The Shift, if he was curious about it.  I think trying to read the several thousand transcripts on line would be almost incoherent – I got through about 25 of them.  David Tate’s compilation makes it possible to coherent picture of Elias.  It’s good to read things that attract our interest and see what we think about them.

I really don’t remember Seth joking about loving your neighbor – I’d have to figure out where it is and read it again to discuss it.  Personally, I think “the great commandment” is one of the gems of Christianity and contains its essence.  As I recall Seth only spoke about Christ a couple times and it didn’t seem central to the overall thrust of the books.  I just assumed we were getting a non-Christian point of view.

Rob  

Many thanks, Im going to order the book! Maybe I will see "channelers" differently after reading it! Anyway, if Elias is genuine, then there are other ones who are probably not! Thanks, once more!  :)

Rob Calkins wrote on Apr 18^th, 2007 at 1:58pm:

Recoverer, I can’t recall any books dealing with consciousness, spirituality, religion or psychic phenomena where I agree with everything that is said in them.  I think any book coming from a psychic or trance state needs to be read with caution and a critical eye.  That said, I found the Jane Roberts/Seth books more credible than most.  As I recall, even Jane Roberts was skeptical about where Seth was coming from. All in all the Seth books present a coherent and comprehensive view.  They cover many topics.  I know they helped me recognize the importance of understanding consciousness, got me to glimpse beyond space and time, broadened my conception of the divine and encouraged me to understand that my existence extends well beyond my physical body.  I know I’m glad I read them even though I may not agree with or understand everything that was said. The purpose of my post was to encourage Gemini to read the Elias book, The Shift, if he was curious about it.  I think trying to read the several thousand transcripts on line would be almost incoherent – I got through about 25 of them.  David Tate’s compilation makes it possible to coherent picture of Elias.  It’s good to read things that attract our interest and see what we think about them. I really don’t remember Seth joking about loving your neighbor – I’d have to figure out where it is and read it again to discuss it.  Personally, I think “the great commandment” is one of the gems of Christianity and contains its essence.  As I recall Seth only spoke about Christ a couple times and it didn’t seem central to the overall thrust of the books.  I just assumed we were getting a non-Christian point of view. Rob

I agree, with you Rob.. Yeah, just because some psychics are frauds doesn't mean that all of them are too.. They shouldn't get a bad wrap, because there are some genuine psychics out there.. For instance Sylvia Browne, James Van Praggh, John Edward, James Padgett, Melanie Moore, and many more.. Yeah, I know there are many channelers like Miss Cleo or whatever her name was.. That doesn't mean Jane Roberts is a fraud too..  Just check those sources out for yourself and decide for yourself who's a fraud or not.. That is why I don't like skeptics who just shoot the s hit and don't do the research on these type of sources..

Melanie Moore is psychic that I met on the web and she was magnificent.. Described my gpa perfectly and she knew something my gpa told me in the past.. She also knew things about me that my gpa only knew and other family members.. She knew that I had mental illness and that I was a very sensitive person..

peace

Rob:

I guess I see things differently. Since Jane Roberts/Seth intentionally try to belittle Christ and his teachings, I feel no need to be educated (and often mislead) by them. To me a connection at one's heart level is more important than book knowledge, even if that book knowledge is correct on occasion.

Here's another example of how Jane Roberts/Seth tries to twist Christ's teachings. They state that when Jesus said to show a person your left cheek after having your right cheek struck, Jesus was suggesting that a person rolls up and plays dead like a possum (I don't remember a tactic). Therefore, they reduced another one of Jesus' famous teachings from a spiritual teaching to a defensive tactic. Below is this teaching with surrounding verses.
 

From Matthew:
You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you." (Matthew 5:38-42, NIV)
A parallel version is offered in the Sermon on the Plain in the Gospel of Luke:

From Luke:
"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you." (Luke 6:27-31. NIV)

recoverer wrote on Apr 18^th, 2007 at 3:23pm:

Rob: I guess I see things differently. Since Jane Roberts/Seth intentionally tried to put Christ down in several ways, if I was in a desert dying of thirst, and Seth came along and offered me a drink, I wouldn't accept it. Therefore, I certainly don't need him to educate me. To me a connection at one's heart level is more important than book knowledge, even if that book knowledge is correct on occasion. Here's another example of how Jane Roberts/Seth tries to twist Christ's teachings. They state that when Jesus said to show a person your left cheek after having your right cheek struck, Jesus was suggesting that a person rolls up and plays dead like a possum (I don't remember a tactic). Therefore, they reduced another one of Jesus' famous teachings from a spiritual teaching to a defensive tactic. Below is this teaching with surrounding verses.   From Matthew: You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you." (Matthew 5:38-42, NIV) A parallel version is offered in the Sermon on the Plain in the Gospel of Luke: From Luke: "But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you." (Luke 6:27-31. NIV)

I see what you mean and believe Seth has twisted Christ's teachings as well.. Yet, he does have some truths that I agree with.. Other than that I would take most of what Seth says as a grain of salt..  I try to get information from all types of sources and only take with me what I believe to be true.. Like for instance him denying Christ crucifixion is just total b.s... I know there are some deciving spirits out there.. But they have to give you some truth to seem credible...

Rondele quotes me:  <<<Elias is a loving and jolly soul who once had a projection here as Oscar Wilde.>>>
then states his/her opinion:
It's a vivid reminder that new agers will accept anything a so-called channeled entity says.  The quality of discernment, which is important to apply no matter what the subject matter, seems to be lacking.
____


I would only say I have beliefs and opinions. I am proud to be called a new ager now, so that no longer bothers me. Rondele's answer to my "belief", my opinion is to answer me with her own "belief, and opinion."

None here have absolute truth in the palm of their hands and we should respect each other's beliefs.

I offered my reply to Gemini for scrutiny and told her to investigate. This was and is my experience with what I read and meditate on is very valuable. Rondele assumes I'm simple minded and will accept any channelled material no matter what the lack of spiritual discernment "seems to her" to be.
another opinion offered. I just want Gemini to understand all these opinions thrown about here are just words...you have to make your own decisions.

I don't think Seth and Elias get a fair shake here. I think the Seth material changed the world, or else we wouldn't even be here discussing it now would we? and since we weren't there at the time of Christ's crucifiction in this particular physical vehicle, then we are just conjecturing on what really happened here. the truth would not change the fact that a lot of good thought is in the Seth books, one of a kind material.

my opinion for what it's worth, and to myself, I'm worth a lot! :)  is that the Elias material surpasses the Seth material in quality, believeability and genuine pearls of wisdom for all new agers who are discriminating..

now why don't you guys argue over the reptiles who are supposed to be living inside the Earth instead of Elias?  :)

and Gemini, I hope you find just the right material for your soul growth, to each his own, may we each enter the shift gracefully without condemnation of one another's beliefs, but with generosity of spirit, that that's why we come to Earth, to be perfected in love, just as the man who walked here did not go around condemning and attacking other's beliefs.

he just said forgive them. ok, I forgive you :)   lol. I'm out of here.

LaffingRain wrote on Apr 18^th, 2007 at 4:55pm:

Rondele quotes me:  <<<Elias is a loving and jolly soul who once had a projection here as Oscar Wilde.>>> then states his/her opinion: It's a vivid reminder that new agers will accept anything a so-called channeled entity says.  The quality of discernment, which is important to apply no matter what the subject matter, seems to be lacking. ____ I would only say I have beliefs and opinions. I am proud to be called a new ager now, so that no longer bothers me. Rondele's answer to my "belief", my opinion is to answer me with her own "belief, and opinion." None here have absolute truth in the palm of their hands and we should respect each other's beliefs. I offered my reply to Gemini for scrutiny and told her to investigate. This was and is my experience with what I read and meditate on is very valuable. Rondele assumes I'm simple minded and will accept any channelled material no matter what the lack of spiritual discernment "seems to her" to be. another opinion offered. I just want Gemini to understand all these opinions thrown about here are just words...you have to make your own decisions. I don't think Seth and Elias get a fair shake here. I think the Seth material changed the world, or else we wouldn't even be here discussing it now would we? and since we weren't there at the time of Christ's crucifiction in this particular physical vehicle, then we are just conjecturing on what really happened here. the truth would not change the fact that a lot of good thought is in the Seth books, one of a kind material. my opinion for what it's worth, and to myself, I'm worth a lot! :)  is that the Elias material surpasses the Seth material in quality, believeability and genuine pearls of wisdom for all new agers who are discriminating.. now why don't you guys argue over the reptiles who are supposed to be living inside the Earth instead of Elias?  :) and Gemini, I hope you find just the right material for your soul growth, to each his own, may we each enter the shift gracefully without condemnation of one another's beliefs, but with generosity of spirit, that that's why we come to Earth, to be perfected in love, just as the man who walked here did not go around condemning and attacking other's beliefs. he just said forgive them. ok, I forgive you :)   lol. I'm out of here.

Great post and good points laffingrain!! :) I agree, wholeheartedly about the seth material being a world changing event.. I think Seth was a respectful spirit.. Yes, he has twisted Christ's teaching a bit.. Who knows the real truth though about Christ's teachings?? Most of Christ's teachings are metaphorically presented.. Not literal like most fundimentalist assume..

peace

Alysia:

How can you suggest that you're discriminating when you won't even consider the points people make? You're able to write the below even though Seth purposely tries to discredit Christ? If I was dying of thirst in the desert I wouldn't accept a drink from Seth. People spoke against Elias because somebody asked. Channeled sources of information must love it when people won't question them.

Regarding the Crucifixion, Seth's argument against it is completely illogical and is contradicted by other channeled sources that also deny it. It is affirmed by a ACIM and Conversations with God. They can't all be right when they contradict each other.

When I first read what Seth had to say about the crucifixion I inwardly felt he was wrong. Nevertheless, I prayed and asked for an answer. I received the message that not only was Christ crucified, he was crucified willingly. Nevertheless, because I can be stubborn at times, one night I prayed before going to sleep and asked again.  I woke up in the middle of the night in my astral body, looked at my astral hands, and they were bleeding. I believe this was a strong confirmation that he was crucified. I've received two other messages that began with the showing of a crucifix. On other occasion I was simply shown a golden crucifix. Certainly part of the reason I was shown crucifixes in these instances was to make the point that Christ was crucified.

I don't understand why people have such a hard time believing Christ was crucified. Crucifixions weren't uncommon during his day. What is the motive of these channeled sources that deny Christ's crucifixion? If a person has any respect for Christ, I don't see how they can accept what such sources have to say about him. Sometimes people are too quick to justify.



[quote author=laffingrain link=1176719814/15#26 date=1176929750]

I don't think Seth and Elias get a fair shake here. I think the Seth material changed the world, or else we wouldn't even be here discussing it now would we? and since we weren't there at the time of Christ's crucifiction in this particular physical vehicle, then we are just conjecturing on what really happened here. the truth would not change the fact that a lot of good thought is in the Seth books, one of a kind material.

Recoverer, I tend to agree with you on your earlier post.  It’s unlikely I would read something that insults my beliefs and spirituality and I would question its validity.  But then I didn’t see it as being that denigrating when I consider the books as a whole.  I also don’t think that most of what he says is incompatible with Christianity – though he is decidedly panentheistic and you have to take a big view of consciousness.

Gemini, remember I haven’t formed an opinion on the Elias compilation yet.  I’m only a little way through it.  He has made some good points but I have to finish it before I form any opinion.  But if you have an interest in it, read it.  

I don't think it matters really Albert. When I first read what Seth said that J let some other guy take the rap, I just thought to myself, that's one smart guy!

then I thought some more that J would be so far evolved, so very enlightened, even if he did go thru with the whole show, he would know how to control pain of the body, and certainly there would be angels all around for this momentous world changing, religion-establishing business. so I wondered why Seth would say what he did, that a switcheroo occurred.

then I thought, maybe he meant he just up and left the physical body as of course any enlightened being could leave his body at will. in that case, if this is true, that would explain why Seth said "another" took his place. This other would be one who had an assignment to take his place, to make it appear as if suffering was taking place, in order so that the Christians could see, yes, indeed, it is wrong to crucify another in the name of that a good thing is happening.
but we needed a religion, didn't we? that way we could we could all have fun giving forth with our opinions that we are all such guilty people, unless the devil made us do it.
we can always blame the devil.

so I don't know what happened, and just because you offer me your opinion of what you saw and understood, I don't accept your belief either. and no reason you should accept mine. it's for each of us to make our contributions here respectfully, is all the point I wish to make.
I saw the thread as getting out of hand that it all.

when I read channelled material I do not automatically think because it is channelled that it's going to feed me. it's for each of us to discern, take out what is useful, meditate on it, throw out what can't be used, or store it in memory to see if another author, alive or dead, as the case may be, is supportative of the same concept.
that's how we learn.

getting away from arguments pro or con on anything, we need to keep in mind the original posters questions..and see if they have found anything useful in our opinions offered, starting a war here is not usually beneficial to the original poster. thanks, alysia

Alysia said: I don't think it matters really Albert. When I first read what Seth said that J let some other guy take the rap, I just thought to myself, that's one smart guy!

"My feeling is that Jesus would have too much integrity to do such a thing. I know I wouldn't allow another person to be crucified in my place, and I haven't obtained Jesus' level of consciousness. Besides, as I wrote before, Seth stated that Judas came up with the plan without Jesus knowing about it, which doesn't make sense, since at the last supper Jesus stated that somewhere here would betray him and let it be know that Judas was the betrayer."


Alysia said: then I thought some more that J would be so far evolved, so very enlightened, even if he did go thru with the whole show, he would know how to control pain of the body, and certainly there would be angels all around for this momentous world changing, religion-establishing business. so I wondered why Seth would say what he did, that a switcheroo occurred.

"Good question."

Alysia said: then I thought, maybe he meant he just up and left the physical body as of course any enlightened being could leave his body at will. in that case, if this is true, that would explain why Seth said "another" took his place. This other would be one who had an assignment to take his place, to make it appear as if suffering was taking place, in order so that the Christians could see, yes, indeed, it is wrong to crucify another in the name of that a good thing is happening.
but we needed a religion, didn't we? that way we could we could all have fun giving forth with our opinions that we are all such guilty people, unless the devil made us do it.
we can always blame the devil.

"What are you implying, that the crucifixion was needed for the sake of Christianity, but an enlightened being such as Jesus wasn't up to the task of following through with his sacred destiny? Even if this is so, it's funny that a man who supposedly had the destiny to be crucified in his place was a mentally disturbed man who had to be drugged and tricked into carrying out his duty."

Alysia said: so I don't know what happened, and just because you offer me your opinion of what you saw and understood, I don't accept your belief either. and no reason you should accept mine. it's for each of us to make our contributions here respectfully, is all the point I wish to make.
I saw the thread as getting out of hand that it all.

"I don't accept the lies of Seth, Elias and other channeled sources that state that Jesus wasn't crucified."

when I read channelled material I do not automatically think because it is channelled that it's going to feed me. it's for each of us to discern, take out what is useful, meditate on it, throw out what can't be used, or store it in memory to see if another author, alive or dead, as the case may be, is supportative of the same concept.
that's how we learn.

"Out of respect for Christ I won't waste my time with sources that purposely lie about him."

Alysia said: getting away from arguments pro or con on anything, we need to keep in mind the original posters questions..and see if they have found anything useful in our opinions offered, starting a war here is not usually beneficial to the original poster. thanks, alysia[/quote]

"A person asked a question, and differing answers have been provided. Sometimes things get a little hot under the collar when our beliefs are challenged."

Alysia-

No one is condemning you or attacking you.  It's really not about you whatsoever.  It's about giving people the entire picture about something.

In this case, it's about channeling.  When you post something as if it were an absolute fact (i.e. Elias was Oscar Wilde), I think that's irresponsible to say the least. That is not a factual statement, and therefore it needs to be qualified.

There was a time back in the 70s when I first read Seth Speaks.  I thought it was amazing.  I was so impressed, I even took notes and told others about it.

I've wised up since then.  It doesn't matter how eloquent the material is, it doesn't matter how credible it sounds or how well it is organized.  Just because something sounds convincing (and yes, most of it really does) we should never make the leap into believing it is true, or that the source is beneficial and has our best interests at heart.  

Again, we need to understand the agenda and forget the eloquence.  There was also a time when I thought ACIM was handed down from Jesus.  I no longer think that.  And even if I did, I would not be on this or any other website advocating that others should read it and accept it.  

The key is discernment.  We need to police what goes into our minds, just as a fuel filter does for a car.  Otherwise we can get clogged up and hopelessly confused, because what Seth says is totally contradictory to what ACIM says.  We cannot possibly say we believe in both of those because it's like saying we believe up is down and vice versa.

When we believe in everything we end up believing in nothing.  Personally I would not touch channeled material with asbestos gloves, but that's just me.  The only thing I am saying to others is that they should not just read that stuff without knowing the other side of the picture.  And the other side is far from pleasant.

Alysia said: I don't think it matters really Albert. When I first read what Seth said that J let some other guy take the rap, I just thought to myself, that's one smart guy!

"My feeling is that Jesus would have too much integrity to do such a thing. I know I wouldn't allow another person to be crucified in my place, and I haven't obtained Jesus' level of consciousness.
_____

yes, but there is a plan and its concievable to me that J could have made an agreement with another spirit even before history was enacted. its just concievable...notice I didn't say it was the truth. its just a thought. we can find out the truth when we find out.
Personally I believe nothing would have been done by J, that was not in the highest good of the world.
As for Seth, theres some good stuff in the books about personal reality creating, good enough for people to study his other points and not discredit him entirely because of one small portion not understandable to yourself.
______


Besides, as I wrote before, Seth stated that Judas came up with the plan without Jesus knowing about it, which doesn't make sense
_____

this can be explained (my opinion, remember!) Judas was used by the forces that be, call it spirit, he had to perform his role, otherwise the crucifiction might not have occurred as it did. Without the crucifiction, we simply would not have a religion called Christianity. think about it.
_______

, since at the last supper Jesus stated that somewhere here would betray him and let it be know that Judas was the betrayer."
______

of course J would be psychic. He's god remember? god knows everything in a precognitive manner. I suggest J came into the world knowing what his job was and proceeded to establish a religion, when he would rather have established a brotherhood among all men. its us, Seth included, all books, it's us who make the religious dogma, it's us who have bias. its us who don't know how to love or accept our brothers and sisters the way J would have us to. but your point is to discredit all of Seth's teachings on the basis that Seth said
yada yada yada...ok. if Judas came up with the betrayal idea all by himself and it wasn't part of the destiny of Christianity....then I'd be mighty surprised is all I can say.

I don't know. But I have a belief it's an orderly universe, not chaotic as you suggest. Seth, to my way of thinking could have meant that Judas was not in touch with his higher self and that his ego came up with the idea of betraying that which he loved. as I'm pretty sure he did love J. just to be around J, you would love him.

C1 state of consciousness is limited mind. Seth material does not explore C1 versus higher self. In limited, ego thoughts, we are quite capable of feeling and being dissociated with higher thought and enact all sorts of dramas which include viciousness and death. So in reading Seth, it can be a sort of primer for other stuff. it was for me like a starting point, a place to entertain myself with new thoughts, then when it no longer suits my beliefs, move on to something that resonates more fully.
I believe in doing a lot of reading, of everything..and not putting down anything as right or wrong. I've adopted Monroe's "there is no right, there is no wrong." all just is.
so I can't say to Gemini, don't read it, but read it, then see if it works for you, if not, theres so much stuff to read, surely a little prayer will lead everyone to their fountain.

_______


Alysia said: then I thought some more that J would be so far evolved, so very enlightened, even if he did go thru with the whole show, he would know how to control pain of the body, and certainly there would be angels all around for this momentous world changing, religion-establishing business. so I wondered why Seth would say what he did, that a switcheroo occurred.

"Good question."
____

yes, and perhaps I will ask him someday, I'll say Seth, why you wanna say something so outrageous? you old buzzard you, look what you've done to our forum...not to speak of your credibility. he'd probably say, oh, I got you all thinking now didn't I? that was all I wanted to do, make you go find out the truth by yourself.
______

Alysia said: then I thought, maybe he meant he just up and left the physical body as of course any enlightened being could leave his body at will. in that case, if this is true, that would explain why Seth said "another" took his place. This other would be one who had an assignment to take his place, to make it appear as if suffering was taking place, in order so that the Christians could see, yes, indeed, it is wrong to crucify another in the name of that a good thing is happening.
but we needed a religion, didn't we? that way we could we could all have fun giving forth with our opinions that we are all such guilty people, unless the devil made us do it.
we can always blame the devil.
_________
"What are you implying, that the crucifixion was needed for the sake of Christianity
____

yes.
____


, but an enlightened being such as Jesus wasn't up to the task of following through with his sacred destiny?
____

no I'm not saying he wasn't up to the task. that's what you are saying. a being such as J can do whatever he wants, anytime he wants, anywhere he wants, and not necessarily do it the way WE want him to, according to our limited understanding of how things should work.
______


Even if this is so, it's funny that a man who supposedly had the destiny to be crucified in his place was a mentally disturbed man who had to be drugged and tricked into carrying out his duty."
____

you're right..what a dreadful picture. Now I have two things to ask Seth. my goodness, my work never ends!!  lol. I still say theres no need to throw out all of Seth's teachings just because we could never accept this one thing. but what if things didn't happen the way we think they did? would we love J any less? nope. I'd still love J with all my heart as well I would love this poor mentally disturbed, drugged person. I think that's what J would say, just keep to the love and forgiveness, and so I would have to forgive Seth too, right? I mean if it's true he said what you said he did. you could be misinterpreting or you could not have the whole truth right now.
______

Alysia said: so I don't know what happened, and just because you offer me your opinion of what you saw and understood, I don't accept your belief either. and no reason you should accept mine. it's for each of us to make our contributions here respectfully, is all the point I wish to make.
I saw the thread as getting out of hand that it all.

"I don't accept the lies of Seth, Elias and other channeled sources that state that Jesus wasn't crucified."
_____
thats ok. I don't accept anything anyone says anymore. but I do have a mind that is curious that I could be wrong what I believe, and if I'm really really curious about something, and all of you, you can get your own answers within you, I think you have to follow your heart is all. its really not important to me, what actually happened back then as like I said, there is a higher plan, and we're not privy to it most of the time.
we're just yakking here. and Elias never said the same thing Seth did, so don't confuse the two.
_______


when I read channelled material I do not automatically think because it is channelled that it's going to feed me. it's for each of us to discern, take out what is useful, meditate on it, throw out what can't be used, or store it in memory to see if another author, alive or dead, as the case may be, is supportative of the same concept.
that's how we learn.

"Out of respect for Christ I won't waste my time with sources that purposely lie about him."
_____
yes, I understand we both respect Christ and don't have a lot of time to waste on sources which do not feed the soul. yet I will offer to you once again, I do not believe Seth purposefully lied and that is your assumption. we don't have all the facts. and theres a saying out there I found to be true: "one's man's trash is another man's treasure." I derived at the time, many years ago, some useful things from Seth Speaks. personally. for instance, I had no idea people could create their own reality.... [smiley=dankk2.gif]

so reading about this concept gave me some direction, that no other material had as yet done. for that, I thank him. then Elias takes it even further about personal reality creating. the premise, which is indisputable, is that we can all become loving, accepting, people by speaking our truths to one another, just as you are doing now, and I am doing now, to be allowing everyone the same voice, and that we can control ourselves (how hot we get under the collar!) lol. we don't need to jump up and down, if we follow the belief what we are here for. we are here for each other.
_____


Alysia said: getting away from arguments pro or con on anything, we need to keep in mind the original posters questions..and see if they have found anything useful in our opinions offered, starting a war here is not usually beneficial to the original poster. thanks, alysia[/quote]

"A person asked a question, and differing answers have been provided. Sometimes things get a little hot under the collar when our beliefs are challenged."
____

all beliefs are just beliefs. I can see everyone has different viewpoints. we can disagree, but we can keep to harmony by respecting those we disagree with.

I think its important to communicate despite disagreements and u don't have to see another's opinion as a challenge. I was not challenging your belief, merely to put my own out there as an equal two cents.

my personal belief about you Albert is you have a pre-set bias against All channelled material. and this is strange to me, as you have loving guides around and about you, these are spirits I assume of high order.  Also it can be that one will channell a being of equal high order as your own guides, and that all of us can be having our own high order of guides around and about upon invocation, as we are all equal in the sight of all that is.

we are all quite capable of making our own discernment regarding reading material or otherwise. I notice you are always on this topic of channelled material like a fly on poop.

so something there to examine whether is all channelled material you don't like or just all the channelled material that "I" like?  

hold on. you just taught me something that Elias taught me also, Albert, you said we all get hot under the collar when our beliefs are challenged...thats like suddenly a light bulb went off.. :)  thanks! Elias says to express yourself when this happens, not hold it in.
Elias will say its better to speak up then let it simmer on the back kettle, just so long as we don't necessarily make someone else wrong, in order for us to right.

so thanks, you're right! I'm right too. heaps of love to you! alysia

Rondele link=1176719814/30#32 date=1176941391]Alysia-

No one is condemning you or attacking you.  It's really not about you whatsoever.  It's about giving people the entire picture about something.
_____

thank you, you had me worried there for a minute :)
_____

In this case, it's about channeling.  When you post something as if it were an absolute fact (i.e. Elias was Oscar Wilde), I think that's irresponsible to say the least. That is not a factual statement, and therefore it needs to be qualified.
_____

absolutely agree with you, and later I qualified. I should have qualified right away, its my belief. forgive me please.
______

There was a time back in the 70s when I first read Seth Speaks.  I thought it was amazing.  I was so impressed, I even took notes and told others about it.

I've wised up since then.  It doesn't matter how eloquent the material is, it doesn't matter how credible it sounds or how well it is organized.  Just because something sounds convincing (and yes, most of it really does) we should never make the leap into believing it is true, or that the source is beneficial and has our best interests at heart.
_____
it served you then. the material no longer serves you. it shows you have grown. still, there maybe a person out there who can still get what you originally received, we are not all in the same stage of growth.
______

Again, we need to understand the agenda and forget the eloquence.  There was also a time when I thought ACIM was handed down from Jesus.  I no longer think that.  And even if I did, I would not be on this or any other website advocating that others should read it and accept it.
___

It seems to me you have the same bias against all channelled material. so I offer no more of my insight to you personally regarding channelled material as you've already made up your mind. thats ok. I am still ok to express my beliefs as you are, so long as I qualify that it is my belief and it is my opinion.  I can tell my story personally, of the benefits that I underwent in my spiritual growth, and I can do that without asking others to accept or read it. I have a right to share my story, so long as I don't be coercive about it.
that is their decision whether they will check out the material or not.
thats what this forum is for, to communicate, so I don't see any argument here to further discuss.
______

The key is discernment.  We need to police what goes into our minds, just as a fuel filter does for a car.  Otherwise we can get clogged up and hopelessly confused, because what Seth says is totally contradictory to what ACIM says.  We cannot possibly say we believe in both of those because it's like saying we believe up is down and vice versa.
_____

I was hopelessly confused once, until I read ACIM. now I'm not. and I do not know for certain that there is controversy in Seth and ACIM. I am not accepting the viewpoints expressed here as absolute and factual in the least. everybody is merely talking but nobody is communing, if you get my drift.
_______

When we believe in everything we end up believing in nothing.  Personally I would not touch channeled material with asbestos gloves, but that's just me.  The only thing I am saying to others is that they should not just read that stuff without knowing the other side of the picture.  And the other side is far from pleasant.
_____

and I say don't close the mind down, but explore everything. don't take anybody's word for anything. get your truth within, and if you can share it, to uplift one person, then share what's in your heart. theres always 2 sides to everything. the other side of the picture is far from pleasant as you said.
I chose to focus on the positive and let others be demon slayers.
See you guys on the other side some day and we'll all have some more good conversations I'm sure.
hummph..disc members are such nags.... :)

Alysia-

Well, back in the 70s I was pretty young and didn't have much experience under my belt.  I automatically assumed that if a book was channeled by some other world entity, it must be true.  

It took many years and much study to come to ask myself why such highly evolved spiritual entities would give such contradictory teachings.  Why, for example, would Seth tell us again and again that earth is a school and we are here to learn, and when we die we undergo a life review to show us the things we did that were both positive and negative, etc etc. while ACIM pretty much trashes the earth and tells us it is full of snares and traps and delusions?

Why would Seth tell us we go thru incarnations in order to learn, while ACIM tells us the things that we think are sins are really just an illusion and there is no reason to feel guilt because, after all, we never did anything wrong in the first place.  

And there are many more contradictions.  

And so I had to ask myself, what the heck do I believe?  Am I here to learn and to be accountable for my actions or inactions, or am I here because at some point (for reasons ACIM never makes clear) I decided to separate from God, and by the way I am not really accountable for my actions because everything is an illusion. Charlie Manson really never did anything wrong by killing those people, we just "think" he did.  Basically he and Mother Teresa are the same.

So then I asked myself the question that really iced it for me.  What is the agenda of the authors?  Suppose it really isn't Jesus who authored ACIM.  Why did he say he was?  Well, suppose the purpose of the book is to undermine the teachings of the Bible (which it does a very good job of)?  Suppose the author is well aware that humans would love nothing better than believing that there is no accountability and would therefore glom onto the book and its teachings with no hesitation?

I am no Bible thumping fundamentalist.  I don't believe in fire and brimstone and eternal suffering.  But I do believe our actions are important and yes, I believe there is accountability.  Not to some angry, wrathful God but ultimately to ourselves and to our own spiritual advancement.  

If all of us followed the Golden Rule, we could avoid the morass of all of these contradictory teachings.  And we would end up leading a fulfilling and enriching life. That's really all we need to know and do.

And one final word about channeling.  I would compare it with the warnings we give kids about not jumping into the deep end of the pool unless they know how to swim.  I'm concerned that lots of folks, especially younger people, simply don't have enough life experience to help them properly evaluate what they read from material such as Seth, Elias, and all the others.

And therefore I feel a measure of responsibility to at least urge them to be aware of the pitfalls before diving in.  That's all.  We can debate this forever and neither one of us will probably change our opinion, so let's call it a draw and move on.



R

Rondele link=1176719814/30#35 date=1176998048]Alysia-

Well, back in the 70s I was pretty young and didn't have much experience under my belt.  I automatically assumed that if a book was channeled by some other world entity, it must be true.
___
sorry if it seems I always have to have the last word. but you're right, we can debate forever and its a beautiful day out there and we both appear to be wanting to enjoy the sunlight. I never assumed that channelled stuff must be right just because it's channelled. I've seen some channelled stuff that I was worried about. you have to listen with your heart to some of this stuff...I think Gemini is quite capable to not fall into the trap of being led down a false pathway. Gemini has both sides of the story. we can let this thread die then.
________


Why, for example, would Seth tell us again and again that earth is a school and we are here to learn, and when we die we undergo a life review to show us the things we did that were both positive and negative, etc etc. while ACIM pretty much trashes the earth and tells us it is full of snares and traps and delusions?
____
I don't see it that way. Trashing the earth is pretty strong terminology. ACIM speaks of allusions. The word allusions means an idea which "alludes" to something. When you call it snares, traps, delusions, it's not the same as the meaning of allusions. If we compare ACIM to bible teachings, we have some thoughts there to consider..."you must come out from among them"  (bible) means (personally speaking) do not be led as a sheep into error thoughts, or allusions.  I don't see any contradiction between Seth and ACIM.
  ______

Why would Seth tell us we go thru incarnations in order to learn, while ACIM tells us the things that we think are sins are really just an illusion and there is no reason to feel guilt because, after all, we never did anything wrong in the first place.
_____
a sin is an error thought, it is uncorrected thought; as I said an illusion alludes to something that has not occurred yet in physical reality; it is not substantiated as fact. Guilt is a fear thought. Fear is "false evidence appearing as real." We are to self correct, feel the guilt, then release the guilt to transmutation process. releasing guilt has nothing to do with ceasing to take self responsibility for correcting ourselves.
_____

Am I here to learn and to be accountable for my actions or inactions
_____

I agree with you.
______
or am I here because at some point (for reasons ACIM never makes clear) I decided to separate from God
____

There are two parts to the mind. one is the ego, one is the holy spirit's voice. The ego feels separated from god, and from all others. the ego wants to rule this world because the ego feels it knows it has the answer.
the voice for HS is different. it disengages fear thoughts of the ego, and control thoughts of the ego voice, by a thought of love and unity.
I know you do not believe there are two voices, but you can understand that we have a will, and that we have a choice to make in each moment for thoughts of fear or love that come into our minds. basically, we cannot change the world. but we can change ourselves by the way we react to one another, either in love, or in fear.
this material of ACIM will not be accepted by the general public for many years as I said before. It means that this world begins to fade away and while we are here, who among us really is ready to completely give up the world and the feeling we are "right?"
_____

, and by the way I am not really accountable for my actions because everything is an illusion. Charlie Manson really never did anything wrong by killing those people, we just "think" he did.  Basically he and Mother Teresa are the same.
____

you are accountable, I am accountable. That's not what ACIM is saying. That's an interpretation you offer. there is a life review, this is a school, and none of us are alone in our seeking and learning if the spirit of unity has come to join us.
_______
So then I asked myself the question that really iced it for me.  What is the agenda of the authors?  Suppose it really isn't Jesus who authored ACIM.  Why did he say he was?  Well, suppose the purpose of the book is to undermine the teachings of the Bible (which it does a very good job of)?
____
Well, I'm not a bible follower, you must know by now, so if it gets undermined, well thats cool. there are very few passages in the bible which do anything at all for my spiritual growth. mainly I think Gibran the poet is much more spiritual than the bible.
____


Suppose the author is well aware that humans would love nothing better than believing that there is no accountability and would therefore glom onto the book and its teachings with no hesitation?
____

you've got this idea everybody gets off scot free around here. Life itself has a way of kicking our butt. no free rides...the only people who read ACIM are those who are led to read it, and all other paths will lead to the same destination eventually. ACIM just speeds up the process..my opinion.  the endless point ACIM makes is to forgive; to forgive, is to give of yourself as you gave before the grievance occurred.
_____

I am no Bible thumping fundamentalist.
____
ah, I disagree.
_____

I don't believe in fire and brimstone and eternal suffering.  But I do believe our actions are important and yes, I believe there is accountability.
____
you're right. I agree. but I aint changing your viewpoint, and you arent changing mine, we're are just sharing ourselves. I appreciate you've shared yourself this much; it clarifies for me, who I am too. I can see a future world where everyone takes responsibility for this world and the suffering we see, but it's up to each individual to start in the heart area.
_____

If all of us followed the Golden Rule, we could avoid the morass of all of these contradictory teachings.
_____
yes, it would solve all the problems of the world, the golden rule. too bad humans can mess up the most simple message huh?
_____

And one final word about channeling.  I would compare it with the warnings we give kids about not jumping into the deep end of the pool unless they know how to swim.
_____
I think channelling has fearful connotations from way way back. when we were told to discern spirits as all manner of evil lurked in the invisible heavens and astral domains and all those who studied these areas were burned at the stake.
intuitively, I've found people respond to a constructive thought more readily than a fear thought. if you go around as defender of the truth, giving forth warnings, thats all well and good, as long as you can also support the kids to explore on their own and make up their own minds after presenting the pros and cons. which we did pretty well.
I've never met anything evil out there to fear and I'm the type of person who has jumped in the deep end, and then by necessity, I've learned to swim.

I know my way is not for everyone. I'm ok with that. I'm ok with your sharing and our differences.
______
 I'm concerned that lots of folks, especially younger people, simply don't have enough life experience to help them properly evaluate what they read from material such as Seth, Elias, and all the others.
______
my opinion, the kids that are here nowdays, they teach me a thing or two, I'm not worried in the least for these bright lights I'm meeting. channelling will be old hat someday, there will be so many. and then someday, we will all be channelling our own truth and live in harmony and be leaders instead of followers, and no more killing! wouldn't that be great if we all could just agree to end the slaughter because we can all see killing does nothing but perpetuate the problem with rebirth and repitition?
_____

well, it's one step at a time in this world. thanks for talking with me, and for reading me.
love, alysia

Alysia-

I have no problem with anything you said.  Except (lol) when you say you disagree that I am not a Bible thumping fundamentalist!  Wow, that is about the furthest I am.  I can assure you that if I were, I would acknowledge it.  I wish I did spend more time reading the Bible even tho there are many parts of it I cannot accept and in fact makes my hair hurt.

Essentially I do believe in the teachings of Jesus but even there, there are things that I find hard to accept or even objectionable.

I lost a lifetime friend when he converted to Jehovah's Witnesses.  If I were a bible thumper, he and I would still be buds.  The only thing I thump these days is a cold bottle of beer, especially when it gets empty and I'm trying to coax out the last few drops.

Peace.

R

Alysia:

Regarding your response to me, I don't believe it will do any good to make the same points again.

Regarding you finding it odd that I have problems with Seth even though I communicate with guidance, I do believe there are a lot of good guys out there. I wouldn't do like Jane Roberts did and make contact with one through an ouija board and then allow this spirit to speak through my body for years without really knowing who the spirit is.

My guidance has led me to having love and faith for Christ after I viewed him similar to how some people on this forum view him. My guidance hasn't attempted to tarnish Christ's reputation as Seth does.

I've put lots of effort into discriminating who I am in contact with. I don't want to make the mistake of being misled. My guidance hasn't given me advice like don't have health insurance because my belief in such a need will cause me to have health problems some day. Jane followed such advice and ended up having to spend huge amounts of money on hospital bills when she developed an autoimune disorder. I wonder why Seth from high above couldn't provide his long time voice piece with some healing energy.  

To tell you the truth I don't know if she channeled a spirit named Seth, her subconscious, or made up the whole thing because she couldn't make a living as a science fiction writer and ESP teacher. The teachings aren't very original. Create your own reality, similtaneous incarnations, mulitiple realities, nothing new. I wonder why she/he never spoke of things such chakras, kundalini, and growing in love. Regarding love, I remember reading a paragraph where she/he said love and hate are the same thing.

recoverer wrote on Apr 19^th, 2007 at 7:07pm:

To tell you the truth I don't know if she channeled a spirit named Seth, her subconscious, or made up the whole thing because she couldn't make a living as a science fiction writer and ESP teacher. The teachings aren't very original. Create your own reality, similtaneous incarnations, mulitiple realities, nothing new. I wonder why she/he never spoke of things such chakras, kundalini, and growing in love. Regarding love, I remember reading a paragraph where she/he said love and hate are the same thing.

Very interesting view. But what do you think about the fact Seth, from what I know, never contradicted himself? I Think that it would be very hard to not contradict yourself if it was made up...  Unless you are highly intelligent.

Recoverer,

Do you think she meant that love and hate are the same thing to the extent that they create a strong bond between hater/ 'hatee' or lover/ 'lovee'?

I'd also then like to ask if you or anyone thinks that one can love without creating a bond or connection, absolutely freely? And if it's a bond or connection of love, is that a not-good thing?

Bets

Gemini:

I haven't done a detailed enough study to quote seth contradictions, but I have already stated some on this thread. For example, in seth speaks he states that the hoax of the crucifixion was a physical event, while in an earlier book, the one with the pictures, he states that the crucifixion wasn't a physical event, it was a dream like event.

He also contradicts himself when he presents himself as if he speaking up for Christ, when in fact he puts Christ down. This might be intentional.



Gemini wrote on Apr 20^th, 2007 at 4:30am:

recoverer wrote on Apr 19th, 2007 at 7:07pm: To tell you the truth I don't know if she channeled a spirit named Seth, her subconscious, or made up the whole thing because she couldn't make a living as a science fiction writer and ESP teacher. The teachings aren't very original. Create your own reality, similtaneous incarnations, mulitiple realities, nothing new. I wonder why she/he never spoke of things such chakras, kundalini, and growing in love. Regarding love, I remember reading a paragraph where she/he said love and hate are the same thing. Very interesting view. But what do you think about the fact Seth, from what I know, never contradicted himself? I Think that it would be very hard to not contradict yourself if it was made up...  Unless you are highly intelligent.

ok thread officially closed I guess! another one bites the dust! :)

I just want to end on this note; I'm sure glad that we don't take all the books and burn them, like was done back in history..

although humanity hasn't advanced a heck of lot further than those days, my opinion.

its all a dream Albert. nothing real can be threatened, nothing unreal exists.

Jesus is king no matter how he did it. may we all do the things he did someday.

oh watch your calendars for July 7th this year. we're supposed to get some planetary adjustments of a beneficial nature. I'll be watching!

Alysia:

I wonder if Jane Roberts thought the below when she had her life review.  Did she tell the light being, "It's just a dream bub. Lighten up. Who cares if I took part in misleading people?" I don't believe a light being would judge her, but she might feel some remorse.

Even if the below does come from Christ, would he actually want people to have a "it doesn't matter, do whatever you want" attitude? If we're all one, do we want to mislead each other?




[quote author=laffingrain link=1176719814/30#42 date=1177110796]ok thread officially closed I guess! another one bites the dust! :)


its all a dream Albert. nothing real can be threatened, nothing unreal exists.

hello again Albert :) you said  
Even if the below does come from Christ, would he actually want people to have a "it doesn't matter, do whatever you want" attitude? If we're all one, do we want to mislead each other?
____

the answer to your two questions above is no, and no.

bless you, bye.

Gemini who is elias and what did he do love deanna

Gemini,

I have had wonderful experiences with Elias and Seth. I do not believe it is my place to tell you what to think of any particular source of information, because, as you have problem concluded, the various members of this forum arise from differing philosophies that contradict and compliment. All information is flavored through the personality offering it. The source, in essence, remains the same, but the process of translation still occurs.


E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

Beautifully said Eternal Essence!  the experience of each book or reading material is solely the experiencer's.  Gemini, if u are still around reading or anyone else asking questions on what to read follow your intuition is best, as you will surely receive contradictions by the mere asking.
we also have a list of reading material right here on this board; look under Resources and free articles at the top of the page.

Every book is an experience walking beside another human being. love, alysia

Deanna:

He lied and said that Jesus wasn't crucified.



deanna wrote on Apr 21^st, 2007 at 6:07pm:

Gemini who is elias and what did he do love deanna

recoverer wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2007 at 1:10pm:

Deanna: He lied and said that Jesus wasn't crucified. deanna wrote on Apr 21st, 2007 at 6:07pm: Gemini who is elias and what did he do love deanna

maybe he lied. maybe Seth was there and maybe he didn't lie. I'm not following you around to incite you Recoverer. I'm exploring new ideas as new ideas does not threaten my belief system nor my love of the ones who change our world throughout history.

whenever a new idea is thrown at us, it's important to examine our reaction to it and why it threatens us.  on another note I'm saying nothing here is as it seems in appearance.

I have a report from a friend that JC went into hiding after the  crucifixion, that he walked around and continued preaching and spreading his message of love in out of the way places. whether he did this in his flesh body or his light body, I have no idea, but I can see the possibilities that he may have done this, because its true we needed the crucifixion to base a religion on, but it could have been just an appearance of death, so that it could also appear that when they rolled the boulder back he had sprung back from the dead so it could down in history that way.

however, maybe Seth was making us think about things so we could go and find out for ourselves what really happened, kind of like poking us out of our complacency that sacrifice and martyrdom is the only way to get to heaven.
Now, maybe he died on the cross, then got resurrected because you can't keep a good man down. that's what I choose to believe, so I'm with you but I keep an open mind and explore.

and another thing :) JC's body was never found. nobody can explain that yet. we can say it was transmuted into the light, but we can't explain it.
thats why we'll have to explore on our own, each one.

and finally, no matter how it was done, Christianity was born and I think it's been helpful but it's time to go and see just exactly how he did do the things, the healings, and whatnot that he did, and those of us who love him would still love him as that is basically the premise of Christianity that we love each other as he loved us.
ok, one more thing, a sacrificial type spirit would gladly take his place on the cross and a little nip of whatever before doing it is a possibility also. weird, but a possiblity, as we have kamakazi pilots don't we? so these are sacrificial type souls.

and in the end, I've found we are all liars in one way or another. I think we can all find the truth eventually through PUL, but not by labeling each other liars.
its just an opinion. it's just exploration.

Alysia:

Perhaps we should have a food fight with a bunch of cream pies instead. It would be a lot more fun and tasty too.  :P

I believe the question is what do we "know" and not what is your "opinion." Again, I have had good experiences with both Seth and Elias. Opinions here differ, but I speak from having direct experience and knowledge.

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

EternalEssence:

Seth states that Jesus was just making a joke when he said love your neighbor as yourself.  Do you believe this is true?



EternalEssence wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2007 at 4:35pm:

I believe the question is what do we "know" and not what is your "opinion." Again, I have had good experiences with both Seth and Elias. Opinions here differ, but I speak from having direct experience and knowledge. E. [smiley=engel017.gif]

recoverer,

Thank you for your question. With due respect to you, I do not read your posts for the most part because I find them suspicious in nature, an assault, however small or slight, on opinions differing from your own.

Your posts is derived from a particular perspective and a particular philosophy. You strike me as very passionate, but very wary of any organized material. Threatened may be a more apt description. I will not debate my beliefs with you, for as I have stated, I do not need approval and you do not appear to be open to being wrong; however, for this one moment, I will state this: From Seth's perspective, the material you quoted -- and I speak directly from the way you wrote it, as it is not a direct quote with a source and reference page -- what Jesus said probably was a joke. To you, it may not have been a joke. Your point, while understood, does not override another simply because you feel your side more worthy of attention and favor.

Seth does not need me to fight for him, as he has pointed out that not everyone needs him, as has stated Elias; however, everyone has the right to read material contrary to any particular belief without being made to feel that reading such material makes them inferior. I have not and will not encourage anyone to follow blindly any path; however, I will suggest that a person actively engage in learning in order to affect their ability to discern.

I have had positive experiences, again, with both Seth and Elias, among others. I will not shy away from that because someone is upset with their viewpoint. After all, in the end, have you not made a name for yourself in that very arena.

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

Thanks EE. well said.  I might share a little more what I got out of Elias, as I derived far more from Elias, and I read Seth many years ago and can remember learning something valuable there but cannot be so specific.  I like to think about the original poster, what the original question was, and I was thinking today about Albert and about this thread that we did get away from the discussing just Elias somehow and launched right into an attack on Seth and Elias are related personages but different in their approach. Heres some of the differences I noted:
Elias is an easier read, more relaxed. Seth seemed more volatile now and then.
Seth focuses more widely on humanity's creative ability, while Elias focuses through the individual readings on the specific question the person has about their self and their essence.
People pay for this personal touch, to get their own personal questions in alignment with their purpose and intention for incarnating.
I never felt the need to get a reading, as I like to study humanity, so I would myself skip over the personal questions and sooner or later Elias would broaden his answers to show how belief systems we get attached to, do produce a manifestation into society.

and thats what we talk about here, our belief systems.

I noticed Elias is nonjudgmental in his approach. thats why I said he was relaxed. I also noticed he did say he was called here by the people whom he serves. this on another level. I am in agreement with him that we as a people do have collective agendas we have agreed upon to enact into earth plane.
this means we are responsible for our reality, not someone else, or some other force. In our oneness, we do create reality and the good thing about this is it puts reality in our hands, thats where freedom lies.

following briefly whether JC had a sense of humor, I do believe a sense of humor is necessary and it is a human trait.
I do believe JC was also a human, and that is the reason we can relate to him, as our father in heaven is a formless abstract thing. and he would be speaking of PUL I assume, just as we try to speak of PUL also.
if he were joking about loving your neighbor as yourself, then he must have met my neighbor I had one time. my neigbor carried a shotgun around and shot cats. I think his mother may have loved him..just joking, can't u tell? :)  all right. I did retrieve him, but I had to call upon help in these situations.

back to JC. he's our brother and he was a human and divine at the same time. I am sure he wants us to realize we are also human and divine at the same time, and the main point of ACIM is it teaches foregiveness over and over, which is merely a release from your system the holding in of negative energy feelings.

negative energy can create illness on your body. forgiveness frees your spirit to a feeling of joy and well being, so it's very scientific what the Course illustrates and I can well imagine this is indeed the voice of JC.

also the word itself fore giveness. needs defining, like everything does. when you were a child and got into a fight, ever notice how the fight was forgotten right away? its because kids release the negative energy faster than adults as they are closer to home than we are with our belief systems.  to fore give is to give as before the grievance took place.
you give yourself, you give your joy, your livliness of a positive nature away as before the grievance. you become a child to reenter heaven, leaving your belief systems by the wayside.

the real gist of this post is to say, not from any book, but from my experience, releasing negative energy by foregiving adds a spiritual composite to your life that may have been missing before, at the same time it's an emotional thing...the left brain is always working on the solution by focusing on it and creating the solution, the foregiveness part is the negative energy we don't need to allow to build up.

peace of mind, that is what we all really desire. I never knew this before I read the Course. I do enjoy peace of mind and I would like to say for the most part this board has been instrumental in my thoughts and growth. I wish to extend gratitude, and I would like to not have to define what gratitude is. :-X

Right now, I'm grateful to Shirley and Eternal Essence. tomorrow I may be grateful to someone else.

ok, my neck hurts sitting here!   :-*  goodnite B-man.