Source: "Seth Speaks" 366-67:

[Seth:] “Christ, the historical Christ was not crucified...He had no intention of dying in this manner; but others felt that to fulfil the prophecies in all ways, a crucifixion was a necessity.”
______________________________________________________________________
There was no recognized Jewish prophecy of a crucified Messiah prior to Jesus’ resurrection.  Rather, Isaiah 53 was retroactively applied to Jesus’s death after His Resurrection so that His crucifixion could be understood as fulfilled prophecy.   [Seth:] “There was a conspiracy in which Judas played a role, an attempt to make a martyr out of Christ.  The man chosen was drugged--hence the necessity of helping him carry the cross (Luke 23)--and he was told that he was the Christ.  He believed that he was.”
________________________________________________________.  

Seth in effect accuses Jesus of using Simon of Cyrene as a scapegoat.  Romans routinely beat their victims within an inch of their lives before crucifying them.  It is this savage beating--and not drugs--that explains the need for help in carrying the cross.

Seth has simply ripped off a universally discredited 2nd century Gnostic version of the claim that Simon--not Jesus- was crucified:

“He [Jesus] did not suffer, but a certain Simon of Cyrene was compelled to carry His cross for Him; and this Simon was transformed by Him [Jesus] so that he was thought to be Jesus himself, and was crucified through ignorance and error.   Jesus, however, too the form of Simon, and stood by laughing at them. (Irenaeus AH 24:4).”

According to this absurd Gnostic version, Jesus shapeshifts to make Himself look like  Simon of Cyrene and supernaturally transforms Simon’s appearance to make him a replica of Himself.  Then a cruel Jesus stands by the cross and laughs while Simon suffers a slow agonizing death!  Then notice the deception attributed to Jesus in making it later seem that He had in fact been crucified:  [Seth:] “Christ was a great psychic.  He caused the wounds there to appear upon his own body.”  

Of course, Seth must resort to desperate measures to rationalize how a Jesus who never died made his exit from the stage of history: [Seth:] “His physical presence was no longer necessary, and even an embarrassment under the circumstances.  He siimply willed himself out of existence (368).”  In other words, Jesus just made His physical body go “poof!”  Wow!  The Elias entity
agrees that Jesus was never crucified but contradicts Seth by claiming that Jesus lived into His 40s and moved to Macedonia.  Both claims are breath-takingly absurd.  

In fact, Simon of Cyrene had no prior connection with Jesus and was coerced into carrying a badly beaten Jesus’ cross for Him: “They compelled a passer-by, who was coming in from the country, to carry Jesus’ cross; it was Simon of Cyrene, the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mark 15:21);  Mark notes that Alexander and Rufus are Simon’s sons because at least Rufus becomes a
member of the church at Rome.  Mark composes his Gospel in Rome.   In his epistle to the Romans, Paul greets Rufus in a flattering manner: “Greet Rufus, a choice man in the Lord, and his mother and mine (Romans 16:13).”

So does this nonsense pour out of Jane Roberts’ unconscious or is she a victim of spirit impersonation?   Many second century Gnostics are called Sethians and The Second Word [Logos] of the Great Seth is an ancient Gnostic text.  There seems to be a close connection between ancient Gnosticism and the modern channeling of Seth and Elias.  In second century Gnosticism, Seth was viewed as the ruler of the 3rd heaven and Elias (spelled “Eloaeus,” but pronounced similarlly) was the ruler over the 5th heaven (Epiphanius, Panarion 27.10.1).  Thus, both ancient Gnosticism and modern channeling can claim that Jesus was never crucified and can give an exalted role to Seth and Elias.  This is no coincidence.   I doubt that Jane Roberts and Mary Innis ever read Epiphanius who was not even available in English translation in Jane Roberts’s time.  So I suspect that these modern entities are simply reviving and drastically changing ancient lies about Jesus.    

To see just how blasphemous these ancient Gnostics were, one need only examine their perversion of Holy Communion into a disgusting adulterous sex orgy in which the participants first have sex outside their marriages and then consume the semen and female imissions as substitutes for the bread and wine that normally represents Christ’s body and blook in the Eucharist:

“For the  husband withdraws from his own wife, and says these words to his own wife: `Rise up, make the love (feast) with the brother.’...When have had intercourse out of the passion of fornication, then...the woman and the man take the man’s semen in their own hands,..saying, `We offer thee this gift, the body of Christ...Simlarly, with the woman’s emission at her period; they
collect the mestrual blood which is unclean, take it and eat it together, and say, `This is the blood of Christ. (Epiphanius, Panarion 26.4)’”

My next planned post will demonstrate how Seth's historical claims can be discredited on other grounds.

Don

Comments below:

[quote author=Berserk link=1177715919/0#0 date=1177715918]Source: "Seth Speaks" 366-67:


Seth has simply ripped off a universally discredited 2nd century Gnostic version of the claim that Simon--not Jesus- was crucified:

“He [Jesus] did not suffer, but a certain Simon of Cyrene was compelled to carry His cross for Him; and this Simon was transformed by Him [Jesus] so that he was thought to be Jesus himself, and was crucified through ignorance and error.   Jesus, however, too the form of Simon, and stood by laughing at them. (Irenaeus AH 24:4).”

[I started to read some of the above supposed Gospel, and stopped doing so after I quickly saw that it made Christ sound like a jerk.]

Of course, Seth must resort to desperate measures to rationalize how a Jesus who never died made his exit from the stage of history: [Seth:] “His physical presence was no longer necessary, and even an embarrassment under the circumstances.  He siimply willed himself out of existence (368).”  In other words, Jesus just made His physical body go “poof!”  Wow!  The Elias entity
agrees that Jesus was never crucified but contradicts Seth by claiming that Jesus lived into His 40s and moved to Macedonia.  Both claims are breath-takingly absurd.  

[I don't see how an intelligent person can read how Seth and Elias completely contradict themselves as they try to discredit Christ, and still believe that both sources of information are genuine. Talk about being apologetic to the point of absurdity.]
 

To see just how blasphemous these ancient Gnostics were, one need only examine their perversion of Holy Communion into a disgusting adulterous sex orgy in which the participants first have sex outside their marriages and then consume the semen and female imissions as substitutes for the bread and wine that normally represents Christ’s body and blook in the Eucharist:

“For the  husband withdraws from his own wife, and says these words to his own wife: `Rise up, make the love (feast) with the brother.’...When have had intercourse out of the passion of fornication, then...the woman and the man take the man’s semen in their own hands,..saying, `We offer thee this gift, the body of Christ...Simlarly, with the woman’s emission at her period; they
collect the mestrual blood which is unclean, take it and eat it together, and say, `This is the blood of Christ. (Epiphanius, Panarion 26.4)’”

[Somebody, somewhere, will find a way to justify the above.]

Yeah, I have never read the Seth Material, or Elias... After knowing this info. I will definately not read them..

Wow, me and Don agree on something..

peace

I have never quite understood why people listening to a channeled source assume that the entity talking to them must have ulltimate knowledge about any question asked of them.  By all accounts, discarnate humans immediately after death are very much like they were in life.  

Either Jane Roberts was channeling Seth or fabricating the channeling in order to put forth her New Age philosophy.  The appeal of Seth was the message; a fairly consistent cosmology built around the idea that human beings are transdimensional beings who create their own realities.  This cosmology/theosophy was not new; spiritualists and others had put forth many of these ideas more than a century before Roberts.  However Roberts' genius was seen in the coherence of her message and the fluent communication of the so-called channeling.

Seth and Elias also wow people because the philophical talking points remain consistent.  The consistency noted by the listeners lends credence to the idea that this channeled source must be heavenly, or omniscient.  

What you have at the end of the day with a channeling is a series of lectures, which may be interesting to think about, given by what is assumed to be a spiritually advanced omniscinet entity (an assumption).  Those who follow the every word of a channeled source do not move in different spiritual spheres themselves; it is more a form of hero worship for the entity.  As such, the only growth possible is an intellectual one.  Unlike exploring with meditation, partnered exploration, or NDE related experiences all of which deal with the spiritual growth of the individual, intellectual understanding only takes us so far; it is understanding without knowing.  This is my main problem with channeled material in general.

Matthew

You can add hilarion also.He told me I was harold smyth on the titanic.I was told he told cpt smith,that we have hit an iceberg and we are taking on water.I looked up the list of officers,but there was no harold smyth on the titanic.Stay clear of channeling,Its false.George.

George,

Thanks for investigating the bogus past life on the Titanic that the Hilarion entity assigned to you.  Your bad experience illustrates a simple lesson about past lives revealed through channleing or hypnotic regression:  Beware the alleged past life that purports to be someone famous or identifies you as a major player in a very famous event.  When Seth's claims about his past lives can be historically checked, they can also be proven bogus:

“I [Seth] was a pope in AD 300...I had two illegitimate children [class laughter], a mistress the sneaked into my private study, a magician that I kept in case I did not do too well on my own. a housekeeper who was pregnant in every year that I had her. , and 3 daughters who joined a nunnery because I would not have them....I wrote two church laws...I was originally called Protonius. ...This is not my papal name, but my...common name: Meglemanius, the third...I sent
armies to the north also (“Seth Speaks,” 350-351).”

Seven historical errors expose Seth’s claim as fraudulent:
(1) There is has never been a Roman bishop of Pope named either “Protonius”
    or “Meglemanius.”  Marcellinus is the leader of the church of Rome in this
    era (296-304 AD).
(2) Whatever their character flaws, no ancient bishop or Rome or Pope would
     retain the services of a private ‘magician.”
(3) There is no evidence that Marcellinus “wrote two church laws.”  

Four of Seth’s other false claims involve anachronisms--making claims that only apply to a later era.
(4) The Latin “papa” is routinely applied to any church leader in this era.  Only
    much later does “papa” become an honorary title for the bishop of Rome
    and hence the equivalent of “Pope.”
(5) The bishop of Rome receives no additional papal name or any other
    honorary name in this era.
(6) Pope Seth's many sex scandals are clearly intended to stain the reputation
    of Catholic leaders in general.  But these papal scandals are bogus.  There
   are no “nunneries’ in this era, to which Seth’s disgruntled 3 daughters might
   flee.  
(7) Seth claims a prior incarnation as Pope in the pre-Constantine era in which
     the church is still persecuted by Rome and is far too small and impotent for
    its leaders to “send armies to the north.”  Only sevreal centuries later can a
    Pope even think of exercising such military might.  Imagine a pastor in a
    small Arerican country church of mostly elderly people claming that he eent
    armies to Iraq!  Seth's papal miltary claim is equally absurd.

Don

george stone wrote on Apr 27^th, 2007 at 11:19pm:

You can add hilarion also.He told me I was harold smyth on the titanic.I was told he told cpt smith,that we have hit an iceberg and we are taking on water.I looked up the list of officers,but there was no harold smyth on the titanic.Stay clear of channeling,Its false.George.

 Is that Hilarion from Jon Fox?  As i understand it, Hilarion has been channeled by various folks.

 Anyways, channeling is a mixed bag, much like humanity itself.  There are many just plain fake and/or deluded channerlers/psychics out there, there are some who channel some negative intentioned or just ignorant cosnciousnesses, there are the real deals (with more expanded sources than not) who are motivated more by the intention of helping others rather than money or ego recognition, and then there are the mixes of some or all of the above who can and do waver back and forth at times.  

 So not all channeling or psychism is false.   There are the real deals out there like Rosiland McKnight's stuff, Edgar Cayce's, Swedenborg, etc.     And no surprise that many of these more than not agree on some key issues and subjects.

 Recoverer mentions Christ, his crucifixion and resurrection for example, and the many discrepancies and differences of stories between various channelers and psychics out there such as Seth, Elias, Mathew, etc.

 But, funny enough, the ones i mentioned earlier, the much more verified, helpful, and non materially profitable ones all agree that Yeshua was a real live person, who lived a life of amazing purity beyond that of any other teacher who has incarnated in a slow vibrating cycle, was wrongfully put to death, and resurrected his body physical so that he could appear physically as well as psychically to others.

 Heck, Bob Monroe just might have met him in-physical too, after asking to meet the most spiritually mature person living in his space/time reference.  

  But, why should we add logic, consistency, and verifications to the whole beliefs game?  What's the point of trying to balance out the sometimes wild and whacky right brain and feminine energy of ours?   Anything goes in this day and age.  Because of both religion and because of ego, there is a deep, deep, and pervasive hatred of the pure one who blazed a path for us all.

 Anyways, a grain or two of salt is perhaps needed when approaching the channeling, medium, and psychic world.   But total, blanketed skepticism is also too extreme as well.

 I once had a well respected psychic tell me that i was one of the highest vibrating people that she ever tuned into, but later on treated (or condoned treatment of) me as if i was a virus of some kind, who needed to be quarantined.   Quite a difference between words and actions with some hungry twin lions.  Remember, we will know them more by their fruits and not so much their words.

 But, remember its part of the game, and most things, even the painful, "bad", and what not, happen for deeper and ultimately good reasons.   There's a place for all in this drama of life.  So meanwhile, let's not concentrate too much on the darker aspects of life and the drama.  Ah...but don't repress it either like some do, that's just as harmful as concentrating on it, perhpas even more so.....    

Be honest with self and with others, and don't try to act enlightened before your time either.  You will know beyond a doubt when you've truly awoken from the dream, for there are signs and indications that accompany the inner transformation.  These outer indications are necessary, otherwise in this world of maya layered upon maya, too many would convince themselves that they've fully remembered their true selves when they're still living from and within the false reflection.  

 

I disagree that anything is exposed. Elias helped me a lot in my spiritual growth.
I also channel my own self.  we are at a time in history where spirit channelling is not well accepted yet. that will change as people begin to see our underlying oneness and that we are like radio stations to tune into others.

we as these singular personalities who disagree are not really but a small part of us.

love, alysia

   Occasionally an unwise person with a tendency to lying will say a wise, insightful, sincere, and constructive thing.   Which when it happens, it is a good thing of course, and the light shines.

   A wise person (both logically and intuitionally/feeling/spiritually speaking) will consistently speak and say wise things.  

 Practically and pragmatically speaking, who does it make sense to listen to more.   The person who oft lies, tell untruths, and/or illogical and inconsistent things as well as unwise things, or the sincere, consistently wise, logical and insightful person?

 Why not align oneself more to the sincere, logical and consistent, verified, wise, and truthful source?

 How does this not make sense at both a mental-intellectual and heart level?


  Perhaps an example is needed.   Take Yeshua and the Pharisees, two different sources who acted as teachers and guides to others.   It seems that Yeshua was at times rather critical of the Pharisees and some of things they taught or did.   He occasionally pointed out their greed, their lies, their illogical and unwise interpretations of Jewish law, their misleading of the Jewish people.  In turn, they were vehement and irrationally angry and reactive towards him.

 Yet i'm sure occasionally one of the Pharisees who tended to corruptness, lying, insincerity, etc. occasionally said or did a wise and truthful thing.  

 But, who would you listen to more, speaking pragmatically and practically, whose teachings would you give more weight to, Yeshua's or the average Pharisee whom he pointed out the falsity of and their immersion in ego's ways?  

 Now, if you sensed, felt, and logically saw more truth, understanding, and wisdom in Yeshua and his words and teachings, any sane, balanced, rational, and constructive being would listen more to Yeshua wouldn't they?

  You would think the huge majority would, if that was the case, and yet, look at how many chose to listen more to the Pharisees and to their lies and ego teachings?  Many more listened to them than to this Master of truth and of pure Light.

 What does this say about humanity, ego, and how easily we can mislead ourselves?

 What does it say about the need of discrimination especially in the area of spiritual exploration?

  What does it say about channeled material which not only contradicts its own info at times, but also contradicts more verified sources who were not seeking material gain nor ego recognition?

 Why would a person be in defense of such sources which contradict the verified sources (which just so happen to all basically agree with each other), and yet the less verifed sources not only contradict themselves at times, the verified sources, but also all of each other all at the same time?

 

maybe ahso, the question is "what is verification and factual?"
isn't it relative?
one thing ACIM taught me is the ego is the part of us which can always come up with another question. the ego must be in control, and it produces the questions which the mind is like a programmed divice. ego is never satisfied and looks out there for the answer.

when the answer is the kingdom of god is within, when you surrender the ego holdings of having to be right.

ACIM's answer to the mind buzz in the head which is always asking questions yet never quite answering those questions with a thought of peace, is to wait for god to take the final step for you.
which is another way of saying you live in the now moment and surrender your will to god knowing that you are his treasure, his delight, and he has always been waiting for you to see this. the divine spark of god is in each person, saint or sinner and we can fan it alive in each other because we are nothing without each other anyway.

you all will be taken care of in your preparation for merging with god. it has already happened and we are dreaming we are separate from our good, from god. but waking up is assured and the process can happen with daily meditation.

love, alysia

Alysia says:

<<I disagree that anything is exposed>>

Well, there you have it in a nutshell.  Belief systems, once inculcated, are virtually impossible to dislodge even in the face of historical, factually based information.  

If Jane Roberts were alive today, and if she made a public confession that the whole Seth thing was an elaborate hoax, do you think the "Sethians" would then stop believing in the material?  Some undoubtedly would.  Others, however, would find a rationale to continue to accept it.  Maybe they would convince themselves that Roberts was coerced into the confession, or that Roberts needed to get more publicity and would later renounce her confession.

We can either stubbornly cling to a belief system or acknowledge that maybe we're wrong.  

The simple admission of "I don't know" is a sign of wisdom and an important first step in spiritual and emotional growth.  

Rondele,

----Belief systems also extend to the original post. Historians and researchers on both sides are still debating the "facts" purported to be true. ----------

----Rationales are part of belief systems, so trying to separate it from "facts" you purport to be true is, as you say, useless.

Your wrote: We can either stubbornly cling to a belief system or acknowledge that maybe we're wrong.
I reply: I agree. Being wrong is always an option. For both sides. You cannot purport the truth if there is a possibility of being wrong.

As to your assertion of "I don't know." --- Wow. This board is thus full of wise people. Since the "I don't know" is what brought all here in the beginning.

Thanks for your insight on how this topic should be handled. :)

E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

"History" is a Story.

You have your Story and I have my Story....and don't our Stories shift and change as we tell each other our Tales.

I've read lots of the Seth books....about 20 years ago.  At the time, I thought they were one of the most fascinating groups of books I'd ever seen.

I was also interested in the Bible at the time.

But, I was never concerned with the "truth" of the crucifixion....or the reality of Seth.  I was simply immersed.

My way of study is considered ridiculous by many.  Because I prefer to let the books blow through me....

then I go on.  I make no attempt to memorize or cling.  I may, however, go back to the source and read again, but not in a methodical manner.

And so, a lot of different ideas have passed my way.  I now, at my age, have the luxury of knowing much that my mind and heart have still not touched on.

It's just a book.  Remember, it's just a book.

Jane Robert's writings were stimulating and provocative.  I enjoyed them, and I enjoyed imagining her process of discovery as she wrote.  If there are "historical" errors within then I ignored them.  Because all I got out of the books was a widening of my mind.

That was enough.

We can feed the soul and talk about all the good food.  But I think what matters is....

does it matter to you, Now? Does it speak to you? Does it bring you a small piece of the puzzle that you need right now?

If so, aren't you the lucky one?

So many people have no books....have no food.....they are ill and dying....

They are remembering now all the books they will never read here, and all the people they will never have a chance to meet here.

So, part of my path at this time is to avoid being jaded by "truth" or "lies" and to simply be grateful...

grateful for words....for poetry....for science....for inspiration from all sources.

For we need a healing now, this world.  A great healing.  And it will come from all of us, depending on how we see the stories, how we tell them, what we focus on.

love, blink :)

An ultimate piece of ridiculous channeling was the story of Nancy
Lieder, and her prediction of the coming of Planet X. She said that
Zeta aliens in UFOs told her that it was coming into our area and
was a great danger to Earth. Planet X never arrived, and was
laughed at by the astronomers. You can read about this by putting
Nancy Lieder into Google.

One thing that made me skeptical of Seth is his idea that the past
could be changed. Can you imagine what that would entail?
Every person leaves a paper trail in bank records of everything
that was spent by writing a check. These records exist for everyone
who has a checking account. The records also exist for utilities
and taxes and everything else. These all interlock like
interrelating balanced accounts. I have cartons of financial
records going back 10 or more years.

Now, suppose that you were to change anything in a persons life.
And suppose I had some financial interaction with that person. Could
some magic, capable of changing the past, reach into my cartons
and change the records that are written there? And all the other
stacks of records on this person? This is not a practical reality
at all.

For reasons like this, I am relieved to see these things finally coming
under skeptical attack. Blink, you give a good description in your
post of the kind of vague mindedness that allows weird cults with
strange beliefs to develop and continue. But Vulcans like me get an
unsettled feeling in the presence of things like this.
I can sometimes wonder when surrounded by such things, that maybe I
am not with it, that I lack the perception that I am supposed to
develop later that will enable me to understand something that does
not work for me. But this does not happen. No voice appears that
authoritatively delineates what this is all about. The problems
with the material remain. Vulcans want to build substantial
knowledge, and this is lacking.

Nevertheless, some ideas in Seth were useful to me, like the idea
of the  probable future existing as an image in the unseen world.
This I go along with. I still have not answered the question of
where the original causality exists, whether in the physical or in
the astral.

Also, I have retained respect for what I feel is genuine psychic
talent, even if the talented person has some screwy beliefs concurrently.
But I will check the psychic part with whatever is available to use for
checking.

Incidentally, I suspect that some of the Bible is channeling. I
seem to remember reading things like " the spirit came and spoke to
me and.....". I am skeptical of the book of Revelations, and dont
take it seriously.

Boris-

Actually the notion of probabilities that Seth writes about is even more far fetched.  For example, he says any time we are faced with a decision, we spin off a probable self whose entire life is based on the decision we did NOT make!  Suppose I am trying to decide who to marry.....Beth or Carol.  I choose Beth.  But, per Seth, I spin off another self who actually DOES decide to marry Carol.  And of course that probable self spins off more probable selves each time he ponders a decision.

Per Seth, the "road not taken" doesn't exist, because we take ALL roads!  You really can't make this stuff up, but Seth proclaims it to be true.  In his scheme of things, there are countless billions and trillions of probabilities associated with just one person as he/she goes about their life.

And he also says we choose not only when we will die, but how as well.  Yeah right.  Gee, let me think.....do I want to die a peaceful death when I'm old and gray, or do I want to die after being tortured to death by having my head slowly sawed off with a dull knife?  

To believe Seth is to require that we put our own judgment out to lunch.  We have to suspend plain common sense.  

And then along comes Elias with other stuff.  It isn't just that he is inconsistent with Seth.  It's that he is totally contradictory to Seth.  Seth says earth is a school and we are here to learn.  Elias says we are here just to "experience."  The notion of earth as a school is not part of Elias' teachings.  

And then we have a whole bunch of others out there.  

I suppose there are people who believe that 9/11 was an inside job.  Bush had over 3,000 Americans killed just so he could justify going into Iraq for oil.  Why not.  Once we start believing in these discarnate entities, it gets to be a slippery slope wherein everything is fair game.

Seems to me that the personality that Jane Roberts channels is totally in traditional character. Quoting from E A Wallis Budge's book "The Gods of the Egyptians" Vol 1, pp122 -126 (more or less)-

"The natural opponent of Osiris was Set, who typified death and destruction, and who was the god par excellence of the desert; and in various forms and told in various ways we have the narrative of the context between the powers of life and death, and light and darkness, and decay and regeneration, which appears in the religious texts of every period. In fact, Set was the opponent in every way of Osiris who ... typified the 'unbroken rejuvenescence of immortal Nature according to the Divine Will and according to eternal laws.' ...

Unfortunately we find nowhere in Egyptian works a connected narrative of the life, acts and deeds, and sufferings and death, and resurection of Osiris, the man-god, but we possess a tolerably accurate acount of them in Plutarch's "De Iside et Osiride". ...

Typhon, the Egyptian Set, and his seventy two comrades made Osiris to lie down in a chest, which was immediately closed by them, and cast into the Nile ... When Isis heard what had befallen her husband, she cut off a lock of her hair as a sign of grief, and then sent it out to find his dead body. At length she traced it to Byblos,... among the branches of a tamarisk tree, which ... had enclosed the chest ...

The king of the country, admiring the tree, had it cut down and made a pillar for the roof of his house; ... the hieroglyphic sign ... tet ... Isis begged for the pillar ... cut open and took out the chest
and her husband's body  ...

... Typhon..,. found the chest, and recognizing the body tore it into 14 pieces, which he scattered u and down throughout the land. ... When Isis heard of this she ...gathered together the fragments ..."

So Set, aka Typhon, seems to be a deceiver whose role is antithetical to resurrection and life. So long as the spiritual Set follows this general description, there is both an historical and also emotional role in which to survive. Since the forces of creation are necessarily primitive to those of destruction (else we wouldn't be here) to keep tearing down reality is a guarantee of job security. The chaos generated is thus the space in which Set operates.

There is evidence that the manner of attachment of entities is to locate a strong emotional pattern that is compatible, so that the affective space is codefinitive of both the host and entity. The entity then has the ability to enjoy that aspect of the host's life, and to make subtle suggestions to influence it by emphasizing certain of the elements of the host's feelings. For an entity that believes its nature to be negative, the story of Set, and all the other similar stories we know, give a fairly well defined space in which to exist, plus a correlated emotional reaction. It might not be much of a "living", but it's better than nothing, I suppose, and it keeps the Set entity (or entities, since we might as well toss in the 72 companions as equally likely) from having to pass through reincarnation by providing a permanent BST in which to be stuck.

For channels like Jane Roberts and a large number of others who believe themselves to be the guiding lights of the universe, their arrogance and negativity to any higher and more meaningful power is sufficient to generalize their own Set-like attitude. This evidently provides the Set spirit(s) a comfortable place to hang out.

While entity eviction is quite easy when the entities are tractable and willing to cooperate, I suspect that Jane Roberts would turn out to be a nearly impenetrable fortress by which to protect and nurture the Set spirit(s) in the name of "enlightenment". This strikes me as quite similar to drug addiction, except that it uses possession and self-aggrandizement as the reward that keeps it all stuck together. (And in contrast, Jesus' challenge to "Take up thy cross and follow me," would mean for Jane to abandon the glory of being a channel etc, returning to her natural state.)

dave

wrote on Apr 28^th, 2007 at 12:07pm:

"History" is a Story. You have your Story and I have my Story....and don't our Stories shift and change as we tell each other our Tales. I've read lots of the Seth books....about 20 years ago.  At the time, I thought they were one of the most fascinating groups of books I'd ever seen. I was also interested in the Bible at the time. But, I was never concerned with the "truth" of the crucifixion....or the reality of Seth.  I was simply immersed. My way of study is considered ridiculous by many.  Because I prefer to let the books blow through me.... then I go on.  I make no attempt to memorize or cling.  I may, however, go back to the source and read again, but not in a methodical manner. And so, a lot of different ideas have passed my way.  I now, at my age, have the luxury of knowing much that my mind and heart have still not touched on. It's just a book.  Remember, it's just a book. Jane Robert's writings were stimulating and provocative.  I enjoyed them, and I enjoyed imagining her process of discovery as she wrote.  If there are "historical" errors within then I ignored them.  Because all I got out of the books was a widening of my mind. That was enough. We can feed the soul and talk about all the good food.  But I think what matters is.... does it matter to you, Now? Does it speak to you? Does it bring you a small piece of the puzzle that you need right now? If so, aren't you the lucky one? So many people have no books....have no food.....they are ill and dying.... They are remembering now all the books they will never read here, and all the people they will never have a chance to meet here. So, part of my path at this time is to avoid being jaded by "truth" or "lies" and to simply be grateful... grateful for words....for poetry....for science....for inspiration from all sources. For we need a healing now, this world.  A great healing.  And it will come from all of us, depending on how we see the stories, how we tell them, what we focus on. love, blink :)

Great post and I like your thinking..

[quote author=Berserk link=1177715919/0#0 date=1177715918]Source: "Seth Speaks" 366-67:

[Seth:] “Christ, the historical Christ was not crucified...He had no intention of dying in this manner; but others felt that to fulfil the prophecies in all ways, a crucifixion was a necessity.”
______________________________________________________________________
There was no recognized Jewish prophecy of a crucified Messiah prior to Jesus’ resurrection.  Rather, Isaiah 53 was retroactively applied to Jesus’s death after His Resurrection so that His crucifixion could be understood as fulfilled prophecy.   [Seth:] “There was a conspiracy in which Judas played a role, an attempt to make a martyr out of Christ.  The man chosen was drugged--hence the necessity of helping him carry the cross (Luke 23)--and he was told that he was the Christ.  He believed that he was.”
________________________________________________________.  

Seth in effect accuses Jesus of using Simon of Cyrene as a scapegoat.  Romans routinely beat their victims within an inch of their lives before crucifying them.  It is this savage beating--and not drugs--that explains the need for help in carrying the cross.

Seth has simply ripped off a universally discredited 2nd century Gnostic version of the claim that Simon--not Jesus- was crucified:

“He [Jesus] did not suffer, but a certain Simon of Cyrene was compelled to carry His cross for Him; and this Simon was transformed by Him [Jesus] so that he was thought to be Jesus himself, and was crucified through ignorance and error.   Jesus, however, too the form of Simon, and stood by laughing at them. (Irenaeus AH 24:4).”

According to this absurd Gnostic version, Jesus shapeshifts to make Himself look like  Simon of Cyrene and supernaturally transforms Simon’s appearance to make him a replica of Himself.  Then a cruel Jesus stands by the cross and laughs while Simon suffers a slow agonizing death!  Then notice the deception attributed to Jesus in making it later seem that He had in fact been crucified:  [Seth:] “Christ was a great psychic.  He caused the wounds there to appear upon his own body.”  

Of course, Seth must resort to desperate measures to rationalize how a Jesus who never died made his exit from the stage of history: [Seth:] “His physical presence was no longer necessary, and even an embarrassment under the circumstances.  He siimply willed himself out of existence (368).”  In other words, Jesus just made His physical body go “poof!”  Wow!  The Elias entity
agrees that Jesus was never crucified but contradicts Seth by claiming that Jesus lived into His 40s and moved to Macedonia.  Both claims are breath-takingly absurd.  

In fact, Simon of Cyrene had no prior connection with Jesus and was coerced into carrying a badly beaten Jesus’ cross for Him: “They compelled a passer-by, who was coming in from the country, to carry Jesus’ cross; it was Simon of Cyrene, the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mark 15:21);  Mark notes that Alexander and Rufus are Simon’s sons because at least Rufus becomes a
member of the church at Rome.  Mark composes his Gospel in Rome.   In his epistle to the Romans, Paul greets Rufus in a flattering manner: “Greet Rufus, a choice man in the Lord, and his mother and mine (Romans 16:13).”

So does this nonsense pour out of Jane Roberts’ unconscious or is she a victim of spirit impersonation?   Many second century Gnostics are called Sethians and The Second Word [Logos] of the Great Seth is an ancient Gnostic text.  There seems to be a close connection between ancient Gnosticism and the modern channeling of Seth and Elias.  In second century Gnosticism, Seth was viewed as the ruler of the 3rd heaven and Elias (spelled “Eloaeus,” but pronounced similarlly) was the ruler over the 5th heaven (Epiphanius, Panarion 27.10.1).  Thus, both ancient Gnosticism and modern channeling can claim that Jesus was never crucified and can give an exalted role to Seth and Elias.  This is no coincidence.   I doubt that Jane Roberts and Mary Innis ever read Epiphanius who was not even available in English translation in Jane Roberts’s time.  So I suspect that these modern entities are simply reviving and drastically changing ancient lies about Jesus.    

To see just how blasphemous these ancient Gnostics were, one need only examine their perversion of Holy Communion into a disgusting adulterous sex orgy in which the participants first have sex outside their marriages and then consume the semen and female imissions as substitutes for the bread and wine that normally represents Christ’s body and blook in the Eucharist:

“For the  husband withdraws from his own wife, and says these words to his own wife: `Rise up, make the love (feast) with the brother.’...When have had intercourse out of the passion of fornication, then...the woman and the man take the man’s semen in their own hands,..saying, `We offer thee this gift, the body of Christ...Simlarly, with the woman’s emission at her period; they
collect the mestrual blood which is unclean, take it and eat it together, and say, `This is the blood of Christ. (Epiphanius, Panarion 26.4)’”
*****************
Don,
I'm not defending the "Seth" materials here (they smack of the most
McDonald's-like variety of New Ageism) but what you have to say about the Gnostics, JUST MIGHT be derived from questionable sources.
Take the (admittedly stomach-turning) rituals you mentioned above. Perhaps this was a SLANDER - patently untrue - promulgated by the Literalists - who included such paragons of wisdom and honesty as Tertullian (a certifiable nut-case and sadist) and Eusebius (liar and fabricator extraordinaire) - to smear the Gnostics with...
*Irenaeus wasn't exactly an unbiased authority either, Don.*
Let us not forget that almost ALL current information about early Christianity, has been filtered through several centuries of ROMAN CATHOLICISM, perhaps the most bogus religious enterprise (and ENTERPRISE it is, the most lucrative in human history) ever foisted upon humanity...
Be careful with the sweeping statements about the Gnostics, chief. (OR any other such historical material, for which there is questionable documentation at best.) In your zeal to appear as a wise scholar, you end up looking like an ignorant dunderhead. (And I KNOW you're smarter than that, Don old boy..!)

B-man
P.S. EPIPHANIUS, you call a reliable source...?
Hoo-boy...
Epiphanius was a ROMAN CATHOLIC MONK of the LATE 4th CENTURY, Don. These were the type of people who were busily smashing ancient temples and grand monuments which had stood for hundreds, if not thousands of years... burning libraries, forever destroying irreplaceable knowledge accumulated over 3 millennia (gee, I wonder if a cure for cancer or whatnot was in there? We'll never know NOW, will we?) and sitting atop pillars a'la "Saint" (WTF is a "saint", anyway?) Simeon of Stylites (who among other things, had his adoring crowd of goggle-eyed groupies COLLECTING AND SELLING HIS FECES to raise money for the "cause" as it were. Not too surprising though - consider how ALL Catholic churches have at least one "relic" (i.e., corpse part) on the premises, usually immured somewhere in the altar. (Looking for your barf bag yet..?)
The very people, who gave us the DARK AGES!
Is it much of a reach, to imagine ol' Epiphanius "cooking up" a revolting story - yet, a LIE - about the Gnostics he hated? (they were COMPETING with the Literalists, after all!) All the better to get the IGNORANT MASSES on the Literalist side..!
To imagine people like Epiphanius clearly, I suggest you rent a copy of the 1971 b-movie sci-fi flick "Omega Man" (starring uber-Christian Charlton Heston!) and take a good look at the "plague vampires." Their behavior is likely a good approximation of what those gangs of 4th-5th century monks and "hermits" acted like.
(NOT a coincidence, methinks..!)

Alysia:

You also claim that ACIM helped you, and it comes from Christ. I don't understand how a person who was helped by Christ, could allow the likes of Seth and Hillarion to dump on him.



LaffingRain wrote on Apr 28^th, 2007 at 2:37am:

I disagree that anything is exposed. Elias helped me a lot in my spiritual growth. I also channel my own self.  we are at a time in history where spirit channelling is not well accepted yet. that will change as people begin to see our underlying oneness and that we are like radio stations to tune into others. we as these singular personalities who disagree are not really but a small part of us. love, alysia

blink,

Excellent point.


E.
[smiley=engel017.gif]

I have listened to the seth audio tape that has a professional reader read portions of her books and it seems pretty good to me.  

The stuff about "Jesus" was interesting and different and I decided to remind OPEN-minded about it.   Jane obviously knew it would cause a stir at the time and decided to put it out anyway.  She knew people with "rigid belief structures" would spew out "hatred" at her and her guide.  And she did it anyway.  It took guts.  And I admire that.  She could have taken the easy route and keep her mouth shut about that "topic".  But she told the "TRUTH" as it was revealed to her.  And in the context of the other nice stuff the audio tape said about other stuff I decided to keep OPEN.  And that OPENEDNESS takes me to sites like this! :)

welcome to the board Richman. I see we have someone who is open minded, well blow me down!

I don't know one way or the other, but I'm not threatened to consider all possibilities, as you say I'm not afraid to explore dimensions of reality where events "could" have unfolded differently than our standard way of thinking about it, alternate realities are very much a part of my belief system and yet both realities could be co-existent, if both are simply movies being projected on screens, and we think we are here, when we are here but only in partial context, we are so much more than our bodies.

always, human nature is threatened by something new. we are creatures who desire our comfort zones. look out for the thought police!

I enjoy looking at all books, all peoples, I think we can get the answers we really desire by going into our private chambers.
well thanks for your post! :)

But she told the "TRUTH" as it was revealed to her.  And in the context of the other nice stuff the audio tape said about other stuff I decided to keep OPEN.  And that OPENEDNESS takes me to sites like this! :)
______________________________________________

Well, you've come to the right place.  The only hatred vented here is directed against Christians.  But tell me, are you "open" to the historically grounded refutation of Roberts's claims about Jesus offered in this thread?   Or do you have no respect for expertise in related disciplines to paranormal investigation?   No respected historian of antiquity (including non-Christians) would take Robert's claims seriously.  Do you really believe that Jesus just went "poof" and dematerialized His physical body?   Do you buy the claim that he materialized fake wounds to deceive people?  Are you unphased by the contradictory version peddled by the Elias entity of Mary Innis?

Don

As to all the "hatred being vented" ... at whoever ... whether seth or christians or others ... YES ... I see that as a block to being OPEN.

Do you?  (If I am HATING anything my HEART is NOT OPEN to that person and LOVE is not flowing into me from GOD and NOT FLOWING out of me in that moment... so HATE is a block to LOVE ...from my viewpoint) LOVE your enemies means ...not agreeing but ... allowing the LOVE to flow in and out and believing doing that PRODUCES MIRACLES. And walk away from people that are doing stuff you are not into and give others the freedom to follow their heart... if they are ADULTS. ;)

And others can be as OPEN or Blocked as they want.  I practice being OPEN and ALLOW the TRUTH to reveal itself at a deeper level (the Kingdom is Within).

As to your stuff about miracles ... that seth said Jesus did, make wounds appear, ... I think in regular bible Jesus did some miracles too, maybe different miracles.  He could do them , right? It would make sense if He did miracles it would be in LOVE and to Help people and NOT HURT them.

My impression from the Seth tape I listened to was not that the Mission of Christ was LOWER by the way she put it , but HIGHER and more profound.  Like a Being trying to help ants ... gee... how can I convey the Truth to ants in a way that was beyond where they are at , I guess become one of them and show them they are more than ants. And the King Ant and POPE Ant probably would be pissed for revealing what they are doing is "lower" compared to NEW way.

Gee bro ... we are both at OOB website and forum room ...and we are not having this conversation on Religious Christian site and forum room (different crowd :) )  :) Peace! :)

Quote:

I don't understand how a person who was helped by Christ, could allow the likes of Seth and Hillarion to dump on him.

Dear Albert,

You may wish to consider bringing your kundalini down into your heart chakra.  Holding it there is a far better place than at the crown.  That does not mean you cannot raise it for personal experience.  Only that if you cannot answer this question, then you are missing the imparting of the "wisdom of the ages" which is directly related to and the imparting of the fruit of the spirit.

Love, Kathy