This book is by Neale Donald Walsch, for those who don't know about the book.. I was just wondering if, you guys think it is a load of crap or worth the read.. I will still read it no matter what your opinions are... Because I like to come up with my own opinion on what I believe is good or not..

peace

I've only perused several of his "many" books in books stores and local libraries.  Some warning bells went off. At one point when Walsch mentions something about ACIM, God supposedly states "I put that in there."  When asked about ascended masters, Yogananda was one that God supposedly named. I ran into a few other things like this and decided to wait until God himself tells me that the "many" books Walsch put together and most certainly made "lots" of money with, came from him.

Regarding God's supposed support of Yogananda, here's a thread from another forum by people who have been around the block with the guru thing.

http://www.kundalini-support.com/forum/index.php/topic,1550.0.html

recoverer wrote on Apr 20^th, 2007 at 7:09pm:

I've only perused several of his "many" books in books stores and local libraries.  Some warning bells went off. At one point when Walsch mentions something about ACIM, God supposedly states "I put that in there."  When asked about ascended masters, Yogananda was one that God supposedly named. I ran into a few other things like this and decided to wait until God himself tells me that the "many" books Walsch put together and most certainly made "lots" of money with, came from him. Regarding God's supposed support of Yogananda, here's a thread from another forum by people who have been around the block with the guru thing. http://www.kundalini-support.com/forum/index.php/topic,1550.0.html

Alright, thanks for your comment and the thread! I will read his book with much scruntity! I'm sure he's not 100 % or even 90 % accurate on his beliefs.. But I am sure he does have some truths to his stories.. I am not sure if he really talks to God... I'm not saying I doubt him or anything.. I will just have to see for myself.. If, I believe him or not..

peace

I reccomend Conversations with God Alex. :)

Golly gee Alysia! This is getting Hillarion. ;D

Walsch says the crucifixion happened, Elias said it didn't. You can't actually believe that they're both true when they contradict each other on such an important point? I'm out of here.



LaffingRain wrote on Apr 20^th, 2007 at 7:55pm:

I reccomend Conversations with God Alex. :)

say Albert do u even reccomend Bruce's books? u seem really opinionated, although that's fine, we don't have to agree, remember?

tell Alex what u do reccomend, not what you don't.

modify that: my opinion. when someone not as well read as you (maybe) ask for advice on a board, go ahead and sound off is your preogative, however, a balanced viewpoint is to reccomend something that you did find worthwhile to read, that way, you have taken away something from them, but you balance it out by offering them something else. that way we can help each other better to learn.

if you're noticing a pattern of behavior thats a good thing to notice. this is just my advice. I personally don't care what anybody reads, its all good to me as every so called "bad" book only gets you closer to the good one.

but theres no good or bad. thats just my viewpoint. you don't have to understand me to love me. :)

LaffingRain wrote on Apr 20^th, 2007 at 8:07pm:

say Albert do u even reccomend Bruce's books? u seem really opinionated, although that's fine, we don't have to agree, remember? tell Alex what u do reccomend, not what you don't. modify that: my opinion. when someone not as well read as you (maybe) ask for advice on a board, go ahead and sound off is your preogative, however, a balanced viewpoint is to reccomend something that you did find worthwhile to read, that way, you have taken away something from them, but you balance it out by offering them something else. that way we can help each other better to learn. if you're noticing a pattern of behavior thats a good thing to notice. this is just my advice. I personally don't care what anybody reads, its all good to me as every so called "bad" book only gets you closer to the good one. but theres no good or bad. thats just my viewpoint. you don't have to understand me to love me. :)

Thanks and I will check it out.. As a matter of fact I just ordered it off of amazon.com.. It was a used one for only $1.95..!!

I stopped reading conforsations with God,when I read walch heard God saying that it was ok to molless little boys and little girls.I just can not believe that God said such a thing.George

george stone wrote on Apr 20^th, 2007 at 10:42pm:

I stopped reading conforsations with God,when I read walch heard God saying that it was ok to molless little boys and little girls.I just can not believe that God said such a thing.George

Are you just saying that because of him saying there is no right and wrong???

Hi George i agree with you ,that God would never tell anyone to do that,so whoever wrote that in a book seriously wants his brain looking at ,i think who wrote that was thinking more of the darkness than the light of our gracious God ,may God forgive whoever wrote that in a book for telling such a down right lie against our father who art in heaven.

Love and God bless  Love Juditha

wrote on Apr 21^st, 2007 at 3:14pm:

Hi George i agree with you ,that God would never tell anyone to do that,so whoever wrote that in a book seriously wants his brain looking at ,i think who wrote that was thinking more of the darkness than the light of our gracious God ,may God forgive whoever wrote that in a book for telling such a down right lie against our father who art in heaven. Love and God bless  Love Juditha

Well I agree, if he really did say that.. But I doubt he said that..

Well you can believe it or not,but I read it in one of his books.George

george stone wrote on Apr 21^st, 2007 at 5:31pm:

Well you can believe it or not,but I read it in one of his books.George

Well, from all the research I have done on him it seems to me he never said that... Also, I asked some respectful authors who had read his books... If he did say anything like that and Roy E Klienwachter, said he never said that...

I'm not saying your a liar or anything.. I am just saying from what I have researched so far I see nothing about him saying that..

peace

Keep looking,you will find it.George

Funny that. I came his book on a library shelf, but felt no impulse to even browse through it!?
Looking forward to your readings reviews...On another note, I went to a spiritual retreat in
the early to mid 1990's( people of all different religions, traditions and beliefs) but mainly
new age seekers in the broad sense of the word......I met a few people there who were
satya sai baba devotees and inquired about him. They told me of 'minor miracles' that
had happened to them. Anyway, I purchased three books about him(2nd hand), one by
an american psychiatrist, one by an australian author, and one by the man himself. Was
impressed...so ripped out a picture of him from one of the books(sai baba) stuck it in a
silver picture frame, and plonked it on my bookcase, expecting some minor miracles for
me...Every day I looked at his pic I felt uncomfortable, and it grew daily. I then got rid of
it....In the late 1990's the internet was filled with how he(Baba) was a secret sexual
molester of the male kind, children and all.....In 1978 a book was published by a american
guy who was part of sai baba's inner circle in India in the 1970's. He warned people that
baba was a sexual pervert all the way back then!(I actually browsed through a copy of
this book, and seen pictures and testimony of him and baba as he claimed..re: inner circle)
.....He, himself was propositioned by baba for sex...Funny thing though, he claims that this
guy baba could create miracles and had witnessed them on many occasions...The author
later became a christian, and accused sai baba of being the antichrist!??...Gman.  

Duh Bears,

This is the perfect book for th myopic New Age Ghetto that imagines (1) that all dreams of the recently deceased are actual visits from them, (2) that all dreams of leaving the body are genuine OBEs, and (3) that any New Age kook who claims to speak for God should be believed, even when he can provide no verifications of this contact.  Just make sure you avoid the devastating critiques of discerning writers outside the Ghetto.   For ecample, "God" gets the name of the author of ACIM wrong (Helen Schucman).  When confronted on this, Walsch claims that "God" gave him the correct name by he made the mistake of writing down the false name he recalled.   Duh!   God affirms all the tired New Age bromdes and offers nothing new.   Just remember this: you are not allowed to ask why God would not authenticate His authorship by offering a few scientific or mediical breakthroughs.   Or maybe God could have told us where Jimmy Hoffa's body is buried.  Walsch views this criticism wtth contempt and dismisses it as a vulgarization of divine revelation.  Hah!  Duh Bears, I apologize for urging you to read discerning books outside the Ghetto.  As Jack Nicholson put it, You can't handle the truth!

Don

P.S.  And with a disgruntled Lance Briggs and the loss of starters like Thomas Jones, your Bears wills suck next year too!  

Berserk wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2007 at 12:11am:

Duh Bears, This is the perfect book for th myopic New Age Ghetto that imagines (1) that all dreams of the recently deceased are actual visits from them, (2) that all dreams of leaving the body are genuine OBEs, and (3) that any New Age kook who claims to speak for God should be believed, even when he can provide no verifications of this contact.  Just make sure you avoid the devastating critiques of discerning writers outside the Ghetto.   For ecample, "God" gets the name of the author of ACIM wrong (Helen Schucman).  When confronted on this, Walsch claims that "God" gave him the correct name by he made the mistake of writing down the false name he recalled.   Duh!   God affirms all the tired New Age bromdes and offers nothing new.   Just remember this: you are not allowed to ask why God would not authenticate His authorship by offering a few scientific or mediical breakthroughs.   Or maybe God could have told us where Jimmy Hoffa's body is buried.  Walsch views this criticism wtth contempt and dismisses it as a vulgarization of divine revelation.  Hah!  Duh Bears, I apologize for urging you to read discerning books outside the Ghetto.  As Jack Nicholson put it, You can't handle the truth! Don P.S.  And with a disgruntled Lance Briggs and the loss of starters like Thomas Jones, your Bears wills suck next year too!

Does not God talk to all devout christians, Don??...And why has not any of your brainwashed
crowd given us the whereabouts of Hoffa's body or medical breakthroughts???!!!! What has
your god told you lately? Any tips on the stock exchange? How about asking him who really
killed kennedy?...As usual the christian dictatorship's feedback from god is somewhere
between O and 1% ...Gman. ps. Has any passed saints given us any new scientific breakthroughs from the big boss above????

Say George, I never heard of Walsh saying that either and I'm not wasting my time to search for it.  but here's an idea: anytime that someone, anyone at all, even JC, gains a noteriety in the public eye, they will be either slain outright by opposers who make up lies, or the rumors will kill their popularity, at which time they've done their life work and can safely exit stage left and go home to a place where no more lies take place and everybody knows everything instantly.
just ask PeeWee Herman.

just the way it is.

[Gman:] "Does not God talk to all devout christians, Don??...And why has not any of your brainwashed crowd given us the whereabouts of Hoffa's body?"
______________________________________________________________

Sensibly enough, the Bible never claims that we can identify God with the voice in the back of our head and converse with Him.  The Bible offers us 3 basic types of divine inspiration.  (1) Prophetic inspiration basically deals with this question: Do our external religious pretenses really relfect an inner spiritual  transformation?  If not, what must we do to make our spirituality real?  Even the prophetic word of knowledge deals with hidden spiritual conditions, not with the location of Jimmy Hoffa's corpse.   (2) The divine inspiration that derives from "the word of wisdom" is mediated through lessons learned in the school of hard knocks.   (3) God also speaks to us in the sense that He helps us apply His biblical messages to our experience.   In all cases, Christian claims of divine inspiration need to be subject to careful discernment from the corporate body of Christ and are inevitably interfused with very human interpretations that can lead to distortions.  In other words, unlike New Age kookery, Christian claims  of divine inspiration are ever cognizant of the potential for self-delusion.


[Gman:] "What has your god told you lately?"
_________________________________________

Two days ago, I felt the need to expose the absurdity of Alysia's claim that atheist Howard Storm was a dumb masochist who chose to go to Hell.   Just before I was about to post, I felt the impulse to turn on my TV.  There was Howard Storm discussing his NDE ordeal in Hell!  This was the first time I've ever heard him speak!

A couple of weeks prior, Roger (Rondele) posted on actor Telly Savalas's paranormal experience of being picked up on a rainy night and driven to a gas station.   He later learns that the driver had died in a car accident the previous year.  Telly is able to provide the driver's mother with awesome verifcations that the driver was indeed her son.  I was going to post my online reply about this, when I felt a strong impulse to turn on my TV.  The screen was immediately filled with Telly Savalas, an actor I haven't seen in many years since the Kojak series ended.

Is God speaking to me through such synchronicities?  Is God perhaps telling me that these paranormal experiences are genuine?   I must reply with the three words you rarely hear New Age Ghetlo members utter: "I don't know."  Perhaps.  

The one time God clearly spoke to me in my youth was an incident of intense spiritual ecstasy in an outdoor amphitheatre at a Christian camp.  I was initially by myself in the dark, but a crowd soon gathered because they saw my face glowing in the dark.  I asked them why they were there because their presence struck me as odd. And what did God say to me?  He told me that my theology was flawed, but that it was not in my best interests to have Him directly clear up my misunderstandings.  He implied that my instincts were good and that I needed to passionately live my burning questions and find my own answers that way.   By doing so, I had the chance to integrate my "answers" into a vibrant spirituality that made a difference and was more than a mere head trip.  In other words, despite the rich blessings my Pentecostal background had provided, God told me to leave my Christian Ghetto and seek out alternative intellectually respectable perspectives.  That divine edict prompted me to get my MDiv from Princeton and my doctorate from Harvard in Theology.  At the same time, I also immersed myself in New Age thought.  So when I press you to leave the New Age Ghetto and seek out challenging alternative perspectives, I speak from a personal sense of divine calling.

Don

George is right to reject this book.  Its title really should be "Conversations With Myself."  It is not only a cheap knock-off of ACIM (as is Disappearance of the Universe) but it is also a self serving diatribe wherein Walsch tries to exonerate himself of things he did in his past.  Anyone with an ounce of discernment will toss this book into the nearest trash bin.

Here is just one excerpt of a reviewer's comment about the book:

"Perhaps the most blatant misuse of the Bible is the recasting of the Ten Commandments into the Ten Commitments. These Commitments include the idea that taking God's name in vain means that we don't understand the power of words. We are to honor the Mother/Father God and “all life forms”; and that coveting your neighbor's spouse makes no sense because we know that “all others are your spouse.” God adds benevolently that these are ten freedoms, because he does not order us around. He just tells us that these commitments are “signs” indicating we have found God."

Ok folks here are the facts:  Walsch was a notorious womanizer in his early days.  No wonder his "god" tells him that it's ok to screw around with someone else's wife.  He himself did that before he wrote this pile of garbage.

The new age mentality thinks that anything and everything is true as long as it's channeled.  They don't stop and think.  Their ability to discern fact from fiction is compromised.

George, you are wise to stay away from this crap.  I read it a few summers ago at the beach, and the first half was pretty good.  It totally breaks down, however, in the second half.  In fact sometimes I think the new agers who embrace this nonsense just skim through things without even realizing how absurd the stuff really is.

Again, ask yourself what motivation is behind the material.  Walsch uses his mythical conversation in order to absolve himself and others from all sorts of perverted abuses.  Any amateur psychologist would know right off the bat what Walsch is trying to do.  The pity is that so many people are bamboozled.

P.T. Barnum was right.

R

DaBears,

My recommendation is that you read the book and report what your impressions. Everyone who reads the book will form an opinon of it from their nature. Take what you can from the book and disregard anything that does not ring true. By reading the book, any book, you are not saying that you agree with the author, but you may still find small pearls of wisdom in the words.

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

Eternal Essence:

There's a short coming in what you say. Please consider this before I explain. I used to belong to a group that was led by a guru. His group was filled with many well meaning and loving people. Many of them were quite intelligent. While in the group most of these members were certain this guru was enlightened. He put on a good show. Most of them have left his group and are certain that he isn't enlightened. They woke up from the fog he put them in when they found out about the numerous ways in which his life didn't match his teachings. He pretended to be something he wasn't.

I've been observing what gurus from both this conntry and other countries have been doing for about 24 years. Time after time I find that gurus aren't what they claim to be. Each of them is able to compile a flock of well meaning, loving and often intelligent followers. Why are they able to do so? Because out of the goodness of their hearts their followers find it hard to believe that a person who speaks well about things such as God and love could be a fake.

This is a difficulty I worked hard to get over.   Something I witnessed at my work helped me do so. I worked with a lady who was always concerned about her husband cheating on her. I found this odd because he didn't seem like a person who would cheat. Later on I found out why she was so concerned. Because she cheated on him. Her cheating framework of mind didn't allow her to understand how somebody else could be faithful. In a similar manner, my lack of mental tendencies that would enable me to become a fake guru made it hard for me to understand how somebody else could do so.

The reason I shared the above is to show that discernment doesn't always come just like that. Just as many people such as myself weren't able to discriminate about gurus until we became wise about them, many people aren't going to be able to discriminate about channeled sources until they have the knowledge to do so.

Just as I feel compelled to warn people about gurus, I feel compelled to warn them about questionable channeled sources. It can take years to get rid of the false concepts one picks up from a false source of information.  Not everybody has to learn the hard way, as many people do.

On the other hand, people can say everything is kumbaya, nothing is real.



EternalEssence wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2007 at 7:25pm:

DaBears, My recommendation is that you read the book and report what your impressions. Everyone who reads the book will form an opinon of it from their nature. Take what you can from the book and disregard anything that does not ring true. By reading the book, any book, you are not saying that you agree with the author, but you may still find small pearls of wisdom in the words. E. [smiley=engel017.gif]

recoverer wrote on Apr 20^th, 2007 at 7:09pm:

I've only perused several of his "many" books in books stores and local libraries.  Some warning bells went off. At one point when Walsch mentions something about ACIM, God supposedly states "I put that in there."  When asked about ascended masters, Yogananda was one that God supposedly named. I ran into a few other things like this and decided to wait until God himself tells me that the "many" books Walsch put together and most certainly made "lots" of money with, came from him. Regarding God's supposed support of Yogananda, here's a thread from another forum by people who have been around the block with the guru thing. http://www.kundalini-support.com/forum/index.php/topic,1550.0.html

  Wow, didn't know all that about Yogananda.  I mostly enjoyed (but definitely did not agree with all of) his Autobiography of Yogi and assumed he was the real deal, though not a master or fully enlightened.  


  Do you know anything about Sri Aubinado?   A person whom i've clashed on the personality/ego level with a lot in this and other lives (it seems), spoke very highly of this particular teacher, but since he spoke highly of Alice Bailey and her teachings (enough to recommend them), i'm not to sure about his powers of discrimination to begin with.    

 From what little i do know of Sri A., he was supposedly involved with a group which condoned and perhaps practiced political violence before he became a guru type.   When i asked the above person of how could such a supposedly spiritually developed person partake of such things even into their mid 20's, and not know that was wrong on some level be on the same spiritual page as someone like Yeshua who knew such things seemingly pretty early on, i got silence.   Earlier he had said that not only did he consider Sri A. an incarnated Avatar but also one of the highest masters.   That's some pretty high praise there.

 My question is concerning these proclaimed enlightened ones, is why do all of them age and die?   From various psychic sources which i respect like some from TMI or Cayce, most of thesel indicate that a very intune, balanced and loving person will stop aging "normally", and an automatic revitalization of their body-physical starts to happen, hence they experience sickenss, disease, aging, etc. less and less and radiant, vibrant health more and more.  If they get intune enough like Yeshua, they will trancend physical death completely and be in this world but not of it, so to speak.  

  Anyways, thanks for the eye-opener concerning Yogananda, it was somewhat disillusioning but necessary.   Thankfully though, i never got to much into him other than reading that one book and thinking he was probably much more intune than the average person.  

 Stuff like this, shows how important discrimination  and balancing the right brain with the left brain is.  

Ah so said:   Do you know anything about Sri Aubinado?   A person whom i've clashed on the personality/ego level with a lot in this and other lives (it seems), spoke very highly of this particular teacher, but since he spoke highly of Alice Bailey and her teachings (enough to recommend them), i'm not to sure about his powers of discrimination to begin with.    

 From what little i do know of Sri A., he was supposedly involved with a group which condoned and perhaps practiced political violence before he became a guru type.   When i asked the above person of how could such a supposedly spiritually developed person partake of such things even into their mid 20's, and not know that was wrong on some level be on the same spiritual page as someone like Yeshua who knew such things seemingly pretty early on, i got silence.   Earlier he had said that not only did he consider Sri A. an incarnated Avatar but also one of the highest masters.   That's some pretty high praise there.

 My question is concerning these proclaimed enlightened ones, is why do all of them age and die?   From various psychic sources which i respect like some from TMI or Cayce, most of thesel indicate that a very intune, balanced and loving person will stop aging "normally", and an automatic revitalization of their body-physical starts to happen, hence they experience sickenss, disease, aging, etc. less and less and radiant, vibrant health more and more.  If they get intune enough like Yeshua, they will trancend physical death completely and be in this world but not of it, so to speak.  

"Even though I've known about Aurobindo for years, I've never read any of his teachings or come accross anything that is negative.

Ah so said:  Anyways, thanks for the eye-opener concerning Yogananda, it was somewhat disillusioning but necessary.   Thankfully though, i never got to much into him other than reading that one book and thinking he was probably much more intune than the average person.  

 Stuff like this, shows how important discrimination  and balancing the right brain with the left brain is.

"Good statement about balancing the right brain with the left. Otherwise everything is kumbaya. Regarding the Avatar thing, fake gurus use it as a oneupmanship thing. In India, if you're an Avatar, you're not just a self realized master like other gurus or a piece of God like the rest of us, you're God himself incarnate.  There are a number of gurus who have claimed such a thing without it being true. For example, Sai Baba who used to molest the male children of his followers. Some gurus don't start out as Avatars, but later announce that they are one. Adi Da (Da Free John, and numerous other names), Yogananda, and I believe Sri Chinmoy and Rajneesh (Osho) are a few gurus who have done this. I guess they get to the point where they feel the pedestal their followers put them on isn't high enough. Sometimes followers will give their guru this title-sometimes after their guru has passed away. I don't know where the avatar thing started for Aurobindo.  Whatever the case, if a guru has been around long enough, it is liable to come up.

Regarding the appointing thing, there was a lady who visited this forum for a short while, and at another forum she wrote that Sai Baba, Bill Gates and somebody else (I think Mother Theresa) are avatars. Bill Gates? Perhaps she doesn't understand what the original meaning of the term is.

You're welcome for the Yogananda info.

recoverer,

First, let me say that this post comes after the previous post and the flavor of it is somewhat different. I feel it as different, because in this post, you come across as a person speaking from experience and it shines through with its own conveyance of truth.

I understand your experience and I can only infer that you wished someone had told you then what you know now, which is what you wished to accomplish. Did the experience make you a bad person? A better one? The event and the people are secondary to what you obtained as a result of that experience. I, too, have experiences that I would love to prevent others from going through, but it is not my place. I know, without doubt, that there is a reason for it.  

Do I believe that everyone works for the betterment of others? No. Do I believe that there is a reason for what happens. Yes. From what I can ascertain of your post, you retained your ability to reason rather than following blindly in the footsteps of another. I do not blind following, but encourage experience and a healthy dose of intellectual curiosity. I am a living, breathing creature, born from light to which I will eventually return. I speak only from my experience, because it is my truth. It is not the only truth, because by its nature a truth can never be untrue.

For what it is worth, I had a similar experience with the cheating scenario, but the sexes were reversed.

I understand the why of your caveats on sources of material; however, what is the personal responsibility of those who allow themselves to be swept away by gurus? Not one channeled source of material, not even my higher self, has ever stated that I should follow their way. If anything, I have been forced to work harder to learn to reason and to draw from them what rings true for me and to disregard other material.

My recommendation of this book did not come with a "This is the way." but only "I recommend you read it." Only by reading it, does one gain a personal perspective that they can share, an experience they can offer, much like your experiences with gurus. Once experienced, in whatever form, it can be discussed, which is what forms the basis of this forum.

Thank you for sharing.

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

EternalEssence wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2007 at 8:41pm:

recoverer, First, let me say that this post comes after the previous post and the flavor of it is somewhat different. I feel it as different, because in this post, you come across as a person speaking from experience and it shines through with its own conveyance of truth. I understand your experience and I can only infer that you wished someone had told you then what you know now, which is what you wished to accomplish. Did the experience make you a bad person? A better one? The event and the people are secondary to what you obtained as a result of that experience. I, too, have experiences that I would love to prevent others from going through, but it is not my place. I know, without doubt, that there is a reason for it.   Do I believe that everyone works for the betterment of others? No. Do I believe that there is a reason for what happens. Yes. From what I can ascertain of your post, you retained your ability to reason rather than following blindly in the footsteps of another. I do not blind following, but encourage experience and a healthy dose of intellectual curiosity. I am a living, breathing creature, born from light to which I will eventually return. I speak only from my experience, because it is my truth. It is not the only truth, because by its nature a truth can never be untrue. For what it is worth, I had a similar experience with the cheating scenario, but the sexes were reversed. I understand the why of your caveats on sources of material; however, what is the personal responsibility of those who allow themselves to be swept away by gurus? Not one channeled source of material, not even my higher self, has ever stated that I should follow their way. If anything, I have been forced to work harder to learn to reason and to draw from them what rings true for me and to disregard other material. My recommendation of this book did not come with a "This is the way." but only "I recommend you read it." Only by reading it, does one gain a personal perspective that they can share, an experience they can offer, much like your experiences with gurus. Once experienced, in whatever form, it can be discussed, which is what forms the basis of this forum. Thank you for sharing. E. [smiley=engel017.gif]

I am going to read this book no matter what people say or think about it..

good for you Alex! read everything you can get your hands on and own yourself!
the power is within to listen to your guidance of what rings true in the heart.
if you ever get an uneasy feeling when you are reading something, you might want to listen to what your feelings are telling you and read something else. If on the other hand you are connecting with the material and your mind and heart are resonating in joy to it, I'd go with that.  theres a book for everyone out there no matter what part of the path home they are on and we don't all read or support the same books as you may have noticed! :)

Thanks for your post EE. I like the way you communicate yourself. love, alysia

LaffingRain wrote on Apr 24^th, 2007 at 12:09am:

good for you Alex! read everything you can get your hands on and own yourself! the power is within to listen to your guidance of what rings true in the heart. if you ever get an uneasy feeling when you are reading something, you might want to listen to what your feelings are telling you and read something else. If on the other hand you are connecting with the material and your mind and heart are resonating in joy to it, I'd go with that.  theres a book for everyone out there no matter what part of the path home they are on and we don't all read or support the same books as you may have noticed! :) Thanks for your post EE. I like the way you communicate yourself. love, alysia

Yeah, I feel the same way you do about listening to my heart and feelings! BTW EE you are a great poster and need to post more often!!
peace

Yo Alex,

you also promised you were going to read Malachi Martin's "Hostage to the Devil" and Johanna Michaelson's "The Beautiful Side of Evil"  (2 books not recommended by the New Age Ghetto).  Were you just lying or are you sitll planning to keep your promise in your own good time?

Don the Nagger

Berserk wrote on Apr 24^th, 2007 at 10:30pm:

Yo Alex, you also promised you were going to read Malachi Martin's "Hostage to the Devil" and Johanna Michaelson's "The Beautiful Side of Evil"  (2 books not recommended by the New Age Ghetto).  Were you just lying or are you sitll planning to keep your promise in your own good time? Don the Nagger

No, I am not going to read them.. Now that I have looked at the reviews from posters at amazon.com.. I have read many books on demons already.. I don't believe in demons so I don't want to waste my time reading about demons that don't exist..

peace

Alex,

But then you can't claim to be open-minded.  You absolutely WILL beleive in demons if you read Martin.  I guarantee it.  I have issued this challenge to doubters before.  SO FAR I HAVE NEVER BEEN WRONG IN THIS CLAIM.  One skeptical college student spoke like you.  He later apologized to me that he couldn't finish the book because it gave him insomnia.  But he sheepishly added that Martin absolutely convinced him that demons DO EXIST.  Just think about this, Alex: you just could be the first exception!   You did promise and it would be your first truly challenging book on evil outside the New Age Ghetto.  OK, forget Michaelsen and just read Martin.  Reading a challenging book with a point of view contrary to your own is a rite of passage into intellectual adulthood.  

A few nights ago on the late night radio program 'Coast the Coast,' a hard-core New Ager who took several courses at the Monroe Institute was interviewed.  She had just authored a new book "Suddenly Psychic."  When asked if she believed in demons, she confessed that she had always bought the New Age party line on this issue and rejected demons.  But then a close friend of hers beecame demon-possessed.  The horror of that experience changed that New Ager's mind!

Don  

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

"Even though I've known about Aurobindo for years, I've never read any of his teachings or come accross anything that is negative. "Good statement about balancing the right brain with the left. Otherwise everything is kumbaya. Regarding the Avatar thing, fake gurus use it as a oneupmanship thing. In India, if you're an Avatar, you're not just a self realized master like other gurus or a piece of God like the rest of us, you're God himself incarnate.  There are a number of gurus who have claimed such a thing without it being true. For example, Sai Baba who used to molest the male children of his followers. Some gurus don't start out as Avatars, but later announce that they are one. Adi Da (Da Free John, and numerous other names), Yogananda, and I believe Sri Chinmoy and Rajneesh (Osho) are a few gurus who have done this. I guess they get to the point where they feel the pedestal their followers put them on isn't high enough. Sometimes followers will give their guru this title-sometimes after their guru has passed away. I don't know where the avatar thing started for Aurobindo.  Whatever the case, if a guru has been around long enough, it is liable to come up. Regarding the appointing thing, there was a lady who visited this forum for a short while, and at another forum she wrote that Sai Baba, Bill Gates and somebody else (I think Mother Theresa) are avatars. Bill Gates? Perhaps she doesn't understand what the original meaning of the term is. You're welcome for the Yogananda info.

 Thanks for the further info Recoverer.  It seems i too did not know exactly what an "Avatar" was according to Indian definitions.  Just always assumed it was someone who came in (born from) an unusually expanded and fast vibrating consciousness state and who would play a direct teaching type role.   Something that i would attribute to someone coming in from the Solar or Arcturian dimensions.  Uncommon, but only relatively speaking.

 Then an Avatar had a pretty good chance of becoming a fully enlightened Master type or close to in that life, or something similar along those lines.  In Robert Monroe's biography, some folks who knew him refer to him as an "Avatar" but it seems they also don't know the more traditional definition of the word.   There's more than a wee bit of personality worship in his biography (not Monroe's fault by any means), but its an interesting book nonetheless.

 Anyways, didn't realize the whole "avatar" thing it was a form of oneupmanship like that.   Wonder why people can't settle for being parts of God, which can choose to become one with Source by being like Source?   But no, i'm "special" and i'm God directly reincarnated, while you're not???    That doesn't make any sense to me anyways.  

 I mean i do believe that as children of Source with Freewill, we all are at different rates and degrees of growth towards pure Source consciousness, but i don't think anyone is ultimately more special than anyone else and the destiny of each Total self/Disc is the same for everyone though we all make our arrivals at different moments relatively speaking.

 Anyways, that guy that i mentioned earlier--the one i had had problems with, had a very strong "guru wannabe" vibe to him, and no surprise he is so into the Indian/Vedic traditions.   Apparently he decided that i needed him as my guru, and wouldn't leave me alone.    When i stopped responding to him on the public part of the site because i finally became fed up with and intolerant towards him, he started to p.m. me.  Interestingly, he almost never said one positive or uplifting thing to, or about me but said plenty of very negative, judgemental and critcal things...hmmm that's how enlightened folks act though.

 In a sense, i did consider him a "teacher" but not in the way that he thought he was or wanted to be to me (and wanted me to think of him).   Helped me with attachment issues.  Anyone i have problems and personality clashes with, i tend to consider as teachers.   Well anyways, thanks again.

 

You're welcome Ah so.

Berserk wrote on Apr 24^th, 2007 at 11:36pm:

Alex, But then you can't claim to be open-minded.  You absolutely WILL beleive in demons if you read Martin.  I guarantee it.  I have issued this challenge to doubters before.  SO FAR I HAVE NEVER BEEN WRONG IN THIS CLAIM.  One skeptical college student spoke like you.  He later apologized to me that he couldn't finish the book because it gave him insomnia.  But he sheepishly added that Martin absolutely convinced him that demons DO EXIST.  Just think about this, Alex: you just could be the first exception!   You did promise and it would be your first truly challenging book on evil outside the New Age Ghetto.  OK, forget Michaelsen and just read Martin.  Reading a challenging book with a point of view contrary to your own is a rite of passage into intellectual adulthood.   A few nights ago on the late night radio program 'Coast the Coast,' a hard-core New Ager who took several courses at the Monroe Institute was interviewed.  She had just authored a new book "Suddenly Psychic."  When asked if she believed in demons, she confessed that she had always bought the New Age party line on this issue and rejected demons.  But then a close friend of hers beecame demon-possessed.  The horror of that experience changed that New Ager's mind! Don

I've already been open minded by the fact I've read books about demons.. So, I don't think I should read this book.. IF, it caused a guy insomnia I don't want that... With my already ocd problem..

Ghosts are what cause possesions not demonic entities..  By calling my belief system the New Age Ghetto.. That is very disrespectful.. I want you to stop that!

Sorry  I don't think any book about demons will change my point of view.. I just don't see why God would create demons..

Alex,

Well, I too have broken promises I meant to keep for a variety of reasons.  Let's reverse the sitiuation.    You recommend and inquire about books here and rightly so.    Suppose you were arguing with someone and thought a New Age book wiould convince them.   So you challenge him to read it to deepen the discussion.  But your dialogue partner refuses to read it on the grounds that its paranormal claims are based on demonic deception.   Such a claim, of course, thwarts meaningful discussion.   Would you not feel a twinge of indignation about his close-mindedness?  You often dogmatically dismiss positions on this site simply because they clash with your rigid belief system.  It does not seem to matter that your debating partner marshalls evidence from many different sources to justify his claims.   You see no need to give reasons.  Why do you even imagine that it is important or meaningful for you to affirm your confomity with those who reinforce your biases.  You'll learn very little that way.  All I'm doing is asking you just once to read a book outside the New Age ghetto to prove that you are emotionally stable and independent enough to survive such a challenge.  I'm skeptical that you  can tolerate the threat.  

I don't lock all New Agers into a Ghetto--just those who refuse to investigate alternative perspectives to sharpen up their grasp of their own case.  You seem to lack the resolve to resist the powerful and compelling cases histories witnessed by Martin.   So you put your head in the sand and continue to dogmatize.    You could gain some "street creds' with a lot of New Agers here if you would just once test yourself to see if you're up to such a challenge.  As I've said, I guarantee you the Martin will blow you away.  Perhaps, you'd rather remain within your comfort zone than be a truth seeker. I have a huge New Age library and feel cleansed by the balance that comes from checking the evidence for these New Age views and experiences against my own experiences and current beliefs.

Don

Berserk wrote on Apr 25^th, 2007 at 7:18pm:

Alex, Well, I too have broken promises I meant to keep for a variety of reasons.  Let's reverse the sitiuation.    You recommend and inquire about books here and rightly so.    Suppose you were arguing with someone and thought a New Age book wiould convince them.   So you challenge him to read it to deepen the discussion.  But your dialogue partner refuses to read it on the grounds that its paranormal claims are based on demonic deception.   Such a claim, of course, thwarts meaningful discussion.   Would you not feel a twing aof indignation about his close-mindedness?  You often dogmatically dismiss positions on this site simply because they clash with your figid belief system.  It does not seem to matter that your debating partner marshalls evidence from many different sources to justify his claims.   You seem no need to give reasons.  Why do you even imagine that it is important or meaningful for you to affirm your confomity with those who reinforce your biases.  You'll learn very little that way.  All I'm doing is asking you just once to read a book outside the New Age ghetto to prove that you are emotionally stable and independent enough to survice such a challenge.  I'm skeptical that you  can tolerate the theat.   I don't lock all New Agers into a Ghetto--just those who refuse to investigate alternative perspectives to sharpen up their grasp of their own case.  You lack the ability to resist the powerful and compelling cases histories witnessed by Martin.   So you put your head in the sand and continue to dogmatize.    You could gain some "street creds' with a lot of New Agers here if you would just once test yourself to see if you're up to such a challenge.  As I've said, I guarantee you the Martin will blow you away.  Perhaps, you'd rather remain within your comfort zone than be a truth seeker. I have a huge New Age library and feel cleansed by the balance that comes from checking the evidence for these New Age views and experiences against my own experiences and current beliefs. Don

Alright, I'll read it... I told you I have already read books about demons that argue they do exist.. But if this book will blow me away like you say, I'll give it a try..

Is this book going to be at the nearest library or what?? Do I have to buy it?

You also, forget to remember that I was raised Catholic and went to a legit Catholic High School.. So, I know all about demons my friend.. So, I started researching other religions and Spiritualism, and New Age.. The one that rings more with truth to me is the New Age and Spiritualism..

peace

Alex,

I'd call or visit a big lcocal library to see if they have it.  If you read it, it will change the whole tone of all my dicussions with you, even if you don't read any other book I recommend.   I do know that you'd also just love David Fontana's book "Is There an Afterlife?  A Comprehensive Overivew of the Evidence."  But that is a New Age book.  Still, it is not a Ghetto book because Fontana tries to consider various sides of the argument for each type of afterlife evidence.

Don

P.S.1 Sorry for all my typos. I've corrected them and reworded my prior post.

P.S. 2 I am not Catholic, but I was a religion professor at a Catholic university for 12 years.  I had some excellent students, but many were biblically illiterate.  I'n not saying that this applies to you.   My main objective here is to posters to hinestly come to terms wit hboth sides of each important question.    Christians from my Protestant background seldom do that.  Dialogue becomes pointless if we don't read each other's most influential sources. Anyway, I'll be very impressed if you read Martin.  Sorry for being so pushy. ::)

Over the past few years, I have pursued readings in several areas including studies/books on the nature of consciousness, OOBEs, NDEs and what may be called New Age thought.  I have also reviewed parts of Judaism and been open to hearing about Christianity from various sources, including Don.  One of the most common recurring themes I have encountered is that on a spiritual quest, direct experience over an extended period of time is the most important and rewarding way to advance one's own spirituality.

This is why I added comments to the "who is Elias" thread.  Many can get lost if immersed in the written word so much that they debate chapter and verse of any one earthly or channeled source at the expense of experiencing love and grace on their own (this was not directed at any forum member).  Don has written of his own personal experiences of divine love; to me they are far more important (though no less interesting) than his interpretation of New Testament scripture.  With this as a prologue, I now direct my comments at Alex and the insistence on reading Martin's "Hostage to the Devil."  

Alex, if you take a New Age view that demons are only misguided humans, and that their evil disappears in a poof when they recognize it, then reading Martin's text may be important.  If these disturbing accounts of five cases of possession are what is needed to convince you, so be it.  If, on the other hand, your view of the universe allows for the notion of evil, and you don't need convincing, I am not certain of how this book will forward your spiritual quest.  

If most sources point toward love and PUL as being the driving force of the divine and heaven, one can conclude that evil stems from the converse: distancing oneself from the divine, and a lack of love (or presence of hate).  I am still not sure how the notions of good and evil, right and wrong - the duality of the physical and spiritual planes, meld into a unity of all things, but on a higher level, there is a synthesis of this dualism, much as the yin/yang sign has within it two fish, one black and one white which together make up a perfect circle.  

One does not need to indulge in evil, or explore its reality to know it exists and is real.  If I believe our consciousness is independent of the physical world, then I believe other consciousness/entities are out there in the nonphysical realms.  Exploring possession does not forward my spiritual quest if it does not somehow push me to be more in line with the love of heaven.  When the movie "The Exorcist" came out in the 1970s, men and women ran out of the theaters screaming.  There were reports of true miscarriages induced by the horror of the movie (much of which was enhanced with innumerable visual and audio subliminal messages to enhance the sense of fear and horror).  I saw nothing positive that came out of the rellease of that movie.  

There are potential down sides to reading these five very disturbing very detailed cases of possession.  I have read reviews of the book where readers began to read too much of the demonic into their own actions, and became frightened and lost for a time.  Only a well balanced mind can maintain the proper perspective to digest these cases and not suffer from fear related consequences.  Fear begets fear and usually leads away from love.  Bruce describes this quite well on this site; in fact it is said that fear and love can not coexist, and in many instances, when love is used to banish fear, I believe this is true.

So read Malachi Martin if you need convincing, but pursue your spiritual quest toward love and God on your own, through your actions with others, meditation and exploration.  If you don't need convincing about the reality of evil, do not read Martin just to satisfy Don's challange.

Matthew

Let me second Doc's common-sense advice....

Let your own experience be the touchstone in your journey.

Fear is never the direction to go in.

well said Doc. I 3rd the motion and just add that studying evil is to study the problem, but to neglect the solution..to focus in the direction where, as the Christians will say, your salvation lies. it's really hard to be afraid of something if you're concentrating on revealing love.
amazing grace is almost here, let the sun shine.

Hi Doc-

Generally speaking I agree that fear and love cannot co-exist.  I think where the real problem comes in is when we are confronted with objective evil.

Fortunately I suspect that most if not all of us have never encountered the type of evil Martin writes about.  It is my own view that in the presence of such raw, unadulterated evil, it would be pretty much useless to try to send "PUL" in its direction, thinking that will be sufficient to dispel it.

I think that is one of the big misconceptions of new age thought; i.e. sending PUL will chase evil away.  I think that is a useful technique if what we see or perceive is a manifestation/projection of our own thoughts or fears.  However, in the face of pure evil, it would be like bringing a squirt gun into a knife fight.

And that's the potential danger when new agers confuse evil with our own projections.  They vastly underestimate the power of evil.  They really have little or no understanding of the type of evil Martin describes.  

I think you would serve all of us if you were to read the book and then give us your reactions.  Your opinion is respected and well balanced.  I really think Don just wants all of us to be aware of the potential dangers out there, and if Martin's book doesn't serve that purpose nothing will!

R

Roger,

I appreciate your words.  I have no desire to delve into Martin's book right now, not because I dismiss it (this is where I think some go astray), but on the contrary, because I acknowledge the awfulness of the possessions and believe that discarnate entities exist with both angelic and malefic personal agendas.  I am still uncertain whether knowing that on one levell evil exists will ever convince a New Ager that their cosmology is flawed.  The existential suppositions and systems already have explanations within them to account for discarnate entities or "negs," in the astral way of speaking.  

I should also point out that when reading any text, the possible agendas of the author, along with their truthfulness and character may impact the writing of the text in an obvious or subtle way.  More on this with regard to Martin later...

If I can get through my current reading on NDEs (which I plan to post more on in the near future), I might at some point come back to Martin's book for a read.  But I think what you are hearing is that this forum has more open minded people than some give it credit for.  Many do not doubt the existence of these possessions or the demonic.  Some of us simply want to know, if we are in agreement with you and Don as to the existence of evil, what we have to gain from going through and immersing ourselves in the experience.

Matthew

Doc-

Point well taken.  I have chosen not to read Martin's book as well, for much the same reasons you give.  Something within me sends up a red flag, and I'm not sure why.  Probably because I'm concerned that if I direct my thoughts too heavily in that direction, it just might give those entities (if they exist) power that they do not now have at least as far as myself is concerned.

And btw, let me clarify something.  Regarding objective evil, my own view is that I just don't know if it exists or not.  That being said, I would rather err on the side of being wrong in believing that it exists rather than vice versa.  Because if it does, it's nothing to fool around with or to dismiss with typical new age nonchalance.

Does it really matter what the origins of a dark spirit are? Spirit energy is spirit energy, and darkness is darkness. Sometimes human beings become quite dark even when they are in the body. Insane-animal like behavior, hate, anger, rage, perversion, ill will, and irreverence towards the divine are ways of being that just about any spirit can live according to if for whatever reason it ends up doing so. I say just about, because there is no way God will go dark and I doubt that his angels can.

When it comes to the five Martin cases, what are the circumstances that led to each possession?

I believe that if there is interest, a whole new thread should be started on M. Martin's "Hostage to the Devil."  I have been waiting for Don's followup to these comments to see if he wishes to start such a thread.  I have some interesting information about Martin that may shed some light on his writings as well.  But first, I await Don's input (this is his baby).



Matthew

I actually discourage people from reading Martin if thay already believe in evil spiritual forces that cannot be "helped", say, by sending PUL.   I recommend Martin only to those who are adament that demons do not exist.  One gal from this site asked me if I'd recommend that she read Martin and I said No.   She had encountered evil profoundly in her life and I thought Martin might just depress her.   But she took this as a challenge and read him anyway.   She was very upset by Martin's cases, but his book crystallized her perspective on the dark forces that had hurt her family.   She also asked me to recommend another book on possession.  So I recommended "Possessed: The True Story of an Exerocism" by Thomas Allen.   This book is the true story of the most famous exorcism of the 20th century-- the case that inspired the movie "The Exorcist."   Surprisingly, she found that book even more disturbing than Martin, perhaps because it is so much more detailed and is based on the exorcist's diary.  The net effect of this reading on her seems to be a deeper recognition of the grace and protection of a loving God that is available to the humble seeker that encounters such negs.

In my view, the greatest enemy of productive spiritual quests is secular humanism.   For many, the reality of supernatural evil is one of the best ways to make them consider that there really is a loving God after all.  I mean, just consider my own family's exorcisms.  My brother was clairvoyantly given the name and location (a distant coffee house) of a possessed person  and was divinely commissioned to perform the exorcism. Aother demon tried to possess my cousin (age 2-3) in a car at the very moment his minister Dad had just exorcised a demon from a woman inside a nearby house.  My cousin instantly fell into a deep trance with his eyes rolled up so that only the whites were visible and screamed incessantly.  He was too young to grasp what his Dad had just done.  Exorcisms can be very persuasive means of creating a hunger for an intimate relationship with a loving God.

Don

recoverer wrote on Apr 20^th, 2007 at 8:01pm:

Golly gee Alysia! This is getting Hillarion. ;D

Ooooh, did someone call Hilarion? *looks around this thread*

Well, since Hilarion's name was brought up, and since one subtopic raised in this thread has to do with "dark beings", I will reiterate that on this topic, I share Dave (Dr Dave Armentrout)'s understanding on the true nature of these beings. While they are not necessarily merely 'misguided humans' as some might think (indeed, many of such (mis)labelled (and misunderstood) beings were never ever incarnated as a human previously; though some were, previously human), but they in truth not 'embodiments of evil' either (for good/evil and right/wrong are relative/illusionary); only (that they have been themselves) misled to imagine themselves as such.

Those interested in such a viewpoint (ie. Dave's, my own's, and oh yes Hilarion's) on this topic, might like to visit my webpage here for further reading.
http://infinity.usanethosting.com/forum/messages/59.html

And to remain on-topic for this thread...

Whether "Conversations with God" is a good read for you; whether you will feel the (guided) 'urge' to pick it up and read it; and how 'spiritually accurate' it is, depends on many factors, including one's personal evolutionary, consciential, and spiritual pathway. This is, ultimately, unique for everyone, but there are (by choice) schools of thought, religion and philosophy that many groups of souls will find most helpful, appropriate, or relevant for themselves and their soul's evolution.

As such, "Conversations with God" certainly has its place, and for those who resonate with the concepts within; for those whose souls are aligned with similar philosphies as the guides & helpers behind the book project "Conversations with God", for these people then, certainly it is a good book to read.

As to the "God" referred within; one must of course, understand that by the very nature of God, the book could well indeed be accurately renamed "Conversations with Self" as suggested earlier on this thread. It is Neale Donald Walsh's conversations with his own higher (or 'God') self, together with (input from) his personal guides & helpers, as well as other specialist guides & helpers behind this project (such polykarmic work (positively) affecting the minds of so many people, always involve many many guides & helpers).

So relax if something in that book doesn't agree with you. You're God yourself, every bit as much as Neale Donald Walsh is, so you certainly don't have to agree with what's in the book, how he said what he said, or even what he actually meant. Remember that if something doesn't feel intuitively right to you, it's not right for you, specifically in how you interpret those words/ideas being communicated (regardless of how they were originally intended), and also factoring in your soul's personal (and unique) choice of perspective and spiritual evolution.

Uniqueness and diversity is a not just a good thing, it's a God thing. Afterall, that's precisely whyfore Creation (ie. infinite consciousness, all forever One (God) in essence, but infinite (and wonderfully unique!) in manifestation/form/expression/experience!).

Kyo:

What does Hillarion say about the crucifixion?

Why does it all come down to what one believes/says about the crucifixion?  What makes that "Truth" more than any other?

I've asked before, and not gotten an answer, but where, outside of the bible, is the proof that this person even existed?

It is simply a yardstick for those believers to measure by..but its not everyone's yardstick.  Some measure by Mohammed..some by other dieties.  

LaffingRain wrote on Apr 26^th, 2007 at 4:46am:

well said Doc. I 3rd the motion and just add that studying evil is to study the problem, but to neglect the solution..to focus in the direction where, as the Christians will say, your salvation lies. it's really hard to be afraid of something if you're concentrating on revealing love. amazing grace is almost here, let the sun shine.

Alright, I 4th that because I don't want to go crazy from reading this book.. Because when I was younger and brought up in Catholicism, I feared demons so much.. I thought I was possesed and that demons were always around me.. I heard voices and didn't know if it was just my mind playing tricks on me or really demons..  They finally, stopped when I say a therapist.. He told me it was just my mind playing tricks on me and that demons don't exist.. He had a wife who was a ghost hunter and that did exorcisms.. So, from his perspective he didn't believe in demons and believes a loving God would never create demons to tempt or harm humans.. That's when he told me to read up on Victor Zammit's book and his site... I asked Victor via email and he replied something like this now these guys with devils and demons - do NOT have objective authority at all. They cite the bible as their authority. But
the Bible has only subjective (personal beliefs) authority..

It is universally accepted that whenever there is an inconsistency between
the subjective and objective authority, inevitably, objective authority
prevails.

These guys are into beliefs. But all beliefs are subject to complete
invalidation. It can never be any other way.

Also, about the vanishing demons from the fears of a person's projections I agree with.. But I never said if an misguided discarnate evil human being posseses someone or they have a first hand encounter in the astral world, or at death's door PUL will win them over.. The help of God can only help that person out who encounters an evil discarnate human being.. Then the only other thing that could be considered a demon is an non-human entity from a different planet.. You will know what I mean if you read Michael Newton's book Journey of Souls, and Destiny of Souls... Dr. Newton asks so you don't see malevolent spirit directed here by some demonic force?? The person he has hypnotized replies nooo-sometimes we might run into a dark,heavy entity who is disoriented by the Earth sphere. This place is dense but they come from places even more dense.. Anyway they want to cling to us because they don't know what they are doing. We call them the "heavies: because of their lack of mobility..

Thanks DocM for the good advice.. I want to get more spiritual by following the love of God.. Not determining if demons really do exist...  Yes, I believe there is about a 25% chance that they may exist, but I'm more positve that they don't exist.. Plus, I have read many convincing books on demons already.. Those books didn't convince me so I doubt any other book will..

Kyo_Kusanagi wrote on Apr 26^th, 2007 at 2:02pm:

And to remain on-topic for this thread... Whether "Conversations with God" is a good read for you; whether you will feel the (guided) 'urge' to pick it up and read it; and how 'spiritually accurate' it is, depends on many factors, including one's personal evolutionary, consciential, and spiritual pathway. This is, ultimately, unique for everyone, but there are (by choice) schools of thought, religion and philosophy that many groups of souls will find most helpful, appropriate, or relevant for themselves and their soul's evolution. As such, "Conversations with God" certainly has its place, and for those who resonate with the concepts within; for those whose souls are aligned with similar philosphies as the guides & helpers behind the book project "Conversations with God", for these people then, certainly it is a good book to read. As to the "God" referred within; one must of course, understand that by the very nature of God, the book could well indeed be accurately renamed "Conversations with Self" as suggested earlier on this thread. It is Neale Donald Walsh's conversations with his own higher (or 'God') self, together with (input from) his personal guides & helpers, as well as other specialist guides & helpers behind this project (such polykarmic work (positively) affecting the minds of so many people, always involve many many guides & helpers). So relax if something in that book doesn't agree with you. You're God yourself, every bit as much as Neale Donald Walsh is, so you certainly don't have to agree with what's in the book, how he said what he said, or even what he actually meant. Remember that if something doesn't feel intuitively right to you, it's not right for you, specifically in how you interpret those words/ideas being communicated (regardless of how they were originally intended), and also factoring in your soul's personal (and unique) choice of perspective and spiritual evolution. Uniqueness and diversity is a not just a good thing, it's a God thing. Afterall, that's precisely whyfore Creation (ie. infinite consciousness, all forever One (God) in essence, but infinite (and wonderfully unique!) in manifestation/form/expression/experience!).

I see what you mean and I agree.. Thanks for the great post and advice!

peace

Shirley:

ACIM and Conversations with whoever states the crucifixion did happen.
Seth, Elias and Matthew state it didn't happen, with the Seth "story" and Matthew "story" contradicting each other. Yet some people will vouch for each source.

If a person takes the time to consider what Seth states with his denial, they'll see that it is illogical. I've already provided reasons on other threads, but I'll restate them again in an abreviated manner. As I've stated before the Gospels can't be refuted as a part of the argument, because Seth used the gospels for the basis of his argument. Seth states that Judas planned an execution behind Jesus's back. Only problem is that during the last supper Jesus told Judas that he would betray him. Why would Jesus tell Judas this if he was planning a hoax? Seth also states that Peter denied Jesus because he didn't recognize the man being crucified as Jesus. The problem is that during the last supper Jesus told Peter that he would deny him. Why would Jesus tell Peter this if it isn't Jesus who gets denied? Seth also stated that Jesus was a great psychic and had wounds appear on his hands when he reappeared to his disciples so they would recognize him. Wouldn't his disciples know if he had left their presence? Seth claimed that a mentally disturbed man was drugged so he could be fooled into believing that he was Jesus so he could take his place. Would it be that easy to convince a person that he is Jesus? Wouldn't the arresting parties have at least one person who knows what Jesus looked like?

As far as it mattering, if Jesus Christ is in fact a being of love and light, why would another supposed being of light try to discredit his reputation in various ways, as Seth does? What is the motive?

It is completely illogical to suggest that one doesn't need to be concerned about how a channeled source puts down Jesus Christ of Nazareth because chances are that he never existed, because why in tarnation do they even bother to put him down if he didn't exist? They would just say that he didn't exist.

It really doesn't make sense to deny the falseness of various channeled sources, by ignoring the illogical and false things they say.


Shirley wrote on Apr 26^th, 2007 at 5:20pm:

Why does it all come down to what one believes/says about the crucifixion?  What makes that "Truth" more than any other? I've asked before, and not gotten an answer, but where, outside of the bible, is the proof that this person even existed? It is simply a yardstick for those believers to measure by..but its not everyone's yardstick.  Some measure by Mohammed..some by other dieties.

recoverer wrote on Apr 26^th, 2007 at 2:37pm:

Kyo: What does Hillarion say about the crucifixion?

Here's mostly everything that Hilarion says about Jesus Christ (Sananda), Mother Mary (Miram) and Mary Magdalene; feel free to check it out for yourself :
http://infinity.usanethosting.com/Heart.Of.God/Hilarion/Hilarion_On_JesusChrist.htm

[Shirley:] "I've asked before, and not gotten an answer, but where, outside of the bible, is the proof that this person even existed?"
________________________________________________

The best proof can be found in Paul's epistles.   Paul's blinding light encounter with Jesus on the Damascus road transforms him from a hitman for the Phariseeds orgainzing the imprisonment, beating, and murder of Christians into Jesus' most effective defender.   Before Paul begins his apostolic mission, he makes two trips to Jerusalem to be checked out and instructed by eyewitnesses of Jesus such as Jesus' brother James, Peter, and some of Jesus' other disciples (Galatians 1:19-19; 2:1-10).  They share with Paul their recollections of Jesus' life and teaching (e. g. 1 Corinthians 11:23-25; 15:8-8).  

The New Testament Gospels can be linked with eyewtiness testimony to Jesus' life.  For example, Papias who lived in the first century meets both disciples and those trained by them.  He learns that Mark was Peter's interpreter in Rome and collected Peter's memoirs after his exccution by Nero and shaped them into the Gospel of Mark.  

Jesus' existence is also well established by various non-Christian sources.  The most important non-Christian source is the Pharisee Josephus.  Josephus grew up in Jerusalem just 7 years after Jesus' crocifixion.   He knows about Jesus' reputation as a miracle worker and teacher and also confirms His crucifizxion by order of Pontius Pilate (Antiquities 18.3.3).  A few words of this text have been added by a later Christian hand, but the core of text is authentic and has been preserved in a more original wording by the ancient Arabic translation of Josephus.   Josephus is also familiar with Jesus brother James and describies his murder by order of the high priest Annas II.   Josephus describes James as "the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ (Antiquities 20.9.1)."  

A Roman inscription by Emperor Claudius has been discovered near Nazareth, Jesos' home town.  The inscription warns that locals that the penalty for further grave robbing is capital punishment.  The inscription responds to the embarrassing fact that the Romans don't know what happened to Jesus' body in the tomb.  Like many Jews of that period, the Romans assume that Jesus' disciples stole His body.  This concern demonstrates that they are well aware of Jesus' existence as a perceived threat to Roman order in Judea.  

I could offer much more proof, but this should suffice.  

Don

Berserk wrote on Apr 26^th, 2007 at 11:43pm:

[Shirley:] "I've asked before, and not gotten an answer, but where, outside of the bible, is the proof that this person even existed?" ________________________________________________ The best proof can be found in Paul's epistles.   Paul's blinding light encounter with Jesus on the Damascus road transforms him from a hitman for the Phariseeds orgainzing the imprisonment, beating, and murder of Christians into Jesus' most effective defender.   Before Paul begins his apostolic mission, he makes two trips to Jerusalem to be checked out and instructed by eyewitnesses of Jesus such as Jesus' brother James, Peter, and some of Jesus' other disciples (Galatians 1:19-19; 2:1-10).  They share with Paul their recollections of Jesus' life and teaching (e. g. 1 Corinthians 11:23-25; 15:8-8).   The New Testament Gospels can be linked with eyewtiness testimony to Jesus' life.  For example, Papias who lived in the first century meets both disciples and those trained by them.  He learns that Mark was Peter's interpreter in Rome and collected Peter's memoirs after his exccution by Nero and shaped them into the Gospel of Mark.   Jesus' existence is also well established by various non-Christian sources.  The most important non-Christian source is the Pharisee Josephus.  Josephus grew up in Jerusalem just 7 years after Jesus' crocifixion.   He knows about Jesus' reputation as a miracle worker and teacher and also confirms His crucifizxion by order of Pontius Pilate (Antiquities 18.3.3).  A few words of this text have been added by a later Christian hand, but the core of text is authentic and has been preserved in a more original wording by the ancient Arabic translation of Josephus.   Josephus is also familiar with Jesus brother James and describies his murder by order of the high priest Annas II.   Josephus describes James as "the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ (Antiquities 20.9.1)."   A Roman inscription by Emperor Claudius has been discovered near Nazareth, Jesos' home town.  The inscription warns that locals that the penalty for further grave robbing is capital punishment.  The inscription responds to the embarrassing fact that the Romans don't know what happened to Jesus' body in the tomb.  Like many Jews of that period, the Romans assume that Jesus' disciples stole His body.  This concern demonstrates that they are well aware of Jesus' existence as a perceived threat to Roman order in Judea.   I could offer much more proof, but this should suffice.   Don

Sorry Don; none of what you offer is "proof". They're just words.


How can words really "prove"  anything? They're just concepts after all.

My own view is that it is only one's own direct experience that uncovers anything of real value; and most of that which is uncovered by direct experience only reveals further questions to explore. Halleluja!!! God says..."It'd be pretty boring otherwise"

Didn't you recently post that there's no real proof that Shaykumuni Buddha actually existed?  If I quote books or text affirming that he did exist... would that prove to you that Lord Buddha actually existed?

Of course not!!

And... who cares!!!

What kind of "proof" is offered through ANY text?

( I know... in response you're gonna say something about the "New Age Ghetto" or some such sh*t)

If you call me "New Age Ghetto", I'll just call you "Christian Ghetto" and match your energy that way.

That way when you complain, you be complaining against your own energy.

I hold a mirror in my left hand... what do I hold in my right?

(If you guess right,  I'll eat my hat )

p.s. it's not a hat.

In the spirit of fun... ( the only spirit I have)

                          Tim

Kyo:

I checked the below the other day when you posted it, and it doesn't say anything at all about the crucifixion. Is "mum" the word?



Kyo_Kusanagi wrote on Apr 26^th, 2007 at 11:10pm:

recoverer wrote on Apr 26th, 2007 at 2:37pm: Kyo: What does Hillarion say about the crucifixion? Here's mostly everything that Hilarion says about Jesus Christ (Sananda), Mother Mary (Miram) and Mary Magdalene; feel free to check it out for yourself : http://infinity.usanethosting.com/Heart.Of.God/Hilarion/Hilarion_On_JesusChrist.htm

recoverer wrote on Apr 27^th, 2007 at 12:17pm:

Kyo: I checked the below the other day when you posted it, and it doesn't say anything at all about the crucifixion. Is "mum" the word?

"Not important" is probably more like it.

Here is some experience Mr. Nobody?

I used to believe as some of the people on this forum believe; when it came to Christ I thought in terms of fundamentalism.

I started to receive messages from the spirit World about two years ago, and about a year ago I started to receive messages such as "accept Christ." This troubled me because like some other posters on this forum when the subject of Christ would come up I would become uncomfortable and start to look for spit balls to throw.

Fortunately, I didn't keep my mind and heart completely closed to the matter of Christ. One day while going for a walk I spoke to God (I didn't hear him reply), and I said "If Christ is a significant part of your divine plan then I'm all for him, because your divine plan is important to me. But I can't assume that Christ is a part of your divine plan simply because a book states that he is, because I would be asserting this to myself, and this would be dishonest."

One night I woke up and I was shown a crucifix. I asked why. I was shown an image and received some thoughts which stated: "They killed him (Christ), they put him on display, they spotted his reputation." Next I experienced myself pressing the highest C note on my piano. I understood this to mean that Christ is the highest consciousness there is.

After wards I received a number of other messages which stated that Christ is a significant part of God's divine plan. My post would be too long if I shared all of them. But here is one significant experience. One night I was reading an Elaine Pagels book. She wrote that the Gospel of Thomas speaks of Christ as if he was just another enlightened being like other enlightened beings; the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke speak of him as if he is a messenger of God; and the gospel of John speaks of him as he is the only begotten son, the first word, the light, he created the World for God, and then incarnated into the World so he could show the way.

Before I went to sleep this night I prayed and asked for a dream which told me which version is true. In the middle of the night I woke up from a dream. I turned on my night lamp and grabbed my dream journal and a pen so I could take some notes. But then I saw a light flash.  I see spirits appear as starlike flashes of light quite often. I see them this way because this is how you see them when your energy is at your crown chakra,  and my energy is at my crown chakra most of the time. This flash of light was much bigger and much more powerful than any flash of light I've experienced before. It felt more real than the physical World. It felt divine. Even though I didn't see or hear him, I knew it was the presence of Christ. I decided to forget about my dream notes, put my dream journal and pen away, turned off my night lamp, and layed on my side. I was overcome with more energy than I had ever felt before, and I have awakened kundalini, which can be powerful at times. This energy worked on me for about 15 minutes in a manner that is beyond how kundalini works on you. My heart chakra expanded so it felt as if it encompased my entire upper body. The energy of Christ also worked on my three upper chakras. Ever since the energy flow from my heart chakra to  my crown chakra has been more alive and clean. I felt divine love, humility and grattitude towards Christ to an extent that was beyond what a belief system could create. Regarding the question I asked before I went to sleep, the feeling I got was that Christ can be in as many places as he wants to be. He is universal.

After the above experiences took place I started to reflect on my life and found that the series of experiences which began with the "Accept Christ" messages, weren't the first occasions on which I received Christ related messages. For example, about 29 years ago I had a night in heaven experience. I was an atheist at the time because I believed that science had all the answers. Nevertheless, during this experience I knew that God and the afterlife did in fact exist. Not only did I know that they existed, I completely understood how it was possible for them to exist without even having to think about it. It was a wonderful experience and the level of happiness I experienced was beyond the level of happiness that can be experienced in this World. It was such a relief.

To show you how stubborn I was at the time, when the experience ended I dismissed it as a dream. Boy was I disapointed. Years later, after not thinking about the experience at all, the memory of the experience came back to me. There are people who have had near death experiences who have had the same delayed memory syndrome.  The memory of this experience is more alive today than it was 27 years ago. One thing I recall is that during the experience I clearly understood that Christ is a major part of the grand scheme of things. I didn't see him during this experience, but the knowledge of his importance permeated the realm I was in.

Some people might say that I experienced according to my beliefs. This isn't so because 1) I was an atheist at the time and completely didn't believe in the existence of God, Christ and the afterlife; 2) the manner in which I understood things was far deeper than what a belief system could create; and 3) at the end of the experience I saw a bright star flash and I knew this was a symbol for Christ.  Regarding the possibility that my mind created the above, in addition to what I just shared, there is no way that my mind could've created what I experienced, because what I experienced was far beyond anything I had experienced before.

There are a couple of other experiences I had before I received the accept Christ messages. Early on during my kundalini unfoldment process I was shown the image of a lifesize heavy metal rocker dude. I could see kundalini flowing within him.  He said he uses his kundalini for evil. Next I saw a lifesize demonic image of myself. Next I saw the face of Jesus Christ. I received the message if you're going to go through kundalini unfoldment process, make certain that you do so with Christ conciousness in mind.

On another occasion I was doing a retrievel while meditating. Suddenly the man I was trying to help stopped listening to me because across a bay an image of Christ appeared. Gold light spread out from Christ and filled the landscape I was experiencing. The man I tried to help floated accross the bay to where Christ was in a timeless manner. I say a timeless manner, because he traversed the distance accross the bay quickly, without having to float quickly. I had no expectation to see Christ during this experience, yet I did.

You stated that you believe experience is important, and some experiences have been shared. If one wants to find out about Christ one shouldn't make the mistake of trying to do so according to the fundamentalist viewpoints that annoy one. One should try to see if there is another way of viewing Christ. A way that is joyful, rather than repressive.

I'm not the only person who has had experiences with Christ.  For example, people who have had near death experiences. I know some people like to dismiss such experiences as nothing more than the play of a person's preconceived ideas, but if you read enough of them closely, you'll find that some people experience too much depth during their experience for it to be based on what they believed before. Especially since some of these people had experiences that were non-fundamentalist in nature, even though they had fundamentalist ideas before they had their experience. I also know of a few other people who have experienced the presence of Christ without having a near death experience.  


[quote author=Mr. Nobody link=1177109721/45#55 date=1177651621Sorry Don; none of what you offer is "proof". They're just words.


How can words really "prove"  anything? They're just concepts after all.

My own view is that it is only one's own direct experience that uncovers anything of real value; and most of that which is uncovered by direct experience only reveals further questions to explore. Halleluja!!! God says..."It'd be pretty boring otherwise"

Not important, or a matter of not wanting to have to reveal oneself by taking a stand?



Kyo_Kusanagi wrote on Apr 27^th, 2007 at 1:10pm:

recoverer wrote on Apr 27th, 2007 at 12:17pm: Kyo: I checked the below the other day when you posted it, and it doesn't say anything at all about the crucifixion. Is "mum" the word? "Not important" is probably more like it.

Tim's comments, that objective reality is really not so objective, but subjective based on an interpretation of sensory data and an agreement of a subsequent "shared" experience of the results is a valid one, however I'm not sure where to go with it.

We have deniers of everything out there (this is not addressed to Tim, btw).  Some deny Christ ever lived, others deny the Holocaust - this being the case even knowing what meticulous record keepers the Germans/Nazis were both on film and on paper.  "Prove it," the deniers say, as they give pseudo-plausible reasons why what we know to have occurred might never have happened at all.  

The problem with saying that we can never prove everything is that we are left with a feeling that nothing matters (or some of us are left with that feeling).  It is a moral relativism - to say that truth is relative, history may or may not have occurred, etc.  

I believe that in our shared experience of reality, there are obvious truths in the shared experience.  I believe then that there are obvious moral "right" and "wrong" actions in our shared reality to help us get closer to love and God.  ("wrong" tends to be those actions that lead away from love and God).  

Don's questioning whether Siddartha Gautamata really walked the earth is analagous to the Christ deniers.  I wonder, if the arguments made against the Buddha's real earthly existence were leveled at Christians with the same purported proof, if Don would truly accept it in a factual way if the roles were reversed...

Tim's point about personal experience is very important.  But there is a shared experience we all agree on in the physical plane.  We can not say that the conclusions we come to from our shared experience are completely invalid without somehow saying that earthly life loses some of its meaning.


Doc

 

Doc said: The problem with saying that we can never prove everything is that we are left with a feeling that nothing matters (or some of us are left with that feeling).  It is a moral relativism - to say that truth is relative, history may or may not have occurred, etc.  

"Good point Matthew."

Don's questioning whether Siddartha Gautamata really walked the earth is analagous to the Christ deniers.  I wonder, if the arguments made against the Buddha's real earthly existence were leveled at Christians with the same purported proof, if Don would truly accept it in a factual way if the roles were reversed...

"Buddhism has probably evolved into more varying forms than Christianity. There are a number of different texts which are attributed to the Buddha. I'm not certain, but I don't believe it is perfectly clear which came from him, and which didn't. A lot of them do have a similar way of expression. Certainly the texts came from somewhere."

[Matthew:] "Don's questioning whether Siddartha Gautamata really walked the earth is analagous to the Christ deniers.  I wonder, if the arguments made against the Buddha's real earthly existence were leveled at Christians with the same purported proof, if Don would truly accept it in a factual way if the roles were reversed..."
_________________________

Sorry Tim!  Jesus's existence is verified by verious eyewitnesses who knew Him personally and, in one case, was even related to Him as His brother.  His existence is verified by both His non-Christian and Christian contemporaries.  That amounts to "proof" in the ordinary historical sense of the word and almost all modern Bible scholars (including atheists) who teach at secular unversities acknowledge this fact.   The proof for Jesus' existence is even more compelling than that for towering ancient figures like Alexander the Great, Anthony and Cleopatra.   Of course, a New Ager like Tim can change the standards of "proof" so that no historical figure can pass the test.   That New Age ploy might be used to try to exempt absurd claims of past incarnations from decisive critical scrutiny.  

By contrast, the existence of Siddartha Gautama is far more tenuous.  Scholars cannot even agree on when he allegedly lived and estimates range from 563-400 BC.  More serious is the fact that his life is not even written down untul well over 400 years after the earliest proposed date.

Don

Hi Albert,

I love reading of your direct personal experiences. Your voice warms my heart.


Hi Matthew,

I'm glad you recognise I'm not denying the truth of the being called "Christ"

My point is that one can't point to a book for proof of his existence.

I also believe it is important to understand that "up" and "down" are different directions.

And... even when one finds one's separate self to be fiction, it still costs $1.50 for bus-fare.



Hi Don,

I love ya buddy!!!  



Y'all are wonderful folk, it's a privilage to know ya,

Tim

Thank you for the kind words Mr. Nobody.

Recoverer-

You describe a pretty wonderful and affirming experience.  I just have one question....I would guess that most people on this website are here because they are searching for something.  But in your case, it sure appears that you found it.

So tell me, why are you here?  Is there something else you are seeking?  Or maybe it's because you want to share your own experiences?

(whatever the reason it's good that you ARE here!)

Rondelle:

To find what others have found and to share what I have found. I'm still figuring it out. I figure it is a rare bird indeed who figures it all out while here in the physical. It isn't easy.


rondele wrote on Apr 27^th, 2007 at 5:10pm:

Recoverer- You describe a pretty wonderful and affirming experience.  I just have one question....I would guess that most people on this website are here because they are searching for something.  But in your case, it sure appears that you found it. So tell me, why are you here?  Is there something else you are seeking?  Or maybe it's because you want to share your own experiences? (whatever the reason it's good that you ARE here!)